Jump to content

Boycott SOPA, PIPA & ACTA


Recommended Posts

But nobody is sensibly saying that the creative industry is "fair game", merely that unfairly protecting it is, well, unfair.

 

It seems that in many cases the copyright holders want their cake and eat it. Let's say you have created a successful business based on the film industry where you have an Internet site that reviews films, using the film clips that are issued by the distributors. Would it be fair if some unhappy distributor had the power to shut you down just because they didn't like your reviews?

 

When you said "Why do we have to protect an industry that was profitable in the past against a loss in future profits, simply because it was profitable in the past? Plenty of other businesses have been swallowed by technology, adapt or die, so why is this different? " I understood you were suggesting exactly that.

 

I have already, having reviewed the SOPA legislation the details of which I had not seen, agreed it is flawed.

 

However the basic principle of criminal sanction against those who steal things, profit indirectly but knowingly from others stealing things or sell on stolen goods should apply to the creative industries as much as any other. Can you not agree with that principle?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you said "Why do we have to protect an industry that was profitable in the past against a loss in future profits, simply because it was profitable in the past? Plenty of other businesses have been swallowed by technology, adapt or die, so why is this different? " I understood you were suggesting exactly that.

 

I cannot see the suggestion at all, neither was it meant, nor would I ever make it. :huh:

 

However the basic principle of criminal sanction against those who steal things, profit indirectly but knowingly from others stealing things or sell on stolen goods should apply to the creative industries as much as any other. Can you not agree with that principle?

 

Yes of course, but and the actual purpose of this legislation did not have that in mind. My statement that you italicised still stands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes of course, but and the actual purpose of this legislation did not have that in mind. My statement that you italicised still stands.

 

Your statement would be valid if the issue affecting creative artists was they insisted on releasing everything on cassette tape and betamax and thus people didn't buy it anymore. The actual issue is that technology has made it very easy to steal their stuff. If my business was in the same situation then i would expect the powers that be to legislate to stop my stuff being stolen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, were you aware that hollywood was built on piracy?

 

The reason hollywood is where it is was because they wanted to escape the copyright laws on the east coast.

 

Hollywood was behind the rest of the US, which was behind the rest of the world.

 

England has had copyright in printed material since the fifteenth century, but Dickens was still campaigning for the US to recognise it when he died.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your statement would be valid if the issue affecting creative artists was they insisted on releasing everything on cassette tape and betamax and thus people didn't buy it anymore. The actual issue is that technology has made it very easy to steal their stuff. If my business was in the same situation then i would expect the powers that be to legislate to stop my stuff being stolen.

 

My statement is valid, and as much as I like you ( :) ) I quite resent you trying to twist it. There's no "would be" about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My statement is valid, and as much as I like you ( :) ) I quite resent you trying to twist it. There's no "would be" about it.

 

Maybe I read it wrong. "Why do we have to protect an industry that was profitable in the past against a loss in future profits, simply because it was profitable in the past? Plenty of other businesses have been swallowed by technology, adapt or die, so why is this different? " was the statement.

 

We both I hope agree the issue facing the creative industry is theft and that internet technology has allowed that theft to become endemic

 

So how can they adapt or die?

 

There are only two ways to stop theft, ensure the law protects you from you stuff being stolen or at least will punish those who steal it or take the law into your own hands. They are pursuing the legal avenue which surely is better than the other option?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just waiting for the day when all movies are chock-a-block full of advertisment and product placement etc.

 

Everyones' enjoyment of film will suffer, but at least that's a model that will allow the film companies to make money.

 

I believe a similar dynamic is at play with the Android marketplace. On iOS, developers know they can make money without (or with) ads, however, Android doesn't have the same security measures in place, and app piracy is rife (certainly compared with iOS), so developers just put loads of ads in their apps. Hey-presto, everyones' happy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.