technical accustat "pirating" question

E

enzo

Banned
as i understand it, pat has trashed much of his accustat inventory some years ago. i think i know the answer to this question, but was really curious to confirm it. is it technically illegal to copy an accustat that is no longer for sale by pat???

secondly, if it is in fact legal to trade and/or copy accustats that he doesnt have in his inventory, wouldnt it be great to have a forum here for "accu-stat trades" where people could post what they want.

so, im curious to hear what you all have to say, and thanks in advance for the input
 
enzo said:
as i understand it, pat has trashed much of his accustat inventory some years ago. i think i know the answer to this question, but was really curious to confirm it. is it technically illegal to copy an accustat that is no longer for sale by pat???

secondly, if it is in fact legal to trade and/or copy accustats that he doesnt have in his inventory, wouldnt it be great to have a forum here for "accu-stat trades" where people could post what they want.

so, im curious to hear what you all have to say, and thanks in advance for the input
Click to expand...

Whether the copyrighted material is available for purchase has absolutely no bearing on the case. The copyright law is clear....

"Thou shalt not copy...."

Pat is perfectly free to let the old matches fall into the mists of time.. And then charge out the buttocks for them in 20 years when he is ready to retire.

That's the perks of being the one to own intellectual property. You are free to manipulate supply as you see fit in order to increase demand..

Personally, if I were Pat, I would ditch the whole DVD thing and go straight to streaming subscriptions. $14.00 to download a match would make a heck of a lot more money than he is making right now. I'm sure there is a company that will provide hosting of his videos and will set up the whole deal for a reasonable fee. The only people who are buying Accu-Stats are the people who got a pretty decent amount of money, anyways. All of those people are more likely to have a high speed connection. People buy more videos when they can just put the order in online, go to bed, and have four matches ready to burn to a personal DVD..

Russ
 
Last edited:
While were on the subject has anyone tried the dvds from mac that were offered here on az forums?--Leonard
 
StevenPWaldon said:
How'd I know Russ would chime in on this one?
Click to expand...

Ooooh! Ooooh!

I'll play the game, Ms. Baumgartner!! How did StevenPWaldon know I would chime in on this?

(I have an idea.. Could it be because I do not believe in piracy, and am willing to say so?)

Russ
 
enzo said:
as i understand it, pat has trashed much of his accustat inventory some years ago.
Click to expand...

I think Pat still has the old matches, he just doesn't reproduce them anymore since it is cost prohibitive. I think he has plans to eventually transfer everything to DVD, including making the old archived matches available on DVD.
 
Just like MP3, "streaming video" is a step backward.

No reasonably sized streamed video would compare in quality to a 4.3 gigabyte DVD. Finally, after enduring years of fuzzy match tapes, we now enjoy the much-improved resolution of DVD from AccuStats. It would be a grievous error to trade that for something that would likely be more akin to the resolution of VHS.

Most Accu-Stats customers would not wish to go to the trouble of creating their own DVDs—the technical capabilities of the average pool fan are not conducive to a properly mastered DVD, with chapter "breaks" and menus. I would rather pay the extra $12 and get the full product. What's your time worth? Besides, before burning and authoring, streamed video would have to undergo a conversion to DVD-friendly MPEG, reducing the quality further.

Also, let's say your hard drive crashes, and you lose your Accu-Stats videos. You eat the loss. "Didn't you make a backup?"

Doesn't a nice, professionally produced $26.00 DVD seem like a great bargain right about now?
 
Slider said:
No reasonably sized streamed video would compare in quality to a 4.3 gigabyte DVD. Finally, after enduring years of fuzzy match tapes, we now enjoy the much-improved resolution of DVD from AccuStats. It would be a grievous error to trade that for something that would likely be more akin to the resolution of VHS.

Most Accu-Stats customers would not wish to go to the trouble of creating their own DVDs—the technical capabilities of the average pool fan are not conducive to a properly mastered DVD, with chapter "breaks" and menus. I would rather pay the extra $12 and get the full product. What's your time worth? Besides, before burning and authoring, streamed video would have to undergo a conversion to DVD-friendly MPEG, reducing the quality further.

Also, let's say your hard drive crashes, and you lose your Accu-Stats videos. You eat the loss. "Didn't you make a backup?"

Doesn't a nice, professionally produced $26.00 DVD seem like a great bargain right about now?
Click to expand...
true. just look at youtube and google video, etc, However, we are reaching a time when bandwidth will get huge, and we could download dvd in a few seconds in a few years. They can already do it now, just not "us."
 
belmicah said:
true. just look at youtube and google video, etc, However, we are reaching a time when bandwidth will get huge, and we could download dvd in a few seconds in a few years. They can already do it now, just not "us."
Click to expand...

If it were faster, yes, I'd probably download a fully prepared, full-quality, "ready-to-burn" DVD image, even if it took an hour. If it were attractively priced.

The thing is, the packaging probably only adds $2 or $3 to the cost, and if I buy it from Accu-Stats, I get a pressed DVD, not a burned one with a shorter life expectancy, and potential player compatibility problems.

The same general objections apply to commercial downloadable music. Quality-wise, it's inferior to what you get on a CD, so it's not worth having, unless it's very inexpensive, of course. At $0.99 a song? No thanks. That's approximately what the "real" version on the CD costs.
 
On demand is better

I would prefer to pay a monthly fee for ON DEMAND access to the full library. Then there could be a discount for DVDs if you wanted to own a match. Also Pat could offer custom sets, as in which matches would you like on the DVD.

I'd gladly pay $10 a month for instant access to all the matches. Or $15 maybe.
 
Slider said:
If it were faster, yes, I'd probably download a fully prepared, full-quality, "ready-to-burn" DVD image, even if it took an hour. If it were attractively priced.

The thing is, the packaging probably only adds $2 or $3 to the cost, and if I buy it from Accu-Stats, I get a pressed DVD, not a burned one with a shorter life expectancy, and potential player compatibility problems.

The same general objections apply to commercial downloadable music. Quality-wise, it's inferior to what you get on a CD, so it's not worth having, unless it's very inexpensive, of course. At $0.99 a song? No thanks. That's approximately what the "real" version on the CD costs.
Click to expand...

Apple has made a few hundred million dollars off those 99 cent songs...

Must be something to it.

In case you were wondering what it's called, when people fight to preserve the old way of doing things, and to try to postpone the future, it's call "head in sand" syndrome.

I haven't bought a CD in years, and I doubt most of the people on the board have bought one in the last six months.

Russ
 
I agree that it would be great to get this streaming. But the price right now is too much for what you get. $5 to watch a match one time is a little ridiculous. I would definitely pay $15 a month to watch any content I wanted at any time.

And yes, it is without question illegal to download any material that is still copyrighted. The fact that it is no longer available for purchase is, unfortunately, irrelevant. This is actually contrary to the original purpose of copyright, which was to give an individual short term rights to content, in exchange for that content becoming public property after a set time. The idea was actually to prevent material from becoming lost to humantiy after a copyright holder had derived benefit from it. The purpose was _NOT_ to allow Disney to rerelease Fantasia every five years when a new video format came out.
 
I bought 11 from him a couple of months ago and they were good, can't complain, they were from early 90s, so the quality of film was probably not up to todays standards, but I am enjoying watching all the great players.
Also, enjoy the boys in the booth, gives good insight on what is going on.
 
Russ Chewning said:
Apple has made a few hundred million dollars off those 99 cent songs...

Must be something to it.
Click to expand...

P.T. Barnum said it best - I see no need to repeat it here. Add trendiness, and a clever marketing campaign aimed squarely at a bored, covetous , compulsive populace, and you pretty much have it.

Russ Chewning said:
In case you were wondering what it's called, when people fight to preserve the old way of doing things, and to try to postpone the future, it's call "head in sand" syndrome.
Click to expand...

I have very few questions about the english language. I believe the term you're reaching for is "Ostrich Syndrome", but I suspect the concept you are trying to convey is more along the lines of "xenophobia."

I am wondering about something, though. Why are you posting your job description in a thread concerning digital content delivery?

This is getting way off-topic, so I'll start a thread with a more appropriate title.
 
Slider said:
P.T. Barnum said it best - I see no need to repeat it here. Add trendiness, and a clever marketing campaign aimed squarely at a bored, covetous , compulsive populace, and you pretty much have it.
Click to expand...

Actually, in my case, no. I buy music from the Itunes store for a couple of reasons different from what you posted.

1. Apple is technically competent and trustworthy enough that I don't have to worry about their software having viruses or spyware embedded, which I cannot say for the other companies doing the same thing.

2. CD is an antiquated technology. The sound difference between an MP3 and CD is so minute as to be undetectable to the average listener. Also, all things being equal, I am betting if I use proper backup practices, my music is going to be around a heck of a lot longer than your CDs will. Never scratched a CD, eh? Got kids??

3. I don't know where everyone is getting their CDs, but even in the PX here on post, CDs cost a minimum of $12.00. More for a popular artist. I think that is low compared to the prices the general public pays. Buying an entire album on Itunes is less expensive PLUS.....You get bonus tracks that are ONLY distributed through Itunes..:D The average price of an album containing 12-17 songs is $9.99 on Itunes.

4. Funny you should mention marketing. A big part of marketing is designing packaging to attract the senses, which leads to many impulse buys when one goes to a brick and mortar business to buy a product, such as music. So, people like you who insist on going to the store to buy a CD are exposed to all sorts of marketing such as impulse item placement, complementary product placement, etc. When I go into Itunes and connect to the store, I usually know EXACTLY what I want. And if I think that only 6 songs on a CD are worth buying.. I pay $6.00 for those songs, whereas YOU pay FULL PRICE.

Now who's the sucker? :D :D :D

Russ
 
Russ Chewning said:
... Could it be because I do not believe in piracy, and am willing to say so?

Russ
Click to expand...
Russ, I am with you on the piracy thing -- even though it sometimes feels like a minority in the internet world :)

It's a sh*tload of work to create any kind of decent original "content". It is just not right -- even if it is real easy in this age of technology -- to just wholesale rip... Accustats should be supported, and maybe encouraged to a tape a few more events :) :)

JMHO, too.
 
Agree...

Although it's very convenient and nice for people to have access to so much, that they can get for free... Unfortunately you have to consider the consequences. When someone puts forth the effort, they deserve a commensurate reward for their efforts. Otherwise, there will be a disincentive for people to innovate and create new things that we may like...
 
What is Accu-stats doing nowadays? Are they solely in the video reproduction pool business now? With a name like Accu-STATS do they still do anything statistical???
 
FLICKit said:
What is Accu-stats doing nowadays? Are they solely in the video reproduction pool business now? With a name like Accu-STATS do they still do anything statistical???
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, once the word got out that 78% of all statistics are made up on the spot, that aspect of their enterprise took a downhill turn.
 
Slider said:
Unfortunately, once the word got out that 78% of all statistics are made up on the spot, that aspect of their enterprise took a downhill turn.
Click to expand...

Post Deleted.

I think I just got that you were making a funny. :D I went off on a rant, thinking you were criticizing the authenticity of Accu-Stats ratings.

If you were, let me know so I can repost.. :D

Russ
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top