DMCA Takedown Service Tells Copyright Companies: 'Adapt Your Business To The New Digital World'

from the they-really-get-it dept

Although DMCA takedown notices figure quite frequently here on Techdirt — especially abusive ones that use the system to remove material covered by fair use or even in the public domain — the industry that has grown up around them remains somewhat in the shadows. That’s what makes the site with the self-explanatory name “Takedown Piracy“, found via the 1709 Blog, so fascinating: it offers a glimpse of the world of DMCA takedowns as seen from the other side.

As you might expect, Takedown Piracy sends DMCA notices to sites that it believes are holding copyrighted material belonging to its clients. But what’s surprising is the scale of the takedown: one recent post on the site talks of “hammering these sites with DMCAs“, and later goes on to give an idea of what that entails:

Once word got around that [the #3 adult torrent site] Cheggit was complying, myself and at least one other removal company began monitoring the site daily resulting in 100s if not 1000s of torrents were being reported every day.

Since the site was “complying”, that presumably meant 1000s of torrents were also being taken down every day. Making extra work in this way lies at the heart of the company’s service, as this helpful FAQ explains:

Piracy is rampant and can often seem like you’re playing Whack-A-Mole. However, in this case you’re not just hitting the moles with rubber mallets but we’re dropping napalm bombs on the whole field. Part of the success of piracy sites can be attributed to them offering a superior surfing experience for users. As long as copyright owners do nothing, that experience will continue to be superior. We interfere with that experience by introducing frustration to the mix. Whether it’s the site owner frustrated at the amount of time he/she spends on removing content or the frustration the downloader feels at not being able to find free content, frustration is a very valuable tool to use in combating piracy, and we excel at that.

What’s fascinating here is the recognition that piracy sites offer a “superior experience for users” – compared to the official offerings. That confirms other evidence that what people who use unauthorized sources are really seeking is not free content — because often they must pay to access them — but the extra convenience those sites offer.

Which means, of course, that it is the copyright industries themselves, with their failure to provide that convenience, that are helping to drive potential customers to alternatives. It also implies that if the content companies managed to make their offerings competitive with pirate sites — that is, even more convenient — they would win back much of that lost business.

Significantly, that is what the Takedown Piracy service seems to advocate:

While we’re doing our thing, you’re able to adapt your business to the new digital world and have a chance for your new distribution models to flourish.

If even an avowed enemy of pirates can see what’s needed, why can’t the copyright companies themselves?

Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and on Google+

Filed Under: , , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “DMCA Takedown Service Tells Copyright Companies: 'Adapt Your Business To The New Digital World'”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
97 Comments
Lokisays:

Oh, they can see what is needed. But since we are talking industries that either built their businesses (the MPAA/ major studios) around “violating” other people’s IP (basically, by their personal worldview, their own businesses are built on “theft of property”) or built their businesses (the RIAA/major labels) by essentially hijacking the copyrights of other people to leverage into profits.

Adapting would require them to both be honest (something they’ve proven to be largely incapable of) and to be able to actually compete in the marketplace (something they’ve also proven to be largely incapable of).

Anonymoussays:

Re:

Yea but you see, they figure if they can make the Internet inconvenient enough for people to use, they will all flock back to the old ways. And in the meantime they can blackmail the tech-industry to give them full control of the Internet. That way, they believe they can turn it into something resembling TV and Radio. The only thing they understand. Then they can squeeze even the last coin from their “consumers” (or stupid, filthy, unwashed plebeians, as they see them) from this new monopoly stream.

TtfnJohnsays:

Re: Re:

Thing is though, that had they made their services easy to access, easy to use and accessible along with little or no DRM they’d have had the public running to them because, at the time, TV, Radio and the Movie house experience was largely all there was. They’d have had their internet/web version of tv, radio and movie houses with some changes and made a killing and the public would have gone along with it.

Instead. They told people “no singles from cds” which gave birth to Napster. They kept idiotic windows in place which sent people to video and movie pirate sites and kept geographical restrictions in place which sent people off to video sites. Sometimes industries create their worst nightmares and the piracy issue is one glaring example of that. Live music thrives because there really is no alternative to being at a show even if there’s hundreds of people dancing and crowd surfing around you. You’re a part of something. An important part of something, at least in your own mind which is where it really matters. Recordings not so much to hear the RIAA tell it thouhgh they’ve never addressed the issue of 13 cuts on a CD and 9 of them trash at an expensive price. Movies not at all because. apparently, they’re all losing their shirts while continuing to drag in record revenues and profits.

What the monitoring agency/company is telling them is STOP making things so difficult or there will always be piracy. Seems a simple enough thing to figure out. But the RI/MPAAs of the world just can’t seem to grasp it.

The way you did business, the pre-Web models you used are dead and gone. Accept it and adapt and you’ll do fine. But just remember this you made things so hard or impossible to do legally the underground you were afraid of is alive, well and thriving and it’s not going away. More people seem to trust pirate sites that they do Hollywood or whatever sites Hollywood might set up to respond to this in an intelligent way. So the opportunity to carve out part of the web to be the “new” radio, tv and movie houses has come and gone and they weren’t there for it. The orderly mall has become a bazaar. So now they’re going to have to try harder to convince customers to try them out after the customers have been treated as criminals (DRM), locked out (sliding release windows), geographic restrictions that make no sense (gee I can record a program from an American channel in Canada or I can record the same program on a Canadian channel but I can’t watch a clip???? WTF?).
They had the chance, they blew it. The chance isn’t coming back again. So much for some kind of new monopoly steam, four or five years ago it MIGHT have worked. Not now.

Ninjasays:

Re: Ripping your own DVD's gives a superior experience

That’s plain annoying. I’m in 2012 and I can’t skip those damn trailers?

Doesn’t need much more than 2 neurons to see that this will be outdated next year so why make it obligatory to watch?

Sometimes I take my DVDs out to watch and that’s when I get reminded how nice it is to be a pirate. No unskippable content.

Anonymoussays:

they can see it. they just dont want to admit that they themselves are at fault! it must also be more beneficial to the entertainment industries to continuously waste money on trying their damnedest NOT to change than to actually change. couple that with the absolutely disgusting attitude they have towards customers in general (remember how after SOPA was put on hold, the entertainment industries wanted to talk to find middle ground, but the general public were all labelled as pirates?), is it any wonder they will fail eventually?

Anonymoussays:

wow, what a way to read into it exactly what you want, you have not even thought of the way they could mean it

“superior surfing experience for users”
could also mean, no ads, no stupid articles, no annoying pictures or pop ups etc…

bottom line is they want it free

“While we?re doing our thing, you?re able to adapt your business to the new digital world and have a chance for your new distribution models to flourish”

could also mean, while we take down the illegal content, your able to sell your content, since the illegal content is now gone

but most of the free loading losers will just look for another illegal rogue site to download content from, that they don’t want to pay for to begin with

this article doesn’t prove what you say, you read it your way to back up your arguement, while others read it differently

PaulTsays:

Re:

“what a way to read into it exactly what you want”

“bottom line is they want it free”

“free loading losers”

“they don’t want to pay for to begin with”

Mr Pot, have you met Kettle, Esq.? I think you’ll get on.

How does your typically skewed and falsified take address people who want to pay but either can’t or are offered a vastly inferior experience?

Anonymoussays:

Re: Re:

Oh please just shut the fuck up, you asshat.

Who do you think you’re fooling? You’re very funny here, prancing around pretending this blog isn’t full of unemployed content addicts that spend their worthless days ripping off other’s work, in between bouts of registering faux indignation about their “rights” on pirate blogs like this. Gag.

BigKeithOsays:

Re: Re: Re:

Neither me or any of my friends are willing to spend $30+ on a single blu-ray. Most don’t pirate, some do, most are willing to go without instead of pay those prices. Personally I got a Kindle for Christmas and have switched the vast majority of my spending to Amazon and Steam. Really TV and movies aren’t that important.

Most of my friends have had or currently do have a Netflix account. Single biggest complaint on Netflix? Lack of new content. These are paying customers looking for the content you worship above all else who can’t get it.

Here’s a tip, put this junk on Netflix for reasonable rates. I can guarantee that piracy rates will plummet overnight.

Oh, me and my friends are employed too.

MrWilsonsays:

Re: Re: Re:

“pretending this blog isn’t full of unemployed content addicts that spend their worthless days ripping off other’s work, in between bouts of registering faux indignation about their “rights” on pirate blogs like this.”

[citation needed]

You keep saying things like this. I’d like to see the files you’ve had drawn up on all the commenters on this blog. How much does who pirate who also comments on this blog? How many of us are unemployed? How many private investigators are you wasting money on to find all this out?

Oh, you’re not investigating us? You’re just wildly speculating and your conclusions coincidentally fit your preconceptions about freetard pirates who just want everything for free? We thought as much.

Not everyone here is a pirate. Not everyone here just wants stuff for free. That you can convince yourself and attempt to convince others that that is the only perspective held by anyone who disagrees with your point of view is indicative of how much you live in denial of reality.

Gwizsays:

Re: Re: Re:

…pretending this blog isn’t full of unemployed content addicts that spend their worthless days ripping off other’s work, in between bouts of registering faux indignation about their “rights” on pirate blogs like this…

I am none of those things you describe. You, on the other hand, seem to be of the first commentors on every single Techdirt article posted. Isn’t that telling.

Why don’t you go peddle your one sided bullshit on the comments section of a MPAA or RIAA sponsored blog. Oh that’s right. They don’t actually want to hear what their customers are saying.

PaulTsays:

Re: Re: Re:

Really? that’s your argument? I used the example of me obtaining something that I was literally refused access to in any legal way to prove my point about “underserved customers” and that makes me a bad guy? You miss the entire point of my example if you thought that “convenient” was my major argument, and I’m someone who spends a lot of time, money and effort legally buying material in spite of your industry’s idiotic attempts to stop me spending money.

Think about that for a moment, then ponder the actual arguments being made, not the fantasy strawmen you people depend upon.

KelvinZevallossays:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Specially considering how does “piracy” shows us that the content is so easy to transfer that the “3-year gap” or any kind of “time gap” the content distributors (who contractually buy the rights, but do not create the content) is completely ludicrous?

I mean… if the “pirates” can distrubite the content so easily, why the content industry can’t?

Josef Anvilsays:

Re: Re:

Yup, I read that completely wrong…

“Part of the success of piracy sites can be attributed to them offering a superior surfing experience for users. As long as copyright owners do nothing, that experience will continue to be superior.”

They obviously mean that piracy is evil and costs the economy more than the entertainment industry makes in a year.

Oh and….

“While we?re doing our thing, you?re able to adapt your business to the new digital world and have a chance for your new distribution models to flourish.”

That clearly means that we are doing our best to hold off piracy until you can get lawmakers to completely protect your business at the expense of everyone else.

Thank you for helping us all with our reading comprehension. All those words in plain English were a little confusing.

bigpicturesays:

Re: Read It

Yes you can read it any way that you want, but in the end it is facts that matter. Who actually produces music or written content? Is it not actually the artists and authors?

Does the recording companies and publishers not steal all the producers rights, when they sign them up for marketing agreements?

Now there are options to how producers market their stuff and these recording and publishing companies no longer have monopolies.

You think MegaUpload was shut down for piracy? No that was only the public face of the action, the spin if you will. There were plenty of artists making a good living through MegaUpload that will not have that option any more. “Monopoly” through any means possible.

Jadesays:

Re: (@9)

Are you daft?

There are ads all over piracy sites for one. The popup thing is a false claim, no one likes pop ups. I’m glad they stopped being such a big thing as they were in the 90s. At least now I can watch porn without having to close 20 popups a picture.

Who really cares what the reason is though, a superior service is a superior service. If I have the option between a mechanic who makes me listen to music I hate at full volume and a mechanic who just has on quiet music, whatever it is, the latter is a superior service and people will go there even if the first is cheaper.

Most people would be fine with paying, but if it means I have to sign up for 3 services that don’t work well together (violetlight or whatever it is, I’m lookin at you), then its service is equivalent to having your dinner served with a shit log on top.

“You’re able to adapt your business” does NOT mean “you’re able to sell your content” because the latter implies that NOTHING is changing. Something has to change in your business for it to adapt.

Next time you say “could also mean”, make sure you find actual possible meanings. You’re practically inferring that the sky is red from the sentence “the sky is blue”.

Anonymoussays:

Glyn, you are truly missing it here.

If you run a restaurant, and don’t have to pay for your food costs, you can spend plenty of extra money and time on “the eating experience”. Pirate sites are in the same boat, they don’t spend their time producing the content, cataloging it, or maintaining it, they get all that for free. They can spend their efforts on a better user experience. That improvement in experience is mostly that people don’t have to pay!

I think what these guys did is perfect. They made the torrent site have to deal with the reality of using pirated content as the core of it’s business, and when it got the point of having to deal with 100s or 1000s of removal requests, it ends up being too expensive to use this “free” content.

When it comes to this sort of thing, porn companies are way ahead of everyone else.

PaulTsays:

Re: Re: Re:

“So sorry if it doesn’t line up with your world view.”

I’m sorry your world view can’t allow for anything other than black-and-white, and precludes you from intelligent thought. Even a child would understand that your pathetic analogy is fundamentally wrong.

Unless you honestly think that the negligible overheads associated with copying digital files is the same level of overhead as buying in raw food ingredients, in which case back to the unicorns with you.

Anonymoussays:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Paul, you are again not dealing with the main issue, and trying to argue a sideline.

The site was packed full of torrents of illegal content. The rights owners “pounded” them with DMCAs until the cost of their “free” content was higher than it would be to be legit, and they shut down.

Deal with the main subject, stop trying to wander away from it. FACE UP TO REALITY!

Anonymoussays:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

There is no need for the studios to change their business model.

Wait… I know, you are snickering. But think about it. There is no need for them to change at all. If their business models are truly that bad, they will be wiped out by new business models, new entrants into the entertainment business that will wipe them out.

Let’s go back and look at the classic buggy whip / buggy history. When the car came out, it became a better product, with better usability, better user experience, and it slowly but surely pushed the buggy companies out of business. Now, the car manufactures didn’t hire hit squads to go out and shoot all of the horses to eliminate the old business model, they just made a better product, sold it in a better way, and as a result, they came to dominate the marketplace.

Mike tries to play it as a “business model” discussion, but it really is product. The business model follows the product, not the other way around.

If you think that the free distribution model is a better business model, then make some content for it and use the business model. If the model is so good, it will wipe out the existing entertainment businesses and the problem will solve itself.

However, if the only way the new models can compete is by taking the product of the “old models” and delivering it without cost, then they really aren’t better business models.

Why do all the new models seem to be hinged on “and we pirate the old system into the ground?”

BigKeithOsays:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

Because that is the reality of the situation today. You will never, ever kill piracy. The entire thrust of this blog is how to complete with piracy and make money doing so.

The crazy thing about all of you AC’s is how you attack Mike and this site while he is only trying to help you.

However, if the only way the new models can compete is by taking the product of the “old models” and delivering it without cost, then they really aren’t better business models.

Correction – they aren’t better business models for you! Why don’t you guys ever consider the customer in your arguments? It isn’t Mike himself out there costing you $10-bizallion in lost sales every year. It’s your own goddamn customers. They decided your business model is no good. Deal with it.

Not an Electronic Rodentsays:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

There is no need for them to change at all. If their business models are truly that bad, they will be wiped out by new business models, new entrants into the entertainment business that will wipe them out.

Well yes and no. That’s exactly what willhappen/is happening. Except the playing field isn’t level so it isn’t happening as fast as it should. Unless, I suppose, you consider it acceptable as part of a business model to be able to buy laws to prop up your business in against any emerging competition that doesn’t happen to have several billion lying around to “lobby” with.

The business model follows the product, not the other way around.

It’s both and service is a product too. Cars took off not when cars turned out to be “better” than horses, but when they were better AND accessible AND cheaper due to mass production.

If you think that the free distribution model is a better business model, then make some content for it and use the business model

You do know that every time you yark on about “giving stuff away doesn’t work” you sound dumb, right? Not one person in this thread mentioned “the free distribution model” but you. I wasn’t aware it was singular either.

Why do all the new models seem to be hinged on “and we pirate the old system into the ground?”

They only do in your tiny little universe inside your head. Most articles and comments about business models I’ve seen round here talk about different ways of using legitimate content. Netflix for example. On the other hand you, like the major content companies seem to have one of 2 responses to companies or ideas like that; 1/ [put fingers in ears] “La la la la la I’m not listening to you, you can’t make me so there!” 2/ “Oh, we didn’t think that would work, right well now you owe us ummmmmm a Gazillion dollars in extra licensing fees that we’ve just invented on top of the ones we agreed to in the first place. Why? Umm well because only WE are allowed to make ANY money whatsoever of our stuff (It’s OURS OURS OURS SO THERE!!!) and you’re just making too dang much even though you’re paying us.”

Anonymoussays:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

” If their business models are truly that bad, they will be wiped out by new business models, new entrants into the entertainment business that will wipe them out.”

Unless they spend 100s of millions of dollars to keep their bad business model relevant by buying registration and federal officers…..

PaulTsays:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

“Paul, you are again not dealing with the main issue, and trying to argue a sideline.”

Because that’s all that was presented to be by you to argue with. I’m not disputing either than the site had pirated material, nor that the DMCA was used to shut it down (although there were certainly better ways to do this, and the method used is troubling for less clear cut cases).

No, what you presented was an idiotic analogy, attacks on people who haven’t disputed your point, then went on your usual bullshit path of asserting your own opinion as if it were fact. In other words, you won’t address the actual reality in front of you, because then you might have to think, and accept that people sometimes have valid opinions that differ from your blind assertions.

Why don’t you wake up to reality? You are still unfamiliar with it, despite all the times people have shown it to you.

Machin Shinsays:

Re:

Have you actually looked at the sites people complain about the most? The Pirate Bay for example?

You really should take a look because then you will realize just how little is actually spent on “efforts on better user experience”. Pirate sites tend to be pretty bare and ugly to look at. They are not the most user friendly. In general as web pages go pirate sites suck.

The reason people go there is because even though they are ugly and a pain to use they are STILL easier to deal with than movie studios options.

Not an Electronic Rodentsays:

Re: Re: Re:

Having a great product when you can’t deliver it to your customers or provide a customer service would be worthless. Having a great movie sitting in a format that only a fraction of your potential customers want isn’t going to help.

Let’s stop apologising for guys who run studios that expect everyone to pay though the nose for mediocre product with zero delivery or service. It just seems stupid to support them.

John Smithsays:

They Just Don't Get It!

I couldn’t agree more with the article. I am an HBO subscriber and HBO has on demand offerings. However, right now HBO offers on demand of Sopranos from season 2 and True Blood from season 2. I can?t watch the past season of True Blood as I missed it because I was overseas. I also missed a lot of the last season of the Sopranos. So even though I pay to have HBO, I had to get the shows I wanted to watch over torrent sites. It is very sad when it is easier to find what I want illegally than legally.

John Smithsays:

They Just Don't Get It!

I couldn’t agree more with the article. I am an HBO subscriber and HBO has on demand offerings. However, right now HBO offers on demand of Sopranos from season 2 and True Blood from season 2. I can?t watch the past season of True Blood as I missed it because I was overseas. I also missed a lot of the last season of the Sopranos. So even though I pay to have HBO, I had to get the shows I wanted to watch over torrent sites. It is very sad when it is easier to find what I want illegally than legally.

BigKeithOsays:

Re: Re: Re: They Just Don't Get It!

I didn’t say pirating it was the preferred method, just not to feel bad about pirating it. Sounds like he’s paid for the content and just couldn’t get it legally. So I don’t see a moral issue with obtaining it illegally.

In a perfect world HBOGo would have all of the episodes you are looking for. This isn’t a perfect world however.

(Viruses in pirated content, really? Just read the damn comments they aren’t hard to avoid.)

Sujasays:

If even an avowed enemy of pirates can see what’s needed, why can’t the copyright companies themselves?

Morony, pure and simple.

They are like a monkey who won’t let go of handful of nuts in a jar, the nuts are keeping their hand stuck in the jar but they refuse to let go and get them out 1 at a time.

They will eventually starve to death, still clinging the same nuts they refused to let go of. Morons.

Re: Re:

You mean like CBS did with CNET back in the day? Am I the only one who remembers how they advertised file-sharing and Usenet applications like nepster? Heck, they still offer most of them for download right now.

You remember wrong. CBS has only owned CNET for a few years. “Back in the day” they were independent. That meme that went around about CBS purposely seeding the world with file sharing programs is highly misleading and has to do with a silly lawsuit someone filed. Don’t be duped.

Not an Electronic Rodentsays:

Re: Re:

Torrents are generally NOT effecient, except that they spread the load over everyone else’s network rather than making the original distributor pay to get their work out there

“Torrents are not efficient, except for the ways in which they are efficient.” Interesting observation.

If you started from scratch, this still wouldn’t be the most desirable model. Versioning alone of files is a real issue.

Soooo making, for example, an official release with an appropriate hash that’s independantly checkable wouldn’t go some way to solving versioning, or a little bit of thought and development from someone in whose intrerests it would be to make it more efficient? And as it is, you’d say bit-torrents were far less efficient than, say, shipping little plastic disks everywhere?

I think what you meant was “I can’t think of a good way to be able to charge a boat-load of cash for every single peer-to-peer byte of data moved, nor can I think of a justification I could use to charge enough to average at least 1000% profit per item that anyone would swallow”

Anonymoussays:

Re: Re: Re:

Spreading the load isn’t effecient, as much as it is freeloading on other people’s networks.

Versioning issues exist because not everyone has the right update. Trying to keep current (and eliminate out of date versions) in a universe where you don’t control the distribution is pretty much a losing batter.

As for the rest of your post, it’s total bullshit. Let’s compare REAL models – bit torrent distribution, or direct download servers. In a direct download, you control the content, and you serve your customers directly, creating trust. The costs of bandwidth are low, so the costs to distribute in this manner are very low.

The rest of your post, well, just isn’t honest or fair.

Not an Electronic Rodentsays:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

In a direct download, you control the content, and you serve your customers directly, creating trust.

Now there’s an idea. I think I’ll just go buy myself a legitimate 1080p download of the “just re-released on bluray” Pulp Fiction. Oh.. that’s a shame I don’t seem to be able to find one that’s not (probably) infringing. In fact searching for it I don’t see one offering I could “trust” not to be infringing. It seems my only choice for legitimate HD content is a little plastic disc. What was that about comparing REAL models?

The rest of your post, well, just isn’t honest or fair.

Fair? possibly not. Honest? Yes it was a 100% honest, if facetious, opinion based on observation.

Oh, and:

Spreading the load isn’t effecient, as much as it is freeloading on other people’s networks.

Aaaaaand again with the “wanting stuff for free” rant. If you dislike it so much offer the customer a CHOICE. Personally I don’t mind sharing a bit of bandwidth since a/ I can control it and b/ I can get a Linux distro or appliance server down in a 10th of the time it would take otherwise. But if sharing your toys and playing nicely isn’t your thing that’s up to you.

Gwizsays:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Spreading the load isn’t effecient, as much as it is freeloading on other people’s networks.

Riiiight. Freeloading on the internet connection that I pay for with my hard earned cash.

Next, your going to tell me that about all those bastards who “freeload” phone minutes on their unlimited phone plans by talking too much.

Anonymoussays:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

You act like the host can not provide a ton of bandwidth over a torrent. You realize you can seed your content with a huge pipe right? So you can host a file that is in essence both direct download and torrent.

This is what Blizzard does and its much better than a direct download. Its better because they have multiple servers all giving out the bandwidth that most people use for a direct download. So rather than choosing a mirror to download from you download from all the mirrors at once.

Also, when a ton of people are downloading the same thing from a direct download host that host will not be able to provide a good speed to everyone, all pipes have their limits. However if this is a torrent all the people share with each other so as the host slows down the web of peers picks up the slack.

Blizzard has 11 million people downloading patches on the same day. They would not, and were not, be able to do this efficiently without torrenting the content.

Claiming you can’t control versions when using torrents is also laughable.

Chuck Norris' Enemy (deceased)says:

Customer Appreciation

We interfere with that experience by introducing frustration to the mix. Whether it?s the site owner frustrated at the amount of time he/she spends on removing content or the frustration the downloader feels at not being able to find free content, frustration is a very valuable tool to use in combating piracy, and we excel at that.

This sounds like the content industry’s business model to a tee. The content they provide aka. “legal” are pure frustration for end users who have already paid! Frustrated by window releases, region locks, forced commercials, drm locks, lack of device portability, etc. Until the legacy buffoons make their services less of a frustration than pirate sites they will not gain ground over piracy.

Niallsays:

Re: Customer Appreciation

I do like Dreamworks movies, but it’s frustrating to have to sit through the unskippable ads on my legally bought copy of a kid’s movie that is as likely to make my 3-year-old want to watch that instead, only to run into another unskippable ad that makes him want to watch that instead, and I’m grinding my teeth at another mindless ad for a movie I’ve probably had to see 50 times already…

naschsays:

Re: Frustrating customers... what the media industry does best.

I find it amusing that they think frustrating the customer is the solution to infringement, when in reality it is a major cause of it in the first place.

Well that’s exactly it. When you’ve made your proudct so much more frustrating than the pirate alternative, you have two choices to compete. Make your product less frustrating, or theirs more so. They are unwilling to do the former, so are left with the latter.

Anonymoussays:

They're easily dealt with

Like this:

takedownpiracy.com: BLOCK

Nobody is obligated to accept their email, just like nobody is obligated to accept anyone’s email. And since they’ve publicly admitted that they’re spammers, there’s no reason to. Best to just blacklist them permanently: if they REALLY want to communicate, then can send a (paper) letter.

Bet they won’t. Bet their “service”, based on intimidation, abuse, and extortion, won’t be financially viable if they actually have to pay for what they use instead of stealing it from their victims.

Mekhong Kurtsays:

Mau-Mauing the Flak Catchers

Time to summon white hats to mau-mau these folks at Takedown. Some good guys should band together to constantly takedown Takedown, letting the bstrds have multiple overdoses of their own medicine.

Phaps they’ll come to understand the concept of restraint once the corn cob is swiftly ascending their posterior nether regions. . . .

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop ┬╗

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...
Older Stuff
13:40 It's Great That Winnie The Pooh Is In The Public Domain; But He Should Have Been Free In 1982 (Or Earlier) (35)
12:06 Norton 360 Now Comes With Crypto Mining Capabilities And Sketchy Removal Process (28)
10:45 Chinese Government Dragnet Now Folding In American Social Media Platforms To Silence Dissent (14)
10:40 Daily Deal: The 2022 Ultimate Cybersecurity Analyst Preparation Bundle (0)
09:29 A Fight Between Facebook And The British Medical Journal Highlights The Difficulty Of Moderating 'Medical Misinformation' (9)
06:29 Court Ruling Paves The Way For Better, More Reliable Wi-Fi (4)
20:12 Eighth Circuit (Again) Says There's Nothing Wrong With Detaining Innocent Minors At Gunpoint (15)
15:48 China's Regulatory War On Its Gaming Industry Racks Up 14k Casualties (10)
13:31 Chinese Government Fines Local Car Dealerships For Surveilling While Not Being The Government (5)
12:08 Eric Clapton Pretends To Regret The Decision To Sue Random German Woman Who Listed A Bootleg Of One Of His CDs On Ebay (29)
10:44 ICE Is So Toxic That The DHS's Investigative Wing Is Asking To Be Completely Separated From It (29)
10:39 Daily Deal: The 2022 Complete Raspberry Pi And Arduino Developer Bundle (0)
09:31 Google Blocked An Article About Police From The Intercept... Because The Title Included A Phrase That Was Also A Movie Title (24)
06:22 Wireless Carriers Balk At FAA Demand For 5G Deployment Delays Amid Shaky Safety Concerns (16)
19:53 Tenth Circuit Denies Qualified Immunity To Social Worker Who Fabricated A Mother's Confession Of Child Abuse (35)
15:39 Sci-Hub's Creator Thinks Academic Publishers, Not Her Site, Are The Real Threat To Science, And Says: 'Any Law Against Knowledge Is Fundamentally Unjust' (34)
13:32 Federal Court Tells Proud Boys Defendants That Raiding The Capitol Building Isn't Covered By The First Amendment (25)
12:14 US Courts Realizing They Have A Judge Alan Albright Sized Problem In Waco (17)
10:44 Boston Police Department Used Forfeiture Funds To Hide Purchase Of Surveillance Tech From City Reps (16)
10:39 Daily Deal: The Ultimate Microsoft Excel Training Bundle (0)
09:20 NY Senator Proposes Ridiculously Unconstitutional Social Media Law That Is The Mirror Opposite Of Equally Unconstitutional Laws In Florida & Texas (25)
06:12 Telecom Monopolies Are Exploiting Crappy U.S. Broadband Maps To Block Community Broadband Grant Requests (7)
12:00 Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of 2021 At Techdirt (17)
10:00 Gaming Like It's 1926: Join The Fourth Annual Public Domain Game Jam (6)
09:00 New Year's Message: The Arc Of The Moral Universe Is A Twisty Path (33)
19:39 DHS, ICE Begin Body Camera Pilot Program With Surprisingly Good Policies In Place (7)
15:29 Remembering Techdirt Contributors Sherwin And Elliot (1)
13:32 DC Metro PD's Powerful Review Panel Keeps Giving Bad Cops Their Jobs Back (6)
12:11 Missouri Governor Still Expects Journalists To Be Prosecuted For Showing How His Admin Leaked Teacher Social Security Numbers (39)
10:48 Oversight Board Overturning Instagram Takedown Of Ayahuasca Post Demonstrates The Impossibility Of Content Moderation (10)
More arrow
This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it