A Timeline Of How The Entertainment Industry Made The File Sharing Issue Much Worse For Itself

from the keep-whac-whac-whacing dept

A bunch of folks have sent over the various stories about how Paramount's COO, Fred Huntsberry, recently started claiming that the "new piracy threat" facing Hollywood is "digital lockers." The whole article is a bit silly in a variety of ways, not the least of which is that it's an implicit admission that Hollywood's own tactics have been a complete failure. The funny thing is that even as they're admitting it, you get the feeling they don't realize it. Let's follow the "path" which many people warned about as soon as Napster was sued:
  1. Napster was a Silicon Valley, venture capital-funded startup that tried to bend over backwards to figure out a way for the industry to embrace it and work with it legitimately. The entertainment industry had every opportunity to work out a reasonable deal, and instead took a hardline position, suing the company effectively out of business (though the brand later lived on).
  2. After Napster, just as many people warned, the file sharing market began to fragment and shifted to slightly more distributed operations, such as Grokster, Kazaa and Morpheus. These were a bit more difficult to work with, but all still involved company entities that had an interest in working with the entertainment industry. Once again, they were sued out of business.
  3. After Grokster, again the market fragmented even more, and a lot of the interest shifted to BitTorrent and tracker sites. These sites were often outside of the US, and not particularly interested in working with the entertainment industry to actually set up any kind of business relationship. And, still, the industry sued to get them shut down (a process that is still ongoing), while also seeking to pass specific laws against them.
  4. So here we are, and the market has fragmented even more and people have been driven even further underground to things like private cyberlocker sites. Hollywood is claiming that many of these sites are run by organized crime groups, though, we've yet to see any evidence to support that.
So look at the progression here. There was really one company initially, which was entirely aboveboard and open to working with the entertainment industry. At every step down the ladder -- each one pushed forward by the entertainment industry's own lawsuits and regulatory efforts -- the market becomes more fragmented and more underground, with less and less of an ability for the entertainment industry to embrace and work with them.
"Sometimes these sites look better than the legitimate sites," Huntsberry said. "That's the irony."
That's not irony, Fred, that's your company and your colleagues failing for over a decade to come up with a way to properly satisfy consumer demand.

All in all, you actually start to wonder if Hollywood has this need to make up some big scary bogeyman to keep pushing its legislative agenda of granting more and more control and taking away more and more user rights. At first it was "file sharing sites." Then those were sued out of existence. So then it was BitTorrent trackers. And now its lockers. In fact, it's amusing that as part of Huntsberry's talk he basically admitted that three strikes laws aren't enough because they don't do anything to stop these file lockers. In other words, "we fought, and are still fighting, for three strikes laws that we know are useless." It's as if the entertainment industry has to just keep pointing out some huge new threat so that the government keeps paying attention to them.

Along those lines, techflaws.org points us to a German publication's coverage of the same Huntsberry talk, and it's interesting that The Hollywood Reporter version of the story appears to have conveniently left out the part where Huntsberry blames Google for all of this (that's a Google translation of the original). In that one, he calls Google the "biggest leech." Of course, the courts recently shot down that claim, but it looks like Viacom and its subsidiaries are sticking to the claim.

What's amazing, of course, is that if the folks at Paramount and other studios and record labels stopped looking for enemies everywhere, they would have realized there were tons of opportunities to adapt and embrace these things a decade ago. But each step of the way they've made things more difficult for themselves. It's a living case study in how not to respond to a disruptive market change.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 25th, 2010 @ 6:34pm

    Interesting, what are these "file lockers" you speak of?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Ian, Jun 25th, 2010 @ 6:53pm

    This is terribly written.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 25th, 2010 @ 7:26pm

    welcome to friday at techdirt.

    tune back in monday when mike will attempt to post something that isnt total dreck.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jun 25th, 2010 @ 7:36pm

      Re:

      What a brilliant refutation of the points made in the post, TAM.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jun 25th, 2010 @ 8:36pm

        Re: Re:

        i am not tam, and there is nothing here to refute. its a shallow post about nothing, attempting to stitch together no related items into some sort of funeral dirge for the music industry. it isnt even amusing to read.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Jun 25th, 2010 @ 9:09pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          You are TAM, and I note that you will not even attempt to explain how the industry has not made things worse for themselves by going from a singular willing-to-negotiate entity to a series of distributed individual sites.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            Anonymous Coward, Jun 25th, 2010 @ 9:20pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            It's like the drug wars. The police bust up the central gangs and what happens? The gangs split into smaller, decentralized components and it makes things even worse.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              identicon
              Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 11:41pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              The difference is that drugs are a finite commodity, so busting up a huge drug supplier lowers the supply, even temporarily, and raises the price, keeping them out of the hands of those who can't afford it. When you fracture the distribution of an infinite good, like music files, it just continues to grow along parallel paths, making it more and more difficult to stop. Physical distribution is differant in that it takes considerable resources and time to actually distribute the good, making it possible to beat back the tide. With the ease, speed, fragmented nature, and nearly zero cost of digital distribution, the flow is impossible to stop.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                icon
                PaulT (profile), Jun 27th, 2010 @ 1:05am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                Yep, this is the thing they don't seem to understand. If you shut down a source for "pirate" digital files, there's only a very temporary downturn as people look for the next source. There's always a next source, and file sharing always increases as a new prosecution takes place as it works as an advertisement for that source.

                As with drugs, the secret to reducing "piracy" is to reduce the demand, not the supply.

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            Jay (profile), Jun 25th, 2010 @ 9:58pm

            Wow

            So glad that you took the time to actually refute the logic instead of throwing out rhetoric.

            Now we know who to ignore when the only thing you can do is the very same as certain other people that make baseless arguments.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 12:35am

          Re: Re: Re:

          The music industry? Don't you mean the recording industry? Rookie mistake!

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      The Groove Tiger (profile), Jun 26th, 2010 @ 9:52am

      Re:

      Mandatory friday comment by tammy!

      "Blah blah blah friday sucks blah blah I love lasagna blah I hate mike you killed my father prepare to die."

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 10:14am

      Re:

      It must be Friday, that's why TAM doesn't have anything substantive to say.

      Tune back Saturday, where TAM makes an even bigger fool of himself. Stay tuned, don't go away, you don't want to miss it.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      mkam (profile), Jun 28th, 2010 @ 5:33am

      Re:

      Why are you on here reading this then? Plenty of other places to go read tech news. I don't understand.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 25th, 2010 @ 8:26pm

    cyberlocker sites are websites that allow users to upload whatever files they want within certain parameters such as size.
    the uploader then gives a URL that links back to the uploaded file to the person(s) they want to share the file with.
    these sorts of sites include rapidshare, megaupload, easyshare etc.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 25th, 2010 @ 9:56pm

    I hereby predict that the "next piracy threat" will be 10TB lightweight flash drives distributed via a network of carrier pigeons. Better get the lobbyists working on some pigeon scaremongering right away...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 25th, 2010 @ 10:08pm

    I don't know why they're so surprised?

    They're currently to implement for Three Strikes law which means entire households can be disconnected for one person's wrongdoing, using only an IP address as evidence.

    Why is it shocking that the pirates simply stopped using the services that disclosed their IP addresses or found a way to mask it? To me, that would be the only logical consequence of a law like this.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 25th, 2010 @ 10:13pm

    This is a pretty neat article, but don't forget Napster is nowhere near the first part of this timeline.

    Bulletin Board Systems (BBS):
    Publicly available message and file repositories.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulletin_board_system

    Usenet:
    Sort of a precursor to modern internet forums, people could post messages and files under a hierarchically organized system of topics. Hosting was usually provided by the ISP running the Usenet server. Usenet is still in use today for file swapping although more and more ISPs are closing their Usenet servers under pressure from media companies.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet

    Private FTPs:
    Serious traders still run sFTP servers with terabytes of music, movies, games, cracks, app, and anything else. Access is often traded via IRC communities. Usually an up/down ratio is enforced for anonymous users.

    Gated file share communities like Hotline:
    A wealth of applications sprang up that incorporated messaging and lists of file share servers. Access is usually traded through IRC and favors, sometimes by contributing a certain amount of verified warez to a person's share before being given free access.

    Sneakernet/Lan parties:
    You better believe this one is still in use today. Space is so cheap and local networks are so fast that it's easy to bring your desktop with your entire collection to a party and come away with hundreds of gigs of new goodies.

    Soooo many other things could be listed, like gophernet and xdcc communities. I'd love to see an article paralleling the development of all those things with media company attempts to shut them down.

    The reason people say that further efforts will just drive communities to go farther underground and become more advanced is that it's true. We've been through hundreds of iterations of this so far and the amount of progress made on stopping the widespread sharing of copyrighted material is less than 0. Filesharing is more prolific than ever.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      FUTURE ACTA ENFORCER, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 12:34am

      Re:

      For now.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 7:18am

      Re:

      there are plenty of systems that, when not abused or made generally available would be tolerated. but like anything, if they get too big, they will end up in the legal sites of the industry guns.

      usenet is getting squeezed on all sides, its life is almost up.

      private ftps require an actual owner to operate. as more and more people end up on the bad end of legal charges, there are fewer people willing to be on the hook.

      gated communities share the same problem, they have owners who can be found personally liable. even if they come out ahead legally (think oink) the personal costs of getting there are insane.

      lan parties with the intention of sharing files is a legal situation ripe for action. authorities only need to get one person 'inside' to spot the action, and then they can swoop down and take action directly. there is potential that parties like these would not only be violating contract law (copyright) but could be considered a criminal conspiracy, worthy of actual police action. it would be on the level of burning dvds and selling them at a flea market.

      in the end, any community or system that becomes widely known will get slapping into the dirt. as communities go further underground, they seperate themselves from the mainstream and no longer are of great concern as the general public will not be part of them. at that point, piracy isnt an issue. in the end, the industries dont expect to make piracy disappear, just to make it so that the vast majority of the public no longer participates or sees it as a valid, safe, and legal option.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 7:54am

        Re: Re:

        Are you some kind of pirate expert?

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 9:25am

        Re: Re:

        "usenet is getting squeezed on all sides, its life is almost up."

        Only because of obsolescence. It's being replaced by superior technology.

        "private ftps require an actual owner to operate. as more and more people end up on the bad end of legal charges, there are fewer people willing to be on the hook."

        1 percent of the population can only enforce so many laws against the rest of the 99 percent of the population being that 1 percent of the population can conduct far less law enforcement labor than the quantity of law violating labor that the rest of the 99 percent can conduct. It's impossible to go after that many people, you can't jail everyone our jails simply don't have the capacity or the funds to maintain themselves. Tyrannies have failed throughout history for good reason, they are unsustainable. When you have too many laws they become unenforceable being that the population breaking the laws far outnumbers those enforcing the laws and hence far outdoes them in terms of labor efforts. and when everything everyone does becomes illegal the law becomes meaningless. You can't control the every action of everyone and law enforcement already can't control the drug war, IN JAIL, yet alone out of jail (or even in China), despite the tens of billions of dollars spent per year and criminal sanctions.

        "as communities go further underground, they seperate themselves from the mainstream and no longer are of great concern as the general public will not be part of them."

        No, they simply better organize themselves to avoid getting caught. The drug wars are dangerous for good reason, because enforcement is harsh. Gangs create their own governments with their own rules and enforcement entities with weapons so that they can sell drugs to anyone they pleas. and pretty much anyone right from the general public right now can buy drugs with little to no risk of getting in trouble. To the extent that people don't buy drugs it's only because drugs are bad for us and doing drugs is not in our best interest, not because anyone really fears law enforcement. Piracy does not suffer this same dynamic and most people see nothing wrong with breaking our current laws.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 10:02am

          Re: Re: Re:

          and not to mention that drug dealers and people who buy alcohol and drugs are mostly uneducated potheads. Yet look at the level of sophistication they have managed to accomplish. Imagine the level of sophistication that groups of educated people, not on drugs with far clearer thinking minds, can accomplish, when compared to most cops and politicians who are mostly tech and academically illiterate in comparison. The educated people will easily run circles around the cops many degrees over. They will create black markets where they produce their own technology and sell it (I've seen it) or alter existing hardware to make it do what they want (as in the case with those who pirate satellite or those who used to unscramble scrambled cable signals or those who used to take apart playstations and install chips on them to make them play games and later built and sold their own game shark like devices to attach to Playstations to make them play pirated games). and black market technology will only get better and better and the costs necessary to give cops the necessary education to properly understand the technology will be expensive to the point of being unfeasible to administer without substantially deterring people from becoming cops. and we already have a shortage of cops as it is with respect to the number of cops necessary to enforce all of our current nefarious laws despite the many many billions of dollars spent per year on law enforcement and the complete failure the war on drugs is.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 9:28am

        Re: Re:

        Hey genius, there is lots and lots of sneakernet that has nothing to do with Lan parties. Good luck breaking into my tight circle of a few file sharing friends - you are not welcome here. Any busting you do will be at least 2 degrees removed from me. Contrary to popular belief, sneakernet is way more efficient than any online solution - takes a little more coordination but pays off bigger and more quickly.

        Bottom line, I'd be more than happy to pay a reasonable price get music or movies or whatever in a format I actually want. Unfortunately, the industry does not sell what I want to buy. I am forced to find another way. Wake up and start selling what people actually want to buy and then all the other crap the industry is fighting so hard will become irrelevant.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 11:28am

          Re: Re: Re:

          "Hey genius, there is lots and lots of sneakernet that has nothing to do with Lan parties. Good luck breaking into my tight circle of a few file sharing friends - you are not welcome here. Any busting you do will be at least 2 degrees removed from me. Contrary to popular belief, sneakernet is way more efficient than any online solution - takes a little more coordination but pays off bigger and more quickly.
          " - the speed at which you share with your immediate friends isnt fast enough to cause the same issue as open file trading online. if you only trade with friends you trust, it is likely that the material you pirate isnt exactly turning into millions of copies. if you are too ignorant to see the difference, well, enjoy wearing down your sneakers.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            Richard (profile), Jun 26th, 2010 @ 4:50pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Ever heard of "Six degrees of separation"?

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 6:57pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            "if you only trade with friends you trust, it is likely that the material you pirate isnt exactly turning into millions of copies"

            My friends have friends that I do not associate with, those friends of friends also share music and so on. Even with sneakernet information travels quickly. You can believe that the sum of sneakernet shares is not in the millions but you are wrong.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              identicon
              Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 8:08pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              I, for one, agree. My own experience tells me that this person is wrong. I do not encourage piracy but even during the days where most people I knew had dial up connections where very little was pirated over the Internet I knew tons of people in my school that pirated music and operating systems and software just off of CD's that they either exchanged or sold for dirt cheap (ie: $5 for a CD full of music or software or whatnot). Anyone can practically request anything they wanted from certain people and those people would either have it or find someone who has it. It was easy to find someone who has what anyone else wanted. Granted, now most people pirate stuff off the Internet and this sneakernet market died as a result but the point is that rampant piracy is unstoppable. Like I said, I've known markets where people would sell chips with instructions on it that required people to take apart PlayStations (tech illiterate high school freshmen even could and did it) just to install a chip into the playstation to enable it to play pirated games. and people sold pirated games sneakernet style, the Internet was still too slow for it to be feasible. Soon afterwords that became obsolete as the black market started developing and selling a game shark like device that you simply plugged into the back of your PlayStation to play pirated games. Again, highschooler (as young as Freshmen) were selling this stuff. You have no idea what the black market is capable of.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 9:44am

        Re: Re:

        "lan parties with the intention of sharing files is a legal situation ripe for action. authorities only need to get one person 'inside' to spot the action, and then they can swoop down and take action directly."

        Yet the drug wars are still a complete failure. If law enforcement really wants to crack down on piracy then piracy gangs will create harsher and harsher resistance against insiders, creating their own laws and enforcement thereof. Their level of organization and sophistication will increase. Authorities will get one person inside but once others have figured out who this one person is they will simply reform and exclude that outsider. Authorities will have to find another insider each time and it can't be from any known authorities either (ie: cops or known law enforcement), it must always be someone new. The demand for pirated goods is (or will be) far greater than the demand for illegal drugs. Why? Illegal drugs are bad for us so most people don't want them. Pirated goods do not suffer this dynamic. Demand creates supply one way or another and more demand means more supply, even if violent force is necessary against insider cops who are discovered, just like with the war on drugs. and being that the demand for piracy far exceeds (or will far exceed as more and more people adopt technology) the demand for illegal drugs people will be willing to employ more violence against law enforcement to fulfill that demand. The costs simply won't be worth it.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Jay (profile), Jun 26th, 2010 @ 10:54am

        Re: Re:

        "usenet is getting squeezed on all sides, its life is almost up."

        I beg to differ... source

        There are other reasons that usenet has disappeared, but a crushing vice isn't one of them.

        I find your post quite odd.

        It ignores the fact that broadband and the internet have taken away the large disparities that are supposedly inherent in the market place. You can download a torrent, get a movie and have someone else ready to watch that movie in another country.

        Here's how the movie and music industry could make money. As Mike does, you pay for access to the content. Music is a commodity? Fine, P2P, 5$ a month, go nuts. Every now and then run a contest. Most downloads in a month, give them a $50 gift card. You want to be part of the community? Great, promote this new artist.

        For movies, it's so much simpler to print the DVDs, have a universal release date and release the torrent on the same day. Charge a first rate $10 for the torrent, keep the receipt and you get $5 off when the DVD comes out in your area. It uses the technology of today without seeming to screw the fans. Would it make money for all involved? Hell yes! Will it happen now? Not with the current landscape. Regardless, criminalizing people doesn't work to do anything but make you believe you are the only one in the world to exist.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 12:23pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          Here's how the movie and music industry could make money. As Mike does, you pay for access to the content. Music is a commodity? Fine, P2P, 5$ a month, go nuts. Every now and then run a contest. Most downloads in a month, give them a $50 gift card. You want to be part of the community? Great, promote this new artist.


          They could have done this at any point during the last 10 years and it would have been a smashing success. All-you-can-eat, flat fee, no DRM. Seamless integration with purchase of physical goods like t-shirts, notification of new concerts and albums by bands that you like, instant dynamically generated radio stations using the "sounds like" algorithms to help you discover new music, easy integration with social sites like facebook, all in one package.

          Instead they let their crushing fear that someone somewhere might copy a song get in the way. They launched poorly-thought-out services that did not do very much, tied their user's hands with DRM schemes, offered no value that the user couldn't find elsewhere, and punted on every chance for actual innovation. So iTunes and other competitors stole those opportunities right out from under them.

          It amazes me that music service offerings are still so fragmented today. iTunes took a large share of the market, but there is still room for a major industry leading service that does all of these things. The money has always been right there for them to take. Instead they have repeatedly elected to fight human nature and sue their customers out of existence.

          Innovate: "Wow, those guys built a really cool service around our stuff! Buy it and hire them!"
          Litigate: "Wow, those guys built a really cool service around our stuff! Let's spend years suing them and our own customers and spend who-knows how many billions lobbying for new laws in every country in the world!"

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            PaulT (profile), Jun 27th, 2010 @ 1:21am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            "All-you-can-eat, flat fee, no DRM."

            Yep, that's the secret.

            I often tell my story of how I consumed music. I bought a *lot* of CDs in the 90s, and a lot lot of vinyl as I also worked the occasional night as a house/garage DJ (but didn't earn enough to feed my vinyl addiction!). By the early 2000s, I was buying virtually nothing. Finances were hard, I'd given up my money losing DJ gigs and commercial music had no appeal.

            My habits were turned around by eMusic. At one point, I was on their 100 tracks for €30 plan. I devoured whatever I could find, happy to experiment with many different genres and new artists as I was only paying €3-4 per album. I found a massive amount of great new artists and it rekindled my love for the medium.

            But, of course, things turned sour when the majors got involved. As soon as Sony decided to hook up, prices increase so that the average album would cost closer to €6 - as much as a sale CD at play.com. All of a sudden, it wasn't a good deal, so I first reduced then cancelled my subscription. This was a year ago, and I've gone from buying 10-12 albums per month to only buying 4 in the last year.

            This is the lesson. Reasonably priced, quality product on consumer-friendly terms gets you custom. Anti-consumer terms, DRM, region restriction and high prices loses it.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              identicon
              Anonymous Coward, Jun 27th, 2010 @ 7:27am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              Don't forget to throw in more formats. Not everyone wants MP3s. I want high quality downloads, I can appreciate a high sample rate, cd quality and up. If you are going to compete with P2P and other free services then you really need to compete, not just try to keep up.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 11:15am

        Re: Re:

        Really?

        How will the industry respond to private anonymous networks?

        That is P2P 2.0 for ya.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Richard (profile), Jun 26th, 2010 @ 4:53pm

        Re: Re:

        lan parties with the intention of sharing files is a legal situation ripe for action. authorities only need to get one person 'inside' to spot the action,

        Sounds like you are proposing the Stasi to me. Remember how well that worked....

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      TtfnJohn (profile), Jun 27th, 2010 @ 8:37am

      Re:

      As you point out trading and sharing has gone on "forever" and reaches back to old BBS systems and further back.

      Still, in this timeline Napster was among the first to take advantage of the widespread adoption of high speed (DSL etc) as opposed to dial up which made trading and sharing of music recordings and movies practical. And it was one of the first "above" ground attempts to do so.

      Mike's correct in that each attempt to stifle this has led to fragmentation and the appearance of even more ways to share.

      Thing is the "private lockers" are, in their conception, as legitimate as bittorent is. In fact, the private lockers are one of the keys to the overhyped cloud. (Bittorrent was developed, initially, to make the distribution of Linux and BSD easier and faster over dialup and people have found other ways to use it since. You can't blame the technology for how people use it.)

      As you say, people will find a way to get what they want. That's the key truth behind the phrase "information wants to be free" in the sense it wants to be unimpeded. And people will find a way to do just that.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    PrometheeFeu (profile), Jun 25th, 2010 @ 10:32pm

    I'm waiting for sneakernet being the new "#1 threat to music." I suggest posting gards outside of people's doors and shooting them when they try to leave unless they have a music license. Pretty soon, the industry will find out people hum to each other and then Congress will happily bend over and throw us all in solitary confinment to protect "culture." God I'm in a bad mood!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 9:07am

      Re:

      We are headed straight to 1984. There will be cameras in your house. Better get out your tin foil hat.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Peet McKimmie (profile), Jun 26th, 2010 @ 4:21pm

        Re: Re:

        "Cameras in your house"... Have you given any thought to these new "gestural interfaces" that are supposed to replace games controllers and remote controls? How do they work? Why, by putting a camera in your house, usually attached to a device connected directly to the web. What could possibly go wrong...?

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 25th, 2010 @ 11:32pm

    Cat Shit ONE the series.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KyX7O4qplQs

    Somehow I think the world will end up like that with rabbits killing everything that moves.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 25th, 2010 @ 11:48pm

    So these companies have spent billions lobbying Governments around the world to do their bidding and even though three strikes looks like it will become a reality as a result of this in many parts of the world, they're still not satisfied?

    Personally, I hope they do force web-blocking into law. I'd spend all my free time requesting that the websites of the BPI, RIAA, iMPAA, etc be removed for the most vexatious of reasons.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      nasch (profile), Jun 28th, 2010 @ 11:51am

      Re:

      Then they would start enforcing those penalties for invalid DMCA takedown requests that don't get enforced against **AA members and collection societies. Remember, the laws are to benefit the big corporations, not you.

      Cynical? Me?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 1:58am

    I don't actually agree that what the recording industry has done is drive this technology underground. I don't live in the US and I couldn't care less about the various three strikes laws.

    Having said that, I and many others moved away from torrents years ago, not through fear of being sued or imprisoned, but because there are far more effective and efficient ways to obtain the material we want.

    Who wants their 100Mbit line hobbled to a crawl due to a poorly seeded torrent? Forget that, I'll go with an option that will max out my connection 24/7, and that isn't torrents.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Jay (profile), Jun 26th, 2010 @ 6:21am

      Re:

      I beg to differ.

      Think about when Napster first came out and the technology that it unleashed. In no way was P2P very efficient. With that technology (we're disregarding BBS since that's been around for what seems like centuries) companies continued to find new ways to make the download process more efficient.

      I have to question how exactly you're downloading something new compared to BT, since that still seems the best way for most people.

      Main point is that as Hollywood tries a heavy handed approach, it's making the filesharing process that much more efficient as it litigates once company out of existence.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    PaulT (profile), Jun 26th, 2010 @ 5:35am

    ""Sometimes these sites look better than the legitimate sites," Huntsberry said. "That's the irony."

    That's not irony, Fred, that's your company and your colleagues failing for over a decade to come up with a way to properly satisfy consumer demand."

    Indeed. I can only repeat here what's been said before. "Pirate" services have always given people *what they want*. The content industry has spent the last 15 years pissing around - first trying to ban MP3 players and digital playback devices. When that didn't work, they have tried at every step to impose anti-consumer blocks on what people can do - region locking, DRM, windowed releases, "bonus" tracks on albums that a person in another country is not allowed to buy, double-dipping DVDs and trying to force people to buy inferior discs in "smaller" markets.

    Meanwhile, the "pirates" have everything that a person could want - every album and movie, often before their release or well after they're "out of print", all the tracks, all the extras in a format that's as high (or low) quality as you wants, whenever you want, and will play on any device you wish.

    Forget the "free" aspect of it - the selection and lack or restrictions are the real killer feature of the "pirate" sites. I reckon a lot of people would pay for a legitimate service with these features if one was available, but there is not one that matches up. This is largely thanks to outdated licensing models that are unworkable in the modern world. If only they had tried fixing that instead of attacking customers, they might have such a service available today. Instead, I'm not allowed to buy digitally from Amazon, iTunes doesn't sell the movies I want and my XBox 360 constantly tells me I'm on the wrong patch of dirt to buy from it. The Pirate Bay, on the other hand, is happy to offer me the goods I want but doesn't take money, even though I am willing to pay legally for them.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      PaulT (profile), Jun 26th, 2010 @ 1:53pm

      Re:

      OK, so at the risk of repeating myself, here's a fantastic example:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkg7Ozu0pH8&feature=related

      The song is You're Not Alone by Olive. It was essentially a one hit wonder back in 1996, where the song shot straight to #1 in the UK and then no other tune by the band did as well. I always though they were short-changed but I stumbled across them while listening to music while getting ready to go out tonight.

      So, what does that have to do with this discussion? Well, first of all if you managed to see the video after clicking on the link - no f**king regional restrictions. While (as far as I know) the song was only a hit in the UK, I watched it in Spain and people anywhere in the world can see it. Yet, the first comment on the video is this:

      "How did you find this video. I had the MTV2 watermarked version, and VIACOM took it down. This is the best version!"

      Yeah, that's right. Somebody who loves this 15 year old song wanted to share it with the world, and the copyright owners too it down. This from an industry that's dependant on back catalogue titles. Meanwhile, this particular video, which people clearly love and may have bought copies of, according to the comments, is also a clear copyright "violation" from the Yahoo watermark in the corner.

      If this restriction doesn't strike you as idiocy, and you're not receiving money from the RIAA, maybe you'd better re-evaluate your ideas about music, because not sharing the stuff has never been a good thing for music. Same thing for movies, games, whatever.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 6:31am

    BBS...Usenet...sure they were the first but most certainly not mainstream or user friendly. How many people who were alive in the heyday of the BBS even know what one is?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 9:12am

      Re:

      Count me as one person who used BBS services. There are more of us than you realize.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Peet McKimmie (profile), Jun 26th, 2010 @ 4:30pm

        Re: Re:

        A friend of mine used to run a BBS in Aberdeen that was quite popular in the USA. ("Dark Star", if anyone remembers it...) A couple of nights a week we'd all sit round at his place chatting to random Americans who dialed in. This would have been some five years before I got my first Internet connection... Happy days. Oh, and it all ran on an early Amstrad "portable" computer, off two floppy drives, at 14.4kBaud. Not much file sharing...

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Alan Cohen (profile), Jun 26th, 2010 @ 6:35am

    Perhaps it's time to get Congress to remember the public domain. There was a time when copyrights actually ended and the work became freely usable. Now they are immortal.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Hephaestus (profile), Jun 26th, 2010 @ 6:37am

    Its also ....

    "It's a living case study in how not to respond to a disruptive market change."

    A friend of mine is getting his doctorate studying the psychology of this disruptive market change. After watching 20-30 random hours (600 hrs total) of video he has shot or gathered at label and studio get togethers. I find it pretty amazing the way these people group toghether, are totally inflexable, attack anyone with a discenting voice, go into rages or walk away in denial when anyone questions their belief system.

    My favorite quote from my friend is "Its a modern day corporate cultism, all that is missing is jonestown or waco style event".

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    average_joe (profile), Jun 26th, 2010 @ 6:50am

    Have to ask...

    What's TAM stand for?

    Thanks a million, that amuses me, or what?

    TIA.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      PaulT (profile), Jun 26th, 2010 @ 12:05pm

      Re: Have to ask...

      "The Anti-Mike"

      He's a troll that used to have that as a login, but abandoned it when he realised people would just attack his previous posts when he tried to make a claim. He's now posting as an AC, but he's easily identifiable as the same moron, so people call him out on him.

      As his original username suggests, his entire persona is dependent on attacking Mike on everything he posts, no matter how lucid, well cited or intelligent it is. Sad, really. I don't agree with everything Mike posts, but to create an entire persona over attacking his posts? Pathetic.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 12:38pm

        Re: Re: Have to ask...

        Mike could write a post about how summer is hot, winter is cold, and kittens are cute and TAM would respond with a vicious diatribe claiming summer is cold, up is down, and kittens are diabolical thieves who are leeching the blood from the entertainment industry and should burn in hell.

        Strawman, fallacy, and ad hominem are his weapons of choice. His moronic arguments do so much to discredit his own position that I'm beginning to think he's actually pulling for the other side.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 12:47pm

          Re: Re: Re: Have to ask...

          but then you read documents like the one above (in the OP) and realize that the IP maximist side truly is retarded.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 7:31am

    average joe: TAM = The Anti-Mike --> guy who comes here and attacks anything Mike Masnick says with baseless/ill informed arguments. Or just skips the arguments and goes with insults.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    average_joe (profile), Jun 26th, 2010 @ 7:47am

    thanks!

    The Anit-Mike. I never would have guessed that.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    average_joe (profile), Jun 26th, 2010 @ 7:48am

    oops...

    I meant The Anti-Mike. Where's the edit button.... :)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 8:46am

    Let me elaborate on a fundamental truth of human existence.
    If people want something, they will find a way to get it....

    If people want booze, they will get booze. It can be as easy as going to a store and paying taxes, or as hard as finding a speakeasy and paying some mobster.

    If people want drugs, they will get drugs. It could be as easy as growing pot in your closet, or as hard as finding some shady drug dealer who tries to hustle crappy cut up crack.

    If people want free music, they will get free music. (See a pattern here?) It could be as easy as getting it from a single entity that could be forced to pay royalties a-la napster, or as hard as going to a warez site and getting a virus.

    The entertainment industry has only managed to drive the entire file sharing industry underground. If there is involvement with organized crime, or other unpalatable entities its the industries fault.

    I am really beginning to doubt that the entertainment execs will ever understand any of this. Unfortunately it might take the collapse of the major labels/studios before there are enough firing synapses in Hollywood to grasp the situation.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Jay (profile), Jun 26th, 2010 @ 11:08am

      Re:

      It's funny... There's a news story that relates drugs with the drug trade. Source

      Quote

      The underlying concept of the war on drugs, initiated by Richard Nixon in the 1970s, is that demand can be curbed by eliminating supply.

      ...

      This concept marries intellectual idiocy – that supply leads demand – with practical impossibility. But it is golden politics. For 30 years it has allowed western politicians to shift blame for not regulating drug abuse at home on to the shoulders of poor countries abroad. It is gloriously, crashingly immoral.

      The entire "jail them all" concept is kinda tired in the US. We need a new strategy. Quite frankly, if we could end the war on drugs and the war on piracy and accept that a new way is needed, we may all be a better off.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 11:34am

      Re:

      "The entertainment industry has only managed to drive the entire file sharing industry underground. If there is involvement with organized crime, or other unpalatable entities its the industries fault. " - oh god, is that idiotic. you would rather deal with organized crime and support criminal enterprise rather than respect the law?

      as for the rest of your points, the issue is never those who desperately want something, but rather easy availability to those people in the middle. when drugs are too easily avialable, more people try them (particularly in and around high schools). the more people who try them and get addicted creates the demand. it is one of those horrible circular things, demand is created by availability, and availabilty is created by demand. it is almost impossible to stop demand, but it is much easier to work against supply.

      the war on drugs is mostly lost because of weak borders, and a criminal justice system that makes it easy to get off, and very hard to build a case. it is also hampered by a justice system that cannot find the time or the money to really prosecute anyone but the biggest and the very smallest players. the big middle just keeps on.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 11:44am

        Re: Re:

        "the war on drugs is mostly lost because of weak borders, and a criminal justice system that makes it easy to get off, and very hard to build a case. it is also hampered by a justice system that cannot find the time or the money to really prosecute anyone but the biggest and the very smallest players. the big middle just keeps on."

        Nope the war on drugs is lost because the Justice Department is to small to contain it, the laws to make it happen are the ones that would deprive people of due course and the right to a defence, it ain't happening. That is why copyright will also fail in the end.

        People will just find anonymous private networks and all your talk will be just BS on the wind.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 11:55am

        Re: Re:

        "the war on drugs is mostly lost because of weak borders, and a criminal justice system that makes it easy to get off, and very hard to build a case. it is also hampered by a justice system that cannot find the time or the money to really prosecute anyone but the biggest and the very smallest players. the big middle just keeps on."

        and somehow the war on piracy is immune to these obstacles? As far as the lack of money to prosecute them, $24+ billion this year alone was spent

        http://www.drugsense.org/wodclock.htm

        What makes you think they can find the time or money or time to prosecute piracy offenders? Why does the war on piracy not suffer these same dynamics? The whole point that I'm making is that it does. The 99 percent of the population that completely disrespects our current IP laws (95 year copy protection lengths) can produce more law violating labor hours per unit time than the labor hours that law enforcement can produce per the same unit time.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 5:16pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          "The 99 percent of the population that completely disrespects our current IP laws..."

          Bullshit, completely specious argument. First of all, there is no way in hell that 99%, or even a majority, of the population "disrespects" current copyright law. If they do, its because of unintentional that happens without intent, due to the laws being so restrictive that its impossible NOT to violate it. OR, if there is truly that many people violating the law, then perhaps the law is unjust and/or needs to be revised or eliminated? Civil disobedience of that scale means there is a major problem with the law.

          So, which is it, which is your position? Because you cant have it both ways. You cant have a "little of column A, a little of column B" here.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 6:34pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            "OR, if there is truly that many people violating the law, then perhaps the law is unjust and/or needs to be revised or eliminated?"

            Yep, that's what I'm saying. 95 year copyright length for instance and the fact that the punishment for accidental infringement is greater than the punishment for accidentally claiming privileges on something one does not have privileges on. and the fact that out of print books and discontinued material are still covered under copy protection laws.

            and the only people that don't disrespect copy protection laws are ignorant about it. Most (if not all) people I know disagree with it. I bet a poll will show the same results, that most people substantially disagree with the law. and disagreement and disrespect will only get worse.

            "Because you cant have it both ways."

            I haven't presented two contradictory ways.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              identicon
              Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 6:38pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              the punishment for accidental infringement is greater than the punishment for accidentally claiming privileges on something one does not have privileges on when the reverse should be true since the entity claiming to have privileges is in a better position to know what it has privileges on than those they claim infringe. *

              and if so few people disrespect copy protection laws then why all the lobbying efforts to stop it? If copy protection laws were so respected then piracy naturally wouldn't be a problem without the need for the RIAA et al to keep lobbying for it to be stopped. It's a problem because so many people disrespect it. and yes, there is something seriously wrong with our laws. They need to be fixed.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                icon
                PaulT (profile), Jun 27th, 2010 @ 12:48am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                "and if so few people disrespect copy protection laws then why all the lobbying efforts to stop it?"

                This is easy - money. The fools in charge of the entertainment industry think that "piracy" represents "lost" sales (as do you TAM), and spend millions trying to force people to pay that money. The fact that this is not true escapes them.

                "If copy protection laws were so respected then piracy naturally wouldn't be a problem without the need for the RIAA et al to keep lobbying for it to be stopped."

                If you're talking about DRM, that idiocy has prevented me from buying digital movies and games - and not "pirate" them, btw - and stopped me from trying out digital music for many years before it was dropped. If not, then you're an idiot - people have been copying music, movies, games, books, whatever well before the internet ever existed - it just wasn't such an easy scapegoat before.

                "It's a problem because so many people disrespect it."

                Civil disobedience - look it up. Sometimes, if a large number of people disobey laws, it-s because the laws are unjust, not because there's something wrong with the people.

                "They need to be fixed."

                Indeed. Customers need to be given a reasonably priced service, in whatever quality they choose, without regional or platform restrictions, without being called a "thief" if they choose to format-shift their legally bought item, use them on a different patch of dirt or getting sued for sharing it with a friend.

                Oh, that's not what you meant? Figures, moron.

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                •  
                  identicon
                  Anonymous Coward, Jun 27th, 2010 @ 9:16pm

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                  Sometimes, if a large number of people disobey laws, it-s because the laws are unjust, not because there's something wrong with the people.


                  And sometimes people disobey laws because they like free shit!

                  Calling piracy "civil disobedience" is hilarious. None of you are Rosa Parks. Get over yourselves. Go torrent some more porn but make sure to keep an ear out for mommy's footsteps, you wouldn't want her to catch you being "civilly disobedient" into your gym sock...

                   

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  •  
                    identicon
                    Anonymous Coward, Jun 27th, 2010 @ 10:02pm

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                    "Calling piracy "civil disobedience" is hilarious."

                    So then what is it, violent disobedience?

                     

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  •  
                    identicon
                    Anonymous Coward, Jun 27th, 2010 @ 10:14pm

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                    Civil Disobedience 2.0

                     

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  •  
                    identicon
                    Anonymous Coward, Jun 28th, 2010 @ 2:35am

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                    Hilarious is calling imaginary thing property and then trying to say somebody stole it LoL

                     

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  •  
                    identicon
                    Anonymous Coward, Jun 28th, 2010 @ 2:39am

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                    Hilarious is calling some imaginary thing property and then trying to say somebody stole it LoL

                    Crazy bastards!

                    crazy person: Look at my new car!
                    confused person: There is nothing there!
                    crazy person: yes there is, my imaginary car!
                    confused person: hmmm...now I understand, you make believe those things.
                    crazy person: I'll call the cops to imprison you, you stole my car I saw it.

                     

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  •  
                    icon
                    PaulT (profile), Jun 28th, 2010 @ 2:48am

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                    "And sometimes people disobey laws because they like free shit!"

                    Yes, life is so much easier if you make simple assumptions and ignore the very real problems and complexity in life.

                    Get over yourself. I've detailed many, many reasons in the this thread as to why these laws may be disobeyed - from DRM and region coding to format restrictions, windowing and out of print tiles. None of these, you'll notice, has anything to do with price.

                    Now, do you want to address any of these or just ignore the real world as usual?

                     

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 6:55pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Also, when I use the word disrespect I don't mean disobey. Someone could have no respect for a law (ie: in the sense that they don't like the law and want it changed) without disobeying it.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 12:09pm

        Re: Re:

        "you would rather deal with organized crime and support criminal enterprise rather than respect the law?"

        If drinking water is criminal, many would. If doing something that ought NOT be criminal is criminal, then many would. The only true criminal enterprise here is the U.S. government for their crimes to humanity and their efforts to restrict us of our natural rights for no good reason and their use of violent force to enforce their nefarious laws. The only ones here promoting organized crime are big corporations because of their inability to adapt and their unwillingness to give up their unearned monopolies. If copying was legalized there would be no such organized crime and there would be tons more music, art, creativity, and innovation. Or at least if copy protection laws were more reasonable it would reduce such organized crime. But being that they're not, rampant organized crime is inevitable and the government et al are powerless to stop it.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 2:29pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          and besides, the overwhelming majority of cops do not enforce copy protection laws, I've never heard of anyone getting arrested for violating copy protection laws. Heck, many cops break these laws themselves. The only people enforcing them (who probably break them themselves as well) are a SMALL minority, their law enforcement labor hours is miniscule when compared to the law breaking labor hours of the general public. and copyright is mostly a civil issue so it's mostly none of the cops business but even to the extent that it's a criminal issue most cops don't care. There are so many laws that it'll take multiple PhD's to know them all (copyright law, patent law, criminal law, civil law, each state has its own laws, cities have their own laws, etc...), there is good reason why cops do not enforce most laws (only the most important ones and most cops do not see IP infringement as important), it's impossible to enforce them all yet alone for any cop to know them all.

          Unfortunately the overwhelming volume of frivolous laws in this country distorts the enforcement efforts of good laws but it also makes the enforcement of bad laws like copy protection laws more difficult because they must compete with the enforcement labor demand of other laws.

          RIAA et al, I just want you to think about this for a second. You are truly fighting a losing battle. People have come to disrespect you, they have come to disrespect the nefarious laws you have put in place, and while getting congress to pass whatever laws you want is cheap, changing human behavior is not cheap. I want you to read this and think hard. The economics of this doesn't work out for you. You are largely outnumbered and hence out labored. Pouring more money into the equation can't fix that because money is a product of labor and those who outnumber you can produce more labor than you can. It's simple economics. You can't win.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Richard (profile), Jun 26th, 2010 @ 5:11pm

        Re: Re:

        the war on drugs is mostly lost because of weak borders, and a criminal justice system that makes it easy to get off, and very hard to build a case. it is also hampered by a justice system that cannot find the time or the money to really prosecute anyone but the biggest and the very smallest players. the big middle just keeps on.
        No, even if you fixed all of that the war on drugs is unwinnable. Even if you succeed in limiting supply all that achieves is to drive up the profitability of the remaining supply - given that demand will certainly not tail off quickly. This just increases the resources available to evade enforcement and attracts more players into the game. It is simple market economics.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 5:38pm

        Re: Re:

        and a criminal justice system that makes it easy to get off

        Unless you happen to be black. Or are you that much of a moron?

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Jay (profile), Jun 26th, 2010 @ 6:06pm

        ???

        "as for the rest of your points, the issue is never those who desperately want something, but rather easy availability to those people in the middle. when drugs are too easily avialable, more people try them (particularly in and around high schools)"

        Easy availability? Neither supply nor demand are static in this regard. One drops (supply of drugs) the demand increases (raising the price to get a certain drug). In terms of illicit drugs, there's been the same demand going on 6 or more decades. Obviously, something isn't working because people continue to make this black market lucrative enough to continue to produce these drugs.

        "the war on drugs is mostly lost because of weak borders, and a criminal justice system that makes it easy to get off, and very hard to build a case."

        First part is laughable. I don't want to make this into a drug thread, but stronger enforcement on the borders isn't going to make the flow of drugs any less.

        Our justice system has the most people imprisoned compared to any other country in the world. We aren't keeping drugs out of the country, we're making smarter criminals. There's a huge difference. And yet, you're saying we're letting them off?

        I must say your argument is somewhat flawed.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 8:49pm

          Re: ???

          The border argument is hilarious. It's not like drug dealers have ever been known to use private planes or even submarines to ship their products into America. Nope. It's all through the border. With that one country. You know, Canada.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 8:51pm

          Re: ???

          Quick, let's compare piracy to drugs as that analogy is sure to work! They're the same thing, right? Close enough? Drugs are bad and therefore illegal just like piracy is bad and therefore illegal. I see. It's all so clear to me now.

          How could I have been so stupid.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 9:24pm

            Re: Re: ???

            There are differences and the differences suggest piracy enforcement will be worse than drug enforcement for a variety of reasons mentioned above.

            Heck, even when I was a little kid, many years ago, I knew someone who was in college who needed a ~ $2000 piece of software for a class and didn't want to have to buy it or be forced to only use it at school. The software required like forty to fifty 3 and a 1/2 floppy disks, a whole box full of them. This person wound up acquiring a box full of floppy disks with a pirated copy of the software and installed it on a home computer to use (this was back before anyone I knew had an Internet connection and I was really young). I'm sure this person isn't the only one who did this and from what I gather everyone in the class pretty much did the same thing. Those days are gone now that we can stick all that content on a single CD. This person returned the disks when the class ended and deleted the software afterwords (it took up too much hard disk space being that it was installed on a computer with Windows 95 and 1 GB of HD and it had to compete with Windows and other software for hard disk space and was only necessary for the duration of the class).

            Heck, the software was some sort of DOS math program even, this person was taking a computer math class I believe, it might have been Mathematica (the DOS version?). Not sure, just a guess.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        TtfnJohn (profile), Jun 27th, 2010 @ 1:43pm

        Re: Re:

        "oh god, is that idiotic. you would rather deal with organized crime and support criminal enterprise rather than respect the law?"

        Just to repeat what Mike said do you have as much as a shred of evidence to back that up that hasn't come from remarks made by MPAA and RIAA spokespeople who haven't shown anyone their sources either?

        "the more people who try them and get addicted creates the demand. it is one of those horrible circular things, demand is created by availability, and availability is created by demand"

        Simplistic as all get out but still wrong. Of course, if it was right the USA would still have alcohol prohibition, right? (Sorry to point out the flipping obvious but someone needed to.) The same dynamic is at work in drugs. (Alcohol is a drug, you know, and the most, by far, addictive one.) So you're wrong again. Working on strike three.

        "the war on drugs is mostly lost because of weak borders, and a criminal justice system that makes it easy to get off, and very hard to build a case." And it should be hard to build a criminal case. Read the US Constitution, Magna Carta and a few other source documents and refinements to the criminal justice system to find out why.

        Swing and a miss...strike three and you're outa there.

        As for money to prosecute those you call the "big middle" I trust you are aware that the US spends something like $70 billion a year on that now. And you want to spend more on a failure?

        Presumably, you want the same for copyright infringement too and another $70 billion, at least, for that. In addition to direct and indirect criminalization of what is at worst a civil offense now. (ACTA anyone?)

        Do you begin to realize just how idiotic that sounds?

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Jun 27th, 2010 @ 4:46pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          Strike three! Did you say strike three? By the rules of tamminess anyone found in breach of strike three must be permablocked from the interwebs.

          On another note, it's heartwarming to see no sign of TP for a while, even on a Friday.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Jun 27th, 2010 @ 2:52pm

        Re: Re:

        "the more people who try them and get addicted creates the demand."

        If nobody got "addicted" to software nobody would buy software legally and the software business would die. The fact that you need demand for people to buy software will naturally create demand for people to pirate it.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Richard (profile), Jun 27th, 2010 @ 3:37pm

        Re: Re:

        "The entertainment industry has only managed to drive the entire file sharing industry underground. If there is involvement with organized crime, or other unpalatable entities its the industries fault. " - oh god, is that idiotic. you would rather deal with organized crime and support criminal enterprise rather than respect the law?

        I think you are confused here. The person you are attacking is not supporting criminal enterprise - he is simply pointing out it's inevitability.

        Please read this wikipedia page before you comment again.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_the_messenger

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        nasch (profile), Jun 28th, 2010 @ 2:04pm

        Re: Re:

        it is almost impossible to stop demand, but it is much easier to work against supply.

        If it's so easy, why has the drug war been such a stupendous failure?

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    bigpicture, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 10:29am

    Technology Transition

    In the days of the transition from horse carriage to automobiles Studebaker was one of the biggest horse carriage manufacturers. (A huge company by the standards of the day) They finally caved too late to the concept that automobiles would eventually replace carriages and started manufacturing automobiles. But they still used the horse carriage mentality and were unable to compete with paradigms like Ford introduced (manufacture and control ALL your own components and assemble on a line) and were eventually put out of business. See how many of the big Recording labels are around in another 10 years? Could Studebaker stop the advent of the automobile?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Chris in Utah, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 3:41pm

    I think my phychology professor shared this once...

    We are perpetually in a state of wanting something:

    As kids we scream for it
    As teens we rebel for it
    As adults we scheme for it.

    Tell us not to do something were going to find a way to do it. Just for the experience. It's not wanting something that is the cause but the curiosity of human nature.

    The name of the Renaissance painter escapes me and I'm probably mutilating the quote but;
    "I do things I cant do, simply to learn how to do them"
    & for all the cats out there;
    "... And satisfaction brought them back"

    After all fun is why were here.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Chris in Utah (profile), Jun 26th, 2010 @ 3:42pm

    I think my phychology professor shared this once...

    We are perpetually in a state of wanting something:

    As kids we scream for it
    As teens we rebel for it
    As adults we scheme for it.

    Tell us not to do something were going to find a way to do it. Just for the experience. It's not wanting something that is the cause but the curiosity of human nature.

    The name of the Renaissance painter escapes me and I'm probably mutilating the quote but;
    "I do things I cant do, simply to learn how to do them"
    & for all the cats out there;
    "... And satisfaction brought them back"

    After all fun is why were here.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      TtfnJohn (profile), Jun 27th, 2010 @ 1:46pm

      Re: I think my phychology professor shared this once...

      Another truism is that people generally don't know they want or need something till they're told they can't have it. Same dynamic at work, I think.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 26th, 2010 @ 4:05pm

    The newest form of entertainment:

    Call all your customers thieves.
    Flounder about like morons whenever you don't get your own way.
    Claim how important you are to an industry which would be doing infinitely better without you.

    Please continue... because I find this stupidity almost as entertaining as "The Three Stooges".

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Drew, Jun 27th, 2010 @ 3:51am

    Wel said..

    Dude there was nothing better said here than they could have done something earlier. After-all they're much richer than the guys who put up the pirate sites so they could have came into this a lot earlier with paid sites but instead as you said they cursed the enemies for what they were doing instead of using their tactics to get the stuff out there the legitimate way.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 27th, 2010 @ 6:13am

    The products don't appeal to the customers.

    Here's the thing- The entertainment industry needs to bring consultants into the creative process because consultants are hip to the latest trends.

    For example, when the industry makes a movie, it has to have shiny props. Whatever it is, people like it more if it's shiny. And if you make it shiny, you can get product placement deals and charge more. More shiny = more money. I'm convinced that is the solution to the problem.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Fred the bad consultant, Jun 27th, 2010 @ 6:22am

    The products don't appeal to the customers.

    Here's the thing- The entertainment industry needs to bring consultants into the creative process because consultants are hip to the latest trends.

    For example, when the industry makes a movie, it should have shiny props. Whatever it is, people like it more if it's shiny. And if you make it shiny, you can get product placement deals and charge more. For example, how many asians have shiny mirror-face cases for their iPhones? Asians have money too. Why do you think Google called their new browser "Chrome?"

    More shiny = more money. I'm convinced that is the solution to the problem.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 27th, 2010 @ 6:07pm

    it still boils down to you want it for free, and will point at any reason you can invent to justify your theft

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jun 27th, 2010 @ 7:42pm

      Re:

      Calling it theft is a lie and you are trying to make up any reason to justify your dishonesty.

      What is theft, though, is the Canadian tax/levy on CD's that goes directly to the CRIA. That's theft, it's taking from the consumer and allocating it to an undeserving private good that gives nothing in return. These corporations are criminal organizations, just because they control the laws doesn't mean the laws they make are justified.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jun 27th, 2010 @ 8:03pm

      Re:

      You mean like: "it's not theft, so says the USSC" or "it's the industry thats screwing the artist, not file sharing" or "Why should I pay for something that has been free since the modem" or "I want to see it, but it's not available anywhere else, so I'll download it" or "i just really loath the sleazy industry execs, so I'll do my part to bring them to their knees" or "I haven't taken anything from anyone" or "I would have bought the song but they insist on squeezing me for way more than I'm willing to pay"

      You mean those excuses?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Richard (profile), Jun 28th, 2010 @ 2:51am

        Re: Re:

        Irrelevant.

        The problem is that the entertainment industry is being eaten by a lion because it failed to feed the lion - and now it is trying to blame the lion.

        Look - the lion does what the lion does - end of story. If you want to survive in the lion enclosure then you have to play by the lion's rules. Whingeing about it won't stop the lion biting you leg off.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Jun 27th, 2010 @ 10:16pm

      Re:

      Adorable!

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Alex Martinez, Jun 28th, 2010 @ 9:24am

    Kazaa

    Kazaa was amazing, it caught on with the general public very fast, and was easy to use. It's a shame that users had to mess with it, but I’ve heard it is coming back again looking to take over Itunes

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 30th, 2010 @ 8:48am

    Wait 'till they find out about this new fangled thing called Usenet.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This