|
Post by worlder on Nov 20, 2011 0:17:01 GMT -5
And there goes the ENTIRE fanfiction genre. And the internet commentary genre. And basically the whole Internet. Are these people so stupid that they don't get this? Don't worry they'll charge us for using their footage and story... at the usual cost. Whatever that may be, but it'll probably be very high.
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Zachski on Nov 20, 2011 0:21:09 GMT -5
And there goes the ENTIRE fanfiction genre. And the internet commentary genre. And basically the whole Internet. Are these people so stupid that they don't get this? Apparently.
|
|
|
Post by nickiknack on Nov 20, 2011 0:50:25 GMT -5
Is there anyway the focus can be narrowed down. I'm not for this bill at all, but reading about it gave me a really bad feeling about it.
|
|
|
Post by RavynousHunter on Nov 20, 2011 0:55:12 GMT -5
ITT: Vee makes himself look like an asshole.
Also, seriously? Didn't they pay attention when Australia tried something similar? ONE WORD: Anonymous.
|
|
|
Post by Mantorok on Nov 20, 2011 1:01:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by foolishwisdom on Nov 20, 2011 1:05:37 GMT -5
This bill is ridicules, while this may lower piracy, it won't permanently stop it. I'm reminded of the controversial SecuROM for Spore. Two big things about it: 1. You install it without your knowledge, nor is it mentioned in the End-User License Agreement (EULA), which would technically make SecuROM a Trojan Horse. 2. It causes you to install only 3 installations (at least for Spore), so if you want to do more then 3 installations, you need to buy another copy of the software. Now for the more bigger headaches, to which this article sums up nicely: (Article was written in 2009) www.tomshardware.com/forum/101407-13-securom-gamesEnd result: A class-action lawsuit against EA www.gamepolitics.com/2008/09/24/ea-faces-class-action-lawsuit-over-spore-drmwww.courthousenews.com/2008/09/23/Spore.pdf (< Court file, PDF format) And Spore became the most pirated game in 2008, with 1,700,000 downloads. And that's just using a cheap bait 'n' switch trick, you think a minor thing like censorship is going to stop these people? "The more laws and order are made prominent, The more thieves and robbers there will be." ~ Lao-tzu
|
|
|
Post by DarkfireTaimatsu on Nov 20, 2011 1:10:56 GMT -5
Is there anyway the focus can be narrowed down. I'm not for this bill at all, but reading about it gave me a really bad feeling about it. Don't worry too much about it. President Obama says he'll veto it if it gets to his desk. Of course, it shouldn't be allowed to get that far, but still...
|
|
|
Post by Kit Walker on Nov 20, 2011 1:11:17 GMT -5
How would you apply his "give them a service better than what the pirates give them" principle to movies or tv shows or comic books or music, where you can download products every bit as high quality as are legally available for absolutely free? And I'm kind of of two minds about this. On the one hand, the language is way too broad and the punishment way to extreme. On the other hand, the "companies should suck it up, piracy happens, besides they're bajlillionaires anyways" argument really doesn't hold any water with me and we the people are kind of bringing this on ourselves.
|
|
|
Post by Rat Of Steel on Nov 20, 2011 1:15:18 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Zachski on Nov 20, 2011 1:18:02 GMT -5
And I'm kind of of two minds about this. On the one hand, the language is way too broad and the punishment way to extreme. On the other hand, the "companies should suck it up, piracy happens, besides they're bajlillionaires anyways" argument really doesn't hold any water with me and we the people are kind of bringing this on ourselves. Someone's making the second argument? I didn't realize that. What I did realize was that when you put on draconian measures that are designed to restrict the average consumer and punish them, piracy will increase, whether out of protest or because the pirated product has less bullshit to deal with. On the other hand, if you treat the consumer well, give them freedom, and make the product affordable to them, then piracy will drop and all you'll have to deal with are the cheapskates that would have pirated the product anyways. As for "Piracy exists, deal with it"... well, it does. And while, as a former pirate, I do support anti-piracy measures to an extent, it's something that will always exist, and when you punish the average consumer for the pirate's actions (which is what your last statement about "we're bringing this upon ourselves" encourages) then the only predictable reaction is that more people turn to piracy so they don't have to deal with the bullshit.
|
|
|
Post by Kit Walker on Nov 20, 2011 1:21:30 GMT -5
Not really comparable, and I'm unsure of what you're trying to say. Companies are to blame for piracy by trying to prevent it? Even assuming that is true, how the flying fuck does that justify piracy? I like Penny Arcade's comment on the matter. Someone's making the second argument? I didn't realize that. It's what most pro-piracy arguments boil down to, in my experiences. Because that totally justifies theft! It's really hard for me to get a car loan because I have no credit but I need credit to get credit, I'll just steal a car! Music costs $0.99-$1.29. An episode of a TV show costs $1.99. A movie costs $9.99. It doesn't get much more affordable than that (assuming you want to run a profit). And yet these are still the most popular things (to my understanding) to pirate. Most people I know (I know, anecdotal) tease me because I actually pay for shit. That is to say, when I bitch about how Amazon is late getting the newest episode of Young Justice up or express annoyance about how much a season DVD set costs, I get sent links to The Pirate Bay. The internet has produced a generation of people who think things should be free because they can be. They kind of have to take these sweeping steps though. This is a brand new era. Never before has one person making an illegal copy of something been able to distribute it to millions of people world wide, on a level large enough to impact the balance sheets. They're trying desperately to keep up, and I can't fucking blame them. Don't blame the company for feeling it necessary to put up more hurdles, blame the pirates who force them to.
|
|
|
Post by lexikon on Nov 20, 2011 1:26:22 GMT -5
Not really comparable, and I'm unsure of what you're trying to say. Companies are to blame for piracy by trying to prevent it? Even assuming that is true, how the flying fuck does that justify piracy? I like Penny Arcade's comment on the matter. Showing a few clips, and singing songs =/= piracy.
|
|
|
Post by Kit Walker on Nov 20, 2011 1:33:50 GMT -5
Showing a few clips, and singing songs =/= piracy. And under the law, yes it does. It infringes upon copyright to sing happy birthday in a public forum or for me to play a DVD in my living center's common area. It goddamn well violates copyright to put clips up on Youtube or sing copyrighted songs. Internet reviewers can get away with stuff on fair use grounds, but some of them really push it.
|
|
|
Post by Smurfette Principle on Nov 20, 2011 1:34:10 GMT -5
Is there anyway the focus can be narrowed down. I'm not for this bill at all, but reading about it gave me a really bad feeling about it. Don't worry too much about it. President Obama says he'll veto it if it gets to his desk. Of course, it shouldn't be allowed to get that far, but still... That was for net neutrality, not this, unless you have a source.
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Zachski on Nov 20, 2011 1:40:16 GMT -5
It's what most pro-piracy arguments boil down to, in my experiences. Most pro-piracy arguments tend to invoke "They've abused just what copyright actually entails, and we don't like that." I'm sorry that you seem to take a cause and effect analysis as "justification", but that's all it is. Cause and effect. ...What kind of people do you hang around with? You do realize pirates actually account for a very small percentage of a minority, right? and then there are the people who confuse the percentage even further by pirating something, and then turning around and buying it (which doesn't make things better, I'm talking pure statistics here) I think piracy seems to be pretty big in 4chan, but most other places will get you lambasted to all hell for even mentioning an emulator. FSTDT is one of the few "neutral grounds" where you can really talk about it and get a genuine mix of opinions on the subject. No, they don't have to take sweeping steps. Piracy is not nearly as big of a problem as companies like the RIAA would like you to believe. In fact, I do believe that the actual impact piracy has had on the RIAA's profits is minimal. Also, if you want to use the logic of "pirates forcing companies to put up more hurdles", then I will use the equally valid logic of "companies forcing people to pirate to avoid their hurdles." Showing a few clips, and singing songs =/= piracy. And under the law, yes it does. It infringes upon copyright to sing happy birthday in a public forum or for me to play a DVD in my living center's common area. It goddamn well violates copyright to put clips up on Youtube or sing copyrighted songs. Internet reviewers can get away with stuff on fair use grounds, but some of them really push it. No, it does not infringe copyright to do so. Copyright means that someone cannot claim that the song is theirs when it isn't. It is to protect ownership of the song. It is not used to dictate to others what you can do with the product they spent their money on and bought. If they want to make a music video with it, by all rights, they should be allowed to. Just as long as they include a disclaimer. Also, a nitpicky note, but I'm pretty sure that "happy birthday" is public domain.
|
|