Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Negotiating to Offer Rentals for Movies Still in Theaters, but at a Price

I

ignatius345

macrumors 604
Aug 20, 2015
6,997
11,483
Now that I've switched over to a projector and have a 6' wide screen, it would be pretty tempting to just watch a current-release film at home for $30, especially when you consider that movie tickets here in NYC are about $15 each. The moviegoing experience has been so degraded with intrusive pre-movie video ads, insane food prices, and people blithely talking and texting... I'm just as soon stay at home if I can.
 
2

2010mini

macrumors 601
Jun 19, 2013
4,698
4,806
ArmCortexA8 said:
People are so easily confused and misled and don't question anything and this is where the issues start. Copyright by design was originally designed to allow free sharing of creations without any restrictions, and there was an option to pay a fee of your choosing, but it was not compulsory, there were no "agents" from the corrupt "industry" controlling and milking it for every cent and the works by default were owned by the creator only.

Paying for movies does not mean you own the movie, as the ownership never transfers to the purchaser. In effect you are leasing the movie. However in the early years of Copyright people wrote books regarding treason in relation to their Administration / Government and in an attempt to control this material, the Stationers of England were created to control all creative works by others - for a fee or charge or be threatened via blackmail / coercion / extortion. This created an "agent" like the "MAFIAA" who controls creative works by others and profits it for it, and hands back the remainder to the "creator"

Copying is not illegal and is not theft despite the corrupt industry switching the term "copy" to "pirating" to psychologically make people feel bad for their actions in order to financially sway them to pay for what they want.

Quote "To read the true history of copyright is to understand just how completely this reaction plays into the industry's hands. The record companies don't really care whether they win or lose these lawsuits. In the long run, they don't even expect to eliminate file sharing. What they're fighting for is much bigger. They're fighting to maintain a state of mind, an attitude toward creative work that says someone ought to own products of the mind, and control who can copy them.

And by positioning the issue as a contest between the Beleaguered Artist, who supposedly needs copyright to pay the rent, and The Unthinking Masses, who would rather copy a song or a story off the Internet than pay a fair price, the industry has been astonishingly successful. They have managed to substitute the loaded terms "piracy" and "theft" for the more accurate "copying" — as if there were no difference between stealing your bicycle (now you have no bicycle) and copying your song (now we both have it). Most importantly, industry propaganda has made it a commonplace belief that copyright is how most creators earn a living — that without copyright, the engines of intellectual production would grind to a halt, and artists would have neither means nor motivation to produce new works."
[doublepost=1481240767][/doublepost]

Read and ponder:-

"To read the true history of copyright is to understand just how completely this reaction plays into the industry's hands. The record companies don't really care whether they win or lose these lawsuits. In the long run, they don't even expect to eliminate file sharing. What they're fighting for is much bigger. They're fighting to maintain a state of mind, an attitude toward creative work that says someone ought to own products of the mind, and control who can copy them. And by positioning the issue as a contest between the Beleaguered Artist, who supposedly needs copyright to pay the rent, and The Unthinking Masses, who would rather copy a song or a story off the Internet than pay a fair price, the industry has been astonishingly successful.

They have managed to substitute the loaded terms "piracy" and "theft" for the more accurate "copying" — as if there were no difference between stealing your bicycle (now you have no bicycle) and copying your song (now we both have it). Most importantly, industry propaganda has made it a commonplace belief that copyright is how most creators earn a living — that without copyright, the engines of intellectual production would grind to a halt, and artists would have neither means nor motivation to produce new works."
[doublepost=1481240842][/doublepost]

The real world is corrupt and full of people making money off other people's creations - how does this help creators - too many hands in too many pockets.

Read:-

"To read the true history of copyright is to understand just how completely this reaction plays into the industry's hands. The record companies don't really care whether they win or lose these lawsuits. In the long run, they don't even expect to eliminate file sharing. What they're fighting for is much bigger. They're fighting to maintain a state of mind, an attitude toward creative work that says someone ought to own products of the mind, and control who can copy them. And by positioning the issue as a contest between the Beleaguered Artist, who supposedly needs copyright to pay the rent, and The Unthinking Masses, who would rather copy a song or a story off the Internet than pay a fair price, the industry has been astonishingly successful.

They have managed to substitute the loaded terms "piracy" and "theft" for the more accurate "copying" — as if there were no difference between stealing your bicycle (now you have no bicycle) and copying your song (now we both have it). Most importantly, industry propaganda has made it a commonplace belief that copyright is how most creators earn a living — that without copyright, the engines of intellectual production would grind to a halt, and artists would have neither means nor motivation to produce new works."
Click to expand...

You are delusional if you think Me as an artist will allow you to take my creation for free because you think I don't own it. Did you give me the inspiration? Did you pay for my years of schooling so I could hone my skills? Did you stay up with me nights on end perfecting a riff or vocals?

No.

But you should now copy my hard work without compensation?!?.....

F*** you, you over entitled brat is what I would say. And the same sentiment goes for those who create movies and tv shows. It take a lot of years of work.

How about you go create your own movies to enjoy?
 
rezwits

rezwits

macrumors 6502a
Jul 10, 2007
811
414
Las Vegas
2010mini said:
You are delusional if you think Me as an artist will allow you to take my creation for free because you think I don't own it. Did you give me the inspiration? Did you pay for my years of schooling so I could hone my skills? Did you stay up with me nights on end perfecting a riff or vocals?

No.

But you should now copy my hard work without compensation?!?.....

F*** you, you over entitled brat is what I would say. And the same sentiment goes for those who create movies and tv shows. It take a lot of years of work.

How about you go create your own movies to enjoy?
Click to expand...

A yeah you're lost...

But in an opposite direction, my pops can barely make it to a movie after cancer, and I (we) would easily pay $25 for some movies and $50 for like Rouge One, at home!

On another note, I only saw like two 4K mentions, I didn't read all 10+ pages but...
 
J

JayMBP

macrumors regular
Apr 25, 2011
152
21
Surrey, BC
HiRez said:
One problem I see with this is that the price makes a lot more sense for larger families, while smaller families and single people get the shaft. Since they don't know how many people are watching, everyone has subsidize the costs for larger families/groups.
Click to expand...

If you think about it, it might be what they are trying to do.

Big families or parents (like myself) don't go to movies all that often because of cost/arrangements needed... etc to watch a movie in theater. Hence, these are lost revenues for the movie companies. And if planned right, they might be able to take a piece from that lost piece of pie.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eyeseeyou
LethalWolfe

LethalWolfe

macrumors G3
Jan 11, 2002
9,370
124
Los Angeles
Defthand said:
The problem with affluent Californians is that they think everyone can afford the same luxuries. $50 for two persons to watch one of today’s crappy movies is absurd.

$50 might be reasonable for a family with three kids who want to watch the latest Pixar flick. They’ll save $$$ on refreshments too. A better solution would be an AppleTV that has the ability of a Kinect to detect how many people are in the room and charge accordingly.
Click to expand...

I think luxuries, by their nature, are things most people can't afford/don't have access too. ;) If paying $50 to watch it at home is too expensive then just pay less money and watch it at the theater. Paying $50 is being proposed as ANOTHER way to watch a movie, not the ONLY way.

I too thought about having a camera in the room counting how many people are there in order to set the price, but that just sounds creepy and ripe for hacking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2010mini
T

Tech198

Cancelled
Mar 21, 2011
15,915
2,151
Zandery said:
At $25 for 2 people that makes sense but if you push it up to $50 then it becomes a what the hell moment, I currently spend $20 for 2 plus a further $10-15 on drinks and popcorn which is $30-35 total, maximum I'd consider is $30 for early rental at home but $50? The studios can do one if they think people will pay that kind of money.
Click to expand...

Yes, but $50 is the 'asking' price .. There is no decision yet, but the media does a good job freaking us all out as well :)

I would bet so much stir o one would rent even a good movie for $50, at least allot less people, to would be more attractive to put it at $25 for all new movie releases.

Copyright holders just want more money.
 
Msail30bay

Msail30bay

macrumors regular
Jan 4, 2014
181
18
Penn., USA
The last time I was in a movie theater was............. :cool:......... last year, once to a art house film. I just wait on Netflix and my usual go to__________ ;). Renting on iTunes, once-in-a-blue-moon. However!! I donate yearly to my local art house to keep it open, so NOT feeling bad.
 
R

Rob_2811

Suspended
Mar 18, 2016
2,569
4,253
United Kingdom
All part of Timmys masterplan to turn Apple into a services company.

Just a few problems with it:

1. Apple are terrible at services

2. They will need about about 3 thousand services to make the kind of money they make on hardware.

:rolleyes:
 
J

jtrenda33

macrumors 6502
Oct 22, 2008
345
138
ugahairydawgs said:
...having to buy their $8 popcorn.
Click to expand...

They make you buy their popcorn??
[doublepost=1481305231][/doublepost]One reason I don't go to the movies is because I hate stupid people. Another reason is because ticket prices are ridiculous. I don't care how you slice it, $25-50 is not enticing at all to me for a single rental. I would, however, pay up to $50/month for on-demand streaming of iTunes movies/tv shows. That's what I'd like to see Apple focusing on because you go from one thing which will not create a consistent revenue stream, at least in my case, to the other thing which would generate $50/month in revenue per user/family.
 
E

eyeseeyou

macrumors 68040
Feb 4, 2011
3,384
1,594
jtrenda33 said:
They make you buy their popcorn??
[doublepost=1481305231][/doublepost]One reason I don't go to the movies is because I hate stupid people. Another reason is because ticket prices are ridiculous. I don't care how you slice it, $25-50 is not enticing at all to me for a single rental. I would, however, pay up to $50/month for on-demand streaming of iTunes movies/tv shows. That's what I'd like to see Apple focusing on because you go from one thing which will not create a consistent revenue stream, at least in my case, to the other thing which would generate $50/month in revenue per user/family.
Click to expand...

In your mind would this streaming service include movies that are still in the movie theater?
 
chrisbru

chrisbru

macrumors 6502a
May 8, 2008
809
169
Austin, TX
Logic368 said:
it would be a good risk to take, honestly... i mean, if you want pirated content, that'll always be there, even without immediate rentals... this will be like steve jobs's "carrot" theory: people will pay money if the carrot is easier to get/higher quality. If the studios can really take advantage of this and let people watch movies at super high quality levels (hdr, high frame rate, etc...), it might work out...
Click to expand...

Gonna need a 4k, HDR capable Apple TV for this to make sense. But I agree - I never go to the movie theater, really, but would probably spend $25-30 two or three times a month to watch a new movie at home.
[doublepost=1481323781][/doublepost]
npmacuser5 said:
Patience, not needing to be first inline, pays off with excellent return on ones Monies!
Click to expand...

Not everything is about getting best "return" on your money. Some people live comfortably and are willing to pay for small luxuries.
 
A

ArmCortexA8

macrumors 65816
Feb 18, 2010
1,075
206
Terra Australis
2010mini said:
You are delusional if you think Me as an artist will allow you to take my creation for free because you think I don't own it. Did you give me the inspiration? Did you pay for my years of schooling so I could hone my skills? Did you stay up with me nights on end perfecting a riff or vocals?

No.

But you should now copy my hard work without compensation?!?..... F*** you, you over entitled brat is what I would say. And the same sentiment goes for those who create movies and tv shows. It take a lot of years of work. How about you go create your own movies to enjoy?
Click to expand...

What a professional response. Fact is music for free or for sale is not designed as a financial tool to recoup the costs outlaid simply because you chose to make a living from music. As mentioned, the original design of Copyright was never to make money but people had the choice to pay, however the creative works stayed the property of the creator - not all the hangers-on and "agents" working for the corrupt industry making money on other people's creations. It was always designed to share create works freely without rules or restrictions. This encompasses all creative industries - anything that embodies create works - same for movies etc.

As mentioned, the industry "swapped" the terms "copying to piracy" to have more of a psychological / guilt trip response with people so that they follow the lies and misinformation while others profiteer from it.

Remember the "industry" has tried to hide the origins of Copyright for over 300 years in order to perpetuate their lies and profits based on theories, not fact. Furthermore we the people are not here to financially prop up personal costs attributed to learning and creating music, etc as you chose this hobby of your own choosing. It sounds like you are happy with other people taking money from you directly / indirectly for your own works. People don't seem to see the corruption here and anyone that "accepts" the system is guilty by association.

The truth -
 
  • Like
Reactions: rezwits
J

jujufreeze

macrumors 6502a
Jan 7, 2016
511
535
I don't care how spiffy your new 50 inch ultra HD TV and surround sound setup is, nothing beats the theater's big screen, big sound, and concession stand convenience. I pay a premium for the experience. If the price is roughly the same I'll choose the theater every time.
 
cmaier

cmaier

Suspended
Jul 25, 2007
25,405
33,471
California
Rob_2811 said:
All part of Timmys masterplan to turn Apple into a services company.

Just a few problems with it:

1. Apple are terrible at services

2. They will need about about 3 thousand services to make the kind of money they make on hardware.

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Which is why Apple has no interest in being a services company. It's why they didn't buy Netflix or time warner or a mobile carrier, too. They are a hardware company.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom