One Of The Most Successful NY Startups... Is Dedicated To Infringing Activities (According To The Entertainment Industry)

from the but-of-course dept

Tue, Oct 11th 2011 11:19am — Mike Masnick

A few months back, we wrote about the bizarre situation in which advertising giant, GroupM, had put together a list of "pirate sites" on which they would not allow their advertising to appear. From what we've heard, GroupM relied heavily on its entertainment industry clients, including Warner Bros., Paramount and Summit Entertainment on the movie side, and Universal Music on the music side. Universal Music was a key player in compiling the list, which is why a bunch of hip hop blogs it wanted power over ended up on the list (along with other non-infringers like the Internet Archive, Vimeo, SoundCloud and personal websites of Universal's own artists.

As we noted in the article, one of the sites listed as a "pirate" site was the site Complex.com, which is a rapidly growing popular "lifestyle" site, focused on young men. What I didn't realize was just how big and successful the site is. Business Insider recently ranked Complex as one of the most valuable NY startups, pinning its value around $140 million. It also has two of the most respected VC firms around backing it: Accel and Austin Ventures. This is not a fly-by-night operation.

And this is a big issue. We keep hearing from supporters of PROTECT IP that people shouldn't worry about it and similar legal attempts taking down legitimate businesses, because it's only designed to go after sites that are dedicated to infringing activities. But as this shows, according to folks in the legacy entertainment world, successful new media companies, like Complex, can be harmed by falsely accusing them of being "dedicated to infringing activities," and seeking to get advertisers or payment processors blocked from the site.

This is why so many tech entrepreneurs are so worried about legal changes like PROTECT IP. We've seen how the old industry likes to accuse anyone who does anything new or interesting of merely being "pirates," and using that to harm them. Why should we then allow Congress to pass new laws that will only come back to haunt the successful new generation of startups that are growing, creating jobs and actually innovating?

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: copyright, infringement, protect ip
Companies: complex media, groupm, universal music

56 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

deane (profile), 11 Oct 2011 @ 11:30am

interesting and in before the trolls. if you create something new the RIAA/MPAA will take you down even though what they are doing amounts to libel. hope somebody like this will sue them for libel/defamation ;-)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
John Doe, 11 Oct 2011 @ 11:30am

The illusion of control
Why should we then allow Congress to pass new laws that will only come back to haunt the successful new generation of startups that are growing, creating jobs and actually innovating?

I am afraid at this point in our country's history, we the people only have the illusion of control over our government. It is no longer here to serve us, but we are here to serve it. Even worse, people are freely asking the government to take away our rights.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Ninja (profile), 11 Oct 2011 @ 11:34am
  
  Re: The illusion of control
  And we've got worrisome examples right here @ TD. Some of our most brilliant trolls (willful or not) keep saying that while Protect IP can be misused and cause collateral damage it surely won't be used like that. Despite constant evidence in the media.
  
  They say that the worst blind is the one that doesn't want to see. Talk about that with our dear TD trolls...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Dark Helmet (profile), 11 Oct 2011 @ 11:54am
  
  Re: The illusion of control
  "I am afraid at this point in our country's history, we the people only have the illusion of control over our government."
  
  If you believe you're free, there's no escape for you.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- hmm (profile), 11 Oct 2011 @ 4:36pm
  
  Re: The illusion of control
  Sadly you only have the illusion of government itself.
  
  The 'system' mostly doesn't even exist anymore and is just there to placate the general population with all the financial and military decisions being decided in corporate boardrooms before being passed out to their employees...sorry I mean congress, the senate and the President.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ninja (profile), 11 Oct 2011 @ 11:32am

Trolling and clueless posts in 3, 2, 1...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Oct 2011 @ 11:33am

The party is over Freetards! Soon all you pirates will be going to prison and will lose your internets, just like the Complex.com pirates are!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- John Doe, 11 Oct 2011 @ 11:36am
  
  Re:
  I know this post is probably meant to be funny and we have had a lot of them lately, but I just want to clarify that we are not all freetards. I actually want to pay for stuff, I am just not willing to pay the price being asked. The current prices are based on old distribution models that included manufacturing, shipping & handling, middlemen, retail space and sales people, etc. The current model has near zero distribution costs and it is time the price reflected that savings.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - WysiWyg (profile), 11 Oct 2011 @ 11:48am
    
    Re: Re:
    I would like to add that I'm actually prepared to pay even these high prices, as long as someone (OH GOD PLEASE SOMEONE!) starts offering me the products/services I want.
    
    Every time someone talks about how much money the contentindustry is loosing I always ask "what's wrong with MY money!?".
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - John Doe, 11 Oct 2011 @ 11:52am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      I agree with this as well. Give me the content and only the content, no DRM, no spyware, no malware, no rootkit and no restrictions on when/where/how I view the content.
      
      As an example, I tried to view a youtube video on my Android phone the other day. Someone posted a link to the video on Facebook. When I clicked it, it said the person who uploaded it had not approved it for viewing on mobile devices. WTH?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - chris (profile), 11 Oct 2011 @ 12:36pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I agree with this as well. Give me the content and only the content, no DRM, no spyware, no malware, no rootkit and no restrictions on when/where/how I view the content.
        
        what are you some kind of pirate?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - nasch (profile), 11 Oct 2011 @ 7:49pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        And no stupid fscking FBI piracy warnings.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 11 Oct 2011 @ 2:20pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      I just want to make clear that no service or product from those people will be ever paid from my pocket, I do not support bad actors inside society no matter how good they are at what they do.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - fogbugzd (profile), 11 Oct 2011 @ 12:25pm
    
    Re: Re:
    >>The current model has near zero distribution costs and it is time the price reflected that savings.
    
    And BREAKAGE! Let's not forget about the fragile nature of .mp3 files that break if they are dropped! Part of the standard recording industry contract still deducts the cost of breakage from the artists' share. It originated back in the day of vinyl records, but it is still charged even for downloads. Breakage was a dubious charge even in the day of vinyl records. Why on earth should breakage be deducted from the artist's share? Wouldn't it have been more reasonable to attribute breakage to the distribution costs? But the industry's goal then as well as today is to cheat the artist at every turn, so at least they are consistent.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 11 Oct 2011 @ 3:16pm
    
    Re: Re:
    I know this post is probably meant to be funny and we have had a lot of them lately, but I just want to clarify that we are not all freetards. I actually want to pay for stuff, I am just not willing to pay the price being asked. The current prices are based on old distribution models that included manufacturing, shipping & handling, middlemen, retail space and sales people, etc. The current model has near zero distribution costs and it is time the price reflected that savings.
    
    So how do you solve your moral dilemma? Do you do without or just take it?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Brendan (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 9:55am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Shotgun approach. Download lots of stuff, see what sticks (stuff you like and enjoy repeatedly), and pay to support that.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- deane (profile), 11 Oct 2011 @ 11:37am
  
  Re:
  >The party is over Freetards! Soon all you pirates will be >going to prison and will lose your internets, just like the >Complex.com pirates are!
  
  now to find a lawyer to prosecute you for libel!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Ninja (profile), 11 Oct 2011 @ 11:38am
  
  Re:
  *applauds profusely*
  
  Bravo! That was some quality trolling! I foresee your comment being hidden due to mass report from TD readers that actually fell for it.
  
  10/10
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Onnala (profile), 11 Oct 2011 @ 12:09pm
  
  Re: Only a Writer here.
  Actually I'm a writer and have found this site to be very useful in feeling out trends for creative works and good ideas for dealing with digital copies of works.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Oct 2011 @ 11:38am

If they are dedicated to infringing activities, then they have something to worry about. If they are not making their money on the backs of unpaid content creators, then they have nothing to worry about.

Oh yeah, Hi Marcus.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 11 Oct 2011 @ 11:40am
  
  Re:
  It's like you're not even trying anymore.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 11 Oct 2011 @ 12:36pm
    
    Re: Re:
    And if you took away copyright, they would stop all together.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 11 Oct 2011 @ 11:43am
  
  Re:
  NO, you idiot!
  You should NEVER, EVER mention the unpaid content creators. The freetards here might catch on that we're the ones that don't pay them and turn our argument against us.
  Didn't you get last weeks memo?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Ninja (profile), 11 Oct 2011 @ 11:44am
  
  Re:
  Marcus, for God sake, invite him/her/it out for some coffee. He/she/it seems to love you!
  
  And yes, from my understand these complex guys are as dedicated to infringing activities as Facebook is. So they should target Facebook too, makes sense. Derp....
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - blaktron (profile), 11 Oct 2011 @ 12:05pm
    
    Re: Re:
    They don't like to target or fight with companies that could destroy all of them in a temper tantrum. There are a growing number of tech industry players with personal net worths greater than the entire music industry, and a few approaching the size of the entire content industry (Zuckerberg included). So ya, Facebook/Google/Apple/MS could pretty much open a site Pirates'R'Us.com and give away everything for free from central servers, and I'm pretty sure the content industry would bite their tongues and keep going after the smaller players. They're bullies, and you can't bully people 100 times bigger than you are.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - WysiWyg (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 12:41am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Viacom vs YouTube mean anything?
      
      The truth is that you CAN bully anyone if you get the government to give you special laws that allows you to do so easy.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 11 Oct 2011 @ 12:52pm
    
    Re: Re:
    When Marcus stops being a dipwad, I will stop pointing out his stupidity. Until then, he gets it as he gives.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 11 Oct 2011 @ 1:03pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Perhaps you and OotB should get together to trade tinfoil.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 11 Oct 2011 @ 3:20pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Better if they exchange Depenz! Used of course.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 11 Oct 2011 @ 1:07pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Did you ever think that perhaps if you stop being a dipwad yourself first, Marcus will too?
      
      Show respect, get respect.
      
      Got nothing nice to say, then just stfu instead of saying something dumb.
      
      Etc.
      
      Because, apparently the only one with a thing for Marcus is yourself. And somehow, you never discuss anything he says just go on about his "performing". Leave him be. If he enjoys doing it that's his thing. I think some really major "stars" are complete and total cr*p. I ignore them and let them do their thing. Not point out their flaws to others or to them on boards. Do the same. You'll spare yourself the aneurysm that is surely headed your way.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 11 Oct 2011 @ 1:25pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Marcus shows no respect. He didn't earn it, he doesn't get it.
        
        Posting mocking comments is just his latest sad tactic. Too bad you guys fall for his bullshit and give him sympathy. He takes the whole community here down a few notches. God knows why Mike lets him post stories on here. That is some incredibly bad judgement, IMHO.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 11 Oct 2011 @ 1:48pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Your obsession really is sad.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 11 Oct 2011 @ 2:12pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I think it's adorable!
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Someantimalwareguy (profile), 11 Oct 2011 @ 11:58am
  
  Re: Hmm - two more words...
  Tortuous Interference:
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortious_interference
  
  If this site is in fact not guilty of infringement, then GroupM and others maintaining the "pirate list" are guilty of this offense and should be sued mercilessly in court...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Caliburn, 11 Oct 2011 @ 12:32pm
    
    Re: Re: Hmm - two more words...
    I've been saying that since I first read about the GroupM list. Seems like libel to me.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 11 Oct 2011 @ 12:54pm
    
    Re: Re: Hmm - two more words...
    Not at all. See the whole Spamhaus deal. The right to maintain a list is there, any group can blacklist any other group, and the public is free to follow or not as they see fit.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Bengie, 11 Oct 2011 @ 1:04pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Hmm - two more words...
      Sounds dangerously like anti-trust
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Someantimalwareguy (profile), 11 Oct 2011 @ 2:57pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Hmm - two more words...
      Not at all. See the whole Spamhaus deal. The right to maintain a list is there, any group can blacklist any other group, and the public is free to follow or not as they see fit.
      The problem with that analogy is that spamhaus isn't blacklisting other spam blocking services. To me, one advertiser/media company trying to blacklist those who do now, and in the future may be competitive to its business model merits some scrutiny - or at least a challenge of some sort in the courts.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- nasch (profile), 11 Oct 2011 @ 7:52pm
  
  Re:
  If they are dedicated to infringing activities, then they have something to worry about.
  
  Are you actually serious?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
WysiWyg (profile), 11 Oct 2011 @ 11:50am

Isn't a big point with Protect IP that they skip the whole "due process"-part? Which means that anyone, regardless of whether they actually do any infringing, can get hurt by a mere accusation?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Anonyous Coward, 11 Oct 2011 @ 3:23pm
  
  Re:
  It may take the removal of all Internet users for the **AA's to realize their mistake.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Oct 2011 @ 12:09pm

Considering how music licensing cartels can legally have rights to music that no one had legally bestowed on them, I can only assume that RIAA and similar groups would just use Protect IP as a government enforced extortion regime. Corporations do not have morals or ethics, they have no qualms about abusing power.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TOG, 11 Oct 2011 @ 12:12pm

Complex is a Mark Ecko company
Um... yeah, Complex is one of Mark Ecko's companies (at least the magazine bear's his name). It's been around for a number of years now (the magazine). I know this because it arrives in my mailbox from time to time even though I've never subscribed, don't remember ever being anywhere that would have resulted in my getting a free subscription, I've been getting it for a while, and there is nothing in this magazine that appeals to me (nor did it appeal to me when I was still in my 20s; it goes straight into the recycling).

In any event, it makes sense that companies that are scared of hip-hop blogs also would be scared of this venture. But since the magazine is largely marketing/advertising (and from the looks of it the website is too), I don't think they're hurting too badly.

Anyway, I assume a large number of readers have heard of Mark Ecko, so I just thought I'd share.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 11 Oct 2011 @ 2:24pm
  
  Re: Complex is a Mark Ecko company
  That is probably it, since the law won't have any effects on real piracy and it only can affect companies, so it probably be used to extort favours from others.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Oct 2011 @ 12:18pm

The Industry's actions, proposals, and mannerisms remind me of a spoiled, mean, mentally retarded little boy who tortures animals and still wonders why everyone hates him and is missing fingers, eyes, and skin.

Since these draconian IP laws remind me of prohibition, I have to wonder what kind and quantity of gangsters will pop up this time after Dear Leader rubber stamps PROTECT IP. More laws = more bandits after all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rikuo (profile), 11 Oct 2011 @ 12:28pm

Haven't seen out_of_the_blue here yet...must be thinking REALLY hard about how to spin this into an attack against Mike. Well, here's to hoping that he'll be thinking for a good while longer!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
bob, 11 Oct 2011 @ 12:32pm

Innovation? Get a clue Mike
I always find it hilarious to watch Mike equate piracy with innovation. Anyone can make a store more efficient by getting rid of the checkouts. Anyone can make the prices cheaper by not paying the creator. That's not innovation.

As far as I can tell, Complex is just a bunch of magazines. If they devote themselves to distributing MP3s without paying the creator, well, that's not innovation. Anyone with a web server can put up a file. Real innovation is arranging for the creator to be able to pay for health insurance.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- blaktron (profile), 11 Oct 2011 @ 12:39pm
  
  Re: Innovation? Get a clue Mike
  And you think that the obsolete loan-and-never-recoup model pays content creators? Riiiight.
  
  "As far as I can tell, Complex is just a bunch of magazines." So you haven't invested any research into this, don't know anything, still spout your ill informed opinion WHILE telling Mike to get a clue? Get a clue, Bob.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 11 Oct 2011 @ 1:26pm
    
    Re: Re: Innovation? Get a clue Mike
    Well then, what is "complex"?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - surfer (profile), 11 Oct 2011 @ 2:04pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Innovation? Get a clue Mike
      "complex" is freetard speak for an attempt to educate copytards on just how ridiculous copyright is in a digital era
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Oct 2011 @ 12:39pm

Follow the money
Complex supplied ads to a site that ICE seized last November.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Oct 2011 @ 3:13pm

As we noted in the article, one of the sites listed as a "pirate" site was the site Complex.com, which is a rapidly growing popular "lifestyle" site, focused on young men. What I didn't realize was just how big and successful the site is. Business Insider recently ranked Complex as one of the most valuable NY startups, pinning its value around $140 million. It also has two of the most respected VC firms around backing it: Accel and Austin Ventures. This is not a fly-by-night operation.

First of all, as a .com, Complex.com is not subject to the Protect IP Act. So if it were a pirate site in the eyes of law enforcement, it would be subject to forfeiture right now. But there it is, as big as life. Why FUDboy; why is it still there if it's been branded as a pirate site?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 11 Oct 2011 @ 4:09pm
  
  Re:
  and could you explian to me whay is branded as a pirate site if it wasn't taken out by your logic
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- surfer (profile), 11 Oct 2011 @ 10:39pm
  
  Re:
  um, I give,..
  
  because copyright was designed to 'promote the (anti)science and (accounting) arts(istry) for the people (in the entertainment industry)'?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 5:03am

"Why should we then allow Congress to pass new laws that will only come back to haunt the successful new generation of startups that are growing, creating jobs and actually innovating?"

But Mike, don't you see the congress doesn't want to create jobs? After all, that's why congress isn't passing Obama's jobs bill, because, *gasp*, it would create jobs, and we can't have that now can we?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rich Antoniello, 12 Oct 2011 @ 7:46am

The data needs to be updated
Complex.com and most, if not all, of the sites we represent have been taken off this list. We now have an open dialogue with UMG and are working diligently together to protect everyone's rights and reputations.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]