Obama Nominates Former Top RIAA Lawyer To Be Solicitor General
from the well-that's-just-great dept
This has actually been rumored for quite some time, but now it's official. President Obama has nominated one of the RIAA's top litigators, Donald Verrilli to replace Elena Kagan as Solicitor General. Verilli, of course, was instrumental in leading the RIAA's case against Grokster. He was apparently also involved in Viacom's fight against YouTube (according to Wired -- I didn't know that previously). In other words, he's been the copyright maximalists' go to guy in court for extending and twisting copyright laws in anti-competitive and free speech-destroying ways. So, it seems we should expect a pretty strong defense of the government seizing domain names in violation of the First Amendment.Of course, I find it kind of amusing that Darrell Issa and anti-Google lobbying group Consumer Watchdog are still claiming that the administration is in Google's pocket. As far as I know, many of the former top Googlers who did go to the White House have since left (some in frustration), while Obama has been hiring all sorts of folks who are about as anti-Google as can be into top roles. Beyond Verilli, Obama has also hired Bill Daley, who had been president of SBC (now AT&T), which has gone out of its way for years to try to take down Google. Where exactly is Google's "power" in the administration these days?
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: donald verrilli, elena kagan, president obama
Companies: riaa
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
One would think...
Guess not.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: One would think...
-Spend millions on a wasted effort.
He's perfect for the job.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: One would think...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: One would think...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: One would think...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
hahahahahahaha
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
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:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
He went to power with all this Google and other "free information" universe people. What he has found out in a little over 2 years in power is that piracy and it's close relative counterfeiting, are major drags on the US economy. They appear to have realizes that it nice to be extreme leftist "everyone gets everything for free", but it isn't economically sound.
Appointments in the last little while have been much more business oriented, realizing that they need to move forward and re-level the playing field in all sorts of areas.
The alternative is 2 years from now having President Palin taking out pirates with her double barrel like she does deer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Entertainment is one of the last things the US exports.
To think gov is just going to let it fly out the back door unpaid for, is delusional.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
That's funny, while the politicians like to spout "whatever", the data shows entertainment exports "ain't shit".
You want to be in industrial and capital goods, son.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If you want to discuss things calmly and rationally, welcome aboard. If you want to continue insinuating that the world would be a better place if people you disagree with would be shot with double-barrel shotguns, please go swallow one yourself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Perhaps you want to take your head out of your freetard ass and try again?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
PS- You should cut out all that "freetard" stuff, it has the opposite effect you're hoping for.
If you're here for a discussion, have one. If you're here to cause trouble, aka to troll, then you *really* need a hobby. If trolling *is* your hobby, well, you need to apply yourself, because "freetard" is just as pathetic as people who would call Pro-IP people "sheeple".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
The person suggested that I was putting forward violent rhetoric and suggested I supported the shootings in Arizona. That is offensive. He should be lucky I only called him a freetard, rather than some of the other choice terms I could come up with.
Actually, I call the Masnick followers sheeple. They don't read past what is presented, they just look at the feast of free stuff in front of them and ignore logic as to why it is bad. They will stand over the spoiled feast soon enough, making themselves sick on the rotting remains. That is their problem, not mine :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Everyone here thinks with their own minds. They have their own thoughts about the morality of piracy and a government using copyright law to enforce draconian laws, all in "protecting" artists.
If you look, there's a LOT of artists that don't support this. 50 Cent called it a marketing strategy. Joss Stone won't sue her fans. Shakira actaully defended piracy.
The ones being made redundant are the ones who took advantage of artists.
If anything, follow who is complaining the loudest and you'll find the weakest position.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The ones being made redundant are the ones who took advantage of artists.
And that of course, would be you, Freetardo.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Here's a refresher:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Unless you have a good philosophic reason for claiming copyright is a founding ideal, I'm going to have to mark this one in my book as "claiming patriotism as a defense of IP laws" and roll my eyes at it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Umm, before you go spouting unfounded statements, you need to learn what you are talking about. Read this and you will see how our founding fathers looked at property. just plug in the term "Intellectual Property".
http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2011/jan/21/jay-hottinger/rep-jay-hottingers -assessment-founding-father-unfo/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
First off "constant extensions" just doesn't reflect the 5 changes made in 200 years. That is far from constant.
Second, there is no proof that progress isn't promoted. There are two ways that progress is promoted, in part by encouraging new expression instead of repeating the old, and also by encouraging people to think outside of the box rather than just wallowing in it.
By making repetition and copying less attractive, it leaves the other alternative (new speech, new music, new books, new movies) look way more attractive.
So sadly, that argument of "doesn't promote the progress" always falls flat, because it just isn't true.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Progress was certainly promoted when those film making pirates went to Hollywood to avoid paying Edison patent royalties.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yes it does.
The result is that nothing ever makes its way to the public domain anymore because every time something was supposed to, the law got extended.
"Second, there is no proof that progress isn't promoted."
It's hard to prove a negative, but even so there is virtually no evidence that IP promotes the progress and there is plenty of evidence that it only hinders progress. You can start here
http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/general/intellectual/against.htm
Your beliefs that IP promotes the progress is no different than someone saying they believe that magic, undetectable, elephants move the earth around the sun. There is no proof that they don't, but your statement is unfalsifiable and hence it's probably false.
Not only that, but since IP robs me of my rights and it certainly does cause economic harm (monopolies are bad for the economy), so the burden is on you to prove its justification, not on me to prove that its lack is justified.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The speed of innovation in the last 30 years has only increased, not decreased. In the times of copyright, patent, and even trademark, we have continued to progress at a faster and faster rate. While Masnick and his ilk will point at those who seek to abuse the system, the reality is that the vast majority of patents and copyrights don't do great harm, and in the case of patents, have allowed hundreds of millions (if not billions) of dollars to be invested in research and development.
On the other side, countries like India, with very poor patent and copyright laws find themselves lagging badly, only able to snag some of the market for research by being the low cost provider. Much of their Pharma business is based on knocking of medicines that are patent in other places but not in India. Most of their innovative people in this field leave the country and head for places like the US, where their developments can be turned into riches, and fund their future work.
The "haves" and the "have nots" can be easily weeded out by their level of IP compliance. China is a good example, because without IP protections, they appear to be growing quickly. But in reality, they are doing the same thing as China, offering a low cost labor force, and turning the profits from that into research and development. President Hu discussed the need for stronger IP laws in China, and that comes as China finally reached the same point Japan did in the 60s and 70s, where they were finally producing work worthy of protection. Their growth rate without IP protection has been phenominal, but only because someone else was providing the IP work. They understand they cannot lead if they cannot be masters of their own products.
There is always the problem that people can see the short term advantages of suddenly removing patents and copyright. They can get a bunch of stuff cheaper now. But good public policy isn't made on short term gains, it is made in long term strategic moves that make you stronger, even if it hurts you a little today.
One example of why all of this is silly is the "patent thicket" idea on smart phones. Masnick loves to post his needlessly complex diagram of who is suing who and all that comes with it. The reality is that even with all of these apparent blocks, we keep getting newer, better, and more feature laden smart phones, at a pace that is mind spinning. My 1.5 year old HTC android phone is incredibly out of date in many ways, because progress in the field has been incredible. That is in the face of this so called thicket that is suppose to be stopping everything. Yet progress happens at a pace that most of us cannot keep up with.
For me, it's all part of the "Masnick Effect", where conclusions are drawn not based on the full reality and all of the facts, but with only the facts that support your desired conclusion. The thicket looks horrible and scary as presented, and yet the reality is that the smart phone business is not only surviving, but thriving and packed full of real innovation and real developments, not just changing the color of the case or redoing the logos, actual innovation that leads to a truly better product.
Reality trumps opinion every time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You have it backwards - developing nations struggle because america and other developed nations got there first and slammed the door in everyone else's face declaring the games closed. Intellectual property laws are one of the tools used to do this. It costs significant money to compete in an IP-laden marketplace, which poorer countries simply do not have because of the restrictions put in their way. Blaming it all on IP laws would of course be overly simplistic, but it is a significant factor.
As for China, you better brush up on your Mandarin because it looks to me like they've jumped in with both feet and learned to play to win and they already own a significant part of the american economy (as well as many others). Were I you I would also look up the phrase "hoist by your own petard" because that outcome is far more likely than your utopian vision.
I'm also impressed by the way you manage to convince yourself that China's growth without paying any attention to IP laws in some way means that IP laws are good. Do you think that, after growing hugely since the mid 80's and having been the fastest growing enconomy on the planet for what 15-20 years without bothering with IP laws, their sudden foray into the area indicates they suddenly want to become good corporate citizens? The only difference between China and the "IP poor" nations you describe is that China is big enough to have totally ignored the US's ranting and raving about copyright and patents until they were ready toplay. Most other countries the US can bully into submission.
Reality trumps opinion? Excellent, go find some and present it. You know? Facts, data, evidence? Otherwise my "opinion" is just as valid as yours and at least has some connection to observation and doesn't seek to distort or put words in other people's mouths.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Most of it is occurring in other countries (and being copied in/transferred to the U.S.), countries that aren't as big on IP as the U.S.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Both short term and long term. The evidence substantially shows that patents only hinder innovation and that without them much more short term and long term innovation will occur.
"In the times of copyright, patent, and even trademark, we have continued to progress at a faster and faster rate."
Not so much. It's just that we still benefit from previous advancements that were made before IP was so prominent, it's not like this advancements disappear. On top of that, we also benefit from newer advancements, no one said that IP completely stops innovation, just that it slows it down. Also, better communication helps to facilitate advancement, which is a reason there was a spike in advancement after the printing press (it makes it easier to build on old advancements because more people have access to those old advancements instead of having to go through the trouble of re - inventing the same thing over. Instead, they can focus their efforts on newer advancements. More people having access to more information makes it easier for people to learn find material relevant to what they want to do and to build on it). Also, as stated above, more of our advancement is being developed in countries that aren't so strict on patents, whereas much less is now being developed in the IP maximist U.S. Then those advancements get transferred to the U.S. so we benefit from it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I agree, hence we should get rid of patents. It helps us a lot today and tomorrow, but it hurts the lazy rich people (like patent trolls) that want to make money money without conducting any R&D, contributing anything of value to society, or doing any work. Who cares about them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yes, but where are these phones being developed. Let me give you a hint, it's not the U.S.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Wrong, it went in one direction, constantly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
A word that, ironically, tends to apply to only those who use it, I'm afraid. =/
(Obligatory XKCD link.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Actually it is cause you're the one looking like a fool when none of your predictions will come to pass. Apparently you're not sure yourself so you use AC.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Oh, my sincerest *snerk* apologies for the misunderstanding of your obviously sarcastic statement about what you think the alternatives are. I don't know how I EVER misread that.
See, sarcasm is not that hard to relay in a text-based environment.
And I do love how you lump me into a 'freetard' category since my statement didn't really have anything to do with the debate on free vs pay. I was calling you out on violent rhetoric and how you think shooting people who disagree with you is a better way to go.
Now, in all seriousness, I apologize if I misread your intention... Perhaps if you don't intend to give the impression of a gun-toting vigilante for the content industry, you should refrain from such violent statements as "shoot pirates with a gun" without using sarcasm indicators.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Disregard that part... had that left over in my spell-checking word doc and didn't clear it out. My bad.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
So, you're against the 2nd amendment, correct? I wish you people would just leave my country since you obviously don't believe in the principles upon which it was founded.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
And you think I'm worried about your respect? Heh. Try again pal. You're a troll of the worst kind... you come in here anonymously and make inflammatory statements about killing people, then drop "freetard" on anyone who doesn't agree with you on anything. You’re right on your post here:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110124/17422712805/obama-nominates-former-top-riaa-lawyer-to-be -solicitor-general.shtml#c529
When someone acts like a jackwagon, they do get called out on it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You are fast to jump to a conclusion, a wrong one, and you look like a jackwagon for doing it. Tissue?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I think they cover that in grade school. Head's up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Why? Because you need to cover your face being too embarrassed for not using sarc tags. Ease up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/12/7/15845/6055
If she is whoever taught her failed at almost everything related to guns. She gets a grade of fail and should not be allowed to use guns until she relearns the basic safety stuff you learn in how to handle guns 101.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Now if Hollywood and Palin could just destroy each other that would be the best of both worlds :-)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If by "re-level the playing field" you mean trying to return to the days when talented independent artists had no avenue or palpable hope for making a sustainable income on their own, then you're probably on the right track. It will never happen, but I'll bet that's the objective, yes.
This is just another case of pissing down our backs and calling it rain. Or in this case, "transparency".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Not at all. Your answer is the problem, because you are mixing the rights of the artist to distribute their work as they please with piracy, which is the distribution of work against their rights.
If independent / up and coming / never going anywhere artists want to spread their work for free, more power to them. Have a nice time, enjoy it. Knock yourselves out. Copyright does not in any way stop that from happening. That is their choice as artists.
Where there is a problem is artists (or the people they have signed contracts with) who don't want their music distributed this way. This is their choice, and people should respect it.
It isn't an all or nothing world as you try to paint it. If new artists want to work differently from the existing music industry, they are free to do so. They just shouldn't be dragging people who aren't willing to work that way down to their level. That sucks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
You don't want your clients' IP distributed? Keep it to your fucking self you entitled prick.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Jackwagon is a non-word, made up by advertisers. The humor in using it apparently is lost on you.
Mom's basement isn't name calling. It's is a statement of fact (unless proven otherwise).
Entitled prick is the other persons words sent back.
had enough yet?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
In fact, if all sides of this argument did this, that would be just swell.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Doesn't matter where it came from. "Fuck" came from (arguably) "fricken" which means to strike; or from "pluck yew" if you want to believe the English/French war origins... but if I call you a fuck, it's still name calling. You’re using it as a derogation… which is name calling.
You're right... it's not name calling. But it is making personal attacks, which is no better. And don't try the "its fact until proven wrong". I could say that you're a child molester and claim it fact until proven wrong, but I'm above that.
So you are playing the "they're doing it too!!" card. Epic.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Close relative? I'm gonna have to call bullshit on that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
**Lead** lawyer on Viacom v. YouTube
http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-york/nysdce/1:2007cv02103/302164/1/
I wonder whose side the SG's office will take when that case hits the Supreme Court?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hyperbole much?
What free speech has this guy stopped? The free speech of piracy? Not really protected speech, is it?
How has he supported anti-competitive things? By working to shut down pirate sites and attempting to hold YouTube responsible for the methods they used to grow their business on the backs of others?
Come on Mike, your post sounds like the sour grapes of a little child who lost a game of tag in the playground.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
His MO from here on out will be to describe all piracy enforcement efforts as assaults on the First Amendment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
If anything, using it shows a guilty mind, a desire to hide something. It's a big loser all around.
Sneakernet? Knock yourself out. I will be particularly interested to see which idiots are paid to swim the atlantic to take things to Europe.
Darknets? Please... go now. Go hide, and don't tell the rest of the public how to get in. That would resolve much of the piracy issue immediately.
Now give me specific evidence of how the sharing of a specific file at a specific time by a specific person has harmed a specific artist.
Oh boy, now there is a standard to measure up to. Who are you to demand this stuff? Don't get out of Mom's basement much? Attacks like yours suggest you are joining Mike in understanding that the gig is up. Anger. It's the first step in the process.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Technology progresses as enforcement progresses. Zero sum game here.
"Sneakernet? Knock yourself out. I will be particularly interested to see which idiots are paid to swim the atlantic to take things to Europe."
That's what planes are for.
"Darknets? Please... go now. Go hide, and don't tell the rest of the public how to get in. That would resolve much of the piracy issue immediately."
Never answered that one. Guess deluding yourself leaves much to be desired on actually answering questions.
"Attacks like yours suggest you are joining Mike in understanding that the gig is up. Anger. It's the first step in the process."
Don't think anyone took it as a demand save you. But if you have nothing on the subject, all the vitriol does nothing to prove your point.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Go play on your darknet, stay out of the light. Take the turds on the TPB and places like that with you. Piracy wouldn't go to zero, but you would stop dragging new people in the door.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You do realize that actually makes no sense? If anything, what the government is doing, along with the record labels is going to cause MORE people to seek out what the fuss is.
It's as if you want to say McCarthyism helped Hollywood by blackmailing a few artists for being "Communist".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Did you even READ the darknet paper? Go ahead, it is at http://msl1.mit.edu/ESD10/docs/darknet5.pdf. Note that darknet does not mean "not in the public eye" at all - in fact, the authors consider Napster of all things as an example of a darknet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You can call a tail a leg, you still can't stand on it. "darknet" is the idea of something that cannot be seen, is "in the dark". Napster is a "dark" like 2nd base at a night baseball game in Yankee Stadium.
They may have hijacked the name, but that isn't a dark net. that is the most public and most widely seen of all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freenet
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
What are you on about?
Dragging people? They all come through those doors extremely willing and of their own free will. They seek out those doors because of people like you and the laws and restrictions you place on things.
So keep on keeping on and our side only grows stronger.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I call a big BULLSHIT on this one. I do not and will not feel guilty for wanting privacy. Period.
How ironic that this statement comes from an anonymous poster.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Until I see solid proof that piracy actually hurts artists, I will support the downfall of copyright.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Good to know. I think there's a number of rights holders and content creators post here so why don't you start by emailing Nina Paley your details to follow up on? Or does it only count when you have a certain amount of money? What's the magic number ( and what politician should it be sent to) to obtain access to that clearly needed service in your little world of absolutism?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It isn't "all or nothing". When you get some life experience outside of the classroom, you will realize that everything happens in shades of grey, not the wonderful black and white world of debate class.
Why would I email anything to Nina Paley? I don't want to have dealings with her at all. I don't get where you are going with this. Perhaps you might want to try whole english sentences to explain your position more clearly?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dichotomy
Don't mean to be picky... logical fallacies are a study of mine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
All internet communication has patterns. There are different patterns for web site visits, for watching a you tube video, for getting your mail, for chatting on skype, and yes, for sharing files. You don't even have to look at the content to know one from the other. packet sizes, connection patterns, number of incoming and outgoing requests, packet format, etc. Without looking at the actual content or trying to assemble stuff, the actions are actually pretty easy to see.
Most people surfing the web have few incoming connection, and have some outgoing (typically 4 to 10 at a time), and generally all to the same places. Someone using P2P will have many incoming connections from a wide variety of places, they will have outgoing connections to a wide variety of locations, and the packet sizes will all be very similar in nature.
After that, once you know who is using file sharing, you can figure out from the actual packets the protocols and such being used, and then even potentially determine what is being shared, either through packet inspection or simply by requesting packets until you have enough to see what is inside.
That is assuming the worse. In reality, once you have the IP address of someone who is sharing (because there is always some form of announce to let people find you in the P2P network) then you are easy enough to spot. You don't think that the copyright holders won't almost be part of those "dark" nets?
So I'll say it again: Until you stop using the network infrastructure, and until you stop allowing anyone you don't personally know into the circle of friends, you will always be open to be caught. Accept and understand it, it is a fact not a fiction.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
1. - P2P != illegal file sharing
2. - IP address != person
3. - traffic patterns can be manipulated to look like other traffic patterns
4. - VPN /Proxy tunneling can convolute all the above
5. - deep packet inspection is a violation of privacy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Might want to keep up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
And it's still a violation of privacy. Just because it occurs doesn't make it less so.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I don't think you understand what Distributed DNS is supposed to prevent. It's not meant to hide anything at all, in fact, it's meant to help things *stay visible*. Sorry to ruin that argument, though. You've used it before at it seems like you really liked it.
If anything, using it shows a guilty mind, a desire to hide something. It's a big loser all around.
Ignoring the fact that the subject that spawned this gem of a statement was based on incorrect information, wishing to hide does not prove guilt. It proves fear. It can be a fear of being caught, yes, but it also can include a fear of being wrongly accused, or persecuted unjustly, etc.
Sneakernet? Knock yourself out. I will be particularly interested to see which idiots are paid to swim the atlantic to take things to Europe.
These idiots will do it. You fail at understanding what a "sneakernet" really is. (Hint: It doesn't involve actual sneakers.)
Darknets? Please... go now. Go hide, and don't tell the rest of the public how to get in. That would resolve much of the piracy issue immediately.
You also fail to understand the term "Darknet". My my, you certainly have a loose grasp of these things!
Who are you to demand this stuff?
Since every so-called "anti-piracy" law and every "piracy" lawsuit is *based* on the "fact" that filesharing hurts artists and will ruin creative sectors of the market, I think everyone has a right to demand it. Do you disagree?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Distributed DNS isn't about "hiding". On the contrary, distributed DNS is about getting your address out to as many people as possible through alternative channels. I assume you just don't understand the term "DNS". (A copyright maximalist that doesn't understand technology? That's unpossible . . .)
And your argument about "being on the same pipes" (and therefore implicitly in view of the authorities) is rather laughable. Software like Freenet routes (and caches) encrypted content through multiple nodes on the network before it arrives at your computer, making it nearly impossible for anyone outside to know what is being passed around, and making it nearly impossible for anyone inside to determine who actually requested a particular piece of data.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Distributed DNS is about trying to eliminate any central point that controls DNS (even though this has never, ever been an issue). Often, it is used as part of a plan for an "alternate DNS" which would allow people to have sites using non-approved top level domains (TLDs). That is either to create a members only universe, or an attempt to hide by having things not be visible to outside parties (such as Googlebot).
As for your freenet argument,remember: The data goes somewhere. Actively connecting to a freenet node would be a good indication of someone trading files (or receiving them). See, all the "hiding" tools actually make you way more obvious, because normal people just won't do it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
No. That's part of the beauty of Freenet: not only can you not prove that I received a particular file, you can't even prove that I requested it. And not only can you not prove that I requested it, you can't even prove that I requested anything. Traffic flowing in an out of a node it not an indication that the node is itself trading files.
And even if you had a vague inkling that a certain node was trading files . . . so what? Trading files isn't in itself illegal. It would be much like knowing that sealed envelopes were being routed around the country, but you couldn't open the envelopes up to see what's inside, and you didn't know where the envelopes were coming from or where they were going to.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
A 'good indication' isn't enough for a conviction, or even a charge. If it were, all of the street corner drug dealers and sex workers would be behind bars.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
As for your freenet argument,remember: The data goes somewhere. Actively connecting to a freenet node would be a good indication of someone trading files (or receiving them).
A 'good indication' isn't enough for a conviction, or even a charge. If it were, all of the street corner drug dealers and sex workers would be behind bars.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I know your just a troll but hey, if you're actually that delutional you need to be shipped off to the looney bin.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Actually, I foresee one more big US export in the near future: young, intelligent expats.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Technological Taliban
Who would have believed that Obama would turn out to be worse than Bush? Who knows how many technologies will never see the light of day in America, how much business it will lose as a result of its anti-technological policies?
It's like the technological Taliban has taken power in America.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The Technological Taliban
"sacrifice its entire economic well-being and technological advancement"?
So you can rip off music, movies, software, etc?
LOL
You people are losing it...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The Technological Taliban
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The Technological Taliban
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The Technological Taliban
THE great IP wall of America.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mr. Wolf.
What confuses me (about the trolls *and* Mike) is why it is assumed that the cases he has worked on reflect his personal feelings on the matter. I'm probably being naive, but taking those cases was just a job, right? He was told to sue these people, and paid to do so, so he did.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mr. Wolf.
Also, while not any form of proof for Verrilli, so far all of those from that industry do seem to still be pushing the RIAA mantra even in their new positions. Or it could just be their new boss feels the same way as their old boss (anti technology and kill the future).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mr. Wolf.
...although now he works for the US citizenry, doesn't he?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mr. Wolf.
It gives them hope that this might save "their copyright". What I find amusing is how they have never been right in anything they have tried in the past, and they expect that this time will be different.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
that means he'll be in the hot seat
Q: How can we rationalize the discrepency between the draconian penalties for file sharing with the actual miniscule damage inflicted?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: that means he'll be in the hot seat
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: that means he'll be in the hot seat
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: that means he'll be in the hot seat
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: that means he'll be in the hot seat
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: that means he'll be in the hot seat
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: that means he'll be in the hot seat
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The ACs sound very manic today...
What I like about the trolls is their total cluelessness and lack of understanding of technology and what is going on around them. They toss out terms like IPv6, ISP monitoring, three strikes, and think some combination will save them.
This is going to be fun to watch ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
What I like about the trolls is their total cluelessness and lack of understanding of technology and what is going on around them. They toss out terms like IPv6, ISP monitoring, three strikes, and think some combination will save them.
What is funny is watching the pirate apologists trying to some up with some way to support piracy without supporting piracy (Masnick tries so hard). At the end of the day, the only reasons these solutions are being pushed is because the children can't control themselves.
Your actions online would be entirely different if your IP address was unique and followed you everywhere. You would be so much less likely to break the law if you actually thought you could get caught. Times are changing my friend, just as the TD ilk was singing and dancing about for the last 5 or 6 years in the other direction, you need to now accept that the free ride is just about over, the bright lights are being shined into the dark corners of the online world, and there will be fewer places to hide. Widespread lawbreaking isn't tolerable in our society, no matter how much you try to justify it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
Unfortunately for you, this will never happen. If such a system tries to get implemented, I for one, would never use it and the Geek Legions would be writing code to route around it.
Widespread lawbreaking isn't tolerable in our society.
Which is why laws that are not followed by the majority are either reversed or simply not enforced.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
IPv4 has run out of addresses. And it's usefulness.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
Let him have his delusions and hope. People need hope.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
I don't get it. If you love that stuff so much, just use it and leave everything else alone. Why do you insist that people should have the right to pirate all this other stuff if you don't want it anyway? Why is there all this negative talk, and then all the software, music, and movies you despise are the most popular downloads?
Lead the revolution. Stop downloading copyright materials. stop listening to copyright music. Stop watching copyright movied. Quit whining about piracy being some sort of right. Just do it for real. Use what is freely available, and don't participate in the copyright culture. Step up. You can do it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
I do use it.
Why do you insist that people should have the right to pirate all this other stuff if you don't want it anyway?
Never said anything of the sort.
Lead the revolution. Stop downloading copyright materials. stop listening to copyright music. Stop watching copyright movied.
I listen to music and watch movies that I have legally purchased all the time. I just don't do it the way you wish me to. I watch my DVD's on my Linux box (having to circumvent the DRM to do so) and I listen to my ripped CD's on my iPod (after loading them with gtkPod). I also watch movies from my huge library of VCR tapes that I have taped from HBO and Showtime and such (which I considered purchased since I pay for those channels on my cable bill).
Quit whining about piracy being some sort of right.
Never said that either. My problem with with your enforcement of what you call Intellectual Property comes into play when you conflict with my rights, such as free speech, due process, privacy and the ability do what I wish with what I have legally purchased.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
And everyone in prison is innocent.
You people are such cowards.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
I have done it to replace the cheaply made albums that became scratched. I have done it to replace the cheaply made 8-tracks that stretched. I have done it to replace the really cheap cassettes that fell apart. And I have done it to replace cheap CD's that cracked trying to release them from the jewel case.
Isn't getting my money for the same content two or three times enough or are you folks really that greedy?
I don't download any new music, because it usually sucks and if there is something I want (and it's been a long time) I buy the CD to support them.
I don't download movies because it isn't worth my time or hard drive space.
Now, I have come clean. What about you? Ever download anything illegally? Bet you have.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
I see a lot of people here claiming to never rip off music. Interesting. Maybe Mike could start a section where people could post .jpgs of their purchases/receipts.
He could start with himself, as he claims to purchase all his music.
Let's see your iPod, Mike.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
I'll start, since you apparently won't: www.rdio.com
Unlimited music, offline caching, excellent selection (now). $10/month. I'm sold. Buying copies of music is *so* 2010.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
Indeed. I do. I either have the physical CDs (which, I still buy) or I buy them from one of a few sources: generally Amazon, CDBaby or (preferably) directly from a band/label etc. I've been buying a bunch of downloads lately from Whatevski Records. I always try to support the artists I like.
Not sure how one can prove this, but I have no music that is "unauthorized." I believe it's important to support content creators you like, which is why I focus so much attention on doing so and helping others set up ways in which their fans can support them.
In the meantime, I'm curious why you still don't answer my question about how come the bands who listen to me are doing better than ever before, while -- by your own admission -- the bands you work with are failing. Given all of that, how can you claim that I'm the one trying to rip off artists? I'm the one helping artists, and *by your own admission* having artists listen to you is a recipe for failure.
Who's really ripping off artists? The one helping them make more money or the one leading them down a path of admitted failure?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
I know you enjoy repeating this lie, but the bands I work with are doing far better than the ones you "help", none of whom, of course, anyone has heard of.
I said that were it not for piracy, and their entire catalogs being available for free on the net, they would have more money in their pockets.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
Do you even realize that files can be packed inside of other files? It happens all the time. That just because a file has a certain name doesn't mean the contents are what the name indicates? The only way to be sure is to open the file yourself, and to do that you have to download it. Which means you have to do the very thing you rail against.
Tell me, how do you plan to identify and stop billions of people from doing what they do? You really have no idea just how widespread this is, Anonymous, or how futile your flailing about is. I leave you with these words. Ponder them and realize that they apply to the current situation more than you realize.
"I see you. I can feel you now. You're afraid. You're afraid of us, afraid of change. I didn't come here to tell you how this is going to end. I came here to tell you how this is going to begin. I'm going to hang up this phone, and then I'm going to show these people what you don't want them to see. A world without you. A world without rules and controls, without borders or boundaries. A world where anything is possible. Where we go from there is a choice I leave to you."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
Jamendo.com
Free platform for artists.
Dmusic.com
ANOTHER, older free platform for artists to connect with fans.
Last fm
Another FREE site.
It's funny... I've named at least three sites where I can stream or download songs for free and yet you can't name one band that's taking advantage of that. The odds of me finding a band that's great in the genre I select is far larger than some imaginary people you will make up to say "Hey, they're losing because of piracy"
I think I have a name for you now.
Luddite.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
I rather doubt that, but okay.
I said that were it not for piracy, and their entire catalogs being available for free on the net, they would have more money in their pockets.
Doubtful, of course. There are plenty of artists who we've spoken about whose works are available widely for free online and those who have embraced new models and embraced their fans (rather than attacking them, as you do), are doing better than ever before.
But this also contradicts what you said in the past, where you explained how the bands you work with have had to find day jobs.
Funny how your story keeps changing.
Still, you never answer my question. Why do you claim I'm ripping people off when the artists who listen to me are doing better than ever, and the artists who work with you are failing?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
The bands he helps are both making money hand over fist due to his help and on the verge of complete bankruptcy due to piracy, depending on which version of his story most supports his current argument.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
Tell us, why are you such a supporter of piracy?
Seems like your advertisers and those you present to should know about this. We'll have to work on that next.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
Again, answer me this: how do you plan to stop billions of people from doing what they're doing? I want an answer. Now. Or give a complete retraction of everything you have ever said on this site.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
"Quite simple, the tide is turning (actually started about 18 months ago now), and continues to flow against the pirate world. It was fun while it lasted, but there is little tolerance for it anymore."
Actually what you have is a bunch of people who have managed to screw up everything they have touched in the past. That have been appointed to positions of power and will now follow through with their "grand plan" to curb infringement.
Infringement is not what is killing the record labels, it is competition, singles -vs- albums, and not being able to sell the same product multiple times to the same person.
For 50 years there were only two forms of electronic home entertainment radio and TV. Now you have competition from over 5 million bands on myspace and elsewhere, gaming, texting, emailing, blogging, surfing the web, chatting, social media, YouTube, PornTubes, and a ton of other things. All of which eat away at the time people have available for music or TV. Your slice of the pie has gotten smaller and will continue to shrink.
singles -vs- albums ... nuff said everyone gets this point.
Digital is the final format (mp3 or FLAC), and it doesn't degrade. Gone are days of unwould cassette tapes, worn and scratched records, needing to buy a new copy when the format changed.
Between being over extended financially, facing competition, and making really bad business decisions, you guys are so shit out of luck.
"Your actions online would be entirely different if your IP address was unique and followed you everywhere."
You really don't know much about routing tables, DNS, or how the all this wonderful technology works, do you?
"Widespread lawbreaking isn't tolerable in our society, no matter how much you try to justify it."
This isn't promoting the progress, its promoting the police state.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
This isn't promoting the progress, its promoting the police state.
I love your logic. By that standard, arresting drug dealers is bad because it doesn't promote progress for the dealers.
Come off it.
Enforcing the laws doesn't stop progress. They create the stability required for progress. You are pretending that enforcing the laws would stop everything. It just doesn't. You have nothing, nada, zilch to support your position. You do however have a job you want to keep. Now that we know what you do for a living, it sort of shades you comments. Now we know that you profit from the failures brought on by widespread lawbreaking. I guess for you, that is progress.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
Holy fucking shit. No, really. That was awesome.
Let's walk through this together:
Copyrights were designed to promote the progress of the arts.
Drug laws are designed to keep us from having controlled substances.
So, arresting drug dealers does, in fact, keep people from going to that drug dealer for drugs. However, if actively block people from creating because they sampled 4 seconds of a 50 year old song, you are *not* promoting the progress of the arts, are you? So, enforcing the law in this regard makes no sense.
I find it *completely* amazing that you couldn't reason through that by yourself.
PS- I'll admit, though, that arresting drug dealers does very little to actually stop drug use, but that's a conversation for a different day, I think.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
I am getting bored with this guy. We need to import a higher class of trolls and shills.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
I love your logic. By that standard, arresting drug dealers is bad because it doesn't promote progress for the dealers."
You really make me laugh. Talk about twisting the meaning of everything said.
My line "This isn't promoting the progress, its promoting the police state" is a play on the copyright clause.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution, known as the Copyright Clause, it reads ... "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."
oh and Congrats on your man getting into a position of power. I can not wait a year to see how badly he screws up. As I said before ... This is going to be fun to watch ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
I am not a "pirate apologists". I am an part time analyst trying to determine when the labels and TV studios will fail. The problem is everything that is done to protect "COPYRIGHT" from the "Pirates" has shortened how long they will survive. These people are all very self defeating. They are not business men in any sense of the word, they are monopolists who don't know how to compete.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
I understand, your job depends on piracy. Congrats, now I undestand why you have a very one sided view of the world.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
Me - "I am not a "pirate apologists". I am an part time analyst trying to determine when the labels and TV studios will fail. The problem is everything that is done to protect "COPYRIGHT" from the "Pirates" has shortened how long they will survive. These people are all very self defeating. They are not business men in any sense of the word, they are monopolists who don't know how to compete."
You - Anonymous Coward - "One thing for sure, you will have a job for a long time to come, because they aren't going anywhere. Until you accept that basic concept, you are in trouble.I understand, your job depends on piracy. Congrats, now I undestand why you have a very one sided view of the world."
In all actuallity my job depends on people being stupid and short sighted. Which you seem to have plenty of. Did you take a course or were you born special?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
"He's only a troll..."
Woosa. WOOOSA! Now let's get your heart rate down...
Do it with me. *Breathe in*
And out...
*Exhales*
There we go!
Now... Let's remember. The same RIAA/MPAA have gotten practically everything they've wanted. The only thing they didn't get was third party liability, which Verizon shot down. They can't compete with free and have done a large number of things such as bully normal citizens, spend $90 million on legislation, and negotiating three strikes laws with Biden.
But beware the spoiled child that gets everything they want. No matter how much collusion is occurring between corporate and government interest, it can't end well. Main thing that will happen is our government becomes so slanted that revolt will surely follow as people become fed up with the political maneuvering.
Shoudl be fun to see.
WOOOSA!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
Not really. My ISP can already tie an IP address to my computer at a particular date and time (that's how they catch a large portion of file sharers, after all).
That doesn't solve the problem of disentangling encrypted traffic that is purposefully routed inefficiently through multiple nodes so as to avoid anyone knowing who actually requested what.
Your grasp of technology seems to be a fragile thing . . .
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The ACs sound very manic today...
There may be little tolerance in the RIAA/MPAA worlds, but you’re hardly seeing the general public on the streets protesting about these terrible crimes. Those not directly involved in on side of the debate or the other hardly seem to care at all, and they’d probably be in the majority.
"Once it became a drag on the economy (and the economy as a whole fell into the dumper), it became time for the government to start acting."
Wow, to even hint at conflating the GFC and copyright infringement is ridiculous. And there is absolutely no independent evidence that copyright infringement actually hurts any country’s economy. This evidence has been asked for countless times but never provided.
"Widespread lawbreaking isn't tolerable in our society, no matter how much you try to justify it."
Actually, societies have a long history of tolerating widespread breaking of laws that are felt to be wrong, immoral and outdated. Judging by the scale of copying of movies and music, a very significant proportion of society believes this to be the case with copyright laws. This is no surprise considering the most prominent supporters of these laws are the recording and film industry middlemen who have gone out of their way to rip off both artists and consumers for decades, and continue to fight so hard against what their customers actually want.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If you look back, the Powers That Be (cue thunder) have always tried to hinder change. No difference here. Then, it was challenging the shape of the earth, the center of the universe, how old the earth is… now, we have the challenges over who has the authority over recorded ideas and emotions.
Once you boil it down, the music and movie (and book) industries are all about controlling the distribution of those thoughts and emotions. The technology available now challenges their control over that distribution. But at least this time, no one’s been burned at the stake. Well, not yet, anyway.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Looks like the Obama Administration doling out another gift to Hollywood, who loves shoveling money at Democrats. This is their plan after getting whooped in the election.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How Sneakernet Works
The RIAA is committed to a business model in which there are only a thousand songs or so. That means that to make their accustomed revenue (let us notionally estimate it at ten billion dollars), each song has to earn an average of at least ten million dollars, and sell at least twenty million copies. These twenty million copies are distributed over the billion or so inhabitants of the developed countries, because obviously the third-world countries and China do not pay royalties. That means that one person in fifty has a copy of a typical song.
So, if you have three hundred kids on a school playground, who probably have a rather higher propensity to consume recorded music than the general population, it is a reasonable assumption that ten or twenty of them will have copies of any song in the top thousand. If those three hundred kids hold an efficient swap meet, they will all have the full thousand songs. I suppose that there would probably be trading specialists, kids who knew all about every song, and what it was worth, and who would trade among themselves at a higher level than they traded with the mass of kids in the schoolyard. A playground with three hundred kids might have twenty specialists.
Of course, you can construct a two-tier model, reflecting the fact that kids do not all go to the same school system. The catchment areas of the Catholic parochial school system do not precisely correspond to those of the public schools, so kids who are neighbors at home might well be going to different schools. So new music can jump, virus-like, from one schoolyard to the next.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How Sneakernet Works
At the end of the day, torrent file trading works because it doesn't depend on social connections. When you slow things down to social connections only, real time, piracy drops to nearly nothing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: How Sneakernet Works
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: How Sneakernet Works
Cragslist, for example.
"WTT one used 1TB hard drive for used 1TB hard drive. Works like new, not in original packaging. Expect the same for trade."
Ta da!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: How Sneakernet Works
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: How Sneakernet Works
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: How Sneakernet Works
At that level, nobody would complain too much about piracy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: How Sneakernet Works
With a 1TB hard drive costing less than half of my cable bill, how much data do you think can be moved around *without* the internet being used to actually transfer the files?
It's not *just* the internet that made file sharing so easy, it's also the fact that media is now just bits of 1's and 0's.
Preventing piracy is a losing battle. Spend the money on marketing to the pirates instead.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: How Sneakernet Works
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: How Sneakernet Works
Reel to reel...those things were ungainly. External drives are so svelt.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: How Sneakernet Works
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: How Sneakernet Works
The absolute biggest thing working against you, is that only you and a very very small group of people see this as illegal activity. If over half the US is breaking the law by sharing files, then it is the law that is wrong, not the people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: How Sneakernet Works
At the end of the day, torrent file trading works because it doesn't depend on social connections. When you slow things down to social connections only, real time, piracy drops to nearly nothing."
And yet that 'nearly nothing' was enough to create a moral panic back in the eighties, with the catch phrase: 'Home Taping is Killing Music'. Perhaps you've heard of it.
People who say that the industry and it's legal representatives will be satisfied if they 'only' have to deal with the sneakernet, which is exactly what 'Home Taping' was, are either ignorant of the relevant history, or they are lying.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How Sneakernet Works
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
People disregarded copyright law because they knew they could get away with it. Duh. There was no enforcement.
Copyright law is unreasonable? And wrong?
You, (for many reasons, obviously) are a delusional person.
United States copyright law is not going away.
If you don't like it, move somewhere where there is no copyright law. And everything is free. Unicorns and skittles for everyone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I'm not surprised in the least that you have no grasp of logic.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Thats exactly what the prohibitionist said to the public back in the day when they got alcohol banned. They even wasted a lot of time, money, and lives (yes, people died) trying to enforce it.
Guess what. Many many people just ignored it and now that law is no longer on the books. Just because you can pay to have a law passed, doesnt mean you can force people to comply with it. Keep dreaming. Your jails are only so big.
"If you don't like it, move somewhere where there is no copyright law."
If you remember correctly this country was copyright free first. So, If copyright is what you want, YOU move to somewhere where you can freely oppress the people. I hear theres room in China for you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
And unicorns and babies' souls is what the *IAAs run on. Didn't you get the memo?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]