Slashdot Mirror
MPAA Ignores Usenet, Goes After Bittorrent
mjeppsen writes "The Motion Picture Association of America is turning a blind eye towards movie piracy on Usenet, going after torrent link sites instead. PC Magazine says it is because the studios are in bed with GUBA, who is also shilling downloadable movies for the MPAA at a premium price."
The article misses a major point.
The MPAA is perfectly free to choose who to go after. If they choose to allow GUBA to continue (at least for now), that is their right. It doesn't take away from their valid position to protect their copyrights.
As an aside, I had never heard of GUBA before this. I may have to look into it...
It's just easier to find and sue torrent abusers.
So right there, Guba has some sort of DRM system in place that keeps people from just watching any movie at any time - and since they use the Usenet archives at times to snag their movies, the MPAA doesn't have to worry about "clean" copies - they'll still get paid for crappy Usenet archive copies that Joe Geek ripped from the DVD.
But there's something else that Guba offers as well: tracking of content. Does Hollywood want to know what movie might be a good pick? What if there's been a lot of traffic in "Santa Claus versus the Martians", and it's pretty constant - maybe rereleasing the DVD will make some cash.
Either way, the selective nature of just what the MPAA will go after and what they won't is rather interesting. I read through the artcle which seemed to show pretty clearly that the MPAA can ignore copyright violation when it wants to. Anyone else have a better idea than I why that may be?
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
I think the MPAA doesn't care about Usenet is because the Usenet that is provied "free" by ISP's sux in a major way. Anyone with Earthlink or TimeWarner can confirm that even with PAR2 files, there is simply not enough left of just about any rar to reassemble the archive. Too many pieces just disappear.
I guess GigaNews still isn't big enough to attract the attention of the MPAA. I hope GigaNews wouldn't give up the user's data without a fight anyway.
Also, one person posts on usenet and there are many free "anonymous" posting servers out there. Several people download. Getting the uploaders is more important to the RI/MP-AA than the leachers/lurkers. With bittorrent, nearly eveyone who downloads also uploads so all users are just as guilty.
Finally, the IP addresses of the users are easier to find via torrent than they are via usenet.
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
Lets be honest, the real reason they aren't going after it is that usenet is little known outside of IT circles and is pretty user unfriendly (at least to a layman).
It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
When a movie/music files/whatever posted to Usenet, there is only one distributor/publisher of the questionable content. When someone downloads questionable content via BitTorrent, they are simultaneously taking on the role of downloader and distributor/publisher. If the *AA wants to go after those distributing/illegitimiately publishing their content, they'll find a lot more potential targets for litigation. Even if they went after individual Usenet servers who carry the groups and posts containing copyrighted material, the pool of BitTorrent users is simply larger.
Also, these days, I'd wager that there are more simply people downloading via BitTorrent than binaries newsgroups, given the lower learning curve and generally faster download speeds.
When they're on their death beds will they look back on their lives and say "I'm glad I never kissed a girl, it was much more fun watching the latest Hollywood bullshit, then bitching about it, and all for free, hahahalolroflmao..."