Entertainment Industry's New Spin: Fair Use Harms Innovation

from the day-is-night,-night-is-day dept

The supposedly "free market" think tank, the "Progress & Freedom Foundation" has always confused some people with their stance on copy protection. Despite saying the government should stay out of almost everything (they're vehemently against muni-broadband, for instance), they're huge supporters for any law that pushes copy protection. This seems to go against everything else they say, because it basically supports millions of government granted monopolies. The latest column written up by PFFI's Patrick Ross isn't just disingenuous, it tries to co-opt the language of those who support loosening draconian intellectual property laws by claiming that fair use stifles innovation. The reasoning is bizarre and somewhat circular, but can be summed up as the same old line that the entertainment industry has used for years: if there's fair use, entertainment companies won't put out any more content. Of course, that's provably false. Fair use has existed for years, and there's still plenty of content out there. However, it's worse than that. Copy protection often lowers the value of the content by severely limiting it or making the content useless for many users. The claim that people trying to actually use the content they legally purchased harms innovation is corporate doublespeak at best -- especially when it's pretty clear that no copy protection can actually protect content. No copy protection has been able to keep content off file sharing networks, so it's hard to see how it makes one bit of difference to those entertainment companies. The content is still out there for free whether or not there's fair use. If the entertainment industry is afraid to release their content digitally, that's not a problem for innovation, that's a problem for those companies. There are other entertainment companies that have learned to embrace more open distribution means, and it would seem that the "free market" position would be to let those companies compete and see what happens -- not force government regulations to protect one industry's business model. In fact, it seems that those who have created new business models that embrace giving customers what they want without annoying copy protection are a lot more innovative than an entertainment industry that needs a bunch of laws to protect their business model.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    Nate K., 6 Oct 2005 @ 8:04am

    DRM

    So why don't we just stop buying any media from the industry? Or at least anything with DRM. I think if consumers communicated clearly with their buying choices that they are not willing to put up with this garbage, it would become a non-issue rather quickly.
    ~Nate

    link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      SuperJudge, 6 Oct 2005 @ 9:06am

      Re: DRM

      That'd be nice. Except it has often come up in various forwarded emails and the like, and yet still has not been done.

      I'm still waiting to find out exactly when we're going to stop buying gas for 3 days...

      link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Pete Austin, 6 Oct 2005 @ 9:56am

      Re: DRM

      Re: So why don't we just stop buying any media from the industry? Or at least anything with DRM.
      Nate correctly points out that this does not sound credible. If you're serious, switch to buying used/second-hand books, music and dvds, preferably from charity shops. If there's a "must see" new movie, borrow it from a public library, or club together with some friends and rent just one copy. This way, you'll be protesting against the RIAA, helping charities, and not hurting yourself.
      I have just started following this advice and it is working well for me.

      link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Pete Austin, 6 Oct 2005 @ 8:11am

    Loony thinks customers are mad

    link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 9 Mar 2006 @ 6:29am

      Re: Loony thinks customers are mad

      Hmm..I've have a bank account,, and they are always changing that. Every couple of years, they are switching up the term of the chequing account, in order to screw me out of my money. You oay more in service charges then interest. I always thought that it was me who lent the bank money. Not the bank who owned my money and doled it out.

      How about the fact that my bills keep going up. It was advertised at 29.99 a month. They keep raising it.

      or the no extra feel for my cell phone at 35$. Then.. 'voice mail not included.5$ a month.. oh need to cheque your messages out of town? Oh, thats long-distance? Sorry.'


      There are tons of things out there that mess with you. Its there usually in the terms of service.

      link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Greg, 18 Apr 2006 @ 12:19pm

        Re: Re: Loony thinks customers are mad

        All those things are part of your contract. They have the contractual right to change it. DRM gives them the power to ignore a contract, and deactivate music that's already in the consumer's possession.

        link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    jeremiah, 6 Oct 2005 @ 8:21am

    Circular Reasoning: 101 or Owellian Doublespeak in

    I liked this little snippet:

    "What does this infinite flexibility for digital TPM mean for media distributed online? It means consumers will have more choice."

    With infinite restrictions, infinite choice is possible. How very Mao of him.

    Are journalists drug-tested, or can someone take me to this man's dealer??

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    maven, 6 Oct 2005 @ 9:59am

    "entertainment" industry

    These are the same people that cannot produce an original piece of "entertainment" without "adapting" every Japanese horror movie and British television show/concept.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Bill, 8 Apr 2008 @ 3:43pm

    Stop buying DRM encoded tracks.

    Vote with your money. Stop buying DRM encoded tracks. The idiot companies still using DRM will go out of business and the world will be a better place without them.

    Personally, I have totally boycotted all of the RIAA member companies for the past 8 years. Until they embrace the digital era and stop treating all customers like criminals in order to catch a few percent who wouldn't have bought anything from them anyway, I just won't give them my money. I either listen to the 700+ CDs I bought before they started treating me like a criminal for putting my own CDs on my own computer, or I listen to XM and Internet radio.

    What would it take to get me to start buying 2 releases a week like I did for so many years? First, the RIAA would have to abandon DRM wholeheartedly. Second, they would have to stop lobbying to pass laws making it illegal for me to use my own CDs on whatever equipment I own. Otherwise, they can collectively pucker up and french kiss my rosey crack.

    To be honest, I would love to see all of the RIAA member companies go out of business and all of their artists get signed by modern digital era companies who use the full benefits of modern technology in order to treat the artists fairly and treat their cusomers fairly. Imagine, maybe someday artists big and small will sign with "Google Music Group" who pays them twice the money and utilizes instant viral distribution to customers for a fraction of the cost. When will some sharp entrepeneur create a full-on high-tech digital record label that does this? They stand to make a fortune.

    link to this | view in chronology ]


Follow Techdirt
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord

The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...

Loading...
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.