Instead of SOPA, Beat Piracy With Better Product

In reality you simply cannot stop piracy you can only hope to slow it -- and the best way to slow it is to provide inexpensive, easy access to content so that piracy becomes a less tempting alternative. Why exactly this

We are talking about the entertainment industry here. Logic and common sense have no sway here. They will be dragged kicking and screaming into this. Now how many decades it take that another question.

There shouldn't even be a delay of a few days. They should make it available at the same time online as when it airs on TV.

It is because scarcity doesn't exist in a digital world where everything is infinitely copyable. Decent content will be widely available no matter what. That's the reality.

What the paid/pirated ratio looks like is dependent upon what the content owners charge and how widely they make it available.

It is because scarcity doesn't exist in a digital world where everything is infinitely copyable. Decent content will be widely available no matter what.

So what does this all have to do with your comment? Everything. To simply assert "scarcity doesn't exist in a digital world because it's technically possible to copy digital works" is ignoring all the ways mankind has built up businesses and markets and even economies around artificially scarce goods. There is no reason that it's not possible to create artificial scarcity around digital goods. It's happening all the time right in front of you.

Like in non-digital markets, artificial scarcity in digital markets requires an enforcement mechanism.

Except that it's not just "technically possible". Computers were designed to easily handle digital data. Copying that data has been one of the core functions of computers since they were first invented.

To create scarcity in digital files, you have to essentially break the proper functioning of the computer. To keep people from ripping DVDs or Blu-Rays, you need to introduce some method of keeping the system from reading data from discs, or prevent ripping programs from running, both of which are at odds with how the computer was designed to function. To prevent people from sharing or making copies of digital downloads, you need some method of keeping the system from playing those files, which is also at odds with what it was designed to do.

Do they also require penalties that are higher than those for physical goods?

Shoplifting is also a big problem, but I don't recall Walmart lobbying the government to impose special $20,000 fines and multi-year prison sentences or to make it an automatic felony.

So is putting material in paper money that makes it look different when copied "essentially breaking the proper functioning of a copy machine"? which has been "the core function of copy machines since they were first invented"? And is this "at odds with what it was designed to do"?

Not really relevant to the topic. But, I'll come back on your analogy with what the music distributors would say, which has some validity. Shoplifting one CD is a loss of 10 bucks or whatever. Putting that CD on MegaUpload or Pirate Bay is like shoplifting the entire store's inventory of that CD. Bigger crime.

But what if the publishing industry demanding a legal solution to prevent people from copying or scanning books? Coming up with a printed page that can be easily read, but which can't be copied would be expensive and virtually impossible. So far the only solution they've come up with for making documents uncopyable is to use black ink on dark paper, which also makes them very hard to read.

The only workable method would to have the copier connect to a central database every time you scan something to compare the hash of what you've scanned with a list of know hashes for copyrighted works and refuse to work if it matches something on the list. Of course such a system would have a high failure rate, false positives and wouldn't account for fair use, essentially breaking the core functionality of the machine, but hey if it keeps people from copying copyrighted material, it's worth it. Right?

To create scarcity in digital files, you have to essentially break the proper functioning of the computer. To keep people from ripping DVDs or Blu-Rays, you need to introduce some method of keeping the system from reading data from discs, or prevent ripping programs from running, both of which are at odds with how the computer was designed to function. To prevent people from sharing or making copies of digital downloads, you need some method of keeping the system from playing those files, which is also at odds with what it was designed to do.

It's like trying to create a physical book that can only be read by one person.

But piracy shouldn't be regarded as competition for paid content.

That would like comparing working and robbing a bank as a means of earning a living.

The first time these programs air EVERYTHING is paid for and profit is to be had, anything else is just double dipping and extra icing on the cake.

But piracy exists because content people want is not available where they live or how they want to view it.

Up here in Canada one of our cable companies teamed up with FX and created FX Canada.

What's on it? Older shows that FX cancelled (Lights out), non current seasons of SoA, and a host of reality shows to fill out the schedule, but I'm expected to pay through the nose for this.

I can't watch Boardwalk Empire unless I subscribe to the Uber premium gold pressed latimum package, I'd be happy to shell out $x for HBO, if I could get it by itself,without the bundled bs, to me it's worth it.

So the restrictions put in place by the media companies has forced me to look elsewhere for their content and they aren't legal means.

I'm not justifying what I'm doing, but the reality if I could get what I wanted to watch, when I wanted to (even if it means paying for HuluPlus)I would resort to those alternative methods of getting my fix.

Now you can say wait for the Blu Ray/DVD to come out. OK, so in the above example of Boardwalk Empire, I'll have to wait till next fall (HBO releases the Blu Ray/DVD's just before the next season starts) to watch the previous season and the cost is now higher then if I just paid $X/month to HBO.

Actually, everything *isn't* paid for. If you actually worked in television (as I have), you'd realize that the hope is that everything is paid for, but often times isn't.

When the next-day's Nielsen report hits the networks *and* the advertisers, a less than promised audience results in a lower rate for the advertising. These days, only stupid advertisers pay the rate card.

It has come to the point where people view piracy as an entitlement. Sure SOPA was bad in many ways and I absolutely don't support it in its current form but no one who works in the industry can deny that piracy is a problem.

It should entitlement to expect that you be paid for your work.

It should not be an entitlement to expect that you have the right to steal the work of others.

There are also many people in the industry who don't see this as a problem. There are actually artists who release their works to the world for free (imagine that!). Record companies and their shareholders definitely see this as problem; they would do better to look for the opportunity.

This is just a bass-ackwards way of looking at the issue. You start by assuming that piracy is the way it is, and enforcing copyright laws is some weird new stupid idea (i.e. "continuing their business model by force".)
...
Rather than "continuing their business model by force", they are trying to assert their historic rights of ownership under copyright, as has been going on for centuries.

Again this is bass-ackwards. The fact that some artists release their works for free (or at least some of their works), and that some artists sell direct to the public through the Internet bypassing the record companies, does NOT lead one to the conclusion that free copying of works SHOULD BE THE LAW (or at least the accepted practice). This like saying some stores are online only so ALL stores MUST be online only. It's the choice of an artist or a store which way to go! Don't make it mandatory just because you happen to like one or the other. Choose with your dollars and your attention.

I hate to be a party pooper but I have a hard time figuring out why the entertainment industry has to change anything. Piracy is still against the law ... why should they have to change ... ? If you do not like it, DO NOT BUY THE PRODUCT!

Then change the law. The Volstead Act was repealed.

Then change the law. The Volstead Act was repealed.

I hate to be a party pooper but I have a hard time figuring out why the entertainment industry has to change anything.

you still don't get it do you?

Yes illegally downloading is wrong. HOWEVER unless you can put a sigificant number of people in jail or sue the hell out out of a significant number of people as to scare people away form piracy then running around screaming "Piracy is wrong" doesn't matter. People are doing it and if they want people to stop and start making some money off them they need to embrace they new technology. Even if it means making less money, because last time checked SOME > NONE.

Excellent posting Karl.

And Nelson was the icing on the cake.

However, I have one correction.

The correct term is 'Eat their cake and have it too'.

Anyone can have their cake and then eat it too but to eat it and then have it is the trick.
Dave

And this is why Piracy will always win, The entertainment industry are power tripping control freaks.