Senator Franken Defends Censoring The Internet Because He Doesn't Think Hollywood Should Have To Change Biz Models?
from the really? dept
We were a bit surprised late last year to see that Senator Al Franken was supporting censoring the internet via COICA (which, yes, is about censoring the internet). After all, Franken has positioned himself as the "internet freedom" politician, and has spoken out repeatedly against attempts to limit speech on the internet. Ars Technica has an interview with Franken, where he delves into his support for COICA, noting that he's heard from those who worry about censoring the internet, but in the end, he thinks it's okay, because he's from the movie/entertainment world, and he doesn't seem to think they should have to adapt to the changing internet:The other side of this, of course, is that this is about, essentially, stealing copyrighted material and selling counterfeit goods. This goes to tens of billions of dollars in theft. Some of the supporters of this were after the American Federation of TV and Radio Artists, the Screen Actors Guild, the Directors Guild... I happen to belong to all three of those unions. This doesn't just affect the jobs of writers and directors and producers; when they're free to steal all this intellectual material, it changes the business model of a movie. So it really costs the jobs of the technicians and the crew and the craft services people. It changes the entire business model for the industry. It's not just movies and TV, it's everything.This is pretty disappointing, on any number of levels. First of all, his repeated use of the technically and legally incorrect words "stealing" and "theft" are troubling. Second, his repeating the totally debunked claims that this is somehow costing "tens of billions of dollars." The GAO has already debunked those numbers as having little to no basis, and it's disappointing that Franken would repeat them. But the key point is that yes, of course it changes the entire business model for the industry. But that's what new technologies do. They change the business models for legacy companies and it's not our government's job to protect those legacy companies and their business models, even if our elected officials used to work for those companies.
That said, Franken does suggest that he's heard many of the concerns about COICA and is focused on narrowing its focus significantly, saying that he has "tried to tighten the definition of who could be targeted under the bill" and in the recent hearing on COICA asked a series of questions to make sure that the bill "is narrowly tailored and will not unwittingly lead to the blocking of legitimate speech that is protected by the First Amendment." The problem is that I'm not really sure there's a way to do that effectively -- especially when, prior to COICA passing, Homeland Security already seems to think it can seize domains without any First Amendment considerations, leading to plenty of perfectly legal speech being suppressed. Franken should know better than to think that a bill allowing internet censorship can be crafted to only take down speech of one kind.
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: al franken, business models, censorship, coica
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Infringement (Piracy) is not destroying hollywoood, it is just sending back to a time before, TV reruns, cable, VCR's and DVD's.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
It's a very human tendency--the same reason why most ancient cities are found near rivers, most people didn't want to go far to get water... Just saying.
;-P
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
The prediction is that movies will only make money in the theaters. Over time they will loose all their "Windows" with the exception of the big screen. In the end even that will disappear.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It would be a huge loss to the economy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Try harder, you usually do better than that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
LANGUAGE: THE ULTIMATE SUPERVILLAIN.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Like what?
Post stats that show it is being driven for a reason other than piracy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
As in, show what the predominant force is, if it isn't piracy.
Good luck.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
See, you can't be continuously more profitable each year AND claim piracy is destroying the industry. One of those conditions has published numbers that show the profit is still there and not even necessarily getting smaller, the "piracy killing machine" is simply the monster in your closet when you go to bed at night and leave the door open.
[ 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:
[ 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:
You are brilliant, aren't you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It also didn't help that he was/is slightly computer illiterate and couldn't figure out the whole iTunes/iPod combo.
It was just ridiculously easier for him to spend his time and money playing video games.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
People listen to music as much as ever. They just rip it off because no one would bust them for not paying.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Chances are, there's more competition for a person's time. So you have to work harder to get noticed by everyone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Online Music Piracy Falls 27% (Rafat Ali, Jun 8, 2004 10:06 PM ET 2004)
Streaming Rises, Music Piracy Falls (2009)
Study shows music piracy on the decline, porn the most popular of it all (By Thorin Klosowski, Tue., Feb. 8 2011 @ 10:40AM)
Music Execs Stressed Over Free Streaming – PCWorld (By Joab Jackson, IDG News, 2011)
There happy now?
Now can you please STFU!
[ 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:
http://www.irs.gov/taxstats/index.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Have you ever considered that free legal alternatives are cutting down on spending? have you considered that people don't want to buy a CD that they will rip to a MP3, have you considered that others competitors(i.e. Jamendo) are taking market share from those sales?
Now even if that is true, what are you going to do about it?
There are no laws capable of stopping that and there are no technological solutions either at some point you people will need to come to terms with that simple fact. NON-COMMERCIAL PIRACY IS NEVER GOING AWAY AND IT WON'T BE REDUCED pronto, that is the elephant in the room that some think they can't just ignore.
[ 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:
http://www.zeropaid.com/news/92723/cria-trying-to-debunk-industry-canadas-pro-p2p-stu dy/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It would be a huge loss to the economies of private transnational economic elites.
Meanwhile consumers get to give their money to an entirely different set of transnational economic elites.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Regarding Al, he's a huge hypocrite that I just ignore from now on. His support of the COICA hurts his stance that net neutrality is an issue to take him seriously on. What I am disappointed with Ars about is that they didn't talk to him about the actual question of having broadband compete. It seems all around there's a lot of things that could have been done to improve the experience for consumers but Franken doesn't think about it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Consumers shouldn't be pushed towards illegal activity because companies refuse to change business models.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
You need to be more specific.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
You're about as sharp as a bowling ball.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Everyone here, including you, knows what I meant by that: that the number one driver of piracy is a lack of legal services which fully leverage modern technology. If you want to deny that, then YOU be more specific.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
You're not fooling anyone when you try to pretend it's anything but that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You need to sell it for it to be bought.
> mentality.
>
> You need to be more specific.
Pirating is easier than being a legitimate paying customer. If I want to take advantage of the state of the art in multi-media I basically have the choice of buying into a single vendor monopoly, pirating, or going to a lot of work.
The problem with option #1 is that it is still somewhat incomplete when compared to either option #2 or #3.
Option #3 is cool in many respects but is well... a bother. I can see why most people wouldn't do it. Plus you're still likely running afoul of the law anyways.
So that leaves piracy as the best option available even ignoring price. It's the easiest, least trouble free, and most complete option.
There are a number of nice infographics that capture all of this.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You need to sell it for it to be bought.
The vast, vast majority of what you rip off could be purchased; on itunes, amazon, from the band, etc.
You bozos aren't fooling anyone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: You need to sell it for it to be bought.
Prince of Persia: the Forgotten Sands
Where purchasing a legitimate piece of software was more damasging to computers and customers' time than pirating. Ubisoft lights the way in pissing off its customers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: You need to sell it for it to be bought.
You bozos aren't fooling anyone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Somebody paid good money to get those copyright laws in place, and science damn-it those laws need to be enforced!
And damn the expense! Who cares how much it damages our culture, hinders our future, slows the economy, or takes law enforcement away from eating donuts, handing out traffic tickets, investigating murders, or finding rapists, tracking down terrorists... None of that matters if people can get "free" copies of 1's and 0's over the internet.
AC, you're absolutely correct. If purchased laws aren't worth the money, then the average worth of senators and congressman may fall below the millionaire level and lobbyists might stop getting billions of dollars to sway the lawmakers of this country.
AC, you're right. WE ABSOLUTELY MUST ENFORCE THOSE COPYRIGHT LAWS! If we do not, the entire lobbyist/lawmaker economy might fall apart, and that dog don't hunt monsieur.
[ 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:
Drone, not so much (though I do hum on occasion).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Oh, that's kinda what you said.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
"God you are such an anti-ip drone, it's almost impossible to read your stuff."
&
"How can I shill when I am not in the industry?
Try harder, you usually do better than that."
So I guess my comment for you should be:
You are such a Pro-IP coward who cannot even put a name to his/her rhetoric. You just regurgitate whatever lame incorrect study "the industry" has fabricated and fill the comments of these posts with inane commentary that does nothing to further the conversation. Good Day Sir!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Unchecked illegal activity means there is something wrong with the law. Most people are moral and ethical. If there is widespread disobedience to a particular law, then that law is immoral and unethical.
It would be a huge loss to the economy.
I think you missed a story today, where using the content industry's own methodology, ~12 jobs are created for every 1 lost to infringement. So, which is true, the methodology for both studies is correct (and therefore copyright is the loss to the economy), or both are incorrect (and therefore the content industry is lying again)?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I'd also add non-sensical and unknowable to the average person.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Fixed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Are you sure you want to take the position that all laws are moral an ethical, and therefore?
The protests in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya were illegal. Helping an escaped slave was illegal. Leaking classified documents (even if they show gross negligence and mismanagement of a war) is illegal.
So, you'll say those are different situations. Ok.
The Boston Tea party was illegal.
Not paying the stamp tax was illegal - and that's what the Boston Tea party was about.
Why didn't people want to pay the stamp tax?
No representation in their government.
Can you really say that the government of this country represents the people, when all our elected seem to listen to are corporations and special interest groups? Both of the major political parties are saying 'more copyright good' where the evidence suggests the opposite.
So why should I pay the copyright tax if I'm not being represented in my government?
Find me even a single Senator or Congressman attempting to scale back or abolish copyright and I'll concede the point that there's someone with my interests trying to make a difference even if they get out voted.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Here, I'll help you: weed. The criminality of weed has slowly been addressed by various state legislatures.
The problem for you is that you'd still find more people that would say weed should be legal, than people saying ripping off music should be legal.
Of the people that rip off music, most know its illegal and wrong. They freely admit they do it because at the moment it's easy.
But they're not lobbying their congressmen to make it legal; they know that's ridiculous. And so should you.
[ 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:
Bored yet of being caught out?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yes, that comparison makes sense because the prisons are full of people who infringed copyright, right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Is that so?
http://torrentfreak.com/piracy-socially-acceptable-110228/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
http://hightimes.com/legal
I think its a misnomer either way.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Everyone I know pirate something, maybe we don't live in the same planet LoL
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
ps: hahaha! WTF!
Poll: Americans think downloading no big deal
Air Force cracks software, carpet bombs DMCA (By John Timmer | Last updated August 4, 2008 2:02 PM. The government will enforce copyright on others but not on itself)
70% of public find piracy OK (by Editor on Mar 1 2011.)
GoogleFu:
piracy is ok
is piracy ok
piracy is fun
piracy who cares
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
This time around no government will be able to help you people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
But no, "it's all the pirates' fault the sky is falling. It's all the pirates' fault we're bribing your elected representatives in order to keep our role as gatekeepers."
And you wonder why the public would rather break the law than conform to these bullshit laws.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
You dolts can't debate this issue, but you just keep trying.
It's hilarious.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
IS that the best you can do? Seriously? I offer examples of the business model being adapted, and you call us all thieves. Good to know where your priorities are. Clearly you've never truly loved content or culture - just raped it like the Goths did the Romans.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I have news for you: The internet isn't everything. It isn't the end-all, be-all of everything. I realize that for many pathetic and worthless geeks it might be, but they don't represent the masses.
None of you ever discuss the cost of production, human and monetary, because you're completely clueless about what it takes to create a professional entertainment product; one that is desired and appealing to many. There are large costs. You can keep pretending that's not the case, but the fact is you can't demonstrate otherwise on a mass level. All you guys ever come up with are incidental outliers.
The fact is you don't know what you're talking about. That's why no one listens to you, and your hare-brained ideas about things are ignored.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
DISCLAIMER
Anonymous: "I am a lying industry shill with no sense of morality or even the pretext of a point. I fear change like nothing else and cannot comprehend living without extorting as much as I can from my clients and blaming the 'losses' on a nonexistent problem. I do not know how to address an argument or even present one. I just flame because I know I'm wrong and unable to prove a single thing I've said, and I'm terrified to admit it."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Write up a budget for me.
Post it right here:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Source: Sony BMG official site
[ 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:
Musescore cost $0
LMMS cost $0
Using the piano roll to make a beat for nothing priceless.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
An approximate breakdown of the cost of, say, a major label UK-sold album:
20% VAT
2% Production of disc (may not always be applicable)
3% Transport (may not always be applicable
1-6% 'artist' royalty
5% Producer
25% Sound staff
43-49% Label.
That's a preetty big share of the pie, don't you think?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
B. Your actual numbers are wrong (of course).
Seriously, if you guys don't know what you're talking about, why do you just spew this idiotic nonsense?
[ 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:
Hilarious.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
1. Radio servicing
2. Tour support
3. Management
4. Store promotion
5. Advertising
etc, etc.
I could go on and on.
Now, if you actually knew anything about the music business, instead of being a raging asshat, you would have noticed that too.
[ 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:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
All you need is an account on YouTube today apparently.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Coal Company: "It cost us $300/ ton to get that coal to you."
Steel Mfg: "I don't care, I can buy on the spot market for $200/ ton."
Coal Company: "Senator!!!!!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
wow.
Sorry, but you are seriously stupid.
[ 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:
Dude. When someone accurately states economics to you and you call him "seriously stupid," the only one that makes look stupid is you.
It's a *fact* that pricing is not based on fixed costs, but on marginal costs. Your desire to ignore that doesn't change it, nor does your desire to call someone who schools you in basic economics "seriously stupid" make you look knowledgeable. It makes you look clueless, though it explains why you're failing.
[ 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:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Steel Mfg: "I don't care, I can buy on the spot market for $200/ ton."
It's okay, I can sell it to you for $100 a ton because I steal it out of the other company's supply, you know, the people who actually pay the money to dig it up.
No problem, they appear to have an infinite supply.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: 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:
I love ignorant claims like this.
I think you'd shut up if you could see my email box from just this week alone. It's pretty funny, but I can tell you that content creators way more famous than you are very clearly listening to what I have to say. Ditto with some politicians.
But you know what everyone thinks, so go with that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
This sounds like more of Masnick's secret evidence. Kinda like all those "1st Amendment lawyers" that supposedly agreed with him.
Btw, where's the seizure appeals, Masnick, hmmm?
[ 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:
Never been about *my* successes, kiddo. It's about the people who learn how to succeed.
This sounds like more of Masnick's secret evidence. Kinda like all those "1st Amendment lawyers" that supposedly agreed with him.
Heh. They do agree with me. That's why they're working on lawsuits.
Btw, where's the seizure appeals, Masnick, hmmm?
Will you admit you were wrong when the details come out? Of course not.
You seem to open your mouth an awful lot from a position of total ignorance, and even worse, accuse folks who know what they're talking about of being ignorant. You may know something about music, but you have demonstrated you have no knowledge of economics, business or the law.
Will you admit you were wrong? Of course not. But it's okay, because I know when I'm proven right, yet again, that you'll know how foolish you look.
By the way, my offer to help you for free goes away the day we publish the story about an appeal of a seizure. So, hurry up. You're about to lose out on a good chance to stop failing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You, on other hand, are hoping that once the court does address it, that they'll reverse the original judge's warrant, and rule them unlawful.
Because you've got $500 riding on it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110219/00252113175/just-because-judge-signs-warrant-doesnt-ma ke-it-legal.shtml
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
http://www.sfweekly.com/2011-02-16/news/pot-raid-sfpd-castro-law-professor-clark-freshman- sue/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Uh, could you be specific please. Otherwise I'm worried that you have no idea what a strawman is.
"None of you ever discuss the cost of production"
You mean, except when we discuss it. Is there a specific point you would like us to address on the subject? I'd offer some examples to get us started, but you've already rejected any I might bring up as "incidental outliers".
"The fact is you don't know what you're talking about. That's why no one listens to you, and your hare-brained ideas about things are ignored."
Come on, you can do better than that with the personal attacks. Perhaps an upgrade to pea-brained, at least.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Show me what costs and I show you how to do it for next to nothing.
Here have a look at how to smash an iPhone without spending money.
http://www.blenderguru.com/smash-an-iphone/
Or make some music on the cheap.
http://www.hydrogen-music.org/
Damn you don't even need a singer anymore with Vocaloid that last year alone had several top charts music in Japan alone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
@ other Anonymous Coward who dissed geeks
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
"You wouldn't download a car?"
Yes, who wouldn't, if all it took was some zeros and ones and a little bit of electricity, sure, why not?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Physical scarce good does not equal free to replicate data.
I would not have shoplifted a CD or DVD because I would be depriving the store of the physical object. If I stole it, they would no longer have it.
Would I have borrowed a CD or DVD from someone, ripped the track, and then given it back?
Yep, I would have. I did. I still would.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
The fact you can't wrap your head around the common idea that copying isn't theft leads me to believe you are incapable of doing anything other than parroting slogans.
"You wouldn't steal a car?"
Hell no, but if I could make an exact copy of it without costing me a dime more than the electricity cost of running the copy machine, I sure would.
Sharing is human nature.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I bet even you did some, didn't you?
Have you never recorded a TV show? have you never made a mix-tape or a mix-CDR?
No one cares about copyright, no one cares specially about YOUR COPYRIGHT CLAIMS, people just ignore you and that is what makes you jump up and down all day screaming PIRATES! PIRATES!.
I hope the government passes all those ridiculous laws and you get what you want and realizes then that they will do nothing to reduce piracy or PIRATES! LoL
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Mr. Franken admitted it changes the dynamic he is just ignorant of the fact that nobody knows where this could lead.
Further "piracy" have been in non-commercial circles for as long as there was copyrights and it didn't seem to do any harm.
Radio didn't destroy musicians and composers income, TV didn't destroy Hollywood, VHS didn't destroy TV and Hollywood.
There will be change and non-commercial piracy will be there and long after, there are no technologies or laws able to stop it and worst yet there are solutions to circumvent those laws using stringent copyright laws to achieve the same end result for free content that is sharable and freely legally distributable by anyone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If only
Freaky Friday
Vice Versa
Big
18 again
Like Father Like Son
All Of Me
Good job Hollywood itself can infringe in the name of creativity eh?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"even if our elected officials used to work for those companies"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
7 dirty words
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Copyright vs Counterfeit
Even if I was completely new to the idea of copyright, that is the impression I would get. The same idea behind whenever you hear a politician wanting to pass a law "for the children". You know it isn't actually needed and will only have bad side effects.
When all of the IP gang stops trying to conflate IP with actual counterfeit goods, then I will have a little respect for them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Copyright vs Counterfeit
That's another element of the real problem.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why is anyone surprised?
Big businesses and the big unions give big money to their front men to conduct their business in Congress. Despite everything he said when running for office, Frankel is not a politician and is doing his master's bidding.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why is anyone surprised?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Protect your royalty checks Al
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
al francken
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: al francken
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: al francken
Yeah, I know it was shuckable, but I couldn't help it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: al francken
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Quote:
Damn those Chinese from Zhejiang University.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Enlighten Me
Silicon Valley and the collective Internet syndicate willingly offering up free access to all digital content without authorization from the copyright holders does not qualify as a “new business model”, there's actually a name for that and it's called "copyright infringement".
It's very easy to be successful when you don't follow any of the rules.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mike Masnick, thank you! https://nobullshitseeds.com/auto-white-widow-xxl-fem-seeds/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If you don't think that we're right for each other
Well I'm a hustler and a player and you I'm not a stayer,
I know you wan draw card say me just can't perform.
krunker
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mike Masnick, thank you!!! https://lizavetacbd.com/best-cbd-oil-for-sleep/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
hi
A really informative web-site. The way you might have share this details is basically really appreciative. Hope to discover far more on this
https://aixonne.com/l/iPhoneCase.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]