Is it ethical to download the Wolverine Movie Streaming/Torrent file?

In short, no. You haven't paid for it (yet) and until you do, it is not ethically responsible to consume the content. However... This question forms the core of the debate over music and movie piracy on the Internet.

The multi-format twist on the question also dives into the controversy surrounding current DRM (digital rights management) techniques and content protection. 1) I believe in free and open access to all information including movies, music and content in general. This being said, I also believe that the creators of this content need to be rewarded for their work and encouraged to produce quality content that is worthy of high prices.

Currently, the music and movie industries are setup to monetize content on a "per unit" basis. Ever since audio was distributed on vinyl records and movies became available on VHS tapes, people have been able to consume this content in the luxury of their own homes. To this day, audio and video content is distributed for home consumption; but different than 20 years ago, technolgoy offers us a diverse number of ways to watch or listen to the media.2) Since the advent of home distribution, the music and movie industries have dictated a "low" monetary charge to consumers for the purpose of consuming that content.

This is an old commerce model that does not take into account the variety of methods and devices in which people today want to enjoy the content that has been created. The music and movie industries are floundering around trying to create an effective way for people to pay for the content that they have created while keeping it safe from illegal distribution (pirating). So far, DRM has been unsuccessful because it limits the distribution of media to devices that can be uniquely identified and tied to a user.

DRM is currently cumbersome and is technically inadequate. In this answer, I summarize 5 different revenue models that that music industry could use. These models also apply to the movie industry.

mahalo.com/answers/music/what-is-the-fut... 3) The argument of downloading and consuming media as it relates to ethics is outdated. It is not the fault of the consumer that the music and movie industries have dropped the ball. It is also not the fault of the music and movie industries that the Internet has created the opportunity for mass distribution of content.

With history, current issues and Internet media piracy in mind, ethics quickly become a cloudy issue.

The age old debate. Many people who download it would never pay to see it anyways so is it doing any harm. Yes, TECHNCIALLY all of this is very illegal (except in countries where its "kinda" legal).

Are you harming the filmmakers? If you don't pay to see the film, then yes absolutely. That said, its a WORKPRINT meaning its an un-finished version of the film.

Some directors would never want this leaked out, but as an independant filmmaker myself I love to see the evolution of films. I would really enjoy seeing this only to compare it to the final cut. Perhaps the director was unsatisfied by the final theatrical cut (I don't know if this is the case or not) and leaked HIS verison?

Who knows... So ethically, its wrong. From a creative standpoint, very interesting.

I used to think like allot of you do, that if I where paying for the movie anyways then it would be totally fine to take a peak at it. The truth of the matter is, it's wrong, it's dead wrong. It's stealing in it's most innocent genesis.

Think about it like this. Not only are you taking money out of the pockets of the studios, you are also taking money away from every single person who took part in the creation of the film. The writers, the directors, the producers, all the way down to the person who mops up the kitchen and cleans the dirty costumes.

PERSONAL NOTE(s): Ethics all aside I did see parts of this movie online, but noticed one thing in particular, the quality of the product is fleecing with every new release. Why is that? Perhaps because they didn't get enough at the box office in the earlier 2 films so they could get someone to magically erase Ryan Reynold s wire guides.

We all should be asking the question, "where can I see the film in theaters", not , "what's the best website to catch the torrent". Regards, XDS.

I think even if you just go to see the film in theaters without buying the Blu-Ray, you are still ethically justified in viewing the torrent file ahead of time. The fact is, you are still paying to see the final product, so if you take a 'sneak peek', are you really hurting the studio? Since they were getting your money either way, does your early viewing of a rough cut of the film jeopardize their potentially business in any way?

I don't think so. While I don't know if I'll view the torrent or not, I do know that its a workprint so it may have many differences from the final cut of the film. I plan on seeing Wolverine regardless, so if I view the workprint, it will be so that I can see the differences between that vision and the final cut.

Well it is technically stealing, at least that's what the law says it is... I don't think you can put the crime on the same level as say walking into a store and putting and slipping a DVD into your coat and walking out without paying for it. I think it's on the same level as a teenager paying for a theater ticket and then walking into an R rated movie. We pay to use the internet, by watching a torrent/stream of something your not suppose to be looking at is like slipping into that R rated theater, if you get caught you're going to get in trouble, if you sit through the whole movie and nothing happens you are simply entertained.

Nobody gets hurt and no movie studio loses money. (Look at movie revenue since torrents became popular, they have gone nowhere but up) So, for now, I guess have to call it "unethical" because your breaking the laws that our lawmakers have set for us to abide to and most likely the filmmakers don't approve of you seeing the moving online, even if you plan on buying it. Of course, this is watching a movie were talking, its not like a debate on the ethics of euthanasia or pre-emptive war.So relax, go with your gut, watch the movie if you want, eat some poppingcorn.

Your soul will be cleansed the moment you actually pay for it (as you say you will).

Actually, the studios are starting to include digital downloads with packaged DVDs (the Clone Wars DVD I just bought came with a digital download, and the packaging didn't even mention it, nice surprise). So based on your conditions "if you plan on going to see the film in theaters AND buy the blu-ray disk" then to a certain degree I would say "yes, you may watch a digital copy AFTER you buy the blu-ray disk", as the digital copy will probably be included with the blu-ray disk. The proposition you are making is one the studios would take you up on (as long as they control the digital copy, not BitTorrent), but there is one catch in that you said you PLAN to buy the blu-ray and you actually haven't done so.

You know you can pre-order these things Jason. I think we've just hit on the next Mahalo greenhouse project. A site that allows you to stream movies as soon as you pre-order the DVD.It would increase revenue for the studios and combat BitTorrent at the same time.

OMFG this is genius! Jason, run with this, or I am going to have to start a company and keep this gem for myself. Maybe I could pitch it at your start-up conference.

Seriously, let me pitch it, OK?

In terms of seeking indulgences, paying for a ticket and buying the BD copy would seem to work. That makes a whole slew of assumptions about user behavior that may not be warranted. A torrent is not any different from the illegal DVD being made available for download.

Bittorrent is merely a transport medium and what is carried over it is the big worry. Change in transport medium does not change the morality or legality.As a content producer myself, I have mixed feelings on this. Frankly, I can wait until it hits the theater.

The Moore-Eick version of Battlestar Galactica was very good preparation for that. The main problem is that the ethical situations like this arise because of a market inefficiency. The indulgences/penitential acts proposed don't make things any better because there is no realistic expectation that such will actually happen.

There are no nuns with rulers to whack hands in this case and otherwise ensure enforcement. If I had something leak prior to its intended grand debut, frankly I would change the final product slightly just to mess with those who couldn't wait. That way they'd at least feel better if they went ahead with those indulgences/penitential acts.

In my area of content production, though, I have a system called Public Radio Exchange that removes stuff like this from the shadows and keeps everybody legal and ethical. Structural change rather than penance is required here and I disagree with the avenue proposed by Jason.

Technically by being illegal it essentially makes it unethical (depending on your exact viewpoints of law and ethics). Many people claim that they will/do go and see the movie or buy it on DVD anyway and so therefore do not negatively impact the filmmakers financially. Similarly many people will spend the time to watch something from a Torrent which they HAD absolutely no intention of ever watching otherwise, so also don't technically negatively impact the filmmakers.It could even be argued that in some situations people may, after watching a Torrent, be encouraged to go and watch the film at the cinema or purchase it on DVD, in which case the Torrent would have helped the filmmakers financially.

However, for every well meaning person there is someone who will download a Torrent of a film they want to see and never credit the filmmakers in anyway. Ultimately it is very difficult to prove whether, or by how much, Torrents affect the filmmakers profits; As it is not always possible to categorise people in the above groups, because people are not always honest and because, if a film is poor, a person is likely to change their mind about buying it after watching the Torrent.To answer the actual question, (ignoring the legal argument) it could be justified ethically if there was a guarantee that, regardless of whether the film turns out to be good or bad, you will go and watch it and buy the disc. However you may well in fact be cheating yourself by watching a sub-par version of the film before seeing it at the cinema.

Filmmakers put a lot of effort into creating cinematic experiences that can easily lose their effect if you're watching it for the second time after having seen a less than spectacular version.

Sounds like you're suggesting the leaked version is like full-featured trial software, and as long as you buy the suite at the end of it, it's all good. I disagree with vandal913, though - I think it's opposite. If you're going to buy the disc, then it's fine.

If you only see it in the theater, it's not. When you buy a ticket to go see it in the theaters, you don't get to take it with you - that is, you don't have a tangible copy. With the blu-ray/DVD/whatever, you do.

The theater is a pay-per-view situation, so if you watch the stream and want to justify it by buying a ticket to the movie ... you'd have to buy 2. So I vote ... - Go nuts if you're going to buy the take-home product, like a DVD or blu-ray. In this case, you're watching the leak on credit.

- Shame, shame, something about a name if you're only going to watch it in the theaters. You've only paid to see it once, and you'll have seen it more than that if you watch the leak.

Couldn't all this money be made back by offering the Streaming/Torrent File to the public with ads. I'm sure there would be quite a few advertisers that would love to advertise on a site streaming such a video. The numbers that would be attracted to these sites would be a huge.

This issue isn't going to go away so why don't they work with it to come up with a solution.

What makes this question interesting is the way it is framed. It's the end bit that apparently makes it acceptable to download it. However, what percentage of people who download it using the above criteria don't end up seeing the movie in the theater or buying the BD?

I'm guessing that percentage is not insignificant. And I say this as someone who generally has no issue with watching a bootleg film. Ah, the ethical line can so easily be blurred when no one is 'obviously' being hurt or undermined.As a photographer, I am certainly sensitive to my own materials being use in inappropriate ways.

Additionally, I found a blog the other day which has ripped off an article I written without crediting me (while also having made so horrendous changes to it - clearly not by a decent writer). So, what's my answer then... Hmmm.....

Seeing as how the last 2 x-men movies were horrible...its totally ethical. You shouldn't have to pay money for something thats terrible. If you really like the movie though, you can always show your appreciation later by buying it.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.