New 3d darling be on youtube

[PrBlahBlahtson]

Originally Posted by Pinkexp

I didn't mean to post something illegal, if you think it would be appropriate, I'll delete this thread.

I believe the only videos they posted for free are the ones on their website, but I could be mistaken. 3rd-Art content seems to be ignored if it gets posted here, so as long as nobody makes a habit of it, there should be no problem.

As for deleting the thread, you can't.

[supermikeman]

They only have a small preview video. I think that they release those videos on youtube to attract members.

[Lingster]

Originally Posted by Beastwheat

...yes it is technically 'pirated' but that dont really bother me none...probably bothers 3rdart people but... se la vive.

Well, it's not "technically" pirated, it's just plain pirated. The guy who made this video probably invested tens if not hundreds of hours of his time with the expectation that he would get paid for his effort.

And as should be obvious, when creators' expectations for payment go down, so does their creative output in that area. More piracy = less content.

[Brainfuck]

Originally Posted by Lingster

And as should be obvious, when creators' expectations for payment go down, so does their creative output in that area. More piracy = less content.

Really? You think software like Linux, GNOME, KDE, Firefox and so on was created on the hope of getting green?

The difference between software and art, is that software is often a community project, and you seldom know who actually wrote the piece of software you are using right now. But when it comes to art, there is usually one person behind it.

But it still requires creativity from its creators. A lot of people who put up art on DeviantART don't expect a dime (well, most), but expect to be recognised by a community. And honestly, that means more to me than money, but hell, I wouldn't mind money.

But usually, when your foremost goal is getting paid, creativity seems to get hit as well. If you want to be recognised, then you have to do that extra.

Which is usually why some films are not made with the content of being profittable, they want critics to like the film, rather than make a buck of it. Can they do both? Then excellent. Some of the most profittable films are not decent films, and some of the most decent films were flops.

Does money create better art? I beg to differ.

[Lord T Hawkeye]

Originally Posted by PrBlahBlahtson

No they wouldn't. If there's one thing content providers have learned in the BE community, it's that people steal your shit. Case in point: this thread.

That matter isn't as cut and dry as it's made out to be. Napster being the classic example. While Napster was being made out to be the big bad pirates, the truth is they actually offered record companies in on the deal. The companies turned them down and decided to try and sue piracy off the internet. Did it work? Ask all the songs you've got downloaded right now.

As Foamy the squirrel put it best "People were trading cassette tapes long before the internet and I didn't hear anyone complain about that."

[OhZone]

Originally Posted by Lord T Hawkeye

That matter isn't as cut and dry as it's made out to be. Napster being the classic example. While Napster was being made out to be the big bad pirates, the truth is they actually offered record companies in on the deal. The companies turned them down and decided to try and sue piracy off the internet. Did it work? Ask all the songs you've got downloaded right now.

As Foamy the squirrel put it best "People were trading cassette tapes long before the internet and I didn't hear anyone complain about that."

I knows what you mean... but ohnoes! And au contraire too!

They DID complain! For all the good it did 'em!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_Ta..._Killing_Music

[PrBlahBlahtson]

Originally Posted by Lord T Hawkeye

That matter isn't as cut and dry as it's made out to be. Napster being the classic example. While Napster was being made out to be the big bad pirates, the truth is they actually offered record companies in on the deal. The companies turned them down and decided to try and sue piracy off the internet. Did it work? Ask all the songs you've got downloaded right now.

As Foamy the squirrel put it best "People were trading cassette tapes long before the internet and I didn't hear anyone complain about that."

Record companies and music artists have other sources of revenue beyond album sales. Endorsement, licensing, etc.

Did The Warlock, or Mistress Taylor, or MediaFire Productions do any advertising for Mountain Dew? Do they appear at sporting events for the half-time show? Do they have live performances with tickets garnering three figures a seat? Has their work been used in a major television show, leading to a licensing fee paid back to them?

While I respect your example, you need to recall scale. BE content providers aren't grossing a billion yearly. Every theft hurts their bottom line substantially more than a pirated album hurts the label.

[Lingster]

Originally Posted by Brainfuck

Really? You think software like Linux, GNOME, KDE, Firefox and so on was created on the hope of getting green?

Your entire argument is a load of shit, because that was OPEN SOURCE software from get-go. The creators intended for it to be free. They willingly gave their creative effort away.

3d Darlings' creator DID NOT GIVE HIS LABOR AWAY FOR FREE. It's HIS CHOICE and he CHOSE TO SELL IT.

When someone creates something, it is his right to determine how other people might obtain it. He can set a price or give it away. YOU DON'T HAVE ANY RIGHT to obtain it through any terms other than those specified by the creator.

You shouldn't presume to lecture people when you either don't know what you're talking about or are just a liar.

[Brainfuck]

Originally Posted by Lingster

Your entire argument is a load of shit, because that was OPEN SOURCE software from get-go. The creators intended for it to be free. They willingly gave their creative effort away.

3d Darlings' creator DID NOT GIVE HIS LABOR AWAY FOR FREE. It's HIS CHOICE and he CHOSE TO SELL IT.

When someone creates something, it is his right to determine how other people might obtain it. He can set a price or give it away. YOU DON'T HAVE ANY RIGHT to obtain it through any terms other than those specified by the creator.

You shouldn't presume to lecture people when you either don't know what you're talking about or are just a liar.

I am not challenging the case in this topic. I agree that it is incorrect of people to steal the content that is copyrighted. My point is merely, that money does not necessarily produce better content. That is my point. But obviously you are landlocked by context.

[PrBlahBlahtson]

Originally Posted by Brainfuck

My point is merely, that money does not necessarily produce better content.

Didn't need a comma there, but I agree with your point. Getting paid doesn't necessarily lead to better work, but not getting paid can lead to lower quality work, or a stop to work altogether.

[Jungles]

Legal or not, piracy and/or knock-offs does have its benefits as well. Piracy is certainly not the straight line to the bottom that some would have you believe.

Take the fashion industry, for example. That is an industry rife with knock-offs, the "piracy" of design, sure as if you cut and paste an image onto your computer from an artist and sold it off for a lower price. A high end designer can churn out imaginative new styles of clothing and sell it for thousands of dollars, but it isn't long before some Chinese factory is mass producing an imitation for sale at Walmart.

Is the high end designer losing money over this? Perhaps. But consider this. The people buying the knock-offs from Walmart weren't going to spend tons of money for the "latest" fashion anyway... and by the time they're buying from Walmart, everyone's starting to look same... thus creating the demand for new fashion. And who do people turn to buy this new fashion? Why, the high end designer of course.

Piracy will always be a problem... but perhaps if there's a way to find an equilibrium, such as the fashion industry has found, you will have a solution. Just my humble opinion.

[Nostrum]

Piracy isn't a "real" problem to the major supplies though... most people are going to buy the original product at it's listed price. The problem with piracy is in the niche markets.

Think of this in terms of a Super Market and the Local farmers market... if a couple people steal fruit at the super market, their bottom line isn't hurt to a degree that's going to cause them to close up. However, if a couple people steal apples from the only guy in the market that sells them (And the apples weren't very popular to begin with) that guy is going to feel the hit much more dramatically. While it's true that piracy is not true theft as in this example, if it causes even a few people to get their product for free instead of paying, the niche provider feels it because he wasn't selling that many to being with.

As for why Pirates are generally unconcerned with what they are doing... that's because the people who complain the loudest about it are the people least effected by it, because they have the money to make themselves loud... and because some people are just assholes :-)