MPAA Calls MPAA Intellectually Dishonest For Claiming That Infringement Is Inevitable
from the talking-points dept
We've been having some fun with the MPAA's extraordinary cluelessness lately. It started with MPAA communications person Alex Swartsel bizarrely and unfairly attacking GigaOm's Janko Roettger for daring to point out that an economic downturn (combined with dumb moves by the movie industry) might lead to greater file sharing. Swartsel, a spokesperson for the MPAA, went ballistic, claiming that such a statement was intellectually dishonest and somehow condoned the practice as socially acceptable. Here's the key paragraph from Swartsel and the MPAA:We doubt many people will subscribe to the kind of intellectual dishonesty that suggests that it’s fine – or really, that it’s inevitable – to steal as a way of saving. But it’s troubling that by suggesting that stolen content available on rogue sites and elsewhere is just another substitute good, Roettgers is tacitly arguing that content theft is legitimate and socially acceptable. Truth is, it’s neither.And what, specifically, did Roettger say? Here's the exact quote:
The U.S. credit ratings downgrade, tumbling stocks and international instability have made not just financial analysts nervous this week. Consumers are also starting to wonder whether we’re about to enter another recession. Whenever that happens, people start to tighten their belts and cut unnecessary expenses — like paying for movies and TV shows. Add in the Netflix price hike as well as new authentication plans from broadcasters like Fox, and you’ve got yourself a perfect storm for piracy.I don't see how that's condoning anything, really. But if Roettger is being intellectually dishonest and saying that it's fine, well, then that means that the MPAA is also intellectually dishonest and condones piracy. That's because, as TorrentFreak points out, just a couple years ago, former MPAA boss Dan Glickman said almost the exact same thing that Roettger said:
"This is a high priority issue," said Motion Picture Association of America head Dan Glickman, who expressed concern that the dire financial situation would make pirated movies more popular on the streets and online.So, if I'm reading all of this correctly -- and I pretty sure that I am -- according to the MPAA, the MPAA is being intellectually dishonest in suggesting that "it's fine -- or really, that it's inevitable -- to steal as a way of saving." Got it.
"If you look at the situation, the current economic crisis makes this problem much more serious than before," he told a forum.
In the meantime, we're still waiting for the MPAA and Ms. Swartsel to issue an apology to Roettger, an excellent and fair reporter, who certainly doesn't deserve the MPAA's bizarre "blame the messenger and accuse him of supporting piracy" treatment.
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: alex swartsel, dan glickman, infringement, sophistry
Companies: mpaa
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Oh what a tangled web we weave
John Doe's Law - Eventually, all dishonest people will paint themselves into a corner in which they cannot get themselves out of.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Oh what a tangled web we weave
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Oh what a tangled web we weave
The first thing I thought was ... I this day and age, where the internet never forgets, it must be really tough to be a liar and scumbag.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Oh what a tangled web we weave
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Oh what a tangled web we weave
The Internet never forgets.
Expect us.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
apology???
you have friends on the internet??? ve are watching you!!
sig.... ops later for that
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
To the callers of bullshit - das vidaniyah!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
In other news, the chocolate ration will be increased to 20 grammes a week.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I don't see the connection
I took the Roettger quote as saying people cut back on paying to go out to the movies or paying to watch TV (cable/sat). Does the MPAA really think people can't live without seeing a movie and must therefore pirate said movie?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I don't see the connection
Of course, that only makes sense if watching television is necessary for survival, but as you said its not. T.V. is a luxury, and when the cost becomes unreasonable, due to budget or lack of use, we drop it. Even if they stopped piracy, that's not going to bring people back, not in this economy.
Too bad MPAA and others would rather kill their business then address the real problem.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I don't see the connection
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That's very hypocritical of you Mike. The movie studios are clueless fools who live in never-never-piracy-land. The MPAA is just the messenger. Stop shooting the messenger.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's merely that Swartsel doesn't care for the prediction.
Mike is just putting out his usual exaggerated propaganda with inter-site trolling, again hoping to be noticed.
Swartsel actually HEDGES it PRECISELY (emphasis added in upper case): "by SUGGESTING that stolen content available on rogue sites and elsewhere is just another substitute good, Roettgers is TACITLY arguing".
And having read the WHOLE piece by Roettger's (as I bet most haven't, you just swallow Mike's version), I think that's fair; Roettger's tone strikes me as more gloating than warning.
Some here don't grasp the nuances of words, you just know who to dislike: it's all ad hom with you. You're just Mike's groupies who respond to his cue -- and get worked up on cue again when someone carps of Mike's hyperbole.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's merely that Swartsel doesn't care for the prediction.
Kettle...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
^^
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's merely that Swartsel doesn't care for the prediction.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's merely that out_of_the_blue doesn't care for the prediction.
out_of_the_blue is just putting out his usual exaggerated propaganda with inter-site trolling, again hoping to be noticed.
Roettger actually HEDGES it PRECISELY (emphasis added in upper case): "Consumers are also STARTING to wonder whether we’re about to enter another recession. Whenever that happens, people START TO TIGHTEN THEIR BELTS and cut unnecessary expenses".
And having read the WHOLE piece by Swartsel (as I bet most haven't, you just swallow out_of_the_blue's version), I think that's fair; Swartsel's tone strikes me as more gloating than warning.
Some here don't grasp the nuances of words, you just know who to dislike: it's all ad hom with you. You're just out_of_the_blue's groupies who respond to his cue -- and get worked up on cue again when someone carps of out_of_the_blue's hyperbole.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: It's merely that out_of_the_blue doesn't care for the prediction.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: It's merely that out_of_the_blue doesn't care for the prediction.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's merely that Swartsel doesn't care for the prediction.
This is logic 101.
* People are worried about money.
* Many people see nothing wrong with downloading content.
* Studios are making content more expensive or difficult to obtain.
Once you've stated those three things, the only possible conclusion that you can make is that piracy might rise. You can say that people should just forgo the content if they aren't willing to pay for it, and you'd have a legal argument in saying such, but that's only talking about what people should do, not about what they might do. What might people do? They might pirate more. What should people do? That's an entirely different question.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's merely that Swartsel doesn't care for the prediction.
Roettger doesn't need to SUGGEST that infringing content is a substitute good because, to many people, it IS a substitute. Whether he feels this is right or wrong is irrelevant and isn't stated in his article. Downloading movies, etc. on the internet is easy to do and a lot of people don't feel bad about it. If you think otherwise you are fooling yourself. The large number of people sharing illegal files backs this up. If you don't think many people would find this a tempting alternative in an uncertain economy then you are naive.
Bottom line- Roettger is telling it like it is. Labeling that as intellectual dishonesty is not only disingenuous but its a self-destructive attitude to have. Roettger and others are pointing out exactly why piracy is looking more attractive. Don't you think it would be more profitable to take in some of the well reasoned points being made and take some proactive steps to change some of the things that make consumers consider piracy in the first place?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's merely that Swartsel doesn't care for the prediction.
I've been reading Techdirt since 2004. Threw the years Mike has earned my trust and my respect.
I've been reading out_of_the_blue's comments for a few months. During that time you have earned my disdain and distrust.
I've been reading about the MPAA's deeds for years. During that time, I've seen them screw fans, potential fans, artists, and twist laws into unrecognizable shapes. They have earned my belief that they are willing step on anyone to get what they want.
Who am I going to believe?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: It's merely that Swartsel doesn't care for the prediction.
And as an addition:
"Mike is just putting out his usual exaggerated propaganda with inter-site trolling, again hoping to be noticed."
He doesn't need to hope, he IS noticed to the point ppl ASK him about tech issues and huge companies (ie: MAFIAA) acknowledge him to the point they RESPOND to articles posted here meaning they READ it too. So, uh, you fail. But you do get noticed for your amusing cluelessness and stand out as one of the most funny clowns of techdirt. Congratulations =D
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's merely that Swartsel doesn't care for the prediction.
" Not sure what you read, but the full article that I read didn't sound like Roettger was endorsing anything at all. Sounded to me like he was showing you Hollywood's opinion on the death and decline of piracy and giving evidence that Hollywood is wrong about that decline.
Waitwaitwhat?!? Comprehension fail! Maybe the whole thing (since it references past articles and events and has no pictures) is a bit confusing to you, so let me back it up for you… Swartzel says that Roettger’s words = advocacy for piracy. Rotther’s words are almost exactly the same as one of Swartzel’s Boss’s statements. So Mike points out the irony of attacking an opponent on the grounds of ‘intellectual dishonesty’ for saying the same thing your side said earlier.
Accusing another of doing the same thing one does oneself seems to be contagious.
Let me translate that for you Blue... "it's all ad hom with you... [inserting ad hom attack against you now]". Blue, this is hypocrisy… hypocrisy, this is Blue. What? Oh, you’ve met.
Oh, and 'predicting that we'll get worked up when someone 'carps of [sic sic] Mike's hyperbole' doesn't work when you bait it. But if that's what you're aiming for –the very definition of trolling-, well then troll-on sir, troll-on.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: It's merely that Swartsel doesn't care for the prediction.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: It's merely that Swartsel doesn't care for the prediction.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's merely that Swartsel doesn't care for the prediction.
Self-referential irony perhaps? Somehow I doubt it was intentional. Nothing quite like someone who endlessly trolls with ad hom attacks on anyone and everyone that disagrees with them, article writers, writers of linked articles, other commenters telling everyone else that their 'all ad hom.'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's merely that Swartsel doesn't care for the prediction.
/ignore
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mike, the F reading student upset a B student is not perfect
If this is not the pot calling the kettle black, I don't know what is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mike, the F reading student upset a B student is not perfect
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Times are getting bad in which cops seem unable or unwilling to punish the people who commit crimes. This is leaving citizens feeling like they have no recourse. If things continue like thist it will be a perfect storm for vigilante justice.
Apparently saying that means I support vigilante justice.
There's a big difference in saying stating a what/how/why and actually supporting that what/how/why. This this does not meet that condition.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just a misunderstanding?
Fortunately, Swartsel works for the movie industry, and it turns out there's actually a movie that ought to do a reasonable job at explaining to him the connotations of this phrase.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Piracy not done with commercial intent is all good in my book and I don't see it as anything else but people sharing and spreading culture.
Some people may not want to accept that fact, but I don't really care.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Mission SO accomplished.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I love how other ACs jump at any opportunity to sling "freetard" around and declare anyone who reads this blog a criminal.
Mission SO accomplished.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That I have to point this out to you, Mike
It's not stealing. It's infringing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: That I have to point this out to you, Mike
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I believe it might be useful and informative to seek out and explain those factors important to the incumbents in the content industry. At least this would provide the other side of the story, and from these contrasting views more informed opinions can be formulated.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
MPAA and Piracy
The US government seems be spending an undue amount of money trying to support entertainment (trivia), while spending not nearly enough on making necessities more secure and updated.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: MPAA and Piracy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: MPAA and Piracy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]