Norway The Latest Country To Look At Censorship As A 'Solution' To Entertainment Industry's Failed Business Models
from the so-sad dept
Almost exactly two years ago, I spent a nice week in Norway for Nordic Music Week, where I was able to spend a lot of time talking with musicians and music industry folks from various Nordic countries, including Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark and Iceland. One thing, that I found encouraging about many that I spoke to in Norway, was how eager and willing they were to embrace new opportunities. I wrote about how refreshing this was at the time. There were lots of success stories coming about and a general optimism for new technologies, without much worry about things like "copyright" infringement.So it's a bit disappointing to see that legacy industry lobbyists (with the help of US diplomats, of course) appear to have had their way with Norwegian politicians and convinced them to propose an extreme and dangerous reform, that would both order ISPs to censor websites, "where material is being made available to a great extent, evidently infringing copyright or other rights in accordance to this Act" and also slash away at current data protection rules that require careful handling of personal info. Under this law, any info related to accusations of copyright infringement would no longer need to comply with Norway's Data Protection Act, which makes sure that information is handled properly.
This is all very unfortunate, if not surprising. We're seeing similar efforts in other countries as well. To the industry players, they seem to not care at all what rights they trample, just so long as they think it makes copyright "stronger."
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: censorship, norway, privacy, protect ip
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oh Mike, how can you write this will a straight face?
You don't think that the content creators don't have boot prints all over their backs from the pirates ignoring their rights, and walking all over them?
The only way you could be against this law would be if you think piracy is good, and should not be treated as the crime it is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Lets be friends!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Yeah, Mike. It's not like gray areas or nuance exist in this black and white world. What the hell? You're either with us, or you're against us, all of nothing, yo!
Seriously? We STILL have to deal with this nonsense? This is the same crap as "If you're against the war, you hate the troops and likely rape pigeons". It's stupid. Your argument went out of style after the Vietnam War, dummy...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Somehow, he believes he can preach morality to people while the high prices of marketed goods means people will vote with their wallets a lot more.
He might actually have a point somewhere but it's lost on his manifesto of anti-piracy. So SHHHH! Don't give him ideas on how he can have a better debate than that tired drivel he wrote already!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Have you ever considered that the biggest blockage to much lower prices for content is the number of people who just take it for free?
Have you ever considered that there is a point where the black market wipes out the normal market, and in the end takes both of them out as a result?
Mike claims piracy is bad and illegal, and then moans every time a country tries to put a law in place to stop the rampant piracy going on. Laws like this exist because people insist on playing the old whack-a-mole game of hiding their pirate site offshore, in rare friendly jurisdictions, and playing the "speed of the net versus real life" to profit.
Ask the people who ran Ninja video... 500k for a couple of years work is pretty good money when you have almost no expenses!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
They don't need it, every other profession inside society don't have those "protections" and they still manage to make a living, but somehow you thing a small group of people is entitled to extraordinary rights that if applied to any other field would just be crazy.
No artists have no rights to try and collect money on the public space that is not and never was their right, the public space is for everyone not just a few.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
If you want free music, create it yourself. If you create it, you can determine how it is marketed, how it is distributed and how it is licensed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Always there are resources used.
Hard-drives cost money, thus the disk space costs.
electricity to run the computer costs money, thus copying has costs,
bandwidth costs money, thus distribution costs.
The thing is, the relative cost is next to nothing--but most certainly it is not free.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Proof of that is that no top 100 singer, band, movie earned last in the last decade they all earned much more and somehow all movies from the 70's before the internet to this day none of them turned a profit at least not in the books, so one cannot trust liars.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
They don't need it, every other profession inside society don't have those "protections" and they still manage to make a living, but somehow you thing a small group of people is entitled to extraordinary rights that if applied to any other field would just be crazy.
No artists have no rights to try and collect money on the public space that is not and never was their right, the public space is for everyone not just a few.
How many people do you think would go to Ruth's Chris for dinner tonight and shell out a couple of hundred bucks if they could download that steak to their desk for free and eat it there? Your extra chromosome is showing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
If I could download exactly the same food for free, it still wouldn't replace going to the restaurant. It only replaces the food, not the experience, and if the food were the only thing I was after I would never eat there right now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
If you could download the food for free, other people would set up "fake Ruth Chris" places, and attempt to give you nearly the same experience for a lot less money.
Some people would choose never to go out to eat, they would just eat the downloaded food.
There would likely be less people working in the lower end restaurant business, and their lack of income would hurt the whole economy, limiting the number of people who could spend the $100 to go out.
You cannot drop the stone in the water without ripples.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Or are you suggesting that the ripple effect only works in the downturn?
[ 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:
What Ruth's Chris charges for is the experience. If someone else were to be able to magically copy their food for free, it wouldn't touch them because the thing they're really selling cannot be duplicated that way. You have to actually build a plush dining space, hire good staff, etc. The cost would end up being insignificantly less than what Ruth's Chris has to pay.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Jesus, what a horrible freetard you truly are.
When ProtectIP passes you are soo going to pay.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Have musicians not made millions in contracts?
Piracy doesn't decimate the market is the very thing that keep it alive, it is the very thing that forms it, but that is irrelevant, when people start talking censorship for whatever reason it is time to take a good look at things and start seeing the dangers of such acts, it affects the foundation of all free and democratic institutions everywhere.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yes, some have, but some musicial acts do not tour, and studio musicians never tour.
Again, some have, but many contracts are performance based, paying the performer a portion of the profits from the sale of the music. When you steal music you are reducing the potential profit from that music.
Just because a copyright holder doesn't offer a record at what you consider a resonable price (free) does not give you the right to take it. Just like I do not have the right to go into Best Buy and say I refuse to pay $2000 for a 55" 3D television and instead just walk out the door with it.
Justifying your actions by claiming that it creates good will or promotes the music does not negate the damage done. By illegally downloading music you have taken something (the performance) to which you were not granted permission.
I'm all for copyright holders offering their music for free, but if they chose to charge a price, you must respect that. It is their right as copyright holder and it is their decision.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Can you provide proof of harm, yet? No one has yet provided solid evidence of harm.
[ 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:
How? can you show that it creates less demand for the music? because somehow I doubt you can prove harm, if that was true why payola keeps happening where labels pay radios to give their music for free on the airwaves?
It gives me all the right to steal that music from him.
You don't need to like, I'm doing it anyway and there is nothing you or anyone can do about it.
You see sound is not a 55" physical object, it is soundwaves and nobody have the right to own soundwaves.
No, trying to justify your actions based on something ridiculous like trying to own the water in the oceans is what is really offensive and immoral.
I'm all for artists to get paid, but not by some imaginary property that they have no real rights to it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Have musicians not made millions in contracts?
Piracy doesn't decimate the market is the very thing that keep it alive, it is the very thing that forms it, but that is irrelevant, when people start talking censorship for whatever reason it is time to take a good look at things and start seeing the dangers of such acts, it affects the foundation of all free and democratic institutions everywhere.
Got a movie example for me?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Did recently not have been a zombie movie made under $45 bucks that was a success and even got picked up by a studio recently?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1183689/British-zombie-movie-cost-just-45- make-set-surprise-hit-Cannes.html
It was so well receive on Facebook that it got to Cannes.
There is also.
http://www.snowblind-film.com
Blender is alive because of piracy, actually it is because of it that it is thriving and they did not once but 3 times already and will make a fourth short again.
http://www.bigbuckbunny.org
http://orange.blender.org/
http://www.sintel.org/
The Passenger.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGW0aQSgyxQ
But maybe the most notable will be the guy who made District 9, he apparently got the job after he released his demos on Youtube and every pirate put his name on the clips, free advertisement is just good isn't it?
Tetra Vaal
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1zGLx6H3f4
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neill_Blomkamp
Pir acy also enabled Red vs. Blue, The Guild, Annoying Orange, Ray William Johnson and a tone of others to become something.
Now you are saying that piracy is not good?
Piracy is everything, you just didn't realize it yet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
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:
I AM DISAPPOINTED, SIR!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Obviously the black market isn't going anywhere. the normal market appears to be doing quite well also - so when is this economic armageddon suppose to be taking place? It doesn't appear to have even started, yet.
"Laws like this exist because people insist on playing the old whack-a-mole game of hiding their pirate site offshore,..."
LMFTFY: Laws like this exist because people insist on playing the old whack-a-mole game of trying to stop piracy that so richly serves the markets they ignore.
Serve your market well and turn a reasonable profit and piracy will be such a non-issue that it would be easy to ignore. Accept the fact that digital content will not be paid for to some small degree regardless of any and all efforts. Sorry, you'll just never stop the neighbor kid from burning a copy of something or emailing a file they want to share with their friends at school.
"Ask the people who ran Ninja video... 500k for a couple of years work is pretty good money when you have almost no expenses!"
You would think the content folks would realize this by now - wouldn't you?
I mean if three people can do this on a thin dime and make half a million - you would have to think the movie and music industry could serve the same market at the same prices rather easily. After all, they actually have the digital and physical copies of the digital content in their hands - do they not?
Serve the market properly at reasonable prices and the industry can spend their time counting money.
-Or-
Spend vast sums of money on legal teams and lobbyists who can get laws passed that supposedly serve their interests but doesn't turn into a single dollars worth of profit and does absolutely nothing to stop piracy but, may very well cause it to increase.
One of those options seems rather foolish...just saying!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Not too tough when your cost to produce a motion picture is zero.
[ 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:
You obviously know nothing about movie budgeting. Equipment rental, prop rental, set construction, film stock, camera rental, lodging, actors, crew, drivers, director, producers, vehicle rental, location fees, hotels, caterers, special effects, stunts, post production, insurance, completion bond, etc. You don't have to blow hundreds of millions but I've yet to see much of anything worth watching that didn't cost at least a million. Are there exceptions? Sure. Blair Witch cost $40,000. Now many hundreds of thousands were spent in post production to make it watchable but it was done on the cheap. The first Paranormal Activities was under a million, the second was over seven. You are pretty much talking out your ass.
[ 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: Re: Re: Re: Re:
True, none of them were in theaters or on DVD, but that's irrelevant. Also irrelevant is my ignorance of movie budgeting factors (which I admit fully to) -- I'm just going by the end result.
You can say I'm talking out of my ass, but yet -- these movies exist nonetheless.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What's the Studio's cost to produce a motion picture? If it's more than zero or they aren't getting PAID to produce it, I would be surprised
How many production companies PAY the movie studios for the movies they produce for them (marketing, licensing management, legal fees, contracting rights, blah, blah, blah). What basically ends up happening is the production company pays the studio $50 million or so to 'promote, market, and distribute' the movie, the production company then turns around and tells the actors, sorry, we owe $60 million on this film, you're not going to get any royalties until all the debts are paid off (which almost never happens).
Meanwhile, little Johnny (the production companies, brother's nephew, who just happens to be the grand son of one of the studio board members), gets a check for $5 million dollars to market the movie.... which means he needs to tell all his high school friends about how great it's going to be....
No I'm not cynical much, why do you ask?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Let us know how that goes compared to say, the 'War on Drugs' or the 'War on Terror'.
In the UK, we had our own 'War on Terror'. In the end, the government wised up, recognised the Republican Irish opposition (conditionally) and engaged them legally. Now, a (possible) ex-terrorist (spokesman) can not only be Northern Ireland's Vice First Minister (or whatever), he can run for Republic of Ireland's presidency.
Now, if only the MAFIAA could learn the power of engagement, instead of wheeling out ever-bigger and more inaccurate 'guns'...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[citation needed]
Be aware, the countries that adapted to it by putting more legal alternatives, defeated piracy and made money.
"Have you ever considered that there is a point where the black market wipes out the normal market, and in the end takes both of them out as a result?"
So in your world, there's only the black market and legal market... Interesting... And judging from the fact that software continues to be made, sold, and used all over, I don't think you know what you're talking about in regards to current markets.
"Mike claims piracy is bad and illegal, and then moans every time a country tries to put a law in place to stop the rampant piracy going on."
Wow, putting words in other's mouths. Also, I didn't put words in your mouth. I was mocking your viewpoint because your drivel was outdated and tired.
"Laws like this exist because people insist on playing the old whack-a-mole game of hiding their pirate site offshore, in rare friendly jurisdictions, and playing the "speed of the net versus real life" to profit."
*facepalm*
When you have a better argument than believing everyone is a criminal let me know.
"Ask the people who ran Ninja video... 500k for a couple of years work is pretty good money when you have almost no expenses"
Wow, you know what the expenses are. Care to run them down in a detailed list that no one has seen?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[citation needed]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Piracy is industry's own damn fault
Pegoraro compares the different stats in the report and notes that there's a very clear indication that when legal alternatives are available, the amount of unauthorized file sharing drops considerably. So if the MPAA's goal is to reduce file sharing, then the answer is to start offering legitimate services. Pegoraro even asked the director of the study about this, and the guy agreed:
Michael D Smith - Legal alternatives taken away, people turn to piracy
Fox delays availability, piracy increases
Point stands: Give people legal alternatives, piracy decreases. Take them away piracy increases as people find other services to cater to their needs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
This! It is the exact point that quite a few of the ACs and people in the industries seem to not be able to comprehend. Instead of just wasting time and effort fighting a problem that will never go away, they'd be better off using those same resources to combat piracy in the best way possible, by giving people a better alternative to it. Ala iTunes and Netflix and Hulu, the latter two of which are now most unfortunately being slowly killed off due to greed/control issues, thus only further alienating customers and pushing them towards less than legitimate alternatives.
Piracy presents people with what they want. Quality products with no restrictions on them and their use. If some would just look at that simple fact then they could turn a profit by doing the same thing but in a legal capacity.
And I'm not justifying piracy. Or saying people have a right to do as they please. But if they want something and you refuse to cater to what they want then they'll get it elsewhere if they can. It's not hard to figure out. So rather than let them do that, listen to them, see what they want, provide it to them, earn yourself a buck. Rather than earning nothing by standing around b*tching about the problem.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
A place like Brazil has less access to digital services. Europe is getting better but movies still don't cater to them with less options like Netflix. So please, if you're going to retort, I'm interested in seeing something in regards to the foreign markets, not just domestic.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I'm sure he'd rather put a boot up your ass. I know I would.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I might find a way to reach across computer screens and slap ACs with bad logic.
Then I'll patent it and sue them...
I'll be rich, I tell you... RICH!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I might find a way to reach across computer screens and slap ACs with bad logic.
Then I'll patent it and sue them...
I'll be rich, I tell you... RICH!
Please vajayjay, you won't do shit. That AC would slap your stupid face, take your lunch money and stuff you in a (cyber?)locker... just like the old days.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Look, he even has a semi-witty comeback all prepared. Did Daddy prepare that for you along with the sandwich for school? Now run along now and learn to play nice while the grownups are talking.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
...and yet one of the major incentives for piracy is the high prices. Interesting, don't you think?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I can't say I've ever considered that happening. Possibly because there's absolutely no evidence that that is happening, or in fact has ever happened before.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I've been thinking that one of the regular Anonymous Coward's around lately should be called "Darth AC":
"Only a Sith deals in absolutes."
"If you are not with me, then you're my enemy."
"I do not fear the dark side as you do. I have brought peace, freedom, justice, and security to my new Empire!"
"So this is how liberty dies, with thunderous applause."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers.
Ummm, do you have like, a blow-up doll of her or something.
[ 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: 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:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Caricatures of likenesses that may even relate to themes might be interesting for each 'Insider' to 'Create' (damn, I hope I am not violating any IP rights by suggesting a creation) might actually have some physical value.
Fans could adore them.
Lurkers could learn from them.
Weanies could lean one way or the other because they like the likeness.
Trolls could defile them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Hahahahahaha.... well played Zachary. You have totally bested me there. You get a +1 funny from me. If (and when) I recover from this wound, I'll be back to the fray.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJ5q0sZgcx8
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS SHIT
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
but I merely opine.
J.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The thing that sickens me the most is that most major-label, small time artists are convinced pirates are the reason they're not making any money. Here's a tip for ya' THE LABELS ARE RIPPING YOU OF.
In this day and age, YT and social media is the way to get your song out - F the labels.
Second, I'm Norwegian - I'm 100% against internet censorship (please don't mistake that for being pro CP).
This situation right here not only angers me, but it scares the S*IT out of me; not long ago Norway passed it's data retention bill (which will come into effect sometime next year). Although there were some that protested the bill, it didn't get nearly as much attention as deserved.
Given that this may seem like a smaller intrusion in to peoples privacy (it isn't, but still) I wouldn't be surprised if it passed...
Now, I am not against artist / movie makers getting paid. I buy the music I like (records, not CD's) and I am a longtime subscriber of the awesome Spotify service. I go to the movies now and again, and I buy BD's. I also download a shitload of movies and TV shows (HD - 4TB worth ATM). Why? Not because i don't endorse their product - but because it's accessible!
Realize, Norway isn't exactly at the top of the list when releasing new songs/albums/movies. Why would I stall enjoying media I've been seeing commercials on, online for months, when I can enjoy it now? In a nutshell; Norway months - Online, almost instantly. Accessibility!
What I would really like to see is an indie label/studio making available online (free / subscription based) making their media available online. No country bans/blocks, no IP filters - easy access for all! Market that through the social media, and I am sure of, in the words of Borat, "GREAT SUCCESS"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Sk�l!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I wish I could laugh at this statement, but it seems to be more true every day...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rather than try to defend these models by pumping large volumes of cash into apprehending pirates, do as people suggest - give consumers large scale, readily available access in the formats they want, for a reasonable price, and they will be far less likely to turn to illegal means to get access to their media.
Piracy will likely never go away, but it is hardly stripping the media moguls of the dollars they claim it is. Saying person X robbed me of dollar value Y because they viewed/listened to my media for free is false. If they couldn't get it for free they could just as likely have chosen not to waste their time or money on it. Give it to them for a reasonable price in a format they want with access means they want, for a reasonable price, and you might just come up with a workable business model.
Take a look at iTunes - you think they don't make money because of piracy? Gimme a break.....
The other scary issue at hand here is the fact that media companies are in effect setting laws into place. Although it can be easily argued that piracy is not freedom of speech, it is only a hop skip and a jump away from saying any other content media moguls (or any other company with enough money to bend law enforcements ears) find offensive all of a sudden becomes "illegal".
1984 is here and Big Brother IS watching - mind your P's and Q's....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Would you
Would you PLEASE just say "I think piracy is good", then the ACs will basically masturbate themselves to death, then we don't have to hear from them again!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Would you
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
QQ about online piracy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]