I specifically didn't mention music
http://www.fastcocreate.com/1679025/bright-spot-for-the-music-industry-product-placement-is-pirate-proofRegardless of whether users pay to download videos or songs, whose lyrics can also feature paid shout-outs to brands, they're still getting the marketing message. And that's good news for both brands and the music labels. "Obviously if the song is pirated, the lyrics aren't going to change,"
They may not know that *you* have watched the show but they know roughly how many hundred thousand pirate scum like you have downloaded it. You think you don't count in the viewership numbers because you didn't pay to watch it? How does advertising work on your planet then?
It's not above the law, but I disagree that youtube is in the business of making money of piracy, yes technically it happens but they actively take steps to stop it.Music files and recent movies get taken down really quickly with the use of automatic software.If the executives running youtube are actively seeking to make money from piracy then sure lock them up.
I wonder how long the people who create big-budget movies would carry on if 'hollywood' (the people who distribute the movies and make the money based on the article) was gone, and only ThePirateBay remained.
Guess all the copyrighted material on youtube doesn't make any money from all the ads huh. More traffic more money, like I said the only reason they started enforcing the take downs with newer music is because they realized they could make money on it. Rage on about MU, carry on using youtube and say the pirating on it is fine, because its a small amount. One law for some another for others.
Quote from: Bell;1463877The funny thing is I intentionally put in "Yes technically it happens" and then argued against the point you just made before you made it.Yet you went ahead and used that as an argument anyway like you hadn't grasped my post.You comment about only enforcing take-down because they realised they could make money is pure speculation.I didn't bother reading any of your other posts, your argument was based on that youtube doesn't have feature movies on the site so therefore its ok. No Batman, so guess nothing else matters. Yes its speculation about the music take downs, but seems pretty funny they started enforcing it right around the same time they they started making money off the music. But im over it, carry on arguing how bad piracy and MU is, then continue to use sites like youtube.
The funny thing is I intentionally put in "Yes technically it happens" and then argued against the point you just made before you made it.Yet you went ahead and used that as an argument anyway like you hadn't grasped my post.You comment about only enforcing take-down because they realised they could make money is pure speculation.
The Demon Lord, if the content creator wanted it publically available for 'easy advertising', they would make it so. But they don't. Much less people I know buy music now than they did 10-15 years ago. That alone is enough for me to know piracy impacts sales.
I didn't bother reading any of your other posts, your argument was based on that youtube doesn't have feature movies on the site so therefore its ok. No Batman, so guess nothing else matters. Yes its speculation about the music take downs, but seems pretty funny they started enforcing it right around the same time they they started making money off the music. But im over it, carry on arguing how bad piracy and MU is, then continue to use sites like youtube.
holy fark there's legions of poor misguided fools like me...http://www.google.co.nz/search?q=piracy+and+product+placement&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a
That's $400000 per episode, ie, enough to cover the costs of production and provide a little something something on the side. And that doesn't take into account product placement or dvd/merch sales.
You argument seems to be aslong as they make some revenue regardless of how small it is then it's ok.
That's hilarious.
Here you go kiddies....http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204616504577171180266957116.htmlYou might notice the concept of 'intent' is used throughout the document.....argument won, thanks for playing.
Here is one of many choice little tid-bits from that document I've been browsing..On or about Jan 28 2010, in an e-mail entitled "activating old countries" a user of a Mega Conspiracy site asked BATATO: "Where can we see full movies?"BATATO replied " You need to go to our referrer sites. Such as http://www.thepiratecity.org or http://www.ovguide.com. There are the movie and series links.You cannot find them by searching on MV directly. That would cause us a lot of trouble ;-)They have afew pages of $#@! like that.Read some of that document and tell me if you were a judge reading that, that the intent of DotCom and co isn't plainly obvious.In conclusion the difference between youtube and MU is... INTENT it's all about $#@!ing INTENT yet you guys refuse to argue that extremely important point you just crap on about other things because you know yourself what the intent of MU was.
intent
