King Kong vs. Movie Pirates 485
Caoz writes "The New York Times is running an interesting article about movie piracy with Peter Jackson providing some comments. There a couple of comments that I thought were surprising. Like an executive admitting that file sharers are not the biggest threat to Hollywood. From the article: 'There is a very dark, black cloud in this game. It's not in the hands of kids who live next door to you; it's organized groups and organized crime.' Why are they suing bitorrent users then?"
Re:Bitorrent User Group (Score:1, Informative)
Well, most file sharers aren't being charged with crimes either: they're being sued in civil court by the **AA.
Re:Because it would be hard... (Score:3, Informative)
Que ironico: Edison's audio recordings wound up in the public domain and are downloadable via http://www.archive.org/ [archive.org] , along with other music and movies which have entered the public domain.
One should take note of the age of most of the public domain documents in the Internet Archive...except for those who specifically give their works a Creative Commons license, the gusher gives out during the '20s. There is a trickle up until 1976, when the US passed the Copyright Act and ratified the Berne Convention. Thanks, Sonny Bono.
Re:Why are they going after BT users (Score:5, Informative)
"as stated elsewhere most BT users won't break your knees, crush your nuts in a vise or bust a cap in your ass if you go after them."
And neither will the warez groups and the Chinese DVD factory owners and the guys with the contacts at the studio who get the screeners. There's a HUGE reading comprehension issue here, folks -- you're reading "organized crime" and I guess you're thinking of the Italian-American mafia or something. You're smarter than that. You should understand that "organized crime" means just that: more than one person working in cooperation. RTFA if you'd like to learn more. I can't believe this post was modded "insightful."
Regardless of this, the feds bust warez groups, bootleg DVD operations and other organized piracy schemes
ALLTHE
TIME.
Here's an example [pcworld.com], and another one [usdoj.gov], and another one [smh.com.au], and another one [sfgate.com].
It took me all of like two minutes with Google to find these.
Re:"The Scene" film? - (Score:1, Informative)
Asia is a CONTINENT (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Bitorrent User Group (Score:5, Informative)
I accept the unskippable copyright messages (even when they have to show it in 8 different languages) but to subject a paying cusotmer to such a long advert is taking the piss. At least they could do what most companies do and just add the advert as a 'special feature'.
Well done Universal Studios.
Small fry... (Score:1, Informative)
Damn, I wish I could run a business that was so barely profitable.
The revenue 'lost' due to piracy is estimated to be $3 billion. Admittedly, a large number, but honestly this is 3.5% of the overall market by the figures in the article.
Do they really need to get so wound up over it all? I feel really sorry for them....
Re:Bitorrent User Group (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Bitorrent User Group (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Boo - Fucking - Hoo (Score:3, Informative)
The court reasoned that when you steal from someone you're depriving them of the object and their rights associated with the object. E.g., if I steal your car, you're unable to use your car, sell your car, lease out your car, etc.
However, if I download a song, the band and the label can still use, sell, and lease the song. In other words, the only right my infringement impacts is the right of a limited monopoly as guaranteed by the US Constitution and copyright law.
That does NOT mean that infringing is legal. Of course it's illegal to infringe copyrights, but merely because it's illegal does not make it theft. Rape illegal, but it's not considered theft. Murder is illegal, but it's not considered theft. Arson is illegal but it's not considered theft.
But of course the content industries LOVE to call it theft, stealing, and piracy. Those terms are simply more ominous and frightening than infringing. They are trying to turn this into an emotion issue sheep like you can understand. And you can continue being a sheep and believe the RIAA and the MPAA's lies and corruption of our language and call infringement theft, but you'll still be wrong.
downloading (Score:3, Informative)
It's a pity they've got their heads up their collective asses. I'd be happy to pay for on-line content if they'd provide a reasonable service. You'd think iTunes would have taught them a lesson.
I'd think they'd learned from Betamax. Movie studios were so afraid video cassettes would rob studios because people would be able to record movies yet tape sales became hugh profit makers. Seems what they are afraid of is new technology that gives movie watchers choices of what to watch when. There are some though who get it, like Mark Cuban the owner of the Dallas Mavericks. He first made a fortune from the internet so he gets it. Now he's pushing HDTV and is part owner of HDNet. He's also owner of Landmark Theatres [landmarktheatres.com] and is working on delivering movies to theatres through broadband [boston.com] which eliminates shipping of film, reducing costs.
Falcon