Why Don't Consumers Have A Say?

from the ignore-the-people-it-affects-most dept

The latest Walt Mossberg column in the WSJ points out that while the Senate is holding hearings about copy protection schemes for the entertainment industry, they left out a crucial player. They invited the entertainment industry and the tech industry to testify. But, no one invited the consumers. It’s a valid point. If Congress is supposed to be looking out for the rights of the people, and not just companies, you would think they would do a better job talking to the people who pay the salaries of the entertainment industry.


Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Why Don't Consumers Have A Say?”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
10 Comments
Oliver Wendell Jones (profile) says:

This could apply to other industries

What happens if (heaven forbid) this should get pushed through and becomes law?

How long until the insurance industry decides that they could save bazillions of dollars each year if all automobiles had new ‘technology’ added that prevents them from speeding, etc.

Pretty much everyone agrees that speeding is illegal, and lots of people do it anyways (kind of like piracy).

Do you think Americans are going to want to buy cars with new, improved ‘technology’ that prevents them from exceeding the posted speed limit?

Who knows what other ‘technology’ could be implemented to help save other industries?

Mike (profile) says:

Re: Re: This could apply to other industries

Well, not to get into a semantics debate, but I still don’t believe that file trading is either piracy or stealing. No one is missing anything if I share a file with someone else. It’s not like taking a physical object. You have made an exact copy. In my understanding, you haven’t stolen anything if the person you “took” something from isn’t missing anything.

Floyd says:

Re: Re: Re: What is missing

>Well, not to get into a semantics debate, but I still don’t believe that file trading is either piracy or stealing. No one is missing anything if I share a file with someone else. It’s not like taking a physical object. You have made an exact copy. In my understanding, you haven’t stolen anything if the person you “took” something from isn’t missing anything.

The artist, producer, distributer and others who would normally share in the sale of an item are deprived of income.

Mike (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 What is missing

The artist, producer, distributer and others who would normally share in the sale of an item are deprived of income.

That makes one very big assumption: that I would have bought the CD in the first place. If I never had any intention of buying it, then they’re not losing anything.

Or… another way to look at it. If I open up a pizza place and charge $3/slice, and some guy opens up a pizza place next door to me and charges $2/slice – by your definition of stealing, that guy is stealing from me, because I’m deprived of income that otherwise would have gone to me. I don’t get the income because the consumer has an alternative…

That’s not stealing. That’s business.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:3 What is missing

Why does this subject always touch off such a disagreement on basic principles? Piracy is not exactly the same as stealing, but is illegal nonetheless. I thought the speeding analogy was a good one. Better than the pizza one, although that would be a better analogy if, say, the cheaper pizza place were also called Pizza Hut (trademark infringement), stole your secret sauce recipe (trade secret), duplicated your patented pizza ovens (patent infringement), and stole your menu artwork (copyright infringement).

thecaptain says:

yeah right...consumers.

” But, no one invited the consumers. It’s a valid point. If Congress is supposed to be looking out for the rights of the people, and not just companies, you would think they would do a better job talking to the people who pay the salaries of the entertainment industry.”

Actually, the entertainment industry has pretty much proven (and worked hard to convince Congress) that we aren’t customers, that the majority of us are thieves and law-breakers who live to deprive them of their income, as such, I doubt they feel we should have ANY say.

I always thought that in the US, it was innocent until proven guilty. I guess that went out the door with “fair use” right? SIGH

Leave a Reply to Mike Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...