Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

MPAA Blames BitTorrent for Star Wars Distribution

Posted by timothy on from the what-do-you-burn-apart-from-witches? dept.

AI Playground writes "Slyck News reports on the MPAA's press release (.doc) blaming the BitTorrent protocol for the leak of Episode III. MPAA President and CEO Dan Glickman: 'There is no better example of how theft dims the magic of the movies for everyone than this report today regarding BitTorrent providing users with illegal copies of Revenge of the Sith. The unfortunate fact is this type of theft happens on a regular basis on peer to peer networks all over the world.'"

41 of 1,196 comments (clear)

  1. And this is news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Look, most people I know who have the ability to download the movie chose not to. They want to see it on a big screen, with big sound, with other fans.

    1. Re:And this is news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I, for one, watch only stolen movies. It makes me feel cool, like if I had a big penis.

      Of course, BitTorrent is responsible. The author of this un-American software should be arrested immediately and pay a fine of 400 million to the starving author of Star Wars.

    2. Re:And this is news? by bman08 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I believe it was BitTorrent on the Grassy Knoll. BitTorrent also touched those boys at Michael Jackson's pad. This is like blaming Boeing for destroying the World Trade Center.

    3. Re:And this is news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      BitTorrent is (one of many) file transfer mechanisms that spareds distribution cost evenly over content consumers, instead of dumping it all on the content producer.

      And that's all it is. Nothing magic, evil, or anything.

      The only reason the MPAA doesn't like it is because it happens to be prohibitively expensive for someone who isn't making money off of it to distribute lots of content in the old days. The MPAA makes lots of money from licensing their content, so they don't care if it's expensive for a content producer to distribute data. P2P simply happens to reduce cost to content producers (good for individuals who can produce worthwhile content, like open source authors or Red vs Blue artists) below the point where individuals without scads of money can infringe on copyrights held on very large files like movies.

      The attacks the MPAA is making against P2P are attacks against inexpensive content distribution, and all those that rely on it and those that benefit from it.

    4. Re:And this is news? by Seraphim_72 · · Score: 5, Funny

      You forgot that BitTorrent hides alien contact in Area 51, and that it also stole WMD's from Iraq just as we were going in. Also, it made me sterile just by watching a downloaded movie.

      Sera

      --
      Slashdot, where armchair scientists get shouted down and armchair theologians get modded up.
    5. Re:And this is news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Where is this Bit Torrent person and when is he handing out free movies again?

      Also I heard that the RIAA is suing FTP for the lack luster sales of Ashlee Simpson's CD.

    6. Re:And this is news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm sure its not BitTorrents fault. Its Intels fault. If there were no computers there would be no piracy...

      Actually its probably the MPAAs fault, if there were no movies there'd be no piracy...

    7. Re:And this is news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Every time you use BitTorrent, God kills a kitten.

    8. Re:And this is news? by et764 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Except in this case the press release is directed specifically at BitTorrent for facilitating the distribution of Episode III. They are not attacking piracy, but blaming BitTorrent for it.

  2. they need to be stopped by timmarhy · · Score: 5, Informative

    from making misleading claims like this. it's already been ruled that copyright infringement is NOT theft

    --
    If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    1. Re:they need to be stopped by Scrameustache · · Score: 5, Insightful

      clearly ethically wrong, that is pirating movies

      The MPAA is in no position to give me, or anyone else, ethics lessons.

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    2. Re:they need to be stopped by Henry+V+.009 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Ethically wrong? Illegal, certainly. In many places. For the distributor usually, not the distributee.

      But we're well beyond a universal system of ethics aren't we? I can imagine a number of arguments that could be used to by people who have no ethical problem with copyright infringement.

      For one, copyright is a contract between the government and authors on their people's behalf. Since it's made without the individual's say-so, he might not consider himself bound by it.

      For another, copyright has only existed for a few centuries. The great ethical minds of the past never had a problem with appropriating the intellectual property of others.

      Another argument that could be used is that modern copyright terms have been manipulated by big business into lengths of time that violate their intended purpose. Therefore the law is unjust and should be disobeyed.

      Another argument could be that copyright itself is a bad idea that stifles creation. In music, for example, the case could be made the copyright has killed live performance. Therefore the law is wrong and just be disobeyed.

      So on and so forth.

      I can imagine arguments in the other direction as well. But the point is that there is no universal morality on the subject.

    3. Re:they need to be stopped by rpdillon · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Granted, but that is not really the point of the article. The release specifically says that Bit Torrent has provided the pirated movies.

      This is obviously wrong and misleading. It is akin to saying the axe murdered the person, or it was the car that hit the guy in the crosswalk. That is simply not the case: it is the PEOPLE behind the tools that make the decision about how to use them.

      This rampant demonization of peer to peer software is absurd. The fact that we have to have a case go to the supreme court to decide whether or not peer to peer software should be legal is absurd. They have to decide in the HIGHEST COURT of the land whether or not people who own computers can share data between the computers?

      Again, we (as a society) love to blame the tools, rather than take personal responsibility for our actions. I, for one, grow tired of it.

    4. Re:they need to be stopped by skasingularity · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Clearly unethical? Like stem cell research is clearly unethical? Or more like homosexuality is clearly unethical?

      There are people who would tell you eating pork is clearly unethical. You say the grandparent poster is splitting hairs, I say you're being too general.

  3. Copyright by kdark1701 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'd start taking him seriously if they used proper terminology. It is copyright infringment, not theft.

  4. Once again... by Geekenstein · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A case of blaming the highway for the high speed chase. Nothing new here...move alone.

    1. Re:Once again... by Dysfnctnl85 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      EXACTLY!

      BitTorrent maybe the catalyst but it's certainly not the reason the movie got leaked...how about the person who actually ACQUIRED the film in the first place?

      Good lord!

    2. Re:Once again... by nacturation · · Score: 5, Funny

      Plus, it's not BitTorrent's fault that the movie was released. The fault of the release is due to TCP/IP itself! I think we should lobby the government to ban the TCP/IP protocol, which makes all copyright infringement possible.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
  5. The only thing by William-Ely · · Score: 5, Funny

    that dimmed the magic of this movie was George Lucas.

    --
    Mod me down with all of your hatred, and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
  6. Tragic by MattW · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's a shame that this has happened, and that Star Wars Ep. III is hardly taking in any money as a result.

  7. I blame.. by SocialEngineer · · Score: 5, Funny

    I blame internet. Lets sue Al Gore!

    --
    "Better to be vulgar than non-existent" -Bev Henson
  8. Tinfoil hat time! Did the MPAA leak it purposely? by GuyMannDude · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's interesting to note that the copy making rounds on the p2p networks is a workprint and not a cam-copy, suggesting an inside job. Given that everyone knew how high-profile ROTS was going to be, it doesn't seem too improbable that the MPAA purposely leaked the print just so they could make a big deal about it. I mean, ROTS is pretty much review-proof and p2p-proof; anyone who was interested in the film was going to the theater to see it anyhow. So there really wouldn't be a big loss by leaking this copy and it gives them a perfect opportunity to bang on the drum again. If ever they were going to leak a blockbuster, ROTS would be the one to do it for.

    GMD

    --
    watch this
  9. Magic of Movies by futurekill · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think the $10 price of a ticket is starting to dim the "Magic" of movies more than bootlegs...

    --
    The gates in my computer are AND, OR and NOT; they are not Bill.
  10. many thanks for telling me where to get it by Gunstick · · Score: 5, Funny


    Thanks to the MPAA announcing the availibility of Episode III on bittorrent, I know now which client to start and search for it. Great service.

    Georges

    --
    Atari rules... ermm... ruled.
  11. You, sir, are most correct! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Revenge of the Sith only had a record $50 million opening day. This is a travesty! I will personally donate my yearly salary of $40,000 to George Lucas to help keep him from starving.

    1. Re:You, sir, are most correct! by muszek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      1. With 40k salary, $100 is still important. On the dark side: Lukas shits money (not sure if it's correct English), $xM is less for him then $50 for me.

      2. I don't recall anybody but my friends/family worrying after I got robbed/stolen from (it happened few times... even after I got kicked multiple times in the head they told me to wait patiently at the hospital for several hours before any doctor spoke to me). Why in the world would we give a shit about people that aren't even "neutral strangers", but people we honestly dislike (MPAA)? I didn't go outdoors to find that guy and smash his head. And that's exactly what MPAA and other fatties are doing. Here's one recent example. They do a lot of nasty things, which are immoral to people that are far less strict than I am. 3. Stealing $100 from me means I'm losing $100. Downloading illegal movies means they are not getting extra $xx. Little difference, but still, a difference.

      4. I personally believe that it's morally worse (yes, I'm a relativist) to be a fat guy that chases little ones than to be a little guy and steal intellectual property from fat guys.

    2. Re:You, sir, are most correct! by Atryn · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Ahhh, it's all relative then. So you wouldn't care if some homeless guy ripped you off for a hundred bucks or so. Got it.
      No, you are completely missing the point. It has nothing to do with relativity. It has to do with a complete misunderstanding of the impact of this technology on the market. Did Ep III land on BitTorrent? Yes. Did that impact it's first day sales? No.

      If anything, the excitement around the movie was probably heightened by early reviews that came out from folks who had seen it illegally. I know I was in a theater auditorium live on a MUD (on my Blackberry, yes I'm a geek) and someone said they had already seen it 12 hours ago but were going again that day. They had also already encouraged others to go see it.

      Hollywood seems to believe that everyone is out to rob them. The truth is that when a movie is good, folks WANT to see it on the big screen and folks WANT to reward Hollywood for a job well done.

      Where BitTorrent might have an impact would be on a BAD movie -- and that is what I think Hollywood is really worried about. Did you see the backlash against cell phones and SMS after The Hulk came out? It's dissapointing start was largely blamed on early messages floating around telling folks how bad it was, causing them to cancel plans to see it.

      I, for one, think Hollywood should embrace technology more. I have a 1-year old child, and seeing the midnight debut of Ep III was a MAJOR hassle. Had they provided me with a legal way to see it in high quality, I would gladly have paid more than a theater price for the convenience.
      --
      Come play Moral Decay!
  12. Funny, it doesn't work for me by Pac · · Score: 5, Funny

    When I heard about this BitTorrent program delivering non-released movies, new top-40 albums and great warez software I (being cheap and lazy) immediatelly downloaded, installed and opened it. Then I waited for the goods to start pouring into my disk. So far nothing has happened. Does anyone knows what I am doing wrong?

  13. Terminology is chosen to generate emotions by GuyMannDude · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You're splitting hairs to justify doing something that is clearly ethically wrong, that is pirating movies, music, and software.

    It's more than splitting hairs. Piracy is not a synonym for copyright infringement. Piracy and theft are charged words designed to generate a strong emotional response. Unconsciously, the word 'piracy' conjures up images of barbarians who murder and rape without remorse. 'Theft' is used to dig at the fear that everyone has of having their material items stolen from their house. Yes, consciously, we know that a 13-year old 'pirate' is not a raping, murdering, theiving monster but the MPAA wants to generate fear, anger, and other emotions in the public. Using 'copyright infringement' -- the correct term -- just won't do that for them. So they continue to use incorrect terminology. We're not being grammar nazis by insisting that they use less-neutral terms. Yes, copyright infringement is wrong. But it's a different class of wrong from the actions of pirates and thieves.

    GMD

    --
    watch this
  14. not enough magic? by yagu · · Score: 5, Informative

    From TFA:

    MPAA President and CEO Dan Glickman: 'There is no better example of how theft dims the magic of the movies for everyone than this report today regarding BitTorrent providing users with illegal copies of Revenge of the Sith.
    and now, from a syndicated article in the Herald Sun (among MANY other papers):
    THE final chapter in the Star Wars movie saga grossed a record $US50 million ($66 million) from its first 24 hours in North American theatres, the highest box office tally ever for a single day, 20th Century Fox said.
    I guess the most revenue ever just isn't enough magic for Glickman.... he really does care about us after all!
  15. Not only BitTorrent by trezor · · Score: 5, Funny

    Of course, BitTorrent is responsible.

    No, no, no! Not only that! I got mine via FTP, so FTP is responsible as well! And I found the FTP-link by the web, so I guess that makes HTTP responsible as well.

    Oh.. and they all use IP. Which would make IP the one mainly responsible for the IP-theft! Yup. Sounds like double-A logic to me.

    --
    Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
    1. Re:Not only BitTorrent by pocketfullofshells · · Score: 5, Informative

      I thought it was funny the MPAA still continues to only blame the end distribution for these problems, i.e. the p2p systems where it can take days to get these files. Forget the fact that someone on the inside ripped it 2 days prior to release, forget the fact that the only reason its on bit torrent or any P2P network is that it was on the newsgroups first.

      Its funny... the fact that the newsgroups never make it on the news.

    2. Re:Not only BitTorrent by TheAvatar666 · · Score: 5, Funny

      And they are all protocols in the internet! Al Gore invented the internet! Arrest Al Gore!

  16. Re:P2P and guns by tedrlord · · Score: 5, Funny

    That simile is flawed. Handguns have many uses, such as easing server bandwidth requirements and doing a lot to spread open source software, while bittorrent was designed mainly for use in non-military situations to kill human beings. It's fairly obvious that for practical purposes, bittorrent should be carefully controlled.

    Wait, I think I mixed things up a little there, didn't I.

    --
    [insert witty quote here]
  17. Re:Let's please get our heads on straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I find nothing wrong with the terms "piracy" and "theft" to describe such actions.

    But what about "rape" and "murder"? When you copy a movie, you are metaphorically raping the director by taking something he considers precious, without consent, for your own pleasure. And you are metaphorically murdering his chance of making a profit out of you.

    In fact, I think people who rape kids' movies should be charged with sex crimes. Those pedos are some sick people. I heard about this guy who even copied an old "Bambi" VHS tape! Pedophilic rape and bestiality in one. The sicko tried to say it was okay because the copy was for his granddaughter. That's just twisted.

    Or maybe we could, you know, use words which are actually descriptive of the real crimes being committed?

    "Copyright infringement" should be reserved for cases such as when I make a video game that stars Mario or Pokemon, infringing upon Nintendo's copyright.

    No, it shouldn't - because that would be a case of trademark infringement, not copyright infringement, unless you used Nintendo's actual artwork or level layouts.

    Of course, it's not your fault you don't know the difference. You've been confused by everyone using words wrongly. If everyone used "theft" to mean theft and "copyright infringement" to mean copyright infringement and "trademark infringement" to mean trademark infringement, then there would be no confusion. When you start using "theft" to mean copyright infringement, it's hardly surprising that you then get confused and use "copyright infringement" to mean trademark infringement.

    And yes, the difference is important. Copyright infringement can be a criminal offense in some circumstances; I don't think trademark infringement can. That's a pretty big difference.

  18. MPAA's at fault by Propaganda13 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I didn't know that you could download the new Star Wars until the MPAA told me. So they're really to blame for me downloading it right now.

  19. Re:Of course by Sendy · · Score: 5, Informative

    Pirates are real!

    --
    GNU guru and mainframe hacker
  20. The Supreme Court agrees by GoddessEvilena · · Score: 5, Informative

    Back in 1985 a man named Dowling was prosecuted for the Interstate Transportation of Stolen Property for selling infringing copies of Elvis records. U.S. Supreme Court in DOWLING v. UNITED STATES, 473 U.S. 207 (1985) http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?n avby=search&court=US&case=/us/473/207.html struck this down because copyright infringement is not theft. You have to deprive your victim of the item in order to steal it from them. Making copies doesn't deprive anyone of what it being copied, therefore its not theft.

  21. the blame game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Let's blame trucks for bringing illegal immigrants across borders, hyperdermic needles for heroin use, beer cans for alcohol abuse, cameras for pornography, voice boxes for the rise in bad language and linear time for people getting older and dying.

    1. Re:the blame game by matts-reign · · Score: 5, Informative

      Bittorrent is used to allow large files to be shared without having to have a heavy-duty server. This is good for free software developers and GNU and the GPL and open source and to prevent the slashdot effect.

      --
      Waffles rock.
  22. Rape = download? Who modded this guy insightful? by MunchMunch · · Score: 5, Insightful
    "If you see this same woman, is not working at a particular moment, due to not having a paying client, should you be allowed to take a free romp? Sure, why not, that's what she does, and she's just sitting there."

    Wow...Just, wow.

    I know multiple women who have been raped (and, if you check out the anonymous survey statistics, chances are you do as well) and I'd like to see you try to tell them that their being raped is comparable in any way to downloading a movie without permission.

    I know what you were trying to say (trying to paint copyright as an absolute moral right--an idea so historically rejected and antithetical to the original conceptions of copyright in the US that that in and of itself deserves to get you kicked out of the room), but if you can't see how watching a movie without permission and raping a woman might -- just might -- be too incongruous subjects for analogy, then there isn't much more to say.