The Sofa (General Chat Thread)

Spon Farmer

Frank O. Pinion wrote: »

Yeah, but by stealing these delicious torrents, I and others save so much money.

So you now admit you are cheap? And that it is theft?

Frank O. Pinion wrote: »

If I understand you correctly, you're suggesting people...give...their money...away for stuff easily stolen using the internet? Pure madness. I'd definitely download a house and a car if I could.

I'm suggesting you want something you pay for it. If you can't afford it you can't have it.

Would you steal the car? Would you cheat someone to get the house? Would you walk out of Dunnes without paying for your food?

Regarding the high horse comment earlier - I find it odd that you are attempting to throw insults at me because I don't (edit) steal. That is pretty ridiculous.

I don't know exactly what your argument here is. It is theft, pure and simple. You steal this stuff (your own words). What point you are trying to make?

Spon Farmer

CastorTroy wrote: »

Ye're just reminding me of

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmZm8vNHBSU

Or the better version

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALZZx1xmAzg

Now you've made me want to watch The IT CROWD again. :P

Frank O. Pinion

Spon Farmer wrote: »

So you now admit you are cheap? And that it is theft?

I'm definitely admitting I like money. By downloading sweet torrents and italicizing certain words, I save so much per year. Copyright laws are a load of nonsense.

I'm suggesting you want something you pay for it. If you can't afford it you can't have it.

But I can, it's just so easy! I'm been doing it for nearly two decades, who's going to stop me?

Would you steal the car? Would you cheat someone to get the house? Would you walk out of Dunnes without paying for your food?

Nope. But if I could make a copy of the car, the house, or an entire Dunnes and easily download them from my home? You bet your ass I would.

Regarding the high horse comment earlier - I find it odd that you are attempting to throw insults at me because I steal. That is pretty ridiculous.

What? So, now you're admitting to STEALING!? Lock him up.

I don't know exactly what your argument here is. It is theft, pure and simple.

Nah, I'm just makin' copies.

You steal this stuff (your own words).

I was using your words, guy. And you just admitted to stealing too, (your own words).

Spon Farmer wrote: »

What point you are trying to make?

This is a discussion forum, correct? None of us have a point.

Spon Farmer

Frank O. Pinion wrote: »

I'm definitely admitting I like money. By downloading sweet torrents and italicizing certain words, I save so much per year. Copyright laws are a load of nonsense.

But I can, it's just so easy! I'm been doing it for nearly two decades, who's going to stop me?

Nope. But if I could make a copy of the car, the house, or an entire Dunnes and easily download them from my home? You bet your ass I would.

What? So, now you're admitting to STEALING!? Lock him up.

Nah, I'm just makin' copies.

I was using your words, guy. And you just admitted to stealing too, (your own words).


This is a discussion forum, correct? None of us have a point.

So you claim you can afford all these services but don't want to pay. You are admitting you are a cheap tight wad yet you popped up here last balling your eyes out that I said it.

It is theft and you already admitted it is stealing so why you now using the word "copy". The previous posters that I was responding to were not afraid to admit it is robbery.

It seems important to you that no one can stop you. Is this because no one can see you and that is why you steal movies, etc. but not cars, food, etc because the chances are you'd get caught. That is cowardice.

Obviously I mistyped but rather than saying so you try to twist it. Again cowardly.

Most people on these boards do have a point. You are simply one of the few who don't.

I wonder how long you can keep this going with no point?

The Black Oil

This is one of those things a certain section of the entertainment industry have had a bit of a persecution complex about, imo. They're competing with gaming which is huge but don't really mention that. I don't know if downloading (torrents, as opposed to dodgy streams) is more common now, compared to the say the mid 2000s when broadband was starting to roll out and before any streaming platforms came to be. I do also think pirating works to their advantage sometimes - word of mouth, brand awareness, social media, articles, etc. And it's within internet culture to always be a little ahead of whatever studios are trying to do. The likes of Supernatural probably has a far bigger audience than actual eyeballs on the screen - the number of social media followers its actors have shows that. The TV industry has adapted better than its peers in music who bitched and moaned a lot back in the day, whilst providing almost fup all solutions until iTunes had some competitors. I pay for Netflix and Prime. Put the systems in place and a good chunk or the majority will pay, but so help me God, don't tie it down endlessly in licensing bollocks, region restrictions and all that nonsense.

Frank O. Pinion

Spon Farmer wrote: »

So you claim you can afford all these services but don't want to pay. You are admitting you are a cheap tight wad yet you popped up here last balling your eyes out that I said it.

It is theft and you already admitted it is stealing so why you now using the word "copy". The previous posters that I was responding to were not afraid to admit it is robbery.

It seems important to you that no one can stop you. Is this because no one can see you and that is why you steal movies, etc. but not cars, food, etc because the chances are you'd get caught. That is cowardice.

Obviously I mistyped but rather than saying so you try to twist it. Again cowardly.

Most people on these boards do have a point. You are simply one of the few who don't.

I wonder how long you can keep this going with no point?

Everyone knows what piracy is, the ones freely admitting to it, are freely admitting to it. You have no point, because you're telling people it's stealing, who do not care. "you popped up here last balling your eyes out", lolwut? That escalated quickly.

Copyright law is absolute nonsense. Just check Disney's involvement. Copyrights for films are simply just too long, it's ridiculous. It isn't theft. See, I can italicize, too.

Of course it's important to me that no one can stop me. The fact that someone could stop you and actually arrest you, helps with laws that actually work, don't you think? Like I said, if I could download physical copies of things, I absolutely would. Maybe some day I can, with a 3D printer. I'm going to start with your house. 10 of 'em.

Nobody has a point. Nobody. Define point. Life doesn't have a point.

How long is a piece of string?

Spon Farmer

Frank O. Pinion wrote: »

Everyone knows what piracy is, the ones freely admitting to it, are freely admitting to it. You have no point, because you're telling people it's stealing, who do not care. "you popped up here last balling your eyes out", lolwut? That escalated quickly.

Copyright law is absolute nonsense. Just check Disney's involvement. Copyrights for films are simply just too long, it's ridiculous. It isn't theft. See, I can italicize, too.

Of course it's important to me that no one can stop me. The fact that someone could stop you and actually arrest you, helps with laws that actually work, don't you think? Like I said, if I could download physical copies of things, I absolutely would. Maybe some day I can, with a 3D printer. I'm going to start with your house. 10 of 'em.

Nobody has a point. Nobody. Define point. Life doesn't have a point.

How long is a piece of string?

"Life doesn't have point". Jaysus cut the melodrama. :rolleyes:

You have not been able to freely admit you are stealing because you wobbled back to saying you "copy" stuff. Just have the guts to admit you are a thief.

How is copyright law nonsense? People and companies have the right to profit and protect what they've created and why they own. You'd be the very one crying into your pillow if some took something g belong to you.

The likes of you is why we have and need laws, yes. You finally made a point. Well done.

"Going to start with my house". More melodrama. Or is it supposed to be some kind of threat? :rolleyes:

Escalation you say.

This has really got your nose out joint. You need to watch less TV and get out more. At least actual pirates used to go outdoors

pixelburp

Spon Farmer, Frank O. Pinion; take a breath, quit bickering with each other. This is going nowhere.

Spon Farmer

pixelburp wrote: »

Spon Farmer, Frank O. Pinion; take a breath, quit bickering with each other. This is going nowhere.

No bickering on my end just stating the facts, but I will do as you ask.

Spon Farmer

The Black Oil wrote: »

This is one of those things a certain section of the entertainment industry have had a bit of a persecution complex about, imo. They're competing with gaming which is huge but don't really mention that. I don't know if downloading (torrents, as opposed to dodgy streams) is more common now, compared to the say the mid 2000s when broadband was starting to roll out and before any streaming platforms came to be. I do also think pirating works to their advantage sometimes - word of mouth, brand awareness, social media, articles, etc. And it's within internet culture to always be a little ahead of whatever studios are trying to do. The likes of Supernatural probably has a far bigger audience than actual eyeballs on the screen - the number of social media followers its actors have shows that. The TV industry has adapted better than its peers in music who bitched and moaned a lot back in the day, whilst providing almost fup all solutions until iTunes had some competitors. I pay for Netflix and Prime. Put the systems in place and a good chunk or the majority will pay, but so help me God, don't tie it down endlessly in licensing bollocks, region restrictions and all that nonsense.

iTunes and Netflix both support worldwide availability but that is up to the distributors.

iTunes look the other way when customers sign up for iTuns accounts outside their country of residence and Netflix only blocked VPNs whenever studios complained and when the EU forced them to.

The Black Oil

Spon Farmer wrote: »

Has The Treaty ever been released digitally or on DVD?

Not familiar with it. Probably a question for the production company RTE and whoever took over Thames Television. A young Gleeson here.

https://www.rte.ie/archives/2016/0808/807723-brendan-gleeson-is-michael-collins/

Spon Farmer

The Black Oil wrote: »

Not familiar with it. Probably a question for the production company RTE and whoever took over Thames Television. A young Gleeson here.

https://www.rte.ie/archives/2016/0808/807723-brendan-gleeson-is-michael-collins/

A great film. Can't believe RTÉ haven't showed it regularly.

Maybe for the anniversary they'll release it in some format. I suppose blu-ray would be too much to hope for. :P

DavyD_83

I blame whoever branded it as piracy.
If it was widely referred to as robbery/stealing of content or would have more of a sigma to it.
Any previous attempts to equate stealing money or a car to stealing a movie have failed miserably.

Piracy as a term is related to adventuring and taking from the rich robin hood style. A victimless crime (or at least with an unsympathetic victim)

Spon Farmer

DavyD_83 wrote: »

I blame whoever branded it as piracy.
If it was widely referred to as robbery/stealing of content or would have more of a sigma to it.
Any previous attempts to equate stealing money or a car to stealing a movie have failed miserably.

Piracy as a term is related to adventuring and taking from the rich robin hood style. A victimless crime (or at least with an unsympathetic victim)

Except for all the people the pirates robbed, murdered and raped.:eek:

Frank O. Pinion

Spon Farmer wrote: »

"Life doesn't have point". Jaysus cut the melodrama. :rolleyes:

You have not been able to freely admit you are stealing because you wobbled back to saying you "copy" stuff. Just have the guts to admit you are a thief.

How is copyright law nonsense? People and companies have the right to profit and protect what they've created and why they own. You'd be the very one crying into your pillow if some took something g belong to you.

The likes of you is why we have and need laws, yes. You finally made a point. Well done.

"Going to start with my house". More melodrama. Or is it supposed to be some kind of threat? :rolleyes:

Escalation you say.

This has really got your nose out joint. You need to watch less TV and get out more. At least actual pirates used to go outdoors

You're the one taking this super seriously, I'm obviously having a laugh. I find it hilarious people still think downloading torrents in 2019 is wrong and "stealing". I mean, you actually asked if I was threatening you...about downloading your house.

Copyright law IS absolute nonsense. Disney made it last nearly 100 years on films, which is just ridiculous. This is more than a black/white legal issue, there's more depth to art and copyright law than that. You don't seem to able to understand that though, and continue to reference me "crying/balling" which is just...weird. Again, I find your point of view humourous and very outdated.

Spon Farmer

Frank O. Pinion wrote: »

You're the one taking this super seriously, I'm obviously having a laugh. I find it hilarious people still think downloading torrents in 2019 is wrong and "stealing". I mean, you actually asked if I was threatening you...about downloading your house.

Copyright law IS absolute nonsense. Disney made it last nearly 100 years on films, which is just ridiculous. This is more than a black/white legal issue, there's more depth to art and copyright law than that. You don't seem to able to understand that though, and continue to reference me "crying/balling" which is just...weird. Again, I find your point of view humourous and very outdated.

You were indeed crying about it in your first post and right & wrong doesn't get "outdated".

And the moderators have told us to stop arguing it anyway. So you need to let it go.

Frank O. Pinion

Spon Farmer wrote: »

You were indeed crying about it in your first post and right & wrong doesn't get "outdated".

And the moderators have told us to stop arguing it anyway. So you need to let it go.

"Cool, good for you. But not everyone follows your morals, and many don't consider it stealing, or simply don't care. You won't change anyone's mind riding around on your high horse, calling people cheap."

What part of that implies "crying". Hard to debate with someone who interprets things so bizarrely.

Of course views that were considered right and wrong become outdated. Like abortion and gay marriage.

"So you need to let it go."

As do you, if you can stop shouting your morals from your high horse.

Spon Farmer

Frank O. Pinion wrote: »

"Cool, good for you. But not everyone follows your morals, and many don't consider it stealing, or simply don't care. You won't change anyone's mind riding around on your high horse, calling people cheap."

What part of that implies "crying". Hard to debate with someone who interprets things so bizarrely.

Of course views that were considered right and wrong become outdated. Like abortion and gay marriage.

"So you need to let it go."

As do you, if you can stop shouting your morals from your high horse.

No interpretation required. You were crying about it.

I said right & wrong doesn't get outdated. Stealing is wrong hence why you do in secret on your computer but are afraid to do it where you could get caught.

There is no high horse.

The moderators said to stop moaning about this but to ignore you is bad manners. So I find myself in a bind.

Mr E

Let me force the issue so - stop bickering.

Frank O. Pinion

Mr E wrote: »

Let me force the issue so - stop bickering.

Ironically, you're the one that posted the pirate meme in the first place, that lead to this discussion.

Mr E

The discussion turned into a slapfight between you and SF.

Tom Mann Centuria

Back to Life on BBC Three, (or however you choose to source it ), is very good. Well worth a watch imo, it's been compared to Fleabag, which is pretty apt. Tone is definitely similar between the humour and genuine moving drama.

Skid X

Some of you might remember Tony Slattery from Who's Line Is It Anyway? and many other 90s shows on UK Television

He seemed to disappear after that - there is a revealing interview in the Guardian today where he talks about his struggles with Bipolar Disorder and drink and drugs. Sad to read how his career collapsed and he has never really recovered either personally or professionally .


https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/apr/29/tony-slattery-had-very-happy-time-went-slightly-barmy

pixelburp

I do remember him well from Whose Line..., he was always the dapper, well dressed one. Sad to hear drugs et Al had their way. He has aged pretty badly

pixelburp

Fans of the 'Rivers of London' book series rejoice, it looks like Simon Pegg & Nick Frost will be producing a series; absolutely no details beyond this right now, but had been thinking the other day the series would be tailor-made for TV:

https://news.avclub.com/simon-pegg-and-nick-frost-working-on-tv-adaptation-of-f-1834394042

Agent Coulson

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Emily Deschanel & David Boreanaz along with another ex producer on Bones have been awarded a $179m in law suit against Fox over profit sharing.


Fox are appealing it.

‘Bones’ Stars & EPs’ Stunning $128M Punitive Damages Award Against Fox Punted By Judge In Appeal Hearing

Just over two months after Bones stars Emily Deschanel and David Boreanaz and executive producers Barry Josephson and Kathy Reichs were awarded $179 million in their long-standing profit participation fight with 21st Century Fox, a California judge today heard arguments on the arbitrator’s hefty decision.

The now Disney-owned Fox TV studio wasn’t happy with any of the huge sum in the self-dealing dispute. However, Fox isn’t contesting the non-punitive damages of $50,240,048 that arbitrator Peter Lichtman awarded the Bones actors and EPs. At issue specifically this morning was the $128 million in punitive damages he handed the plaintiffs as part of the final award.

With attorney Daniel Petrocelli of O’Melveny & Myers taking the lead for Fox’s appeal of the condemning arbitration decision, the Fox team is kicking back with the aggressive POV that Lichtman overstepped the bounds of his brief in awarding “punitive damages in the face of a contractual provision explicitly denying him that power.” Looking to vacate the award, the defendants filed their response on February 27 within minutes of the arbitration order being made public on the Los Angeles Superior Court docket.


At the beginning of the more than one-hour hearing this morning, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Richard Rico told those assembled that he had read the documents related to the case and would take that and their oral arguments under submission. “Give me your best shot, both sides,” Rico said to a panel of some of Hollywood’s most expensive and adroit attorneys.

A ruling is expected “shortly” in what is one of the biggest, if not the biggest, such award in Hollywood history.

“The award must be confirmed,” Josephson’s main lawyer Dale Kinsella said to Rico, stressing there is no ambiguity in the arbitrator’s decision and the law surrounding it.

“They are trying to sell the court that you do not have any power at all,“ Petrocelli, the defendants’ relatively newly hired attorney, countered as Rico sat at the bench head in hand. “This court must be the ultimate judge of whether an arbitrator exceed his authority or not.”

Uncharacteristically declining to issue a tentative before the hearing formally began today, Rico’s actions hit the pause button on the contentious case, at least for a few days. One thing for sure during this morning’s hearing was that the temperature and tone taken by Lichtman has simmered by technicalities. Lichtman, a former judge, lambasted the Fox defendants in his final order with accusations of giving “false testimony” and a “company-wide culture and an accepted climate that enveloped an aversion for the truth.”

In that context, the cooperating legal teams representing Deschanel, Boreanaz, author Reichs and Josephson are holding strong that they want every penny of the $178,695,778.90 that Lichtman declared they should get, sources tell me. The Fox TV studio side is equally set in its belief to fight the potentially industry-changing award of almost $128 million for as many appeals or reviews as they can get.

Deschanel and Josephson were both in the downtown courtroom this morning as were their own pricey Hollywood heavyweight team fronted by Kinsella of Kinsella Weitzman Iser Kump & Aldisert and John Berlinski of NYC-based Kasowitz Benson Torres LLP. However, it was Daniel Saunders of the latter firm who handled most of the matter in front of the judge Monday.

Saunders started off the often-heated oral arguments, citing previous cases and precedent. He tore into Fox for essentially stamping its feet in his opinion because the arbitration they themselves sought in the nearly four-year-long case went against them.

“Now that that gamble hasn’t paid off for them,” Saunders told the judge, Fox isn’t now deserving of a re-do. “They would be arguing that plaintiffs couldn’t be in here if the decision went the other way,” he added, noting the documents of arbitration both sides drafted and agreed to before the matter was moved out of the public eye in 2016 included punitive damages.

“They have a right to argue all of it, before the arbitrator,” he said.

“The proof is in the pudding, your honor,” Petrocelli said being called on by Rico once the other side tried to shut down Fox’s desire to toss the award in their opening salvo.

“This is an afterthought to somehow shield this award from post-hearing review,” the O’Melveny & Myers lawyer said as he took a swipe at the plaintiffs and Lichtman’s “industrial brand of justice/”

“They are making the argument that we have waived our right to seek judicial review,” ex-Donald Trump and AT&T attorney added, “because we somehow agreed the arbitrator would have conclusive authority over this matter.”

“Everyone knew this was going to end up in the Superior Court on a motion if the arbitrator found” for Deschanel, Boreanaz, Josephson and Reichs, Petrocelli said in closing his first round of remarks.

Saunders said “The question here isn’t did the arbitrator interpret the provision correctly, but did he interpret it at all,” while accusing the other side of cherry-picking their reading of the agreements between the parties and the power of Lichtman, a former judge.

“Their entire argument hinges on the fact that somehow your honor must divine that Fox threw in the term “in connection with” to include other entities,” Kinsella told the court in what he said was a deliberate attempt by the TV studio to sweep up in one net the connected and now past-connected corporate cousins. “That is preposterous!” the Kinsella Weitzman Iser Kump & Aldisert lawyer said of the possibly ambiguous language in the Bones deals.

Almost a year and a half before Bones concluded its 12-season run on March 28, 2017, EP Josephson filed his wide-ranging breach of contract and fraudulent inducement complaint ripping the “unrelenting” Fox with “underreporting” the finances of the Hart Hanson-created series to the tune of millions and millions back on November 25, 2015.

Less than a week later, actors and fellow Bones producers Deschanel and Boreanaz filed their own lawsuit, claiming they and Reichs had been “cheated out of more than $100 million in gross revenues and being overcharged many additional millions of dollars in alleged expenses.”

On April 8, 2016, the consolidated cases saw Josephson, Reich and the actors take a hit as Rico agreed with Fox and moved most of the case behind closed doors to arbitration. As the self-dealing issues were being handled in private, the rest of the case was stayed.

The big-bucks loss and damning of Fox execs — including Dana Walden and Peter Rice, both now at Disney — came down just as the final pieces were being assembled for the completion of Disney’s $71.3 billion acquisition of most of Fox’s assets. That kicked the matter onto Bob Iger’s desk.

Even though the controversy adverse CEO tweeted out on February 27 that he had “complete confidence” in Walden’s and Rice’s “character and integrity,” Iger likely wouldn’t make any bones about being displeased with the situation in which he finds Disney.

https://deadline.com/2019/04/bones-profits-ruling-emily-deschanel-david-boreanaz-fox-barry-josephson-damages-disney-1202603676/

Agent Coulson

Youtube has announced it will show all it's originals for free however they will be ad supported.

pixelburp

Can't say that's surprising: a sign YouTube Red is struggling? YT has been getting a bad rap lately from its content creators, and paying for a small corner of a hitherto free service was always a tough sell IMO

vargoo

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Youtube has announced it will show all it's originals for free however they will be ad supported.

So cobrai is watchable now?

Agent Coulson

vargoo wrote: »

So cobrai is watchable now?

I think it’s from August when there shows will go free.