RIAA: The Copyright Reform We Need Is To Make Everyone Else Copyright Cops

from the they-just-don't-get-it dept

The RIAA is gearing up for the big copyright reform battle doing the only thing it knows: whining that everyone else won’t fix its own broken business model. Despite heavy budget cuts and layoffs, the RIAA hasn’t yet realized that singing the same old debunked song isn’t a winner. It’s claiming that the DMCA’s safe harbors are broken and need to be fixed. It’s really quite incredible. They talk how they’ve sent 20 million DMCA takedowns to Google, and then complain that the process isn’t working. Seems odd, then, that they would send so many. Perhaps they should have knocked it off earlier, and focused on things like teaching people how to have better business models.

But, that’s not how the RIAA functions.

Rather than having a useful employee, like a VP of new business models, the RIAA has a VP of anti-piracy (I actually believe they have a few), and one of them, Brad Buckles, wrote the latest misleading screed against the safe harbors. The short version is basically: everyone else needs to prop up our business models by randomly taking down content that might, possibly be infringing. Of course, this makes no logical sense, no matter how much the RIAA wants to play pretend. Already, we see stories practically every day about how the copyright holders themselves — including the RIAA — send bogus DMCA takedowns all the time. And those are the guys who are supposed to know what’s infringing.

And yet they magically expect some third party, who has no idea if the content was put up in an authorized manner or not to make that determination for them? Really? Do they not realize (or not care) what a massive chilling effect that would have on innovation? If service providers are required to proactively guess at what is infringing and what’s not — and face liability for guessing wrong — then the obvious is going to happen: a lot less innovation in any service that includes user generated content. The risk of liability would be way too high. That may not matter to the RIAA, who has never been a fan of the internet, but it sure as hell matters to the public, who has received tremendous value from the internet. I’d also imagine it matters quite a bit to tons of musicians who are not a part of the RIAA machine, who now use the internet to have a better career than they ever had under the old system.

So, here’s a suggestion for the RIAA, while they’re laying off a bunch of staffers (despite giving boss Cary Sherman a hefty raise to $1.5 million per year). Maybe layoff the “anti-piracy” team — since clearly that’s not working for you — and hire a “new business model” or “innovation” team, and give them a shot to help your members.

Filed Under: , , , ,
Companies: riaa

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 “RIAA: The Copyright Reform We Need Is To Make Everyone Else Copyright Cops”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
99 Comments
That One Guysays:

Turnabout is fair play

I think a fairly effective way to get the *AA’s to back off on this ‘everyone needs to police our content but us’ would be to give them exactly what they say they want.

Hear me out here.

Since no one but the copyright holder can know what is and is not authorized, but they want everyone to take down content that even might be infringing anyway, that would mean that everything would have to be taken down.

Links to potential download sites? Gone.
Reviews/previews, whether text or video? Gone.
Trailers/articles for upcoming or past movies/albums? Gone.
Sites that sell their products and aren’t run directly(so no sellers like Apple/Amazon) by them? Gone.

And even those sites that had explicit permission to host/sell those things, as soon as they got a single claim that they might be infringing, would be forced to take the content down, just in case, and if they wanted to put it back up they would have to provide solid evidence that they were authorized, only to have to do the same thing for each and every claim.

After all, as they are always saying, better to err on the side of caution when dealing with potential copyright infringement, and no collateral damage is too high.

I think if they had their presence(and profits) on the net essentially disappear overnight it wouldn’t take too long before they’d start thinking that maybe a more moderate approach would be a good thing to consider after all.

DannyBsays:

Re: It's fair play, and would stop piracy, what's not to love?

It’s not just fair play, but it would actually stop piracy.

Be careful what you wish for.

Eliminate every single work of the RIAA from the internet. Every. Single. One. Because it might be infringing. And we can’t be sure if it is authorized if the RIAA cannot even be sure it is authorized. And it might not be fair use.

If just anyone, anywhere can get content taken down from, say Amazon or iTunes, then that’s great. The RIAA (and MPAA) seems to think it just fine that they can take down content that they do not own. Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

If the RIAA wants to have a penalty for using the DMCA to take down content the filer does not own, then that needs to work both ways — and with real teeth.

Anonymoussays:

Re: Turnabout is fair play

That would play into the RIAA hands, as the only way left to release music would be CDs and they control that market.
Remember that every artist that publishes outwith their control is competition for their business. It is this competition that will kill them in the end as their sales will drop as more artists compete in the market outwith their control.

That One Guysays:

CLARIFICATION OF POST

Judging by the number of comments similar to yours, it looks like I should have been clearer.

Since the reason for the ‘shoot first, ask questions later’ plan of taking everything down ‘just in case would’ be to avoid potential lawsuits, it would also only apply to those groups(like the *AA’s) that have proven to be lawsuit happy, and not independents.

So *AA music/movie trailers/reviews? Gone.
Independent music/movie trailers/review? Still up.

Sorry for the confusion, should have been more clear I guess.

out_of_the_bluesays:

Re: Turnabout is fair play

@ “Since no one but the copyright holder can know what is and is not authorized,” — THAT’S A LIE! — I can look at MOST OF the content on Rapidshare or whatever “file host”, and KNOW beyond doubt that it’s not authorized. A full length recent major movie for free is definitely infringed content. Being able to STEAL infringed content is the WHOLE draw of those sites.

Edward Teachsays:

Re: Re: Turnabout is fair play

I can look at MOST OF the content on Rapidshare or
whatever “file host”, and KNOW beyond doubt that
it’s not authorized.

This is categorically false. Unless you are a party to whatever contractual agreement gets made, you, OOTB[123] have no idea what infringes and what doesn’t.

Beyond that, consideration of fair use, in the USA the safety valve that lets free speech and intellectual monopolies co-exist, requires a court trial to determine. While you might like to be Judge, jury and enforcer on fair use determinations, hardly any one else would be satisfied with that.

Please, use your mind before posting such monumentally and patently and prima facie false statements.

DannyBsays:

Re: Re: Turnabout is fair play

THAT’S A LIE! — I can look at MOST OF the content on Rapidshare
or whatever “file host”, and KNOW beyond doubt that it’s not authorized.

Either you can or cannot tell if it is authorized. Let’s examine each.

1. You can tell if it is authorized or not.

Then why do your paymasters take down their own videos and music that is authorized?

If it is unauthorized, can you tell if it is fair use? A song incidentally in the background (in poor quality) of someone’s video of their child.

And, as someone else points out, if you can absolutely tell, then why do you file bogus takedowns on content that is not even yours? There should be a gigantic penalty for that.

2. You cannot tell if it is fair use.

Then how can you expect anyone else to tell?

You are therefore full of #$%@! for saying you can tell.

Anonymoussays:

Re: Re: Turnabout is fair play

You need glasses then, because full feature films could be being distributed by their own producers for a variety of reasons, to this day I believe that Wolverine was leaked unfinished by the studio to generate buzz.

Further copyright doesn’t apply just to moving pictures you have the old static pictures, writings and a lot of other things, how do you know that somebody bought the image, sound or video and it is using it in a perfect legal manner?

http://www.turbosquid.com/Search/Index.cfm?keyword=yoshi&media_typeid=2

Are all of those Yoshi’s infringement?
Is TurboSquid a well established pirate website then?

Oh look they have Iron Man there.
http://www.turbosquid.com/Search/Index.cfm?keyword=iron+man&x=0&y=0

Good luck annoying 3D creators LoL

Anonymoussays:

Re: Turnabout is fair play

I think this is a fine idea. Let’s remove all the possibly-infringing items from Amazon’s store. Let’s get all the reviews off Rolling Stone’s site. Let’s pull down all the third-party compilations of concert calendars. Let’s dispose of the performance reviews in newspapers.

Yes, it ALL must go because it might, just might, be infringing.

I’m sure that this will provide a valuable return on investment for the RIAA’s members.

Anonymoussays:

Re: Turnabout is fair play

Fun thought, but I don’t think it would work the way you think it would.

Links to potential download sites? Gone.

This plays right into the RIAA’s hands. They despise things like iTunes and Amazon because download sites remove some of the RIAA’s control. Take down all online music stores, and you move music back toward the world of CDs and brick and mortar stores as the only (legal) distribution medium where the RIAA can exert total control over most artists. And of course the first thing the RIAA would do is do away with singles and jack up the price of albums since there would be no competition to keep them at least partially in check.

If you meant other sorts of download sites, the argument still applies. Digital distribution in general is the enemy to the RIAA, regardless of which flag it flies.

Reviews/previews, whether text or video? Gone.

Once again, the RIAA would love this. They know 90% or more of their output is rotting garbage. They don’t like reviews getting out. Better for them if the consumer buys an album based on hype and marketing and only later finds out that only one or two (or zero) tracks on the album are worth listening to.

Trailers/articles for upcoming or past movies/albums? Gone.

Same as above, especially since movie trailers have made an art form of making trailers by piecing together the only good 5 minutes out of a terrible 90-100 minute movie.

Sites that sell their products and aren’t run directly(so no sellers like Apple/Amazon) by them? Gone.

This goes back to point 1, but the RIAA views sites like this as competition. And we all know how stagnant companies feel about competition. (Sent from my Android phone)

Take down the whole internet, and you fulfill the RIAA/MPAA’s wet dream since the late 90s. They thrive in a twentieth century world. The problem is, this is a twenty-first century world.

dennis deemssays:

Re: Re: Turnabout is fair play

But the infrastructure they relied on in the nineties is gone. Goody is gone. Tower is gone. Border’s is gone. Most of the local music shops I haunted in the nineties are gone. You could go into any one of those stores and preview a CD before taking it home. Why would anyone but a devoted fan buy a CD’s worth of music they haven’t heard yet?

Could the MAFIAA replace iTunes or Amazon? Honestly that ship sailed twenty years ago. I think it’s been sufficiently demonstrated that the recording industry has zero interest in competing with iTunes or Amazon.

So where would a consumer go to buy their bland, regurgitated product? I say pull the plug and let them die with dignity.

Greevarsays:

Re: Re: Turnabout is fair play

It would only eliminate centralized sources. Only sites and links would be gone, but there would still be tools out there that don’t rely on fixed links and sites. There are pure p2p tools that aggregate their indices without a centralized server or link. They peer the index to fellow peers and the user searches through the index for content. No servers, no link required. Tools like Tribler make this possible. Once these tools are published, there’s no way to make them disappear. The internet never forgets.

They could close down The Pirate Bay every other p2p site, but the genie is out of the bottle. There is nothing they can do short of shutting down the entire internet that will stop sharing of content. Since that will never happen, they’re just pissing in the wind. It’s war is over, they lost. What’s left are some flailing corpses unwilling to accept the fact that they are dead.

Anonymoussays:

Oh no, don't throw me in the brier patch!

Since no one but the copyright holder can know what is and is not authorized, but they want everyone to take down content that even might be infringing anyway, that would mean that everything would have to be taken down.

Yes, that that’s exactly what they want.

They want links gone, so that they can control who gets to promote music.
They want reviews and previews gone, so they can control what you see before you buy.
They want Youtube gone, so that everybody has to go to Veho to view music videso.
They want Apple and Amazon gone, so that everybody has to go back to record stores.

if they had their presence(and profits) on the net essentially disappear overnight it wouldn’t take too long before they’d start thinking that maybe a more moderate approach

No, their presence wouldn’t disappear because they have distribution monopoly, but everybody else’s presence would, which is exactly what they want.

Piracy is a straw-man. What they want is for everybody else to stop competing with them. Moving from “the internet is a communications medium” to “the internet is a broadcast-only medium” would fuck everybody except them.

PaulTsays:

Re: new business model

Looootttsss of previous threads over the years debunking this idiotic argument that’s a complete misrepresentation of anything that anyone here has ever said, and an obvious attempt to deflect away from the fact that the new model will simply not work long term in today’s market..

But you knew that.

DannyBsays:

Re: new business model

If revenues are declining, maybe you should figure out why people are not buying your stuff. Maybe they don’t want it anymore. Not even for free.

People buy Bottled Water (can’t compete with free). And the bottled water companies don’t need to give away their water to sell t-shirts.

Maybe you should try the copyright trolling business model. It seems to have worked well for Righthaven and Prenda. You too can be rich beyond your wildest delusional ravings!

DannyBsays:

Re:

I’ve made the point many times before that:
1. Google is not the only search engine
2. If they focused their efforts on the host, then ALL links, including search engine links would no longer matter

But they’re too stupid to get it as their continued focus on Google demonstrates.

I never thought of what you said: Maybe their problem is the think Google is the whole internet.

But how did Google take over from America Online which used to be the whole internet?

That Anonymous Cowardsays:

Re: Re:

Actually I think targeting Google has always been the plan.
Google has money, money the **AA’s like to claim was only made by ‘stealing’ their content.

They intend to bury Google in notices until its just more cost effective to let them have their own unchecked removal system and pay a portion of the profits to the **AA’s.

This could be the reason Google is now keeping a record of how many of these notices are freaking bogus.

Anonymoussays:

‘despite heavy budget cuts and layoffs, the RIAA hasn’t yet realized that singing the same old debunked song isn’t a winner’

convincing those in Congress will be harder than convincing these. there is little between them as far as common sense is concerned!

‘ It’s claiming that the DMCA’s safe harbors are broken and need to be fixed’

quite true. however, the fixing that is needed is so the DMCA does what it is supposed to do, not what the RIAA and other entertainment industries want it to do, and, in fact, try to make out that it does! the 20million take downs wont be enough for them if it was 200million. instead of keep getting sites, links and whatever else taken down, offering the same things from their own sites how customers want and keep asking for would be a better move. at least then they would be getting money in instead of keeping paying out! even with others paying bills for them they still have unnecessary outlays. ridiculous business plan!

as far as bogus take downs are concerned, ‘do they not realize (or not care) what a massive chilling effect that would have on innovation?’

they realise alright! they just do not care! they have it in their heads that there is nothing as important in the whole, wide world as a music track or movie. everything else is purely incidental. if the other things didn’t exist, it doesn’t matter. if things that could/should be released are not, it doesn’t matter! there is nothing more ridiculous and more self centered than an industry with this sort of attitude!

Mesays:

They've already found a new model -- and it's working

These content holders have already found a new way to work with Google to get their way. As Mike talked about a month ago, Google and UMG have signed an agreement where Google has agreed to take down and Keep Down all videos on Youtube that use partner content — even if those videos are totally fair use.

What’s happening here is clear: soon all this DMCA stuff won’t matter because as Google wants YouTube to become more and more slick channel/premium content-like, the more and more they’ll be willing to contract away the ability of regular users to make fair use. Copyright law itself isn’t working for these guys, so they’ve just looked elsewhere.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130405/01191322589/youtube-wont-put-your-video-back-up-even-if-its-fair-use-if-it-contains-content-universal-music.shtml

DannyBsays:

Fixing the DMCA

One fix that the DMCA desperately needs is a Sick Strikes provision that after six bogus DMCA takedowns that are defective in some major way, you lose your ability to ever file any more DMCA takedowns.

What I mean by defective in a major way is not some minor nitpick, but something of substance, such as not being the actual owner or authorized agent of the owner of the content being taken down.

out_of_the_bluesays:

Too many thieves and pirates break ANY business model.

You’re arguing the obvious in circles. IF people would stick to minimum morality so that piracy weren’t widespread, then copyright owners wouldn’t have to protect their incomes.

But of course you pirates don’t want to argue on moral grounds because know you lose there, so you keep putting out all these variations of BLAME THE PRODUCERS NOT THIEVES. Sheesh.

We must all police morality or civilization collapses. If you believe that taking someone else’s work-product is moral, then don’t be surprised when your efforts are stolen by even bigger thieves.

out_of_the_bluesays:

Re: Re: Too many thieves and pirates break ANY business model.

I repeat: But of course you pirates don’t want to argue on moral grounds because know you lose there, so you keep putting out all these variations of BLAME THE PRODUCERS NOT THIEVES. Sheesh.

But I’m actually wrong there, because you ankle-biters don’t argue at all! Attacks of all kinds are about the only response.

Take a loopy tour of Techdirt.com! You always end up same place!
http://techdirt.com/
Where the fanboys troll the site with vulgar ad hom, and call anyone disagreeing “trolls”!
04:29:01[f-842-1]

Ronsays:

Re: Re: Re: Too many thieves and pirates break ANY business model.

I don’t have a problem with the RIAA sending take down notices to have illegal stuff removed. They just don’t want to pay for it. They need to hire enough staff to do searches and send the notices out to have it removed. Google is not the one putting the stuff online. They are making it easier for the RIAA to find the stuff to take it down. Google makes it really easy for the RIAA to find the infringing stuff so they can have it taken down. The RIAA should use this tool to help them.

Gwizsays:

Re: Re: Re: Too many thieves and pirates break ANY business model.

Attacks of all kinds are about the only response.

Bullshit, Blue.

You have been refuted so many times that it’s becoming pathetic. Any argument that disproves what you say you simply ignore and pretend it doesn’t exist.

It must be getting pretty hard to type with your head buried that far in the sand.

Rubensays:

Re: Re: Re: Too many thieves and pirates break ANY business model.

How’s this: the RIAA and their ilk are the biggest pussies out there.

They’re too scared to go after infringers directly for whatever reason(possibly, as has been pointed out repeatedly, that they truly are their biggest customers), and instead go for this underhanded DMCA takedown and six strikes. Then they whine about how it’s not working.

No one respects copyright. It’s just insanely overreaching.

S. T. Stonesays:

Re: Re: Re: Too many thieves and pirates break ANY business model.

of course you pirates don’t want to argue on moral grounds because know you lose there

Okay, Blue, I?ll play your game.

What moral high ground gives the MPAA/RIAA (and its bought-and-paid-for allies) to extend copyright to a point where no one alive in the United States as of today (including any baby born today) will see any major submission to culture made within their lifetimes enter into the public domain?

What moral high ground gives the MPAA/RIAA the right to take down perfectly legal content with false DMCA takedown notifications?

What moral high ground gives the MPAA/RIAA the right to shaft creators on payments while pocketing most of the proceeds from sales of those creators’ products via accounting tricks?

What moral high ground gives the MPAA/RIAA the right to expect people not to do what the technology of today allows them to do?

What kind of moral high ground do you think the MPAA/RIAA have, anyway?

PaulTsays:

Re: Re: Re: Too many thieves and pirates break ANY business model.

Love it…

“Still insisting that everyone here is a pirate? What an idiot.”

He calls you out for being an idiotic liar, and what do you do?

“you pirates”

You repeat the same lie! No wonder you fail constantly, you can’t deal with reality.

cradesays:

Re: Re: Re: Too many thieves and pirates break ANY business model.

I take special care to not infringe on copyrights, although certainly not because I believe in copyright law as it is. I don’t pretend that I haven’t ran afoul of copyright law, though.. I’m pretty sure thats not actually possible to accomplish in our day and age. Just that I do my absolute humble best not to.

I hope it’s not my statement that is offensive? I’m just making the moral argument that ootb requested:
Even if you assume that copyright infringment is wrong
It doesn’t change whether or not punishing those who are not responsible is wrong.

Zakida Paulsays:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Too many thieves and pirates break ANY business model.

Sorry, I wasn’t clear. It was OOTB’s blanket ‘you pirates’ statement that I found offensive.

Like yourself, I do my best not to infringe copyright but, as you say, with copyright as it is it is almost impossible not to infringe in some way or another.

PaulTsays:

Re: Too many thieves and pirates break ANY business model.

OK, the magic wand has been waved and all piracy has just disappeared (an impossible goal, but since you’re too dumb to address the actual opinions of the people you attack here, bear with me).

Guess what? The recording industry is still losing a lot of money compared to 30 years ago. Why? Because of unbundling (people can now legally obtain the 2 tracks they want for $2 instead of being forced to pay $20 for an album of filler). Because of competition from other media (gaming, internet and movies take much of the youth culture that used to be the sole domain of music). Because quality has stagnated and people are turning to sources outside of the major record labels you fight so blindly to defend. Because you’ve treated your own artists so poorly that they’d rather not deal with the record labels any more.

If only you’d address the perfectly possible aim of reducing these problems instead of the impossible task of eliminating all piracy. Bonus: piracy will still go down and you won’t have been attacking your own customers in order to do so!

Anonymoussays:

Re: Re: Too many thieves and pirates break ANY business model.

This rebuttal brought to you by your friends at the RIAA. Because we know what you really want, and we’re going to take it from you anyway, so you might as well submit without resistance.

“And yet they magically expect some third party, who has no idea if the content was put up in an authorized manner or not to make that determination for them?”

That is correct. Magic is the “in” thing at the RIAA these days. Our magic is decorated with the faces of dead presidents, which makes it more powerful than your magic. By definition. Get used to it.

“Really?”

Yes.

“Do they not realize (or not care) what a massive chilling effect that would have on innovation?”

We absolutely realize what a massive chilling effect that would have on innovation. Since innovation is the enemy of our Dead-Hand-of-the-Past(tm) business model, creating chilling effects that stifle innovation and creativity is the exact objective of our actions. Making a few adjustments to your general and (freedom of) speech-related liberties, and those of the world’s population at large, is a desirable concomitant benefit. But that’s another topic for a different context. Nothing to see here. Move along.

“If service providers are required to proactively guess at what is infringing and what’s not — and face liability for guessing wrong — then the obvious is going to happen: a lot less innovation in any service that includes user generated content.”

What’s wrong with that? That’s the desired outcome of our actions. Jamming a stick in the spokes of the wheels of progress for our own personal enrichment (as well as that of our cronies) is the reason we exist.

“The risk of liability would be way too high.”

Exactly! It’s magic!

“That may not matter to the RIAA, who has never been a fan of the internet, but it sure as hell matters to the public, who has received tremendous value from the internet.”

The “public?” Get real! What relevance could the needs and desires of the “public” possibly have?! This is our playground you’re talking about! We make the rules here! Because we have magic (decorated with the faces of dead presidents)!

“I’d also imagine it matters quite a bit to tons of musicians who are not a part of the RIAA machine, who now use the internet to have a better career than they ever had under the old system.”

Who are those delusional fools? They don’t deserve our Munificence-In-Exchange-For-Your-Soul(tm) anyway. If any musician draws breath, it’s only at our sufferance! (Also, due to the complexities of calculating how much our members are owed by their unrecouped slaves, we prefer to measure quantities of musicians numerically, rather than by global net weight.)

The RIAA now returns you to your regularly-scheduled programming. Remember: We have the magic (decorated with the faces of dead presidents); you do not.

Ronsays:

Re: Too many thieves and pirates break ANY business model.

Did you forget the fact that during the 80’s and 90’s the record labels conspired to fix prices on CD’s and basically stole money from people actually paying for their music.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/life/music/news/2002-09-30-cd-settlement_x.htm

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,115443,00.html

Not to mention the fact the industry as a whole try everything it possible can to not pay the artist the actually make the music.

http://www.theroot.com/views/how-much-do-you-musicians-really-make

As for myself I only buy used CD’s that the record labels get no money from (that they also think is stealing but can do nothing about) or buy from unsigned indie bands that fund their own music and keep every penny over the cost of making the CD. The music I download is stuff I already own but am too lazy to rip myself.

Anonymoussays:

Re: Too many thieves and pirates break ANY business model.

“But of course you pirates don’t want to argue on moral grounds because know you lose there…”

Arguing over morals is like arguing about what is your favourite colour. It is utterly unproductive.

Interesting as a mental exercise, but useless in our post-modern world of technology.

Bring some data to the table, and then we can talk.

Anonymous Cowardsays:

Re: Too many thieves and pirates break ANY business model.

This isn’t about morality, jackass. It’s about accountability.

Take something down (via DMCA) you don’t own and you get your ass handed to you. Why can’t the RIAA accept accountability for their actions, since it’s the moral thing to do?

We’re wating, jackass.

Anonymoussays:

Re: Too many thieves and pirates break ANY business model.

We must all police morality or civilization collapses.

This is the most chilling sentence I have seen in a while.

Historical morality police enforcement topics include:
Interracial marriage/wrong race
Communist sympathies
Witchcraft
Insufficient adherence to religion
Women wearing immodest clothing (e.g. pants)
Diverse sexuality
Dancing
And sorry to go Godwin’s law, but…Wrong religion

Never mind. The piracy police is in fitting company.

Greevarsays:

Re: Too many thieves and pirates break ANY business model.

I do think copying and sharing “someone else’s” content is moral. In fact, sharing content is morally superior to hoarding it to leverage it for profit. I also don’t ascribe any ownership to any content I might produce because it’s not really mine, it’s built on the common wealth of culture that belongs to every thinking being in existence. It’s not mine nor any other person’s property. Everything I have, or will, personally publish is, as far as I’m concerned, automatically part of the public domain. I’m not so stupid to think that I can make money by going against human nature’s compulsion to share knowledge and culture. I know that if what I do is worth paying for, I can get paid for doing it. It’s called being paid for labor. Idiots like you want to get paid for a product that doesn’t exist. And what of the content I produce? It’s advertising for my value as a content creator, so that people may know what I’m able to provide them. Content I publish isn’t what’s valuable, I’m what’s valuable. If there is no me, there is no content created by me.

So, I have no fears about people sharing content I create because I will never support my income on that platform.

Anonymoussays:

The only thing that the RIAA has taught me over the last ten years is that copyright should be ignored altogether. They can pass all the laws they want, but I now longer choose to acknowledge it’s legitimacy in any form. So much so that I won’t even give them the honor of even pirating their material.
Don’t buy anything (firsthand) from any label that’s part of the RIAA
Don’t buy anything (firsthand) from Sony.
Haven’t watched TV/Cable in years.
Don’t even waste my time downloading content, if it ain’t on Netfilx it’s not worth the time.
Don’t much care anymore if bands I really like go broke anymore if they are signed to a major label.
Don’t really care anymore if shows I might otherwise love fail to find, or lose enough of their, audience to get cancelled if they are produced by the networks.
Don’t really care if MPAA movies flop at the box office.

Why?

Because the RIAA/MPAA/big publishing houses refuse to get it through their small, insignificant brains that they are NOT competing with piracy and they never were. They are, and always have been competing with THEMSELVES.

I have access to over 2,500 albums (and over 30,000 songs), over 1,200 movies and dozen of TV shows, over 2,000 books, a handful of console and PC games, and a crapload of board and roleplaying games.

I have no NEED for new content, and if I have a DESIRE for new content, there are plenty of sources (increasing by the day) that provide me what I want, when I want it, at a price that is reasonable, and without treating my like I am a piece of shit or a criminal.

They could find a magic bullet tomorrow that could totally stop piracy, and it wouldn’t help them much (at least in my case). I don’t consume their content, even for free, so why would I bother paying for it.

Anonymoussays:

They’re not just complaining about infringement, they’re complaining about competition period. They don’t want any competition whatsoever. As evidence see

A: Government established broadcasting and cableco monopolies. These make it difficult for independent content creators to get their content distributed (via these mediums) without giving up their copy protection privileges to a parasite third party that contributes nothing besides access to their monopoly privileges that they lobbied for and stole from the public.

B: A one sided penalty structure that prevents restaurants and other venues from hosting independent performers without paying a third party parasite a licensing fee. This deters restaurants and other venues from hosting independent performers. Even bakeries are afraid of allowing children to draw custom drawings on birthday cakes because they might draw something infringing and the bakeries don’t want to face potentially expensive lawsuits.

These laws hurt both artists and the public. They only help the parasite middlemen that contribute absolutely nothing beyond doing all they can to stifle competition. This isn’t just about stopping infringement, it’s about stopping all competition.

We need to start with abolishing govt. established broadcasting and cableco monopolies for commercial use or into the hands of private or commercial entities. That’s not how a govt should regulate broadcasting spectra in the public interest.

out_of_the_bluesays:

???????? This comment has been flagged by the community.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click to show the comment.

identicon horse with no name, May 24th, 2013 @ 7:34am

new business model
lotttttttttttttttttttssssssssssss of t-shirts.

Winner!


THAT IS SOMEHOW OBJECTIONABLE? Only to fanboys with their buttons to click on!

You kids can’t be taken seriously.

Take a loopy tour of Techdirt.com! You always end up same place!
http://techdirt.com/
Mike will soon announce T-shirts that he personally silk-screens! Just $1000 each! — He’s selling REAL scarcity as only one in 20 come out legible!
04:23:14[f-530-5]

Anonymoussays:

Re: ???????? This comment has been flagged by the community.

“”THAT IS SOMEHOW OBJECTIONABLE? Only to fanboys with their buttons to click on!

So OOTB believes that everyones comments should be objected too and reported too apart from their own put down comments. If OOTB doesn’t like the articles and comments on this site then OOTB can always write his own blog but he wont because he gets very excited in posting objectionable comments and putting down people they don’t like so its no wonder OOTB comments get reported etc.

Anonymous Howardsays:

Re: ???????? This comment has been flagged by the community.

But LUCKILY here you are, standing on the pedestal of Morality, armed with the Book of Law and the Sword of Justice, radiating Rationality, the only entity between the heaven of artists and the chaotic, dark masses of pirates.

Go on, maybe I’ll write a poetry from your whining about buttons and censorship.

Anonymoussays:

Re: Question?

RIAA has the record – sorry – “music companies” as their customers. The music companies have artists as customers. The Artists have music buyers as customers.

In the past, when self-publishing was a lot harder it was a common fight where what was good for the record companies was good for the artists. Since the music companies are now fighting tooth and claw in a desperate fight against self-publishing, the RIAA has to highlight something they can all see as a common enemy and that is piracy!

The fight is to some extend a distraction from their internal descend into no longer representing artists and record companies at the same time. What is even worse: Even some of the “music companies” have changed with the times and even they can see that the past doesn’t come back.

The only way to pretend to speak for all music companies and artists is to peg their raison d’etre to a fight against piracy, which most of them can agree is a problem or nuisance.

RIAA has no incentive to want a further development in the modern direction since it will cause its existance to be questioned further.

I do not see RIAA existing in its current form for much longer. It has lost a lot of its previous importance and power and eventually it will have to change its name.

DanZeesays:

Music Industry earning more money than ever!

What’s funny in this entire argument is that the ARTISTSs are actually making MORE money than EVER. It’s only the record companies that are making less.

Fans now have access to everything an artist has ever done, including demos and concert recordings, and they become even bigger fans, and are willing to plunk down up to $1200 to see Lady GaGa IN CONCERT. I’m sure Lady GaGa would rather you buy a ticket to see her than buy all her albums where she might get a few dollars in royalties.

dennis deemssays:

Some very cool graphs of the last thirty years of the music industry sales can be seen here that provide some insight:

http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/081611thirty

You can scroll through the comments and see a couple different variations where people have put all thirty years in one graph. My favorite is almost at the end of the thread, where you can see CD sales as an enormous blue bubble holding the industry aloft for years while consumers convert their LP collections to CDs as the labels slowly bring out their back catalogues on CD in shitty masters, and then finally in decent remasterings that consumers buy yet again.

Anonymoussays:

The reason this doesn’t make sense to you is because you think piracy is pretty awesome. Replace it with something else illegal that you don’t find so awesome and things start to make more sense.

Government corruption is illegal. If the regulars here are to be believed, it is also endemic (much like piracy). So, the solution should not be to try to fight it. Fighting it is stupid. You need new models that accept corruption and try to leverage it to accomplish your aims. The world has changed and it’s nobody’s responsibility to maintain a world with your quaint 1950s-era notions about how government should run just because you say so.

That’s what you sound like to them.

Anonymoussays:

Re: Re: Re:

I wouldn’t call it equal to corruption since corruption as a broad term is far too non-specific. It is probably more like corporations influence on governmental decissions since that is something without a simple solution.

Less illegal, but something with a more logical angle of comparison. I guess you wouldn’t like that analogy, though?

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