Senator Franken Defends Censoring The Internet Because He Doesn't Think Hollywood Should Have To Change Biz Models?

from the really? dept

We were a bit surprised late last year to see that Senator Al Franken was supporting censoring the internet via COICA (which, yes, is about censoring the internet). After all, Franken has positioned himself as the "internet freedom" politician, and has spoken out repeatedly against attempts to limit speech on the internet. Ars Technica has an interview with Franken, where he delves into his support for COICA, noting that he's heard from those who worry about censoring the internet, but in the end, he thinks it's okay, because he's from the movie/entertainment world, and he doesn't seem to think they should have to adapt to the changing internet:
The other side of this, of course, is that this is about, essentially, stealing copyrighted material and selling counterfeit goods. This goes to tens of billions of dollars in theft. Some of the supporters of this were after the American Federation of TV and Radio Artists, the Screen Actors Guild, the Directors Guild... I happen to belong to all three of those unions. This doesn't just affect the jobs of writers and directors and producers; when they're free to steal all this intellectual material, it changes the business model of a movie. So it really costs the jobs of the technicians and the crew and the craft services people. It changes the entire business model for the industry. It's not just movies and TV, it's everything.
This is pretty disappointing, on any number of levels. First of all, his repeated use of the technically and legally incorrect words "stealing" and "theft" are troubling. Second, his repeating the totally debunked claims that this is somehow costing "tens of billions of dollars." The GAO has already debunked those numbers as having little to no basis, and it's disappointing that Franken would repeat them. But the key point is that yes, of course it changes the entire business model for the industry. But that's what new technologies do. They change the business models for legacy companies and it's not our government's job to protect those legacy companies and their business models, even if our elected officials used to work for those companies.

That said, Franken does suggest that he's heard many of the concerns about COICA and is focused on narrowing its focus significantly, saying that he has "tried to tighten the definition of who could be targeted under the bill" and in the recent hearing on COICA asked a series of questions to make sure that the bill "is narrowly tailored and will not unwittingly lead to the blocking of legitimate speech that is protected by the First Amendment." The problem is that I'm not really sure there's a way to do that effectively -- especially when, prior to COICA passing, Homeland Security already seems to think it can seize domains without any First Amendment considerations, leading to plenty of perfectly legal speech being suppressed. Franken should know better than to think that a bill allowing internet censorship can be crafted to only take down speech of one kind.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    icon
    Marcus Carab (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 9:56am

    It's a little funny and a little depressing: for ages, industry insiders have been claiming piracy is "destroying" the industry, and smarter folks have been pointing out that it's actually just changing the business model. Now, apparently, insiders are adopting it and saying "piracy is changing the business model!" as if that alone is a bad thing.

     

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

  2.  
    icon
    Hephaestus (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 10:45am

    Re:

    "It's a little funny and a little depressing: for ages, industry insiders have been claiming piracy is "destroying" the industry"

    Infringement (Piracy) is not destroying hollywoood, it is just sending back to a time before, TV reruns, cable, VCR's and DVD's.

     

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

  3.  
    icon
    :Lobo Santo (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 10:53am

    Re: Re:

    Honestly, if I made millions a year for re-spinning the same old shit again and again, I wouldn't want anything to change either.

    It's a very human tendency--the same reason why most ancient cities are found near rivers, most people didn't want to go far to get water... Just saying.

    ;-P

     

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

  4.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 10:54am

    I agree with Franken on the basic concept: You shouldn't have to change business models because of unchecked illegal activity. Yes, they will likely have to change models, or more likely go out of business because there are no supportable models for business of this type anymore.

    It would be a huge loss to the economy.

     

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

  5.  
    icon
    :Lobo Santo (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 10:57am

    Re:

    Shill harder.

     

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

  6.  
    identicon
    MrWilson, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 10:57am

    Re: Re: Re:

    Then we invented railroads and automobiles so we don't have to build cities near water anymore, which is why the content companies should be studied by archaeologists and not by law students.

     

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

  7.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 11:01am

    Re: Re:

    How can I shill when I am not in the industry?

    Try harder, you usually do better than that.

     

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

  8.  
    icon
    Marcus Carab (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 11:02am

    Re: Re:

    maybe i'm misreading your comment, or maybe you misread mine, but I definitely was not saying that I believe infringement is destroying the industry...

     

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

  9.  
    identicon
    MrWilson, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 11:02am

    Re:

    What if your business model involves illegal activity such as payola or price fixing or government corruption or RICO activity? Should you have change your business model then?

    It would be a huge loss to the economies of private transnational economic elites.

    Meanwhile consumers get to give their money to an entirely different set of transnational economic elites.

     

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

  10.  
    icon
    Jay (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 11:03am

    Re:

    I really hope that's sarcasm because that's been debunked 20 ways from Sunday...

    Regarding Al, he's a huge hypocrite that I just ignore from now on. His support of the COICA hurts his stance that net neutrality is an issue to take him seriously on. What I am disappointed with Ars about is that they didn't talk to him about the actual question of having broadband compete. It seems all around there's a lot of things that could have been done to improve the experience for consumers but Franken doesn't think about it.

     

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

  11.  
    icon
    Jay (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 11:04am

    Re: Re:

    Dammit, found a better link

     

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

  12.  
    icon
    Marcus Carab (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 11:05am

    Re:

    You shouldn't have to change business models because of unchecked illegal activity.

    Consumers shouldn't be pushed towards illegal activity because companies refuse to change business models.

     

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

  13.  
    icon
    Ben (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 11:05am

    If only

    If only this guy had been around in the 80s, stronger copyright law would have meant we'd only have had to endure one 'body switch' or 'unintended double' movie rather than

    Freaky Friday
    Vice Versa
    Big
    18 again
    Like Father Like Son
    All Of Me

    Good job Hollywood itself can infringe in the name of creativity eh?

     

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

  14.  
    identicon
    Irving, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 11:06am

    "even if our elected officials used to work for those companies"

    What do you mean "used to"?

     

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

  15.  
    icon
    :Lobo Santo (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 11:06am

    Re:

    On second thought--I agree!!

    Somebody paid good money to get those copyright laws in place, and science damn-it those laws need to be enforced!

    And damn the expense! Who cares how much it damages our culture, hinders our future, slows the economy, or takes law enforcement away from eating donuts, handing out traffic tickets, investigating murders, or finding rapists, tracking down terrorists... None of that matters if people can get "free" copies of 1's and 0's over the internet.

    AC, you're absolutely correct. If purchased laws aren't worth the money, then the average worth of senators and congressman may fall below the millionaire level and lobbyists might stop getting billions of dollars to sway the lawmakers of this country.

    AC, you're right. WE ABSOLUTELY MUST ENFORCE THOSE COPYRIGHT LAWS! If we do not, the entire lobbyist/lawmaker economy might fall apart, and that dog don't hunt monsieur.

     

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

  16.  
    icon
    Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 11:08am

    Re:

    You shouldn't have to change business models because of unchecked illegal activity.

    Unchecked illegal activity means there is something wrong with the law. Most people are moral and ethical. If there is widespread disobedience to a particular law, then that law is immoral and unethical.

    It would be a huge loss to the economy.

    I think you missed a story today, where using the content industry's own methodology, ~12 jobs are created for every 1 lost to infringement. So, which is true, the methodology for both studies is correct (and therefore copyright is the loss to the economy), or both are incorrect (and therefore the content industry is lying again)?

     

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

  17.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 11:08am

    Re: Re:

    God you are such an anti-ip drone, it's almost impossible to read your stuff.

     

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

  18.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 11:12am

    Re: Re: Re:

    But he's agreeing with you!

     

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

  19.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 11:14am

    Re: Re:

    "If there is widespread disobedience to a particular law, then that law is immoral and unethical."

    I'd also add non-sensical and unknowable to the average person.

     

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

  20.  
    icon
    :Lobo Santo (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 11:14am

    Re: Re: Re:

    Anti-IP, yes. For a reason.

    Drone, not so much (though I do hum on occasion).

     

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

  21.  
    icon
    The Infamous Joe (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 11:18am

    Re: Re: Re:

    Seems to me he's an anti-corruption drone and a pro-freedom drone.

    Oh, that's kinda what you said.

     

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

  22.  
    icon
    Chris in Utah (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 11:19am

    7 dirty words

    If George Carlin had a say today I propse were screwed for "one type of speech" protection.

     

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

  23.  
    icon
    crade (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 11:19am

    With any luck, somewhere else will set up alternate dns and route around the issue.

     

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

  24.  
    icon
    Kevin (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 11:38am

    Re: Re: Re:

    You not really giving us much else to tear apart here. You make these claims (already proven false btw), and then you come back with comments like:

    "God you are such an anti-ip drone, it's almost impossible to read your stuff."

    &

    "How can I shill when I am not in the industry?

    Try harder, you usually do better than that."

    So I guess my comment for you should be:

    You are such a Pro-IP coward who cannot even put a name to his/her rhetoric. You just regurgitate whatever lame incorrect study "the industry" has fabricated and fill the comments of these posts with inane commentary that does nothing to further the conversation. Good Day Sir!

     

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

  25.  
    icon
    The eejit (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 11:44am

    Re:

    Bull and Shit. Frontier One, the VODO-only show, has a viable funding model. More and more indie movie-=makers are embracing Bittorrent as an alternative distribution service. Musicians, as a class of people, are making more money. Box office records gross, year-on-year, is increasing.

    But no, "it's all the pirates' fault the sky is falling. It's all the pirates' fault we're bribing your elected representatives in order to keep our role as gatekeepers."

    And you wonder why the public would rather break the law than conform to these bullshit laws.

     

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

  26.  
    icon
    Killer_Tofu (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 11:50am

    Copyright vs Counterfeit

    To me it seems that the new found constant need to always say copyright infringement alongside counterfeit only means that copyright doesn't have a solid leg to stand on and harms nobody. They need to create this link to actual harm that just isn't there. If there was actual harm, they would respond to the debunkings of their studies, do some good studies, or perhaps stop trying to conflate copyright infringement with everything evil under the sun.

    Even if I was completely new to the idea of copyright, that is the impression I would get. The same idea behind whenever you hear a politician wanting to pass a law "for the children". You know it isn't actually needed and will only have bad side effects.

    When all of the IP gang stops trying to conflate IP with actual counterfeit goods, then I will have a little respect for them.

     

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

  27.  
    icon
    The eejit (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 11:53am

    Re: Re: Re:

    Oddly enough, you can shill without being in the industry. Funny how that dastardly language works.

    LANGUAGE: THE ULTIMATE SUPERVILLAIN.

     

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

  28.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 11:59am

    Re: Re: Re:

    Logical fallacy alert! The need for change is not being driven by unchecked illegal activity it is being driven by unchecked LEGAL activity of which some is civil infringement.

     

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

  29.  
    icon
    Hephaestus (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 11:59am

    Re: Re: Re:

    It was a little sarcasm, mixed with one of my predictions.

    The prediction is that movies will only make money in the theaters. Over time they will loose all their "Windows" with the exception of the big screen. In the end even that will disappear.

     

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

  30.  
    icon
    Greevar (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 12:00pm

    Re: Re:

    It's going... going... it's outta the park!

     

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

  31.  
    icon
    FormerAC (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 12:14pm

    Why is anyone surprised?

    Why is anyone surprised that a politician is parroting his patron's positions? What a politician says during the campaign bears little to no resemblance to what they do in office. Words are cheap, and often believed. Actions cost money, and the voters don't have enough.

    Big businesses and the big unions give big money to their front men to conduct their business in Congress. Despite everything he said when running for office, Frankel is not a politician and is doing his master's bidding.

     

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

  32.  
    icon
    Comboman (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 12:28pm

    Protect your royalty checks Al

    All those people who are downloading Stuart Saves His Family are stealing from you. ... Both of them.

     

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

  33.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 1:04pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    and if there is an earthquake and that river takes a new path that goes miles away from your village, you should complain to the village elder and make him come up with a way to stop earthquakes.

     

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

  34.  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 1:41pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    it is being driven by unchecked LEGAL activity

    Like what?

    Post stats that show it is being driven for a reason other than piracy.

     

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

  35.  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 1:42pm

    Re: Re:

    This just sounds like boilerplate freetard entitlement mentality.

    You need to be more specific.

     

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

  36.  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 1:46pm

    Re: Re:

    Unchecked illegal activity means there is something wrong with law enforcement.

    Fixed.

     

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

  37.  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 1:50pm

    Re: Re:

    If it was really a bullshit law then all of you would've been shoplifting CDs back in the day. Or DVDs a few years back.

    You dolts can't debate this issue, but you just keep trying.

    It's hilarious.

     

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

  38.  
    icon
    The eejit (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 2:08pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Because treating all you customers like a criminal is going over SO well in Canada. As is treating the artists like criminals for collecting their money.

     

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

  39.  
    icon
    btrussell (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 2:08pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

     

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

  40.  
    icon
    The eejit (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 2:10pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    I would have done, but there were no stores locally.[/sarc]

    IS that the best you can do? Seriously? I offer examples of the business model being adapted, and you call us all thieves. Good to know where your priorities are. Clearly you've never truly loved content or culture - just raped it like the Goths did the Romans.

     

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

  41.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 2:15pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    But the marginal cost to producing real goods has a value that translates into real money.

    "You wouldn't download a car?"

    Yes, who wouldn't, if all it took was some zeros and ones and a little bit of electricity, sure, why not?

     

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

  42.  
    icon
    Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 2:21pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Fixed.

    Are you sure you want to take the position that all laws are moral an ethical, and therefore?

    The protests in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya were illegal. Helping an escaped slave was illegal. Leaking classified documents (even if they show gross negligence and mismanagement of a war) is illegal.

    So, you'll say those are different situations. Ok.

    The Boston Tea party was illegal.

    Not paying the stamp tax was illegal - and that's what the Boston Tea party was about.

    Why didn't people want to pay the stamp tax?

    No representation in their government.

    Can you really say that the government of this country represents the people, when all our elected seem to listen to are corporations and special interest groups? Both of the major political parties are saying 'more copyright good' where the evidence suggests the opposite.

    So why should I pay the copyright tax if I'm not being represented in my government?

    Find me even a single Senator or Congressman attempting to scale back or abolish copyright and I'll concede the point that there's someone with my interests trying to make a difference even if they get out voted.

     

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

  43.  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 2:25pm

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

    Like I said, post the stats that show it is being driven by something else.

    As in, show what the predominant force is, if it isn't piracy.

    Good luck.

     

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

  44.  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 2:27pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    I asked for specificity, and you replied with that.

    You're about as sharp as a bowling ball.

     

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

  45.  
    icon
    Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 2:36pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    If it was really a bullshit law then all of you would've been shoplifting CDs back in the day. Or DVDs a few years back

    Physical scarce good does not equal free to replicate data.

    I would not have shoplifted a CD or DVD because I would be depriving the store of the physical object. If I stole it, they would no longer have it.

    Would I have borrowed a CD or DVD from someone, ripped the track, and then given it back?

    Yep, I would have. I did. I still would.

     

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

  46.  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 2:36pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    The fact you can't present a contemporary US law sorta says it all, doesn't it?

    Here, I'll help you: weed. The criminality of weed has slowly been addressed by various state legislatures.

    The problem for you is that you'd still find more people that would say weed should be legal, than people saying ripping off music should be legal.

    Of the people that rip off music, most know its illegal and wrong. They freely admit they do it because at the moment it's easy.

    But they're not lobbying their congressmen to make it legal; they know that's ridiculous. And so should you.

     

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

  47.  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 2:51pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    The distro methods you guys bring up are strawmen. Everytime.

    I have news for you: The internet isn't everything. It isn't the end-all, be-all of everything. I realize that for many pathetic and worthless geeks it might be, but they don't represent the masses.

    None of you ever discuss the cost of production, human and monetary, because you're completely clueless about what it takes to create a professional entertainment product; one that is desired and appealing to many. There are large costs. You can keep pretending that's not the case, but the fact is you can't demonstrate otherwise on a mass level. All you guys ever come up with are incidental outliers.

    The fact is you don't know what you're talking about. That's why no one listens to you, and your hare-brained ideas about things are ignored.

     

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

  48.  
    icon
    Marcus Carab (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 2:58pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Oh please. #1 - you've never said anything specific in your life, you just bark pro-IP slogans and #2 - You've been here long enough to know exactly what arguments I am referring to. Of course, you'll probably deny that, since you refuse to put a name to your comments so you never have to be held accountable for anything, and so you can just keep using the same debunked arguments over and over again instead of either coming up with new ideas or admitting you might not be 100% right.

    Everyone here, including you, knows what I meant by that: that the number one driver of piracy is a lack of legal services which fully leverage modern technology. If you want to deny that, then YOU be more specific.

     

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

  49.  
    identicon
    TDR, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 3:01pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Except that the cost of production is continually going down vastly, something you refuse to admit or accept. Another thing - once something is digital, it is everywhere. Which means it is infinite. Which means it cannot be contained. Try to actually think about that for a minute.

    DISCLAIMER
    Anonymous: "I am a lying industry shill with no sense of morality or even the pretext of a point. I fear change like nothing else and cannot comprehend living without extorting as much as I can from my clients and blaming the 'losses' on a nonexistent problem. I do not know how to address an argument or even present one. I just flame because I know I'm wrong and unable to prove a single thing I've said, and I'm terrified to admit it."

     

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

  50.  
    icon
    The eejit (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 3:06pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Clue's in the name, brah.

     

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

  51.  
    icon
    The eejit (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 3:08pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Actually, I lobby my representative every chance I get, using reasoned arguments from a non-vested perspective. The issue is that, in the Senate and Congress, money talks and bullshit walks. And I'm all outta cash.

     

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

  52.  
    icon
    The eejit (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 3:12pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    OH, really?

    An approximate breakdown of the cost of, say, a major label UK-sold album:

    20% VAT
    2% Production of disc (may not always be applicable)
    3% Transport (may not always be applicable
    1-6% 'artist' royalty
    5% Producer
    25% Sound staff
    43-49% Label.

    That's a preetty big share of the pie, don't you think?

     

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

  53.  
    identicon
    coldbrew, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 3:14pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    I can't figure our for the life of me why I should care what the cost of production is? I simply do not care, and that is not how economics works. That you don't understand that is really telling.

    Coal Company: "It cost us $300/ ton to get that coal to you."
    Steel Mfg: "I don't care, I can buy on the spot market for $200/ ton."
    Coal Company: "Senator!!!!!"

     

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

  54.  
    identicon
    JEDIDIAH, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 3:16pm

    You need to sell it for it to be bought.

    > This just sounds like boilerplate freetard entitlement
    > mentality.
    >
    > You need to be more specific.

    Pirating is easier than being a legitimate paying customer. If I want to take advantage of the state of the art in multi-media I basically have the choice of buying into a single vendor monopoly, pirating, or going to a lot of work.

    The problem with option #1 is that it is still somewhat incomplete when compared to either option #2 or #3.

    Option #3 is cool in many respects but is well... a bother. I can see why most people wouldn't do it. Plus you're still likely running afoul of the law anyways.

    So that leaves piracy as the best option available even ignoring price. It's the easiest, least trouble free, and most complete option.

    There are a number of nice infographics that capture all of this.

     

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

  55.  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 3:25pm

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

    Actually, the issue is your congressman probably thinks the same things about you that I do, he just doesn't utter them out loud.

     

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

  56.  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 3:28pm

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

    Except you don't what you're talking about. Again.

    Write up a budget for me.

    Post it right here:

     

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

  57.  
    icon
    Marcus Carab (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 3:29pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    What you call "incidental outliers" are in fact (as seen by more observant people than you) the growing first wave of an obvious shift in the industry. It's a shame you can't accept that, because you are going to get left behind.

     

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

  58.  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 3:31pm

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

    A. You haven't got all the expenses there.

    B. Your actual numbers are wrong (of course).

    Seriously, if you guys don't know what you're talking about, why do you just spew this idiotic nonsense?

     

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

  59.  
    icon
    Mike Masnick (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 3:32pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    The fact is you don't know what you're talking about. That's why no one listens to you, and your hare-brained ideas about things are ignored.

    I love ignorant claims like this.

    I think you'd shut up if you could see my email box from just this week alone. It's pretty funny, but I can tell you that content creators way more famous than you are very clearly listening to what I have to say. Ditto with some politicians.

    But you know what everyone thinks, so go with that.

     

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

  60.  
    icon
    The eejit (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 3:33pm

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

    ...And it turns out to be nearly correct from the RIAA's OWN WEBSITE. I think the phrase is Pwnd.

     

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

  61.  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 3:35pm

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

    I can't figure our for the life of me why I should care what the cost of production is? I simply do not care, and that is not how economics works.

    wow.

    Sorry, but you are seriously stupid.

     

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

  62.  
    icon
    The eejit (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 3:37pm

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

    See, you've done nothing but attack, without any evidence to back your argument up. You just refer as 'freetards' and 'stupid'. The information I found was hidden way in the archives of the RIAA website. So again, I think the phrase is Pwnd.

     

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

  63.  
    icon
    Mike Masnick (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 3:37pm

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

    ..And it turns out to be nearly correct from the RIAA's OWN WEBSITE. I think the phrase is Pwnd

    Hilarious.

     

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

  64.  
    identicon
    JEDIDIAH, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 3:39pm

    Re: Copyright vs Counterfeit

    ...not to mention the real victim in the case of counterfeiting is not the corporations. It's the individual that manages to buy something that's not what they expected it to be. Of course this is not the Senate's perspective on counterfeiting.

    That's another element of the real problem.

     

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

  65.  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 3:39pm

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

    Yes, the internet is awash with stories about Mike Masnick's successes in music...

    This sounds like more of Masnick's secret evidence. Kinda like all those "1st Amendment lawyers" that supposedly agreed with him.

    Btw, where's the seizure appeals, Masnick, hmmm?

     

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

  66.  
    icon
    The eejit (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 3:42pm

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

    I stole them all and shared them with your 'friends'. They're all my friends now.

     

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

  67.  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 3:45pm

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

    Almost as hilarious as the fact that there are no expenses listed for:

    1. Radio servicing
    2. Tour support
    3. Management
    4. Store promotion
    5. Advertising
    etc, etc.
    I could go on and on.

    Now, if you actually knew anything about the music business, instead of being a raging asshat, you would have noticed that too.

     

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

  68.  
    icon
    The eejit (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 3:48pm

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

    Funny, I never said I was in America. I said I lobby my representative. Funny that you don't bother checking simple things like that.

    Bored yet of being caught out?

     

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

  69.  
    icon
    The eejit (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 3:51pm

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

    IT takes $250,000 to produce a typical top-10 album.

    Source: Sony BMG official site

     

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

  70.  
    icon
    The eejit (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 3:52pm

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

    Damn, I hate it when links don't work.

     

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

  71.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 4:09pm

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

    Store promotion? I thought all the record stores closed? You know, because of all the stealing?

     

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

  72.  
    icon
    Ron Rezendes (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 4:13pm

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

    Why are you asking for stats that should show the demise of an industry that is perfectly healthy and reaping record profits in the midst of all this "piracy" that someone, somewhere is claiming destroys this same industry.

    See, you can't be continuously more profitable each year AND claim piracy is destroying the industry. One of those conditions has published numbers that show the profit is still there and not even necessarily getting smaller, the "piracy killing machine" is simply the monster in your closet when you go to bed at night and leave the door open.

     

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

  73.  
    icon
    Mike Masnick (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 4:24pm

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

    Sorry, but you are seriously stupid.


    Dude. When someone accurately states economics to you and you call him "seriously stupid," the only one that makes look stupid is you.

    It's a *fact* that pricing is not based on fixed costs, but on marginal costs. Your desire to ignore that doesn't change it, nor does your desire to call someone who schools you in basic economics "seriously stupid" make you look knowledgeable. It makes you look clueless, though it explains why you're failing.

     

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

  74.  
    icon
    Mike Masnick (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 4:29pm

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

    Yes, the internet is awash with stories about Mike Masnick's successes in music...


    Never been about *my* successes, kiddo. It's about the people who learn how to succeed.

    This sounds like more of Masnick's secret evidence. Kinda like all those "1st Amendment lawyers" that supposedly agreed with him.

    Heh. They do agree with me. That's why they're working on lawsuits.

    Btw, where's the seizure appeals, Masnick, hmmm?


    Will you admit you were wrong when the details come out? Of course not.

    You seem to open your mouth an awful lot from a position of total ignorance, and even worse, accuse folks who know what they're talking about of being ignorant. You may know something about music, but you have demonstrated you have no knowledge of economics, business or the law.

    Will you admit you were wrong? Of course not. But it's okay, because I know when I'm proven right, yet again, that you'll know how foolish you look.

    By the way, my offer to help you for free goes away the day we publish the story about an appeal of a seizure. So, hurry up. You're about to lose out on a good chance to stop failing.

     

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

  75.  
    icon
    vivaelamor (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 4:44pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    "The problem for you is that you'd still find more people that would say weed should be legal, than people saying ripping off music should be legal."

    Yes, that comparison makes sense because the prisons are full of people who infringed copyright, right?

     

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

  76.  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 4:44pm

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

    Recorded music sales have been cut in half since Napster. If piracy isn't the reason, post the stats of the real cause.

     

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

  77.  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 4:49pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    The number one driver of piracy is people being able to take something because law enforcement didn't provide protection.

    You're not fooling anyone when you try to pretend it's anything but that.

     

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

  78.  
    icon
    vivaelamor (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 4:54pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    "The distro methods you guys bring up are strawmen."

    Uh, could you be specific please. Otherwise I'm worried that you have no idea what a strawman is.

    "None of you ever discuss the cost of production"

    You mean, except when we discuss it. Is there a specific point you would like us to address on the subject? I'd offer some examples to get us started, but you've already rejected any I might bring up as "incidental outliers".

    "The fact is you don't know what you're talking about. That's why no one listens to you, and your hare-brained ideas about things are ignored."

    Come on, you can do better than that with the personal attacks. Perhaps an upgrade to pea-brained, at least.

     

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

  79.  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 4:58pm

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

    I'm sure no one noticed the fact that I responded to his statement about "the cost of production", and you amended it to try and fix his stupidity.

     

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

  80.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 5:15pm

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

    I blame recorded video game sales. This is anecdotal but my brother used to spend money purchasing shiny plastic discs to listen to. Then he stopped listening to music and started purchasing shiny plastic discs to play to.

    It also didn't help that he was/is slightly computer illiterate and couldn't figure out the whole iTunes/iPod combo.

    It was just ridiculously easier for him to spend his time and money playing video games.

     

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

  81.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 5:17pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Every time I commit an act of copyright infringement I call up my local police force and tell them what I'm doing. Well, I would, but after the first couple of times they told me to stop bothering them.

     

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

  82.  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 6:06pm

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

    I'm waiting for the seizure appeals; I'll be happy to see the issue addressed in court.

    You, on other hand, are hoping that once the court does address it, that they'll reverse the original judge's warrant, and rule them unlawful.

    Because you've got $500 riding on it.

     

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

  83.  
    identicon
    rudy yniguez, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 6:10pm

    al francken

    who cares what that loser says? francken can go to hell, commie pig.

     

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

  84.  
    icon
    Greevar (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 7:04pm

    Re: al francken

    While I support your opinion, your usage of commie doesn't apply as a true communist would not do the things Franken has done. The term you're looking for is dictator.

     

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

  85.  
    icon
    Greevar (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 7:05pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    You mean aqueducts, not roads.

     

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

  86.  
    icon
    Chris in Utah (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 8:07pm

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

    I'll take 10:1 odds. Clark Freshman comes to mind for one that will be winning.

    http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110219/00252113175/just-because-judge-signs-warrant-doesnt-ma ke-it-legal.shtml

     

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

  87.  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 8:42pm

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

    I just posted stats about the music industry and you post a Techdirt article about the MPAA. Brilliant.

     

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

  88.  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 8:45pm

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

    If people weren't interested in music, then it wouldn't get ripped off so much. No one would buy ipods, etc.

    People listen to music as much as ever. They just rip it off because no one would bust them for not paying.

     

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

  89.  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 8:48pm

    Re: You need to sell it for it to be bought.

    You're a liar.

    The vast, vast majority of what you rip off could be purchased; on itunes, amazon, from the band, etc.

    You bozos aren't fooling anyone.

     

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

  90.  
    icon
    Greevar (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 9:15pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Specifics? You're one to talk. All you do is speak in ambiguity. You never cite any factual evidence because you just pull your stuff out of thin air and pretend it's fact all the while demand that we all prove you wrong. Start backing your own arguments with real evidence and maybe we'll be inclined to stop seeing you as a bad joke that has been going on far too long.

     

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

  91.  
    icon
    Greevar (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 9:18pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    "The problem for you is that you'd still find more people that would say weed should be legal, than people saying ripping off music should be legal."

    Is that so?

    http://torrentfreak.com/piracy-socially-acceptable-110228/

     

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

  92.  
    icon
    Chris in Utah (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 10:07pm

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

    Just a jab back at ya
    http://hightimes.com/legal

    I think its a misnomer either way.

     

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

  93.  
    icon
    Jay (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 10:10pm

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

    [citation needed]

    Chances are, there's more competition for a person's time. So you have to work harder to get noticed by everyone.

     

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

  94.  
    icon
    Ccomp5950 (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 11:47pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Shoplifting isn't the same as piracy.

    The fact you can't wrap your head around the common idea that copying isn't theft leads me to believe you are incapable of doing anything other than parroting slogans.

    "You wouldn't steal a car?"

    Hell no, but if I could make an exact copy of it without costing me a dime more than the electricity cost of running the copy machine, I sure would.

    Sharing is human nature.

     

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

  95.  
    icon
    The eejit (profile), Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 12:15am

    Re: Re: You need to sell it for it to be bought.

    Asassin's Creed 2
    Prince of Persia: the Forgotten Sands

    Where purchasing a legitimate piece of software was more damasging to computers and customers' time than pirating. Ubisoft lights the way in pissing off its customers.

     

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

  96.  
    icon
    The eejit (profile), Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 12:17am

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

    Notice, I said production costs, not POST-PRODUCTION. Nice try.

     

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

  97.  
    icon
    The eejit (profile), Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 12:19am

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

     

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

  98.  
    icon
    Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 2:53am

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

    Non sequitur

     

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

  99.  
    icon
    The eejit (profile), Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 3:09am

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

    Yet the cost in your world included post-production costs, like advertising. I explicitly said pure production oosts

     

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

  100.  
    icon
    btrussell (profile), Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 3:12am

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

    No, I posted a link to a previous comment of mine.
    You are brilliant, aren't you.

     

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

  101.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 4:03am

    Re:

    ...or it could be a net gain somewhere else.

    Mr. Franken admitted it changes the dynamic he is just ignorant of the fact that nobody knows where this could lead.

    Further "piracy" have been in non-commercial circles for as long as there was copyrights and it didn't seem to do any harm.

    Radio didn't destroy musicians and composers income, TV didn't destroy Hollywood, VHS didn't destroy TV and Hollywood.

    There will be change and non-commercial piracy will be there and long after, there are no technologies or laws able to stop it and worst yet there are solutions to circumvent those laws using stringent copyright laws to achieve the same end result for free content that is sharable and freely legally distributable by anyone.

     

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

  102.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 4:07am

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

    That is not what the IRS says!

    http://www.irs.gov/taxstats/index.html

     

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

  103.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 4:14am

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

    Also, the trend is downwards and you can't blame piracy alone when the game industry suffers from the same thing and is having record profits or when the movie industry is having also record profits, that just points to something else besides piracy that is driving CD sales down.

    Have you ever considered that free legal alternatives are cutting down on spending? have you considered that people don't want to buy a CD that they will rip to a MP3, have you considered that others competitors(i.e. Jamendo) are taking market share from those sales?

    Now even if that is true, what are you going to do about it?

    There are no laws capable of stopping that and there are no technological solutions either at some point you people will need to come to terms with that simple fact. NON-COMMERCIAL PIRACY IS NEVER GOING AWAY AND IT WON'T BE REDUCED pronto, that is the elephant in the room that some think they can't just ignore.

     

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

  104.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 4:18am

    Re: Re: Re:

    ...or there is something wrong with those laws.

    This time around no government will be able to help you people.

     

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

  105.  
    icon
    btrussell (profile), Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 4:20am

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

    "“However, we find the opposite, namely that P2P file-sharing tends to increase rather than decrease music purchasing.”"
    http://www.zeropaid.com/news/92723/cria-trying-to-debunk-industry-canadas-pro-p2p-stu dy/

     

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

  106.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 4:39am

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

    Haven't you heard, people don't download illegal music anymore, they found legal alternatives, that was the conclusion of a lot of studies done over years.


    Online Music Piracy Falls 27% (Rafat Ali, Jun 8, 2004 10:06 PM ET 2004)

    Streaming Rises, Music Piracy Falls (2009)

    Study shows music piracy on the decline, porn the most popular of it all (By Thorin Klosowski, Tue., Feb. 8 2011 @ 10:40AM)

    Music Execs Stressed Over Free Streaming – PCWorld (By Joab Jackson, IDG News, 2011)

    There happy now?
    Now can you please STFU!

     

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

  107.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 4:51am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Are you blind or deaf?

    Everyone I know pirate something, maybe we don't live in the same planet LoL

     

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

  108.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 5:04am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Piracy OK in the minds of most Americans (January 28, 2007 / Mike Panic)

    ps: hahaha! WTF!

    Poll: Americans think downloading no big deal

    Air Force cracks software, carpet bombs DMCA (By John Timmer | Last updated August 4, 2008 2:02 PM. The government will enforce copyright on others but not on itself)

    70% of public find piracy OK (by Editor on Mar 1 2011.)

    GoogleFu:

    piracy is ok
    is piracy ok
    piracy is fun
    piracy who cares

     

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

  109.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 5:08am

    Re: Re: You need to sell it for it to be bought.

    Why buy anything when you can just go to the Youtube page of the artist and listen for free?

    You bozos aren't fooling anyone.

     

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

  110.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 5:18am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    BS coming from a liar.

    Show me what costs and I show you how to do it for next to nothing.

    Here have a look at how to smash an iPhone without spending money.

    http://www.blenderguru.com/smash-an-iphone/

    Or make some music on the cheap.
    http://www.hydrogen-music.org/

    Damn you don't even need a singer anymore with Vocaloid that last year alone had several top charts music in Japan alone.

     

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

  111.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 5:18am

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

    Post stats that piracy IS the cause not just your backwards logic that SALES DOWN=PIRACY just because you can't do a simple google search.

     

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

  112.  
    icon
    Joe (profile), Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 5:20am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Law enforcement's job is not to provide "protection," it's to enforce the law. Don't confuse the two.

     

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

  113.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 5:24am

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

    Hydrogen cost $0
    Musescore cost $0
    LMMS cost $0

    Using the piano roll to make a beat for nothing priceless.

     

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

  114.  
    icon
    Joe (profile), Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 5:28am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    So smoking weed causes piracy?

     

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

  115.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 5:30am

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

    Because there is probably no need for those expenses as Felicia Day has proven already LoL

    All you need is an account on YouTube today apparently.

     

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

  116.  
    icon
    Joe (profile), Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 5:32am

    Re: Re: Re:

    That's what you're missing. People bought CDs back in the day because it was the most viable, easy method to get music. Today, it's not. The consumers have changed the way they listen/obtain music, but the music industry had to be brought kicking and screaming into the new era and they're still fighting to keep the CD model alive, even though it's no longer the most viable, easy way for consumers to get their music.

     

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

  117.  
    icon
    Joe (profile), Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 5:36am

    Re: Why is anyone surprised?

    The fact that he's an idiot doesn't clear the water any either. ;)

     

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

  118.  
    icon
    Joe (profile), Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 5:38am

    Re: Re: al francken

    Dictator? Isn't that what you get when you cross Al Franken and a potato?





    Yeah, I know it was shuckable, but I couldn't help it.

     

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

  119.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 5:42am

    Re: Re: Re:

    Is a BS law, I know that since the 70's when everyone was making mix-tapes LoL

    I bet even you did some, didn't you?
    Have you never recorded a TV show? have you never made a mix-tape or a mix-CDR?

    No one cares about copyright, no one cares specially about YOUR COPYRIGHT CLAIMS, people just ignore you and that is what makes you jump up and down all day screaming PIRATES! PIRATES!.

    I hope the government passes all those ridiculous laws and you get what you want and realizes then that they will do nothing to reduce piracy or PIRATES! LoL

     

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

  120.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 6:25am

    People were complaining they couldn't watch sports online, well search for TVANTS and you will find what you are looking for.

    Quote:
    Although lacking some of the channels that other P2P streaming programs have the fact that TVAnts has a high quality ESPN channel with full English commentary makes TVAnts an essential piece of software for those wanting to watch live streaming football on their PC.


    Damn those Chinese from Zhejiang University.

     

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

  121.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 6:30am

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

    ...or because people are not interested in buying music anymore you see your revenues decline and no amount of anti-piracy BS will change that.

     

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

  122.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 7:05am

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

    oal Company: "It cost us $300/ ton to get that coal to you."
    Steel Mfg: "I don't care, I can buy on the spot market for $200/ ton."


    It's okay, I can sell it to you for $100 a ton because I steal it out of the other company's supply, you know, the people who actually pay the money to dig it up.

    No problem, they appear to have an infinite supply.

     

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

  123.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 7:25am

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

    Now you just became the entertainment industry that produces nothing but claims ownership of everything LoL

     

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

  124.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 8:42am

    I think it's fair to refer to infringment as "stealing" and "theft". Just like levies on blank media or internet connections is consumer rape.

     

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

  125.  
    icon
    The eejit (profile), Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 8:46am

    Re: Re: Re: al francken

    I was going to go with Frankentater, but yours works, too.

     

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

  126.  
    identicon
    niiwe, Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 10:01pm

    Re:

    Had the book-copying monasteries of the middle ages been a bit ahead of their times and gotten a legal monopoly on distribution of books, Gutenberg's invention would have been in big trouble...

     

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

  127.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 7th, 2011 @ 11:19pm

    @ other Anonymous Coward who dissed geeks

    you know, i'm one of those geeks you mentioned. the only difference is, I DO know what is put in to making large scale films or albums, or shitty, over priced software. it's just so damned hard2find or so expensive to get that i resort to riping a cd or pirate sites. some software, for example: Adobe Dreamweaver, $399 for their "base line" web page editing program. the companies could find such simple ways to make them less expensive, like open source code, or focusing less on how big their own bank accounts are getting, and how small their customers' are getting. (this goes for this subject and what was said about weed) greed is one of the most powerful forces known to man. it makes people do dumb things (raise prices through the roof/shoot someone for trying to rip you off). (onto the weed now) all i have to say about weed is that the same thing happened durring the prohibition, except weed does more good than harm, more than anyone can say for alcohol. (back to piracy) criticize me all you want, but piracy wouldnt be a problem if it wasnt a necessity.

     

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

  128.  
    identicon
    -Silicon Valley Is Gonna Burn-, Mar 10th, 2011 @ 11:24am

    Enlighten Me

    You all seem to know so much about this supposed "new business model". So, what is it? Seriously I'd like to know what all you brilliant minds have come up with over the past 10 years. Come on Mike, spit it out...what "business model" are you referring to? Enlighten me...If you've got a specific idea that might actually work, let's hear it. I know you're not talking about 'Add-supported' or 'Free', are you!? Are you guys really still trying to keep that pipe dream alive?

    Silicon Valley and the collective Internet syndicate willingly offering up free access to all digital content without authorization from the copyright holders does not qualify as a “new business model”, there's actually a name for that and it's called "copyright infringement".

    It's very easy to be successful when you don't follow any of the rules.

     

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


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