The people who download scene-by-scene rips of their favorite movies, studios and stars in high resolution or even high-def 720p+ are quite certainly not the same crowd looking to get "a quick fix" of jerky, buffering, recompressed wmv shit. Sorry, but just superbly misdirected article.

Pr0n sites, at least those that I am talking about, will never have to fear a second of "competition" as in taking from them, as their offering simply caters to a wholly different need.
If you just need a 3 minute wank, then you can do whatever, google yourself 50 pics, go to a random picsite of the thousands out there or to any xxx tuber. But the pr0nateer that I know will have terabytes and terabytes of his stars and fuck flixx. That's just how it is, nigger.

So fuck all the propaganda bullshit.

For a 99 cent track, the labels collect 67 cents, out of which they pay the royalties to the recording artist, the composer, etc.. The other 32 cents is retained by Apple to cover operating costs, credit card processing fees (about 10 cents per transaction, which is why Apple would rather sell pre-paid $20 cards than individual tracks), marketing, etc., and to make a profit.

I don’t just don’t seem to care about 720p video with lossless audio when I’m masturbating.

It's not written in this article but the remaining 29c is split between the Artist and Apple. During the last threatened iTunes price increase it was the artists trying to get a larger share. Apple shot it down because raising prices could kill the paid download market. Apple can't decrease their share because all of it goes to maintaining the servers (they profit off the iPod not the music).

And the Labels? Were they willing to decrease their share so that artists can increase theirs? Wahaha! No.

The moral is: most artists get paid by being as close as possible to their audience. That means cutting the middle man as much as possible.

Please do not make up figures to support your argument. Making up facts renders your argument nothing more than a fictional self-justification. Now, how about your actually do a little research and provide us links with the actual profit breakdowns rather than making up stuff.

"Now it seems to me that their hurting more from apple than us."

What? So someone that pays some portion of money to them from a sale to a consumer is "hurting them" more than someone who pays nothing but still consumes the artists work? How? Because all I see is one consumer that the artist recieved money from and one consumer that the artist recieved nothing from Get a grip on reality dude…

It pisses me off when pirates actually try to say thay are "helping the artist". I dont pay a cent but I also dont delude myself that this is beneficial to the artist.

Your argument doesn't make sense: in the case of games, movies & music it has *always* been this model so why is it becoming worse – "more abysmal – neglected, uncared for". It isn't as though you are able to compare it to a time when this system wasn't in existence – and content was "better" because of it – because it always has been there.

Also, distribution companies are not interested in distributing content that people will not like (and then purchase)… this certainly IMHO leads to a great reluctance to take risks with new types of material and genres but I fail to see that entities involved in distribution are of the position of not "caring" about what they distribute. This also makes your argument of quality having something to do with who owns the rights rather silly as the distirbutors are most often not having anything to do with making the content they own.

Artists use this distibution system because they wish to get paid and they do get paid: if this is not the case why is it that with alternatives available – eg. p2p – artists are not moving away from this traditional distributiuon model. Please do not try to pretend you know something that artists do not beyond your own self-interest.

Also your argument fails to take into account the fact that most content, film-wise and a lot of other content is made completely independent of any distributor. Distributors pick up rights after content is made in this case, often competing with each other to obtain the rights: after all, your agument also fails to address why almost no artists and content producers seem to look anywhere else barring the current distibution system.

PureTNA and the likes should probably look into doing something similar. Once you see the porn industry doing that, the RIAA and MPAA will wake up and realize what's going on finally.

Oh, XnXX all the way for me :)

http://www.youporn.com

artists are not moving away from this traditional distributiuon model
FALSE

This also makes your argument of quality having something to do with who owns the rights rather silly as the distirbutors are most often not having anything to do with making the content they own
There is no need anymore for these middle-men. They only make the culture more abysmal. Now stop being a Nazi apologist.

Your argument doesn't make sense: in the case of games, movies & music it has *always* been this model so why is it becoming worse
It has always been becoming worse.

Here is a simple solution: extend the definition of fair use to include all non-commercial usage and non-commercial derivative works (effectively putting the usage of websites like The Pirate Bay into the category of "fair use"). If it makes sense to say that using The Pirate Bay is "fair use," then it is a doubtlessly a good policy to extend the definition of "fair use" in such a way that using The Pirate Bay shall fall into the category of "fair use."

Brilliantly said, Ernesto.

there are already maaaany of them. of course they don’t host the content but only embed it from other sites but they are hugely popular at least where i live at. kino.to, a pure warez streaming site, is #78 in germany :> (http://www.alexa.com/site/ds/top_sites?cc=DE&ts_mode=country&lang=none ) . higher than any torrent site.

Thanks!
R

Looks like they don't teach grammar or spelling in school either…

Why don't don't they just do the same so they can get a piece of the pie. No Pun Intended.

http://www.p2ptechtime.com

BTW, is it overkill to have 5 tabs open with 5 different streams buffering so that I can change the scene at a moments notice with no loss of skin time?

PS – The internet is made for porn.

More like a quick tug…
LOL!

Honestly, I do feel a *little* guilty about the whole tube sites (other than youtube) and if it was anything other than porn they would have not been able to get away with it (imho).

Imagine a tube site that streams nothing but blockbuster movies…
or another tube site that streams nothing but the latest TV eps…
you would have a whole lotta lobby backed scumbags making a big noise and DMCAs flying everywhere, but because its porn.. few want to get their hands dirty (open pun, make up your own joke ;p ) so few will support it.

Heck, in this day and age you cant even stream music as you want it to the masses without the likes of the RIAA and their fellow scumbag organizations trying to slap you with lawsuits and C&Ds… but because its porn, its alright.

On the other hand, the adult industry regularly screws everyone (pun intended) so maybe its time they got a bit screwed themselves :))

Cheers!
http://www.eZee.se

To bad less people seem to understand such things like how the distribution model (like what EA games and ITunes uses) for things like movies, games and music is completely flawed as the people who make the content don't make the money, the people who distribute it do, and that's bad for me as a consumer who pays more because of this, and the developers as they're only making over companies rich by letting them distribute their content.

It just seems wrong to me that someone creates something and then has to go to someone like apple to get them to distribute it over itunes. Then Itunes sells the song for like say $1. Now out of that $1 $.30 goes towards the studio/record label or whatever it is this step is called. Then out of that $.30 like $.10 goes to the person after the studio/music label takes his share. And then people like apple go and say where the bad guys for pirating the song. And it doesn't stop their no. Apple even says that content makers are losing because of "us pirates". Now it seems to me that their hurting more from apple than us. If apple takes like 70% of the sales money and like %10 goes to the artist then for every copy they sold we could download 7 copy's if 1 download counted as 1 unit of sales. And doing that we would be just breaking even in terms of the amount of money us "pirates" and companies like apple are stealing from the artists. And how can they say where stealing from artists when most of the money lost in sales would have gone to companies like apple who do nothing, not the artists.

And their is no way that EA games can try and say that they are the good guys when EA games is busy creating DRM that literally stops people from playing the games they purchase. And then the only way to play the game is to buy it again or download it. These greedy corporates are pathetic, all they care about is money and how they can avoid work, even if it involves more work than just doing the work.