Studio 4K - The Italian Eureka?

[gap]

Originally Posted by whitesheik

You'd think that he and all the others in this and the other thread would have the humility to come back and at least admit they were wrong now that proof has been provided. You'd think that, but alas.

I can't speak for pecker but I have nothing to admit too. All I have ever stated was that the onus was on the potentially wronged companies not the consumer and that Studio 4K was innocent until proven guilty.

As it would seem to be beyond any doubt whatsoever that their release of The Man Who Knew Too Much was/is not legitimately sourced, it can be reasonably assumed that the other discs aren't either. The key element being proof from one of the wronged parties.

Despite the matter being cleared up, and hopefully put to bed, it's a little childish to gloat, no?

[MifuneFan]

The database entries should be completely removed from the site and these threads should be locked, with warnings posted in the OP

[whitesheik]

Originally Posted by gap

I can't speak for pecker but I have nothing to admit too. All I have ever stated was that the onus was on the potentially wronged companies not the consumer and that Studio 4K was innocent until proven guilty.

As it would seem to be beyond any doubt whatsoever that their release of The Man Who Knew Too Much was/is not legitimately sourced, it can be reasonably assumed that the other discs aren't either. The key element being proof from one of the wronged parties.

Despite the matter being cleared up, and hopefully put to bed, it's a little childish to gloat, no?

What does gloating have to do with people behaving properly - you've read this and other threads and you know very well what my point is.

[gap]

Originally Posted by whitesheik

What does gloating have to do with people behaving properly - you've read this and other threads and you know very well what my point is.

It reads to me as "I was right. Tell me I was right. Poor me if you won't."

That might not be your intention but it's how it comes across.

[Douglas R]

Originally Posted by gap

It reads to me as "I was right. Tell me I was right. Poor me if you won't."

That might not be your intention but it's how it comes across.

It didn't come across like that at all. It was a perfectly reasonable comment to make in the absence of a response from those who had been unwilling to accept the obvious doubts about the legitimacy of the discs.

Sadly it seems to be a rule on internet forums that if one is found to be in error, one never, ever, admits it!

[edcresdee]

unsubscribing from this thread. nothing but arguing for the last few pages

[gap]

Originally Posted by Douglas R

It didn't come across like that at all. It was a perfectly reasonable comment to make in the absence of a response from those who had been unwilling to accept the obvious doubts about the legitimacy of the discs.



Sadly it seems to be a rule on internet forums that if one is found to be in error, one never, ever, admits it!

To you perhaps, not to me.

And, again, not once was I unwilling to accept the illegitimacy of the company - I only ever called for actual proof and not speculation. What's that tenet of the American justice system? Oh yes, innocent until proven guilty.

I can only assume people want an apology or a declaration of being wrong from certain members.

[Mansinthe]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

The database entries should be completely removed from the site and these threads should be locked, with warnings posted in the OP

why? is the company not legit after all? sorry i missed the last few pages in all the studio 4k threads...

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by Mansinthe

why? is the company not legit after all? sorry i missed the last few pages in all the studio 4k threads...

It's pretty much been determined that they're selling unlicensed movies. So essentially if people are buying them through the database, Blu-ray.com is financially benefiting from the sale of illegally produced movies.

[Mansinthe]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

It's pretty much been determined that they're selling unlicensed movies. So essentially if people are buying them through the database, Blu-ray.com is financially benefiting from the sale of illegally produced movies.

thanks , wont buy anymore of their releases. so far i only own "the third man" from that label.

would it make sense to contact amazon at this point to declare my concerns about the label not beeing legit etc?

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by Mansinthe

thanks , wont buy anymore of their releases. so far i only own "the third man" from that label.

would it make sense to contact amazon at this point to declare my concerns about the label not beeing legit etc?

You could try, but I think for it to be removed, the license holder would have to make the claim. There's a possiblity for Amazon to put the item "Under Review" and investigate it further themselves

[tenia]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

The database entries should be completely removed from the site and these threads should be locked, with warnings posted in the OP

Unfortunately, Rone and Fusion are still in the database while also seeling unlicensed titles. I guess Studio 4K will also remain here.

[whitesheik]

Originally Posted by gap

It reads to me as "I was right. Tell me I was right. Poor me if you won't."

That might not be your intention but it's how it comes across.

That's how it comes across to YOU and it is your projection and your problem. If I'd wanted to say "I was right. Tell me I was right. Poor me if you won't." I would have, although I would have said it in a more colorful way. But I didn't, did I? No. But thank you for projecting on my behalf.

[whitesheik]

Originally Posted by Douglas R

It didn't come across like that at all. It was a perfectly reasonable comment to make in the absence of a response from those who had been unwilling to accept the obvious doubts about the legitimacy of the discs.

Sadly it seems to be a rule on internet forums that if one is found to be in error, one never, ever, admits it!

I think it's also pretty obvious who the comment was meant for - one person in particular, and then beyond that several others who were doing the same thing. And yes, you're right about the rule on Internet forms - when proven wrong, disappear without a trace never to be heard from again in those threads. Happens on every board on every forum.

[gap]

Originally Posted by whitesheik

That's how it comes across to YOU and it is your projection and your problem. If I'd wanted to say "I was right. Tell me I was right. Poor me if you won't." I would have, although I would have said it in a more colorful way. But I didn't, did I? No. But thank you for projecting on my behalf.

You're welcome.

Or should that be YOU're welcome?

Either way, doesn't bother me in the slightest. Life's too short to get hot and bothered about blurays.

[whitesheik]

Originally Posted by gap

You're welcome.

Or should that be YOU're welcome?

Either way, doesn't bother me in the slightest. Life's too short to get hot and bothered about blurays.

And yet, here you are The appropriate post would have been, "Gee, sorry I projected something you didn't intend." Yes, that would have been the appropriate post, but had you made it several of us would have probably had a heart attack in disbelief.

[gap]

You are of course correct . How silly of me to forget that you know best as to what is appropriate. Perhaps in future you could just PM us all in advance with what you would like us to post and then we can be sure that all replies are suitably appropriate.

[KrugerIndustrial]

It's only Blu-ray's, guys. No need to get personal.

[Pecker]

Originally Posted by whitesheik

You'd think that he and all the others in this and the other thread would have the humility to come back and at least admit they were wrong...

Excuse me?

I think you'll find I was consistent in saying that there was no firm evidence that these were bootlegs and that it wasn't my job to police the situation.

For the record, I hold exactly the same position now. There was no firm evidence that they were bootlegs. No website is not proof. If another company appears with the same MO I'll behave in the same way until and unless any solid information comes to light.

However, I wonder how many others here will consistently refuse to buy a Blu-ray Disc from companies with no website?

With specific regard to this comment:

"Since none of the money goes into the investment of preserving these films, it would be great if would-be buyers think hard before even considering a purchase from these dubious sources."

This is a valid point, and I will not be buying any further titles from them where the legitimate release is available elsewhere.

However, had I not yet bought The Third Man I'd still be buying the Studio 4K version, for the simple reason that the fullest implication of the above doesn't really apply.

I've already bought the SC version, and if I buy a used copy of the Criterion version not a penny would go towards film restoration, either.

Steve W

[tenia]

Originally Posted by Pecker

if I buy a used copy of the Criterion version not a penny would go towards film restoration, either.

Oh, now we're throwing second-hand market into the argument ?

Fact is : the pennies you don't send to film restoration have already been given the first time. Through Studio 4K, they won't, not through the 1st buyer, not the 2nd, etc etc.

But please : don't compare second-hand market and bootlegs.

Please.

Just please.