republican-creole
site Search:


 
   
story category
Recording Labels Begin Astroturf Push For U.S. 3 Strikes Law
Why have consumer support when you can pretend you do?
by Karl Bode Tuesday 22-Jun-2010 tags: legal · Fileswapping · business · Op/Ed · trouble · consumers
We've long discussed why booting broadband users off of the Internet for copyright infringement is a bad idea. The evidence used is often faulty, it requires ISPs spend money to prop up evolution-challenged labels, and it will be largely impossible to track offenders across ISPs (or even within homes). Studies repeatedly show that heavy P2P users buy more media than the average consumer, and by kicking them off the Internet you're severing a potential sale. There's also the over-arching question of whether terminating a person's lifeline to the Internet is a fair punishment for trading copies of TV shows without commercials.

After discovering that suing their customers wasn't going to stop piracy, the industry got some ISPs to agree to voluntarily terminate P2P user connections. That hasn't worked out well either, with piracy continuing to grow, ISPs facing legal liability for threatening users with false evidence, and the systems they're using being completely non-transparent. In Verizon's case, we've shown you how it appears they're bluffing completely. It's clear that the labels won't be satisfied until a new three strikes law passes, but they've lacked the political muscle to pass such an unpopular concept, even with all their lobbying influence.

Click for full size
So the recording industry appears to be doing what any corporation eager to pass an unpopular law would do. They're launching an astroturf campaign designed to make a U.S. 3 strikes law seem like a good idea to uninformed consumers. Through major label front groups like Music United and efforts like Music Rights Now, the labels are trying to push for three strikes laws by pretending that the idea has broad support -- especially among artists and consumers. Notes Techdirt:

...it seems clear that the industry is realizing that ISPs aren't going to agree to kick people offline based on accusations, so it's kicking off a well-coordinated campaign to get the government to help, and pressure it to put in place the same sort of overly draconian protectionist measures that don't actually help musicians or the music industry -- but clearly try to prop up the failed and dying business model of a few middlemen. Not surprisingly, this seems well-timed to go with the expected release this week of the report from the White House's IP Enforcement Coordinator (IP Czar), Victoria Espinel....

With all of the influence the recording industry has in the current White House (take a look at the Vice President's claim this week that piracy is the same as doing a smash and grab at Tiffany's), it seems inevitable that some type of heavy-handed laws will be passed. Of course they won't work to stop piracy -- copyrighted file exchange will simply get more sophisticated, and any laws tasked with tracking pirates from home to home or ISP to ISP will prove futile. Meanwhile, all this effort could instead be put into more innovative legit content distribution systems.

view: topics flat text 
Post a:

castsucks

@sbcglobal.net

So I get a smller fine and no cut off by shoplefting CD's?

So I get a smller fine and no cut off by shoplefting CD's?
ADL

join:2000-12-20
USA

Re: So I get a smller fine and no cut off by shoplefting CD's?

Actually, I guess it is back to buying bootlegs off the street.

Anonymous_
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1
kudos:2
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
·Comcast
·Time Warner VOIP

Re: So I get a smller fine and no cut off by shoplefting CD's?

said by ADL:

Actually, I guess it is back to buying bootlegs off the street.
nah direct download FTW!

Romney2012
Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe in
Premium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4
said by castsucks :

So I get a smller fine and no cut off by shoplefting CD's?
But get caught a couple times and you go to prison.
--
Are you happy with your rep in Washington, DC?
nasadude

join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
you're talking about theft; the article is about copyright infringement.

i apologize in advance if you are being sarcastic as opposed to being ignorant.
Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
sad thing is if you steal a CD the impact is less then if you download one. in theory they can hit for 150k per song. if you steal the CD you are made to return it or spend the 19.95 and get a stiff talking to by a police officer.

which is funny because taking the CD is stealing, the store is now out inventory that cost them money. while downloading a CD the RIAA does not loose the ability to sell that same music.(it is still not legal though).
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

Sick

There are already plenty of civil laws under which copyright infringers can be cited or otherwise punished. No more laws are needed.

The music industry has no business trying to shift part of its costs of doing business onto the taxpayers.
--
"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service.

JasonOD

@comcast.net

Re: Sick

But it's the sheer volume that makes it so difficult to manage. The labels are better off mass mailing fine in lieu of lawsuit letters. A million or so of these should have the desired impact on behavior, not to mention the labels bank accounts.

Cutting off peoples access seems much more problematic from a legal standpoint.

Gbcue
Almost P.E.
Premium
join:2001-09-30
Santa Rosa, CA
kudos:8
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse

Re: Sick

said by JasonOD :

But it's the sheer volume that makes it so difficult to manage. The labels are better off mass mailing fine in lieu of lawsuit letters. A million or so of these should have the desired impact on behavior, not to mention the labels bank accounts.
They're already doing that...

Did it have any impact, no.
--
My Blog 2.0
SixSpeed

join:2001-12-24
USA
Reviews:
·Optimum Online
·Verizon FiOS
said by pnh102:

There are already plenty of civil laws under which copyright infringers can be cited or otherwise punished. No more laws are needed.

The music industry has no business trying to shift part of its costs of doing business onto the taxpayers.
But that's what the RIAA does, buy laws through lobbyists. If the previous laws they bought and paid for aren't doing the trick, they buy more lawmakers and force them to make new laws to try out. Its a sad reflection on our government and law makers.
gorehound

join:2009-06-19
Portland, ME
I am so sick of the RIAA & MPAA.
3 strikes your out comes to this country then I guess we will see some serious violence happening.A lot of folks will be pissed off and will swear to get someone back for the krap these laws will cause.lots of innocent folk who do not have the knowledge will find trheir networks comprimised.
We should all write letters to these organiozations telling them we boycott their Industry.

Anonymous_
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1
kudos:2
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
·Comcast
·Time Warner VOIP
said by pnh102:

There are already plenty of civil laws under which copyright infringers can be cited or otherwise punished. No more laws are needed.

The music industry has no business trying to shift part of its costs of doing business onto the taxpayers.
um CD and dvds are taxed (hidden tax built into the cost) so even if one just uses them for data only they still get F-ed over with the tax

GlobalMind
Domino Dude, POWER Systems Guy
Premium
join:2001-10-29
Hollywood, FL

So much for due process...

Ahh yes, let's toss due process, shall we?

Three accusations, not convictions. Nice. So now let's use this against folks we don't want speaking ill about you or your company, position whatever. Welcome the new SLAPP method.

You want 3 strikes? Then get a conviction.

Guarantee if passed it'll be abused to no end, and with nearly NO way for you to defend yourself. Afterall it's just an accusation that does it, and well...the labels and their cronies are always right.

Good luck consumers, sorry, no lube for you.
--
TheGlobalMind.com / Speed costs money. How fast do you want to go? / Trust the instinct to the end, though you can render no reason. - Ralph Waldo Emerson / Free market capitalism is the best path to prosperity.

PCInTech
keeping art alive since 1953
Premium
join:2004-06-07
Massena, NY
kudos:9

Stealing

Didn't anyone ever teach you kids that STEALING something that doesn't belong to you is WRONG?

baineschile
2600 ways to live
Premium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI
Reviews:
·Comcast
·magicjack.com

2 edits

Re: Stealing

I think the issue is more of a consumerists point of view, than actual moral obligations.

FOR INSTANCE

If I bought a CD, paid to see a band live, then the CD was destroyed, should I be able to download what I've paid for (what some may argue) twice?

If I paid to see a movie in the theater, shouldn't I be able to download it?

I am not saying stealing is right; I am against piracy, and always have been. But I can definatly see a pirates point of view. I personally believe the industry should take some fault too. $18.99 for a 9 track Harmony House CD was ridiculous, $9.50 for a movie ticket, and then $20 for the DVD that gets watched one other time? Aside from casettes and VHS, there were no other options. Actors and musicians, along with their exec's make MILLIONS AND MILLIONS. If they would have started adapting (iTunes?) a few years ago when the college's first for their T1 lines, and just made a few MILLIONS, they wouldnt be in the bind they are in now.

Edit: See this related story that was just posted:

»consumerist.com/2010/06/apple-wo···ash.html

bionicRod
Funkier than a mohair disco ball.
Premium
join:2009-07-06
united state
Reviews:
·CenturyLink
·Mediacom

Re: Stealing

said by baineschile:

If I bought a CD, paid to see a band live, then the CD was destroyed, should I be able to download what I've paid for (what some may argue) twice?

If I paid to see a movie in the theater, shouldn't I be able to download it?
No. If I bought a Ferrari and wrecked it, I should get a free Ferrari? And if I keep wrecking them, I should get them for life? Why are movies and music any different?

Don't get me wrong, I'm completely against the ISP practices outlined above. I agree 100% with your argument about the industry adapting to combat piracy instead of punishing their consumers.

baineschile
2600 ways to live
Premium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI

Re: Stealing

A ferrari is a physical asset. A movie is not.
talz13

join:2006-03-15
Avon, OH

1 edit
said by bionicRod:

No. If I bought a Ferrari and wrecked it, I should get a free Ferrari? And if I keep wrecking them, I should get them for life? Why are movies and music any different?

Don't get me wrong, I'm completely against the ISP practices outlined above. I agree 100% with your argument about the industry adapting to combat piracy instead of punishing their consumers.
If I bought a ferrari from a car dealer that had a big red button that said "create a new ferrari out of nothing", I better well be able to get another one if I crashed the first one!

Simba7
I Void Warranties

join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT
said by bionicRod:

No. If I bought a Ferrari and wrecked it, I should get a free Ferrari? And if I keep wrecking them, I should get them for life? Why are movies and music any different?
Um.. Let's see.. $100k or $10..

At least let them have a replacement policy. If the disc gets unreadably damaged, they could have a $1 replacement cost plus a dollar for shipping.

..or they could do something else. Each CD could have a code for a digital download of the disc in case it was damaged. I would expect it to be in a lossless format.
--
Bresnan 15M/1M
MyWS[E5200@3.75GHz,4GB RAM,2x1TB HDDs,Win7]
WifeWS[A64@2GHz,2GB RAM,120GB HDD,Win7]
Router[2xP3@1GHz,512MB RAM,18GB HDD,SMC 8432BTA,2xDigital DE504,Compaq NC3131,Intel Pro/1000MT,IBM Gigabit Ethernet-SX,Allied Telesyn AT2560FX,Gentoo Linux]
nasadude

join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
said by bionicRod:

No. If I bought a Ferrari and wrecked it, I should get a free Ferrari? And if I keep wrecking them, I should get them for life? Why are movies and music any different?
...
I hope your mouth is OK from swallowing the RIAA/MPAA spin on intellectual property hook, line and sinker.

bionicRod
Funkier than a mohair disco ball.
Premium
join:2009-07-06
united state
Reviews:
·CenturyLink
·Mediacom

Re: Stealing

said by nasadude:

said by bionicRod:

No. If I bought a Ferrari and wrecked it, I should get a free Ferrari? And if I keep wrecking them, I should get them for life? Why are movies and music any different?
...
I hope your mouth is OK from swallowing the RIAA/MPAA spin on intellectual property hook, line and sinker.
Wow, I guess I'm old school. See, I have this crazy notion that if you want something someone else created, you should pay them for it. Whether it's $10 or $100k. If you can't afford it, or just don't like the pricing, here's an idea: do without. This isn't swallowing anybody's line, this is just common decency. You're not entitled to someone else's property, intellectual or not.

Again, I agree that the entertainment industry needs to compete better with piracy to ultimately diminish it. But stealing is stealing, no matter how you try to justify it.
tennisman94

join:2010-02-18
Palm Harbor, FL
kudos:1

Re: Stealing

said by bionicRod:

Again, I agree that the entertainment industry needs to compete better with piracy to ultimately diminish it. But stealing is stealing, no matter how you try to justify it.
But it is not stealing, that is one of the points he is trying to make. it's SHARING, not stealing. This is what he meant by swallowing someone's line.
If I owned an older CD that has suffered from CD rot, can I procure a digital copy of it that I could have made myself but didn't? The same issues come into play when talking about ebooks. If I bought a books at full hard cover price, should I have to pay that price again to view the book on my kindle? Is it wrong to gt a digital copy that I could have made myself?
I think he underlying principal is: Can I procure a digital copy that I could have made my self? and more importantly, when I buy something, do I own it entirely,(any personal use is justified) or am I buying a liescence to use it in the provided container? Making a digital copy is fair use, but in the case of DVDs, I can't do it without breaking a digital lock, which is technically illegal in the US.

bionicRod
Funkier than a mohair disco ball.
Premium
join:2009-07-06
united state
Reviews:
·CenturyLink
·Mediacom

Re: Stealing

It is stealing. If you owned an older CD and it degrades due to lack of care (no CD rot if you keep it in its jewel box) you should have to pay for that content again. Nobody from the entertainment industry came over and broke your music, so why do you think they owe you another copy? That's what you've always bought...a copy of a cd or movie. YOUR copy. Now that people can copy these things themselves and share them with little effort over the internet, they seem to think it's their god given right to receive free or almost free content and the entertainment industry is so mean because they expect to be paid by people enjoying their products.

I'm not one to normally be overly corporation friendly, and I think the entertainment industry is behind the 8 ball and that it's solely their fault for failing to evolve. It doesn't give people a right to pirate, nor is it a good excuse. If you don't like the price/conditions of what the industry is selling, vote with your dollars and don't buy it. Just don't steal it and claim it was yours to begin with because you bought a CD in 2003(not you personally tennisman).
switchg3ar

join:2008-07-01

1 edit

Re: Stealing

Lets take it a step further, is it legal to copy that cd to mp3 format so I can put it on my mp3 player? Or do I have to buy it again? Now if you said ya I can copy it. What happens if instead of copying it from the physical media I just download it. Is that wrong? I think when you buy music you are licensed to listen to it, not copy it. If I am licensed to listen to it does that mean I can listen to it on any device I want?

I love that Ferrari example. If I bought a Ferrari copied all the pieces put it back together and gave it to my friend. Did my friend and I steal the car from Ferrari?

bionicRod
Funkier than a mohair disco ball.
Premium
join:2009-07-06
united state
Reviews:
·CenturyLink
·Mediacom

Re: Stealing

said by switchg3ar:

Lets take it a step further, is it legal to copy that cd to mp3 format so I can put it on my mp3 player? Or do I have to buy it again? Now if you said ya I can copy it. What happens if instead of copying it from the physical media I just download it. Is that wrong? I think when you buy music you are licensed to listen to it, not copy it. If I am licensed to listen to it does that mean I can listen to it on any device I want?

I love that Ferrari example. If I bought a Ferrari copied all the pieces put it back together and gave it to my friend. Did my friend and I steal the car from Ferrari?
Downloaded it from where? A peer site where you didn't pay for it? Because that's stealing. I don't see what's so hard to understand. If I buy a multi-plat video game for the PC, am I entitled to the same thing on the 360, PS3 and Wii for free? If I buy a DVD, am I entitled to a VHS, blu-ray and digital copy to take with me everywhere for free? I don't understand your argument at all. If you want something pay for it. If you want more than one copy, for multiple formats, buy them or wait until you agree with the price. Or (gasp!) do without. Once again, your arguments do not justify stealing.

Oh, and if and you were somehow able to make copies of Ferraris, called them Ferraris, and gave them away to all your friends, you don't think Ferrari would sue your ass and be 100% justified?

digitalfreak
Premium
join:2005-12-09
Blacklick, OH

Re: Stealing

The RIAA will be needing a new face man in a couple of years. You'd be a perfect fit since you're so out of touch with reality.

bionicRod
Funkier than a mohair disco ball.
Premium
join:2009-07-06
united state
Reviews:
·CenturyLink
·Mediacom

Re: Stealing

said by digitalfreak:

The RIAA will be needing a new face man in a couple of years. You'd be a perfect fit since you're so out of touch with reality.
Care to clarify?
margaf77

join:2000-12-22
Bayonne, NJ

Re: Stealing

The clarification is it is not stealing (theft). It is copyright infringement, a civil matter.

karlmarx

join:2006-09-18
iraq
I think the real question he is asking is this. When you BUY a CD, what exactly are you buying? Are you buying a license to listen to the music? Or are you buying a physical thing you own. If you are buying a license to listen to the music on said CD, then you have the right to back it up, rip it, copy it, save it, DOWNLOAD it. Remember, you bought a license to listen to the music. Where and how you get it is irrelevant. Or, did you buy the media. If so, you PAID for that media, and the law clearly states that you can do with it as you will. If you buy it, you have every right to back it up, copy it, rip it, whatever. Those are really the only 2 options when you exchange CASH for GOODS (physical media) or SERVICES (license to listen to it).

However, the music industry has a THIRD view. In THEIR view, when you give them money, you rights are restricted so you can only listen to the music on that media. In their view, you can't rip, back up, copy or do anything to the media you paid for, the only thing you can do is listen to it on the media you paid for.

That's not a legal exchange for goods or services, that's an illegal restriction on your purchase. So, **AssAsses, what is it, are you buying the MEDIA (physical) copy, or the LICENSE It's got to be one or the other, but in BOTH cases, you DO have the right to make copies, back ups, transcode and transfer your purchase, which in their mind is illegal, but it's not.
--
Remember 1 in 4 people are retarded. 25% of Americans are Republican. Coincidence? I don't think so.

bionicRod
Funkier than a mohair disco ball.
Premium
join:2009-07-06
united state
Reviews:
·CenturyLink
·Mediacom

Re: Stealing

said by karlmarx:

So, **AssAsses, what is it, are you buying the MEDIA (physical) copy, or the LICENSE It's got to be one or the other, but in BOTH cases, you DO have the right to make copies, back ups, transcode and transfer your purchase, which in their mind is illegal, but it's not.
You sum the argument up very well, but I disagree. You are buying a copy of the media from the people that own it. A copy. IMO that does not constitute the right to make infinite copies to do whatever you want with, give to friends, have across every medium known to man, unless the company sells you your copy in agreement with that principal. I agree that they should allow you to burn a copy for yourself (I thought that was fine until you started to share?), but then again if they don't want to you have the right to walk away from the sale to begin with. If you wanted to license to make a hundred copies I'm sure they'd come up with a price and you'd have to decide if it was worth it to you or not. I've said it before, if you don't like the industry's prices/practices, do without. Crappy, last century practices do not justify stealing.

scorpiousx

@comcast.net
Actually, if you buy a DVD or Bu-Ray (some Blu-Rays also come with a DVD), you get a digital copy to take wherever you want.

bionicRod
Funkier than a mohair disco ball.
Premium
join:2009-07-06
united state
Reviews:
·CenturyLink
·Mediacom

Re: Stealing

said by scorpiousx :

Actually, if you buy a DVD or Bu-Ray (some Blu-Rays also come with a DVD), you get a digital copy to take wherever you want.
Yes, I realize this. Because you bought it, legally from the company, who sold both copies to you that way. Buying a blu-ray without a digital copy doesn't give you the right to go download the same movie without the company's permission so you can watch it in another format, IMO.
tennisman94

join:2010-02-18
Palm Harbor, FL
kudos:1

Re: Stealing

said by bionicRod:

Buying a blu-ray without a digital copy doesn't give you the right to go download the same movie without the company's permission so you can watch it in another format, IMO.
IMO, I disagree.
This is completly seperate from file sharing, but what are your thoughts on having a DMCA exception for breaking digital media locks for "fair use"? (coverting to another format, etc.) It is currently legal to rip CD's for your own personal use (because there is no lock). It is currently illegal to break the lock on DVD's and Blu Rays, so you can't legally exercise fair use yourself, no sharing involved.
Markie

join:2003-07-26
Kalispell, MT
Yikes. Just yikes. I can't tell if you're a joke/troll or if you believe what you're saying. Somehow I'm scared - you may actually believe it.

BF69
Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
said by tennisman94:

said by bionicRod:

Again, I agree that the entertainment industry needs to compete better with piracy to ultimately diminish it. But stealing is stealing, no matter how you try to justify it.
But it is not stealing, that is one of the points he is trying to make. it's SHARING, not stealing. This is what he meant by swallowing someone's line.
Answer this question is it ok to sneak into a movie theater without paying. Is that stealing? According to YOUR logic it isn't. You're not actually taking a PHYSICAL product. If the theater is half empty you're not occupying a seat that a paying customer would have either so what's the harm?

So here's the point if it's not ok to sneak into a theater then it's not ok to download music or movies without paying. If its ok to download music and movies without paying then its ok to sneak into a theater. It's the same thing. In both cases there is no real product being "stolen" so it can't be ok to do one and not the other.
tennisman94

join:2010-02-18
Palm Harbor, FL
kudos:1

Re: Stealing

The movie theater example would not be theft, it would still be illegal, but more like dining and dashing than shoplifting, an important destinction.

There are two parts to this issue. Those who already own a copy of a work and want it in another format, and those who do not own a copy of a work and are definitely infringing.
pika2000

join:2005-10-13
Seattle, WA
You seem to be missing the point. Let's say if somebody steals a CD 3 times, does the person barred from shopping at retail stores forever?

bionicRod
Funkier than a mohair disco ball.
Premium
join:2009-07-06
united state
Reviews:
·CenturyLink
·Mediacom

Re: Stealing

said by pika2000:

You seem to be missing the point. Let's say if somebody steals a CD 3 times, does the person barred from shopping at retail stores forever?
I think you missed this part of my original post:

"Don't get me wrong, I'm completely against the ISP practices outlined above."
pika2000

join:2005-10-13
Seattle, WA

Re: Stealing

LOL. I was replying to PCInTech, not you.

bionicRod
Funkier than a mohair disco ball.
Premium
join:2009-07-06
united state

Re: Stealing

Oh geez you were, sorry about that
I was feeling kind of defensive about the reception my comment got

BF69
Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
said by pika2000:

You seem to be missing the point. Let's say if somebody steals a CD 3 times, does the person barred from shopping at retail stores forever?
Actually people caught shoplifting from our local wal-mart can be barred for LIFE from ever even stepping on the property.
pika2000

join:2005-10-13
Seattle, WA

Re: Stealing

Errr, no. I work for retail, and the so called "banning" customers is just a scare tactic, depending on the employees working, the manager in charge, etc. Even if the person is banned from your wal-mart, the person can still go to any other retail stores. Not the case with this 3-strikes-law, where you will be blacklisted on all ISPs. Also note that there's no due process in this.

DeathbyZombi

@sbc.com
said by PCInTech:

Didn't anyone ever teach you kids that STEALING something that doesn't belong to you is WRONG?
It's not considered stealing when the other person puts it on the net, or hands it to me to share to me, when I was growing up I was taught "Sharing is caring" I guess that was just a lie.
Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
however it is not stealing when you make personal copies of media you purchased. so if you buy a CD and make a copy for the car it is still legal. same with DVD and Blu-Ray. making a copy to my HTPC/Media Server is also totally legal because its part of that backup allowed by copyright law.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports
pika2000

join:2005-10-13
Seattle, WA

Re: Stealing

Not really. Backing up is legal, but breaking the DRM, which what you need to do to actually back up retail DVD/blu-ray videos, is illegal per the DMCA.

sceptical

@lvcablemodem.com

Studies or Study?

"Studies repeatedly show that heavy P2P users buy more media than the average consumer"

Karl your reference to studies is linked to your own article which links to two others; an Ars Technica article on a single Canadian study and a link to an article which references the same Ars Technica article.

Do you have any other studies that can substantiate your editorial claim?
TheMG
Premium
join:2007-09-04
Canada
kudos:1
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL

Re: Studies or Study?

I can vouch for that myself.

I used to be a pretty heavy P2P user and still use it a fair bit. P2P has and still allows me to discover new music, TV series, and movies that I otherwise would never have considered buying.

I have over 100 legally purchased movies, 50 music CDs, and several legal online music purchases/downloads. Without P2P, I expect my collection of legally obtained IP would have been considerably smaller.

I would have even more if the pricing wasn't so high. Currently I only buy movies (on Blu-ray disc) once they have dropped below the $20 mark. I REFUSE to buy a movie for more than $20 and wouldn't even consider the thought of paying more than $10 for a DVD anymore. For TV series I cap it off at $1 per one hour SD episode or $2 for HD.

El Quintron
... a faint odor of kerosene
Premium
join:2008-04-28
Etobicoke, ON
kudos:2
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·voip.ms
·WIND Mobile
·TekSavvy Cable

Same comment I always make but whatever...

Anyone who follows the news, and wants to continue file-sharing is just going to get better at hiding their activities.

Although my experience with darknet-type filesharing is limited I can see it getting a lot more popular if/when this bill passes.

Also, aren't the law enforcement agencies of countries who've implemented this complaining about the increased usage of anonymizing technologies like encryption, proxies and VPNs?

Who are we fooling here?
--
Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.
pika2000

join:2005-10-13
Seattle, WA

And so it begins

Yup, this is what we, as voters, apparently wanted from our representatives and government officials. Oh, and we are keeping them in office, and paying them with our tax money too. How great. :rolleyes:

Really though, this is just another step towards barring people to have access to the internet. The internet has empowered the lay people to gain uncontrolled information and citizen journalism. This doesn't bode well for the ministry of truth. God forbid if the slaves are empowered with uncontrolled information. This 3 strikes law is an obvious attempt to reduce access in disguise of intellectual property protection. We already have the DMCA, and Google deleting accounts based on bogus takedown notices.

So yeah, good job to us, voters/slaves.
ISurfTooMuch

join:2007-04-23
Tuscaloosa, AL

Re: And so it begins

I get the gist of what you're saying, and I agree with the sentiment, but:

People didn't vote for these clowns for that reason. Hell, a good portion of people don't vote at all, and many of the ones who do either don't have a positive reason for voting for one guy over another (they're the lesser of two evils), or they vote the way their church, family, or friends tell them to. Then there are the ones who just watch the talking heads on TV, parrot their talking points, and obediently vote the way they're told to vote.

And I do so wish that the Internet was being used as the empowering medium it could be, but it isn't. If you don't believe me, walk around any office and see what sites people are visiting. Odds are, a vast majority are owned by the same corporations that churn out most of the TV, radio, and print programming in this country.

Unfortunately, most people want to be comfortable and entertained, and this even applies to politicians and media execs.
pika2000

join:2005-10-13
Seattle, WA

Re: And so it begins

said by ISurfTooMuch:

People didn't vote for these clowns for that reason. Hell, a good portion of people don't vote at all, and many of the ones who do either don't have a positive reason for voting for one guy over another (they're the lesser of two evils), or they vote the way their church, family, or friends tell them to. Then there are the ones who just watch the talking heads on TV, parrot their talking points, and obediently vote the way they're told to vote.

And I do so wish that the Internet was being used as the empowering medium it could be, but it isn't. If you don't believe me, walk around any office and see what sites people are visiting. Odds are, a vast majority are owned by the same corporations that churn out most of the TV, radio, and print programming in this country.
Well, I don't think it matters the reason people voted for these clowns. Fact remains that we voted for them, and they are passing these draconian laws again and again without balance check (eg. the DMCA). If we, the voters, don't replace them, who will? Fact is we keep voting for the same clowns again and again.

Internet is an empowering medium. Your example based on what you see around your office is weak and ignorant. Think about free speech. Most people talk crap, but that doesn't mean free speech is not important. Look at the power of twitter in citizen journalism. The power of blogging, video streaming, etc. The internet allows uncontrolled access to publish and gain information (whatever the information is), and that is a power that the ministry of truth want to control. Since blatant censorship would be too obvious, we are being bombarded with these draconian laws in disguise of protecting intellectual property and the children to reduce access.
ISurfTooMuch

join:2007-04-23
Tuscaloosa, AL

Re: And so it begins

Nowhere did I say that the Internet is not an important source of unfiltered information. What I said is that many, many people are not using it that way. I've been on the Net since 1992, and I've seen the level of informed and civil discourse drop while the level of sheer banality go through the roof.

I also never said that these political hacks weren't voted into office. What I said is that a great number of voters have precious little grasp of the issues that they're deciding with their votes. And it's been my observation that some of the most intelligent people I know are also the most apathetic. Rightly or wrongly, they've decided that the system is rigged, so there's no point in voting anyway. I don't necessarily agree with that, but when any intelligent discussion is drowned out by the ignorant sheep, it's easy to get disillusioned.

What I'm trying to say here is that there is so much ignorant, uncritical thought out there that the Internet isn't being used to its full potential, so the powers-that-be have little to fear right now. What gets them motivated is simple: money. The idiots at the record labels and movie studios are terrified that their profits will slip away, and they're willing to blast away with the biggest guns they can find in the hopes they can protect them. They've got lots of money, and they'll shovel it to whichever politicians will pass the laws they want. The politicians are happy to take the cash and do what they're told to do, whether it has the intended effect or not. The outcome doesn't matter as long as the check clears.

digitalfreak
Premium
join:2005-12-09
Blacklick, OH
said by pika2000:

If we, the voters, don't replace them, who will? Fact is we keep voting for the same clowns again and again.
It doesn't matter who you vote for - in the end they're all the same. Republican, Democrat, whatever. It's all about having power and control to them. F'k the "small people".
Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ

Re: And so it begins

said by digitalfreak:

said by pika2000:

If we, the voters, don't replace them, who will? Fact is we keep voting for the same clowns again and again.
It doesn't matter who you vote for - in the end they're all the same. Republican, Democrat, whatever. It's all about having power and control to them. F'k the "small people".
that is what bugs me, nobody works in the political field to be for the people they do it to get the kickbacks from the corporates. of course you cant even run without those kickbacks because the whole process needs tons of money to out advertise the other guy.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports

pokesph
It Is Almost Fast
Premium
join:2001-06-25
Sacramento, CA
kudos:1

fixed the logo..


DOWNLOAD FREE PLEASE
..for ya.
visuelz

join:2003-05-01
Brooklyn, NY

recording labels are idiots

I believe these guys are idiots. Boot people off the internet? By doing so, we're going to be moving back in time. Say goodbye to innovation if that happens. If innovation goes down, then this country is gone.
qworster

join:2001-11-25
Bryn Mawr, PA
Reviews:
·MSN
·Brand X Internet
·DSL EXTREME

1 edit

Want it stopped? VOTE OUT THE BUMS!

If you vote out the bums who are in the pocket of these criminal cartels, then there won't BE anyone to vote this crap in for them! The reason that Congress (the opposite of PROGRESS by the way) allows this crap to happen is they know they can get away with it! Kick a few of them out on their ever widening a$$es and watch how quickly the rest of them begin to remember why they are there-to represent US!!!

See 7 replies to this post

nfe

@verizon.net

two words

Napster Forever! (The original, not the Riaa poster child version).

juke

@windstream.net

amazing to think

Amazing to think the Romans lasted so long. I liken them as an expanded version of America. Innovations in arts and science, needless to say military might, but eventually succumbing to incompetence and corruption (even though it's always present to some degree). Sorry to change the subject, here's your chance to bash me...

Gogorama

@pacbell.net

Sharing will it ever stop?

I know this is slightly getting off topic. But didn't they freak out about tapes killing their business and they CDs. And from what I read profits are not in a slump.

I just sent 50+ CDs to an in-laws house so he could copy them and add them to his stuff, because he was bored with what he had. I'm guessing I broke the law legally, in the minds of record execs... but say I bought a pizza and shared it with the same man... is that illegal? I am giving him some part of a physical thing I bought. Or say I bought a book for myself and gave it to him to read, is that illegal? I certainly don't hear novelists or poets freaking out about all the sharing going in their field, because they probably like it when their work is shared. Now that I think about it I am sure musicians also like having their work shared. So this all sounds like rich people whining that poorer people are stealing stuff they didn't really create (I know that's not Virgins exec playing guitar on The Who's Who's Next).

But I know nothing about laws but do know the definition of sharing. I do know users may call it sharing because it sounds better than stealing, even if it is in fact sharing people sharing music with other people. So I don't understand what the problem is other than this sharing is now going on at a much higher rate thanks to the internet. And again the book world has never freaked out about sharing and yet the music world had a heart attack over tapes and then CDs and now this. They killed Napster but the just led to 10 other sprouting up. It's like a mythical Hydra you cut of one head it grows two in place of it.

Maybe instead of the "thieves" trying to change laws or wait for lower prices. The music and movie companies should change, if they don't like this file sharing then they need to sell their products in way that will make people want to buy them (iTunes is a good example). And unfortunately for them, in the end, people wants and LOVE free stuff.

But frankly I don't give a shit about music companies. The musicians get very little of the money made, many own no rights to their own music, and are coerced into contracts that suck just so they can get a CD made. And I am sick of the fat cats making money off of dead artists! So to hell with them. I think when an artist dies their recordings should become public domain or maybe under the rights of family members still living but I am through with the rich getting richer and teachers still being paid shit.

Another thing I wonder about is used record stores. People bring in stuff they don't want sell it to the store and they sell it at a great discount. The record company isn't making any money off the second sale, though I sure they want to, so isn't file sharing sorta like a used record store except you aren't paying for the used record. So maybe we're actually stealing from record stores or I guess what I am saying is file sharing hurts all the cool and funky record stores more than it hurts the already rich record companies.
Halftech

join:2010-07-08
Jefferson City, MO

Mediacom teams up with Paramount Pictures-piracy letters!

Today is Thursday July 8. A week ago we started having cable problems. The internet was flaky and later died completely. So were our phones do to having Mediacom VoIP phone service. We could not even dial 911 if a emergency happened. So we called tech support from our cell phone and was told there is a flag on our account for illegally downloading some dumb movie we never herd about. They said a letter was sent and we had to wait for it to get any more information. Today the leter came and it had the time, date, movie name, and the IP we supposedly had assigned to our modem. So I jumped on the Linux box we use as a router and pulled out all of the DHCP entries. I found the IP was never ours. Armed with this new info we called Mediacom back. We explained our story and evidence. The tech finally told us that he had just received an email to Mediacom internal staff stating that Paramount Pictures is having Mediacom install software on their nodes to track illegal downloads. The software was causing problems with service and linking random IPs to innocent user’s accounts. He went on to state that multiple users were flagged which means allot of people will be getting wrongful letters. He said the flag was removed from our account earlier today. Interesting after a week of no internet or phone everything started working when they removed the flag around 3 PM. We did some further research and found out starting April 1 2010 Mediacom has teamed up with Paramount Pictures to offer a online movie service EPIX. Folks we need to start suing these companies and take back the internet from these large corporations.

Monday, 04-Jun 17:18:47 Terms of Use & Privacy | feedback | contact | Hosting by nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo
over 12.5 years online © 1999-2012 dslreports.com.