Re: he goodwill towards the companies that run the MPAA and the RIAA has dropped below zero.
Who are these "moral people". And what do morals have to do with laws anyway?
I, for one, don't like piracy, but I also don't like Big Media (MPAA and the RIAA).
But if there is no other way for me to access that content, then I have no other choice but to download it. Case in point, lots of TV-series in the US won't ever get aired in NL (or years after they've been aired in the US). Nor will the DVDs be playable on my hardware, as they are Region 1 encoded, and I have a region 2 dvd-player (sadly it's not capable of being region-free). So what other choice do I have? I want to pay for it, but I can't, as I am not offered that opportunity.
Re: Or are you seriously arguing that this fight had positive net results?
So, this fight has caused people to stop downloading infringing material? Seriously? I think you should get a reality check.
This fight they are fighting right now, is not gaining them anything. If anything, they are getting themselves painted as cheezy Bond villains. The goodwill towards the companies that run the MPAA and the RIAA has dropped below zero. What do you do when people hate you? Sue them more?
The recording industry is the most hated industry in the world right now. All because of this fight. Is that a positive net result? Or a negative one?
Re: US Lawmakers Target The Pirate Bay, Other Sites
"Piracy denies individuals who have invested in the creation and production of these goods a return on their investment thus reducing the incentive to invest in innovative products and new creative works."
There are still people making movies, writing books, creating music. So what exactly is your point?
Re: It really does make you wonder why the MPAA and the RIAA have bothered with all of this. It hasn't even remotely slowed file sharing down.
"a world without piracy"
Good luck with that, could you start in Somalia?
Oh and I'll hold Johnny Depp for you, so you can beat him up for portraying a pirate and making piracy cool.
Oh you mean copyright infringement? Well, given that you yourself infringed on the NYTimes copyright just a few days ago. I think you should check your own moral principles.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Why did he explain copyright as a natural right in the Federalist
I want copyright REFORM, not abolishment. I want much like Karl to have copyright that actually promotes creation of new works rather than a welfare state for lazy musicians, who want to get paid for their work they made umpteen years ago.
I want my public domain back. Right now the public is being cheated out of their cultural heritage, by greeding corporations and their lobby groups.
Perpetual copyright will not help the 'poor and starving' artist. All it will do, is have him or her languish in obscurity.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Copyright and patents today are immoral, unbalanced, unfair and a threat to the health of society.
What in the blue blazes does a mouse being kosher or not have to with this discussion. Stick to the points at hand, and don't start veering off.
Fact is, copyright was once meant as a social contract between artist and public. "You get a monopoly on your work for a _limited_ amount of time, and after that time you get the chance to renew it for another _limited_ amount of time, after which it ultimately becomes public domain, as cultural heritage."
Would people still listen to Beethoven's music, if it had been locked up behind perpetual copyright?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The primary goal of copyright is not to reward authors, but "to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts." - Justice O'Connor, from the majority opinion in Feist v. Rural
So you want other people to show their law degrees, and yet when we ask the same of you, you make a joke of it.
Wow, congrats for working together with some kid named Barack (I went to a school with a guy named Bill, so what?) and well done for working with Greenpeace. None of it is actually relevant to this discussion, now is it?
When you are called upon admitting defeat you start going wildly off topic, and yet you want people to take you seriously? Amazing how your mind works.
As terry pratchett once said in one of his novels, always make easy for people to give you money.(going postal) maybe the music industry could learn from that.
Re: She talks all about label deals and the fact that most artists don't own their own music.
Instead of seeing 'piracy' as a danger to the music world, you could also see it as a lost opportunity.
Clearly, there is a market, but you are not tending to that market properly.
Perhaps the filesharers don't like the limitation of the music being available only in a few select countries (Amazon) or worse, on just one device in certain select countries (iTunes). Or are just too high priced. Or they don't like the limitation of how they can share the music with their friends.
An artist's worst fear shouldn't be filesharing, it should be obscurity, unless you're one of those rare artists who would gladly remain in the background, with as few as possible exposure to the outside world to keep the work pure.
Besides Hulu losing developers. They also will lose the war against "piracy" as with piracy you can put the downloaded material on your set-top box like Boxee and play the files.
Thus, with piracy you still have a better product than through Hulu.
When are the suits going to realize that they have to provide a better product in order to compete, not a worse product?
How much would Gimp use go up if people actually had to buy Photoshop?
How large would Photoshop's market presence be, were it not for the ease of pirating of the software? The pirating of the software actually helped it gain the marketshare.
Have fun with your blank webpages. Because the caching mechanism in your browser, which your browser does automagically, is also making a copy of the webpage you are viewing.
In fact, by viewing this comment you in breach of my copyright, but it's okay, I give you permission to read my comments.
Why focus on trying to punish people you don't like, when you have so many opportunities to happily engage with people you do like?
In some cases they are the very same people. Some people have done something that content creators don't like (downloading a movie, a book, a tv-series, a song), and yet became the very people that content creators like (raving about something to their friends, who then bought the content, or bought it themselves, or went to concerts/writers tours/cinemas)...
So trying to sue those people actually hurts those people that the content creators would like.
I am sick and tired of the big companies in the world think they own the world, but owe no accountability to anyone. The entitlement of these companies... I just don't have words for it.
We have:
- very misaligned copyright laws (skewed in the direction of the big media corporations rather than the artists and the public), the world over, that harm rather than stimulate creativity. (and according to a debat recently held in NL on copyright and legal/illegal downloading, our government can't even change those laws without raising a lot of heckles with other countries, as these laws are deeply embedded in lots of treaties and with ACTA coming, it is only going to get worse)
- patent laws that harm rather than promote innovation.
- companies that think they are entitled to a lot more than they should.
- Justice skewed in the direction towards the rich. (The team with the most expensive lawyers almost always win)
You can't also know for sure that the movie or cd you are downloading is an illegal source.
Lots of bands nowadays use bittorrent and other p2p services to promote/distribute their wares.
So, how can a 'simple consumer' tell, what is a legal offering, and what's not?
On the post: Four Years In, How Successful Has Hollywood's Attack On The Pirate Bay Been?
Re: he goodwill towards the companies that run the MPAA and the RIAA has dropped below zero.
I, for one, don't like piracy, but I also don't like Big Media (MPAA and the RIAA).
But if there is no other way for me to access that content, then I have no other choice but to download it. Case in point, lots of TV-series in the US won't ever get aired in NL (or years after they've been aired in the US). Nor will the DVDs be playable on my hardware, as they are Region 1 encoded, and I have a region 2 dvd-player (sadly it's not capable of being region-free). So what other choice do I have? I want to pay for it, but I can't, as I am not offered that opportunity.
On the post: Four Years In, How Successful Has Hollywood's Attack On The Pirate Bay Been?
Re: More silly Pirate Logic
On the post: Four Years In, How Successful Has Hollywood's Attack On The Pirate Bay Been?
Re: Making your customers angry will only result in losses.
On the post: Four Years In, How Successful Has Hollywood's Attack On The Pirate Bay Been?
Re: Or are you seriously arguing that this fight had positive net results?
This fight they are fighting right now, is not gaining them anything. If anything, they are getting themselves painted as cheezy Bond villains. The goodwill towards the companies that run the MPAA and the RIAA has dropped below zero. What do you do when people hate you? Sue them more?
The recording industry is the most hated industry in the world right now. All because of this fight. Is that a positive net result? Or a negative one?
On the post: Four Years In, How Successful Has Hollywood's Attack On The Pirate Bay Been?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Mike and many others here in the comment threads are talking about a CHANGE in copyright.
Please not to be confusing the two.
Only those who are opposing Mike's view, like yourselves, are talking about abolishing.
On the post: Four Years In, How Successful Has Hollywood's Attack On The Pirate Bay Been?
Re: US Lawmakers Target The Pirate Bay, Other Sites
There are still people making movies, writing books, creating music. So what exactly is your point?
On the post: Four Years In, How Successful Has Hollywood's Attack On The Pirate Bay Been?
Re: It really does make you wonder why the MPAA and the RIAA have bothered with all of this. It hasn't even remotely slowed file sharing down.
Good luck with that, could you start in Somalia?
Oh and I'll hold Johnny Depp for you, so you can beat him up for portraying a pirate and making piracy cool.
Oh you mean copyright infringement? Well, given that you yourself infringed on the NYTimes copyright just a few days ago. I think you should check your own moral principles.
On the post: ABA Journal Highlights How The Music Industry Is Thriving And How Copyright Might Not Be That Important
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Why did he explain copyright as a natural right in the Federalist
I want my public domain back. Right now the public is being cheated out of their cultural heritage, by greeding corporations and their lobby groups.
Perpetual copyright will not help the 'poor and starving' artist. All it will do, is have him or her languish in obscurity.
On the post: ABA Journal Highlights How The Music Industry Is Thriving And How Copyright Might Not Be That Important
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Copyright and patents today are immoral, unbalanced, unfair and a threat to the health of society.
Fact is, copyright was once meant as a social contract between artist and public. "You get a monopoly on your work for a _limited_ amount of time, and after that time you get the chance to renew it for another _limited_ amount of time, after which it ultimately becomes public domain, as cultural heritage."
Would people still listen to Beethoven's music, if it had been locked up behind perpetual copyright?
On the post: ABA Journal Highlights How The Music Industry Is Thriving And How Copyright Might Not Be That Important
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The primary goal of copyright is not to reward authors, but "to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts." - Justice O'Connor, from the majority opinion in Feist v. Rural
Wow, congrats for working together with some kid named Barack (I went to a school with a guy named Bill, so what?) and well done for working with Greenpeace. None of it is actually relevant to this discussion, now is it?
When you are called upon admitting defeat you start going wildly off topic, and yet you want people to take you seriously? Amazing how your mind works.
On the post: ABA Journal Highlights How The Music Industry Is Thriving And How Copyright Might Not Be That Important
On the post: ABA Journal Highlights How The Music Industry Is Thriving And How Copyright Might Not Be That Important
Re: She talks all about label deals and the fact that most artists don't own their own music.
Clearly, there is a market, but you are not tending to that market properly.
Perhaps the filesharers don't like the limitation of the music being available only in a few select countries (Amazon) or worse, on just one device in certain select countries (iTunes). Or are just too high priced. Or they don't like the limitation of how they can share the music with their friends.
An artist's worst fear shouldn't be filesharing, it should be obscurity, unless you're one of those rare artists who would gladly remain in the background, with as few as possible exposure to the outside world to keep the work pure.
On the post: How Depressing Must Your Job Be If Its Focus Is On Breaking What The Technology Allows
Thus, with piracy you still have a better product than through Hulu.
When are the suits going to realize that they have to provide a better product in order to compete, not a worse product?
On the post: Joe Konrath Explains Why Authors Shouldn't Fear File Sharing
Re:
How large would Photoshop's market presence be, were it not for the ease of pirating of the software? The pirating of the software actually helped it gain the marketshare.
On the post: Joe Konrath Explains Why Authors Shouldn't Fear File Sharing
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
In fact, by viewing this comment you in breach of my copyright, but it's okay, I give you permission to read my comments.
On the post: Joe Konrath Explains Why Authors Shouldn't Fear File Sharing
Re: Re: Re: addendum
[citation needed]
On the post: Joe Konrath Explains Why Authors Shouldn't Fear File Sharing
In some cases they are the very same people. Some people have done something that content creators don't like (downloading a movie, a book, a tv-series, a song), and yet became the very people that content creators like (raving about something to their friends, who then bought the content, or bought it themselves, or went to concerts/writers tours/cinemas)...
So trying to sue those people actually hurts those people that the content creators would like.
On the post: Would A Moron In A Hurry Be Confused Between A Huge Luxury Retailer And A Small Roadside Cafe?
We have:
- very misaligned copyright laws (skewed in the direction of the big media corporations rather than the artists and the public), the world over, that harm rather than stimulate creativity. (and according to a debat recently held in NL on copyright and legal/illegal downloading, our government can't even change those laws without raising a lot of heckles with other countries, as these laws are deeply embedded in lots of treaties and with ACTA coming, it is only going to get worse)
- patent laws that harm rather than promote innovation.
- companies that think they are entitled to a lot more than they should.
- Justice skewed in the direction towards the rich. (The team with the most expensive lawyers almost always win)
Stop this world! I want off.
On the post: Supreme Court Asked To Explore Whether 'Innocent Infringement' Is A Legit Response In File Sharing Cases
Re: I have a new theory called Burger King
On the post: Supreme Court Asked To Explore Whether 'Innocent Infringement' Is A Legit Response In File Sharing Cases
Re:
Lots of bands nowadays use bittorrent and other p2p services to promote/distribute their wares.
So, how can a 'simple consumer' tell, what is a legal offering, and what's not?
Next >>