The US Entertainment Industry thinks it rules the world

[Devonavar]

I get a bit disturbed when I read sentences like this in our national newspaper...

Whole article.

[quote]“The industry groups feel very strongly that we need to ratchet this up,â€

[qviri]

I, for one, welcome our new IIPA overlords.

[Runn3r]

Take out the "Entertainment Industry" words from the topic title and you are probably CLOSER to the REAL problem! hehe

Everything else are mere symptons and/or logical extensions of the ACTUAL problem

regards
Runn3r

[nutball]

Seems to me that if "this industry" is so concerned that their "intellectual" property is at risk in Canada, or indeed anywhere else, then their first step should be to immediately stop selling their products in that country. Nothing says "we're worried about you" like the tough love of a trade embargo.

[wussboy]

Unlike in the United States and most other developed countries, videotaping movies in theatres is not illegal in Canada.

I like how that sentence implies that Canada is not a developed nation. I may be in the UK now, but I'm Canadian through and through and this pisses me off.

This stuff makes me so frustrated, and I feel powerless to do anything about it. The DMCA is ruining culture and making criminals out of a huge chunk of the population to protect the interests of a few people. It's not even the artists, either. Grrrr....

[andyb]

The US industries are greedy and manipulative, and should not put pressure on their government, let alone another countries government to forwrd their agenda - there agenda is profit/suing.

An interesting way to look at piracy.

If someone steals something for profit, that is piracy.
If someone steals something for their own use but would otherwise buy it if they could not steal it, that is piracy.
If someone steals something that they would never have bought, but have only stolen it because they can, then that is not piracy.

The above is wrong from the basis of greedy organisations/people, however is it wrong if that organisation/person was never going to get the money anyway.???

I belive that is not the case, you only have to look at the developing world to see that hardly anyone actually buys software/films/music etc etc because they cant afford it. The fact that they can afford the computer is a side-issue, if they new that they could never afford the software/films/music would they have ever bought the PC - no they wouldnt.

So strictly speaking the PC hardware industry is blooming because of piracy, and in the future when that pirate/piracy ridden country can afford their warez they might just buy them, therefore in the long term piracy will actually benefit those greedy companys.

And again, would people bother stealing things if the sell price of that item was not so high to start with, again this is down to greedyness, if things cost less they would sell more of them. Asas the company would make a smaller profit overall, so this will never happen.

These comanies have essentially created the "home" piracy market because of their greed, lets face it would anyone bother stealing something if it was a commodity item and not a premium item.

And people also pirate things out of anger/frustration about being charged a hefty price over the cost in another country, this fact alone causes those companies to loose millions of sales. People say why should I pay £1 per song when it costs $1.50 in the US, which equates to £0.77, they just lost another 10,000 sales because of that fact alone - people dont like being ripped off.


Andy

[CA_Steve]

So much opportunity for bashing...so little time.

Yep, the US Entertainment industry is out of control. They are dinosaurs sinking in a La Brea Tar Pit of their own making - rather than evolving with the times and technology, they utilize lawyers and lobbyists to strong-arm consumers and congressmen to get their way.

Instead of provide DRM-free content at a reasonable price, they opt to sell DRM-bugged content at prices beyond the sweet spot in the price/demand curve, and then wonder why CD sales are dropping.

The fellows at the RIAA got their asses handed to them last week in their Sue the Moms, Save the Industrycase. I can only hope for more of these type of results.

[Mescalero]

So strictly speaking the PC hardware industry is blooming because of piracy,

Not just PC industry. Does anybody, including Apple, think that there would be so many sold 0GB Ipods (and other mp3 players) if it hadn't been for Napster and the whole scene it started? Would people have adopted fast broadband internet as quickly if it hadn't enabled them access to all this free content?
Piracy may have cost the entertainemnt industry some money but overall I think industry and technology has profited from piracy.

[nici]

Well who would need broadband if it wasn't for downloading large files..? I remember downloading music with a 56k modem, that was nice. This was before P2P. Online multiplayer also worked just fine, with anyone having a ping under 100 being called a low ping bastard. But that's off-topic.

Actually when you think about it, we have a lot of things to thank piracy for.

Now i just download stuff to try it out, if i like it a lot i will buy the record. If i don't like it, or there is just one or two good tracks, i don't feel like it's worth paying for. Sot he stuff i downlaod is basically stuff that i would not buy anyway, so who is losing money on this i ask? If anything it's free advertising for the artists, i might buy their next album, or tell about them to a friend who goes wild and buys their whole discography.

[andyb]

Its official:

Piracy is "Trivial"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6364953.stm


Andy

[Kaleid]

It's not just the enterteinment industry...google "full spectrum dominance".

[Trip]

If someone steals something that they would never have bought, but have only stolen it because they can, then that is not piracy.

Err, it's still theft though it doesn't harm the original owner.

You couldn't know whether a person would have purchased the property.

I think the focus should be on what the negatives are to policing. Does the governing unit have the power to do x or would such be an outstep of its bounds. Is there potential for abuse?

The best possible solution ought to be made, but there will always be crime. It's unfair as Devonar said to narrowly consider the issue from the view of the entertainment industry.

It seems reasonable to me to punish Canada with trade reduction for not respecting American copyright laws, but I'm not all that familiar with the issue. I certainly am more concerned with big government and big business policing than with the entertainment industry's financial health, but at the same time do not want side with thieves if a reasonable solution can be found. If I knew more, I'd take more of a stance...

[nici]

Now let's assume i download a bands discography because my friend recommends them, and out of six albums i find that three are worth paying for and i buy them, what's the problem? If i hadn't downloaded all the albums i would not have bought any of them, or maybe just one. I know it's wrong in the eyes of the law, but why? I get records i like, the record company gets money, everyone should be happy.

What i think record companies should do is offer lossless and DRM free music for download, i would buy it. At the same time we would get rid of the limitations of CDs, which are only 44.1kHz/16bit. A computer could easily play 48/24 for example, it would be better than a CD, and it would pollute a lot less because it doesn't need a physical CD and a crapload of logistics.

The compressed music i can buy over the net now is not worth much, since it's not near cd or vinyl quality it should also be half the price or cheaper. Also because of strict DRM the usability and backup options could be limited.

[qviri]

Well who would need broadband if it wasn't for downloading large files..?

One word: porn. "If porn didn't exist everyone would still have 30 MB hard drives."

I know it's wrong in the eyes of the law, but why?

Because the law's retarded.

It's true about the free samples though, I've seen it happen over and over again with music. I've also seen it happen (with companies' approval) with those free food samples they give out at grocery stores. I'll also note that drug peddlers give out free samples to get people hooked -- I'm actually rather surprised the industry has not noticed the similarity.

It seems reasonable to me to punish Canada with trade reduction for not respecting American copyright laws

Nobody involved in this issue is interested in actually preventing any kind of exports to Canada or imports from Canada, or protection of their intellectual assets or whatever. If they were, they wouldn't be talking, instead they'd cease all the exports to this silly little country and that'd be that; see nutball's post. They're just using this as a threat that they pretend Canadians will pretend scares them to force Canada into tighter copyright control.

I kind of wish there was a widely-read newspaper with balls enough to print a headline "AMERICANS TRY TO FORCE THEIR POLICIES ON CANADA; AVRO ARROW ALL OVER AGAIN" instead of this wishy-washy crap Devonavar quoted.

[Trip]

If they were, they wouldn't be talking, instead they'd cease all the exports to this silly little country and that'd be that; see nutball's post. They're just using this as a threat that they pretend Canadians will pretend scares them to force Canada into tighter copyright control.

You think it'd be better for the US to cease imports and exports than to threaten to do so?

That's absurd... first a nation threatens to take action and then it takes action.

It's true that the US probably won't make good on its threat, but why should you be more outraged by an empty threat? An empty threat is just that: empty and hence nothing.

I must, as usual, be missing something

[Devonavar]

If someone steals something that they would never have bought, but have only stolen it because they can, then that is not piracy.

Err, it's still theft though it doesn't harm the original owner.

But it's not theft if nothing was taken. It may be piracy, but it's not theft. Piracy is about unauthorized copies; the original remains intact an in the possession of its rightful owner. Lost potential income is not theft; if it was, companies could accuse their competitors of thievery.

[quote="Trip]It seems reasonable to me to punish Canada with trade reduction for not respecting American copyright laws, but I'm not all that familiar with the issue.[/quote]

This is true but irrelevant because it's not American copyright law that's at issue here. It's Canadian copyright law that is being disrespected here. The IIPA may represent American businesses, but these businesses are operating in Canada and they are bound by Canadian law. The IIPA's use of the American government to put pressure on Canadian law shows a clear disrespect for our laws, and I see no reason why Canada should change its laws to suit foreign companies. Canada makes laws in its own interest, thank you very much.

That said, I realize that this issue is larger than my summary above, since camcording in Canada allegedly contributes to piracy in the United States, thereby indirectly abetting violations of American copyright law. However, I don't think that a difference between American and Canadian copyright law can be construed as Canada disrespecting American copyright, especially since the practice of camcording in theaters for commercial purposes is already illegal in Canada.

If the IIPA is really as upset as they say they are, they are welcome to carry out their threat and stop doing business in Canada. I would welcome that, as I can think of many talented, starving Canadian artists who are well qualified to fill the vacuum.

However, I think I am really just calling their bluff, as it is not in their interest to pull out of Canada. Not only would they lose access to our market, but they would end up creating a situation like China or Russia (or Brazil or...) where piracy of their products has some moral justification, as there would be no reasonable mechanism to obtain their products legally.

[Devonavar]

You think it'd be better for the US to cease imports and exports than to threaten to do so?

In the case of American media, yes; see the above post.

It's true that the US probably won't make good on its threat, but why should you be more outraged by an empty threat? An empty threat is just that: empty and hence nothing.

I'm upset because I'm insulted. I also think these threats are empty, but I'm insulted because the IIPA is acting as though it were entitled to run our country. I'm upset because the IIPA is acting with an arrogance that is not matched by their importance. I'm upset because they are acting hurt because we did not immediately capitulate to their demands, as though Canada were nothing but a tamed beast or slave that quakes in fear at its master's demands. I am not afraid of them, and I am insulted that they think I should be.

[nici]

I know it's wrong in the eyes of the law, but why?

Because the law's retarded.

It's true about the free samples though, I've seen it happen over and over again with music. I've also seen it happen (with companies' approval) with those free food samples they give out at grocery stores. I'll also note that drug peddlers give out free samples to get people hooked -- I'm actually rather surprised the industry has not noticed the similarity.

Some bands have free complete songs to download from their official site, but i don't see this happening with any band signed to a big record company.

Free samples work. Whether it is food, music or drugs make no difference.

[andyb]

Looks like China might be next.

I guess that their answer will be "phuck off" knowing how good the Chinese government is with foreign relations.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6367419.stm

Yes I have problems with counterfieted car parts that might fail and cause injury and death, or dodgy drugs that might containe the same shyte that drug peddlars put into their wares, and copied books and other goods. However when you are talking about something that actually has substance, just how much can a pirated book save you.???


Andy

[qviri]

camcording in Canada allegedly contributes to piracy in the United States

Actually, I've a story about that too... Last year I downloaded a telesync (taped video and audio from the FM transmitters in the cinema) of a major Hollywood movie. Upon watching it, I have decided that I must see it on a larger screen, thereby contributing to the profits of industry at issue here. I go to movies about two times a year, so it's pretty safe to say I wouldn't have gone if it wasn't for the telesync.

[shunx]

Yes I have problems with counterfieted car parts that might fail and cause injury and death, or dodgy drugs that might containe the same shyte that drug peddlars put into their wares, and copied books and other goods. However when you are talking about something that actually has substance, just how much can a pirated book save you.???

There are people in China selling counterfeit medicine and milk for babies, fake products which are not only worthless but are genuinely dangerous or lethal. When someone sells counterfeit designer clothes or watches, it may take some profit away from the creators, but the goods serve a function and can't physically kill anyone (overly restrictive underpants notwithstanding.)

As far as the exclusive rights to control the distribution of virtual, non-physical objects which can be infinitely duplicated almost freely, that's a problem only for content creators who have an issue with sharing. It's somewhat ironic to hear complaints from supposed artists when people actually pay attention to their work by massively distributing it; throughout history, entertainers earned their bread by actually going out to perform in front of an audience, and by continuously writing new content for their clients. They can still choose to do this instead of antagonizing their audience. The top musicians today can earn dozens of millions of dollars a year by touring alone.

[AZBrandon]

Looks like China might be next.

I guess that their answer will be "phuck off" knowing how good the Chinese government is with foreign relations.

I disagree with your assessment of how China will react. Right now they're our #1 non-oil trading partner in the world. We send more non-oil money to them than any other country in the world so they are determined to keep us happy so as to keep the dollars flowing. What they will do is promise to adhere to whatever we tell them to. I'm not saying they will enforce anything, but they'll have representatives give convincing speeches so as to make the folks in the US feel good about themselves, then do nothing. It's win-win.

[Trip]

If someone steals something that they would never have bought, but have only stolen it because they can, then that is not piracy.

Err, it's still theft though it doesn't harm the original owner.

But it's not theft if nothing was taken. It may be piracy, but it's not theft.

I see and when in Canada they must follow Canadian law which allows some of what the US calls piracy.

This is true but irrelevant because it's not American copyright law that's at issue here.

So you think this is an issue with the owners of the pirated material and not the US itself.

That makes sense.

I see, so it wouldn't be an issue for the US unless Canada itself had violated a previous agreement not to allow what the US considers pirating. But if such laws are standard in Canada, then it's the US businesses that have to learn to work under Canadian law when selling in Canada or else choose not to sell in Canada.

Thanks for clearing it up. Qviri, I had misunderstood you. So, you were right.

[Mike_P]

The US industries are greedy and manipulative, and If someone steals something that they would never have bought, but have only stolen it because they can, then that is not piracy.
Andy

EXACTLY. all these lost profits and revenue numbers ASSUME every person who pirates would have normally purchased their crappy movie/game. This is inflated to suit their needs, as greedy &^%^&'s.

It's all a moot point in ontario, as rogers has killed p2p speeds. which is a WHOLE other topic in itself.

The entertainment industry (mainly movies) should realize it's not going to stop, and embrace it like the music ind. did, sell it cheap online, that will save millions in production lines.

[nzimmers]

Unfortunately, members of organizations like the MPAA and RIAA cannot accept that their world is changing. They are desperately clinging to the what has always been a cash cow for them.....control of the distribution. This is something they just can't do anymore.

If they scale up their legal operations, they will surely see a reaction in the P2P community - sooner or later someone will develop a P2P file sharing application that natively takes advantage of secure encrypted anonymous networks such as "tor" or darknet - which is actually something that's already possible to use for file sharing but requires some knowledge and configuration.

if you could download an application that is absolutely 100% encrypted and anonymous that had the ease of use and installation as current popular P2P software.....would you use it? It's going to be available - the technology is already there, and how fast this becomes available depends on how much pressure the entertainment industry puts on the population.

I might eventually get windows vista....but it's very likely that I won't - considering the deeply embedded DRM in Vista and video drivers with revocable certificates - I don't think I want to allow that kind of control over my PC to the entertainment industry (which are explicitly the ones who can decide the matter)

check out the "security now!" website and their excellent and highly technical podcasts (available on Itunes)

oh, which brings me to another issue, piracy might account for *some* of the lost revenue the entertainment industry has "suffered" over the past few years, but nowdays instead of buying music CD's in download free content like podcasts and watch other free content on the internet. In a small way, I kind of thank them for being such assh*les and giving me a reason to explore what's really out there.

[wussboy]

First: Everyone must read Lawrence Lessig's "Free Culture". Google for it. Guess what? It's free!

Second: He has a great example in that book. The RIAA claims that every downloaded song is a lost sale. However, if you added up the entire number of songs downloaded and subtracted them from the amount of songs that were sold before p2p, you'd have a negative number! By their own argument, legitimate sales should have gone to about -10%. Funny.

[nzimmers]

wow, I just listened to "free culture" great information!

for those that haven't - here's just one gem of information from "Free Culture" (which is available for free btw)

- there's a very good reason why hollywood is in California and not somewhere on the east coast.... Thomas Edison was trying to protect his intellectual property (the movie camera and projector) and many of the new film makers who did not want to pay licensing/royal fees simply moved out to california so they were out of the reach of federal agents untill the patents expired (back then patents expired after 17 years). Hollywood was founded on brazen piracy, outright stealing, and fleeing from law enforcement.

For those of you that don't already know - March is "don't buy anything from the RIAA" month -

[Ralf Hutter]

For those of you that don't already know - March is "don't buy anything from the RIAA" month -

Hmm, I've been observing the "2000 is the don't buy anything from the RIAA millennium" for the past 6+ years.

[Devonavar]

And I've been actively avoiding buying major-label releases since I found out they were suing people. Of course, it helps that I have indy-label taste...

When I do buy major label releases, they tend to be in vinyl form, so the RIAA doesn't get my money in any case.

[CA_Steve]

My two rules of thumb regarding the RIAA are:

- Buy used Cd's
- Buy from the artists at their shows (ok - all indy, but at least I'm maximizing the money going into the musician's pocket).