What do you think they will do /g/?
They're just so used to getting their way on everything. Here they find themselves with nobody to run to and no congresscritter to pay off who will just make the problem go away. And they've somehow convinced themselves that this problem is costing them some obscenely large amount of billions per year.
They're not doing it right then.
Do all production work on encrypted, airgapped systems with no USB ports, to prevent employees leaking movies. Distribute them to theaters in armored vehicles escorted by full SWAT teams so nobody can steal a copy there. Replace the big screen with tiny devices that project the movie directly onto your retina, and supervise all use of them, to prevent recording devices. Stop showing movies on TV, streaming them over the Internet, or releasing them on DVD/Blu-Ray, as these are inherently stealable.
This is even better. Never let anyone outside the studio see the actual movie.
They could still release them in theaters and on DVD, but it would just consist of some trailers for upcoming movies, followed by a notice that due to antipiracy measures the film cannot be displayed on this screen.
Then someone else could optimize the process by realizing that it's only necessary to produce trailers rather than full length films, cutting production costs tremendously.
We don't yet have a way to dump that back into a format you can pirate though. Besides a braindump of a movie would lose a lot in terms of quality and details.
I was thinking of a camera fitted out with a lens to make it focus the image.
The cost of doing this (if it's even possible), would far eclipse the "costs" of piracy. Of course, the costs associated with all these legal processes far eclipse those of piracy too, so I don't see why they wouldn't go for it. They're easily that fucking retarded.
It's all Progressivism. Through
They seek to police the internet and obtain total control. Recently "muh slow lanes/ISP corruption!" was also added to the toolset.
>any movie popular in America
>not just using Netflix if you have to
>using torrents for anything
Still, it makes me a little mad. How can they be so successful in their jewish schemes? When will the world realize sharing isn't bad?
Most moderately wealthy people like say your Joe Rogans and Kevin Smiths are either indifferent or ignore this sort of thing.
The people who tend to complain the most about this sort of thing are old mega rich assholes.
Yeah I'm not sure if Joe is "pro piracy" but he doesn't seem to see any particular problem with it. He's said in later podcasts that he thinks Paul Stanley is just an old man who doesn't understand how things are now.
I think his argument was something like equating it to recording a song off the radio on a cassette tape.
i think its like a marihuana thing, implying that suddenly they have this new business "suing pirates". Pirate is a word that was used to described people who copied a movie to re-sell it.
So by definition, a Pirate is the first leaker-uploader of the movie. The rest are sharers.
However, somehow they figured it makes more economical sense to persecute the sharers, as they are many, so, more trials = more money.
Is a dead end discussion, its exactly like persecuting stoners to stop weed, i mean, those are the already lost cases, you should go to the distribution point, so the stoners don't multiply, not just clean the stoners and feel done.
Unless you want something to do tomorrow as well.
>Pirate is a word that was used to describe people who copied a movie to re-sell it
>So by definition, a Pirate is the first leaker-uploader of the movie
>The rest are sharers
No, by definition, the first uploader is also a sharer because he/she is not selling or profiting from the upload but rather freely distributing it, possibly at his/her own expense.