how-to block ads
|
Comments on news posted 2003-11-13 09:27:24: Legislation set to be introduced today could deliver significant fines and prison time to anyone who has a copy of an unreleased film in a shared folder. ..
| |
 SaBo7Ge
join:2003-03-12
US
| Make the Studios pay for Security not US citizens While I can understand the MPAA's concern to keep their profits secure this legislation is wrong in the largest sense.. It's not our government's responsibility to keep the Major companies products secure it's their reponsibility.. If they are having problems then that's tough. They need to design a better system and secure their interests. The US citizen should not pay tax money because some people at the movie studios can't hire trustworthy individuals.. | |
| | jackisy
join:2003-11-08
| Re: Make the Studios pay for Security not US citizens its a scary thought that you have people of all ages downloading stuff. and then lets say an underaged person whose parents do not know anything about cpus gets caught what happens? your going to leave that family poor for the rest of their lives just for a $10 to go see the movie. what im having trouble understanding is this if you are not sharing but just download you are only causing them a loss of $10 that it would cost to see the movie in theatres how could they come up with all these fines. just a thought | |
| serein
join:2003-11-13
Elliot Lake, ON
| Please don't stop sharing your files! Emule and Bittorent require you to share your partial files because if no one shares anything the peer to peer network doesn't work which is of course exactly what the RIAA and MPAA want and that's why Kazaa isn't as good as it used to be.It's all scare tactics, your odds are better of winning the lottery than being prosecuted for sharing a few files. Unreleased movies are a different thing I would think, I presume the people who actually have access to these can protect them from prying eyes. I don't mind waiting till a movie comes out to see it.
Glad I live in Canada which isn't as far down the road to the 4th Reich,
| |
| jackisy
join:2003-11-08
| scary dont get me wrong that i agree with downloading movies because its wrong thats that. im just saying how could the fine be a quarter million. if the person is underaged and he has parents who know nothing about computers and then the next day his parents get arrested and lose all their money how could the law allow that? when a juvenile murders he is held responsible? second if the person does not upload anything and just watches it himself. he is just costing the movie companies $10 for not going to see it. so how do they get to these losses if your not sharing im just wondering that. | |
| | 
Iowan5
Premium
join:2002-11-27
Des Moines, IA
| Re: scary China rules!
No one can do anything about it, because they are the strongest nation on the planet! 
You can get the latest movies before they are released for free.
Too bad I don't speak Chinese so I have to wait in warez forums to get the link  | |
| | serein
join:2003-11-13
Elliot Lake, ON
| What is so screwed up about the logic of the MPAA and RIAA is that they actually think that just because someone downloads something they would go see it or buy the CD if they couldn't download it. OK they're losing money but they aren't losing $10 *every* time someone downloads a movie. They should concentrate on making better movies so people would want to go and see them on the big screen. | |
| 
Winerin
Premium
join:2002-03-30
Woodland Hills, CA
 ·Pacific Bell - SBC
| Was a matter of time It was a matter of time before things like this started to happen. We all know sharing copyrighted materials are illegal but we do it anyways. It's easier to sit at a computer and trade feeling immune. Don't get me wrong. I use to trade a lot and use to run a FTP server. I don't like this any less than anyone else.
File sharing will still be around though, for a long time. But it will get a little more difficult since most of it will have to come from overseas as more and more prosecutions happen and people under this law flee the sharing hobby. | |
| 
viperpa33s
Why Me?
Premium
join:2002-12-20
Bradenton, FL
 ·Bright House
| Just my 2 cents Of course the movie companies don't want you reviewing a movie before it comes out as we seen with the movie The Hulk. The movie company that distributed the movie complained that the reason why The Hulk got bad reviews and did so bad at the theatres was because people reviewed it before it came out. What would be the difference in a person previewing a movie by downloading it or reading about a bad review in the newspaper?
I think people are tired of plopping down $10 or more at a movie theatre, finding that the movie was so bad that the money could of been spent on something else more useful. You don't get your money back for watching a bad movie. The commercials you see on t.v promoting a movie don't help since it will only show the best parts which may only be 2 minutes of the movie.
It's not whether downloading is right or wrong, it's whether the consumer is tired of wasting money. This law don't help since I believe it will give the incentive for movie companies to continue making bad movies. Do I think that movie companies make bad movies intentionally, not at all. I do think that when a movie company does make a bad movie, they can still make some of there money back through other means like dvd's. So it may not be a total loss like they make it out to be.
Just my 2 cents | |
| | AnyOlTech
join:2003-10-30
Oakland, CA
| Re: Just my 2 cents There are reviews done on movies after they come out. You don't' have to watch the movie if it gets bad reviews. If you don't want to waste $10 on a bad movie, don't' watch it the first day it comes out. Let the professional reviewer spend his money. Read the reviews in the papers or online. But to see the movie for free and calling it your way to justify not spending the $10 on a bad movie is just theft. Would you pay an extra $10 if the movie was extremely good? I think not. | |
| |
viperpa33s
Why Me?
Premium
join:2002-12-20
Bradenton, FL
·Bright House
| The point I am trying to make is it's a hit or miss when you go watch a movie. A movie review will either make a movie company money or the movie company will lose lots of money. Don't you think if a movie company had the chance they would prevent the bad reviews to become public? So in a sense if you told me a movie was bad, that would contradict what your saying. It may not be stealing but it's preventing a company from making money.
Am I advocating stealing, not at all. Everyone has a right to make money, that's how a capitalist society thrives. Though I do have questions on the media companies actions whether it's the MPAA or the RIAA. It will come to a point when no one will be able to give there point of view. The point of the movie company was not that people downloaded it but people were able to review it before it came out.
Do I always go by the preview I see in the newspaper, I don't. I may have different tastes than the person who is previewing it. The only true preview I would go by are the many people who see the movie. Even then I would have my doubts. I do believe that I should have the right to preview a movie before I plop down $20 or more since I have a family between the tickets, popcorn, and soda. It's not being cheap, it's being practical. Like I said even a review, a bad review is like stealing cause your preventing a company from making money.
So I hope this clears things up | |
| mr_cool
join:2003-10-14
USA | question?? does that mean ONLY in a shared folder or what?  | |
| Kip patterson
Premium
join:2000-10-23
Columbus, OH
| What the law REALLY does If you get caught with a kilo of cocaine, you will be charged with possession with intent to sell.
If you get caught with a copy of an unreleased copy of a movie you will be charged with theft under EXISTING law.
The new bill adds only one thing - if you post an unreleased movie on the web where it is available for downloading it presumes that copyright infringement has occurred, eliminating the need to prove actual infringement.
Now, that pound of snow could have been for your personal use as could the stolen movie. If you want to steal a movie to look at it, just don't put it on the web, and keep your coke under careful lock and key.
There is no presumption of guilt - only a presumption of intent. The federal government (NOT the MPAA - they have nothing to do with criminal matters) still has the burden of proving that you actually possessed the movie, in a jury trial, beyond a reasonable doubt. Until that happens the alleged infringer is presumed to be innocent. That is the usual high standard by which our mostly successful criminal courts work. | |
| | russotto
join:2000-10-05
Collegeville, PA
| Re: What the law REALLY does said by Kip patterson  :
If you get caught with a copy of an unreleased copy of a movie you will be charged with theft under EXISTING law.
No, you won't. Unless you have a physical copy which was actually stolen. There isn't even a law against mere possession of an unreleased movie, with or without the studio's permission. You might get charged with copyright infringement, on the theory that you couldn't have gotten it without infringing a copyright. But not theft. | |
| 
CenTex2
join:2003-04-16
Marlin, TX
|  Perhaps this is a good sign!
The last I heard, the movie and music industries are doing fine desipte the recent recession. Musicians still get their $.50 per CD the RIAA allows them to have, and the movie industry regularly doles out $50 million salaries for some no-talent boneheads to provide a half-assed convincing performance while stand in front of a camera for a few hours. Now they're going to come after me? I don't think so. The fact that I may have a movie on my PC doesn't affect their bottom line one bit. If the movie sucks so bad that the bad PR around it affects movie sales when it does come out, how about taking it out financially on the idiots that made the movie? Maybe if the media moguls (both audio and video) would take responsibility for the crap they're producing, maybe there would be things coming down the pipe that consumers WOULD GLADLY purchase.
Talking about a skewed values system. I'm a senior network engineer for a major medical facility in Texas, with a modest salary of around 100k per year. I'm contributing to society, i help get things done and make the healthcare industry more efficient (if that's possible). Police, paramedics, and firefighters - among other public safety officials - put their lives on the line every day and most never see over $50k per year. Your TYPICAL professional baseball player makes $50k every FOUR days, and they're underpaid compared to basketball and football leagues. Is seeing anyone's face on a film justify the price of the ticket so they'll get their multi million dollar salary? Nope, don't condone that one either.
This country has problems.....but I think there's more important crap to worry about than what it's citizens have on their computers. When I'm rich, perhaps I'll do as the RIAA and the MPAA have and purchase the legislation necessary to ensure my survival. In the meantime, I'm not pushing the issue or crying that my 'profitability' is down a few points because of some punk in North Dakota has a copy of my work on his PC.
/end of rant
Brian | |
| | AnyOlTech
join:2003-10-30
Oakland, CA
| Re: Perhaps this is a good sign! said by CenTex2 :
This country has problems.....but I think there's more important crap to worry about than what it's citizens have on their computers. When I'm rich, perhaps I'll do as the RIAA and the MPAA have and purchase the legislation necessary to ensure my survival. In the meantime, I'm not pushing the issue or crying that my 'profitability' is down a few points because of some punk in North Dakota has a copy of my work on his PC.
Brian
Where do you start? Where do you end. I believe that all crimes deserve punishment. There doesn't need to be one crime that needs to be punished before another. They all need to be dealt with. The fact of the matter is we all need to put our foot down and fix this issue of immoral behavior and better-than-thou attitudes we are growing in America. We are a nation (supposedly) that believes that if you have a dream you can accomplish it; that if you work hard, you can do anything. The truth of the matter is we are a Capitalist society and for better or worse, that fact stands true. Money rules with an iron fist with laws and justice taking a backseat while morality and the good of the common folk are stuffed in the trunk. Most of our problems will get solved - eventually. As far as the RIAA and MPAA, they will cease to be a monopoly - eventually. This problem would be solved a whole lot easier if people would stop committing crimes in the name stopping the huge cash cow and actually hurt the beast by not giving them interest in their products by purchasing or stealing from them. Kill the demand and kill the monopoly.
| |
| jackisy
join:2003-11-08 | just another thought the U.S. is one of probably 6 countries where they can actually stop this. so what about the other 100 more countries that have access to all this stuff and no laws against it?????????? | |
| | Dave90631
join:2003-11-07
La Habra, CA
| What it comes down to people... | |
| | Dave90631
join:2003-11-07
La Habra, CA
| The fact is that information should be free. Movies and music are created by artists and is art. The MPAA and RIAA are restricting my access to this art. They are the ones commiting the crime here with the help of the government. All in the name of enormous profits and "security". Now with trusted computing just around the corner, we're gonna lose even more access to information that might otherwise be available to us. Soon the government and certain parties will control everything we see and hear(worse than now). Free speech will no longer be allowed and the government can lie freely and do as they wish without fear of an outcry from the public because we won't know about it. Knowledge is power my friends and when you control what is known, you control it all. We must all resist this Orwellian future that is over-taking us. The government is going too far and we need to fight. But alas it is probably to late. The corporations control the government now and have stripped away most of our means to do so. Heck, we can't even take up arms now because of gun control laws(again, for OUR safety). There will be a revolution in this country, soon. There has to be. With all the goverment corruption, loss of rights, and lack of caring(by the government) of the common citizen, If not, we are lost. We were once a mighty nation now were a freakin' joke. We should remove(kill if need be) all the current politians and lawyers and establish a new government. A lean, effiencent government with a structure that makes sense. Not the bloated Microsoft version we have now. And what happened to not having taxes? That sorta went out the window, huh? Everything that this country was founded on has been lost. It is no longer "The land of the free", it is the land of "Working at some job you hate until you're to old to work anymore while making corporate fat-cats rich and then you die" Yes, this post is a little off topic, but it had to be shown that the original topic is part of a much greater issue... | |
| | | Dave90631
join:2003-11-07
La Habra, CA |  Re: What it comes down to people...
| |
| TrustedZero
join:2001-08-25
Claremont, CA
| piracy "SURREPTITIOUS VIDEOTAPING of movies in theaters would also be outlawed under the measure, sponsored by California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein"
I was asssuming she would be supporting this bill. Every bill she has either supported or come up with really sucks. It makes me wonder if she is hellbent on striping the american people of all their constiutional rights. | |
| | Khyr0n6
join:2001-03-17
Cheshire, CT
| Re: piracy What's wrong in this equation is that a movie theater charges me 9.25 to see a fucking movie. The prices are WAAY WAAY WAAAAAAAY over the inflation index, it's just a monopolized industry and we're being raped. What's being done about that equation you hypocrites? | |
| 
cbrigante2
Cubs 20??
Premium
join:2002-11-22
North Aurora, IL
| The "real" issue Let's all be frank on this issue. This would hold true with the music industry as well. They both have a bunch of suits who guide the ship and they see one thing: The Bottom Line.
In the music industry, they claim (and that is all that matters for them) that profits are down 2 straight years. It doesn't matter if that has happened in the past or not, they want money....and lots of it. Lower profits might make us happy, but they ALWAYS want higher profits, every year.
Not sure what kind of year the film industry is having, but they sure seem to be reacting in a similar fashion. They might be making truckloads of money, but they think they should be making boatloads....big boatloads.....oil tankers full of cash.
I happen to love lots of music and movies. Let's all try to put ourselves in the movie studio president's shoes for a second. If my profits are down just once with this kind of technology out there, I'm not going let my head roll. I'm going blame it on piracy. It doesn't matter if you feel that they have too much money, are too greedy, too many mansions..etc. What matters is that they want it back, and sooner or later the spigot is going dry up. If someone is stealing my product (it's not money in an unlocked house that everyone takes....it's money that has been put up as an investment to make more money back, and like it or not, they would be making more money without piracy) and I have no legal recourse...guess what...I'm gonna stop making all those movies and there will be nothing worth pirating.
Do I think the punishment is a bit harsh...yes, but that isn't the point.
The point is this is a business, and the point of a business is to maximize your return of investment. | |
| | ross
join:2000-08-16
·Digizip
| Great Idea! Why don't they just stop making product, go out of business, and let some new form of production and distribution system evolve? It would probably benefit everyone concerned. Especially, the newly criminalized class, fleeced of their aasets and thrown in the slammer for 3-5 years.
If the CEO's of the entertainment companies don't begin to evolve with the technology, and comply with the demands of their audience/customers for more equitable, affordable access to their product, they will cease to exist anyway! | |
| |
cbrigante2
Cubs 20??
Premium
join:2002-11-22
North Aurora, IL
| Re: The "real" issue Evolving with the technology is also something these companies have always done, just not to the speed of some of the consumers liking.
DVD, VHS, PPV on demand are just some of the "technologies" that have been introduced to the Hollywood business plan.
Stealing something to make a company change is not a valid argument that is going to hold any weight in a U.S. court.
I don't think many people would be too excited to try to make a dollar in the movie business if it went belly up because of this. | |
| | Cyron
join:2002-09-24
Charlotte, NC
| said by cbrigante2 :
and like it or not, they would be making more money without piracy)
The point is this is a business, and the point of a business is to maximize your return of investment.
I don't think anyone can say for a fact that piracy hurts the record industry more than it helps, and vice versa (there's been independent studies that show both). What I can say for a fact, is the RIAA's war on piracy has created a negative image that will take years to overcome (even the RIAA admits this is hurting them).
From a business standpoint, I would want to disassociate my company from the RIAA, and go my own way. CEO's have to answer to a board of directors, and both have to ultimately answer to shareholders. Shareholders will only buy the piracy angle for so long. | |
| |
cbrigante2
Cubs 20??
Premium
join:2002-11-22
North Aurora, IL | Yes, this is a very good point that I failed to cover. | |
| | 
bolt
Former Broadband Exile
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Charlestown, IN
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| said by cbrigante2 :
The point is this is a business, and the point of a business is to maximize your return of investment.
This is true, but why must companies insist on making profits at the cost of alienating thier own customers? The software companies have been proclaiming for years that software piracy costs them $$$. But they assume that everyone who has the program would actually purchase it. That simply isn't true. So thier numbers are inflated. I suspect the MPAA and the RIAA are doing the same thing. I don't go to movies. I don't download them either. I know that for myself, I quit purchasing cd's. Also, instead of quitting the music clubs I belonged to, I stayed a member and plan to NEVER purchase another cd. I figured that way I was at least costing them something. Probably just as effective as sending a letter. I have used file sharing in the past, but I've used it mainly to find digitized copies of music I have on vinyl. The MPAA and RIAA need to realize that they need to change their business practices, instead of trying to hold on to the failed practices they have. When you can start downloding tracks for less than $.50, and can do what you wish with them, within fair use, perhaps I'll start buying them online.
--
bolthttp://www.boltweb.com | |
| |
cbrigante2
Cubs 20??
Premium
join:2002-11-22
North Aurora, IL
| I thought I would post a quote from today's New York Times about this very subject, as they are more graceful with the language than I. (I know...the Times is a funny irony with this subject with the scandal that rocked the paper a few months ago!)
"Because the thrust of this campaign is not to address a present crisis but, somwhat remarkably, to attack the cultural roots of the one that looms just over the horizon. The easy exchange of sounds and pictures makes it easy to forget that someone -- a lot of people -- made them, and that someone (else) owns them, and that taking them without paying is a kind of stealing. No amount of cyberlibertarian sloganeering can wish this basic axiom of capitalism away. Information may want to be free, but art costs; property may be theft, but the theft of intellectual property is still a crime."
--A.O. Scott, The New York Times
Sunday, November 16, 2003
Arts & Lesiure Section
Page 15
Again, just a much better way of stating what I was trying to get across before. | |
| SanJoseNerd
Premium
join:2002-07-24
San Jose, CA
| Fix Your Own House MPAA The only way an unreleased film can be on a file sharing system is if someone working for the movie company stole it and put it there. If movie companies are having security problems, they should fix it themselves. It is outrageous for the MPAA to demand the passage of laws and provision of police resources at public expense to fix a problem they could fix themselves by instituting proper security. | |
| | 
black_mantis
join:2003-09-10
Lake Monroe, FL
| Music to Movies I dont think that the movies company will hurt over this issue because the fact is even though you may download the movie you still want to see it on the big screen and even if there is a copy on your computer when the dvd comes out with the extra features your still going to buy the dvd it not like music one you get the file you can edit to how you like... | |
| 
aliasrlz
Premium
join:2000-09-01
the world
| Someone please...... ...define "unreleased" ??? Does that mean before it hits theaters? While it is still in the director's posession?
Or before stores? Or before DVD release? Or after critic and public screenings? What? What? What? They haven't even defined the key word for which they are going to try to prosecute people... blah!
Another unclear , undefined, law they are trying to get on the books......
--
If you have to ask what EFNET is, you don't need broadband | |
| | | |
|
