Movie

[Kraftster]

Kraftster is correct:

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/1 ... ealnetwor/

So it's illegal to "break the encryption." What if I put the movie in a DVD player and used my video inputs to record the movie the way I use my PC as a DVR? The laws just are't catching up to technology.

Right. And there's more effort in finding new ways to steal the material than there is in protecting it. So, its probably a race that copyright holders are never going to catch up in.

[Kraftster]

So it's illegal to "break the encryption." What if I put the movie in a DVD player and used my video inputs to record the movie the way I use my PC as a DVR? The laws just are't catching up to technology.

There is always a way around everything. Everyone downloads and rips and knows it illegal. The fact is, the legality of the subject is hiding in plain site, and people aren't afraid because most of these rules and descriptions are not clear on what can be done.

The MPAA wanted people to buy the disc again digitally to put it on their Ipod. Even the term's "fair use" have come into the firing range by them. So if they aren't willing to play fair, then neither am I.

I mean, the rules are pretty clear. The law may not directly address the means by which the theft is now occurring, but, the protection against theft generally, is flexible enough to encapsulate any means currently being used or that will be used in the future.

What do you mean about "fair use?" "Fair use" is actually a term of art that has a very specific definition in the copyright arena. It was a poor title for the doctrine because its so susceptible to a lay interpretation of the words. And what exactly is not "playing fair" that they have done? Whatever "unfair" approaches that they have undertaken, the original problem was created by the end users violating copyright law.

My first comment was tongue-in-cheek. Now its turned into debating the merits of this issue. I don't really think there's anything to debate. How can it be argued that we should be permitted to have intellectual property for free? It can be argued that "everyone does it" and that its "not serious," but its clearly illegal and I don't think there are any good arguments as to why anyone should be entitled to this stuff for free.

[Ben Klingston]

Got 'Seven Pounds' in Netflix the other night.

Good flick.

[eddysnake]

so I've been watching Lady and the Tramp twice a day for the last couple weeks (2 yr old girl) and we figured we would give Lady & the Tramp 2 a shot... unbelievable that they could tarnish the first one with this steaming pile they call a sequel. I couldn't get through 15 minutes of it and refused to let my 2 yr old watch anymore, sure she cried, but she will thank me when she's older.

[Malkamaniac]

What do you mean about "fair use?" "Fair use" is actually a term of art that has a very specific definition in the copyright arena. It was a poor title for the doctrine because its so susceptible to a lay interpretation of the words. And what exactly is not "playing fair" that they have done? Whatever "unfair" approaches that they have undertaken, the original problem was created by the end users violating copyright law.

My first comment was tongue-in-cheek. Now its turned into debating the merits of this issue. I don't really think there's anything to debate. How can it be argued that we should be permitted to have intellectual property for free? It can be argued that "everyone does it" and that its "not serious," but its clearly illegal and I don't think there are any good arguments as to why anyone should be entitled to this stuff for free.

I'm not arguing about it now because you had stated prior that this wasn't a holier than thou statement. That was the basis for the original argument.

I was merely stating as ways of unfair tactics provided by the RIAA and MPAA, regarding their legal terms basically bull heading people into proving a point. The justification of what they are doing to provide an outlet and scapegoat one person is incredibly stupid. I will state this again, prior to you saying tongue and cheek and not holier than thou, I had an issue. That issue no longer exists.

I know it's illegal, I knew it was illegal the day I downloaded the original Napster. My thoughts are contrived from this whole thing with the RIAA. A cd's worth is not 15 bucks and most times not even 10. The money paid for those cd's only go to a fraction of the actual artist. The artists, make money on the shows people attend. I would basically care to bet there certainly are bonuses to the artist involved if certain sell goals are met, which is why they would gripe. The quality of today's media is so garbage, and regurgitated, it's not even funny. Paying 15 dollars for a cd, that has 3 songs out of 15 worth listening to is even more crazy than just downloading it(prior and in some cases where people don't have a computer to use Itunes).

However, I do know it's illegal and understand the repercussions of what could happen. The original debate I had wasn't about if it was legal or not, it was about other people telling others it's illegal even though they have downloaded in the past. At this point in time, that argument is moot.

[nocera]

Ouch. The only gripe about Bale that I even entertain as being legitimate is the Batman voice. What gives?

I'm just saying he is an average lead actor. I don't really care if he is in a movie or not.

I'm with you. He was great in "Empire of the Sun" and "American Psycho" but in the last two blockbusters he was in (Dark Knight and T4), he was completely overshadowed by another actor in the film. He's been pretty plain and downright boring lately.

[Kraftster]

What do you mean about "fair use?" "Fair use" is actually a term of art that has a very specific definition in the copyright arena. It was a poor title for the doctrine because its so susceptible to a lay interpretation of the words. And what exactly is not "playing fair" that they have done? Whatever "unfair" approaches that they have undertaken, the original problem was created by the end users violating copyright law.

My first comment was tongue-in-cheek. Now its turned into debating the merits of this issue. I don't really think there's anything to debate. How can it be argued that we should be permitted to have intellectual property for free? It can be argued that "everyone does it" and that its "not serious," but its clearly illegal and I don't think there are any good arguments as to why anyone should be entitled to this stuff for free.

I'm not arguing about it now because you had stated prior that this wasn't a holier than thou statement. That was the basis for the original argument.

I was merely stating as ways of unfair tactics provided by the RIAA and MPAA, regarding their legal terms basically bull heading people into proving a point. The justification of what they are doing to provide an outlet and scapegoat one person is incredibly stupid. I will state this again, prior to you saying tongue and cheek and not holier than thou, I had an issue. That issue no longer exists.

I know it's illegal, I knew it was illegal the day I downloaded the original Napster. My thoughts are contrived from this whole thing with the RIAA. A cd's worth is not 15 bucks and most times not even 10. The money paid for those cd's only go to a fraction of the actual artist. The artists, make money on the shows people attend. I would basically care to bet there certainly are bonuses to the artist involved if certain sell goals are met, which is why they would gripe. The quality of today's media is so garbage, and regurgitated, it's not even funny. Paying 15 dollars for a cd, that has 3 songs out of 15 worth listening to is even more crazy than just downloading it(prior and in some cases where people don't have a computer to use Itunes).

However, I do know it's illegal and understand the repercussions of what could happen. The original debate I had wasn't about if it was legal or not, it was about other people telling others it's illegal even though they have downloaded in the past. At this point in time, that argument is moot.

Okay. We're on the same page.

I agree to a large extent regarding the fact that an artist's cut on a CD sale is appalling. I think that the system is somewhat broken. iTunes went a long way towards reshaping things in a positive way, but, I do agree that there's got to be a better way of delivering the product in a legal (and profitable) way for the artists. Its easy to see the record companies as the bad guys because of their treatment of artists and because of the fact that the labels actually hold a lot of the copyrights anyway. But, on a conceptual level, its still "stealing" from the artists, and I guess that's what bothers me.

[AlexPKeaton]

The genie is out of the bottle on free music and movies now. The record and movie companies moved too slow in providing legit alternatives (actually they never really did, 3rd parties like Apple and Amazon did) and now they are paying for it.

[pittsoccer33]

back to movies,

I've been watching Jeremy Isaacs' CNN Perspectives Presents Cold War. He is the same guy that put together the 20some part The World at War series on WW2 that is advertised on TV a lot. This one is 24 hour long episodes each on a different aspect, event, or issue of the Cold War. Many former government officials from both sides are interviewed along with old footage.

I'd been looking for a copy of the set for for the last five or six years, but I learned that after the US operations in Afghanistan began that a lot of the footage included in the documentary of the CIA's involvement battling the Soviets there had been reclassified, and the documentary out of print since DVDs came to prominence.

[eddysnake]

if anyone is looking for a good documentary, check out: The Endurance: Shackleton's Legendary Antarctic Expedition. One of the best docs I've ever seen, amazing story. anyone have any suggestions for any other great documentaries?

[Hockeynut!]

if anyone is looking for a good documentary, check out: The Endurance: Shackleton's Legendary Antarctic Expedition. One of the best docs I've ever seen, amazing story. anyone have any suggestions for any other great documentaries?

Check out "Paradise Lost: The Child Murders at Robin Hood Hills" and the follow up, "Paradise Lost 2: Revelations". They'll really make you question the legal system. Another great doc by the same filmmaker is "Brother's Keeper". I'd highly recommend all of them.

[pittsoccer33]

if anyone is looking for a good documentary, check out: The Endurance: Shackleton's Legendary Antarctic Expedition. One of the best docs I've ever seen, amazing story. anyone have any suggestions for any other great documentaries?

Discovery's six hour long When We Left Earth: The Nasa Missions. It was a fairly in depth look at every phase of our space program, from rocket plane testing to fixing Hubble. Neil Armstrong (who never ever does interviews) participated in the making of it.

Also the british documentary In the Shadow of the Moon was a pretty good feature on the Apollo program.

[eddysnake]

if anyone is looking for a good documentary, check out: The Endurance: Shackleton's Legendary Antarctic Expedition. One of the best docs I've ever seen, amazing story. anyone have any suggestions for any other great documentaries?

Discovery's six hour long When We Left Earth: The Nasa Missions. It was a fairly in depth look at every phase of our space program, from rocket plane testing to fixing Hubble. Neil Armstrong (who never ever does interviews) participated in the making of it.

Also the british documentary In the Shadow of the Moon was a pretty good feature on the Apollo program.

I have seen both of those and I really enjoyed them! I highly recommend "Grizzly Man" as well, anything W. Herzog touches is gold in my book, but Grizzly Man is hilarious, great doc to watch while drinking with buddies or if you just want a good laugh at how dumb some people are

[nocera]

I highly recommend "Grizzly Man" as well, anything W. Herzog touches is gold in my book, but Grizzly Man is hilarious, great doc to watch while drinking with buddies or if you just want a good laugh at how dumb some people are

I wouldn't describe Grizzly Man as "hilarious" at all. Unless by "hilarious" you mean "disturbing" and "sad"

[Hockeynut!]

I wouldn't describe Grizzly Man as "hilarious" at all. Unless by "hilarious" you mean "disturbing" and "sad"

Totally agree.

[eddysnake]

I highly recommend "Grizzly Man" as well, anything W. Herzog touches is gold in my book, but Grizzly Man is hilarious, great doc to watch while drinking with buddies or if you just want a good laugh at how dumb some people are

I wouldn't describe Grizzly Man as "hilarious" at all. Unless by "hilarious" you mean "disturbing" and "sad"

you say tomato, i say tomato. Anyone who thinks they are trusted by bears because they visit them every summer and doesn't expect to be dinner is hilar in my book. It's not like the guy wasn't warned repeatedly by professionals, he had it coming and I think it's 103 minutes of pure hilarity, but yeah I can see how some would think it's sad and disturbing...

[Malkamaniac]

I wouldn't describe Grizzly Man as "hilarious" at all. Unless by "hilarious" you mean "disturbing" and "sad"

Totally agree.

Disturbing to the fact that this man thought that he actually had a connection to the bears, and sad that they didn't show the video of him getting eated. Anyone who is this far disconnected to society and believes in their mind that he is "friends" with brutal animals, that's bound to happen.

[nocera]

I wouldn't describe Grizzly Man as "hilarious" at all. Unless by "hilarious" you mean "disturbing" and "sad"

Totally agree.

Disturbing to the fact that this man thought that he actually had a connection to the bears, and sad that they didn't show the video of him getting eated. Anyone who is this far disconnected to society and believes in their mind that he is "friends" with brutal animals, that's bound to happen.

It's a disturbing look into a disturbed mind and yes, the outcome of it is sad. I don't know how you could watch his girlfriend listening to the tape of his death and think it was funny.

[eddysnake]

I wouldn't describe Grizzly Man as "hilarious" at all. Unless by "hilarious" you mean "disturbing" and "sad"

Totally agree.

Disturbing to the fact that this man thought that he actually had a connection to the bears, and sad that they didn't show the video of him getting eated. Anyone who is this far disconnected to society and believes in their mind that he is "friends" with brutal animals, that's bound to happen.

but can you see the humor in it? the rant he goes on had me in stitches, the way he talks to the fox and the bears, it's full of non-stop comedy, I guess I'm watching it in different eyes, but even Herzog seems to be making fun of him throughout.

[Malkamaniac]

It's a disturbing look into a disturbed mind and yes, the outcome of it is sad. I don't know how you could watch his girlfriend listening to the tape of his death and think it was funny.

I never once said it was funny. I'd honestly like to see the tape(supposedly it does exist), just to see the look on his face when the bear turned. I'm not one to find these situations funny, however I am interested in the psychology of these things when they occur.

[nocera]

It's a disturbing look into a disturbed mind and yes, the outcome of it is sad. I don't know how you could watch his girlfriend listening to the tape of his death and think it was funny.

I never once said it was funny. I'd honestly like to see the tape(supposedly it does exist), just to see the look on his face when the bear turned. I'm not one to find these situations funny, however I am interested in the psychology of these things when they occur.

The guy is obviously not right in the head, that's what makes it disturbing and sad. Because he really does think that these bears accepted him as their own.

And the "you" was the universal "you."

[beerman]

I've never seen this video but it's making me laugh just thinking about someone getting eaten by a bear.

On the surface someone getting eaten by a bear isn't funny, but if the guy actually thinks he had a connection with the bears and then ends up getting eaten by one then yeah I find that funny

[nocera]

I guess we should just agree to disagree. Turns out, my sense of humor does not include death.

[Idoit40fans]

I don't find it funny, but it wasn't sad that he died. I felt pretty horrible for his girlfriend, but otherwise someone that stupid/unstable, whatever you want to call it, was going to meet their end in some stupid way.

[Malkamaniac]

Ya know, I know what you mean, but when someone does this to their wikipedia page. I find it hilarious.