Leaked ACTA Draft: More Power to the RIAA
Written by Ernesto on April 14, 2009A recent draft of the controversial Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) surfaced on Wikileaks this weekend. Among other things, the draft aims to strengthen the power and rights of the entertainment industry and other copyright holders, by letting them choose how they want to be compensated for copyright infringements.
ACTA is an international agreement that aims to target piracy and counterfeiting globally. The degree of secrecy surrounding the negotiations is astonishing. Many institutions, the press and various individuals have requested that the participating countries provide an insight into their plans, but none have succeeded thus far.
It almost seems they are actively blocking the public from having their say, while in contrast they continue to receive input from anti-piracy lobbyists such as the RIAA and MPAA. However, as time progresses more details about ACTA become public, largely thanks to Wikileaks.
With the most recent draft that leaked a few days ago, another piece of the puzzle is completed. The leaked draft covers a wide range of issues which are impossible to cover in one article, so here we focus on the damages section. In this section, it is explained how copyright infringers should be compensated by those who share copyrighted content.
It starts as follows:
1. Each Party shall provide that:
(a) In civil proceedings, its judicial authorities shall have the authority to order the infringer of intellectual property rights to pay the right holder.
(b) In determining the amount of damages of intellectual property rights, its judicial authorities shall consider, inter alia, the value of the infringed goods or service, measured by the market price, suggested retail price, or other legitimate measure of value submitted by the rights holder.
This basically means that the courts should be allowed to make those who share copyrighted content pay compensation to the rights holders. By itself this is not that groundbreaking, but combined with point (b) it means that the RIAA, MPAA and others pretty much have a carte blanche for the amount of damages they want to request.
But it gets even worse.
2. At least with respect to works, phonograms, and performance protected by copyright or related rights, and in the case of trademark counterfeiting, in civil proceedings, each party shall establish or maintain a system that provides:
(a) pre-established damages
(b) presumptions for determining the amount of damages
In the footnote of paragraph 2b it is detailed that the damages should be equal to the number of infringed goods, multiplied by the profit that would have been made if the infringement had not taken place. The “would have been sold” part is crucial here. Is every copyrighted file shared to be considered a lost sale or will there be another formula to calculate the claimed loss in sales?
If this paragraph ends up in the final version of the agreement the participating countries are encouraged to come up with a standardized fine for copyright infringers based on lost profit. The way we see it this could easily lead to a situation where file-sharers face thousands of dollars in fines if their IP-address is found sharing a popular movie or music album.
The damages section of the ACTA draft continues with the following paragraph that suggests giving rights holders full control over how they want to be compensated.
3. Each party shall provide that the rights holders shall have the right to choose the system in paragraph 2 as an alternative to the damages in paragraph 1.
This is even more absurd. It basically means that the RIAA and MPAA will have the right to come up with their own damages formula, where they will probably cite one of their own studies to legitimize asking for exorbitant amounts of damages.
Even though this leaked ACTA text is just a draft, and many member states have suggested it should become less extreme, it is crystal clear that the legislation is heavily skewed towards the rights holders. The rights of the public, their privacy and the general criticism on the claimed “loss in profit” because of illegal downloading are all completely ignored.
Previously: Miramax Rewards Would-Be BitTorrent Pirate With Free Ticket
Next: BitTorrent Powered TV is Coming
121 Responses
cool story bro
Bomb MPAA\RIAA headquarters and end this once for all.Tired of hearing sad news time & again.My D-day is 17th April regarding TPB fate.
will wait to see what happens to TPB
Let’s hope we’ll get some sort of “good” news soon …
Seriously…. Someone just kill the CEO’s of the RIAA and all these stupid “copywrite” holders. They are doing NOTHING but taking peoples money, just like the stupid FCC in the US.
The person who made/passed this law should be sentenced for life for backstabbing the people like this.
#2 has the right idea,somebody please finance/help him.
+1 mate.
Look, it’s a civil case. If you are in America, you can not pay and they can do NOTHING about it. One of the prime rules of the Americans Judaical system (Which blows btw) is that no man should ever be jailed for not paying debt (Only IRS can arrest yo ass). There, you happy? Pay your IRS moneys and be happy, RIAA can make you pay $0.
This is why I loved that movie “The Day the Earth Stood Still”. The people that made this new law need to wiped off the face of this earth by termites.
How many songs do I have to have to download before they get my firstborn son?
don’t know about songs, but it’s about 30 seconds for movies, isn’t it?
@2+5: You’re a bunch of whiny retards. Killing has never solved ANYTHING. The second you kill the RIAA president all filesharers will be marked “murderers” playing even more into the hands of the industry. Bombing the MPAA headquarters would have the exact same effect. The next week a new guy would be announced to take over and fight you even harder because of what you did.
The ONLY way to get these people to comply and fess up to reality is
A) boycott any and all of their products (no downloads, no pirating, no TV, no Cinema, no nothing) only when nobody gives them money or free attention anymore will they finally realize they are wrong
or
B) Become an invaluable asset for them, buy as much as you can and send them your receipts and complaints about how screwed up that system is and that you as a customer want change.
or
C) Become an artist/creator and share your works in a better way, when the BitTorrent economy of the web overtakes their business model in a legal manner they WILL have to adapt, what are they gonna do? Sue legal artists?
r0ck,
Killing solves lots.
36 seconds for first born. fyi
This was a carefully calculated number from bullshit figures determined by people who have never used bittorrent and still pay for their newspaper, cable tv, and political power.
Holy crap! I’m not a big RIAA/MPAA fan… Ok, I pretty much hate them… but recommending bombing and murder? Yeah. There’s a solution. Let’s hope cooler heads will prevail.
Okay okay. Suggestions of death threats and acts of terrorism are going waaaay too far. Get a grip otherwise they can and will prosecute you.
Advice to the RIAA and MPAA, you really need to stop going way too far with your legal manuevers. You are infuriating the people that you want as customers.
Hire a PR company and learn how to resolve the differences between you and your potential customers.
This is not a law. It is a formula or member nations to framework their laws. Just looking at this framework, a first year law student could punch holes in it. It would never pass in my country, or if it did, the judges would throw it out on appeal. The government would not get relected at the next election. No, it just wouldn’t fly.
Personally I think that killing people whyo work for MPAA wouldnt solve anything. I suggest we target their families and loved ones instead.
I think that you are all a bit too serious about the death threats trying to look mature and all. it’s failing.
This is going WAY to far. The RIAA are given power which equals, or superseeds the local authorities! To give you an idea how insane this is:
- When you receive a ticket for speeding, you`ll have to pay some serious money (I`ve got one for 200EUR).
- When you download a movie, you`ll have to pay more, than you`ll have to for risking lives!
Sorry to say this, but WTF!?! I wonder how they ever get THIS far! I think it won’t be due to their PR deparment. More likely they pay millions of USD for lobbyists!
The part I really don’t like is that we can’t appeal this decision before it’s going into use!
Piliticians aren’t representing civilians anymore, they are representing money-driven p*gs!
We, the civilians, are even offering methods of making some serious money (abandon the old corporate model, adopt a new one, adjusted to include new media), but either they aren’t listening, or want to make HUGE piles of thousand dollar bills!
I`m feeling alone at the moment, left to die by the people that should represent us/me!
“the legislation is heavily skewed towards the rights holders. ”
well duh. This legislation is a direct reflection of the ransacking the digital medium has endured in the first place. No piracy? No need for new legislation. OF COURSE its about protecting rights holders. At the moment, pre-piracy legislation doesn’t protect the rights of the rights holders. That’s the whole POINT of the ACTA, to re-level the field of commerce.
r0ck has a lot right, here. Total boycott is the only way to gain valid credibility in the eyes of government and industry but lawbreakers are inherently dumb and pirates demonstrate that everyday. Pirates CAUSED the ACTA. And every illegal download doesn’t represent a lost sale, everyone knows that. But if the rights holder intended a sale for your possession and you possess it improperly without paying for it, THAT is when the ACTA will step in and hold the pirate accountable to the retail value of their own illegal possession and if evidenced as true, also using bit torrent to facilitate potentially millions of other illegal possessions, at retail prices in the millions. Pirates follow no laws, not legal nor moral, so we’ll craft the laws as we need them and some degree of piracy will inevitably pay bigtime. REALLY bigtime. That’s the point and that’s the goal. And that much will clearly be achieved.
This is carefully worded, surprisingly fair legislation. God speed.
“Information wants to be free.” Yeah, it’s free if YOU create it and want it that way maybe, lol, but the pro’s who do this for their family’s living put a price tag on it. Always will. And the government will always stand up for them in the face of rampant lawbreaking. And crime will be punished, in this new and evolving case quite harshly just as it should be. Always will.
blah blah blah….useless.
@10
“…when the BitTorrent economy of the web overtakes their business model in a legal manner they WILL have to adapt, what are they gonna do? Sue legal artists?”
They wont adapt, they’ll just find a way to force all musicians, movie makers…. to join the RIAA/MPAA cartel. Probaply by suing them for something… Money talks…
Ok, Thus in a nutshell: The ACTA terminates the normal gov in the ACTA-countries and let the MAFIAA rule them.
Bad, veeery bad :(
Rock, as people have said, killing off the RIAA/MPAA (literally) would solve plenty of problems.
It’s kind of hard to blame every filesharer in the world for a murder. Think you can put them all in jail?
Gov’t vs the entire populace, well guess who the winner is. Cluebat: it isn’t the government, even if the gov’t is armed.
I think im just done with “Their” entertainment anyways. Screw it, i will boycott everything this establishment produces.
Secret treaties, eh? The papers upon which the USA was founded list such actions as justification for revolution.
I read the leak, this is craaaazy shit. There’s even a special section near the end for dealing with camrippers. lol
i actually think reasoned mind has a point, it is updating the old laws for the digital age.
i dont agree that the people who decide what is lost profit are the same people who have ‘lost’ this profit. it should be down to an independent body, who have looked at all the reports on downloads vs missed sales and come up with a sensible figure for the compensation.
i really do think that the entertainment industry needs to catch up with the rest of the world and open up the options for the sale of their new products, or they will be overwhelmed by the number of pirates out there – they can’t take everyone to court!
hey, why is the
sorry, hit enter, why is the time of the post wrong – it’s 19.07 on my clock! or is torrent freak operating from the future… ooooo spooky!
“It almost seems they are actively blocking the public from having their say, while in contrast they continue to receive input from anti-piracy lobbyists such as the RIAA and MPAA.”
“Almost”??? There’s no “almost” or “seems” about it. Keeping the public from having any say in these negotiations is EXACTLY what all the secrecy is about. They want to get this treaty worked out and put into effect before anyone has a chance to object to it.
The way i read it.. if they take someone to court for sharing 1 song. the civil infringment is worth about $1.29 neh?
“The way i read it.. if they take someone to court for sharing 1 song. the civil infringment is worth about $1.29 neh?”
It seems to me that it’d be worth as much as the recording industry said it was worth. Probably the entire cost of recording and touring for that one song, if they can figure out a way to justify it.
The cost of a one song infringement will hinge on whether you uploaded it. Uploaders will be stuck with a significant loss since the torrents can cut into profits in a huge and demonstrable way. Besides, this is all just cat and mouse and the ACTA is just getting started. Pirates will continue, the laws will tighten and tighten further as privacy is sacrificed to equal justice for rights holders under the law. But the difference is that rights holders are stolen FROM but have no legal/punishment worries. Content creation is legal and especially protected and encouraged.
But the pirates who steal the content are not protected because their own actions warrant taking them down. It’s illegal. That’s all that truly counts. You’ll keep stealing “information” and gain possession of entertainment product, sure, but soon you’ll be taking insane risks to do it. Sooner or later, iPODS and flashdrives and HD’s and laptops will all be scanned at public marked and unmarked checkpoints. Why? Because Pirates don’t care, they will drive this issue until every shred of privacy is lost. Government will always protect the law abider, and take out the law breaker, just as it should be. And nowhere in the world does privacy ultimately trump your “right” to use it to secretly break the law. Not Canada, not Germany, not France or the UK, not the USA. Not Australia or New Zealand. Not even Spain. Nowhere. Nor should it.
TPB WILL prevail! They did NOT break ANY Swedish law. American law does not apply in Sweden so they are NOT going to lose the trial. Stay positive people!!! TPB can win this. Fuck the MAFIAA and the MPAA and the RIAA and the IFPI. They deserve to be lynched for denying us the human right of sharing.
Since when did comments need to await moderation…? -_-”
Wait till April 17th guys.
@35 You should send your script to the Wachowski brothers for V for vendetta 2… I’m sure it would be the #1 in the top 10 most pirated movies.
Now is the time to star spreading the word:
“Copyright is theft”
Sing it on every street corner, in every sig – until its the first thing anyone will say if you wake them in the middle of the night.
@38, Frank, the mistake pirates make is thinking this is only about copyright. It’s not, ONLY to the rights holders. To the governments of the world, it’s about law and order, maintaining their economies and tax collection, and you can choose ANY crime you want, ANY ONE, Frank, and if organized lawbreaking began on this scale and did this kind of damage to industry, economy, tax revenue and ordinary creators lives the governments would come down just as hard on THAT activity, too. And government will not stop until this is contained. And the people doing it will be historically responsible for the new world order they compelled by their own illegal activities. The ACTA is a tentative first step towards digital law and order, and government will not be denied law and order in the new digital realm. Too much rides on this to let piracy reign.
Pirates could have stopped buying when they decided they didn’t like the content, the prices, the means of delivery or the terms and had huge, lasting, legal impact on the entertainment industries. They began to steal it all instead, when technology gave them cover. And that’s when pirates lost this in the big picture. When they stole and traded their privacy for free movies and music and games, thus handing the issue to law enforcement.
bomb the boats and feed the f@#king flesh to the fish
What else do they want? Private law enforcement? Private courts and prisons?
I’m just going to record songs directly from the internet radio. That way, it’s not any different than the old days of recording from TV to VHS.
I’m recording a publically broadcast signal at a lower quality for personal use.
@36
Since I started posting.
Reasoned Mind, I am an visual artist, I know copyright laws very well. If I had no access to free galleries where I could sit down and sketch the styles of other greater artists . Where would I find inspiration? If I could not go out and look at everything around me?. The fact is everything that is copyrighted has been stolen ittself, through form of inspiration.
I do not think Bittorrent has actually in any way hurt the Movie industry(which has by the way been produceing crap for the past 10 years). Rather gave light to show its true self. greedy, fat corperations with shitty Artists , a bad businuss plan and some terrible propaganda’s. Get off there dicks Reasoned Mind.
I am not a pirate, I’m a filesharer, if you want pirates go to the Somalian coast, you’ll find plenty of real pirates over there.
MPAA = FAIL
RIAA = FAIL
They just won’t admit people aren’t buying albums anymore. Who needs the whole album when you can purchase the whole song off itunes for $11 USD less.
As for their own damage formula… I’m guessing it wont be very accurate with the REAL numbers. They might be off by a couple hundred-thousand digits wrong.
“Someone just kill the CEO’s of the RIAA and all these stupid “copywrite” holders”
Copyright, not copywrite.
@ 42 “What else do they want? Private law enforcement? Private courts and prisons?”
Do you mean the music and book publishers? Motion picture makers? Digital game producers? Software manufacturers? Recording artists?
I don’t think they want any of that prison/court/LEO stuff, frankly, I think the pirates are the ones who have compelled all that crap. I think they just want you to stop stealing their stuff. Really. If you want it, just pay for it like every other product for sale. I really think that’s all it is.
Would “Trademark Counterfeiting” also apply to the Big Media companies?
Hey, at least Shareaza would be due “pre-established damages” from iMesh -their misbehaved “authorized agent.”
they just need to accept that they cant control everything and find an innovative and fair way to sell things.
everyone describes the killing and bombing as acts of terrorism, but the descibed measures are acts of terrorism themselves. We all know that lots of random innocent epople are attacked by these companies, how are we allowed to defend ourselves against these terrorists?
I don’t condone it but is there another way of defening yourselve if attacked by these companies? This sound more and more like a new nazi era coming up
@ Reasoned Mind
You do know that laws can be changed, right? No law is perfect and what worked ten years ago may need to be changed to work in the present times. Copyright law is an excellent example of a law in need of change.
And cut out the “stealing” crap! It’s not stealing if I never had any intention to buy it, or if I can’t buy title X because it is not legally available in our country ten (or more) YEARS after it was first made.
No, I am not making this up. There are titles that are over 10 years old and to this day are not available for sale in our country, even though they can be (especially now, with the various digital distribution methods). Which means the people who have the copyrights don’t WANT my money in the first place, and so they cannot complain that I’m “stealing” their product…
One bill would stop ALL THIS BULLSHUIT!… A bill to end corporate personhood.
@51, Shadowblack,
“Stealing”, or digital theft, or taking without paying are all widely regarded as accurate in one way or another by the rights holders and by those who write the laws. Piracy is currently a civil infraction as “infringement” for one reason only:
These laws in force were written long ago and are in the process of being upgraded.
If a certain title is not available in a certain market or pulled from that market by the rights holder as a marketing strategy, that’s their right. This is no justification for torrenting it. If you disagree, tell it to the judge, or your congressman or your President or Prime Minister. But stealing it will only get more and more risky.
Where do you gather this notion that as a consumer, you have some “right” in your own mind to whatever you want whenever you want it at whatever price you wish to pay on your own schedule and on your own terms? All those attributes (and many more, actually) are all well within the domain of the creator or the creators agents, the “rights holders.” No product is ever delivered that way. Digital piracy is not going to change this.
No one had a hard time understanding this prior to the rise of digital piracy because this is based in a form of commerce that is time tested and fair for all involved. Your rights are to accept it as they offer it or do without. That’s the beginning and the end of it and you shouldn’t hold your breath for this to change anytime soon, and you get the same rights for YOUR products, which is why this is abundantly fair.
You can always pass. I recommend you do if you don’t like these terms. But if this is hard for you to understand and you keep stealing it, I’m sure the ACTA will help clarify your comprehension in the months and years ahead. No industry will give in to extortion based upon digital theft. Nor should they.
@ Reasoned Mind
You make it sound as if we consumers have no rights at all.
If the shop doesn’t have what I want when I want it I go to another shop. If the price is too high I go someplace else, or don’t buy the product at all. If the product doesn’t meet my expectations – I don’t buy it (I may or may not buy another product). THAT is my right as a consumer. And it is up to the shop to give me what I want when I want it in order to get my money. If they can’t – that’s their problem. If they go out of business because they couldn’t meet the expectations of enough people to turn a profit – that is also their problem.
Also, I do pass up. I watch hollywood movies only when they are shown on TV – I don’t even bother downloading them. The same goes for music. Games I gave up years ago because I didn’t like the quality of the new games. Books I have never downloaded (though I really need to try and find a way to download a few books that will never get published in our country) and buy them… as long as the price is reasonable. Did I miss anything?
Let’s say Guy A downloads a song and then begins to share it. After a while, he gets brought up on charges. He loses in court and has to pay based on how many lost sales the Beast has suffered. Since there’s no practical way of tracking the actual impact, I feel we should assume that Guy A has paid for ALL the downloads floating around, and the Beast shouldn’t be able to prosecute anyone else for that particular song, since they’ve been ‘paid their dues’ for that song already. Does this make sense, or am I just suffering from Red Bull Overdose?
hackers could trace each one working in anti piracy gangs,trace politicians tracing its meetings, e.mails, phone calls, everything is possible and make public their activities, let’s stop the hypocrisy
OK “Reasoned Mind” in comment #21, I’ll bite.
“every illegal download doesn’t represent a lost sale, everyone knows that.”
A shocking admission, but you immediately contradict yourself when you say a downloader/possessor is “accountable to the retail value” of their possession:
“But if the rights holder intended a sale for your possession and you possess it improperly without paying for it, THAT is when the ACTA will step in and hold the pirate accountable to the retail value of their own illegal possession”
You need to stop calling downloaders & possessors “pirates”. Obtaining (downloading), possessing, and making available (sharing) are separate concepts. Only sharing is at issue here. If I walk into a bookstore and the guy at the counter hands me a counterfeit book, regardless of whether he charges me money for it, I am not a criminal, I have not stolen anything, I’m not a “pirate”, I do not “illegally possess” the book, and I don’t owe the legitimate publisher a dime. The publisher is free to try to sue me in civil court for perceived damages, but it’s unlikely they’ll win. Only the counterfeiter has committed a crime and can be brought to trial in a criminal court, and only they and maybe the bookseller (depending on their complicity) can reasonably be sued in civil court for damages. Yet if you had your way, you’d sue everyone, especially the consumers, for whatever amount you can get out of everyone.
@21
“That’s the whole POINT of the ACTA, to re-level the field of commerce.”
If this was to level the playing field, then the penalties wouldn’t be chosen by the recipient of those penalties. Our society would devolve into chaos if this principle was applied to any other type of crime, which is why it’s a stupid, dangerous, disastrously unfair idea.
As it stands, the RIAA is already claiming that a single download causes them several hundred dollars in lost revenue. The _lowest_ penalty a file sharer can get if convicted is $750 per song.
In no economy does a single download of a digital copy of a single song equal the cost of over 40 purchases of that WHOLE album.
That’s like stealing ONE egg, and being punished as though you stole 40 cases of eggs. And you didn’t even actually steal the egg, you just made a copy of it!
They also claim, falsely, that a single download is equal to a lost sale. As most people who have ever pirated a song will attest, there are always songs that they downloaded but would never buy.
This is about wringing every dollar possible from every possible source. In every case where music is being digitally distributed the RIAA is right there claiming it’s unfair how small their cut is.
Instead of adapting their business model, they’re trying to kill innovation (like internet radio), digital distribution, (with their crazy restrictive DRM), and everything else that threatens their antiquated way of doing things.
This isn’t about leveling the playing field. It’s about trying to maintain control of an industry that doesn’t need them anymore.
And to claim that this is about artists is ludicrous. The RIAA pays artists literally pennies on the dollar (if that) to their artists – the ones that drive their entire business – and then the RIAA has the gall to complain that they’re still not getting their fair share.
It’s garbage.
“and if evidenced as true, also using bit torrent to facilitate potentially millions of other illegal possessions, at retail prices in the millions.”
There’s no such thing as an “illegal possession” of music/video/literature, no matter how much you would like for there to be. If someone possesses something they didn’t pay for, it can’t be assumed that they stole it, at least not in criminal court. Even if they did deliberately avoid paying for it, for digital transmissions it is the supplier, not the consumer, who’s held responsible for licensing. So it does not matter how one comes into possession; ACTA can only deal with the supply side. But when you refer to “potentially millions” of infringements and commensurate damages, you’re venturing into wild speculation. In a criminal court, you would have to prove actual or at least likely lost sales, not just potential. In a civil court, you really don’t have to *prove* anything, depending on the judge; you just need to have precedent and something like ACTA on your side.
Also, even publishing a direct link to an unlicensed work on a web site potentially makes it available to the entire Internet-using population of the Earth, yet doesn’t make the link’s author or the ISPs or anyone else responsible for paying for a billion-plus infringements that never occurred. In a decentralized system like BitTorrent, there’s no feasible way to know how many copies are made, at best only an estimate of many people got torrent files (info about files being shared). Since it’s too difficult to prove actual or even likely infringement, you’re using ACTA to certify whatever estimate you want to make as “true” damages, without needing a shred of evidence. Shameful.
“crime will be punished”
Crime? This legislation is apparently only meant for rights holders to continue use the civil justice system as a bludgeon to seek judgements and financial remedies for whatever financial damages they want to claim against whoever they want to sue, regardless of how flimsy the evidence. The legislation attempts to deal with the inconsistency of civil courts in determining damages — an increasing number of judges are of the opinion the damages being sought are excessive, and you don’t like that, do you? Anyway this has nothing to do with the criminal justice system, which is the only venue in which criminal activity can be ascertained. People you sue are not criminals, they are defendants in a civil suit — parties accused not of a crime, but merely of owing money — nothing more. Your industry avoids the criminal courts like the plague (for digital “piracy” issues at least), perhaps because you know in that system there’s a much higher threshold for proving your case, and the judges there are far less tolerant of your shenanigans.
“No one had a hard time understanding this prior to the rise of digital piracy because this is based in a form of commerce that is time tested and fair for all involved.”
Because at no time prior could a person sell something without actually trading anything to the buyer in the sale.
Digital distribution is different because it isn’t an actual product that’s being sold, it’s a copy. Laws need to reflect this, and businesses need to adapt to this.
non-binding international ‘agreements?’ press the panic button
LOL @ all the basement warriors
well as long as the lisbon treaty is not agreed upon in ireland,
this particular draft is OUTSIDE the irish constitution, and anything that supercedes our constitution requires a public vote.
i bet to see a lot of hollywood dollars in the push for this lisbon treaty agreement, which all countries stress MUST be unanimous.
LMfAO
this treaty will, like the ‘federal’ systems/laws in the USA, overpower local law, and stupid backhand deals like this will be forced upon ALL COMPLIANT STATES.
what about…..
what about catching WAN on an offshore cruiser, with giant server farms?
technically not ‘catchable’
I wonder how any company can get you for stealing a game or other software, when it expressly states that when you purchase such a product that you do not own it, but are licensed to use it. As I am not a lawyer type, I am curious if one would tell me the legality of this? Or is this a gray area?
pho·no·gram (f?’n?-gr?m’)
n. A character or symbol, as in a phonetic alphabet, representing a word or phoneme in speech.
pho’no·gram’ic, pho’no·gram’mic adj., pho’no·gram’i·cal·ly, pho’no·gram’mi·cal·ly adv.
there is my legal defense right there i didnt pirate anyone’s vowels i swear
why do all these laws use this word it doesnt seem to be interchangeble with mp3/dvd it just makes me see a turn table with a big brass funnel on top.
They cant even update the terminology to the 21st century and they expect to be able to fight the technology of the 21st century
Minor correction to my comments above: after skimming the actual ACTA document, I see its scope is far greater than the parts we’re, uh, discussing; and it’s not legislation, per se, but an international agreement which would guide the creation of legislation. Nevertheless, my point remains: downloading and/or possession is not a crime.
No big surprises here, more control, more money for the holder, etc. It’ll be ignored and life goes on until acta part 2 where you get jailed on accusation.
On a nit pick though Ernesto grab some coffee:
“In this section, it is explained how copyright infringers should be compensated by those who share copyrighted content.”
I’m not sure if you meant some sort of jab at the labels for stealing the artist’s rights but boy did it confuse me at first.
No big surprises here, more control, more money for the holder, etc. It’ll be ignored and life goes on until acta part 2 where you get jailed on accusation.choose a practical shower curtain to decorate your bath room
There is a quote that comes from the Ancient Greeks: “The Republic is at it’s most corrupt when the Laws are at their most numerous”.
You can argue all day about whether or not artist should be compensated for their songs but your missing the bigger picture here. ACTA is a blantant pandering to Special Interest. The People’s Government is actively denying our right to representation.
ACTA marks the for the first time publicly that we no longer live in a Republic or a Democracy but rather a rising Ogliarchy (a repressive one at that). Mark my words, it’s only gonna get worse from here on out as they struggle for power.
People relax! Let them push their laws, the more brutal, the more secret an unjust the better. No need for terrorist acts, or deaththreats either.
Civil obidience is the way to go, which basically means: We keep doing what we do best. Pirating our ass off, and don’t spent a dime on their shitty products, slowly starving their greedy corporations to death. Just remember to keep spreading the word and educate people, opening their eyes. Everyday more and more people wake up to whats going on!
And when they really starts tightening the grip, we all start using VPN-tunnels and proxys, and at that point all they can do to keep the control, is basically kill of the internets funtionality, rendering it useless. Which in effect will rise such a tremendous uprising from the entire populations in the western countries, that they won’t know what hit them, when that shit’s cracking down! ;-)
As @25 mentions, the people will always win, if it comes to a showdown between state and population. And the more they push us around, the harder they will fall under the hands of angry-mob justice!!
@UnReasoned Mind-troll:
Incredible how you have the capabilty to see everything upside down!
So it’s the pirates fault, when the MAFIAA (yeah, your employers!)is using illegal rampaging measures to pursue and extorte innocent university printers, underage teenagers and dead people? I guess it’s also the pirates fault when the MAFIAA, bribes politicians, threatens independent organisations and nations, hustle the artist’s they claim to represent, hacks private computers on suspiscions alone, illegally monitors private peoples internet connections and correspondence and generally manipulate worldwide governments and their legal systems?
I guess next you will claim that the egg gave birth to the Hen as well?
JACKASS!
This is not just about RIAA. Many other businesses will be changed from selling products at affordable prices to making them very expensive and “leaking” them.
@66: They can’t measure musing with kilograms so they use “kilo-phonograms”, “mega-phonograms” etc.
lolol unreasoned mind hes a troll-bot
killing RIAA heads is a bit extreme, but surely they could be blackmailed lol… you know they are some shady motherfuckers, someone’s got some dit on them
See, I think something like this is good in a backwards sort of way…
P2P doesn’t decrease sales. Quite the contrary, it helps to “build the brand”, bring in more people who would not otherwise have an interest, and give them the opportunity to become interested. It builds the popularity of the artist, and allows him the opportunity to increase his profits.
So, when one is found guilty of “infringement”, and damages are calculated based on loss-of-profit, when it turns out that P2P tends to increase profits, NEGATIVE damages should be awarded, requiring the plaintiff to pay the defendant for his work.
Yeah, “kill” and “bomb” … pretty obvious provocations by RIAA / MPAA types … least we forget, these dinosaurs have been trying to link file sharing to “terrorism” and this is just another cheap ploy to see if anyone is willing to jump on the “terror” bandwagon. Don’t fall for it, folks … use your f**king skulls … now, if just 1% of all file sharers were to contact their elected officials and complain and / or demand some degree of COPYWRONG reform, something might actually change … until then, ignore the nonsense … @ 2 & 5, I hope you trolls drink a jug of AIDS… <3
Reasoned Mind said:
‘ACTA is a tentative first step towards digital law and order, and government will not be denied law and order in the new digital realm.’
So true. Gvmnt will not be denied. I just dont see how they can win in the current arena.
If I were in power (muwhahaha) I would get off my lazy ass and marginalize piracy by building the new ‘Internet II’ they were yakkin about a few years back.
This would be created by gvnmt with lessons learnt from this one. The MPAA/ RIAA’s dreams fulfilled a NON anonymous pay as you go (credit card only?) presumably secure net separate from this one. This is where you would do shopping & banking, safe for kids censored new web. All schools and gvmnt institutes would have to use it…for starters.
Of course this ‘net’ would still exist. Cause thats where all the free shit will be. This will be the old ‘black net’ just like IRC & email newsgroups are still around. This old net will survive as the underground here you can torrent, get virused, scammed, read uncensored news,PORN etc. Some good some…well.
set up a two tiered system and if youre really evil start outlawing the old 1.0 ‘black net’. Big fines if youre caught with a ‘black net’ connection, execution maybe for torrenters. Follow your heart :)
Look I really just want everyone to show up to work in a snappy uniform, and the trains to run on time.
00ster
I agree with #2.
Anyone know any radical Jihadist who wants to strike at the “Great Satan”? For once they’d actually be blowing up something that would matter in the larger scheme of things.
Also seeing as I live in the United Police States of America.
Disclaimer for big brother. All comments made here are strictly hypothetical and/or in jest.
@ 21 Reasoned Ass
Gee thanks Reasoned Ass, I’m glad we have someone so obviously superior to us ‘dumb’ pirates to tell us how clever you are. Just remember that us dumb pirates have you so freakin’ scared that you have to come here everyday to tell us how bad we are and to shake your finger at us. At the end of the day that’s about as much effect as your precious entertainment industry will have on us. Piracy will be here for ever, you can’t stop it, you can’t control it and no matter what laws are crafted, they will be bypassed. It’s hopeless for you, give up already, hell you’ve probably downloaded something yourself. Embrace it.
But if the industry wants to keep up with their antics, I say, BOYCOTT their products, dont go to the movies or buy DVD’s or music. Make them suffer, they NEED us. We should dictate the terms to them!
LOL @ Reasoned Mind
How does it feel to be on the losing side of history?
#adventureland #fbi
Everyone needs available: Affordable high speed internet access, capable of streaming HD video with plenty of overhead, to stream without any hic-ups.
Several obvious plans to collect the money:
1) Unlimited Music access* service
2) Unlimited Movie access* service
3) Unlimited (???) access* service
Profit.
* as much as your internet cable can deliver
People can subscribe for unlimited access, and pay a nominal monthly fee.
The profits made from [each subscriber] will only go to the producers and developers of media which [each subscriber] has accessed.
Now how many people do you know that don’t use any kind of media?
The Amish … the homeless …
Therefore, with the billions of people on Earth paying about $10 USD a month for each service, that’s trillions of dollars in profit.
How can anyone complain, having anything they want to listen to, watch, read, or whatever, at anytime they want, in as high quality as they choose, or are able to sustain, for a low monthly fee?
They won’t need to pay for the packaging, the marketing, etc. They won’t even have to pay for the bandwidth with current P2P technology.
The copyright laws must be used as intended, to keep people from profiting from, or claiming your work as their own.
They are not to stop kids from sharing music, and never were, despite what they want you to believe.
Just as the phonograph allowed sound waves to be recorded and played back, years later, it’s the same thing, just a different device to do it with.
Don’t act so shocked, like you just time traveled to 2009 from 1909.
-Media is created but not destroyed.
-Past libraries will live forever.
-Population has increased
-Technology should never be halted for any reason.
-Technology can save lives, not money.
You can’t stop a Mars sized asteroid from hitting Earth with dollar bills. You can’t inject money into a cancer patient and fix them, etc.
They didn’t halt technology to build the ultimate death rays and atom splitters, so why halt it when it is purely for the enjoyment, entertainment, and education of people?
So The parasites form the majors will be able to chose between stainless steal and lead bullets to be compensated? Cool!
Can we pre-establish the calliber?
So The parasites from the majors will be able to chose between stainless steal and lead bullets to be compensated? Cool!
Can we pre-establish the calliber?
So The parasites from the majors will be able to chose between stainless steal and lead bullets to be compensated? Cool!
Can we pre-establish the calliber?
ROW ROW FIGHT THE POWAH
Anyone got a teabag? I got a tea party to go to! In Boston. Some tar and feathers would be nice.
@13 Zack:
If you actually look at the effects of what killing does for most situations it’s only an elaborate way of covering your eyes and ears with your hands shouting “I can’t see/hear you”. Killing NEVER solves a problem. It solves your perception of the problem (as far as idiots are concerned that’s enough for them) but if you really want to solve a problem the proper way you can’t do that through violence. Once you’ve eradicated ANYONE who disagrees with you people from your own team will start feeling guilty about all the crimes they have committed and start working against you from the inside. Problem solved? I don’t think so.
And to be quite honest, you (and I assume you’re a ridiculously stupid jackass with violent fantasies and a very small penix) wouldn’t want to live in a society of the kind which you seem to imagine.
Thank goodness for Wikileaks!
“(b) In determining the amount of damages of intellectual property rights, its judicial authorities shall consider, inter alia, the value of the infringed goods or service, measured by the market price, suggested retail price, or other legitimate measure of value submitted by the rights holder.”
Measured by the retail price? Are they insane? Now the content providers think they can sue filesharers for the retailers cut of the profits, as well as their manufacturers profit margin?
Wow.
So does that mean that they will give the profit from each case (RRP – their manufacturers selling price) to my local music shop for their ‘percieved loss’?
Or would they simply keep the difference, as well as not having to pay the artists (as they would if I bought a song from itunes), and not pay for marketing, distribution, storage, bandwidth, etc?
What a BRILLIANT business model. All they have to do is pay to produce ONE album, then they can live off mega-profits forever, without any further expenditures, thanks to the legal system.
I’m in the wrong job…
I am not very surprised. This ACTA bullshit has been looming for some time. It is a piece of crap bought by the A’s to try and save themselves.
Unfortunately the US justice dept is being filled by RIAA lawyers.
see: http://www.boingboing.net/2009/04/13/obama-adds-yet-anoth.html
They will have your broadband and your ipod next. Shut down the internet so a bunch of dinosaurs and hangers on from the 50’s can continue to milk the artists and patrons for their pound of flesh.
If we could get rid of these lampreys and the media business change their business model a little, millions could be made.
Peace Out.
a vote for law regarding punishment of incest has been postponed, in order to retry to pass the three strikes crap.
sieg riaa/sacem/holywood/other parasites.
The cries of a dieing monster..
Concerning the suggested acts of domestic terrorism and murder, you only ever need to kill someone when they are absolutely irreplaceable to the other side. Killing or bombing over this issue would only portray pirates as terrorists and spark outrage internationally. There are certainly issues that nearly all of us would be willing to kill over, but file-sharing should certainly not one of them.
Look at the Islamic extremists who performed attacks against the US in ‘01 and a few years later in England. Did these attacks result in the downfall of the West? No. Did these attacks result in general hatred of Muslims becoming tolerated, hundreds of thousands of deaths during the Coalition invasion (mostly civilians), and the U.S. government becoming more imperialistic? Absolutely. The end result of their actions was paranoia, hatred, and the West committing actual atrocities against them.
As for this law, of course the Industry will advocate extreme copyright laws. Conversely, most of us will advocate the extreme opposite. It really is too bad the leaders in the file-sharing community and leaders in the Industry can’t sit down together and find a solution that benefits everyone. The thing that truly keeps this from happening is the fact that the Industry sees us as a problem that will go away if pressured. They are gravely mistaken in this.
The ONLY way we can actually change the system is to defy it openly while not purchasing ANY entertainment products. Downloading is an excellent act of civil disobedience to show our defiance. We must also bring the masses into our fold, as that will be the only way to cut the proverbial umbilical cord from the entertainment industry.
IDEA: Maybe in their infinite wisdom the MPAA/RIAA could adopt some kind of flat-rate policy: say $15 for each movie you download, $5 for every track you download. It’s a fine, like a parking ticket. Slightly more expensive than pay-downloading it, therefore turning the market back toward pay.
@89 fines
Why, just get rid of them. The
movie and music industry could charge less and make billions. They just cant seem to get over the fact that their is now competition in an industry that they once monopolized and set prices to anything they wanted. Very few of us have that luxury. The A’s will wipe out the internet to keep the monopoly.
A smarter approach would be to market their product over the internet and pass the savings of publishing, shipping, and retailing on to customers (worldwide).
Im talking billions $$$ and they would not be around to sue kids, network printers and dead people.
(and then keep the money).
The one thing the RIAA/MPAA don’t happen to mention is that the money going to the “rights holders” isn’t going to the artists, but to the RIAA/MPAA. So who is this really protecting.
The “one infringement equals one lost sale” thing is wrong. Not because of the “I’d never buy it anyway” argument, but because of the “Now that I’ve heard of it and seen it, I’ll buy it” argument.
Scanlated manga probably falls under similar laws as fansubs. Meaning my reading scanlations online is probably a violation of the author’s copyright.
However, because I like One Piece, Naruto, Death Note, Elfen Lied, and Full Metal Alchemist so much, starting next month I’m planning on buying 2-3 manga volumes per month, probably more when money allows.
So, in this case, my piracy has resulted in numerous future sales, whereas if I hadn’t read it online, it’s unlikely I would have even known they existed, much less have found out I liked them.
Little blurb summaries you often see don’t do any job at all of conveying how good or bad a 10,000 page (500+ chapters and about 20 pages per chapter) manga series like One Piece is, and anyone that buys something based on that is quite stupid.
I think people who advocate taking free copies of “for-sale product” online are missing the larger, more important point. To industry or government, this could just as well be sensitive health care information, military or diplomatic communication, credit card data. Or private communications. It’s ALL unsecured at present and it all does real damage to the rights holders everyday. And I think this situation will tighten for decades until the network is relatively “safe” as defined by the governments agreements.
Were this a big dvd or cd copying operation in some warehouse somewhere, even if distributed for free, the majority of observers would expect this to be deemed illegal and shut down. But do the same exact thing online from a webpage and suddenly some percentage of those observers cry “free culture” and “freedom of speech” as the larger issue. There’s a logical disconnect here that pirates never address. It’s only a shift to nontangible format. The issue remains the same. And only pirates see this distinction as reason to allow it to go forward.
Addressing online filesharing is just one small part of the ACTA and the ACTA is just one small part of where global legislation will inevitably go. This is only the first tentative babysteps towards internet control. In the material world, no well sorted out government is going to be okay with a certain geographic region living in daily chaos and anarchy, with lawbreaking and theft of any sort allowed to continue as routine. Sooner or later, the government steps in and does whatever it takes—-whatever it takes—to gather a reasonable control of the region.
Online will prove no different over time.
It’s true that laws are not in place yet and digital phenomenon is way out ahead of the legislators at the moment. The online/digital realm is presently host to a wide variety of chaotic and anarchic memes: hacking and webpage defacing, credit card and atm info pilfered, identity theft, fraud of many kinds, pfishing for data, Nigerian banking schemes, copyright infringement, digital theft of a wide variety of products, the list goes on and on. At the moment, global law enforcement is 1) way behind the curve 2) working from a disjointed patchwork of antique legislation and 3) just trying to keep some degree of basic online organization in place until the world begins to decide on internet standards and work together to enforce them.
The internet we share is the greatest thing ever in communication, digital distribution, the free spread of CC information.
But pirate’s don’t seem to be interested in organizing and influencing this legally to their way of thinking, but rather do real damage to their cause by pretending that anything in the digital format is/should be fair game and free and then reach to ludicrous measures (assassination anyone?) as a response to a government pushback. If you ever wonder why the industries and governments don’t listen to you and your suggestions about how they should run their businesses, just read the moronic comments above.
The internet is far too valuable for the governments of the world to simply walk away and let this virtual domain continue indefinitely in the kind of fraudulent and infringing way it currently operates. My guess is that inevitably, governments will do “whatever it takes” to get this new wild west under some degree of reliable control, safe for sensitive information, safe for digital product. Because if they don’t or can’t, if pirates and hackers will always rule unabated, then the value of the network is basically lost for real business and truly secure communication. I know you love to bleat “they can’t stop us.” I wonder. I really wonder if government will–at some future point–just throw their hands up and allow the kind of behavior that is presently commonplace here to continue unabated.
I myself just don’t see it.
@Reasoned Mind
Good luck with your plan to nail gravy to the wall.
You cannot fight basic economics. The cost of a product in a competitive environment will naturally tend to just over its cost of manufacture. The ‘cost of manufacture’ of a copy of an MP3 is so ridiculously low it would be quite an acheivement just to quantify it. There is no scarecity in ones and zeroes, nor can there ever be.
Broadband speeds are going up, storage costs are going down. It won’t be that long before the entire back catalogues of the music labels can be copied on an idle whim. Already a single drive could hold more music than the average music store holds in stock. Drive-swapping is fast, social and entirely off the radar.
It’s no longer a case of if the music labels will fail, it’s when. The film industry should take heed, and find another model while they still can. I suspect that whatever ends up replacing the labels, it will work better for fans, better for artists and better for society as a whole than the bunch of clueless douchebags that claim all the copyrights today. Old music is dying, I just wish it’d hurry up already.
Filesharing is killing old music, so do it copiously, constantly and with a cheer in your soul.
OK, I’ll stop feeding the troll now.
@ 35 (Reasoned Mind):
Actually, Canada is a country that tolerates noncommercial piracy.
Don’t get me wrong. I only use BitTorrent because I’m only 15 and I can’t be bothered to illegally obtain a credit card and actually pay for all the stuff.
@ 95:
“Online will prove no different over time.”
But it already has proven different. And I have to disagree on your point that the Internet will become controlled, because then it would cease to be the Internet. The Internet was designed to be an “open and free” network.
And your “whatever it takes” clause troubles me. China already does these things with censorship. Do we North Americans really want to go the same way, just to protect the rights of the minority? Certainly the minority has rights, but these rights are not an absolute priority.
@ 12 and 21:
An absolute boycott does nothing more to send a message that pirating the video/music doesn’t already do. If nobody is buying the CD but it has a massive piracy ring online, I think the message it should send is, “People like our music, but they don’t like paying so much for it, or they don’t like DRM, etc.”
An absolute boycott, on the other hand, will send the message that “nobody likes our music”.
Perhaps artists should move to boycott creating music, if piracy affects them so much. Then we would get the message.
@99
Couldn’t have said it better myself :D – Spot on!
“It’s ALL unsecured at present and it all does real damage to the rights holders everyday.”
What about the damage that the rights holders have done to the people? There was no widespread internet piracy back in 1998 when Disney and others begged the government to extend copyrights to 70-95 years after the death of the author. There was no widespread movie piracy in the early 1980s when the movie industry tried to kill the VCR.
How is it “leveling the playing field” when the rights holders get all the rights and consumers have none? You don’t even “own” any media any more, you only get a license to use it. Not to mention that copyrights are now being used for things that were never intended. Like the guy who was convicted of copyright infringement for taking and selling the CDs that were rejected by music club members and which the record company didn’t want back. They claimed that even though the post office was instructed to throw them away (where they then become fair game), they still owned them. In what world does that make sense?
Why is it that if I buy a DVD player, it comes with a warranty against defects? If a defect in the manufacturing causes damages, I can most likely sue the company. On the other hand, all software comes with an anti-warranty where the company assumes no responsibility whatsoever for any defects in their product, or any damages that it might cause. How is that fair?
Someone I know bought the special edition of a Sony movie on DVD the day it came out. He paid full price, only to discover that it wouldn’t play in his slightly older DVD player. Sony’s response? Tough s***. They didn’t use those words exactly, but that was the general idea. No offer to replace the disc or refund his money just a “We can’t guarantee that every DVD will work in every player.” Excuse me??? That’s EXACTLY what the DVD “standard” is supposed to ensure. Where were his rights?
Maybe I’ll respect their “rights” when *I* start getting some of my own. And no, I don’t mean getting everything for free. I mean the right to use legally purchased copies of media however I want, including converting them to other formats for my own use and/or breaking the encryption to enable me to play them on the devices of my choice. I mean a guarantee that my legally purchased movie or game is going to play on the player or computer of my choice as long as it meets the stated requirements. I mean copyright terms shortened back to a “limited time” as originally envisioned by the creators of copyright law, not this life+xxx years crap. I mean being able to exercise true “fair use” of small pieces of media without the rights holder firing off a DMCA complaint at the first hint of a single frame of their media. I mean actual penalties for rights holders who abuse the DMCA takedown system.
Until then, I look at downloading as truly “leveling the playing field”.
Its very clear here that still your identity must be proven.
By using Certain software that logs activity, that software your using right now you are opening yourself up to a world of HURT.
Is there a choice in software that works to protect you?
Fight the fight of the century untill we wont need Digital rights any more.
@”Reasoned Mind” Troll
“If you ever wonder why the industries and governments don’t listen to you and your suggestions about how they should run their businesses, just read the moronic comments above.”
Yes, and all black people are lazy. Congratulations, you just accused the industries you love so much of being bigoted, backward-thinking entities. Which is what pirates have been saying the whole time. We’re glad you finally agree with us :).
@99, Anonymous
Your assertion that pirating drive-swaps will supplant online piracy is likely true but that wasn’t my point. My interest is in the daily damage pirates are doing to the internet. Drive swaps will place that particular issue back into the material realm again and legislatures, law enforcement and the court systems will address that incrementally and in due time. Frankly, I don’t care whether old music survives or not. My interest is in that moment of epiphany where pirates finally realize it is their own (illegal) behavior that is giving government little choice but to regulate and destroy what they claim to love in the first place.
I seriously doubt that “any work in digital format” will inescapably be subject to the gutting of market value because of a plethora of ones and zero’s. Technical possibility in no way presages inevitable likelihood. Were that true, highway speeding and retail shoplifting would be off the charts, and we all see how they are being curtailed.
While it is true this network was originally envisioned as free and open, 1) so is any new realm at first and 2) freedom is always narrowed on balance with privacy and other concerns until wrongdoing is curtailed. The network is rife with illegal activity at the moment. Curtailing it is a clear pattern well established over the course of human civilization. My point is that pirates appear to believe that this new realm will remain anarchic and somehow be different, that is, either “impossible to police” or “allowed to remain rogue” by civilizations choice, and I just don’t see it. I think both these outcomes are highly unlikely in a realm brought to us by the industries we are currently ransacking and regulated by the same governments bringing us the ACTA.
I honestly believe that government in general would love to leave this free and open and not commit resources to policing but I also believe pirates will not self-regulate and so will not allow that to happen. I think pirates can be intelligent but are fundamentally stupid. The debate over copyright and rights in general are only ancillary issues, and sorting out online freedoms on this particular playing field of willful illegality and civil disobedience–as piracy has required it–is a very bad decision that will have negative repercussions to our network that are likely not reversible.
Our personal freedoms both material and digital exist in direct relation to how and how often we abuse them. Most studies place illegal network abuse at 30-50% of the traffic. So my point remains that any pirate here who thinks this goes on indefinitely because you intend to abuse the network indefinitely is precisely the person doing the destruction in the first place. You are ruining this for everyone. You could be organizing and taking this to your governments properly, but instead you are simply looting and calling it “free speech” and government is reacting accordingly.
And if this path continues, history will lay the inevitable online police state directly at the feet of these very selfish, very stupid “pirates”. If you see an alternate path where government and industry just folds their tent and let’s online anarchy reign–thereby gutting monetized digital industry and the potential of digital distribution of product—I’d like to hear about it. I think you are kidding yourself. And I think history backs me up.
“Were this a big dvd or cd copying operation in some warehouse somewhere, even if distributed for free, the majority of observers would expect this to be deemed illegal and shut down.”
That’s one hell of an assumption. Sure, we might “expect” it to be deemed illegal and shut down (if caught), but most people also “expect” major uploaders of copyrighted material to be deemed illegal and shut down (if caught). These expectations have nothing to do with what we believe to be correct.
When I was a kid, friends would record songs off the radio and share them among their friends. Blatantly illegal (which we didn’t know at the time) but none of us believed it SHOULD have been illegal. Those were physical copies. Given away for free. Now apply that to a larger scale. Then to a global scale. Then to the internet. Same thing in all cases, just on a larger scale and in different formats. And the vast majority of people participating don’t think it should be illegal.
i’m sick and tired to read the reasonned troll. i’m giving up that blog as long as he isn’t permanently banned.
“i’m sick and tired to read the reasonned troll. i’m giving up that blog as long as he isn’t permanently banned.”
cry more you whiny bitch.
@Reasoned Mind
There are a couple of things in your statements about the responsibilities of governments that are truly frightening, and can only attributed to your disrespect for democracy. First, let us make it clear that a government should be elected BY THE PEOPLE FOR THE PEOPLE. Seconde, laws should reflect the WILL OF THE PEOPLE.
Now let us consider some of your statements: “Government will always protect the law abider, and take out the law breaker, just as it should be.” What if the law do not reflect the will of the people, but only of a few? What if the current copyright laws are not supported by the people? Should the government still uphold such a law? No it should not, it should seek the reform the laws as reflected by people. I argue that ACTA and other anti-p2p laws are not the will of the people, for example, the large majority in sweden opposes the new IPRED-law.
Now lets consider another statement: “Pirates follow no laws, not legal nor moral, so we’ll craft the laws as we need them and some degree of piracy will inevitably pay bigtime. REALLY bigtime.” The fact that your are using the term “we’ll craft the laws as we need them” is very interseting. If the majority of people are against these new anti-p2p laws then who will “craft the laws”? Your are implying that the government should uphold laws that are in favor of the mediacompanies shareholders. (Not the artist or producers, as long as there is a demand for culture/knowledge these will be just fine). This is not democracy, it is dictatorship.
For the first time, there is a chance to cut out the middle man (the mediacompanies and other). Of course mediacompanies will try to stop this progress by spreading fear and lies, like you are doing now. Interstingly you talk about unmoral pirates (the people), when it is infact the mediacompanies that in their mindless hunt for profits will stop at noting, including corrupting the government and enslaving the people. However, the more you push us around, the faster and more powerful our response will be.
From a uniquely US perspective, the founding fathers believed that the moment a government was no longer listening to the people, it became illegitimate and the people then had the right, perhaps even the duty, to overthrow it. Taxation without representation sound familiar to anyone?
@Eddymerck #109
I have respect for Democracy, Eddy, and I hope you voted in your respective elections as I do (and did). The laws actually do reflect the will of the majority of people at the moment. The majority of the people will elect their representatives along ideological lines that appeal to the majority in the future. Anarchy gets you arrested and little more. Sweden will vote their reps out if they truly feel artists should have to deal with this kind of thinking. If you are correct, the majority will change the laws and that is exactly what I suggested to be the far smarter path forward for pirates. But everyone here knows that a big component of online digital theft is the financial/commercial advantage, the avoidance of the price and the money you keep from the artist and the rights holder.
“Illegal file bartering has been held to be a commercial use, cutting off the defense of fair use in the U.S.: “…[C]ommercial use is demonstrated by a showing that repeated and exploitative unauthorized copies of copyrighted works were made to save the expense of purchasing authorized copies.” A&M Records, Inc. et al v. Napster, Inc., 239 F.3d 1004 (9th Cir. 2001), at 1014.”
So by thieving online, you hand this issue to law enforcement on a silver platter and you know it, then whine about the easily foreseeable result. In that regard I have zero sympathy for anyone caught and punished. You use privacy statutes to hide while you grab harddrives of “free” stuff intended for someone’s livelihood and then wonder why privacy is threatened and complain about free speech when you get caught. The artists, their agents and the content creators continue to work along democratic, legal lines in the legislatures and the courtrooms while you ransack their products. Do you wonder why you receive so little regard? You receive the regard you earn with your conduct.
When pirates organize a clear voting majority and find the courage to come out from behind privacy laws, then you’ll have your chance to genuinely influence history. The people brought down an American President 30 years ago pre-internet, they can certainly eliminate copyright today if the majority really wants to.
But they don’t. Not really, and certainly not the majority. So far it’s all been about hiding, taking all the “free” stuff and whining about how you never get a chance to be heard. The creator of the product properly sells or controls that product and sets the price. Others can buy it or live without it, and content creators will fight you to the end for their right to these principles. You can count on that. If paying for a movie or a song or a game is “enslaving the people” then I invite you to push back, Eddy, if this is what you think is fair. This is just getting started with artists and their agents supporting the ACTA so they can get paid again, and I’ll take no pleasure watching you get busted while sitting in the good (legal) seats in the house. Better still, overthrow the government for your “right” to steal artists digital products online and off. All in the name of “free speech”, of course.
First of all, my argument has noting to do with privacy, nor with freedom of speech.
Second, do you actual believe that these new anti-p2p laws are the will of the people? If we for example could cut out 90% of the cost by eliminating the middle man (that is the record companies, “film distributors” etc.), do you think that the majority still would support a law that aims to protect media companies from dying. We both know the answer, NO…
Also, i did not mention that the artist did not have the right to get paid. Of course they do, and they always will. Do not try to tell me that we need to pass ACTA in order to protect the artist. AS LONG AS THERE IS A DEMAND OF CULTURE/KNOWLEDGE, ARTISTS/RESEARCHERS WILL GET PAID ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. If they do not get paid, then no culture/knowledge will be produced. Then when demand is sufficiently high people are willing to pay. This is called equilibrium.
The point I make is that ACTA and other laws only serve to protect the media companies (which are not needed anymore), and therefore are not the will of the people. (Also today’s CD&DVD and other physical formats system is a terrible waist of resources)
Okay Eddy, so basically your position sounds like this:
1. the greatest industrial looting of all time should be allowed to continue because it’s the “will of the people.” (minority or not.)
2. anything digital in the future is fair game for taking without concern, essentially gutting any promise of a paying digital career for anyone in any industry. Let them do something else on the side that can’t be stolen, right?
3. In this one case the rule of existing law should be ignored and you should not be under any obligation to prove your case. You are in the majority (in your view if not in actual numbers) and that’s all that counts.
4. those people who’s products have been looted should not be granted any legal rights in protection or recompense in the courts. from your perspective, thousands of industry employees in music, books, movies, games, business, touring, graphics, a variety of artistic careers and hundreds of thousands of artists whose work has been taken all without intended payment these past 9 years should all just shut up, assume their losses and go home and find some other way to earn an income for themselves and their families. It is understood that they deserve to be paid, you just don’t want any legal obligation to ever do it, while enjoying free and unimpeded access to their life’s work.
5. the people responsible for this lawbreaking should enjoy immunity from the law and not be held accountable to their illegal actions nor to any of the damage they have (illegally) done because it is their own will. And the people trying to stop this ransacking and protect their legal interests are actually the bad guys.
6) these outcomes should be allowed to stand as precedent examples for other lootings and acts of lawbreaking in the future, if they are the will of the people.
Do I have this essentially correct?
On second thought Eddy, it’s probably better that you don’t take your ideas to your congressman or government representative.
And of course, Eddy, it goes without saying that if a majority greater than you and your family ransack your life’s work and your possessions and your ability to earn (even though everything you do and have done is in full compliance with the laws) and they leave you with nothing, you’ll man up and take it and start over without complaint and find something else to do with your life. And if you even think about fighting back in the courts for your legal rights you are cool with being publicly crucified and branded “the bad guy, a greedy man who just wanted to get paid.”
And all of this….because the group that robbed you is in greater numbers than you are.
@Reasoned Mind
Wow, i do not even know where to start. Short version: no you did not get it.
A bit longer: You did not read the “AS LONG AS THERE IS A DEMAND OF CULTURE/KNOWLEDGE, ARTISTS/RESEARCHERS WILL GET PAID ONE WAY OR ANOTHER” part did you, or maybe you just did not understand? The true creators WILL ALWAYS GET PAID.
Regarding the legal responsibility: Yes i do think that there should be some responsibility (for example, creators should still have exclusive rights to “sell” the product). But I also believe there is ways of reducing the costs (by for example cutting out the middle man, and more efficient distribution)and then making people willing to pay the “correct” price. Spotify is a good example (although they have not cut out the middle man) of digital distribution which has reduced the costs and I happily pay my 9.99 (although some of my favorite artists are not even included). I am also sure that this service would have never come to life if it wasn’t for the fact that the music industry had to adopt in order to compete with the “pirates”. However if a law (that even you seem to believe is not the will of the people) is passed making it possible for the media companies keep operating like they are currently doing (or even worse), then there will not been any progress.
This is why I also believe that a law, that is not the will of the people should never be passed, because it is only in favor of outdated media companies and waist of resources. You also asked if I believe that industry employees should find some other way to earn their livings. The answer is that once the middle man is cut out they will have to, don’t they? Why should a protectionist law like ACTA be passed for the “media” industry. What gives them the right to gain such an advantage compared to others?
On topic that i have not yet discussed is if “the people responsible for this lawbreaking should enjoy immunity from the law” (as the law is now). My answer would have to be yes, because if they all (which of course would be impossible) would be convicted for “making illegal copies” (NOT THEFT!!!) then there would be no incentive for “the industry” to change.
“you use privacy statutes to hide while you grab harddrives of “free” stuff intended for someone’s livelihood and then wonder why privacy is threatened and complain about free speech when you get caught.”
quoted for truth.
@ reasoned mind
Come on your telling me you never let someone borrow your car, your clothes, or your ipod. PLEEEAAASEEE. You are just as liable. All those companies own the rights to those items, why don’t they sue. This is just beaucratic b.s. They only want what they can’t have. My head on a platter. I download and share terabytes of data annually and i will continue to do so. Reasoned mind you should be ashamed of yourself. You ever boughta cd/dvd and loaned it to someone, by definition you shared it. And since you can’t distinguish sharing from piracy you are guilty as charged. GTH
ACTA, ass-raping your civil rights since 200x. Let’s just forbid the internet once and for all, yeah and all zeros and ones also just to be sure.
Testing…
@Reasoned Mind
Your ‘Wild West’ analogy doesn’t stack up I’m afraid.
In the frontier days, poor helpless colonists were at the mercy of ruthless bandits on horseback. You seem to be equating the four major labels with the quivering townsfolk of old.
Really? The same four labels that sue dead people? And children? And sign the ‘talent’ into disgusting terms, in which they have to repay the production costs before they see a cent?
These are the people that need protecting?
Seriously?
Yes, things will change. But unlike the wild west, these days most people seem to think its the system that’s wrong, not society. Every poll, every anecdote I hear, tells me that most folk see little to no problem with sharing media, copyright or otherwise.
Copyright makes no sense in the digital era. It needs to be replaced.
Yes, artists need to be paid, and we need to find a way to do that. But the days of people paying a per-unit price so that some record label exec can keep his Maybach gassed are rapidly drawing to a close.
Music is a social phenomenom. Soon, it will belong to the people.
GoodFLAC
You have 23,767,325 of 23,767,325 known music FLACs.
15 references to this post
Responses are closed
All remaining responses will continue to be archived. Use the TorrentFreak forums if you want to discuss something.