Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

SOPA


  • Please log in to reply
88 replies to this topic

#21 cor

cor

    The Hacker

  • Admin
  • 1993 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amsterdam, Netherlands

Posted 25 January 2012 - 05:21 AM

Cor, NL is part of WIPO, yet allows stolen copyrighted material within its borders with lax enforcement and by that , internationally. This is the type of lax enforcement of copyright infringement that requires stronger prevention. And yes it is stealing to download anything that is copyrighted because once you put it in a publicly available and not pay for it, unless the license is paid for. The copyright is broken ONCE there is no license paid for the material. Common internet fable of legality, check with your lawyers. :) Sorta like streaming music from a website to play at a club because they can't pay for the DJ to appear at the club, or watching Homeland (which I also don't watch but know the peeps) recorded from Showtime in the US and distributed on the internet, which somehow mysteriously falls into NL servers. :) Come on, now who has wool over their eyes. :) You are much smarter than me, so how can you not see that?


Im sorry Drew, but you're just wrong, no matter how badly you want to be right. Stealing requires criminality, it is part of criminal law. Downloading copyrighted material is not illegal in NL and many other european countries. (I dont know US law on this matter). It is not part of criminal law, I can not be arrested for it. It is that simple. This is purely about downloading for personal use. It is not at all like streaming music and playing it at a club, because that is not for personal use. And it's also not at all like recording showtime in the US and distributing it on the internet, because distributing content is not the same as downloading content. Both things you mention are illegal, also in NL.

What is not illegal, is if YOU offer copyrighted content to me (which is illegal), and I find it and download it. You can be arrested, I cant. No matter how many times you want to argue about that, this is a fact. Not some point of argument or interpretation. The NL versions of MPAA/RIAA have tried to get this law changed many times, and failed. For the same reason it's also not illegal for anyone to download a picture you made from your website, print it out, and put it on the wall in their room.

Closer to home for you, canada has the EXACT same laws as NL. It is legal in canada to download copyrighted materials for personal use as well.

Im not saying that this is better or worse than if it was illegal, im just saying you are wrong for calling it stealing, because it isnt. It may be illegal in your country but then so is smoking pot.

Now I must admit I find the globalization of US law a point of worry.

Cor

ps: this part of the discussion has no bearing on SOPA, because SOPA is only about US citizens, and I think SOPA is bad for other reasons than it being illegal to offer copyrighted materials to others. I do believe it should be illegal to offer copyrighted materials to others.

pps: I believe that most, if not all, US lawsuits have actually been about sharing (and thus distributing) copyrighted material, not about downloading copyrighted materials.
Cor Bosman - Nikon D2X Subal ND2 - Nikon D7000 Subal ND7000
website | tripreports/journal | facebook | wetpixel map | twitter


#22 cor

cor

    The Hacker

  • Admin
  • 1993 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amsterdam, Netherlands

Posted 25 January 2012 - 06:52 AM

I should mention that in NL there is a tax on all storage devices (CD,DVD,USB Sticks,Disks,etc..) that's supposed to offset personal copy use. This goes directly to the dutch version of RIAA/MPAA who then pocket 95% of it for their own gain, and move 5% on to the rights holders. I suppose the dutch found this a saner solution than criminalizing 95% of the population over a corporate problem. I dont know if Canada and others have similar solutions in place.
Cor Bosman - Nikon D2X Subal ND2 - Nikon D7000 Subal ND7000
website | tripreports/journal | facebook | wetpixel map | twitter


#23 loftus

loftus

    Blue Whale

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4571 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Winter Park, Fl

Posted 25 January 2012 - 06:57 AM

I should mention that in NL there is a tax on all storage devices (CD,DVD,USB Sticks,Disks,etc..) that's supposed to offset personal copy use. This goes directly to the dutch version of RIAA/MPAA who then pocket 95% of it for their own gain, and move 5% on to the rights holders. I suppose the dutch found this a saner solution than criminalizing 95% of the population over a corporate problem. I dont know if Canada and others have similar solutions in place.

:)
Much more sane to steal from them than to criminalize them
Nikon D800, Nikon D7000, Nauticam, Inons, Subtronic Novas. Lens collection - 10-17, 15, 16, 16-35, 14-24, 24-70, 85, 18-200, 28-300, 70-200, 60 and 105, TC's. Macs with Aperture and Photoshop.

#24 decosnapper

decosnapper

    Manta Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 423 posts

Posted 25 January 2012 - 10:52 AM

.....In europe we cant even get most current TV shows until a full year later. To me this is unacceptable in this day and age. Instead of the industry trying to cling to this system of worldwide fiefdoms, they need to embrace the new century and offer me products I actually want. I cant even PAY to get Homeland in NL.


I'm going to play devils advocate for a moment...what if the creator does not wish to license their works for a particular purpose...even at any price? The user may well want access to content, but this is not a right, whereas saying "no, not at any price" is exercising just that.

Is this fiefdom? Or exercising one's rights as the creator?

And in case anyone is wondering, yes I have denied a user a right to use. The fee was not so bad...but the intended use was contrary to my own moral values...hence the 'No'. There was nothing to stop them going ahead and creating something similar (care needed, plagarism laws might apply...a ruling in the UK has just popped up dealing with just that...) but they certainly didn't have the right to insist.

The right to say 'no' is something many overlook. We may be doing so at our peril.
Simon Brown

www.simonbrownimages.com

#25 Drew

Drew

    The Controller

  • Video Expert
  • 10643 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:GPS is not reliable in South East Asian seas

Posted 25 January 2012 - 11:08 AM

Cor, you are arguing semantics of NL law where you yourself just admitted it's stealing when one UPLOADS but not when one downloads. That little levy for CD/DVD (which btw, doesn't affect copying since it's computers, monitors etc etc that are used) is the NL government fixing a price on content that they don't own. It also assumes all content will be leviable. Worse it is also against EU law and WIPO law. If you read WIPO:

http://www.wipo.int/...en/faq/faqs.htm

Since NL is part of WIPO and they agreed to protect rights internationally, then it is illegal. NL also signed the Rome Convention:

Article 13
Minimum Rights for Broadcasting Organizations

Broadcasting organisations shall enjoy the right to authorize or prohibit:

(a) the rebroadcasting of their broadcasts;

(b) the fixation of their broadcasts;

the reproduction:

(i) of fixations, made without their consent, of their broadcasts;

(ii) of fixations, made in accordance with the provisions of Article 15, of their broadcasts, if the reproduction is made for purposes different from those referred to in those provisions;


So WIPO and Rome Convention requires NL to enforce other basic copyright rules, which is my point. And it's this lack of enforcement that is forcing people to protect their copyright in other ways.

If I'm not wrong, this is why XS4ALL site was ordered by Dutch Court to block out Pirate Bay etc, because NL law is moving towards making downloads illegal by preventing access to copyrighted material. NL law does not provide for internet copyright protection, which is why it's "legal" but actually illegal, since there is no compensation to the copyright holders. Just because it's not enforced, doesn't mean it's legal. I know you guys are appealing the order but if the EU is against it, as is WIPO and the Rome convention, then either NL withdraws from the EU, WIPO and Rome convention or enforce the laws they agreed to.

I'm actually surprised you'd be FOR a levy that assumes all content is copyrighted and thus justified. A freer market would be where I pay for my content at price offered (or not buy it if I think the value isn't fair). I'd hate for a government make me pay a levy for materials I'm not downloading, and also trashing the value of copyrighted works because they think their citizens prefer their material obtainable from illegal sources. It also fixes a price for a product without consulting the copyright holder.

Drew
Moderator
"Journalism is what someone else does not want printed, everything else is public relations."

"I was born not knowing, and have only had a little time to change that here and there.


#26 cor

cor

    The Hacker

  • Admin
  • 1993 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amsterdam, Netherlands

Posted 25 January 2012 - 01:26 PM

Drew, i'll msg you instead. You are wrong about the court decision. It was not about downloading. I'll msg you the details.

I'll just give one last paragraph..

The downloading of music, movies, etc is here to stay. No matter if you hate it or love it, that genie is simply not going back into the bottle. A whole generation of kids of growing up that dont even know any better and see absolutely no fault in it. You and I at least see fault in it, even though you may not believe me :) Im just a realist and a pragmatist. I think the world needs a solution to the problem, not a solution to the symptoms, and I believe Big Media has done virtually nothing to be part of fixing the problem and keeps on wanting to play an endless game of whack-a-mole with increasingly larger and less accurate hammers.
Cor Bosman - Nikon D2X Subal ND2 - Nikon D7000 Subal ND7000
website | tripreports/journal | facebook | wetpixel map | twitter


#27 loftus

loftus

    Blue Whale

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4571 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Winter Park, Fl

Posted 25 January 2012 - 02:11 PM

A whole generation of kids of growing up that dont even know any better and see absolutely no fault in it.

Pretty sad commentary, especially when no consequences can be expected and the same attitude then applies to everything else. Not just kids though, adults have quite easily adapted to this new reality as well.

Edited by loftus, 25 January 2012 - 02:19 PM.

Nikon D800, Nikon D7000, Nauticam, Inons, Subtronic Novas. Lens collection - 10-17, 15, 16, 16-35, 14-24, 24-70, 85, 18-200, 28-300, 70-200, 60 and 105, TC's. Macs with Aperture and Photoshop.

#28 Drew

Drew

    The Controller

  • Video Expert
  • 10643 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:GPS is not reliable in South East Asian seas

Posted 25 January 2012 - 02:23 PM

The downloading of music, movies, etc is here to stay. No matter if you hate it or love it, that genie is simply not going back into the bottle. A whole generation of kids of growing up that dont even know any better and see absolutely no fault in it. You and I at least see fault in it, even though you may not believe me :) Im just a realist and a pragmatist. I think the world needs a solution to the problem, not a solution to the symptoms, and I believe Big Media has done virtually nothing to be part of fixing the problem and keeps on wanting to play an endless game of whack-a-mole with increasingly larger and less accurate hammers.

I think it's because up till now, there has been no consequences of stealing copyrights. I've explained why content providers can't drop the entrenched system quickly. The industry would probably collapse if there are drastic changes. The internet allows people to break laws without consequences, and everyone likes to break the rules if they can get away with it, and that's the problem.

Pretty sad commentary, especially when no consequences can be expected and the same attitude then applies to everything else.

It's called bad parenting! :)

Drew
Moderator
"Journalism is what someone else does not want printed, everything else is public relations."

"I was born not knowing, and have only had a little time to change that here and there.


#29 decosnapper

decosnapper

    Manta Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 423 posts

Posted 26 January 2012 - 12:38 AM

The downloading of music, movies, etc is here to stay. No matter if you hate it or love it, that genie is simply not going back into the bottle. A whole generation of kids of growing up that dont even know any better and see absolutely no fault in it.


This is not a view I would recognise, or agree with. The whole statment is simply wrong...my daughter is fully aware of her rights as a creator, and responsibilities as a consumer...and I am currently in the company of many young people, ranging in the ages of perhaps 22 to 30, who not only understand the concept of intellectual property but realise that it has value and their careers and income directly depend on the entire concept.

I would agree that some do not know any better, but to claim all is wrong.

As for companies not changing, how does that explain the success of the iTunes store? This is an example of content being made available at a price..and the entire businesss model works within existing copyright law.

Based on that, is there a compelling reason to change? Of course many would like to just take without consequences or payment, but would these individuals ever be customers? Probably not.

Edited by decosnapper, 26 January 2012 - 12:39 AM.

Simon Brown

www.simonbrownimages.com

#30 Drew

Drew

    The Controller

  • Video Expert
  • 10643 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:GPS is not reliable in South East Asian seas

Posted 26 January 2012 - 07:14 AM

Simon, Cor is right that filesharing is here to stay in some form because there aren't any far reaching strategies. However, let's be VERY real about the fact that people do it because it's free and don't care about the legality issue, not because they don't know. The mentality stretches from the copyright owners won't miss a few $ to bizarre robin hood like justification.

I just came from a friend's house, a group of friends who share illegally downloaded content because it's free! They laughed about the legality issue with their kids. Maybe that's why they are rich, because they save on music/video costs!

iTunes/Amazon/Google are moving ahead with music, because the digital player is now on phones as well as ipods/tablets etc. Video is a whole new level that isn't ready for downloading yet.

Drew
Moderator
"Journalism is what someone else does not want printed, everything else is public relations."

"I was born not knowing, and have only had a little time to change that here and there.


#31 cor

cor

    The Hacker

  • Admin
  • 1993 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amsterdam, Netherlands

Posted 26 January 2012 - 12:06 PM

Hey Deco, glad to know your daughter knows better, but I never said all. Of course it's not all, thats impossible (I assumed that was a given, my mistake). But it's enough to know that it's a trend, a trend that goes hand in hand with the ease of use of modern technology. Look at what Drew said about the parents basically teaching this to their kids. I did mention the itunes store as a good positive example if you want to read back, and Steam (thats for games in case you dont know it). The itunes store does have some zoning issues that I personally find very annoying being in a non-US zone (see, americans never run into these problems so they dont perceive it as a problem, which I find annoying in itself :). But these aren't big enough to matter that much.

I absolutely dont agree that the whole statement is wrong, but i'll agree to disagree :) You're not going to be able to seriously police insanely large markets like china, india, africa (majorly upcoming in for instance mobile), large parts of asia etc. And even in Europe and the US people have been, are, and will find a way to work around copyright.

I think one reason why mobile app markets are so popular is the price level. Most people dont mind so much paying < $3 for a game or something. I agree with Drew that people want things for free(*) but I think part of that is because of price levels. Drew, has the industry ever tried to significantly lower pricing to see if that would bring in more people? What if a movie was $1,99 and that meant lots and lots more people would buy them? Would that offset the losses by downloading?(*2)

(*) I still believe part of the problem is availability. Im in Europe, and I hear this all the time. You can be all 'too bad', but thats not very helpful.
(*2) Although research has shown that there may not be any correlation between losses and downloading. It's not at all clear that people that share, would actually have bought the thing they're downloading. What is clear and proven many times, is that people that do share, on average spend much more on legal content as well, which to me makes the whole argument regarding 'people just want things for free' highly suspect. And wasn't 2011 a top year for movie theaters?
Cor Bosman - Nikon D2X Subal ND2 - Nikon D7000 Subal ND7000
website | tripreports/journal | facebook | wetpixel map | twitter


#32 ATJ

ATJ

    Tiger Shark

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 638 posts
  • Location:Blue Mountains, NSW, Australia
  • Interests:Diving, Photograph, Marine Biology

Posted 26 January 2012 - 06:06 PM

Video is a whole new level that isn't ready for downloading yet.

Sure it is. There's a raft of content available on iTunes, including TV shows and movies. I can buy a season pass for a TV series and download each episode as soon as it has aired.

#33 Otara

Otara

    Sting Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 260 posts

Posted 26 January 2012 - 07:05 PM

"What if a movie was $1,99 and that meant lots and lots more people would buy them?"

Or they could price it at 1 cent and everyone would buy it! At some point theres a basic cost involved, and I suspect its not nearly as small as people seem to think when they make these kinds of suggestions.

Otara

#34 cor

cor

    The Hacker

  • Admin
  • 1993 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amsterdam, Netherlands

Posted 27 January 2012 - 03:33 AM

Ah yes, those basic costs.

http://www.techdirt....we-500000.shtml
Cor Bosman - Nikon D2X Subal ND2 - Nikon D7000 Subal ND7000
website | tripreports/journal | facebook | wetpixel map | twitter


#35 Drew

Drew

    The Controller

  • Video Expert
  • 10643 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:GPS is not reliable in South East Asian seas

Posted 27 January 2012 - 04:54 AM

I absolutely dont agree that the whole statement is wrong, but i'll agree to disagree :) You're not going to be able to seriously police insanely large markets like china, india, africa (majorly upcoming in for instance mobile), large parts of asia etc. And even in Europe and the US people have been, are, and will find a way to work around copyright.

That I'll agree with. But I'll also add that most of those people aren't going to pay for it either, when there's a free copy available right next to it. The % of people willing to pay is much lower than you think, or at least that's what the "studies" within the industry say. From what I've seen, I'd agree with that assessment.

I think one reason why mobile app markets are so popular is the price level. Most people dont mind so much paying < $3 for a game or something. I agree with Drew that people want things for free(*) but I think part of that is because of price levels. Drew, has the industry ever tried to significantly lower pricing to see if that would bring in more people? What if a movie was $1,99 and that meant lots and lots more people would buy them? Would that offset the losses by downloading?(*2)

(*) I still believe part of the problem is availability. Im in Europe, and I hear this all the time. You can be all 'too bad', but thats not very helpful.
(*2) Although research has shown that there may not be any correlation between losses and downloading. It's not at all clear that people that share, would actually have bought the thing they're downloading. What is clear and proven many times, is that people that do share, on average spend much more on legal content as well, which to me makes the whole argument regarding 'people just want things for free' highly suspect. And wasn't 2011 a top year for movie theaters?

This goes right back to intellectual property protection. Luxury goods are copied like nobody's business worldwide because they are priced too hight for 95% of the market. So the only way to maintain "exclusivity" is to prevent copies. The same "too bad" philosophy is reversed as well, since those who buy knock offs generally can't afford the real thing but want the "idea" of the real thing.

There is no price level lower than free! :) As I said, entertainment content is so entrenched, it is seen as a "right" vs a "luxury." The only reason why iTunes/Amazon/Netflix are doing ok is because of the "moral" decision pay vs use free download, and also convenience. So there has to be some sort of protection against making filesharing easy. One of my favorite justifications I keep hearing is the ol' one guy paid for the license and is sharing his product with his friends, all 30 million of them! Not so much different from sharing a DVD/BD, except the numbers are exponentially larger! It is because they know it's wrong that they have to come up with justifications.


Sure it is. There's a raft of content available on iTunes, including TV shows and movies. I can buy a season pass for a TV series and download each episode as soon as it has aired.


The internet downloaded quality is nowhere near BluRay. Obviously there are some people willing to buy it and watch it on their tablet/computer/phone, but the larger market who want it on their larger TV screens don't have a convenient way of doing it, since internet TVs can only really stream right now with no real storage, and those media drives can't really interact with websites etc. Apple TV and other machines are now moving towards that model. It is, however, not penetrated the market in any real shape to move entirely to digital downloads/streaming. Then there's the issue of broadband speeds.

That said, the industry is moving towards digital downloads as seen in the last year or so. Moneyball, Friends with Benefits and a few other films were all released digitally BEFORE the DVD/Bluray went on sale. I personally love digital, less crap like DVD/BD to deal with. With iCloud and other cloud systems, you don't have to store it on your own server. I wanted my money back for Dark Knight though, cos it looked terrible on a big screen! It's not ready for prime time but for secondary sales, it works for a smaller segment of the population.

Cor, for every artist presented as an example of being ripped off, there's another who has great representation with agents, accountants and lawyers, hence it is a huge industry. Hey, surprise surprise! People rip each other off, that's capitalism at its finest. And that is jumping way off topic. The point is the protection of intellectual property and copyright holders. There are costs involved. Apple wants a cut, as do the copyright holders (and it's not just the artists, but also the production company etc) Everyone wants a piece of that pie. It's like every other industry.

Drew
Moderator
"Journalism is what someone else does not want printed, everything else is public relations."

"I was born not knowing, and have only had a little time to change that here and there.


#36 cor

cor

    The Hacker

  • Admin
  • 1993 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amsterdam, Netherlands

Posted 27 January 2012 - 05:47 AM

There is no price level lower than free! :) As I said, entertainment content is so entrenched, it is seen as a "right" vs a "luxury." The only reason why iTunes/Amazon/Netflix are doing ok is because of the "moral" decision pay vs use free download, and also convenience.


I think you are underplaying the convenience part. I think itunes/kindle/spotify/appstores.. are successful mainly because of their ease of use, their 'coolness' factor and their integration into other products. I think morality plays a much smaller part in why people use them.

And as I've been saying throughout this discussion, I firmly believe that if there were more cool/easy legal alternatives to existing illegal ways of sharing, you'd slowly start to get more and more people moving towards paying for their content. Dont think you can change the world in 1 go by some magical superweapon called SOPA. Im sorry Drew if I dont really trust industry studies, they have not always panned out to be the most reliable.

I also believe the industry itself is partly blocking this progress by their existing payment structure. As I showed in the above URL, in the music world you are still paying for breakage of vinyl in distribution!! The sole reason this is happening, is because the industry is desperate to keep their gross income and profit margins high enough to please wallstreet. But this cant endlessly continue. As distribution and production costs drop, you cant keep prices at the level of a system based on a completely different cost structure. People can see the cost structure, and are getting more and more upset by the perceived unfairness of it all. Drew himself mentioned the ebook case, where sometimes ebooks are more expensive than printed books. The average joe just doesnt get that. It feeds the system of not caring about the evil content industry.

Some people may think im for sharing (and probably, if you follow some lines of thoughts, for the terrorists), but this is not the case. I work for (and founded) a pretty well known ISP, that also happens to be really active in the political/social scene. In our daily work we see almost all sides of this story pass by. We deal with content owners, uploaders, downloaders, law enforcement, sharing sites, virusses (that are often used in sharing illegal data), etc etc. You name it, we probably deal with it daily. Because of this, you realize that both sides (and here I agree with Drew) have taken positions that are extreme. The content industry wants to keep the status quo and maintain their archaic income/cost structure in spite of the modern world changing almost monthly, the sharers want some kind of get-out-of-jail free card for getting everything for free.

We are trying to find a middle grounds and are trying to tell both sides they are being unrealistic. You cant distribute content illegally, and you cant have a nuclear weapon to destroy parts of the internet at your leisure because you dont like it. The solution lies in the middle, but both sides seem to want their cake and eat it. Lets be clear here, it's not the MPAA/RIAA/content industry that created current working solutions. It's businesses that saw a case for making products in the middle of this conflict, often being totally frustrated by the same MPAA/RIAA . These services fought their own war with the content industry because they threatened to upset their status quo.

I am not a big fan of MPAA/RIAA because of what I see them do almost daily. And for me SOPA was the proverbial case that broke the camels back.
Cor Bosman - Nikon D2X Subal ND2 - Nikon D7000 Subal ND7000
website | tripreports/journal | facebook | wetpixel map | twitter


#37 Drew

Drew

    The Controller

  • Video Expert
  • 10643 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:GPS is not reliable in South East Asian seas

Posted 27 January 2012 - 08:32 AM

I think you are underplaying the convenience part. I think itunes/kindle/spotify/appstores.. are successful mainly because of their ease of use, their 'coolness' factor and their integration into other products. I think morality plays a much smaller part in why people use them.

And as I've been saying throughout this discussion, I firmly believe that if there were more cool/easy legal alternatives to existing illegal ways of sharing, you'd slowly start to get more and more people moving towards paying for their content. Dont think you can change the world in 1 go by some magical superweapon called SOPA. Im sorry Drew if I dont really trust industry studies, they have not always panned out to be the most reliable.

I also believe the industry itself is partly blocking this progress by their existing payment structure. As I showed in the above URL, in the music world you are still paying for breakage of vinyl in distribution!! The sole reason this is happening, is because the industry is desperate to keep their gross income and profit margins high enough to please wallstreet. But this cant endlessly continue. As distribution and production costs drop, you cant keep prices at the level of a system based on a completely different cost structure. People can see the cost structure, and are getting more and more upset by the perceived unfairness of it all. Drew himself mentioned the ebook case, where sometimes ebooks are more expensive than printed books. The average joe just doesnt get that. It feeds the system of not caring about the evil content industry.

Some people may think im for sharing (and probably, if you follow some lines of thoughts, for the terrorists), but this is not the case. I work for (and founded) a pretty well known ISP, that also happens to be really active in the political/social scene. In our daily work we see almost all sides of this story pass by. We deal with content owners, uploaders, downloaders, law enforcement, sharing sites, virusses (that are often used in sharing illegal data), etc etc. You name it, we probably deal with it daily. Because of this, you realize that both sides (and here I agree with Drew) have taken positions that are extreme. The content industry wants to keep the status quo and maintain their archaic income/cost structure in spite of the modern world changing almost monthly, the sharers want some kind of get-out-of-jail free card for getting everything for free.

We are trying to find a middle grounds and are trying to tell both sides they are being unrealistic. You cant distribute content illegally, and you cant have a nuclear weapon to destroy parts of the internet at your leisure because you dont like it. The solution lies in the middle, but both sides seem to want their cake and eat it. Lets be clear here, it's not the MPAA/RIAA/content industry that created current working solutions. It's businesses that saw a case for making products in the middle of this conflict, often being totally frustrated by the same MPAA/RIAA . These services fought their own war with the content industry because they threatened to upset their status quo.

I am not a big fan of MPAA/RIAA because of what I see them do almost daily. And for me SOPA was the proverbial case that broke the camels back.


Cor, we both are in agreement but just coming from the other side. I certainly don't support SOPA/PIPA in its present form. Neither side are angels calling out the devil in the opposition. However, you and I both are directly affected and perhaps biased by that. Neither of us can deny the internet has made it a global problem that can't be handled locally.
Obviously there is some middle ground but I think we'll never get there unless we go back to charging for bandwidth. It's obvious if a user is connecting via torrents, the traffic is going to be pretty hardcore vs someone just downloading from iTunes/Amazon/Netflix. The UK ISPs are now hitting those who don't download from legal sources will get hit with bandwidth penalties. It's not practical though. To scale that methodology planetwide requires global cooperation. And we can't even agree on what copyrights are. :)
I think content producers don't see much money in providing online content so long as there is piracy. You can't beat 0 dollars! Another factor is that those who are paying won't be inclined to download pirated works anyhow. So again, the freebie peeps are just keep getting product by breaking copyrights and there is no real way stop it without serious laws to protect them.

Here's a little breakdown of how much an artist gets from various forms of distribution:

Posted Image

Mind you this isn't the atypical contract but an example of revenue distribution. As you can see, the labels get the largest cut of services like itunes. That's why certain artists have gone to releasing their own stuff online or heavily renegotiate their contracts. Income from album sales has shrunk due to piracy and the internet. Musicians now have to seek other forms of income including merchandizing (yet another pirated commodity), live performances (which for certain musicians are limited) etc.

Movies/TV shows are even more complicated. TV stations need to sell ads (unless it's state supported). The EU doesn't get US TV shows immediately because the local EU stations need to do several things, including dubbing dialog/subtitles etc. There's also the issue of the marketability of a show like Homeland in say NL. NL TV can pretty buy all TV shows for broadcast immediately, but they have to pay for it. And those programs have to bring in revenue. There are only so many hours and so many channels, so not all the popular shows will make it onscreen. Same for movies. The blockbusters tend to be released closely worldwide, but lesser known films have that delay because again there are only so many cinemas and only so many nights for the audience to watch it. Box office receipts are where the major portion of money comes from. DVD sales use to be a healthy supplement and occasionally even surpasses the theatrical release receipts. Piracy has ended that run.

The type of money coming from online isn't great. The DVD/BD sales is multi-billion dollar industry, but digital (depending on which research firm you ask), hasn't even hit a billion. However, physcial DVD/BD is declining and streaming/download is growing. There is one bold estimate that 2015 will see online overtake physical, but I seriously doubt that. Then of course there's the declining cinema tix sales in the last 2 years, but that could be due to the economy too.

And online pricing doesn't mean costs go down significantly. Kindle fixes a price for a book @ $12.99 digital (usually the savings of distribution, printing etc). The hard copy comes out $29.99 because some people still want hard copies, but after 18 mths, it's taking up space in the warehouse, so it's sold @ $5.99. There is no real need to sell the digital copy for less because there's no shelf space it's occupying or any paper rotting away. Furthermore, we are forced to buy ebook readers, where the savings benefit avid readers but not the occasional reader. Still the move to digital media seems unstoppable since Amazon now sells more ebooks than actual books.

PS: I know you aren't a terrorist(WTF??) or sharer.

Drew
Moderator
"Journalism is what someone else does not want printed, everything else is public relations."

"I was born not knowing, and have only had a little time to change that here and there.


#38 cor

cor

    The Hacker

  • Admin
  • 1993 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amsterdam, Netherlands

Posted 27 January 2012 - 08:48 AM

There have been many, many methods by which people in Big Media (often through puppet/bought politicians) have tried to link music/movie pirating to terrorism. Typical FUD. But as I said to some friends about a dutch news item recently, I think 'terrorist' should be added to Godwin's Law. The term has inflated to the point of being meaningless.
Cor Bosman - Nikon D2X Subal ND2 - Nikon D7000 Subal ND7000
website | tripreports/journal | facebook | wetpixel map | twitter


#39 Drew

Drew

    The Controller

  • Video Expert
  • 10643 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:GPS is not reliable in South East Asian seas

Posted 27 January 2012 - 09:06 AM

Oh that... well dumb people do outnumber smart people! :)

Drew
Moderator
"Journalism is what someone else does not want printed, everything else is public relations."

"I was born not knowing, and have only had a little time to change that here and there.


#40 cor

cor

    The Hacker

  • Admin
  • 1993 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amsterdam, Netherlands

Posted 27 January 2012 - 09:07 AM

I forgot to mention Spotify is a bit of an odd one out as it's owned by Big Media, who obviously do not have the best interests of the actual artists in mind. (people sometimes forget they're simply huge corporations with shareholders, and nothing trumps shareholder value, including the interests of artists).

It seems though that as revenue has been increasing in spotify, so has the payout to artists increased..

http://www.spotidj.com/blog/?p=264

I think the moral of the story is, self-publish :)
Cor Bosman - Nikon D2X Subal ND2 - Nikon D7000 Subal ND7000
website | tripreports/journal | facebook | wetpixel map | twitter