but not everyone that downloads it is like you and me and probably many other people on this site. so it doesnt ultimatly matter if we will go out and buy 3 copies of the dvd when its released or 1. the law is in place to protect the people that created and to do that it has to handle the lowest common denominator. is that right? should someone that makes a movie (or other work) be able to make money off it and control how and when its released? I guess you can debate the answer to that, but as it stands in the US they should be able to.
as far as the money you spent. My $18 is the price of the two tickets I bought. It doesnt include snacks, which i dont buy cause they along with the tickets are overpriced, so if the theater owner is going to get money from me for something i think is over priced im gonna limit the money they get. Fandango charges you for the service of buying online tickets, that was your choice, its not an extra dollar in the Studios pocket, and actually comes from higher credit card rates for online/phone orders. Same with snacks, that doesnt go to the Studios, at least not directly as far as i know. I mean, technically i could include the price i paid for gas to get to the theater on money i spent on the movie. Im not trying to belittle you, but the point is, just because you paid for the movie once, or twice or however many times. and spent however much money on it doesnt mean you have the right to have the movie before its officially released.
if its a tvshow that has been off the air for years and there is no inkling of it ever being released, while under the law its the same, in my view its different than a movie that has just come out in theaters and we already know its gonna be on dvd in 5 months. You've waited how long for the movie to be released and you cant wait another 5 months for the dvd so you can watch it anytime you want? Plus, what dvds of single movies, that arent 'collectors' sets or something along those lines that cost you $50. Episodes I & II MSRP's was 29.98, even retail stores like best buy were selling it new when it first came out for around $22.
now, while overall my line of thinking of downloading stuff is probably more along the same lines as yours as opposed to the MPAA's and RIAA's it doesnt make it right in the law. but seriously, the numbers of what they are loosing is hugely exaggerated. if i had a copy of episode III on dvd, or even an mpeg, would i probably watch it 10+ times while it was still in theaters? yeah, probably. would i still see it multiple times in the theater, again yes. If i didnt have a copy, which i dont, would i go to the movies 10+ times and spend $9 a viewing to see it, nope.
your toy example is also flawed. in that example the toy was payed for. Your brothers was paid for by him. Your friend paid for his. whoever made the toy got paid for both. when your friend gives the toy to you there is still only 2 'copies' both of which were paid for. its technically a gift. replace toy with dvd, it still plays the same, unless now instead of giving the toy to you, your friend makes a copy of the toy (ie downloading) now there are 3 copies, one of which was made in violation of the law. I could also argue, that now using dvd instead of toy, your brother is falsly profiting from the movie because its for private viewing and in violation of copyright law.
again, not trying to bash you, just pointing out the MPAA's problem with downloading. are they totally correct? no, like i said, i probably agree more with your line of thought. but not everyone does. Did they cause the problem? it could be argued yes, through hi prices and what not. do i think they are combating the problem wrong (created by them or not)? yes.
-Darth Simon