Apple Didn't Delete That Guys iTunes Movies, But What Happened Still Shows The Insanity Of Copyright

from the different-but-still-bad dept

Last week we, like many others, wrote about the story of Anders G da Silva, who had complained on Twitter about how Apple had disappeared three movies he had purchased, and its customer service seemed to do little more than offer him some rental credits. There was lots of discussion about the ridiculousness — and potential deceptive practices — of offering a “buy” button if you couldn’t actually back up the “purchase” promise.

Some more details are coming out about the situation with da Silva, and some are arguing that everyone got the original story wrong and it was incorrect to blame Apple here. However, looking over the details, what actually happened may be slightly different, but it’s still totally messed up. Apple didn’t just stop offering the films. What happened was that da Silva moved from Australia to Canada, and apparently then wished to redownload the movies he had purchased. It was that region change that evidently caused the problem. Because copyright holders get ridiculously overprotective of regional licenses, Apple can only offer some content in some regions — and it warns you that if you move you may not be able to re-download films that you “purchased” in another region (even though it promises you can hang onto anything you’ve already downloaded).

And, here the situation is slightly more confusing because Apple actually does offer the same three movies — Cars, Cars 2 and The Grand Budapest Hotel — in both Australia and Canada, but apparently they may not be the identical “versions” of the film, as they may be slightly altered depending on the region.

And while this may be marginally better than completely removing his “purchased” films, it’s still absolutely ridiculous. The CNET article linked above is sympathetic to the idea that Apple has to go to extreme lengths such as these to prevent “region hopping,” and says that da Silva is just an “edge case” that “fell into a licensing crack.” But, again, that’s nonsense. This is digital content that he “purchased” using a “buy” button. It shouldn’t matter where he is at some later date. He should still get access to those original files. That’s what a purchase means. The fact that this might possibly in some cases mean that (OH MY GOSH!) someone in Canada can access a movie released in Australia when they’re actually in Canada, well, uh, that seems like an “edge case” that a movie studio and Apple should deal with, rather than screwing over legitimate purchasers.

But, alas, we’re left with yet another example of the insanity driven by excessive copyright, in which copyright holders get so overly focused on the notion of “control” that they feel the need to control absolutely everything — including making sure that no wayward Canadians might (GASP!) purchase and download a movie meant for Australians. It’s this overwhelming, obsessive desire to “control” each and every use that messes with so many people’s lives — including da Silva’s — and makes sure that the public has almost no respect at all for copyright. Give up a little control, and let the edge cases go, and maybe people wouldn’t be so quick to condemn copyright for removing their own rights so frequently.

Filed Under: , , , , , ,
Companies: apple

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 “Apple Didn't Delete That Guys iTunes Movies, But What Happened Still Shows The Insanity Of Copyright”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
92 Comments
Obvious Lee says:

So, obviously, your hysterical screeching was wrong.

> It was that region change that evidently caused the problem.

There you go. You surround that with usual attack on copyright, your only purpose again:

> It’s this overwhelming, obsessive desire to “control” each and every use that messes with so many people’s lives

Oh, the horror! Couldn’t watch three movies again!

Sheesh. Why don’t you kids do something with the marvelous advantages you’ve been handed OTHER THAN complain you can’t wallow in mindless entertainments?

crade (profile) says:

Re: So, obviously, your hysterical screeching was wrong.

Sheesh. Why don’t you kids do something with the marvelous advantages you’ve been handed OTHER THAN complain you can’t wallow in mindless entertainments?

They would love to do great things but are blocked by copyright and patent entitlement standing around with their hands out and spewing bullshit at every turn.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: So, obviously, your hysterical screeching was wrong.

Likely because actual Kids are put down by adults for merely thinking and even more for doing something. Then adults have the gall to ask why Kids aren’t doing anything.

Not all entertainment is mindless. In fact, a well written piece of media has great potential to teach or cultivate a person’s mind. The people that dismiss that potential are the ones to fail future generations from the very start.

ShadowNinja (profile) says:

Re: So, obviously, your hysterical screeching was wrong.

There you go. You surround that with usual attack on copyright, your only purpose again:

So then you’d be fine if say clothing makers did the same thing, and tried to confiscate all your clothing if you moved to another country?

"Sorry but that clothing was legally purchased in the USA and you’re in Europe, you aren’t allowed to use it in other countries. You’ll have to purchase clothes from a local European clothing store".

David says:

Re: Re: So, obviously, your hysterical screeching was wrong.

So then you’d be fine if say clothing makers did the same thing, and tried to confiscate all your clothing if you moved to another country?

Well, I recently read on Interpersonal Stack Exchange some item where an Indian was wearing a T-Shirt with Hitler or a Swastika on it (don’t remember which one but he likely considered it a thumbs-up to his German co-workers). He’d have been saved some embarrassment at the workplace if that T-shirt had been region-coded and would have refused being worn in Europe because, well, it doesn’t really work as a thumbs-up there. Waaaaaay not.

For every insane rule there is an even more insane use case…

crade (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: So, obviously, your hysterical screeching was wrong.

Your example doesn’t really work very well… Your hitler or swastika shirt isn’t acceptable in any region. For the second thing, even if in your scenario the public’s feelings are so sacred that the shirt should be censored it really only applies to public display of the shirt, not private ownership.

Your Indian fellow could own the shirt, wear it in his bathroom, use it to wash his car, or whatever he wants without any problem.

These use cases really don’t apply to copyright. Utterly, the only thing gained from taking something away from someone using Region restrictions is the ability to sell it back to them.

Bamboo Harvester (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3 So, obviously, your hysterical screeching was wrong.

More to the point, should Amazon remove copies of every movie “bought” with the buy button about WWII? Because of the swastikas?

You either want free speech or you want only what YOU deem “acceptable” speech.

I’ve seen plenty of idiots wear swastikas on clothing. Usually white bikers. Not to mention tattoos.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:3 So, obviously, your hysterical screeching was wrong.

Exactly. Swastika is a very common religious symbol in India and used everyday in temples/homes in religious ceremonies. Majority of the uneducated population in India doesn’t know about Hitler or how it was used as a Nazi symbol. So an Indian guy wearing a swastika is very normal.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: So, obviously, your hysterical screeching was wrong.

There you go. You surround that with usual attack on copyright, your only purpose again:

Because region locking is dumb and should be attacked.

Oh, the horror! Couldn’t watch three movies again!

Doesn’t matter what it was or how much it cost. He purchased them, he gets them. Otherwise, the "buy" button and the marketing that says "own it today!" are illegal false advertising.

Wendy Cockcroft (user link) says:

Re: Re: Re: illegal false advertising... or theft

Ditto. But Our Glorious Leaders are showing no interest in doing that. They love a bit of fraud if it’s related to The Preciousss, I mean copyright.

I think I know why: if people realised they don’t actually own what they “bought” there would be rucktions and therefore change. The left is as bad as the right on this, I know one dedicated socialist who claims it’s a matter of principle that the creator should benefit from the work of hand or brain. I agree, but that right ends where my rights begin. And that, dearly beloved, is where my deep and abiding hatred of being lied to by authoritarian gits comes from. And it’s how I was won over to the “abolish copyright” cause. If they can’t play nicely with their toys, they can’t have them.

Rico R (profile) says:

Re: So, obviously, your hysterical screeching was wrong.

Can someone explain the logic as to how restricting content to certain regions has NOTHING to do with copyright? It has everything to do with copyright, or rather, the current copyright regime that believes they own the absolute right to control everything you buy. Forget taking the content you PURCHASED in one country to your new one; we have different deals with distributors/we have a slightly different version of the film in your new country/some other BS reason to take away what you’ve already bought with your own money. Copyright’s purpose was to promote progress. Explain to me how taking content you legally purchased away just because you moved promotes progress?

The reason people like me keep talking about the need to change copyright laws (or, as you put it, complaining) is that this nonsense is somehow allowed. Anti-consumer? Yes. Perfectly legal? Of course, it is! Yet Hollywood and other corporations think the only problem with copyright law is that there’s nothing being done to stop piracy. News flash: This anti-consumer behavior is what pushes people to piracy. If this iTunes customer illegally downloaded those three movies instead of buying it on iTunes and uploaded those movies to his private Google Drive account, guess what? Those movies would still be there! Yet, rather than invest in ways to make their products and services better, they’d rather stick to the anti-consumer status quo and lobby for stronger copyright laws that will harm innovation. And if we don’t stand up and speak out about these issues, who will?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: So, obviously, your hysterical screeching was wrong.

Yet Hollywood and other corporations think the only problem with copyright law is that there’s nothing being done to stop piracy.

Replace piracy with competition, and you know what their real objective in beating the piracy drum is, and that is restoring their control as gatekeepers to the works that get published.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: So, obviously, your hysterical screeching was wrong.

Do we get to tell a contractor how much they can charge to fix our houses?

The contractor can name whatever price they want, but that doesn’t mean they’re going to get it, or that they’re entitled to that price. They can say "I want $100,000 to fix that thing and I won’t do it for less" all they want. Demanding a certain amount of money because they feel "they’re worth it" or something isn’t going to go very far.

So no, we don’t get to tell them how much they can charge, but we do get to tell them how much we’re willing to pay. They can accept that or go out of business.

I don’t feel the ability to play a single song as much as I like, in perpetuity, is worth much more than a dollar or so, or a 45-60 minute album is worth more than about $12. If the rightsholder wants more than that, I won’t pay, and I also won’t pirate it. The rightsholder can meet my price, or they can go out of business.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: So, obviously, your hysterical screeching was wrong.

Can a simple contract rather than copyright law give a creator this control?

That depends on the terms of the contract.

Do we get to tell a contractor how much they can charge to fix our houses?

I do that all the time, it’s my job. It’s called "competition." It works like this: "Hey contractor, your rival, Xtra Value Drainage Services, just came back with a quote @ £1,000 less than yours. Please can you take another look at the costs and advise as to why this is the case."

Effectively, I just told "contractor" what to charge us. If I don’t get the response I want, Xtra Value gets the gig.

stine (profile) says:

region licenses

What you’re saying is that Apply has to claw back the license fee it paid for the Australian copy and use that money to pay the Canadian licensee?

I suggest not. I think Apple simply needs to state that since you’re accessing regionally licensed content, that if you leave the region, you won’t have access to the content until you return to the region.

Seegras (profile) says:

Re: region licenses

I suggest not. I think Apple simply needs to state that since you’re accessing regionally licensed content, that if you leave the region, you won’t have access to the content until you return to the region.

No, they simply must allow you to access the content you have “bought” is accessible to you no matter where in the world you are.

David says:

Re: Re: region licenses

That’s not how it works with region-coded DVDs, but then region-coded DVDs are not tied to a single user and can be resold. Frankly, if a particular user is going to “save money” by travelling around half the world, chances are that he’ll still put down a whole lot of money for his copies.

This is turning a bad solution to a self-made problem into an awful solution for a non-problem.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 region licenses

“Yes it is. I can take a DVD and DVD player anywhere I want and play it.”

But, you’re not guaranteed to be able to use the DVD player in the new location, nor are you guaranteed to be able to get the movies through customs.

The only difference is that with discs they haven’t been able to get around the first sale doctrine, but they can to a degree with digital due to claiming it’s a licence rather than purchase, even if the button you click to access it says “buy”.

nasch (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3 region licenses

But, you’re not guaranteed to be able to use the DVD player in the new location

As long as I bring the right power adapter I am.

nor are you guaranteed to be able to get the movies through customs.

We’re getting pretty far afield in the analogy now since customs doesn’t inspect internet downloads.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:4 region licenses

“As long as I bring the right power adapter I am.”

Well, depending on the local TV standard, maybe. It’s more likely than in the the past but there’s a number of issues that mean most people are really not going to bother.

“We’re getting pretty far afield in the analogy now since customs doesn’t inspect internet downloads.”

Well, maybe. My point was just that while they may not exactly be beating down your front door, it’s certainly possible for your collection to be confiscated either way if you come across the wrong situation when you cross into that new country.

I actually remember having this happen when I was a teenager. I went on holiday to Cyprus with my family, and at the time there were shelves of pirated videos pretty much everywhere around tourist areas. I picked up a few new blockbusters that hadn’t even been released back home at the time, along with a few of the “video nasties” that were either officially banned or not legally available due to the BBFC refusing to certify them. When I got back to the UK, some of the videos were missing from my suitcase. They had taken the new releases, but not the ones I couldn’t get to see legally!

It’s not a great analogy for the specific situation I suppose, but it certainly isn’t unheard of whether you’re dealing with physical or digital items.

takitus (profile) says:

Re: region licenses

Does Apple state that “purchases” made through iTunes are in fact rentals, and that access to content depends on you paying a new license fee each time you move?

No? In that case, they must claw the license fee out of their own funds.

If they’re unhappy with a copyright system that creatues these situations, it behooves them to throw their massive weight behind reform, rather than passing the pain on to their customers.

8Red (profile) says:

Distributors

Usually this kind of thing comes down not to different “versions” of a film, but who the regional distributor is. Most of time a film will be distributed by different companies in different areas, and they can get very territorial about it since they usually pay the studios a good deal of money for the rights. It’s antiquated in today’s world, but so is much of the entertainment industry today. There is probably some stupid contract right on those films digital distribution that prevents their transfer between regions.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Distributors

It’s antiquated in today’s world, but so is much of the entertainment industry today. There is probably some stupid contract right on those films digital distribution that prevents their transfer between regions.

"Stupid" is right, and people are right to be giving a trillion-dollar company (Apple) flack for agreeing to it. That’s probably bigger than all the film studios combined. They could easily do what Sony did when the entertainment industry was working against them: buy a studio.

That Anonymous Coward (profile) says:

Doesn’t that guy with the trendy avatar always mention that the copyright cartels need to stop subdividing the world to face the reality that we’re global?

I guess in the cartels minds if he owned DVD’s & went to Oz he would have to buy the content again b/c he can’t get a DVD player with the right region.

I think the constant theme is they look for ways to make you pay them again and again for no reason other than they rigged the system to benefit them.

Whats next, iOS devices using GPS to stop showing content when you cross international borders where you haven’t paid them for the right to watch the content you bought?

Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile) says:

Re: Re:

"I guess in the cartels minds if he owned DVD’s & went to Oz he would have to buy the content again b/c he can’t get a DVD player with the right region."

I don’t know for sure, but if I were moving to Oz and knew anything about Oz before I moved there, I might decide to bring my DVD player with me.

Of course it’s a long move and one might reduce the load by selling items before packing, but it is likely that replacing those items in the new local would cost more than the sale of the used items produced. Rather than trying to discern the best financial option, I would think the simpler option, bring the damn DVD player along, would be the better choice.

BTW, we are talking about the Oz with the yellow brick road here right? Cause this guy moved from Australia (aka Oz) to Canada, not the reverse.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

I think the constant theme is they look for ways to make you pay them again and again for no reason other than they rigged the system to benefit them.

Take out "again and again" and you’ve described copyright. Illicit downloading is better in almost every way possible—and would be way better if not for legal concerns—leaving some vague sense of illegality as the main reason to avoid it. That, or the payors don’t understand Hollywood Accounting, and think that money could go to someone they care about.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

There are more works than ever being made available for free, or on a voluntary support the creator basis than any individual can keep up with. Direct your attention and support in that direction, and the maximalists will lose custom, money and power, and those with a desire for an audience will also move to that model.

Uriel-238 (profile) says:

So...say I really like a film...

…And as such I really don’t mind my delicate provincial sensibilities altered by seeing versions of a film intended for foreign eyes and foreign minds. To the contrary, I’m interested in seeing how the film is presented world wide.

How do I find and acquire versions of films for other regions? Can I get a list of versions and their differences? Who is deciding what people in my region can or cannot see?

Does Vader get to win in Japanese Star Wars?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: So...say I really like a film...

Does Vader get to win in Japanese Star Wars?

No, but the final fight would involve giant robots, lots of yelling, and Luke explaining to Vader and the Emperor (in the middle of the fight) that they’ll never win because family and friendship are the most powerful forces of all and there’s no way he could lose to someone who doesn’t understand that.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: So...say I really like a film...

How do I find and acquire versions of films for other regions?

Unauthorized downloads. Or if you’d prefer to give your support to ridiculous legalism, hop on a plane and buy a local media player and media after you arrive. If not available in physical form, you might have some trouble (some online distributors may disallow you from having multiple accounts).

Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Demoman -- the last restaurant

Somehow I have a hard time imagining John Spartan and Lenina Huxley having as elegant a meal in a Pizza Hut rather than a Taco Bell.

But maybe I have some food prejudices. Or a lack of imagination. Or difficulty imagining any Pepsico product becoming ‘it’ as they are all about quantity and limited menus rather than quality and the concept of the ‘set of all food’ along with possibilities.

But it was a fun movie (the Taco Bell one, I cannot speak to the Pizza Hut one as I am regionally prevented from seeing it).

JoeCool (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Demoman -- the last restaurant

It’s a great movie – one of my favorites. I have seen the Pizza Hut version, and all they did was change any Taco Bell graphics to Pizza Hut, and any place an actor says Taco Bell, they dubbed over the voice with the actor saying Pizza Hut… which was actually dubbed pretty badly. The words don’t quite match the mouth.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: So...say I really like a film...

Weird thing about that – I watched the movie once at the cinema when it was first released and, then many times on video afterwards and I only remember the Taco Bell version. Not sure if I’m just forgetting the original version having seen the TB version afterwards or if I have a strange Mandela effect thing going on…

michael (profile) says:

No, it's worse

“the situation is slightly more confusing because Apple actually does offer the same three movies — Cars, Cars 2 and The Grand Budapest Hotel — in both Australia and Canada, but apparently they may not be the identical “versions” of the film, as they may be slightly altered depending on the region.

And while this may be marginally better than completely removing his “purchased” films …”

I’d actually consider this worse. At least Apple had an excuse if they no longer sold the films. “We sell those films, he purchased those films, but we’re not letting him have them anyway” is a much worse stance for Apple.

That One Guy (profile) says:

Re: Re: 'If I'm going to be considered a criminal either way...'

And leaving them in the position of ‘do I risk this happening again, or do I just skip the whole ‘pay first’ step and download it directly next time?’

I always find it funny how so many ‘anti-copyright infringement’ and/or ‘copyright protection’ schemes instead provide people very real examples of why not to pay by penalizing and/or offering a decidedly worse product to those that pay, almost as though they are trying to stop people from paying them by punishing those that do.

crade (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: 'If I'm going to be considered a criminal either way...'

Unfortunately, it’s only funny until you figure out they actually are disingenuous, they have no interest in stopping piracy and the only reason for many of these schemes is actually to provide fuel for pushing legislation to give them more “compensation” for everything they “lose” because of it.. anti-circumvention.. more restrictions.. levies.. statutory damages… and whatever horrible stuff is coming next.

That One Guy (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 'If I'm going to be considered a criminal either way...'

Oh I’ve long stopped buying the ‘we’re doing this to combat copyright infringement’ excuse, and instead treat such things as what they almost certainly are, attempts to kill off competition, attempts to get free money for nothing, and/or attempts to regain if not increase the control they have over the market.

There’s only so long I can buy they ‘they just don’t know better’ excuse before it transitions to ‘they know better, they’re just lying about their motives/what they’re actually after.’

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: I bet there is a way around this geo blocking thing

And then they’re legally a pirate

Legally a copyright infringer (AFAIK, "pirate" hasn’t made it to legal codes yet). If VPNs were writting into local copyright law, and if nothing like fair use or common sense applies, for which I’d take an "innocent until proven liable" stance.

Vikarti Anatra (profile) says:

Re: I bet there is a way around this geo blocking thing

So does all Dasilva needs to do is log in to an Australian VPN and the items should be there and downloadable again… or is IP region hopping like that somehow illegal in the minds of these people as well?

VPN will not help.
IP does NOT matter here. Only country in iTunes account does.

Anonymous Coward says:

Steam does this too

Or at least they did as of 8 years ago. I had preordered (shhh, I know. I was younger and wanted the beta access) the Medal of Honor reboot, and although the game was coming out while I would be out of the country (Japan, in this case), I had a decent laptop and figured it’d be a nice timekiller while I was there.

Except it would have been, but apparently Japan wasn’t getting it then, or maybe at all. Steam would not let me touch anything about the game and prevented me from installing it for the duration of my stay. As soon as I returned home months later, they let me play my game.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: ...

“The disc itself may have a region code on it, but so far there’s not a way for the disc itself to detect that it’s located in the wrong region.”

The disc doesn’t detect anything, just as it doesn’t play itself, that’s down to the player – and most players respect the region codes (along with other idiocy like not allowing you to skip trailers and anti-piracy warning on the disc you bought, that pirates will never see).

ECA (profile) says:

Metioned before.

The fun part of finding videos, and music on the web..Even some online games from certain companies..
wondering yahoo, you see all their games but wish to play another version…Jump to Another country and its THERE, but you cant play it, because of REGION..including Canada, WHICH IS REGION 1, as is the USA..
a Cartoon or movie that was on 1 system/.. isnt available in your area, but you find it in another country…”YOU” CANT WATCH/LISTEN to it threw the REGULAR’ channels..

This is as bad as the OLD system of shipping music and video in HARD MODE, DVD/TAPE/RECORDS around the USA. WHO gets what and where and HOW MUCH is a pain in the Butt.
Look all over your area, even your friends want the same thing..and its NOT THERE…go 20-2000 miles away and THERE IS IT..
Then you wonder WHY those Old record shops that RESOLD albums did so well…

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Metioned before.

“Dawson’s Creek is now streaming on Hulu, with a different theme song…”

So, it’s not the same work and people will wish to obtain the original, even if the only option available to them is piracy. That’s a choice of the industry not to sell it to them, not the consumer for having no choice.

Yet, you will blame people taking the only option available for doing so, rather than the industry for forcing that choice on to them.

Thad (profile) says:

This does change my opinion a bit, as Apple negotiating around region locks would require a lot of additional international negotiating (the studio the distributes a movie in one country may not have the rights to it in another). It’s a tangled mess and something of a nightmare.

That said, if anyone’s got the resources and the clout to do it, it’s Apple.

John Smith says:

iF I WERE ON A JURY I WOULD AWARD THIS GUY A REFUND FROM Apple, pattorney fees, due to Apple not properly informing him of this in a “reasonable” manner. if it’s “rare” then let Apple eat the cost of providing him with the same access in Canada.

This would address the situation without weakening copyright law. As someone who has created works that could be licensed in many regions, I don’t want to have to globally sign away y rights just because someone in Togo wants to produce one of my books etc. (no, my work is not coming to a Togo television station anytime soon for who would inevitably ask).

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

This would address the situation without weakening copyright law. As someone who has created works that could be licensed in many regions, I don’t want to have to globally sign away y rights j

If it on the Internet, it is on a truly global distribution system, and streaming is not TV.. Regional rights made sense when printing and distribution were carried out on a country by country basis, but now that shipping is global, that no longer applies.

As T.V is performance rights, company by company licensing sort of make sense, but beware that you need a secretarial and legal department to handle it, unless you wish yo spend a large amount of time dealing with queries, and doing your own marketing. So selling your rights to an agency that can deal with that is usually the better option.

Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

Why do you have to sell your rights to an agency to have them enforced? Why cannot you hire some agency to perform these duties and not give up your rights?

Now you are correct in that the concept of regional distribution is not longer a needed thing (except in the minds of people who are solely concerned with monetary output and see regional licensing as an asset), but there is the potential opportunity to license translations to those regions that might need translations, but I would not expect that to produce any significant revenue. The alternatives to paying a premium for a translation are not insignificant. Offering translated versions, easily obtainable anywhere, seems like a better method of moving product off the shelf (so to speak).

Which brings us to the point. What are the appropriate methods of reducing ‘piracy’ (a poor choice of words, infringer’s is better, but the nomenclature has evolved)? Remove restrictions, offer better access, offer a reasonable price, make it easy to buy, connect with your fans and give them a reason to buy, listen to the market (not what you want to hear, but what they actually say), offer something they might want (discerned by listening to the market, not your own ‘feelings about what they want’), and offering your product to undeserved markets for free, but the OP of this thread doesn’t listen to reason. He thinks he knows better than anyone else.

John Smith says:

Re: Re: Re:

Coopyright insanity doesn’t begin with retail: anyone who touches a product can wind up with an equal share of the rights, especially if they alter the script in any way (then they get a writing credit). Properly dividing up the rights is enough to make a lawyer very wealthy, and not doing it is a way to make that lawyer even wealthier.

Te creator has to decide whether “show” or “business” comes first. Almost all the disputed content here is more “business” than ‘show.” A true artist loves to get paid, and to get rich, but will produce first and ask questions later. The audience doesn’t pay to see people neogitate contracts and rights, nor should it.

Many shows are important from one country to another, like Dancing With The Stars or even “Cash Cab,” which has different versions in six different countries or whatever. There’s a legitimate reason for regionalizing contnt, but it would certainly be simpier if this ghost were given up. I don’t know if it would be more profitable or not, since so much else would change.

Now I’m wondering if I violated some regional rights by watching Univision’s coverage of the World Cup soccer matches to hear Andres Cntor yelling GOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLL!

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

“There’s a legitimate reason for regionalizing contnt”

Regionalising the content? Sure. Blocking people from accessing other versions because you demand that people only watch whatever they want to target toward the patch of dirt they happen to be sat on at the time – often at odds with what the viewer actually wants to access? No, and that’s where you start running into problems.

“Now I’m wondering if I violated some regional rights by watching Univision’s coverage of the World Cup soccer matches to hear Andres Cntor yelling GOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLL!”

Probably. The industries you endlessly support would certainly rather you didn’t have the choice, so that you can only be sold the restricted selection they choose to offer whatever silo they want to store you in.

But, you probably won’t admit where the problems really lie, even though you have admitted you know they exist.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re:

“I don’t want to have to globally sign away y rights just because someone in Togo wants to produce one of my books etc. (no, my work is not coming to a Togo television station anytime soon for who would inevitably ask).

Why are you deliberately refusing your known potential consumer base access to your work, and then complaining when they pirate it instead after you refused to sell to them?

Also, books? I thought you claimed to be owed millions from your music career? Hmmm…

PaulT (profile) says:

“And, here the situation is slightly more confusing”

Actually, it’s not confusing at all, it’s something people who travel regularly have to put up with on a nearly daily basis. It’s also getting worse, since instead of having, say, a region 2 DVD that covers the whole of Europe, they’re now imposing restriction per country – all this in a supposed single market where we’re meant to be import at will between countries.

It’s nice that this has got so much traction, but it’s hardly new and a shame that facts were so thin on the ground initially. But one thing is still clear – the blame is on the antiquated, increasingly unworkably licencing system, not on Apple.

Paul Keating (profile) says:

Frontier Copyright Police

You obviously have not heard. There is a new agency – the FCP – who also searches the boxes of unsuspecting expats who move out of the US to another country. The confiscate any book or other material that has not been authorized for distribution in the country of destination. They are nice enough to place a card inside the box informing you that if you wish to recover their confiscated items you can change your mind about moving…………….

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published.

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

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...