MPAA Exec Admits: 'We're Not Comfortable With The Internet'

from the and-it-shows dept

There have been a ton of post mortems about the whole SOPA/PIPA fight, with many trying to figure out where and how the MPAA "went wrong." After all, this is a group that is very used to getting its way inside DC. And it got slaughtered. We've already discussed our thoughts on why the MPAA failed, but what stuns me is how every time someone from the MPAA opens their mouth, they seem to make the situation worse by demonstrating just how tone deaf they are to the online community and what their concerns were. Whether it's just blaming Google or thinking that the solution is more backroom dealing, each response just sounds like a group of people who are playing a different game, and still don't realize the rules have changed.

The Hollywood Reporter's version of the postmortem is a good read, even though it covers much the same ground as many other such recaps. Still, it's worth reading to get a good feel for Hollywood's view of the world. But the really stunning part is the quote from Michael O'Leary, the MPAA's number two guy, who makes what may be the most tone-deaf statement we've seen to date in this fight:
The MPAA's O'Leary concedes that the industry was out-manned and outgunned in cyberspace. He says the MPAA "is [undergoing] a process of education, a process of getting a much, much greater presence in the online environment. This was a fight on a platform we're not at this point comfortable with, and we were going up against an opponent that controls that platform."
Yes, even when he tries to say that they're trying to learn about that confounded internet thingy, he sounds ridiculous and dismissive. But the real point is his inadvertent admission within that statement: the MPAA (and the rest of "old" Hollywood) simply "is not comfortable with" the internet. And that's really what SOPA and PIPA were about. Rather than trying to understand this new platform, and learn from the many entertainers who do get the internet, they did what the MPAA does and simply tried to regulate that which they don't understand and fear.

Furthermore, even more ridiculous is the end of that sentence: "an opponent that controls that platform." As the article makes clear, he means Google. Which shows that he still doesn't get it. First, Google didn't lead the protests. It came late to the game, after the grassroots had already taken off with this stuff and run with it. But, more to the point, contrary to what O'Leary and the MPAA seem to believe: Google does not control the internet. No one does.

This, of course, explains why the MPAA wants to "negotiate" with Google these days. But that's not going to work. The folks on the internet don't want a backroom deal, whether it's negotiated by Google or someone else. Either way, this suggests that the MPAA is desperately in need of new leadership. They need leaders who don't try to regulate that which they admit they don't understand. They need leaders who aren't so clueless as to think that Google controls the internet (or that Google is somehow "the enemy"). And, really, most important, they need leaders who recognize and understand that the internet is their future too -- and any leadership needs to not fear the internet, but understand it and learn to embrace it. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem likely that the MPAA is going to find such leadership any time soon.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    icon
    crade (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 11:04am

    "He says the MPAA "is [undergoing] a process of education"
    Am I the only one picturing a bunch of execs in suits who keep getting held back in second grade and don't understand how all the other kids grasp the internet in one short class?

     

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

  2.  
    icon
    Marcus Carab (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 11:28am

    You know, the MPAA is totally right: I've been hearing about this internet thing for awhile now, and although I still think it might just be a fad, it really does seem to be gaining momentum... In fact I know quite a few people who use it! It could be the next big thing. I guess it's time to get comfortable with it so I can get in on the ground floor.

     

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

  3.  
    icon
    Mesonoxian Eve (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 11:54am

    To O'Leary:
    Use Twitter. This way, your ridiculous commentary isn't drowned out by the flooding of the crocodile tears. Leave the acting of emotions to Kristen Stewart, star of the Twilight series.

    I'm always appreciative of a business terrified of Google, who must deal with the FTC and their rules of "We want you to block rogue sites, but if you program that, we'll charge you with anti-trust violations for limiting the results."

    Let's hope that IF the MPAA learns how to use the internet, they'll educate our even less knowledgeable government.

     

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

  4.  
    icon
    crade (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 11:59am

    Re:

    Imagine how much damage they could do if they actually learned about it.

     

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

  5.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:01pm

    Re: Re:

    Imagine how much damage they could do if they actually learned about it.

    Really. Our major advantage is that they do not understand the digital terrain.

     

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

  6.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:01pm

    Has there ever been an MPAA quote that focuses on what would be good for the consumers?

     

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

  7.  
    icon
    Jay (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:01pm

    Time to let go...

    Mike, I know... We had some good times with the MPAA. They've focused on content protection. They've screwed the indie artists, the actors, and the public for decades. And the law is more in favor to them.

    But look in the eyes of the MPAA. Don't you see that wild disregard for the profits? Can't you see the hurting hypocrisy as they complain that people "just want free stuff?"

    No... We have to hold down this organization. Take away its tentacles, the 2.2 million jobs, the $58 billion dollar profits, and the ability to destroy platforms. And though it brings a tear to my heart, we have to say "Adios"...

    And pull out our Colt 45, shoot the MPAA in the head, take out a cigarette and walk off into the sunset with a tear in our eye. It's the humane thing to do.

    *The End*

     

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

  8.  
    icon
    Michael Bennett (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:05pm

    Hollywood: Jealous Socialists

    I think they're just jealous because Google's revenues rival all of hollywood's revenues. There's also a twisted expectation that everyone else should subsidize hollywood. The very fact that blank media is taxed to subsidize the mafiaa is beyond revolting.

    My biggest question about SOPA was who is going to pay for this? The entire process oozes socialism.

    I guess the 2008 financial crisis made America okay with socialism, since the bail outs are/were, as Lawrence Lessig put it "the stupidest form of socialism"

     

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

  9.  
    icon
    mickmel (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:06pm

    Fast, not free

    Here's the short lesson for them: Users on the internet expect to get their content quickly, not necessarily for free. Organizations (and ill-informed people such as Bill Maher) confuse that with users wanting to always get their content for free. The primary motivation for piracy is a lack of a legal alternative.

    Napster --> iTunes is the perfect example. Once Napster launched, it seemed that people just wanted free music. Granted many did, but if you give people an easy way to legally purchase music they will -- to the tune of roughly 20 BILLION songs song on iTunes. Do the same with movies, instead of these horrible "windows" and geo-restrictions, and the same thing will happen.

     

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

  10.  
    icon
    Kyle Reynolds Conway (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:07pm

    Re: Time to let go...

    I'm not sure it will evoke the same emotions as "Old Yeller," but it may just be the humane thing to do. It's hard to watch an old business model flail and seize and repeatedly demonstrate how disconnected it is in the face of 21st century realities.

     

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

  11.  
    icon
    RadialSkid (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:07pm

    They simply can't grasp that the internet is a communications medium, not a broadcast medium. They're used to the snobbery of thinking that the suits control everything, and the public has to be lead along by the collective nose. They're not used to the public at large biting back, and when it does, it utterly confounds them.

     

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

  12.  
    icon
    MAJikMARCer (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:11pm

    Does this mean...

    More industry shills in the comments telling us we are all pirates or pirate apologists and we don't know what we are talking about? Oh that'll be awesome!

     

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

  13.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:11pm

    I think I speak for everyone when I say:

    "WE KNOW!"

     

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

  14.  
    icon
    Kyle Reynolds Conway (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:11pm

    Re: Fast, not free

    I agree with your main point, but iTunes still isn't what I want (I couldn't even use it if I wanted to as a Linux user).

    Can we add "truly ubiquitous" (read: open) as a criteria as well? I've had digital conversations with recently signed musicians about downloading their content in a lossless format and they apologize that their new label only sells physical disks and lossy format downloads.

    Guess who I'm still not listening to?

     

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

  15.  
    icon
    jakerome (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:12pm

    MPAA in denial

    I hope their employees read this. Nothing demonstrates how supremely out of touch the MPAA & the studio executives are than this sentence, "Instead, the studios believe Google's real agenda was protecting revenue from advertising on illegal sites."

    Yes, that's what this was all about. Adsense on illegal sites. Adsense to start is what, 10-30% of Google revenue? That includes most major web outlets. I can't imagine that even on the high end more than 1% of ads are on sites that the MPAA would deem "rogue." Maybe 1/10 of those are actual rogue sites dedicated to piracy. So 0.1% of Google revenue, at best, is from pirate sites.

    So stay out of touch with reality MPAA. Live in denial, convince yourselves it was a single company manipulating the entire internet into supporting wholesome legislation, with only the valiant MPAA fighting the hordes of Google Zombies in order to preserve Hollywood, nay, society itself from being destroyed by the Evil Masterminds at Google. Sounds like a plot from...

    Wait a second! It all makes sense now. The whole self-serving narrative that the MPAA has constructed is as transparent as a Hollywood storyline. And just as fantastical. That's why they're so into it, they think they're actors in their own adventure. My goodness, it's worse than I thought!

    Get me rewrite!

     

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

  16.  
    icon
    Chris ODonnell (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:13pm

    An opportunity...

    If the MPAA thinks Google controls the Internet, then maybe Google should sit down with the MPAA, negotiate something reasonable, extract an ironclad, contractual agreement from the MPAA that as long as Google does X, they will not sue, litigate, or otherwise harass anybody about anything that is happening on the Internet. The MPAA will think they've won, and Google will have done the world a huge favor.

    And the rest of us can safely ignore what Google agreed to, because they in fact don't control the Internet.

     

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

  17.  
    icon
    Almost Anonymous (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:14pm

    O'Leary is clueless

    """This was a fight on a platform we're not at this point comfortable with, and we were going up against an opponent that controls that platform."""

    An opponent? WTF? Does he think he's up against Skynet?

    Mr. O'Leary, I've got news for you, you're not just up against one opponent. If I may paraphrase the great poet Jay-Z, "You've got 9,999,999 problems and a bitch aint one."

     

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

  18.  
    icon
    Mike42 (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:15pm

    **AA leader's problems

    The biggest problems facing the "leaders" of the MPAA and RIAA really come from the extremely wealthy people they represent.
    Dodd gets his marching orders from a small group of fatcats who have nothing but contempt for the public. And as log as Dodd has to relate to them, he will be unable to relate to the public, and be unable to understand the internet. They are just too different.
    In 20 years, when the senile power-mongers are put out to pasture, this will be a non-issue. Assuming that we don't lose here and now.

     

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

  19.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:19pm

    Re:

    The MPAA does not believe talking to inanimate bags of money would be conducive to the crafting of strong copyright legislation at this time.

     

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

  20.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:28pm

    Re: Re:

    Imagine how much damage they could do if they pretended they were just clumsy and ignorant and the public gave them a second chance.

     

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

  21.  
    identicon
    Henrik, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:28pm

    While I do agree that the MPAA is so far out of touch with actual reality nowadays it would be similar to a Laika trying to run on earth again, I must say this article was a bit of a quote mine.

    He didnt say they were uncomfertable with the internet as a whole (even though they do seem like it). What he did say was that they are uncomfertable taking a fight on the internet. Thats 2 completely different things.

     

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

  22.  
    identicon
    Bengie, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:28pm

    Re: Time to let go...

    I just had "The End of The World" voice in my head saying "THE END!" and a whisper of "f*cking kangaroos.

     

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

  23.  
    identicon
    J, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:29pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    They just hire people that know what they're doing and have them do their bidding.

     

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

  24.  
    icon
    Dog On a Teflon Floor (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:30pm

    I am Just a simple Caveman

    I'm frightened by your weird series of tubes and large flying machines....

     

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

  25.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:34pm

    Re: Re: Fast, not free

    Yes give us good quality and open standards, please!

     

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

  26.  
    icon
    Chuck Norris' Enemy (deceased) (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:36pm

    The Internet 101

    I think this is the best educational course for the MPAA to learn about the internet. It is only two-and-a-half minutes long and so clear and concise.

     

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

  27.  
    icon
    Steve R. (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:38pm

    Negotiate???

    Exactly how do you negotiate with an industry group that wants ever greater control and "buys" legislation to give them that.

    Copyright was originally for 14 years, now it is much longer. Is the MPPA going to agree to restore copyright to its original intent and duration? I doubt it.

     

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

  28.  
    icon
    Keii (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:40pm

    Oh ya Mr. Big Tough Guy? If the internet is not Google, then why does it say Google when I open up my Internet? Explain that.

     

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

  29.  
    identicon
    Chaz, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:42pm

    its game over for hollywood

    they can struggle all they want, but the thing is that even if they were to understand the internet. the internet will forever stand against them.

     

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

  30.  
    icon
    The Original Anonymous Coward (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:43pm

    Look at it from their (uneducated) viewpoint

    By uneducated, I don't mean that they haven't been to school. I mean that they aren't techies and don't understand the 'net.

    There are millions of people out there who regularly use the internet for things and don't have a clue how it works. The day that "google" became a verb, as in "I'll just google it", Google did become the internet to many of these folks.

    I'm on the faculty in a program for training network techs and many of these folks start out the same way. When in their intro course we ask them to open a web browser, they say "Oh - you mean I should start the internet" and when we ask them to use a search engine to look for xyz, their eyes glaze over until we tell them to go to Google or Bing.

    Hopefully by the time they leave we'll have fixed these problems, but it's just an indication that most "internet" users have this view of the on-line world because when they start up their browser it automatically displays the Google home page or at least has a search box built into the tool bar at the top that's hooked to Google.

    We have done this to them. We have no one to blame but ourselves for giving them this narrow view of the 'net.

     

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

  31.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:43pm

    Well he is right they were up against "an opponent that controls that platform." unfortunately for them that opponent is their customers.

     

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

  32.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:44pm

    This is not the first time the RIAA/MPAA got slaughtered on proposed legislation.

    Back when they were trying to get the DMCA law passed, it got slaughtered by the rest of the big corporations when they figured out just how restrictive the original was going to be and what it was going to cost them each if it was passed.

    Just about every major international corporation not involved with copyright came out against it and it died in it's first version. It was taken back to the drawing board and what we have today is the result of that redrawing.

    Every once in a while they get so big for their britches in what they want, they forget they are a tiny portion of the GDP, not the major part they wished they were.

     

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

  33.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:46pm

    Re: Look at it from their (uneducated) viewpoint

    I start my car by putting the key in the ignition and it won't start without the key but I don't think the key is the power source. Making something that is easy to use and works well does not make it our(techies) fault that people are ignorant.

    /mandatory car analogy

     

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

  34.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:46pm

    Re: Look at it from their (uneducated) viewpoint

    I start my car by putting the key in the ignition and it won't start without the key but I don't think the key is the power source. Making something that is easy to use and works well does not make it our(techies) fault that people are ignorant.

    /mandatory car analogy

     

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

  35.  
    identicon
    rome, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:47pm

    @Mike, I'm going to need you to Youtube a "Shit the MPAA Says" video.

     

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

  36.  
    icon
    Gwiz (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:48pm

    ...and we were going up against an opponent that controls that platform.

    This mindset will be difficult for Hollywood to overcome. Starting with (and possibly prior to) World War II Hollywood became the government's "go to" guy for propaganda and one-way broadcast mediums have been the norm. The internet, being a two-way communication system, tends to have an uncontrollable life of it's own concerning propaganda, you can toss something out there, but what actually ends gaining momentum may not be what you really intended. The internet demands more than a questionable statement repeated over and over again. By it's very nature, the internet requires sound logic, facts and proof or your propaganda will be pounced on like tuna fish at the crazy cat lady's house.

     

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

  37.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:49pm

    Dumb question, but, why do studios have to be in the MPAA? Is that a government forced regulation if they want to distribute movies? Is it all for the rating system?

     

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

  38.  
    icon
    Keii (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 12:50pm

    Re: Look at it from their (uneducated) viewpoint

    That's pretty much what I've been saying only in a much more insightful and less snarky way. Cheers.

     

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

  39.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:00pm

    Young People Track Web Protests Over Online Piracy Bills

    (Ooops... originally posted this under wrong article. That's what I get for having two windows open at once, I guess.)

    Cruise Ship Accident, Election Top Public's Interest”, Pew Research Center, Jan 24, 2012
    Young People Track Web Protests Over Online Piracy Bills

    . . . But the protest by popular websites against proposed online piracy legislation was a top story for young people. Nearly a quarter (23%) of those younger than 30 say they followed news about the online piracy fight most closely. That is about the same as the percentage following the 2012 elections most closely (21%). Among the public as a whole, just 7% say they followed news about the web protests – which included sites such as Wikipedia going dark for the day – more closely than any other story. . . .



    (Emphasis added.) (Via New York Times, H/T Reddit)

     

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

  40.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:01pm

    More intellectual dishonesty from piracy lover Mike Masnick.

    O'Leary said they weren't comfortable arguing on a platform controlled by their opposition. Which is clearly funded by Google; a giant mega corporation that makes billions on illegally grafted content.

    Google tried to hide their funding of it, but they were lying:

    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_TEC_GOOGLE_LOBBYING?SITE=KTVK&SECTION=HOME&a mp;TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

     

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

  41.  
    icon
    nasch (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:05pm

    Re: An opportunity...

    If the MPAA thinks Google controls the Internet, then maybe Google should sit down with the MPAA, negotiate something reasonable, extract an ironclad, contractual agreement from the MPAA that as long as Google does X, they will not sue, litigate, or otherwise harass anybody about anything that is happening on the Internet.

    Except that X will boil down to "stop piracy".

     

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

  42.  
    icon
    Nick (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:05pm

    If one removed Google and all it's services from the web, it'd take... a week to recover. I'd be grumpy about losing GMail, people would use Bing, youtube would be replaced quite quickly, and no one would notice + was gone.

     

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

  43.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:08pm

    Re: Re:

    There are still more of us than there are of them.

     

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

  44.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:10pm

    Re:

    Nice, I wonder if some of them use computers. Their egos seems so big that they probably have their secretaries print out their emails because they can't be bothered with trying to learn how to type.

     

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

  45.  
    icon
    gorehound (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:12pm

    Re:

    Hollywood must die now !

     

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

  46.  
    icon
    Gwiz (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:13pm

    Re:

    O'Leary said they weren't comfortable arguing on a platform controlled by their opposition.

    See my above comment because you aren't grasping it either. The internet isn't controlled by Google or anyone. Anyone can post a rebuttal to silly statements like I am doing now.

    Which is clearly funded by Google; a giant mega corporation that makes billions on illegally grafted content.

    Umm, what exactly was funded by Google? Sure, Google lobbies just like any other large company, so what? From what I read Hollywood has spent 10x more then the tech companies on lobbing for PIPA/SOPA.

    Google tried to hide their funding of it, but they were lying:

    How are they trying to hide it? Your link is to an AP article.

     

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

  47.  
    identicon
    MrWilson, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:13pm

    Re:

    Funny, I said almost the same thing around 1994.

     

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

  48.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:17pm

    Re:

    It totally scares you rich fancy folk that there is finally a platform that us poor folk can use......and that you don't understand it.

    WTF else does one have to do to get it thru your thick skull that you, too, could be making money off the Internet if you just adjusted your ways....people are willing to pay....they have shown that time and time again.

    I just can't believe that you can look at your screen, and type those words blaming a huge corporation for your woes because 'little people don't matter'.

    The Internet is here to tell you......WE DO MATTER.....so get off your high horse, and put up your wares. We will decide if they are worth paying for or not.

     

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

  49.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:18pm

    Re:

    If the tubes are Google-funded, then where the hell is my paycheck for participating in the protest last week?

     

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

  50.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:18pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Unfortunately we are more easily dis

    KITTEH!

    Kitty kitty kitteh!

     

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

  51.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:22pm

    Re: Re:

    From what I read Hollywood has spent 10x more then the tech companies on lobbing for PIPA/SOPA.

    Then you get your news from liars. Like Mike Masnick.

     

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

  52.  
    icon
    f0nZi3 (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:23pm

    I think on 01/18/2012, it went down like this...

    I believe Michael O'Leary's home page is Google.com. He opened up his handy Internet Explorer browser, and saw the black bar over "Google". He clicked on it, read the information it directed him to and immediately came to the conclusion that: 1) He isn't comfortable with the message he was being presented with; and 2) Since it was the first link he clicked on, Google must control this magical land called "The Internet".

     

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

  53.  
    icon
    Gwiz (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:29pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Then you get your news from liars. Like Mike Masnick.

    Actually, I get my news from varied sources and quite a few (most main stream media outlets for example) are liars or at the very least liars by omission.

    But, that is besides the point, do you have some sort of proof that the 10x figure is not true or are you expecting me to believe you sight unseen?

     

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

  54.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:29pm

    Re: Re:

    I'm not rich, you moron. All the millionaires and billionaires at Google sure are.

     

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

  55.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:31pm

    Re: Re:

    Google pays you by lobbying for piracy. That's how they control you; they buy your cooperation by giving you other people's content.

    All the Blogger accounts that give away music illegally? Google just ignores DMCA takedowns on them.

     

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

  56.  
    icon
    Liz (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:32pm

    Re:

    That's funny. Back in 1996 when I opened the Internet it said "America Online."

     

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

  57.  
    identicon
    SilverBlade, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:33pm

    It honestly astounds me that 13 yr old can hack the pentagon, 3 yr olds are practically masters of iPads, and yet MPAA Execs arn't comfortable with the internet.

    Wow, just...wow.

    The internet and tech industries have literally given the MPAA the technology in order to make money from the internet (streaming, direct downloads, direct payments, etc) yet at every single turn, the MPAA turns them away and complains they are losing money hand over fist.

    The MPAA refuses to change because they see change = loss of revenue. (when history has proven otherwise). They still believe they are immune to technological progression and they still want total control of their product like they did before the internet was around.

    The genie is out of the bottle now. The more they try to buy laws to stop piracy, the more that the pirates will go underground and will be even harder to spot.

    The internet has grown it's own 'immune system'. If there's a threat, the internet goes after that threat and, if needed, re-routes the flow of data around that threat.

    The MPAA need to wake up and take a few lessons from their 5 yr olds, or they should disband and die.

     

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

  58.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:34pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    You're the guy that said it. Where's your proof?

     

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

  59.  
    identicon
    Glen, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:35pm

    Re:

    Yeah, cause I get all my marching orders from Google.

     

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

  60.  
    identicon
    DCX2, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:37pm

    Go figure, the MPAA would think that some centralized entity exerts control over the Internet.

    What I find ironic, though, is how they complain that they're "going up against an opponent that controls that platform". I would say they have it backwards; the Internet is going up against an opponent that controls Congress.

     

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

  61.  
    identicon
    Gordon, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:38pm

    Root of the problem

    I think this whole issue has less to do with copyright and piracy than it does with the rate the world is changing. The pace of technological advancement has accelerated to the point that the old farts that run everything can't keep up. Instead of stepping down (because that's unthinkable) or taking the time to learn, they're throwing their money at the 'problem' (that is the internet) in the hopes that they can just destroy it. They've seen what this new level of communication can do in a society in Egypt, and they're afraid. Rupert Murdoch thinks he runs the world, and this 'cyber-world' cropping up that he doesn't (yet) have control over pisses him off. Just look at his tweets lol
    http://www.cbc.ca/strombo/Images/Murdoch.jpg
    The world is changing, and the unregulated free market hyper-capitalist tycoons that are destroying our society are losing their stranglehold on the media they've been using to control the populace. They know their end is coming. They can see the day on the horizon when the governments of the world serve the people instead of the 'people' (corporations). They're not going down without a fight, though. They're going to expend all of their ridiculous amounts of wealth tearing down any forward thinking institution they can get their greedy little hands on.
    This is the beginning of the technological age's version of a civil war. The 'class warfare' the conservative shills refer to isn't just an expression any more. It's only a matter of time before it goes from strong-arming legislators to outright bloodshed. I can see a lot of protesters going missing in the next few years. Mark my words.

     

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

  62.  
    icon
    crade (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:39pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    People who know what they are doing won't do their bidding.. Thats one of the things they can't figure out.

     

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

  63.  
    icon
    Chronno S. Trigger (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:42pm

    Re:

    Hi Bob.

     

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

  64.  
    identicon
    DCX2, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:42pm

    Re:

    1) Google does not control the Internet. If Google vanished, another service provider would take their place.

    2) The Internet is not funded by Google. It was originally funded by the US Government, but Google most certainly does not fund the Internet, otherwise they wouldn't need to pay for bandwidth would they?

    3) There's a certain irony in your whining about a "giant mega corporation that makes billions on illegally grafted content" when giant mega corporations like Disney make billions on content they grafted from the public domain, and then they bribe legislators to perpetually and retroactively extend copyright.

     

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

  65.  
    icon
    Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:42pm

    Re:

    But remember, they did get the DMCA passed, with nearly everything they wanted in it. They just had to negotiate and have the immunity provision added, something that they've been trying for a decade to weaken in the courts.

    Why do you think they suddenly became willing to negotiate with Google and tech companies? All they see is a temporary setback in their long term strategy.

     

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

  66.  
    icon
    crade (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:45pm

    Re:

    I'm not so sure about this, I don't think it's possible to read the quote that way, if it is you would really have to twist the words to read it that way..
    "This was a fight on a platform we're not at this point comfortable with, and we were going up against an opponent that controls that platform." "

    It's obviously the platform that they are not at this point comfortable with. It whole lot simpler to say This is a fight we are not comfortable with if the platform is not the cause of the discomfort.

    Not sure who their opponent is supposed to be, I assume that's probably just a lame attempt at villifying google, but if they are talking about the electorate then they are spot on.

     

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

  67.  
    identicon
    Rekrul, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:47pm

    Re:

    The sad part is that if you changed the homepage to "Blank", and took out the Google search box, probably 90% of the computer owners today wouldn't know what to do.

     

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

  68.  
    icon
    crade (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:48pm

    Re: The Internet 101

    Thanks for that, it was hillarious.

     

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

  69.  
    icon
    Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:48pm

    Re:

    Studios are not required to be a member of the MPAA. The MPAA is just a trade group/lobbying outfit.

    Just as there can be independent labels that are not part of the RIAA, there can be independent studios that are not part of the MPAA.

     

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

  70.  
    icon
    crade (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:52pm

    Re: Re:

    It's funny how now that google has made it big they are suddenly the go to scapegoat for claiming the internet is all some big consipiracy.

     

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

  71.  
    identicon
    Kenneth Michaels, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:53pm

    Google

    Another reason they want to "negotiate with Google" is that they do the analysis like this:
    http://www.copyhype.com/cdtsopalist/index.html

     

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

  72.  
    icon
    The Logician (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:55pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Proof, AC 42 - non-entertainment industry-backed, empirical data. Or an admission that you are incorrect. Insults only harm what little credibility you may still possess.

     

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

  73.  
    icon
    Gwiz (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 1:59pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Ok. Fine. A quick look at this report seems to place those numbers right around that 10x figure:

    http://benton.org/node/111709

     

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

  74.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 2:00pm

    Re: Google

    That graph is just so beautiful. But why don't they have me on it?

     

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

  75.  
    identicon
    Rekrul, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 2:00pm

    Re:

    Dumb question, but, why do studios have to be in the MPAA? Is that a government forced regulation if they want to distribute movies? Is it all for the rating system?

    It's a voluntary system, but...

    Many theaters, especially chains, refuse to show movies that aren't rated. Many newspapers refuse to carry ads for unrated films. So releasing your film unrated can seriously hamper its distribution and chances of success. So can releasing a film with an NC-17 (and before that, X) rating, for the exact same reasons.

     

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

  76.  
    identicon
    anonymous, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 2:00pm

    'explains why the MPAA wants to "negotiate" with Google these days'

    doesn't seem like much negotiating going on in the UK. yet another 'behind closed doors' meeting with the entertainment industries and government. according to this post:

    h**p://torrentfreak.com/copyright-industry-calls-for-broad-search-engine-censorship-120127/

    if it goes ahead, what will the next step be?

     

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

  77.  
    icon
    crade (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 2:02pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    lol, yeah google is all a big conspiracy to help pirates. That's not a stretch at all. Farmers are also just a big conspiracy to feed murderers.

     

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

  78.  
    icon
    Chuck Norris' Enemy (deceased) (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 2:02pm

    Re: Re:

    Nah! Not bob. There was no obligatory Big (insert overarching term for a segment of our economy here) name dropping.

     

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

  79.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 2:04pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Pretty sure the DMCA doesn't require sites to take down links to infringing content, but you knew that already. Run along now.

     

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

  80.  
    icon
    Chuck Norris' Enemy (deceased) (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 2:11pm

    Re: Google

    Bet you could make a similar graph showing a big MPAA and follow all the arrows to the congress critter that they lobbied into office. Throw in all the movie studios and the majors would all be there in the convoluted mind rape of lines with arrows at their tips. Seriously, my only gripe with that graph is that odd yellow orange color used.

     

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

  81.  
    icon
    crade (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 2:12pm

    Re: Re: An opportunity...

    X actually boils down to "give us control over content distribution". Stopping piracy really isn't going to save these guys, and I'm pretty sure they know it. They need to be *neccessarily* for distribution. They know full well it's not going to matter if people can sell their own art without going through them.

     

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

  82.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 2:14pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Pretty sure the DMCA doesn't require sites to take down links...

    Twitter uncloaks a year's worth of DMCA takedown notices, 4,410 in all”, by Jon Brodkin, Ars Technica, Jan 27, 2012
    On almost any given day, Twitter receives a handful of requests to delete tweets that link to pirated versions of copyrighted content—and quickly complies by erasing the offending tweets from its site.

    That fact itself is probably unsurprising to people familiar with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) takedown process, which gives sites like Twitter a "safe harbor" against lawsuits related to user behavior and uploads—so long as the sites don't knowingly tolerate pirated material or links to such material.

    But Twitter has taken the unusual step of making DMCA takedown notices public, in partnership with Chilling Effects [...more...]

    (Emphasis added.)

    There's the text of the DMCA, and then there's the practice of DMCA takedowns.

     

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

  83.  
    icon
    John Fenderson (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 2:17pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    They do?? I've been missing out, then, as I haven't received a single bit of free content from Google that they didn't make!

     

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

  84.  
    icon
    crade (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 2:20pm

    Re: Hollywood: Jealous Socialists

    Google and the other companies who actually build things are supposed to pay for it. Thats the whole point of making them liable. I don't know that it's exactly socialism.. It's a tax on one company to pay to another.. Socialism is more taxing the people to create public services and such. This is just an attempt to break capitalism by redirecting the money between private companies :)

     

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

  85.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 2:21pm

    Re: Does this mean...

    you are all pirates or pirate apologists and you don't know what we are talking about

     

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

  86.  
    identicon
    Rekrul, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 2:21pm

    Re: Look at it from their (uneducated) viewpoint

    Hopefully by the time they leave we'll have fixed these problems, but it's just an indication that most "internet" users have this view of the on-line world because when they start up their browser it automatically displays the Google home page or at least has a search box built into the tool bar at the top that's hooked to Google.

    It's infuriating the number of people who don't know the difference between the address box and the Google search box. I can't count the number of people I've seen type a web site URL into the Google box, then look through the search results.

    We have done this to them. We have no one to blame but ourselves for giving them this narrow view of the 'net.

    The problem goes much deeper than that and extends to virtually all aspects of computing.

    Because ISPs usually set up a web-based email account for users, most people think that that's what email is. They have no idea that you can install an email client with many more features that responds much faster than any web mail site.

    Because most every program automatically saves stuff to My Documents, nobody today has any clue how to find the files if the program doesn't go right to them. Nor do they have nay real idea of how to organize files, move files, etc. I blame MS and their unintuitive Cut/Copy/Paste functions for working with files. A two pane file manager makes it much easier to visualize where you're moving the files to, not to mention having buttons marked Copy & Move. True, you can open two windows and drag files between them, but most people never manually open a window. They only ever save files from inside other programs.

    Because MS's picture and fax viewer automatically shrinks every picture to fit on the screen, people today have no concept of how large a 4 or 5 megapixel image really is. They think it's this little, web-sized image rather than being poster sized and they're confused when a web site or application says that the image is too large.

    Because Windows now automatically pops up a box asking what you want to do when you insert a disk or a USB drive, most people today don't know how to open a window and manually browse to the required drive.

    People don't know about file extensions because Windows hides them by default. They don't know about file sizes because Windows only shows you icons and filenames by default. They don't know about changing file associations manually because every program you install changes them automatically. They don't know how to edit the startup and can't understand why their system gets slower and slower over time.

    Of course, nobody actually wants to learn any of this stuff. They'd rather have someone else do it for them, even if they have to pay that person.

     

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

  87.  
    icon
    Franklin G Ryzzo (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 2:22pm

    Re: I think on 01/18/2012, it went down like this...

    Not possible... although I guarantee he uses IE (version 6), there is no way Google could be his home page... AOL has there own default page and they don't like Google either.

     

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

  88.  
    identicon
    hackMPAA, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 2:23pm

    and everytime we find a site

    were gonna pound it to rubble after the last 15 years you've put mankind through....

    YOU (MPAA) DO NOT DESERVE TO BE HERE....MOVE ALONG

     

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

  89.  
    icon
    crade (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 2:29pm

    Re: Re: Look at it from their (uneducated) viewpoint

    Things are simplified for individual needs. I guess I don't see the problem. It it were neccessary to understand the complexity behind computers and the internet to use them it would be a lot less useful.

     

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

  90.  
    icon
    John Fenderson (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 2:42pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    I'm having trouble figuring out how the text you've quoted supports your allegation. Can you show is the relevant parts of the actual law? I looked but couldn't find anything to support the notion that linking to infringing content is, itself infringing. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist, of course.

     

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

  91.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 2:45pm

    Number Two?

    ... Michael O'Leary, the MPAA's number two guy ...

    Is he the guy in charge of number two ?

     

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

  92.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 2:48pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    I'm pretty sure all the millionaires and billionaires everywhere are rich....

     

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

  93.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 2:54pm

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

    aaawww where did he go? I was sure he was going to have a logical and pertinent rebuttal.

    Here let me try:

    Fuck you scumsucking pirate. Why don't you go create something instead of leeching off society by regurgitating the facts OTHER PEOPLE worked hard to find.

     

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

  94.  
    icon
    Violated (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 3:00pm

    Right... dream on

    So the MPAA want to win Internet support now? Do they even remember the "Mega" reason why Anonymous have been firing their Ion Cannons at the MPAA website?

    Yes lets all sit down to tea and cakes and hear the MPAA say how "Copyright should be eternal with absolute enforcement"

    The MPAA has been serving Hollywood's interests for so long that they are totally out-of-touch with the rest of society and I just cannot see how they can muster up some Internet support... at least without bribing them.

    I say again what I have said before in that if they want to tackle this "Internet thing" then they should fire Chris Dodd and to put in charge someone who can understand the Internet they aim to regulate.

    The MPAA should well know that their future fights are going to get much harder and if they are to get anywhere they need both understanding and with truthful evidence.

     

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

  95.  
    identicon
    Green, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 3:07pm

    Waking up

    Seeing the effect the internet had on SOPA/PIPA is kinda like waking up to find you have super powers. The citizens of the internet just figured out how much power we have, and now we're ready to see what else we can do with it.

     

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

  96.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 3:08pm

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

    Those numbers are old. Google spent almost 4 million alone just from October-December 2011.

     

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

  97.  
    identicon
    Green, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 3:09pm

    And one more thing....

    Maybe the rules of "the game" companies like the MPAA have been playing with politics have been different for a longer than we thought, but we just never noticed? Well, either way, it's good to know the people still have the last word.

     

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

  98.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 3:11pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Pretty sure the DMCA doesn't require sites to take down links to infringing content, but you knew that already. Run along now.

    You're an idiot. The DMCA DOES require sites to take down links to infringing content. Run along now.

     

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

  99.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 3:14pm

    Re: Re:

    Let's keep pretending Google doesn't make millions off piracy.

    Funny how they lobby for it, right?

    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_TEC_GOOGLE_LOBBYING?SITE=KTVK&SECTION=HOME&a mp;TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

     

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

  100.  
    icon
    The Original Anonymous Coward (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 3:16pm

    Re: Re: Re: Look at it from their (uneducated) viewpoint

    Now I hope that readers don't think that I was saying that it was wrong for the IT world to build stuff so that even the unwashed masses can easily access all the information that is available over the 'net, it's just my observation that by creating these services (see the list of things that Rekrul posted above) we've also dumbed down the entry level for use of the 'net.

    However, just because many, if not most, of the people who use the 'net these days don't have a clue about how it works, just like many people who drive cars don't have a clue about how the internal combustion engine works let along their car's computer, that doesn't mean that folks who lack the knowledge of how things work should be allowed to pass laws concerning the usage of said things.

    This is no different than just about every other situation where people sit in positions of authority and make laws, rules, and regulations about how the rest of humanity should behave. Would it be a good thing to have people on a school board if they weren't able to read or write? How about placing people into positions in a regulatory agency where they would write rules about how a particular industry has to behave when they have no experience in that industry?

    If the people in these positions would do the ethical thing, they would either educate themselves in the particular area or resign for the good of their subjects. Do I think that the folks in the MPAA/RIAA and their cronies (both in and out of government) will want to learn how the 'net works so that they can make money off of it without destroying it? Not in my lifetime. It's easier and less expensive to simply file law suits.

     

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

  101.  
    icon
    Jeff (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 3:24pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    says the pot to the kettle...

     

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

  102.  
    icon
    The eejit (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 3:49pm

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

    ...and? They refute your inital argument. "those numbers" will always be old, because they have to be dollated. It's like looking into the galaxies - always in the past.

     

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

  103.  
    icon
    MikeVx (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 3:54pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Look at it from their (uneducated) viewpoint

    I tend to take the position that is is wrong to hide the underpinnings so thoroughly that the slightest variation from the usual paralyses people into helplessness.

    There have been any number of times I've made myself bleed by having to bite my tongue over being called in to solve a problem that only existed because the user of the system treats it as a magic box, simple problems that would have been easily solved if the user had even the faintest clue of how computers work.

    In an era where people take pride in ignorance (how else could you explain books with titles like "X for Dummies" or "The Complete Idiots Guide to X"?) bad regulation of technology is pretty much the only way things can go.

    While I'm generally against the idea of law as a way to solve a problem, perhaps we need a law that says no one is allowed to regulate some subject until they can converse about that subject with subject matter experts without those experts laughing, crying, screaming or vomiting.

     

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

  104.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 3:59pm

    "This was a fight on a platform we're not at this point comfortable with, and we were going up against an opponent that controls that platform."

    Translation

    "This was a fight on a platform we dont control yet. We will now spend all our efforts to fight our opponents, by any means necessary"

    opponent = customers

     

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

  105.  
    identicon
    Justin Olbrantz (Quantam), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 4:16pm

    Re: Hollywood: Jealous Socialists

    What crade said. The motto of the RIAA and MPAA is "Extermination of piracy at any cost". Of course it's non-negotiable that somebody ELSE (anybody else) will be paying said cost.

     

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

  106.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 4:31pm

    Re:

    People that rip them off when they could just as easily purchase legally, are not their "customers". They're freeloading parasites.

     

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

  107.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 4:35pm

    Re:

    I think the fact the MPAA is even willing to talk with robber barons shows them to be nicer than I'd be.

     

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

  108.  
    identicon
    Justin Olbrantz (Quantam), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 4:35pm

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

    Yes, and? Those figures are old. Funny how you consider $10 million (the final, actual number) a ton of money from the opponents, but $94 million from proponents (which is, remember, quite old and vastly under-reported, as you helpfully point out) is not worth noting.

    Lobbying is Hollywood's world. Google's fighting to gain a foothold; though they seem to be finally figuring out that when you're against someone who relentlessly aggressive toward you as the media industries you're gonna have to do some lobbying yourself. The fact that "Google" managed to defeat Hollywood on this makes an interesting statement: Hollywood is a good order of magnitude more wasteful with their money than Google. Wait, did that sound like an insult to Hollywood to you, too?

     

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

  109.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 4:38pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Farmers don't profit off murderers.

    Yet another moronic analogy from a freetard.

     

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

  110.  
    identicon
    The Amazing Sammy Moshe, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 4:39pm

    Actually,

    I didn't find the context of the statement to be especially dismissive. I feel like it's the first honest thing we've heard from the MPAA in a very long time. It sounds like they're educating themselves, and taking steps towards a bigger online presence. This is good for everyone involved. You are right in that they need new leadership, though.

     

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

  111.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 4:52pm

    your blaming google link is broken

     

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

  112.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 5:01pm

    "a process of getting a much, much greater presence in the online environment. This was a fight on a platform we're not at this point comfortable with, and we were going up against an opponent that controls that platform."

    Because they have almost complete government established control over most other information distribution platforms and they want just as much control over the Internet so that they can keep us clueless and fight for even worse copy protection expansion and extension and enforcement laws. They don't want anyone besides them having any media influence. Anyone else having influence or 'control' is a bad thing, and then they claim that this isn't about censorship.

    By getting a greater presence in the online community he means getting a stronger means of censoring that which he doesn't like. He sees this as a fight that he has to win, one where he can get more bad laws passed as if our current laws aren't bad enough and anyone who resists or criticizes the completely one sided laws that he wants is an opponent to be overcome and censored. and he claims this isn't about censorship.

     

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

  113.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 5:48pm

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

    10 million isn't a final number from the tech industry. Google alone, maybe, but not the entire tech industry.

     

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

  114.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 5:51pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Conspiracy: "An agreement to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act."

     

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

  115.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 6:05pm

    Platforms are things people showcase their products on. That all the MPAA can see in the Internet is a platform says everything about their mentality.

     

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

  116.  
    icon
    nasch (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 6:32pm

    Re: Re:

    The Film Ratings Board rates films from independent studios as well as MPAA studios.

     

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

  117.  
    icon
    nasch (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 6:38pm

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

    Check out his last line: "There's the text of the DMCA, and then there's the practice of DMCA takedowns." He's pointing out that even if the DMCA doesn't require removing links, that is what actually happens anyway. That has no bearing on whether Google should be removing links, but it's an interesting point IMO.

    Also this is not the same AC criticizing Google.

     

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

  118.  
    icon
    nasch (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 6:39pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Farmers don't profit off murderers.

    Yet another moronic analogy from a freetard.


    Murderers don't eat?

     

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

  119.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 6:51pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Have faith in those of us, then, who don't particularly fancy cats.

     

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

  120.  
    identicon
    Justin Olbrantz (Quantam), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 6:51pm

    Re:

    Some commenters here have said even more illuminating things.

    See, all that technology has EVER given us is new ways to consume media produced by the entertainment sector. That's it. As such, all technology is absolutely useless without that media to access, and any technology company who doesn't hold that it is totally and utterly dependent on the entertainment industry is nothing more than a parasite dangerous to its host (the entertainment industry); actual quote: "The parasite [Google et al] will not be allowed to kill its host!"

    I seriously would not have been able to imagine people this clueless existed if they didn't show up frequently to make themselves known.

     

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

  121.  
    identicon
    demented, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 6:54pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Yeah, except all the blogger blogs that HAVE been shut down.

    Poor, poor argument. "uhhhh.... they pay you with piracy! Yeah, that's it! IT'S ALL GOOGLE'S FAULT!"

     

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

  122.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 6:56pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Let's keep pretending Google lobbies for laws to be passed, and copyright to be not extended.

     

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

  123.  
    icon
    Gwiz (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 6:58pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Maybe this will get you off this whole "The SOPA/PIPA Protest was only Google Zombies doing what they're told" thing you are stuck on.

    "The lesson here is not that the tech industry has millions of people blindly doing what it suggests," said Eli Pariser, former executive director of MoveOn.org and now a member of its board. "I don’t think Google will be able to count on all the people who took action on SOPA not to challenge Google when it does something that feels counter to the ethos of the Internet." Source

    That is basically warning to both Google and Hollywood. The internet belongs to neither.

     

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

  124.  
    identicon
    Justin Olbrantz (Quantam), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 7:00pm

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

    Correct, we were talking about Google in particular, and the fact that Google was by far the biggest lobbyist in the tech industry. By definition Google is not the entire tech industry, just like $45 million - the old, stale figure of the amount lobbied by the Chamber of Commerce for SOPA et al - isn't the entire entertainment industry's lobbying.

     

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

  125.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 7:11pm

    Re:

    It's a TV you can type letters on!

     

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

  126.  
    identicon
    Squall, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 7:27pm

    It's been sixteen fucking years since the world wide web started it's rise to popularity. Filesharing has been going on even longer than that.

    How dumb are these retards that after more than a decade and a half they STILL DON'T GET IT?

    Frankly, anyone that can't learn something so simple in sixteen years is never going to.

     

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

  127.  
    icon
    gubatron (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 7:36pm

    Re: Re:

    Looking at how they like to bill for every second working, they'd probably try to charge songs per byte.

     

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

  128.  
    icon
    Jeff (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 7:58pm

    Re: Re:

    bitter much?

     

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

  129.  
    icon
    TtfnJohn (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 8:07pm

    Re: Re: The Internet 101 and it's children

    But, you see , that's the problem. The Hollywood execs think the internet is a series of old mail tubes that span the globe, controlled by Google, made use of my billions of pirates and this all MUST, just HAS to stop!

    To get them to the point where they can realize it's a digital network run mostly using open source software (which just has to be the height of piracy cause no one pays for anything yet somehow makes money so it has to be from Google and its ads) rather than good old closed source and that it's really a commuinications medium not for entertainment alone...well, I could go on but it gets both complex and ridiculous.

    The answer, of course, it to have these fat cats talk to their preteen grandchildren who understand it just fine, thank you, and will explain it. All except for the piracy part cause they, too, are freetards!

     

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

  130.  
    icon
    Chronno S. Trigger (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 8:09pm

    Re: Re:

    "People that rip them off when they could just as easily purchase legally"

    Really? Where?

     

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

  131.  
    icon
    Overcast (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 8:11pm

    I bet... in 1945, many book companies weren't 'comfortable with TV', and perhaps in 1920, many other companies were 'comfortable with radio'.

    You know MPAA/RIAA - there will *always* be criminals - much of the media you put out deals and even glamorizes just that: Scarface, Good fellows and fine examples.

    But there are many people who are more than willing to pay a fair price for digital media - I'm sorry, but you can't keep gouging per title, but you can make up for it in sheer quantity of sales. You have a goldmine, just not the savvy to mine it.

     

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

  132.  
    icon
    TtfnJohn (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 8:23pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    I feel the need to shake my head. They control me by giving me other people's content????? Oh, please. Source, I want.

    And which Blogger accounts that give away music illegally? Oh, you mean the ones independent artists blog on and upload their stuff too? I guess it must be illegal to be an independent artist these days, too.

    As for ignoring DCMA takedown notices once again, source please.

    Now I know you don't have a source but I thought I'd ask.

     

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

  133.  
    icon
    TtfnJohn (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 8:29pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Well, blaming Microsoft has become so old hat regardless of their blatant disregard of laws that no one blames them anymore. No point. We know they're just barely this side of evil. :)

    Anyway, they sold out to Hollywood years ago.

    So, it just has to be Google. The other baddie would be open source but but how do you demonize that to congress or anyone else?

    Open WHAT???? ;-)

     

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

  134.  
    icon
    sehlat (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 9:28pm

    Translation of "we're not comfortable."

    We don't own or control it.

     

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

  135.  
    icon
    toyotabedzrock (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 9:49pm

    MPAA Sees the Internet As Some Type Of New AOL?

    I think their statement indicates that they do not see a difference between the Internet and the traditional AOL service.

    Which is why they think they can control it.

     

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

  136.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 10:01pm

    ""is [undergoing] a process of education, a process of getting a much, much greater presence in the online environment."

    and what's most telling is that the 'solution' has nothing to do with Hollywood changing its behavior. It has nothing to do with Hollywood not getting more bad laws passed, it has nothing to do with correcting the existing bad laws (ie: reducing copy protection lengths and infringement penalties, making copy protection opt in and requiring all works to be stored in various LOC databases for others to reference and so that they can be released to the public when they enter the public domain, increasing false infringement takedown penalties, abolishing government established broadcasting and cableco monopolies. Making the law so that it won't be too legally risky and expensive for restaurants and other venues to host independent performers, so that it won't be too legally risky and expensive for bakeries to allow children to draw their own pictures on birthday cakes). Their solution has nothing to do with them correcting Hollywood accounting or their own bad behavior, their solution is for them to blame everyone else for their failures and find new and deceptive ways to get more one sided laws passed.

     

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

  137.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 10:31pm

    Re:

    They refuse to acknowledge that the reason everyone is against them is because their position is purely self serving. They pretend that the reason everyone is against them is because they don't have a strong enough presence over the Internet, they don't have enough control over our communication channels. Everyone else is to blame for their bad reputation and not their own self serving behavior.

     

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

  138.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 27th, 2012 @ 10:32pm

    "it's just blaming Google or thinking"

    That link is broken.

     

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

  139.  
    icon
    TtfnJohn (profile), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 10:33pm

    Re: Re:

    The point being missed here is that Hollywood IS the parasite here on the Web.

    The point being missed here by various AC's is that the Web gives people the tools to create its own content just as the Internet did before the Web existed.

    Sure, some, perhaps even most, of the tools are still new and crude but that's a situation that won't last long. Already publishing to the Web has moved to and beyond the level of print.

    Music tools have improved immensely the past three or four years to such an extent that someone with a mid-range desktop, some inexpensive tools and know how can set up a decent studio which is partly an explanation of the explosion of independent music the past half decade or so.

    Non linear editors, video cameras and the spread of knowledge about how to do it has made independent film making more available and affordable to "the masses" far beyond the realm of LOL cats. (Nothing wrong with LOL cats though.)

    This is what Hollywood doesn't understand. Or won't understand. The Web is about creation as much or more than it is about consumption of content.

    Which explains, to a large extent, the "so what" attitude of Hollywood's "we provide the high quality content" attitude when the Web just as capable, or soon will be, without the "ownership" attitude and desire to build walled gardens, release schedules, geographic restrictions and on and on as Hollywood traditionally has.

    And it's the Web that went dark. Not Google. The Web.

    SOPA and PIPA weren't just threats to free speech and a danger to the Internet itself, they were threats to what the Web is. It's a medium of creation and consumption at the same time. It does both, unlike radio, television and the phonograph which are one way passive mediums.

    The Web is a two way, active medium. No one controls it. No one owns it.

    That's the power of the Web and the Internet.

     

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

  140.  
    identicon
    Justin Olbrantz (Quantam), Jan 27th, 2012 @ 11:03pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    "This is what Hollywood doesn't understand. Or won't understand. The Web is about creation as much or more than it is about consumption of content."

    To take this idea one step further, this goes beyond just the web. Their brains are hardwired into the traditional western way of thinking about arts: producers produce, consumers consume; bands play, fans listen; writers write, readers read. It's a rigidly unidirectional path from source to sink.

    This results in various exercises in absurdity. Only the professional producers are allowed to own content, and "consumers" cannot truly create; any derivatives or compositions thus also belong to the creators of the original work, regardless of who actually made the thing in question. Fan-fiction belongs to the authors of the original work, not to the people that actually wrote said fan-fiction. Covers, mash-ups, etc. belong to the creators of the original material, not the ones who actually created the cover/mash-up/etc. Or so the conventional wisdom goes.

    Technology is changing that; moving us in the direction of non-western models (traditional African music comes readily to mind). In this model, the line between producers and consumers is fuzzy at best. While it may not always be a 1:1 ratio, fans actively participate in the production of music at concerts, books and other works of literature, etc. Not only can "consumers" produce for other "consumers", but "consumers" even contribute material to "producers", resulting in a big feedback loop. That is the new reality, and as you can see it's making a lot of heads in Hollywood and the RIAA explode. As put in Dilbert, that popping sound is "a paradigm shifting without a clutch".

     

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

  141.  
    icon
    Brendan (profile), Jan 28th, 2012 @ 12:05am

    Re: Re:

    Interesting claim. Where, exactly (with a link if possible), can I buy the episodes of my weekly shows in HD without commercials within an hour or two of them being aired on TV?

     

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

  142.  
    icon
    The eejit (profile), Jan 28th, 2012 @ 2:43am

    Re: Re:

    NAXXANR WAS MERELY A SETBACK!

     

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

  143.  
    icon
    That Anonymous Coward (profile), Jan 28th, 2012 @ 2:46am

    Re:

    So I need a sharpie to update this poster?

    http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100816/15542210641.shtml

     

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

  144.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 28th, 2012 @ 8:08am

    Re: Re:

    (and their 'solution' has nothing to do with ensuring that the public interest is served. It has to do with finding new ways to ensure that only their own interests are served).

     

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

  145.  
    identicon
    Loki, Jan 28th, 2012 @ 9:03am

    Re: Re:

    Hell, I'm one of those "late adopter" types (mostly because I'm not willing to pay those "early adopter" premium prices) and I've been here since 1999. 13 years later and the entertainment industry is just now coming to the table? No wonder AOL never had a chance.

     

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

  146.  
    identicon
    Loki, Jan 28th, 2012 @ 9:28am

    Re: Time to let go...

    Why would I have a tear in my eye? Content creators (besides the handful they make wealthy so they can use them as a marketing tool to attract new clients) might actually get their fair share of the profits.

     

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

  147.  
    identicon
    Loki, Jan 28th, 2012 @ 9:32am

    Re:

    Let's hope that IF the MPAA learns how to use the internet, they'll educate our even less knowledgeable government.

    The internet is to the MPAA/RIAA what Communism was to J Edgar Hoover. No matter how much they try to "understand" it, they will never be able to effectively use it, because behind the internet is an ideology they simply cannot embrace.

     

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

  148.  
    identicon
    Loki, Jan 28th, 2012 @ 9:38am

    Re: Hollywood: Jealous Socialists

    The bailouts weren't even Socialism. They were just the government saying, "Man, you SUCK at managing money, so here, have some more".

     

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

  149.  
    identicon
    Loki, Jan 28th, 2012 @ 9:47am

    Re: MPAA in denial

     

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

  150.  
    identicon
    Loki, Jan 28th, 2012 @ 9:57am

    Re: O'Leary is clueless

    Why the MafIAA fails

     

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

  151.  
    identicon
    Loki, Jan 28th, 2012 @ 10:12am

    Re: **AA leader's problems

    Thousands of years of history has shown repeatedly it's not a matter of if we will win, but when.

    The real question is how bloody will that victory end up being?

     

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

  152.  
    identicon
    Illchi08, Jan 28th, 2012 @ 10:35am

    Re: Hollywood: Jealous Socialists

    SOPA / PIPA were actually the exact opposite of socialism as they consist of intense efforts to enforce property rights at the expense of the common good. Socialism disregards private rights for the sake of the common good.

     

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

  153.  
    identicon
    Twilight, Jan 28th, 2012 @ 11:32am

    Here's how my old boss phrased it...

    My boss was president of a large organization, within a larger conglomerate. Upon graduating with my masters, I took a temp job as a receptionist, and then was temporarily bumped to his executive assistant, before moving on in life.

    It was an eye opener. Here's what he said:

    "Look, I hear what you're saying about email and the Web and all that, it's just... The Internet is computers. And actually, computers are just typing. And typing is for secretaries!"

    Note that, in actuality, he did not know how to type. He had made sure that he didn't know how, so that he wouldn't ever be asked to do it, as a mark of his executive status.

    So I showed him how to get his fave baseball teams scores every day off the "computer thing" in his office, and he was on his way. (That, and responding increasingly slowly to dictated responses -- via audio tapes -- to his email, which I'd had to print and put in his in box up to that point.)

    Maybe someone should show the MPAA execs how to pull up baseball scores.

     

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

  154.  
    identicon
    Steven Van der Werf, Jan 28th, 2012 @ 12:47pm

    Re: Hollywood: Jealous Socialists

    yo what?

    SOPA is about as far from Socialism as it's humanly possible to get.
    The 2008 bailouts, likewise, were not Socialism. That was crank capitlism at it's absolute raging worst.


    Socialism is putting the People fist - not banks, not corporations. Under Socialism, arsehole executives wouldn't be able to pay themselves millions while exploiting and firing their workers, banks would be directly answerable to their customers, and all health care would be free at point of use.

    Socialism does not mean what you think it means.

     

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

  155.  
    identicon
    mary mike, Jan 28th, 2012 @ 12:53pm

    a1

    aaaaaaaaaaaa

     

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

  156.  
    identicon
    Justin Olbrantz (Quantam), Jan 28th, 2012 @ 12:57pm

    Re: Re: Hollywood: Jealous Socialists

    Actually what we have here is corporatism. As the saying goes (if I remember it correctly): "Privatized profits, socialized risk".

     

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

  157.  
    identicon
    Peter Jones, Jan 28th, 2012 @ 1:30pm

    Comparing Dead with Alive

    Its like comparing expedia.com with a mix of Priceline.com and www.onlyrooms.com

     

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

  158.  
    identicon
    vesey, Jan 28th, 2012 @ 5:57pm

    Re: Fast, not free

    Although i agree with your basic point, let's face it, many of the same people complaining (correctly so) about sopa/pipa were also taking sides with Megaupload which is clearly a criminal enterprise which does nothing but make money off of other peoples efforts. Until people are willing to understand the need for copyright protection in some form, groups like MPAA are going to continue to fear the internet users in general and see a bunch of freeloaders even though for the most part that opinion is not justified. We want groups like MPAA to be both reasonable and partner with us but we need to show maturity also and respect for their concerns.............

     

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

  159.  
    icon
    nasch (profile), Jan 28th, 2012 @ 8:07pm

    Re: Re: Fast, not free

    many of the same people complaining (correctly so) about sopa/pipa were also taking sides with Megaupload which is clearly a criminal enterprise which does nothing but make money off of other peoples efforts.

    If that is proven in court with appropriate due process, no problem. Of course, it won't solve any copyright holder's problems if it's shut down, or the operators fined or jailed. That's one major issue for me: this is all futile.

    Until people are willing to understand the need for copyright protection in some form,

    We're still waiting for someone to prove that copyright is needed.

    We want groups like MPAA to be both reasonable and partner with us but we need to show maturity also and respect for their concerns.

    When their concerns are deserving of respect, yes. Right now they're concerned with lobbying for increasingly draconian laws, and curtailing everyone's freedoms in order to avoid adapting their business model. Why should we respect that?

     

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

  160.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 28th, 2012 @ 9:29pm

    The take down of Megaupload, is like a main highway closing you still have all the other roads, and new roads are being built faster than before.
    US corporate content needed to take out Megaupload before they got Megabox fully up and running.
    What some one should do is startup a program like Megabox and give the real content creators a place to do their thing and make money.

     

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

  161.  
    icon
    Josh (profile), Jan 28th, 2012 @ 9:55pm

    Google doesn't control the internet? BLASPHEMY!

     

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

  162.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 28th, 2012 @ 10:43pm

    Re:

    and also, instead of apologizing for all of the harm they caused (ie: Their Hollywood accounting, they are partly responsible for our insanely unacceptable copy protection laws), they are basically saying that they aren't sorry and they will continue to find new ways to seek to cause more harm through bad laws and more Hollywood accounting. They aren't sorry for anything they did wrong and they haven't really learned anything, they plan to continue causing more harm and they think that the solution to getting public support is brainwashing/censorship (what they do over their government established broadcasting and cableco monopolies) and more marketing. The lesson to be learned isn't that they need to act more ethically going forward, it's that they need to do more to convince others not to oppose them despite their unethical behavior.

    If they want public support they should apologize for the sad state of copy protection laws and seek to correct them. They should apologize for all the harm their Hollywood accounting has caused their artists and seek to compensate them back. But, no, an apology is out of the question because they aren't sorry for what they did and they haven't learned anything. Yet they expect to somehow get public support.

     

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

  163.  
    identicon
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Jan 28th, 2012 @ 11:17pm

    Re: Google

    Interesting. Google is shown as the largest box, yet there is no explanation anywhere of the significance of the size of the boxes.

     

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

  164.  
    icon
    Robert (profile), Jan 29th, 2012 @ 2:54am

    MPAA learning the internet?

    I hope one of the first things they learn is exactly how much money business makes over the internet, both national, and international. They gave a greatly inflated number for the amount of money they have lost from Piracy, at about $250 billion. US business make or prevent the lose of several times that much money per day!

    I think the first thing MPAA should learn was how much money the internet makes for them personally.

     

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

  165.  
    icon
    Robert (profile), Jan 29th, 2012 @ 3:18am

    Re:

    Now it is mare than a Communication medium. I think you would have a very hard time finding a Business not connected to the internet in some way, most of them including ways to order products and/or services.

    They gavea inflated number of $250 Billion as what they lost from Piracy. The US people most likely spend more than that much on the internet in a few days. When you add in American Major Business making large orders for basic material, they use the internet to organize more money than that in a just a few hours!

    I bet most of the MPAA's legal orders for their movies went through the internet most likely several times before they were finially bought by a consumer using Amazon or Ebay!

    Major Emergency systems are also connected to the internet, like electrical power, fire, police, Federal Emergency services, even traffic lights!

    The other business companies should be very, very concerned about that, not even with the problem with infringing on the 1st admendment of the US constitution, (a action that will really upset the entire US population).

     

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

  166.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 29th, 2012 @ 7:34am

    Re: MPAA in denial

    "So 0.1% of Google revenue, at best, is from pirate sites."

    The rest of the argument is spot on, but this line is ignoring MPAA 'logic', which is as follows: "Any site that is making money, and is either not run by us, or not paying us, is a rogue website".

    So following that brilliant 'logic', most of the google's revenue is indeed coming from rogue websites.

     

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

  167.  
    icon
    Karl (profile), Jan 29th, 2012 @ 2:51pm

    Re: Google

    they do the analysis like this

    Good Lord, Hart has really gone off the deep end with this one. Even a cursory glance at the EFF's funding, for example, shows that Google's involvement is pretty much non-existent.

     

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

  168.  
    identicon
    and then..., Jan 29th, 2012 @ 3:11pm

    Re: Fast, not free

    an asshole company locks said MP3 songs in DRM encrusted music files so you can't possibly use them anywhere else.

    Effectively, you've traded one form of subsidy for another.

    Thank god Amazon was big enough at the time to release plain-jane MP3 files to "convince" other companies go DRM free as well.

     

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

  169.  
    identicon
    Michael Z. Williamson, Jan 29th, 2012 @ 6:37pm

    Re:

    There was acting in Twilight?

     

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

  170.  
    identicon
    Michael Z. Williamson, Jan 29th, 2012 @ 6:39pm

    Re:

    That's never been the way in this industry. On the other side, the musician's union tried to stop soundtracks for film because it would leave all the poor theater musicians unemployed.

     

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

  171.  
    identicon
    Michael Z. Williamson, Jan 29th, 2012 @ 6:52pm

    Re:

    Odd. I have a dozen novels out in stores, meaning I have skin in this game, and I guess you consider me a "piracy lover."

    My downloads are unencrypted, and I offer three of them for free. That makes me, if I recall the quote correctly, a "Pixel-stained, technopeasant wretch."

    Infringement is a problem, though not a life-threatening one. It is not "piracy." "Piracy" would be stealing my content and re-selling it under another name, or at least reselling it. Sharing it without my consent is not "piracy."

    In most cases I benefit from name recognition, beyond the royalties I'd make on any particular sale, because that recognition increases sales on the next book.

    Someone else debunked your math. I'll just settle for calling you on YOUR intellectual dishonesty.

     

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

  172.  
    identicon
    Michael Z. Williamson, Jan 29th, 2012 @ 6:58pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    What's your site? Because I'll file a DMCA notice on it right now. I'm sure you used the word "the" somewhere on your site, and "the" is (c) by me. You can't use it without permission.

    Seriously, though, sometime around 5th grade you should have read that part of the Constitution about "innocent until proven guilty." Google is under no obligation to take down a page (assuming it's a page they host, which...oh, wait...) until a trial has been held.

    Are you Michael O'Leary? You DO seem to think Google controls the internet.

     

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

  173.  
    identicon
    Michael Z. Williamson, Jan 29th, 2012 @ 7:07pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    And without a court order from a trial, I would tell the government to go fuck itself, and refuse to take down the links.

    People don't get jailed because some asshole claims he lost his wallet, and sites shouldn't be taken down because some asshole says it may have his content.

    It may in fact have his content, or mine, and I would hope a professional ISP would go ahead and make a correction, after checking to ensure it is the case. Many do.

    But I don't take orders worth a damn.

     

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

  174.  
    icon
    Karl (profile), Jan 29th, 2012 @ 7:21pm

    Re: Re: Fast, not free

    many of the same people complaining (correctly so) about sopa/pipa were also taking sides with Megaupload

    You don't have to take sides with Megaupload to believe that the government's actions against them were completely unwarranted.

     

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

  175.  
    identicon
    Michael Z. Williamson, Jan 29th, 2012 @ 7:22pm

    Re: Re: Hollywood: Jealous Socialists

    Can you actually name any socialist society that "put people first" (ahead of the government and cronies)?

    Take your time.

    Socialism does not mean what you think it means.

    Conversely, a capitalist invests capital in a venture, at some risk, in exchange for commensurate return. There's nothing in there about, "having the government steal money from people to cover my bad gambling choices with vapor assets that never existed."

    Capitalism doesn't mean what you think it means, either.

    Sure is a nice world you live in, though. How far from Earth is it?

     

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

  176.  
    identicon
    Michael Z. Williamson, Jan 29th, 2012 @ 7:32pm

    Re: Re: Re: Fast, not free

    As you may note, I'm an ardent opponent of SOPA.

    Copyright is needed because that's how I make my living--I tell stories, people pay me for them. Most will do so even if there are illicit downloads.

    However, if those illicit downloads are considered perfectly okay, then people will have trouble paying me for my stories, because they won't know they're mine.

    This means I'll be working for months on end to entertain people, for no return. In which case I'll stop doing it.

    This is even more significant if I were writing nonfic for educational or development purposes, which required lengthy research or experimentation, costing money out of pocket. Without a process for recouping the work, it's not worthwhile.

    The intellectual monopolies (limited in duration) that Jefferson came up with created an explosion in development, as patronage was no longer needed.

    But hey, if you like patronage from nobles, go right ahead.

    In my experience, those who argue against copyright tend to be retards who are incapable of creative endeavor, hoping to benefit from the fruits of their betters.

    This doesn't mean (c) should be eternal. But a creator is certainly entitled to income from their work, and a means to stop others from using it illicitly.

     

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

  177.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jan 29th, 2012 @ 8:56pm

    Re:

    I believe youtube has file-size limits, so unless the video displayed a whole bunch at once, and changed what quotes are displayed really quick, allowing you to go through them really fast, something like that would probably be too big.

    Maybe a mini-series though...

     

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

  178.  
    icon
    nasch (profile), Jan 30th, 2012 @ 6:11am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Fast, not free

    However, if those illicit downloads are considered perfectly okay, then people will have trouble paying me for my stories, because they won't know they're mine.

    This means I'll be working for months on end to entertain people, for no return. In which case I'll stop doing it.


    What you're missing is that there are ways to profit from creating content other than by selling copies of it.

    In my experience, those who argue against copyright tend to be retards who are incapable of creative endeavor, hoping to benefit from the fruits of their betters.

    You're not likely to ever understand their position if you assume they're retards and inferior to you.

     

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

  179.  
    icon
    John Fenderson (profile), Jan 30th, 2012 @ 9:12am

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

    Ahh, I get it. My bad.

     

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

  180.  
    identicon
    Bob Jones, Jan 30th, 2012 @ 11:34am

    Bah...

    Who are you kidding? Kristen Stewart doesn't know how to act, come on!

     

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

  181.  
    identicon
    Bob Jones, Jan 30th, 2012 @ 11:45am

    Re: Re: Re: Hollywood: Jealous Socialists

    Oh, about as distant as you are.

    How's the view from all the way out there?

     

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

  182.  
    identicon
    Bob Jones, Jan 30th, 2012 @ 12:03pm

    Re: Re: Fast, not free

    The MPAA, reasonable?

    You're smoking crack.

    The MPAA sees EVERYBODY as walking wallets. They don't want to partner with anyone, they want everyone's money. Every single person is a target to them.

    You can't co-operate with a predatory organization.

    If the MPAA were to completely fire their entire leadership and hire people with a completely different mentality (pro-consumer, pro-open internet, anti-legislation) then maybe.

    Otherwise, it's a waste of energy to even try.

    The MPAA should fear us, always. The internet has its own wrath, and groups like the MPAA/RIAA mean DEATH for the internet. For legitimate users and file-sharers alike.

    P.S.
    File sharing is not stealing. Period.

    Stealing is depriving an individual of the original possesion so it cannot be sold by them to make a living.
    File sharing merely takes a copy of that information, depriving the original owner of nothing. (And if you assume that every file "shared" equates to what otherwise would have been a "sale", you're delusional, that's the same argument the MPAA/RIAA make in court cases.)

    This is why they can never co-exist with the internet. Better just to disband the MPAA/RIAA.

     

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

  183.  
    identicon
    Bullseyed, Jan 30th, 2012 @ 1:10pm

    Re: Re:

    THE INTERNET IS GONE SOMEONE CALL MY NEPHEW BILLY HE KNOWS COMPUTER THINGS. THE VIRUSES MUST HAVE KILLED IT. ALSO CAPS LOCK IS ON BECAUSE I THINK THE LIGHT IS PRETTY.

     

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

  184.  
    identicon
    Bob Jones, Jan 30th, 2012 @ 1:31pm

    Re: Re: MPAA in denial

    Who cares what RIAA/MPAA logic is?

    The fact that collectively, they all don't have the IQ of an autistic 3 year old.

    When someone deludes themselves with made-up "facts" and lies, which they themselves believe, who cares how they think? They're sick, they need fixing.
    A bullet to the temple should do nicely, then send them the bill for the bullet. Just like is done in China when executing criminals.

     

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

  185.  
    icon
    nasch (profile), Jan 30th, 2012 @ 4:25pm

    Re: Re: Re: MPAA in denial

    The fact that collectively, they all don't have the IQ of an autistic 3 year old.

    Off-topic, but autistics aren't stupid. They might collectively score lower on an IQ test, I don't know, but that's not a great measure of intelligence.

     

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

  186.  
    identicon
    painkiller1961, Feb 4th, 2012 @ 8:56pm

    MPAA must die

    Hollywood and TV are drying up so are their sponsers.
    I quit TV because of the lame advertising,they only get dumb old people buying their crap(boner pills,weight loss,exercise equipment) and the smart people now buy off the internet CHEAPER! and i now record my favorite shows.

    they will try another DRM scheme next or change the name next year of the SOPA bill to "SAVE THE CRACK BABIES" bill to make you look bad for voting against it.

    thats how hollywood/media works with "SPIN"

     

    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