SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Earlier this week we received a leaked presentation covering the results of a Google Fiber survey conducted on behalf of Warner Bros and Sony Pictures Entertainment. The research was conducted in 2012 and aimed to get a baseline of the piracy levels, so changes can be measured after the rollout.
[...] Drawing on an MPAA formula that counts all pirated views as losses the report notes that it may cost Hollywood over a billion dollars per year. That’s a rather impressive increase of 58% compared to current piracy levels. The research also finds a link between piracy and broadband speeds, which is another reason for Hollywood not to like Google’s Internet service.
[...] What’s most striking from the above approach is the way the studios frame Google Fiber as a piracy threat, instead of looking at the opportunities it offers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 02 2015, @05:30AM
They're probably right. 1 gbps symmetric, no cap? I could torrent as much as any laptop out there could handle, do torrent streaming, use extra privacy layers that would slow things down, seed well, etc.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Friday January 02 2015, @05:56AM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 2) by frojack on Friday January 02 2015, @07:23AM
Why do they have to be timely?
Never understood why a movie has to be watched the instant it is released. I'm perfectly happy to watch two or three year old movies for the very first time (on a large screen TV). I've not seen the, so they are all new to me.
But then I've been to exactly one movie in the last 7 years, so I'm probably not the one to ask.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Tork on Friday January 02 2015, @08:04AM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Friday January 02 2015, @08:54AM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by metamonkey on Friday January 02 2015, @04:53PM
Today you don't have to wait 3 years. Try 3 months. Guardians of the galaxy. Theater: August 1st. Download: November 18th. Disc: December 9th.
Okay 3, 2, 1, let's jam.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Friday January 02 2015, @09:40PM
True enough, but they are still expensive in three months, (and I'm still a cheap bastard).
Some I will watch within 6 months, but most I just wait till I have a couple hours to kill and a beer in hand, and put them up on the big TV on a whim for less than three bucks.
Current-ish movies on Google play
Guardians 6 bucks. Gravity 7 bucks.
Older-ish movies on same
LoTR-TT 3 bucks.
Lots of times you can BUY and own for life (of Google, not you) for the same money as you can rent and watch once today.
None of the above arguments for a movie having to be current releases are convincing to me. Unless you are a crowd follower, and your life is so vapid that all you can discuss is the movie you saw last night, I still don't see why a well done story 2 years old is less appealing than one done today.
Watched 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) over the holidays. It didn't look cheesy as some allege. Didn't even particularly look dated. 40 year old movie FFS.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by CRCulver on Friday January 02 2015, @10:15AM
(Score: 2) by Tork on Friday January 02 2015, @09:48PM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 03 2015, @07:00AM
You don't have to wait for your torrent to arrive with torrent streaming. It downloads the first pieces of a video file first, and plays in a media player capable of streaming from file like VLC. Well-seeded popular torrents (thousands of seeds) are usually the type of show/movie you would find on Netflix and would download fast on 10 mbps. With a gigabit connection, no matter how you choose to torrent the file, it will likely be completely done in under a minute.
Storage is cheap unless you are SSD only. You can delete the file after you're done. You can reuse the same 10-50 GB to download a batch of content and delete it as you watch it. H.265 is *starting* to cut some file sizes in half and can play on machines that are a few years old.
(Score: 2) by CRCulver on Saturday January 03 2015, @09:29AM
Yes, they are. When one watches a lot of films, the costs of watching them legitimately can rise into the hundreds or thousands of dollars. Meanwhile, torrents are free.
With gigabit, even HD torrents arrive very quickly, within the time that one is, say, preparing some snacks for the film and rearranging chairs. Nowadays this is true even for less popular content like some obscure art films; there's always a couple of seeders around and the download is pratically instantaneous. The days of waiting in agony for torrent content are over.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Saturday January 03 2015, @07:38PM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 2) by CRCulver on Friday January 02 2015, @10:36AM
(Score: 2) by metamonkey on Friday January 02 2015, @04:57PM
Yup, and that settles it. We need federal legislation to ban internet speeds greater than 10Mb/s. Nothing should be allowed to exist that threatens established corporate profits. Anything else would be un-American.
Okay 3, 2, 1, let's jam.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 02 2015, @10:00PM
The only mainstream use of very fast internet has been sending video. It can be legal, ie Netflix, or piracy. I don't think the general public has a particular use for it, but the phone companies can keep talking people into paying for it...