Oatmealing and the new practice of ethical bittorenting

Forums: Oatmealing, Internet, Ethical Bittorenting, Ethical Video Piracy, Online Piracy
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Oatmealing is a recent created term which can be defined as ethical video piracy. A promise taken by an individual who bittorents illegal copies of movies and television now but promises to buy a copy of the DVD or streaming rights whenever the exclusive item comes available to the rest of the world where for whatever reason can not access the media right now.

Quote:

In short, the cartoon depicts a generic Oatmeal character—presumably standing in for the Oatmeal’s creator, Matthew Inman—as he struggles to watch the HBO show Game of Thrones. With an angel on his left shoulder and a devil on his right, he weighs whether to pirate the show.

At first, the angel wins, and the character tries to pay to watch the show. He goes to Netflix, where the release date for the show is listed as “unknown.” It’s similarly unavailable on iTunes, and attempting to watch it on Hulu Plus forwards him to HBO.com, where he’s told he needs to sign up for HBO with his cable provider in order to stream the show.

“The reason I use all these other websites is because I don’t have or want cable,” the character laments.

http://www.dailydot.com/news/oatmeal-cartoon-web-piracy/

The online webcomic that birthed the concept:
http://theoatmeal.com/comics/game_of_thrones

For a long time, I have been openly against bittorenting and other forms of video piracy. Out of frustration, I am now publicly supporting the ethical "bittorent now, pay later model."

Would you pay a monthly fee to be able to watch a particular channel (sans the need for all you can eat cable or satellite massive monthly bill)? Say make HBO a single channel equal to Netflix? I would love to see and would pay extra for say ... Netflix Premium if they had all the content of say HBO GO but without the cable TV requirements/subscription.

Do you do ethical bittorenting? Watch now and pay later when the DVD's or BluRay's or whatever medium comes to your relevant market?

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 13 • Views: 10,590 • Replies: 148

@tsarstepan,

Of course I would watch now, and pay later. Unless what I watched turned out to be a big, fat disappointment.

2 Replies

@roger,

roger wrote:

Unless what I watched turned out to be a big, fat disappointment.

Exactly. I have ben shamelessly Torrenting and Usenetting for almost a decade and a half, and most of what I have downloaded I would not pay money for, and in those cases, no sales were lost.

0 Replies

@tsarstepan,

The problem with this is that HBO is owned by a cable company.

One does not simply watch HBO a la carte.

1 Reply

@roger,

I think that's exactly what they're afraid of.

0 Replies

@tsarstepan,

I think that's a bullshit argument.

Just because you want something now doesn't mean you can steal it now with the promise to pay for it later.

What difference is this than if I went to a theater watched a movie and said that I'd pay for it later, when it was at the dollar theater because I could only afford a dollar. Does that mean that I deserve to see it now?

This kind of thinking takes away any incentive creative people have to make anything.

As to the argument that "it isn't something I would have bought anyway" -- how is that any better than shoplifting. Kleptomania of someone else's creative product is theft no less than if you stole jewelry and threw it in a drawer and never wore it.

3 Replies

@boomerang,

Copying is not stealing. Copyright infringement is rarely a criminal matter; it almost always a civil matter.

Some folks think that's kind of pedantic, but it's an important distinction.

If I steal your bicycle, then you can't use it. If I download a copy of Avengers, you can still watch your copy of Avengers.

There is also a lot of evidence that shows that copyright laws, as currently written, actually hinder creativity.

(Copyright was created to protect printers when printing books was very expensive. Technology has moved on; it's about delivering the content to the consumer, nowadays, not about locking it up in a vault so that you can control access.)

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

Quote:

There is also a lot of evidence that shows that copyright laws, as currently written, actually hinder creativity.

I would like to see that evidence.

If people don't want to copyright their work, that's fine, they should distribute it for free and encourage others to copy it. If they decide they want to protect their work with copyright that decision should be respected.

To me it just seems like a bunch of spoiled children who WANT IT NOOOOWWWW and everyone else be damned.

Also, if you steal my bike I can file a police report and press charges against you. Plus, my homeowner's insurance will help me replace my bike.

2 Replies

@boomerang,

boomerang wrote:

Also, if you steal my bike I can file a police report and press charges against you. Plus, my homeowner's insurance will help me replace my bike.

That doesn't change the fact that there's a difference between stealing and copying.

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

Granted, the bike scenario is different but it was your example so I ran with it.

That doesn't mean copying isn't stealing.

If I make a photograph and sell it to someone and they make copies and give them away, they have stolen what should rightly be my income based on sales. Sure, I still have the original photo so that hasn't been stolen but the copier has surely stolen money from my pocket.

It's no different for movie and television and music makers. If someone makes a copy of their work without paying for the work or paying royalties then they have stolen from the artist who made the work.

3 Replies

@boomerang,

you go, boomer.

I read this earlier and have been chewing on it all afternoon...

now I don't have to word a post.

0 Replies

@boomerang,

It's a theft of intellectual property.

Nothing ethical about it.

0 Replies

@boomerang,

HOW CURRENT COPYRIGHT LAW DISCOURAGES
CREATIVE OUTPUT: THE OVERLOOKED IMPACT
OF MARKETING

Caps were in the original title, sorry 'bout that.

More to follow, but I don't have time to search down the links right now.

TechDirt covers a lot of stuff on copyright and patents.

1 Reply

@tsarstepan,

tsarstepan wrote:

Would you pay a monthly fee to be able to watch a particular channel (sans the need for all you can eat cable or satellite massive monthly bill)?

Sure. To a first approximation, HBO and Showtime are the only reason I watch TV at all, so this product would probably save me money.

tsarstepan wrote:

Do you do ethical bittorenting?

I suppose the answer is "yes". I habitually use Bit Torrent to download new versions of my operating system, Fedora Linux. That's the only thing I use Bit Torrent for. And while I don't consider the downloading of illegal movie copies to be unethical per se, I mildly resent the question's implication that all uses of Bit Torrent are illegal by default.

0 Replies

@boomerang,

No, the law is very clear. Copying is not stealing.

Granted, the damages for copyright infringement are incredibly draconian.

1 Reply

@boomerang,

boomerang wrote:

This kind of thinking takes away any incentive creative people have to make anything.

This is demonstrably false. Historically, copyright is a fairly recent invention, dating back to the late 18th and 19th centuries. Still, creative people must have had some incentive to make things before, as proven by the fact that they made them.

2 Replies

@boomerang,

boomerang wrote:

That doesn't mean copying isn't stealing.

Stealing is when I take something away from you. Copying your DVD of a movie doesn't qualify, because you still have your DVD after I copied it. Nothing has been taken away from you. If copying your DVD is wrong --- and right now I'm not arguing that it isn't --- it is wrong for reasons other than it being theft.

3 Replies

@Thomas,

Thomas wrote:

Still, creative people must have had some incentive to make things before, as proven by the fact that they made them.

people paid them - had them on staff - you know this stuff

if you didn't pay for the paintings or books or music, you didn't get (unless you worked for the artist's patron and were given an opportunity to experience the art)

artists have to live on something

1 Reply

@Thomas,

Thomas wrote:

Nothing has been taken away from you.

something has absolutely been stolen. The opportunity to make money from the results of the artistry. That right belongs to the artist.

1 Reply

@ehBeth,

ehBeth wrote:

people paid them - had them on staff - you know this stuff

But not by the copy. Boomerang's claim was that there is no incentive for creativity other than copyright. Being on somebody's staff is one incentive for creativity other than copyright. There are others.

3 Replies

Forums
» Oatmealing and the new practice of ethical bittorenting

Read Discussion
Reply to All

Oatmealing and the new practice of ethical bittorenting

Quick Links

My Account

able2know