MPAA Violates Another Software License

Patrick Robib, a blogger who wrote his own blogging engine called Forest Blog recently noticed that none other than the MPAA was using his work, and had completely violated his linkware license by removing all links back to the Forest Blog site, not crediting him in any way. The MPAA blog was using the Forest Blog software, but had completely stripped off his name, and links back to his site. He only found about it accidentally when he happened to visit the MPAA site.

Comments

Maybe they should be investigated som more

[viking80]

I am quite sure MPAA would fail in many similar regards if someone would take the effort to investigate.

Re:Maybe they should be investigated som more

[daknapp]

Wouldn't it be nice to send the friendly folks from the BSA to do a complete software audit of the MPAA?

Maybe an auditing circle-jerk could be set up: the BSA investigates the MPAA, who investigates the RIAA, who invesigates the BSA, etc. ad nauseum, and they could just leave the rest of us alone.

Re:Maybe they should be investigated som more

[eskayp]

"Maybe an auditing circle-jerk could be set up:..."

Their circle is already a bunch of jerks.

Re:Maybe they should be investigated som more

[Mistlefoot]

While I hope this is true - it would look good on the MPAA

1) The screencaps show very little detail
2) "Dan Glickman Forum" from the screencaps turn up nothing in Google.
3) The line provided http://www.mpaa.org/blog_default.asp doesn't exist, isn't found in google OR the wayback machine and the home page back in September 06 looks very much like it does today - I don't find any obvious links to this.

If the MPAA accuses me of stealing files they had better produce some evidence and I damn well expect (not that they desterve it) that evidence has to be provided on this.

Of course my Google skills might not be up to snuff - but come on community, find the evidence while it still exists - if it did at all.

Re:Maybe they should be investigated som more

[Chiaro Meratilo]

If you see his latest post, here, you'd see the MPAA's response.

Re:Maybe they should be investigated som more

[Patrick Robin]

I'm the creator of Forets Blog and, obviously, the author of this article so its only right that I respond to your queries.

1) The screenshots show as much detail as possible, I can/could only view the output of my system and not the source.
2/3) I came across the blog through my website referals when they accessed the RSS feed from my site. The site was live and online but I'm unsure whether it was ever linked to or if it was spidered by google, but it was on a live web server that was accessable by any member of the public. It has been removed from their web server since the article was written after some dialogue between myself and the MPAA.

I have been in communication with Paul Egge and Richard Kroon (Director of Application Development) at the MPAA and have copies of all of the emails that were sent.

Re:Maybe they should be investigated som more

[Patrick Robin]

I think you are getting slightly confused, the calendar isn't there to access archive posts but to view events that the blog owner has entered in to the system and the calendar operates independantly of which ever page is being browsed. When you are viewing the events for a given date, such as you have linked to, the calendar will change to show that month. If you are just browsing the site it will show the current month/year by default. If you look at my update on the site (http://www.patrickrobin.co.uk/default.asp?Display =5) you will see why the MPAA blog is no longer visible.

Not the first time

[Ydna]

This is not the first time the MPAA has been caught pirating the copyrighted works of others. They got caught making and distributing copies of This Film Is Not Yet Rated without permission (and after they claimed they did not make any copies).

Re:Not the first time

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know why your post is modded as "informative," because you haven't provided any information about the incident to which you are referring. Maybe if I post that the MPAA were caught red-handed drowning kittens and leaving the toilet seat up I can be modded "informative" too?

Re:How hard is it to check the license?

[Anonymous Coward]

The issue is that strict copyright law is basically unenforcable. This isn't 10 rich guys and 30 lawers going, "Muwhahaha", this is some web team figuring that they're no different from the thousands of other coders like us that break the occasional license unbeknownst to our bosses.

It's not that strict copyright law is unenforceable, it's the fact that the culture overwhelmingly looks at copyright as a minor violation.

Contact MPAA about piracy

[Anonymous Coward]

Here, I suggest contact MPAA about the whole piracy issue and point them to the offending party; themselves.

http://www.mpaa.org/ReportPiracy.asp
Please feel free to let them know about their own transgressions.

Here's the MPAA response:

[All_One_Mind]

From the next blog post on the authors site:

Well, I must say I'm surprised;to after getting no response to my previous emails to the MPAA about their use of Forest Blog at the tail end of last year I got a result within five hours this time, unless they were just replying to the original email?

Anyway, thanks to Paul Egge and Richard Kroon the situation has now been resolved and they've removed Forest Blog from their web server.

Update on his site

[creativeHavoc]

http://www.patrickrobin.co.uk/default.asp?Display= 5 The MPAA claim that it was in use only privatly and they had no advertising. Good to know. If they ever come knocking, I will tell them I watched the movies and home and never sold them to anyone.

Re:Here's the "/." response:

[NormalVisual]

In other words when informed they do the correct thing about it.

How many of the targets of **AA action were afforded the opportunity to just say the same thing - "okay, sorry, I took it down, and it wasn't really meant for public consumption anyway, so we didn't do anything wrong", as opposed to being on the wrong end of a settlement demand?

Re:Well, not anymore...

[zCyl]

Don't worry, after they pay for the Forest Blog software, they'll ... um ... they won't be able to buy a corporate lunch. Not bankruptcy I suppose, but something.

Note, at present exchange rate, the permision to remove the links is $97.

No no no. It has nothing to do with the cost of the albu^H^H^H^Hsoftware. You see, since they didn't pay initially, they should have had a link. And if they had placed a link, then there would have been more users of Forest Blog, and thus they are liable for each user who did not use Forest Blog because they were missing the link. Therefore their liability should be $97 times everyone who has visited mpaa.org, and thus was a lost customer, plus punitive damages of $150,000 per page that should have had a link.

DMCA

[dekkerdreyer]

Simply send a DMCA take down notice to their ISP requesting that the site be taken down because it is infringing.

Re:How hard is it to check the license?

[kevinbr]

"....Stealing a copy of something leaves behind no evidence...."

Over and over.....copying is not stealing. It is copying. There is a difference. The powers that be LOVE when people call copying stealing. If I steal an object - you no longer have the object. If I copy an object, you still have the object. Copyright is a givernment granted monopoly so what I am doing in copying is ignoring your monopoly. What I actually do with that copy then defne the damage that potentially could occur to your income from that copy.

I grew up copying my friends albums on tapes. We all bought stuff, but no one bleated then about stealing. We called it sharing.

How many people out there are buying NOYTHING and only aquiring music via copying. Very few I would imagine.

Re:Its sorta legit....

[TheRaven64]

Should we have decided to make the move to production, then we would have paid the 25 Pounds that would have authorized us to run a version of the blog without the logos and links. So, presumably, that means it's fine for me to download films created by MPAA members as long as I say I'll buy the DVD if I like them?

Re:Well, not anymore...

[Anonymous Coward]

---------------> Joke
O
/|\ --------->You
/ \