Jon Stewart Now Knows About SOPA/PIPA... And He's Not Impressed

from the hello-fair-use dept

Thu, Jan 19th 2012 4:23am — Mike Masnick

Remember how, based on an audience question, Jon Stewart promised to study up on SOPA/PIPA for a future show. Looks like that happened. And, apparently, he did his homework before Wednesday, so he could actually use Wikipedia. In last night's show, Stewart used yesterday's blackouts and protests as a jumping off point to discuss the bill. There were two main points: (1) Congress is trying to pass laws about an internet they don't understand at all, and (2) fair use is incredibly important, and anything that potentially damages fair use is dangerous to culture. For the first point, he played some clips of Rep. Mel Watt proudly displaying his ignorance of technology -- and then points out that Watt is the ranking member on the IP sub-committee. He also mocks the calls during the markup from various Congressional Reps. to have a hearing with "the nerds" by reminding them that it's not "nerds" they're looking for... it's experts. Something in short supply in Congress. For the second point, he ably uses a ton of short clips, fair use style, to demonstrate how important fair use is to a show like his... while mocking Viacom and its own lawyers for trying to limit fair use. Good stuff all around. And yes, for those people who live in foreign countries that don't have a deal with Viacom, I apologize that you can't see the video below. It's just one more example of how Viacom encourages infringement by not giving people what they want.

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: blackouts, copyright, fair use, jon stewart, mel watt, pipa, protect ip, protests, sopa, the daily show
Companies: viacom

77 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 19 Jan 2012 @ 4:28am

One can only hope Bill Maher gets his thumb out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Todd (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 4:54am

A matter of priorities
I find it ironic (and also quite sad) that a comedian can figure out the core issue within two days and that congress has been working on this for two years and still hasn't gotten the point.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 4:58am
  
  Re: A matter of priorities
  "I find it ironic"
  
  Irony or corruption?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:12am
    
    Re: Re: A matter of priorities
    exactly!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Samuel Abram (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:41am
    
    Re: Re: A matter of priorities
    "I find it ironic"
    
    Irony or corruption?
    
    I'd say "Irony".
    
    After all, Both Jon Stewart and the congresscritters in favor of SOPA are paid by Viacom.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Jan 2012 @ 5:01am
  
  Re: A matter of priorities
  I think you greatly underestimate the power of comedy, and the skills of a satirist. Stewart's career rests on his ability to cut to the core of a topic and expose absurdities.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Todd (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:40am
    
    Re: Re: A matter of priorities
    I would say it's less of an issue of underestimating Jon Stewart's skills and more a question of why is that not what our legislator's careers rest on too?.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:46am
      
      Re: Re: Re: A matter of priorities
      Politicians rely on a demonstrably different set of skills -- that of obfuscating the key points and positioning themselves to look as they're on "your" side, whoever you happen to be. This is what happens when you have career politicians.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Loki, 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:50am
    
    Re: Re: A matter of priorities
    The same can be said for the likes of George Carlin and Lewis Black, just to name two.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 19 Jan 2012 @ 7:50am
      
      Re: Re: Re: A matter of priorities
      Very much so. Some of the best minds in history were satirists.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 19 Jan 2012 @ 9:13am
    
    Re: Re: A matter of priorities
    Not all comedians are made equal, there is another one in congress right now that is in favor and probably has his name still as a co-sponsor of PIPA in the Senate.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - jupiterkansas (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 11:57am
    
    Re: Re: A matter of priorities
    And it's sad that he can continue to do this daily for years on end.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Gabriel Tane (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 5:55am
  
  Re: A matter of priorities
  That would be because a comedian can look at the situation and make his observations... Congress has spent this time tying to analize it and find further interpretations of the situation to justify thier working on the behalf of big business instead of the people they're supposed to work for... you know, us
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:14am
    
    Re: Re: A matter of priorities
    Soooo you're saying essentially, they're working for corporate people, not people people? That would explain a lot...
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Marcel de Jong (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:39am
      
      Re: Re: Re: A matter of priorities
      Hey now, corporations are people too!
      
      After all, they pay the same taxe... no, that's not it...
      They breathe the same oxy... no, that's not it either.
      They have the same righ... no, wrong again.
      Damnit, why are corporations people again?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Loki, 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:53am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: A matter of priorities
        That totally made me think of this
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:33am
    
    Re: Re: A matter of priorities
    Congress has spent this time tying to analize it
    
    I thought the word was spelt "analyze" unless of course it was a completely different word that you were intending....
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Richard (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:35am
      
      Re: Re: Re: A matter of priorities
      Last comment was mine - missed that I wasn't logged in.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Gabriel Tane (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:04pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: A matter of priorities
      Oh, I missed the hyphen...
      
      Anal-iaze.
      
      Thanks for catching that ;)
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- demented, 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:14am
  
  Re: A matter of priorities
  Well, you have to have a certain amount of brains and understanding of the masses to be a successful comedian. Neither is required to be a politician.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Hephaestus (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:58am
    
    Re: Re: A matter of priorities
    What if you are both like Al Franken
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - ltlw0lf (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 2:37pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: A matter of priorities
      What if you are both like Al Franken
      
      Haven't seen him in a long time. I believe he gave up on comedy (and his brain) when he was elected.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Non-sense, 19 Jan 2012 @ 7:21am
  
  Re: A matter of priorities
  It's really a matter of common sense. Something which is severely lacking in our government for quite some time now...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 19 Jan 2012 @ 3:02pm
  
  Re: A matter of priorities
  Todd:
  
  I find it ironic (and also quite sad) that a comedian can figure out the core issue within two days and that congress has been working on this for two years and still hasn't gotten the point.
  
  Ironic, maybe, but hardly surprising. Jon and all the rest of the Daily Show team�s writers, researchers and presenters are content creators, not content publishers. Copyright was never about favouring the content creators, but about monopolies to prop up the content publishers. Artists readily see why �strengthening� copyright can only hurt them and put barriers between them and their audience. The publishers, collection agencies, and other such middlemen, on the other hand, figure the more such barriers, the better, because it makes their own gatekeeper roles more important, and to hell with the actual interests of the content creators.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Samuel Abram (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 3:59pm
    
    Your got your facts wrong re: copyright.
    Just because copyright has been gradually becoming more and more maximalist doesn't mean it was always that way. At the start of our republic, copyright had a maximum term of 28 years for two terms, 14 years a term. And since it was opt-in, 95% of authors chose not to copyright their material. And all copyright meant was no other publisher could publish anything copyrighted (which was limited to books, sheet music and maps). That's it. You were allowed to copy it by hand and make derivative plays based on a copyrighted book. It was still a monopoly, but a much more limited monopoly than we have now.
    
    And if you want to know WHY we (as in the US) have copyright, just read the US constitution, Article 1, Section 8:
    
    The Congress shall have Power...To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
    
    [Ed: Bold Mine]
    
    Notice what it does not say. It does not say "publishers and merchants". It says "authors and inventors", as in the actual people who have done the work as opposed to the people who make their work public or fund their work. Also, it says "limited times", something this court has chosen to forget too many times.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 20 Jan 2012 @ 6:51pm
      
      Re: You got your facts wrong re: copyright.
      You seem to think the US invented copyright. It didn�t. It copied (sic) the concept from Europe.
      
      Here, go read up on the concept, then come back and tell me it was all about �promoting the progress�.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
kleuske (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 5:04am

Nerds? Experts!
He sure put them right on the "nerd" thing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- MAJikMARCer (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 5:57am
  
  Re: Nerds? Experts!
  I am a geek sir! And I expect you to address me as such!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - ltlw0lf (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 2:41pm
    
    Re: Re: Nerds? Experts!
    I am a geek sir! And I expect you to address me as such!
    
    How do chicken heads taste?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 19 Jan 2012 @ 3:04pm
    
    Re: Nerds? Experts!
    Q: What�s the difference between a geek and a nerd?
    
    A: A geek can get a date.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Philip (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:15am
  
  Re: Nerds? Experts!
  I was disappointed ... I expected to hear "Geeks!" But no, he called us "experts." :(
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - kleuske (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 8:13am
    
    Re: Re: Nerds? Experts!
    I don't mind if a fellow nerd calls me a nerd, i take it as a compliment. It's something else when these overgrown jockstraps start calling us nerds and/or geeks. I think Steward danced around that effect quite elegantly.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- el_segfaulto (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 8:06am
  
  Re: Nerds? Experts!
  As an 'expert' I almost always expect to be called a geek wherever I go.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Graham J (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 5:04am

"This content is not available at your location"

Irony! Thanks Big Media, for making the consumption of culture as difficult as possible.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Jan 2012 @ 5:12am
  
  Re:
  "This content is not available at your location"
  
  On the internet, Ha.
  
  Sure its not available. :D
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - inconsistency (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 9:52pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Don't tell me you're going to circumvent their perfectly reasonable determination that you can't watch their show? :-)
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Planespotter (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:31am
  
  Re:
  Here... have a look at this copyright infringing video clip that is posted on Youtube.
  
  http://youtu.be/SDqJTUpH6pI
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:49am
    
    Re: Re:
    I'm pretty sure that falls under fair use, and thus isn't infringing.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Planespotter (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 7:14am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Maybe we think it is and maybe Viacom think it isn't...
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 19 Jan 2012 @ 7:52am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        It either is or it isn't, and the fact that we need a court to determine it for us is indicative of how broken the system is.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Violated (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 9:07am
    
    Re: Re:
    Now that was inspiring and the best TV coverage too date. A very funny guy but too bad this was done in the name of comedy and not major politics.
    
    We can at least much thank him for taking the time to respond.
    
    I think we can make a good fair use case on that clip.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Martijn, 19 Jan 2012 @ 4:44pm
  
  Re:
  "And yes, for those people who live in foreign countries that don't have a deal with Viacom, I apologize that you can't see the video below. It's just one more example of how Viacom encourages infringement by not giving people what they want."
  
  I live in the Netherlands.
  
  I can actually see the video posted here, but indeed, when american, canadian or even british networks put videos on their own sites, I'm often not able to watch them because the content is blocked based on my location. Because they don't have the necessary rights to broadcast it in my country.
  
  What.. The.. Fuck..?!
  YOU made the content, YOU published the content. Who else has the rights to broadcast it over the internet to other countries but YOU?
  
  The same goes for sites like HULU. They claim they're not allowed to show ANY clips in the country I live in, and they're working on getting the rights to do so. Why don't the companies who host their material with HULU tell HULU they are allowed to broadcast it wherever the hell they want? It's not like they get any less revenues on advertising when I watch it, compared to a US citizen watching it? Google managed to make this work by showing me Dutch advertising based on my global position/IP?
  
  And I doubt very much that Dutch TV networks or the Dutch government would have any basis for sueing them for broadcasting their own material on Dutch soil over the internet, rather than selling it to the Dutch networks to show on Dutch TV. After all, the US networks can do whatever the hell they want with their own shows?
  
  When foreign networks will no longer sell their shows but instead show them on the internet for ad money, I'd say that would be an incentive for Dutch networks to start making good shows of their own for once, rather than relying on foreign material. That would be great for a change, actual quality TV. Imagine that!
  
  Anyways, all of the above is exactly why I have to resort to piracy. Yes, I download TV shows, because I have no way of watching them legally in this country, unless I wait for the DVD's to get released in stores, which often takes years over here. Please make it inconvenient to consume your product, and thanks for making me a criminal!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ninja (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 5:18am

Upload the thing to DailyMotion, Vimeo or whatever is more people-friendly and not MAFIAA-friendly. Any of our friendly TD contributors (via comments) can do that? Pretty please? *big round wet eyes*
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- wigelst (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 5:46am
  
  Re:
  Comedy Central doesn't region restrict it's shows. You can just go and watch the whole episode on their site.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Paul Hobbs (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:06am
    
    Re: Re:
    Alas, it does. I am in Australia, and when I tried to watch the video on the CC site (http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/wed-january-18-2012-joe-nocera), I got the message:
    
    Sorry, this video is unavailable from your location.
    
    That's such bullshit. They're not sorry at all. I bet they don't give a rats arse.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - TN (the melburnian), 19 Jan 2012 @ 7:59pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Damn... I read wigelst's comment and I thought 'great!', then I saw your comment underneath and I was all 'pfft.. forgettaboutit!'.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Marcel de Jong (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:43am
    
    Re: Re:
    They region restrict it to the regions they air their programming to. For instance, in NL they have a Comedy Central station, so I have access to some of their programming.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Planespotter (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:47am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      http://youtu.be/SDqJTUpH6pI
      
      *WARNING*
      The Above Link Points To A Copyright Infringing Clip Of The Daily Show.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jan 2012 @ 5:27am

I was all set to click play until you mentioned Viacom. They are subject to a personal boycott. :shrug:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Planespotter (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:32am
  
  Re:
  How about some infringing video on youtube then?
  
  http://youtu.be/SDqJTUpH6pI
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
FU Viacom, 19 Jan 2012 @ 5:49am

Get ass cancer
I wish ass cancer to all the SOPA and PIPA supporters out there, and give a big FU to Viacom for not allowing me to watch this in Australia.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Jan 2012 @ 2:15pm
  
  Re: Get ass cancer
  Know what they need? The most comfortable asses in the world.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jan 2012 @ 5:50am

As a Network Admin, I was pretty pissed off to hear them say "I'm not a nerd."

The demeaning tone just epitomizes how little respect they have for what they were pushing/being pushed to pass.

damn them to hell.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- demented, 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:17am
  
  Re:
  Well, they're old, fusty and trying to appeal to other fusty old people. Those people think of anyone knowledgeable of computers as a "nerd," rather than a contributing member of society.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 22 Jan 2012 @ 3:48pm
  
  Re:
  Then you kinda missed the point. The ones calling for the nerds were the ones OPPOSED to SOPA, calling to get the nerds that actually actually understand all this stuff. Considering many in the tech and online communities are not at all opposed to labeling themselves geeks, that's obviously the tone they were trying to use... Get in the people that are enthusiastic and knowledgeable about the internet and actually know what this would do.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jordi H., 19 Jan 2012 @ 5:51am

I feel bad for laughing.
I saw this last night, and I feel really, really awful for laughing.

At the same time, my mom asked, and I quote, "Did they actually say that?"

My response: "Yes. Yes, they did."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
FU Comedy Central, 19 Jan 2012 @ 5:51am

FU
Actually Comedy Central does region restrict. Can't watch it there either. I guess they get wished ass cancer too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jan 2012 @ 5:57am

Sorry John, it's a day late and a dollar short. You promised that the Internet would be the guest on the next show and then waited a week to do anything. My faith in you is gone.

That being said the whole skit was well done and spot on. Thanks John!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Marcel de Jong (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:51am
  
  Re:
  I am disappoint. You keep misspelling Jon Stewart's first name. While it's right there in the title of the program: "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart".
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:01am

Hmm. Everyone contact their congressperson and ask that we get some folks on this committee who either understand "this stuff" or at least will not support crafting legislation without hearing from people who do understand "this stuff"??

I just did.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
gorehound (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:10am

Check out my group on Facebook "Boycott Big Content".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mike, 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:14am

Viacom
I once put a 4 min clip of The Daily Show on Youtube and had it yanked, Viacom blah blah. What I find ironic is the fact that the 4 min clip was Elmo with a mustache and turban (Gitmo). I just found it so funny that I wanted to share it with others that will never see it...ever.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Major Patent, 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:29am
  
  Re: Viacom
  eeek, Don't speak ill of the job creators! The can have you whisked away to club gitmo... for indefinite days and ? nights you'll enjoy the tranquility of solitary confinement while you indulge your taste buds with expired MRE rations and all the water you can breathe. It's all inclusive, and it can be yours IF you do what's right.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:30am

Did anyone else find the Comedy Central logo looks a hell of a lot like a copyright symbol?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Samuel Abram (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:47am
  
  Re:
  I know what you mean. I find it quite disturbing too. Then again, if it looks like the copyright symbol, it saves Comedy Central on trying to remind people that you're a horrible thief equivalent to someone who mugs old ladies with those unskippable DVD/Blu-Ray FBI Warnings by just having their logo look like a copyright symbol. So all the work is done for them.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jan 2012 @ 6:56am

(o^.^)o Joy. Sopa and PIPA what a farce.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
James Litwin (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 7:08am

This video is unavailable from your location.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jan 2012 @ 7:10am

"proudly displaying his ignorance of technology"

I'm ignorant and I'm proud of it!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Loki, 19 Jan 2012 @ 7:13am

"Wait, no no no no no, even as a joke we don't have John Lennon copyright money. By the way if you post this on Youtube, you will be hunted down and suedddd. And there's nothing I can about it. It makes no sense."

Pretty much sums up the absurdity of the situation right there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
EF, 19 Jan 2012 @ 7:48am

Thanks Mike
Mike,
Thanks for this clip and others from the Daily Show. You know, I haven't given much attention to The Daily Show before: to me, it wasn't real news but news satire. Now, I like it for that very reason! you've created a fan in me of Stewart and the Daily Show. I've been to his site several times now and I've set up the DVR so I can watch his shows and I share Daily Show clips with my own online community. Sharing and linking promotes and drives traffic. SOPA/PIPA, DMCA, ProIP, ACTA,...would end this today if they could. YOU get it. Btw, I share a lot of your material with friends and credit you and techdirt at every opportunity. Thanks for what you do!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Micheal Garabaldi, 19 Jan 2012 @ 8:29am

foreign countries... can't see the video below
Firefox has a plugin, modify headers, that solves this issue
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 19 Jan 2012 @ 3:06pm
  
  Re: foreign countries... can't see the video below
  How can a plug-in solve the issue? Don�t they check your IP address?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
David, 19 Jan 2012 @ 8:52am

If anyone is looking for a free, simple way to get around the region lock, try FlyVPN. Easy, free, simple.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- btrussell (profile), 19 Jan 2012 @ 11:37am
  
  Re:
  I figured out quite a while ago that they didn't want me watching, so I cancelled my cable.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
robin, 19 Jan 2012 @ 11:23pm

piracy
Couldn't agree more with what Martijn stated above. Hoi kerel ;) Me myself also living in the Netherlands think the media companies, whom provide excellent content (from time to time) can't be bothered with trying to find some obscure copy of something i'd like to see. The problems, in my opinion, with the movie companies, for why this many people resort to piracy, are two things. The main being availability. The key for any business, whether film, tv, newspaper, etc., is reaching customers. Something the film industry does in an excellent way when it comes to advertising what it has to offer, but not for it's potential customers to acquire said advertised content.For myself, If only they some sort of platform from which I could cheaply download their content. Which brings me to my second point: cost! I was discussing just yesterday with a flatmate about how much we would pay fora movie. We agreed that the promotion the MediaMarkt had last week or the week before, �14 for a blu-ray, was a marginally acceptable price.

One goes to the movies for approximattely �9 here. But you go watch a movie for the cinematic experience of it. When you buy, or download, a movie it might be because you hadn't seen it or because it is for a collection.

I download because I like to collect. Mind you I don't upload, I'm trying to abide the law if possible. Then again, when I'm after something which should be available, but "isn't in my country", I think a big "f*ck you mediab*tches, I'll find it elsewhere".

Gotta leave the story here I'm afraid, I'm about at work, but you get the gist.

My message to the media companies: "Create a download platform for consumers which:
- offers all content, regardless of country!
- offers it cheap! I'd say around �10 for UNLIMITED monthly subscription, download however much you can for it (look at newsgroups, it works!)
- cancel your pathetic lawsuits and join the future with your own, better developt, content platform
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Luke Witnesser, 20 Jan 2012 @ 4:35am

Here lies the truth about SOPA/PIPA that even TechDirt has yet to report: what MPAA, RIAA, and Hollywood execs do not want you to see.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJIuYgIvKsc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzS5rSvZXe8

The truth behind why these big companies responsible for SOPA and PIPA are also responsible for piracy itself is far more insidious than even their outmoded business model.

Can you say, do as I say so I can crush you under heel?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dave P, 20 Jan 2012 @ 1:28pm

Good points
It's OK, folks. I'm in the UK and the simple application of a proxy allowed me to watch! (Not a word of this to Lamar, otherwise I could be deported and end up doing five years in jail!) I have to say that the loud American humour with the bad language and screaming audience is probably an acquired taste but he has managed to ridicule all the supporters in no uncertain fashion. The "country boy" politician who seems singularly proud of the fact that he hasn't got a clue about what he is trying to legislate against is priceless. Perhaps the entertainment industry has bribed him by promising him a new tractor and hen-house.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]