Active Users:643 Time:26/04/2024 11:47:52 PM
again, you are taking the wrong approach moondog Send a noteboard - 07/02/2012 03:57:03 PM
you're trying to say that *everyone* who is pirating copyrighted material is just doing so because they can't afford, or don't want to buy, what they are pirating. i would say that if you follow the trends and most of the independent studies on the subject, the fact is that well over 50% of people who pirate do it for reasons other than just plain getting something for free. in many cases, it's because they are willing to buy the product but are either not getting it in a format they prefer, or they want to be able to justify purchasing it in a physical format and are using the downloaded version to make sure it's worth buying. having alternatives to the brick and mortar stores and/or expensive movie theaters would greatly reduce piracy to the tune that a lot of people who are currently pirating would turn into paying customers instead of criminals. are you honestly telling me that if you could subscribe to a service that gave you all the broncos games in a season for $10 you would still stream them for free through illegal websites?

You know the only thing more speculative than Big Medias sales losses due to piracy? The extent they could reduce piracy with their own cheap, easy and reliable download portals. Any study claiming to put a number on that is just guessing. Are you honestly telling people who will illegally download copyrighted material for free under ANY circumstances will admit that when asked? Even though the inability to do it legally is the most popular explanation/excuse for doing it illegally?

I agree this is not an end user problem, but it is most definitely an illegal for profit provider problem. I would not criminalize obtaining copyrighted electronic data for free any more than I would criminalize people making and mailing Phish concert tapes. If I correctly recall the way you explained that to me, Phish did not mind either—unless there was money involved, because then someone else was making a profit off their work, a valid complaint. We should target the sites, aggressively, using every legal means to block access to them and any site deliberately providing that access, shutting them down and prosecuting the operators when possible, just like we do any other thief. We should NOT target everyone who has ever had even brief and/or innocent contact with them, or let unsubstantiated unspecified accusations of piracy justify blocking/taking down sites.

Those are straightforward improvements over SO/PIPA. We would not even have to worry about Congress comprehending measures so similar to what they did with the DMCA. And before you say it again, no, that does not prove DMCA adequate, because the proposed legislation specifically targets regions outside DMCAs jurisdiction. Buying a new set of tires does not obviate the need to change sparkplugs.



does the pirate bay make money off of the distribution of copyrighted material? no, they give it away for free. do you consider what pirate bay does to be perfectly legal? according to your numerous explanations they are in the right for offering copyrighted materials for no cost. yet, some of the admins of the site are in jail now because sweden changed their laws to make what they do illegal, in large part because of pressure from the very industries that want sopa and its ilk. i would love to see you go to sweden and explain to them that what pirate bay does is perfectly legitimate copyright infringement and i'm sure the judge will clear the charges.

so, once again, THERE IS NO WAY TO FULLY SHUT DOWN PIRACY! no matter what you propose for penalties, SOMEONE will always find a way around it, and many people will take it for no other reason than that they can. when it can be proven that over 50% of people who illegally download actually come back and buy the same products they've "stolen", you'll still argue that tougher restrictions should be put in place instead of changing the market to suit the ACTUAL PAYING CUSTOMERS.

if you want to use phish as an example then let's see how it works for them: they have allowed recording of their live shows since their very first performance (12/1/84 or somewhere around that time). because of this, there is an extensive back catalog of shows which lots and lots of people enjoy trading for no more cost than the price to ship some CDs or tapes. when the digital revolution happened to music, instead of CDs and tapes it went to FLAC and SHN files. when phish got back together this last time, they launched a store where they sell certain specific copies of shows for purchase. their informal, but written, request is that any show which is put up for sale no longer be traded for free. because of the loyal fan base (and this is the real key -- LOYAL FAN BASE) anyone who puts up a torrent of a show which is in the phish store is blacklisted and their files taken down. this is phish enforcing their copyright, and exactly how the system is designed to work.

what the movie studios are doing, is to go to the people who have been BEGGING for other formats or different delivery systems for movies and tell them all they are thieves and should be locked up for a felony for up to 5 years because they dared to go outside the normal distribution channels. they berate people who are paying customers and push for tougher laws which continue to extend copyright beyond the life expectancy of the original artist. people are pissed off and there are fewer and fewer loyal fans/customers of the major studios left every year. in the case of phish, the fans actually help with copyright enforcement. in the case of the mpaa, this is what they want, but they're trying to get it by insulting everyone who should be on their side and trying to put them in jail.
"The RIAA has shown a certain disregard for the creative people of the industry in their eagerness to protect the revenues of the record companies." -- Frank Zappa

"That's the trouble with political jokes in this country... they get elected!" -- Dave Lippman
Reply to message
You will never kill piracy, and piracy will never kill you - 05/02/2012 06:56:57 PM 1105 Views
Pretty much - 05/02/2012 08:39:16 PM 323 Views
The article both raises good points and is full of shit - 05/02/2012 11:36:25 PM 593 Views
Re: The article both raises good points and is full of shit - 06/02/2012 02:07:01 AM 491 Views
Re: The article both raises good points and is full of shit - 06/02/2012 02:11:38 AM 521 Views
Then it really seems to differ between our countries - 06/02/2012 10:52:39 AM 463 Views
What are your ticket prices? *NM* - 06/02/2012 12:53:04 PM 203 Views
are those theaters all hollywood movies or from european studios? - 06/02/2012 03:01:37 PM 517 Views
Both, basically - 06/02/2012 04:55:36 PM 518 Views
I just want to comment on a couple things. I feel like you're a little bit behind the times. - 06/02/2012 05:23:40 AM 590 Views
Disagree. *NM* - 06/02/2012 09:38:56 AM 349 Views
Feel like explaining? *NM* - 06/02/2012 03:25:11 PM 180 Views
Well, call me old-fashioned but I think that'll be my preference for a while now. - 06/02/2012 10:36:41 AM 454 Views
It's not just a matter of taste when one technology is demonstrably superior. - 06/02/2012 04:04:27 PM 471 Views
Re: It's not just a matter of taste when one technology is demonstrably superior. - 06/02/2012 04:27:09 PM 355 Views
It's rare, I'll admit. - 06/02/2012 06:19:20 PM 344 Views
My age is gonna show even more in the next reply, but here we go - 06/02/2012 06:25:09 PM 457 Views
Re: My age is gonna show even more in the next reply, but here we go - 06/02/2012 08:13:48 PM 491 Views
I'll give you a hint. - 13/02/2012 03:31:56 PM 589 Views
Re: I'll give you a hint. - 14/02/2012 01:52:50 AM 392 Views
yeah, cinemas here aren't doing so well - 06/02/2012 01:33:06 PM 414 Views
That subject line well encapsulates this whole debate, IMHO. - 07/02/2012 07:52:22 PM 444 Views
That pretty much echoes my opinion on the subject - 06/02/2012 12:56:49 AM 502 Views
Holy text-wall, Batman! - 06/02/2012 12:49:28 PM 401 Views
I did not ask for alternative LAWS, Obama did; I merely quoted him, and this article mentions no law - 07/02/2012 04:50:14 AM 525 Views
you're confusing the issue - 07/02/2012 06:22:30 AM 392 Views
No, I am clarifying the issue. - 07/02/2012 06:54:40 AM 511 Views
again, you are taking the wrong approach - 07/02/2012 03:57:03 PM 491 Views
I disagree, and there are factual errors in your statements. - 07/02/2012 07:36:16 PM 467 Views
actually, there are not - 08/02/2012 04:15:09 AM 377 Views
Yeah, actually there are. - 09/02/2012 01:53:02 AM 484 Views
Re: No, I am clarifying the issue. - 07/02/2012 07:52:42 PM 438 Views
It is not the same as taping an album for a friend. - 09/02/2012 01:18:42 AM 484 Views
Re: It is not the same as taping an album for a friend. - 09/02/2012 10:39:05 PM 383 Views
Re: It is not the same as taping an album for a friend. - 12/02/2012 12:04:57 AM 473 Views

Reply to Message