Lurker > Terminonatator

Revelation34 posted...

Terminonatator posted...

Do you not understand PR? The firing is all about optics - how Disney will look in the public eye in light of the controversy. It's meant to be symbolic more than anything. I'm sure the executives at Disney don't give two shits about those tweets, but they fired James Gunn to give the appearance that they care and to quell any potential anger or boycotts that may be levied at Disney as a result.

And not firing him would have done nothing against their brand.

So, you don't understand PR. Got it.
---

Everywhere is within walking distance of you have the time.

Revelation34 posted...

Rooster_Sucker posted...

Disney protecting their brand is smart. It's the exact opposite of what you said.

Because them not firing him would totally hurt the brand.

Do you not understand PR? The firing is all about optics - how Disney will look in the public eye in light of the controversy. It's meant to be symbolic more than anything. I'm sure the executives at Disney don't give two shits about those tweets, but they fired James Gunn to give the appearance that they care and to quell any potential anger or boycotts that may be levied at Disney as a result.
---

Everywhere is within walking distance of you have the time.

MICHALECOLE posted...

is it rude to let your dog pee on somebodys grass?

Dog pee can kill grass over time if the dog keeps peeing on the same spot, but just once shouldn't hurt. That lady sounds like an asshole.
---

Everywhere is within walking distance of you have the time.

the revelation of his old tweets involving pedophilia and rape were uncovered by Trump Supporters and forced Disney to drop him as director of GOTG 3.

What?!

First I've heard of this. Were they joke-tweets or is he actually a pedophile rapist?

nvm just looked it up. Looks like jokes in poor taste.

Anyone who has any inclination of pursuing a career which puts them under the public eye should avoid Twitter. People screenshot and dig shit up all the time. One "bad" tweet can send your whole career and private life into a tailspin.
---

Everywhere is within walking distance of you have the time.

Smarkil posted...

DPsx7 posted...

*Who are you going to believe more? The player that finishes nearly every game (me) or that loaf who might finish one of every few games? His argument doesn't have a lot going for it. The copy/paste is a last ditch attempt to save face.

I mean, if he finishes very few games but still manages to finish bloodborne and the bigdick nerd who 'finishes nearly every game' can't pull it off. I'm gonna say that's a you problem.

This. You can't tout finishing games as evidence of credibility in this argument when part of the reason for the debate is the fact that not only can you not finish the game in question, but you can't even locate a single boss.
---

Everywhere is within walking distance of you have the time.

I was skeptical at first but the Disney princess bit made me laugh.
---

Everywhere is within walking distance of you have the time.

Probably not a popular option, but I'm holding out hope that Red Ninja sees a new installment, someday. The first game isn't all that great, but there was enough there that I'd hope a sequel could iron out the wrinkles and improve the overall game.

A new Red Steel would be welcome, too. Not sure that counts, but you do wield a katana...

That said, the game I'd like to see a new installment of the most would probably be Tenchu. A new Mark of the Ninja would be cool, but that one isn't all that old, so I'd put my preference on Tenchu. Would love to revisit Rikimaru and/or Ayame, but I'd be cool with a new protagonist, too.
---

Everywhere is within walking distance of you have the time.

kind9 posted...

But the company doesn't directly lose money is the point. So is it really "stealing"? I don't know if the pilot/taxi analogy is fair since we're talking about digital piracy.

Streaming is a service, as is Uber, etc.

The company does directly lose money. You're meant to pay for the content being provided. If you're stealing the content, they're losing money.
---

Everywhere is within walking distance of you have the time.

kind9 posted...

XlaxJynx007 posted...

WhiskeyDisk posted...
It's a question of harm. Who have I deprived of said item by having a copy of said item?

You're depriving everyone who was involved in the making of that item of income, AKA theft.

What item? There is no item. It's not the same as walking into a store and stealing a physical copy of something. The only loss is a potential sell.

The notion that a particular, physical item isn't being stolen doesn't matter. You can steal services, such as cable or internet. If you were to refuse to pay your Uber driver, you'd be stealing. All the same, you can steal digital content (music, books, movies, etc). Once again, if you're taking or using something companies have intended for sale/rent/lease without paying for it, you're stealing.

Try telling your airline pilot or taxi driver that you're just "checking out" their service as a "potential" future sale and see how that works out for you.
---

Everywhere is within walking distance of you have the time.

WhiskeyDisk posted...

It's a question of harm. Who have I deprived of said item by having a copy of said item?

Again, if you're trying to convince yourself you're not a thief, it's bullshit. Just own up to being a thief.

It's not a "question of harm". It's a question of "am I taking/using something companies have intended for sale/rent/lease without paying"

If you go to the Taj Mahal, I'm sure you'll find people selling photos and models of it, but you're free to take your own photos/build your own models. Likewise, if Netflix is playing a certain movie, but you're not a subscriber, and you find the movie on some other service for free (providing it was meant to be free on said service), that's fine. But if Netflix is playing that movie and you use some illicit means to watch it on Netflix for free, you're stealing. Not saying sharing Netflix accounts, per se. More along the lines of using something like Kodi to watch Netflix.

That's stealing. If you have a guilty conscience, or don't like being labeled a thief, and you're trying to come up with some other way to approach it (i.e. "question of harm) you're only fooling yourself.
---

Everywhere is within walking distance of you have the time.

likehelly posted...

WhiskeyDisk posted...

I have a hard time viewing digital piracy for personal use as stealing. I think a key component of theft involves depriving another person use of that item.

I.E. if I steal your bike, you can no longer ride said bike. By copying a file I have not deprived anyone the use of their own file.

I'm not going to get bogged down in an argument as to morality and intellectual property here as I'm mainly raising the point that our society and it's technology is rapidly outstripping our notions of ownership and legality.

it's still theft though.

you're accessing something that is not free, for free, without the intention of ever buying it.

This. Companies sell products and services for streaming purposes. If you're using those services and not paying for them, you're stealing.

I don't have an issue with what other people do in that regard, but trying to convince yourself you're not a thief is just absurd.
---

Everywhere is within walking distance of you have the time.

What a dirtbag. I hope the police can charge her with something.
---

Everywhere is within walking distance of you have the time.