Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
News

China Concerned About Internal Copyright Infringers 250

Posted by michael from the internal-security dept.
sfled writes "Audience members at a recent movie preview had ID card numbers stamped on their theater tickets, were videotaped entering the lobby, and had to part with cellphones, watches, lighters, etc. as they passed through a metal detector. Why the big fuss? Because China's movie makers, artists and other creators of intellectual property are finally realizing that China's content-piracy industry doesn't just target imported movies, music, etc. Story at The New York Times, "free" registration, etc..."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

China Concerned About Internal Copyright Infringers More

China Concerned About Internal Copyright Infringers

Comments Filter:

  • I'm not serious. I view this as a good step--piracy in Asia is a terrible problem, software, movies, and more. I know that personally a number of movies I've seen downloaded from the net have Chinese subscripts. Enforcing intellectual property rights for the artists (be they producers, directors, actors, programmers, etc) can only be a good thing.

    • Re:Information wants to be free!! (Score:4, Interesting)

      by commodoresloat ( 172735 ) on Saturday November 02, 2002 @03:19AM (#4583034)
      I know that personally a number of movies I've seen downloaded from the net have Chinese subscripts

      Why are the loudest voices against "piracy" so often also the most shameless of pirates themselves? If you think piracy is so bad, here's the place to start: don't do it! A much better solution than supporting more laws that affect us all. It reminds me of drug addicts who support tougher drug laws in order to control their own behavior.

  • Google no reg required linkage (Score:4, Informative)

    by Zeddicus_Z ( 214454 ) on Saturday November 02, 2002 @03:00AM (#4583004) Homepage
    Google Partner Link [nytimes.com]

    I swear, it takes all of 60 seconds effort - why can't submitters/editors include the Google partner link as well as the reg-required one!
    • Cause /. isn't google, and /. needs neither google nor NYTimes breathing down their necks.

      Of course, seeing as how Google news links to alot of /. stories, maybe something could be worked out.

      Or, you can just get the damn account at NYT. It's quick, and it's a quality site.

      Oh yeah..... piracy bad, good for China. See, I am OT.

      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
        • So, it's obvious you're full of shit anyway, but if you'd actually read the NY Times instead of bashing it on Slashdot you'd understand that the last thing they have in mind is providing Mr. Ashcroft with information on its readership. They'd probably speak out very loudly against such a practice, in fact. People who don't trust the NYTimes can go read some other news source that doesn't ask for their personal information, and shut the fuck up.
    • ...there will be a day when the NYTimes webmasters figure out what an HTTP referrer is, and start using that to check exactly where the so-called "Google partner links" are originating.

      Besides, it "takes all of 60 seconds effort" for you to sign up for a NYTimes account. You already signed up for a /. account, so you're not averse to the whole signing-up-for-an-account business.

      Just for the record, I signed up for the NYTimes account (because after all, they are providing quality writing to me for free), and I have yet to receive a single piece of unsolicited email from them.

      I wish people would quit trying to circumvent the signup, and just do it. Free, quality content is becoming a rarity on the web, and I prefer signing up to the alternative -- losing that free content for good.

      • Re:You know... (Score:2, Funny)

        by Saeger ( 456549 )
        The number of people who even use the NYTimes random login generator [majcher.com], or the partner "hack", is probably orders of magnitude less than the number of people who "steal" from the NYTimes by reading a second-hand copy of the real paper delivered to someone elses doorstep.

        --

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Saturday November 02, 2002 @03:06AM (#4583012)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Every time something like this comes up some ignorant USian says something like "The yearly income is $x, why would they spend $x/10 for a $item?"

      Why can't you understand that just because you can convert the arithmetic value of a year's wages in China to US Dollars, it doesn't actually mean that it has the same *monetary* value? There's this thing called "cost of living", you see. It turns out that for the most part, barring extremes of wealth and poverty, everything consts *proportionally* the same wherever you are in the world. By your argument, buying a chocolate bar in China would cost about the same as buying a DVD in the US. Clearly, this is nonsense.
      • Why can't you understand that just because you can convert the arithmetic value of a year's wages in China to US Dollars, it doesn't actually mean that it has the same *monetary* value?

        Okay, but can you prove that companies like the MPAA/et al actually scale their prices for China? I'd be damn surprised if they did.


        • Okay, but can you prove that companies like the MPAA/et al actually scale their prices for China? I'd be damn surprised if they did


          The irony is that people also complain about DVD region-izing, which is supposed to, at least in theory, enable greater price discrimination. Maybe not to allow chinese farmers to watch "eight legged freaks", but at least in some less extreme situations.


          You can't have it both ways, people.

          • um... i think the regionization was to make sure that Chinese DVDs weren't then pirated and sold here... (because we wouldn't be able to buy them -- and the chinese would have no incentive to pirate western DVDs because their main market, the Chinese, wouldn't be able to watch them)
            • ...and the point of that is differential pricing.

              You charge more in wealthier regions, and less in others, and rely on the region system to prevent people in wealthier regions from importing cheaper copies.
          • The irony is that people also complain about DVD region-izing, which is supposed to, at least in theory, enable greater price discrimination. Maybe not to allow chinese farmers to watch "eight legged freaks", but at least in some less extreme situations.

            Price discrimination is not there so that people who can't afford the DVDs can buy it. The reason it is there is so that those who can afford to pay even more can be forced to do so. This is exactly what Nintendo was trying to do, and they got bitch-slapped for it. They were certainly making a profit off of their sales in the U.K. What they wanted to do was protect their even greater profits in Germany et al. It's not about being able to sell products for cheaper, it's about maximizing profit in each region -- and enforcing artificial barriers to trade to enforce this.

            Show me the region in which the MPAA/RIAA are selling their products for a loss, and I'll believe you have a point.

      • Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)

        by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Saturday November 02, 2002 @05:41AM (#4583261)
        Comment removed based on user account deletion

      • Why can't you understand that just because you can convert the arithmetic value of a year's wages in China to US Dollars, it doesn't actually mean that it has the same *monetary* value? There's this thing called "cost of living", you see. It turns out that for the most part, barring extremes of wealth and poverty, everything consts *proportionally* the same wherever you are in the world. By your argument, buying a chocolate bar in China would cost about the same as buying a DVD in the US. Clearly, this is nonsense.

        Which is why economists spend time trying to come up with stuff like this. [econedlink.org]

      • Why can't you understand that just because you can convert the arithmetic value of a year's wages in China to US Dollars, it doesn't actually mean that it has the same *monetary* value? There's this thing called "cost of living", you see. It turns out that for the most part, barring extremes of wealth and poverty, everything consts *proportionally* the same wherever you are in the world.

        I have never lived in China, but as an American living in Canada I am quite familar with buying imported American goods. Logically, if this mythical adjustment for "cost of living" really exists, when I buy a book, movie, or CD from America, it should cost just the same in Canadian dollars as it does in American dollars. But it doesn't! It costs 1.5x as much because Canadian dollars are worth less than American dollars. This is of course one of the reasons why there are many more Canadians in American than Americans in Canada.

    • Re:This will be great. (Score:3, Insightful)

      by sheldon ( 2322 )
      Movies are a luxury item.

      You make it sound as though they are a life necessity more important than food, clothing or shelter.
    • IMHO what I hear from the original poster is this:

      "*Sigh* Poor Chinese, their Gov't has been holding down them for so long, and stealing all the resources and time to develop from the people for their big socialism goals, it totally justifies that they steal from someone else. *Sigh* Steal away China, we're behind you! We understand!"

      IF you lived in depression era US quality wages, and someone in the 1930s showed up with a DVD player, what would you do? Well, you sure couldn't buy it. Tough stuff. Open up your economy, and pretty soon you can.

      This is a chicken and egg problem. Because the Chinese Gov't decides to control the economy with a tight fist, well, that means that the Chinese populace gets screwed. Getting screwed also means NO CHEAP DVDs.
      You should take that shit up with China and their fucked up economy, and not blame the rest of the world for letting their people make their own choices. Certainly blaming the free market system and saying that Chinese people are justified in stealing is saying that a)Capitalism sucks, and b)that Socialism is good, and c) stealing is an "unfortunate immoral yet justified" (LOL) act to help 'ol Socialism along. Kinda like taking it back for the people from the oppressive movie makers. What a crock. China is probably the safest country in the world to visit, and yet they have these heinous double standards when it gets in the way of the big Socialism Macarena.

      Now before some Socialist nutty from Northern Europe or wherever starts ranting about the "USians" (which is their way of trying to make US Citizens an ethnic slur), let me say this. YES, the USA has double standards too. I don't support them either, so you don't really need to call me an a-hole, and assume that I am a cowboy with an assault rifle. I am an American that would like the see the Chinese people live better... and that is that.

      • Re:Oh, please spare us all this one... (Score:4, Interesting)

        by dalutong ( 260603 ) <djtansey@gmail.cCOFFEEom minus caffeine> on Saturday November 02, 2002 @01:06PM (#4584442)
        I'm not going to say you support one side or another. But I can tell you one thing -- China economy, under the Communist regime, has had double digit economic growth rates for a decade. We haven't had that. Not even with our boom in the late 90s.

        The Chinese government has been good to the majority of the people. That's why, if you go to China and research this, they are happy with their government. They remember what it was like under the US sponsored Guomingdang. To put it frankly: it sucked.

        True Capitalism doesn't work in a country with 1.3 billion people. In fact, I fear for Chinese economy right now. Over the past ten years or so they have been pushing towards privitization. This has caused the great economic boom, but it has also caused the Chinese of the rural areas to be neglected by the ones in the urban areas. (Which happened less when it was the communist government running all the factories and developing all the businesses.)

        So, no, opening up the economy won't help all chinese people. It may help the movie-going urban population... but that's leaving out 900 million rural inhabitants. Allow them to move into cities? It's happening right now, and it is disasterous. The Chinese government doesn't admit it, but it has millions of people in Beijing, Shanghai,Guangzhou, Chongqing, Chengdu, Xi'an, Tianjin, and other large cities who have moved from the country side and are job-less looking for work. (They they'll not find because 1) the government no longer promises jobs for everyone -- part of opening up 2) the Chinese businesses care more for profit than for social welfare -- another cause of opening up and 3) urban economies, when unregulated, can not grow at the pace that they would need to to employ everyone in China. (or even 50 percent))

        So... you can argue that the economy needs to be opened up... but if you look at it economically (as opposed to your view of "right."), "opening up" the economy, entirely, will do nothing but hurt the Chinese people.
        • But I can tell you one thing -- China economy, under the Communist regime, has had double digit economic growth rates for a decade. We haven't had that. Not even with our boom in the late 90s.

          Under the communist regime, on the order of 50 million people died due to economic policies that were stupid from the beginning and due to repression on a scale we can't imagine. Much of the supposed economic growth was actually a sham- steel production was vastly inflated by (literally) household industry, but the product was so poor that it was useless. Only massive subsidies and price-fixing kept the illusion of industrial growth going, while many impoverished Chinese died from food shortages. America's mixed economy may grow slowly, but it's stable at least. The past decade is largely China recovering from 40 years of criminal mismanagement.
        • China economy, under the Communist regime, has had double digit economic growth rates for a decade.

          No. China's officially reported economic numbers show double digit growth. They won't let independent economists look at the data, so we really have no idea what the growth rate was, except that it was probably positive.

          Do not believe anything released by the PRC government. They have a more interesting relationship with the truth than either Slick Willie or Dumbya, and that's saying something.

          • I lived in China for most of that decade. I saw the growth. If you leave one region for more than a year, it is a different place the next time you see it. It's amazing. I've never seen anything like it.
            • Anecdotal evidence is not worthwhile. Until the PRC lets independent economists look at their economy, instead of locking them in cells for "stealing state secrets," there's absolutely no reason to believe them.

              Hell, we're still awaiting real figures on the death toll from the Great Leap Backward.

    • So, in all of your wisdom (he), why exactly is a lack of resources a license to steal? Or is it instead the every person on the planet has an inalienable right to watch any movie any time one wants to without regard to cost?

  • Full Article for Non-Registered People (Score:4, Informative)

    by Renderer of Evil ( 604742 ) on Saturday November 02, 2002 @03:07AM (#4583016) Homepage
    November 1, 2002
    The Pinch of Piracy Wakes China Up on Copyright Issue
    By JOSEPH KAHN

    SHENZHEN, China, Oct. 30 -- When the members of the preview audience showed up at China's fanciest new movie theater here this week, they were treated to much more than just the first look at Zhang Yimou's big-budget martial-arts film, "Hero."

    Viewers had identity card numbers inscribed on their tickets. They were videotaped as they entered the theater's foyer. They handed over all cellphones, watches, lighters, car keys, necklaces and pens and put them in storage. Before taking their seats, they passed through a metal detector. Then they got a welcoming address.

    "We are showing this preview for your enjoyment tonight," announced Jiang Wei, an executive with the film's Chinese distribution company. "I plead with you to support our industry. Please do not make illegal copies of this film."

    Anyone in China who makes movies, writes books, develops software or sings songs for a living knows that popularity is barely half the challenge; such people must also fight intellectual piracy.

    In a country where more than 90 percent of the movies, music and software are illegal copies sold for a fraction of the original price, Chinese artists have begun to join big foreign interests like Microsoft and AOL Time Warner to protest China's seemingly limitless capacity to make cheap knockoffs.

    The local effort is not going to solve the problem right away. The United States trade representative's office grouped China with Paraguay and Ukraine this spring as among the worst copyright violators in the world.

    Still, the tone has changed. Throughout the 1990's, intellectual property was mainly seen as a trade dispute pitting the wealthy West against the developing East. It's now also a domestic struggle, with local stars complaining that they get little fortune from their own fame.

    "After the release, we often have only three days before the pirate copies hit the market," said Mr. Jiang of New Pictures distributors, which handles Mr. Zhang's movie releases in China. "The industry can't survive that."

    The belt-and-suspenders security procedures during the limited release of "Hero" at New South Country Cinema here, just across the border from Hong Kong, were aimed at protecting what China's film industry hopes will be the biggest martial arts sensation since "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon." The movie, with an all-star cast led by Jet Li, cost $30 million, making it China's most expensive film production to date. Beijing will submit it to the Oscars as a candidate for best foreign-language film. Miramax, a division of Disney, has bought the international rights.

    Security guards heightened the drama at the theater. They ordered people to leave behind jewelry and pens to protect against "needlepoint" digital camcorders, though varying descriptions of how such devices worked sounded more like something Q made for 007 in a James Bond movie than a common pirate's tool. Uniformed policemen roamed the aisles during the film. A few sat in front of the screen and watched the audience with what appeared to be night-vision binoculars.

    The intense scrutiny prompted a few complaints, but also some sympathy.

    "Zhang Yimou is not about to go hungry," said Zhu Dazhong, a 48-year-old Shenzhen retailer who saw the preview. "But if he makes a good movie, people should pay a little money to see it. The quality of the pirate copies stinks anyway."

    China's creative industry has been hit hard by the failure to enforce copyright laws. Artists and their lawyers say piracy has worsened since China joined the World Trade Organization late last year and pledged to meet international standards for protecting intellectual property.

    "The Touch," an action-adventure film, was a recent casualty. At the release of the film in Shanghai in August, Michelle Yeoh, who produced and starred in it, boasted about how bodyguards protected the original film reels. When the show moved from theater to theater, Ms. Yeoh said at the premiere, the reels were to travel separately so pirates who got their hands on one reel could not copy the whole film.

    Nonetheless, DVD copies were available on the black market four days after the nationwide release that month, and ticket sales slid fast.

    A popular folk music group, Yi Ren Zhi Zao, or Made by Yi, had an even shorter run with its latest CD. A pirated disc made from a tape released early hit the market before the authentic version was in stores.

    There are now 41 pirated versions of the album, said Zhou Yaping, who runs the group's production company, based in Beijing. He said many were sold openly in top department stores. The legal CD has a 1.2 percent market share, he said.

    "Our hard work and money were stolen and sold cheap," Mr. Zhou said.

    Foreigners have hardly been spared. Microsoft's latest operating system, Windows XP, was selling for 32 yuan, less than $4, in the back alleys of Beijing's technology district before Microsoft formally released the $180 legal version for the China market earlier this year.

    What is presented as the fifth installment of the Harry Potter series, "Harry Potter and the Leopard Walk Up to Dragon," has already reached Chinese bookstores. Though the cover attributes the book to J. K. Rowling, the British author, her publisher says the official version -- its title and subject matter will be different -- will not be available until next year. The Chinese edition is an inventive fake.

    Altogether, the International Intellectual Property Alliance estimates that Chinese piracy costs foreign companies about $2 billion a year, or roughly a quarter of the total global losses attributed to copyright violations.

    But while Chinese copyright holders probably do not lose as much money, local outrage generates more publicity than foreign pressure. A flurry of domestic lawsuits has attracted regular attention.

    The country's two leading Internet portals, Sohu.com and Sina.com, sued each other, each accusing the other of stealing content. Mr. Zhou, of Yi Ren Zhi Zao, sued Chinese factories for manufacturing the illegal CD's. He won damages of 300,000 yuan, about $36,300, in a Beijing court.

    Even the Buddhist monks of the famed Shaolin Temple have joined the fight. The temple pioneered Shaolin boxing, which evolved into kung fu. It has sought to trademark its name and has flung lawsuits against companies that use Shaolin as a brand, including one maker of canned pork.

    Whether the lawsuits and publicity will slow the piracy remains to be seen.

    The government has sought to demonstrate that it is finally taking the matter seriously. In August, the state-run China Daily tallied the exact number of pirated video and audio discs, 43.45 million, that had been destroyed in a crackdown so far this year.

    But at a huge electronics bazaar in Shenzhen, not far from the movie theater that showed Zhang Yimou's premiere, vendors offered a cornucopia of China's latest releases for about a dollar each. "Together," the latest Chen Kaige film, which hit local movie houses in late September, was for sale in the top-quality DVD-9 format.

    Legitimate DVD movies cost at least five times that much, and few were on sale at the bazaar. First-run movie tickets in China go for 30 to 50 yuan, about $4 to $6, depending on the show and the quality of the cinema.

    "Hero" was not available on the black market -- yet. But Mr. Jiang, of the distribution company, said that despite the extensive security, he was still nervous.

    "I won't be at ease until Nov. 4 or 5," he said. "If they managed to pirate it, it will be out by then for sure."

  • Most pirates aren't Chinese (Score:5, Insightful)

    by NewsWatcher ( 450241 ) on Saturday November 02, 2002 @03:10AM (#4583019)
    I was waiting for the inevitable Chinese people don't care about piracy, everything from fake watches to Windows are available in the streets of Hong Kong.
    Does it not seem weird that most people here defend KaZaA et al as an opportunity to distribute material, but point an angry finger when Chinese people make copies of US films?

    Just because they steal with a camera, and you steal with software doesn't make you any less of a pirate.

    So lets get off the anti-Asian rants and show a bit of consistency. Either both are bad, or both are a chance for artists to reach an audience they otherwise would not.
    Of course, IMHO they are both pretty insidious.
    Has the intellectual moral high-ground stopped me downloading? Umm....I best not answer that.
    • So lets get off the anti-Asian rants and show a bit of consistency. Either both are bad, or both are a chance for artists to reach an audience they otherwise would not.


      uh - many different people post on slashdot. Why do you expect a consensus?

    • Re:Most pirates aren't Chinese (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Zemran ( 3101 ) on Saturday November 02, 2002 @04:41AM (#4583154) Homepage Journal
      Most of the rips for sale in Asia are from America. That is how they have them so early. The only reason that they are mass produced in China is for the cheap, good quality, labour. Most of these rips are cam jobs with the original captions from the private showing in Hollywood. If the Americans learnt something from this article instead of bleating, then maybe the rip market would be knocked a bit. ...instead they will continue to attack the individual at home that wants a copy for his mate because they are an easy target. ...or is it because it is the person selling the original cam jobs that is making the decisions....

      I must admit that the only thing I have against the rips is that they are such poor quality. I think that the only real way to combat rips is to make the real thing such good value that no one could sell a rip at a competitive price.

  • No real surprise... (Score:4, Informative)

    by failrate ( 583914 ) on Saturday November 02, 2002 @03:11AM (#4583021) Homepage
    Yeah... every time I go into any Oriental grocery store, there is always the ubiquitous rack of video tapes with hand-drawn titles in Mandarin or Cantonese, sometimes even Hangul-Ma (but that's Korean, so never mind that). So, if I want to, I can buy pirated copies of mainland Chinese movies for like 3-5 bucks down at the corner grocery where I by my red bean buns and udong. And, I've been able to do this for at least the last three years. And China JUST noticed?

  • Well... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by tarpit ( 622224 )
    Personally, I think it'd be good if China cracked down on its piracy, domestic and foreign. Of course, when it comes to piracy concerning foreign movies (especially American) of course many people'll pull that "Oh what does Hollywood need more money for" shit. Well, it's not really your place to decide that Hollywood shouldn't get money for something it paid to make-- and it doesn't change the fact that it's PIRACY, plain and simple. It's the same piracy that hurts smaller, independant filmmakers who need the money-- the people who really do need the money --and that is the same piracy that needs to be stopped.
  • Sounds like the average Regal Cinema in five years to me...

  • Just a preview, probably not standard practice (Score:5, Interesting)

    by George Walker Bush ( 306766 ) on Saturday November 02, 2002 @03:53AM (#4583090) Homepage
    This is a movie PREVIEW, and normally security is indeed stricter at such events, just like here in the US.

    Yet, once the movie hits the theaters as a actual release to the masses, forget about "security". Heck, we don't even have such "security" here in the US. And most pirate jobs are inside ones (the guy in the projection booth himself is the one doing the camcorder recording). With the corruption in China, one can only expect such things to be even more prevalent. And once a single copy gets out, that's all it takes.

  • Hypocrisy? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by chris mazuc ( 8017 ) on Saturday November 02, 2002 @03:55AM (#4583093)
    It seems that despite almost no support on slashdot of any other intellectual property protection scheme, when it's the Chinese pirating American stuff it's a horrible crime. But when it's Americans pirating anyone else's works, including those by other Americans, it's something that should be protected. Make up your goddamn minds people! I personally think that the United States government has it's collective head up it's ass, but the premise for copyright is very well intentioned: give the producer of a work a temporary monopoly for their contribution to society. Back on topic... when you can honestly say that you support the MPAA, RIAA, and every other four letter organisation ending in AA it'll be fair for you to say that the Chinese pirates are wrong, but for the moment I suspect that most of the people posting about the evils of China are guilty of the same crime they are condemning.
    • the premise for copyright is very well intentioned: give the producer of a work a temporary monopoly for their contribution to society.

      Wrong. It's a simple way to reward those who innovate & create, financially. It has nothing to do with society other than if copyright didn't exist, then theft of intellectual creations would run rampant. I sell physical things. It's very easy for me to be compensated. Either you pay for the items you take from me, or I call the cops. Copyrights are just a way for writers, etc. to do the same thing. It has nothing to do with "community".
      • Copyrights are just a way for writers, etc. to do the same thing. It has nothing to do with "community".

        Wrong. The reason copyright exists is for the betterment of the community through artistic works. This is stated explicitly in the Constitution. Copyright is there to provide an incentive for artists to create works that then better the community. The legal protection of their works is the method used to attain the purpose, not the purpose in and of itself. It was not an attempt to make physical property and "intellectual property" equal before the law. The founders understood quite well the difference between physical property and ideas.
    • I didn't know that New York Times writer worked for SlashDot!

  • Security was not so tight (Score:5, Informative)

    by grainofsand ( 548591 ) <grainofsand@gm[ ].com ['ail' in gap]> on Saturday November 02, 2002 @03:57AM (#4583097)
    I attended this screening in Shenzhen and did not notice any of the security measures reported in the article.

    I had to hand over my mobile phone but that was it.

    I didn't see anyone openly vidcaming the movie, but pirate DVD copies of Hero are readily available in Shenzhen, Shanghai and Beijing for about 7 Chinese yuan (US$0.80).
    • I hope that this sobers up people who claim the idea of intellectual property is 'wrong', and the efforts of the RIAA and MPAA to attack piracy are based on mistaken assumptions that 'file trading' doesn't hurt sales.

      The fact is that we have living examples in countries like China where piracy is unchecked. The results are clear; 90+% of the sales of a title turn out to be rips, and the artists get niothing for their work. Sure, some highly popular titles are going to still recover their costs. But how the hell is a film that targets less than a wide swath of the public going to cover it's production costs? How would something Branaugh's Hamlet EVER be made in a place like China?

      Not only does the piracy cut down on what is available to the Chinese viewer, but the pirated copies that drive out the legitmate copies are low quality, too.

  • spin (Score:2)

    by g4dget ( 579145 )
    I'm not condoning copyright infringement, but this story is spin. Just because the same kind of greedy forces that are controlling copyright in the US are starting to get powerful in China doesn't mean that the Chinese are "realizing" anything. And the totalitarian methods of the Chinese state make this even uglier than the web of corporate and political power in the US.

    Both China and the US should find copyright and fair use rules that benefit the people as a whole. Both countries, however, seem to choose copyright rules and laws that mostly benefit a few powerful minorities.

    • Re:spin (Score:3, Insightful)

      by NineNine ( 235196 )
      Wrong. Copyrights benefit the creators of the movie/music, etc. If somebody doesn't want to altruistically create something to "benefit the people as a whole", that's their right. If they want to sell their ceration, that's their right. As soon as you start removing copyright, you're essentuially stealing from those creators, which will cause them to completely and totally stop creating. Read Atlas Shrugged. You'll get a good idea of what'll happen when the gov't says, "your intellectual property is no longer yours... it belongs to "the people".
      • When another person can control what I do with my own equipment, with my own computers, can control what I write on the paper I *buy*. When they can say that a particular labor I may wish to do is illegal, then I am a slave.

        Copyright is an infringment on my human rights. Copyright is a monopoly. Copyright is censorship. Copyright makes me into a slave.

        How could anyone who likes Atlas Shrugged not see this stark fact?

        Such a horrible evil could only be accepted if the benefits were worth the horror. Once, I would have said 'yes'. Now, my answer is slowly changing. The current copyright censorship&control regime is detestable.

        Let Rearden make his metal, but the moment he discloses its recipe publically, by what right shall he gain the ability to say to me 'thou shaln't use this recipee'?

        Let Ayn write her book, but the moment she distributes it publically.. How can she claim that she has lost any rights to control what I do with it. Unless the default state of humanity is control and slave, she never had any ability to control me in the first place.

        • Copyright is an infringment on my human rights. Copyright is a monopoly. Copyright is censorship. Copyright makes me into a slave.

          No it's not. It's analogous to entering into a contract with the creator of the work. Simply put, the creator should be able to enter into a consensual agreement with a buyer. Is your precious Rand against consensual contractual agreements ? Is it not true that you are free to choose not to subject yourself to copyrights you find disagreeable, by not acquiring the copyrighted work in the first place ?

  • this is about the movie, really (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ruebarb ( 114845 ) <colorache AT hotmail DOT com> on Saturday November 02, 2002 @07:25AM (#4583397)
    This is really about the movie, Hero. Producers are taking special advantage of all these special precautions cause this is supposed to be the biggest export since "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon"

    You will see it here in the US, and it'll make a lot of money here. This isn't for the average HK flick yet, or bad Chinese cinema...this is like a sneak preview of "The Two Towers. the US cinema showing special previews months early would probably take the same precautions...

Slashdot Top Deals

GREAT MOMENTS IN HISTORY (#7): April 2, 1751 Issac Newton becomes discouraged when he falls up a flight of stairs.

Close