TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

Internet Doomsday: Wrongs and Rights of Copyright Fortune Telling

As the war of words over PROTECT IP and SOPA ignites the Internet, the MPAA has issued a reminder that “opponents” of past copyright laws have been wrong before. But while some fears over 1998′s DMCA and 2005′s Grokster ruling didn’t come to pass, some things are absolutely guaranteed. If the entertainment industries don’t get their way – or even if they do – they’ll be back for more. Again and again.

The recent outrage over the PROTECT IP and SOPA proposals has been unprecedented. While opposition to new legislation is hardly a new phenomenon, it’s rare for so many entities to disagree with the stances of the mainstream entertainment industries.

Over the past months, fears that SOPA will “break the Internet” have been repeated dozens, if not hundreds of times. But both the MPAA and RIAA feel that people are blowing things out of proportion, forecasting an Internet doomsday where none exists.

In his article “Predictions of Internet’s Demise Have Been Greatly Exaggerated”, the MPAA’s Paul Hortenstine points out the inconsistencies between the historical predictions concerning the consequences of 2005′s “Grokster Decision” and the actual effect the ruling had.

The next day Hortenstine was back again, this time with a post titled “Critics of Current Legislation Have Been Wrong in the Past about Content Protection Law.”

The piece begins by highlighting an article by Variety which chronicles anti-Protect IP and Stop Online Piracy Act comments made by Consumer Electronics Association CEO Gary Shapiro, noting that he was wrong not only about the predicted chilling effect of the Grokster ruling, but also that of 1998′s DMCA. The implication is that since Shapiro was “wrong” then, he must be wrong now.

But powerful people like the MPAA need outspoken opponents to bring them into line and with SOPA they certainly have them. When tech giants such as Google and Yahoo are prepared to leave the US Chamber of Commerce over its support for this proposed legislation, something is seriously amiss.

Later in his article Hortenstine goes on to call Shapiro out again, this time over his claims that passing the DMCA had been “a huge mistake,” going on to state that eventually the DMCA was recognized by Wired as the “law that saved the web.

“So when you hear Gary Shapiro and others proclaiming that the current legislation will be the end of the internet just remember that they’ve been wrong before and they’re wrong again this time,” concludes Hortenstine.

As Wired noted in their comprehensive article, “….it was the DMCA’s notice-and-takedown provision [that] has proven even more crucial to the growth of the internet. The provision grants immunity to so-called ‘intermediaries’ — ISPs, for example.”

So when we read  via a CNET report, that the RIAA are now saying that the DMCA isn’t working, one won’t be surprised to hear what is coming next.

“I think Congress got it right, but I think the courts are getting it wrong,” RIAA lawyer Jennifer Pariser said during a panel discussion at the NY Entertainment & Technology Law Conference. “I think the courts are interpreting Congress’ statute in a manner that is entirely too restrictive of content owners’ rights and too open to [Internet] service providers.

“We might need to go to Congress at some point for a fix,” Pariser added. “Not because the statute was badly drafted but because the interpretation has been so hamstrung by court decisions.”

Essentially, since courts have ruled time and again that the burden of policing infringement is the responsibility of the content owner and not the service provider, the RIAA want that revisited, reworded or otherwise changed.

One of the court decisions that “went against” the RIAA’s interests was in the case of Viacom versus YouTube. Viacom is now asking the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn last year’s ruling which deemed that YouTube is not liable for copyright-infringing Viacom material uploaded to the site. Viacom argued that YouTube should not have safe harbor under the DMCA.

Nevertheless, despite lacking this protection, Viacom chief Philippe P. Dauman collected a raise of nearly 149% last year, a renumeration of $84.5 million. This is not an enterprise in trouble from infringement, clearly.

But in addition to Viacom and indeed the RIAA wanting to tighten up or reinterpret the DMCA to hold the likes of YouTube more responsible, for good measure they also want PROTECT IP / SOPA.

So when “opponents of content protection legislation” (as Hortenstine describes them) make predictions that don’t immediately come catastrophically true, they aren’t necessarily guilty of getting their predictions wrong, only of not putting an accurate enough date on the impending doomsday.

The Internet may not break tomorrow or even next year, but there are people out there that really care, people that simply don’t want to risk it all for an ill-conceived attempt at stopping illicit downloads.

Because, as these “nay sayers” know and as history has shown, once one set of legislation is sent through the MPAA and RIAA only come back for yet more. And when those don’t go as planned they come back for an adjustment here, and a tweak there.

It is this environment of much-wants-more that leaves the likes of Gary Shapiro, Google, Yahoo and everyone else concerned that although the Internet isn’t broken now, there’s a real danger that in the name of copyright protection these corporations will keep fixing it until it is.

So-called “opponents of content protection legislation” can see the end game, and fighting that starts now.

Related Posts

Previous Post | Next Post

  • http://twitter.com/AlyssaBlindy Alyssa Blindy

    I smell systematic desensitization. I feel like the MPAA and RIAA (MAFIAA respectively) are trying to desensitize us to their strategy, and they are just going to take it further and further, until they do reach a broken internet. That is, if we don’t stand.

    • Anon

      Only on a site like TF can “Pay for the for-sale merchandise you make a copy of, or, pass as is your right and do without.” be distorted into a “broken internet.”

      Seriously. lol There sure is a lot of reality gone missing around here.

      • http://twitter.com/AlyssaBlindy Alyssa Blindy

        Yep, I am out of touch, just like google and yahoo. We are so out of touch, that we’re going to go sing a nice song.
        Lol.
        *sarcastic

        • Tom

          Google makes millions of dollars off of piracy, what do you expect them to say?

          LOL

        • Danny

          @Tom

          These so called ‘millions off piracy’ have never been proven. But the link between Movie companies and making millions off of piracy has!

        • http://twitter.com/icanhazsake Ninja

          @Tom

          citation needed

          And Google doesn’t make millions of dollars from piracy. Google makes millions of dollars by selling advertising spaces for the ppl that use their services. And most of their services happen to fulfill the needs of their users which in turn gets them more new users and more revenue. I sincerely doubt that providing a search engine that covers pretty much nothing from the web (I’ve seen numbers as low as 0,2%) but does better than their competitors, e-mail, blogs and so on constitute profit from piracy.

          Before you moan about how Youtube is evil please consider that it wasn’t profitable till this year. And consider that they take down copyrighted content via DMCA notices and even some direct removal process for content OWNERS (not necessarily creators) that has even been abused by the MAFIAA for removal of content that is perfectly legal.

          It is granted that freakloads of their content is user generated and there is much infringing content within the user UPLOADED content. But this doesn’t make Google a pirate heaven much like a private operated road isn’t responsible for drugs being transported (without their knowledge) via their lanes. IP maximalists will tell that Google should filter infringing titles everywhere but if I’m talking about inception but it has nothing to do with the movie Inception then I’m automatically filtered. If I have a torrent called Inception.torrent that has a video with a review for the movie that torrent would be filtered as infringing. That’s when the DMCA enters and while imperfect in the fair use and non-commercial use it’s pretty decent in giving both content owners the power to remove the content and service providers the proper safe harbors if they comply with the takedown notices.

          I know you are just some drooling stupid troll but it’s nice because baseless arguments like you spawn intelligent replies that crush you and enlight the community. In the end we might want to thank you trolls =)

        • http://torrentfreak.com/ Rob8urcakes

          Yup, great post Ninja and absolutely spot-on in terms of info and analysis too.

          In fact that ^ was so good I want you to marry me (again teehee) ;)

      • AnonSucks

        Obviously, you haven’t read up on all the issues being brought up in regards to the laws/acts wanting to be brought about. Issues being brought up by people who helped create the internet as we know it, companies who have revolutionized how we search and view things on the internet, etc.

        There is a lot of reality gone missing around here. But it’s not on the part of TF or it’s readers. It’s on the part of people like you. “It doesn’t go with what I believe, therefore it’s just incorrect or a bunch of people wanting free stuff and decrying anything to prevent that.”

        Nothing could be further from the truth. Anon, yet again, you prove yourself to be an idiot with a major bias who can’t look past his own beliefs to see the REAL issues at hand. It’s not about wanting things for free. It’s about some wanting too much control and harming others in the process (and by others I mean, the entire goddamn internet, in addition to companies who are perfectly legal and legit, in addition to individuals like myself and others on here).

        Why don’t you get lost already? Nobody wants you here. There’s other places to spread your nonsense. Just get already. Because I’m not seeing you proving anything that was written in the article wrong. At least not with any factual evidence that is. Your OPINION does not count as fact nor reality.

        • Anon

          You want facts? How about this then, the network was free and clear of almost any sort of regulation in the late 80′s and very early 90′s. Dialup was slow, Napster was still 7 or 8 years off, infringement of any scale wasn’t in the news because it wasn’t even in the consciousness. It’s a fact there was extraordinarily little online infringement before Napster.

          Enter broadband, then torrents and suddenly a specific group bent on hiding and paying nothing for what they find and take online enters the picture, so the artists and content creators and rights holders watch for awhile and see if this foolish crowd ransacking digital files will come to their senses or need to be taught to respect sales of digital products the same way an entire global culture respects non-digital merchandise.

          But no, the pirates are morons on a selfish feeding frenzy thinking of no one but themselves, they compare themselves to civil rights while they fill their harddrives and finally they are warned, dozens of times for years but no, FREE FREE FREE and infringement doesn’t stop, so the rights holders bring this to government attention and guess what?

          Now government realizes that it, too, is being ripped off for the taxes not being paid on the purchases no longer being made. The very notion of historical bartering for goods and services is being broken by this cowardly group just because they hide so they can. Study the revenue charts of any digital industry you want, not live performance, digital product sales and you’ll see that getting it for free has been the focus of the Piracy community for a decade and historical fact. Not paying has been the point all along. Read the Pirate Party manifesto.

          And if it were not all about getting stuff for free, you’d bring it to your representatives yourselves and they’d listen, because if you were paying for the things you take instead of stealing them (and avoiding the taxes, too) the governments wouldn’t need this shit. NOBODY moved on this until piracy gave no choice and that too, is historical fact because nobody wanted this stupid fight over “taking without paying.”

          Digital theft is a thorn. Decades of cascading regulation coming in the months and years ahead is clearly unavoidable and will make the thorn very painful both ways soon, but don’t kid yourself. There was not even a thought of any of these laws before piracy found a technical way. There is ALWAYS a technical way to be unlawful but who but morons break the law just because they CAN? And then blame others for responding? Really? Pirates are narrow minded and shortsighted and will get what they get. It’s such a gratifying pleasure to see piracy finally begin to reap the same kinds of destruction that online digital theft has sown. And that’s a fact, too.

        • AnonSucks

          I see, so yet again, you’re still an idiot who proves they don’t know anything. You obviously ignored the main part of my comment. That being the issues being raised by those WHO ARE NOT PIRATING A THING. The corporations, the founders of the internet, etc.

          All so you could go on a rant about piracy. A rant, that I still DO NOT see being backed up by any facts. I’m supposed to take your word? Excuse me if I scoff at the notion that I should just believe you, when you’re obviously very biased in regards to the issue at hand.

          Actually, reading again what you wrote. I do not see a single fact in it. Just YOUR opinion, which yet again, IS NOT (nor will it ever be) fact.

          As for infringement in the 80s and 90s, really? It wasn’t in the news? I see, so that whole VHS comparison to serial killing, that was just something made up recently? And not attributable to Jack Valenti, right? Broadband huh? That ruined things? That’s funny, I seem to remember being in high school, when dial-up was the main way people got online and that was how people got things, even then. That was in the 90s. That’s right about the time Napster was killing the music industry wasn’t it? Wait, what’s that? The music industry is still alive and thriving? The hell you say! Well, gosh. It seems like the facts are completely against you. Aren’t they Anon? But I see I ruffled some feathers.

          Score a point for the guy who is NOT committing any theft whatsoever. (That’s right, sweetheart. I DO NOT DOWNLOAD A THING. I get my content freely. As in I pay for satellite, if something’s on I watch it. If it’s not, I wait til it is. My music, I get via the radio or Pandora, or live concerts. In fact, pretty much the only thing I do pay for, as far as entertainment goes, is literature. Books, comics, etc. Because it’s much more entertaining than the crap Hollywood rehashes or the new “hits” that the labels thrust upon us.)

          Now hush child. Go crawl back under your bridge. When you’re ready to back up what you say with ACTUAL FACTS/EVIDENCE, I might give a sh*t what you say. Til then, it’s all purely your opinion (which is the same thing as saying, it’s a load of bollocks.) Don’t get all mad because someone calls you out and ask for proof to back up your unsubstantiated claims.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

          @Anon I hope you know that AT&T being the largest and effectively ONLY provider of broadband is what kept the US on dialup so long. In a world of Compuserve, AOHell, and Windows 98, there were few to actually provide the cables and infrastructure for broadband.

          Torrents were created because they were more efficient. Fact: Twitter and Facebook use torrents to update their files far easier than a central distribution center. So torrents have a legal purpose.

          Another fact, Napster increased CD sales. Yet the RIAA tried to sue the people that wanted exposure to new music. Artists like Chuck D make bank. Artists like Metallica feel hosed. Metallica loses fans, Chuck D gains respect. Simple.

          Fact 145: Piracy has not harmed the copyright industries. Lack of legal product has harmed the copyright industries.

          Study the revenue charts of any digital industry you want, not live performance, digital product sales and you’ll see that getting it for free has been the focus of the Piracy community for a decade and historical fact.

          They’re doing pretty damn good so what’s the problem? Oh, Chart is at the bottom for ya. I guess that’s Fact # 352.

          . NOBODY moved on this until piracy gave no choice and that too, is historical fact because nobody wanted this stupid fight over “taking without paying.”

          Fact 451 – Biden is bought and most other politicians have yet to touch SOPA because of the public outcry. The movie and recording industry have paid close to billions for legislation in their favor. And because of fact 352, your economic harms theory is debunked

          Decades of cascading regulation coming in the months and years ahead is clearly unavoidable and will make the thorn very painful both ways soon, but don’t kid yourself.

          Meanwhile, not one pirate will be found while the sea becomes the Richard O Dwyers, the Jammie Thomas’, and other innocents, in the way of those that were making the internet more valuable or paying for a service before being guilty of a crime hurting no one. Pity. Fact # 752

          But I guess the difference here is I can back up everything I say while you rant and rave like a mad man.

        • Guest

          LOL @ Jammie Thomas being an innocent.

          You people are delusional.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

          Lol @ Jammie Thomas having to pay millions she doesn’t have for 24 songs because the music industry can’t build a platform themselves when they are given a subsidy by the government to do so themselves.

          Lol at those that don’t understand digital technology and how it helps in creating more content.

          Lol @ those that still think piracy is causing harm when it’s been proven not to.

        • CHRONOSSANGRY

          @ Anon you dont know about BBS boards and the topsites that were about moving stuff around. WHAT happened was the mpaa/riaa’s own fault they put it all on large media outlets and such so everyone could go what they talking about. I even have 1980′s vic 20 pirated stuff…..

          like um your out of touch and all us kids were dong it and parents didn’t care cause they wasn’t getting sued to bankruptcy and having people tossed in prisons doing more time then pedophiles when they cant pay these ridiculous fines.

          add to fact back then when authors died the works went into public domaina and we had lots as creators to remake and redo and make new from. THAT has changed with life plus a trillion years after death….ya just dont have enough to work with UNLESS YOU WORK FOR THE MPAA. and no one wants to anymore and thus you get them trying to sue everyone just like how they began as movie pirates and were beng sued themselves. FUNNY HOW its coming back to bite them.

        • Concerned

          @Anon

          Again you successfully divert attention from the fact that the studios are being empowered to censor both the internet and, the individuals right to information. Money is not an issue for filesharers (Pirates are a different class).

          No company can be dispassionate, therefore, they should not be given the last judgment on a decision which effects the entire world population.

          No company, or monopoly should be given that ‘right’. It is makes a mockery of the very concept of ‘freedom’.

          As a businessman myself I know the devil in this decision:
          A person has a right to appeal the heart of a judgment in court,
          but there is no sympathy in business.

          Greed only consumes. It gives nothing away.
          What was once a free internet, will only be a trading station, with the corporations sat at the table, and the people used as their food supply.

        • Danny Denial

          @ Anon: Right and wrong, which have always been highly subjective, doesn’t matter ultimately because the so-called “pirates” are guaranteed to be the victors. The copyright industry requires money to survive, while pirates don’t need anything to continue being pirates. Short of adapting your business models, which may already be too late to solve anything, you cannot win the long protracted battle you’ve chosen.

          If the clams of financial armageddon are true (despite all evidence to the contrary), it means the copyright industry will indeed collapse some day. It’s only a matter of time. Pirates don’t even need to file share in order to win. All they need to do is withhold their money, something becoming increasingly easy to do the more you piss us off and the worse the economy gets. You have to remember that pirates are customers, and customers are pirates. They are regular people with bills to pay and families to support. Entertainment is frivolous and the first thing to go when times get tough.

          The ones who download the most are also the ones who buy more than your average consumer. If they all united in a long term boycott, and I mean truly boycott everything you release, your industry would collapse even quicker than it already is. Have no fear though as the artists will always have a cherished place in society, as well as the lions share and recognition they rightly deserve, something you suits constantly rob them of. It’s the greedy middle men and lawyers who don’t have a future, which works out great since they’re the ones who are standing in the way of progress, something that is essential to our evolution and continued survival as a species.

          The only constant in this universe is the fact that nothing is constant. No matter how many corrupt laws you manage to foist on the masses, change will always be an inevitable part of your future, and nature always wins in the end. The harder and dirtier you fight, the faster you’ll fall. Since I probably won’t be here on that momentous day, I’ll say goodbye right now. Um, make the good riddance. So long and don’t let the door hit you in the ass on your way out!

        • Lulz

          “It’s a fact there was extraordinarily little online infringement before Napster. ”

          Wow… someone missed out on the AOHell days of WaReZ :-P I remember seeing quite the rampant infringement there… mailboxes of 100′s of programs for download… Mass mailers and hosted file links, those were the good ol’ days.

        • Me

          Anon, you make 1 big mistake when you decide that all file sharing is about is everybody wanting something for free, something you bring up time and time again in your posts.
          Sure for some people maybe they are just straight up selfish and don’t want to pay the asking price, but there are so many other factors that you conveniently choose to ignore that motivate people to share files (it is sharing, not stealing).

          I will not waste my time going into it here as I am quite sure you are already set in your views and are also quite aware of these other factors I speak of.

        • Me

          Anon, you make 1 big mistake when you decide that all file sharing is about is everybody wanting something for free, something you bring up time and time again in your posts.
          Sure for some people maybe they are just straight up selfish and don’t want to pay the asking price, but there are so many other factors that you conveniently choose to ignore that motivate people to share files (it is sharing, not stealing).

          I will not waste my time going into it here as I am quite sure you are already set in your views and are also quite aware of these other factors I speak of.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_PFCI5VRUCYT6AVBT3P6ILV3COI Ophelia Millais

          @Anon

          You were correct until you said “artists and content creators and rights holders watch for a while”. Need I trot out a timeline and list of lawsuits and technological and legislative failures that prove your statement to be utterly false? How about the fact that it took until the late 2000s for the record labels and movie companies to finally begin to offer comparable, competitive digital products and services…which are nearly identical to those which you sued out of existence over a decade ago?

          “Now government realizes that it, too, is being ripped off for the taxes not being paid on the purchases no longer being made.” The “purchases no longer made” bait I will not take, since it’s so easily refuted. But the taxes…what taxes are you referring to, exactly? You’re pushing federal legislation, but there’s nothing in it about taxes. Historically the only taxes on physical goods and services from your industry have only been state & local sales taxes, and AFAIK it was never a major source of revenue for those governments. Besides, people are merely spending their entertainment budget elsewhere, and taxes are still being collected on those purchases. And we pay taxes on our streaming subscription services. So…what taxes exactly are you talking about? And why should we pay taxes on things not purchased, when we don’t even have to pay it on things we do legally purchase online? Sorry but you just fail in every regard here.

          “The very notion of historical bartering for goods and services is being broken” – seems to me that the market has very clearly expressed what the value of those goods and services really are. You can say it’s worth so much more, but the cost of producing copies is nominally zero, so you’ll always be arguing on the basis of “our goods are worth more than the market says they are”, which is historically not a good way to keep one’s business afloat.

        • Floppy Copy

          @ Lulz

          “Wow… someone missed out on the AOHell days of WaReZ”

          And before that we used BBS, and prior to BBS it was computer clubs where everyone got together every other week to share everything they had with one another. No matter what the copyright industry does, they will lose. It didn’t have to be this way, but that’s what you get for turning a truly massive opportunity into an excuse to wage war against your own customers. ;-)

          PS: Convenience always takes priority over free, and I’ll happily pay a reasonable monthly fee for that despite the fact that I am a long time sharer of files. Copyright trolls say they can’t compete with free, and to that I say your full of BS.

      • AnonSucks

        Obviously, you haven’t read up on all the issues being brought up in regards to the laws/acts wanting to be brought about. Issues being brought up by people who helped create the internet as we know it, companies who have revolutionized how we search and view things on the internet, etc.

        There is a lot of reality gone missing around here. But it’s not on the part of TF or it’s readers. It’s on the part of people like you. “It doesn’t go with what I believe, therefore it’s just incorrect or a bunch of people wanting free stuff and decrying anything to prevent that.”

        Nothing could be further from the truth. Anon, yet again, you prove yourself to be an idiot with a major bias who can’t look past his own beliefs to see the REAL issues at hand. It’s not about wanting things for free. It’s about some wanting too much control and harming others in the process (and by others I mean, the entire goddamn internet, in addition to companies who are perfectly legal and legit, in addition to individuals like myself and others on here).

        Why don’t you get lost already? Nobody wants you here. There’s other places to spread your nonsense. Just get already. Because I’m not seeing you proving anything that was written in the article wrong. At least not with any factual evidence that is. Your OPINION does not count as fact nor reality.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

        There sure is a lot of reality gone missing around here.

        Yes, and it’s on the part of those not realizing that Viacom’s CEO is one of the top paid people in the US right now, he’s gutted employees (~1000) to be exact, while keeping a $50 million salary that could have paid for the jobs that he gutted. And when people tell him that making a digital platform would work wonders for providing new services, he believes suing Youtube is going to get him to the pay window instead of hard work.

        Looks like someone really did miss the reality boat.

        • Ven

          CEO’s are paid to turn profit, not create jobs. And look around different industries and you will see that CEOs tend to get raises and bonuses as the market gets harder (see: grocery and auto industries). This is to keep the brightest minds from jumping off of sinking ships.

        • http://twitter.com/AlyssaBlindy Alyssa Blindy

          @anonsucks:
          Mr. Anon over here has what look like facts, however, they are really, nothing when you begin to think critically about them. He says the internet created piracy, however, we know that is not the case. If we want to talk about music piracy, it was definitely not the internet. Music piracy started when the phonograph came along, and people could record *gasp* from the radio. Then, cassettes came along, and more people really began recording from the radio. Including myself, I did have a stage before I started using youtube at its accessible link Many of us did, and recording tapes and cassettes was a huge problem.
          The record industry fought Street Piracy for a long time. They are now laying off people because street piracy is no longer their highest pursuit. Now, it has moved to the internet, and the MAFIAA respectively are going after the internet pirate community.
          It’s sad when people are so boolean in nature, and they only believe one thing caused everything else. They believe things either always are, or are not, and that is not necessarily the case. There is a lot of grey, and the people like Anon are the ones who do not see that grey. They only see the two extreme sides of a situation.
          It does make me quite sad.
          Anon seriously is a troll, who needs to go find something better to do in life than go on here and rant his views to the extreme. It is not helping anyone; I have a feeling all he is doing is getting negativity out. Though, that is beyond the point. I think he should start a blog, on bloodspot, or do something where he can really rant, and not just provoke all TF readers into hating copyright, and so on, so forth.
          Maybe, he should do a rant on, hmmm. Let me google anonymous ranting services.
          Ah.
          wordlibs.com.

        • Anonymous

          PROTECT IP and SOPA are pieces of shit.The MAFIAA deserves to die.What else to say about the greedy corrupted Washington ready to sell out this country for a few bucks.We lose our freedoms and they get payoffs in Washington and a pat on the back for doing a good job.
          FUCK YOU !

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

        There sure is a lot of reality gone missing around here.

        Yes, and it’s on the part of those not realizing that Viacom’s CEO is one of the top paid people in the US right now, he’s gutted employees (~1000) to be exact, while keeping a $50 million salary that could have paid for the jobs that he gutted. And when people tell him that making a digital platform would work wonders for providing new services, he believes suing Youtube is going to get him to the pay window instead of hard work.

        Looks like someone really did miss the reality boat.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

        There sure is a lot of reality gone missing around here.

        Yes, and it’s on the part of those not realizing that Viacom’s CEO is one of the top paid people in the US right now, he’s gutted employees (~1000) to be exact, while keeping a $50 million salary that could have paid for the jobs that he gutted. And when people tell him that making a digital platform would work wonders for providing new services, he believes suing Youtube is going to get him to the pay window instead of hard work.

        Looks like someone really did miss the reality boat.

      • Guest

        Oh, grow up you infantile whiner. If you don’t want something copied, don’t release it (you have an expectation of privacy for unpublished information after all). You confuse mine and thine, you greedy psychopath. You own your copy. And only copies exist. You have no right to control other people’s copies, you’re like a toddler screaming “MINE!!!”. And the public knows this. They see the petulant whining of the copyrightist babies, and they are disgusted. I’ve taught 70 year olds to use bittorrent. You have lost. You just don’t know it yet.

        Posting the same response because you keep posting the same stupid denying the laws of physical reality. Information simply does not work the way you think it does or want it to.

        • Anon

          “Oh, grow up you infantile whiner. If you don’t want something copied, don’t release it”

          Oh sure. Say that to BMW, or a large pharmaceutical company, or any tech firm– any one– holding patents.

          What a moron.

        • Danny

          @Anon

          BMW is a bad example. Car manufacturers regularly use each others designs for not much in the way of licensing because the majority are owned by one company. Every car these days is practically the same underneath the shell!

          The pharmaceutical industry is another monopoly that should be broken. Drugs and medication should be produced for the benefit of man not to line the pockets of some fat cats. Just look at the HIV scandal in South Africa! Admittedly money needs to come from somewhere for the research into new drugs but this can be done without profit by governments, the government in the UK subsidise a lot of research into pharmaceuticals only for some big corporations to benefit.

          You sir are the moron!

        • Smoo

          @Anon:

          Patents are wrong too. The patent system will also be abolished. In fact, that’s the pirate party position – abolition of patents, mere reform of copyright law. The pirate party are the *moderate position* when it comes to copyright. The overton window has shifted, doofus, and the pirate party are centrist.

          And patents are bad, but not the same as copyright. No-one’s really trying to censor the net using patents as an excuse. They may be trying to stop development of new technologies as we see in the USA, after all it’s well known patents hinder innovation, but that just shifts the innovation to areas not so crippled by overreaching patent systems and clueless lawyerocracy.

          http://www.dklevine.com/general/intellectual/againstfinal.htm

      • Jmorse43508

        The only reality gone missing around here is from the MAFIAA and their trolls/shills, like you.

        Let me guess. You did not read a word of the post and decided to make the usual inflammatory shill comment anyway.

        EParasite is about wanting to control everything and anything people say or do on the Internet. It may only seem to be about copyright infringement, but there’s a slippery slope to censoring political speech or anything that TPTB don’t like hearing.

  • Guest

    You spelt “remuneration” wrong. Just sayin’.

  • Guest

    You spelt “remuneration” wrong. Just sayin’.

    • Trotter

      You missed the ‘g’ off ‘saying’. Most annoying.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_PFCI5VRUCYT6AVBT3P6ILV3COI Ophelia Millais

        You overlooked the fact that an apostrophe was correctly used in place of the missing letter, and that -in’ is widely used as an informal or slang form of -ing. Jus’ sayin’.

  • Gargamel

    So glad I don’t live in the Corporate States Of America :)

    • Larry t

      Without the USA, there would be almost nothing. It’s pretty astounding how much this country has contributed.

      • Guest

        “Without the USA, there would be almost nothing.”

        US education system at work?

        • http://twitter.com/icanhazsake Ninja

          Megalomaniacs at work ;)

        • Twice Daily

          That sounds like heaven.
          When they destroy the internet it will feel like that’s where we’re living.
          You see, WITH the USA we will having nothing.
          It will cost all the money we have to placate our kids; paying for every damn thing they push through our connection.

          I tell you this, when freedom goes, so does my ISP.

      • Ven

        We should’ve let Germany roll through Europe and Japan roll through Asia in WWII, then it would only be Germans and Japanese arguing about our contribution to the planet.

        • Guest

          Neo Fascists = Copyright Trolls

        • Anonymous

          If you check your history then it was the Russians who really won the War against Germany along with huge loss of life on both sides. Americas place in that one was in terms of humanitarian supplies for a few years to us British before they were convinced to join the War once it became clear that Germany was going to lose and they desired their spoils of War and resulting fame.

          We can be thankful Pearl Harbour did happen when it was a very big wake up call for the United States that got them motivated.

          Now what would have happened had the United States never been involved is less clear but Germany would certainly still have fell. Japan would have taken years longer but without the USA in the region it is a wonder if they would still have joined the War? Most likely it would have turned into an inter-Asia conflict with occupation and new borders.

        • 34t

          Well, if you’re going to speak about it from the British point of view, we really do have to thank the U.S. for stopping the Soviet Advance. After Germany fell, they weren’t going to stop, at least until they were forced to. We do owe them for that.

        • Common Man

          The Soviet Union defeated Germany, not the United States.

      • Trotter

        It’s also pretty astounding how treacherous it is when it gets involved in world trade.

    • Jojo

      Ya, we’re glad also

      • Mahummer

        You’re a Muslim Fundamentalist too? Pleased to have you aboard.

  • Pelouze

    Hurry up and pass the bill.

    • Anon

      And enforce it painfully, too.

    • Guest101

      The fact is, even if they did, it won’t shut down the internet like they want. We know too much about encryption and distributed programming now for that. All they’ll do is damage US competitiveness further. Belief in Imaginary Property is a death spiral for the USA. The sooner copyright and patent are abolished the better, of course, given what we now know about their harmful effects.

      • Anon

        The internet interprets censorship as damage and reroutes. Unfortunately, this will be a tool to censor anything the government finds offensive on the basis of copyright.

        • Guest

          Well, indeed, if copyright didn’t exist they’d presumably just find another excuse. Terrorism, despite the fact we’re the safest we’ve ever been in history. Child porn, despite the fact only a tiny minority of mentally ill individuals are even attracted tochildren rather than post-puberty humans, for obvious biological reasons. But it’s sad for the west to be using something as trivial, known-bad as copyright monopoly to justify censorship, instead of just abolishing copyright as we should be doing. The chinese will rightly laugh (more) in the west’s faces upon futher hypocritical western preaching about freedom of expression.

      • Anon

        The internet interprets censorship as damage and reroutes. Unfortunately, this will be a tool to censor anything the government finds offensive on the basis of copyright.

    • Peleez

      Hiya, Dickhead.

  • foff

    Right now congress can’t even wipe their ass much less pass a bill. We have nothing to worry about. When it comes to passing anything right now congress can’t agree pm anything

    • Ven

      Ain’t that the truth. I’m fairly certain PROTECT IP has been “any day now” for years.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_C7P2UMDJZMMBCUCAOL6BE25AYI Finaro

    Do you really think capitalists would allow free internet to fly? They won’t stop until they make the internet into proprietary closed source for only them while the rest of us suffer which is the real aim here.

    The only way for free internet to survive is a Post-Revolutionary society (i.e. Socialism and finally Communism).

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

      What the hell does the economic system have to do with anything?

      Venture capitalists are against this as much as anyone else.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_C7P2UMDJZMMBCUCAOL6BE25AYI Finaro

        You don’t understand how capitalism works, it’s where only a wealthy few control the means of production hence it has everything to do with the system itself. Also reforms don’t work either which they’ll end up reverting back how they were when somebody else get’s into power sometime in the future (or worse those “Venture Capitalists” would turn out just as bad if they get into power…..).

        Vice versaly, a system where workers control the means the production (i.e. Socialism/Communism) is the only condition we can have free internet permanently without the fear of it being taken away from us unlike living under capitalism.

        Also read these articles:

        http://www.marxist.com/capitalism-internet-patents130306.htm

        http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1977819,00.asp

        http://www.marxist.com/intellectual-property-rights221105.htm

        I hope there are people who are intelligent enough to realize this.

        • Guest

          You’re an idiot. Copyrights and patents are anti-capitalist, in fact socialistic reasoning is usually used to justify them – the poor starving artists/inventors “couldn’t compete” in a capitalist free market, hey let’s give them decades to century long monopoly and completely fuck up the capitalist system.

          This is why libertarians in the USA who have thought about it tend to oppose copyright and patent monopoly law. See N. Stephan Kinsella.

          http://mises.org/resources/3582/Against-Intellectual-Property

          And the same fallacious reasoning – labor theory of value – used by marxists, tends to come into play when idiots are trying to defend copyrights and patents – things aren’t “worth” the work put into them. If you labor real hard to build something stupid no-one wants, like a toothpick car or whatever, that thing isn’t worth more because you worked real hard.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

          Finaro, I’ll say it one more time because Guest is saying it better than I am. The economic system has nothing to do with this argument and you’re barking up the wrong tree.

        • Common Man

          Finaro is basically right: the conflict between technology and money is basically one between socialism and capitalism. It’s hardly a coincidence that the most pro-capitalist countries (USA, UK) are also the ones that have the weakest pirate parties and the strongest copyright lobbies.

    • Danny

      The internet is built on top of open source software. The way systems communicate is all open standards how the hell can you go closed source after this?

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_C7P2UMDJZMMBCUCAOL6BE25AYI Finaro

        Are you people really out of touch with reality? Copyrights/Patents IS part of capitalism which is a another manifestation of property (hence what I mean that the wealthy few control the means of production by stealing everything of what everyone could have used for example we still breathe the air around us and in the past anyone could pick apples from a tree or drink water from the stream but someone puts a fence around that it’s clearly theft) which is putting a fence around ideas & innovation which is exactly the same as putting a fence around land (private property) putting a fence around women (marriage), etc. Also another thing that most people seem to forget that capitalism revolves around the exploitation of workers hence it’s exactly like slavery.

        I think I maybe wasting my time arguing with liberals who would also call me a idiot if I said the sky was blue and totally ignore reality.

  • http://cashsharp.com Ruth Shaw

    awesome

  • Gene_Poole

    “Predictions of Internet’s Demise Have Been Greatly Exaggerated”.

    Isn’t that stealing from the IP of the estate of Mark Twain? someone should sue that guy.

  • Pingback: P2PTalk » Internet Doomsday: Wrongs and Rights of Copyright Fortune Telling

  • D Silva

    I wonder why the people that ha contributed more to our society is not the people ruling / controlling it…

  • Guest

    The predictions of corporate parasite demise Have not Been Greatly Exaggerated because we are going to kill them all.

    No choice here.

  • http://torrentfreak.com/ Rob8urcakes

    On “Copyright Fortune-Telling” …

    The MAFIAA is dead!
    DMCA is gone!
    SOPA and ProtectIP are lost for ever!

    Freedom won the battle, and the Copywrong Industry imploded into it’s own little black hole as independent artists and movie studios embraced the true power of the internet to reach as many customers than never before.

    Epic WIN for everyone.

  • http://profiles.google.com/zerianis10 Christopher Kidwell

    You also have to take into account that a lot of piracy is really people getting things over the internet that they ALREADY pay for by other means.

    Such as I get music channels via my cable TV subscription, so why shouldn’t I download those same songs off the internet in CD quality? I’ve already paid for them!

    This is all about these companies wanting you to pay for things multiple times in multiple ways. I for one are not going to put up with that faggotry.

    • Acslawarecrooks

      I would like to purchase a monthly service that allows me to download anything, “an all you can eat internet.” the MAAFIA companies can still be gatekeepers, they keep track of eveything downloaded and give the royalties to the artists. everyone is happy, the public get anything, the MAAFIA gets to be gatekeepers and the artists get paid. WIN WIN WIN………it will never happen as they refuse to adapt.

  • Someone

    Viacom chief Philippe P. Dauman collected a raise of nearly 149% last year, a renumeration of $84.5 million.

    And that right there is why I don’t give a shit.

  • 123fake

    After careful examination of all the comments and arguments it has come to my attention that the only possible outcome that can erupt from my brain at this time is ..:drummroll:
    *I can count to potato*

  • Louigi Verona

    ” As Wired noted in their comprehensive article, “….it was the DMCA’s notice-and-takedown provision [that] has proven even more crucial to the growth of the internet. The provision grants immunity to so-called ‘intermediaries’ — ISPs, for example.” ”

    In other words, DMCA has allowed for the Internet to grow at a slower rate than not to grow at all. So calling it “savior of the Internet” is like calling stuck brakes on a bike to be saviors of the bike, because the bike can still move, albeit very slow?

    Sounds like a twist to reality. There would be no need for DMCA in the first place if not for the copyright law.

    • Anon

      If your idea of “a free internet” conflates our freedom of privacy and private communication with the simple fact that as currently (un)regulated, the internet is also the tool being used by some for the greatest industrial ransacking of all time, (in terms of uncompensated value taken/copied) then yes, you’ll see the waves of regulation ahead as “breaking” the internet for you.

      But it remains to be seen if the freedoms we currently associate with the distribution and copying of our own creations and our own communications are damaged or not, as more specific creators rights are increasingly secured.

      If this is done carefully and with an evenhand and the governments are surely taking a lot of time trying to get this balance right, existing freedoms to do whatever you wish with all that you create yourself won’t be affected, while the mechanisms to identify and hold accountable those who infringe will finally being to make an influential appearance. Jammie Thomas was never “innocent.” lol

      She’s just the prototype for all the regulation linked to significant punishment that her poor behavior has compelled, regulation now right around the corner.

      • Guest

        You again display no idea of how information works. There is simply no way to enforce copyright without building a global police state with every communication monitored, and even then it won’t really work. There is no compromise possible. It’s inherent in the physical laws of the universe we inhabit – I can encode and share encrypted information in basically anything. Since Shannon, Church, Turing, Hofstadter, Chomsky etc. this has all been understood. You luddites have – at best – a 19th century mindset and understanding of physics (and in fact that’s probably unfair to some of the smarter inhabitants of the 19th century).

        And remember, copyright monopoly is the thievery here. You confuse mine and thine. The thing you work to produce is YOUR copy. There’s no value that’s being “stolen”. That’s all that exists. Release it or don’t release it, or copies. You can’t use a loss of the monopoly rent that would only exist in the presence of copyright law to justify the existence of copyright law in the first place. That’s circular logic and invalid.

        • Anon

          You display no idea of how history as a reflection of human nature works. From the very first lock ever imagined, created expressly to protect “mine” from “your notion of entitlement to it”, humankind has never embraced the selfish “yours is mine” vision you employ here. You are minority, out of step with human nature and that will always be so.

          What is a current retail store if not a “police state”?

          Electronic implants hidden in the merchandise, metal scanners at the entries, guards undercover and in uniform, bag searches, back room questioning, video monitoring, facial recognition technology, video imagery saved to raids, and why? Precisely to protect this historical idea of protecting “mine” from your sense of entitlement to it.

          Digital is a format for some merchandise. The internet is a tool that can be used for distribution, not another realm to be developed along utopian philosophy. Nothing you ever do or say will eradicate the intrinsic human concept of “mine” and “yours”. All you can do and are doing is compel the retail store police state mentality on the internet while you offer a sophists quality evidence of your correctness. Hey, as you wish. Nice work.

        • Guest

          @Anon: You accuse others of your crimes. You are a thief, trying to steal all our property. You and other copyrightists confuse mine and thine. Remember, physical property law is undermined by copyright and patent law, as conclusively elucidated by N. Stephan Kinsella.

          And we’re certainly not a minority. You must live in a very sheltered little bubble. To a first approximation, no-one gives a shit about copyright law anymore.

        • Anon

          @ Guest.

          “You are a thief, trying to steal all our property. ”
          “no-one gives a shit about copyright law anymore.”

          Poorly connected to reality, delusional in both concept and execution.
          I rest my case.

        • Guest

          @Anon:

          Poorly connected to reality? Says someone who thinks it’s rational to dictate what everyone in the world can and cannot communicate?

          Yet again, you project your own crimes on others. This is a well-known propaganda technique, but you just really suck at it.

          We’re smarter than you. We see straight through you.

        • Guest124

          @Anon

          “humankind has never embraced the selfish “yours is mine” vision you employ here.”

          What do you think tribal war is about then, even modern wars are fought for the future hope of better trade deals. Get real. Read up on ‘The Selfish Gene’. Selfishness is what makes the world tick. Nobody these days invents something with the hope of getting zero remuneration.

          That’s the second dumbest comment today.

          This is the dumbest today:

          “If your idea of “a free internet” conflates our freedom of privacy and private communication…..”

          Our idea of the internet is to leave it alone. It’s the selfishness of trolls like you that are forcing change for the worst. You are inducing fear in people where none existed.

      • AnonSucks

        “If this is done carefully and with an evenhand and the governments are surely taking a lot of time trying to get this balance right, existing freedoms to do whatever you wish with all that you create yourself won’t be affected, while the mechanisms to identify and hold accountable those who infringe will finally being to make an influential appearance.”

        Hahahahaha! Oh man that’s the funniest thing I’ve probably ever read in my life.

        Wait. Oh, you were serious? Oh snap. That is even funnier. Doubly so. Either you’re naivety is at a level that no human has ever reached in the history of mankind or your stupidity is etc etc etc. Either way it is HILARIOUS!

        Let’s just rip that apart, shall we?

        It is not being done carefully and evenhandedly. As I pointed out way above, which you saw fit to ignore. There are numerous problems with what is taking place (all these acts). Most notably of which is the vague definitions presented therein of what constitutes “reasonable measures” (in regards to how 3rd parties can best police and monitor for infringing content), what exactly constitutes “infringing” content (because if it’s not easily discernible to the content holders/creators, how can they expect others to know), etc. Those are just the tip of the iceberg in regards to definitions.

        Then there’s the problem with the overly broad stuff. Of which many legitimate things fall under and would be considered as “used for infringing”. Search engines, file lockers (such as Dropbox, Amazon and Google’s cloud services both of which have run afoul of and been denounced by the RIAA, and so on and so forth), VPNs, etc. There’s no specifics used, just generally broad terms, which is what worries many tech companies/start-ups and has them questioning such acts. Oh, did I also mention that in regards to overly broad “rogue” is itself very broad a term. The companies/industries can essentially dictate whatever they feel is “rogue” as being “rogue”. (A nice example, MonsterCable defines eBay, Craigslist, Sears, etc as all being “rogue”. Yep. That’s correct. All those companies, and their online presences, are considered rogue, despite the fact that they are all legitimate corporations and presences. Who in no way, not even remotely, are “rogue”.)

        Then there’s the whole “accusation” is enough to lose your site, your monetary accounts (like Paypal), etc. All before you even get a trial. Which reminds me, you lose all that before you even get a trial. Now, that wouldn’t be so bad if it weren’t for the fact that it’s all done based on an ACCUSATION. No evidence required. We’ll ignore for a moment, that assuming it’s a baseless and wrong accusation there is no way to be compensated for it. So if you get wrongly accused and lose business and spend money on lawyers fighting such accusations and proving your innocence, whoever accuses you can essentially go “my bad” and that’s it.

        Then there’s the problem in regards to free speech and censorship. STFU ANON! Just wait one f*cking minute before you say “copyright infringement is not covered by free speech”. STFU and wait one goddamn moment. I know you already. So silence and read the rest of what I have to write. Let’s see, in censoring one subdomain, the mechanisms in place are (again) overly broad. So let’s say they want to block one site. Well, rather than just block that site directly, they go to GoDaddy or whatnot and say censor everything from here down. Now other sites are being affected because they fall under “from here down”. See how that’d be censorship/violating free speech? (I could copy/paste a better example but I haven’t the time to do so. Besides, it’d be pointless. Even after saying wait, you’re still going to come back with “downloading stuff that isn’t yours isn’t free speech”. Like I said, I know you and your ilk.

        Do you want me to continue? Because this is just a bit of the problems with what’s going on. I haven’t even really gone off. And obviously, you haven’t either. In so far as you haven’t gone off and actually read any of the bills/acts being presented for possible enactment. You haven’t read the complaints issued by the founders of the internet, tech corporations, etc. None of whom are pirates or people committing copyright infringement. All are renown people and corporations. All are people/companies who have read the bills/acts and are finding problem after problem with it. I think I’ll believe them over you in regards to how careful and evenhanded this stuff is (or better said ISN’T).

        As for “evenhanded”. Ha! Let’s see, despite the fact that there were a few companies who helped the politicians come up with these “gems”. None of them were outside the entertainment industry. That’s right. No companies like Google, Apple, etc. Just the movie studios and record labels. Seems to me like the people who should’ve been invited to partake in shaping this were left out. Seems pretty unbalanced/unfair to me. It almost seems like only one party was invited to the table, those with a clearly vested interest in gaining control of the internet. And those with a clearly vested interest in allowing that to happen (campaign contributions anyone?). The latter group of course also possibly allowing all this for potential use later (censorship of any anti-government agendas anyone?).

        “existing freedoms to do whatever you wish with all that you create yourself won’t be affected”

        Actually, as I pointed out, Dropbox and other similar sites/tools can be considered as useful for infringing. So they may be shut down entirely. That seems to negate “do whatever you wish with all that you create”. How so? Because you can no longer post your stuff online. Anything can be considered wrong and illegal now and be seized/blocked. Youtube has the potential to be shut down entirely. Which means I can’t post the music video I made of my own original song. And so on and so forth.

        Yep, completely careful and evenhanded these things are and were planned out. NOT!

        But you just keep on talking without having a real clue. I can’t wait to see what you see to contradict any of this. Or the rant you’ll go on about piracy instead of addressing any of this, as you’ve done on this article once already.

        I also note how below Guest replied to you and you replied to him about “history”. Which means you ignored/overlooked what I pointed out about history up above too. Nice. More Anon class right there. History is against you Anon. Your own arguments can be used against you. Maybe you should quit and move on, huh? That or think before you post and make sure there are no flaws in what you say. Otherwise myself and others will turn them around on you or poke holes in your logic. Which isn’t a bad thing. For those just stopping by who don’t know as much will get better informed. And also see the depths those who want total control will go through to deny and lie about their agendas. Practically win/win for me. The only part I lose on is having to read our comments at all.

        • Regra

          Dude, I really hate to be the one to tell you this, but you do know Anon is on our side, right? You do know he actually favors filesharing, and that he only writes inflammatory comments as a way of galvanizing our side, right?

          I’m just bringing it up because you’re writing big wall-of-text replies to him, and I’m not sure you actually realize what he’s doing. I mean, I’m glad his strategy is working, but still, you’re taking it a little too far.

        • AnonSucks

          @ Regra

          First off, Anon isn’t on OUR side. If you believe that, you’re naive. Secondly, by “big wall-of-text replies” do you mean just this one? Because others have replied to him (up above) with more text than I have, this one being the exception.

          I’m glad you felt a need to point out what you said, but the part where “do I give a f*ck” is still not evident. I’ll put Anon or any other person who states incorrect things in their place.

          You can choose to overlook my comments if you wish. No one is forcing you to reply to them. There is no metaphorical or literal gun to your head or mine. As such, feel the need to not point out anything to me again.

        • Regra

          No need for the hostility friend. I’m just trying to help.

          Anon is on our side. Think about it. His responses always are along the line of “freedom is an acceptable casualty if they kill you damn pirates”. His arguments have gotten progressively more ridiculous over time, and often contradict themselves. It has all the classic hallmarks of someone who doesn’t really believe in what they’re writing.

          Not even that, but his writings fulfill a very specific purpose; they get people to hate him. He acts as a strong personification of everything we see wrong in the MAFIAA, without even arguing that his side is good. He is a living, breathing caricature of everything wrong with the MAFIAA, come down from his troll cave to annoy us. It’s an act. He’s doing it so that we have a focal point for hate.

          I’m not trying to be rude to you, and I’m sorry if I came off that way. It just bothers me when people spend a lot of time arguing against someone that’s on their side. If you prefer, I’ll refrain from bringing it up with you again.

        • Regra

          No need for the hostility friend. I’m just trying to help.

          Anon is on our side. Think about it. His responses always are along the line of “freedom is an acceptable casualty if they kill you damn pirates”. His arguments have gotten progressively more ridiculous over time, and often contradict themselves. It has all the classic hallmarks of someone who doesn’t really believe in what they’re writing.

          Not even that, but his writings fulfill a very specific purpose; they get people to hate him. He acts as a strong personification of everything we see wrong in the MAFIAA, without even arguing that his side is good. He is a living, breathing caricature of everything wrong with the MAFIAA, come down from his troll cave to annoy us. It’s an act. He’s doing it so that we have a focal point for hate.

          I’m not trying to be rude to you, and I’m sorry if I came off that way. It just bothers me when people spend a lot of time arguing against someone that’s on their side. If you prefer, I’ll refrain from bringing it up with you again.

        • Regra

          Just thought of an analogy.

          Think about it like this. He’s a satirist, and the MAFIAA is the entity he’s satirizing. It’s just kinda weird to see people yelling at the satirist instead of the thing he’s satirizing, you know what I mean?

      • AnonSucks

        “If this is done carefully and with an evenhand and the governments are surely taking a lot of time trying to get this balance right, existing freedoms to do whatever you wish with all that you create yourself won’t be affected, while the mechanisms to identify and hold accountable those who infringe will finally being to make an influential appearance.”

        Hahahahaha! Oh man that’s the funniest thing I’ve probably ever read in my life.

        Wait. Oh, you were serious? Oh snap. That is even funnier. Doubly so. Either you’re naivety is at a level that no human has ever reached in the history of mankind or your stupidity is etc etc etc. Either way it is HILARIOUS!

        Let’s just rip that apart, shall we?

        It is not being done carefully and evenhandedly. As I pointed out way above, which you saw fit to ignore. There are numerous problems with what is taking place (all these acts). Most notably of which is the vague definitions presented therein of what constitutes “reasonable measures” (in regards to how 3rd parties can best police and monitor for infringing content), what exactly constitutes “infringing” content (because if it’s not easily discernible to the content holders/creators, how can they expect others to know), etc. Those are just the tip of the iceberg in regards to definitions.

        Then there’s the problem with the overly broad stuff. Of which many legitimate things fall under and would be considered as “used for infringing”. Search engines, file lockers (such as Dropbox, Amazon and Google’s cloud services both of which have run afoul of and been denounced by the RIAA, and so on and so forth), VPNs, etc. There’s no specifics used, just generally broad terms, which is what worries many tech companies/start-ups and has them questioning such acts. Oh, did I also mention that in regards to overly broad “rogue” is itself very broad a term. The companies/industries can essentially dictate whatever they feel is “rogue” as being “rogue”. (A nice example, MonsterCable defines eBay, Craigslist, Sears, etc as all being “rogue”. Yep. That’s correct. All those companies, and their online presences, are considered rogue, despite the fact that they are all legitimate corporations and presences. Who in no way, not even remotely, are “rogue”.)

        Then there’s the whole “accusation” is enough to lose your site, your monetary accounts (like Paypal), etc. All before you even get a trial. Which reminds me, you lose all that before you even get a trial. Now, that wouldn’t be so bad if it weren’t for the fact that it’s all done based on an ACCUSATION. No evidence required. We’ll ignore for a moment, that assuming it’s a baseless and wrong accusation there is no way to be compensated for it. So if you get wrongly accused and lose business and spend money on lawyers fighting such accusations and proving your innocence, whoever accuses you can essentially go “my bad” and that’s it.

        Then there’s the problem in regards to free speech and censorship. STFU ANON! Just wait one f*cking minute before you say “copyright infringement is not covered by free speech”. STFU and wait one goddamn moment. I know you already. So silence and read the rest of what I have to write. Let’s see, in censoring one subdomain, the mechanisms in place are (again) overly broad. So let’s say they want to block one site. Well, rather than just block that site directly, they go to GoDaddy or whatnot and say censor everything from here down. Now other sites are being affected because they fall under “from here down”. See how that’d be censorship/violating free speech? (I could copy/paste a better example but I haven’t the time to do so. Besides, it’d be pointless. Even after saying wait, you’re still going to come back with “downloading stuff that isn’t yours isn’t free speech”. Like I said, I know you and your ilk.

        Do you want me to continue? Because this is just a bit of the problems with what’s going on. I haven’t even really gone off. And obviously, you haven’t either. In so far as you haven’t gone off and actually read any of the bills/acts being presented for possible enactment. You haven’t read the complaints issued by the founders of the internet, tech corporations, etc. None of whom are pirates or people committing copyright infringement. All are renown people and corporations. All are people/companies who have read the bills/acts and are finding problem after problem with it. I think I’ll believe them over you in regards to how careful and evenhanded this stuff is (or better said ISN’T).

        As for “evenhanded”. Ha! Let’s see, despite the fact that there were a few companies who helped the politicians come up with these “gems”. None of them were outside the entertainment industry. That’s right. No companies like Google, Apple, etc. Just the movie studios and record labels. Seems to me like the people who should’ve been invited to partake in shaping this were left out. Seems pretty unbalanced/unfair to me. It almost seems like only one party was invited to the table, those with a clearly vested interest in gaining control of the internet. And those with a clearly vested interest in allowing that to happen (campaign contributions anyone?). The latter group of course also possibly allowing all this for potential use later (censorship of any anti-government agendas anyone?).

        “existing freedoms to do whatever you wish with all that you create yourself won’t be affected”

        Actually, as I pointed out, Dropbox and other similar sites/tools can be considered as useful for infringing. So they may be shut down entirely. That seems to negate “do whatever you wish with all that you create”. How so? Because you can no longer post your stuff online. Anything can be considered wrong and illegal now and be seized/blocked. Youtube has the potential to be shut down entirely. Which means I can’t post the music video I made of my own original song. And so on and so forth.

        Yep, completely careful and evenhanded these things are and were planned out. NOT!

        But you just keep on talking without having a real clue. I can’t wait to see what you see to contradict any of this. Or the rant you’ll go on about piracy instead of addressing any of this, as you’ve done on this article once already.

        I also note how below Guest replied to you and you replied to him about “history”. Which means you ignored/overlooked what I pointed out about history up above too. Nice. More Anon class right there. History is against you Anon. Your own arguments can be used against you. Maybe you should quit and move on, huh? That or think before you post and make sure there are no flaws in what you say. Otherwise myself and others will turn them around on you or poke holes in your logic. Which isn’t a bad thing. For those just stopping by who don’t know as much will get better informed. And also see the depths those who want total control will go through to deny and lie about their agendas. Practically win/win for me. The only part I lose on is having to read our comments at all.

      • AnonSucks

        “If this is done carefully and with an evenhand and the governments are surely taking a lot of time trying to get this balance right, existing freedoms to do whatever you wish with all that you create yourself won’t be affected, while the mechanisms to identify and hold accountable those who infringe will finally being to make an influential appearance.”

        Hahahahaha! Oh man that’s the funniest thing I’ve probably ever read in my life.

        Wait. Oh, you were serious? Oh snap. That is even funnier. Doubly so. Either you’re naivety is at a level that no human has ever reached in the history of mankind or your stupidity is etc etc etc. Either way it is HILARIOUS!

        Let’s just rip that apart, shall we?

        It is not being done carefully and evenhandedly. As I pointed out way above, which you saw fit to ignore. There are numerous problems with what is taking place (all these acts). Most notably of which is the vague definitions presented therein of what constitutes “reasonable measures” (in regards to how 3rd parties can best police and monitor for infringing content), what exactly constitutes “infringing” content (because if it’s not easily discernible to the content holders/creators, how can they expect others to know), etc. Those are just the tip of the iceberg in regards to definitions.

        Then there’s the problem with the overly broad stuff. Of which many legitimate things fall under and would be considered as “used for infringing”. Search engines, file lockers (such as Dropbox, Amazon and Google’s cloud services both of which have run afoul of and been denounced by the RIAA, and so on and so forth), VPNs, etc. There’s no specifics used, just generally broad terms, which is what worries many tech companies/start-ups and has them questioning such acts. Oh, did I also mention that in regards to overly broad “rogue” is itself very broad a term. The companies/industries can essentially dictate whatever they feel is “rogue” as being “rogue”. (A nice example, MonsterCable defines eBay, Craigslist, Sears, etc as all being “rogue”. Yep. That’s correct. All those companies, and their online presences, are considered rogue, despite the fact that they are all legitimate corporations and presences. Who in no way, not even remotely, are “rogue”.)

        Then there’s the whole “accusation” is enough to lose your site, your monetary accounts (like Paypal), etc. All before you even get a trial. Which reminds me, you lose all that before you even get a trial. Now, that wouldn’t be so bad if it weren’t for the fact that it’s all done based on an ACCUSATION. No evidence required. We’ll ignore for a moment, that assuming it’s a baseless and wrong accusation there is no way to be compensated for it. So if you get wrongly accused and lose business and spend money on lawyers fighting such accusations and proving your innocence, whoever accuses you can essentially go “my bad” and that’s it.

        Then there’s the problem in regards to free speech and censorship. STFU ANON! Just wait one f*cking minute before you say “copyright infringement is not covered by free speech”. STFU and wait one goddamn moment. I know you already. So silence and read the rest of what I have to write. Let’s see, in censoring one subdomain, the mechanisms in place are (again) overly broad. So let’s say they want to block one site. Well, rather than just block that site directly, they go to GoDaddy or whatnot and say censor everything from here down. Now other sites are being affected because they fall under “from here down”. See how that’d be censorship/violating free speech? (I could copy/paste a better example but I haven’t the time to do so. Besides, it’d be pointless. Even after saying wait, you’re still going to come back with “downloading stuff that isn’t yours isn’t free speech”. Like I said, I know you and your ilk.

        Do you want me to continue? Because this is just a bit of the problems with what’s going on. I haven’t even really gone off. And obviously, you haven’t either. In so far as you haven’t gone off and actually read any of the bills/acts being presented for possible enactment. You haven’t read the complaints issued by the founders of the internet, tech corporations, etc. None of whom are pirates or people committing copyright infringement. All are renown people and corporations. All are people/companies who have read the bills/acts and are finding problem after problem with it. I think I’ll believe them over you in regards to how careful and evenhanded this stuff is (or better said ISN’T).

        As for “evenhanded”. Ha! Let’s see, despite the fact that there were a few companies who helped the politicians come up with these “gems”. None of them were outside the entertainment industry. That’s right. No companies like Google, Apple, etc. Just the movie studios and record labels. Seems to me like the people who should’ve been invited to partake in shaping this were left out. Seems pretty unbalanced/unfair to me. It almost seems like only one party was invited to the table, those with a clearly vested interest in gaining control of the internet. And those with a clearly vested interest in allowing that to happen (campaign contributions anyone?). The latter group of course also possibly allowing all this for potential use later (censorship of any anti-government agendas anyone?).

        “existing freedoms to do whatever you wish with all that you create yourself won’t be affected”

        Actually, as I pointed out, Dropbox and other similar sites/tools can be considered as useful for infringing. So they may be shut down entirely. That seems to negate “do whatever you wish with all that you create”. How so? Because you can no longer post your stuff online. Anything can be considered wrong and illegal now and be seized/blocked. Youtube has the potential to be shut down entirely. Which means I can’t post the music video I made of my own original song. And so on and so forth.

        Yep, completely careful and evenhanded these things are and were planned out. NOT!

        But you just keep on talking without having a real clue. I can’t wait to see what you see to contradict any of this. Or the rant you’ll go on about piracy instead of addressing any of this, as you’ve done on this article once already.

        I also note how below Guest replied to you and you replied to him about “history”. Which means you ignored/overlooked what I pointed out about history up above too. Nice. More Anon class right there. History is against you Anon. Your own arguments can be used against you. Maybe you should quit and move on, huh? That or think before you post and make sure there are no flaws in what you say. Otherwise myself and others will turn them around on you or poke holes in your logic. Which isn’t a bad thing. For those just stopping by who don’t know as much will get better informed. And also see the depths those who want total control will go through to deny and lie about their agendas. Practically win/win for me. The only part I lose on is having to read our comments at all.

      • Anonynony

        I guess you’re right drone.
        Resistance is futile.
        Ah, what the hell.
        I’ll give it a shot.

        • http://twitter.com/AlyssaBlindy Alyssa Blindy

          @regra and anonsucks:
          Let’s break it down.
          First, we know we have a troll who acts like a copyright extremest who wants to, exterminate all pirates.
          Now, we know that many of the people who usually are anti-piracy will not come here and comment, but there has to be a circumstance, a stimulus, if you wish, which is causing him to decide to read and comment. It is very logical for anti-filesharing groups to read these articles; look at the other side maybe, to bash it somewhere, but to comment right in it? That usually doesn’t happen. At least, not on a news site. If this were a forum, and people just asked a question about piracy, it would be different, but these are news articles.
          So, off of that tangent, let’s briefly analyze the different reasons Anon could be here:
          1. He has a lot of anger, and takes it out on pirates. This is possible; sometimes, people will go and troll on the web just to get out their anger.
          2. He’s paid to do it. That could be another case.
          3. He’s making a satire of the MAFIAA. Has anyone ever heard of Mark Twain? He wrote satire, esp. in Huckleberry Fin; he made satire of the slave trade. The Crucible (which was not by Mark Twain, lol) was a satire of the “Red Scare.” It could be possible that Anon is making satire of the MAFIAA.
          4. This is the one I was enlightened about in a meditation. He could be one of our own torrent freak reporters, coming on and trying to cause a havoc in the comments.
          Now, I am not trying to slander. All I am trying to do, is point out possibilities.

        • Regra

          1. Admittedly possible. That would be a reason for him to claim that liberty is secondary to killing pirates. Anonymity could just be bringing out his worst side.
          2. I doubt this simply because if someone was going to be paid to post here, the MAFIAA would want someone who has a chance of convincing people, and Anon fails in that measure. (I’m just going to assume that pirate groups wouldn’t pay anyone to stir up their own people like this).
          3. Possible, although if that’s the case, he may be getting the Mark Twain problem of making people believe that the satire is meant to be serious.
          4. Well, he wouldn’t have to be a reporter, he could just be an average commenter. I favor this one because it seems to me that he’s trying to get people riled up and angry.

  • Bencraig

    The MPAA also seems to overlook the fact that ITS predictions don’t come true either. Rewind to 1984, the Sony Betamax case… MPAA President Jack Valenti tells a Senate Committee that the VCR should be banned because it will destroy the movie business! Oops.

    • Danny

      The music industry said the same thing about the phonograph -> cassette -> CD -> MP3. Same shit different year, ‘yawn’

      • Guest

        Agreed.

        And even if it does managed to get stopped on the web it’ll be a cold day in hell before it stops in the real world. There is no cure only price slashing is going to win them this war. Cut the price in half, people buy twice as many.

        Then it will be copied on principle as a protest. Lol.

        I got years of money owning me now I learned how cheap they are to manufacture

  • http://www.facebook.com/aaronjacques Aaron Jacques

    torrent freak completely missed the mark here
    look at the original draft of the DMCA it had no safe harbor protection
    the key component of the law that was responsible for the internet explosion did not exist until after consumer groups complained.

    That the big lie, let us get away with force feeding an unbalanced act down your throats because your previous complaints were the sole reason the previous law wasn’t such an internet killer.

  • Anonymous
  • Pingback: Internet Doomsday: Wrongs and Rights of Copyright Fortune Telling | TorrentForce Blog

  • http://web.ncf.ca/shawnhcorey/ Shawn H Corey

    These laws won’t break the internet but they will fracture it. By when the internet was started Domain-Name Servers (DNS) were implemented on central mainframes since they were the only machines big enough at the time. But nowadays, a smartphone can run DNS, in background, while the user plays Angry Birds. All that is needed is a DNS that ignores delete commands and any attempt to remove a domain from the internet will be in vain.

  • foff

    The main problem with censorship is the collateral damage. Every site on the internet contains copyright material to one extent or another. One question that the industry refuses to answer is what amount of sharing is ok? It was never considered unlawful to share tapes with a group of friends but the size of the group was never defined. It was never a problem to pass a video tape around either.

    Fast forward to now. A certain amount of digital sharing needs to be accepted. I have always maintained the internet is nothing more then a digital library. What the industry needs to do is embrace piracy and post high quality movies music with a little advertising like you tube. They have always lost the battle against media capable of be copied. Despite recent attempts they are losing the battle of the internet. Any serious attempts at blocking could have other unintended affects. Legal sites might end up being blocked, the internet might be severely slowed down by excessive filtering. Just as spam filters can get to aggressive and mpaa or riaa block or filter could have the same affect and make it impossible to send files via the internet and we would have to resort to flash drives. At some point 8 gig flash drives will cost about $.50 and a whole world of sneaker net will be born.

    • Guest

      Perhaps the biggest threat is that people will abandon it the millions out of protest and boredom.

      You see, people aren’t prepared to pay for everything, on every site.

      Then the ISP’s suffer and go belly-up. Then the internet collapses.

      Because I for one wont be paying when I can use the library.

      Then there is no internet.

      But then, perhaps that’s what they want.

      • PinkertonH

        Agreed.

        If only they could release movies at 5 year intervals or so and make them available to watch for free (like we are allowed to watch/record from television for free), that would be fair in my mind. They could then be shown with ads to cover the costs.

    • Guest

      Perhaps the biggest threat is that people will abandon it the millions out of protest and boredom.

      You see, people aren’t prepared to pay for everything, on every site.

      Then the ISP’s suffer and go belly-up. Then the internet collapses.

      Because I for one wont be paying when I can use the library.

      Then there is no internet.

      But then, perhaps that’s what they want.

  • Anonymous

    Meh, wasn’t the Chamber of Commerce something invented by big corporations to make sure competition doesn’t exist.. (Should get sued for antitrust IMO)

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

      The Chamber of Commerce is a lobbying organization. It is in no way affiliated with the US government.

  • Death

    The MPAA has been WRONG on copyright info since the BetaMax decision. The RIAA has been wrong on it since the legislation allowing audio cassettes was passed. With EVERY introduction of a new technology they have cried that the Entertainment Industry will collapse because of it. The world is sick of hearing Chicken Little’s cries (and let’s not discuss the Boy Who Cried Wolf, lol)

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_PFCI5VRUCYT6AVBT3P6ILV3COI Ophelia Millais

      What you say is true, but has nothing to do with the situation at hand. The article doesn’t say it very well, but the problem is this: The MPAA and RIAA are pushing legislation that will strengthen their ability to shut down and/or restrict access to “rogue” websites & domains. This has riled up some scholarly champions of free speech on the Internet, people who are afraid of giving these types of corporations too much power over the ‘net. These folks have been increasingly vocal in their opposition to the legislation, and are generally saying it will “break the Internet”. The MPAA and RIAA say it is these people who are Chicken Little, because they were essentially wrong when they said the same thing about similar legislation in the past.

  • Anonymous

    There are so many things wrong in that article I can only wonder what planet these copyright freaks come from. This is all about control of course and stated “copyright freaks” want to make everyone their bitches. “Come on YouTube my copyright bitch let me fill you full of my protected copyright media cream on pay-to-view climaxes”

    One can wish we can send these morons where they belong (flush…) but the problem is they have lots of money and Congress loves those who make big political donations. This explains why the great US of A has multiple laws in the works without even taking time to see what ones work and what ones do not.

    I am quite sure that Courts do a very good job interpreting the law and Congress does a very good job writing the law so it is clear for all to understand. For them to say the Courts are not reading the law right is unbelievable arrogance. I am right and everyone else is wrong type of stuff.

    I am always mystified why some people hate DCMA law. This law is simply allowing Web 2.0 to exist of user interaction and upload. Quite simply YouTube could not exist without DCMA safe-harbour protection when getting their butt sued, in court cases lasting years, every time some user uploads infringing media is in no way to run a business.

    DMCA law respects the age old fact that rights holders have to police their own creations. Things have always been this way and it is no use them playing lazy shits and now wanting others to do it instead. This also highlights the fact that online services simply do not know the copyright status of mystery media and it is a lot easier for rights holders to simply point out what is theirs and what is infringing their happiness.

    If anything they simply need better tools to search out their media and not another array of “I’m a lazy shit” laws.

    The one key fact they most copyright freaks overlook is that copyright is not some absolute right of 100% enforcement and return. Media is willingly released into the public domain and copyright control is therefore balanced against public rights of privacy, anonymity and fair use. Once released they have lost control and all the law gives them is a “fair” (not “absolute”) right to profit.

    I would put it to all rights holders that you have two choices. First is you have the right to 100% control by not releasing your media. Then second you have fair rights to make return by releasing your media to the public after which you have lost a large degree of control.

    My point is if you want to profit from the market then give up on the idea of absolute control. YouTube brings happiness to millions of people daily and there is no way in Hell that society will allow a bunch of copyright pricks to make them their control bitch.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

      I am always mystified why some people hate DMCA law.

      Because of the notice and takedown proceedings. It is a prior restraint which allows no one to be able to fight the takedown until after it occurs. I would prefer a notice-notice so that the holder of the copyright could talk to the supposed infringer and figure out a way to negotiate.

      Quite simply YouTube could not exist without DMCA safe-harbour protection when getting their butt sued, in court cases lasting years, every time some user uploads infringing media is in no way to run a business.

      If copyright laws weren’t so strict, we wouldn’t need the safe harbor laws.

      DMCA law respects the age old fact that rights holders have to police their own creations.

      Actually, they’re trying to control copies. If rights holders really want to try that, they haven’t been paying attention. They have no moral rights to control what others do.

      This also highlights the fact that online services simply do not know the copyright status of mystery media and it is a lot easier for rights holders to simply point out what is theirs and what is infringing their happiness.

      But they get it wrong more often than not.

      Once released they have lost control and all the law gives them is a “fair” (not “absolute”) right to profit.

      No, the law doesn’t give them a right to any profit. There are no handouts. If they can’t learn to compete, they can go home. I know it sounds unfair, but if they want to make content, there is no guarantee that they can profit from it. None. That’s why they build a better service than what pirates can. That’s the incentive that they have, not to destroy the internet through false takedowns of content.

  • http://www.rxrights.org RxRights Advocate

    Not many people are acknowledging that the PROTECT IP Act and SOPA would negatively affect the health of hundreds of thousands Americans by cutting off access to legitimate online pharmacies.

    The bills broadly define “rogue” sites and inappropriately group real pharmacies — licensed, legitimate pharmacies that require a doctor’s prescription and sell brand-name medications — with rogues — who sell everything from diluted or counterfeit medicine to narcotics without a prescription.

    Simply put, Americans, especially those without insurance and seniors on fixed incomes, can’t afford the exorbitant costs of prescription drugs in the U.S. Many have found dramatic savings by ordering through legitimate Canadian and other online international pharmacies. Cutting off this virtual lifeline would be unconscionable.

    RxRights is a national coalition of individuals and organizations dedicated to promoting and protecting American consumer access to sources of safe, affordable prescription drugs. The Coalition is asking Americans to send letters to Congress and President Obama encouraging them to oppose this legislation. For more information or to voice your concern, visit http://www.RxRights.org.

  • Pingback: ISPs: Blocking The Pirate Bay Violates Freedom of Expression | TorrentFreak

  • Pingback: ISPs: Blocking The Pirate Bay Violates Freedom of Expression | We R Pirates

  • BTGuard - BitTorrent Anonymously

NewsBits

Even more news...

  • The Pirate Bay Isn’t Down Completely, Just Having a Few Issues

    Twitter and Facebook, not to mention the TorrentFreak inbox, are currently alive with complaints that The...

  • Pirate Bay Founder Gottfrid Svartholm on Freedom of Speech

    Freedom of speech is a highly valued commodity, but should people be allowed to say whatever...

  • Blu-ray Anti-Piracy Tech Stops Discs and Promotes Purchases

    An anti-piracy system present in all official Blu-ray players since 2012 has received a fresh update...

  • Foxtel Breeds Pirates by Locking Up Game of Thrones

    One of the main reasons why people turn to piracy is the lack of legal alternatives....

  • UK Student Admits Breaching Sony Copyrights With Leak of PS3 SDK

    Last year an Internet user known as El Nomeo leaked version 3.70 of Sony’s Playstation3 SDK...

MostDiscussed

Below are TorrentFreak's most discussed articles of the past month. Join the discussion if you like.

CopyQuote

Left Quote

“The Pirate Bay has been one of the most important movements in Sweden for freedom of speech, working against corruption and censorship.

Peter Sunde Left Quote

PopularArticles

A selection of some TorrentFreak's classics dug up from our archives.