Russian Bureaucrat: Google & YouTube Should Be Shut Down For Facilitating Infringement
from the talk-to-the-boss dept
Russian president Dmitry Medvedev has been quite vocal lately about the fact that copyright is broken, and that the way to deal with it is not to get more draconian, but to open things up with more open licensing. However, it appears that not everyone in his administration feels the same way. TorrentFreak has a story on yet another recently leaked State Department cable, showing that Russia's Deputy Minister of Economic Development, Stanislav Voskresenskiy, told US diplomats that YouTube and Google "do not conform to current Russian [copyright] laws" and therefore "should be shut down." It's unclear from the context if he meant this as an example of the absurdity of today's copyright law, or if he actually thought that shutting them down would do some good (he admits upfront that it's not "feasible" however). I'd like to believe he was just showing off the insanity of today's copyright laws, but if that's the case, it doesn't look like the US got the message...
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
In Soviet Russia...
What? You were expecting a joke?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: In Soviet Russia...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Google is not failing, and that doesn't mean that government money should be spent in MAKING IT FAIL.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Imformation for free?
What do we have now? The exact same thing. But we call them 'museums', and we have to pay to get in.
Why the hell even have information or communicate in the first place??? I say, we should support this very idea, while those who are open about information keep releasing.
So all those in favor of releasing information freely to the world, keep talking and communicating. All those in favor of locking up information, SHUT THE HELL UP AND STOP COMMUNICATING! PLEASE!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Imformation for free?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mike's right. Copyright unnecessarily protects the rights of content creators.
To put it simply: all artists, screenwriters, musicians, artists and authors should simply connect with their audience and give them reasons to buy.
They need to do away with the tired notion that they'll be paid fairly for their work - gone are the days of that model - they need to focus 80-90%% of their time on doing WACKY, ZANY things to get people to buy the product they can spend 10-20% of their time on.
And remember, if I download/access/obtain your art via illegal means, I'm not the one who's in trouble, it's YOU, because YOUR business model didn't capitalize on my ability to illegally obtain your creation. It's all your fault.
[ 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: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Please show us with all your vast wisdom where (anywhere, please, anywhere at all) there is ANYTHING that gives creators "paid fairly for their work" in copyright law.
We wait with urgent need at your feet to be shown this.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
(That is the big problem with this question. There's no way to be truly fair about whether the marketing department or the creative department or the editing department or the cover designers or the the loading dock is really the most responsible. They're a team.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
*facepalms*
Look, I know Robin Hood was a great guy and all, but the fact remains that this "rob from the rich to give to the poor" idea that copyright seems to have going for it, just makes the system worse for everyone involved except the middlemen. Wielding the "power" of $150K per infringement is beyond stupid and getting blood from a turnip sure hasn't helped in people respecting copyright law.
Just please, PLEASE... Show me a courtcase, or a method of business that involves going to court for supposed damages and is successful. Show something that says this "power" is effective. It's been 10 years of copyright litigation through DMCA. How effective has it been?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
The government could have real data in real time about those things plastered all over the internet if it really wanted too.
Many countries are in the process of digitizing the whole process with central authorities to show how much collection agencies collect and how it is being distribute, with central databases to show what is copyrighted and to whom.
Besides $150K is nothing to big companies that is like half a day expenses, to be powerful deterrent and have an equal impact on everyone no matter how much they make the deterrent should be a fraction of ones income.
Furthermore piracy by consumers is nothing like piracy from a company that is trying to extract financial value from that material that is so true that labels give their music for free to everyone see radio, TV and Studios also do the same, and public libraries exist since the dawn of man to give free books to everyone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
chillingeffects.org - Better to Switch Than Fight?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
chillingeffects.org - Better to Switch Than Fight?
Also if piracy was a real problem for anybody to make money open source would never be able to have multi million companies.
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1635849/open-source-hardware-bucks
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You should've stopped there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The so-called entertainment industry has by its own efforts CREATED the culture of the first world. It has helped to save this country from the path of productivity, inventiveness and progress.... and beneficently steered us towards a state of lazy and greedy entitlement; strong in the belief that a day of work should naturally equal a year's worth of payment, strong in the belief that we can continue renting our so-called "intellectual property" to our own citizens and the rest of the world and they will graciously comply.
And they will fill imaginary museums with all the accomplishments and ideas and artistic expressions Anonymous Cowards DIDN'T create... because they spent their time posting satirical bile on someone else's forum, without even a name.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Personally Im sick of the posts from people whining about protection of the artists. It's the MIDDLE MEN and GATEKEEPERS that are terrified of loss. The artists are just fine because the consumers actually WANT what they have to offer.
When the consumers want the content, then it can be monetized in some fashion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Mike's always wrong, even when he's just pointing out the facts reported elsewhere and the facts are undisputed.
To put it simply: the corporations need to make their money at all costs. The fact that they fail to connect with people, screw over artists and fail to adapt to market realities that didn't exist in their halcyon days is irrelevant. No new business ideas can be accepted, our business has to be run in the same way as it was in 1997.
Artists and consumers need to do away with the tired notion that they get value for money, access to content and incentives to buy. They need to focus on WACKY, ZANY concepts like needing to pay for every single use of our products, which can only be used when, where and how we dictate. Artists also need to remember we own everything they ever do, and they get paid at our discretion, if ever.
And remember, even if you're blocked from accessing content legally or we place restrictions that stop you from using your legally purchased product, downloading will result in you being sued into bankruptcy because you *might* have spent an extra $5 somewhere in a parallel universe.
(am I doing it right?)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
First off Paul, when I saw "Idiot Manifesto", I thought you were going to explain your world view. But since instead you chose to attack someone with a collection of insane logical leaps and bogus interpretations, I guess you need an answer.
" The fact that they fail to connect with people, screw over artists and fail to adapt to market realities that didn't exist in their halcyon days is irrelevant." - a failing statement at it's finest. First and foremost, the content that is more often pirated isn't Cory Smith or Amanda Marshall, it's the very content produced by "the industry". They have long since connected with the fans at the most important level, fulfilling their desire for music. No, they aren't in the hoodie or miniputt businesses, but they are doing exactly what they set out to do, provide the music that the masses want. Want more of a connection can exist in the music world?
"Artists and consumers need to do away with the tired notion that they get value for money, access to content and incentives to buy." - A tired argument, one that is once again shot down by both sales and demand. Remember, they aren't selling you a product, they are selling access to that product. You want more access? You pay for it. Buying a single airline ticket doesn't give you the right to fly on any plane forever. Yet, you can still take a song, rip it to digital, put it on your MP3 player, play it on your computer, listen to it in your car (when you get old enough to own one), and enjoy it in many other ways without paying anyone again.
" if you're blocked from accessing content legally or we place restrictions that stop you from using your legally purchased product" - please show an example of where this happens. I cannot imagine a situation where this happens, except perhaps if you want to rip a DVD and burn copies for your friends. You have the DVD, take it with you if you want to watch it somewhere else.
See, the original commentator stated Mike's position very clearly and correctly. You on the other hand used old wives tales, misdirection, and outright lies.
How does it feel to be so full of shit?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
It was sarcastic deflection, as per the original post.
"First and foremost, the content that is more often pirated isn't Cory Smith or Amanda Marshall"
So? The people complaining the most about piracy aren't them either. But they're hardly starving. Nor are most artists who don't depend on 1997 business models.
"provide the music that the masses want"
I can point out the hundreds of ways they're failing to do this, from regional restrictions to refusing to offer requested formats, but that's too complicated I suppose?
"Remember, they aren't selling you a product, they are selling access to that product."
Funnily enough, that was never a distinction until they started trying to defend their digital strategy and lack of supply for customer demand... Before iTunes, as far as anyone was concerned they were selling the music.
"Yet, you can still take a song, rip it to digital"
That's technically illegal in my home country.
"listen to it in your car (when you get old enough to own one)"
I'm 36 and have been doing so, technically illegally, since I bought my first car.
"without paying anyone again"
For now. The industry seems to be heading in a different direction.
"please show an example of where this happens"
Ubisoft example above. The fact I can't use the DVDs I imported legally from the US without a crack. The fact that I can't buy a book I want for my Kindle from the UK store but I can from the US store, or the fact I can buy a CD from Amazon but not an MP3. The fact I can pay for a lovefilm sub when I'm in the UK but am not allowed to watch the content when I'm in Spain. I can go on if you want...
"How does it feel to be so full of shit?"
Since you seem to be the one deflecting and relying on incomplete facts, you tell me?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Techdirt Manifesto
The Business model has changed and content creators do need to change with the times.
Copyright really does not seem to be working anymore as it has become totally one-sided and not really even on the side of the artists.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Riddle me piss
/Fucked
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Or how about shutting down the torrent links for a day
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Or how about shutting down the torrent links for a day
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Or how about shutting down the torrent links for a day
Did you not realize that the Pirate Bay was shut down for a while and people found alternatives?
"Then they only keep the official videos on YouTube instead of the ones that infringe on music copyrights."
Meanwhile the people that are putting up their own original content of games, remixes of music, and remixes of movies with new funny dialogue would go to Youbu...
" Then see if people really need all the extra piracy that Google facilitates"
And Google is not to blame for what people create. Good attempt at trolling. I give you a C-. It's average, but your points are too easily refuted.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Or how about shutting down the torrent links for a day
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Some of his statements are: "I believe we cannot fight new technologies", "we can go the legal way, ...but the situation is comparable to the invention of a printing press in middle ages. The people were amazed how easy it had become to copy books!", "Piracy is inevitable, no matter how much it shocks the society."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How will anyone fine any sites?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RE Fair Pay
I made "real" products, that did (do) "real" things, this is even more than any artists ever has done, so now I DEMAND real money.
/sarc
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tounge in Cheek perhaps?
I think "We'll shut down our sites when you shut down Google" would have been my first response when confronted by the US.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Tounge in Cheek perhaps?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I remember the early post-Napster days
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Americans are too lazy to fight for freedom. Their idea of freedom is free stuff.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]