theodp writes "Back in 1992, the SIIA released Don't Copy That Floppy!, a goofy video in which anti-piracy rapper MC Double Def DP convinces a young lad not to copy a game by appealing to his sense of right and wrong. Now, to address what it calls 'new generations and new temptations,' the SIIA has uploaded a trailer for a new anti-piracy rap video — Don't Copy That 2 — that will be released this summer. To underscore the video's it's-not-just-a-copy-it's-a-crime message, the new film is a tad darker than the original. A smug teen who's downloading files from 'Pirates Palace' and 'Tune Weasel' finds his world turned upside down when automatic weapons-toting government agents break down the door and take his Mom away in handcuffs. The teen finds himself in a prison jumpsuit forced to tattoo shirtless adult inmates who eventually turn on him, physically attack him, and make him run for his life back to his jail cell (image summarizing his plight)."
Seriously though, the first DCTF was happy and upbeat (and for good reason, as many people simply didn't know that copying a floppy was piracy). What happened to that feel? Are we really at a point where we're so influenced by the RIAA/MPAA's ways of doing things that SIIA's first sequel in 17 years immediately jumps to scare tactics?
Maybe it's just me, but I see this quickly becoming one of those "You wouldn't steal a car" type of
things - jumping to such an extreme that it becomes a satire piece.
I agree that at least DCTF served a purpose. This one is exactly where the RIAA/MPAA is. Kid copies some software, ends up making prison tattoos and being chased (so he can be beaten/killed) because he wasn't good at making the tattoo.
It's clear cause and effect here: own a computer, be annoyed by an 80s reject rapper, get shanked in prison.
What they need is another DCTF, just not corny. If they ran PSAs saying it's important to buy software, otherwise people won't be able to make The Sims 4, Crysis 5, or Barbie Horse Adventures 7: The Mysterious Case of the Calico Clydesdale, they could probably get a whole new generation of kids to think twice about copying.
Instead they made themselves a joke again.
Even if they had to do this campaign, did they really have to tie it into DCTF? That can't possibly lend them credibility. I bet if I showed this new video to the average 12 year old, they'd think it was some kind of internet sketch comedy thing.
Even if they had to do this campaign, did they really have to tie it into DCTF? That can't possibly lend them credibility. I bet if I showed this new video to the average 12 year old, they'd think it was some kind of internet sketch comedy thing.
That was literally my first thought when I saw this, but I checked out other videos by that YouTube user and it looks totally legit. If this is a joke, they went a long way.
Yeah, but honestly. Wouldn't someone at the marketing department mention the fact it looks identical to parodies of piracy PSAs, and that releasing it just might be counterproductive?
Their marketing department didn't even notice that they made an unauthorized reproduction and depiction of a well known anime character in their video...
So I would guess that they don't even understand the meaning of the word irony.
Don't give Cheney too much credit. State violence in support of corporate interest has been as American as apple pie since before he was a gleam in the milkman's eye.
I honestly think they are just wasting their cash. Kids today are a HELL of a lot more cynical than we were in the 80s. They see the corruption, the obvious payoffs, the lies and the bullshit.
Remember a few years ago when they had that little forced 'public service message" that they forced kids to watch at school? They did that at my oldest's school, and when he told me about it he was standing with a whole bunch of other kids waiting to be picked up. Nearly all the kids had iPods or Sandisks or some other MP3 player blasting in one ear while they had the other free for bullshitting. So I asked the kids "what did you think about it?" and their answer was pretty much variations on "RIAA are greedy pigs".
So I really don't think it'll work. They have watched as every politician from Obama on down have been more than happy to do a 180 for a nice fat check, they think the entire system is total bullshit (I can't even convince mine to vote when they turn 18 "what is the point? They'll just take bribes and ignore you anyway" is what I get) and therefor are gonna do whatever the hell they want and give you the finger if you say something about it. So much for that whole "youth can change the world" huh?
Well, let me put it this way. Once upon a time my grandma believed in government, that police were honest, and that voting was a duty all should perform. After 2004 she quit with a "what's the point?" attitude. When I asked her why she said "You would have to be blind to not see how corrupt the have all become, and I may be old but I ain't blind". The same thing has happened with my mom and as I said my boys, not matter how hard I try to convince them, refuse to vote as they figure it would probably be rigged if anyone but a D or an R looked like they might have a shot.
You can't watch everyone from the President on down flip flop every time a treasonous whore...err I mean lobbyist breaks out his checkbook before you say "why bother?". Look at Obama, who has changed just about every single thing he ran on during the election for big fat checks. Or McCain who actually could have run against his 2000 self and would have had completely different platforms. The corruption has gotten so bad, and the MSM is now owned by the cartels and releases "news" about as real Pravda during the cold war, so why wouldn't everyone just say "WTF?" and not care?
The simple fact is our elected thieves will happily sell out the safety, security, and the people of this country to multinational corporations that don't give a shit if the whole country burns as long as they get the insurance money. How exactly are you supposed to compete with those that can write 6 zero checks as easily as you buy a stick of gum?
Which works exactly again them. It tends to make young people take them less and less seriously. You might as well run a PSA against teen age sex by convincing young men there are teeth in young women's vagina's and their peepee's will turn green and fall off if they touch themselves.
by Anonymous Coward
on Tuesday July 07, @12:02AM (#28604125)
You might as well run a PSA against teen age sex by convincing young men there are teeth in young women's vagina's and their peepee's will turn green and fall off if they touch themselves.
I bet if I showed this new video to the average 12 year old, they'd think it was some kind of internet sketch comedy thing.
Ah, but what happens when they target it at a younger audience who doesn't know any better?
Throw it into a DARE program (anti-drug education for those outside the US; called VIP in some areas of Canada) targeting 10-year olds who don't yet understand its stupidity, let it sit for a few years. Bingo, a generation of well-trained consumers who think free information is pure evil.
If it works anything as well as DARE has, I predict the Pirate Party will sweep the midterm elections in 2022 and we'll be singing "Arr to the Chief" in 2024.
"Throw it into a DARE program (anti-drug education for those outside the US; called VIP in some areas of Canada) targeting 10-year olds who don't yet understand its stupidity, let it sit for a few years. Bingo, a generation of well-trained consumers who think free information is pure evil.
"
Great idea! They can eliminate all illegal copying using the same techniques they used to win the war against citize^H^H^H^H^H^Hdrugs!
DARE cracked me up. The essential message was "Kids, if you ever smoke a joint, you're going to end up dying in the gutter." Especially funny now, considering that our last three U.S. Presidents were all avowed "druggies" (by DARE's standards). Maybe they should create a new "Kids, if you don't toke, you'll never get to be President" campaign.
I remember going through DARE and how my peers became interested in cannabis and alcohol soon afterwards. DARE had little to no effect on my age group.
Thank God for that. I suspect it does have a lasting effect on more people than you suspect however. Consider that your peer group is not the same as other peer groups, who may be more susceptible to such indoctrination. Geeks tend to be more questioning than most.
Don't get me wrong, I despise the "war on drugs" just as much as the current attempts to move technology back twenty years. I'm just saying that judging by the previous DCTF ad, they're aiming this at kids, and we should have some sort of counter argument ready for those who don't see the flaws of it immediately.
Always thought the best 'anti-piracy' ad would be from e.g. a set carpenter on a blockbuster - saying something like:
"hi. My name's Mike. I work on the set here, where they're making the ${latest_big_blockbuster}. I'm not a 'big name' - I get paid ${reasonable_amount} per (day/month/year), and I quite like my job - I like making movies, that you can see in the cinema or on DVD. I'd like to thank you for paying for (your cinema ticket|this DVD). You see, it's the sales of the film that determine whether they make another one or not - and that means I get to keep my job, and you get to enjoy another film."
The only problems were: A) They hired an actor to pretend to be a set builder. B) He was griping that he "only" worked 8 months a year. C) He was griping that he "only" earned $88,000 USD a year. D) He accused everyone watching the movie of being thieves.
We talked to a local movie theater owner and politely explained that the anti-piracy advertisement was insulting his customers and making them feel unwelcome in his theater. We also mentioned that the message that his customer's hard earned money (most of whom make less in a year than the fake set builder makes in 8 months) should go to pay a relatively well off guy living in California to work less and earn more than them was not going to be received the way it was intended. Lastly we pointed out that the people in the theater have already *paid* for their ticket, if they were going to steal the movie they'd be at home in front of their computers and never see the PSA. Since that chat, I haven't seen that PSA or any other anti-piracy PSAs in theaters around here.
Since he's "running for his life," does that mean they're essentially saying "You wouldn't steal a car, but if you copy Microsoft Office, we'll kill you?"
The "you wouldn't steal a car" ad always annoyed the hell out of me. Bad analogy, and all that. It wasn't until just now that I realised that this Peugeot ad [youtube.com] is what you're actually doing when you download media. You're using your own hardware to create a (usually lower fidelity) replica of the car.
Got into this argument with someone today. They said they wouldn't be STEALING a movie they want to see. I pointed out that downloading it is hardly stealing when, by my downloading it, I am not depriving a single person from seeing it.
The car analogy doesn't work unless when I download Big Robots Part 8, someone going to see the movie gets turned away. "Sorry, Goldberg's Pants pirated this film so you can't see it."
And yet these idiots just don't get how their analogy is utterly flawed. The thing is the media have spent so much time yelling IT'S STEALING! IT'S STEALING! IT'S STEALING! that the majority have bought into the lie put forward by the RIAA, MPAA etc... Despite the fact that they can say it a million times, and it still won't make it true.
People who get hauled up for downloading are NOT charged with stealing or theft. It'd be better for them if they were because theft, rape etc... Carry far lesser sentences than what they are ACTUALLY charged with. Criminal copyright infringement.
On a related note, I saw a nice piece of juxtaposition the other day that highlights the insanity. The RIAA verdict saying $84,000 or whatever it was per song, right next to a story saying the victims families of the Air France crash would get $24,000.
If you could use my car without having any chance of crashing it and with no wear/fuel usage, I'd be completely fine with it. I'm not going to be upset that you gained some benefit with no negative consequences for me.
Anyways, stealing is not necessarily defined by depriving one person of an experience or possession, it's defined by obtaining said item without giving the original author or owner the compensation requested for your copy.
Are you sure? IANAL, but here's a few definitions I found from different legal texts around the world... (bold emphasis mine)
"A person is guilty of theft if: he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it.": UK Theft Act 1968, Section 1
"Unlawfully appropriating property with intent to deprive the owner of property" : Texas Penal Code, Title 7, Paragraph 31.03
"Every one commits theft who fraudulently and without colour of right takes, or fraudulently and without colour of right converts to his use or to the use of another person, anything, whether animate or inanimate, with intent to deprive, temporarily or absolutely, the owner of it, or a person who has a special property or interest in it, of the thing or of his property or interest in it;": Canada Criminal Code, Section 322
"A person is guilty of an offence if: the person dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of the property.": Australian Criminal Code Amendment (Theft, Fraud, Bribery and Related Offences) Act 2000, Part 7.2, Division 131.1
I certainly won't argue that piracy isn't a crime, but it definitely does NOT appear to be "theft"...
People seem to have a big problem with understanding what "illegal" means. You cannot go to jail for every illegal action. Some illegal actions create a civil liability, and some create criminal liabilities... and then criminal liabilities are separated into misdemeanors and felonies.
I've had issues with people commenting that "prostitution is like murder, it's illegal", and I point out, "No, prostitution is like jay-walking... it's illegal." Prostitution is a misdemeanor and will not get one a lot of time in jail. It's why prosecutors (hell, law enforcement themselves) are so eager to offer a prostitute immunity in order to testify against their pimp (which is a felony).
People just have a very hard time understanding that you cannot be sent to jail for every illegal action. ESPECIALLY, a hard jail. Typically the worst that you can be hit for with copyright violation is fines... it can make your life difficult, or even hell, but it can't take away your freedom.
Moreover, the unlawful activities fall under different Acts (or statutes? What do Americans call them?)
For example, murder is against the Criminal Code of Canada.
Speeding is in the Motor Vehicles Act. (And there's a great loophole there, should you care to read through this Act.)
Practicing Engineering without a licence is against the Engineers and Geoscientists Act.
Unauthourized duplication of copyrighted material is against the Copyright Act.
The list can go on and on but I won't bother.
Anyway, all of the aforementioned activities are unlawful, but the difference in enforcement and penalties is extreme. It varies from a $125 file to life without parole. Like you, I've always hated the "if you've ever driven even ONE MILE over the limit, that's the same as SERIAL MURDER. IT IS ILLEGAL!!1!ELEVEN!" argument.
Just to put it into perspective. Al Queda is pressuring farmers in afghanistan to grow poppies to make cocaine. There is a large effort to convert to convert the farmers to grow something else like saffraan.
But cocaine!= weed, but there is some truth in that message.
Just to put some facts into perspective (you unfortunately appear to have crossed some facts, otherwise your post is otherwise relatively sound - must all be the weed you're getting)
Opium poppies are used to produce opium and can then be refined into heroin. Initially the Taliban (who are not Al Qaeda, but host them) were against drug production but have now resorted to hosting drug lords to fund their fight against the Western infidels (this really does remove what little moral high ground they might claim to have had).
Cocaine is derived from coca leaves (mostly grown in South America, which is rather far away from Afghanistan), and the Columbian government has had some success in reducing this (during its grinding war against FARC that has picked up successful momentum).
In both cases (Afghanistan, Columbia) the drug trade (opium, cocaine) is used to fund rebellion against the central government. Destroy the drugs and the rebellion struggles. The Afghan farmers complain that legitimate crops pay poorly compared to poppies so pressure the Afghan government to resist Western suggestions of aerial crop eradication. It is unlikely that demand in the West for recreational drugs will be reduced completely (the recession helps aparently) so it crop eradication is a better bet in winning the drug war. Saffron is a substitute that pays better than wheat (provided it can be grown successfully).
OK. Now let's really put it into perspective. One of the most dangerous drugs on the planet is Alcohol. It is legalin the US. Osama isn't running any alcohol production/smuggling/distribution rings. Given that Marijuana, Cocaine, Heroin, etc. are only profitable to terrorists because the government chooses not to legalize and regulate them (in true hypocritical fashion), whom do we have to blame if they are making tons of money on the black market the government created and fuels again?
by Anonymous Coward
on Monday July 06, @10:28PM (#28603537)
"This video is not available in your country due to copyright restrictions." so use: instead try http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x9ovyz_the-it-crowd-anti-piracy-ad_fun
A smug teen who's downloading files from 'Pirates Palace' and 'Tune Weasel' finds his world turned upside down when automatic weapons-toting government agents break down the door and take his Mom away in handcuffs. The teen finds himself in a prison jumpsuit forced to tattoo shirtless adult inmates who eventually turn on him
Huh, that's funny. Last I checked you normally don't get jail time for copyright infringement. Search warrants? For your computer maybe. Serving papers for a court date? Sure. Arrested on the spot? Don't think so. Jail time? Not to my knowledge. The only legal consequence the SIIA lists on their site [siia.net] are "significant fines for copyright infringement." Unless the kid was uploading unreleased Guns N' Roses tracks or orchestrating the huge operation of The Pirate Bay I don't think he'll be doing time.
Maybe they should do a little more research before they imply that you will end up in a gulag tattooing cartoon characters on convicts?
Don't get me wrong, I'd be fine with the kid (assuming he's 18+) getting a letter in the mail saying he has to appear in court and then a slow five year montage ending with him settling out of court and not being able to go to college or only attending a community college. That'd be pretty realistic. I still don't agree with it but that's how it works these days. Who knows? Maybe the over emphasized results will backfire on them and the general populace will see how unrealistic the charges are for copyright violation? I mean, that's not going to change until a politician looks bad taking a sack of money in campaign contributions... or realizes that it bothers his constituents that lives are being ruined over something that maybe isn't so serious that a person should be financially hobbled for the rest of their life or next seven years from bankruptcy or whatever results. Huge fines are enough to stop me from copyright violations but lets face it, you're not going to jail if you do it. You're not a hardened criminal with a rap sheet serving time next to murderers if you're convicted of file sharing. You're most likely going to settle out of court and be financially stunted.
I bet the RIAA have already traced sharers to an IP, gotten a home address, found out it's the home of some celebrity or politician and immediately dropped it.
...finds his world turned upside down when automatic weapons-toting government agents break down the door and take his Mom away in handcuffs. The teen finds himself in a prison jumpsuit forced to tattoo shirtless adult inmates who eventually turn on him, physically attack him, and make him run for his life back to his jail cell
The message I get from this is, "Wow, movies and music sound like dangerous stuff. I better avoid them at all costs whether purchased legally or not."
Because we've seen that the RIAA will go after your family if they don't think they can get any money out of you; regardless of whether or not any of you even own a computer!
The teen finds himself in a prison jumpsuit forced to tattoo shirtless adult inmates who eventually turn on him, physically attack him, and make him run for his life back to his jail cell
I thought I would point out the many inaccuracies in this film:
1. The mother was fighting back to the evil paramilitary force that, without warning, smashed down her door and entered her house. She would have been shot because she clearly "endangered" the armed men's life.
2. ANIME ANGEL TATOOS? In an American prison??? I doubt there are any anime nerds in lockup...
The phrase "copycrime" really reminded me of "thoughtcrime" from 1984, which isn't a good message propaganda should be sending...
I love how they use the coercive threat of prison violence. These days it's just accepted as fact that the prison system is completely and utterly broken beyond repair.
BILLY MAYS HERE... (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously though, the first DCTF was happy and upbeat (and for good reason, as many people simply didn't know that copying a floppy was piracy). What happened to that feel? Are we really at a point where we're so influenced by the RIAA/MPAA's ways of doing things that SIIA's first sequel in 17 years immediately jumps to scare tactics?
Maybe it's just me, but I see this quickly becoming one of those "You wouldn't steal a car" type of things - jumping to such an extreme that it becomes a satire piece.
Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... (Score:5, Insightful)
Watch the preview video. It's there now.
I agree that at least DCTF served a purpose. This one is exactly where the RIAA/MPAA is. Kid copies some software, ends up making prison tattoos and being chased (so he can be beaten/killed) because he wasn't good at making the tattoo.
It's clear cause and effect here: own a computer, be annoyed by an 80s reject rapper, get shanked in prison.
What they need is another DCTF, just not corny. If they ran PSAs saying it's important to buy software, otherwise people won't be able to make The Sims 4, Crysis 5, or Barbie Horse Adventures 7: The Mysterious Case of the Calico Clydesdale, they could probably get a whole new generation of kids to think twice about copying.
Instead they made themselves a joke again.
Even if they had to do this campaign, did they really have to tie it into DCTF? That can't possibly lend them credibility. I bet if I showed this new video to the average 12 year old, they'd think it was some kind of internet sketch comedy thing.
Parent
Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... (Score:5, Funny)
You mean it's not?
Parent
Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... (Score:5, Insightful)
That was literally my first thought when I saw this, but I checked out other videos by that YouTube user and it looks totally legit. If this is a joke, they went a long way.
Parent
Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... (Score:5, Interesting)
Are you kidding?
Their marketing department didn't even notice that they made an unauthorized reproduction and depiction of a well known anime character in their video...
So I would guess that they don't even understand the meaning of the word irony.
On several levels.
GrpA
Parent
Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... (Score:5, Funny)
So I would guess that they don't even understand the meaning of the word irony.
On several levels.
But then, why would metallurgists work for the RIAA ?
Parent
Re:The new U.S.: Violence is entirely acceptable. (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:The new U.S.: Violence is entirely acceptable. (Score:5, Funny)
I think you underestimate how long Cheney has been around. Where do you think we got the oil in the first place? Cheney had the dinosaurs slaughtered.
Parent
Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... (Score:5, Interesting)
I honestly think they are just wasting their cash. Kids today are a HELL of a lot more cynical than we were in the 80s. They see the corruption, the obvious payoffs, the lies and the bullshit.
Remember a few years ago when they had that little forced 'public service message" that they forced kids to watch at school? They did that at my oldest's school, and when he told me about it he was standing with a whole bunch of other kids waiting to be picked up. Nearly all the kids had iPods or Sandisks or some other MP3 player blasting in one ear while they had the other free for bullshitting. So I asked the kids "what did you think about it?" and their answer was pretty much variations on "RIAA are greedy pigs".
So I really don't think it'll work. They have watched as every politician from Obama on down have been more than happy to do a 180 for a nice fat check, they think the entire system is total bullshit (I can't even convince mine to vote when they turn 18 "what is the point? They'll just take bribes and ignore you anyway" is what I get) and therefor are gonna do whatever the hell they want and give you the finger if you say something about it. So much for that whole "youth can change the world" huh?
Parent
Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, let me put it this way. Once upon a time my grandma believed in government, that police were honest, and that voting was a duty all should perform. After 2004 she quit with a "what's the point?" attitude. When I asked her why she said "You would have to be blind to not see how corrupt the have all become, and I may be old but I ain't blind". The same thing has happened with my mom and as I said my boys, not matter how hard I try to convince them, refuse to vote as they figure it would probably be rigged if anyone but a D or an R looked like they might have a shot.
You can't watch everyone from the President on down flip flop every time a treasonous whore...err I mean lobbyist breaks out his checkbook before you say "why bother?". Look at Obama, who has changed just about every single thing he ran on during the election for big fat checks. Or McCain who actually could have run against his 2000 self and would have had completely different platforms. The corruption has gotten so bad, and the MSM is now owned by the cartels and releases "news" about as real Pravda during the cold war, so why wouldn't everyone just say "WTF?" and not care?
The simple fact is our elected thieves will happily sell out the safety, security, and the people of this country to multinational corporations that don't give a shit if the whole country burns as long as they get the insurance money. How exactly are you supposed to compete with those that can write 6 zero checks as easily as you buy a stick of gum?
Parent
Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... (Score:5, Funny)
Which works exactly again them. It tends to make young people take them less and less seriously. You might as well run a PSA against teen age sex by convincing young men there are teeth in young women's vagina's and their peepee's will turn green and fall off if they touch themselves.
Of course nobody takes them seriously anymore.
Parent
Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... (Score:5, Funny)
Wait, that's not true?
Woo Hoo! Hold my calls!
Parent
Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... (Score:5, Interesting)
I bet if I showed this new video to the average 12 year old, they'd think it was some kind of internet sketch comedy thing.
Ah, but what happens when they target it at a younger audience who doesn't know any better?
Throw it into a DARE program (anti-drug education for those outside the US; called VIP in some areas of Canada) targeting 10-year olds who don't yet understand its stupidity, let it sit for a few years. Bingo, a generation of well-trained consumers who think free information is pure evil.
Parent
Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... (Score:5, Funny)
If it works anything as well as DARE has, I predict the Pirate Party will sweep the midterm elections in 2022 and we'll be singing "Arr to the Chief" in 2024.
Parent
Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... (Score:5, Insightful)
Great idea! They can eliminate all illegal copying using the same techniques they used to win the war against citize^H^H^H^H^H^Hdrugs!
Parent
Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... (Score:4, Interesting)
I remember going through DARE and how my peers became interested in cannabis and alcohol soon afterwards. DARE had little to no effect on my age group.
Thank God for that. I suspect it does have a lasting effect on more people than you suspect however. Consider that your peer group is not the same as other peer groups, who may be more susceptible to such indoctrination. Geeks tend to be more questioning than most.
Don't get me wrong, I despise the "war on drugs" just as much as the current attempts to move technology back twenty years. I'm just saying that judging by the previous DCTF ad, they're aiming this at kids, and we should have some sort of counter argument ready for those who don't see the flaws of it immediately.
Parent
Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... (Score:5, Informative)
Well, they actually did that PSA.
The only problems were:
A) They hired an actor to pretend to be a set builder.
B) He was griping that he "only" worked 8 months a year.
C) He was griping that he "only" earned $88,000 USD a year.
D) He accused everyone watching the movie of being thieves.
We talked to a local movie theater owner and politely explained that the anti-piracy advertisement was insulting his customers and making them feel unwelcome in his theater. We also mentioned that the message that his customer's hard earned money (most of whom make less in a year than the fake set builder makes in 8 months) should go to pay a relatively well off guy living in California to work less and earn more than them was not going to be received the way it was intended. Lastly we pointed out that the people in the theater have already *paid* for their ticket, if they were going to steal the movie they'd be at home in front of their computers and never see the PSA. Since that chat, I haven't seen that PSA or any other anti-piracy PSAs in theaters around here.
Parent
Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... (Score:5, Insightful)
Since he's "running for his life," does that mean they're essentially saying "You wouldn't steal a car, but if you copy Microsoft Office, we'll kill you?"
Sounds like a threat to me....
Parent
Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... (Score:5, Insightful)
Got into this argument with someone today. They said they wouldn't be STEALING a movie they want to see. I pointed out that downloading it is hardly stealing when, by my downloading it, I am not depriving a single person from seeing it.
The car analogy doesn't work unless when I download Big Robots Part 8, someone going to see the movie gets turned away. "Sorry, Goldberg's Pants pirated this film so you can't see it."
And yet these idiots just don't get how their analogy is utterly flawed. The thing is the media have spent so much time yelling IT'S STEALING! IT'S STEALING! IT'S STEALING! that the majority have bought into the lie put forward by the RIAA, MPAA etc... Despite the fact that they can say it a million times, and it still won't make it true.
People who get hauled up for downloading are NOT charged with stealing or theft. It'd be better for them if they were because theft, rape etc... Carry far lesser sentences than what they are ACTUALLY charged with. Criminal copyright infringement.
On a related note, I saw a nice piece of juxtaposition the other day that highlights the insanity. The RIAA verdict saying $84,000 or whatever it was per song, right next to a story saying the victims families of the Air France crash would get $24,000.
Three human lives are worth one song apparently.
Parent
Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... (Score:5, Funny)
No crime has been committed. Where the fuck do you live? Saudi Arabia?
Parent
Definition of Theft (Score:5, Informative)
Anyways, stealing is not necessarily defined by depriving one person of an experience or possession, it's defined by obtaining said item without giving the original author or owner the compensation requested for your copy.
Are you sure? IANAL, but here's a few definitions I found from different legal texts around the world... (bold emphasis mine)
I certainly won't argue that piracy isn't a crime, but it definitely does NOT appear to be "theft"...
Parent
Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... (Score:5, Insightful)
People seem to have a big problem with understanding what "illegal" means. You cannot go to jail for every illegal action. Some illegal actions create a civil liability, and some create criminal liabilities... and then criminal liabilities are separated into misdemeanors and felonies.
I've had issues with people commenting that "prostitution is like murder, it's illegal", and I point out, "No, prostitution is like jay-walking... it's illegal." Prostitution is a misdemeanor and will not get one a lot of time in jail. It's why prosecutors (hell, law enforcement themselves) are so eager to offer a prostitute immunity in order to testify against their pimp (which is a felony).
People just have a very hard time understanding that you cannot be sent to jail for every illegal action. ESPECIALLY, a hard jail. Typically the worst that you can be hit for with copyright violation is fines... it can make your life difficult, or even hell, but it can't take away your freedom.
Parent
Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... (Score:4, Interesting)
Moreover, the unlawful activities fall under different Acts (or statutes? What do Americans call them?)
For example, murder is against the Criminal Code of Canada.
Speeding is in the Motor Vehicles Act. (And there's a great loophole there, should you care to read through this Act.)
Practicing Engineering without a licence is against the Engineers and Geoscientists Act.
Unauthourized duplication of copyrighted material is against the Copyright Act.
The list can go on and on but I won't bother.
Anyway, all of the aforementioned activities are unlawful, but the difference in enforcement and penalties is extreme. It varies from a $125 file to life without parole. Like you, I've always hated the "if you've ever driven even ONE MILE over the limit, that's the same as SERIAL MURDER. IT IS ILLEGAL!!1!ELEVEN!" argument.
Parent
Scare tatics (Score:5, Insightful)
Or like the anti-drug commercials that aired immediately after 9-11 that attempted to link smoking a joint with supporting Osama Bin Laden.
Parent
Re:Scare tatics (Score:4, Funny)
Just to put it into perspective. Al Queda is pressuring farmers in afghanistan to grow poppies to make cocaine. There is a large effort to convert to convert the farmers to grow something else like saffraan.
But cocaine!= weed, but there is some truth in that message.
Parent
Re:Scare tatics (Score:5, Informative)
In both cases (Afghanistan, Columbia) the drug trade (opium, cocaine) is used to fund rebellion against the central government. Destroy the drugs and the rebellion struggles. The Afghan farmers complain that legitimate crops pay poorly compared to poppies so pressure the Afghan government to resist Western suggestions of aerial crop eradication. It is unlikely that demand in the West for recreational drugs will be reduced completely (the recession helps aparently) so it crop eradication is a better bet in winning the drug war. Saffron is a substitute that pays better than wheat (provided it can be grown successfully).
Parent
Re:Scare tatics (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
So... (Score:5, Funny)
Anyone got a link to the torrent?
A better video (Score:5, Funny)
Re:A better video (Score:4, Informative)
"This video is not available in your country due to copyright restrictions."
so use: instead try http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x9ovyz_the-it-crowd-anti-piracy-ad_fun
p.s and the show is on channel4 not bbc
Parent
Re:A better video (Score:5, Interesting)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXkxSl4f6vw [youtube.com]
- The Boondocks!
Parent
British TV (Score:5, Interesting)
DP (Score:5, Funny)
Since When Does Infringement Equal Jail Time? (Score:5, Interesting)
A smug teen who's downloading files from 'Pirates Palace' and 'Tune Weasel' finds his world turned upside down when automatic weapons-toting government agents break down the door and take his Mom away in handcuffs. The teen finds himself in a prison jumpsuit forced to tattoo shirtless adult inmates who eventually turn on him
Huh, that's funny. Last I checked you normally don't get jail time for copyright infringement. Search warrants? For your computer maybe. Serving papers for a court date? Sure. Arrested on the spot? Don't think so. Jail time? Not to my knowledge. The only legal consequence the SIIA lists on their site [siia.net] are "significant fines for copyright infringement." Unless the kid was uploading unreleased Guns N' Roses tracks or orchestrating the huge operation of The Pirate Bay I don't think he'll be doing time.
... or realizes that it bothers his constituents that lives are being ruined over something that maybe isn't so serious that a person should be financially hobbled for the rest of their life or next seven years from bankruptcy or whatever results. Huge fines are enough to stop me from copyright violations but lets face it, you're not going to jail if you do it. You're not a hardened criminal with a rap sheet serving time next to murderers if you're convicted of file sharing. You're most likely going to settle out of court and be financially stunted.
Maybe they should do a little more research before they imply that you will end up in a gulag tattooing cartoon characters on convicts?
Don't get me wrong, I'd be fine with the kid (assuming he's 18+) getting a letter in the mail saying he has to appear in court and then a slow five year montage ending with him settling out of court and not being able to go to college or only attending a community college. That'd be pretty realistic. I still don't agree with it but that's how it works these days. Who knows? Maybe the over emphasized results will backfire on them and the general populace will see how unrealistic the charges are for copyright violation? I mean, that's not going to change until a politician looks bad taking a sack of money in campaign contributions
Re:Since When Does Infringement Equal Jail Time? (Score:4, Insightful)
Just look at the "You wouldn't steal a car..." videos.
The MPAA didn't seem to care that they were comparing unrelated crimes.
Parent
Re:Since When Does Infringement Equal Jail Time? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Dangerous stuff (Score:5, Informative)
The message I get from this is, "Wow, movies and music sound like dangerous stuff. I better avoid them at all costs whether purchased legally or not."
So, basicly, (Score:5, Funny)
Well, at least it's truth in advertising (Score:4, Insightful)
Because we've seen that the RIAA will go after your family if they don't think they can get any money out of you; regardless of whether or not any of you even own a computer!
Don't download this song (Score:3, Funny)
This one's much better:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32wmepTVM3I [youtube.com]
This sounds familiar (Score:4, Funny)
Sounds like an average day working tech support.
Many, MANY inaccuracies in this video! (Score:4, Interesting)
I thought I would point out the many inaccuracies in this film:
1. The mother was fighting back to the evil paramilitary force that, without warning, smashed down her door and entered her house. She would have been shot because she clearly "endangered" the armed men's life.
2. ANIME ANGEL TATOOS? In an American prison??? I doubt there are any anime nerds in lockup...
The phrase "copycrime" really reminded me of "thoughtcrime" from 1984, which isn't a good message propaganda should be sending...
I love how... (Score:5, Insightful)
I love how they use the coercive threat of prison violence. These days it's just accepted as fact that the prison system is completely and utterly broken beyond repair.
Re:IN SOVIET RUSSIA (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent