I don't think running a protection racket is the best way to get your point across. "I promise never to watch a movie until my demands are met" might actually carry some moral weight.
This wouldn't matter as the companies in question will just count that as a "sale lost to piracy" regardless. They already assume that their profits should be going up every year. Do you really think they care that you are taking a moral stand when it benefits them to label you as a "pirate" as opposed to just a lost sale?
Sorry, but it just sounds like entitled whining. No one has an inherent right to watch any movie, no matter how much they love them, and it's not a necessity.
He's not claiming they have the right: he's claiming they feel the need. That feeling of need has been created and fostered by the filmstudio's, who spend tons on advertising to make people feel they need to see movies. Just watch your average trailer: it is hardly about the movie and much more about why you need to see it anyway. Some consider that quite an achievement in market experience; others consider it exploitation of the human psychology bordering on criminal behavior.
I didn't say that at all, but thank you for putting words in my mouth.
What I did say is that suggesting the American populace stop seeing movies if they don't like the treatment is silly. The American populace isn't going to ever stop seeing movies.
It wont happen, and so suggesting that it happen is moot.
