These happen all the time with digital “releases”, they charge obscene amount for rental but the price comes down to regular amount in a few weeks. High prices for the most impatient.
Usually if you complain you can get a real refund. The other post was Amazon and they usually bend over backwards to make customers happy. Still pretty shitty that you have to jump through some hoops, though.
I totally get that, but it is what you paid for it. As long as it is greater than your original payment adjusted for inflation it’s fair enough. It sucks, I think there should be some sort of penalty for not getting proper licensing to let people use it forever (until your company shuts down).
No, it’s what you paid for one specific digital item that was valuable enough to you to be worth paying for. That doesn’t mean that anything else they have to offer would have enough value to cover the value of the item you’ve been deprived of.
I thought the movie was kinda funny but mostly just a mess in terms of plot structure and tone. Calling it propaganda is hilarious. How fragile do you have to be to be triggered by a movie as tame as barbie. To me it amounted to a tiktok compilation of semi-funny feminist memes, hardly the ‘Blazing Saddles’ of feminism.
Pretty much, the plot was dumb and the story wasn’t much better but that didn’t stop it from being a fun watch. Ironically Ryan Gosling, a man, was the best part of the movie.
This user thinks Jimmy Hoffa proves all unions forever are bad, but demands rock-solid proof that Jordan Peterson does the thing he’s primarily known for doing.
All post-2016 mainstream movies are propaganda. Quite a few before then of course. WW II films, ect. But Homeland Security has had their fingers in the Hollywood pie for a while now.
Movies have been used as propaganda since they were invented. Maybe you’ve heard of a little film that came out in the 1930s call Tell Your Childres also known as Reefer Madness.
$30 to own the movie is valid, but for $5 less, you’re only allowed 1 watch within 24 hours of starting. Something like that shouldn’t be basically the same price as the movie. With pricing like this, they basically force you to spend the extra $5. There isn’t even a point to rent the movie and they know that.
If you don’t get a physical piece of media that can be viewed offline indefinitely, you don’t own anything, you’re just renting. Services revoking even bought and paid for content is not unheard of, digital purchasing gives every streaming company the ability to do that.
Doesn’t make up for the false implication that you are “purchasing” the movie in any commonly understood meaning of the word. And if there was any alternative where you own a full res digital format, maybe the outrage could be said to be misplaced, but there isnt, and it’s not.
Man, I spent 15 bucks to watch it at the movie theatre. Why is the rent option more expensive than that? Even with the popcorn and drink I stayed below that.
My only argument I can come up with is that other people have friends, so $25 will be less than going to the cinema because they don’t have to pay that price for each person watching. It’s still ridiculously expensive though.
Family sounds more likely in this case. Two adults and three kids could be like 50 euros for tickets unless the kids are small enough to sit in your lap.
Libraries pay more for books than a customer would at retail.
There are different payment models libraries use. And not all options may be available to all authors.
The one-copy method pays for the book up front, while the cost-per-checkout method pays a small amount each time (and can be more profitable in the long run).
With the one-copy method, libraries often pay two or three times the retail cost of a print book—and sometimes even more than triple the retail price of an ebook.
With the pay-per-use model, a book makes an amount less than the retail cost—but each time it’s “checked out,” the author gets royalties. If a lot of people read your book, you win!
You are exactly right. This whole thread is full of people complaining about the price, but it’s perfectly justifiable for this one reason. If you have a significant other then it’s actually cheaper to rent than it is to go to the theater. And big screen TVs are commonplace, so the experience is about the same (arguably better since you can pause if you have to go pee, can rewind if you missed something, can be as obnoxious as you want, don’t have to commute there, and don’t have to deal with sticky floors and overpriced popcorn).
I’m not saying the price is reasonable (it’s too high in my opinion) but people need to stop pretending like it makes no sense from a business perspective. It’s a no-brainer to the average non-pirating consumer: they are getting something better, for cheaper.
I love all the good and the bad of the movie theater experience, except the price. But having a young child now, it’s just not worth going most of the time. I am still an avid film viewer so it’s nice that I have an option to rent at home with only a slight delay behind the theatrical run. If I’m feeling really patient, I can usually wait a little longer and stream it for free. I recently did that with the TMNT movie.
Oh God just wait until they realize they can use cameras/IP geodata from your phone to determine how many people are in your house while you stream something so they start charging per person.
Wouldn’t work because if you live in an apartment, then your neighbors are going to skew the numbers. There’s no way for them to know if the guy who lives on the floor above you is in your apartment or theirs.
Cameras would work, as would AI to know which device identifiers tend to be close to one another. Besides, they wouldn’t need or want perfect accuracy. I’m picturing basically something like the British does with TV licenses where they more or less assume you’re guilty and then badger you into proving you’re not. You have some friends over for the game, then you get a bill in the mail that says something like “This address has been linked to a broadcast without express, written consent from the NFL. Please pay $5 or we shut your service off. If you believe this letter is in error feel free to hire an attorney, take a day or two off of work and drive hundreds hundreds of miles to the dispute resolution center you agreed to use for such purposes when you accepted our EULA. We pay them, but who knows? Maybe they’ll rule in your favor!”
“We own everything”, basically. All they want is for them to control how everyone else does things.
Also, a hearty “fuck you” to all those folks out there (I’ve run into them before) who claim that publishers should get to have absolute control over how consumers use stuff they put out.
Read the TOS for all streaming/digital content services
they ALL reserve the right to withdraw or remove content at ANY time and there’s nothing you can do about it, if they decide to pull the plug or move content to another service they will just do it and you’ve most likely agreed to it in their very long winded and convoluted TOS that barely anyone bothers to read fully
Renting a DVD or video game was like $3 at its peak here. There was a video store that had older movies that they would let you rent 5 movies for 5 nights for 5 dollars.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
“own it” until we delete it from your account because reasons, but hey, we’ll give you a coupon!
These happen all the time with digital “releases”, they charge obscene amount for rental but the price comes down to regular amount in a few weeks. High prices for the most impatient.
Ahh, good ol’ price discrimination.
Good movie though. I enjoyed it quite a bit since feminism doesn’t scare me. Grow up people.
With that said, fuck those prices, and fuck fake ownership.
No you are mistaken with “Or $5 mire to own it”. You own a license to watch for the amount of time the platforms decides to keep it up.
And people will go ‘you didn’t buy it!’ like it doesn’t say “Buy” right fuckin’ there.
True, but it just says “buy 4k” which for all we know could mean “buy a temporary license to watch the 4k movie”.
AAAAAUUUGHHHHH!!!
Then, when they remove it, they offer you a measly $5 gift card only redeemable on their platform.
On that last post where someone got a refund they gave a full refund as a gift card and an additional 5 euro gift card.
(Not saying it’s an okay think to do, just in case you’re referencing it.)
A gift card isn’t a refund
It also doesn’t change the false implication they would “own” the digital copy
Usually if you complain you can get a real refund. The other post was Amazon and they usually bend over backwards to make customers happy. Still pretty shitty that you have to jump through some hoops, though.
It’s a refund in the sense that you can exchange it for an item of equal value. A real refund would be more appropriate, I agree.
Equal value to the store != equal value to actual people.
I totally get that, but it is what you paid for it. As long as it is greater than your original payment adjusted for inflation it’s fair enough. It sucks, I think there should be some sort of penalty for not getting proper licensing to let people use it forever (until your company shuts down).
No, it’s what you paid for one specific digital item that was valuable enough to you to be worth paying for. That doesn’t mean that anything else they have to offer would have enough value to cover the value of the item you’ve been deprived of.
The store has a profit margin, so the store values the item significantly less than the sticker price.
The store has a profit margin, so the store values the item significantly less than the sticker price.
Who does that??
https://lemmy.world/post/6245858
“Own” it.
Watching propaganda is not why I pirate. It’s to have access to the media that isn’t straight up propaganda.
Swing and a miss, bud.
A miss? Considering all the but-hurt, I hit the target precisely (to borrow your analogy). All post-2016 mainstream movies are propaganda.
I remember when Thomas Propaganda invented it in 2016.
Yep, Paw Patrol and Saw X are definitely propaganda!
I can’t imagine feeling this hurt about a Barbie movie
Dude confused Barbie with Oppenheimer.
Barbie was a funny movie, the only people complaining about “the propaganda” are retards who don’t understand women are people.
I thought the movie was kinda funny but mostly just a mess in terms of plot structure and tone. Calling it propaganda is hilarious. How fragile do you have to be to be triggered by a movie as tame as barbie. To me it amounted to a tiktok compilation of semi-funny feminist memes, hardly the ‘Blazing Saddles’ of feminism.
Pretty much, the plot was dumb and the story wasn’t much better but that didn’t stop it from being a fun watch. Ironically Ryan Gosling, a man, was the best part of the movie.
Tame is a good word to describe the messaging.
Come on Barbie, let’s go party!
This user thinks Jimmy Hoffa proves all unions forever are bad, but demands rock-solid proof that Jordan Peterson does the thing he’s primarily known for doing.
Leave.
This user doesn’t understand nuance, and is sure all people who hold a different opinion are nazis and -ists.
Poor.
I pirate so I can watch the propaganda for free, lol
Lol haha
Lmao you probably don’t blink an eye at the US Military funding the Transformers movies or having veto power for Marvel scripts.
But yeah, sure, Barbie’s the propaganda.
All post-2016 mainstream movies are propaganda. Quite a few before then of course. WW II films, ect. But Homeland Security has had their fingers in the Hollywood pie for a while now.
Amazing. A Quiet Place was propaganda, but Iron Man was a piece of high art because
-checks notes-
it was made before 2016.
Holy fuck my dude I rewatched that movie earlier this year and it’s kinda garbage. The white saviour is real in that movie.
Ohh no, not my propaganda movie Tenet, they advocate running and driving backward.
It’s a comspiracy to convince people Moonwalker wasn’t faked!
Movies have been used as propaganda since they were invented. Maybe you’ve heard of a little film that came out in the 1930s call Tell Your Childres also known as Reefer Madness.
Spending $30 to own a brand new movie that just came out is not something I have a problem with.
However, not being able to download a copy of the movie you purchased is where I take issue.
deleted by creator
$30 to own the movie is valid, but for $5 less, you’re only allowed 1 watch within 24 hours of starting. Something like that shouldn’t be basically the same price as the movie. With pricing like this, they basically force you to spend the extra $5. There isn’t even a point to rent the movie and they know that.
Hmmm… The region-free blu-ray
iswill be cheaper than this. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Barbie-Blu-ray-Region-Margot-Robbie/dp/B0BGY6PRK5When you said “cheaper” I was not expecting like NEARLY HALF THE PRICE
Yeah. I’m back to buying discs for the movies I want to support. Then I can always hang on to a copy no matter where it might live on streaming apps.
I absolutely agree! Renting a movie should cost nowhere near as much as purchasing the movie.
If you don’t get a physical piece of media that can be viewed offline indefinitely, you don’t own anything, you’re just renting. Services revoking even bought and paid for content is not unheard of, digital purchasing gives every streaming company the ability to do that.
They are legally entitled to do so, sure.
Doesn’t make up for the false implication that you are “purchasing” the movie in any commonly understood meaning of the word. And if there was any alternative where you own a full res digital format, maybe the outrage could be said to be misplaced, but there isnt, and it’s not.
It doesn’t have to be physical
/pendantic
Would be rad if a service actually let you download a movie you purchased as an mkv file or something. Can’t see it happening though
Yep companies love DRM!
Yeah, $5 more to “own” the movie
I’m also happy I’ll never watch this film
It actually was pretty entertaining. About as good as any film directed towards teens and women.
Man, I spent 15 bucks to watch it at the movie theatre. Why is the rent option more expensive than that? Even with the popcorn and drink I stayed below that.
My only argument I can come up with is that other people have friends, so $25 will be less than going to the cinema because they don’t have to pay that price for each person watching. It’s still ridiculously expensive though.
Don’t most friend groups pay for their own ticket?
Who out there paying for a ticket for all their friends? And are they really friends at that point?
Family sounds more likely in this case. Two adults and three kids could be like 50 euros for tickets unless the kids are small enough to sit in your lap.
This is the logic publishers apply to libraries when they charge them more for books than general retail price.
They do ? I assumed they get better deals as they buy shit in bulk.
Mainly relates to eBooks now;
https://goodereader.com/blog/e-book-news/here-is-a-breakdown-of-how-much-libraries-pay-for-ebooks-from-publishers
Edit; found a good summary.
Source; https://danieljtortora.com/blog/are-libraries-good-for-authors#:~:text=With the one-copy method,%2C” the author gets royalties.
I’m trying to imagine a Barbie watch party and I’m having trouble.
It’s less than 2 movie tickets and people usually don’t go to the theater alone.
You are exactly right. This whole thread is full of people complaining about the price, but it’s perfectly justifiable for this one reason. If you have a significant other then it’s actually cheaper to rent than it is to go to the theater. And big screen TVs are commonplace, so the experience is about the same (arguably better since you can pause if you have to go pee, can rewind if you missed something, can be as obnoxious as you want, don’t have to commute there, and don’t have to deal with sticky floors and overpriced popcorn).
I’m not saying the price is reasonable (it’s too high in my opinion) but people need to stop pretending like it makes no sense from a business perspective. It’s a no-brainer to the average non-pirating consumer: they are getting something better, for cheaper.
I love all the good and the bad of the movie theater experience, except the price. But having a young child now, it’s just not worth going most of the time. I am still an avid film viewer so it’s nice that I have an option to rent at home with only a slight delay behind the theatrical run. If I’m feeling really patient, I can usually wait a little longer and stream it for free. I recently did that with the TMNT movie.
Oh God just wait until they realize they can use cameras/IP geodata from your phone to determine how many people are in your house while you stream something so they start charging per person.
Wouldn’t work because if you live in an apartment, then your neighbors are going to skew the numbers. There’s no way for them to know if the guy who lives on the floor above you is in your apartment or theirs.
Cameras would work, as would AI to know which device identifiers tend to be close to one another. Besides, they wouldn’t need or want perfect accuracy. I’m picturing basically something like the British does with TV licenses where they more or less assume you’re guilty and then badger you into proving you’re not. You have some friends over for the game, then you get a bill in the mail that says something like “This address has been linked to a broadcast without express, written consent from the NFL. Please pay $5 or we shut your service off. If you believe this letter is in error feel free to hire an attorney, take a day or two off of work and drive hundreds hundreds of miles to the dispute resolution center you agreed to use for such purposes when you accepted our EULA. We pay them, but who knows? Maybe they’ll rule in your favor!”
And you “own” it only as long as they deem it. https://nofilmschool.com/warner-bros-deleting-purchased-digital-content
This seems like reverse piracy
“We own everything”, basically. All they want is for them to control how everyone else does things.
Also, a hearty “fuck you” to all those folks out there (I’ve run into them before) who claim that publishers should get to have absolute control over how consumers use stuff they put out.
Read the TOS for all streaming/digital content services
they ALL reserve the right to withdraw or remove content at ANY time and there’s nothing you can do about it, if they decide to pull the plug or move content to another service they will just do it and you’ve most likely agreed to it in their very long winded and convoluted TOS that barely anyone bothers to read fully
this is part of Apple’s TOS
Alternatively you can just stream it on himovies.sx . Oppenheimer is still only in “Cam” quality.
One word: Stremio(+Torrentio)
Renting a DvD / Blueray was like 7$, going to the movies is 10-15$, why TF is this platform so expensive??
It’s not the platform. The movie is that much on them all. In a few months it will drop to $6 - 7 for rental.
Renting a DVD or video game was like $3 at its peak here. There was a video store that had older movies that they would let you rent 5 movies for 5 nights for 5 dollars.
corporate greed.
It’s pre release. You can often get streaming copies prior to the street date, but it’s generally quite expensive.
Barbie was released on July 21, 2023. It’s still showing in theaters.
It should get cheaper on the “normal” timeline for these things, which would be what 9 months? A year? From release.
It’s for people who don’t want to wait a few more months to pay $5.99 instead.
That’s two hours of labor at minimum wage in a lot of States. I feel like I’d maybe pay $5 to watch it at home.
What platform is this?
This looks like Google Play/TV or whatever they’re calling it nowadays.
Holy hell