

HBO Is Targeting Game of Thrones Pirates: What Does This Mean for You? - datsun
http://thoughtforyourpenny.com/2015/04/22/hbo-is-targeting-game-of-thrones-pirates-what-does-this-mean-for-you/

======
Someone1234
We used to pirate GoT two seasons ago, then last season we paid for it "just
for this season" since we wanted to watch it live. We never did wind up
cancelling HBO even after GoT finished that season, we keep it for the movies,
HBO Go (which is actually quite a good even with Netflix and Amazon Digital),
and since then John Oliver has a show which we want to DVR.

I absolutely understand why people abroad are pirating and put that at the
feet of HBO. Wire cutters now have an option with HBO Now if they wish, and
those who don't wish to pay, fair enough, but HBO's product is actually
surprisingly good.

Ideally HBO should have seen a large drop in piracy this season due to HBO
Now, however unfortunately with this four episode leak people are so paranoid
about spoilers that a lot of people feel "forced" to pirate it even if they
legitimately pay for either HBO Go or HBO Now.

Keep in mind that a GoT season is 10 episodes. So a four episode leak is
almost 1/2 of an entire season.

------
junto
I don't understand the film companies. I'd like to watch GoT season 5 and some
of the other seasons too.

I want to watch them in English and I live in Germany. Do I have any options
apart from a cable subscription for a bunch of other bullshit I don't want. No
of course not.

I could wait until the DVDs cone out in a years time, bit the fuckers will
more than likely split the season into two releases to make you buy two
separate box sets for double the money.

I could watch online but that would be illegal and I don't want to go there. I
just don't watch. I'd pay a couple of Euros to watch each episode in the
format I want (DNLAed off my Synology) it appears that they don't want my cold
hard cash. It has been like that for years and I'm slowly tuning off from
media completely. I wonder how many others are like me- abstainers?

------
b2themax
Piracy is completely unethical.

He argues that somehow piracy caused innovation in the music industry, and
thus the piracy of hollywood will somehow usher in a new era of innovation in
streaming video. In some respects its true that Napster brought about
innovation in digital music... BUT IT HASN"T STOPPED PIRACY!

There is a ton of more streaming options today, which is great for lawful
netizens, we do have a lot of great options. But that doesn't excuse pirates
from ethical obligations.

You don't have a right to someone's property just because you think you
should.

Maybe I should just take refuge in your fancy-house just because I think it
would be morally just because you have a nicer house than I do.

Thats essentailly the argument pirates make, and it doesn't hold water.

~~~
fragmede
> I should just take refuge in your fancy-house

To further your analogy, it costs me approximately $0 to make an exact copy of
fancy-house, it travels over the internet to you, and what you do with your
copy doesn't affect me in the slightest.

I am very willing to give you a copy of my fancy-house under such a scheme,
and you are completely welcome to do with it whatever you want.

~~~
b2themax
You are living in this entitled fantasy world. How do you believe this doesn't
effect film studios? Everyone who pirates a film is someone who could have
been a paying customer. Instead they choose to break the law. An alternative
option is to not watch the illegal films!

Either don't pirate, or pay for your media. People shouldn't steal.

Maybe they should be patient and wait until the films come into the public
domain if they're too cheap to pay.

~~~
lazylizard
then maybe copyright should be limited to 5 yrs instead of life + 129 yrs.

------
1971genocide
Never spent a penny on anything byte related, from the time I was 12 years
old.

The irony is now I want people to pay me to write software ?

Maybe I am just an unproductive scum on earth, mooching off other people's
work. But I was homeless for a month this year so not like I have had much
options.

I do not feel at least bit sorry about stealing.

~~~
simlevesque
> But I was homeless for a month this year so not like I have had much options

You have the choice not to consume any content or to consume free content. You
are entitled.

Maybe that if people paid for things that are on the web, you wouldn't have so
much problem getting paid for software work. Maybe that would've kept you from
the street.

~~~
threedaymonk
> You have the choice not to consume any content or to consume free content.

Over the years that I've watched this discussion, I've come to notice that
people who advocate for paying for stuff seem (though it might just be my
perception) to use expressions like "consume content" more often than those
who don't.

It's rather uninspiring, and I suspect it's counter-productive. No one wants
to "consume content". They want to watch a film, or listen to a song, or read
a book, or just be entertained. I doubt anyone ever invited a date round "to
consume beverages and content".

~~~
nostrebored
Are you producing content by watching a television show? No, that's absurd,
you're consuming the content that others have produced. It's really not that
far from consuming a beverage. People would say drink, or in this case, watch,
but the truth is that those are just two verbs that describe the type of
consumption you're doing.

Why would you say it's counter productive to label it consumption? The truth
is, if you're sucking up entertainment without providing anything or
incentivizing production, you're a net loss in the system.

I say this as someone who has pirated things -- pretending you're not a burden
on the production system if you're just pirating things is delusional. The
argument that people make towards pirating and paying for content which they
liked is much more consistent. Rather than pay people off for marketing/hype
and support bad content in the future, you can fund solely content that you
think is worthwhile. But again, this is just changing the way in which you're
consuming material.

~~~
klez
I have to disagree.

If you consume something you are making it impossible for someone else to
consume that same thing. You can consume a beverage (no one can drink it after
you did) but you can't consume digital content. Here[1] it is explained by
someone more knowledgable than me. (incidentally, the FSF also suggests to
avoid the word 'piracy' to describe illegal file sharing)

Also, when saying pirating is a net loss to the system, maybe you can say it
about piracy as a whole, but for the individual I would not be so sure.
Suppose I wouldn't have bought the content anyway (that is, my alternatives
would have been pirating it or not seeing it). How am I causing a loss in this
conditions?

[1] [https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-
avoid.html#Consume](https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-
avoid.html#Consume)

~~~
Versability
Piracy doesn't cause any losses on the whole because it raises the brand
image. I wouldn't know anything about Game of Thrones if not for piracy, and
it increases my affection for HBO and media as a whole. if not for torrents, i
would play outside, not buy GoT.

