White House will not support SOPA, PIPA

I don't think blackout is appropriate. What is appropriate is to make people see a page where they are encouraged to all their congresscritters before showing any content.

If I can come up with the right apache-fu in time, I might do that to my site, but not sure if I will have time.
 
What we most need is some rationality in copyrights. They should be done in 50 years if owned by a corporation, and in the lifetime of the author plus 25 years if owned by private persons.

Trademarks are not copyrights; Disney can keep the mouse and selling anything "Mickey Mouse" will still not be legal as a result. There is nothing Disney has not already sold under that trademark, so there is nothing you can sell under it if you are not Disney.

Then we have narrowed the field down a bit.

And the problem can be addressed without the draconian measures being contemplated.

My example is music piracy.

Music piracy is way down.

People buy services like Pandora or XM streaming to listen to music, or purchase music at reasonable prices at Amazon or Apple. The free market supplied the answer; "Make it easy and inexpensive, and people will buy rather than pirate."

If the movie industry or the porn industry would have the well-executed equivalent of iTunes or Pandora, the problem would largely go away.
 
rocketdodger said:
Yes I am being totally serious. Why would I risk installing a torrent client from some site I don't know is legit? Why would I even want to take up space on my hard drive with downloaded videos? Why would I even risk visiting some shady site in russia claiming to have the whole mission impossible movie to stream?
Click to expand...

It took me 5 minutes to find MI4 and 15 minutes to download. I watched it and then deleted it. FYI is was meh.
 
BenBurch said:
Because there was always the chance that it would die without his help, and he would have been able to avoid upsetting Big Money during an election year? But since that wasn't going to happen, he had to act.
Click to expand...

I guess. It'd be nice to have a president whose policies are clear from the start.
 
applecorped said:
It took me 5 minutes to find MI4 and 15 minutes to download. I watched it and then deleted it. FYI is was meh.
Click to expand...

Yeah I know it was meh.

The question I posed is who would rather go though the trouble of pirating when they can just pick the blue ray up at redbox on the way home for less than 2 dollars ???

I don't know of anyone that would do such a thing and isn't already a cheap skate or pirate just for the principle of it, and they wouldn't pay for it anyway.

The problem of piracy is grossly overstated.

Its like going to the mall and offering people free cupcakes and seeing all the people that take em and then thinking "oh, I should charge for these, I will get < amount charged > X < all the cupcakes I have given out > profit if I do that." No, that is just stupid -- if you charge for them, only a fraction of the original group would actually go for it. Common sense.
 
rocketdodger said:
The question I posed is who would rather go though the trouble of pirating when they can just pick the blue ray up at redbox on the way home for less than 2 dollars ???
Click to expand...

People who don't want to pay anything. I think you might be underestimating how many people like free stuff and would spend an inordinate amount of time to get for free. Sometimes the enjoyment isn't in the viewing but in the acquiring.
 
applecorped said:
People who don't want to pay anything. I think you might be underestimating how many people like free stuff and would spend an inordinate amount of time to get for free. Sometimes the enjoyment isn't in the viewing but in the acquiring.
Click to expand...

And those people actually cost nothing. Because in fact they were not going to be customers under any circumstances and in any case never enjoy anything except a tiny bit of the material they download.

Make it easy and inexpensive to watch online, and piracy will go WAY down.

For example; Porn. I can go to Gamelink, to name one, and buy recent brand-name porn on PPV or for download. But to do that, I will be paying something not too far removed from the cost of buying the DVD. On Gamelink, it's 60 minutes for $8.95. If in fact you could rent a film for $2.99, like iTunes offers for mainstream films, you would have far more people plunking down their geld. Enough more that you would absolutely increase revenue and your expenses would not rise proportionately, so more profit.
 
Jonnyclueless said:
I assume this goes along the lines of "Yes we want to fight online piracy, but we don't want to implement anything that could actually have any effect on stopping online piracy, so we'll just claim any attempt to stop online piracy is censorship and say something better can be done, but not actually provide anything that is better".
Click to expand...

You pretty much just quoted the freetard manifesto. Quite eloquently too, hopefully you will allow me to use your quote
 
BenBurch said:
And those people actually cost nothing. Because in fact they were not going to be customers under any circumstances and in any case never enjoy anything except a tiny bit of the material they download.

Make it easy and inexpensive to watch online, and piracy will go WAY down.

For example; Porn. I can go to Gamelink, to name one, and buy recent brand-name porn on PPV or for download. But to do that, I will be paying something not too far removed from the cost of buying the DVD. On Gamelink, it's 60 minutes for $8.95. If in fact you could rent a film for $2.99, like iTunes offers for mainstream films, you would have far more people plunking down their geld. Enough more that you would absolutely increase revenue and your expenses would not rise proportionately, so more profit.
Click to expand...

And if you could get it down to $.99, (even if they were one-watch downloads that became dysfunctional after a single viewing) not only would the total downloads jump, they would jump enormously because no one would bother storing them when they could download a fresh copy when they wanted to watch the movie again.
 
BenBurch said:
Such persons never get elected.
Click to expand...

That's the two-party, least worst candidate theory. It is only self fulfilling because it's never been successfully challenged...wait, wasn't the Republican party a "third party" that became one of the big two after it elected Lincoln?
The Republican Party was meteoric by today's standards. They were organized on February 28, 1854, held their first convention on July 6, and elected forty-four Representatives and fifteen Senators in November (19% of the House; 25% of the Senate). In the 1854 and '58 elections, with the help of some other parties, they denied majority control of the House to the Democrats. They unsuccessfully ran John Fremont for President in 1856. When they elected Lincoln as President in 1860, they took majority control of the House and the Senate. By the time Lincoln began his first term as President, the party was in place and in power. Prior to this period it was the Whigs and the Democratic parties.
 
Trakar said:
That's the two-party, least worst candidate theory. It is only self fulfilling because it's never been successfully challenged...wait, wasn't the Republican party a "third party" that became one of the big two after it elected Lincoln?
The Republican Party was meteoric by today's standards. They were organized on February 28, 1854, held their first convention on July 6, and elected forty-four Representatives and fifteen Senators in November (19% of the House; 25% of the Senate). In the 1854 and '58 elections, with the help of some other parties, they denied majority control of the House to the Democrats. They unsuccessfully ran John Fremont for President in 1856. When they elected Lincoln as President in 1860, they took majority control of the House and the Senate. By the time Lincoln began his first term as President, the party was in place and in power. Prior to this period it was the Whigs and the Democratic parties.
Click to expand...

Not quite the same as the Whigs had collapsed.

If Obama wins and the GOP goes not get control of the Senate, the GOP itself may collapse in a similar way.

When it does, I'm going to have to look carefully at what comes out of it for signs of something I'd like to see succeed.
 
Trakar said:
And if you could get it down to $.99, (even if they were one-watch downloads that became dysfunctional after a single viewing) not only would the total downloads jump, they would jump enormously because no one would bother storing them when they could download a fresh copy when they wanted to watch the movie again.
Click to expand...

The price of porn is likely to go way up as LA is now going to require condom use. This will nearly kill the porn industry there. And porn shoots will not be all done with condoms, they will go back underground with all that entails. And the end result of their righteous action will be shoots without proper testing and more people infected rather than less.
 
BenBurch said:
The price of porn is likely to go way up as LA is now going to require condom use. This will nearly kill the porn industry there. And porn shoots will not be all done with condoms, they will go back underground with all that entails. And the end result of their righteous action will be shoots without proper testing and more people infected rather than less.
Click to expand...

((Actually, I was talking about mainstream movies,...but hey, whatever floats your bo..., er, splats your mat! ;) ))
 
BenBurch said:
Not quite the same as the Whigs had collapsed.

If Obama wins and the GOP goes not get control of the Senate, the GOP itself may collapse in a similar way.

When it does, I'm going to have to look carefully at what comes out of it for signs of something I'd like to see succeed.
Click to expand...

The Whigs were still the second major mainstream party in the 1956 elections, though it was actually the deaths of both Clay and Webster between the nominating convention and the 1952 election that ripped the party apart and led to its eventual dissolution into the major sects which had come together in 1836 to face the Democratic party after the collapse of the Federalist Party. (The modern Democratic party was formed to replace what was originally called the Jeffersonian Democratic Republican party, often shortened to "Republican" which was formed around the remains of the Anti-Federalist Party). So the modern Republican party traces its roots to the strong and large national government, conservationalist progressive activists of our nation's first century or so, and the modern Democratic party traces its roots to the first party called "Republican" and was all about State's Rights and both social and fiscal conservatism,...and people wonder why I see so little difference in the faces of our nation's political coin.

I would like to see a truely Progressive party arise, regardless of which coalition it arises from, the last party that came close to true progressivism, called itself the Progressive party, but I'm more interested in actions than labels.
 
We should resurrect the Bull Moose Party. And I'm serious; That is the progressive agenda to aim for. Even today, once you take out the few pure anachronisms, the Bull Moose platform that Roosevelt ran on looks very good.
 
pipelineaudio said:
Tried and failed more than a decade ago.

Any current suggestions?
Click to expand...

Tried? Where and what?

You wan't to reduce piracy, you must not cripple services like Netflix or Hulu.
(Is Netflix reducing illicit file sharing? Depends on which stats you believe http://arst.ch/p74 )

Providing content to services like Vuze. No more restriction on what countries can play some Youtube videos. (like music videos and Germany)

And DRM should just be killed.

And lastly same services for fair price in other countries.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom