$25 to rent the movie, one watch within max 24 hours after you start watching it… Or $5 more to own it. Scammers.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    192 years ago

    This is ridiculous, but at least Barbie is getting a physical release. I’m actually very willing to pay for media… if I can access it offline and am not dependent on the good will of some large corporation.

  • Alien Nathan Edward
    link
    fedilink
    English
    592 years ago

    That’s $25 for a revocable license to watch it once and $5 more for a revocable license to watch it as many times as you want until the service folds or they decide to memory-hole it in order to get out of paying residuals to the cast and crew. The only way to own something is to steal it.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      72 years ago

      Buying the disk is still owning it (which is another $5 less on amazon BTW) though it is not out yet.

      • Alien Nathan Edward
        link
        fedilink
        English
        5
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        What’s the DRM like on a disc copy? I’ll admit that I’m not caught up, it’s been a long time since I bought physical media. Is it revocable?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          12 years ago

          With a physical item, first sale doctrine clearly applies, so you can own the movie, and resell it to somebody else, or lend it to your friends, or give it to a library. None of which is possible with a digital DRMed "ownership "

          • xcjs
            link
            fedilink
            English
            22 years ago

            It’s not even grey - in the US it is illegal under the DMCA.

            I’m not up to date on ripping tools, though.

              • xcjs
                link
                fedilink
                English
                12 years ago

                The DMCA supersedes that - it’s still a crime to bypass copy protection mechanisms, and there are very few exceptions to that rule.

            • Karyoplasma
              link
              fedilink
              English
              12 years ago

              I know that in the EU, if you buy a video game and it runs poorly or not at all because of the DRM put in place by the publisher, you are allowed to use a crack. Dunno if it’s the same for a movie tho.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        112 years ago

        It’s weird how people were told it’s theft and they simply repeated it forever despite knowing exactly what theft is and knowing piracy is literally not the same thing.

        • Zoolander
          link
          fedilink
          English
          12 years ago

          It’s not the same thing but that doesn’t mean it’s not theft, nonetheless.

              • Zoolander
                link
                fedilink
                English
                1
                edit-2
                2 years ago

                Way to be dishonest. Comments do not make for people’s livelihoods. Piracy is theft of income from the creators. People here are dishonest and try to do all these mental gymnastics to justify their specific version of piracy. The only form of piracy that can be argued to be somewhat amoral is pirating media that is not available legally. Otherwise, no matter how you look at it, you are stealing an income or livelihood from whoever created it.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  32 years ago

                  Please understand that copying intellectual property and theft are, legally speaking, two different things. If I build a machine that just makes endless copies of your intellectual property, just because I can, it doesn’t affect your income whatsoever. You don’t get more poor for each copy that’s made.

                  I agree with you about pirating media that’s not legally available. However, a lot of great content will become unavailable at some point in the future. Making a copy for the archives while it’s possible is a good idea for any media you care about, since there’s no guarantee that anyone else cares.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 years ago

          Now apply this same reasoning to other life concepts we’ve been told, and welcome to enlightenment.

          (Or black pilling, YMMV)

          • Brave Little Hitachi Wand
            link
            fedilink
            English
            12 years ago

            You need to get yawnpilled. Check it out: some of the things people commonly accept as true actually are true. Up your grind and get on my level

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    3
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    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.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    122 years ago

    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.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1502 years ago

    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.

    • ZachOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      752 years ago

      $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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      122 years ago

      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.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        72 years ago

        If you don’t get a physical piece of media

        It doesn’t have to be physical

        /pendantic

      • archomrade [he/him]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        52 years ago

        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.

  • Corroded
    link
    fedilink
    English
    52 years ago

    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.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    6
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Watching propaganda is not why I pirate. It’s to have access to the media that isn’t straight up propaganda.

    • Bunch of Kens in here.
    • oʍʇǝuoǝnu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      462 years ago

      Barbie was a funny movie, the only people complaining about “the propaganda” are retards who don’t understand women are people.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        62 years ago

        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.

        • oʍʇǝuoǝnu
          link
          fedilink
          English
          12 years ago

          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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      172 years ago

      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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      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.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12 years ago

        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.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          122 years ago

          Amazing. A Quiet Place was propaganda, but Iron Man was a piece of high art because

          -checks notes-

          it was made before 2016.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            12 years ago

            Holy fuck my dude I rewatched that movie earlier this year and it’s kinda garbage. The white saviour is real in that movie.

        • Annoyed_🦀
          link
          fedilink
          English
          7
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          Ohh no, not my propaganda movie Tenet, they advocate running and driving backward.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          32 years ago

          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.

    • trashcan
      link
      fedilink
      English
      362 years ago

      I can’t imagine feeling this hurt about a Barbie movie

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        A miss? Considering all the but-hurt, I hit the target precisely (to borrow your analogy). All post-2016 mainstream movies are propaganda.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2332 years ago

    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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      15
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      And people will go ‘you didn’t buy it!’ like it doesn’t say “Buy” right fuckin’ there.

      • RBG
        link
        fedilink
        English
        42 years ago

        True, but it just says “buy 4k” which for all we know could mean “buy a temporary license to watch the 4k movie”.

    • Decoy321
      link
      fedilink
      English
      782 years ago

      Then, when they remove it, they offer you a measly $5 gift card only redeemable on their platform.

      • JackbyDev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        452 years ago

        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.)

        • archomrade [he/him]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          242 years ago

          A gift card isn’t a refund

          It also doesn’t change the false implication they would “own” the digital copy

          • JackbyDev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            112 years ago

            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.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                22 years ago

                The store has a profit margin, so the store values the item significantly less than the sticker price.

              • JackbyDev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                22 years ago

                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).

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  32 years ago

                  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.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                12 years ago

                The store has a profit margin, so the store values the item significantly less than the sticker price.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            22 years ago

            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.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    282 years ago

    Renting a DvD / Blueray was like 7$, going to the movies is 10-15$, why TF is this platform so expensive??

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    82 years ago

    I can understand not being interested in the movie or the price point or digital “ownership”, but why does it make them scammers to offer the purchase at a price that heavily amortizes down the cost per viewing?

    The rental price is on par with two theater tickets and they’re not playing games with pretending like the purchase price should be double because you plan to watch it at least twice.

    • archomrade [he/him]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Why am I seeing this capitalist apologia on a pirating forum?

      It makes them ‘scammers’ because:

      • they are calling it a purchase, but its not a purchase. It’s a lease.
      • the rental price is arbitrary anyway. It costs them the same to stream the media, if it’s $25 or $0.25. Hell, it costs them the same if they stream it as a purchase as it does to stream it as a rental.
      • you don’t have any legal option to control your own digital full res copy of any media that you pay for, but they take your money anyway so you can pretend that you do.

      I consider that to be a scam.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 years ago

        I don’t think you know what a scam is. The terms of the purchase are spelled out clearly and nobody is being deceived.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      92 years ago

      Well shouldn’t rental be much less than the price of buying and much less than the price of cinema tickets? That’s how it used to work.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12 years ago

        The rental price will eventually be much lower, but they’ve been doing this lately where they let people watch movies that are still in theaters for a significantly higher price.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        32 years ago

        Personally I prefer theaters so I think that price is high, yes. But rentals also used to be less convenient because the wait was longer and the TVs were lower quality.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          12 years ago

          The reduced wait time I think is the only real leg to stand on. It arguably doesn’t make sense to undermine theatre ticket sales by making it cheaper at home, although I’d argue that it should be that the theatre option is the premium option that should cost more while home streaming is the cheap option if you don’t want or need the theatre experience which should make it a complimentary income source to ticket sales not a threat to it but I guess they reckon they’ll make them both cost the same until the cinema run is over so they never make less than a full theatre ticket price until then.

          I hate how things being convenient means they have to cost more. “Convenience fees” are such a crock. If it cost them more to offer the convenience over their usual service, but they don’t run video stores any more and this has arguably less overhead than the renting physical media business did so it should be cheaper for everyone and yet instead they contrive additional expense on top because they made it convenient.

  • Phoenixz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    572 years ago

    “own it” until we delete it from your account because reasons, but hey, we’ll give you a coupon!