Slashdot Mirror


China Concerned About Internal Copyright Infringers

sfled writes "Audience members at a recent movie preview had ID card numbers stamped on their theater tickets, were videotaped entering the lobby, and had to part with cellphones, watches, lighters, etc. as they passed through a metal detector. Why the big fuss? Because China's movie makers, artists and other creators of intellectual property are finally realizing that China's content-piracy industry doesn't just target imported movies, music, etc. Story at The New York Times, "free" registration, etc..."

250 comments

  1. Obligatory no-registration link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll
    1. Re:Obligatory no-registration link by BRUTICUS · · Score: 1

      If hollywood doesn't want its movies pirated why dont they wait a couple weeks before they ship the movies to asian countries.

      Other than that there is no serious searching for recording devices here in america so can we really expect other countries to do this.

      However, i'm curious if they are searching for entrance on all movies or just the chinese ones.

  2. They need to enforce their laws for both by SexyKellyOsbourne · · Score: 0, Troll

    If China wants to have an actual film, music, and art scene in their country, they should enforce copyright laws for both films foreign and domestic.

    If they only enforce the laws for domestic films, then what is going to stop the average Chinaman from going to pirate an American movie instead? However, if they enforce the laws for American movies while protecting their own, their fledgling media may have a chance of producing an industry that could provide some valuable creative works, given China's historical creativity and inspiration.

    1. Re:They need to enforce their laws for both by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Since when does revenue and piracy have anything to do with an "art" scene?

      Art, with arguably no firm definition, has always been at least an exchange of ideas, and piracy, in fact, helps to further this exchange.

      There is a very very thick line between "artists" and "businessmen". Copyright laws serve businessmen, and frequently enable businessmen to screw over artists.

      Why should China care about protecting art in teh first place, anyway? "All your thoughts are belong to us."

    2. Re:They need to enforce their laws for both by commodoresloat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm not sure why the above is insightful -- what is the link between pirating American movies and stifling Chinese creativity? I'm not sure whether them cracking down on piracy of American movies would have any effect whatsoever on their own "fledgling media."

    3. Re: They need to enforce their laws for both by seanadams.com · · Score: 3, Funny

      If they only enforce the laws for domestic films, then what is going to stop the average Chinaman from going to pirate an American movie instead?

      Dude, Chinaman isn't the proper nomenclature; Asian-American, please.

    4. Re:They need to enforce their laws for both by Shenkerian · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Nothing would stop the "average Chinaman" from pirating an American movie. However, many artistic Chinamen would then have free access to examples of creative works from which to draw their own inspiration, thereby spurring their own creative industry. Once the industry developed sufficiently to become popular internationally, China would then have an incentive to honour other countries' intellectual property rights in exchange for having its own honoured overseas.

      The canonical example of this is of course the United States itself, as original copyright was given specifically to only domestic works. The law changed only when prominent American authors, such as Mark Twain and Noah Webster, complained that their works were being pirated in Britain. This movement didn't rise until after years of American pirating of British works. The penny versions of Dickens didn't draw Americans away from domestic literature, but rather inspired it.

      --
      You tell me how "whilst" differs from "while," and I'll stop calling you a pretentious jackass.
    5. Re: They need to enforce their laws for both by jkfresh · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You are not asian-american if you live in china.

    6. Re: They need to enforce their laws for both by commodoresloat · · Score: 2
      Dude, Chinaman isn't the proper nomenclature; Asian-American, please.

      uhhh yeah... Asian-Americans. From China. That's the ticket.

    7. Re: They need to enforce their laws for both by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 2

      Dude, Chinaman isn't the proper nomenclature; Asian-American, please.

      Insightful?? Must have been moderated by an American.

    8. Re: They need to enforce their laws for both by Panoramix · · Score: 1
      Dude, Chinaman isn't the proper nomenclature; Asian-American, please.
      uhhh yeah... Asian-Americans. From China. That's the ticket.

      Dude, that was a reference from The Big Lebowski. A very, very good movie, if I may say so.

    9. Re:They need to enforce their laws for both by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was going to Moderate your comment Insightful, but then I saw the "All your base..." reference.

      Ugh.

    10. Re:They need to enforce their laws for both by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      To tell the truth. Most american movies are pathetic, propagandistic, patriotic "shit".
      Sure chinese movies are somehow propagandistic too. But they don't force their shit on the rest opf the world like americans do. So, to get straight to the point: I was always happy to realize that a us product sucked when i checked the pirated version. Realizing that after spending 10$ at the box office is on of the worst things i can think of..

    11. Re: They need to enforce their laws for both by jonblaze · · Score: 1

      Walter, this isn't a guy who built the railroads, this is the guy who peed on my rug!

    12. Re:They need to enforce their laws for both by ReaperOfSouls · · Score: 1

      How many operation condors do we need to have before we can claim that china forces their shite on the rest of the world?

      --
      Shameless self promotion : The Misadvetures of the in
    13. Re:They need to enforce their laws for both by Beliskner · · Score: 1, Troll
      If they only enforce the laws for domestic films, then what is going to stop the average Chinaman from going to pirate an American movie instead?
      And who are you to say that, God? Money paid for imported intellectual property is a drain on the Chinese exchequer, in exchange for the Chinese getting what exactly?

      The US military will have to threaten war before the Chinese will even consider protecting foreign films. Remember these people run over students with tanks at Tianeman Square, do you think they give a damn about pirating from some Hollywood Director who'll turn around and tell everyone that Chinese products are inferior and cheap?

      --
      A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?
    14. Re:They need to enforce their laws for both by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh yes, Americans are putting a gun to my head and forcing me to watch their movies. You really should stop smoking crack.

    15. Re:They need to enforce their laws for both by BlackHawk-666 · · Score: 1

      Even artists need to eat. Why should cheap punks be able to enjoy the fruits of the artists labour without contributing something of their own. These artists aren't GPL'ing their work - they expect recompense for it.

      --
      All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
    16. Re:They need to enforce their laws for both by BlackHawk-666 · · Score: 1
      I'd prefer to see work that wasn't "inspired" by American cinema - which IMHO is amoungst the worst in the world. Sure, there are notable exceptions, but the majority of it is pure trash with little redeemable value.

      It is better to be taught by a grand master than another apprentice.

      --
      All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
    17. Re:They need to enforce their laws for both by AvitarX · · Score: 2

      I assume the therory is that if American movies are easy to pirate they will be far more available. If you can buy American blockbuster x for 1 unit of currency. And Chinese fledgeling art movie for 2 or 3 units of currency, since the people seling it nead to recapture the cost of filming (film is not cheap) the American movies will have an advantage. Selling at a loss to crush competition is a prectice that was widly used to allow one company an advantage over another, by only enforcing Chinese copyright they are damaging their distribution penatration relative to US films.
      When the playing ground is fair the US films dominate in the US, and are starting to in Europe (warning: that is personal observation from two trips to Vienna). Eventually they will need to offer the same protections to American movies, but that costs the government more money, and offers no immediate benifit. While protecting the Chinese films helps the locals make more money, which directly benifits the economy.

      P.S. To those who say artists are not business men, I agree. But they are human. With no business side art cannot be more then a hobby. And film would be a hobby for the rich. Even a very very cheap film is 10000 of dollors (think El Mariachi). How you expect the artists to be able to spend that much money for everyone else to make mony selling ten dollor DVD's on ebay, and 2 dollor ones in China is beyond me. But maybe I live in some fantasy world where film is expensive, and artists need to eat, and you guys are grounded in reality.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    18. Re:They need to enforce their laws for both by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "given China's historical creativity and inspiration".

      yeah, where do people like you come from? inspiration? umm, you mean like torture? or do you mean using only one well placed bullet in the skull and then charging the families of the victim for the bullet? (that is sheer brilliance). for all those who have been or will be beaten, tortured, and killed by "China's historical creativity and inspiration" i apologize for this poor misguided sole. oh yeah less i forget, if you ever need a liver you can pick up a cheap "used" one in china thier ramping up on body parts for the pre-holiday rush.

    19. Re: They need to enforce their laws for both by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. They are Chinamen, the same way I am an Americaman and my wife is an Australiawoman.

    20. Re: They need to enforce their laws for both by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was a *joke*, dumbass.

    21. Re:They need to enforce their laws for both by ncc74656 · · Score: 2
      To tell the truth. Most american movies are pathetic, propagandistic, patriotic "shit". Sure chinese movies are somehow propagandistic too. But they don't force their shit on the rest opf the world like americans do.

      HTF did this tripe get modded +2, Insightful? I understand that people's tastes differ, but did someone hold a gun to your head and force you to blow the local equivalent of $8 on Crossroads? Didn't think so...so quit yer bitchin'. How is it our fault that your own film industry can't compete? Produce films that people want to watch and they'll watch. Produce tripe and they'll get them from elsewhere.

      (AFAIK, Crossroads tanked at the box office...and it deserved to do so.)

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
  3. you won't hear me crying by GoatPigSheep · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Untill recently, China has turned a blind eye to rampant piracy in the country. Sure they do some token 'crackdowns' now and then to appease American companies but generally China is a piracy free for all. It's about time they get a taste of their own medicine.

    Billions of dollars have been lost (or should I say stolen) from American companies because of chinese piracy. Considering how badly the economy is doing now, that doesn't make me feel too good.

    --
    GoatPigSheep, the 3 most important food groups
    1. Re:you won't hear me crying by Busty+Amateur · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Billions of dollars have been lost (or should I say stolen) from American companies because of chinese piracy.

      Money which you don't have in the first place canot be lost or stolen.

      The most that happened is that a few CEOs and executives didn't take home a bonus because the revenue for that year was slightly lower.

    2. Re:you won't hear me crying by commodoresloat · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Billions of dollars have been lost (or should I say stolen) from American companies because of chinese piracy. Considering how badly the economy is doing now, that doesn't make me feel too good.

      Yeah I'm sure we'd all be much better off economically if Hollywood billionaires were a few billion dollars richer. In any case, the idea that piracy in China represents "theft of billions" from American companies is pretty ridiculous since it assumes the people who buy pirated videos there would pay much higher prices for the "real thing." Probably a few of them would but I doubt you'd see billions if piracy in China suddenly stopped.

    3. Re:you won't hear me crying by GoatPigSheep · · Score: 0, Troll

      Copying a 20$ DVD is the same as stealing 20$ from the company that made it.

      --
      GoatPigSheep, the 3 most important food groups
    4. Re:you won't hear me crying by Shenkerian · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Copying a 20$ DVD is the same as stealing 20$ from the company that made it.

      Would you lend someone $100 as easily as you would 5 DVD's? You might, but I know many who wouldn't.

      --
      You tell me how "whilst" differs from "while," and I'll stop calling you a pretentious jackass.
    5. Re:you won't hear me crying by Graspee_Leemoor · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      " Copying a 20$ DVD is the same as stealing 20$ from the company that made it."

      No it isn't, trolling fuck-nuts person.

      For a start, if you legally bought the DVD then the company would be out the actual (albeit small) cost of producing the DVD.

      2nd - it's only lost revenue if you would have bought the DVD anyway.

      3rd - depriving of profit is not "stealing"- it's depriving of profit.

      graspee

    6. Re:you won't hear me crying by Mmmrky · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is been covered many, many times before, but:

      1. If I pirate a movie I gain a movie (surprise!). Net change in company's revenue: 0.

      2. I don't buy or pirate movie. I gain no movie, and company gets nothing.

      3. I steal a physical copy (DVD) from company. Net gain for me: 1 movie. Net loss to company: cost of producing said DVD.

      4. I buy the movie. I get a movie. They get my money.

      Pirating (not that I endorse it) only causes a real loss if you would buy it if you couldn't get it illegally.

    7. Re:you won't hear me crying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And it's not even a loss because you can't lose something you never had.

    8. Re:you won't hear me crying by Henry+V+.009 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      3rd - depriving of profit is not "stealing"- it's depriving of profit.

      Points 1 and 2 are right on, but I have to disagree with the above.

      Our society gives authors and creators a sort of 'implied contract'; they create, and we grant them copyright. Sure, no one signs anything, but none of us signed the constitution (which grants copyright authority to Congress) either. There are certain social obligations that everyone is bound to, whether or no they agree. In effect, you (through your legal institutions) have promised copyright, and in return the author has created something. Once the goods have been delivered, you are at least somewhat obligated to fulfill your side of the deal. Breaking this social contract is slightly different than merely depriving a corporation of profit. You can't give the author back their lost effort. On the other hand, I deprive McDonalds of profit every time I drive by their shitty restaurant and thank god that I'm not stopping.

    9. Re:you won't hear me crying by rollingcalf · · Score: 1

      No, point 3 is still correct. Depriving of profit is not the same thing as stealing. However, there are different ways of depriving profit, some of which are ethical and legal, others which are not.

      It is perfectly legal and ethical to deprive McDonalds of profit by deciding to cook my own food, or even to publish a full page newspaper spread listing the fat and cholesterol content of their burgers. But depriving them by threatening their customers would not be legal. One method is right, one method is wrong, but neither is "stealing".

      --
      ---------
      There is inferior bacteria on the interior of your posterior.
    10. Re:you won't hear me crying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, like who wrote that? Not you I bet. You're pirating lyrics!!

    11. Re:you won't hear me crying by ahfoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No kidding, theft has to be the most abused concept of the latter half of the twentieth century.
      I'ts not just IP either. Think about what we've gone through with welfare. It took forever to get to the point that welfare moved from these welfare stores of the thirties with their dehumanizing proselytizing to food stamps to simple cash payments. Once the stigma was finally being stripped away the rhetoric immediately turned to THIEVERY! Those fucking thieving nigger bitchez is stealing frum our fragile economy. Dear Lordy, them thieving snakes are gonna kill us all!
      Now nevermind that the money that disappeared from a bankruptcy like Enron could have supported hundreds of thousands of crack dependent welfare moms who could have at least been there for at home watching the kids instead of taking some menial position outside the home to gratify the expiatory fantasy of the revenge seeking TV audiance.
      And nevermind the fact that the scandanvian nations are total welfare states. That's not thieving because everything is "fair" there.
      Now we've gone from mothers caring for children as thievery to accessing information as thievery.
      I don't believe the Chinese are sincere about this crackdown on intellectual property because the Chinese intellectual tradition is a tradition based on a surprising degree of anonymity in authorship. One can argue that this is a product of political expediency, but over so many centuries that seems to be a bit of a stretch. Moreover, many truly proud Chinese authors have historically denied their authorship because they felt it was the honorable thing to take a humble position with regards to their authorship even when there was abundant evidence attributing their work to them.
      And then there's this thing about the adoption of open hardware cores and the Dragon CPU. That doesn't go well with a new hardline attitude towards intellectual property.

    12. Re:you won't hear me crying by Beliskner · · Score: 2
      Billions of dollars have been lost (or should I say stolen) from American companies because of chinese piracy
      So that Anna Nicole Smith can't get a raise, Micheal Jackson can't get a new Wonderland, Austin Powers can't get $35mil instead of 30mil, and EMI can't pay it's fat bosses $100mil bonus. Yeah

      --
      A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?
    13. Re:you won't hear me crying by BlackHawk-666 · · Score: 1

      It's closer to stealing $1 from the company that made it and preventing all the middle men from getting the rest.

      --
      All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
    14. Re:you won't hear me crying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe the name is Mike Myers, not Austin Powers.

    15. Re:you won't hear me crying by NineNine · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Try that in my store. If somebody steals something saying, "You wouldn't have sold this anyway. So, really, I'm not stealing from you", I'll break their fucking legs.

    16. Re:you won't hear me crying by NineNine · · Score: 2

      Yeah I'm sure we'd all be much better off economically if Hollywood billionaires were a few billion dollars richer.

      That's what's so great about the US. IT's not up to jackasses like you to decide who owns or earns what. If somebody wants to make billions, and do nothing with it other than buy billions of jellybeans, they can. It's none of your goddamned business. I could very easily say that "anyone that's making more than $50K is making more than they need to live on, so they don't deserve it. Let's have the gov't make a law to take it away from them."

      And since you know next to nothing about economics, what do you think that those movie companies do with their money? Hide it under mattresses? It gets spent somehow, so yes that does benefit the economy.

    17. Re:you won't hear me crying by Henry+V+.009 · · Score: 2

      Agreeing to a contract, having the product delivered, and then not paying might be classified as stealing.

      But for the other reasons you mention, I would generally agree with you that it is not stealing. (And in fact, if there is no expectation that you would have paid in the first place--because, say, you are poor--then you can't really say you made the author work under false pretenses either.)

      In the end, there is simply no deprivation taking place, as there is, say, when you steal a car from its rightful owner.

      The legal system should not be applying laws created for the protection of physical goods, therefore, to the protection of intellectual property.

      Unfortunately the English langugage is not so precise, and I'm afraid we'll have to live with the words in common usage. Argh, Matey, I'm off to burn me some CD's.

    18. Re:you won't hear me crying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get down on your knees Like lovers do I will date you tonight I wanna do you We must be dreaming Our bodies under strain We'll be rockin' and rollin' In the leather of seats Just one more night Giving up your soul Just one more time Violent blow Better than love and lovers dreams Gonna make you sweat Gonna make you scream Nothing/blood/love is weaker than water Keep in control We are bound by desire Can we govern your soul Can we govern your soul Can we govern your soul Keep on hunting High and low There will be no more games Better than love and lovers dreams Gonna make you sweat Gonna make you scream Love is weaker than water Keep in control We are bound by desire Can we govern your soul Can we govern your soul Can we govern your soul Love is weaker than water Keep in control We are bound by desire Can we govern your soul Can we govern your soul Can we govern your soul Can we govern your soul Can we govern your soul Can we govern your soul Can we govern your soul

    19. Re:you won't hear me crying by (void*) · · Score: 2

      But the reason why you'd break his legs, is because he tried to turn the argument on its head, making the supplier into the consumer. Not because of anything wrong with the argument, but because the argument was inappropriately applied.

    20. Re:you won't hear me crying by Stonehand · · Score: 2

      It causes other losses, as well.

      (1) There's a substitution effect. A pirated product still costs time, and may sate an appetite; if you could download a somewhat crappy game and spend hours playing it, would you still be likely to buy a different game, or would you be sufficiently content already?

      (2) There are those who claim a "try before you buy" approach, and who end up rarely if ever buying. It's interesting how that happens... while the rest of us conserve money by watching closely for reviews and feedback.

      (3) Widespread infringement contributes to an "economy" in which the overall tendency to buy anything may decrease, because availability shoots up. Witness, for instance, China... most software there is illegal, and because of that it's socially acceptable to be a massive infringer -- your boss is doing it, your friends are doing it, probably the government is doing it. Therefore it's nothing special to rip off the latest product and send it to the CD replicators, and the cycle continues.

      --
      Only the dead have seen the end of war.
    21. Re:you won't hear me crying by That_Dan_Guy · · Score: 1

      You missed one.

      5. Pirate goes into Theater and records the movie. He then packages and reproduces it for sale, and of course sells it. You buy it, pirate makes Money, you gain a movie and originating company/author gains nothing, where he would have normally.

      So do you rack that up as a loss for the company and an actual theft?

    22. Re:you won't hear me crying by Gluteus+Minimus · · Score: 1

      Yes, you may govern my soul.

      --
      My sig's name is Sigmund, but you may call it "Siggy."
    23. Re:you won't hear me crying by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2

      Except they aren't stealing anything. If they came into your store showing you something they got somewhere else cheaper, saying "I never would have bought this at your prices", do you break their legs?

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    24. Re:you won't hear me crying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, of course there is no immediate material loss suffered by the company, but I'm not sure anyone worth conversing with ever thought otherwise.

      The problem however, is in it being that no matter how much you may say, "I wouldn't have bought this anyhow, and so I will just obtain a pirated copy," that you do obtain a copy betrays the fact that you did have some desire to obtain a copy. And in fact, obtaining that pirated copy satisfies this desire just as suffiently as buying it legally would have.

      And so, once you have obtained a pirated copy you give up your ability to in the future fairly evaluate whether or not you would have purchased the product.

      Had your desire not been satisfied for example, you may very well have put in a few extra hours at work, or done away with some other luxury in order to obtain the money to legally satisfy that desire.

      Furthur, even if you do not take either of these actions with a mind to have the money to satisfy this desire, it may just happen that you do shortly thereafter come to have the money that would have legally satisfied that desire. Had you not illegally satisfied this desire, there is every reason to believe that you would now pay the money to legally satisfy it.

    25. Re:you won't hear me crying by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      So it is in fact your assertation that the Chinese are bound by the US Constitution?

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    26. Re:you won't hear me crying by Henry+V+.009 · · Score: 2

      I do not assert that. Hell, I don't even imply it. In fact, the U.S. didn't respect foreign copyright for years.

    27. Re:you won't hear me crying by tsg · · Score: 2

      Copyright infringment is entirely different from property theft. Don't compare the two.

      Nowhere in copyright law does it refer to content as property.

      --
      People's desire to believe they are right is much stronger than their desire to be right.
  4. here's a mirror of the article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Actually, that would be against copyright law... I got this from the New York Times webpage...

    All materials contained on this site are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of The New York Times Company. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.

    However, you may download material from The New York Times on the Web (one machine readable copy and one print copy per page) for your personal, noncommercial use only.

  5. Re:So Why Dont They.... by GoatPigSheep · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Because America has less freedom of speach than China does now.

    --
    GoatPigSheep, the 3 most important food groups
  6. Information wants to be free!! by Moridineas · · Score: 2


    I'm not serious. I view this as a good step--piracy in Asia is a terrible problem, software, movies, and more. I know that personally a number of movies I've seen downloaded from the net have Chinese subscripts. Enforcing intellectual property rights for the artists (be they producers, directors, actors, programmers, etc) can only be a good thing.

    1. Re:Information wants to be free!! by commodoresloat · · Score: 4, Interesting
      I know that personally a number of movies I've seen downloaded from the net have Chinese subscripts

      Why are the loudest voices against "piracy" so often also the most shameless of pirates themselves? If you think piracy is so bad, here's the place to start: don't do it! A much better solution than supporting more laws that affect us all. It reminds me of drug addicts who support tougher drug laws in order to control their own behavior.

    2. Re:Information wants to be free!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Y H B T

    3. Re:Information wants to be free!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the subtitles are put in by the movie producers you fuckwit tithead.

      kthxbye~!

      Yours Sincerely,
      The Big Bad Troll.

    4. Re:Information wants to be free!! by Moridineas · · Score: 2

      I didn't say that *I* had been the one downloading them...if you're at college it's pretty much impossible to NOT see people watching pirated stuff on the net. I buy my CD's and DVD's (and software for that matter).

  7. Google Link by wmspringer · · Score: 1

    Couldn't find a cache, so here's a Google "translation" from Portuguese..

    No Password Required

  8. Still a token move by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Cracking down on the Entertainment industry where it is already heavily controlled and regulated to give an advantage to domestic product is one thing...

    But they could much more easily walk into all the larger corporations in China (foreign or domestic owned) ask to see their current corporate license for Windows or any other major enteprise software, count the actual number of desktops (or employees using computers)and let the floggings, fines and hangings begin.

  9. here's a circumvention device by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just hold this up to the original article and read it backwards.

  10. Google no reg required linkage by Zeddicus_Z · · Score: 4, Informative

    Google Partner Link

    I swear, it takes all of 60 seconds effort - why can't submitters/editors include the Google partner link as well as the reg-required one!

    --
    Janie took my gun...
    1. Re:Google no reg required linkage by jericho4.0 · · Score: 2
      Cause /. isn't google, and /. needs neither google nor NYTimes breathing down their necks.

      Of course, seeing as how Google news links to alot of /. stories, maybe something could be worked out.

      Or, you can just get the damn account at NYT. It's quick, and it's a quality site.

      Oh yeah..... piracy bad, good for China. See, I am OT.

      --
      "A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming, is not worth knowing" - Alan Perlis
    2. Re:Google no reg required linkage by MisterFancypants · · Score: 1
      I swear, it takes all of 60 seconds effort - why can't submitters/editors include the Google partner link as well as the reg-required one!

      Because, fair or not, Slashdot would very likely be sued if they included the partner links in the editor-sanctioned posts.

    3. Re:Google no reg required linkage by fmaxwell · · Score: 2

      Or, you can just get the damn account at NYT. It's quick, and it's a quality site.

      Many Slashdot users do not do that because the accounts allow the NYTimes (and hence Herr Ashcroft) to more easily track the viewing habits of users. Also, I believe that the registration process asks for information that some people are hesitant to supply. While I have registered to use the site, I certainly respect those who do not trust the NYTimes to protect their privacy and anonymity.

    4. Re:Google no reg required linkage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is this post moderated (+5, Informative) when this post with pretty much identical content was moderated (-1, Troll)?

    5. Re:Google no reg required linkage by Evil+Adrian · · Score: 1

      Well then, they can't use NY Times, plain and simple. That's the beauty of the agreement, if they don't like it, they can look elsewhere.

      And if they try to circumvent it, well, there's yet another case of people trying to be dishonest.

      --
      evil adrian
    6. Re:Google no reg required linkage by fmaxwell · · Score: 2

      Well then, they can't use NY Times, plain and simple.

      Actually, they can. There is at least one web site that creates an account automatically with fictitious information.

      And if they try to circumvent it, well, there's yet another case of people trying to be dishonest.

      If someone has not agreed to the NY Times terms, how is it being dishonest? In order for it to be "dishonest", they would have to agree to the terms and then go back on their agreement.

    7. Re:Google no reg required linkage by BlackHawk-666 · · Score: 1
      Aw, for fuck sake, is it really so horrible to fill in some details - you can even put dummy info into the ones you don't want to provide for real. The company is providing a quality news service to you *for free*.

      The cookies can only track your use of that site, which they can do through your IP anyway if they wanted to. Besides, what do you think they are going to do? Analyse your reading habits, find out you use slashdot and are therefore some sort of communist, then make you turn in your library card?

      --
      All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
    8. Re:Google no reg required linkage by SN74S181 · · Score: 1

      Ah yes, the New York Times, one of Americas biggest bastions of liberalism, one of the papers that goes at Ashcrofts and Bushs throat whenever the opportunity arises, is going to help Ashcroft 'crush your cherisied right to privacy.'

      Hahahaha! Tell another one!

    9. Re:Google no reg required linkage by Fastolfe · · Score: 1

      Like this?

    10. Re:Google no reg required linkage by the+gnat · · Score: 2

      So, it's obvious you're full of shit anyway, but if you'd actually read the NY Times instead of bashing it on Slashdot you'd understand that the last thing they have in mind is providing Mr. Ashcroft with information on its readership. They'd probably speak out very loudly against such a practice, in fact. People who don't trust the NYTimes can go read some other news source that doesn't ask for their personal information, and shut the fuck up.

    11. Re:Google no reg required linkage by Evil+Adrian · · Score: 1

      If you haven't agreed to their terms, then you shouldn't be using the site. If they stipulate that you are to register some personal information with them in exchange for using the site, and you falsify information, you are lying. That is just plain unethical. Not to mention, probably illegal.

      --
      evil adrian
  11. This will be great. by fmaxwell · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Now the average, urban, Chinese person (who has a yearly income of about $800) can stop buying cheap pirated movies and can, instead, spend a week's wages to buy a commercial video. That is, provided he/she was not planning to squander that money on food, clothing, or shelter.

    Those living in rural areas, where the per-capita income is about 1/3 that will just have to sell a family member into slavery if they really want that video.

    Maybe before whining about the evil Chinese pirating videos and software, you should consider what their incomes are compared to ours.

    1. Re:This will be great. by Gordonjcp · · Score: 2

      Every time something like this comes up some ignorant USian says something like "The yearly income is $x, why would they spend $x/10 for a $item?"

      Why can't you understand that just because you can convert the arithmetic value of a year's wages in China to US Dollars, it doesn't actually mean that it has the same *monetary* value? There's this thing called "cost of living", you see. It turns out that for the most part, barring extremes of wealth and poverty, everything consts *proportionally* the same wherever you are in the world. By your argument, buying a chocolate bar in China would cost about the same as buying a DVD in the US. Clearly, this is nonsense.

    2. Re:This will be great. by wd123 · · Score: 2

      Why can't you understand that just because you can convert the arithmetic value of a year's wages in China to US Dollars, it doesn't actually mean that it has the same *monetary* value?

      Okay, but can you prove that companies like the MPAA/et al actually scale their prices for China? I'd be damn surprised if they did.

      --
      "question = (to) ? be : !be;" --Shakespeare
    3. Re:This will be great. by mumblestheclown · · Score: 2


      Okay, but can you prove that companies like the MPAA/et al actually scale their prices for China? I'd be damn surprised if they did


      The irony is that people also complain about DVD region-izing, which is supposed to, at least in theory, enable greater price discrimination. Maybe not to allow chinese farmers to watch "eight legged freaks", but at least in some less extreme situations.


      You can't have it both ways, people.

    4. Re:This will be great. by sheldon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Movies are a luxury item.

      You make it sound as though they are a life necessity more important than food, clothing or shelter.

    5. Re:This will be great. by fmaxwell · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Movies are a luxury item.

      And, as we all know, only rich people deserve "luxury" items. Poor people in second and third world countries should just eek out a pitiful, impoverished existence, devoid of even the simple pleasure of seeing a movie. How dare they want more than that from life?

      You make it sound as though they are a life necessity more important than food, clothing or shelter.

      That's the point: They are not more important so the people of China, by and large, will be deprived of them if piracy is substantially eliminated.

    6. Re:This will be great. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
      One (major) point about incomes: it is all relative.

      That is, a Chinese person might not make 6k per month,
      but he does not spend 1.2k for rent either. Nor
      does he spend $500 per month for food.


      I remember when I was living in a third-word country
      many years ago where the starting salary was $20 per month
      for the locals. In comparison, my 5-bedroom appartment
      in perhaps the most afluent part of the city was
      $5 dollars per month, complete with a gatekeeper,
      marble floors, etc,. (but the can of imported Coke was .80 cents, that is the equivalent of $40 dollars per can for an American to purchase a Coke at 7-11 in the USA.)


      It is very foolish to say the the $800 per year for the
      Chinese is little money. What counts is his his puchasing power.

    7. Re:This will be great. by fmaxwell · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Every time something like this comes up some ignorant USian says something like "The yearly income is $x, why would they spend $x/10 for a $item?"

      When a U.S. firm exports a video tape or DVD to China, they expect to be paid in U.S. dollars by the importer. They don't give a rat's ass about the cost of living in China. Do you think that MGM will sell a $20 DVD for 44 in China (because China's per-capita income is 1/45th of that in the U.S.)? Do you think that Microsoft will sell them Windows XP upgrades for $4 (US retail of $180 divided by 45)? Do you honestly believe that U.S. firms will sell below their costs?

      By your argument, buying a chocolate bar in China would cost about the same as buying a DVD in the US.

      As a percentage of income? Probably so if it's a Hershey's or Nestle's chocolate bar. That's why they manufacture their own chocolate bars, paying the going wages in China rather than paying for chocolate bars produced by U.S. workers.

      You cannot spend $50 to produce a product in the U.S. (where it sells for $100) and then sell it for $2.22 in China to make up for the per-capita income difference.

      P.S. Don't call me "ignorant." As shown above, I am both more knowledgeable and more intelligent than you are.

    8. Re:This will be great. by fmaxwell · · Score: 2

      It is very foolish to say the the $800 per year for the Chinese is little money. What counts is his his puchasing power.

      His purchasing power is only good for Chinese goods. He has very little purchasing power when it comes to goods manufactured in the U.S. -- like the MGM videos and Adobe software packates (for example) that are pirated there.

    9. Re:This will be great. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      P.S. Don't call me "ignorant." As shown above, I am both more knowledgeable and more intelligent than you are.

      Waah! Waah! Mommy mommy idiot slashdotters are ruining my internet!

      Pfft.. anyone with UID > 249000 is an idiot.

    10. Re:This will be great. by Asprin · · Score: 2


      Why can't you understand that just because you can convert the arithmetic value of a year's wages in China to US Dollars, it doesn't actually mean that it has the same *monetary* value? There's this thing called "cost of living", you see. It turns out that for the most part, barring extremes of wealth and poverty, everything consts *proportionally* the same wherever you are in the world. By your argument, buying a chocolate bar in China would cost about the same as buying a DVD in the US. Clearly, this is nonsense.

      Which is why economists spend time trying to come up with stuff like this.

      --
      "Lawyers are for sucks."
      - Doug McKenzie
    11. Re:This will be great. by Cyclops · · Score: 4, Funny

      P.S. Don't call me "ignorant." As shown above, I am both more knowledgeable and more intelligent than you are.

      No one can easily question your intelligence, but your humanity is quite at a doubpt with such a post.

    12. Re:This will be great. by parasite · · Score: 1, Interesting


      Why don't YOU get a clue ? Yes they're poor -- damn poor, there is no doubt about that.
      So how in the hell, exactly, would you please tell me, does that mean they have a
      God-granted "right" to high-quality entertainment -- namely American movies ?
      I can't afford very MANY American movies myself -- I'd like to watch a few more,
      but those pricey theaters *tsk* *tsk*, should the US government be helping me out
      of this pitiful situation ? Are my human rights being violated because I give
      precedence to other more important purchases ? (Namely net access and music ?)

      Is this a matter of life and death ? Should the UN be holding emergency meetings
      trying to convince the free countries of the world to unite for the cause of offering
      VCD relief funds to the peasants of rural China ? Or maybe the US government should
      offer to send in the troups to construct huge free theaters all around China ?

      (And to put a bit of perspective on how idiotic your rant is,
      I am in fact sitting IN CHINA right now, agonizing about the fact that my girlfriend
      works 8 hours a day -- for about $3 US for the ENTIRE day. I just got back from the
      local Wal-mart-esque store where I spent the equivalent of two days of her salary to
      get conditioner and soap.)

      Why don't you try rephrasing it, substitute your identical concept with different
      objects... say designer clothing and inner-city black wel-fare children. Just think
      if a 15 yr old boy couldn't get his FUBU jeans to be trendy with all his "brothas",
      *oh the tragedy* and he was forced to sell his 12 year old sister into prostitution ?

      So in conclusion, before you complain about people who thing intellectual property
      ought to be respected PERIOD, consider that if the people who created HADN'T it
      wouldn't exist -- and as such they have a right to sell it for ANY price they want,
      and to whomever they choose.

    13. Re:This will be great. by NineNine · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So, in all of your wisdom (he), why exactly is a lack of resources a license to steal? Or is it instead the every person on the planet has an inalienable right to watch any movie any time one wants to without regard to cost?

    14. Re:This will be great. by SN74S181 · · Score: 1

      Sure they can have it both ways. There's a fresh new crop of idealist Freshmen coming along each fall. All these 'radicals' have to do is convince 10% of them to 'fight the man' and they've got a 'movement for freedom' to justfy their lack of a life and reinforce their paranoia that 'the conspiracy' is for real.

      Plus a pool of young idealistic freshmen women to ball. Yeah, I've been there. I know how 'radicals' operate.

    15. Re:This will be great. by SN74S181 · · Score: 0, Troll


      And, as we all know, only rich people deserve "luxury" items. Poor people in second and third world countries should just eek out a pitiful, impoverished existence, devoid of even the simple pleasure of seeing a movie. How dare they want more than that from life?


      No, actually, poor people should just die and become the fertilizer used to grow the corn fed to the unhappy cow whose skin is made into the rawhide chew that rich ladie's little pink poodle.

      (fuggin' 'tardboy. quit seeing the world through your shaded class-warfare glasses)

    16. Re:This will be great. by fmaxwell · · Score: 2

      Pfft.. anyone with UID > 249000 is an idiot.

      And what does that make people who, like you, are too stupid to even create a UID for themselves.

    17. Re:This will be great. by fmaxwell · · Score: 2

      No one can easily question your intelligence, but your humanity is quite at a doubpt with such a post.

      Yes, I'm an inhuman monster because I think that we should consider the plight of people who can't afford the things that we enjoy. I'm inhuman for pointing out that people in China are trying to eek out a living and that we should cut them some slack when they trade in pirated movies and software that they otherwise could not afford.

    18. Re:This will be great. by dalutong · · Score: 2

      um... i think the regionization was to make sure that Chinese DVDs weren't then pirated and sold here... (because we wouldn't be able to buy them -- and the chinese would have no incentive to pirate western DVDs because their main market, the Chinese, wouldn't be able to watch them)

      --

      What comes first, finding a teacher or becoming a student?
    19. Re:This will be great. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe before whining about the evil Chinese pirating videos and software, you should consider what their incomes are compared to ours.

      Since the tech meltdown, let's see their $2.00 per day versus my $0.00.

      What's the name of that pirate movie site again?

    20. Re:This will be great. by Stonehand · · Score: 2

      ...and the point of that is differential pricing.

      You charge more in wealthier regions, and less in others, and rely on the region system to prevent people in wealthier regions from importing cheaper copies.

      --
      Only the dead have seen the end of war.
    21. Re:This will be great. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then you can become a burnt out cynic and bitch about how everybody else is so wrong and you know it all now that you've "grown up".

    22. Re:This will be great. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need a vacation, pal. Seriously. Leave town for awhile and come back with a fresh perspective before you knife someone on the street for looking at you the wrong way.

    23. Re:This will be great. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, that moron would have (accidentally) made a darkly funny post, and I would have respected it.

      As it is, he added the bit in brackets, basically saying "Any intelligence in the above post whether express or implied, is pureley coincedental and should not be taken as any indication of intellect."

    24. Re:This will be great. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, I'm an inhuman monster because I think that we should consider the plight of people who can't afford the things that we enjoy. I'm inhuman for pointing out that people in China are trying to eek out a living and that we should cut them some slack when they trade in pirated movies and software that they otherwise could not afford.

      Why do you portrait yourself as the victim here, just because someone states a different opinion? Why do you automatically assume that everyone is against you, acting all defensively and vitctimize yourself?

      I think you should really think about that.

    25. Re:This will be great. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      P.S. Don't call me "ignorant." As shown above, I am both more knowledgeable and more intelligent than you are.

      1) "Knowledgeable" persons tend to think they "know it all", and is not open to fresh perspectives. I think you degrade your abilities of reason to boast about that.

      2) Intelligence is not the end-all. I respect compassion and empathy lots more, because that is what can really solve problems. Wars and holocausts have been created by too much thinking - "intelligence".

      3) What if someone calls you ignorant? If there is no truth in that, then you don't have to defend yourself; you already know you aren't. By defending you lend out credibility and your own integrity.

      Btw, I respect ignorant persons that are wise, because they are both open and knowledgeable. They never claim they know it all - or better, yet people come to THEM to listen.

    26. Re:This will be great. by fmaxwell · · Score: 2

      Why do you portrait yourself as the victim here, just because someone states a different opinion?

      They did not simply state a different opinion. They called into question my very humanity. Reread what they wrote:

      your humanity is quite at a doubt with such a post.

    27. Re:This will be great. by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2

      The irony is that people also complain about DVD region-izing, which is supposed to, at least in theory, enable greater price discrimination. Maybe not to allow chinese farmers to watch "eight legged freaks", but at least in some less extreme situations.

      Price discrimination is not there so that people who can't afford the DVDs can buy it. The reason it is there is so that those who can afford to pay even more can be forced to do so. This is exactly what Nintendo was trying to do, and they got bitch-slapped for it. They were certainly making a profit off of their sales in the U.K. What they wanted to do was protect their even greater profits in Germany et al. It's not about being able to sell products for cheaper, it's about maximizing profit in each region -- and enforcing artificial barriers to trade to enforce this.

      Show me the region in which the MPAA/RIAA are selling their products for a loss, and I'll believe you have a point.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    28. Re:This will be great. by thales · · Score: 1, Troll
      Hot Damn!!!


      Now I don't have to dream about having that fully restored 1967 Cobra 427 roadster I can't afford.


      I can just go out and steal it because people "deserve" a luxary item and are "entittled" to take it if they can't afford it.


      Do you have any luxary items that I "deserve" and are now have the "right" to steal?

      --
      Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est
    29. Re:This will be great. by God!+Awful · · Score: 1


      When a U.S. firm exports a video tape or DVD to China, they expect to be paid in U.S. dollars by the importer. They don't give a rat's ass about the cost of living in China. Do you think that MGM will sell a $20 DVD for 44 in China (because China's per-capita income is 1/45th of that in the U.S.)? Do you think that Microsoft will sell them Windows XP upgrades for $4 (US retail of $180 divided by 45)? Do you honestly believe that U.S. firms will sell below their costs?

      Actually, companies do sell products for different prices in different markets, as long as they have some confidence that the cheap versions won't find their way back to the rich countries. In fact, that's part of the rationale behind region encoding in DVDs. Of course this fact is pretty much lost on the /. crowd, who can hardly suppress their righteous indignation over the fact that that cheap DVD they bought in Burundi doesn't work in the US. Even Canada has special CD releases, which are adjusted for the low exchange rate. Alas, globalization is working against us, and Internet shopping is now forcing many Canadians to pay US prices for commercial goods. Thanks, globalization.

      -a

    30. Re:This will be great. by SN74S181 · · Score: 1

      Naw. I just grew up.

      One of the stages of growing up is discovering you do NOT know it all. The leaflets you passed out were rash and proposed simplistic solutions. Etc. etc.

    31. Re:This will be great. by sheldon · · Score: 2

      "And, as we all know, only rich people deserve "luxury" items. "

      Deserve?

      Nay, can afford.

      "Poor people in second and third world countries should just eek out a pitiful, impoverished existence, devoid of even the simple pleasure of seeing a movie. How dare they want more than that from life?"

      No, they should seek to improve their lot so that they can afford to buy luxury items. As such rather than wasting time viewing movies, they should instead work another job or train to get a better job.

      "That's the point: They are not more important so the people of China, by and large, will be deprived of them if piracy is substantially eliminated."

      But you can't be deprived of a luxury item, since it is not something that you need to exist.

      Your argument begins and ends with false assumptions.

    32. Re:This will be great. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interesting.. your username is 'parasite', and you are spending your girlfriend's hard-earned (*two* days wages!) money on soap and conditioner for yourself. Why don't you get a damn job yourself?!?!

    33. Re:This will be great. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "But you can't be deprived of a luxury item, since it is not something that you need to exist.
      Your argument begins and ends with false assumptions. "

      Eh? So if you get mugged for your mobile phone, you`ve not been deprived of it? How do you figure that out?

    34. Re:This will be great. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have trouble reading?

  12. Full Article for Non-Registered People by Renderer+of+Evil · · Score: 4, Informative

    November 1, 2002
    The Pinch of Piracy Wakes China Up on Copyright Issue
    By JOSEPH KAHN


    SHENZHEN, China, Oct. 30 -- When the members of the preview audience showed up at China's fanciest new movie theater here this week, they were treated to much more than just the first look at Zhang Yimou's big-budget martial-arts film, "Hero."

    Viewers had identity card numbers inscribed on their tickets. They were videotaped as they entered the theater's foyer. They handed over all cellphones, watches, lighters, car keys, necklaces and pens and put them in storage. Before taking their seats, they passed through a metal detector. Then they got a welcoming address.

    "We are showing this preview for your enjoyment tonight," announced Jiang Wei, an executive with the film's Chinese distribution company. "I plead with you to support our industry. Please do not make illegal copies of this film."

    Anyone in China who makes movies, writes books, develops software or sings songs for a living knows that popularity is barely half the challenge; such people must also fight intellectual piracy.

    In a country where more than 90 percent of the movies, music and software are illegal copies sold for a fraction of the original price, Chinese artists have begun to join big foreign interests like Microsoft and AOL Time Warner to protest China's seemingly limitless capacity to make cheap knockoffs.

    The local effort is not going to solve the problem right away. The United States trade representative's office grouped China with Paraguay and Ukraine this spring as among the worst copyright violators in the world.

    Still, the tone has changed. Throughout the 1990's, intellectual property was mainly seen as a trade dispute pitting the wealthy West against the developing East. It's now also a domestic struggle, with local stars complaining that they get little fortune from their own fame.

    "After the release, we often have only three days before the pirate copies hit the market," said Mr. Jiang of New Pictures distributors, which handles Mr. Zhang's movie releases in China. "The industry can't survive that."

    The belt-and-suspenders security procedures during the limited release of "Hero" at New South Country Cinema here, just across the border from Hong Kong, were aimed at protecting what China's film industry hopes will be the biggest martial arts sensation since "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon." The movie, with an all-star cast led by Jet Li, cost $30 million, making it China's most expensive film production to date. Beijing will submit it to the Oscars as a candidate for best foreign-language film. Miramax, a division of Disney, has bought the international rights.

    Security guards heightened the drama at the theater. They ordered people to leave behind jewelry and pens to protect against "needlepoint" digital camcorders, though varying descriptions of how such devices worked sounded more like something Q made for 007 in a James Bond movie than a common pirate's tool. Uniformed policemen roamed the aisles during the film. A few sat in front of the screen and watched the audience with what appeared to be night-vision binoculars.

    The intense scrutiny prompted a few complaints, but also some sympathy.

    "Zhang Yimou is not about to go hungry," said Zhu Dazhong, a 48-year-old Shenzhen retailer who saw the preview. "But if he makes a good movie, people should pay a little money to see it. The quality of the pirate copies stinks anyway."

    China's creative industry has been hit hard by the failure to enforce copyright laws. Artists and their lawyers say piracy has worsened since China joined the World Trade Organization late last year and pledged to meet international standards for protecting intellectual property.

    "The Touch," an action-adventure film, was a recent casualty. At the release of the film in Shanghai in August, Michelle Yeoh, who produced and starred in it, boasted about how bodyguards protected the original film reels. When the show moved from theater to theater, Ms. Yeoh said at the premiere, the reels were to travel separately so pirates who got their hands on one reel could not copy the whole film.

    Nonetheless, DVD copies were available on the black market four days after the nationwide release that month, and ticket sales slid fast.

    A popular folk music group, Yi Ren Zhi Zao, or Made by Yi, had an even shorter run with its latest CD. A pirated disc made from a tape released early hit the market before the authentic version was in stores.

    There are now 41 pirated versions of the album, said Zhou Yaping, who runs the group's production company, based in Beijing. He said many were sold openly in top department stores. The legal CD has a 1.2 percent market share, he said.

    "Our hard work and money were stolen and sold cheap," Mr. Zhou said.

    Foreigners have hardly been spared. Microsoft's latest operating system, Windows XP, was selling for 32 yuan, less than $4, in the back alleys of Beijing's technology district before Microsoft formally released the $180 legal version for the China market earlier this year.

    What is presented as the fifth installment of the Harry Potter series, "Harry Potter and the Leopard Walk Up to Dragon," has already reached Chinese bookstores. Though the cover attributes the book to J. K. Rowling, the British author, her publisher says the official version -- its title and subject matter will be different -- will not be available until next year. The Chinese edition is an inventive fake.

    Altogether, the International Intellectual Property Alliance estimates that Chinese piracy costs foreign companies about $2 billion a year, or roughly a quarter of the total global losses attributed to copyright violations.

    But while Chinese copyright holders probably do not lose as much money, local outrage generates more publicity than foreign pressure. A flurry of domestic lawsuits has attracted regular attention.

    The country's two leading Internet portals, Sohu.com and Sina.com, sued each other, each accusing the other of stealing content. Mr. Zhou, of Yi Ren Zhi Zao, sued Chinese factories for manufacturing the illegal CD's. He won damages of 300,000 yuan, about $36,300, in a Beijing court.

    Even the Buddhist monks of the famed Shaolin Temple have joined the fight. The temple pioneered Shaolin boxing, which evolved into kung fu. It has sought to trademark its name and has flung lawsuits against companies that use Shaolin as a brand, including one maker of canned pork.

    Whether the lawsuits and publicity will slow the piracy remains to be seen.

    The government has sought to demonstrate that it is finally taking the matter seriously. In August, the state-run China Daily tallied the exact number of pirated video and audio discs, 43.45 million, that had been destroyed in a crackdown so far this year.

    But at a huge electronics bazaar in Shenzhen, not far from the movie theater that showed Zhang Yimou's premiere, vendors offered a cornucopia of China's latest releases for about a dollar each. "Together," the latest Chen Kaige film, which hit local movie houses in late September, was for sale in the top-quality DVD-9 format.

    Legitimate DVD movies cost at least five times that much, and few were on sale at the bazaar. First-run movie tickets in China go for 30 to 50 yuan, about $4 to $6, depending on the show and the quality of the cinema.

    "Hero" was not available on the black market -- yet. But Mr. Jiang, of the distribution company, said that despite the extensive security, he was still nervous.

    "I won't be at ease until Nov. 4 or 5," he said. "If they managed to pirate it, it will be out by then for sure."

    1. Re:Full Article for Non-Registered People by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Note to slashdot opponents:

      A link to the above 'comment' should be forwarded to the New York Times. In this way we can eventually be assured that Slashdot gets shut down for pirating content.

      Note to people who repost articles in their entirety:

      Keep up the good work, Sam!

  13. Most pirates aren't Chinese by NewsWatcher · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I was waiting for the inevitable Chinese people don't care about piracy, everything from fake watches to Windows are available in the streets of Hong Kong.
    Does it not seem weird that most people here defend KaZaA et al as an opportunity to distribute material, but point an angry finger when Chinese people make copies of US films?

    Just because they steal with a camera, and you steal with software doesn't make you any less of a pirate.

    So lets get off the anti-Asian rants and show a bit of consistency. Either both are bad, or both are a chance for artists to reach an audience they otherwise would not.
    Of course, IMHO they are both pretty insidious.
    Has the intellectual moral high-ground stopped me downloading? Umm....I best not answer that.

    --
    If the pattern goes 9am, 10am, 11am, why isn't noon 12am?
    1. Re:Most pirates aren't Chinese by Alec+Varezz · · Score: 0

      Most of those crappy screener VCD/SVCD on IRC are straight out of China.
      Or is it India?

    2. Re:Most pirates aren't Chinese by seanadams.com · · Score: 3, Interesting

      So lets get off the anti-Asian rants and show a bit of consistency. Either both are bad, or both are a chance for artists to reach an audience they otherwise would not.


      uh - many different people post on slashdot. Why do you expect a consensus?

    3. Re:Most pirates aren't Chinese by Zemran · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Most of the rips for sale in Asia are from America. That is how they have them so early. The only reason that they are mass produced in China is for the cheap, good quality, labour. Most of these rips are cam jobs with the original captions from the private showing in Hollywood. If the Americans learnt something from this article instead of bleating, then maybe the rip market would be knocked a bit. ...instead they will continue to attack the individual at home that wants a copy for his mate because they are an easy target. ...or is it because it is the person selling the original cam jobs that is making the decisions....

      I must admit that the only thing I have against the rips is that they are such poor quality. I think that the only real way to combat rips is to make the real thing such good value that no one could sell a rip at a competitive price.

      --
      I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
    4. Re:Most pirates aren't Chinese by NewsWatcher · · Score: 1

      I was wanting individuals to show a bit of consistency, not slashdotters en masse.

      --
      If the pattern goes 9am, 10am, 11am, why isn't noon 12am?
    5. Re:Most pirates aren't Chinese by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nah. not china nor india. they came straight out of your ass last night when i hehehe. oh that makes me blush!

      kthxbye~!

      Yours Sincerely,
      The Big Bad Troll.

    6. Re:Most pirates aren't Chinese by psamuels · · Score: 1
      I was wanting individuals to show a bit of consistency, not slashdotters en masse.

      Which individuals are being inconsistent? I want to join in on the public flogging.

      --
      "How can you claim that you are anti-crack, while still writing a window manager?" — Metacity README
    7. Re:Most pirates aren't Chinese by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Karma: STFU (Mostly because nobody cares what you think)

    8. Re:Most pirates aren't Chinese by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I always hoped that some enterprising movie company would release their flicks as divx on cdrws for $0.25 each.

      That would really rock! (Seriously, I'm not being sarcastic, I'm too dumb for that shit.)

    9. Re:Most pirates aren't Chinese by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which individuals are being inconsistent? I want to join in on the public flogging.

      Uhh, I think the dude were referring to ME

    10. Re:Most pirates aren't Chinese by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you're right, considering you aren't even consistent with your tenses.

    11. Re:Most pirates aren't Chinese by cylcyl · · Score: 1

      You are misstating facts to get your point across. I'm not saying that there are no such people that you describe. But I think the majority defend KaZaA because you should be able to distribute content you have rights to.

      Many disagree on the extent of right, but kazaa clearly allows the distribution of material of independent producers who want to. I personally do NOT use KaZaA for any content I can get in the US. I'll do without.

      Doing without is at issue here, do we have a RIGHT to purchase content at a "reasonable" percentage of our income regardless of the cost of production? I don't mean the production of the media, but of the actual content. What if I'm unemployed and have no income, everything should be free? ;-)

  14. No real surprise... by failrate · · Score: 4, Informative

    Yeah... every time I go into any Oriental grocery store, there is always the ubiquitous rack of video tapes with hand-drawn titles in Mandarin or Cantonese, sometimes even Hangul-Ma (but that's Korean, so never mind that). So, if I want to, I can buy pirated copies of mainland Chinese movies for like 3-5 bucks down at the corner grocery where I by my red bean buns and udong. And, I've been able to do this for at least the last three years. And China JUST noticed?

    --
    Voodoo Girl is the bomb!
    1. Re:No real surprise... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And China JUST noticed?

      No. They just realize that they need to protect IP rights. Just like US when the angry Charles Dickens came. After they get a bit better and wealthier, they started to work on this.

    2. Re:No real surprise... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I like your post a lot.

      I especially loved the worthless, irrelevant bit about "Hangul-ma." I tried to take your advice about never minding it, but failed. You see, if you didn't want me to mind it, why didn't you edit it out of (or refrain from editing it into) your post?

      VoodooGirl set up us the bomb!

  15. Well... by tarpit · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Personally, I think it'd be good if China cracked down on its piracy, domestic and foreign. Of course, when it comes to piracy concerning foreign movies (especially American) of course many people'll pull that "Oh what does Hollywood need more money for" shit. Well, it's not really your place to decide that Hollywood shouldn't get money for something it paid to make-- and it doesn't change the fact that it's PIRACY, plain and simple. It's the same piracy that hurts smaller, independant filmmakers who need the money-- the people who really do need the money --and that is the same piracy that needs to be stopped.

    1. Re:Well... by Lochin+Rabbar · · Score: 1

      of course many people'll pull that "Oh what does Hollywood need more money for" shit. Well, it's not really your place to decide that Hollywood shouldn't get money for something it paid to make

      That's your opinion and in a democracy you ought to have the freedom to express it. However, in a democracy it is the right of the people to decide what ever they feel like deciding, and if they decide that Hollywood shouldn't get so much money for something they paid to make that's the way it should be. After all Hollywood's ability to make money depends on the extrodinary legal privilege of copyright, and in a democracy the way to hang on to such priveleges is not to abuse them, because whether you like it or not it is precisely the people's place to make such decisions.

    2. Re:Well... by Beliskner · · Score: 2
      Ahh, classic Game Theory problem.

      Hollywood has two states - 1) maximise revenue, and 2) price according to peoples' tolerance.
      Government has two states - 1) Loose, and 2) Restrict Hollywood

      Does Hollywood co-operate with the peoples' request and risk 2-2 in the next round anyway, or does Hollywood maximise their prices (1-1) and risk the next round becoming a 2-2?

      --
      A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?
    3. Re:Well... by Stonehand · · Score: 2

      Your "expression", however, should come in the form of not obtaining the product, should you choose not to pay for it. Likewise, if you refuse to pay more (or anything), Hollywood has a perfectly valid right to deny you its products and services.

      Neither side may unilaterally force a transaction in a moral system.

      --
      Only the dead have seen the end of war.
    4. Re:Well... by Lochin+Rabbar · · Score: 1

      Let me see now, Hollywood produces a product say a film on DVD and charges a price I am unwilling to pay, so I don't. However I would like to see the film, so I borrow the a copy from a friend called Sam. After watching the film I realise my other friend Joe would probably enjoy the film so I make a copy, return the original to Sam, and give the copy to joe. Note, Hollywood has been nowhere involved since they sold the original to Sam. So, this is alright then?

      Well no it isn't, because of the copyright system. Copyright is a system which prevents some transactions in order to enforce others. In this case if Joe wants to see the film he must either borrow a legal copy or buy a copy from Hollywood.

      Now consider technologies like DRM. Suppose Sam had not bought a DVD but downloaded it from the internet. He does this legally by paying Hollywood a sum of money to gain the right to obtain a copy of the film. He gets a copy of the film but it can only be played back on his computer so he can't lend me a copy. Now if I or Joe want to see the Film we are forced to buy a copy.

      The purpose of copyright is to 'unilaterally force a transaction'. Copyright creates artificial scarcity by creating a monopoly supply of a given work. The artificial scarcity that copyright creates enables institutions like Hollywood to demand prices that are much higher than those the could obtain in a free market. That's fine by me, after all in a free market the price of a product that can be copied approaches zero, and artists are unable to make a living from their work.

      I support the idea that artists should me able to make a living, art (including films) is important. What I do not support is the notion that the people that the people who control the artificial monopolies crated by copyright laws should be able to abuse the legal privelege they are given in order to gather excessive wealth. When they do abuse this privelege it is our right to withdraw it.

  16. Hmmm what ever happened to Communism? by ReaperOfSouls · · Score: 1

    Last I heard, China was a communist country?!? Did that suddenly change? I would think that as a good communist, it is your duty, no moral imperitive to make movies availible for for public consumption...These black market vendors are only doing, what the producers of the movie should have done in the first place...
    Yeah so they are making a little money on the side, thats just capitolism right? I thought that was a good thing...From the sound of it, I would think that the American government would want to support the black market vendors duplicating chinese produced films since it only helps propogate capitolism and consumerism... :-)

    --
    Shameless self promotion : The Misadvetures of the in
    1. Re:Hmmm what ever happened to Communism? by failrate · · Score: 1

      Communism is dead, baby. I asked a Chinese Lady if she had ever read Mao's book. No, daddy, she said, nobody reads that book anymore. It's Squaresville.

      --
      Voodoo Girl is the bomb!
    2. Re:Hmmm what ever happened to Communism? by dracocat · · Score: 1

      Not really. China has not been a communist country for a while now. You might ask why they still have the communist symbols on their flags and call themselves a People's Republic. Good question. But they definately are not communist.

    3. Re:Hmmm what ever happened to Communism? by George+Walker+Bush · · Score: 1

      There's a difference here between economical and political systems. China, increasingly since the eraly 1980s, has been a capitalist market-driven economy in many areas, no different than the US. At the same time, China still has a Communist government and a socialist political system.

      --
      George W. Bush
      President, United States of America
    4. Re:Hmmm what ever happened to Communism? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, they are socialist. Read their Constitution

    5. Re:Hmmm what ever happened to Communism? by FooBarWidget · · Score: 2

      They haven't been communist for a long time now. Their economy is a mix between capitalism and communism. There are both private corporations and government communist corporations.

      I've been telling this for quite a while now, yet nobody believes and instead post excuses like "that one is so old". Well, there's *yet another proof* that what I've been telling is true.

    6. Re:Hmmm what ever happened to Communism? by psamuels · · Score: 1
      Last I heard, China was a communist country?!? Did that suddenly change?

      No, not suddenly, but yes, it changed. China is largely a market economy these days.

      According to a friend of mine who has been there, China still has some of the socialist mindset - within their capitalist companies. Apparently a lot of industrialists have built companies practically the size of city-states, which wholly own such things as day care, education, entertainment, etc., for the employees and their families. That is, socialism stepped down a notch from the government to the corporation. My friend has a lot of respect for this approach, due to one of his pet theories: the usefulness of socialism is inversely proportional to the implementation unit size. (I.e. socialism presents a lot of problems for a national government, but is pretty much required for a nuclear family.)

      Now, as far as political freedoms, they are still well behind the curve.

      [Says the guy who is neither a Chinaman nor an Asian-American....]

      --
      "How can you claim that you are anti-crack, while still writing a window manager?" — Metacity README
    7. Re:Hmmm what ever happened to Communism? by Stonehand · · Score: 3, Informative

      Suddenly? No. The change came quite some time ago, under Deng Xiaoping, who was pragmatic enough to declare that "It is glorious to be rich" and that "It doesn't matter whether the cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice". In other words, prosperity was the objective moreso than maintaining a clearly nonfunctional ideology.

      So, since then, they've basically been a vaguely capitalist single-party dictatorship; there are some socialist traces left like state-owned companies, but they've been edging away from them as well as the guaranteed-employment model.

      --
      Only the dead have seen the end of war.
    8. Re:Hmmm what ever happened to Communism? by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 2

      They haven't been communist for a long time now. Their economy is a mix between capitalism and communism. There are both private corporations and government communist corporations

      Depends on what you mean. There are two common meanings for "communism"; a system of government, and an economic arrangement. They are of course intertwined. Communist apologists benefit from the confusion.

      China is a brutal dictatorship. It is not a democracy. Government owns many companies, and can crush the rest at a whim. It can and does "nationalize" companies that it didn't own before, when it wants to.

      That's nice that they allow more private ownership and enterprise now. It would be nicer if there was a political structure and a culture that would prevent that from being swept away at a whim (or selectively crushed if one person or company "gets out of line").

  17. You sure that's China? by Guppy06 · · Score: 2

    Sounds like the average Regal Cinema in five years to me...

  18. piracy is what american propaganda deserves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    except that: chinese ppl are poor and can't waste money for such crap like american movies.. sure chinese movies also dont lack propaganda.. but they dont try to force it on the rest of the world like americans love to do.

    1. Re:piracy is what american propaganda deserves by tarpit · · Score: 1

      The funny thing about American movies is that America actually doesn't really *have* to force it on the world-- the world WANTS American movies. Even islamic countries who HATE America LOVE American movies. You have to remember that the reason American movies go to other countries is because there's a market for them. There's a market for them because people want to see them.

    2. Re:piracy is what american propaganda deserves by ReaperOfSouls · · Score: 1

      How many bad dubs of Jackie chan and Jet Li do we have to suffer though before we can claim chinese movies are forced on the rest of the world?

      --
      Shameless self promotion : The Misadvetures of the in
  19. unexpected behavior by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    figured China didn't have any perception of monetery value towards such things. But since they have expressed concern, I wonder if they'll express it with the usual zeal common for their culture. Chopping off of hands maybe? Whatever form of discipline, it ought to be interesting.

  20. You know... by SlashChick · · Score: 2

    ...there will be a day when the NYTimes webmasters figure out what an HTTP referrer is, and start using that to check exactly where the so-called "Google partner links" are originating.

    Besides, it "takes all of 60 seconds effort" for you to sign up for a NYTimes account. You already signed up for a /. account, so you're not averse to the whole signing-up-for-an-account business.

    Just for the record, I signed up for the NYTimes account (because after all, they are providing quality writing to me for free), and I have yet to receive a single piece of unsolicited email from them.

    I wish people would quit trying to circumvent the signup, and just do it. Free, quality content is becoming a rarity on the web, and I prefer signing up to the alternative -- losing that free content for good.

    1. Re:You know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You sound pretty hot. a/s/l? i read your journal, you're really smart. i wish i could +5 moderation on all my comments. let me ask this question. are you into anal?

    2. Re:You know... by Saeger · · Score: 2, Funny
      The number of people who even use the NYTimes random login generator, or the partner "hack", is probably orders of magnitude less than the number of people who "steal" from the NYTimes by reading a second-hand copy of the real paper delivered to someone elses doorstep.

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    3. Re:You know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      she's probably a fat bitch that needs a weelchair to move around, and its not because she's physical disabled. technically she is, but i think you know what i mean.

      anal? oh baby i bet she is. she anals herself all the time to get rid of the dried up hard-as-cement hammerheads stuck in there so she won't look so fat.

      this my friends, is the atypical stereotypical and definitely, most-apt epitome of the average slashdot idiot.

      kthxbye~!

      Yours Sincerely,
      The Big Bad Troll.

    4. Re:You know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, that's not "stealing" at all. It's called "pass-along readership", and print publications use that to increase what they charge for ad views, above and beyond their normal subscriber-base readership.

      Funny how that doesn't translate into the online version, huh?

  21. Re:So Why Dont They.... by tarpit · · Score: 1

    Oh yeah, a country where you can easily go to almost any bookstore and find a bunch of magazines that are practically dedicated to speaking ill of the US, where you can say things like that and sleep well at night, where you can openly say really whatever you damn well please about the gov't and have really nothing to worry about -- yeah, that's MUCH less free than China.

  22. Actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's China that wants to be free.

  23. Re:Legalize Capital Punishment! by ReaperOfSouls · · Score: 1

    Shhhhh! Don't give the RIAA, MPAA or the representive from Disney any ideas...

    Just what we need Micky Mouse with and electric chair..

    --
    Shameless self promotion : The Misadvetures of the in
  24. Just a preview, probably not standard practice by George+Walker+Bush · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is a movie PREVIEW, and normally security is indeed stricter at such events, just like here in the US.

    Yet, once the movie hits the theaters as a actual release to the masses, forget about "security". Heck, we don't even have such "security" here in the US. And most pirate jobs are inside ones (the guy in the projection booth himself is the one doing the camcorder recording). With the corruption in China, one can only expect such things to be even more prevalent. And once a single copy gets out, that's all it takes.

    --
    George W. Bush
    President, United States of America
    1. Re:Just a preview, probably not standard practice by erroneus · · Score: 2

      Hrm. I guess that was straight from the president. That's his web site such as it is after all. I had no idea he read, let alone writes on Slashdot.

    2. Re:Just a preview, probably not standard practice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have to say, it suprised me, I had no idea he could read, let alone write.

    3. Re:Just a preview, probably not standard practice by dbCooper0 · · Score: 1
      This is off-topic, but I'm too curious not to ask.

      Since my /. ID# is over 50,000 higher than you, and I've been on /. (IIRC) since before Dubya's term or even campaign, did you change your handle?

      If so, how did you do that? I can't find the option in preferences...not that I want to change...like I said, this is curiosity.

      I do concur with the content of your comment. It hits the nail right on the head.

      --
      db
      Cig:
      ôô
      /`
  25. Hypocrisy? by chris+mazuc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It seems that despite almost no support on slashdot of any other intellectual property protection scheme, when it's the Chinese pirating American stuff it's a horrible crime. But when it's Americans pirating anyone else's works, including those by other Americans, it's something that should be protected. Make up your goddamn minds people! I personally think that the United States government has it's collective head up it's ass, but the premise for copyright is very well intentioned: give the producer of a work a temporary monopoly for their contribution to society. Back on topic... when you can honestly say that you support the MPAA, RIAA, and every other four letter organisation ending in AA it'll be fair for you to say that the Chinese pirates are wrong, but for the moment I suspect that most of the people posting about the evils of China are guilty of the same crime they are condemning.

    --
    E pluribus unum
    1. Re:Hypocrisy? by NineNine · · Score: 2

      the premise for copyright is very well intentioned: give the producer of a work a temporary monopoly for their contribution to society.

      Wrong. It's a simple way to reward those who innovate & create, financially. It has nothing to do with society other than if copyright didn't exist, then theft of intellectual creations would run rampant. I sell physical things. It's very easy for me to be compensated. Either you pay for the items you take from me, or I call the cops. Copyrights are just a way for writers, etc. to do the same thing. It has nothing to do with "community".

    2. Re:Hypocrisy? by chazzf · · Score: 1

      You speak as though Slashdot speaks with one voice. It does not. Repeat after me: Slashdot has 600,000 user accounts. Thousands of those post daily. They are all unique individuals. Thank you.

      --
      No statement is true, not even this one.
    3. Re:Hypocrisy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But your wrong. What are schools for? the good of the community. Everything within U.S. borders is regulated for the good of the community.

      if copyright didn't exist, then theft of intellectual creations would run rampant.
      - if copyright didn't exist, using somone else's IP wouln't even be considered theft at all.
      Copyright is getting so drastic anymore, I wonder who's patented breathing, so I can send a royalty check each month for every breath I take.

    4. Re:Hypocrisy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who ever said it was a major crime for Chinese to pirate movies? IMHO it isn't a major crime no matter who is doing it.

      NR

    5. Re:Hypocrisy? by spitzak · · Score: 2

      I didn't know that New York Times writer worked for SlashDot!

    6. Re:Hypocrisy? by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2

      Copyrights are just a way for writers, etc. to do the same thing. It has nothing to do with "community".

      Wrong. The reason copyright exists is for the betterment of the community through artistic works. This is stated explicitly in the Constitution. Copyright is there to provide an incentive for artists to create works that then better the community. The legal protection of their works is the method used to attain the purpose, not the purpose in and of itself. It was not an attempt to make physical property and "intellectual property" equal before the law. The founders understood quite well the difference between physical property and ideas.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    7. Re:Hypocrisy? by cylcyl · · Score: 1

      Piracy and IP protection schemes are two different things, even though they might be related.

      IP protection is evil when it prevents fair use. Fair use covers most non-commercial personal uses. Piracy is using of IP for commercial purposes without permission, stealing from the originator to line your own pocket

  26. Security was not so tight by grainofsand · · Score: 5, Informative

    I attended this screening in Shenzhen and did not notice any of the security measures reported in the article.

    I had to hand over my mobile phone but that was it.

    I didn't see anyone openly vidcaming the movie, but pirate DVD copies of Hero are readily available in Shenzhen, Shanghai and Beijing for about 7 Chinese yuan (US$0.80).

    --
    A dream is good. A plan is better.
    1. Re:Security was not so tight by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 2

      I hope that this sobers up people who claim the idea of intellectual property is 'wrong', and the efforts of the RIAA and MPAA to attack piracy are based on mistaken assumptions that 'file trading' doesn't hurt sales.

      The fact is that we have living examples in countries like China where piracy is unchecked. The results are clear; 90+% of the sales of a title turn out to be rips, and the artists get niothing for their work. Sure, some highly popular titles are going to still recover their costs. But how the hell is a film that targets less than a wide swath of the public going to cover it's production costs? How would something Branaugh's Hamlet EVER be made in a place like China?

      Not only does the piracy cut down on what is available to the Chinese viewer, but the pirated copies that drive out the legitmate copies are low quality, too.

    2. Re:Security was not so tight by antirename · · Score: 2

      They'll sell it in the U.S.

    3. Re:Security was not so tight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      cool,
      dude, can you put it on
      kazaa?

    4. Re:Security was not so tight by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 2

      They'll sell it in the U.S.

      So all Chinese art, literature and film is going to end up being made to appeal to a U.S. audience because that is the only way they can make money?

      The implications and negative effects of that on Chinese society are very easy to imagine.

  27. Such eloquent arrogance :) by Zemran · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think that they think there is a difference between Chinese culture (including their films) and the hollywood pap. When using internal flights in China I have to watch Chinese films (the only time I watch them) and I am often surprised at how good they are. If I were Chinese I would be proud of the Chinese film industry. I would also want to protect it.

    I do not think it is really posible to protect a film as it has to go public at some point or it serves no purpose. At some point the film will get into the hands of the ripper, he will get the first release and have it on sale as quick as the original reaches general release. He normally has Hollywood films before they are released but that is because there are more crooks in Hollywood.

    The Chinese do more to combat the rippers than the Americans do, but there is less respect for IP and more of an attitude of product in China. If Hollywood would sell a good product at a fair price the rippers would be out of business.

    As for the valuable creative works, they are already doing it and they know that soon Hollywood will rip their ideas off just as they have always done in the past. Like with Yojimbo = A Fistfull of Dollars and Seven Samurai = The Magnificent Seven (I know Akira Kurosawa was Japanese but the point is still true). I think the most insulting thing is that Hollywood does not even make good copies of other peoples work.

    --
    I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
    1. Re:Such eloquent arrogance :) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      soon Hollywood will rip their ideas off just as they have always done in the past. Like with Yojimbo = A Fistfull of Dollars

      Nice try, but "A Fistful of Dollars" is not a Hollywood film, or even American film. It is European.

      In fact, most films in the "Western" genre were made by and for Europeans.

      Everyone uses ideas from other peoples' work. Even Akira Kurosawa did.

    2. Re:Such eloquent arrogance :) by muyuubyou · · Score: 1

      If you're talking about chinese films, why don't you give a single chinese example? As you said, those 2 films you mentioned are japanese. The impression I had is you can't name one of those magnificient chinese films you saw (or they can't match Kurosawa's opera).

    3. Re:Such eloquent arrogance :) by Stonehand · · Score: 2

      Try Kaige Chen's "The Emperor and the Assassin" and "Farewell My Concubine", and Timou Zhang's "Raise the Red Lantern".

      --
      Only the dead have seen the end of war.
    4. Re:Such eloquent arrogance :) by TheWickedKingJeremy · · Score: 2

      Everyone uses ideas from other peoples' work. Even Akira Kurosawa did.

      Very true... Ran is based on Shakespeare's King Lear.

      --

      my religion lies somewhere between buddhism and super monkey ball - pamphlet?
  28. Re:My experiences in China - Mod parent down by abimelech · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Hey, you've posted this before.

    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=43066&cid=45 14 674

    And, apparently you think exactly the same of India:

    'http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=42305&cid=4 44 9517

    I personally think that it's 100% off topic, and you've shared your experiances more than people care.

  29. misuse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    just note: usage of the word "art" is questionable in the context of recording _industry_

  30. Fledgeling? by jesterzog · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There are more than a billion people in China. On what basis do you consider the Chinese movie industry "fledgeling"? Is it the fact that you never see any?

    I guess you probably consider the Indian movie industry as fledgeling too, for the same reasons.

    1. Re:Fledgeling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      have you ever seen a real indian movie?
      all they do is sing traditional folk songs and dance around trees playing hide and seek or run around in a big maze made out of hedges and pretend to accidentally walk backwards into each other.

      oh not forgetting the MTVs. the camera will show some indian chap singing some verse and doing some funky hand actions, and then the camera would zoom out then you have a few thousand people in a big field or something singing the same verse and doing the same hand actions in unison.

      oh gawd the horror and the terror.

      indians are nothing but the niggers of the asian continent. same way malays or polynesians are the mexicans of asia. chinese/japanese/taiwanses, are of course, the ever-omnipotent and everpresent superior whites of the asian world.

      kthxbye~!

    2. Re:Fledgeling? by Beliskner · · Score: 2, Troll
      That's because the majority of the Indian viewing public is illiterate, and can only uderstand mindless songs. Joe sixpack in India is a rice farmer who's never been to school and is repressed by his Brahmin ruler.

      The intellectual elite in India is only 10% of the population (90 million) and they learn calculus at the age of 6. They can whip the pants of Einstein at the age of 10, they work harder than the Japanese! That's why there's so many H-1Bs

      The movies that this Indian elite watches are beyond the ability of the majority of Americans to understand.

      This is because the Hindu religion is licensed LGPL and is continuously extended even today, unlike the Bible and Koran which are proprietary and locked by "change one word of the Bible and Satan will consume you" Revelations and "Mohammed is the last prophet, kill whoever modifies even a semicolon in the Koran" various Imams. These caveats caused problems when the Bible and Koran were translated into English.

      --
      A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?
    3. Re:Fledgeling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think he just meant that their movies suck

    4. Re:Fledgeling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's because the majority of the Indian viewing public is illiterate, and can only uderstand mindless songs. Joe sixpack in India is a rice farmer who's never been to school and is repressed by his Brahmin ruler.

      Actually some small wording variations on that would go a long way towards explaining the North American movie industry.

    5. Re:Fledgeling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This, this is insight? How in the world does the fact that the population of China is over a billion have any bearing on whether or not its film industry is 'fledgeling'?

      Besides, most of those billion Chinamen are dirt-poor peasants without consistent access to electrical power, much less the opportunity to go out to the movies.

  31. Geez. by The+Fanta+Menace · · Score: 1

    If this is any indication how how we're going to be treated when seeing films in the future, then count me out.

    Metal detectors in airports I can understand. It's going too far in cinemas.

    --
    -- Even if a god did exist, why the fsck should I worship it?
    1. Re:Geez. by Saxerman · · Score: 2
      >If this is any indication how how we're going to be treated when seeing films in the future, then count me out.
      >Metal detectors in airports I can understand. It's going too far in cinemas.

      But... but... we have to treat you like criminals to protect our property! You can't just *not* buy it! How are we suppose to make any money?!?!

      *grumble*
      If this keeps up we'll have to come up with something that people are actually willing to pay money for.

      --

      A steaming cup of soykaf would be real wiz right now.

  32. In a ....what? by RoC+MasterMind · · Score: 1
    In a country where more than 90 percent of the movies, music and software are illegal copies sold for a fraction of the original price...
    Huh? This makes no sense?!?! This just seems like someone tried to make up fake statistics to fearmonger.
    1. Re:In a ....what? by mumblestheclown · · Score: 3, Informative
      why does this make no sense?

      I lived in and worked in Malaysia for a year. I can tell you that 80%+ of the dvds/vcds/software out there in the field are illegal copies. no question about it.

    2. Re:In a ....what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RoC-whateverthefuckhisnameis is just another typical dumb uninformed american fuck head who knows nothing about what goes on in the rest of the world.

      kthxbye~!

      Yours Sincerely,
      The Big Bad Troll.

  33. I love this one... by SexyKellyOsbourne · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    These stories are truly works of art.

    Mod em' up! Way up!

  34. They thought they were safe... by llama1911 · · Score: 1

    Uniformed policemen roamed the aisles during the film. A few sat in front of the screen and watched the audience with what appeared to be night-vision binoculars.

    Yes, they appeared to be night-vision goggles...

  35. spin by g4dget · · Score: 2
    I'm not condoning copyright infringement, but this story is spin. Just because the same kind of greedy forces that are controlling copyright in the US are starting to get powerful in China doesn't mean that the Chinese are "realizing" anything. And the totalitarian methods of the Chinese state make this even uglier than the web of corporate and political power in the US.

    Both China and the US should find copyright and fair use rules that benefit the people as a whole. Both countries, however, seem to choose copyright rules and laws that mostly benefit a few powerful minorities.

    1. Re:spin by NineNine · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Wrong. Copyrights benefit the creators of the movie/music, etc. If somebody doesn't want to altruistically create something to "benefit the people as a whole", that's their right. If they want to sell their ceration, that's their right. As soon as you start removing copyright, you're essentuially stealing from those creators, which will cause them to completely and totally stop creating. Read Atlas Shrugged. You'll get a good idea of what'll happen when the gov't says, "your intellectual property is no longer yours... it belongs to "the people".

    2. Re:spin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Chinese don't all of a sudden care about protecting copyright in their country, and I really don't care if American IP is 'Pirated' in China, their a sovereign nation and can do whatever they see fit, the U.S. constition does not cover them. The orig article makes it sound like China is turning over a new leaf, hardly, it was written for those of us in the States as more propaganda about piracy. Quite frankly, Hollywood has been pandering to a Least Common Denom international audience for a long time now so that their films can be aired everywhere in creation to maximise profit, which has really destroyed anything American about their factory generated 'product'. When have you recently seen an American movie that really took a stand about anything? All the bitching about american brainwashing(in movies) is kinda true, it's not a political brainwashing with a set agenda, it's more of a dumbing down brainwashing, placate the international masses. While we're in the pirating spirit, let's 'pirate' chinese stuff - fair enuff right, it's better than Disney getting their grubby paws on it an putting a crappy soundtrack over the orig and dubbing it poorly

  36. Re:Google Link - from Russian! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    here, try this instead since you don't want some crummy translation. Russian, my friend, a far finer language (just joking! but it doesn't sound as funny as a google translation of Portuguese)

  37. Re:So Why Dont They.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yeah, I can even burn my freaking flag too if I want to! oh wait - that's a crime? and did you know that you're assumed guilty before proven innocent every time you get a speeding ticket? then there's this little "Patriot" Act and the DMCA which prevents freedom of speech for many people. But i guess those don't count, do they? wake up and smell the coffee dude. America stinks.

  38. Re:So Why Dont They.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    fuck you. yes why don't they all fuck you. just you and you alone. i mean really really fuck you. just so they can fuck you. after they fuck you, they'll fuck you again and again. after which, they'll fuck you just to prove to you that they can fuck you. fuck you ok?

    kthxbye~

  39. Re:So Why Dont They.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    i think this post with all the "Fuck You's" is more redundant than the following (which was modded down as redundant"


    Re:So Why Dont They.... (Score:-1, Redundant)
    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 02, @02:41AM (#4582965)
    do what they say, say what they mean? One thing leads to another.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]


    -AC

  40. Re:So Why Dont They.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i think you are so much more fucked than he who just got fucked. so why don't they......

    fuck you. oh yes fuck you. like a fuckable fuck thing. fuck you all day long, all through the night and fuck you when its rainin'!!

    oh baby. why don't they fuck you. fuck you oh yes! fuck you like the fuck you always wanted to be. fuck fuck fuck. all the fucks in the world! fuck fuck fuck. hey baby did you ever know? yes fuck fuck fuck oh yea. fuck you just cos i can fuck you baby yesyesyes!

    kthxbye~!

    Yours Sincerely,
    The Big Bad Troll.

  41. this is about the movie, really by ruebarb · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is really about the movie, Hero. Producers are taking special advantage of all these special precautions cause this is supposed to be the biggest export since "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon"

    You will see it here in the US, and it'll make a lot of money here. This isn't for the average HK flick yet, or bad Chinese cinema...this is like a sneak preview of "The Two Towers. the US cinema showing special previews months early would probably take the same precautions...

    --

    ----------
    ah honey, we're all resplendent - Bill Mallonee
  42. In other news... by riflemann · · Score: 1

    Microsoft concerned about misleading EULAs

    Bush administration concerned about freedoms being lost

    RIAA concerned about consumers losing fair-use rights

    Slashdot editors concerned about editorial integrity.

  43. Oh, please spare us all this one... by El+Camino+SS · · Score: 2

    IMHO what I hear from the original poster is this:

    "*Sigh* Poor Chinese, their Gov't has been holding down them for so long, and stealing all the resources and time to develop from the people for their big socialism goals, it totally justifies that they steal from someone else. *Sigh* Steal away China, we're behind you! We understand!"

    IF you lived in depression era US quality wages, and someone in the 1930s showed up with a DVD player, what would you do? Well, you sure couldn't buy it. Tough stuff. Open up your economy, and pretty soon you can.

    This is a chicken and egg problem. Because the Chinese Gov't decides to control the economy with a tight fist, well, that means that the Chinese populace gets screwed. Getting screwed also means NO CHEAP DVDs.
    You should take that shit up with China and their fucked up economy, and not blame the rest of the world for letting their people make their own choices. Certainly blaming the free market system and saying that Chinese people are justified in stealing is saying that a)Capitalism sucks, and b)that Socialism is good, and c) stealing is an "unfortunate immoral yet justified" (LOL) act to help 'ol Socialism along. Kinda like taking it back for the people from the oppressive movie makers. What a crock. China is probably the safest country in the world to visit, and yet they have these heinous double standards when it gets in the way of the big Socialism Macarena.

    Now before some Socialist nutty from Northern Europe or wherever starts ranting about the "USians" (which is their way of trying to make US Citizens an ethnic slur), let me say this. YES, the USA has double standards too. I don't support them either, so you don't really need to call me an a-hole, and assume that I am a cowboy with an assault rifle. I am an American that would like the see the Chinese people live better... and that is that.

    1. Re:Oh, please spare us all this one... by dalutong · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm not going to say you support one side or another. But I can tell you one thing -- China economy, under the Communist regime, has had double digit economic growth rates for a decade. We haven't had that. Not even with our boom in the late 90s.

      The Chinese government has been good to the majority of the people. That's why, if you go to China and research this, they are happy with their government. They remember what it was like under the US sponsored Guomingdang. To put it frankly: it sucked.

      True Capitalism doesn't work in a country with 1.3 billion people. In fact, I fear for Chinese economy right now. Over the past ten years or so they have been pushing towards privitization. This has caused the great economic boom, but it has also caused the Chinese of the rural areas to be neglected by the ones in the urban areas. (Which happened less when it was the communist government running all the factories and developing all the businesses.)

      So, no, opening up the economy won't help all chinese people. It may help the movie-going urban population... but that's leaving out 900 million rural inhabitants. Allow them to move into cities? It's happening right now, and it is disasterous. The Chinese government doesn't admit it, but it has millions of people in Beijing, Shanghai,Guangzhou, Chongqing, Chengdu, Xi'an, Tianjin, and other large cities who have moved from the country side and are job-less looking for work. (They they'll not find because 1) the government no longer promises jobs for everyone -- part of opening up 2) the Chinese businesses care more for profit than for social welfare -- another cause of opening up and 3) urban economies, when unregulated, can not grow at the pace that they would need to to employ everyone in China. (or even 50 percent))

      So... you can argue that the economy needs to be opened up... but if you look at it economically (as opposed to your view of "right."), "opening up" the economy, entirely, will do nothing but hurt the Chinese people.

      --

      What comes first, finding a teacher or becoming a student?
    2. Re:Oh, please spare us all this one... by the+gnat · · Score: 2

      But I can tell you one thing -- China economy, under the Communist regime, has had double digit economic growth rates for a decade. We haven't had that. Not even with our boom in the late 90s.

      Under the communist regime, on the order of 50 million people died due to economic policies that were stupid from the beginning and due to repression on a scale we can't imagine. Much of the supposed economic growth was actually a sham- steel production was vastly inflated by (literally) household industry, but the product was so poor that it was useless. Only massive subsidies and price-fixing kept the illusion of industrial growth going, while many impoverished Chinese died from food shortages. America's mixed economy may grow slowly, but it's stable at least. The past decade is largely China recovering from 40 years of criminal mismanagement.

    3. Re:Oh, please spare us all this one... by crawling_chaos · · Score: 2
      China economy, under the Communist regime, has had double digit economic growth rates for a decade.

      No. China's officially reported economic numbers show double digit growth. They won't let independent economists look at the data, so we really have no idea what the growth rate was, except that it was probably positive.

      Do not believe anything released by the PRC government. They have a more interesting relationship with the truth than either Slick Willie or Dumbya, and that's saying something.

      --
      You can only drink 30 or 40 glasses of beer a day, no matter how rich you are.
      -- Colonel Adolphus Busch
    4. Re:Oh, please spare us all this one... by dalutong · · Score: 2

      I lived in China for most of that decade. I saw the growth. If you leave one region for more than a year, it is a different place the next time you see it. It's amazing. I've never seen anything like it.

      --

      What comes first, finding a teacher or becoming a student?
    5. Re:Oh, please spare us all this one... by crawling_chaos · · Score: 2
      Anecdotal evidence is not worthwhile. Until the PRC lets independent economists look at their economy, instead of locking them in cells for "stealing state secrets," there's absolutely no reason to believe them.

      Hell, we're still awaiting real figures on the death toll from the Great Leap Backward.

      --
      You can only drink 30 or 40 glasses of beer a day, no matter how rich you are.
      -- Colonel Adolphus Busch
    6. Re:Oh, please spare us all this one... by cylcyl · · Score: 1

      You gotta be kidding! Comrade "Continent", it is not the "communist" regime that is causing the double digit growth, it's the capitalitic economic policy.

      The current regime is "communist" in name only, it is more totalitarian than anything else. When it was communist, there was the "great leap forward" and "cultural revolution" which raped China of its industrial capability, culture, and trust in people.

      You seem to be under the impression that China is under operation of true capitalism. NOT TRUE! Capitalism / private enterprise is only allowed in the special economic region. This is the only part of China really growing.

      The economy was totally failing under the communist / socialist economy. Deng realised this and took bold steps to address this and it is working great.

      You are right about there being massive problems outside the economic regions. But communist economic policies have definitely failed.

    7. Re:Oh, please spare us all this one... by dalutong · · Score: 2

      I never said they didn't fail.. i was just replying to the guy before me. and i didn't say they were communist. i said they were "communist."

      --

      What comes first, finding a teacher or becoming a student?
    8. Re:Oh, please spare us all this one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, let's send in Arthur Anderson, I'm sure that they're trustworthy.

  44. This is an outrage. by user+no.+590291 · · Score: 1
    And remember--this sort of "content protection" is exactly what the intellectual "property" industry would be doing right here at home, if they wouldn't have its collective head handed to them for trying it.

    The DMCA was just the first toe in the water, the CBDTPA is the next.

  45. The US didn't enforce laws for both... by TheConfusedOne · · Score: 2

    Back when the US's publishing industry was getting started they "seeded" the market by blatantly taking copyrighted works from England and selling them without paying any royalties. Charles Dickens used to complain about it bitterly.

    The US industry used the revenue from this to jump start their own literature industry. As that grew and the US had more literature to export then they became more concerned about fully enforcing copyright laws.

    Seems kind of strange that we can't seem to allow other countries to grow the same way we did.

    --
    --- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
  46. oh goodie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Send those pirates to where they belong, the gulag! Or better yet, don't even bother with a trial and jury, just march them to the wall and blow them away! Yeah!!!

  47. Re:My experiences in China - Mod parent down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He's posted this many more times than three times now. Why come up with new material when the old stuff is so hard to find, and the creative limitations of his mind keep him from coming up with anything interesting any more?

    He waits for stories about china so that he can post this all over again. If that last bit of his post was true, he would've died from an std by now. Not racist - but 3rd world whores, like karma whores, are filthy.

  48. Isn't that called "fraud"? by yerricde · · Score: 2

    is it really so horrible to fill in some details - you can even put dummy info into the ones you don't want to provide for real.

    The NYT Terms of Service document is a contract. Misrepresenting your information is fraud, a felony in all fifty U.S. states.

    Besides, what do you think they are going to do? Analyse your reading habits

    In theory, a publisher could exploit a loophole in its privacy policy and, when you read an article about a medical issue, notify the insurance companies. Now, when you research information about say AIDS, your insurance rates go up.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  49. Politeness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why is this post moderated (+5, Informative) when this post with pretty much identical content was moderated (-1, Troll)?

    More polite comments will be moderated up. Tip 1: Do not use any of George Carlin's seven favorite words.

  50. Piracy??? by sebmol · · Score: 1

    I don't know if it is just me or has the meaning of piracy been changed in the past decade? I always thought it was meant stealing in terms of robbery, i.e. taking *away* something that doesn't belong to you.

    But it's that taking away part that I fail to see when it comes to movies or software. If I, purely for the sake of discussion, download a movie from the internet, how is that stealing if, at the end, the owner still has the original?

    Or if I were to tape a movie off a screen, how can that constitute theft if (a) the movie is still in the possession of the owner, and (b) my copy is of a significantly less quality to the original.
    So maybe instead of talking about piracy, we should rather start talking about unauthorized copying, which begs a totally different question: what right does the owner of software or a movie have to tell me what I can or can't copy. Last time I checked, the only one who can tell me anything are law enforcement officials acting out the law of the land. EULA's in and by themselves can't and shouldn't be able restrict my behavior after the act of purchase.
    It is time that we start waking up and realizing that we as a civilization would not be where we are now had we not copied other people's invention. Imagine somebody had patented paper hundreds of years ago and charged horrendous license fees to produce paper. It is highly arguable that such a copyright could never have been in the public interest.
    It's funny how so many people, especially in the US, are so adamant about freedom of choice and capitalism as an economic system. Where are those people when it comes to preserving our rights to choose what we want to do with a product after we bought it? Where have the ideals of fair competition gone if copyright terms get extended to a point where a perpetual copyright is becoming a reality?
    Patents are by their very nature monopolistic. They go against everything that is considered "holy" in a capitalist economy. The original founders of copyright laws knew that very well. But they considered the increased incentive to invent an acceptable trade-off for monopolistic behavior, *as long* as the monopoly is limited in time. Without the latter part, we might just as well say capitalism in the movie and software industry good bye.

    --
    "Light is faster than sound." - "Is that why people tend to look bright until you hear them speak?"
    1. Re:Piracy??? by Stonehand · · Score: 2

      Believe it or not, rarity does matter for perception of value. For a trivial example, got a girlfriend? Would she be happy if she went to a party and found out that two other people wore the same exact dress as she did? Would she treasure a diamond as much, if the De Beers cartel's stranglehold on supply were shattered and the world was flooded in diamonds?

      More seriously... Would you pay the same for a print of Van Gogh's "Sunflowers #Foo" as you would for the original? Most people would not, I'd wager.

      Would the original go for immense amounts of money, if Van Gogh had instead worked with silk-screen, and cranked out thousands, Franklin-Mint style?

      Would you pay ANYTHING for a print, if you could get it for free online? Quite a few people would not -- at least that's what we learn from Napster, et al.

      Face it. Quantity and availability affect effective price. The more copies there are, and the easier it is to get them, the less perceived value something has.

      --
      Only the dead have seen the end of war.
    2. Re:Piracy??? by spitzak · · Score: 2
      I don't understand your arguments!

      The original, and low number prints, and initial print runs, are often valued for lots more, even if thousands of prints are made. And I can go to the Getty and buy a postcard-sized VanGogh Sunflowers for 75 cents and for some reason that does not make the original worth less. I can even color-xerox that card for almost nothing, and I'm sure I can download an nice Sunflowers image from the net, yet somehow the original is worth a lot.

      The difference with movies and music is that money is made from viewing the copies. I'm sure the original negative of that Chinese movie is worth a lot, but the pirate copies greately cut into the method used to generate income from the ownership of that original copy.

      Perhaps a solution is to somehow make music and movies work like prints of art. Artists don't seem to be too worried that people can color-xerox or scan their work, and don't seem to be trying to make these devices illegal. Art pirates are only attacked when they try to make money by selling copies, they don't try to prosecute people using the office color xerox to make garage sale flyers.

    3. Re:Piracy??? by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But it's that taking away part that I fail to see when it comes to movies or software. If I, purely for the sake of discussion, download a movie from the internet, how is that stealing if, at the end, the owner still has the original?

      Very simple. By doing so you are depriving the owner of income. That income is often required for the inventor to recover the investment he made in the production of the original of what you have copied. A movie these days can cost up to $100 million to produce. A new drug can cost $1 billion to bring to market. Who is going to invest that if they cannot recover their costs? By obtaining that illegal copy you are not only stealing that income from the author of the original, but you are also depriving us of future works by reducing the economic incentive to produce new inventions.

      It is time that we start waking up and realizing that we as a civilization would not be where we are now had we not copied other people's invention.

      And what if nobody had produced that invention in the first place? Would you have anything to copy?

      The purpose of intellectual property law is to give added incentive to inventors and authors to produce new works. In the case of patent law there is the additional covenant which requires the inventor to fully disclose his invention in exchange for the patent grant.

      In the grand scheme of technological progress a 20 year bar on copying an invention is insignifiact. The invention isn't going away; it will be available for copying.

      In the late 1600's England realized the benefits of the social contrat of the Patent and Copyright, and made it law. The results were fabulous - man had not materially changed the way he lived since the development of agriculture. At that time the number of books that were available numbered in the thousands. Now the number is in the 100's of millions. The availability of this knowledge is due both to the copyright (encouragement of authors) and to the inventors who devised the hot metal Linotype machine, the web fed printing press and the Fourdriner paper making machine (all patented), advancing the old technology of papermaking that was essentially unchanged in the 5000 year period between the invention of paper by the Chinese and the invention of the patent in England.

      Patents are by their very nature monopolistic. They go against everything that is considered "holy" in a capitalist economy.

      And exactly how is that? Monopolies are a very natural outcome of a capitalistic society. This country has had a long tradition of monopolies including Standard Oil, Microsoft, etc.

      The fact is that patents have a net effect of DECREASING monopolies because they put a specific time on the exclusive right of the inventor. The alternative to not having a patent system is to go back to the pre patent ways of doing things, that is protecting the technology with trade secret and licensing agreements. Trade secrets have NO period of duration. This is why some companies choose not to patent some inventions; for example the formula for Coca-Cola was never patented.

      EULA's in and by themselves can't and shouldn't be able restrict my behavior after the act of purchase.

      You are REALLY showing your ignorance here. EULAs are a CONTRACT between you and the software vendor. If we as a society decide that we are going to abandon contract law, pretty much all commerce becomes impossible.

      Imagine somebody had patented paper hundreds of years ago and charged horrendous license fees to produce paper. It is highly arguable that such a copyright could never have been in the public interest.

      FYI, A patent and a copyright are very different things, the first process of paper making was developed thousands, not hundreds of years ago, and the fact is that processes for making paper have been patented many times over the past 400 years with no apperent ill-effects.

  51. Say, George by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's talk. I'm tired.

    Bygones?

    --
    Osama

  52. New film projection format by zero0w · · Score: 1

    I have learned a while ago that there are new technologies in the making which would embed a specific frequency in the movie projector on the screen, which would not be distinguishable by human eyes, but would render those video cameras a flickering image which made this type of preview pirating impossible. I think this might be a way to solve things out, at least for a while. As for the film reels, I guess security has greater concern. Maybe they should have hidden cameras put inside the film reels to bust out the pirates in case of breaching.

  53. The TRUTH about America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm really not surprised by this. Those conniving Americans -- they turn a blind eye to piracy of foreign content (even the government and military-owned factories are in on it), but zealously crack down on their domestic stuff. Just another example of their double standard and hypocricy that pervades the entire society. I'm a German businessman in the import- export business, so as you might guess, my frequent travels take me to many places around the world, on every continent. Anyhow, I wanted to share my experience in the "great" country of America, in the very part described by the article.

    So, I was in Chicago last December for about a week on business. A bit of background: Chicago, like New York and a few other places, is a "Special Economic Zone" that the American government set up to try and give foreigners the illusion that America really ISN'T a drab, decaying fascist state that's economically languishing behind the rest of the world. Here, rules are relaxed and capitalism is encouraged, not surppressed. Well, let me tell you this, if this is America's best, then I'd hate to see the worst.

    Anyways, when I stepped off the train from New York (which was no paradise itself, as that place has gone down the shitter since the Dutch left) I was shocked. The whole place smelled like a combination of vomit and dog shit that had been left out in the sun for a day or so. And it was probably BECAUSE there was vomit and dog shit all over. I almost retched, and I've certainly been in some sketchy places in my travels but NOTHING like this.

    People spit everywhere. Trash litters the streets. I found myself looking DOWNWARD much more than looking FORWARD when I walked.

    Noise pollution is endemic. It doesn't help that their infernal language consists of abrupt rapid fire tones that is a cacophony for any human ear to bear. How do they speak and listen to that shit without going crazy all day long is beyond me.

    Anyways, Americans stink -- literally. There is no concept of personal hygiene whatsoever. Meetings with even top officials were hourlong sessions of having to endure hot sweaty bodies and rancid breath eminating from mouths missing a few teeth. Geez, at least use deodorant for crying out loud.

    The hypocrisy, corruption, and double-standards from the highest levels of government on over are the norm at the same time America opens up to the world. Foreigners get charged as much as five times for transportation, lodging, food, and everything else.

    Traffic is horrible. Rules are non-existent except for at traffic lights: red means to go fast, green means to go REALLY REALLY fast.

    The American people themselve are pretty apathetic and everyone just wants to get out of that hell hole, so you see smuggling rings shipping people out hidden in truck beds and ships, all too often with tragic results.

    The whole country, in my assessment is a lost case. Even the cheap labor can be found in Southeast Asia or Mexico. Same goes for pirated stuff -- SE Asia and Eastern Europe will keep on churning them out.

    Anyways, the one redeeming quality were the girls. I paid $12 (about 12 Euros) for a great fuck, with a 16 year old who seemed quite new and "unblemished" if you get my drift. Boy, was she tight, made all the right noises, sucked and fucked all night long and let me cum all over her. Much better than even the vaunted Dutch whores, and worlds apart from anything in Berlin or in France. Best bargain I have EVER found in my life!

    So yeah, screw the hell hole that's America. It's a lost cause of a country suspsended by a hollow facade of so-called new capitalism that's just show more than anything.

  54. "cost of living" -- a myth by Jonathan · · Score: 2

    Why can't you understand that just because you can convert the arithmetic value of a year's wages in China to US Dollars, it doesn't actually mean that it has the same *monetary* value? There's this thing called "cost of living", you see. It turns out that for the most part, barring extremes of wealth and poverty, everything consts *proportionally* the same wherever you are in the world.

    I have never lived in China, but as an American living in Canada I am quite familar with buying imported American goods. Logically, if this mythical adjustment for "cost of living" really exists, when I buy a book, movie, or CD from America, it should cost just the same in Canadian dollars as it does in American dollars. But it doesn't! It costs 1.5x as much because Canadian dollars are worth less than American dollars. This is of course one of the reasons why there are many more Canadians in American than Americans in Canada.

  55. two words "B" "S" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone think China actually believes what propaganda they spew needs to buy some swampland in Flordia.

  56. Who wants to watch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who wants to watch crappy Chinese movies anyway?

    Who would pirate them. This is just another example of MPAA propoganda.

    "Movie IP makes so much sense, that the Chinese are even trying to protect it. Just watch, that communist Stalin, I mean Stallman will soon be copyrighting his works, just so he can enforce his IP. Mark my words, he will copyright his works, and then you will see."
    - Anonymous MPAA insider

  57. Then I am a slave by Convergence · · Score: 2

    When another person can control what I do with my own equipment, with my own computers, can control what I write on the paper I *buy*. When they can say that a particular labor I may wish to do is illegal, then I am a slave.

    Copyright is an infringment on my human rights. Copyright is a monopoly. Copyright is censorship. Copyright makes me into a slave.

    How could anyone who likes Atlas Shrugged not see this stark fact?

    Such a horrible evil could only be accepted if the benefits were worth the horror. Once, I would have said 'yes'. Now, my answer is slowly changing. The current copyright censorship&control regime is detestable.

    Let Rearden make his metal, but the moment he discloses its recipe publically, by what right shall he gain the ability to say to me 'thou shaln't use this recipee'?

    Let Ayn write her book, but the moment she distributes it publically.. How can she claim that she has lost any rights to control what I do with it. Unless the default state of humanity is control and slave, she never had any ability to control me in the first place.

    1. Re:Then I am a slave by elflord · · Score: 2
      Copyright is an infringment on my human rights. Copyright is a monopoly. Copyright is censorship. Copyright makes me into a slave.

      No it's not. It's analogous to entering into a contract with the creator of the work. Simply put, the creator should be able to enter into a consensual agreement with a buyer. Is your precious Rand against consensual contractual agreements ? Is it not true that you are free to choose not to subject yourself to copyrights you find disagreeable, by not acquiring the copyrighted work in the first place ?

  58. don't just mod them up.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    put them on the p2p networks so everyone can enjoy them!!

  59. ADDITIONAL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    in addition to my above [parent] post...

    I just got some mod points while posting so I've slapped him with a Troll -1!

    Talk about timing!

  60. cultural participation by MenTaLguY · · Score: 2

    With the destruction of traditional culture, movies and other media more or less required if you want to participate culturally these days.

    I don't think it's a good thing at all, but that's the way things have shaken out.

    --

    DNA just wants to be free...
  61. Maybe they needed it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I mean really, WHAT the fuck are they teaching in school these days?

    Teacher always said "look both ways before you cross the Square..."

  62. Per capita by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Before you wander off on generalizations, consider than a Chinese in the market for a pirated DVD already has a DVD player and a TV! These are not poor peasants. Pirates steal because they can, not deperate economic need.

  63. Last Post! by alpg · · Score: 1

    BOFH excuse #216:

    What office are you in? Oh, that one. Did you know that your building was built over the universities first nuclear research site? And wow, are'nt you the lucky one, your office is right over where the core is buried!

    - this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...