so the only way you respond is to deliberately cut my sentance in half


there no period there buddy boy it all one sentence


even so your still misrepresenting again, by definition if they became a smash success after the limited money push on the single

they are no longer UNKNOWN

at that point that is investment in an established success.

Artist-fill-in-name-here your first single sold so well your now a major success we could pay 2 million in royalties but we are going to spend half that money on the rest of your album is not nor will it ever be investing in an unknown band/artist.

gideongallery should have been banned from here a long time ago.

if really wasn't making sales you could got me out of hear by simply taking the pussycash bet.

The fact that backpeddle like a little bitch means you know i more than qualify.

good to see you admitting you a scum bag who never answered the first question that resulted from me catching you in a lie.

to bad you had to cut my statement in half to misrepresent same question as "changing your question"

http://transitionvoice.com/wp-conten...d1-550x392.jpg

http://krykeywebradio.files.wordpres...zedwebsite.gif

:warning

ADG

That pretty much sums it all up.

It is sick when crowd is making decisions on what's going to happen with a product that YOU created, and it has to stop. Content creators should be given back the ability to control all venues of distribution of their products, which as we all hope this new bill is going to achieve. If content creators see value in giving their products away for free, they can do that anytime, internet is still there for them to explore whatever opportunity they deem interesting and promising. Free, paid, or some mix of both, whatever. Crowd has no say in such matters, it is completely up to copyright holder to decide. Especially since as we all know that in practice those "decisions" made by crowds never boast huge variety and they're pretty much always FREE FREE FREE.

SOPA is not going to shut down the internet as some of the doomsday sayers in this thread are trying to convince us. Internet will still be there, SOPA or not, and it is still a free media that can be explored by creative people to promote their work using whatever option they see fit. Piracy is not necessary to pave way for new bands/artists whoever to make themselves known, there are tons of legit ways to promote yourself without resorting to high traffic piracy sites that make their living by cannibalizing creative works of other people.

Internet WAS a free media awhile back in pre-piracy times that allowed tons of creative people to thrive by selling their original works, it allowed many companies like ours for example to start from scratch and to grow without limitations of physical world. But now it is quickly coming to the point where internet is no longer free media, I mean it is not free anymore for us the people who actually create content that millions of other people download and enjoy. It is only free for thieves cheered up by hordes of freeloaders, but not for us content creators anymore. Internet is on it's way to becoming a BURDENING SLAVERY for anyone who's capable of actually creating something original, not just "posting" or "commenting". Anything that can be digitized WILL BE STOLEN and posted to download for free at thepiratebay and the likes. There are no other options. That's a fact that we're facing every day. Creative people are becoming SLAVES to parasites who feed themselves by posting links to stolen shit whithout any reward or royalties to the original producer.

That couldn't go on much longer. As the world is becoming increasingly digital, internet couldn't be just a buttom feeder media that lives off of whatever is left from the traditional media industries that are still producing something original that can be stolen and posted to download free. In such a shape and form internet is threating entire world's creativity because traditional channels of distribution will stop working soon while new digital channels are not viable solution because they're completely controlled by pirates. Something has to be done to stop it.

Yep that's actually HUGE news because news-service.com is (was) a backbone usenet provider that has (had) alot of scamming resellers such as usenext who were sponsoring lots of other piracy sites.

So shutting them down will not simply decrease the availability of pirated materials, but will also cut ad dollars that went to support lots of smaller piracy sites.

Because pirates and supporters of pirates or piracy buy adverts. Also idiots like GG boost the post count.

he should be outed for his real involvement in this business, so we can choose to or not, do business with him. Or if he's not in the business kicked out.

Damian who from his history of posts hates any attempt to bring down piracy is harming himself. His marketing of himself is an indication of his marketing skills.

http://troll.me/images/victory-baby/...andcastles.jpg

http://iseeahappyface.com/upload/hula-hops.jpg

:smilie_we

ADG

How does my thinking this bill is shit translate to me not understanding mainstream culture?

I think you posting that you think teachers have a will of iron to resist fucking 15 years olds is much more dangerous Paul.

So yes, I do oppose wasting money in a futile manner.

But you, you posted saying your friends think it would be a bad idea for you to be a teacher, that you are happy to take topless photos of a 15 year old and that you think teachers have an iron will to avoid fucking the children in their care.

No idea what you are trying to market yourself as by posting that.

I am marketing myself as someone who opposes stupid, untenable bills that will stifle creativity, start-ups and cripple the internet. You support them because you've not read them, you don't understand the internet and you think it will stop piracy.

You do the math, girlfriend.

Still nice you stopped ignoring me again. I knew it wouldn't last long.

snoooooooozzzzzeeee....

says the guy who entire business model is a copy of another DMCA outsourcing service

so did you get permission for your copying
how much do you pay in royalties for "stealing" their business model

REWORDED TO MAKE IT ACCURATE. Reworded to make it accurate.

They won't shut down law abiding sites or people, unless they want to get the whole law over turned in the Supreme Court. They will shut down the scum who steal because they can and then find stupid reasons to justify their theft.

Also try using spell check your English is worse than mine.

REWORDED TO MAKE IT TRUE.

[QUOTE=DamianJ;18541527]I think you posting that you think teachers have a will of iron to resist fucking 15 years olds is much more dangerous Paul. LET ME SEE IF i CAN SIDE TRACK PAUL AWAY FROM THE DEBATE.

Reworded to make it accurate.

Damian you're either stupid to the limit of stupidity, or the worse marketing man in online porn or a pirate. Pick anyone or all 3. this is a board of potential customers for you. These guys are, so you say, your only income. Unlike me you don't have it as your second income stream. So posting that you're opposed to any measures to limit piracy is business suicide.

And you've done this since the very beginning. You have always been opposed to limits on piracy, and attempts to limit piracy and think it should be made legal or ignored. I remember your posts on P2P and measures to stop it.

Maybe this bill isn't a 100% slam dunk, bills never are and never intended to be. But it's a way to limit the effect piracy has on huge businesses way beyond your comprehension. your posts about how much Microsoft and the music industry make and therefore justifying piracy of their product. Show your thinking. You don't think of the 10,000s of people doing an ordinary job off that money. you think it goes into the pockets of a few at the top. It doesn't. Like online porn the money is spread around.

Some goes to affiliates, some to shooters, some to designers, some to hosting, some to broke little marketing men so they can pay the rent. The $30 is spread thin. Like the $Billions Microsoft makes.

Now if you think you or any other piracy supporter has a snow balls chance in hell of stopping this bill, you're not stupid. You're stark raving mad.

The Navy has the pirates in it's sights and it will take a few cannon balls to sink their ships. but they will get sunk or at least reduced. Live with that fact and tailor your online activities. Adapt or get taken down. :thumbsup

That was fun, more fun than teasing Rajah with his toys. Mind you it was easier. Rajah bites back with real teeth. :thumbsup

Well, let's have a think about it, shall we? Has ANYTHING had any impact on piracy? No. Have millions of dollars been wasted? Yes. Do I think if that money was spent on making a better product more revenue would have been generated? Yes.

I think posting you are in favour of government censorship as a pornographer is more stupid that posting saying you are against paying snake oil salesmen money to fail to stop piracy. But whatever.

I know you are really really fucking stupid and all, but you need to learn that because I am against wasting money pointlessly doesn't mean for a split second I agree with piracy. I just don't agree with wasting money.

I've never once said it should be made legal.

You are your lies Paulie!

Shall I start telling lies about you too?

No, the posts about how much the music industry makes was a reply to Cherry saying the music industry is fucked. It clearly isn't. And piracy is clearly not really stopping Microsoft making billions of dollars. There is no justification whatsoever for piracy. It is illegal.


No, that was PROFIT. Do you know what PROFIT means?

Again, do you want to bet on that? Any money you like. Tell you what. If the bill goes through I will leave GFY for ever and eric permabans me. If it doesn't go through, you leave. Put your money where your mouth is, old man.

It's so sweet you actually seem to think piracy is stoppable. So sweet.

You have to wonder why Damian is so against others wasting their time passing laws to stop piracy online.

It's not his time that's being wasted. It's not even the UK Government wasting time. So the effect on him, if he's legal and above board s not a lot. The possibility eventually these measures will limit piracy of the product in the industry he says he makes his living is there.

So no cost to him, if he is legal and above board. And the possibility of a benefit.

Something isn't quite right here.

He was vehemently opposed to sending out letter to pirates. With the threat of going to court or settling out of court.

Did anyone here his voiced raised when Acacia were sending out similar letters to law abiding firms? I don't remember his posts, maybe he would like to show them to us. Seems strange one form of blackmail he has little to say on and the other a lot. Whats the difference?

As he doesn't own a site, Acacia won't come after hi. As he's not a pirate and clever enough to stop others leeching off his Wi Fi, he's not going to get a letter from a lawyer accusing him wrongly of being a pirate.

Something isn't quite right here.

If it smells fishy, it's a good chance it is fishy.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

Fucking priceless :1orglaugh

You can't make that statement as fact.

Are you involved in piracy (I'm not saying you are btw, I think the opposite). If not, why not? I asked before, but don't think you answered - if piracy was completely unpunishable, and there were zero comebacks whatsoever, and it wasn't seen as unethical, would you be involved in piracy? I know I would, but as there ARE comebacks and punishments, I'm not.

So there you go, an example of comebacks having an impact on piracy.

Shut up you fucking tool, you're an embarrassment to the thread.

It's illegal. So of course I am not involved in it. I am not, as I have said many times, in favour of legalising piracy. What I am against is spending money on things to try and stop it. And I am not in favour of giving control to the MPAA and RIAA to close sites as they see fit.

So OK, making piracy illegal discourages some people from being pirates. So yes, some things do discourage piracy. However, what I meant, and I know you know this, is that spending millions of dollars on measures above and beyond the law haven't demonstrated any efficacy that I have seen.

I think his point isn't that there is no potential danger in being involved in piracy, but that the battle against piracy has failed to yield positive results. It is kind of like the war on drugs. We have spent billions, maybe trillions in the war on drugs yet they are just as easy to get today as they every have been, the purity of them is at an all time high and after all that money little has changed because about the same number of people (percentage of the population wise) still use drugs.

The same can be said with Piracy. They sometimes get a win against people. They spend a lot of money and they make a lot of noise, but it doesn't seem to have curbed the amount of piracy online.

Anyway, I think that is what he meant, but I'm just guessing.

Locking up thieves discourages theft.

I think thats a good idea.

I've explained it many times. The money thrown down the drain could be spent on making a better product, thus making the business more money. It's very simple. I now have to wonder why you don't understand that and feel the need to keep making posts insinuating I am financially involved in piracy.

Some people, Paul, are interested in what goes on in other countries in the world.

They won't limit piracy. The bill will not even pass.


Indeed I am against that. And the people doing it in the UK have been disbarred. This is because what they were doing was wrong. Do you see how that works?

Why do you think it is good?

Yes, it's you constantly posting lies about me.

Sales and rentals of DVDs and Blu-ray discs fell by 7% to $10.9bn in the first nine months of this year compared with last year, according to the industry body The Digital Entertainment Group; and the British Video Association says DVD sales fell 5.6% last year. The fall was most severe in new-release titles, which account for 25% of the market, with sales crashing 15% in 2009.


I was just talking to a friend of mine, we were talking about he lack of funding for his new film and the fact that his last film had been pirated and download thousands of times but no income....

When you post A Miracle Guitar man as evidence of the new creativity it makes me feel you don't understand the work that goes into making films.



And if this is the best youtube has given culture.... oh dear !




What is at risk, losing thousands of films and music like this...




As a 100 million dollar film would spend 100 million on advertising and marketing these are matters that effect your profession as much as content producers.


Putting aside this bill.

What measures do you think should be taken to stop piracy ?

it not like the independent film producers haven't produced quality work




http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1352852/

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1687247/

i would put el mariachi up against any of the over produced hollywood crap that your afraid we will lose.








how about embrace and support the medium as a channel

fund your project with kickstarter

develop open source based development principles ( a day in the life style)
establish social causes that actually improve the world as the foundation of your documentary (yes men save the world)
or 113 other solutions that don't take away anyone elses rights.

So in the middle of a recession in 2009 people didn't buy as many new DVDs? What's your point?

You are citing 2009, when the movie industry made 20.65 billion USD, compared to 1995 when it made 5.29 million. http://www.the-numbers.com/market/

Can you try and find some evidence that isn't you talking to friends or relatives to back up your tenuous points?

When you post saying you don't understand Mystery Guitar Man is makes me feel you don't understand what makes films popular, modern culture or how to use the internet. Look how many views he has. Look how many subscribe to his channel. Why do you think that is? People like it.



The thread is ABOUT the bill. You've still not said why you think it is good.

None. What steps do you think should be taken and why? I think we should make better products. Look at iTunes. Huge piracy of music. iTunes launched a legal, simple and good way to buy music and it worked. We should do more of that.

That's pretty much it really, I'm against doing nothing, because it's my belief that it'd be far more widespread if nothing had been done/gets done.

Damian - I know you're against piracy mate, only thick cunt markham tries to portray you as pro-piracy, so you've nothing to worry about there. What I can't grasp is your apathy towards anti-piracy measures - no doubt you can't grasp my 'doing something is better than doing nothing' stance, and no-one is going to change their view based on what someone on a message board says, but it kills the boredom during break-times :D

Ok this. Tell me how money not spent on fighting piracy, but on 'making a better product' helps me, directly, as an affiliate marketer.

I can't remember claiming it would?

However, if someone makes a better product, more people want to buy it and therefore you make more money.

HTH

350 people that haven't read the bill

My belief really is that people spending a monthly retainer with a piracy removal service would make no extra money from doing this. And, that if that money was spent on marketing, they would make more sales.

I've not seen any evidence from any of the removal companies to suggest otherwise.

And we all know how well the MPAA and RIAA campaigns worked out? As started, it's like the war on drugs. A total waste of money. Billions of dollars and more is pirated now than ever before.

That's all it is really.

The post can't be seen in the UK, so irony there.

As you have no idea of how much it costs to make films why do you post ?

Say we want to make a documentary on Russia 20 years after the fall of Communism, a serous subject, you would need researchers, camera people, sound, director, money for airfares, hotels, meals , editing... for one hour you would need anything from about $300,000. IF YOU BELIEVE IN PAYING PEOPLE AND PEOPLE HAVING A CARE


For a feature film, just take one scene out "The Wild Bunch" The Mexican Army is bombarded as hundreds of rebels on horseback attack, the Army cram on to the period Steam Train firing their guns at the attacking hordes....Exploding shells around the train pulls out..

How many "kickstarter" projects to pay just for the train ?

A scene like this could cost $10,000,000. You want the film for free?

You risk destroying a major industry for an industry that gives us a cat playing a piano.

Independant cinema, that you say you like, has been hit much more than Hollywood.

Citation?

Don't you, as someone that hates youtube, think the screening of the sundance films on there was good?

Here:

Today's guest blog is penned by Reed Martin, an adjunct associate professor at NYU's Stern School of Business, who teaches the course "Film Marketing, Exhibition, and Distribution." He is formerly a research associate at Harvard Business School and most recently the author of "The Reel Truth: Everything You Didn't Know You Need To Know About Making An Independent Film."

YouTube?s new rentals service which launched by offering five Sundance films for $3.99 each, drew just over a thousand paying customers nationally ? not enough to shift traditional film distribution paradigms or overshadow Steve Jobs ? but this humble beginning masks the opportunity for YouTube and for today?s aspiring independent screenwriters, directors and producers. Just as text blogging gave unaffiliated writers new ways to connect to large audiences and even shape the national discourse, new avenues for distributing and consuming full-length independent films will now give anyone with the talent and drive to make movies, a viable and well-trafficked platform for getting their work in front of huge audiences and more importantly - sold. YouTube's unrivaled ability to help content go viral will no doubt help the fledgling online distribution of independent feature films reach a tipping point. And if a few talented directors are discovered along the way by agents and studio executives looking for the next cool thing, all the better.

The opportunity for monetizable self-distribution on the Internet hasn?t come a moment too soon for indie filmmakers who are left with fewer options after the winnowing of leading specialized film distributors such as Miramax, Paramount Vantage, Warner Independent Pictures, Picturehouse, THINKfilm, and New Line, all of whom have recently shuttered offices in New York and Los Angeles. Over the past decade the economics of releasing a film theatrically have only gotten tougher. Competition forced distributors to pay more for marketing as increasingly-fragmented audiences turned to DVR's, social media, video games, and other distractions. Tough economics and disappointing returns from several high-profile theatrical releases drove most of the major studios to re-evaluate their aggressive push into the specialized film market, and either retrench or close down their specialized banners altogether. However, the ensuing distribution vacuum presents a business opportunity for YouTube, and other video-sharing sites that allow filmmakers to sell their films alongside studio content available for online streaming.

From now on, the Lee Daniels? ("Precious") and Kathryn Bigelow?s ("The Hurt Locker") of tomorrow will be able to bypass traditional gatekeepers and monetize their hard work and creativity using only an HD camera, a fast laptop and a decent Internet connection. Indeed, the day when nearly everyone has made an independent film, in the same way that most people today have both an e-mail address and a Facebook page (and perhaps a blog and a Twitter account), may not be far off. What will never go out of style is the desire to tell stories and the need for people to express themselves in the most creative way possible. The big news is that the historically-pejorative idea of going ?straight-to-video? (which often meant fighting for shelf space in struggling mom-and-pop video stores or accepting modest sell-through deals with big box retailers) will soon take on a positive meaning and present an exciting opportunity for filmmakers everywhere.

--

http://ytbizblog.blogspot.com/2010/0...-film-nyu.html

The effect against piracy so far has been little. That will not be allowed to continue.

Damian's argument is it has had little effect so far.

Well we will never know how much an effect making it legal would of had. And the future is in front of us.

If it were legal, I could take Twistys site, stick it on a server and sell memberships. Not illegal, VISA probably would turn a blind eye, affiliates wouldn't give a shit and I have a site that I can make money with by selling memberships. That is what Damian, GG and others will see if they have their way of no one doing nothing.

Yes the war on drugs hasn't been won, so make it legal. And then every dope dealer can sell what ever he likes. Or bring it in with Laws ruling it's distribution. And see the zombies multiply from being hooked on heroin.

If we end up with a hammer to crack a walnut solution. It will be the fault of the pirates.

Fuck off idiot, put me back on ignore.

So now you're against people charging for the service to bring down clients pirated material. What has it got to do with you. Where do they ask you for money?

It's not your money being wasted and the people running the multi billion dollar corporations seem to think it's a good idea. Damian typing from his living room doesn't.

That does not make them wrong and you right.

This is not a one battle war, it's a long campaign. nice to see you're a quitter.

The day I take notice of you, is the day they can shoot me. You wasted 5 minutes of your valueless time typing that.

Me I have time to take the piss out of idiots like you. :thumbsup

Dear Damian,

Well, lets look at your quote, just in a different order...

Quote

The opportunity for monetizable self-distribution on the Internet hasn’t come a moment too soon for indie filmmakers who are left with fewer options after the winnowing of leading specialized film distributors such as Miramax, Paramount Vantage, Warner Independent Pictures, Picturehouse, THINKfilm, and New Line,.

Quote

And why have they closed ?

So what is the new way of selling feature films?

Quote

YouTube’s new rentals service which launched by offering five Sundance films for $3.99 each, drew just over a thousand paying customers nationally – not enough to shift traditional film distribution paradigms or overshadow Steve Jobs – but this humble beginning masks the opportunity for YouTube and for today’s aspiring independent screenwriters, directors and producers

$3.99 x 1000 = $3,990 dollars enough to pay for the cameras used on the HURT LOCKER for 1 day.

Just need to add that GOOGLE will show people where they can download the film for free (making money on adds as it does)

Quote

From now on, the Lee Daniels’ ("Precious") and Kathryn Bigelow’s ("The Hurt Locker") of tomorrow will be able to bypass traditional gatekeepers and monetize their hard work and creativity using only an HD camera, a fast laptop and a decent Internet connection.
Quote

Fantasy. These films are low budget = still costing tens of millions of dollars, "The Hurt Locker" was shot by a professional cinematograph, with a FULL crew. this costs hundreds of thousand dollars a day. Not because the money is wasted , but the film has to be shot on location, with make up, special effects, hotels, meals etc...

Quote

Indeed, the day when nearly everyone has made an independent film, in the same way that most people today have both an e-mail address and a Facebook page (and perhaps a blog and a Twitter account), may not be far off

The reveal the depth of ignorance about how films are made by the author.

The cost of oil paints in within the reach of millions of people - can everyone make a great painting ? Or does it take thousands of hours of practice?

All you have to do see the truth of what I say is to try and watch a selection of no budget films made that never even make it to DVD.

5 minutes to type 29 characters? ok :1orglaugh

And how are you taking the piss exactly out of anyone but yourself?

Taking the piss by quoting me and replying to Damian/gg? ok :1orglaugh

Taking the piss by telling everyone you put me on ignore then not having the willpower to keep me there for more than 5 minutes (or the time it takes to type 29 characters, going by you)? ok :1orglaugh

Taking the piss by being the complete fucking laughing stock of EVERYONE who has ever done ANYTHING in this biz? ok :1orglaugh

Get your carer to wipe your arse and put you to bed, you deluded old cunt :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

i gotta piss but i wanna finish a couple banners and read this thread before i go, damn!!!