Star Wars coming to Blu Ray (UPDATE: August 30 2011, No! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!) — Page 79

he'll release it INSTEAD of the original films though

It is kind of impressive and Inception-y how Lucas was able to plant the seeds of this general idea and make it grow out there, becoming normal. Whether it's remakes or special editions or 3D, the idea is everywhere now: keeping Star Wars "up-to-date" in one way or another (every few years for the rest of our lives I guess) is something that just needs to happen. Something that would have sounded really stupid in 1994 became inevitable by 2004.

Mithrandir said:

Besides, I wouldn't underestimate the market, surely they'll find someway to solve this "piracy" problem and keep making money.

[...]

Don't know, perhaps I'm giving my point from a very parcialized place, our market is not as extense as yours; bands here rarely have "merchandising". What's more, it's common between musicians to measure their success by "being" (appearing in) a sticker, a t-shirt; a student bag, etc, but while they're in the underground time of their careers, no one pays for copyright, or commercial name rights, and at some point, they're ok with that if it leads them to a path of success and an increase in public recognition. Not that here people are not jealous at all of their own production, but it seems to be that they're less than in other lands.

 I highly doubt the first part of your statement. I don't know where you live, but I know the problems of a small market, because I live in a small country.

To be honest, ten years ago I had a worse opinion of piracy than I have now. I understand economic standard isn't exactly an excuse (although it's hard to understand how much a pain it is to actually want to buy something and can't because food and bills take up 90% of your monthly budget, if you have a decent salary that is), but it's an economic reality. Piracy is an economic factor just as much as shipping costs, information storage device production costs and a plethora of other things. Music isn't exactly the best point for my argument below, and maybe that's why music isn't pirated as much as other stuff where I live, but the movie industry and, above all, software marketing specialists are, to put it mildly, idiots.

What's the best way to incite people to buy instead of pirate? Fair prices and good cost/value ratio. Ten years ago software and games were the exact same price as in the West, same content, only added shipping and VAT. Fair, even if (very) costly. Now they're full of awful non-functional DRM systems, more expensive due to (non-existent) localizations and local support (and more inflated pricing due to currency), content is often cut and resold as ridiculously expensive DLC's or region locked. What...?

And then some guy behind a desk is scratching his head wondering why the hell Eastern Europeans are lazy bums who pirate stuff and tries to put even more draconian measures, instead of coming up of a functional marketing plan. *facepalm*

Eh, if I could have received back my time spent trying to get overseas support just to get perfectly legal copies to work...

Movies are a bit different - sometimes the release will be a late by a month (or several), DVD's may get extras cut and so on, but it's mostly "OK" and on par with other markets. So there's a functioning, even if small, DVD market that's fully legal.

I don't have a Bluray player because BluRays costs a lot where I live, unlike DVD's which have finally gone down to pricing levels bearable for the local market, but my plans to buy one went down the drain after reading that new BluRay movies don't work well with cheap players - and my local market doesn't have exactly high-end models, even if I could afford one.

Burdokva said:

Mithrandir said:

Besides, I wouldn't underestimate the market, surely they'll find someway to solve this "piracy" problem and keep making money.

[...]

Don't know, perhaps I'm giving my point from a very parcialized place, our market is not as extense as yours; bands here rarely have "merchandising". What's more, it's common between musicians to measure their success by "being" (appearing in) a sticker, a t-shirt; a student bag, etc, but while they're in the underground time of their careers, no one pays for copyright, or commercial name rights, and at some point, they're ok with that if it leads them to a path of success and an increase in public recognition. Not that here people are not jealous at all of their own production, but it seems to be that they're less than in other lands.

 I highly doubt the first part of your statement. I don't know where you live, but I know the problems of a small market, because I live in a small country.

 When I say market, I mean market-economy, aka capistalism.

I live in Argentina, by the way, which has a rather small market too.

Hello all, as this is a very interesting subject, I'll try to contribute with my own point of view.

Mithrandir said:

 So most of professionals here have it clear that, in some way, their achievements are product of the collective effort of a society who payed their studies. This, for some people, is indeed a "moral debt"; and even if we all have some point of individuality, and ambition, no one lives and progresses completely on their own. 

I can see the logic behind your argument. However, I do not agree with the idea that you're suggesting: "As I own my (musical) education to society, then my music should be free for all". No matter how you look at it, this "moral debt" doesn't justify piracy. Your ideas remind me eerily of Marx, as the concept that your work is for the society as a whole, and not for you, (non-existence of private property) is one of the main ideas of classic comunism. Of course, our education is paid by other persons, but the so called "moral debt" is an illusion, as we too pay for other people's education, thus creating the necessary cycle (and without the necessity of giving up the fruits of our hard work).

Besides, I wouldn't underestimate the market, surely they'll find someway to solve this "piracy" problem and keep making money.

I agree with you, but again, this doesn't justify piracy. It's not fair to consider that "Even if it's wrong, it will be solved, so I'll do it anyway". Sure, the market will grow two more heads if this one is cut off, but that doesn't mean that the two new heads (DRM, anyone?) are going to be fairer than the old one.

Cheers

crazy_verbigracia said:

Hello all, as this is a very interesting subject, I'll try to contribute with my own point of view.

Mithrandir said:

 So most of professionals here have it clear that, in some way, their achievements are product of the collective effort of a society who payed their studies. This, for some people, is indeed a "moral debt"; and even if we all have some point of individuality, and ambition, no one lives and progresses completely on their own. 

I do not agree with the idea that you're suggesting: "As I own my (musical) education to society, then my music should be free for all". No matter how you look at it, this "moral debt" doesn't justify piracy. Your ideas remind me eerily of Marx, as the concept that your work is for the society as a whole, and not for you, (non-existence of private property) is one of the main ideas of classic comunism. Of course, our education is paid by other persons, but the so called "moral debt" is an illusion, as we too pay for other people's education

Besides, I wouldn't underestimate the market, surely they'll find someway to solve this "piracy" problem and keep making money.

I agree with you, but again, this doesn't justify piracy. It's not fair to consider that "Even if it's wrong, it will be solved, so I'll do it anyway". Sure, the market will grow two more heads if this one is cut off, but that doesn't mean that the two new heads (DRM, anyone?) are going to be fairer than the old one. 

Cheers

 

 I made the point of the moral debt more as an example in order to point out how people see things in this side of the world. Education here in Argentina is product of a collective effort, and per 10 people that pay taxes, only one gets the degree; so it shows how education(or the degree, which is "intelectual property") is not a "private" property, for it's not only on your own.

Is there any news on these?

Ghostbusters said:

Is there any news on these?

If there was, don't you think someone would have posted it?

TV's Frink said:

Ghostbusters said:

Is there any news on these?

If there was, don't you think someone would have posted it?

Do you have to be a commentator for everything I say?

I'm not going to buy this blu-ray set. It looks like they haven't fixed the colors at all according to that trailer, I doubt they will even bother to fix the "green lightsaber" in ANH. Will it still be legal for me to own a  copy of Adywan's ROTJ Revisited and PT Revisited if I don't own this set (since he is going to use this set as the masters for his next edits.)

Ghostbusters said:

TV's Frink said:

Ghostbusters said:

Is there any news on these?

If there was, don't you think someone would have posted it?

Do you have to be a commentator for everything I say?

If you keep posting like you have been...yes.

You know it, girlfriend.

Ghostbusters said:

Will it still be legal for me to own a  copy of Adywan's ROTJ Revisited and PT Revisited if I don't own this set (since he is going to use this set as the masters for his next edits.)

It's hard to say that downloading any fanedit is legal.  The accepted rule of thumb is to "own what you download," but no one has ever had to find out if it would stand up in court.

Theoretically speaking, you would need to own the Blu-ray set to download the new Revisited edits.

And I need to own the 2004 DVDs to download ANH:R or the 1980 ESB recon, but I don't (I used the 2004 discs from the GOUT as Frisbees until they shattered).  I wouldn't worry about it.

I wonder how many times Greedo is going to shoot Han before Han shoots back in this version? I wonder if George Lucas will have Greedo shoot twice before Han shoots just to rub it in a little bit more.

Maybe he'll have Greedo shoot and miss, then Han says "you missed." Then Greedo shoots again and Han says "you missed again". Greedo shoots a third time and Han says, "I'm gonna have to shoot you if you don't stop" and then Greedo gets up and walks away.  

I'm sure it will be exactly like the 2004 version of Greedo shooting. It is certain that they'll port over the 2004 set with zero effort. So much for Lucas "supervising" the transfer; it is nothing more than burning an old VHS tape onto DVD, except with more hi-tech gadgets.

If they decide to release the originals, they will just use the GOUT again. Imagine: letterbox Blu-ray!

crazy_verbigracia said:

Hello all, as this is a very interesting subject, I'll try to contribute with my own point of view.

Mithrandir said:

 So most of professionals here have it clear that, in some way, their achievements are product of the collective effort of a society who payed their studies. This, for some people, is indeed a "moral debt"; and even if we all have some point of individuality, and ambition, no one lives and progresses completely on their own. 

I can see the logic behind your argument. However, I do not agree with the idea that you're suggesting: "As I own my (musical) education to society, then my music should be free for all". No matter how you look at it, this "moral debt" doesn't justify piracy. Your ideas remind me eerily of Marx, as the concept that your work is for the society as a whole, and not for you, (non-existence of private property) is one of the main ideas of classic comunism. Of course, our education is paid by other persons, but the so called "moral debt" is an illusion, as we too pay for other people's education, thus creating the necessary cycle (and without the necessity of giving up the fruits of our hard work).

Besides, I wouldn't underestimate the market, surely they'll find someway to solve this "piracy" problem and keep making money.

I agree with you, but again, this doesn't justify piracy. It's not fair to consider that "Even if it's wrong, it will be solved, so I'll do it anyway". Sure, the market will grow two more heads if this one is cut off, but that doesn't mean that the two new heads (DRM, anyone?) are going to be fairer than the old one.

 

Cheers

 

Hey guys, I've been lurking here for years, but it took a topic completely unrelated to Star Wars to get me to post :D

Sorry that this is totally off-topic.

I've been a DIY musician for five years now (used to play in bands before that, but we never distributed our music), and would never dare ask for any money for my releases.  All of my music is free to download and will always BE free to download.  I bring 50 CD's to each of my free shows and pass them out for free to anybody who wants them, and I sometimes leave stacks of them at record stores.

This attitude is not uncommon for newer musicians.  I think the days of these mega stars who make millions are numbered.  A lot of DIY musicians think free online distribution is the way of the future.  As it becomes easier and easier to record from your home, the aura of the rock star will fade (not altogether, mind you) and the people who create and release music will be people who truly have a passion for making music, and not for fame/money/sex.

There are so many netlabels out there releasing music for free, it's not even funny.  I don't even bother to listen to commercial music anymore, because it's just not necessary.  Actually, to keep this Star Wars related, here's a pay-what-you-want (even $0) album by IG88 ;) http://ig88.bandcamp.com/album/mutual-mastication

What I'm getting at, is that even musicians themselves don't believe you have to make money from music.

PS:  Hey Zombie!  Loved the book!

Of course it makes sense.

I've thrown away just about every free CD I've ever been handed.  Only listened to about half of them.  Giving it away diminishes the perceived value off the bat.  (Case in point: eiyosus has linked to an undoubted boundless universe of free music...that I am in no way whatsoever interested in accessing, because the price ($0) is a reliable signal of the likely value of the content (zilch).)

And besides, production value is important, and if the investment into it has been made, it has to be recouped. 

I agree that the age of the U2-type album-oriented megabands is coming to a close, but it doesn't fill me with exuberant expectation for some liberated future.  I fear that it will mean the end of the Album, which is something I cherish.  I think the most recent truly great albums, by of Montreal and Mars Volta, were back in 2008.  My own current-CD purchases have diminished spectacularly over the last few years, from something in the 30s in 2005 to, I think, 5 in 2010.  And this is not because I download.  I don't download. 

Some of the formerly great album bands have issued direct statements saying that it's just not worth it anymore, and many, many budding album bands have simply not sold enough copies of their debut for the label to float a sophomore effort.

Can this happen to movies, too?  I really wonder.