Valenti's "Boston Strangler" Testimony

Seth Schoen writes "'I say to you that the VCR is to the American film producer and the American public as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone.' Jack Valenti said this in 1982 in testimony to the House of Representatives on why the VCR should be illegal. He also called the VCR an "avalanche" and a "tidal wave", and said it would make the film industry "bleed and bleed and hemorrhage". This speech is an important part of history, yet until today it had never been published on-line in its entirety. Valenti's testimony was published today by Cryptome. It's essential background reading if you want to see just how little the MPAA's arguments have changed in two decades." Compare to the Analog Hole document and they're virtually identical (except Valenti was playing on anti-Japanese sentiment then, and today it's anti-pirate sentiment). Of course, the MPAA was unsuccessful in plugging the "VCR Hole" - insufficient lobbying and clueful judges stopped them. The MPAA successfully adapted to the changing times and today sells about 70 million cassettes for rentals and 600 million cassettes for home viewing every year (both numbers are on the decline due to the rise of DVD).

Comments

you know what to do with it...

[0WaitState]

Quick! Pirate that testimony! Put it on a tshirt! Set it to music, dictate it and sample it!

bwaaa haaa haaa!

[L. VeGas]

Valenti -- "Now, they are up to 6 hours. They are going to be up to 24 hours. Pretty soon, they will have a cassette that will record all year long"

And it only takes 2 days to rewind.

the biggest difference between VHS and DVD is

[davmct]

the relative ease to which you can now transfer content between people. Sure, you could make VHS copies of movies in your basement, but you were still limited to physical distribution. Now that distribution is effectively uncapped, the MPAA and RIAA realize their nest eggs are being poached.
The biggest problem with all of this is the lack of concern of the RIAA/MPAA towards their customers. Sure, you will always have a few people hacking and stealing content, but if the movie/music industry realized that the standard of economy is based on the supply/demand chain, they would realize a better way to combat this 'theft'.

I, myself, am an avid DVD-collector, and have quite a repository built. I have no qualms with paying good money to buy a good movie. But what I do expect is for the MPAA to be competitive. Since there are no other options THAN the MPAA, we are all held up to paying 20-35$ for a DVD, which in all reality may only be worth 15-20$. What the MPAA must realize is that their competition is now the free route, and the only way to combat this is to
a) lower prices
b) provide extras to create a competitive advantage

I'd surely shell out 14 bucks to watch AoTC on a big screen over having to watch a pirated version that shakes like a hyperactive child sucking on a lollipop. Sure, there will be the cheapskates that will watch it for free, but those were never really customers of the MPAA anyway.
The MPAA needs to get back to the business of making movies, and distributing the "extras" that make it worthwhile buying.

Re:the biggest difference between VHS and DVD is

[gblues]

the relative ease to which you can now transfer content between people. Sure, you could make VHS copies of movies in your basement, but you were still limited to physical distribution. Now that distribution is effectively uncapped, the MPAA and RIAA realize their nest eggs are being poached.

Bullshit.

The "unlimited distribution" myth has been repeated by everyone from New Economists to Technologists to lawmakers. But, no amount of repetition makes it any more true.

Distribution on the Internet is not an economy of scale. In fact, it is exactly the opposite! With economies of scale, the cost of production approach zero with an increase of output--e.g. it costs less to produce 10,000 than it does 100.

The Internet does not work this way. As your production levels increase, production costs go up--often logarithmically. In other words, it costs many times more to distribute 100GB per month than it does to distribute 10GB per month.

What about peer-to-peer, you ask? Peer-to-peer networks rely on the uneconomical nature of high-speed Internet. This market is beginning to correct itself as the ISPs cap the bandwith of bandwidth hogs. Eventually, the peer-to-peer networks will be the proverbial victims of their own success. People will stop using them when the ISP bill runs into the triple digits.

Therefore, even if DVD were completely unencrypted, it would be more expensive to download the 13+GB DVD than it would to simply travel to your local video store and purchase a legal copy.

In fact, if you factor in the time it takes to download the rips/theater screeners, it is already more expensive. However, expect the implicit cost to transform into explicit costs (in terms of higher ISP bills) in the near future.

Nathan

Kastenmeier's sarcasm

[Asikaa]

I'd love to know if Kastenmeier's response was as sarcastic as it sounded here:

[VALENTI:] I am going to stand, if you don't mind, Mr. Chairman, cause I have what is known as "visual aids." I know they are visual; whether they are aids or not is something you will have to determine later on.

Mr. KASTENMEIER. And whether they are copyrighted or not.

That is priceless, and Valenti just ignores him and presses on as if nothing happened!

Stagnent Media Industry

[jamieo]

The media industry (music and film) are so stangnent it's unbelievable.

MP3 and digital music was (actually still is) a chance for them to make lots of money in new ways.

The same goes for digital TV/films, yet they can't see it. I actually worked in Digital TV a while and I don't have any faith in these companies being able to pull off anything worthwhile for the public due to the anal retentives in the media industry.

PVRs are great - the public love them. However, they're by no means the statan to media companies. PVRs will change, allowing targeted programming, targetted adverts, pay per view, etc. Nerds will hate it (I do), but it will happen.

But that's only the start. PVRs are not long for this world, as a set top box anyway. The future will be PVRs in the network - no set top box, no limited 40Gb storage - it will all work in the back end for you. Not only will this offer PVR like functionality but it will bring the reality of video on demand and targeted programming to the masses.

When this happens, the big media companies will be able to make more money from it than they can from their current distribution systems.

If they kill this, their only hope is DVD and then they're opening themselves up to far more piracy.

Personally, I hope all such companies burn in hell, but realistically they'll survive and continue to screw me over with content I don't want. Hopefully the digital revolution will give me a *bit* more choice.

Re:Looks like he was wrong...

[K8Fan]

Didn't the record companies say the same thing about audio tape?

Audio tape? Hell, they said the same thing about radio, and sued to stop radio broadcasters.

The said the same thing about imported LPs, DAT, used CDs, anything they could find to lay blame on to explain a temporary downturn in revenue. Increases in revenue are, of course, entirely due to their own brilliance.

This is about what it always about - the lobbyist's desire to get the government to give their industry a handout. They used the introduction of DAT to get a tax passed on the units and blank tapes. As musicians and Deadheads are virtually the only people who buy DATs (other than data DATS for backup), they have been paying a tax that it delivered directly to the members of the RIAA.

Forget welfare to the poor. It is dwarfed by Corporate Welfare.

Valenti is an admitted pirate!

[TrumpetPower!]

I found this exchange fascinating:

The average number of cassettes per household -- this is fascinating -- Mrs. Schroeder, was 27.7, 28 cassettes. Now, if you are just time shifting, all you are doing is you are away from home and you are taping something and you come back and you watch the commercial, then you time shift, you don't need 28 cassettes. You need one cassette or at the most two. Why do you have 28? Why? Because of the next line. Seventy-five percent have a permanent collection. My own home, we do it in our on home. I know about that. Anybody that has a VCR, talk to them, and I ask you to use your own commonsense, Mr. Chairman, Mrs. Schroeder, Mr. Railsback, just think of you as human beings. If you had the power to sit on a playback of a recording and you could wipe out the commercials or not wipe out the commercials, what would you do? You would do exactly what you said, sir. That is terrific. Of course. We all do it.

But when you do it, you strip away the reason for free television. Now, let me --

Mr. KASTENMEIER. Jack, let me ask you. Do you consider yourself and your family infringers when you engage in that practice?

Mr. VALENTI. I consider myself and my family believing what the plaintiffs in this lawsuit said and they said publicly, they have said it to the press, they have said it to the lawyers, they have said it to the courts. They do not intend to file any actions against homeowners now or in the future. I mean, that is obvious and they have said that publicly, Mr. Chairman, so I believe them. As far as I am concerned, I am going to continue taping because the plaintiffs have said they aren't going to do anything to me. I am not committing any crime. They know that.

Mr. KASTENMEIER. That wasn't my question.

Mr. VALENTI. Do I consider myself an infringer?

Mr. KASTENMEIER. When you engage in such practice.

Mr. VALENTI. Yes, sir, I do. I am taking somebody else's copyrighted material without their consent and I know damn well I am infringing. But as far as court action or anything else, I am safe. First, it is not a criminal act. Again, the opposition would tell you video, police, and criminals. They show an astonishing lack of the copyright law. They know good and well that that is not a criminal infringement unless you do it for profit. But on the other hand the plaintiffs have said they are moving against anybody in the homes. There is no problem, but 1 know and everybody else knows they are infringing.

I'm not one who participates in copyright infringment, even with the strict standards imposed by recent changes to the law. Mr. Valenti's testimony, however, has completely changed my opinion on whether or not it is right for me (y'all are welcome to do as you wish, I'm talking about me) to engage in such practices. What's good for the goose, and all.

I think I'll go download something right now....

b&

Thank goodness he set me straight!

[JoeWalsh]

Thank goodness this testimony became available. Through it, Jack Valenti was finally able to set me straight. Here's one of the truly remarkable things he said:

"I have spent most of my adult life in politics and you learn one thing. Nothing of value is free. "

Now I know I should erase Linux and FreeBSD from my company's servers and install Windows. Because, obviously, if I got something for free, it's worthless. And how can you base a business on something that's worthless?

Thank goodness he set me free. Amazing how prescient he proved to be way back in the early eighties.

Thanks, Jack!

-Joe

Terms, Terms, Terms

[Bouncings]

First of all, I think we need to make something clear. One thing that often decides debates is language. Any side of a debate adopts a language all its own. "Pro-life" vs "pro-choice"; "illegal immigrants" vs "undocumented immigrants," etc. The similarity between the Analog Hole article, this testomony, and the wording in the rest of the Hollywood argument is establishing a general-purpose set of words for the MPAA to use.

The time has come for advocates of general purpose tools to adopt some words. "General purpose" I like, but it could be better. Suggestions? Some more ideas, but please, come up with more, everyone:

• 'Piracy' -- Copyright infringement is called just that, 'copyright infringement.' I suggest you stop someone when they use the word 'piracy' and ask them what boats on what ocean they are talking about. "Piracy" has no legal meaning and it only exists because 'copyright infringement' doesn't sound as bad. It's hard to argue with this fact.
• Spyware is an excellent word to use for DivX and Kazaa kind of cases. It's not directly related to this debate as much, but it's an excellent example of choosing your own vocabulary.
• I think we should call programs that play DVD's but don't copy them 'crippleware' or 'defective' -- the MPAA calls them 'secure' -- I call them 'defective.' Even better, let's call anything related to copy restriction 'defective.'
• When speaking specifically, don't use the word 'protection', use the word 'restricted.' Everyone wants a 'protected' computer, no one wants a 'restricted' computer.
• 'Circumvention devices' is OK. But how about 'repair' devices that fix things like defective CDs. Or maybe 'full use' -- the DeCSS is a 'full use' device, in that it gives you full use of your computer.

Think of some good terms, everyone.

Wolf!

[cybermage]

Looks like the MPAA has turned into the boy who cried wolf. With any luck, a pattern of resisting technological innovation will ultimately serve to discredit them in the eyes of law makers.

Both the MPAA and RIAA have resisted new technologies, like analog tape. In the past they were ultimately told to shut up and deal with it. Once they embraced the new technology, they found new markets.

Now the battleground is digital movies. I'm confident that the industry will eventually be put in their place, and then we'll see what innovations follow. Maybe in a decade, movies will be released straight to home theatre. Perhaps we'll see an immersion style of theatre where you can watch the movie from within it, or even participate.

I wish the industry would learn from their past and maybe try to be the ones innovating instead of the ones whining. They'd make more money dragging us into the future than the other way around.

Not Just the MPAA Either...

[irix]

I found it fascinating that not only the MPAA (Valenti) was testifying. The national association of theatre owners, the actors guild, people from television, actors, etc. etc. All against the VCR, and all so set in their ways that they couldn't see the forest for the trees.

About Valenti

[WEFUNK]

This is actually kinda sad...

This repeat of history made me wonder about the story behind Jack Valenti. According to the MPAA web site, Jack is (or was) actually a truly remarkable man. He was a war hero and had an impressive career before becoming only the third President of the MPAA. Unfortunately that happened back in 1966. This is often the problem with having one person in power for so long.

The MPAA site seems to be as much about him as it is about the industry, with the press release page actually titled "Jack". The funniest thing is from this intro to his bio [my emphasis]:

"In his current role as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Motion Picture Association of America, Valenti has presided over a world wide sea change in the industry. New magical technology, the rise of importance of international markets, the tyranny of piracy have radically changed the landscape of the American film and television industry."

ACC quotes aside, technology does not equal magic. Jack, thanks, I'm sure that at one time you did a real bang up job but please step aside for someone who can understand and appreciate the direction and impact of new technology on our culture, and perhaps someone who's bio starts off with an appreciation of the majesty of the film industry, rather than fear mongering about issues you clearly can't handle.

Poor pirates...

[ryanvm]

I'll bet real pirates are pissed that their image has been hijacked for the sake of copyright protection.

Pirates used to be swarthy, maruading, swashbucklers, living adventurously on the high seas. Now the term has been relegated to the description of pimply-faced, 16 year-old, recluses, downloading techno MP3s in the middle of the night.

The whole ordeal must be quite disheartening for them.

Except they inserted copyright protection...

[sudog]

...technology into each and every consumer-grade VCR out there. It's called Macrovision people. When was the last time you tried to record a video cassette (that you bloody well BOUGHT, no less) onto a temporary copy so you could better preserve the original in an archive?

Uh huh. Thought so.

They just want to do the same thing to digital devices. It's just proving a lot harder to do. But for all your belly-aching and all your complaining about how information wants to be free, digital devices are too uncontrollable, too hackable, to maintain the threshold of expertise required to bypass them. (Witness DeCSS and descendants!)

Not everyone can double-click and magically cause a de-macrovision device to pop up so they can record from one VCR to another. They have to either fork out $$ to buy a device, or be advanced enough with analog devices and time-signals to build one themselves. Macrovision turned out to be an extremely effective form of copy protection. Unfortunately broadcast signals are so full of ads and trimmed to fit the schedules of the networks that there's not much point in using them as an alternative. Broadcast is not on-demand programming.

Now, anyone can rip and re-encode a DVD. Just go to http://www.doom9.net, it's all right there.

You're insane if you expect to come out of this with devices that are clean from the touch of the MPAA. But the fact that you're fighting for that means that the MPAA won't get away with true murder--just a relatively minor assault. The more outfield you go, the further towards your position the compromise will be.