Paul Vixie: SOPA/PIPA Would Be Good For My Business, But I'm Still Against It

from the the-toothpaste-will-come-out-somewhere dept

Last night, there was an interesting panel at Stanford discussing many of the problems with SOPA. It covered a lot of the ground that we've covered here over the past few months, but there were a few interesting moments. Paul Vixie, who has been a very vocal opponent to DNS blocking, explained why it wouldn't work, and how it would cause a lot of other problems... but he also noted that he was probably going against his own self-interest in making this argument. That's because the problems caused by SOPA/PIPA's DNS blocking would need fixing... and he suggests lots of folks would come to his company and pay for fixes. So it's a pretty principled stand by Vixie.

A separate point that was raised by Mark Lemley early on was that this argument that those in the US simply can't go after foreign sites is ridiculous. Under existing law, it's happened plenty of times in the past where copyright holders have gone after sites and companies based outside of the US and dragged those folks into US courts.

The vast majority of the evening proceeded with the implicit assumption that everyone there was categorically opposed to SOPA... but towards the end two execs from Paramount Pictures made it known they were there, and they were very much on the other side. The temperature in the room must have dropped 20 degrees when that happened. To be honest, the panel itself might have had a few more fireworks (though likely wouldn't have been that productive) if there had been a SOPA supporter on the panel itself. Of course, the Paramount guys, in typical Hollywood fashion, made a bunch of false assumptions. Perhaps the best part was when one of them challenged venture capitalist Albert Wenger by claiming that the companies in his portfolio used intellectual property laws to protect their business: to which Wenger immediately shot back that they did not, and that they didn't support such things at all. Instead, he noted that the companies his firm (Union Square Ventures) invests in tend to win in the marketplace by competing and winning. He noted that even if they completely gave away the source code of Tumblr (one of USV's investments), it wouldn't matter. In fact, he pointed out that another company had copied Tumblr feature-for-feature... but they couldn't get users. The point is clear, and it's the same point we've made here for years: focusing on copyright to protect yourself is not a good business model, and not something they invest in. Instead, they focus on things that can succeed by executing even if someone copies them line for line.

Finally, there was an entertaining moment when Andrew Bridges asked the Paramount guys exactly how many sites they saw as a problem. Because, he noted, other studio execs from some of the big Hollywood studios had given him numbers between 10s and a few hundred. And, he noted, if it's just such a small number of sites, then why create massive regulatory issues for the entire internet, rather than trying to deal with the sites. The problem is that Hollywood wants control over much more than what's really "the worst of the worst." However, when someone suggested it was "a couple hundred" sites that were problems, Mark Lemley pointed out that then they should be all done, because ICE has already seized 450 domains.

All in all it was an interesting evening. The specific discussions on the problems of DNS blocking were particularly enlightening. It's why when the House had its ridiculously one-sided hearing on SOPA last month -- in which not a single panelist knew anything about DNS -- they should have had someone like Paul Vixie there to explain the basics of why SOPA and PIPA are bad ideas that won't fix things and will likely make things worse.

There was one metaphor that was used repeatedly through the evening, and it's really quite apt. People kept noting that "the toothpaste is just going to come out somewhere else." It's a good way of noting the unintended consequences here. Plugging this "hole" and then putting pressure on sites may stop certain actions, but it won't deal with the real issue that Hollywood is facing. In fact, it's likely to cause more problems, as the toothpaste squirts out somewhere else, unexpectedly.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    icon
    vegetaman (profile), Dec 8th, 2011 @ 8:12pm

    Yet again...

    "It's okay, we can do whatever we want with our legislation... Then that pesky tech world with all of that there interconnected series of tubes can figure out how to make it work."

     

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

  2.  
    icon
    DandonTRJ (profile), Dec 8th, 2011 @ 8:35pm

    Man, I have not been paying attention at all -- had no idea Fred jumped ship from the EFF to Google. Good for him. He spoke on a panel at my law school a year or two ago about rogue websites, and I'm pretty sure he was the sole voice of reason between a bunch of studio attorneys who just wanted to shut down every site with UGC. Now THAT event sparked some fireworks. Actual shouting matches! Supremely entertaining.

     

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

  3.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 8th, 2011 @ 8:49pm

    " it's likely to cause more problems, as the toothpaste squirts out somewhere else, unexpectedly."

    Once again, you (and many other opponents of SOPA) are making a basic, false assumption: That it would make piracy go away.

    That isn't the intention. It's a question of "tipping" public views on piracy, and the public's access to pirated materials.

    Right now, piracy is overt, it is open, and it is big. Anyone can find it, it's all over. It makes it a very easy choice for those looking to obtain the latest movie or music. They can pay for it, or they can easily obtain it through pirate sites - just by typing the movie name and "torrent" into Google.

    If you get rid of that first layer of sites, if you make the stuff harder to find (even a little harder), then some people will stop pirating. They may not buy more stuff, but they will not use up their "demand" on pirated material. At some point, if their demand is high enough, they will become legal consumers once again.

    Now, if you move 10 - 20% of the current pirates back to being legal consumers, that is a big win for the content producers, and it is also a fairly solid blow against piracy. Piracy depends on all those little individual nodes helping out, sharing files, uploading to file lockers, running P2P, whatever it is... remove some of them, and the network gets weaker.

    SOPA doesn't solve all the issues, there will always be some "toothpaste" coming out in other directions. But if it makes it harder for pirate sites to operate in the open, if it makes the pirate choice less palatable to consumers, then over time things change.

    A little spilled toothpaste is nothing compared to the benefits.

     

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

  4.  
    identicon
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Dec 8th, 2011 @ 8:57pm

    Re: It's a question of "tipping" public views on piracy, and the public's access to pirated materials.

    Interesting you should say that, because where in the putting together of SOPA were the “public views” taken into account at all?

     

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

  5.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 8th, 2011 @ 9:08pm

    Re:

    Here's the assumption that you're making: you're assuming that the spilled toothpaste will be a little, and that the benefits will be huge by comparison. Even in your suggestion of "10 - 20% of the current pirates", you have to use an "if". SOPA doesn't mandate the offering of legal, viable alternatives on the side of those who want to see this pass. Regardless of demand, if - one way or another, such as region locking or lack of money - a person cannot obtain said media, removing access to pirated material will not make him flock to the legal alternative.

    Sure, you can remove some of the "little individual nodes". Here's the thing, though - you've acknowledged that there will be toothpaste spilled regardless. This means that more individual nodes will pop up to replace the nodes you've removed. In the end you're not solving anything; you're mostly driving pirates beyond the reach of what SOPA intends to cover. And let's not forget how certain alphabet organisations (MPAA, GEMA, BREIN, etc.) are extremely open to shutting down sites via the lack of due process - regardless of how much of the site is actually "dedicated to infringement", or if any of it is at all.

    SOPA is going to have few benefits in addition to what's already in place and a lot of toothpaste is going to be spilled - how is this a good thing?

     

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

  6.  
    icon
    A Guy (profile), Dec 8th, 2011 @ 9:10pm

    Re:

    Proponents of SOPA get it wrong. To a lot of us, it's not about the spilled toothpaste either.

    The problem is the massive over reach embodied in SOPA. It will inevitably lead to abuse and censorship by both private and governmental actors. It will weaken our economy, not strengthen it. It will divert innovation out of the United States and new services will come from elsewhere instead.

    At the end of the day, someone will provide a quality product at a low price and if it doesn't come from content producers within the United States, it will come from somewhere else.

    I have already spent money on low cost, quality entertainment from overseas. If Hollywood cannot compete, their jobs will become outsourced too.

    SOPA is just the latest in a string of attempts to not deal with the economic realities of today.

     

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

  7.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 8th, 2011 @ 9:19pm

    Re:

    this is called "closing the barn after the animals got away"

     

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

  8.  
    identicon
    Larry, Dec 8th, 2011 @ 9:36pm

    Re:

    If you feel the need to "tip" the public, then by all means, you should provide that to them. Perhaps you could put a 20 second "downloading is theft" PSA that isn't skippable at the beginning of each DVD or something.

    But stealing (or worse, attempting to steal) my constitutional rights and justifying it by LYING and PAYING the our inept government is going to get you lynched at some point.

    Or, if not lynched, then locked up for stealing someone's "idea" and not having enough money to "defend" yourself.

    Figure it out. Jeez.

     

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

  9.  
    icon
    A Guy (profile), Dec 8th, 2011 @ 9:38pm

    Re: Re:

    Frankly, content owners should fear people no longer bothering to pirate their media, because it means they are no longer relevant.

    They will have been replaced in the consciousness of their consumers by someone else and I guarantee others are salivating at the prospect of taking a giant bite out of your market share.

     

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

  10.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 8th, 2011 @ 9:49pm

    Re:

    "That isn't the intention."

    Of course not. Turning the Internet into what our legal system has wrongfully turned everything outside the internet into (a government established monopolized cartel) is the intention. Banning free speech and competition is the intention. Just like they did outside the Internet through broadcasting and cableco monopolies and through laws that deter restaurants and other venues from hosting independent performers.

    "It's a question of "tipping" public views on piracy,"

    Yes, brainwashing the public to take your side and to take a position that is in your best interest (and not in the public interest) is the intent. Telling the public that they should believe what you believe because somehow your views are better than everyone else's instead of suggesting that the public should decide for themselves is the intent.

    "and the public's access to pirated materials."

    What about the public's access to public domain materials? Oh wait ...

    The public domain competes with monopolized materials and so the public domain has effectively been eliminated through constant copy protection extensions. IOWS, the objective is to deny access to competing materials and to ensure that all materials go through a self interested government established monopolist gatekeeper. Which is exactly what's done outside the Internet.

    and you assume that IP laws should even exist to begin with. Call it piracy, call it theft, call it murder, call it charity, call it what you want. Changing what it's called doesn't make it any more immoral and it shouldn't make it any more illegal. When the best argument that you can come up with for your position is to change the name of something and play word games then that is evidence that you are intellectually bankrupt. There is nothing wrong with freely copying as one pleases and it should be legal regardless of what you decide to call it.

     

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

  11.  
    identicon
    Resistance is futile, Dec 8th, 2011 @ 9:50pm

    Re:

    It's a question of "tipping" public views on piracy.

    People already see through the bullshit the record labels spew, so trying to get these ppl to believe in their lies is futile.

    The truth is, they fuck artists out of money every chance they get. They are the lowest forms of life leeching off of the content creators they claim to fight for.

     

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

  12.  
    identicon
    nice, Dec 8th, 2011 @ 9:55pm

    Re: Re:

    Anonymous Coward, Dec 8th, 2011 @ 9:49pm

    - Clap clap Clap clap Clap clap Clap clap Clap clap Clap clap Clap clap Clap clap Clap clap Clap clap Clap clap Clap clap Clap clap Clap clap Clap clap Clap clap Clap clap Clap clap

     

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

  13.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 8th, 2011 @ 9:58pm

    Re:

    "It's a question of "tipping" public views on piracy,"

    As if the public should just take for granted that your position is the correct one simply because you said so. and I thought this was supposed to be a democracy.

     

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

  14.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 8th, 2011 @ 10:15pm

    Re: Re:

    I think it's more of "closing the barn after the animals got away, and shoving your parents in the barn and locking them in to replace said animals".

     

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

  15.  
    icon
    Hephaestus (profile), Dec 8th, 2011 @ 10:48pm

    Re:

    Your entire argument is based on false assumptions.

    "If you get rid of that first layer of sites, if you make the stuff harder to find" ...

    You do nothing except drive the development of new and better ways to get around the blockade. This is what the content types just don't realize.

    "Now, if you move 10 - 20% of the current pirates back to being legal consumers, that is a big win for the content producers" ...

    No it isn't. In the simplest terms, everyday there are more ways for people to entertain themselves. I am charting thirty eight of them, every month "OLD" content slips a little. People only have so much time and money for entertainment.

    Here is the key trend ... People are spending more time and money on interactive entertainment, and less on static entertainment ...

    So. Hand me that plastic disk, I need something to put my drink on, while I play this video game with my friends online.

     

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

  16.  
    icon
    Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), Dec 8th, 2011 @ 11:47pm

    Re:

    That isn't the intention. It's a question of "tipping" public views on piracy, and the public's access to pirated materials.

    Well, then SOPA has already failed. Before the bill was even up for a debate in Congress, there was a massive public reaction against it. The public's view is well beyond "tipped" - it is overwhelmingly against increased effort to censor the pirates away.

    They can pay for it, or they can easily obtain it through pirate sites

    Yes, I can easily obtain it through pirate sites. You are absolutely wrong in that I can pay for it if I choose to. Please name for me just one single recently released movie from a major Hollywood studio that I can buy a quality, DRM-free, download in a convenient format at a reasonable price.

    Now, if you move 10 - 20% of the current pirates back to being legal consumers,

    Wait. You want to put tremendous regulatory burden on nearly every bit of the internet, and still not solve 90% of what you think is the piracy problem?

    Let's put some hypothetical numbers out there. Let's say that in the western world there are currently about 1 million hard core pirates who you'll never get to pay, and there are 20 million casual pirates who do it when its easy, but pay when its not. Now, your stated goal is to convert 4 million casuals into paying customers. Say you pass SOPA or something similar everywhere. Well, you got your 4 million, so time to celebrate, right? Nope. You've just converted 16 million into hard core pirates (plus the existing first 1 million) who actively tell their friends and family how to get around the blocks, and now there are 100 million casual pirates. Don't believe it'll happen? Look at the history of every time you stamped out one way to infringe, and how its successor became even more popular, easier to use, and harder to track than the last.

    But if it makes it harder for pirate sites to operate in the open, if it makes the pirate choice less palatable to consumers, then over time things change.

    Half right. Instead of trying to make pirate sites go underground (which has never worked in the history of the internet, by the way - in fact every time you've tried to stop it is has actually gotten easier), why don't you focus on making your product more palatable to consumers? It is easier. It is cheaper. There will be no collateral damage to the rest of the internet. It will make you more money. It will bring your customers back (and more than 10-20% of them).

    Why are you so against adapting to reality and actually giving your customers what they want?

     

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

  17.  
    identicon
    anonymous, Dec 9th, 2011 @ 12:49am

    Re: Re:

    simple. it isn't about piracy. it isn't about the money, or the artists or anything else. it's about the CONTROL! the entertainment industries want to control what people buy, when they buy it, how they buy it and the price they pay. they dont want competition, they dont want me coming to your house and listening to music you have bought. i am supposed to go and buy it myself, even though i haven't heard it before and may or may not like it. same with a movie. there is no other industry that does so little for customers but demands so much from them. it's a one sided deal, always benefiting the 'industries'.

     

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

  18.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2011 @ 2:23am

    Re:

    As a member of the public I can assure you, I intend to pirate with even more gusto than before.

    The only thing you do is give me more and more reason to do it and feel good about it.

     

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

  19.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2011 @ 2:25am

    Re:

    Also what gives these little group the right to screw everybody else and make life difficult for everybody else?

     

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

  20.  
    identicon
    FuzzyDuck, Dec 9th, 2011 @ 2:35am

    Re:

    Talking for myself, the actions of the MAFIAA itself are what is stopping me from buying - because I don't want to fund their constant attempts to erode civil liberties. I'd feel guilt if I gave them money.

     

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

  21.  
    icon
    disfit (profile), Dec 9th, 2011 @ 3:08am

    Impact on US economy

    What I have been missing in the discussions, is the possible or probable impact of SOPA/PIPA and other laws and regulations on the US economy.

    The Patriot Act has already caused a lot persons and organizations to think about the risks of having their data under control of a US company (e.g. cloud computing).

    This will be added on by risk analysis of using domains and IP addresses under US jurisdiction, but more importantly will have them look at the advertising networks and payment facilitators under US jurisdiction.

    This makes me wonder what the impact might be when there are more and more reasons to distance oneself from entities under US control.

    From the US standpoint it might look as if the advertising and payment markets are solely in control of US companies, there is however successful geographic or language specific competition around the world. Although people might now use a combination of US and non-US service providers, risk aversion might create a situation where they will choose not to use US service providers.

    In this respect SOPA and PIPA will, in my opinion, have a negative impact on the US economy. How big of an impact I do not know, but if it happens it will have a long term impact: once people are accustomed to use non-US service providers, and these service providers grow bigger, why go back?

     

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

  22.  
    icon
    Richard (profile), Dec 9th, 2011 @ 3:29am

    Re:

    Once again, you (and many other opponents of SOPA) are making a basic, false assumption: That it would make piracy go away.

    That isn't the intention. It's a question of "tipping" public views on piracy, and the public's access to pirated materials.


    Actually it's about chilling the competion from those who actually use the internet to distribute their own work freely.

    By placing burdens on those who provide platforms for user generated content big content hopes to kill the competition that comes from that source. This is a disgraceful agenda.

     

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

  23.  
    icon
    Chris-Mouse (profile), Dec 9th, 2011 @ 4:12am

    Re:

    A little spilled toothpaste is nothing compared to the benefits.

    when ''a little spilled toothpaste' involves trampling all over the constitution that is supposed to be the foundation of your entire legal system it's far from being 'nothing'

     

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

  24.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2011 @ 4:42am

    Re: Re:

    "SOPA doesn't mandate the offering of legal, viable alternatives on the side of those who want to see this pass. "

    Of course it doesn't mandate it - it doesn't have to. A significant shift in the market place would make creating viable alternatives into a functional business model. No, nobody is going to give stuff away for free, if that is what you are wishing for.

    I think it is also clear that viable alternatives already exist in music (itunes) and movies (Netflix, both disc and streaming) that allow people to obtain the content they want at prices that are pretty hard to argue. As the demand picks up for legal services, others will join the party, and perhaps even new models will come as a result.

    It's hard to develop a new business model when you are competing against you own product, being given away for free.

     

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

  25.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2011 @ 4:56am

    Re:

    You seem to be missing the point too.

    Even if SOPA works and raises the revenue streams of content providers, the likely collateral damage is likely to not be worth it.


    Or to phrase the question directly... is it worth another decade of 10% higher revenue, while all innovation that would have cut into that revenue is shut down before it can start? Do you really think that not innovating new products will improve long-term revenues more than creating something new and brilliant?

     

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

  26.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2011 @ 4:59am

    Re: Re:

    Yes, I can easily obtain it through pirate sites. You are absolutely wrong in that I can pay for it if I choose to. Please name for me just one single recently released movie from a major Hollywood studio that I can buy a quality, DRM-free, download in a convenient format at a reasonable price.


    You don't even need that many adjectives. How many of those movies can I even see in the cinema, let alone buy the DVD, in Australia?

     

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

  27.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2011 @ 5:01am

    Re: Re: Re:

    There's a *yet* in there. We get the films, if weeks or months later.

     

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

  28.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2011 @ 5:25am

    Re: Re: Re:

    I know that's true in the bottled water industry. I can receive water from my tap for a pitiful amount of money, but I understand how the bottled water industry is struggling with record profits.

     

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

  29.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2011 @ 6:13am

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    If the bottled water industry were only selling the exact same product as tap, you might have something. But since they are not (not all water is the same, sorry), you don't have a leg to stand on.

    Further, remember that the bottled water industry isn't selling water as much as they are selling bottles. It isn't just water, it's the convenience of that water being in a format you can carry, you can take anywhere, that you can chill, etc.

    Music files are music files. A "free tap" version of a song is EXACTLY the same as the paid version, it is just as transportable, it has all the same characteristics.

    So sorry, your bottled water comparison sucks.

     

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

  30.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2011 @ 6:14am

    Re: Re: Re:

    They don't have to fear this at all, because the numbers don't lie: What is pirated the most? Hollywood content.

    If anything, the demand today for this stuff is higher than it was 20 years ago. They don't have to worry about losing customers, because after you have seen Sita Sings the Blues 30 times, you are dying for a decent movie.

     

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

  31.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2011 @ 6:16am

    Re: Re:

    "You do nothing except drive the development of new and better ways to get around the blockade. This is what the content types just don't realize. "

    What you seem to fail to realize is that SOPA isn't a way to block a single technology (it doesn't outlaw P2P, example), but rather a tool that can whack any of the moles that come up.

    You can tapdance around in circles on this one, but it is likely in a SOPA world that, at least in the US, obtaining pirated material will be incrementally harder, and those people who are "soft pirates" and do it only because it is easy will stop doing it.

    "No it isn't. In the simplest terms, everyday there are more ways for people to entertain themselves. I am charting thirty eight of them, every month "OLD" content slips a little. People only have so much time and money for entertainment. "

    Do tell. 38 ways? Sounds more like you have found 37 ways to position your hand when you are alone in a dark room, but please, enlighten us.

     

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

  32.  
    icon
    E. Zachary Knight (profile), Dec 9th, 2011 @ 6:40am

    Re: Re: Re:

    And yet you admit that Netflix and Spotify are viable business models. But they aren't? I am confused. How can something be successful and not at the same time?

     

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

  33.  
    identicon
    NUGENT, Dec 9th, 2011 @ 7:09am

    Jeez. I wasn't at Stamford last nite. I was at a union meeting. Of people who worry about their pensions, residuals, jobs.. You guys just don't care about the impact of content theft on real lives. You care about debate and semantics. Sad.

     

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

  34.  
    identicon
    NUGENT, Dec 9th, 2011 @ 7:18am

    Re:

    Um, StaNford.

     

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

  35.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2011 @ 7:21am

    Re: Re: Re:

    Quote:
    What you seem to fail to realize is that SOPA isn't a way to block a single technology (it doesn't outlaw P2P, example), but rather a tool that can whack any of the moles that come up.


    Like in Belgium?
    Where they blocked the Pirate Bay and every pirate found its way to it again in a week?

    Yep, I see how hard it will be.

    Quote:
    You can tapdance around in circles on this one, but it is likely in a SOPA world that, at least in the US, obtaining pirated material will be incrementally harder, and those people who are "soft pirates" and do it only because it is easy will stop doing it.


    I heard that before and it always ends up a dud.
    DRM will make it harder! we all know how hard it is.

    The DMCA will make it harder!
    Pirate increases and only legal business, legal blogs are the ones really target by that stupid law.

    SOPA will save us all!
    Sorry but I have to laugh, SOPA does nothing to stop pirates, since they don't depend on websites to find illegal stuff, are you going to shutdown Facebook? Twitter? Flickr? and other places? that may slow it down a bit until everyone start using things like YACY that is a distributed search engine that can't be censored and it can be used to crawl the deep web(aka deepnet, invisible net).
    So stop being delusional, you are not going to reduce anything, what you will do is increase the security of the pirates making them harder to track and making law enforcement men cry.

    Quote:
    Do tell. 38 ways? Sounds more like you have found 37 ways to position your hand when you are alone in a dark room, but please, enlighten us.


    Music:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netlabel
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Free_m usic

    Games:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Free,_open_source_video_games

    Books:
    http ://www.archive.org/index.php
    http://runeberg.org/
    http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Main_Page
    http:// librivox.org/

    Movies & TV:
    http://vimeo.com/
    http://www.youtube.com/
    http://vodo.net/
    http://www.mininova.org/
    http:// www.getmiro.com/
    http://www.wreckamovie.com/
    http://www.snowblind-film.com/
    http://blender.org/

    You people are not the only game in town anymore.

     

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

  36.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2011 @ 7:27am

    Re: Re: Re:

    "You can tapdance around in circles on this one"

    You can tap dance around in circles on this one, but that's what they said about the DMCA. They were wrong about that and they're wrong about this too.

     

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

  37.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2011 @ 7:27am

    Re: Re: Re:

    Quote:
    What you seem to fail to realize is that SOPA isn't a way to block a single technology (it doesn't outlaw P2P, example), but rather a tool that can whack any of the moles that come up.


    You seem to fail to realize that the internet is a communication tool, unless you can block all communications ending the internet and disconnect all their peers you won't be able to stop "piracy" or reduce it.

    Are you going to end Facebook?

    People can create forums there dedicated to infringiment and post magnet links all day long and get that indexed with something like YaCy that is censorship resistant.

    Look how well that worked for Belgium, all the Belgian pirates in a week found their way to the Pirate Bay again, they just asked around and everybody knew how to bypass that and you expect SOPA to fare better? only if you believe Belgians are smarter than Americans.

     

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

  38.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2011 @ 7:30am

    Re:

    Troll harder!

     

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

  39.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2011 @ 7:30am

    Re: Re: Re:

    "and those people who are "soft pirates" and do it only because it is easy will stop doing it."

    and if so many people won't do it only because our legal system makes it so difficult then perhaps it should just be legal, at least if we are to have a representative government. I advocate we abolish IP, especially since so many people seem to think these laws aren't important enough to pay much attention to as you seem to even admit.

     

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

  40.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2011 @ 7:37am

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Hollywood for now, because music people are not pirating anymore, books they also don't pirate that much and TV people are starting to warm up to the netchannels that have no geo-limitations.

    Did you know that in Japan the movie industry there surpassed Hollywood?

    Did you know that in China the government is happy to not let Hollywood movies in?

    Did you know that Russians do some great movies for themselves now?

    Did you know I can pirate stuff without an internet connection? and I do get better quality not that compressed shite from the Pirate Bay that looks like it was recorded from the TV.

     

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

  41.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2011 @ 7:38am

    Re: Re: Re:

    No one is wishing for the giving away of stuff for free; we're watching to see if SOPA will serve its purposes - as you stated, it's to drive people to legal alternatives that they will use. SOPA has no reliable way of doing this because it doesn't actually create said alternatives or make existence alternatives more attractive. Better yet, you don't seem to have addressed the issue: if people cannot afford or have access to your product, SOPA will not magically give them that access. At best it will drive them to it, then piss them off when they realise that the legal alternatives fail to work.

     

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

  42.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2011 @ 7:38am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Sorry, no, you are an idiot if you believe a compressed file will ever be an exact copy of the original, that is just BS.

     

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

  43.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2011 @ 7:39am

    Re:

    Aside from the citations needed, you sound against any form of negotiation that might even come to an agreement.

    Small wonder then you're for the legacy industries; you have a deep-seated loathing for due process.

     

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

  44.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2011 @ 7:40am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Oh wait, was you trying to say that the original crap is so crappy that it compares to a compressed version that has 1/10 of the size of the original and a very noticeable loss in quality?

    No, tell me you didn't say that LoL

     

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

  45.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2011 @ 7:49am

    Re: Re: Re:

    You can tapdance around in circles on this one, but it is likely in a SOPA world that, at least in the US, obtaining pirated material will be incrementally harder, and those people who are "soft pirates" and do it only because it is easy will stop doing it.


    https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/mafiaafire-piratebay-dancing/

    How hard is to install and add-on?

     

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

  46.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2011 @ 8:19am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    I don't know. Bottled water is often much worse that what comes from the tap. The tap and a filter offer a much more comprehensive, and cost effective solution. What the bottled water industry is selling is convenience. What the **AA's are fighting is convenience. Kinda points out how extreme they really are.

     

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

  47.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2011 @ 8:35am

    Re: Re:

    Now there's an idea. Let the IP holders claim the 'downloads' as 'charitable' contributions (donations to the public). Then let the IRS look into it. I bet they don't get much credit for those 'contributions' because a) they cannot actually prove them and/or 2) there are actually a lot fewer than they claim. Yeah...let the IRS solve it.

    This doesn't get any more money to the creators, but that does not bother SOPA supporters.

     

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

  48.  
    icon
    ltlw0lf (profile), Dec 9th, 2011 @ 10:33am

    Re: Re: Re:

    What you seem to fail to realize is that SOPA isn't a way to block a single technology (it doesn't outlaw P2P, example), but rather a tool that can whack any of the moles that come up.

    You do realize that you cannot win the game "whack a mole." Each iteration through the game gets harder as the moles pop-up and retreat quicker and the game gets infinitely harder. So now instead of paying for whack a mole yourself though, you are going to make everyone else pay for it.

     

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

  49.  
    icon
    A Guy (profile), Dec 9th, 2011 @ 11:22am

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    "They don't have to fear this at all, because the numbers don't lie: What is pirated the most? Hollywood content."

    [citation needed]
    I admit though, they are extremely relevant right now. However if, and that's a strong if, they really are able to clamp down on movie piracy many consumers will move onto other things. It's not because they are all dirty pirates who will never pay anyway. The internet hype machine will no longer be working for Hollywood. It will promote what is immediately available and convenient.

    "If anything, the demand today for this stuff is higher than it was 20 years ago. They don't have to worry about losing customers, because after you have seen Sita Sings the Blues 30 times, you are dying for a decent movie.""

    Yes, due to the massive exposure that the internet has brought, Hollywood has more fans than ever. Demand is high. It is a new golden age in content. What happens when hype becomes more scarce due to Hollywood content becoming more scarce?

    It seems like a losing strategy to me.

     

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

  50.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 9th, 2011 @ 11:51am

    Re: Re:

    You know, I've seen video's of 'cow tipping' and while I don't support it, I can see how some people could get enjoyment from that sort of thing (taking advantage of someone without the consolidated resources, abilities, or methods to protect itself, much like the public and public domain being attacked by the **AA)

    But where can I find some of these 'public tipping' videos? Do they involve **AA goons running up to sleeping people and tipping their beds then running away laughing? Sounds like it could be a 'hoot', or am I not understanding this correctly?

     

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

  51.  
    icon
    RowdyRebel (profile), Dec 9th, 2011 @ 2:58pm

    Re:

    It isn't about piracy or copyright infringement so much as it is about the illegal shut-down of websites as per the governments fundamentals or ideals. It is a blocking of mainstream media via the internet. SOPA isn't anything more than the governments newest multi-billion dollar spending machine at work to destroy the creativity of people who enjoy cyberspace.

    I think if the government was truly intent on securing the web from cyber-pirates, then they would work on a specific firewall design that would track any form of breach detected, instead of just spying on people attempting to voice their public views on stupidity and ironicisms.

     

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

  52.  
    icon
    Jay (profile), Dec 10th, 2011 @ 10:36am

    It's up now

    The discussion is now up on Youtube

     

    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