I am a translator of subtitles for tv shows.
I helped create and mantain a team of translators.
In our 3 and a half years of existance, as team, we've translated hundreds of subtitltles, thus helping those shows to become more popular, and increased their value, both commercilly and artistically.
We don't charge for our services. We do it because we love to do it. We do it because it helps us get better in both languages. We do it because we can and doing it helps others that can't. We do it with absolutelly NO interest in money.
How it's used, it's not our problem.
To do it, we use transcripts created by other fans, that we make a point to aknowledge. Not because we MUST, but because it's FAIR. We only ASK the same courtesy.
To this day, I've never even stopped to think if there's any kind of illegality or infringment in this, and I think I never will. I started doing it because some shows I wanted to watch with my family, didn't have subtitles in the languages we ALL could read. I still do it mainly for them, I just changed from family, to, who ever may be interested.
The thing is, I, we, don't really need the subtitles. But, being able to do something that we know it will give someone the chance to enjoy something that was otherwise impossible, and, doing it is FUN and Chalenging and teaches us new things every day, I really can't think of a reason NOT to do it.
Anyway, I will never stop, even if they try to make us pay. The only ones that will suffer are the ones that will not get their subtitles. Will they still watch the show? Will that show be worth the same? After burning us on the stake for it, will they be respected for it?
One other small thing, why shows must be TV Shows? Why should great stories and spetacular shows be dependent of the whims of TV's bureaucrats? Isn't it time to get rid of Yet Another Stupid Businness Model?
Stream it, with ads, publish it for free with ads, ask for fansubs and get rid of TV execs that are in the businness of producing ad spaces by inserting anything in the middle. If that "anything" attracts viewers they charge more for the ads, if not, they change it for "something" that will.
The total disregard for their consumers, will kill them, if a new competitor arrives.
I'll never buy a music CD ever again. From whatever source.
Why? Well, they really don't need to sell cd's anymore, they only have to wait to catch 1% or less of the file-sharers, brand them as "pirates", sue them, and make more money then actualy working.
The artists? Well, the ones I respect and encourage, are on Jamendo. The rest aren't artists anymore, only businness man/woman. So, no, don't respect them, any of them anymore.
I do listen to music. I do spend money on music, but, supporting them directly, not distributors that are on it just for the money.
If a band needs a space, I can share my garage with them, and actualy attend. I'll gladly build them a website for free. But, no, no more money for RIAA or anyone that thinks music as $$$.
That waiver could be pasted on any song, and, also, could be cut from any song, rendering it unusable. You would never be sure if the song had been edited or not.
As for the purppose of the post comment, it's abundatelly clear that governments everywhere are bought and paid for by the Big Media Corps. They aren't capabble of unbiased decisions. One thing they are forgetting is that file-sharers are growing everyday, and pretty soon they will be abble to vote. Some, have already voted. With organized parties like "Pirate Party" file-sharers will have a voice.
I really don't care about legalities or rights or whatever, my main concern would be my ratio. If you don't know what I'm talking about, go find out.
Why do you think Mike, or anyone else, has to create a businness model for you?
You, if interested part, needs the model, either pay someone for it, or, pull it out of your head. Why demmand anyone to create one, just because that person points the flaws in other models?
Authors, artists, content producers of every kind, need to take advantage of new technologies. That's a fact. Either do, or die. But it's up to each one of them to come up with a working model, instead of relying on "someone else's" bright ideas.
Last time I checked there's plenty of professionals eager to help you build it. Just provide the personal angle that is the cornerstone of today's world.
It's up to you. Don't demmand anyone. Do it yourself.
Wich you assume, in your good will mind, that the RIAA is paying ALL the artists ALL that is owed to them. And I mean the RIAA as one organization, but also the RIAA as the group, considering all the labels that are there.
FYI, there are several lawsuits againts RIAA companies, by artists, claiming they got cheated.
I've been reading and reading, trying to understand, but, this question remains.
What is actualy copyrighted?
Take for instance a movie. If I have a DVD and rip it to divx, or xvid, or rmvb or whatever, I don't get a copy of a DVD. I get a version, lower in quality and options, and basicaly a different set of "0 and 1's" from the DVD. That version requires a different equipment (software) to produce a "similar but different" experience from that one I get from the DVD. My question is, the copyright extends to these versions that are NOT copyed but transformed?
Isn't this "reversal engineering"?
Imagine I don't have a DVD player. The only way to access the media I have is by transforming it into something else, using, maybe my neighbours computer... Isn't this "Fair Use"?
If then having a VERSION of something I share it, who am I hurting? Whose rights?
Ok, I really don't expect anyone here to answer, I just have this question. Maybe one day I'll find a satisfying answer.
Really? Games hard to copy? Consoles hard to crack?
You can crack a console for the price of a CD.
Every game you want is available for download. Sometimes, even "BEFORE" they are available to buy. And yet, Gaming industry makes bigger profits each year.
Music industry on the other hand, can't deal with it's lost monopoly of entertainment. So, they choose to blame everyone they can.
As any 13 year old playing WOW would say: "Less QQ and more PewPew."
Oh, and before going to bed, try "http://www.jamendo.com" and be amazed how GOOD free music can be.
IMHO, I think almost everyone here is missing the point, at least the main point.
"Piracy" isn't file-sharing. "Piracy" is making money out of duplicating copyrighted items.
File-Sharing isn't about making money. At most is about saving money, money that will be spent somewhere else, maybe improving economies locally, instead of comglomerates.
Entitlement, is what copyright holders feel about their items. They created it. Found a way to monetize their creations. And then they feel entitled to receive in perpetuity plus a day, royalties from that creation, without producing anything else more.
What file-sharers do, and, they will keep doing, is not recognize that entitlment. You can argue all you want with laws, and infringment and whatever else, but anyone learning that it is being abused, and finding a way to not remain in that position, will take it. Whatever what you may call it.
Prices, availability, DRM's, Openness, all that is fruitless, as long as the entitlment remains. "Rightfull compensation to authors" is the main reason everyone is invoking. That is the main problem. No one should be entitled to be compensated for creating something for commercial purposes. If you are doing it for artistic and not commerce, you don't feel entitled.
If any of you starts a businness, and many of you have, you don't expect that your businness will be "Rightfuly compensated". You will work, and demand payment, and will be paid, or law will be at your side. But, no one guarantees that you will keep receiving after the job is done. In perpetuity.
Why "creative" work should be "Entitled" to that?
File-sharers have reached that conclusion, and found that they also have the right to some entitlement of their own. Call it what you want, as mike stated, the horse is out of the barn. People realized that they were being abused, and found a way to fight back.
Sending letters, fines, sueing, cutting access... and whatever else you may do, or demand done in the name of your entitlement, will only create more on the file-sharers side. Ultimately, file-sharing will never stop, and it will be higher at every effort made to quelch it. The sooner everyone realizes that, and find a reasonable way to deal with it, either embracing it, or removing the reasons for it to exist, the sooner everyone will proffit from it.
Just my oppinion, as file-sharer, as father, as educator, as creator, as author, as human being. Peace...
Disappointing that polititians are bought by lobbys? How?
By deffinition a polititian is a property bought and payed for. What else can you expect from them?
When I heard my sister saying she was considering a political career, I stopped talking to her for 2 years. She eventually got the message.
I have more respect for drug dealer, that is doing harm to a few kids, then I have for ANY polititian in the world. Those scumbags I consider bellow human.
Apparently, I have seen no actual proof, they provide a service of some kind. Even if that proves to be true, wich I really doubt, one for each city would be more then enough. The rest, well, I can think of several uses, being fertilizer the best so far.
For all of you, that really think a polititian is someone important, I can only say... I just saw Santa Claus having a drink with Superman.
It will be a simple replacing of "Stars". The artificially made, that are now the standard, by the fan selected, that are becoming the norm. Example: Susan Boyle.
Musicians everywhere are realising that they are not employees of the labels. At best they are label slaves. Who actualy pays them are the fans, and those are the ones that need to be obliged. Little by little, they'll come around. Of course, some dinossaurs will take more time to die then others, some will make more noise, or stink a lot worse, before they disappear, but since meteor "Internet" fall on these once label paradise, they are doomed to extintion.
What will replace them? What will be the "mammal" of the after crash? Too early to tell yet. Let's enjoy the ride...
No, the flow is in no danger. Maybe, just maybe, who knows... Quality will even improve...
RSS
Twitter
Why? (as FatGiant)
I am a translator of subtitles for tv shows.
I helped create and mantain a team of translators.
In our 3 and a half years of existance, as team, we've translated hundreds of subtitltles, thus helping those shows to become more popular, and increased their value, both commercilly and artistically.
We don't charge for our services. We do it because we love to do it. We do it because it helps us get better in both languages. We do it because we can and doing it helps others that can't. We do it with absolutelly NO interest in money.
How it's used, it's not our problem.
To do it, we use transcripts created by other fans, that we make a point to aknowledge. Not because we MUST, but because it's FAIR. We only ASK the same courtesy.
To this day, I've never even stopped to think if there's any kind of illegality or infringment in this, and I think I never will. I started doing it because some shows I wanted to watch with my family, didn't have subtitles in the languages we ALL could read. I still do it mainly for them, I just changed from family, to, who ever may be interested.
The thing is, I, we, don't really need the subtitles. But, being able to do something that we know it will give someone the chance to enjoy something that was otherwise impossible, and, doing it is FUN and Chalenging and teaches us new things every day, I really can't think of a reason NOT to do it.
Anyway, I will never stop, even if they try to make us pay. The only ones that will suffer are the ones that will not get their subtitles. Will they still watch the show? Will that show be worth the same? After burning us on the stake for it, will they be respected for it?
One other small thing, why shows must be TV Shows? Why should great stories and spetacular shows be dependent of the whims of TV's bureaucrats? Isn't it time to get rid of Yet Another Stupid Businness Model?
Stream it, with ads, publish it for free with ads, ask for fansubs and get rid of TV execs that are in the businness of producing ad spaces by inserting anything in the middle. If that "anything" attracts viewers they charge more for the ads, if not, they change it for "something" that will.
The total disregard for their consumers, will kill them, if a new competitor arrives.
I just don't know what's keeping them.
(as FatGiant)
"Life is Sharing"
:) Nothing more to say!
(as FatGiant)
Reading this, all I can say is:
I'll never buy a music CD ever again. From whatever source.
Why? Well, they really don't need to sell cd's anymore, they only have to wait to catch 1% or less of the file-sharers, brand them as "pirates", sue them, and make more money then actualy working.
The artists? Well, the ones I respect and encourage, are on Jamendo. The rest aren't artists anymore, only businness man/woman. So, no, don't respect them, any of them anymore.
I do listen to music. I do spend money on music, but, supporting them directly, not distributors that are on it just for the money.
If a band needs a space, I can share my garage with them, and actualy attend. I'll gladly build them a website for free. But, no, no more money for RIAA or anyone that thinks music as $$$.
Goodbye RIAA.
(as FatGiant)
The problem is a bit more complicated I'm afraid.
That waiver could be pasted on any song, and, also, could be cut from any song, rendering it unusable. You would never be sure if the song had been edited or not.
As for the purppose of the post comment, it's abundatelly clear that governments everywhere are bought and paid for by the Big Media Corps. They aren't capabble of unbiased decisions. One thing they are forgetting is that file-sharers are growing everyday, and pretty soon they will be abble to vote. Some, have already voted. With organized parties like "Pirate Party" file-sharers will have a voice.
I really don't care about legalities or rights or whatever, my main concern would be my ratio. If you don't know what I'm talking about, go find out.
Re: Re: Re: The flaw in Mike's economic plan that he continues to ignore (as FatGiant)
Why do you think Mike, or anyone else, has to create a businness model for you?
You, if interested part, needs the model, either pay someone for it, or, pull it out of your head. Why demmand anyone to create one, just because that person points the flaws in other models?
Authors, artists, content producers of every kind, need to take advantage of new technologies. That's a fact. Either do, or die. But it's up to each one of them to come up with a working model, instead of relying on "someone else's" bright ideas.
Last time I checked there's plenty of professionals eager to help you build it. Just provide the personal angle that is the cornerstone of today's world.
It's up to you. Don't demmand anyone. Do it yourself.
Re: (as FatGiant)
Wich you assume, in your good will mind, that the RIAA is paying ALL the artists ALL that is owed to them. And I mean the RIAA as one organization, but also the RIAA as the group, considering all the labels that are there.
FYI, there are several lawsuits againts RIAA companies, by artists, claiming they got cheated.
But, ok. I get your point. You are a believer.
Sorry, I'm not.
Re: (as FatGiant)
My question to you is:
Guilty about what?
:)
Question: What is copyrighted? (as FatGiant)
I've been reading and reading, trying to understand, but, this question remains.
What is actualy copyrighted?
Take for instance a movie. If I have a DVD and rip it to divx, or xvid, or rmvb or whatever, I don't get a copy of a DVD. I get a version, lower in quality and options, and basicaly a different set of "0 and 1's" from the DVD. That version requires a different equipment (software) to produce a "similar but different" experience from that one I get from the DVD. My question is, the copyright extends to these versions that are NOT copyed but transformed?
Isn't this "reversal engineering"?
Imagine I don't have a DVD player. The only way to access the media I have is by transforming it into something else, using, maybe my neighbours computer... Isn't this "Fair Use"?
If then having a VERSION of something I share it, who am I hurting? Whose rights?
Ok, I really don't expect anyone here to answer, I just have this question. Maybe one day I'll find a satisfying answer.
Thanks all for a great discussion.
Standing Ovation required... (as FatGiant)
"The only ones who should be "sanctioned" or face penalties is you, for your own inability to compete."
Apparently they are already feeling the "sanctions" that may be the reason for his rant.
Your response, even if I consider it, a bit too polite, is perfect, and, in any place minimally enlightned you would get a standing ovation.
Great reading, thankyou Mike.
Re: (as FatGiant)
Of course it is.
But, what people actualy do is file-sharing, not piracy.
Piracy is making money out of something that isn't yours.
File-sharing is NOT making money, while sharing with everyone what you like.
Somehow, file-sharing got conoted with piracy, I'll give you one guess of who did it.
You really want to compare bank robbing and file-sharing? Really?
And another small thing, just out of curiosity, are you being payed to post, that's why you hide behind a anonymous handle? Just curious.
Games Hard to copy? (as FatGiant)
Really? Games hard to copy? Consoles hard to crack?
You can crack a console for the price of a CD.
Every game you want is available for download. Sometimes, even "BEFORE" they are available to buy. And yet, Gaming industry makes bigger profits each year.
Music industry on the other hand, can't deal with it's lost monopoly of entertainment. So, they choose to blame everyone they can.
As any 13 year old playing WOW would say: "Less QQ and more PewPew."
Oh, and before going to bed, try "http://www.jamendo.com" and be amazed how GOOD free music can be.
(as FatGiant)
IMHO, I think almost everyone here is missing the point, at least the main point.
"Piracy" isn't file-sharing. "Piracy" is making money out of duplicating copyrighted items.
File-Sharing isn't about making money. At most is about saving money, money that will be spent somewhere else, maybe improving economies locally, instead of comglomerates.
Entitlement, is what copyright holders feel about their items. They created it. Found a way to monetize their creations. And then they feel entitled to receive in perpetuity plus a day, royalties from that creation, without producing anything else more.
What file-sharers do, and, they will keep doing, is not recognize that entitlment. You can argue all you want with laws, and infringment and whatever else, but anyone learning that it is being abused, and finding a way to not remain in that position, will take it. Whatever what you may call it.
Prices, availability, DRM's, Openness, all that is fruitless, as long as the entitlment remains. "Rightfull compensation to authors" is the main reason everyone is invoking. That is the main problem. No one should be entitled to be compensated for creating something for commercial purposes. If you are doing it for artistic and not commerce, you don't feel entitled.
If any of you starts a businness, and many of you have, you don't expect that your businness will be "Rightfuly compensated". You will work, and demand payment, and will be paid, or law will be at your side. But, no one guarantees that you will keep receiving after the job is done. In perpetuity.
Why "creative" work should be "Entitled" to that?
File-sharers have reached that conclusion, and found that they also have the right to some entitlement of their own. Call it what you want, as mike stated, the horse is out of the barn. People realized that they were being abused, and found a way to fight back.
Sending letters, fines, sueing, cutting access... and whatever else you may do, or demand done in the name of your entitlement, will only create more on the file-sharers side. Ultimately, file-sharing will never stop, and it will be higher at every effort made to quelch it. The sooner everyone realizes that, and find a reasonable way to deal with it, either embracing it, or removing the reasons for it to exist, the sooner everyone will proffit from it.
Just my oppinion, as file-sharer, as father, as educator, as creator, as author, as human being. Peace...
(as FatGiant)
Disappointing that polititians are bought by lobbys? How?
By deffinition a polititian is a property bought and payed for. What else can you expect from them?
When I heard my sister saying she was considering a political career, I stopped talking to her for 2 years. She eventually got the message.
I have more respect for drug dealer, that is doing harm to a few kids, then I have for ANY polititian in the world. Those scumbags I consider bellow human.
Apparently, I have seen no actual proof, they provide a service of some kind. Even if that proves to be true, wich I really doubt, one for each city would be more then enough. The rest, well, I can think of several uses, being fertilizer the best so far.
For all of you, that really think a polititian is someone important, I can only say... I just saw Santa Claus having a drink with Superman.
Have a nice one...
(as FatGiant)
The flow drop is in no danger of happening.
It will be a simple replacing of "Stars". The artificially made, that are now the standard, by the fan selected, that are becoming the norm. Example: Susan Boyle.
Musicians everywhere are realising that they are not employees of the labels. At best they are label slaves. Who actualy pays them are the fans, and those are the ones that need to be obliged. Little by little, they'll come around. Of course, some dinossaurs will take more time to die then others, some will make more noise, or stink a lot worse, before they disappear, but since meteor "Internet" fall on these once label paradise, they are doomed to extintion.
What will replace them? What will be the "mammal" of the after crash? Too early to tell yet. Let's enjoy the ride...
No, the flow is in no danger. Maybe, just maybe, who knows... Quality will even improve...