Slashdot Mirror


Slyck Interviews the MPAA

An anonymous reader writes "P2P community and news source, Slyck, interviewed vice president Dean Garfield of the MPAA. Topics covered range from the MPAA's thoughts on BitTorrent, Limewire and DRM. Garfield acknowledges that they do not have much of a grip on the file-sharing world as they would like to believe."

139 comments

  1. Uhh by Poromenos1 · · Score: 4, Funny

    The motion picture industry is working aggressively to take advantage of wide array of digital distribution platforms

    He misspelled "ban".

    --
    Send email from the afterlife! Write your e-will at Dead Man's Switch.
    1. Re:Uhh by HTL2001 · · Score: 1

      no, he simply forgot to add "by making it manditory to buy the same piece of media at least once for every platform"

      --
      By reading this, you have given me brief control of your mind.
  2. It's not a misspelling.... by Chmcginn · · Score: 1, Redundant

    as much as a mis-translation from legalese.

    --
    Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?
  3. Misread you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    I've misread what you wrote as "The moron picture industry".

    Sorry.

  4. Grip on the filesharing world? by TheUncleD · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's hard to have a grip on anything p2p these days, since most p2p users have more than a single client depending on their interests/needs. Sometimes, bit-torrents come in handy, other times people resort to eMule/limewire and the various sorts of softwares available. Big deal. Kazaa really did it best when they got into the market and spread like wildfire before the competition. Their use of advertising helped give them a profit and in turn, feed back into making them a stronger company. And now with skype, what a landslide that was... The future of p2p is going to be up to the communities of people and their needs. It's not enforcable like it once was, shutting down warez servers one at time like the old-days. It's everyone and everywhere these days and gripping the market as a whole is next to impossible. Good luck

    1. Re:Grip on the filesharing world? by dc29A · · Score: 0, Troll

      They sure got a good grip on the file sharing world!

      Or maybe not ...

    2. Re:Grip on the filesharing world? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    3. Re:Grip on the filesharing world? by BushCheney08 · · Score: 1

      How right you are. If they really wanted to do something about it, they'd try to get some new legislation passed. Oh wait...

      --
      Be a real patriot: Question authority. Think for yourself. Formulate your own conclusions.
  5. Open Source? by onion2k · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Given that few would support commercial piracy, and given the poor publicity over the use of DRM, how much of their problem is directly caused by commercial piracy?
    Garfield: "We are studying that issue, but do not have a real answer. Identifying the scope of the commercial versus the open source problem is no easier than discerning real data on p2p usage.


    Eh? Where in that question did he infer the interviewer was talking about open source anything? This sort of ridiculous statement about the open source by a clueless muppet with no idea what open source is, let along how it works, just makes him look like a jerk. The interviewer clearly meant commercial piracy as in a person selling what they make with a DVD duplication system in their garage as opposed to someone sharing something they've downloaded either through a P2P network or giving copies to their mates.

    Gah. Idiot.

    1. Re:Open Source? by Ilex · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes I noticed this rather statement myself. The way I interpret this is Commercial == Far eastern bootlegs / car boot sales, for profit. Open Source == P2P Little Johny in the bed room, personal use.

      This shows a worrying mindset in the entertainment industry. They believe that Closed proprietary systems (Microsoft) is good and Open systems (Linux) is bad. Of course this isn't new, we've long suspected this. Now the entertainment industry have pretty much admitted it. So don't expect future legal media formats to be able to play under Linux.

      This will result in Linux users having to resort to illegal bootlegs further reinforcing the Open Source == Piracy perception which may hamper the commercial adoption of free and open systems.

    2. Re:Open Source? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      'Given that few would support commercial piracy' I wouldnt be so quick to jump on people just because you've posted in a slashdot website. If you read the portion you were referring to then you would see that he was referring to commercial piracy as non open source... Which it isnt (generally)..

    3. Re:Open Source? by sweetnjguy29 · · Score: 1

      Perhaps he recognized that open-source and free operating systems like GNU/Linux posed a significant challenge to implementing DRM solutions that movie studios could live with. Perhaps they think that an open-source DRM solution would be easily hacked. Or that a significant/important segment of their customer base can bypass DRM with free software is a problem. Or, as is more likely...he simply doesn't have a clue.

    4. Re:Open Source? by xouumalperxe · · Score: 1

      Calm down! What he said is that studies regarding open source versus proprietary software aren't particularly easy to interpret, and that p2p/piracy/DRM relating to sales drops studies aren't any better.

    5. Re:Open Source? by egjertse · · Score: 1

      Mr. Garfield keeps using the word "source" throughout the interview, and from the context I believe he is referring to sources of digital media, not source code. By "open source" I assume he means non-commercial, non-DRM'ed sources of digital media (i.e. P2P networks like LimeWire etc).

    6. Re:Open Source? by TubeSteak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Is it possible he's trying to seperate between closed source P2P apps like Kazaa/Napster and OSS products like Bittorrent/Gnutella? I don't think it is obvious what the interviewer meant.

      Maybe he misunderstood Slyck. I think a fair interpretation of 'commercial' would be: P2P programs that are supported by advertising.

      I wouldn't necessarily get my panties in a bunch.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
  6. Loses credibility here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How much of their problem is directly caused by commercial piracy?

      Garfield: "We are studying that issue, but do not have a real answer. Identifying the scope of the commercial versus the open source problem is no easier than discerning real data on p2p usage.


    Last time I checked, 'open source' and casual piracy were not synonymous.

    1. Re:Loses credibility here... by manojar · · Score: 1

      Yeah, there are thousands of lives ruined/lost because casual piracy!

    2. Re:Loses credibility here... by FidelCatsro · · Score: 1

      Piracy is only a crime if it is the High seas type . Other than that it is a civil offence in most countries , as for the morality of it .. well I leave that up to you .

      --
      The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
    3. Re:Loses credibility here... by KtHM · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Casual piracy is more akin to casual marijuana use. It's not legal, but it's not hurting anyone.

    4. Re:Loses credibility here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ummm, sure, except casual marajuans use still supports drug dealers. Perhaps not hurting anybody directly, but most certinaly directly helping somebody who is on the wrong side of the law.

      Pick another example. One that is not just plain wrong.

      By the way, we have had 6 marijuana related mureders here this year, and I live in the boonies.

    5. Re:Loses credibility here... by EzInKy · · Score: 3, Insightful


      Ummm, sure, except casual marajuans use still supports drug dealers. Perhaps not hurting anybody directly, but most certinaly directly helping somebody who is on the wrong side of the law.

      Pick another example. One that is not just plain wrong.

      By the way, we have had 6 marijuana related mureders here this year, and I live in the boonies.


      Perhaps if using marijuana wasn't on the wrong side of the law you wouldn't have had those six murders out there in the boonies.

      --
      Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
    6. Re:Loses credibility here... by SamSim · · Score: 1

      What, you expected him to check?

    7. Re:Loses credibility here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's because there is nothing better to do than smoke up and start killin' in the sticks.

      Or go to the ghetto titty bar and watch your little sister.

    8. Re:Loses credibility here... by mzwaterski · · Score: 3, Funny

      If murder was legal, we'd have fewer people in jail. I know that much.

    9. Re:Loses credibility here... by kurzweilfreak · · Score: 1

      Maybe if alcohol was legalized we wouldn't have all those murders and beatings in the middle of a drunken rage. And if drunk driving was legalized, we probably wouldn't have all those drunken car accidents.

      --

      kurzweil_freak

      5th Kyu Genbukan Ninpo/KJJR student

      Be the darkness that allows the light to shine.

    10. Re:Loses credibility here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Ummm, sure, except casual marajuans use still supports drug dealers

      It does? I'm wondering how watering the cannabis plant growing in my bathroom supports drug dealers? Perhaps if it grows tall enough to touch the ceiling, and somehow there's a drug dealer upstairs, well, then I suppose you'd be right.

      Otherwise, wow, you really are dumb.

    11. Re:Loses credibility here... by shibashaba · · Score: 1

      Marijuana related means revolving around the drug trade shit head.

      Marijuana on it's own has been proven to make people less prone to violence.

      But just keep believing everything people tell you, that's what intelligent people do.

      --
      ---------- Open Source is capitalism applied to IP.
    12. Re:Loses credibility here... by manojar · · Score: 1

      What if I grow my own? or smoke only free-range pot?

  7. Awareness through litigation? by mauledbydogs · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's truly dumb. Educating parts of the market by beating people with a piece of legal two-by-four is not productive. Advertise, promote, share information and engage with the people you're trying to reach is healthier and more likely to create understanding.

  8. Way to go! by Dysfnctnl85 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "The motion picture industry is working aggressively to take advantage of wide array of digital distribution platforms and to provide consumers a wide array of legitimate options for enjoying movies and television shows.

    Hey, way to be about 15 years late. Everyone with a half a brain realizes that Hollywood should have changed their distribution methods when the Internet usage became widespread, instead of *ignoring* the problem.

    "One way to look at this issue is through an analogy. At present, when you purchase a car there is computer technology in the car that keeps track of your average speed, but that technology is accepted and is viewed as net value add. However, if that technology were to automatically report the fact that you speed to the authorities then peoples perspective would change. DRM is the same. The technology is a part of a balance that is struck with the consumer."

    Ewwwwwwwwwwhaaatttttt? The device doesn't curb your usage of speed; am I the only one that doesn't see how this analogy is supposed to work?

    I'm going to step out on a limb and say that this war on piracy is like the war on drugs -- a glorious method of wasting resources. There's nothing you can do to keep people from *acquiring* media however they want; just as you cannot keep drugs out of America.

    Yeah.

    1. Re:Way to go! by parasonic · · Score: 1

      Ewwwwwwwwwwhaaatttttt?

      OKAAAYY!!

    2. Re:Way to go! by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You can't expect such a large industry to be so flexible as to understand, in advance, the ramifications of p2p. Even now they persist in believing that they can stomp it out if they just put enough work into it, or that they can come up with a cheap technical fix which will roll back the clock all the way to LPs, where you couldn't make copies at all without permission.

      So it's not surprising to me that they seem to think DRM is an addition to their product that consumers would find to be "valuable". Not sure how it's going to pan out in the long term. I think DRM is completely impossible for the next ten years...even if they got the ability to put flawless DRM capable hardware in all new TVs, DVD players, CD players, etc, it would still take at least that long to achieve sufficient market penetration with that DRM'd hardware, and that doesn't even count the inevitable flaws and backwards compaitbility issues, as well as the fact that there is no DRM standard.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    3. Re:Way to go! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      YEAAAAAAAAAH!

    4. Re:Way to go! by cliffski · · Score: 1

      " There's nothing you can do to keep people from *acquiring* media however they want;"

      sounds like a bit of a tough break for the poor bastards who try to earn a living by creating that media doesnt it? You really think the guys that make new albums, new TV shows, new movies and new games should not be paid for it? Clearly some uses of DRM are batshit insane, but you cant blame people for wanting to be paid for the fruits of their labours. Not every artist or software company is evil, but they all seem to be treated as such by the people illegally redistributing their products.

      --
      DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
    5. Re:Way to go! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the one hand, I think that the people creating movies, music, etc should be paid for it. On the other hand, there's no way in hell I'm paying more than $12 (including tax) for a movie, and the equivalent of a dollar per song for an album. Most new movies I see out are selling (or, you know, not selling) for between $25 and $30. Most cds are somewhere around $18 for nine or ten songs. At least with music, I have the option of paying for and legally downloading it online, at the exact price I'm willing to pay.

      So, pretty much, if they want to turn a profit, they need to have more competitive prices. Sure, nothing can really compete with free, but I think that most people would be willing to pay to own things legally (if for no other reason than to avoid the possibility of a lawsuit). It's basic economics, but evidently the record company/motion picture execs forgot all the economics they learned in school.

    6. Re:Way to go! by John+Courtland · · Score: 1

      Something has to change, though. These methods that the MPAA are attempting to employ are both flawed and wasteful. There is no way to prevent people from ripping the content. If pirates have the machine that can turn a recording into analog A/V then the game is already lost. I think the solution is for the Movie studios to figure out how to offer their wares at a low enough cost to compete with pirated videos. I'm not smart enough to say that is a for-sure fix, but if I could legitimately buy a DVD without bullshit copy protection (that costs a ton of money to create) for like $5-$8, maybe $15 for a "super-deluxe" release, I'd be buying them like hot cakes. Right now I don't like buying DVDs because the fucking money I'm paying goes right into the pockets of these assholes. I wish I could pay the artist(s). I like doing that with CD's, but I realize it's far more difficult with movies due to the number of people involved.

      The other issue is simply what is happening with PC games, which is that it's easier and usually safer (from a windows/dll hell standpoint) to rip copy protection right out of a game so it actually works. I've had many games refuse to install because their copy protection was either fucking up or just incompatible with my DVD drive. I had one game not let me install because my key was already in use and it wouldn't let me install it. I don't know about you, but when I spend $50 on a game and it doesn't play nice, I tend to get upset. I realize the only thing they lose is a customer, but I won't buy games like that any more. It has seriously turned me into a console gamer. Same with movies, if they make it difficult to play on your hardware, offer tons of restrictions, etc, their DRM will be shot to shit quickly by people who will rip and reburn their content in an unprotected manner.

      --
      Slashdot is proof that Sturgeon's Law applies to mankind.
    7. Re:Way to go! by Wikipedia · · Score: 0

      Our Dumb Century (print) AKA the onion in history (online): Drugs Win War on Drugs

      --
      P2P Anonymous Distributed Web Search: http://www.yacy.net/
  9. You know by FidelCatsro · · Score: 3, Funny

    I would like to say what the MPAA do have a firm grip on , though it would be considered rather untoward in polite company(Hint , it includes all of them partaking in corporal punishment of monkeys )

    --
    The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
    1. Re:You know by TubeSteak · · Score: 1
      "Garfield acknowledges that they do not have much of a grip on the real world as they would like to believe."

      And for those who didn't figure it out, FidelCastro is calling the MPAA a bunch of wankers.
      Go Fidel Go!

      /hides from Dept. of Homeland Security.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    2. Re:You know by rk · · Score: 1

      "...FidelCastro is calling the MPAA a bunch of wankers. Go Fidel Go!

      That's "Mr. Catsro" to you, bub. :-)

  10. the real issue is... by zogger · · Score: 5, Insightful
    ...money. I don't see much mention of this important fact in the article. See this quote "We are also concerned with making sure we are (sic) understand and make use of the latest technological advances"...well, gee, how about drastically lowering prices on legit copies then? This is possible now, but they *aren't doing it*. How about making profit through volume sales by using the tech advances that have made digital copies extremely cheap to distribute? A lot of people wouldn't bother to "pirate" if the price of the cheap plastic disks or a legit download was just more reasonable. I mean significanty more reasonable, like a few dollars tops for a DVD movie for example, which they could do if they chose to. In years past, the actual manufacture of the physical media was very expensive, and there was no cheap effective way to distribute outside that method, but today? Someone needs to bust out of their Hollywood residing price structure and recognize that a dollar elsewhere is not the same as in zipcode 90210. It's extremely cheap to make dupes now, so why hasn't "the industry" responded appropriately?



    They want all the economic advantages of the latest tech advances, but they don't want to pass those benefits on to their customers, nor even allow their customers the same tech or advantages. This is called gouging and people respond appropriately to it.

    1. Re:the real issue is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I agree. For example, this year we are giving our 3 teenagers (shhh, it's a surprise) each their own Yahoo Music Unlimited accounts. At $60 for the whole year for unlimited streaming of 192Kbps content from a million track library, it's a fair price FINALLY!!! We bought one subscription last May and have been trying it out. I would say we can give it generally good reviews, though it has some rough edges (most of which were because 3 of us were using it - you can register up to 3 PCs).

    2. Re:the real issue is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Seriously, man. The prices on DVDs are so ridiculously high I almost never buy them. No matter how great a movie is I just am not going to pay $25 or $30 and in some cases $40 for a DVD!

      Put that price down to $5 and I won't download another movie. Even $10 works.

      How can a tell?

      I by DVDs of Taiwan and Chinese movies because they only cost about $12 or so. These are legit copies, they just aren't America sanctioned releases i.e. the DVD menus are only in Chinese and there might not be subtitles. Sure I admit I download Chinese movies sometimes, but mostly it's better to just go to the store check out the new releases and buy a couple.

      But would I consider buying the same movie in the $30 "American Release", no way!

      Oh and I am slightly pissed that DVDs cost significantly less than VHS tapes to make yet the consumer pays more than twice as much!

    3. Re:the real issue is... by Itanshi · · Score: 1

      eh i see 5-15 dollar dvds, shop around

      not to name stores, but actually, you know what? i hate this argument of dvds costing money. I'm an anime fan, i pay the amount i need to pay for quality material even if it isnt quality. i'm under the impression you support the art by buying it even if you saw it twice before on fansubs (and i have) so enjoy your cheap lil prices of 30 dollars, they a heck lot more expensive in japan

      well that's my argument, they not under the mpaa so hmm

    4. Re:the real issue is... by click2005 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "We are also concerned with making sure we are (sic) understand and make use of the latest technological advances"

      I think that is the most important thing said in the whole article.

      MP3s & P2P has caused them to change tactics slightly but everything is still heading exactly where they want things to go, they just need to wait a few years.

      What will things be like then?

      1. DVDng players will be even more restrictive than they are now, possibly only allowing a limited number of plays on certain discs. They'll need internet connections for billing, license & firmware updates.
      2. The Trusted Computing version of Windows will only run approved hardware&software and anything else loaded/detected will prevent media apps from working properly. Import restrictions will be placed on non-secure hardware.
      3. Tivos & PVRs will only record what broadcasters want you to record and auto-delete shows after a short time 48hrs.
      4. DVDs will be sold will variable licenses. Either a basic license which allows 1 or 2 plays or a more expensive license with more 'free' plays.
      5. Distributable digital media will be centrally stored on a MediaCenter WinPC. Every time a song/movie is 'transferred' to another device its no longer available from the MC PC without paying extra. If 2 songs from the same album are listened to at the same time, you'll get billed extra.

      The politicians there are prepared to pass whatever laws the media companies want. Hardware manufacturers will be required to TC harden all their devices or get locked out of future windows/apple releases.

      The european politicians are just as bribe-able as in the states so they'll do the same.

      India will replace the east as the main source of cheaper electronics goods until china/japan/taiwan agree to make TC hardware. This will make non-TC hardware and devices harder to obtain and much more expensive.

      The MPAA/RIAA are just waiting. They never wanted to release digital media until the market was ready for them.
      Its not ready yet but soon.

      --
      I am a free slashdotter. I will not be modded, blogged, DRM'd, patented, podcasted or RFID'd. My life is my own.
    5. Re:the real issue is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      In years past, the actual manufacture of the physical media was very expensive, and there was no cheap effective way to distribute outside that method, but today?

      Very interessant point indeed. You could now develop VOD (Video On Demand) : in the past you had to get a physical copy of the movie, allowing you a unlimited access to it, you could now get a movie via a paying official p2p system (close to 0 distribution cost) and the embedded DRM allow you to watch it for a limited timespan (kind of movie renting). In return the price would be very cheap.
      Some would protest the DRM (in relation to open source) or the time limited access BUT it would add another option to the masses, you are not compelled to buy it if you prefer a costlier(?) full copy.

      Here in France with the recent p2p/DRM/copyright law being discussed, such a project as surfaced and the price would be 4 euros for a new movie and 3 euros for older movies. There are limitations as you have 1 month to view the movie but once you start, you have only 24 hours to finish it. The movie will be available 33 weeks after the theatre release (delay for pay-per-view TV being shorter, DVD being longer).
      The thing has to be tested, but at least it adds another option and for once the movie industry tries to find solutions rather than suing their consumers.
    6. Re:the real issue is... by pla · · Score: 3, Informative

      No matter how great a movie is I just am not going to pay $25 or $30 and in some cases $40 for a DVD!

      Name one major-release single-DVD movie (as opposed to the "super ultra limited edition 20-discs-of-commentary re-re-re-re-release in the gold-foil box with a hologram and beta-test sample animal cracker of the most annoying but cute character in the movie" versions) that retails for over $25.

      Many full season boxed sets go for around $40, but a single movie? I have yet to see it.


      Put that price down to $5 and I won't download another movie. Even $10 works.

      So go to WallyWorld and root around in their "2 for $11" bin with the rest of the livestock/consumers. Buy used, where you usually see big-name movies for $8 or $9, and "B" movies (which sometimes include the Best movies, oddly enough) for under $5.

    7. Re:the real issue is... by IWantMoreSpamPlease · · Score: 1

      I have seen, at Best Buy, Disney films (Oliver and Company comes to mind), that when 1st released were 29.95$.

      Granted, Disney is a greedy bunch of scum merchants, but they are (sadly) not alone.

      In their "special Interest" section, I've seen National Geographic Documentaries go for as high as 45$ for a single 75 minute long DVD.

      --
      So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
    8. Re:the real issue is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem with that is that a lot of classic, indypendent or foreign films only come in with the super deluxe 200 hours of commentary with everyone who delivered coffee to the set once. They know no one wants to watch all that crap, it's just a way to justify jacking up the price.

    9. Re:the real issue is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Wait till next year when they expect you to pay for it again, or their subscription lapses and they 'lose' all the music they downloaded. The RIAA will have helped push the piece up buy then to so you'll probably be paying $120. -- No one is getting me to rent music.

    10. Re:the real issue is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ..they're not making money for the Dolman-Sackville Shoe Corporation.

    11. Re:the real issue is... by i.r.id10t · · Score: 1

      Don't buy 'em in the first week, and check other places. I've been buying DVDs at the local pawn shop, usually about 3 months after they hit the stores, still in the wrapper at times ... $5 each normally, some times down to $3 when I buy 5-6 at once. Still in the wrapper too for the most part. Just picked up both kill bills for $9 total. New in the wrapper. If you don't mind VHS, $1.50 each, less as you buy more.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    12. Re:the real issue is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many full season boxed sets go for around $40

      Hmm. I'll mention that next time i want to buy Star Trek, Farscape, Highlander, or almost any 26 episode anime. $40 sets are an exception. Off the top of my head the only low cost boxed sets are Firefly and Star Gate: SG1. And these are only reasonable at Amazon or Sams or some other exceptionally low cost store.

    13. Re:the real issue is... by Neoprofin · · Score: 1

      Japan is a good point. DVDs and CDs of Japanese material are easily 2-3 times more expensive than equivilent American products, and you know what? Taiwanese piracy of Japanese movies and music has never been more popular. It's not hard to see why someone would rather pay $10 for a Taiwanese professional quality bootleg than $40 for a Japanese original.It's gotten to the point where many musicians (I know of NIN specifically) have started including extra tracks in their Japanese releases to help them seem less overpriced.

      Prices viewed as too high breed the black market economy, as both Japan and America show us, not that that's the only reason but it certainly doesn't help.

    14. Re:the real issue is... by Neoprofin · · Score: 1

      Anything released by the Criterion Collection, including Rushmore as well as a number of other semi-mainstream movies cost about $35-$40.

    15. Re:the real issue is... by cliffski · · Score: 1

      What about niche products though? your analysis surely breaks down there. If you are amking a movie that everyone in the street will like, you can sell it online for $5 and do fine, but if your market is 10-50k units tops, you simple can't do that. It seems that you may be advocating a market model where only the lowest common demoninator crap gets made.

      --
      DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
    16. Re:the real issue is... by StormReaver · · Score: 1

      "Put that price down to $5 and I won't download another movie. Even $10 works."

      I can't sympathize with you on this. As recently as just ten years ago, VHS (that's right, the old tapes) movies were retailing for $80-120 each. Back then, I felt completely justified in going to the store to rent three movies and buy three blank video tapes.

      Recently (6-8 years ago), the MPAA came to its senses and dramatically lowered prices across the board. Now a newly released A-title movie goes for an average of $20. Perhaps you're too young to appreciate the low prices we pay for movies today, but rest assured that the prices we pay today are entirely reasonable.

      The movies industry is no longer gouging us on movie purchases, and hasn't been gouging us for a number of years (there are some rare exceptions). The notion that modern movies are insanely expensive at $20, and that entire seasons of TV shows are too expensive at $40-45 (on a tight average) is complete nonsense.

    17. Re:the real issue is... by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      I agree with you completely. DVDs are quite reasonable... I don't know where the hell the OP was going to buy a single movie for $40. I've never seen one for more than $25, and the vast majority are $20. In some cases, you can get a DVD movie now for less money than the soundtrack to the same movie.

      In fact, my only gripe about DVDs is that I think they should throw the movie's soundtrack in as a bonus. I'd much rather have the soundtrack to The Aviator than a commentary track I'll never listen to. But that's a minor gripe. Compared to VHS and Laserdisk, DVDs are a huge bargain.

    18. Re:the real issue is... by antdude · · Score: 1

      That is why I only buy DVDS when they first come out. Usually cheaper on the first week like at Fry's Electronics and Best Buy. Pricematching helps if you can.

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    19. Re:the real issue is... by ZachPruckowski · · Score: 2, Funny

      "It's extremely cheap to make dupes now"

      That explains everything.

    20. Re:the real issue is... by orasio · · Score: 1

      The current situation is a counterexample to your reasoning.
      Right now most DVDs are the shittiest shit possible.
      Good movies are harder to find that crappy ones, and less sold. And they don't produce them. The other day they were filming parts of a Miami Vice movie around here!! talk about crap! crap squared! And DVDs dn't cost 5 bucks right now.

    21. Re:the real issue is... by JWW · · Score: 1

      The market you described them wanting is one where Millons of customers will just walk away.

      I think that PVR thing will be the biggest impact. I have some shows on my Myth box that are almost 3 years old. Auto delete, no thank you. I realize Myth will never have autodelete, but then again it may become illegal to have. The restrictions wanted by the networks for PVRs will eventually cause the biggest consumer backlash in a long time.

      I know they're trying to cook frogs here by doing things slowly, but they will reach a point where they will say "you can't record this show on a PVR" and have a law to back them up.

      The basic point is that there are NO CUSTOMERS WHATSOEVER that want the things they are trying to do. I a truly free market DRM would die a horrid death, and unencumbered content would be sold at a reasonable price. They're too damn greedy to let that happen.

      The only thing what you list is going to cause is a dramatic shrinking of their market.

      Look at CDs, only one demographic matters: everyone under 30 (or even 25). There are literally 10s of millions of people older who have grown to almost completely ignore the music business, by the music business' own design.

    22. Re:the real issue is... by mikek3332002 · · Score: 1

      He was probably talking about non-US dollars. In Australia the majority of new dvds are AU$29.95-39.95
      Though you can get tons of cheap movies between AU$5-15.

  11. A demonstration of the problem... by laughingcoyote · · Score: 5, Insightful

    At present, when you purchase a car there is computer technology in the car that keeps track of your average speed, but that technology is accepted and is viewed as net value add.

    Correct in terms of a car, but that's where he (and the **AA's at large) go wrong on DRM.

    When I'm going down the road, I WANT to know how fast I'm going. I don't want to wait until the nice police officer decides to pull me over and inform me of it, nor do I want to find out a bit too late that I'm taking a curve way faster then I should. Therefore, indeed, the speedometer is a value add-it's something that I, the owner of the car, WANT in my car (and in fact, even if legal not to have one, would not purchase a car without one.)

    DRM by definition cannot be a "value add", only a "value subtract". No consumer buys a DVD saying "Man, I hope they made it hard for me to back this thing up!" or "I sure hope this will refuse to play on my computer without installing a bunch of intrusive software".

    --
    To fight the war on terror, stop being afraid.
    1. Re:A demonstration of the problem... by CastrTroy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, it would be more like having a car that decided how fast it would go, without considering what the driver told it to do. Some cars do have speed limiters, but only at very high speeds, much higher than any speed limit you would hope to find. That could have added value of prolonging the life of your car. Running then engine at full speed wouldn't be very good if you did it all the time. Also, disabling the speed limit, or modding it, as far as I'm aware, is not illegal, so long as your car doesn't break environmental laws.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    2. Re:A demonstration of the problem... by 91degrees · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Heavy Goods vehicles in Europe are required to have a speed limiter fitted that limits them to 56mph. A lot of truckers are strongly opposed to these since they consider them to fail to solve the problem they are designed to prevent (accidents through speeding), and prevent any benefits that legitimately driving over this speed will offer. These are pretty much the same problems we have with DRM.

      Personally, I'd be quite happy with DRM that told me how many times I'd copied something, what generation copy it is, and any other information that may be relevent.

    3. Re:A demonstration of the problem... by iamwahoo2 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Interesting thought:

      As punishment for the Sony Rootkit, all Sony Media employees and employees responsible for creating the rootkit should have speed monitoring devices attached to all of their vehicles. If they speed, they get mailed a ticket. They can also have all thier phone and email conversations recorded and available on the internet to the public. If they are in such a hurry to live in an Orwellian society, I say, let them have a little taste of it.

    4. Re:A demonstration of the problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We don't have those here in Finland. It's a rare thing to see a truck driving within speed limits. I wonder why truckers don't like limiters.

    5. Re:A demonstration of the problem... by Geoffreyerffoeg · · Score: 1

      At present, when you purchase a car there is computer technology in the car that keeps track of your average speed, but that technology is accepted and is viewed as net value add. ... DRM by definition cannot be a "value add", only a "value subtract".

      Except for dangerous roads, you normally wouldn't need a speedometer except that the police enforces speed limits. DRM can be a "value add" if there's enforcement on video copying, e.g., the recent French proposal to legalize copying if you declare your intention of copying and pay a tax on your ISP cost. If you declare you are not copying, you probably want DRM on your CDs so that if you copy them you can demonstrate you're only making legal copies. If you buy unprotected discs, there's no way of proving how many copies you made or to whom you distributed them.

      Then again, it's only a "value add" because the government itself is the large "value subtract".

    6. Re:A demonstration of the problem... by RosenSama · · Score: 2, Informative

      He might have been referring to the onboard instrumentation which stores your driving history. Not the instrumentation that displays info to you, but more like an airplane's flight recorder. Can be used by service stations to tune for your driving habits. Police and insurance companies would like access to these for investigations. For example http://www.expertlaw.com/library/accidents/auto_bl ack_boxes.html

    7. Re:A demonstration of the problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty certain this is correct.

      Modern engine electronics adapts to your individual engine, car, and driving style. It's not much of a stretch to keep track of your maximum engine RPM, vehicle speed, etc. It's probably already happening, but currently only your dealer can get the data.

      Example: modern US cars track their own smog emissions, and they insist on an extended period of clean operation before declaring themselves "clean." Smog check computers interface to these, and require a "good history" in order to pass. Resetting the computer in your car erases the history, precluding a successful smog check for weeks (or months).

      Similar technology is already used in large outboard motors; if you've exceeded the recommended maximum RPM for any length of time, they'll deny your warranty claims.

    8. Re:A demonstration of the problem... by Chris6502 · · Score: 1

      When I RTFA'ed I almost burst out laughing. ".... but that technology is accepted and is viewed as net value add." I view it as a damn good reason NOT to purchase a vehicle. It's no different from spyware and should be treated in the same manner.

      --
      UNIX: 'cuz you can tattoo it on your knuckles!
  12. Creativity? by kingturkey · · Score: 1, Insightful
    At the same time, we are working to make sure that people respect the creativity and hard work that goes into making television shows and movies.
    Creativity in movies? What cinema is he going to? I've seen alot of remakes of old movies, movies based on books and games, but not much creativity. It seems they are running out of this "creativity". I'm not too sure about the "hard work" either, it seems the industry just substitutes thought and actual work with a big wad of cash to make shiny special effects.
    1. Re:Creativity? by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

      "I'm not too sure about the "hard work" either, it seems the industry just substitutes thought and actual work with a big wad of cash to make shiny special effects."

      What about all the people working hard to produce those special effects? The artists making 40k, working 80 hours a week, to get the CGI up to spec on deadline?

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    2. Re:Creativity? by Walkiry · · Score: 1

      >What about all the people working hard to produce those special effects? The artists making 40k, working 80 hours a week, to get the CGI up to spec on deadline?

      If all people involved in the making of the latest cinema crapfest really worked 80 hours a week while making 40k, and not just the poor sods burning their eyelashes in front of a monitor to do the CGI, you could make a handy profit by selling DVDs at two bucks a pop. There would be no "piracy problem."

      --
      ---- Take the Space Quiz!
    3. Re:Creativity? by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

      My point was that the OP was implying that CGI doesn't require any hard work, that's all.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
  13. sigh by SmellMyTeenSpirit · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "One way to look at this issue is through an analogy. At present, when you purchase a car there is computer technology in the car that keeps track of your average speed, but that technology is accepted and is viewed as net value add. However, if that technology were to automatically report the fact that you speed to the authorities then people's perspective would change. DRM is the same."

    There are two key problems that his analogy brings up. First of all, consumers would obviously resist this hypothetical speed tracking hardware. Perhaps something like this will be implemented some day, perhaps not. But it will surely be fought, and rightly so. Until the Supreme Court overturns Roe v Wade and we lose our constitutional right to privacy, that is.

    But the real difference is that speeding is often an issue of life and death, both for the driver and for everyone else on the road. Piracy isn't even remotely analogous. Even if the industry could prove that piracy is hurting them so much, the "hurt" here is loss of profit. I apologize for not sympathizing with your pain, my rich corporate friend.

    "The technology is a part of a balance that is struck with the consumer. The creative community distributes high quality digital content and the consumers accept that they can't randomly and wantonly redistribute that high quality digital content."

    As a consumer, I do not accept that I can't randomly and wantonly redistribute their content. He's talking about how he wants things to be, and then he characterizes consumers as agreeing with him. Someone needs a reality check.

    Although I do like his use of the word "stuck". Personally, I like to think that a bargain is only good if one side is getting shafted because they lack the legal and legislative resources to stand up for themselves.

    --
    "Cornflakes are not the innocent critters they seem"- Sterling Morrison
    1. Re:sigh by m50d · · Score: 2, Interesting
      But the real difference is that speeding is often an issue of life and death, both for the driver and for everyone else on the road. Piracy isn't even remotely analogous. Even if the industry could prove that piracy is hurting them so much, the "hurt" here is loss of profit. I apologize for not sympathizing with your pain, my rich corporate friend.

      I think his analogy is dead on. The kind of DRM the customer would be happy with is that which tells you whether your copy is "genuine", but no-one else. With luck that could stop commercial piracy as much as is possible, but not harm normal customers; at the very least it would let buyers be more informed.

      --
      I am trolling
    2. Re:sigh by Big_Al_B · · Score: 1

      First of all, consumers would obviously resist this hypothetical speed tracking hardware. Perhaps something like this will be implemented some day, perhaps not.

      If you're talking about the first case--of an onboard computer tracking average speed--it's here, it's normal, and it's in most mid-class and above vehicles sold today. I've personally had in-dash "trip computers" with this info in a '91 Saab, a '95 Jeep, a '97 BMW, and a 2005 Suburu. And you have heard of GPS navigation systems, perhaps?

      If you're talking about the second case--remote speed reporting--it has existed in commercial vehicle fleets for some time, and is touted as a fuel and safety management feature to the fleet owner/operators. In the consumer market, GM's On-Star is a tiny babystep away from this stuff privacy-wise and people are *purchasing* that service as an optional value-add.

      In short, I think your position is weakly founded.

    3. Re:sigh by Ochu · · Score: 1

      Until the Supreme Court overturns Roe v Wade and we lose our constitutional right to privacy, that is.
      I'm sorry, I may be confused, but how does a court case that guarantees a right to abortion bare any relation to a right to privacy? Is someone venting?

    4. Re:sigh by trix7117 · · Score: 1

      Yes, you are confused. The basis for the Court's decision in Roe v Wade was a woman's right to privacy. However, the Constitution does not explicitly mention our right to privacy. The Court implied this right from other parts of the Constitution.

      "...in varying contexts the Court or individual justices have, indeed, found at least the roots of that right...This right of privacy, whether it be founded in the Fourteenth Amendment's concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is, or, as the District Court determined, in the Ninth Amendment's reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy."

      So while the case may have been about abortion rights, the majority decision is where the Court ruled that the Constitution grants Americans the right to privacy.

    5. Re:sigh by da_Den_man · · Score: 1
      Sorry to burst any bubble you may have, and I know this is Off-Topic:

      we lose our constitutional right to privacy, that is.

      We have NO Right to privacy granted ANYWHERE in the Constitution. Nowhere in that document (nor any Governmental Document of its like) does it state we as citizens have any rights to Privacy.
      --
      You keep going until you die..."Me".
    6. Re:sigh by SmellMyTeenSpirit · · Score: 1

      My problem was the hyperbolic nature of his analogy. Yes, there is a very strong case to be made for remotely tracking (and limiting) the speed of consumer vehicles; speeding kills people. The free distribution of copyrighted songs and movies does not kill people, it hurts profits. Namely the profits of the corporate owners of the copyrights, not necessarily the artists.

      "The kind of DRM the customer would be happy with is that which tells you whether your copy is "genuine", but no-one else."

      Sure, I'd be fine with that. It would be an interesting way for me to waste my time, especially if it was a feature in itunes. Wouldn't it be delightful to even be able to see how many people downloaded files that -you- originated? Great fun all around.

      But unless I'm missing a big point here, this isn't what Slyck wants. How would it help him to show us the statistics of what we're doing? Obviously the only reason he is interested in gathering that data is to use it in order to stop people from sharing media, which he will blindly keep trying to do by working himself up to a litigative hissy fit.

      "With luck that could stop commercial piracy as much as is possible, but not harm normal customers; at the very least it would let buyers be more informed."

      I guess you're assuming some sort of benevolence from file-sharers that I simply do not see. That's not to say that file-sharers are in any way inherently the enemies of the artists whose content they are distributing. But that's a whole other argument, and it's one that is played out here on slashdot often enough without our involvement.

      --
      "Cornflakes are not the innocent critters they seem"- Sterling Morrison
    7. Re:sigh by Big_Al_B · · Score: 1
      We have NO Right to privacy granted ANYWHERE in the Constitution. Nowhere in that document (nor any Governmental Document of its like) does it state we as citizens have any rights to Privacy.

      Well, while the phrase "right to privacy" may not appear in the articles, bill or rights or subsequent amendments, you have to admit that this speaks pretty explicitly to the subject of personal privacy:

      Amendment IV

      The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

      Amendments III and V (look them up) also seem to enumerate and describe rights related to personal privacy, no?

      I would think that "The right of the people to be secure in their persons...shall not be violated" was meaningful for Roe v. Wade. How 'bout you?

      Even if you're not following that, Amendments IX and X clearly state that the federal government is Constitutionally bound to respect state's rights and personal rights whether they're explicitly defined or not.

      So, any way you cut it, your profoundly ignorant interpretation is ill-considered, wrong, annoying and, again, profoundly ignorant.
    8. Re:sigh by m50d · · Score: 1
      I guess you're assuming some sort of benevolence from file-sharers that I simply do not see. That's not to say that file-sharers are in any way inherently the enemies of the artists whose content they are distributing. But that's a whole other argument, and it's one that is played out here on slashdot often enough without our involvement.

      I don't think I'm making any such assumption. Casual filesharers will have no reason to strip out such DRM - they know they downloaded the file. There won't be the millions of bored students effect - the original crack for iTMS DRM put a signature in the files it produced. Such people wouldn't care about this type of DRM. Commercial pirates would have to crack it themselves, or pay others to, at considerable expense and questionable benefit.

      --
      I am trolling
  14. Relatively obvious.... by Gibsnag · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "We are committed to making sure that the digital distribution of content is a reality."

    It already is a reality, you just missed the boat by about a decade.

    "For example, we are still trying to learn more about what people want for entertainment, how do the(y?) want it, and how we strike a balance that is fair and gives people choice."

    I can answer that for you, we want it cheap (as in ALOT cheaper than CDs), easy to download and without DRM. That will stop a larger proportion of piracy than your existing methods of beating old and young alike with legal documents. I mean you basically have a choice, use DRM piss off a large proportion of your audience, however pirates will just strip the DRM away (don't be naieve enough to think that it won't be cracked) and it'll be shared as a clean .mp3 file, or you can deliver that clean .mp3 file yourselves, gain some good publicity from that and get more from people who'd rather buy a clean .mp3 than pirate it if possible.

    1. Re:Relatively obvious.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Uhh... they were talking about MOVIES, not music. Although I still think your point is valid one.

  15. Well, yes: by SamSim · · Score: 2, Funny

    Garfield acknowledges that they do not have much of a grip on the file-sharing world as they would like to believe.

    Well, yes, as proven by the fact that file-sharing still occurs.

  16. Christ, are they _all_ this stupid?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Seriously, are they really that out of touch with reality or is it a smokescreen to cover up even more malice towards us?

  17. Bad movies, bad remakes, bad ideas by digitaldc · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "We want to tell stories about fantasmigorical pirates not spend much of our resources on fighting piracy. It should come as no surprise to you that every studio is committed to making movies and television shows that people love and are willing to see. Some times we are successful, but when we are it is not from a lack of trying. No one gets up in the morning and says today 'I am going to make a really bad movie.'"

    They say are committed to making movies and television shows that people love and are willing to see, but usually they have run out of ideas and just remake the television shows into movies that will make money.

    For example, which one of these bombs would you say was a good idea?
    The Dukes of Hazzard?
    Starsky and Hutch?
    Fat Albert?
    Lost in Space?
    The Mod Squad?
    Scooby Doo?


    I was not willing to see any of them, but I guess Hollywood is in a creativity crisis and the MPAA is not helping.
    Nobody gets up in the morning and says I want to make a bad movie, but they DO get up and say I want to make a movie that will make a reasonable profit regardless of the insipid and tedious script.

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
    1. Re:Bad movies, bad remakes, bad ideas by tulak_horde · · Score: 1

      Well, for the record Scooby did $153 Million. Not exactly a bomb.

    2. Re:Bad movies, bad remakes, bad ideas by SpecBear · · Score: 1

      This depends entirely on what your definition of "Good Idea" is. If I'm reading the data at IMDB right, all of the movies you mentioned except "Lost in Space" turned a pretty good profit. What better way than ticket sales is there to measure whether a movie is one that people "love and and are willing to see"? What definition of "bomb" are you using? Usually, a movie that's a "bomb" is one that doesn't turn a profit at the box office. Perhaps you think these movies suck (of course, you don't really know for certain since you haven't seen them), but apparently a lot of people were willing to give them a chance.

      If you want to bash a movie based on a TV show that actually tanked at the box office, I've got one for you: Serenity. But you're not likely to see anyone around here railing on that as signifying a creativity crisis. How about the Star Trek movies? And this isn't just about mining TV shows for ideas to recycle, the practice spans the breadth of media. Hell, how many times are we going to see someone come up with an interpretation of Romeo and Juliet? The Passion of the Christ? Now that's dated.

      There's plenty to criticize about Hollywood, but I think you're just being pretentious.

    3. Re:Bad movies, bad remakes, bad ideas by digitaldc · · Score: 1

      ---There's plenty to criticize about Hollywood, but I think you're just being pretentious.

      I guess everyone has their own sense of taste, and I did see a couple of those movies I mentioned...but still it would be interesting to see movies that are totally original in theme or storyline is what I was trying to get across. It leaves a bit more to the imagination, and you don't end up comparing it to its own original version.

      --
      He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
  18. I almost read the article... by slapout · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...because when I first say the headline I thought it said they had interviewed Garfield the cat.

    --
    Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
  19. Cute by typical · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Identifying the scope of the commercial versus the open source problem is no easier than discerning real data on p2p usage.

    Ah, yes. Those problematic open source P2P authors.

    Mr. Garfield, I like hacking on P2P software. You can sic attorneys on every visible open source P2P author, and all that will happen is you will drive people underground -- and you don't need much of an underground to write all the software that anyone could ever use. You aren't going to manage to stop the production of open source P2P software.

    Perhaps you'd like to look at Microsoft, Mr. Garfield. Microsoft has greater annual revenues than *all your member studios put together*. Microsoft has *clout*.

    Microsoft wasn't able to quash open source development, despite spending an awful lot of money and effort on it, Mr. Garfield. I'm going to give you *very* slim chances of succeeding where they failed.

    What are you going to try? PR? Microsoft did that. They called Linux a virus. They said it exposed users to liability. They said that it was insecure, and that it was *communist*, Mr. Garfield. It didn't work.

    How about legislation? Maybe, if you're *really* lucky, you can manage to pay enough legislators to vote in laws criminalizing the production of software that is used to cause greater than some degree of purported damages. I don't think that you can manage that -- you'd face opposition from a lot of tech types, and a number of legislators have noticed that people don't *like* stories in the newspaper about nine-year-old girls being sued for thousands of dollars. But let's say that, despite all that, you manage it. There are a *lot* of open source programmers overseas, Mr. Garfield, and software does not understand national boundaries. The US government made export of encryption code illegal due to national security concerns for a long time. What happened? Encryption development and distribution continued, from overseas. It didn't do any good. You can't quash software development.

    You going to try to track down all the people copying software and music and movies down? Mr. Garfield, one of the primary functions of a computer is to reproduce and distribute data quickly and accurately. There is *huge* demand for this, demand which far exceeds and outweighs any demand for entertainment. They have a device which does *exactly* what you don't want. There are *too many people* that want to be able to copy around movies for this to work.

    How about a technical solution, Mr. Garfield? You spent plenty of effort trying to lock up DVDs -- that didn't work (you excluded Linux from your supported platforms, which was pretty stupid and put a lot of very smart Linux-using techies and crypto types to work on the problem, but even if you hadn't, it wouldn't have lasted long). You want to try again? Well, there are a lot of security types who would love to take your money and can guarantee you the moon, but it isn't going to happen.

    You want to try keeping digital data from becoming analog? Good luck.

    You want to try keeping analog data from becoming digital? This is a new, interesting one. You're now trying to plug a hole that requires *one* person with *one* analog-to-digital encoding device somewhere in the *world* per movie. It makes no more sense than trying to use CSS to keep people from getting at DVD content. It's just not a feasible approach.

    I know that this is a really appalling concept, and one that you probably don't want to entertain. But it is possible -- just possible -- that your only solution is to reduce costs to where the convenience and guaranteed quality of buying your product from you outweighs the inconvenience of pirating. That means that you have to trim all your excess fat. That means that maybe you can't spend hundreds of millions of dollars producing and marketing a movie. Maybe you can't *have* actors that get tens of millions of dollars for every work. Maybe you need to use CG, and can't afford to recompen

    --
    Any program relying on (nontrivial) preemptive multithreading will be buggy.
    1. Re:Cute by tRANIS · · Score: 1

      Yes! this post says all that I was thinking as well as the rest.

      There is just no way to stop it. Nothing to stop anyone from hooking up analogue outputs from something and capturing on something else. Sure it won't be "high quality" but half the time I don't believe thats a issue.
      The "people" will go to great lengths to do what they are not supposed to.
      Just look at those crazy people who scan entire Dungeons and Dragons books, one page at a time.
      How are you going to beat that?!?

      --
      Oh wait was I supposed to say something witty here?!?
    2. Re:Cute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *I* *really* *like* *asterisks* *!*

      Great post otherwise.

    3. Re:Cute by eheldreth · · Score: 1

      Papaers which on reflect certin wave lengths, you then force congress to pass laws not allowing scanners to use those wave lengths.

      --
      The perversity of the Universe tends towards a maximum. - O'Toole's Corollary
    4. Re:Cute by eheldreth · · Score: 1

      s/papaers/papers/, its hard to type and eat at the same time.

      --
      The perversity of the Universe tends towards a maximum. - O'Toole's Corollary
  20. WTF?!? by iolaus · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The proposed introduction of ICT (Image Constraint Tokens) with blue-ray and HD-DVD formats as part of the Advanced Access Content System (AACS) offers a way forward, a means of limiting the quality of secondary copying. ICT would enable a user to still see content, but not in its original resolution. This way, analogue displays and other unauthorized devices can still receive and play content, just not in a rich HD format.

    That is from Slyck! Last time I checked those technologies did things like disabling HD output unless you are using HDMI (with support for a no-copy flag). WTF?!? Not only are most HD displays manufactured to this date lacking an HDMI input, but such technology eliminates my FAIR USE RIGHT to make a full quality backup! What kind of a sell-out crappy-ass solution is that?

    If you want to make sure I never pirate content here are a few tips:

    • Make the content cheap (a few bucks a movie, $.50 a song, etc.)
    • Make the content easily accessable (let me download it from a fast, searchable site)
    • Make the content high-quality (give me the option of HD quality video and CD-or-better quality audio)
    • Once purchased, let me use the content as I damn well please (rip it, burn it, transcode it, play it on a computer, play it on a portable device, etc).

    Once these requirements are met, all my media will be obtained 100% legally because it will just make sense!
    I am willing to pay a reasonable amount for convenience, quality, and flexability.
    --
    I find laziness to be an excellent motivator.
    1. Re:WTF?!? by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      Since when do you have a right to make a full quality back-up?

      I only ask this because I'm too lazy to go read through the Sony v BetaMax case to see where they talk about image quality.

      Back in those days, making a backup (to tape) created an inherently non-perfect quality result. Even worse, that copy degraded with repeated use.

      I think you're misunderstanding the relationship between the ability to make a perfect digital copy and the right to make one.

      Just my 2 pennies

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    2. Re:WTF?!? by iolaus · · Score: 1

      Well, if I'm only afforded the right to make a copy and not a copy with the full quality technology will allow, I'd say that's an awfuly slippery slope! If that were the case, what would stop the *AAs from restricting copies to some unuseably low quality?

      --
      I find laziness to be an excellent motivator.
    3. Re:WTF?!? by TubeSteak · · Score: 1
      If that were the case, what would stop the *AAs from restricting copies to some unuseably low quality?
      MacroVision?

      If you've ever seen a dubbed tape that has been mangled by macrovision, you'll know what I mean.

      I agree with you, but it would be awfully tempting from a content provider point of view to limit copies to a lower quality and perhaps make you pay for the privelege of a bit for bit dupe.
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    4. Re:WTF?!? by pembo13 · · Score: 1

      I personally find AllofMp3 more convinient than Kazaa, Morpheus, or any of those things.

      --
      "Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
    5. Re:WTF?!? by Dyolf+Knip · · Score: 1

      Years ago I described the ideal online music store. IIRC, I said that it would beat out Kazaa by being organized like a regular music store and have all the songs available in a variety of formats. And it would beat out iTunes and all the sad pathetic attempts at online stores by the RIAA by being hellaciously cheap and selling the tunes in plain simple formats unencumbered by DRM. For those of you who don't know, allofmp3.com sells music at $.02 per megabyte, so the average album at 192kbps will set you back by $1.50

      In fact, the only part of my descriptions that allofmp3 hasn't done is the merchandising. Posters, album inserts, printed or printable cd labels, t-shirts, etc. Probably because they want to keep it an entirely non-meat-space endeavor. They should contract with some other companies to put up links to those.

      --
      Dyolf Knip
    6. Re:WTF?!? by chris_sawtell · · Score: 1
      Once purchased, let me use the content as I damn well please.
      Does that include copying for subsequent resale? If so,
      • Are you prepared to let the copyright holder in on the deal?
      • How should the cookie crumble?
    7. Re:WTF?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes it does and obviously not.

      If you sell me a car, I can resell it without letting you in the deal.

      The doctrine of first sale establishes this is legal already, so the point is moot. The only reason it does not apply to digital works is it is illegal to tamper with the DRM locking the files to one person.

  21. Sorry Mr. Garfield by AnyThingButWindows · · Score: 5, Interesting

    but I own a computer repair store in a town of about 5,000. I am the only one. I do not support DRM or anything with 'Trusted Computing', and NEVER will, for that matter. When someone asks what they should use to get music, I point them to Limewire. I preload Limewire, FireFox, AVG, Nero OEM, and Ad-Aware, on all the PCs I sell. I put the burdon of DRM reactions on the MPAA, RIAA, and those who sell broken music that violates my customer's fair use rights. When a customer has a Sony rootkit problem, I fix the problem, then give them Sony's number for their corporate office, and the number of a good lawyer. If a customer has music with DRM attached to it, I have tools to strip the DRM from the songs, then re-encode them into mp3 format. I now have 3/4ths of the town's file sharers on limewire, and am going strong. I don't put ANYTHING on a customers computer that restricts what they can, and cannot do with THEIR OWN machine. Untill the entertainment industry gets their act together, and stops infecting people's private property with viruses, and spyware, lobbying our elected officials, and continued cyber-terrorist activity, I will continue to recommend Limewire, and fight them with what resources, and influence I have. And at the moment Mr. Garfield, my business is expanding, fast, and vastly increasing.

    --
    When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. - Jefferson
    1. Re:Sorry Mr. Garfield by RyoShin · · Score: 1

      While I agree with the rest of /. that DRM is bad, to me it seems you may be going a bit far. First off, like or not, isn't removing the DRM on songs illegal? (Thanks, DMCA!)

      Second, why point them to Limewire for their music? I can understand trying to fight the Evil DRM Imperialists, but downloading music that isn't released for free is wrong, even if the government punishment for such is overly severe. Why not point them to one of the smaller companies that carry more independent labels and offer un-inhibited MP3 downloads? Why not point them to iTunes and mention (or, since you seem so gung-ho about it, install) jHymn?

      The RIAA is wrong, but fighting them like this isn't the right way to go about it. It's akin to anit-abortion groups covering the walls of an abortion clinic with hateful propoganda. Yes, it may get some of the ideals across, but it's illegal (and bad taste), and most people won't respond too nicely to it on either side.

    2. Re:Sorry Mr. Garfield by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the first customer of yours that gets sued for filesharing is going to rope you in on it...

    3. Re:Sorry Mr. Garfield by AnyThingButWindows · · Score: 1

      Removing DRM is not illegal. DRM is illegal because it violates fair use rights. And I believe that the Betamax (court) decicion was here before the DMCA. The DMCA is an unconstitutional law, but has yet to be challenged in court. The DMCA is illegal within itself. I will never be told what I can and can't say. If I find a way to make (insert something here) work properly, where I can record, or copy (insert whatever here), and some company like Sony doesn't like it, too bad, its already on everyone's drives. I'll tell Sony to bring it on. Ive got lots of money, and a few lawyers myself. I have a few things that I can convict them of too.

      Yes, it may get some of the ideals across, but it's illegal (and bad taste), and most people won't respond too nicely to it on either side.

      It is illegal because the entertainment industry illegally lobbied (paid off) our ELECTED OFFICIALS TO MAKE IT ILLEGAL. They break the law, congress breaks the law, so what IS the law anymore? BTW: I am pro choice, but I do NOT believe in murder. God gave us all free will, but he expects us to do the right thing, and make the right choices.

      Revolution is how America was born. Without revolution we would still be in England, and probably be executed for not being Catholic.

      If money went to the artists that made the music, then they would all be competeing against each other for your dollar, and there would be no Sony, TW, or BMG. Independant artists are great, I listen to a lot of independant metal, and R&B. A good friend of mine, and a local artist owns Scandalous Records. http://www.scandalousrecords.com/. I encourage others to support independant artists too. But what they download is up to them. If they buy a CD, they can do with it as they wish. Just as if someone buys a computer from me, they can do with it as they wish. P2P is a great peice of technology, and Limewire rocks. Limewire has its uses wether good, or bad, and is there for people to enjoy, and learn how technology works. I don't ask them what they paid for and really don't care. They may have owned the CD at one time, and lost it 10 years ago for all I know. You know what would REALLY kick ass though? A download service offering NON-DRM mp3s, Aif, or Ogg Vorbis (why not all?) for like 30 or 50 cents a song (and none of that wma crap since it doesn't work on anything but one player). Now THAT is something I would go for.

      I myself am an artist, but unlike the greedy ones out there, I make music so that others can enjoy it. All my music is created digitally on my Apple with GarageBand, and Soundtrack Pro. I never pick up an instrument. Before Christmas I put Electric Grace on my site for everyone to enjoy. http://www.kore-net.com/~jd/

      --
      When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. - Jefferson
  22. ANNOTATED INTERVIEW by argoff · · Score: 2, Insightful

    BitTorrent

    Slyck: With your outreach to Bram Cohen, it appears that you are trying to bridge the gap between file-sharing developers and content providers. How do you think this interview can bridge the gap between file-sharers and the MPAA?

    Garfield: "Stereotypes are often borne out of silence and a lack of understanding. (understand us, we're greedy) This dialogue, as well as our work with Bram and others, is aimed at creating greater understanding through conversation and action. (or coercion)

    "The motion picture industry is working aggressively (aka, threatening to sue people) to take advantage of ( or exploit) wide array of digital distribution platforms (aka universal controll) and to provide consumers (aka coerce into using) a wide array of legitimate (aka, we can strangle you with content controlls) options for enjoying movies and television shows. Slyck is a great venue for sharing our plans (aka siezing controll) for the digital future and gaining feedback."

    Legislation

    Slyck: Do you feel that the future of your industry will better be served by legislative means only or through negotiated compromise and cooperation to eliminate the sources of first run high quality pirated material?

    Garfield: "Even in the movies it is rare that silver bullets truly work. (aka we make crapy content most of the time) Our strategies for addressing the promises (of total controll) and pitfalls (loss of monopoly) of the digital age are and have to be multi-faceted. In some instances our solution (coercion) will be legislative (bought off)in others it will be based on negotiated compromise (lawsuits). It is worth noting that those two principles are not mutually exclusive. It is often said that the legislative process is like making sausage - - it is a messy compromise. (no 100% monopoly) Even where we go down the legislative route there is always a lot of dialogue and compromise." (and payola)

    Thinking that this implied a reluctance on their part to litigate, we then asked; Does the MPAA feel its legal actions, on behalf of its member companies, helps or deters transition P2P users to legal alternatives?

    Garfield: "We think that it helps to move P2P users away from the illegitimate (ones that we can't monopolize) systems. When people understand that the risks and costs of engaging in this conduct are significant many of those people will stop. (so death threats are next) Not everyone does change their behavior and right now we are having the unintended effect of helping to move people from one illegal service to another. (oops) LimeWire has recently soared in popularity (it has? is this a trap?), because of the closure of other illegal P2P services. That is not lost on us. We are working on strategies to address that problem. (perhaps physical torture and violence?)

    "Moreover, as we roll out more and more legitimate alternatives ( that we can monopolize) we will also have a greater impact (ream people for more overpriced content). We also know that many people, not Slyck readers but others, don't often recognize that downloading and posting movies via some P2P groups is illegal (they don't care) and some parents don't know what kinds of things their kids are doing on line. ( aka - consider suing the parents too) It is our hope that these suits will raise community awareness to piracy (boarding ships and murdering people? NOT! ) and its consequences (our cartel gets broken) and I think our legal actions help to achieve that goal." (to restore the cartel)

    Statistics

    Given that few would support commercial piracy, and given the poor publicity over the use of DRM, how much of their problem is directly caused by commercial piracy?

    Garfield: "We are studying that issue, but do not have a real answer. Identifying the scope of the commercial versus

  23. NEWS FLASH by what_the_frell · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Hackers and the user community are always one step ahead of the RIAA and MPAA.

    1. Re:NEWS FLASH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      (Obligatory 'The Core' Reference)


      We just need to keep DVD Jon well stocked with Hot Pockets & Xena tapes.

  24. Pot != Murder by dwandy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's nice that you move directly from a recreational activity that (might) harm the person who engages in it and no one else, to an activity that prematurely ends another's life ... good to see we all have a little perspective here on /.
    I actually think the analogy isn't too bad: The only reason that pot is illegal and alcohol & tabacco aren't is pretty much an accident of history. There's no actual reason to distinguish between these drugs (and they are all three drugs, but only two are legal). ...so it's not so obious to people that it should be illegal, which is why there is relatively high use and even countries where it is actually legal... where exactly is murder legal or tolerated?

    --
    If you think imaginary property and real property are the same, when does your house become public domain?
    1. Re:Pot != Murder by Joel+from+Sydney · · Score: 1

      where exactly is murder legal or tolerated?

      Here's a short list.

  25. Actually by quokkapox · · Score: 2, Funny

    He accidentally wrote "working aggressively" instead of "failing to".

    --
    it's a blue bright blue Saturday hey hey
  26. Eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...or that they can come up with a cheap technical fix which will roll back the clock all the way to LPs, where you couldn't make copies at all without permission.

    On the contrary, taping your LPs was legal and accepted. All of us geezers (especially nerdy geezers) did it. Bring a blank cassette to a friend's house, tape his new album.

    When I bought an album, it got played exactly once, and taped as it was being played. The cassette sounded nearly as good as the LP, even on good equipment, and a lot better than the LP sounded after it had been played (and dropped) a few times at drunken partys. When the cassette got eaten, record a new one.

    I do that with my CDs now; no way would I take a factory CD (especially of the limited edition indie CDs I buy) in the car.

    These days they have DRM, where nobody but a nerd (or a kid with a sharpie or a finger to hold the shift key down with) can make more than nn copies of their CDs.

    You should google k5 for "birth of a label sanctioned pirate radio station" (I think that was the name).

    1. Re:Eh? by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 1

      I was kinda referring to that period of LPs before 8 tracks came out where you could buy the LP or you could buy the 45, or you could listen to it on the radio, but, without a reel to reel player, you couldn't record anything. I think the RIAA still thinks of that as their golden age.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
  27. No litigation against those aware? by lasindi · · Score: 1

    That's truly dumb. Educating parts of the market by beating people with a piece of legal two-by-four is not productive. Advertise, promote, share information and engage with the people you're trying to reach is healthier and more likely to create understanding.

    And how is the MPAA supposed to deal with people who are fully aware that copyright infringement is illegal? You can "advertise, promote, share information and engage" with such people forever, and they'll still pirate copyrighted material. The Slashdot community constantly argues that if the MPAA/RIAA offer legal movie/music online stores and advertises against piracy, it will stop. It's time to face up to the fact that a lot of people out there are simply breaking the law and are fully aware of it. Copyright infringement is a civil offense, which means copyright holders (e.g. MPAA) are responsible for enforcing their copyrights; and when they do enforce copyrights, Slashdot starts criticizing them for it. I know the MPAA/RIAA has done things that are questionable to say the least (the recent Sony DRM debacle being a perfect example), but I don't see why their primary philosophy, that copyright holders should be able to enforce their copyright, is being attacked.

    --
    I have discovered a truly remarkable proof of this theorem that this sig is too small to contain.
  28. DVDs in Sweden by PromANJ · · Score: 1

    In Sweden DVDs might be 199-249sek for new and well known movies (currently Fantastic Four, SW ep3, Batman Begins). A sek is 7.95 usd at the moment, so that's 25-30 usd for a movie here.

    Then they usually drop to 149sek and stay there if the movie is good (same with games). If they're really old or not that good, they drop to 89sek or '2 for 99sek' after half a year or so.

  29. I think it's just bad wording by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

    I think he didn't mean open source was a problem, but the task of getting accurate numbers on OSS usage data. i.e. how many Linux installations there are vs. the number of Windows installations. (Due to the nature of Linux distribution, there is no accurate way to count exactly how many are using it.) I think he's saying they have the same problem with P2P vs. legit distribution - they have no way of gaining any remotely accurate statistics about exactly how many people are doing it. In short, he was using the example of getting accurate statistics on open source usage to illustrate the sort of problems with trying to get accurate P2P numbers.

    --
    retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
  30. Clean their own house. by schlick · · Score: 3, Interesting
    In the course of the interview the issue of watermarking was discussed. This allows an audit trail leading back to the source of every copy that is made of media. Interestingly, Dean said that he wasn't keen to adopt any system that would give them an incentive to track down people and seek to take legal action against them.


    This tells me that they don't want to persue the people in the industry who are actually leaking the content. They don't want to litigate against thier own. They'll sue a little girl, but not some lacky that works in the industry. You'd think that they'd be interested in at least tracking the propagation path. Hell I'd be interested in that.

    On a different note, I'm a movie junky. When a new movie that I really want to see I want to see it on a big screen with an awesome sound system, with my redvines, popcorn, and cherry coke. My roommate actually got a pre release of Ep.1 and I refused to watch it on his 21" computer monitor at VCD quality. It would ruin the experience.

    What I don't like it the whole "event" marketers try to create (one of my bigest pet peeves about Apple as well). When it is ready to release, f*cking release it!!! The artificial scarcity only makes me annoyed, sometimes pissed off enough to hold out buying it, sometimes violate copywrite as a means of flipping them the bird. Don't treat your customers like imbeciles (even if they are).
    --
    "It's because they're stupid, that's why. That's why everybody does everything." -Homer Simpson
    1. Re:Clean their own house. by Dyolf+Knip · · Score: 1

      My roommate actually got a pre release of Ep.1 and I refused to watch it on his 21" computer monitor at VCD quality. It would ruin the experience.

      Heh, I thought the movie itself did a pretty thorough job of that.

      --
      Dyolf Knip
    2. Re:Clean their own house. by zaliph · · Score: 1
      The problem with persuing the industry-types who actually leak the content is that there are so many. It's easier (and cheaper) to simply "cut them off" from any more releases than it is to actually litigate against it.

      Besides, there's a lot of problems with litigating within the industry as well. Imagine if the editor of Rolling Stone was ripping a few choice DVDs for his friends for Christmas of as yet unreleased material. You're a publicist for a minor distributor and you find out. Do you enforce legal action and risk never getting press in Rolling Stone (or any of its many affiliates) ever again? At the same time, if you take the easy route and refuse to send any more screeners, you're not going to get any press either. So there's little harm in letting this infraction slip by on your end.

      The fact is, the movie industry (with all its intricacies) will screw the consumer in every conceivable way and then create an image of itself as martyr when the fit hits the shan. Not so different from any other industry, is it?

  31. The MPAA President was on PBS December 22nd 2005 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Last night I was having dreams that were a bit like twisted news coverage. There were reports of corrupt elections, training grounds terrorists had used were discovered, human rights were restricted - gays couldn't marry and women were having rights threatened. The Canadian military was moving into Florida in an attempt to free the people. Judge Judy had sentenced corrupt FDA leaders to take massive doses of laxatives, and had sent the CEO of Diebold to a cage at the zoo to be with some very aggressive animals during mating season. International protests were covering the actions of Sony and a major drug company. After complaints of flu shots being more painful than usual this season, it was discovered that they'd secretly been injecting us with RFID chips. Sony had secretly been shipping CDs and DVDs with RFID chips in the plastic, and the bio-data of the purchaser was linked to the serial numbers in the media as purchasers passed through scanners by store exits.. People who'd attempted to use their media in an unauthorized way were mysteriously dying. It turned out that when players of net-enabled Xbox and Playstation games were shooting opponents, they were killing those who'd put discs in their PCs as their shots triggered toxic releases from the in-the-flesh RFID chips. Sony executives denied any connection to the terrorist conspiracy (the plan to stick their asses outside and simultaneously fart in the direction of Washington D.C. at 12 midnight on New Year's Eve was unrelated), saying that they weren't the ones doing the shooting, and they were simply keeping people in line while giving gamers the realism they wanted.

    Just then I woke up, MPAA president Dan Glickman, was on the Tavis Smiley show on PBS. He confessed that theatre attendance was down, partly due to a shift to DVDs and partly due to consumers not finding the movies compelling enough. The following segment didn't explicitly say that the music industry was lacking great new artists and material, but it featured members of Earth, Wind and Fire whose legacy status was reflected by the line "from 8-track to iPod".

  32. Fair use isn't a right of yours, its a defense. by dmouritsendk · · Score: 1

    I'm no law student, but according to a lawstudent friend of mine there's actually a huge difference(we've debated the fair use subject again and again).

    check item 16. @ http://copylaw.com/new_articles/fairuse.html

    1. Re:Fair use isn't a right of yours, its a defense. by iolaus · · Score: 1

      I'm no law student, but according to a lawstudent friend of mine there's actually a huge difference(we've debated the fair use subject again and again).

      Interesting.

      Unfortunately, the defense argument becomes a moot point quickly with the provisions of the DMCA that prevent breaking encryption. I guess the only options left for those of us that want change are media-boycott and civil disobediance. I choose the latter.

      --
      I find laziness to be an excellent motivator.
  33. Never pay a dime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They can do what they want, say what they want but I will never ever pay a dime to the music/movie industry after all the shit they done.

  34. In related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The MPAA has announced that it has taken "Slyck" hostage, commenting "you'll get him back once all P2P filesharers have turned themselves in."

  35. The Correct Quotation by Gryle · · Score: 1

    " It is often said that the legislative process is like making sausage - - it is a messy compromise"

    The actual quotation is "Laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made" and it's attributed to Otto Von Bismarc.
    So the MPAA dpesn't us watching the legislation they push through Congress. That way we're completely ignorant of the destruction of our online rights in regard to information sharing. Cute.

    --
    Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
  36. Re:resigh by SmellMyTeenSpirit · · Score: 1

    I am sorry to point out that my bubble is still intact, unburst, but:

    "Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case establishing that most laws against abortion violate a constitutional right to privacy, overturning all state laws outlawing or restricting abortion."

    That's the very first sentence of the wikipedia entry on Roe v Wade.

    --
    "Cornflakes are not the innocent critters they seem"- Sterling Morrison
  37. Legalise and Tax. by chris_sawtell · · Score: 1

    The various ..AAs of the world should take a page out of the lawmakers' books. When a proscribed activity beomes so widespread that enforcement of a prohibition becomes impossible, both politically and effectively, then sensible Governments legalise, regulate, and tax it. I'd like to see the content creation industries face up to the fact that their best option is to not only run their own BitTorrent trackers and seeds, but also to license others to do so. I just so happen to like content which at least attempts to exercise the brain cells, yet there is none on TV where I live. I therefore get my miniscule ration of programmes over the Internet via index sites which specialise in my kind of content. I would have no problem with having to pay a small fee to view the material I like to watch. Ideally, for convenience, I would like to see the various fees being collected by my ISP as part of my regular bill in return for accessing a BitTorrent tracker & seeds not only on their local network, but also any other licenced provider. Just like my ISP provides e-mail facilities. Note that I _*DO NOT WANT*_, nor am prepared to pay for, any content which has been ruined by being riddled with parasitic advertising messages.

  38. Re:The MPAA President was on PBS December 22 2005 by camperslo · · Score: 1

    Transcript: Dan Glickman, Tavis Smiley

    Tavis Smiley: Good evening. From Los Angeles, I'm Tavis Smiley. Tonight, a conversation about the state of the movie business with Dan Glickman, chair and CEO of the Motion Picture Association of America. The former Kansas congressman heads up the MPAA at a crucial time. He must contend with increasing concerns about sex and violence in movies, DVD piracy and the continuing political debate over Hollywood's perceived liberal bias. Dan Glickman must also fill the large shoes left by Jack Valente who was Hollywood's top lobbyist in Washington for 38 years.

    Also tonight, from the legendary R&B group, the Elements, "Earth, Wind & Fire," Verdine White, Philip Bailey and Ralph Johnson stop by. This fall, the Rock & Roll Hall of Famers are out with their 23rd and latest CD, called "Illumination." We're glad you've joined us. That's all coming up right now.

    Announcer: "Tavis Smiley" is made possible in part by Toyota, makers of the 2006 Toyota Camry. Toyota, now, that's moving you forward. This portion of "Tavis Smiley" is brought to you by Wal-Mart. We embrace diversity and strive to uphold its ideals for our customers and our associates. We are committed to our community partnerships, and we are an equal opportunity employer. And by contributions to your PBS station from viewers like you. Thank you.

    Dan Glickman
    Learn more about this guest.
    Tavis: Dan Glickman is the chairman and CEO of the Motion Picture Association of America, although tonight we will call him the opening act for "Earth, Wind & Fire." He took over at the MPAA following Jack Valente's 38-year run as Hollywood's top lobbyist. Prior to his new post, he served in the House of Representatives for nearly 20 years, representing his home state of Kansas. From 1995 to 2000, he was US Secretary of Agriculture, you'll recall, under President Bill Clinton. I'm pleased to have him here in LA. Mr. Glickman, nice to have you here, sir.
    Dan Glickman: Thank you, Tavis.

    Tavis: How does it feel to be opening act for a group like "Earth, Wind & Fire"?

    Glickman: I'm just shaking in my boots, actually. I hope I don't hurt their routine.

    Tavis: Yeah, I'm sure you won't, sure you won't. Let me start, before I get to the MPAA, with the news of today. You are a former member of Congress, former member of a presidential cabinet. Today's big news, Tom DeLay has been indicted. The Majority Leader has to step down at least temporarily while these charges go forward. What's your sense of what this does to politics in Washington, Republican politics, what Democrats are going to make out of this? A lot of heat on Tom DeLay for months now. And today he officially has to step down.

    Glickman: Well, I actually served with him for a period of years when I was in the House. It's not good when any public official, Republican or Democrat, gets indicted. It further diminishes the public view of public officials, whatever party they are. And I don't know enough about the facts. I think that will have to run its own course. I do think that this is kind of a symbol of excessive amounts of money in politics. I mean, politics today involves just this frenetic search for money by anybody in office or running for office.

    And I think that this is the kind of the natural evolution of what happens when people rush too hard to race for the dollar. Again, not knowing the facts, we'll have to watch how it turns out. But you know, I'm sure that it's not going to make people feel better about politics in this country. But look, if he committed a felony, he'll have to pay for that.

    Tavis: In light of this indictment, and many before it, certainly, Republican and Democrat to your point, in light of Hurricane Katrina and the ongoing debate about what the government did not do and how they did not respond quickly enough, FEMA hearings for Michael Brown earlier this week, I wonder whether it is your sense that the public trust in the integrity of our body politic is, in fact, eroding

  39. Re:The MPAA President was on PBS December 22nd 200 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think you could write some sci-fi stories....