MPAA: Censorship Is Good For Consumers

from the say-what-now? dept

Mon, May 14th 2012 8:15am — Mike Masnick

Ah, the MPAA. Hardly a day goes by when someone there doesn't say something positively ridiculous. The latest is a reaction to the news that a court in the Netherlands has expanded the censorship of The Pirate Bay to a few more ISPs. The MPAA has decided to explain that this kind of censorship is good for consumers:

The UK ruling and indeed other recent ones in Austria, Belgium, Denmark and Finland as well as this one are positive developments that support not only the creative community but also consumers.

It's not entirely clear why they say "the UK ruling," since the post only refers to a ruling from The Netherlands, but it's a strange world when someone is claiming that censoring a website that consumers find useful is "good for consumers." So how do they defend such a ridiculous claim? Well, by getting the story backwards yet again:

The number of sites that offer legitimate creative content continues to increase dramatically. But to fully enable this growing sector to thrive and provide consumers with content when they want it, where they want it and how they want it, it is imperative that the content not be siphoned off and distributed illegally by those seeking to profit from the work and creativity of others.

Hogwash. First of all, if the industry had its way, it would never have to innovate online at all, preferring greatly to live off of the old system of DVDs with crippling DRM. The only reason they were pushed to start innovating online was because of competition from the likes of The Pirate Bay, which finally caused them to agree to license platforms like Netflix, which has shown that it's actually quite easy to compete with The Pirate Bay if the MPAA and its studios would stop demanding ridiculous restrictions on content (and insanely high prices). Offer a good service at a good price, and The Pirate Bay simply can't compete.

The claim that for such services to thrive the content can't be "siphoned off and distributed illegally" is again totally bogus. Netflix competes quite nicely in the US with The Pirate Bay, and if the studios allowed more Netflixes to exist (rather than locking down every competitor with stupid rules like only having 24 hours to watch a movie) there would be plenty of innovation. Furthermore, even if they block The Pirate Bay, it doesn't stop the fact that the content still is and will be available. Claiming that legitimate sites can't compete if there is unauthorized content available means that legitimate sites can't compete at all. Yet we see them compete successfully with unauthorized content all the time.

So why does the MPAA lie?

As always, it's about control. They don't like being pressured by such innovation. They don't like having to adapt and to change. So they attack any new form of innovation and brand it as piracy -- just as they did with the VCR. Of course, amusingly, it's now that same home movie revenue which they fear losing. Yet if the MPAA had had its way 30 years ago, there would be no home movie market from which to lose revenue. Because, just a few short decades ago, the MPAA insisted that such a market would kill Hollywood.

Oh, and as for this point:

The court verdict found that The Pirate Bay is predominantly devoted to illegal activities with more than 90% of all content infringing on copyright.

You know what else had more than 90% infringement in the early days? The VCR. But thankfully courts recognized that it also had substantial non-infringing uses -- as does The Pirate Bay. It's not difficult to see how the industry could have embraced sites like The Pirate Bay to their own advantage, but failing that and having them censored... and then insisting that somehow benefits the public? Sorry, the public isn't going to buy that kind of crap.

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, drm, netherlands
Companies: mpaa, netflix, the pirate bay

83 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Michael, 14 May 2012 @ 8:22am

Does the RIAA love the sound of its own voice or what?

They need to realize that the internet is not their platform to dictate the terms of use for everybody. They don't own it and therefore don't control it. It belongs to everybody.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2012 @ 8:24am

Amen.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2012 @ 8:28am

The court verdict found that The Pirate Bay is predominantly devoted to illegal activities with more than 90% of all content infringing on copyright.

I want to know how the court found that a site that doesn't host any content had 90% of its content devoted to infringing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jay (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 8:31am

Can someone please tell the MPAA that Avengers just made over $1 billion dollars in about two weeks? Can someone tell them that when someone looks at the Youtube, it made others want to watch it even more?

Can someone tell the MPAA that censorship does not work nor is it what movie goers want? Can someone please tell them to get it through their skull that the more they fight the people, the harder the backlash and the more out of touch they become?

Can someone tell the MPAA that they are not the morality police, nor does anyone want them to be? Can someone tell the MPAA that we've noticed their problems in other countries and how this is only about control? Something that they will never have on the internet?

Can someone tell the MPAA that they have yet to invent anything but more ways to piss people off? Can someone tell the MPAA that they don't invent movies, merely leech off of them? Can someone tell the MPAA that their significance in the movie distribution process is going the way of the dodo and no one is going to tolerate it much longer?

Finally, can someone PLEASE tell the MPAA to F*** OFF!?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2012 @ 8:32am

What has always been their problem is instead of them adapting to their consumer needs they force the consumers to adapt to their needs. Which, never works because we love to rebel.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2012 @ 8:33am

it is imperative that the content not be siphoned off and distributed illegally by those seeking to profit from the work and creativity of others.
I agree, time to shut down the MPAA.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael, 14 May 2012 @ 8:35am

Re: it is imperative that the content not be siphoned off and distributed illegally by those seeking to profit from the work and creativity of others.
Don't forget their buddies over at the RIAA.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The eejit (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 8:35am

Re:
I would, but then they might F**K ON to something worse, like investment trading.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2012 @ 8:35am

Re: it is imperative that the content not be siphoned off and distributed illegally by those seeking to profit from the work and creativity of others.
Also note the word 'illegally". Thats right, not unless you have the laws you bought on your side, like the cartels do. You sure you want to 'share' that movie you bought, with friends? Well too bad, YOU ARE A CRIMINAL SCUM. SHARING IS ILLEGAL.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Cory of PC (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 8:37am

Re:
I'll be happy to tell them just that. I am hoping to work on a couple independent movies in the future, one which will take several whacks to the MPAA and RIAA's faces, and hopefully they could be as successful as "the Avengers"... but I'm not holding my breath on that last bit.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael, 14 May 2012 @ 8:40am

Re:
"Does the RIAA love the sound of its own voice or what?"

Whoops, my mistake. I meant to say the MPAA. It's understandable that I'd get one mafia cartel confused with another since they act pretty much the same.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
sophisticatedjanedoe (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 8:41am

Adult entertainment: even more ridiculous
It's even more ridiculous with adult industry. I subscribe to "Free Speech Coalition", a non profit advocate group for the adult industry, on Twitter. I couldn't help poking them after seeing their obvious schadenfreude over the news from Netherlands. I found it amusingly hypocritical.

So I twitted to @FSCArmy:

Your position is somewhat awkward. On one side you are "Free Speech Coalition", i.e. you must decry any censorship, and you do.

At the same time you believe that your industry is badly hurt by illegal filesharig and you want something to be done about it.

The problem is that the "something" being done now IS censorship. You can't have it both ways.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lowestofthekeys (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 8:44am

"provide consumers with content when they want it, where they want it and how they want it,"

This made me laugh.

As far as I've seen, they're barely trying to appeal to the consumer. Netflix could carry more of their movies too if they would stop charging exorbitant prices for "renting" the media.

Then again, they enjoy the position of middlemen, they don;t want middlemen who actually provide a decent service to the consumers because they lose control.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That Anonymous Coward (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 8:49am

Censorship is the latest way for them to protect their profits. None of them want to make any less than they do today.
Movies can now be shot entirely digitally, do we think they rolled the old costs for film and developing into cutting the final price?
They need to keep the prices near what they once were, ignoring their costs have gone down.
They want to convince people that if you see or hear something you haven't paid for you just stole money from the artists pocket directly.
The issue is something digital can be copied with a few keystrokes, and they fear people asking why it costs so much still when making another copy to sell is that cheap. So they want to turn it into a giant moral question of your with us or your a freaking thief.
Its worked so well to get congresscritters to vote for horrible things, your with us or your a freaking terrorist lover.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
TtfnJohn (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 8:50am

Re: Re:
Doesn't matter they all say the same thing the same way anyway.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
TtfnJohn (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 8:55am

Re: Adult entertainment: even more ridiculous
The adult film business may find more demand for their product if they told actual stories again as they did in the late 1970s and early 1980s instead of plotless two hour loops that can be condensed easily back to the 4 minute stuff guys used to go in the back of the adult book store, drop a quarter into the machine and watch.

Sex isn't a spectator sport. For adult entertainment to really work it needs story.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2012 @ 8:56am

"Offer a good service at a good price, and The Pirate Bay simply can't compete."

I'm sorry Mike, but as our local shills/trolls have said repeatedly, "YOU CAN'T COMPETE WITH FREE!!!"

Just kidding. I highly agree with that quote above about The Pirate Bay being unable to compete and, in point of fact, independent studies have proven this point. Offer legitimate services that are easy to use and reasonably priced and not restricted and people will flock to them in droves and you'll see the amount of people going to alternative/illegal sites/services drop.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The eejit (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 8:59am

Re: Re: it is imperative that the content not be siphoned off and distributed illegally by those seeking to profit from the work and creativity of others.
Which is amusing because, as infants, we're taught to share with others. Can't have it both ways. Either we watch each thing on its own merits (aka, NONE) or we share and generate a buzz, and possibly more money for you.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael, 14 May 2012 @ 9:00am

Re: Re: Re:
So true. Thing is, it's obnoxious to have such anti-consumer groups speak down on all of us as if they were the self-appointed law of the internet and we're unruly criminals.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2012 @ 9:01am

So by the MPAA's logic the following must also be true.

-Slavery is good for the slaves.

-Hitler's policy of throwing persecuted minority groups into concentration camps was good for those persecuted minority groups.

-The Supreme Court's ruling that it was perfectly legal for the US government to throw all Japanese Americans in jail during WW2 on the suspicion that they're all likely spies for Japan was good for Japanese Americans, even the many who lost their house and all their property during their years of imprisonment.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
adamj (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 9:03am

If anyone is stealing from artists its the MPPA/RIAA, with their shady accounting schemes.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
BentFranklin (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 9:11am

"when they want it, where they want it and how they want it"

It does appear that MPAA is reading TechDirt. They are at least paying lip service to this mantra. This is a new development, right?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2012 @ 9:18am

Re: Re: it is imperative that the content not be siphoned off and distributed illegally by those seeking to profit from the work and creativity of others.
"SHARING IS ILLEGAL."

My mommy taught me "Sharing is Caring!" ;-)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 9:22am

Re:
Even if we do count the content it doesn't host, how do they know it's 90%? I keep getting copyright claims on Youtube for stuff they definitely don't own. It's probably 90% because five different companies claim one thing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2012 @ 9:23am

no, the public isn't going to buy that crap, provided the stories that dispute what the entertainment industries say are 'put out there', and not dramatically restricted in there distribution, like every other article that tells a different story (the truth) to the one those industries want read
[ link to this | view in thread ]
jupiterkansas (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 9:28am

Re:
A billion dollars in two weeks! Obviously whatever they're doing is working, and we can expect even more of it.

And obviously most people don't care and happily bought their movie tickets. So much for boycotts.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 9:42am

You know, the MPAA is a joke. But it's becoming a bad joke. Is this a case of failing at failing?

Also, is it me or they got way worse after Dodd came in? If u think about it it's better to have Dodd in MPAA than in Congress...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
sophisticatedjanedoe (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 9:53am

Re: Re: Adult entertainment: even more ridiculous
I cannot agree more. 99% of the product is unimaginative, boring stuff. And the room for improvement is huge, alleged "losses" from piracy are dwarfed by the income potential.

One more thought that is still brewing and that I never discussed. Staying on top of copyright trolling cases, I can't avoid noticing that the majority of targeted filesharers is students. And they can be divided to 2 categories:

- those who live with parents and cannot legally access paid content because they don't have money and because they fear parents's anger even if they have money.

- those who live far away from parents yet still have no money for this kind of entertainment.

None of these two groups damages porn industry because they wouldn't buy their stuff in the first place. So instead of disingenuous whining about nonexistent "lost sales", the adult business geniuses should think how to monetize the specifics of younger crowd now, either by offering heavy discounts paired with other incentives attractive to them, or invest in the future, when now-poor students' buying power increases dramatically, by managing loyalty.

This is applicable not only to salacious entertainment, but to any other, including music and games. Recently I talked to a liberal arts college student: on the campus the sharing culture flourishes, it is considered absolutely normal to ask someone to copy his entire music collection, yet kids still spend a lot (basically all the remaining money) on entertainment, including iTunes. And they don't see any contradiction in these two trends! And that's absolutely natural IMO.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2012 @ 9:54am

My head hurts
The logic of these people is astounding. Are they even in the real world?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Besieged, 14 May 2012 @ 9:55am

Sweetness
This means movies theater prices are going to be cheaper and dvd/blu-ray/digital movie sales/rentals are going to have their price's slashed, right? Can't wait!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
sophisticatedjanedoe (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 9:58am

Re: Re: Re: Adult entertainment: even more ridiculous
Regarding managing loyalty instead of suing kids: sure I pirated Leisure Suit Larry when I was young, yet I did not think twice when offered to support Al Lowe's new project on Kickstarter: I gladly parted with $100. And will do it again and again.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ltlw0lf (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 10:27am

Re: Re: Re: it is imperative that the content not be siphoned off and distributed illegally by those seeking to profit from the work and creativity of others.
Which is amusing because, as infants, we're taught to share with others. Can't have it both ways. Either we watch each thing on its own merits (aka, NONE) or we share and generate a buzz, and possibly more money for you.

I just bought the Settler's of Cattan. The reason I bought it was because Wil Wheaton played with three friends on Geek & Sundry's Table Top, and shared the experience with everyone else. If they hadn't played that game and shared the experience with the world, I would never have plopped down $35 for a board game.

I also just bought a book that I never would have purchased had it not been for a friend of mine who showed it to me and allowed me to read a section of it.

I couldn't possibly care any less about any of the current movies out there now, but a friend of mine shared his experience watching the grey, and caught so much of my attention that I'm going to rent it to watch it myself.

RIAA/MPAA apparently aren't very good at marketing (which is surprising because they spend so much of their artists' money on it,) because they completely ignore word of mouth, which is by far one of the most important marketing efforts. It really is sad.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2012 @ 10:30am

why defend them?
Defending TPB makes it appear as if you are, how should I say it, lacking sound judgement on these issues. There are certain consequences for openly advocating for Piracy for years and choosing a name such as theirs. And where is this 90 percent number for VCRs coming from, out of curiosity? I'm guessing not from a court verdict.

Who is 'whining' now?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ltlw0lf (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 10:30am

Re: Re: Re: it is imperative that the content not be siphoned off and distributed illegally by those seeking to profit from the work and creativity of others.
My mommy taught me "Sharing is Caring!" ;-)

My mommy made me stand in a corner for 15 minutes when I wouldn't share my toys with my brothers and sisters.

Maybe we should just put RIAA/MPAA in the corner for a couple minutes until they learn how to be big boys and girls instead of babies.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ECA (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 10:30am

You said it, I said it..my question again..
OK..
EXPLAIN PIRATING...
Where is the money they are SUPPOSED TO BE EARNING, coming from?
Small adverts?
SHOW that they are earning money from the adverts Equal to ANYTHING The MPAA and others are trying to charge.

These lawyers are only working for the MONEY they get from the law suits.

The MUSIC industry is STUPID..
OTHERS saw what the internet was doing and They USED IT..
Every time you turn around..itunes and Hulu and others are FIGHTING (as much is possible) with contracts that the Corps keep changing, to restrict the ONLINE CONTENT..
EVEN youtube, is about to get PISSY and quit.(did you know they have free movies?(front page top= movies, right side 1/2 way down)

BUT, do you consider ALL the cable/sat channels you are FORCED to pay for? REALLY. ESPN is the most expensive. And you cant TAKE IT OFF.(not in this area, anyway)
200 channels, and you only watch 20(about)..
Iv shown people..Take off allt he channels you dont WANT/Watch.
For myself..
no-religious, sports, news, hbo, showtime, special channels..no- mexican, no music..
I would rather pay $1 per channel for 20 channels, then $50 for 180 channels I DONT WATCH. AND with ESPN, if you consider that 40% of the people DONT WANT sports..they still PAY $5 every month for ESPN they dont watch.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
A Pirate Bay user, 14 May 2012 @ 10:34am

Pirate Bay is still there
I had my access to Pirate Bay blocked for about 5 minutes when my ISP caved in & started censoring my internet connection, that's right it took me no more than 5 minutes to get it back, I admit that was a tad slow but it was early in the morning.

Sharing is the New Way!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 10:39am

Re: why defend them?
There are certain consequences for openly advocating for Piracy for years and choosing a name such as theirs

You're cheering on punishing people for their speech instead of their acts? Classy!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Eponymous Coward, 14 May 2012 @ 10:51am

It is always a good thing, to tyrants, when tyrants police the ills that their constituency/consumers may inflict upon themselves!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
RD, 14 May 2012 @ 10:54am

Re: Lets add
"Can someone please tell the MPAA that Avengers just made over $1 billion dollars in about two weeks? "

Lets add "despite being HEAVILY pirated over a week BEFORE the US release." to that.

It was the same with Avatar(ALL TIME highest grossing movie (so far)), Dark Knight (record opening weekend until Avengers) and Wolverine (which made something like $370 million worldwide)

Piracy

IS

NOT

THE

PROBLEM.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
RD, 14 May 2012 @ 10:56am

Re:
"I'm sorry Mike, but as our local shills/trolls have said repeatedly, "YOU CAN'T COMPETE WITH FREE!!!"

A $1 billion dollar earning (so far) Avengers movie says they are wrong.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
PlagueSD (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 11:15am

Re:
@Ninja,

I think you're on to something, to fail at failing means you're succeeding. Gotta love double negatives!!!

/sarcasm
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2012 @ 11:20am

"Hogwash"?! WTF?!?!
Seriously Mike, what the hell have pigs ever done to you?!?!?!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
AdamF (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 11:34am

Watch Out!

Watch out, the Pirate Bay is siphoning off all copies of the Avengers. Get yours for $39.99 while there are still any left. O wait, you can't, DVD won't be released before Christmas.

It also looks like MPAA is leaving the business. If they will not profit from the work and creativity of others, what's left for them to do?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2012 @ 11:41am

Re: Re:
Well... I for one, no matter how much i wanted to see said movie, did not becuase of my MPAA boycott...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
nasch (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 11:42am

Re: Re: Re: Re: it is imperative that the content not be siphoned off and distributed illegally by those seeking to profit from the work and creativity of others.
I just bought the Settler's of Cattan.

May I suggest the Cities and Knights expansion. Way more fun than the original IMO (and the original is great).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ltlw0lf (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 11:59am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: it is imperative that the content not be siphoned off and distributed illegally by those seeking to profit from the work and creativity of others.
May I suggest the Cities and Knights expansion. Way more fun than the original IMO (and the original is great).

I'll have to look into getting that one too. I'd like to see how well my friends receive playing the original one first. They love a good board game... especially one like Monopoly/Risk where we have to work with/against each other, so I figure it will work out well, but we'll see.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The eejit (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 12:03pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: it is imperative that the content not be siphoned off and distributed illegally by those seeking to profit from the work and creativity of others.
I'd much rather play "mole" games such as Shadows over Camelot. Still, the point is that word-of-mouth can often get you as much as a good advertising campaign.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The eejit (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 12:09pm

Re: Re:
But you can't rpvoe a double-negative, only a positive. So, if a positive is a negative-negative and a negative is a positive-positive, where does that leave genertics?

/quantum
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 12:11pm

Dear MPAA
The number of sites that offer legitimate creative content continues to increase dramatically.

Dear MPAA,
I am trying to buy some films I remember fondly from the '80's. They all appear to be out of print on DVD and unavailable to buy as a download. They also appear to be unavailable for streaming on all the streaming services I'm aware of and besides the quality on those suck on my very large television. I want a good quality copy that I can buy, keep, play on any and every device I currently own (many) for the rest of my natural (or unnatural life). With your "growing sector providing consumers with content when they want it, where they want it and how they want it", perhaps you can help me out with that? As an added incentive, if you can provide me with these films I am looking for at a sensible price (since you made your money on them in the 80's) I promise your chances of getting me to buy still more will go up by an order of magnitude.

No? Thought not.

Yours sincerely

A consumer who's money you do not want.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The eejit (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 12:12pm

Re: Watch Out!
Lie for peace! Steal from pirates! SCAM THE SCAMMERS!

oh, wait, wrong group.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jes Lookin, 14 May 2012 @ 12:17pm

The General Rule
Generally, the Infernal Corporatocrasy of the U.S. would like everyone to pay for any access to any information on a per use basis. It seems that simple.
You want a wikipedia article ? You pay to connect to the network, you pay for any information that is related to a company, you pay for the data size transferred, and any additional 'usage' fees and taxes. EVERYBODY gets their nickel because EVERYTHING is monitored and approved - per use.
Just look at the articles here for evidence that this is the desired rule.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
RD, 14 May 2012 @ 12:18pm

Re: Dear MPAA
"The number of sites that offer legitimate creative content continues to increase dramatically."

If by this, they mean in general, outside of the label/studio systems, then yes. If they mean tv and movies controlled by their cartel(s), then this is a bald-faced lie. Its exactly the *opposite* of what is happening in this sphere of things. They are like the nazi's with their propoganda (hello godwins law!) where they tell a huge lie that is in fact opposite of what they are claiming, and keep parroting it in the hopes that eventually everyone else will just accept it even when there isnt a shred of truth in it whatsoever.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2012 @ 12:27pm

Re: Dear MPAA
http://ebay.com
[ link to this | view in thread ]
BeeAitch (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 12:47pm

I find it telling that whenever any of the **AAs refer to us, they use the term "consumer".

Not "customer", but consumer.

IMHO, a customer is someone you get feedback from, listen to said feedback, and adjust your business to suit their needs. (i.e. keep them happy to garner and keep their business.)
A consumer is like the proverbial 'hog at the trough': you slop them, and they feed on whatever you give them, with no say whatsoever in the matter.

Like I said, telling, their choice of words.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
BeeAitch (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 12:55pm

Re:
They've been told. They are either deaf or willfully ignorant.

My guess is it's the latter: they feel they don't need to listen to anyone who doesn't have an MBA or years of "experience" in the business because those types of people simply don't matter: SHUT UP AND CONSUME WHAT WE GIVE YOU.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2012 @ 1:01pm

Re: Re: Dear MPAA
If the MPAA had their way, you wouldn't be allowed to buy movies on eBay.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 1:11pm

Re: Re: Dear MPAA
Ebay? Chock-full of digital downloads of 80's movies I notice.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 1:15pm

Re:
A consumer is like the proverbial 'hog at the trough'
In MPAA-speak you're probably right about the implication of the word. Ironically though, taking he word literally, "consumers" also includes non-legitimate users of the content since they also "consume" it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
AC Cobra, 14 May 2012 @ 1:30pm

Lies
"So why does the MPAA lie? "

Because they are a professional lobbying organization.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
jupiterkansas (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 2:19pm

Re: Re: Re:
Lucky for me I have no desire to see it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2012 @ 2:55pm

"The number of sites that offer legitimate creative content continues to increase dramatically."

I dont want to sign up for "several" sites, and pay "several" money's

I want ONE site, with ONE "reasonable" price, with all the media, technology can provide

I thought that was an integeral part , to what a site like pirate bay offers, or am i wrong?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Baldaur Regis (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 3:02pm

Re: Re: Re:
Well, since we're getting all quantum science-y, recall that a bit can exist in both pirated and non-pirated states simultaneously until it's actually downloaded, when the probability wave-form collapses....hey whaddya know, the math shows virtually no difference between pirated and non-pirated bits, except on the awesomeness transform index, where pirated bits beat the pants off the non-pirated bits. There you have it; science never lies.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mike Masnick (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 4:06pm

Re: why defend them?
Defending TPB makes it appear as if you are, how should I say it, lacking sound judgement on these issues.

It is a weak and unprincipled mind who refuses to stand up for what's right because it "looks bad." I stand up for my principles.

You don't. No wonder you're anonymous.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
BeeAitch (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 5:28pm

Re: Re:
Yes, but treating us like their customers (by my definition) would do more to reduce 'piracy' than DRM, legislation, and all other current tactics ever could.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
TtfnJohn (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 6:12pm

Re:
"Its worked so well to get congresscritters to vote for horrible things, your with us or your a freaking terrorist lover."

Depends on if the terrorist looks a lot like the women who cosplay being Lara Croft. If she does then I'm a an unapologetic terrorist lover!

What we don't realize is that the MPAA is just doing this for our own good. Kinda like what we do for our children when we tell them they can't have another chocolate brownie. They're thinking of the children! In this case us!

Techdirt freetards need all the hand holding we can get you know. ;-)

In some sense of seriousness the *AA's have tried just about anything else so now they've tried their shot at censorship. It works for Iran doesn't it?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
TtfnJohn (profile), 14 May 2012 @ 6:17pm

Re: Re: Re:
Quantum English?

And what does that make a triple negative? In the world of Hollywood or discussions about Hollywood we always reach the edges of reality. :-)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2012 @ 6:54pm

Re: Re: why defend them?
No, I am cheering it on account of their actions over the course of many years. The name thing is just a political reality. They put the spotlight on themselves so it isn't surprising that they have become such a pelt for copyright advocates.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2012 @ 7:23pm

Re: Re: why defend them?
In other words, you believe that protecting The Pirate Bay's right to exist equates to "stand{ing} up for what is right?" Just want to make sure I understand you.

You have no clue what I do or do not stand up for. That's baseless, bro. If you're going to attack anonymous commenters on your own site FOR being anonymous, maybe it would be easier to just change the policy. Put it out to the community. I'm genuinely curious as to what users would say. Could be interesting.

"I stand up for my principles. You don't. No wonder you're anonymous."

In other words, people who employ anonymity online (I can think of a particular organization) are less likely to stand up for principles, or are unprincipled?

If you believe anonymous commenting is unprincipled, I think I have the number of the guy who runs this site. Maybe he can do something about that. But with no ACs, who would people gang up on or off-handedly whine about? Something special about this site would be lost (and hits, lots and lots of hits). The ACs are a defining characteristic as of now. But for as much talk there is of "solutions" around these parts, sometimes I think this site is based more on giving people a space to complain and gang up on a common villain. Do you really want legislative solutions? And if so, what are they?

Honest question. Even if you went so far as to advocate for eliminating digital copyright altogether, that would require legislation. So, what do you say? Be specific. Make a post out of it. Don't be afraid of "looking bad."

Oh -- I almost forgot. What about that 90% number, hm? Where did you happen to get that?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous, 14 May 2012 @ 7:27pm

To everyone trying to make sense of the MPAA's statements, just remember that logic, morals, and common sense have long since left the MAFIAA
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jeremy, 14 May 2012 @ 9:01pm

How long has Netflix streaming existed? I still can't stream any star wars content. I can stream just about any Star Trek tv show though.

Sad.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 14 May 2012 @ 9:54pm

Re: If you're going to attack anonymous commenters on your own site FOR being anonymous, maybe it would be easier to just change the policy.
This site does not censor comments. Even to the extent that commenters are given full freedom to make fools of themselves.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2012 @ 10:01pm

Re: Re: Re: why defend them?
Actions? What actions? Disagreeing with copyright advocates is not against the law and its destruction is not something cheer-worthy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2012 @ 10:03pm

Re: Re: Re: why defend them?
There are certain consequences for openly advocating for Piracy for years and choosing a name such as theirs.

No, you want to punish them for speech. What they have been doing, being a search engine and not hosting any files, is perfectly legal.

You say I am cheering it on account of their actions over the course of many years, and I ask you, what actions?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2012 @ 10:04pm

Re: Re: Re: why defend them?
If you believe anonymous commenting is unprincipled

STOP. He didn't say that, you did. Stop being disingenuous.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2012 @ 10:55pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: why defend them?
Not being disingenuous, a little playful in spots, sure. I mean, look at what he wrote. I just think it's silly for him to be criticizing me for my anonymity rather than just address what I wrote. It would be like me calling people who post here stupid, while I am in fact posting here (me=also stupid). He is undercutting the substance of anonymous comments while simultaneously providing the platform for them/facilitating it. I guess what I'm saying is you can't have it both ways. He also seems to be inherently criticizing Anonymous, which maybe he does often but I haven't seen it, so that's interesting to me. Yeah, I questioned his judgement because of the post, but I stand by that. Also asked a very clear question about the 90% statistic for VCRs. He just called me unprincipled, solely based on the fact that I am anonymous, and then dipped. I'm just calling him out on it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2012 @ 11:00pm

Re: Re: If you're going to attack anonymous commenters on your own site FOR being anonymous, maybe it would be easier to just change the policy.
Wouldn't require censorship, though. Just registration. And obviously avatars would still be in place. (Everybody plays the fool...sometimes)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
inconsistency, 15 May 2012 @ 2:02am

Re: why defend them?
i'm sure it's the law of unintended consequences - nevertheless, this is the way it works out.

the pirate bay has become an accepted shortct term for wholesale piracy.

fine.

wrong, but fine.

suddenly, the whole discussion has been reframed by 'pirate apologists'.

why not take the worst your opponents can do, and turn it into a major political force?

the copyright maximalists cannot conceive of anything worse to be associated with.

the majority of real people couldn't care less!!

the constant refrain of 'piracy' removes all supposed stigma
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 May 2012 @ 3:09am

Finnish Pirate Bay block
Here in Finland, one single operator has been forced to block one single torrent site (The Pirate Bay). It's a simple block that is easily beaten using any free web proxy. They call this some kind of a victory?-) Even if you wouldn't know how to use a web proxy, those evil bastards at Google give you a load of results for any torrent you want to download anyway. I can't decide whether these kinds of court rulings are more funny or pathetic.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Someone, 15 May 2012 @ 4:50pm

Again these people are not trying to compete but kill off competition. Pirates actually buy stuff that is good and worth owning. If MPAA wants to profit they should stop making b-rated flicks and stop mass producing them too. Consumers want quality and accessibility. I am sure its kind of a dive option but get that content out quicker than what Hulu does and you'll see piracy drop astronomically. Is steam suffering from piracy? Nope it is actually profiting from it. Because people try like and buy. RIAA + MPAA Just haven't quite figured out an appropriate method of distribution that doesn't obstruct the first amendment. Everytime you are on Youtube/Netflix/Hulu the data is downloaded to your computer to watch the stream just isn't kept for a long time. To be honest the real big pirates are those companies... YAR! Contradiction!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), 16 May 2012 @ 6:18am

Re:
The bottled water industry would like to have a word with you.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
silverscarcat (profile), 19 May 2012 @ 7:22pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: it is imperative that the content not be siphoned off and distributed illegally by those seeking to profit from the work and creativity of others.
Would need to be 1 minute for every year that they've been around...

It MIGHT take awhile.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
silverscarcat (profile), 19 May 2012 @ 7:28pm

Re: why defend them?
"And where is this 90 percent number for VCRs coming from, out of curiosity?"

The same place where the 90 percent number for the Pirate Bay is coming from.

Remember, the VCR is to the movie industry what the Boston Strangler is to a woman all alone at night.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael Pric (profile), 21 May 2012 @ 7:55am

Re:
Jay you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it think. These are people who do well at running the old business model. If their companies decided to go with a new, better one they'd probably find they need different people to run it well. So where is the incentive for the old management to bring in a new, better business model?
[ link to this | view in thread ]