Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Fighting For Downloaders' Hearts and Minds

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the dude-pirate-is-not-the-prefered-nomenclature dept.

The Almighty Buck 325

iateyourcookies writes "As opposed to enforcement which usually makes the headlines, The BBC is running an article called Inside A Downloader's Head which looks at the film and music industries' attempts to prevent copyright infringement. It details some of the campaigns, their rationale, controversy surrounding them and notes that 'there are plenty, even among the young, who can be eloquent about why they believe illegal downloading is not wrong. These can include everything from what they see as the unacceptable "control freakery" of DRM and regional coding, to overcharging and exploitation of the very artists the music industry claims to protect.' However, PR company for the industry Blue Rubicon attests that 'campaigns can change hearts and minds... If you do them right you can make a material impact on people's behaviour.'"

cancel ×

325 comments

Fuck'em (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28381339)

Information wants to be free. Don't be Jewish with the knowledge.

Re:Fuck'em (2nd FAGGOT) (-1, Troll)

AliasTheRoot (171859) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381909)

you are a gigantic great faggot
you're the man now dog!
netcraft confirms it, you are a faggot
in Soviet Russia faggots are you
I for one do not welcome you as our gigantic faggot overlords!

faGGOT@CRABAPPLE.COM

LINUX! (1)

nomorecwrd (1193329) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382219)

Linux is not ready for downloaders' hearts and minds...

Oh... wait!

Sorry! I was just getting used to it

Re:Fuck'em (1)

paazin (719486) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382307)

Information wants to be free. Don't be Jewish with the knowledge.

Why, are you suggesting that knowledge is catholic?

Re:Fuck'em (4, Interesting)

siddesu (698447) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382409)

Not really. Information only wants to be cheap enough, and that includes transaction costs.

I don't watch that many films, but when I do, my requirements are as follows: I don't want to decide early on what I want to watch (ideally, I want to make up my mind at dinner, and watch it after the coffee), I don't want to spend more time on getting what I want then the time spent deciding what to see (i.e. buh-bye shop), and I want to be able to have at least two alternatives for the evening, in case I get bored with my first choice.

So, in my heart and mind the situation looks like this:

(a) I can download legally: There is little choice in services, they have various requirements for software (meaning it is limited to OS and browser I don't use), they have ridiculously little choice, half of that without language support I require and the price for what is available is also kind of high (a movie download cost about $20-ish last I bothered to check).

(b) I can downloading illegally: I can choose OS and player as I see fit, the availability of content is unsurpassed, even rare films, which will never make it legally here, or have been out of commercial circulation for decades are available; and there is usually someone helpful who has provided subtitles in my language, and in the language of the significant other, for even the weirdest movie and language. besides, it is really fast.

So, again, why should I bother with the "legal" downloads? Why should I put up with crappy customer service? Just because someone bribed some politico types and bought themselves a monopoly? It isn't like the "legal" provider cannot do for me for the same $20 what any private tracker does for free. If they would, I'd be happy to subscribe. I'd be even happier to watch for $5, or (less happy probably) for a fixed monthly subscription of sorts.

It is so simple to win my heart and mind, that I am at a huge loss as to why it is still unwon. The problem isn't it is hard. The problem is no one wants to win me. Well, if you suck, I'll damn right go where they treat me better.

A ha! (4, Funny)

SomeJoel (1061138) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381345)

So they admit they want to control our minds!

Re:A ha! (4, Funny)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381483)

That's so untrue it's not even fu- ALL GLORY TO THE HYPNOTOAD!

Re:A ha! (4, Funny)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381645)

Wow, after reading the story on ocean acidity, I've read this as "AL GORE TO THE HYPNOTOAD". I guess I'm past my bedtime.

Re:A ha! (1)

SCPRedMage (838040) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381679)

And now I'm hoping one of the new episodes of Futurama will have Al Gore's head trying to have a conversation with the Hypnotoad...

Re:A ha! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28382055)

Yeah, yeah.

Q: How many lame jokes get modded up to +5 Funny on the basis of poor reading comprehension?
A: Far, far too many. As in, more than 0.

Ah well. At least it's slightly more original and slightly less of a waste of perfectly good mod points than the repetitive Slashdot memes that you see in every freakin' discussion for months on end that somehow still get modded anything other than -1 Redundant.

Re:A ha! (1)

ArsonSmith (13997) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381697)

Ha, all caps made me first scan/read of that as "Al Gore is the Hypnotoad."

Re:A ha! (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381725)

You might want to talk with K. S. Kyosuke... you two might have a psychic link or something.

Exactly (1)

CarpetShark (865376) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381545)

Some honest two-way dialog is what's needed, not preaching the old way.

Re:Exactly (3, Insightful)

causality (777677) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382359)

Some honest two-way dialog is what's needed, not preaching the old way.

I could be wrong but I think my first impression of the summary was somewhat like yours, though expressed differently. When I saw this part:

However, PR company for the industry Blue Rubicon attests that 'campaigns can change hearts and minds... If you do them right you can make a material impact on people's behaviour.

My first thought on reading that was "because a material impact is the only type they're capable of recognizing." I also have my doubts that their campaign is going to try to "change hearts and minds" with facts and reasoning. It's sort of like a debate which has an audience: if you're good, you can "win" a debate or an argument whether or not you are actually correct, particularly if your audience is naive, unfamiliar with argumentation and critical thinking, or has no independent understanding of the subject matter. Unfortunately, I think all three of those factors are working in favor of the *AAs. The Slashdot crowd is exceptional in many ways, but I would not expect the average person to be so familiar with these issues and many unrelated things remind me of the general public's lack of familiarity with argumentation and critical thinking.

Talk-show hosts do something similar all the time. They like to use the Socratic method not as a teaching tool, but to control the conversation by forcing the caller/guest into answering a series of simple questions that don't permit appreciation of differing viewpoints. Any attempts to suggest that the subject is more nuanced than this, that the questions don't cover the full scope of the issue, or that determing your conclusion prior to taking any other steps might be intellectually dishonest are dealt with. That's why the host's voice has a higher gain/volume than the caller's, why the host has a mute (or hold) button to instantly silence the caller, and is one (of several) reasons why calls are screened before being taken. Put those same hosts in a situation where they must interact as equals who cannot force the other person to submit to their control of the conversation and suddenly they'd have much greater difficulty seeming like they are always "right."

The situation with media campaigns is likewise asymmetric. The *AAs can easily afford to run these campaigns and get their side of the story into public view. Could you or I afford to produce and air our own commercials, on a national level, that argue against them and show any flaws in their reasoning? You mention two-way dialog. Imagine what it would do to all of PR and advertising if that were the norm.

Re:Exactly (2, Informative)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382815)

When I was in high school, I totally thrashed this guy in debate in history class. Can't for the life of me remember what it was actually about, but I do remember that at the end, everyone in the class agreed that it wasn't fair because my side was obviously right and his side was obviously wrong. So, I challenged him to do it again, only I would defend his side and he would defend mine. After he awkwardly tried to re-hash my arguments, I explained that all of the things that I had said were true, but that there were all these other things to consider that he should have said but that I had been steering the entire debate away from, and that I really shouldn't have won because my original position was actually the wrong one for some very good reasons. So, I won the debate again. Relieved my history teacher, who was a little worried about his class leaving having learned a skewed and incorrect understanding of the world.

The situation with media campaigns is kind of like high school, except there's power, control and money involved.

Re:A ha! (5, Insightful)

Wowsers (1151731) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381885)

No, they want control back of your wallet. So stop spending money on computer games, mobile phones, or something else, help out those poor people in the RIAA and film industry.

If they want to win the hearts of people the solution is ALL with the RIAA / Film industry.

1) Stop producing cr@p that nobody is interested in. How many remakes of classic films can you do, do you think people don't realise a rip-off? How many formulaic "artists" are in the music charts when there's other stuff out there which does not get a look in because of the rigged radio market.

2) Stop selling the DVD's and CD's at such high prices. The market has moved on and there's competition for the money, people have more things they can buy, as I mentioned already, computer games, mobile phones etc.. It's not the 1960's where for teenagers there was music, film, and that's it.

3) Stop loading DVD's with unskippable cr@p (Disney the worst offender), stop putting idiotic unskippable trailers on copyrights - we just bought your legit DVD damn it! At least with VHS you could rewind to a spot where the actual content starts!

4) Stop putting crapware on CD's, we want Red Book Standard CD's, and we also want the cases and CD's to have the logo on it to prove they are REAL audio CD's, not the fake crap put out today.

5) Stop putting DRM on legit downloads. It p1sses me off that such and such file is restricted to what file format a device will play (with DRM built in to the player). I don't want to pay extra for a MP3 player to make some DRM licensee richer.

6) Improve the audio quality of Audio CD's, and digital downloads. Audio CD's are chasing the loudness battle - I recently bought a compilation CD and had to give it away because I had ear ache after 5 minutes of this unlistenable compressed music. Digital downloads are also not much better, where are the file formats like FLAC on ALL download sites, not just highly specialised sites. Hell, you can buy a CD then rip it to make a FLAC and it will outclass and MP3.

7) Get rid of the copy restrictions on DVD's, HD discs, camcorders, and the other formats.

MAYBE after all that, downloaders MIGHT think about buying more music and films.

Re:A ha! (3, Interesting)

FishWithAHammer (957772) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382143)

Or they'll just keep pirating because now it's even easier.

Re:A ha! (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381899)

So they admit they want to control our minds!

Wonder what they'll do with downloaders' hearts. Barbecue? Kentucky fried?

fixed the quote (1)

u4ya (1248548) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381365)

'fear campaigns can change hearts and minds... If you do them right you can make a material impact on people's behaviour.'

Re:fixed the quote (1)

EvolutionsPeak (913411) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381413)

Fear campaigns is what the RIAA and their kin have been running, and it has done little to nothing to change hearts and minds. At least not in their favor.

Suuure, trust me (3, Insightful)

dozer (30790) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381391)

"Blue Rubicon attests that 'if you do them right you can make a material impact on people's behaviour.'"

That will certainly make a material impact on Blue Rubicon's net profits. But change people's behavior? That's pretty unlikely. History is not on their side.

Re:Suuure, trust me (2, Insightful)

Lendrick (314723) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381625)

Honestly, the reason the whole "piracy is stealing" but will never sink in is because piracy isn't really stealing and people know it.

If I walk off with someone's handbag, that handbag is gone. The fact is, with a digital copy, there's no real life analogy. If I go up to someone's handbag, make an exact copy of it, and walk off with the copy, the owner of the handbag probably won't care (nor would I have done anything illegal anyway).

The only thing you're depriving the IP owner of when you copy their IP is the chance that you'll purchase their product. Even then, if you purchase the product because you pirated it and liked it, then the IP owner actually gets additional revenue from your piracy (although it's unlikely that this quite adds up to the lost revenue).

Go figure.

All the politics and euphemisms aside... (1)

langelgjm (860756) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381863)

Honestly, the reason the whole "piracy is stealing" but will never sink in is because piracy isn't really stealing and people know it.

You're absolutely right. All the politics and euphemisms aside, the difference between physical and digital goods is fundamental - one is rival, the other is not. It's really hard to hide that fact, since so much of computers and the Internet are designed to exploit it. So these campaigns to "change hearts and minds" end up trying to convince people that the sky is green.

Now you can argue all day long about how to deal with the differences in rivalry, and underproduction of public goods, tragedy of the commons, etc., and those are important debates to have; but in the end, you still have to face the fact that no matter how much you'd like, digital goods are fundamentally different than physical ones. Those "you wouldn't steal a car" ads don't face that fact, because as we all know, if you could download a car, you would.

Re:All the politics and euphemisms aside... (2, Interesting)

Dekker3D (989692) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382565)

well, about the "download a car" thing.. maybe someday, with rapid prototyping. of course, that'd just mean we get the same debate all over again.. with the odds stacked even more against us since we'd actually be saving quite a lot doing so.

exactly the same debate, even, since it'd also open up the possibility for geeks without a factory of their own to design their own car. does this remind anyone of how open source gets criticized?

Re:Suuure, trust me (3, Funny)

bennomatic (691188) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382049)

There is a real life analogy. You know when one kid repeats everything another kid is saying? The repeatee always gets upset, and y'know what? It's really freaking annoying.

I'll bet they could get people to sympathize somewhat if they just had some ad showing a kid trying to say something meaningful and then 1, 2, 10, 100, 1000000 other kids all imitating that kid. It could end with, "Now do you see why we're upset?" in print, and after it's on the screen for a second, the first of the million repeaters saying it aloud, in his most annoying, taunting voice.

Re:Suuure, trust me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28382391)

That's not a valid analogy. (Unless you're sharing a Lady GaGa song, but I digress.)

It's more like the kid saying something meaningful and then getting his speech disseminated on YouTube. No matter how you cut it, the kid's speech has had more of an impact than it would have without it getting shared.

Re:Suuure, trust me (2)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382599)

If I walk off with someone's handbag, that handbag is gone. The fact is, with a digital copy, there's no real life analogy. If I go up to someone's handbag, make an exact copy of it, and walk off with the copy, the owner of the handbag probably won't care (nor would I have done anything illegal anyway).

Hehe, what a terrible example. Lemme list the crimes:

1. Counterfeiting of bank notes.
2. Counterfeiting of government issued identification.
3. Counterfeiting of merchandise.
4. Invasion of privacy.

I get what you're trying to say but, boy, do you need to work on how you say it.

Re:Suuure, trust me (1, Insightful)

Un pobre guey (593801) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382811)

The central issue is that the guy is just flat wrong. People can insist all they want with bogus examples and shallow rehashing of macroeconomic theory. Piracy robs someone of labor. It is simple. You know it. Grow up. What if you were trying to make a living selling media on the web and everyone stole it?

Please don't trot out the old "you can make all your money from touring" crap, either.

Oh children, children... (-1, Flamebait)

Un pobre guey (593801) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382665)

You are mistaken, of course. You are merely trying to pretend that it is OK to steal. You know this. Your example is childish and disingenuous because you are ignoring the labor that went into a product. You are stuck in Piaget's Concrete stage [hawaii.edu] , unable to understand events unless they are intrinsically associated with material objects. Since piracy of easily copyable items like digital media only involves not paying for the labor that went into producing the good, you are unable to understand that something was indeed stolen.

This, by the way, firmly places you in a clinically pre-adolescent stage of cognitive development.

Re:Oh children, children... (1)

xaxa (988988) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382901)

Nothing is stolen, because nothing is taken -- a copy is made. The musician can still sell his music to others, unlike the handbag owner.

I don't see how it makes him pre-adolescent anyway. He didn't say copyright infringement was acceptable, he said it wasn't theft.

Re:Oh children, children... (2, Interesting)

wilder_card (774631) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382915)

Interesting analysis. One problem with it is that much of the "payment" demanded for digital goods is not actually directly linked to the labor used to produce it. A lot of the resistance to paying for music would go away, if the people paying were confident that a) the money was going to the people who created the music, and b) it was a "fair" payment for that music. Most people don't mind if Paul McCartney makes a billion dollars, but much of the music industry is designed to siphon money away from the artists and distribute it to parasites.

In the past, people couldn't do anything about that, it was buy an LP/CD or nothing. Now consumers have choices, and they'd rather go to a lot of trouble to download for free, than pay $.99 for a song where $.01 goes to the actual artists.

Re:Suuure, trust me (1)

DreadPiratePizz (803402) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382879)

If I walk off with someone's handbag, that handbag is gone. The fact is, with a digital copy, there's no real life analogy. If I go up to someone's handbag, make an exact copy of it, and walk off with the copy, the owner of the handbag probably won't care (nor would I have done anything illegal anyway).

If that person makes and sells handbags, they probably would care, since people could just come along, make a copy of her handbag, and get their own without buying it from her, exploiting the time it took her to create and design said handbag.

Re:Suuure, trust me (1)

DigitAl56K (805623) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382931)

The only thing you're depriving the IP owner of when you copy their IP is the chance that you'll purchase their product. Even then, if you purchase the product because you pirated it and liked it, then the IP owner actually gets additional revenue from your piracy (although it's unlikely that this quite adds up to the lost revenue).

Copyright holder. But overall your point is good.

I wanted to add that the fact "the cost of piracy" often gets factored into things like bloated DVD prices is therefore sheer stupidity: It encourages more people to rationalize piracy ("Hey, I want to buy it but I don't want to be ripped off"), and it also acts as a barrier to people who have already pirated it and liked it from purchasing a legit copy ("I'd like to buy a legit copy, but I don't want to pay that much for it").

The media industries need to stop such practices.

Re:Suuure, trust me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28381829)

"Blue Rubicon attests that 'if you do them right you can make a material impact on people's behaviour.'" That will certainly make a material impact on Blue Rubicon's net profits. But change people's behavior? That's pretty unlikely. History is not on their side.

Corollary: If you have to hire a PR firm to make a material impact on people's behavior, you're already doing it wrong.

Re:Suuure, trust me (1)

Nekomusume (956306) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382427)

History is very much on their side. If you can convince somebody of something, whether it's entirely logical or utterly insane, they will then act on that belief.

See every ideology and religion ever for details.

Misleading Examples (5, Interesting)

Myji Humoz (1535565) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381403)

The article seems filled with examples of fuzzy logic. For example, it discusses how many "bad guys" force illegal immigrants/migrants to sell pirated DVDs on the street, thus showing an example of how innocent foreigners are harmed by the trade in illegal software/media. However... isn't this better than them being forced into being drug mules or prostitutes? Shouldn't they be trying to clarify that morality != legality rather than muddling the issue?

I suppose it's better than RIAA's tactics, but the claims of reducing piracy by 5% seem tenuous at best.

Re:Misleading Examples (1)

Daniel Dvorkin (106857) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381661)

It's also a deliberate conflation of two very different issues. The trade in pirated CDs and DVDs -- fly-by-night publishers making physical copies of the discs, packaging them to look like the real thing, and selling them on the street -- has very little in common with people downloading copies onto their personal machines, except that they both involve copyright infringement. The first is clearly a type of organized street crime, with all the dangers that implies; the second involves no physical danger to anyone (except from the cops ...) All sorts of people who want to control other people's behavior indulge in this irritating rhetorical trick, but the copyright lobby seems to be among the worst offenders.

Re:Misleading Examples (1)

lupis42 (1048492) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382211)

More precisely, and hilariously, downloading stuff actually reduces the streetcrime, in the sense that people download instead of buying bootlegs, and the bootleggers don't benefit from the resulting (potential) increase in the artist's popularity (which means, among other things, more live shows with more people at more dollars per person). Like it or not, downloading and "personal use piracy", by devaluing "copies" of content, is making more of a dent in the bootleg copy market than any other social, political, or technological change.

Re:Misleading Examples (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381669)

Just wait until they have to resort to prostitution to pay their MAFIAA fines.

Justifying piracy the right way (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28381891)

Fellow pirates,

I implore you to continue your campaign on Slashdot to make me feel less guilty. I know that not paying someone for their work is wrong, but if Slashdot posts enough articles bashing the RIAA/MPAA/copyright law/whatever, it's easier for me to accept what I'm doing emotionally by visualizing someone else as the bad guy. Once on the forefront of relevant IT news, Slashdot is now a lame repository of mainstream pseudoscience links and pro-piracy articles to appease a dwindling readership. I am overjoyed.

Even though the open source community is about giving back as much as it is taking, I'm just going to take. I'm a human leech with self-serving beliefs and an inability to empathize with content creators who are trying to make a living.

I don't believe John Carmack should be paid for his work. I'm going to sit on my ass while he spends years coding the next advanced 3D engine from id Software. When their game comes out, I'm going to pirate it without giving a second thought about paying John Carmack for his work. I'm just so used to pirating things now that I take it for granted. If anyone mentions John Carmack to make me feel guilty, I'll look for Slashdot articles that bolster my viewpoint, such as this one [slashdot.org] , amusingly posted in the Your Rights Online section even though none of my rights are being violated.

According to that study, it's okay to not pay people for their work because there's some vague hope that they'll make up the difference in income through "concerts and speaking tours." Artists are now forced to take time out of doing what they want to do. John Carmack must stop programming in order to make money from programming. It's genius. The study does exactly what I need it to--make me feel less guilty when I pirate. We've managed to stretch the truth so far that we're actually telling ourselves that we're helping artists by not paying them for their work. Excellent job.

I look forward to Slashdot telling me everyday who the bad guys are. Even though Slashdot has sued websites in the past for copyright infringement, and they've pretended to care about plagiarism [slashdot.org] , we're supposed to go along with Slashdot's anti-copyright agenda. I'm okay with that hypocrisy because it serves me. It makes me feel less guilty when I pirate something. Remember, I'm not the bad guy--the RIAA/MPAA/whatever is. That makes it okay for me to not pay people for their work.

EULAs and copyright licenses are wrong, yet the GPL is good. Piracy isn't theft, yet GPL violations are referred to as "stolen GPL code." I accept all of these double-standards because it serves me. I pretend not to notice when someone points out that the GPL relies on copyright law, and if I want to get rid of copyright, my beloved open source code will no longer be protected by the GPL. I don't care, because I'm too busy concerning myself with what I want for free, not about the consequences. I want to get rid of copyrights because I've been told that copyrights are the bad guy, and they are an obstacle to my rampant piracy.

Fellow pirates, let us continue our selfish leeching. Let us paint others as the bad guys to absolve us of our emotional guilt. Our goal is to convince people that piracy is something the good guys are doing in a fight with the evil corporations. Making money is wrong, even though Slashdot displays ads, and it cost me money to buy the computer I'm using to pirate stuff.

Yours truly,
A fellow Slashbot

Re:Justifying piracy the right way (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28382275)

I will now sign up for slashdot and do whatever I need to do to mod this up.

You hit it right on the nose (1)

Un pobre guey (593801) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382893)

I'm tempted to say "finally someone expresses it in a way even the average slashdot reader can understand." I know, I know. They won't.

I wonder when John Carmack's next concert tour is...

Re:Justifying piracy the right way (1)

Ragzouken (943900) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382899)

Fellow pirate,

tl;dr.

Re:Justifying piracy the right way (1)

selven (1556643) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382907)

EULAs and copyright licenses are wrong, yet the GPL is good. Piracy isn't theft, yet GPL violations are referred to as "stolen GPL code"

Please, for the love of god, stop assuming that it's the same people saying both things. Slashdot is an online forum which means that it has multiple people on it with differing opinions (see: any discussion where it's not just people agreeing with each other)

Re:Misleading Examples (1)

dbcad7 (771464) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381945)

"bad guys" force illegal immigrants/migrants to sell pirated DVDs on the street, thus showing an example of how innocent foreigners are harmed by the trade in illegal software/media.

Using the above.. Then illegal is innocent... So illegal software is, innocent pirated DVD's on the street.

Re:Misleading Examples (1)

TerranFury (726743) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382011)

The article seems filled with examples of fuzzy logic.

Membership functions? Fuzzifiers? Defuzzifiers? Linguistic variables? Where are they? They aren't even citing Lotfi Zadeh...

;-)

Let me be the first to say: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28381417)

I didn't like the article. While it purports to examine the "other side" of the debate, it does not really seem to consider the possibility that that side might be correct.

They will fail... (1)

Stormwatch (703920) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381479)

...because downloading IS NOT wrong!

Re:They will fail... (1)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381555)

It's not even "illegal".. but that doesn't stop them from lying about it.

Re:They will fail... (1)

Threni (635302) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381615)

It's a UK article, and in the UK even ripping a CD and sticking it on your iPod is illegal.

Re:They will fail... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28381667)

It's a UK article, and in the UK even ripping a CD and sticking it on your iPod is a civil wrong.

Fixed that for you.

Re:They will fail... (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381845)

The copyright office has said that the "copies for private study" exception includes listening to music for pleasure. That's just a legal opinion but it's a weighty one.

Re:They will fail... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28382919)

The copyright office has said that the "copies for private study" exception includes listening to music for pleasure.

Cite please.

The sleep-deprived can read the relevant section of the act here:

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/ukpga_19880048_en_3#pt1-ch3-pb2-l1g29 [opsi.gov.uk]

Re:They will fail... (1)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381933)

It's really simple. If you go to the police and say "I witnessed a man download a movie!!!" and they don't send the boys in blue out to slap the cuffs on him, it aint illegal.

They mention the old campaign against home taping (3, Insightful)

Space_Pirate_Arrr (1078149) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381529)

...but it seems to escape them that home taping did not kill the music industry! I guess they just think it means their campaign worked.

And of course I could also mention VHS (aka "The Boston Strangler").

Re:They mention the old campaign against home tapi (1)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382773)

The article itself is pretty unbiased one way or the other.

Good luck with that. (5, Insightful)

Lendrick (314723) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381533)

I can't justify everything I've downloaded from the pirate bay, however, there are certain instances where I don't feel the least bit sorry:

* I purchased Spore and then downloaded the cracked version, which I installed on my computer, and then edited the system registry to give myself a the key. Sorry, if I purchased a piece of software, I deserve to get at least as good an experience as the pirates do, which means no rootkits.
* Several years ago, I purchased RPG Maker XP. I've gone through several computers since the purchase, and it no longer allows me to activate the software. I'd like to continue using the software that I legitimately paid for, and my only option is to download a cracked, pirated version.
* On many occasions, I've downloaded no-CD cracks for games I've purchased legitimately.

Did I violate the DMCA in these cases? Probably. Do I feel justified in doing so? Absolutely. I shouldn't be locked out of software that I purchase, and when I buy software legitimately, I shouldn't be punished for it with shitty DRM.

Re:Good luck with that. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28381795)

I just ask myself: Would I have purchased this? If the answer's no I don't feel any wrong was done to the copyright holder.

Re:Good luck with that. (3, Interesting)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381927)

I just ask myself: Would I have purchased this? If the answer's no I don't feel any wrong was done to the copyright holder.

But how can you trust the answers of a known pirate?!

Re:Good luck with that. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28382231)

Because a known pirate would answer "Yarrrrr!" to all questions?

Re:Good luck with that. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28381999)

to be fair, that is a slippery slope though.

Re:Good luck with that. (1)

syousef (465911) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381943)

* On many occasions, I've downloaded no-CD cracks for games I've purchased legitimately.

You wouldn't steal a handbag. You wouldn't steal a TV....but we definitely think you'd buy a broken one and then feel guilty for trying to fix it after we've ripped you off.

What a bunch of disingenuous propaganda noise. They really don't need to do much to win the "hearts and minds" of downloaders. They just need to play fair.

- Reasonably priced goods, that you can play anywhere once you've bought them WITHOUT jumping through hoops like validation and copy protection checks. Stop differentiating by zone and content player.

- The ability to take something back without hassle if it is broken out of the box.

- The ability to replace already purchased content at reasonable cost when the media breaks (scratched DVDs etc). Stop trying to prosecute people for legitimately backing things up (as opposed to giving a copy to a friend)

- Stop trying to gouge fans by releasing one season at a time, then a boxed set, then a boxed set with extra features so that you're actively trying to get a fan to re-buy the same material multiple times

- Make content quick and convenient to obtain. Downloadable for those with good net access. By mail quickly and cheaply for those that don't

- Realise that some of your potential customers STILL won't be able to afford the content and don't count them as lost sales

So long as they try to rip off the very customers they're supplying with content, a large portion of those customers will feel justified in ripping them right back off. If they're fair, there will still be piracy but not as much.

Re:Good luck with that. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28382019)

Translation:

1: I bought an item, but because it didn't work, I had to go shoplift a working one one from a nearby store

2: I bought a car, and it wore out, so I went out and stole another one from a dealer lot.

3: I may have bought marijuana but I have never inhaled.

Re:Good luck with that. (1)

Omestes (471991) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382589)

Translation:

1. I bought an item, it was broken, I exchanged it

2. I bought a car that had a built in timer than made it break after 5000 miles.

3. I bought a crappy product, so had to fix it myself.

Re:Good luck with that. (1)

Schuthrax (682718) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382873)

#2 sounds a little more like this to me:

2. I bought a stereo for my car, when the car died I took the stereo with me.

The conclusion being that, the way things currently work, I would not be allowed to take my stereo with me.

Re:Good luck with that. (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382025)

Activation sucks, ran into the same issue with a game I purchased (online delivery) that I tried to track down a regression in WINE with. It had quite a few activations (never checked how many, probably in the forever long EULA). Reactivation after that was an email form that took two days to get a response. And if I ever needed to reinstall, I'd have to do that again. My response to that email "Thanks, but I already found a quicker, easier, permanent and probably illegal solution, but I don't care. Have a nice day." I found the DVD version + crack and had it downloaded in about an hour. I'm planning to buy the sequel too because the game is great, but I might as well get the uncrippled version to begin with.

Call me naive (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28382117)

But I can't imagine any sort of logic, propaganda or ethical scheme which can successfully argue with Lendrick here.

And I don't believe anybody has ever tried to counter his simple points.

Re:Call me naive (1)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382507)

Hehe, see the post directly above yours. [slashdot.org]

Propaganda doesn't have to make sense.. most of the time it doesn't.

Re:Good luck with that. (2)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382149)

Did I violate the DMCA in these cases? Probably. Do I feel justified in doing so? Absolutely.

I violate the DMCA every time I play a legally purchased DVD on my computer that runs Linux. I care exactly enough to occasionally mention this fact to company when I pop in the DVD and chuckle.

No-CD cracks for games I own fall in the exact same category.

First step (1)

OpenSourced (323149) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381599)

unacceptable "control freakery" of DRM and regional coding, to overcharging and exploitation of the very artists the music industry claims to protect

As a first step I suggest they finish up with DRM, regional coding, overcharging and exploitation of artists. That will certainly leave the downloaders without arguments, and much enhance the effect of any campaign they are planning. I for one would pay more attention to any message if there was cheap, non-DRM'd, varied and easily available music and videos, and a big percentage of the money would go to the authors. Until then, the rationalization for downloading is so easy, it can be confounded with reasoning.
 

Well... It is (1, Insightful)

sctprog (240708) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381657)

Ok this is coming from someone who actually does download a good half the movies he watches.

It *is* theft. The movie was produced to make money.. and it is quite fair for them to expect that people won't just take it and not pay.

No matter how you water it down, you took something that you didn't pay for. If you can live with that choice, then fine.

But don't go around making up reasons why you're doing the world a favour by saying 'fuck you' to 'the man'.. You're only lying to yourself.

Re:Well... It is (3, Informative)

Daniel Dvorkin (106857) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381759)

The movie was produced to make money.

People do all sorts of things in the expectation of making money. Sometimes this expectation is fulfilled; sometimes it isn't. It's not really a matter of morality in most cases.

No matter how you water it down, you took something that you didn't pay for.

If I "take" something from you, then you no longer have it. That is clearly not what's going on here.

You're only lying to yourself.

The liars are the ones who pretend that intellectual property and real property are the same thing, when any rational person can see that they aren't.

You claim to believe that illegally downloading movies is theft, but that you do it anyway. I have to question the sincerity of your belief. Do you regularly steal other things as well? Probably not, and if not, then it's a pretty good bet that the reason you're willing to "steal" movies but not steal money or cars is because you recognize that there is a fundamental difference between these actions.

Re:Well... It is (1)

zonky (1153039) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382763)

The likelihood of being caught, or the risk is probably a large factor.

Re:Well... It is (1)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382905)

That's certainly true. In order for me to be a really good diamond thief I'd have to weigh the threat my freedom if I was caught. If the likelihood of being caught was incredibly low or the penalties were lower, it'd be a heck of a lot of fun.

Re:Well... It is (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381783)

While I broadly agree with you - my justification for downloading is I like to get stuff for free and before it's released in this country - I'll still disagree that it's theft.

Legally it's different from theft, and argue whatever you want about the morality of it, the main problem is that theft is a loaded word that distracts from the point. There's lots of arguments as to why piracy is wrong. Make the arguments. "Piracy is theft" is nothing but rhetoric.

Re:Well... It is (1)

iron-kurton (891451) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381785)

Would you have bought/rented/paid for admission for the movies you downloaded if they weren't available for download?

Re:Well... It is (1)

sctprog (240708) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381979)

I often do..

I have a blu ray player and I enjoy watching movies on it.

Re:Well... It is (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28381793)

Define theft again? I think you'll find that something vitally important in theft is missing from piracy.

Re:Well... It is (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28381831)

Ok, this is coming from someone who does not download the music or movies he watches.

It *IS NOT* theft. Theft has a precise legal definition to which downloading does not apply, according to the American courts of law.

No matter how dress up your straw man, the producer of downloaded content still has that content.

But don't go around making up reasons why it is morally wrong to treat information (which does not follow the same laws of physics as physical property) differently than how one treats physical property. You are only lying to yourself.

I will add that this is not a problem of morality, but of economics. It is morally wrong to steal because doing so deprives the owner of the item stolen. That is why it is wrong. Whether or not you paid for it means nothing, morally speaking. Whether or not you paid for something means everything economically (and legally) speaking (and that provided the item in question was actually for sale).

Theft is not illegal because it is morally wrong. It is illegal because of the severe economic consequences that it has. Downloading does not have these same severe economic consequences, and can actually be very economically beneficial (according to Harvard, anyway).

Don't confuse morality and legality, don't confuse theft and copyright infringement, don't try to absolutize your obviously subjective moral positions, and don't be surprised when people who are more intelligent than you take philosophical objection to the shallow, oversimplified tripe you are spouting.

Re:Well... It is (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28381911)

"But don't go around making up reasons why you're doing the world a favour by saying 'fuck you' to 'the man'."

I don't. I download because 1. I'm poor and cannot afford to buy all the media I download. The media cartels can suck it. And 2. because *I CAN*. There no technical reason why I can't download a movie from TPB or wherever (or get it from Netflix or my local library), make a copy for my iPod and then enjoy it at my leisure. None. The media cartels are, once again, cordially invited to suck it, and mind the teeth this time.

Re:Well... It is (2, Interesting)

lenester (625236) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382007)

What it is not, however, is any form of lost revenue. You would never have purchased that movie in the first place. It was not physically produced, shipped or shelved. No material loss was suffered, nor any sale eliminated. The cost of piracy to the copyright industries cannot be measured by multiplying downloads times retail prices; not even close. Yet this is how they attempt to portray it. This is what "theft" means.

You are guilty of non-commercial copyright violation. Not theft.

Civil Disobedience (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28381691)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Clause [wikipedia.org]
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Disobedience_(Thoreau) [wikipedia.org]
"Resistance" also served as part of Thoreau's metaphor which compared the government to a machine, and said that when the machine was working injustice it was the duty of conscientious citizens to be "a counter friction" - that is, a resistance - "to stop the machine."

---

Now, the current length for copyright seems to be 50 years or more after the death of an author. Are you fucking kidding me? How the hell is that limited in any way? The person has been dead for 49 years and his/her work still isn't public domain? What is that crap?

The copyright should be date of publication + 20 years and I don't care if the author is a person or a corporation, nor do I care if the art in question is a song, a tune, a movie, a videogame, a tv show, a book, whatever.

If it was published or released before 1989 then it should be public domain, no exceptions.

In fact, the governments should have web servers so that its citizens can go download the now-public-domain things for free, in open or non-proprietary formats.

Re:Civil Disobedience (1)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382543)

In fact, the governments should have web servers so that its citizens can go download the now-public-domain things for free, in open or non-proprietary formats.

Agreed. We'll call them "libraries".. although you can also get works that are still under copyright from libraries.

Acceptable dissent (3, Insightful)

Chris Acheson (263308) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381851)

there are plenty, even among the young, who can be eloquent about why they believe illegal downloading is not wrong. These can include everything from what they see as the unacceptable "control freakery" of DRM and regional coding, to overcharging and exploitation of the very artists the music industry claims to protect.

"Principled opposition to copyright itself" is, of course, left out of their range of acceptable dissent.

Re:Acceptable dissent (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382095)

Well doh, they're a PR firm so they have to sell it like something they can do something about. Anything like "principled" sounds tough to change.

A campaign won't make a change (3, Insightful)

erroneus (253617) | more than 5 years ago | (#28381893)

The core of what is wrong is the abuse, exploitation and extension of copyright law. Region coding is not justifiable as a means to do anything but control multiple prices in multiple markets. Content protection systems (aka DVD-CSS) are not justifiable as it does not prevent copying and only serves to control how and what players are used to access the media that, once purchased, the media companies no longer have any right or entitlement to. And the very idea of DRM is not only a problem in the sense that it grants no rights to the user and that they literally have to "ask permission to access" each and every time the user wants to access it, but it also runs the risk of becoming theft on the part of the DRM controller as when they shut down, they deny all access to the content that was legally paid for by the consumer. (They selleth, and then they taketh away!) And the extension of copyright terms to durations that can only be useful to immortal corporate "persons"? That is more unreasonable than words can express.

And before anyone can say "but that does not give you the right to steal" I have to say "so fucking what?!" Look. Fighting against "wrongness" in any way available is how the USA gained its independence. Some colonials wanted to stay connected to the crown of England and didn't want any part of it. Sounds like the "no right to steal" crowd.

And forgetting all this morality stuff, let's be plain about it. The amount of copyright infringement is negligible and most infringers are also people who buy things when they can and when it is good enough. These media jerks should let it quietly go on because they are still raking in tons of money and are still getting their laws passed. They don't need the enemies they are breeding and they don't need the growing fight they are getting. The more fight they give, the more doom they bring upon themselves. Wait and see... they will be wishing for "the good ole days" when they have everything nearly the way they wanted.

Re:A campaign won't make a change (1)

cdrguru (88047) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382889)

Region coding is a technique that allows different countries to have different censorship (aka Movie Ratings). WIthout this or something like it a DVD must satisfy UK, Japan and USA requirements. This isn't going to happen very easily except for My Little Pony animated cartoons. Take a look sometime what they are forced to cut out to be able to sell a movie in Japan that was already edited for UK.

There basically is no such thing as child porn in Japan. So showing nearly naked 12-year-olds having sex is fine there. However, one pubic hair will get the movie banned from import. It pretty much is the exact opposite in USA and UK. For most of Europe there better not be anything that could be construed as pro-Nazi in any way. So those parts have to be cut out.

You want one region for DVDs? My Little Pony is probably OK. Oh, and Strawberry Shortcake.

As far as copyright infringement is concerned, I don't know anyone that can use a computer that pays for music anymore. Why would they, when it is all free for the taking? Pay? Why? Movies are next on the list, I assure you. As the pirate sites get better and better and the bandwidth keeps increasing there will be no reason not to download movies. And nobody is going to pay, ever again. Most infringers already know the price they have to pay is zero and only the silly noobs pay. This is absolutely the future we are headed towards.

sharing is not theft (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28381923)

It seems the BBC has forgotten about the last time it forgot that sharing is not a crime! : http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/4758636.stm [bbc.co.uk]

'First though, an apology. File sharing is not theft. It has never been theft. Anyone who says it is theft is wrong and has unthinkingly absorbed too many Recording Industry Association of America press releases. We know that script line was wrong. It was a mistake. We're very, very sorry.'

Not sorry enough to remember...

Campaigns are pointless (1)

Endo13 (1000782) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382021)

Until they start living up to their end of the copyright agreement, I don't give a fucking rat's ass what they have to say. That means putting copyrighted works into the public domain while they're still relevant, valuable, AND profitable. For most entertainment items, that would mean about 5 years or less.

They're also not helping themselves with the bullshit clips on DVDs claiming that downloading is stealing.

Word to the media distributors: when you play fair, I'll play fair. Until then, go sodomize yourselves with a retractable baton. And make sure to use a good quality one so it doesn't break during use.

Summary doesn't cover counterarguments well. (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28382037)

For a more sophisticated response which has nothing to do with how control-freaky DRM is, or how much artists do or don't deserve:

http://www.piratpartiet.se/wiki/Why_We_Are_Right [piratpartiet.se]

As long as the basic premise fails to shift from the idea that information is property, we will keep running into an ideological wall.

You wouldn't steal a car? No but I would copy one. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28382091)

I like the commercials which say "you wouldn't steal a car!"

Actually if i could make a FREE copy of a car, without damaging/effecting/stealing the original owner's car and the COPY worked just as good (if not better than the original) I'd totally do it. The same goes for ANY consumer product really: if I could just download a free copy of all my groceries from the internet without paying for them I'd be on board.

I think the government/industry will never be able to get this problem solved as long as they treat it as theft, because unlike theft the original item and the original item owner are left OK. Its not a victmless crime, its a corporate victim crime.

Yuo Fa1l It! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28382115)

Wasting a life with each popular movie sold (1)

bennomatic (691188) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382191)

You know what burns me most about the DRM stuff? That it gives the **AA the right to wast millions of person hours every day. I'm not going to steal their film; why should I be forced to sit through the legal warnings? The people who are going to steal it won't pay attention when they're ripping it.

The way I see it, if an average lifetime is 75 years, then that's 39.4 million minutes. Assuming that any DVDs that are sold are watched at least twice, then any movie that sells 20 million copies has wasted an entire human life with these stupid warnings.

Maybe it wouldn't annoy me so much if the warnings actually did anything, but it's so clear they do not. It's just a huge freaking waste.

Breaking News! (4, Funny)

asolidvoid (964293) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382301)

Stop the presses! A PR Firm promotes the value of running a PR campaign!

Make them like you (2, Insightful)

V50 (248015) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382393)

My personal thoughts are the best way to counter piracy is to make people like you. I can only really give examples from my experience, as I don't really know other people's piracy habits.

I am an avid gamer of all systems, although I rarely game on my PC anymore, as it's typically too much of a hassle with configurations and DRM. The DRM decreases my chance of buying a PC game, (especially if there's a good console version) and makes me more likely to pirate. As an example, I bought a copy of Spore. My bought copy of Spore thought I was pirating it. After screwing around for a bit, I decided to say screw it, and downloaded a pirated copy from the Pirate Bay. As a result, were I actually interested in the Sims 3, I feel I'd be much more likely to pirate it, now that EA's ticked me off.

I have around 200+ console + handheld games, none of them pirated. Several of my systems (DS + PSP in particular) have very active "homebrew" communities, that make it very easy to acquire "backups". Despite the ease of which I know I could get handheld games for free, I choose to buy them, because I derive a great deal of value in having the original box + manual + disc/card to display, and because I actually like the companies.

Pirating a game from, say, Nintendo to me would feel like kicking Mario in the groin. Nintendo (and others) have brought me such good times, that they seem almost like a friend. The few times I've even considered pirating DS games, I've felt very uneasy, the thought of it feels just wrong, to me. The RIAA, on the other hand, does not invoke such warm, fuzzy feelings to just about anyone. Perhaps if they stopped suing so many people, and installing rootkits on people's computers, they might have some more goodwill left.

Those are just my thoughts. I know plenty of people don't derive the same satisfaction from having a big collection of legit games/music/whatever, but I really think that if the RIAA stopped suing people and instead built up a strong relationship with its customers like many gaming companies, and Apple, they might see similar loyalty and less piracy.

Also, suing little kids is stupid on a logical level. I pirated plenty of software when I was around 12 or so because I had no money. Ten years later, I have plenty of disposable income, and provide the entertainment industries with many thousands of dollars in revenue a year.

Re:Make them like you (1)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382835)

My personal thoughts are the best way to counter piracy is to make people like you.

Huh? They are trying to make us be like them. :)

Well they changed my Heart and mind (1)

JumpDrive (1437895) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382585)

I recently purchased a Season on disc. Got it home and found that I couldn't run it on my computer. I was pissed.
Prior to this I leaned toward being against downloading. Now I just don't care what downloaders get.

Where is my return in damages?

It's not about money any more... (1)

PottedMeat (1158195) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382795)

It's all political.

I was going to post a large list of things that piss me off about the industry but hell we all know what they are. Every policy is driven by greed. I won't pay anyone for that. So yeah if they gave me a reason to want to buy from them then I would gladly do so.

I will say that when I'm visiting Asia I buy music ALL THE TIME (admittedly from select labels) because the price is reasonable, the quality of mainstream music is better, you can get the music very easily and in many ways. I also buy movies there because of the same reason. I like that I can pick up a legit english version of a movie on VCD at the same time that the movie comes out.

Meh it's the same ole western greed system that's in place in about every industry. In Asia I can buy a killer mobile phone, pick whatever carrier I want, use prepaid or some sort of plan, not be forced into a multi-year contract just to get a decent phone or rate, have far better access to internet and other features, and get far, far, far more functionality out of the phone. Because the opposite is true here in the states, I don't even bother having a mobile.

My $0.02. Cheap!

PM

How to solve 50% of the problem (1, Insightful)

selven (1556643) | more than 5 years ago | (#28382813)

1) Stop forcing people to watch through "piracy is a crime and teh FBI will jail you for 10 years if you bring your camera phone into a movie theater" for 5 minutes before every movie. Doing that just makes the TPB version a superior product to your version. It's basic capitalism - don't cripple your own product. It's that simple.

You would't steal a .. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28382947)

"You wouldn't steal a purse. You wouldn't steal a TV."

That's right. Those things are for sale. If I ever want one, I can buy it.

"You wouldn't steal a movie." Is that a Blu-ray? You're right; I wouldn't steal one or even take one for free, because there isn't a way to play it.

Would I pirate a HD movie? Well, they're not for sale yet. If downloads are the only thing on the market (i.e. sales are not currently offered) then why not? It';s not like its impacting anyone's market.

You want to win hearts and minds? Start selling a product. It's not a movie (i.e. a thing I can watch) until it's DRM-free.

Sell movies, and I'll buy them. And hope you enter the market in time, before my media server's disks are full. The clock is ticking: do you accept money, or do you turn customers away?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...