We all have different views on what respresents "Fair Use", but we all seem to agree that the current laws stifle our rights whatever we think they should be. It's getting worse now that the MPAA/RIAA are taking a pro-active stance on eliminating technology that would allow us our Fair Use rights. Hollywood tells us that the root of all bootlegging is this new technology, that it is killing their business, and that they are bound and determined to fight to protect their rights. Whether they are right or wrong, or whether or not casual bootlegging has an effect on their profits is meaningless. It is their perception of the problem that counts. We need to find a way to change their perception. We yell at them, they issue lawsuits, developers go down, and it goes round and round ... My thinking is that the introduction of this new "one copy only" coding is reasonable to allow (most of) us Fair Use, and while still in violation of the dreaded DMCA, it may just diffuse the current situation, change Hollywood's perception, and take the lawyers out of the picture. I could very well be wrong tho ...
It's a contentious issue (as we have all seen) however it is not horribly unreasonable at all as long as that 1-copy only thing does not apply to academic copying (not that it should be an issue as universities and such are pretty careful with this stuff)
They've used this same sob story with every new technology. They wanted to see VCRs and VHS tapes stopped entirely but then look at the billions they made from sales of VHS tapes. Their philosophy of combating piracy by taking away everyone's right's is bullshit. It hasn't, doesn't and won't ever stop piracy. The only thing it accomplishes is creating a situation where honest people with little or no technical skill can't protect their investments. Once I pay for media and take it home, it is mine and what I do with it is my perogative, not theirs. Taking media home under someone else's conditions/rules is called a rental not a purchase. People want flexibility with their media not hassles and limitations. Those are key elements to winning any battle. A lack of those two qualities is called "giving up". The entetainment industry has the money and influence to wear us down. They've spent millions convincing the nation that "rampant piracy" is killing their billions-of-dollars-in-profits-every-year-business. It's easier to limit my rights than deal with outfits cranking out thousands of bootlegs a week. Say what you want but it'll never be a "win-win" situation, especially for us. This is absolutely true but the entertainment industry is stomping all over us chasing a "no more piracy" dream instead of facing reality. There will always be a segment of people who will do illegal things with any given technology. As I said before, casual piracy is overblown and the only people that are going to be affected by these new protections are us average people, not the big time pirates. I resent being scapegoated by the industry for a munufactured "epidemic". If your ship is sinking, logic dictates you plug the biggest holes first. One large scale pirating outfit will account for losses that would take thousands of "casual pirates" to match.
We are not going to win this battle by being stubborn and emotional. Those are key elements to winning any battle In my experience, neither of these elements are tolerated in a Court of Law. If we took our rants there, we would be tossed immediately. We cannot hope to solve this problem by carrying signs, belittling the other guy and doing sit-ins - these acts just wreck our credibility
As per my rant on politics and the judicial system, I wont give up (yet) but I cant see how 70 year old politicians who are nearing the end of their life (a) give a crap about what we do and (b) even know what the right/logical/sane thing to do. It's like the life story of a politician: when (s)he is young, they know how to run the country properly but because of bereaucracy and political bullshit and that they are not "elders" yet, they never get to be PM or Pres or soemthing like that. By the time they are "old enough" they've been swamped with too much political infighting and party bullshit they forget who they are serving and cant run the country anymore -- they can run their own coffers real well tho. What's needed is a successful offshore (i.e., non-NA) company to setup some kind of major anti-anti-stupid-copyright-enforcement system up and we all jump on the bandwagon as one cohesive fighting unit. I remember when the suits started flying that everyone said "I'm not buying any label music anymore" ... where are those people now? A lot of them gave up their zealosy. I dunno any high profile press people but hell i'll give a goddamn rant on CNN or something about this crap. In all fairness the FBI and the lot of them arent incompetent. If they were given the task of hunting down piracy, no holds barred they'd do their job admirably however they prolly arent being given those orders. The tax money that pours into blank media where does that go? To pay secretaries and lawyers to waste time and idle around suing people. To me it has become abundantly clear that these organizations are not interested in stopping piracy at all. In fact this is one huge reverse-psychology situation -- by actively hunting the piracy down as they say they do, they make piracy "a big deal", they make it "special", they maket it "1337" -- and what does that do? That just drives up the piracy. So what's in it for them? Lawsuits. Money doesnt grow on trees but they can sure sue their way to a nice paycheck.
... where are those people now ... Most cause-fighters generally become apathetic when they actually have to do something or expend a little effort to support their cause. A good example of this is email campaigns or on-line petitions to try to save a teevee series when it is in jeopardy of being canceled. These are generally non-effective. If the same petitioners actually wrote letters, put them in envelopes and bought stamps to mail them, it would have a greater effect.
I wasn't referring to courts. More important than any court is the rants people carry out through their wallets. Piss off enough people, as they are very good at doing, and they will spend money elsewhere. Leading to.... Me! At the very least, 75% of my music and movies were bought used. I started buying used CDs 17 years ago - same music, half the price. The same with DVDs when I began collecting five years ago. New DVD releases? Wait a week and they're available at secondspin.com for 2/3 the price. I read an article that said RIAA was trying to push for royalties on used CDs - screw the first-sale doctrine, we want more money! They know used CDs/DVDs are a real threat. If the entetainment industry put the same effort into actually giving the customer what they want as they do their self-righteous legal escapdes they'd have a fraction of the problem they do now. It's interesting to note that some counties answer to rampant piracy is to lower the price of factory discs. Give the people what they want and you make a sale. Absolutely true. The "piracy war" is a convenient front to impose more and more restictions like this lovely "one copy only" crap. It's all about control, more control means more profits. Region protection is nothing more than price control. They introduce an easily defeated protection like CSS and when, not surprisingly, it doesn't work they have a perfect excuse to introduce further restrictions. Another point to consider is real and percieved value. I may hardly ever need to make more than one copy of a disc but knowing I can if I ever need to is very important, it's added value. How many of us have bought something because it had tons of features that we ended up hardly using? We could have bought a cheaper one with the features we actually use, but no, the percieved value of the fancy one won out. The same goes for the entertainment industry. If they want to keep sales up with happy customers, they won't screw with percieved value of their product. DRM, limits and lawsuits do nothing to help product appeal. There's already enough DRM floating about and I'm not willing to accept more in the false hopes that I'm going to appease an industry that has never cared about my rights to begin with. It makes no sense.
Not just that, the consumer side needs some form of high profile coverage to bring light to the issue otherwise it will just get swept under the carpet by marketing and PR people.... sure we will carry on the fight but we arent enough people to make a difference.... the sad thing is that the majority of the people that are required, are not techn-savvy enough to care about DMCA or RIAA or stuff like that.... which means more education is required. One can only hope.....
... wasn't referring to courts ... But that's where the battle will be won or lost. Just ask Robert Moore. More important than any court is the rants people carry out through their wallets. Won't happen with this issue. The majority of the population don't have any idea that this is happening and they could care less. Paying $20.00 for a DVD then maybe having to buy it again a few months later when their kid wrecks it is inconsequential. Besides, I suspect the majority of DVD buyers only watch the movie a couple of times before it becomes a permanent fixture on their shelf. If the kid does wreck it, they probably wouldn't bother to replace it anyway. What effect has the public ranting about the cost of gasoline done for us? Everytime the price goes up, the usual SPAM emails hit the internet urging people to stop buying gas. Out of the 1.2 million people in Manitoba, I think 7 people didn't buy gas that day. Doubt if Shell even noticed the drop in sales
A Canadian eh? A very valid point you make, along the same lines as mine ... people need to be informed more before they can care or will care ... which goes back to the need for a high profile case of some sort ...
Hi Praetor In Canada the blank media levy (tax) is collected by The CPCC (" The Canadian Private Copying Collective is the non-profit agency charged with collecting and distributing private copying royalties. Established in 1999, CPCC is an umbrella organization that represents songwriters, recording artists, music publishers and record companies. These are the groups on whose behalf the royalties are collected. CPCC is not an arm of government.") The distribution of the monies collected can be found here http://cpcc.ca/english/finHighlights.htm. Under 6% of the monies collected were used to run the organization Just thought you would like to know
I doubt if any cases regarding copyright violation will ever become a high profile incident (unless someone starts peddling copies of the Mona Lisa on eBay)
I guess we can all agree that the apathy of the "sheeple" is killing us all. The best method to take away rights is by chipping away at them a little at a time and apathy all but guarantees it'll work.
