Trey - your analogy is a little baffling. Cars are physical objects. If I steal a car, then someone else doesn't have it any more. Making a digital copy is not like that at all - if someone makes a digital copy of something, they have it, and so do you. Nothing is stolen.

There certainly seems to be a lot of nostalgia for the days when copying an idea (the contents of a book, the arrangement of bits in an mp3, or the arrangement of pixels in a movie) was synonymous with creating a physical object (a book, an LP, or a VHS tape), but that isn't the case any more.

As to whether anyone would make a media project and make it available for free, there is a vast amount of material licensed and released like that. Take a look at www.sitasingstheblues.com for an example. The free software movement, creative commons licensed music etc etc.

As for organizations that make their money this way, NPR is an obvious example of an organization that makes its money like this. In fact, it's hard to find an industry that produces digital goods that works the way you suggest that isn't heading for bankruptcy.

The bottom line is that the choice is not between wether or not to make it available for free, but between whether or not to make the paid option more difficult to use and get than the free one.

I guess it depends what your goals are. Getting the thing watched by a significant number of people is one potential goal, getting it accepted into a very narrow distribution channel that might provide some monetization is another. Frankly though, these things are kind of 19th century - the people who will pay for this will pay for it regardless of whether they can see it for free, and the people who won't pay for it will see it free regardless of whether you or someone else put it on bt. You're better off uploading it to bt and asking for donations.

"Backyard Blockbusters is, at time of release, not available anywhere [useful]."

Great. Get back to us when it's available to see.

Fireproof -

I can respect that you believe in the apostolic nature of the Star Wars Papacy, the idea that Lucas ascends to the Holy See, passing the role of Pope on to whoever buys the franchise, but I find the idea repugnant.
Like Luther nailing his protest to the church door we need to reject this claim of authority, instead proposing that each of us has an unmediated relationship with the material, and can accept or reject whatever we like as canon. We need a Star Wars Reformation movement.

I did the same, and yes, there is a major speed difference for some things. Obviously it makes disk access much faster, which makes program, data, and paging a lot faster. Of course it doesn't actually speed the machine up - tasks don't go faster, except to the extent the depend on disk access - so video editing or anything else (except as above) will not gain much.

I see that you're taking the view that canon flows from authority, and that you invest GL with a certain level of authority based on his role in the franchise. I think this is very similar to the situation that you see in the religious community (which is of course the origin of the word), where some people invest the Pope, or some other religious leader or group, with the authority to define which texts are canonical. Obviously there is a lot of disagreement with that, especially within the protestant church, where the ability of a structure or individual to make decisions on behalf of the community is much more controversial.

I think I take the view of some of the more progressive protestant churches that what material is canon is a matter of conscience for the individual. It's not something that an authority figure can dictate. Furthermore, I think it it's possible for an authority figure to loose the moral right to exert authority. I would be more inclined to allow GL a role as Pope of Star Wars if he had shown more commitment to the values and principles that informed the OT.

I don't see why you think Disney has any more ability to declare it canon than any other random bum on the street. I mean, Lucas has been rambling for years about there being more to the canon than three movies, and that's clearly bullshit.

I'm not sure I share your optimism, but, hey, we can hope.

I'll check it out.

While I like the idea of community service as an alternative to prison time for non-violent offenders, this smacks of buying off the justice system. He should be sentenced formally, then a judge can decide whether donating 4bn to education is a suitable alternative to jail time.

You forgot 'Option 3' - the Star Trek option - let the thing flail wildly, with only commercial interest at the helm, and no one with any real commitment to the franchise except as a banner to get people into theaters and sell toys.

I don't think she's any more slutty than Jasmine, is she?

I haven't seen this in years, but I have a sense that the building in question is the Palace of Westminster (one of the Houses of Parliament), not Number 10 Downing Street (the Prime Minister's residence).

The price doesn't really matter for most pros - the difference of a thousand dollars or so just isn't significant when compared to having to deal with an operating system or software that interrupts your workflow.