See my comment above about speeding & driving school for further insight into where I derive my line of thinking at least as to comparing speeding and piracy.
Me = thorough reader but only recently turned active commenter who is having a hard time distinguishing distinct threads in TD's comment section.
Rather than submerge these comments with more words of my replies, please see my above replies regarding speeding and piracy as well as my acknowledgement that I did in fact misstate TD's stance on piracy.
Ps. I've been wanting to reach out to you to say how much I appreciate the reporting TD does, but looks like I don't have to now. Thanks for the hard work!
Just want to acknowledge that you guys are correct in noting that I misstated Techdirt's position. I've looked through some articles I remember agitating me & it is true that they do not take a piracy isn't the problem stance.
Speaking to only my own personal feelings engendered by reading some of these articles, I think what has bothered has really bothered me (& perhaps led to my misstatement) is the relative ease with which it sometimes appears that the problem is address. A common overture of some of the articles has been that piracy can be beneficial or that piracy can be addressed in what I'm assuming is a Spotify-like manner.
And while I agree that the industry needs a new model for content distribution, it just isn't simple. Spotify works because it provides two key benefits: convenience & efficiency. Coming from someone who has pirated a good majority of a variety of different types of content, I actually stopped pirating music long before Spotify came out. Why? Because it just took too god damn long to find music, get it by track, organize it, sort it, keep up with new release.. just TOO much effort was required from me to maintain it.
Spotify alleviated me from having to expend that effort (& for an economical cost! God I really do love Spotify)
BUT for other types of content, TV shows, movies, software, books, a distinct less amount of effort is required to wholly obtain this material through pirated sources. Only a few movies, perhaps a dozen TV shows, a minute amount of software (sometimes updates can be a pain & that is when, like with music, I start weighing whether purchasing it & saving the time is just better for me).
Anyways, I'm sure that if TD has a single-user word limit for comment responses, I've definitely surpassed it, so I'll sign off by repeating I incorrectly stated their position (& maybe perhaps still do not fully capture whatever you perceive to be its essence), but I still think that in wanting to make industry responses look foolish they themselves can make it appear like a solution to the problem is all too easy to come by. More attention to the difficulties of that problem would be nice, but that being said I of course don't expect to have TD address my own personal feelings.
I have to disagree that they have ZERO effect because I think saying that conflates your desired effect with the actual effect.
(bear with me, I realize this is longer than intended but I think worth the read)
Relating back to 16-year-old me during the first months with a car in which I got 3 speeding tickets & had my licensed suspended, I'll never forget how the instructor at my first driving school began his class.
He asked everyone, "Alright, who's here for rolling through a stop sign?" 3/4th of the class raised their hands. "And who's here for speeding?" The remaining 1/4 of the class raised their hand. And then he said one of the more poignant & interesting things I could have imagined a driver instructor would say: "Alright, well you guys here for rolling through the stop sign. You're easy because what you did doesn't make sense since not stopping at stop signs really only saves you a few seconds. You guys here for speeding, however, are more difficult, because what you do actually gets you places meaningfully faster."
And I tell you that story not because I like talking but because it's remained a vivid lesson for me that it's hard to stop people from doing something that provides them a tangible benefit which they desire.
Getting places faster was my benefit. But weighed against the costs to achieve that benefit, it simply was not worth it to pay the fines & loss of driving privilege to continuing to drive like I did.
And bringing this tediously long response full circle, piracy provides a benefit. I can get movies, TV shows, software, books at zero cost with relative ease. However, unlike speeding, there is no real cost weighted against that benefit to make me stop.
For reason of wanting to neither take the time to verify those factual statements nor dig into the relevance of that comparison when considering other possible reasons, I'll just take you at your word that the existence of speed limits does not have an impact on the accident rate.
But I'll do this because I don't even know how accidents got introduced into the equation since it's a measuring factor not apart of the original comparison (speed limit enforcement & number of speeders with piracy & number of piraters).
And while I sincerely appreciate/enjoy the dialogue you & others have provided in my search to understand where I myself fall in the debate on privacy, I just simply also find it hard to believe that, at least in America & somehow controlling for other possible causal factors, highways without speed limits would NOT have more people "speeding" (even though what that would mean in such a world is unclear).
I agree that those with a vested interest in the matter (ie., those in the industry) have unfortunately used their big voice to employ hyperbole that often just does not align with the facts. But, as a few other commenters have pointed, articles like this employ similarly incorrect hyperbole and data to support their side too.
I just wish there was more level headed debate about this issue. As a frequent reader of Techdirt who really appreciates much of the reporting they do, I find it interesting that I disagree with their POV on this topic so heavily.
I feel like Techdirt so strongly suggests piracy isn't a problem, presenting a POV (along with other who some term internet exceptionalists) that I believe is often a cop-out steeming from a believe that online regulation is possible. Perhaps thats true, but that line of thinking prevents innovative thinking/creation that could lead to better ways to regulate online activity in a fair way.
Wholeheartedly support this statement; recent stories of people facing multi-year prison sentences for pirating a movie
However, I don't think that this means, as many have suggested, that punishing infringers is the wrong way to address piracy. Fines, rather than imprisonment, are appropriate &–random inspiration–an expedited review process could enable this to actually be an effective way to address a problem.
An imperfect analogy with a premise I'm hoping is clear, If speeding tickets are an effective to reduce speeding/the # of speeders, can't monetary penalties for infringers also still be an effective way to address piracy?
Because until we find (& really, considering the global nature of piracy, I should say IF we can find) a better solution to address the whack-a-mole problem as to the major sources distributing/enabling distribution of pirated content, I can't see a better way to address the matter.
As example of the problem, I look not to PirateBay but to filestube.to, who recently introduced a streaming video search to their website which makes it so unbelievably easy to view pirated content, with no downloading and no wait to view content others pay for.
So, I get your point that some of the most pirated movies also performed well in the box office, but does that fact mean that piracy is still not harming the people producing the movie?
Because doesn't it also mean they could have earned more money but for piracy?
Speaking from personal experience, I know that I forego watching many movies because a decent pirated copy was available for download.
Oh, don't hate on me just because I'm speaking a view contrary to many people who visit Techdirt.
I do not presume that my concerns about piracy are warranted; rather, I just believe the issue is more debatable than this site gives credit (perhaps you can convince me otherwise). And while I agree that existing solutions are not effective/appropriate ways to deal with the problem of piracy, I also still think that it is in fact a problem that needs to be addressed.
On the hand, I understand what you are saying about how to deal with piracy and the benefits of building consumer goodwill. But on the other hand, I think that outlook is very short-sighted.
Yes, the examples you bring up have gained in popularity because of their stances on piracy, but do you truly believe that is a common occurrence? And even if you did believe such, is anyone except the individual reaping the rewards of that open stance on piracy?
The TV and movie industry require a lot of moving part, and just because someone is achieving celebrity status for a mainstream stance does not mean that it is an effective solution to stopping the continually growing problem of piracy.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by AJ.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not Sure I Agree with Your Premise
Me = thorough reader but only recently turned active commenter who is having a hard time distinguishing distinct threads in TD's comment section.
Re: Re: Not Sure I Agree with Your Premise
Rather than submerge these comments with more words of my replies, please see my above replies regarding speeding and piracy as well as my acknowledgement that I did in fact misstate TD's stance on piracy.
Ps. I've been wanting to reach out to you to say how much I appreciate the reporting TD does, but looks like I don't have to now. Thanks for the hard work!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Not Sure I Agree with Your Premise
Speaking to only my own personal feelings engendered by reading some of these articles, I think what has bothered has really bothered me (& perhaps led to my misstatement) is the relative ease with which it sometimes appears that the problem is address. A common overture of some of the articles has been that piracy can be beneficial or that piracy can be addressed in what I'm assuming is a Spotify-like manner.
And while I agree that the industry needs a new model for content distribution, it just isn't simple. Spotify works because it provides two key benefits: convenience & efficiency. Coming from someone who has pirated a good majority of a variety of different types of content, I actually stopped pirating music long before Spotify came out. Why? Because it just took too god damn long to find music, get it by track, organize it, sort it, keep up with new release.. just TOO much effort was required from me to maintain it.
Spotify alleviated me from having to expend that effort (& for an economical cost! God I really do love Spotify)
BUT for other types of content, TV shows, movies, software, books, a distinct less amount of effort is required to wholly obtain this material through pirated sources. Only a few movies, perhaps a dozen TV shows, a minute amount of software (sometimes updates can be a pain & that is when, like with music, I start weighing whether purchasing it & saving the time is just better for me).
Anyways, I'm sure that if TD has a single-user word limit for comment responses, I've definitely surpassed it, so I'll sign off by repeating I incorrectly stated their position (& maybe perhaps still do not fully capture whatever you perceive to be its essence), but I still think that in wanting to make industry responses look foolish they themselves can make it appear like a solution to the problem is all too easy to come by. More attention to the difficulties of that problem would be nice, but that being said I of course don't expect to have TD address my own personal feelings.
Re: Re: Not Sure I Agree with Your Premise
(bear with me, I realize this is longer than intended but I think worth the read)
Relating back to 16-year-old me during the first months with a car in which I got 3 speeding tickets & had my licensed suspended, I'll never forget how the instructor at my first driving school began his class.
He asked everyone, "Alright, who's here for rolling through a stop sign?" 3/4th of the class raised their hands. "And who's here for speeding?" The remaining 1/4 of the class raised their hand. And then he said one of the more poignant & interesting things I could have imagined a driver instructor would say: "Alright, well you guys here for rolling through the stop sign. You're easy because what you did doesn't make sense since not stopping at stop signs really only saves you a few seconds. You guys here for speeding, however, are more difficult, because what you do actually gets you places meaningfully faster."
And I tell you that story not because I like talking but because it's remained a vivid lesson for me that it's hard to stop people from doing something that provides them a tangible benefit which they desire.
Getting places faster was my benefit. But weighed against the costs to achieve that benefit, it simply was not worth it to pay the fines & loss of driving privilege to continuing to drive like I did.
And bringing this tediously long response full circle, piracy provides a benefit. I can get movies, TV shows, software, books at zero cost with relative ease. However, unlike speeding, there is no real cost weighted against that benefit to make me stop.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Not Sure I Agree with Your Premise
But I'll do this because I don't even know how accidents got introduced into the equation since it's a measuring factor not apart of the original comparison (speed limit enforcement & number of speeders with piracy & number of piraters).
And while I sincerely appreciate/enjoy the dialogue you & others have provided in my search to understand where I myself fall in the debate on privacy, I just simply also find it hard to believe that, at least in America & somehow controlling for other possible causal factors, highways without speed limits would NOT have more people "speeding" (even though what that would mean in such a world is unclear).
Re: Re: Not Sure I Agree with Your Premise
I just wish there was more level headed debate about this issue. As a frequent reader of Techdirt who really appreciates much of the reporting they do, I find it interesting that I disagree with their POV on this topic so heavily.
I feel like Techdirt so strongly suggests piracy isn't a problem, presenting a POV (along with other who some term internet exceptionalists) that I believe is often a cop-out steeming from a believe that online regulation is possible. Perhaps thats true, but that line of thinking prevents innovative thinking/creation that could lead to better ways to regulate online activity in a fair way.
Re: Re: Not Sure I Agree with Your Premise
Wholeheartedly support this statement; recent stories of people facing multi-year prison sentences for pirating a movie
However, I don't think that this means, as many have suggested, that punishing infringers is the wrong way to address piracy. Fines, rather than imprisonment, are appropriate &–random inspiration–an expedited review process could enable this to actually be an effective way to address a problem.
An imperfect analogy with a premise I'm hoping is clear, If speeding tickets are an effective to reduce speeding/the # of speeders, can't monetary penalties for infringers also still be an effective way to address piracy?
Because until we find (& really, considering the global nature of piracy, I should say IF we can find) a better solution to address the whack-a-mole problem as to the major sources distributing/enabling distribution of pirated content, I can't see a better way to address the matter.
As example of the problem, I look not to PirateBay but to filestube.to, who recently introduced a streaming video search to their website which makes it so unbelievably easy to view pirated content, with no downloading and no wait to view content others pay for.
Not Sure I Agree with Your Premise
Because doesn't it also mean they could have earned more money but for piracy?
Speaking from personal experience, I know that I forego watching many movies because a decent pirated copy was available for download.
Oh, don't hate on me just because I'm speaking a view contrary to many people who visit Techdirt.
I do not presume that my concerns about piracy are warranted; rather, I just believe the issue is more debatable than this site gives credit (perhaps you can convince me otherwise). And while I agree that existing solutions are not effective/appropriate ways to deal with the problem of piracy, I also still think that it is in fact a problem that needs to be addressed.
In Consistent Disagreement with Your Stance on Piracy
Yes, the examples you bring up have gained in popularity because of their stances on piracy, but do you truly believe that is a common occurrence? And even if you did believe such, is anyone except the individual reaping the rewards of that open stance on piracy?
The TV and movie industry require a lot of moving part, and just because someone is achieving celebrity status for a mainstream stance does not mean that it is an effective solution to stopping the continually growing problem of piracy.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by AJ.
Submit a story now.
Tools & Services
TwitterFacebook
RSS
Podcast
Research & Reports
Company
About UsAdvertising Policies
Privacy
Contact
Help & FeedbackMedia Kit
Sponsor/Advertise
Submit a Story
More
Copia InstituteInsider Shop
Support Techdirt