On a similar note, the Mighty Punishers of Anxious Americans, aka the MPAA, announced that they don’t want people to watch movies in their homes. Apparently many people are setting up illegal home theaters in their homes in which to view movies in a way that is not intended for home movie viewing, according to the MPAA. Theoretically, when you buy a DVD you are technically purchasing the right for yourself to view that movie and no more. If you have 6 people watching a movie with you, technically you need to own copies for each individual watching, otherwise you would be denying the MPAA “the revenue that would be generated from DVD sales” for every other individual watching this movie. Thus to keep from losing money, the MPAA is currently lobbying Congress to require all individuals who have a home theater to license their theaters with the MPAA for a set fee. Read the article here if you must.
What is the MPAA’s definition of a home theater? A home theater is any home setup with a “television larger than 29" with stereo sound and at least two comfortable chairs, couch, or futon” in the same room. My bedroom does not count as a home theater even though I have a 6 channel sound system with a 90" projected screen, but it doesn't count as I have no chairs in my room. Yay! I’ve been good about keeping my money out of the hands of the MPAA for most of this past year, but a recent glut of good movies have been released into the theaters which I decided I really wanted to see. I still say you should fight the system and “rob” the MPAA of their potential profits by borrowing DVDs from your friends or inviting friends and family over for a movie watching party. But if you must feed the beast with your money, I’d recommend Apocalypto*, Eragon, The Prestige, Stranger Than Fiction, or Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan**. I am also told that Déjà vu, Casino Royale, and Deck the Halls are good movies but I have not seen them so I cannot confidently recommend them at this time. I guess I have been giving them business as they have released a number of good movies of late.
First Amendment (proposed by TSW): If the artists are self-published, or are on an independent label then by all means buy their CDs if they are to your liking; this will not bring funds to the RIAA cartel
*Neemund does not recommend that children under the age of 15 see this movie
**Neemund does not recommend that children under the age of 12 see this movie
Friday, December 15, 2006
The Terrorists are Among Us Already
The Racketeering Institution for Antagonizing Americans, aka the RIAA, announced last week that it couldn’t care less about music artists and their well being when it presented its case to the federal Copyright Royalty Judges to lower the amount of royalties they are required to pay artists and publishers. There is apparently a law placed back in 1981 that guides how much artists are to receive for their published works. As we have all seen over the past six years the RIAA has sued countless children, old widows, and thousands of other people for stealing music through the internet, which is stealing directly from the artists who create this music. Now, the organization that terrorizes in the name of starving artists is saying that the artists are being paid too much. I don’t think I’m going to be buying too many CDs in the near future out of protest. Go see your favorite group in concert, buy their merchandise, but please don’t support the RIAA by buying their CDs. “Steal” those from the internet, there are better ways to support your beloved musicians that don’t support American terrorism. This isn't that hard as very few good CDs have been released this year.Read the full article here.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Agreed. The fact that an organization, whose business is music, doesn't care about the creators of that music just reveals there true motives. A slight amendment to your post though: If the Artist is NOT affiliated with the RIAA, then by all means, BUY THEIR CDs! (if, of course, you like them). I am a firm believer in showing them the support they need in order to justify not belonging to that monstrosity of an organization.
Borat really? I wanted to see that one. I may have to.
I would like to see "Eragon" too, but I haven't read the book yet and I think seeing the movie before reading the book may be heresy. :)
You'd probably be better off seeing the movie before reading the book since the movie leaves a lot out.
Borat is definately one of the funniest movies of the year, but it is on the foul side; also he makes fun of every group imaginable, so most people are offended by at least part of the movie.
It's been 12 days since ur last post.
So it has.
Home theatres...I feel bad for families with lots of people-more than six...like mine! :)
Yeah, I haven't seen "Snakes on a Plane". It looked shockingly odd. And "Fearless" was pretty good. I saw it a few nights ago.
Post a Comment