Why do people rip off the vids of others?

Amv_Nekoroms · Post by **Amv_Nekoroms** » Sat May 21, 2005 6:51 am

Maybe they did watch too much "road to iron Chef" Amv...

bloodyhawk · Post by **bloodyhawk** » Sat May 21, 2005 7:47 pm

well i am putting my name *bloodyhawk* on the bottom right hand corner of all my vids now so you can at least try to prevent it.

yes i know you could just crop it out but usally when people take your footage and stuff they are unskilled so if they knew how to crop out stuff then most likely they know how to Rip from DVD's

yuppers.

Arigatomina · Post by **Arigatomina** » Sat May 21, 2005 9:33 pm

madbunny wrote:Has anybody here actually tried, and gotten a reasonable answer?

I asked the first person I found reproducing my vids why she did it when she had those exact vids listed in her favorites list (meaning, she liked them). She said she did the first vid so she could see the footage to a different song. Then she wanted to mix two of my vids to another song, to get all the footage in one video. I didn't ask why she used the third or fourth vid, since I'd gotten the jist by then. Hers was personal motivation - she liked the video and wanted to have it to a different soundtrack. I don't have any problem with that on the surface, if she hadn't shared them like they were her own, without so much as an admission that the editing was 'borrowed' from someone else.

I think that was an unusual case. Most of the people who reproduce *entire* videos, without even changing the audio, are doing it for the ego-stroking feedback. If the viewer thinks you made it, you get the praise. And so long as you don't get caught, there can be a certain pride in being praised for something you didn't put any effort into. It's snubbing your nose at those people who actually *work* to make videos that get positive feedback. All you have to do is download and upload under your own name. Aren't they the fools for doing it the hard way.

Org Profile · Post by **Otohiko** » Sat May 21, 2005 9:37 pm

I can give a reasonable answer, but that'll probably have less to do with AMVs and more with my philosophical/psychological/sociological ramblings

There is, unfortunately, too many people looking for the wrong kind of attention in our world. This is one way to do it.

Beowulf · Post by **Beowulf** » Sun May 22, 2005 1:02 am

Theres no such thing as bad publicity. I can see why someone would want to make people mad in order to get attention. Machine did it, Sammy did it, Requiett does it, and a few others that I can't remember.

I mean these people intentionaly piss people off to get press, not that they stole videos. Except Machine kinda sorta did

. I can see why people would do it.

Org Profile · Post by **Otohiko** » Sun May 22, 2005 1:06 am

Theres no such thing as bad publicity.

Well, unfortunately, that's one of the driving principles in the culture of attention-vampires

Beowulf · Post by **Beowulf** » Sun May 22, 2005 1:10 am

Otohiko wrote:
Theres no such thing as bad publicity.
Well, unfortunately, that's one of the driving principles in the culture of attention-vampires

It might be fundementaly wrong but it works. Loot at Marilyn Manson.

Org Profile · Post by **Otohiko** » Sun May 22, 2005 1:22 am

True. But I mean, it's one thing to be an attention whore for money, and an entirely different thing to be an attention whore for a hobby

HeavyMetal · Post by **HeavyMetal** » Sun May 22, 2005 10:50 pm

Yeah, but Marilyn Manson doesn't get kick off the planet for being an attention whore like video theives.

Why go down in flames before you ever make something of yourself. Maybe someone could get glory for ripping off a really high number of videos before getting caught. Most don't seem to make it to far.

madbunny · Post by **madbunny** » Sun May 22, 2005 11:19 pm

Arigatomina wrote:
madbunny wrote:Has anybody here actually tried, and gotten a reasonable answer?
I asked the first person I found reproducing my vids why she did it when she had those exact vids listed in her favorites list (meaning, she liked them). She said she did the first vid so she could see the footage to a different song. Then she wanted to mix two of my vids to another song, to get all the footage in one video. I didn't ask why she used the third or fourth vid, since I'd gotten the jist by then. Hers was personal motivation - she liked the video and wanted to have it to a different soundtrack. I don't have any problem with that on the surface, if she hadn't shared them like they were her own, without so much as an admission that the editing was 'borrowed' from someone else.
I think that was an unusual case.

At least though, it can be understood (sort of) as a logical thought process. Sort of an illogical way of doing the same thing that we all do when we make videos: put music to video in a way that WE want. I don't think I'd be as generous about it as you seem to have been but it's at least understandable.

Thanks for posting that, it was enlightening.

Arigatomina wrote: Most of the people who reproduce *entire* videos, without even changing the audio, are doing it for the ego-stroking feedback. If the viewer thinks you made it, you get the praise. And so long as you don't get caught, there can be a certain pride in being praised for something you didn't put any effort into. It's snubbing your nose at those people who actually *work* to make videos that get positive feedback. All you have to do is download and upload under your own name. Aren't they the fools for doing it the hard way.

At first I might have thought that, but it doesn't really hold up. It's like claiming credit for your neighbors lawn. One of my thoughts for that was that when people just re-uploaded the videos was that maybe they were uh... putting them in a library, like a playlist where they could be accessed.
If that were the operating theory, then you'd see like... 50 Euphorias, 30 Whisper of the Beast videos all over the place...
That theory only holds up if they do the whole thing, kit and caboodle.

Little clips, maybe some difficult effect, or sequencing thing I can sort of understand too (I've seen my students try that one).

Once they start making changes, claiming it for their own, then it's like WTF? Sure, it's not like we own the intellectual property rights to this stuff or anything, but it's a common convention that the person that put it together essentially is the 'creator' of the new form. Even people that have never seen amv's before know that.