RIAA vs Linux and DVDs

PlayfullyClever writes "The entertainment industry has put itself on the fast-track to destruction, using well-proven tactics as explained in Preventing DVD Playback on Linux Like Prohibition in the 1920's. Are their heavy-handed tactics to lock up and control everything we touch signs of plain old human stubborness?" Or more likely- greed.

Comments

Who's doing what to whom when how?

[fembots]

I did read the friendly article but couldn't quite connect RIAA with Linux and DVDs.

There's no mention of RIAA/music/movie in the article, and hardly any mention of Linux.

So what's happening now? Is it some kind of bullets, leathers and baked beans? Someone please enlighten me.

Fear more than greed

[Shadow Wrought]

The executives making the decisions don't understand the technology and have fortunes built upon the success of Brittney Spears. They are trapped by their own business models and the only way out is something not only new and unproven but something that they can't wrap their brains around. Net result: fear. Fear of failure, destitution, and the loss of everything they have gained on the work of others. Fear.

Re:Fear more than greed

[capt.Hij]

I have to disagree with this. This is about power. The record companies want to dictate how you use their product. They cannot get over the idea that once you purchase something it no longer belongs to them. This is why they call people "pirates" when they do what they want with their own stuff. Real pirates are thugs who forcibly board other people's property and take control over it which, by the way, is what Sony has done.

Somebody needs to make a video of Sony DRM pirates sailing the intenet sea with Monty Python's tune of the Crimson Permanent Insurance sung in the background...

Re:Fear more than greed

[curunir]

While I agree that this is all about power, I believe you're confusing who they're trying to exercise power over.

This is not about preventing piracy. It never has been. Every study shows that piracy doesn't cut into the amount of money they make. Those that pirate weren't likely buyers to begin with and some end up becoming buyers because they like what they downloaded and want it in a better form. What this is about is maintaining their hold on the distribution chain. The record labels are the middle men between the consumer and the artists. As technology continues to enable and simplify a direct connection between artists and consumers, the labels become less and less necessary.

By holding these technologies back, what they are really doing is preserving the situation where artists are forced to go through them to be able to reach consumers. They're preserving the situation where they can force onerous contracts on artists that give that result in the labels receiving the vast majority of the profits from music sales. They're preserving the cartel arrangement that allows charging ~$15 for a plastic disc that costs < $0.50 to create. Home studios are already well within the capabilities of many artists and CD manufacturing can be purchased at very reasonable prices. These were once functions that only record labels could offer. Now the only thing they have left is the distribution network. Filesharing and other technologies that allow artists to market directly to their fans will eventually obviate the last function that labels provide and make them completely unncessary.

That's what they're fighting. That's the power they're trying to maintain.

One major flaw in the analogy...

[L0neW0lf]

The article uses Prohibition as a comparison...but Prohibition was not a product of corporate greed. It isn't like Coca-Cola and PepsiCo. got together and said "Let's find a way to prohibit alcoholic beverages so that we can control what America REALLY ought to drink --our product!"

Starting with a flawed analogy usually leads to a flawed article --as it did in this case.

Read between the lines

[A nonymous Coward]

He's talking about the DMCA being as enforceable as Prohibition. The RIAA and MPAA and Linux and DVDs certainly are involved with the DMCA.

slashdot user on fast track to hyperbole

[ScentCone]

The entertainment industry has put itself on the fast-track to destruction

Oh, please. Even the people who don't think they should have to pay for their expensively produced entertainment will have to realize that actual destruction of the entertainment industry will leave them without anyone really professional to rip off. I mean, you don't have to sleep with a copy of Atlas Shrugged to see the basic truth of it. The rubber has to meet the road someplace, and at some point the Peter Jacksons of the world will not be able to raise the cash for a Really Swell Giant Ape Movie.

And before someone says that artistic patronage, bar gigs, miming in the streets and wearing sandals was good enough 2500 years ago, and real artists shouldn't care about financing actors and makeup artists, blahditty blah... oh, never mind. There, I've said it for you. It's not about whether or not there should be a rational way to play your DVD on your Linux laptop. There should be. The problem is the shrill tone (and glee) in comments like the original post. That does not help matters.

Hmm...what was this about?

[Mr.Spaz]

TFA seems a little disjointed and difficult to follow. Reads more like rambling than any sort of informative article or persuasive opinion piece.

Re:Wrong **AA?

[squiggleslash]

Probably. But the article made no sense whatsoever anyway. It appeared to be something about Prohibition being difficult to enforce, like the DMCA. It then blathered on about banning mutually beneficial exchanges or something, and collapsed from there.

I don't think the author's intent was to come up with anything but a bunch of buzzwords that would guarantee a front page setting on Slashdot and, thus, lots of ad-revenue generating site hits. In that respect, it's kind of surprising how few ads the article has, and how it isn't split into eleven pages. I mean, look at it: "RIAA" (Booo!) "DMCA!" (Booooooooooooo!) Linux! (YAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!) "It's like Prohibition man, Prohibition! That was also when The Man tried to keep the people down!" (WOOOOOOOOOO!)

Why's the MPAA not in there? Because it's not as big a BUZZWORD as RIAA. We ALL know that the RIAA is evil. I mean, this is practically a satire of a P2P pirate's stream-of-consciousness. The only thing that makes me stop short of thinking that's exactly what it is is the lack of the "word" "Rediculous".

What a load of crap. Bring back Jon Katz! At least his stuff made sense enough to disagree with.

Re:Not RIAA / Linux / DVD

[Liam Slider]

Corporations want ownership of materials; Private individuals want free access those materials. Therein lies the battle.

No, the private individuals want access to property they've already paid for. Corporations want control of property that isn't theirs without consent, and expects the owners to pay them for them to take control. Somewhat different battle here.

Re:RIAA sanctioned linux playback

[cayenne8]

"...if the lack of a player were really the reason Linux users have to rip a DVD..."

I think you have 2 issues confused here. In Linux, you do NOT have to rip the dvd to watch it. However, before the DVD encryption scheme was cracked...you could not use your computer's dvd player to watch your perfectly legally purchased dvds. DVD Jon broke the encryption scheme...and now, dvd players on Linux boxes can do the exact same thing that someone using OSX or Win. can do with their purchased media.

The ease in ripping the dvd's was just a side effect from having the encryption broken. But, you can rip a DVD on any OS...not just Linux.