iTunes
"...despite Game of Thrones now being available on iTunes mere hours after it airs in the USA, for just $AUD2.99 an episode"
Well there's the problem. Not everyone has an Apple device.
The United States of America's Ambassador to Australia has taken to Facebook to protect one of America's critical industries: the making of gory television serials. Jeffrey L Bleich, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary, appears to have noted that Australians are very keen on the HBO series Game of Thrones. Vulture …
Piracy exists in gaps in markets... and it's how entire digital industries have been born.
Sure, you might have it out on iTunes... that will hit your Apple using demographic. It's also $3.49 for the HD version. Or you could download it now, and buy the DVD/Bluray when that comes out and use the download for mobile devices, including i[Pad/Phone]... prices between digital products from some vendors are too high. Sony, Steam and iTunes are all guilty in some way... you can often pick up a physical version of the same thing for less. I'm sure this reason is shops complain that it's not fair, but sorry... if I want a disk and box, I'll happily pay a bit extra. If I don't, I won't and there is no excuse for this practice.
Does that mean because you have no iDevice that makes it okay to steal it, rather than wait for it to be released in other formats? Cool, so you'd be okay if I grabbed a TV from your house if I don't happen to have one of those.. After all its wrong of you to have something I want and not give it to me for free. BTW I like your car better than mine too, I'm taking that as well.
He does seem to be going about this in a much more enlightened way than some. There is no point issuing threats you cannot enforce on even a 'shampoo Advert' sample of the population, far better to speak to people as though they are real people and ask them politely to be good about this.
I feel similarly. For music I pay $0.99 for a song that I listen to over and over again. $2.99 for a television episode I'm only going to watch once just feels like a lot. $30 for 1 season of 1 tv show could actually buy me a month of cable TV for probably about 50 channels (though to be fair, it wouldn't include HBO).
Still, it just doesn't add up.
The show doesn't air "mere" hours after the US, it airs 10.30am on Monday in my local time but it's not usualy available to download from iTunes till Tuesday evening. Plus the playback through iTunes is terrible, if they want people to stop pirating they have to make a platform that is better than what people can get for free in terms of automated downloads (without having to give your password every 5 minutes to apple till it locks your account for logging in too often!) and video quality, plus playing in iTunes has annoying audio/visual syncing issues so you have to pause the episode every 15 minutes so the video can catch up.
Hmm, I think your comments say more about the shitty state of Australian broadband than any intrinsic issues with iTunes (which for the record, delivers HD quality at least as good as any torrent you're going to find).
The Australian situation is an interesting test case though; one of the reasons people in the UK claim they torrent GoT is that they otherwise have to buy a full Sky subscription (not always possible, never mind desirable), and that HBO don't make box sets or legit downloads available for a full year after first broadcast. It seems fairly obvious that even if HBO made GoT available on iTunes or LoveFilm the day after release, people would still pirate it, because lets face it, free trumps every other price point.
(NB. I wonder how many people are like me, have a Sky sub and Sky+ it, but still download each episode for their library anyway?)
" I wonder how many people are like me, have a Sky sub and Sky+ it, but still download each episode for their library anyway?"
Quite. SkyHD sub here, so I could get stuff like GoT without having to resort to the legally dubious world of torrents, but I don't like my viewing interrupted by ad breaks at the best of times (i.e. when watching some throwaway programme that requires minimal levels of concentration), let alone when I'm watching something as immersive as GoT, so being able to get ad-free copies of such shows is a pretty big deal for me.
Watched series 1 months before it was made available in the UK. The same for season 2. And again for season 3. I didn't want to wait. I did, however, think the show was SO utterly amazing that I felt compelled to fork out for the blue ray releases of seasons 1 and 2, and I will do the same again for season 3. So, have I been dishonest?
I really can't be arsed to wait out the glacial pace at which these show get released. I look forward to the day when shows like GoT get released worldwide on disc and on day 1.
What's the big damn deal?
Apple and Sky can go die in a fire, they're crap, for different reasons but both still offer too little for what they cost (Apple takes your soul, Sky takes your dignity, both take your money).
So the alternative? Wait a year for it to reach British TV? Erm, no ta.
Yeah, we acquire the episodes in a less than legal manner. But by the same token, we also have both box sets, and will be getting the other box sets when they EVENTUALLY get released. HBO wants more money from the product? Release the damn box sets a month after the season ends, instead of a week after the new season STARTS.
This post has been deleted by its author
This post has been deleted by its author
In the UK GoT is only available on Sky Atlantic, which is a subscription channel only available to those who have signed up to Sky. Many people do not have (or want) this channel, so the only legal method for them to watch the series is to buy the box sets which come out long after the season ends. Or buy it on iTunes episode-by-episode for a lot more than the cost of the box set.
So in these days of immediate gratification, it means that people are going to use alternative methods to watch it. Which means illegal downloading.
The only way around this is to make it available through more widely accessible channels (BBC, Channel 4 etc) or stream it for a reasonable price.
Finally, if I buy the series via iTunes and then download it via a torrent in order to have it on physical media, does that still count as piracy?
I find it interesting how this topic always brings people out with the argument "Well if HBO made it available immediately in the exact way I want I wouldn't download" as if they have some entitlement to everything on their own terms.
Whoever makes the show/movie/music gets to decide how to release it and no laws I'm aware of give people an automatic right to access entertainment. You don't like the cost/availability/release schedule? Then, shock horror, you don't have to watch it! The world does not revolve around you or owe you anything.
if you want to torrent it, go ahead. But don't try and justify it by blaming other people - it's always your choice
It's a difficult situation; GoT is one of the best series to be made in a long time and I have no objection to paying for it on principle. However, £3 for streaming an episode is extremely steep, and you'd have to tie me down and lobotomise me before I'd willingly give any of my money to Apple or Sky.
I am left with the realisitc choice of pirate now, or wait until it comes out on dvd/blu-ray at a reasonable price. Like many others, I'll probably do both.
"The thing is, the Internet has expanded social groups across borders, so people are more likely to hear their friends raving about something that turns out to be blocked or unavailable for them."
What happened to self control? If it's not out in your region now, then just wait until it is or start an online petition (because they always work)
It's a difficult situation; GoT is one of the best series to be made in a long time and I have no objection to paying for it on principle. However, £3 for streaming an episode is extremely steep, and you'd have to tie me down and lobotomise me before I'd willingly give any of my money to Apple or Sky.
But it's down to the the manufacturer of any product or service to set the price and as they're a business they'll charge what they think the market can bear. As consumers we have the choice to either accept this or not buy it. Choosing to take it without paying them anything is hardly the moral choice (I'm avoiding using the word stealing as it's not. I also know that most Reg readers, being paragons of virtue, will buy the blu-ray later but they are obviously above the average person, morally speaking. And more handsome)
I don't agree with the cost of a lot of things - I therefore don't own those things, or even any copyright-infringing knock-offs purporting to be those things.
For the record, I used to download quite a lot from warez sites, but I never pretended it was for any other reason than I wanted to, or that the manufacturer was somehow to blame.
"But it's down to the the manufacturer of any product or service to set the price and as they're a business they'll charge what they think the market can bear."
That includes, the acceptance that it will be pirated, So they balance the price just low enough that piracy doesn't erode too much of their massive profits.
More accurately, I would venture that piracy isn't so much a legal issue as the symptom of a service issue. Or less charitably, a failing business model.
Because if increasingly connected viewers/customers want to watch the same show at the same time all over the world, what exactly is the problem? It certainly isn't because we lack the technology.
If I were in the entertainment industry, I would be striving to do just that. Because bigger viewing figures mean bigger ad potential, and bigger revenues thorugh a wider and more efficient distribution., not to mention the joy of going viral. What's not to like? Why doesn't Hollywood want each if its products to potentially receive the same number of hits as a Gangnam style? When most people might pay 50 cents a pop or 10 bucks a month ? Hello...... do the frickin math people....
"More accurately, I would venture that piracy isn't so much a legal issue as the symptom of a service issue. Or less charitably, a failing business model."
Oh wow. That's what I call hitting the nail on the head.
Like 80% of the respondents here, I'm quite happy to pay but not that price. And since it will never be on sale for a reasonable price, I'll have to wait for the blu-ray.
Which I'll probably never watch.
Here's a question for you all: I've paid my pay-TV subscription and I rent the channel that GoT airs on. If there's a power failure, can I download that episode I missed?
Worth noting, it's not priced at £2.99 it's priced at $2.99, which means, if it was even available to stream in the UK, it would cost £1.92. Now I wonder what the odds are that it'd be sold at, say, £1.99 an episode in the UK or would it be sold for £2.99 after all making it considerably more expensive in the UK? In fact, I'd not be suprised to see it a "premium viewing" price of as much as £3.99 or even £4.99 if some streaming services are to be the benchmark....
If they do put it out at £1.99 an episode in a nice 1080p, steady, ad-free stream, available within no more than 24hrs of original US broadcast then they can sign me up right now. Happy Days!
Until then, I can get it by....other means.
The thing is, the Internet has expanded social groups across borders, so people are more likely to hear their friends raving about something that turns out to be blocked or unavailable for them.
None of this region locking makes sense to the average person, It's long out of touch with the real world and feels like an old redundant thing that's going to be gone before long anyway, so it's easy to rationalise just downloading stuff while it's still relevant rather than waiting until the businesses involved get a clue.
Also £2.99 an episode is way too much, It needs to be cheap enough that people don't question the cost, like the 99c / 69p level for apps and music. iTunes / Amazon / Play downloads aren't competing with physical media, they're competing with free downloads, the price, quality and convenience need to reflect that reality.
This post has been deleted by its author
I find it amazing how copy sellers always defend copyright in terms of payment to copy creators.
It has been clear since they closed the first music sharing network (Napster) that the big companies aren't interested in payment for content, they are, and were, interested in controlling promotion and distribution. They realized even then that if they lost control of promotion and distribution, they would be obsolete.
So yes, technicaly, morally and historically, there doesn't seem to be any clear reason why they should control when and where you view content.
If there was an moral reason why they should control distribution and promotion, I'm sure I would have heard it now, instead of the suppression of file sharing schemes like Napstor, which offered the technical possiblilty of content payment without content control.
No, to watch "Game of Thrones" legitimately WITHOUT WAITING FOR THE DVD TO BE RELEASED you have to buy a subscription to Sky. Or you can have a bit of bloody patience & wait for the DVD.
I have back problems that mean visits to the cinema are not worth the pain they cause, so I wait until the films I want to see are available on DVD or Sky. Am I suffering by having to wait? Not really, I get to watch the film and be entertained by it eventually - just a few months later than some people see it. I also end up spending less on it because I waited.
I agree that $2.99 per episode is expensive, but I doubt that the DVD will cost that much on a per episode rate so it's a case of paying more for instant gratification, or paying less when having the patience to wait.
One word.. Spoilers.
The problem with delays in releasing it is spoilers; people talk about the shows after they are released. A lot of the time you cannot even visit news sites without them trying their best to give the game away. The only way to avoid these spoilers is either a. disconnect from society or b. Watch the show as soon as possible after release. It's the same with films when they are released months in advance in America it's hard to go watch a movie at the cinema without having a good idea of what happens.
For some people they seem to like spoilers; they like reading/discovering about something then watching it happen. Other people like to watch and then advertise it to the world regardless. Personally I'd rather discover the film / tv program for myself without knowing the future; it makes it more enjoyable.
For an SD version in places where you are allowed to get it.
It costs about $3 million to make an episode of a decent TV series, maybe Game of Thrones is a bit more expensive than that.
HBO reckon they get 11 million paid for views, they complain/boast of a million torrent downloads. I reckon a million torrents is the tip of an iceberg. Even if it is only 12 million that means they would break even at 25 cents a view. and $2.99 is a rip off.
As was pointed out earlier, any credibility the Ambassador add vanished the instant he said anything about the Lannisters. After all, claiming moral high ground in this way means condoning stealing of power (the crown), murder, rape, child abuse ( poor Sansa ) and a host of other wrongs.
O wait, he works for the entertainment industry. That's normal then I guess.
As I can assume you can read as well as type, the issue of Spoilers for Game of Thrones is stupid.
I can tell you what will happen in series 4 because of this weird old school technology called a "BOOK" where episodes of the story are etched in strange runes on the shavings of trees mixed with cloth and bound together.
I call "feeble excuse"
And I've got the box sets of one and two, hate Murdoch and won't buy Sky but would have paid for HBO if I'd had the option.
It's just as good a year later (and 4 years after you read the story in the first place).
`“fans of Game of Thrones who have used illegal file-sharing sites … say it was much easier to access through these sites, or that they got frustrated by the delay in the first season'
Exactly, the content owners don't seem to realise that fast home broadband is a game changer. People are prepared to pay reasonably for content but it's still difficult to legitimately access online. Micropayments done through the ISP would do the job. So come on, get on with it, there's money to be made from it.
I don't consider it stealing if , and when, HBO do release the DVD in Oz I buy the set for the collection. Along with the other ones I have already purchased. Down loading in Oz just keeps me current with the GoT banter on the forums/twitter/FB etc. A area that HBO and others over look, their fan base and those bloody spoiler blogs.
They made big steps this year to release episodes at the same time in the US as well as down under and good job with that . But it still needs tweeking so that it is available on line as well.
Whats that but id doesn't suit your business model! Time to change that business model as the internet is not going away.
PS I want to watch it on android get it in the google shop as well .
Cheers
I don't really understand the logic. I understand the desire to watch something we all like, I get that. I understand it's frustrating that some people get to watch a good TV show or movie before others. I also understand why releasing something early on a single format/platform is a poor choice that excludes many people.
But what I don't understand is how any of this makes it ok to just take it. As far as I'm aware "I really want it" hasn't been a very solid defence for stealing something. Should we blame your parents for over indulging you as children? The author of the books and the creator of the TV show are fully entitled to decide where and when their product airs or is made available on various media formats. That's their choice because it's their product. Acting spoiled and shouting "it's not fair" doesn't change this even if their choices aren't good or don't include you. And no, just because someone charges a price that exclude many people doesn't mean they've self-funded and fully expect piracy. Even if that were the case it still doesn't excuse stealing. Someone has to pay, but apparently not you? Awesome reasoning for picking someone's pocket.
Does it make a difference if you've *already* bought something, but can't watch it because it isn't feasible to bring it with you? That's a little more fuzzy. The argument would hold zero water in a court, but morally it seems okay.
Try this:
It's like the replicator machines in Star Trek - once they have been invented, the genie is out of the bottle. And as far as media is concerned, we already have replicator machines. People copy because they can.
Take another example, even if you're worried about depriving someone of their income, I'm sure you use your own car rather than taking a taxi. Because you can. But you don't think of that as "stealing", do you.
And lastly, the nasty taste in the mouth that several decades of being ripped off by the multimedia industries (which isn't going away any time soon) might have something to do with the "problem".
I Like the way he's approaching this, but at the same time, I can't help but feel his perspective is still from the 90's.
If I hadn't downloaded the first season illegally, I'd never have believed it was worth spending $60AUD on the BluRay. Sure, they may have got a few dollars if I had an Apple device, and I used iTunes, and I decided to purchase the episodes - but assuming a price of about $3 per episode, and the fact that Apple takes their Lion's (hurr hurr hurr) share of the price, the people actually responsible for making the series wouldn't see anywhere near the amount of money that they are. And since I'd already paid for it once on iTunes, I'd hardly pay for it again on BluRay.
The attitude seems to be that if they can't see the payments/benefits directly, they don't exist. Nevermind the exposure that piracy gives a show (I highly doubt that without the internet, Game Of Thrones would be anywhere near as successful as it has been).
Many of the people on facebook talking up the show are the ones who have pirated it (his use of facebook to try and tackle the issue seems to confirm this too) and the fact remains that it's their freetard ways that have created the "first world problem" of having a really successful show (that some people aren't paying for) in the first place. Until they address the speed and convenience advantage that digital downloads *SHOULD* have over other methods, I can't see them ever supplanting torrents.