This is some good news:
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid called off a vote on controversial anti-piracy legislation Friday — the surest sign yet that a wave of online protests have killed SOPA and PIPA for now and maybe forever.
Reid canceled the procedural vote on PIPA scheduled for Tuesday. Meanwhile, in the House, Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas), announced plans Friday to put off any consideration of SOPA indefinitely.
“I have heard from the critics and I take seriously their concerns regarding proposed legislation to address the problem of online piracy,” Smith said in a statement Friday. “It is clear that we need to revisit the approach on how best to address the problem of foreign thieves that steal and sell American inventions and products.”
Silicon Valley interests and cyber activists rejoiced at the victory.
“Hallelujah!” tweeted Gary Shapiro, president and CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association.
“Dems, Sen. Reid has just saved u from a lot of embarrassment/loss of support,” tweeted Gigi Sohn, co-founder of Public Knowledge, which had helped organize protests.
Meanwhile, Chris Dodd continues to be a whore for monied interests everywhere, and is going back to the drawing board:
Dodd blames the bills’ reduced support on a slow timeline that allowed opposition to mobilize, but also on a strategy that ended up making the anti-piracy effort seem specifically about helping Hollywood. His own efforts were also limited by a law that prevents him from lobbying Congress directly within two years of leaving office.
Dodd mentioned rethinking the film industry’s distant relationship with Silicon Valley, and said he would welcome a meeting between Internet companies and content providers in order to rework the bills. Unfortunately, there was no mention of his inflammatory comments before the blackout, including calling the Internet protests an “abuse of power” and accusing critics of punishing officials trying to fight “foreign criminals.” Dodd may take a different tack in his next round of lobbying, but cutting out the alarmist rhetoric probably won’t be part of it.
Got it? Dodd thinks the bill failed because they didn’t ram it through fast enough without people knowing what was in it and what it did. That’s his vision of democracy. Additionally, he is now launching threats at the President:
Hollywood’s top lobbyist and former Sen. Chris Dodd is threatening to cut off campaign funds to President Obama’s re-election effort because of anger over the White House appearing to side with tech companies in a bitter fight over anti-piracy legislation.
In an exclusive interview with Fox News, Dodd fired off a warning to Obama — his former Senate Democratic colleague in this election year — “don’t take us for granted.”
“Candidly, those who count on quote ‘Hollywood’ for support need to understand that this industry is watching very carefully who’s going to stand up for them when their job is at stake,” Dodd told Fox News. “Don’t ask me to write a check for you when you think your job is at risk and then don’t pay any attention to me when my job is at stake.”
The money party always plays hardball- that is why they have been winning the last thirty years. It’s also a very solid reminder how bad some Democrats are, especially when you consider how many Democrats are co-sponsors of these bills. This is how far the rot goes:
Believe it or not, South Florida Democratic Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Ted Deutch — supporters of the Stop Online Piracy Act — happened to get a lot of money from interest groups supporting the legislation.
According to the nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization MapLight, Wasserman Schultz and Deutch took in nearly $1 million combined in contributions from interest groups supporting SOPA, compared to only around $125,000 in contributions from interest groups not in favor of it.
That’s the chair of the DNC supporting this wretched bill because of who lines her pockets. Also particularly awesome is the fact that all the lobbying only impacted one side of the Hill:
Following the protests Wednesday that saw dozens of websites go dark in opposition to federal anti-piracy legislation, the four remaining Republican presidential candidate said the U.S. House’s bill would be a disaster for freedom on the Internet.
During a debate in South Carolina Thursday, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum and Texas Congressman Ron Paul all said they did not support the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA).
CNN moderator John King noted in his question to the candidates that CNN’s parent company Time Warner “says we need a law like this because some of its products — movies, programs and the like — are being ripped off online.”
I know of no high profile Senators or Congressmen on the Democratic side who changed their positions on this. As we love to say, Democrats hate their base, Republicans fear theirs. I’ll let Emptywheel sum it all up:
Props to President Obama for being on the right side of this issue, once again (as with Gitmo and so many other issues), going it alone while the Democrats continue to shoot themselves in the foot while it is in their mouths.
kindness
There is a good reason why Chris Dodd is an ex-Senator. This is one of them.
The Moar You Know
Now the work begins. The tech folks breaking their arms patting themselves on the back this morning had better realize that this is at best temporary. Time to start outbidding Hollywood or this bill will be back in front of Congress.
And next time, there’s not going to be any warning. Dodd learned his lesson. Hopefully tech has learned theirs. I am not hopeful about that.
OzoneR
This is when I hate these people. The Dems didn’t let the GOP become the party of Internet freedom. SOPA’s sponsor is a fucking Republican. The lone dissenter in the Senate was a Democratic Senator. The President of the United States, who I’m always told is the face of the Democratic Party, opposed it.
This isn’t a Democratic/Republican issue unless we make it one. There are Democrats who have always opposed it, there are Republicans who have always opposed it. There are Democrats who have always supported it, there are Republicans who have always supported it.
amk
Amen.
Fucking amurikans don’t deserve him.
joes527
Al Franken’s sponsorship of PIPA is the kind of thing that leads folks to throw up their hands and say: a plague on both your houses!
Yeah, yeah, I know. False equivalence … only in this case not so false.
OzoneR
@joes527:
What it should show is nothing in politics is absolute. If you don’t oppose something your favorite politician stands for, you’re not paying attention.
shortstop
Really unhappy that Dick Durbin supported this while Mark Kirk opposed it.
Davis X. Machina
This Chris Dodd?
Punchy
I loves me some Pippa.
rb
@OzoneR:
If you don’t oppose something your favorite politician
stands for, you’re not paying attention.
This, exactly.
Mandramas
Looks like Megaupload is a political maneuver to compensate Hollywood. Expect more moves like this. The money must flow. Also, I feel that the rest of the world missed MU more that USA. Is that true?
burnspbesq
Righteous but pointless indignation doesn’t taste good on top of Wheates. Stick with blueberries.
C’mon, Jake, it’s Chinatown.
General Stuck
Shame on dems for supporting this bullshit. Big money related to the arts just happens to involve a big source of their campaign financing, as other industries are money bags for the wingnuts.
Citizens United is going to amp up what has been going on for a long time, and serve as a catalyst to cause the pay to play nature of our governing matrix, to go all out of control. This is both bad and good, as over reach can be the bane greed and avarice with the degree of rot becoming unmistakable to the average low info voter. Public funded elections will be our only road to salvation of the republic. And that won’t happen until the curtain is raised high to show the public what has happened to their republic.
OzoneR
@The Moar You Know:
I don’t support SOPA, but I think people fail to realize that the battle is between two very powerful lobbies, not Hollywood vs. people. In a battle between the entertainment industry and internet/computer industry- net wins- far more powerful lobby.
That’s not to say we’re on the wrong side of the battle, we were just lucky to have Google, Facebook, YouTube and their lobbyists on our side this time.
Spaghetti Lee
@OzoneR:
This. I saw a list of supporters/opponents and was surprised by how split down the middle it was. There were also large chunks of congress that didn’t have a stated position, at least not on that site.
BenA
@kindness: It really is sad… I grew up in CT. I really admired a lot of what he did in the Senate. I wonder when he decided he really liked being a whore. I guess in CT during the cold war it was easy… you compromised yourself in a much more abstract way. Just vote yes on some nuclear subs and everyone wins.
MikeBoyScout
Laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made. – Otto
mistermix
Schumer sorta-kinda walked back his support:
“You’ve been heard. #PIPA has been pulled so we can find a better solution.”
twitter.com/#!/ChuckSchumer/status/160378986097152002
This is probably what a lot of the other walkbacks are – we’re pulling the bill, no details on where we’re going next. Then they pull the bill, rewrite it to get rid of the most odious parts, insert other odious parts, and trot it out again.
joes527
@General Stuck:
Colbert is working on that.
shortstop
@Spaghetti Lee: Marco Rubio accidentally told the truth when he noted that most people in both houses were unfamiliar with the details of the bills; many had no idea exactly what they were supporting and the effects it would/could have. I trust they’ll be a little better prepared on the second round — some of them, anyway.
Benjamin Franklin
Yup. Let’s get back to those back rooms and midnight, covert meetings.
Chyron HR
Well, if Republican presidential candidates say something during their debates, I’ll believe it without question. That’s what it means to be a True Progressive, right?
OzoneR
@Spaghetti Lee: That’s what I can’t understand- literally kos, emptywheel, Greenwald are the only ones who looked at this as an absolute “Dems support, Republicans oppose” point of view. I mean do they look at everything through party label? If so, then maybe they aren’t so righteous after all.
Gin & Tonic
@BenA:
When he realized it pays better than being a college professor. Plus he gets to eat at the cool kids’ table.
I say this also as someone who thought he was one of the good guys way back when, and contributed to his Presidential campaign.
joes527
@Benjamin Franklin:
FTFY
Brian
I think they should put this up to vote at the same time they put the Protect Stores from Shoplifters bill that bans obnoxiously baggy pants, jackets, and purses from stores that sell copy righted material.
Kola Noscopy
But, but…more and better Democrats!
burnspbesq
@Mandramas:
If by “political maneuver” you mean “trumped-up show trial on frivolous charges,” then no, the Megaupload arrests aren’t a political maneuver. Those folks fairly obviously violated US law.
Whether the timing of the takedown was coincidental, no one knows or can know. My previously stated view is that the timing was a happy accident, because the takedown shows that the Draconian remedies built into SOPA and PIPA aren’t necessary.
Mark S.
The President and all the Republican candidates oppose these bills. So Chris, where’s all that quote “Hollywood” money going to go?
shortstop
@Brian: But I love my baggy purse. And my pursy bag.
The Other Chuck
So Dodd threatens to go nuclear and cut off all the cash, eh? Yeah, that’s going to serve the interests of his industry reeeal well.
Dodd is going to get a firm talking to in private, and will suddenly sound much more conciliatory and diplomatic.
Benjamin Franklin
@joes527:
thanks
The Other Chuck
Oh and Chris? “Hollywood” is all those stars doing benefits and speeches. You are some piss-ant lobbyist suit that no ordinary person actually respects or likes. Cry yourself to sleep with money, because love wasn’t in your benefits package.
Davis X. Machina
@OzoneR: In Kos’ case, it’s the anger of a lover spurned.
MikeBoyScout
All’s Well That Ends Well – Billy
beltane
I’m very upset with Pat Leahy on this one. Bernie came out against it but Leahy was on VPR yesterday reiterating his support for this POS bill.
marduk
@burnspbesq: Are your sure? The site clearly has substantial non-infringing use and is protected from prosecution by DMCA safe harbor provisions unless they can be shown to have deliberately refused to respond to takedown requests.
JPL
Both of my Senators supported the bill and I live in GA. Follow the money.
Benjamin Franklin
@Davis X. Machina:
Yeah. What happened to that Dodd? Wait…..he paid his dues, now he’s cashing in……it’s all in a day’s political outsourcing.
burnspbesq
@marduk:
“Are your sure? The site clearly has substantial non-infringing use and is protected from prosecution by DMCA safe harbor provisions unless they can be shown to have deliberately refused to respond to takedown requests.”
That’s for a jury to decide. As it should be.
Emma
@OzoneR: You know how we always say that Republicans stand for “whatever pisses off Democrat?” We have those too, in an odd way.
OzoneR
@JPL:
But they’re Republicans!
Benjamin Franklin
@marduk:
My theory is the warrants served in New Zealand created some diplomatic blowback.
SOPA would close the barn door before the horse gets out.
The Moar You Know
@shortstop: Shit, I’ll raise you: Feinstein (-DINO) and Boxer both supported, while that loathesome bag of shit a few miles up the road from me, Darrell Motherfucking Issa, the lowest form of life in the House, led the goddamn charge to get this shot down.
Fuck me. There’s not enough water in the world to wash that taste out of my mouth. Or tequila.
Brachiator
Not too sure about this. We do have the massive over-reaction of the Megaupload takedown:
And there are rumors that the MPAA is not taking opposition to SOPA lightly:
Meanwhile Anonymous is continuing to fight Chicago Style (They pull a knife, you pull a gun).
The fun is only just getting started.
somuchyelling
John Cole’s stupidity is remarkable here, as is that as any of the other naive, ignorant morons who are talking about how “at least the Republicans” came out against it. Big Media and Big Hollywood are some of the Democrats’ biggest campaign contributors. Once the Republicans started to see that SOPA/PIPA were going to stall out anyway, they realized that by coming out against they would drive a wedge between the Dem contributors and the Dem base. And, hey, look, because of the naive ignorance of liberal bloggers, they’re winning.
Look, SOPA and PIPA are awful bills, and it’s a good thing they’re going down the tubes — but that’s because of the efforts of Democrats like Wyden, Polis, and Pelosi, along with a FEW Republicans — most of them were on side until they decided to seize political opportunity. There’s no need to compound the stupidity by carrying the Republicans’ water for them and helping them screw over Democrats. Wow.
Zifnab
@The Other Chuck:
Well, it’s a two-way street. If you are pay-to-play, and we pay, then you sure as hell better play ball. The price of not being corrupt is typically that people don’t want to bribe you anymore. MPAA/RIAA lobbyists weren’t shoveling money to the Dems because of their support for a health care plan.
In the end, the question becomes “Will Democrats lose their jobs because they lose this money?” That is at the heart of the problem of corruption. When it works – and the last 40 years demonstrates corruption of the political process to have been wildly successful – then a wave of Flag Lapel Pin and Death Panel attack ads funded with MPAA/RIAA money will oust Dem politicians to replace them with Republican lackeys.
At the end of the day, Dodd will spend the industry money backing people that support his industry’s cause. The only thing that will truly kill this system is to cut off the money to everybody. And Citizens United did just the opposite.
The Republic of Stupidity
@burnspbesq:
Ya know… that was my take on it too…
I can’t tell ya how many times I’ve heard, “We don’t NEED a new law… we just have to enforce the existing ones…”
Occasionally, it appears to be true…
burnspbesq
@ John Cole:
One of the Senators from Oregon, can’t remember which one, switched from support to oppose. And that’s extremely important.
While the focus of public attention has been on digital content, the people with serious money at stake are manufacturers of branded consumer goods. That’s the real explanation for Schumer and Gillibrand’s initial support: they were taking care of PVH, Warnaco, and the other apparel megacorps.
The boys from Beaverton lose more revenue to counterfeiters than any other company on earth. If both Senators from Oregon now oppose the bill, there are only two plausible explanations: (a) they’ve concluded that they can go against the biggest company in their state without adverse consequences, or (b) Beaverton has somehow signaled that it can live without this legislation.
Zifnab
@Brachiator:
I’m not sure how this gets classified as an “overreaction”. Mega-Upload is definitely a pirating site.
TooManyJens
@marduk:
That’s one of the acts alleged in the indictment.
Dave
Gee, another case where the President is on the right side of things and the Democrats in Congress try to screw it up? How unsurprising.
I’m just waiting for the Progressive Purity Brigade to blame Obama for SOPA/PIPA. Just so everything stays the same.
MikeBoyScout
Then again, is it just possible that since September 19th (every year) is International Talk Like A Pirate Day support for pirating is just growing?
me
“Distant”? The relationship was a giant middle finger pointing from Los Angeles to San Jose. Look what happened at the hearing.
Comrade Mary
@Zifnab:
Megaupload is a bit of a mixed bag: yes, lots of piracy, and the founder is an asshole cubed, but people have been using it for legit reasons, too. In addition, some of the filesharing that is nominally illegal, such as obscure music that hasn’t been commercially available for years and may never be commercially available again, isn’t something that I can get too worked up about as a (foreign) creative. There is no income being stolen from creators in those cases.
Anyway, I found this Ars Technica article interesting.
Benjamin Franklin
@Zifnab:
Dare I suggest Publicly Funded Elections?
marduk
@Zifnab:
What would make you say that?
Megaupload provided a vital service that SOME users used to exchange copyrighted material. It may turn out that the site owners refused to respond to takedown notices and are therefore liable for copyright violations. But to label it a pirating site because of how some users used their service when that service is valuable sans piracy is just wrong.
burnspbesq
@Benjamin Franklin:
Dare! Dare!
Punchy
OT: FWIW, off-shore books have re-jiggered their political odds, and have reintroduced Noot into the “Will he win the nomination” mix. Before today, it was only Romney.
His odds are 4-1 to win, so it’s still unlikely. But the fact they re-established Noot numbers is an amazing turn of events…
General Stuck
Regulating the internet in any large way, is going to include some serious backlash, at this stage of its existence. That goes for neutrality issues, as well as excessive enforcement of about any kind that limits its availability in about any way. That train done left the station, and enough folks now use and heart its freedoms, that won’t be surrendered without pain to anyone tinkering with its performance that the public is accustomed to. Pirating is against the law, but you don’t throw the baby out with the bath to deal with it.
Culture of Truth
For some reason I can’t get too worked up about this chain of events. “Alarmist rhetoric” is not the sole province of Chris Dodd. And yes he threatened to withhold support, money and otherwise, not too differently from when progressives say ‘I’m not donating to the DCCC’ or the Obama campaign, because of [ insert issue here ] This is democracy.
And no, the GOP is not the party of Internet freedom – they are still assholes who saw an opening and took it.
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
I hate to think of doing anything with redstate or any other winger blog, but every website on the internet needs to start finding a voice together on these kinds of bills. While I hate the idea, that one article from earlier which talked about money talking was right, and those of us who work with technology, including companies like Google, will have to come up with some way of being proactive on this kinds of stuff.
joes527
@The Moar You Know:
Absolutely true. But it does matter that the reason Darrell Motherfucking Issa was fighting SOPA was that he has his own POS bill that he wants to pass.
Laertes
Support for the bill was strongly bipartisan, but even I, partisan Democrat and proud Obamabot, was struck by the fact that the big high-profile defectors in the senate (Brown & Rubio) were both Republicans, while high-profile liberals like Franken and Boxer remained firmly in the pro-SOPA camp.
Neither party covered itself in glory this time around, but the GOP did better than the Dems. Dammit.
Baud
@OzoneR: Thank you so much for your comment. I’m sorry that it had to be made in response to a post on this blog, though.
And while I’m glad with the result, labor generally supported SOPA/PIPA, and they were part of the Democratic base at one point, or so I thought.
rb
@joes527: Colbert is working on that
Yes. This was simultaneously brilliant, hysterical and depressing.
patrick the pedantic literalist
@Davis X. Machina:
Yeah, that Chris Dodd, the one who was against the FISA amendment that gate immunity to telecoms for illegal spying. Chris, combined with Harry Reid, gave me my first real lesson in political cynicism — and I thank him for showing me how the real political world works.
I had not been a political person until George II. In the democratic primaries I considered voting for Dodd because his stand on FISA. He even filibustered it the senate — actually stood up and talked for hours against it. I was angry with Reid because he let all of the republican filibusters stand without actually making them actually filibuster on the floor of the Senate. It took me a while to figure out Reid and Dodd were particiapating in a sham. Reid didn’t “make” Dodd filibuster, Reid “let” Dodd filibuster so he could put on a show for us rubes. The fix was in on FISA the whole time. So Dodd put on his show, the senate passed FISA with Obama and Hillary’s votes, and Iearned something about democratic party.
amk
@joes527: egg.sack.lee. Peeps here should read up on darrell fucking issa before they start kissing his a$$.
darkmatter
@OzoneR: Said it better than I ever could.
Benjamin Franklin
@Baud:
Politics doth make straaaaaaange bedfellows. Is it the money?
Mandramas
IP laws are obsolete in the current state of the technology. Any attempt to enforce them will eventually fail. The right thing to do is to transform the culture and the business to adopt an open source approach.
taylormattd
@OzoneR: Agreed, thank you. Emptywheel’s response is both stupid and hysterical. She’s nuts if she thinks a single person in this country outside of the “left” blogosphere is crediting republicans.
Peter
@burnspbesq: So it’s for a jury to decide, but they’re clearly guilty? You can’t really have it both ways, Burnsie.
Martin
@marduk:
Vital? They provided no such thing. Convenient, perhaps, but nothing that couldn’t be solved in a dozen other (free) ways.
SOPA and PIPA are just a cavalcade of fail. They illustrate that the MPAA and RIAA and other agencies have no clue how to keep their industries modern and relevant and rather than do the hard work to innovate and meet the needs of their customers, they resort to legislation to drag us back toward pre-internet rules. They also illustrate that members of Congress have no business ruling on things that they don’t understand. It’s long past time that Congress shitcan its paper-passing staffing model and build expert panels that have some real accountability. We can’t cross our fingers and hope that there are enough physicians, engineers, scientists, and so on elected to congress to educate legislators on the impact of legislation – they need to build real panels of recognized experts who are without conflict of interest to advise them on issues like this. No CEO or other major decision maker would do differently. That’s not hard to do. And it illustrates the failure of relying on sector lobbyists to write your legislation for you. Do we really want to leave the course of the nation to warring factions of lobbyists? Because really, that’s what we’re building.
taylormattd
@Kola Noscopy: Oops, you forgot to click on the FDL tab before you posted your stupid fucking comment.
Joel
@OzoneR: This is really just a “who got paid” versus “who didn’t” issue.
joes527
@Laertes:
I don’t know that I would go that far, but the Dems didn’t clearly do better than the GOP.
People are trying to brush this whole thing off as “both sides do it.” (funny how that argument becomes acceptable when it is used as an excuse for Dems doing the wrong thing) But that entirely misses the point. I don’t give a fuck what GOP congress critters have to say. Even when they seem to be saying the right thing, it is a trick. (See: Issa, Darrell) I care about what Dem congress critters say and do. In this case many covered themselves in shit.
The GOP lives to cover themselves in shit, so it is not news that some did just that this time.
I guess that if I am more critical of shitty Dems than shitty Reps I am guilty of false-lack-of-equivalence.
Villago Delenda Est
@Gin & Tonic:
One of the perks of being CEO of the MPAA is you get to go to the Oscars…and Oscar parties afterwards.
Felinious Wench
What is really sticking in the craw of these people is they have little to no power when it comes to the internet. Because in the nuclear option, the search engines stop operating. Without the search engines, no one can find anything. It just shuts down.
It’s too much a part of everyone’s life now, and they have no control over it. That’s gotta hurt.
peach flavored shampoo
How many times does this have to be said…filibustering does not require talking for hours on end. That’s just not the way it works. It can be done for show/media purposes, but it’s not required.
handsmile
While it’s disturbing and dispiriting that usually dependable Senate and House Democrats such as Brown, Franken, Whitehouse, Conyers, and Wasserman-Schultz have not rescinded their sponsorship/support of SOPA and PIPA, it’s not as if the party of creationism, “Drill Baby Drill,” and abstinence education will be able to turn to its political advantage the sudden opposition of a few of its members.
I imagine for most GOP voters the SOPA/PIPA bill is a resolution in support of showering with the former Miss Middleton.
And remember it was the longest-serving Republican Senator, Alaska’s Ted Stevens, now roasting somewhere, who famously described the Internet as a “system of tubes.”
youtube.com/watch?v=f99PcP0aFNE
Baud
@Benjamin Franklin:
I don’t think it’s complicated. Rightly or wrongly, certain labor groups feel that piracy results in lost revenue which results in fewer jobs.
Villago Delenda Est
@Benjamin Franklin:
No.
I suggest free broadcast TV time. What drives the outrageous sums that are needed to run in an election is broadcast TV stations charging top dollar for political advertising. Take that away from these parasites, and suddenly, elections are a lot cheaper.
Brachiator
@Zifnab:
So is YouTube, if you look at it that way. Mega hosts legitimate files as well as pirated files, and there are mechanisms currently in place to deal with pirated material.
The War on Piracy, as the media companies want to do it, is about as dumbass as the war on drugs.
stormhit
@Mandramas:
Grand juries and massive international investigations typically aren’t thrown together in 24 hours.
burnspbesq
@Mandramas:
“Open source” is code for “Pretend free-rider problems don’t exist and transfer massive wealth from creators to consumers.”
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
@somuchyelling:
That would have been a great comment, except you started it with:
Other than Cole, whose more than used to being called an idiot, you probably turned off the entire group of people that would have probably thought your comment was a good idea.
Kola Noscopy
@taylormattd:
Defensive much? And yeah, that “Firebagger” insult gets me every time. I’m on your side, dimwit. I’m just not brainless and fawning about it. Get a clue.
joes527
@Felinious Wench:
Assumes that Google Bing and Yahoo would work together.
I fully agree that Bing and Yahoo suck, but if Google were to push the button and go offline for a day, life would go on with the other search providers and the next day Google would be weaker than it was before.
Will. Never. Happen.
marduk
@Martin:
That’s like, just your opinion, man.
I used megaupload to transfer large files all the time for work. There are certainly other solutions but megaupload was the best for my situation. Now that my first choice has been shut down, how can I trust my files to megaupload replacement services like rapidshare et al knowing the government could shut that service down at any time and using the same rationale?
Any business that lets users transfer large files easily is going to be used in part for copyright infringement but there is still a legitimate need for services that let users transfer large files easily. I know because I do it.
If service providers can’t count on safe harbor provisions then valuable services won’t be provided.
burnspbesq
@Peter:
Sure I can. I can have an opinion based on what I know and reasonable inferences from what I know, while acknowledging that there is a process in place that will tell me whether my opinion was correct.
Just because you can’t keep two independent ideas going in your head at the same time doesn’t mean that I have to play down to your level.
Villago Delenda Est
@Felinious Wench:
That is what this is all about. They don’t want their old business model to end, so instead of adapting to the new reality, they attempt to destroy the new reality.
The thing here is, the pirates will find away around all this in about 10 seconds. People who are not technically adept will of course not know how to do this. That’s what they’re counting on.
The Internet destroys their last remaining hold on their content creators: the distribution apparatus. If artists can sell their music directly to the consumer, they have no need for record companies.
The poor dears. (The poor dears being the parasitical record companies).
Joel
@burnspbesq: Uh, the “free rider problem” exists in the very foundation of Democracy. Do you have a problem with that?
Tim in SF
I think we probably lost the SOPA/PIPA battle several years ago, when we let industry trade groups successfully confuse file copying with “stealing.” They’ve equated duplication with theft so often that people now believe it and accept it.
“Copying files? Oh, that’s stealing.” Even though nothing is stolen.
Legislation to stop it is, therefore, inevitable.
maya
Whatever the normal proceedure for passing legislative bills in congress is both the House and Senate really ought to switch to an auction style proceedure. It would be so much fun to watch.
Harry Reid: ” I hear $3.2 million from the well coiffed MPAA gentleman in the shark skin suit over here. Do I hear $3.3 from the propeller-beany rabble over there?
Going once. Going twice. BANG! Sold to MPAA for $3.2 million. Dick, what’s next up on the platform?”
kay
The Maplight stuff on Wasserman-Schultz is nonsense.
It’s ridiculously broad. If Wasserman-Schultz took a contribution from “auto repair” or “lawyers and law firms” or “manufacturing” or “consumer groups-split) that means she took a contribution from supporters of this bill?
According to SOPA Opera, which is excellent, and is the Propublica tracking tool for this bill, she took 70k from movies/entertainment and 30k from internet/computers.
All the info is there, including who took what in donations and who supports, formerly supported, and opposes.
Kola Noscopy
@Belafon (formerly anonevent):
Yes, because politeness, decorum, and delicate phrasing are a hallmark of Balloon Juice discourse.
burnspbesq
@Martin:
And from where are you planning to recruit such people? Minbar? They don’t exist on Earth, and never will.
Apart from that small detail, an interesting proposal.
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
@burnspbesq: No, that would be copyright violators. Open Source people, on the other hand, follow copyright law better than anyone. Microsoft, and Apple, on the other hand, have no problem using code they did not write to support their products. Take Safari. Apple had to be sued to force them to follow the copyright that was attached to the browser and open the source up. What’s hilarious is the OS X is based on OpenBSD, and Apple keeps it’s version entirely proprietary – which the BSD license allows them to do – and doing very little to contribute back to the group that created the foundation of their OS.
Benjamin Franklin
@kay:
Nicely done.
Tim in SF
@burnspbesq: LOL! Yay! B5 reference!
burnspbesq
@marduk:
I have an encrypted 64 gig USB drive on my keychain. So could you. Or use a legit service. I can’t use Dropbox because its security isn’t good enough for attorney-client privileged or work product materials. I use Wuala. Take a look at it.
OzoneR
@Laertes:
I’m so sure how they did. SOPA is a Republican’s bill!
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
@Kola Noscopy: Yeah, but you’re the exception to even my rule.
Danny
The Republicans “fear” their base, because their base is a) organized, b) willing to work their ass off, and c) eager to take marching orders from guys like Rush and EE and follow them.
Ridiculing stupid republican tools; whining about them being effective while we’re not – pick one.
burnspbesq
@Tim in SF:
I decided over the holidays to re-watch the entire series. I’m up to S5 E4.
Benjamin Franklin
@Villago Delenda Est:
Fairness doctrine? PSA’s? They aren’t ‘free’, but TV ads could be bought with some of the $20 million from PFE
Brachiator
@burnspbesq:
But aren’t these different areas of the law (even if some of the InterTubes related issues are similar)?
For example, the goverment is being pushed to shut down sites that sell counterfeit goods. Reasonable, but even here there is over-reaction:
It’s damned ridiculous that some countries are considering a kind of technological death penalty as remedy, with their demands that sites be de-indexed from google and other search engines, and that individual offenders be banned from using the InterTubes. And many of these proposals are absent any form of reasonable due process or remedy.
kay
@Benjamin Franklin:
If Wasserman-Schultz took a donation from the AFL-CIO or the Teamsters, or, um, the National District Attorneys Association, she took a donation from “supporters of this bill”.
They just added it all together, there on Maplight.
It’s not as much of a smoking gun as one might think, reading that breathless Florida news article :)
She took 70k from supporters, and 30k from opponents, unless we’re willing to really reach and include basically everyone who donates to her for any reason.
joes527
@OzoneR: Some of that impression has to do with movement. More R’s publicly switched from the dark side in the last days. Honestly? The R’s switching sides was more about rats deserting a sinking ship rather than principled legislators reconsidering their earlier positions.
Is it a better thing that when Dems are bought, they stay bought?
Nemesis
Dodd quit Congress to work for the MPAA. He/they wont rest until the twattertoobz are altered to the point of uselessness.
WereBear
This was a stealth move to “control” the internet. Many Industry executive-types are livid that, in a time of dwindling MSM ratings, so many prefer to watch a drooling toddler or the latest Hitler-in-the-bunker.
The eventual goal is to make the entire Internet DisneyWorld; in the sense that we have to pay for everything.
Why should people self publish so easily; selling their own books, music, artwork, crocheted hats? How dare we deny our Galtian Overlords their slice!
RRoss
Wow, way to go Anon, pulling the equivalent of the “burning bag of dog crap” prank on a few websites will really show ’em. The Justice Department will think twice about daring to enforce the law now!
singfoom
Neither party looks good here. SOPA and PIPA were bills designed by big lobbying interests to kill the internet. Piracy is indeed a problem, but it is one that is easily defeated (I speak here of digital piracy, not that of physical goods).
All the industries involved have to do is make it easier to pay for their content legally and the majority of piracy will fade away.
However, the music industry and the movie industry, comprised of large VERY profitable corporations, would rather do ANYTHING than update their business model to do this.
Every single Representative and Senator who supported this bill should be ashamed of themselves.
Though, I am not shocked. Treating corporations as first tier citizens and writing legislation for their benefit is par for the course in our completely captured Congress. If you think the letter before the person’s name means anything, I have a bridge to sell you.
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
So, for everyone here, how would you solve the problem of making sure that the studios get adequately paid for movies they make, and, make sure that really good movies earn the extra money needed to encourage making more good movies? Movies are a bit different than music, in that it really does take a large company to make a movie.
joes527
@WereBear:
Not just the internet. The whole idea of general purpose computers is seen as a threat. They are too hard to control.
It is no coincidence that OS’s are moving to higher level shells where you interact with “markets” that are controlled by corporations, and mechanisms to keep computers from booting replacement OS’s are being rolled out.
Make no mistake, corporate America sees your computer as nothing more than a a product delivery platform.
Brachiator
@Tim in SF:
This is not true. You are impinging on the creator’s right of distribution.
I’ve listened to a number of tech evangelists talk about how music copying is inevitable and nobody can prove that anyone was harmed. But then they also, and strangely happily, talk about a new world in which artists must get used to making less income overall, and coming up with new ways from performance and selling knick knacks to keep fans happy. Of course, this isn’t always sufficient, and does not adequately other products and services.
@Tim in SF:
Great show. I wish though, that JMS had been provided with a bigger budget, and didn’t have the burden of having to write so many of the episodes himself.
Villago Delenda Est
@Belafon (formerly anonevent):
This.
Corporations like Microsoft have no problem stealing intellectual property themselves, if they can get away with it. They do hate to get caught, though.
pseudonymous in nc
@marduk:
Oh, c’mon. All the internet is complaining today about how Megaupload’s takedown means they can’t share personal and not-at-all pirated material? Their explicit approach was to offer free throttled and quota-limited access and charge users to have those restraints lifted. That’s a business model just waiting to be taken down.
Now, if Dropbox were targetted, that would be a different matter. And the problem with SOPA/PIPA is both that it operates on the presumption of guilt, and mandates technological “fixes” that are no less drastic than China’s Great Firewall, except that they’re operating on behalf of corporate interests rather than political ones.
(And as Dan Kaminsky has pointed out, breaking DNS through legal mandate is basically aping a local trojan that hijacks name resolution.)
Kola Noscopy
@RRoss:
This seems reminiscent of the early mockery of Occupy’s first protests on Wall Street.
burnspbesq
@Brachiator:
Well, with respect to that runaway District Court judge, the simple answer is “that’s why we have appellate courts.”
But, while I think the branded consumer goods companies have overstated the extent of their problem, it is a real problem. It’s time-consuming and expensive to have to go to court in Finland to try and take down the website of an Uzbek seller of counterfeit goods that were knocked off in Sri Lanka. They’d like to be able to one-stop shop for legal remedies. Nike and PVH and LVMH might have the resources to fight a multi-front war, but companies like Ecco and Tory Burch don’t. I’m sympathetic to them, but SOPA goes too far.
singfoom
@Belafon (formerly anonevent): That’s a problem that doesn’t need solving.
Check out the revenues for Warner Brothers, Disney, Universal, SOny Pictures.
They’re making hundreds of millions of dollars.
That comes from movie theaters/DVDs/Blu-rays.
There’s a really easy solution for the studios to keep up with piracy. Make it easy for people to legally get the content.
Perhaps if they released official digital/DVD/blu-ray copies of the content immediately after the movie has left theaters, they would get a lot of people buying that content.
It’s not an impossible problem. The studios just are not interested in that kind of platform. See how they fight hulu and netflix.
pseudonymous in nc
@Belafon (formerly anonevent):
Hmm. In fact, Apple’s ported large chunks of its system code to FreeBSD — Grand Central Dispatch, for example, or Bonjour/zeroconf. And that doesn’t even cover the userland stuff like WebKit. Perhaps you’re not looking in the right places?
Tim in SF
@singfoom:
Wrong. Duplication of files is not a problem. Copying is not theft. Please stop repeating this RIAA trope.
Villago Delenda Est
@joes527:
The desire to control comes in a couple flavors. One, of course, is pure Ferengi greed. The other one, though, is a desire to minimize the amount of tech work needed to get your product to function on computers. They don’t want to have to deal with every damn “standard” out there, for example, to get games to work on every video card that’s on the marketplace.
The entire purpose of the Internet RFC is to reach a consensus on what the “standard” should be, from a technical point of view, not from a rentier point of view. Get guys like Microsoft and Apple involved, who want to impose a “standard” on things so they can make in proprietary and collect rents, and you can see the problems.
burnspbesq
Hey, where’s my edit button?
Judas Escargot
If a company rents out a safe deposit box to a customer, and that customer chooses to use the safe deposit box to store something illegal (let’s say a DVD-R full of pirated mp3s) without the owner’s knowledge, can the owner of the safe deposit box be charged with piracy?
burnspbesq
@Tim in SF:
Copying for personal use is not theft, if you paid for what you’re copying. Copying for re-distribution is theft.
joes527
@Belafon (formerly anonevent):
Funny, I would think that that would be a problem for the studios to solve.
I don’t support illegal copying, but it isn’t irrelevant that the content providers ave been waging a long an successful war on the public domain.
Copyright was originally supposed to be a limited right granted to encourage folks to create, but it has been changed into a perpetual sinecure.
Just for perspective:
If I cure cancer, I get to profit from my invention for 20 years.
If I write a book about you finding the cure for cancer, I get to profit from the book until 70 years after I die. (and in all seriousness, when that term threatens Steamboat Willie again, it will be extended to 100 years after my death)
The content providers aren’t looking for a reasonable solution to problems with our system. They are looking for a way to get more, more, more.
pseudonymous in nc
@burnspbesq:
Isn’t the dirty little secret about “the good fakes” (a term anyone who’s shopped in SE Asia will know well) that they basically come off the same production lines as the genuine article? Perhaps not for the highest end stuff, but for a lot of the designer goods that use well-established Asian supply lines?
Villago Delenda Est
@burnspbesq:
I doubt very much if the MPAA or the RIAA is going to worry too much about that distinction. It’s still lost revenue to them.
RRoss
@Kola Noscopy:
Spoken like a true Keyboard Kommando! When was the last time you were pepper sprayed through your USB slot? Or stood out in the cold, outside of a trip to the fridge for another Mt Dew?
@Tim in SF:
Copying is not theft? What? Explain that one to me, I am all ears.
Tim in SF
@Brachiator:
Impinging is not “stealing.”
Don’t put words in my mouth. I didn’t say it caused no harm, I said duplication of files is neither theft nor piracy.
If you want to make an argument that it devalues the original, that’s something we could probably agree on, to a point. As to how much it harms an artist, that’s a point that is debatable. But copying is not theft.
Martin
@Baud:
In either case – whether it’s counterfeit apparel or digital piracy – the market for either exists due to artificial scarcity of supply. Bottom line, that’s what the fight is about. In the case of Nike’s, they want to limit the supply well below demand of a certain kind of shoe in order to drive market prices up. Coach bags does the same thing. A certain amount of their profitability is derived by manipulating supply in order to extract more money from consumers than the product would otherwise command given component and labor costs – and consumers know this. Digital media does it by forcing viewers into program slots, by denying access to content between theater and DVD release, by limiting the content to specific distribution forms (DVD vs internet streaming/download).
So even if consumers want to pay for the product, they’re denied. If I missed an episode of my favorite show last week due to a power outage and want to watch it before next week’s show so I’m up-to-date on the storyline that they’ve written in as an incentive for me to not skip a show, what am I to do? I’m happy to watch the ads in exchange for getting access to the show, or to keep paying my cable bill, etc. Paying them isn’t the issue, but there is absolutely no legal way for me to get that show. And it’s this artificial manipulation of the market from the supply side that creates the market for pirated goods from the demand side.
What companies are really trying to do is erect new scaffolding in order to preserve this artificial constraint on supply. They proclaim that they should be able to constrain supply in a free market, and the market responds by constructing a new marketplace. You can’t solve demand-side problems with supply-side solutions. SOPA and PIPA won’t work any more than tax cuts for billionaires will create jobs.
Ron
I was pretty happy to see Gillibrand come out with a statement today admitting the whole thing had to be reworked. I am normally a huge fan of hers, but on this issue she had disappointed me up until now.
Villago Delenda Est
@singfoom:
They have their business model, it’s working good for them, and they don’t want to have to change it because some technology has come along that undercuts it.
Pure corporate laziness and greed. They don’t want to adapt to the new reality, so they insist on passing legislation to prevent the tide from coming in.
Fuck them.
Tim in SF
@burnspbesq:
Um, no, when you steal something, then the person you stole it from doesn’t have it anymore. If they still have it, then it’s not stealing, is it? It’s duplication.
Ron
I also have to agree with an earlier comment. It applies to Franken and it applies (to me anyway) to Gillibrand. Even the best politicians out there will do something you disagree with. Even if she had continued to push PIPA, I’d happily vote for Gillibrand again.
Tim in SF
@RRoss:
It’s simple, really. If I steal your bike, then I have your bike and you do not. If I copy your file, we both have your file.
Here’s a song that explains it really well: youtu.be/IeTybKL1pM4
Brachiator
@burnspbesq:
One problem though, if you take down a domain or site, a person who is innocent or not even connected to the offending party could be put out of business or lose income or other opportunities while the appeal is going on.
Yep.
Villago Delenda Est
@burnspbesq:
In fact, if you’ll recall back in the 80’s, when DAT was an up and coming (and now forgotten) technology, the RIAA wanted to impose a tax on it to compensate them for piracy that had not yet occurred. They just assumed that DAT would be used for piracy. As in people putting together road tapes for their car, copies for their own personal use, which denied RIAA member revenues.
As far as these guys are concerned, any copy is essentially lost revenue for them, even when done on an individual basis only for individual use, not redistribution. Never mind that you’re taking cut 3 of this album, and cut 9 of this other one, and cut 1 off of album 3, and putting together your own favorites tape. You’re still stealing from them by making copies of shit you have already paid for.
barath
I’ve been disappointed to see that I’m disagreeing with Barbara Boxer and agreeing with Mitch McConnell on PIPA. I told Boxer’s staff that the last few days when I called.
It’s times like this that I secretly wish that there’s an anti-Koch multi-billionaire out there, one who’s willing to secretly fund a few dozen PACs that push against things like SOPA/PIPA, but more than that, push for electric rail and renewable energy and drug reform and marriage equality and all sorts of other issues on which either both parties are compromised or the Dems are too afraid to touch it. The system is clearly broken, but at least this way there’d be a counterbalancing force.
RRoss
@Tim in SF:
Yeah, but I paid for my copy and you didn’t. If I gave it to you, I cost the makers a sale, if you just took it, you stole from me, too!
(aside: I can’t watch the video where I am)
The Moar You Know
@joes527: Not giving that fuckstick Issa one inch of credit, thank you. His bill is far worse than PIPA/SOPA in many ways, as it guts a model of open sharing of knowledge between researchers that has been the underpinning of science in the 19th, 20th, and 21st centuries.
Of course, for him, that’s a benefit and not a bug.
Martin
@Belafon (formerly anonevent):
Don’t artificially restrict supply. Movies are distributed in approximate phases:
1) First-run theaters
2) Second-run theaters, PPV
3) Premium cable, DVD
3) Broadcast/standard cable
There’s no reason why this shouldn’t be opened up with non-exclusivity. Theaters are protecting their premiums not by providing a better experience that consumers want to pay for, but by constraining supply artificially, because there’s no economic constraint preventing the DVDs to be cut and and the content flowing down to PPV and cable at the same moment they hit the big screen. Movies are prevented from opening in certain markets for no reason other than artificial constraint of supply. Movies may never hit certain markets that lack theaters or enough screens to absorb supply for no reason other than artificial constraint of supply.
Look, the free market isn’t a free market for some. It’s a free market for all. If I live in the weeds and don’t have a movie theater, a free market would allow me to still reach the content via some other means. 30 years ago, technology prevented other means from existing. Now it doesn’t. That I can’t directly pay the studio $11 for a 24 hour rental or $30 for a DVD on opening night is bullshit. I have no mechanism to give them money, so if they won’t take it, then I won’t feel bad going to the alternate market for the product. They’re trying to turn the supply/demand curve into tool that only they can exploit. It doesn’t work that way, and no amount of legislation is going to overcome the reality of market dynamics.
BO_Bill
I find it completely startling that the Hollywood lobby, along with Chris Dodd (a spokesman who has no ethical issues), would team up with Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Ted Deutch, oh, let’s keep going. Franken that freak who touched me against my wishes, Levin, Boxer, Feinstein, Lieberman, there are more, to try to shut Americans up.
Good for Gigi Sohn. And also good for Balloon Juice for going against the moneyed interest.
The Moar You Know
@Villago Delenda Est: The final solution was worse than the tax, remember? You ended up with two tiers of DAT machines – one with a digital ID that audibly made the tape sound like shit, and one that cost about 4 times the price without the digital ID function. Destroyed DAT as a format completely – the only people that bought them were recording studios for use in mastering. And that didn’t even last a decade.
beltane
@BO_Bill: Show us where on the doll Al Franken touched you.
Villago Delenda Est
@The Moar You Know:
Speaking of the vile shitstain Issa, what ever happened to all those mountains of subpoenas he was supposed to burying the Obama administration in?
Zifnab
@Comrade Mary: @marduk: @Brachiator: No, YouTube is not the same thing. Yes, even the most cursory perusal of Mega-Upload will reveal copyrighted materials. And no, mixing legitimate business with illegal traffic doesn’t make your illegal business magically legal by association.
If Mega-Upload was refusing to respond to take-down notices or otherwise thumbing its nose at international law, then – again – I’m not sure how you can conclude that the raid was an “overreaction”. It was a perfectly legitimate reaction to a perfectly illegitimate business. So long as the facilitators of the site aren’t getting whisked off to Gitmo and waterboarded, or otherwise having their rights violated, I really don’t see any problem with the raid from a legal or political standpoint.
From a moral standpoint, I think the crusade on piracy is foolish and wasteful of government resources. But labeling every anti-piracy action a “crusade” or an “overreaction” strikes me as silly.
Brachiator
@Tim in SF:
I was not attributing this view to you in any way. I was just using my comment to you to also raise other issues for everyone else reading this thread.
Sure it is. The person making the copy does not have the legal right to duplicate the file for his or her own use.
@singfoom:
Some people always want to steal entertainment, no matter how easy it is to get the content otherwise.
Last year or so, at an office I visited, there was a lot of buzz about the movie The Fighter, about how good it was, and how it wasn’t just about boxing. The movie was still in the theaters. Anybody could buy a ticket. And yet, the next time I visited the office, everybody who wanted it had a pirated DVD of the movie. Even the lunch truck guy.
@Martin:
Not quite true, I think. Now, the issue is that it is ridiculously easy to satisfy demand by making digital copies, and creators don’t get any money. For example, even when Louis CK made his comedy show available and asked for a $5 dollar donation, there was no artiifical scarcity. There was limitless supply. The only issue was the integrity of potential viewers.
Tim in SF
@RRoss:
1. For this to be true, you would have to prove that I would have bought it if I couldn’t get your copy.
2. A lost sale opportunity is not “stealing.” Look it up.
Use TOR – with it you can watch any video you want in any country you are in. I use it to watch youtube videos that are blocked here in the US.
Zifnab
@Judas Escargot: Not unless the cops show up with a notice saying “This guy you are renting to is a career thief, who has stashed stolen goods in your vault, and if you continue to rent to him you are aiding and abetting a criminal.”
At that point, the vault owner stops being an unwitting bystandard and starts being an accomplice. Mega-Upload wasn’t complying with take-down notices. So complaining that they were ignorant of what was going on in their site is falsely naive.
Tim in SF
@Brachiator:
I don’t want to get too pedantic about this, but if you think duplication is stealing, then you don’t know the definition of steal. It’s OK, I’m not faulting you; since the MP3 wars of the late 90’s, the RIAA has been working full time to conflate the two words. It’s not your fault. You’ve been misled.
The Moar You Know
155 posts and not a mention of “buggy whip manufacturers”. Let me be the first.
singfoom
@Brachiator:
You misunderstand me, so let me clarify. I understand that some people will pirate no matter what.
What I am saying is that the movie industry could easy get that lunch truck guy to pay for that content, by creating a platform to stream/download/rent that movie either right after or during the period while the movie is in theaters.
That would be a change to their business model. Even with everyone and the truck guy stealing their content, they’re still making millions and millions.
They need to update their business model to compensate for new technologies and make it easy for people to access and pay for their content. I think they would make MORE money than they do now…
I’d be willing to pay movie ticket prices for movies during that phase. But damn if I’m going to a theater, where I’m overcharged, made to watch ads as a captive audience and pay out the nose for bad food/drinks.
YMMV
Comrade Mary
@Tim in SF:
If you think the product is the unique collection of bits on the creator’s computer, then you’re right: file sharing is just duplication, not theft.
But if the product is access to the concepts / sensory experience represented by the unique collection of bits on the creator’s computer, unauthorized duplication via file sharing is also theft of the creator’s intent to sell access to the experience.
jayackroyd
@Tim in SF:
Nah. It was lost when some brilliant marketing guy thought up “intellectual property” to designate a temporary monopoly.
Villago Delenda Est
@The Moar You Know:
I implied it.
But I didn’t come out and say it.
What happened to all the blacksmiths? They became auto mechanics.
Tone in DC
@The Moar You Know:
Really unhappy that Dick Durbin supported this while Mark Kirk opposed it.
@shortstop: Shit, I’ll raise you: Feinstein (-DINO) and Boxer both supported, while that loathesome bag of shit a few miles up the road from me, Darrell Motherfucking Issa, the lowest form of life in the House, led the goddamn charge to get this shot down.
Fuck me. There’s not enough water in the world to wash that taste out of my mouth. Or tequila.
Classic comment. I wanna steal
piratethat.Sentient Puddle
@Tim in SF:
You crossed that line when you said piracy isn’t theft. The only people who care about the distinction are lawyers.
joes527
@RRoss:
Assumes facts not in evidence.
The idea that every instance of copying is a loss of revenue for the content producer is patently absurd. Yes, some copiers would break down and fork over the money if they couldn’t get something for free, but in the vast majority of cases with casual copying, if the person couldn’t get it for free, they would do without.
Movie studios claiming that every movie download means the loss of a non-discounted theater ticket sale with a large tub of buttered popcorn and a 32 ounce Dr. Pepper (which they do claim) is fundamentally dishonest.
Now, does copying result in a significant loss of sales? It really doesn’t look like it does. Go look at the first chart here. I can’t even find the recession in those numbers, much less a piracy problem that needs to be solved.
What data we have for both music and movies indicates (though doesn’t prove) that copying actually stimulates (or at least doesn’t harm) overall revenue for the content providers.
So all you have left is the tried-and true moral hazard argument with young bucks watching their stolen movies.
burnspbesq
@pseudonymous in nc:
You’re right, there have been numerous documented cases (New Balance is perhaps the best-known) of Chinese contract manufacturers over-ordering components and running a second shift on the sly.
These days, the manufacturing agreements typically give the client unrestricted 24/7 access to the factory, and they send people in at random intervals at night and on weekends. But there’s nothing to prevent your Chinese manufacturing partner (which is probably owned by Taiwanese or Hong Kong shareholders) from sending a USB drive with all of your plans and specs back to corporate HQ, and from there they could end up pretty much anywhere.
Not sure we’re ever going to get entirely rid of counterfeit goods. People in developing countries have the same aspirations, and have been bombarded with the same advertising, that we have. And they’re going to get what they want. Demand begets supply. I’m generally on the side of IP owners, but not at the cost of essential civil liberties.
The Moar You Know
@RRoss: By this logic, me driving by a WalMart and not buying everything in the store is theft. Which I’m sure, come to think of it, they consider to be the case. I ain’t buying it.
@Tone in DC: I’m open source. Use at your discretion.
Comrade Mary
@Zifnab: I think Megaupload is a pretty slimy business that at the very least was incredibly negligent about piracy and, as the AT article I linked said, very likely to be encouraging piracy.
But because there has been some technical “piracy” that I don’t care about, like the sharing of hard to get music, and some legitimate use involving material shared freely by those who owned the rights, there has been some collateral damage to non-assholes in the process. I’m still in wait-and-see mode about this move by the DOJ. I think they certainly appear to have valid grounds, based on what I read, but I want to see more about the whole thing.
Tim in SF
@Comrade Mary:
I think this is is some rhetorical sleight of hand. I don’t think you can steal someone’s intent. I’m not swallowing your logical pretzel.
Tone in DC
@maya:
LULz. At least the honesty factor would increase.
Villago Delenda Est
@Comrade Mary:
The attempt to make “look and feel” a part of the intellectual property domain failed back in the 90’s. Apple sued Microsoft, Lotus sued Borland, both lost.
Tim in SF
@Sentient Puddle:
Well that’s obviously not true. I care about this and I’m not a lawyer. Copying is not theft. Look it up in the dictionary.
burnspbesq
@Tim in SF:
Try it with mustard.
Whether or not you think it’s correct as a normative matter, current copyright law pretty much everywhere gives copyright owners the right to restrict distribution of their work to people who are willing to pay for it.
I have no problem with the idea of content creators being able to pay rent and buy groceries. I’m wondering why you do.
Richard Bennett
“Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author (except on the Internet).” Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as amended 2012.
David Koch
Heh!
4 years ago, all the progressive betters on the blogosphere, including Cole, where lecturing us on the greatness of Chris Dodd.
Brachiator
@Martin:
This is incomplete on a number of levels.
Let’s consider Pasadena, CA, not a particularly small city. Market forces have essentially banished middle class moviegoers from going out to the movies.
There used to be numerous places to watch movies. Four chains have closed their theaters. The Pacific Theaters upgraded to become an ArcLight, promising a premium movie experience, but this is not nearly as good as the ArcLight in Hollywood. But ticket and concession prices increased, and the size of the concessions decreased. Then there is the Gold Class cinema, which promises a super premium experience for $30 or $40 a pop.
I’ve never been to the Gold Class, but I hear that they give massages, and offer a profuse personal apology if the movie you paid for is really bad.
There is the Laemmle art house chain, still good, but they closed two other locations that were more convenient to many moviegoers.
And then there is the Academy, second tier theaters. They are actually doing a great job taking up the slack, even though the screens are really second rate, and the theaters not always very clean.
And that’s it. That’s all of the choices. The studios typically take 50% of the gross of first run films, and the window before DVDs appear gets shorter all the time, so it is hard for theaters to make money, especially with increasing fixed costs. A weak economy pushes attendance down. And more people choose to stay home, since they can get a reasonable viewing experience with home video or cable, and not have to deal with people who insist on talking over the movie or playing with their cell phones. The studios try to counter with gimmicky stuff like 3D and IMAX presentations.
And fewer films are getting made. Studios go for super mainstream and tent pole movies to try to guarantee high grosses. They get more cautious and are reluctant to fund smaller films. And because the DVD market is shrinking for various reasons, this is no longer a reliable source of additional revenues. The direct to DVD market is also thinning rapidly, which means that both front end and after market revenue streams are drying up.
Interesting point. It’s not as though you couldn’t see the movie at all. But you are saying that the existence of digital copies lets you satisy your demands exactly how you want, when you want. And at no cost. Is “free” really an alternate market?
But this is really the dilemma. The wide range of media capable devices, and the ease by which digital media can be perfectly duplicated and distributed, disrupts the supply side of the equation and greatly increases demand, or the means by which demand can be satisfied, without any payment to the creators or content providers.
Comrade Mary
@Tim in SF: On re-reading, “intent” is the wrong word. I’d rephrase my second part as: “theft of a single unit of access-to-the-experience”. Access-to-the-experience may be through a specific arrangement of bits (purely electronic), electronic plus physical artifact, or just a physical artifact.
The creator never intended to sell the specific collection of bits on her computer. She intended to sell access to the experience. Anyone who gets the experience without paying the creator is committing theft of access-to-the-experience.
Comrade Mary
@Villago Delenda Est: Oh, for God’s sake. I’m not talking about “look and feel”, I’m talking about discrete creative objects.
You know, “Smells Like Teen Spirit” had the look and feel of “More Than a Feeling”, if by “look and feel” you mean “whoa — chord progression and crunchy guitar riff!”. But if I were to download or purchase what I thought was Nirvana and got Boston instead, I’d feel ripped off.
Villago Delenda Est
@Comrade Mary:
I’d be far more concerned about ripping off Boston or Nirvana than I would be the RIAA.
The artists I’ll support. The middlemen? Not so much.
Tim in SF
@burnspbesq:
Surely you can’t be saying that you are right because of the way the laws are currently written .
Straw man. I never said they do not.
I said, and I continue to say, that copying is not stealing and I’ve heard little beyond rhetoric befitting a libertarian and logic that could best be described as “copying is *bad* and stealing as *bad* and since they are both *bad* then they must be the same.”
Tim in SF
@Comrade Mary: I’m sorry, but I am not a lawyer and I don’t understand legalese.
Tone in DC
Forgive my firm grasp of the obvious, I’m sure all can see where I’m going with this.
I can think of plenty of music/movies/books I would borrow from the library or a friend that I wouldn’t actually buy from a store or amazon.com. If the library or my bud doesn’t have the song/album/flick/book, then I’ll just get by without it. The main reason for this recalcitrance? The prices.
A new hardback book can cost $30, and we all know how much DVDs and CDs/albums cost. I know that the DVD of Angelina Jolie’s “Salt” cost the studio about $3 to manufacture and deliver to stores. That DVD cost $25 at Best Buy when it was first released after the movie’s run in the theaters. That CD of the Eagles’ Greatest hits, that has sold tens of millions of copies? That’s $15, and it cost even less to make than the “Salt” DVD.
These industries have been gouging the public for years, and only recently have Apple, amazon.com, Netflix and others come up with a less heinous way to sell audio and video.
It takes a lot to make eBay look good, but the publishers, RIAA and MPAA are giving it their best shot.
the dude
@singfoom:
We’ll see. I’m currently streaming hi-quality music via MOG (a subscription service like Spotify, Rhapsody, etc) for $4.95/m, which is a ridiculously cheap and convenient and legal way to listen to music.
But I’m not aware of much reduction in the torrenting of music files despite this.
RRoss
Stealing is still a crime, even if you don’t like the victim.
Comrade Mary
@Villago Delenda Est: Yeah, I support the artists all the way, and I’m thrilled that people like Jonathan Coulton can bypass all the leeches, and Louis CK totally earned that million plus with his concert download (which he then generously shared with employees and charities).
But I can’t say that getting the deep satisfaction of ripping off the RIAA makes up for ripping off the real musicians at the same time.
For example, I just heard the AMAZING Mike Viola on WFMU a few weeks ago, immediately downloaded his CD for $4.99 from eMusic (which pays him a pittance, but I needed immediate satisfaction), and also ordered the physical CD from his site for $9.99 plus Christ knows what financial surcharges at the border so that he could make a little more money. I want people like him to succeed.
(If he hadn’t been on eMusic or some other non DRM source, would I have downloaded his CD illegally? Damn straight I would have, and with no guilt, because I’d also already ordered the CD right from his site.)
So sticking it to the big guy while totally fucking over the little guy doesn’t appeal to me.
Anyway, Mike Viola’s live performance at WFMU’s Free Music Archive. (Killer track: Closet Cutter). All these live tracks are freely offered to you by the artist and the radio station. You don’t have to pay a penny, but if you like it, please consider buying his product, whether electronic or physical.
Comrade Mary
@Tim in SF: I’m not a lawyer, just a humble civilian trying to write as clearly as possible.
It seems pointless to attempt to argue this point with you any further as you keep implying I’m deliberately being sneaky and am arguing in bad faith — rhetoric! legalese!
Brachiator
@Tim in SF:
It’s not a matter of your being pedantic. You’re just wrong.
@singfoom:
I’m not sure that this is the case. I know too many people who just refuse to pay for entertainment, no matter what. And they use platforms to illegally stream or download movies. I understand some of this, though some of the decisions are still odd. People with kids want to keep the little ones with an endless supply of distraction. It would cost too much to take them to the movies every week. Costs nothing to bit torrent what’s hot. Others love action movies, one of the reasons why the top pirated movies are action flicks.
But yeah, I take your point that the movie industry is afraid to experiment with other distribution methods. HOWEVER, movie theater owners nixed an interesting new model.
And you pay through the nose for bad food and drinks because the studios take a big cut of a movie’s initial gross, making it harder for the theaters to make their own profits.
But yeah, the current models suck. As an aside, a lot of people forget that originally, the US had to wait for the Harry Potter novels. The US publisher was not the same as the UK publisher, and had a separate deal to publish the novels months later. But, in part because of the InterTubes, kids were hearing about the stories and reading discussions, but could not get the novels for themselves. They were not happy. Their parents were not happy. And, also because of the InterTubes, some parents said, “Screw this!” and started ordering the book on amazon.uk, bypassing the US sites. Very soon, everybody got religion, and the rest is history.
The entertainment industry has not yet got religion.
The Snarxist Formerly Known As Kryptik
I’m late to the party here, so I just want to throw in my two cents in that…I really don’t think better of GOPers for switching their vote, because I don’t think any of them are doing it out of actual principle or being swayed by the people. What frustrates me though is how many Dems, after all the caveats and capitulations over the last few years, finally decide to stiffen up their backbone, draw a line in the sand, and say ‘We take a stand HEAH!!’…and it’s for this odious shit. What the fuck.
@Tone in DC:
Lets not forget that a vast majority of the money made off such things don’t tend to go to the actual “content creators”, but rather the “content owners”. The actual artists behind it tend to get 10% of that money if they’re LUCKY.
It’s why the whole thing is annoying, because the internet allows a lot of artists to go direct to people without middlemen. THEY’RE adapting and thriving, but the middlemen refuse to adapt…so they want to shut things down so EVERYTHING has to go through them or no one gets to play, EVER.
Tim in SF
@Comrade Mary:
Fair enough. I’ll try again.
Nope. I still don’t understand. There are countless creators of music, video and art who sell their work as bits on a computer. Some follow traditional sales models, while other artists seem to make a living following new models*. I’m clearly not understanding what you are trying to say.
(*- I’m model agnostic – whatever sales model gets the artist money, I’m in favor. What I am not in favor of is allowing the RIAA, MPAA and other trade associations to redefine words like “steal” and “theft” to suit their own purposes.)
Tim in SF
@Brachiator:
Yeah, you’re right, I must be wrong. You have your opinion on your side. On my side, I just have the dictionary.
Mnemosyne
@Brachiator:
I’m not sure people realize that movie theaters are separate from movie companies, and have been since the divorcement agreements of the 1950s. AMC is a completely separate company from, say, Disney or Warner Bros. or Universal, so any money that goes towards DVD sales actually is money that AMC never sees. (You have a very few studio-owned theaters, like the El Capitan in Hollywood that’s owned by Disney and only shows Disney movies, but those are few and far between.)
The movie studios don’t care if movie theaters go away because they don’t have any financial interest in them. Movie companies would be thrilled to sell directly to consumers and not have to deal with distributing films to exhibitors who insist on taking a piece of the gross to show them.
Mnemosyne
@Tim in SF:
She’s trying to say that if you, say, download Louis CK’s internet-only video and then upload it to a file-sharing service, you are taking money from Louis CK.
People try to justify it by saying, “Oh, the record company is going to take all the money from the artist anyway, so it doesn’t matter if I share the file,” but I don’t see how people can argue that sharing a file that you downloaded directly from the artist isn’t basically stealing from that artist. Making photocopies of a book and distributing them on a street corner is still violating the author’s copyright.
Comrade Mary
OK, now we’re arguing on the same level again. Game on!
I’m absolutely in agreement with what you say here — including the last sentence ;-)
All I’m saying is that artists get to choose their sales models. A few years ago, Coulton put every single mp3 up for free, while selling CDs as well. I downloaded all the freebies he offered and, as it turned out, I bought the CDs, too. If I had downloaded a few mp3s and didn’t like them, I wouldn’t have bought the CDs and I wouldn’t have felt an iota of guilt.
But someone like Mike Viola, who offers really great live versions of his music online for free (see link above) doesn’t want people to download his CD for free. He offers it for a very cheap price online and as a CD or vinyl at correspondingly decent prices. He’s doing a lot to get his music out there without music companies and all the usual leeches getting in the way, I like his stuff, and I buy it so he gets money. I don’t just download it without ever paying him because hey, that Coulton guy is giving his stuff away for free.
Do you see the difference? In my non-lawyer mind:
– downloading Coulton, never paying him a cent: OK. That’s his model and I agree to it.
– downloading all the Viola I can get and paying him at least once wherever he’s required payment: OK. I’m following his model.
– downloading just what Viola offers for free: OK.
– downloading Viola’s CD and never paying him: Dude. So not OK.
And I’ll see your Gaiman (who I think is making a lot of sense and who I love anyway — I’ve been playing a library audiobook of M is for Magic much of the day) and raise you a Peter Watts.
Watts writes hard SF that will fuck with your mind three ways to Sunday. He could certainly give you chapter and verse on his struggles with publishers, but he is also offering every single fucking word he has ever written for free online, no DRM, plain old PDFs. Sure, he’d appreciate a few coins tossed his way for cat kibble, but his stuff is free free free online.
That doesn’t mean that I’m going to hunt down Scribd copies of other SF. If the writer hasn’t consented to a model, I don’t force them into that model.
Martin
@Brachiator:
Free really is an alternate market. In fact, it’s a more desirable alternate market than the bootleg market, which actually does shift paying dollars from the content creators to the non-content creators. The free market shifts no dollars. The studios argue that it denies dollars flowing into the market at all, but as noted above, that suggests that every home grown and cooked meal is a theft of a meal from a restaurant. That’s clearly bullshit. Restaurants succeed through adding value. Movie theaters could as well if they weren’t fucking lazy. The theaters that have bars and massages should be commended for adding value to the product in order to attract customers.
In the center of my neighborhood is a theater that shows only 2nd run movies, mostly kids films and they have 6 screens, so it’s pretty big for a neighborhood theater. It’s in walking distance for about 30,000 people. Movies are $2. Candy and soda and popcorn are marked up, but not much more than you’d find in a restaurant. The sell refillable cups and tubs and that kind of stuff to encourage people to come back often. We go there fairly often and the theater is packed every night. I mean, someone has to sit in the front row packed. Entire streets of families walk together to the movies, kids all clustered up talking and playing with parents in tow. For $8 you get admission for a family of 4 and for another $12 you get a decent haul of soda candy and popcorn. $20 for a night out for a middle class family is a pretty damn good deal, and nobody minds paying it.
Back of the envelope calculation is that each theater holds about 400 people. 6 screens is 2400 capacity. At 75% occupancy that’s 1800 customers. At $5 per customer average, that’s $9000 for every showing cycle, $600 per screen per showing just on tickets. They can get 2-3 showing cycles per night (actually more, but the lower occupancy matinees and late night shows sort of average out with one regular one, so effectively that’s what they’re getting). National average for first run theaters is about $300K in revenue per screen annually, but my little local theater is drawing about that number on $2 tickets, and with 5x the volume and ⅓ the price on soda and popcorn, they’re coming out ahead even on concessions. And this is months after the movies first released and around the same time you can buy it on DVD. If we were going to pirate the movie, we had plenty of opportunities to do it.
It’s bullshit that people won’t pay. They will. But demand drives the market, not supply. If the industry adapts to the market, the money will arrive. If they insist on forcing the market to adapt to them when alternatives exist, the market will go with the alternatives. The difference is that now there are alternatives, but a few decades ago there weren’t. And rather than adapt to that reality, they want to legislate it away.
But that’s not really the dilemma – it’s really consumers pulling back the curtain. Because it can be perfectly duplicated and distributed, there’s no excuse for the studios to not do that, and charge us a reasonable price. Fuck, it’s so goddamn easy to do, that the market solved the problem without even needing to coordinate to do it. BitTorrent proves that the solution exists and is easy to implement. NetFlix confirms that even further. This is not a technical or even an economic problem. It’s a political one. It’s studios lacking the will to implement a solution that the market KNOWS exists. We know this works because we’re doing it in spite of the studios not wanting it done.
This is why Apple succeeded with music, because they told the labels that their excuses were bullshit, that they could sell the product in the manner that the market wanted, that the market would actually pay for it, and that if they simply stopped fucking complaining about the world changing and embraced the change, they could come out okay. And it worked. Now, they didn’t need to enrich Apple to the point of 30% of their sales, but because they were too fucking cowardly and lazy to actually do it on their own, they wound up getting taxed for their incompetence. And I don’t see a problem with that.
There are obvious, already implemented business models for successful distribution of digital TV, movies, books and pretty much everything else that address the desires of the market. And the money will flow. The problem is that the studios and networks are refusing the money by refusing the market. Fine. If they won’t take the money for digital distribution, then we’ll do the digital distribution without their money. I don’t have a problem with that, and I don’t have a problem sending $2,000 to Vizio to value-add my entertainment experience rather than $10 to Disney, simply because Disney is too good to take my money. Clearly we’re willing to spend the money. Anyone who has stood in the checkout line at Costco knows we’re willing to spend the money. They just aren’t willing to take it. That’s not my problem, it’s theirs.
Martin
@the dude:
There’s another factor in all of this – and that’s access to payment methods. It’s easy for you to pay the $4.95/mo, but it’s nearly impossible for a 16 year old to do that, simply because they don’t have a credit card. They can ask mom and dad, but if they have cash in hand, why should they need to, and isn’t there a much easier solution?
That’s a legitimate problem, and the shift from this nice, fungible legal tender (handing over cash at a retailer) to payment methods that require pre-approval and demonstrations of future income have created some unintended dampening effects on the market. And the largest consumers of music historically have always been young people, who are now the most discriminated against in the online payment market. So again, we’re back to a problem where demand exists which is difficult or impossible to satisfy for artificial reasons.
Brachiator
@Mnemosyne:
Yeah, people want to think of the entertainment industry as a monolith. It’s understandable. But then again, many people in Southern California not only read and listen to stuff about the industry, but may have friends and relatives who work in it. Or just know some history of the business
@Tim in SF:
Then I guess you need a better dictionary.
But that’s just it. It gets harder to make a living. People have cited Jonathan Coulon here. On a recent episode of This Week In Tech, he talked about how difficult it was to make money even using the new models. He noted that he wasn’t making jack off Spotify. Part of this is the crappy deal with respect to artists that Spotify made with the record companies. And either Spotify or some other service listed all his music, even without his permission.
And yet a lot of techie just love streaming music services. This is their preferred method of getting new music. They don’t even bother with buying CDs. And they don’t care whether the artists, who they claim to love, get a dime.
Tim in SF
@Comrade Mary: Well, I don’t see that we’re disagreeing about much, if anything.
My point is that although unauthorized copying and distribution may be a crime, it may be wrong, it may hurt artists, it may hurt distribution companies and others in the supply chain, it may be a low down, dirty thing to do; that given all of that, unauthorized copying and distribution is different from, and should not referred to as, stealing. That’s all I’m saying.
Martin
@Mnemosyne:
Oh, yes they do. And they do because the measure of a movie is first weekend receipts. With very few exceptions, consumers choose movies based on opening weekends because you basically never see increases in box office receipts from one weekend to the next. You virtually never see good buzz about a poorly marketed film result in higher ticket sales. That opening weekend more than anything dictates the profitability of the project – all the way through DVD sales and broadcast TV rights.
Now, this might be stupid and shortsighted for the studios to have hitched the measure of their wares to who wins the weekend ticket sales, but they have, and because they have, they are incredibly dependent on the theaters.
The Moar You Know
@Brachiator: Why should they? I was a signed artist on a decent-sized label. My label didn’t give a shit if I made money, toured, sold t-shirts or if I had to eat ramen for a year straight (now they want a cut of your live proceeds and make you sign over your t-shirt sales too!). Frankly, once they hit their numbers, they’d have been happiest if I’d just crawled off to die in a gutter. They got their numbers and then they were fucking done with me. Why should anyone care?
Read, really read about what this industry does to most artists. The industry is run by moral monsters of the very worst sort, and I will be damned if they ever get another dime out of me.
Comrade Mary
Did someone say “record industry scum”?
Steve Albini
The Jayhawks: Expecting to Fly
Tim in SF
@Brachiator:
It’s always been hard for greater than 99%* of artists to make a living at their art. Always. New distribution models offer hope for a big chunk of those artists to perhaps make *some* money. Wired had a good article about this, with the first example, Nina Paley, being the example I was going to reference.
I don’t think it logically follows that because an artist it not making money selling their art, that it is caused by unauthorized duplication and sharing. One CANNOT make that assertion when there are so many examples that demonstrate that the two are either unrelated or complementary to sales.
Usually, when an artist can’t make a living, it’s because nobody wants to buy their stuff. Before the Internet, we used to say, “don’t quit your day job.” Now, we scream “PIRACY!”
(*- I’m guessing)
Kola Noscopy
@RRoss:
So what? As in the case of many other, much worse crimes, we should look forward, not back.
Berial
Distributing copyrighted works without license to do so is NOT stealing, it is copyright infringement. Stealing is a different crime and is treated differently. When you talk about digital files being moved around illegally you are talking about copyright infringement. Someone telling you that copyright infringement is NOT stealing is correct.
If I take your CD it’s stealing. If I copy your CD, but leave your CD where I found it, it’s copyright infringement.
THE GREAT BLACKOUT of 2012
THE GREAT BLACKOUT of 2012
I first learned about SOPA and PIPA a few months ago. The prospects of thwarting the efforts of behemoths like Disney and CBS seemed dismal at the time. Everyone assumed these bills were a slam dunk and we would all have to bow, once again, to the power of multinational corporate greed.
I blacked-out all of my websites. The few hundred visitors that frequent them seemed to support the effort. I lost only one subscriber from my mailing list. I salute the subscriber who left because that person exercised the right that I was fighting for – the right to get uncensored information and to choose for him/herself what to do with that information.
Defeating SOPA – PIPA pales in comparison to what is an historic event; THE GREAT BLACKOUT of 2012. The blackout was a demonstration of the FIRST EVER TRULY FREE PRESS – internet bloggers, website publishers , search engines, social networks, classified advertising, and the average day to day guy with a Facebook page – in unison took down the what is arguably one of the most powerful lobbies in Washington – the music and film industry.
Whether you support or oppose SOPA – PIPA you should be in awe of what has happened in the last three days.
This is a demonstration of what can be done by those willing to stand up and be counted.
This is democracy at its finest.
Long live the people.
Dan Laget
The Campus Herald
Mnemosyne
@Martin:
No, they really don’t care, because the US market is less than 1/3rd of the box office take for most movies these days. Studios couldn’t care less if movies don’t do well here as long as they do well overseas. It’s slightly easier to market a US blockbuster overseas than something that tanked at the US box office, but the US market just isn’t very important anymore as far as the studios are concerned.
The only people who care about US box office are the exhibitors, not the movie studios.
burnspbesq
@Berial:
Distinction without a difference. In either case, there’s an additional user of copyrighted material with no royalty paid.
OzoneR
@barath:
I don’t know how to tell you this, but it isn’t Koch pushing SOPA/PIPA, it’s Hollywood liberals.
Ken J.
I expect my young niece (20) to be highly pissed about the Megaupload seizure, since she recently told me to use it to send her some photos of a recent family gathering.
For the lesser-information young voters, the branding from the last 48 hours is going to be clear:
Republicans are for Liberty.
Democrats are working to wreck the Internet you use every day.
*shrug*
Hey, you figure out how to win if 30% of Obama’s young voters stay home in disgust.
OzoneR
@joes527:
More Republicans had originally supported the bill. Most Democrats were opposed or undecided. That’s the point.
I don’t understand how a Republican-drafted bill opposed by Nancy Pelosi and at one point had only Ron Wyden against it in the Senate because the Dems making the Republicans the party of internet freedom. It strikes me as them wanting to believe Democrats are the bad guys and twisting facts to make it so.
pseudonymous in nc
@Brachiator:
Not exactly. Take the Steig Larsson books: still lots of demand for foreign English-language copies. Now, the US publishers like to put out hardbacks first, whereas British and European publishers happily do first-run trade paperbacks, so Americans wanting paperbacks had to buy them from abroad — and had to order from sites other than Amazon.co.uk, which observed the regional embargo.
You’re definitely seeing a tightening of global release schedules for music and movies, but publishing’s still a weird industry, with different markets, different contracts (US vs “Commonwealth”, or “North American” vs “rest of Anglosphere”) and different practices.
pseudonymous in nc
@Ken J.:
Obvious troll is obvious.
OzoneR
@Ken J.:
Young voters aren’t going to vote for Obama because of a bill he opposed?!?!
patrick the pedantic literalist
@peach flavored shampoo:
Yeah, I understand that, you missed the point. Reid “made” Todd filibuster, but it was all for show so Todd could get his minute on the news. There was never any intent by him for any meaningful effort to stop the FISA amendment.
OzoneR
@patrick the pedantic literalist: Todd?
Kola Noscopy
@pseudonymous in nc:
Wow, that is just a devastating response to Ken J’s point about Obama and the dems losing young voters over this Internet freedom shit.
Basic Dembot response to nonbot question or point: FUCK OFF, YOU TROLL, usually with fingers in ears.
Fuck off you troll will also be an effective dem election strategy I’m sure.
Kola Noscopy
@OzoneR:
most dems supported it. he’ll be on the same ticket, get it?
patrick the pedantic literalist
@OzoneR:
Duhhhh…
Darkrose
@Zifnab: I think the Megaupload thing was an overreaction because the site itself was completely shut down. Anyone who was using it to store legal content–like, for example, the Sims modding community–is screwed.
Also, calling it “MegaConspiracy”…seriously?