Entertainment Industry Gets Politicians To Advertise File Sharing Sites
from the what-are-they-thinking? dept
Just a few weeks ago, the USTR put out its infamous Special 301 report that tries to shame countries that don't respect US intellectual property laws, but is put together using the rather scientific method of "what countries are the entertainment and pharmaceutical industries complaining about now?" to generate the list. Around the world -- and even in the US gov't -- the list is mostly seen as a joke. No one takes it seriously.But, apparently one ridiculous list isn't enough. The RIAA and MPAA have convinced a group of US elected officials, who have dubbed themselves the "International Anti-Piracy Caucus" to put out a list of file sharing websites that it hates... and with it, an attempt to shame the companies where those websites are hosted. The timing on this is amusing, because, of course, just last week, you would have needed to put the US on the list, as LimeWire would have likely been seen as just as widely used for unauthorized file sharing as some of those sites.
But the larger point is that this list is effectively advertising these five sites as the best place to go to get unauthorized content:
China's Baidu, Canada's IsoHunt, Ukraine's Mp3fiesta, Germany's RapidShare, Luxembourg's RMX4U.com, and Sweden's The Pirate Bay.You would think that, by now, the RIAA and MPAA would have recognized that every single time they've targeted a particular service for file sharing, the end result is to get that site significantly more publicity, so that its userbase increases rapidly. It happened when they sued Napster. It happened when they sued Grokster. It happened when they got the police to raid The Pirate Bay. It happened when they filed the lawsuit against IsoHunt. Putting out this list basically just pointed a bunch of people at these particular services as a good place to go to get access to content. Nice work by the caucus, who is made up of Reps. Adam Schiff and Bob Goodlatte along with Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse and Orrin Hatch.
And, of course, the RIAA put out a statement supporting this free advertising for those sites. Honestly, people keep telling me that the RIAA really knows what it's doing, but how can they possibly think that this is a good idea?
As a parallel, reader Hephaestus points out this historical bit:
"From 1559 to 1966 the catholic church had a list of prohibited books aptly named the Index Librorum Prohibitorum. One historical note about this list is that a very large number of the books on this list had an increase in sales and reading when they were placed on the list. The International Anti-Piracy Caucus seems to have not learned the simple historical lesson, To list or expose inappropriate subject matter shines a light on it and exposes it to a larger audience. This will undoubtedly lead to more people visiting this "list of notorious sites" quite the opposite of what they seem to be aiming for.Nice work, RIAA and MPAA. You just boosted traffic to those sites.
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
Filed Under: advertising, anti-piracy caucus, file sharing
Companies: mpaa, riaa
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Obvious Incompetence
I honestly don't know why it would be a surprise to anyone that they don't learn from history either. The history of media inventions/innovations all points to them being on the side destined to fail. They'll continue to make the same mistakes of the people before them that attempted to squash how people used new media, and eventually they'll collapse under the weight of the impossibility of their task. When that happens, they'll be an awesome new market without fear of retribution from draconian and ignorant organizations, and the people who can figure out how to navigate that market (and get a little lucky) will be insanely rich.
Until then, just keep doing what you're doing and watch them fall.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Obvious Incompetence
Remember, it's not run by musicians. It's run by attorneys.
So they're doing what they do best, and running billing as high as possible. If they screw things up for their clients, oh, well! Their pools and SUVs are paid for.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Obvious Incompetence
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
No laws, no criminals, no money.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
First, let's go ahead and drop the obligatory Ben Franklin quote: "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.".
And time you think, say, read or hear the words "Giving up some freedom", "Sacrificing a small freedom" or any variation thereof, you really ought to be incredibly suspicious. There's something not kosher there.
Second, I have no idea what freedom you're suggesting is being gained here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I truly believe if they'd've shut their heads about piracy a decade ago it wouldn't have become such an issue. I guess it was easier than adapting.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
SO whose inducing piracy now?
and correction on #4
YOU mean there yacht building programs.
my poor min wage earning neighbor and her min wage hubby have a SUV and a pool
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Master Strategy
But it's premised on assuming those people vising "pirate" sites are disposable, which is arguably short sighted.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Britain looking to repeal the digital wanker bill
yep all whiney not getting hsi own way awwwww
poor bribable politician see how democracy will work out
instead of revolution you get change alright
change of politicians that can't be bribed and do what there fellow citizens want cause they like or want to not for a lil white envelope with cash in it
thats the innovation he speaks of and how is the celebrity rehab show doing? YAH know where almost all of the popular actors and musicians are drug addicts and drunks or so fraked up its not funny. GREAT MODELS FOR THE KIDS
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Uh thanks
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Grokster - Lost case in court
LimeWire - Lost case in court
Wherever the labels can obtain jurisdiction over defendants and the law in such a jurisdiction is generally co-extensive with US law, the labels will pursue such services and litigate to close them down.
What so many of the readers who follow this site seem to not fully appreciate is that the labels, and others having similar concerns, are not targeting torrent search engine providers en masse. They are targeting those whose "purpose in life" is directed almost exclusively to point users in the direction of where they can find unargualby infringing content and who facilitate use of such engines by interacting with users in a manner that assists such users in acquiring such content. These sites, no matter their protestations to the contrary, have been shown by competent evidence to have participated in one form or another in an active manner, and not merely as dumb pipes. Were these sites truly the latter, the above sites would quite likely still be up and running.
The Sony test articulated about 1980 borrowed the longstanding test from patent law concerning "capable of substantial non-infringing use". The law is not foolish. When a site has the capability of meeting the Sony test, but when the factual backdrop is examined it is only too clear that actual non-infringing use is miniscule in comparison to infringing uses which such sites actually promote, facilitate, and participate, such sites are playing with fire and will almost certainly be "burned".
To these sites I say "Concentrate on being merely a dumb pipe and you will likely find safe harbor under Sony and its progeny. Push Sony's boundaries to its limits and you will almost certainly find yourself on the losing end of a lawsuit."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
When they specifically call them out, they drive traffic to them. Sure, they may eventually get them shut down, but look where that's gotten them - here. After they enticed however many people to check out the file sharing sites they read in a news article.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
So...does YouTube fall under "substantial non-infringing use"? I'm lookin' at you, Viacom.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
It is fair to say, however, that YouTube has taken an approach far more conservative that the above torrent sites such that the safe harbor provisions of the DMCA may be deemed to be satisfied.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Grokster - Lost case in court
LimeWire - Lost case in court
Wherever the labels can obtain jurisdiction over defendants and the law in such a jurisdiction is generally co-extensive with US law, the labels will pursue such services and litigate to close them down.
And the end result? Each lawsuit got more people hooked on file sharing, and each loss pushed people further to other services that were more underground and more and more difficult for the RIAA/MPAA to use to their own advantage.
Brilliant.
I'm confused why you believe this was a smart strategy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I mean, iTunes and similar services have flourished since those rulings. It's possible that the growth of those legit download services were helped by these suits.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Perhaps 'hooked' isn't the best word. 'Made aware', most definitely.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
lil rumor from a hacker
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Same old tactics from the media industry...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Always...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
HA!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
comparison to history
Once it was reavealed that a video had been banned, its popularity shot up. Pretty soon, the worst thing for a rock band was to not have had their video banned from MTV!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: comparison to history
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: comparison to history
Actually we could go back 1500 years further than the Index Librorum Prohibitorum to Rome. Where they had this sub sect of a religion that was banned. Their symbol was the letter "t" with a dead guy on it. As far as I can tell banning that sub sect worked really well ... big Ole GRIN
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Do you ever feel bad that you get paid to spew sophist gibberish on a website all day? Some people make the world a better place while they are in it. You spend your time honing idiocy to a fine art.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I (we?) liked you better when you actually tried...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It's called advertising. Man you're dense.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hmm..
_>
brb
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rapidshare
They do try to block infringing content, and they don't offer a search facility. They are basically a mechanism for sending files that are too big to email.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Rapidshare
Why not Photobucket and Flickr for good measure? Someone might be uploading a movie .jpg by .jpg!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Rapidshare
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
a;lsd;lask
Free Downloading of | Computer & Mobile | Games, Movies, Software, Songs, Videos,
Wallpapers, Themes, Ringtones, Tutorials, Trick & Tips etc..
Hey Check this site www.way2mobile.in
Free Downloading of | Computer & Mobile | Games, Movies, Software, Songs, Videos,
Wallpapers, Themes, Ringtones, Tutorials, Trick & Tips etc..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: a;lsd;lask
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]