Search For Free Downloads Of 'The Interview' Shows How Pointless The MPAA's Anti-Google Strategy Really Is

from the google-is-not-going-to-block-yahoo-and-linkedin dept

A few weeks ago, we wrote about how bizarre it was that the MPAA was so focused on attacking Google and forcing it to take entire sites out of its index when it didn't seem to understand these issues in the slightest. As a part of that, we highlighted how pointless the plan was, because if you looked for a domain after it was removed (which we mocked up by using the "-" modifier), you just ended up getting other people telling you how to get the same kind of content anyway. And yet, the MPAA keeps pushing for Google to further push down or delete entire sites. And, of course, Google continues to give in anyway, giving the industry what it wants. A few months ago it ratcheted up the demotion-for-DMCA-notices aspect of its algorithm, and a bunch of sites have effectively disappeared.

But does it really make a difference? As we discussed, one immediate result of this was that people who were searching for free downloads often came across more sketchy sites (which, perhaps, the MPAA doesn't much care about). But, it's also having a secondary effect -- which is that it's showing how perfectly legitimate websites are also being used to tell people how to access content for free (usually in unauthorized ways).

Take, for example, a Google search for someone who wanted to watch The Interview for free. While many, many people paid to see the film through official channels, lots of others went for the unauthorized versions. But if you do a search on Google, where most sketchy sites have been downvoted, you start to see some interesting things: If you can't see it, you'll note that many of the links to free (and most likely unauthorized) versions are from well established sites. The top one is to Facebook. The third slot is Linkedin. Towards the bottom is Tumblr. It's very likely that all these links going to infringing/unauthorized copies of the film. Yet they're on popular sites -- the kinds of sites that Google isn't going to suddenly remove from search or seriously downrank due to DMCA notices because -- and, on this, hopefully everyone can agree -- there's an awful lot of perfectly legitimate content on sites like those.

This isn't, of course, to point out how to access that movie for free, but to highlight, yet again, just how completely pointless the MPAA's preferred course of action is. It's as if no one at the MPAA has ever played chess and realized that thinking more than one move ahead might help. Each time the MPAA demands something silly and pointless, it doesn't help because what Google is doing is not "leading people to piracy." It's leading people to what they're looking for. And if what the people are looking for happens to be free copies of movies, then that's what they're going to find eventually. The way to solve that is not to stupidly go after Google and demand it downrank certain sites (which just means others will replace them), but to better offer people what they want from authorized sources so that when people go looking, the content creators and/or copyright holders are the ones who get the benefit.

In other words, just as we've been saying for over a decade, the proper response is to innovate, rather than to sit around and blame everyone else for not protecting your obsolete business model.

Filed Under: copyright, innovation, movies, piracy, search, the interview
Companies: google, mpaa

Sony's Own Copyright Infringement Shows How Broken Our Copyright System Is Today

from the because-of-course dept

It almost always seems to come out that the most aggressive "anti-piracy" people, companies and organizations are engaged in some form of copyright infringement themselves. There was Nicolas Sarkozy, former President of France who initiated the idea of a "three copyright strikes and you lose access to the internet" program, but who also apparently was mass pirating DVDs. Even the MPAA -- an organization whose entire reputation is basically wrapped up in its anti-piracy efforts -- has a history of infringing on others' copyrights when it's convenient. The latest example is Sony Pictures.

As we've been covering, Sony was among those involved in the MPAA's plot to attack Google by paying for state Attorneys General investigations into Google, a company that the MPAA still thinks isn't doing "enough" to stop piracy online. Yet, now it comes out that in The Interview -- a movie whose plotline has become intertwined with the Sony Hack -- Sony used some music that it did not license. The musicians in question are now threatening to sue:

Tiger JK and Yoon Mi-rae (a.k.a. Tasha Reid)'s agency FeelGhoodMusic said Friday in a press release that the two's duet piece, "Pay Day," is featured in the Seth Rogen/James Franco comedy, but a contract was never signed. About 10 to 15 seconds of the song appears in the film.

"There were initial discussions about including the song in the film score, but negotiations stopped so we were under the impression that it wasn't happening," said the press release. "It was only after the film was released that we became aware of the song's unauthorized use, without taking the appropriate and necessary steps to complete a contract with the artists."

The label also noted that the musicians were hesitant to license the music for this movie at all, given that "the film is a very sensitive topic in Korea." Oh really? I hadn't noticed.

Of course the likelihood of this ever getting to court is basically nil. Sony will pay up to make it go away quietly without a trial. And, as Sarah Jeong helpfully points out, Sony has insurance to pay for these kinds of mistakes.

The larger point here isn't even that Sony is a hypocritical assholish company when it comes to copyright (on both sides of the question). Rather, it's that the entire copyright system is broken, and this little incident demonstrates that once again in multiple ways:

First, if Sony were to get sued, it would face the exact same penalties as someone sitting at home who downloaded or shared an unauthorized copy of the same exact song. It's difficult to see how that's even close to reasonable, but that's the way copyright law is structured today, with no real way to distinguish between a blatant commercial abuse for use in a high profile movie, and totally non-commercial use by a fan. Either way, you're facing $750 to $150,000 in statutory damages (the cap is $30,000 if the infringement isn't "willful" -- but copyright holders will claim that the file sharer at home is willful infringement).

Second, it shows that everyone infringes all the time. Whether meaning to or not, it's actually fairly difficult to avoid infringing on copyrights. That's not to say that accidental copyright infringement is what's happening with file sharers or with Sony's use of the music here, but under the law, it's pretty much all the same. The fact that, as noted above, some of the biggest copyright system defenders are found out to infringe should highlight this issue pretty clearly. Even when you are a strong believer in copyright, there are going to be some situations in which you screw up and break the law. Given how frequently this happens, it certainly seems like the problem is with the law rather than all the people.

In the end, this story will quickly go away, because Sony will fork over some cash and everyone will forget this ever happened. But for someone at home who just wants to check out a movie, these kinds of threats and lawsuits can absolutely destroy them. And Sony doesn't care one bit about that.

Filed Under: copyright, infringement, statutory damages, the interview, tiger jk, yoon mi-rae
Companies: feelghoodmusic, sony

Irony: Sony Turns To Google, The Company It Was Plotting Against, To Stream The Interview

from the funny-how-that-works dept

To me, the biggest story to come out of the Sony Hack remains how the MPAA and the major studios were conspiring to attack Google by paying for state Attorneys General to drum up silly investigations of the company. Most everyone else in the press seems much more focused on the gossip and, of course, what happens to The Interview, the Seth Rogen/James Franco movie that some think was the reason for the hack in the first place (even if the evidence on that remains questionable). Either way, as you know, Sony briefly shelved the plans to release the movie (which has fairly dreadful reviews from those who have seen it), but then decided to allow a few independent theaters to show it, followed by the announcement this morning that it would stream the movie via YouTube.

There are lots of bizarre story lines related to this -- including, apparently, Apple turning Sony down when approached with a similar deal for iTunes. Or the whole idea of how this might actually show the Hollywood studios the value of releasing movies online at the same time as in theaters (a message many have been trying to send Hollywood for ages, which Hollywood is quite resistant to). And, of course, there's the whole story line about a giant company being bullied by a few stray threats about showing the film in theaters, which almost no one thinks were serious.

Still, the story that is most fascinating to me is tying this whole thing back to that original story, about "Project Goliath" and the plan to conspire to attack Google -- and the fact that when Sony needed to find a place to stream the film, it turned to YouTube, a Google-owned company. Huh. Of course, this fits with the long history of the legacy entertainment industry lashing out and attacking the creators of the innovations that industry most needs. The recording industry attacked radio when it first came on the scene, though it eventually enabled the music industry to grow so big. Hollywood, famously, claimed the VCR was "the Boston Stranger" to the movie industry -- yet four years after that statement was made, home video brought in more revenue for Hollywood than the box office. The RIAA sued one of the first MP3 players, yet digital music is a major, growing source of revenue these days. And, of course, Viacom engaged in a many years-long battled with YouTube.

Maybe, just maybe, one of these days the legacy entertainment players will get the message that innovators and entrepreneurs aren't the enemy. They're the ones providing Hollywood (and music and other industries) with all the tools to better serve the market.

Filed Under: james franco, seth rogen, sony hack, streaming, the interview
Companies: google, sony, sony pictures, youtube