Comcast Targets Unlicensed Anime Torrenters
SailorSpork writes "According to a thread on the forums of AnimeSuki, a popular anime bittorent index site, Comcast has begun sending DCMA letters to customers downloading unlicensed fan-subtitled anime shows via bittorrent. By 'unlicensed', they mean that no english language company has the rights to it. The letters are claiming that the copyright holder or an authorized agent are making the infringement claims, though usually these requests are also sent to the site itself rather that individual downloaders. My question is have they really been in contact with Japanese anime companies, or is this another scare tactic by Comcast to try and reduce the bandwidth use of their heavier customers now that their previous tactics have come under legal fire?"
Some (possible) reasons:
- Series' length is small enough to let people that don't like sitting around for days on torrents download them, yet large enough to cause a impact
- Large fansubbing community, some of which compete (so a lot of different versions of the same thing floating around)
- Community that rabidly encourages watching new shows, partially because a lot of anime is so similar, and again, partially because of the short series length of each
- Otaku have the time and devotion to put into managing daily torrents/downloads
- Generality of the genre - it's like saying "there's a lot of people that watch sitcoms"
- There are a lot of nerds on the Internet, period!
I don't care for most anime (most of it seems to be robots, ninjas, and loli) but the people that do are very devoted to the genre. I'm not surprised that it would account for a lot of traffic.
There's two big draws I think. First off, look at the success of serialized shows like Heroes and Lost. Shows with ongoing plot lines, rather than completely episodic sit-coms and dramas like CSI. Rather than being the exception, shows with a single overarching plot line planned from the start of the series (or even earlier in the case of an anime based on a manga) are the norm in most genres. So you can have development, a real crisis, and a conclusion in 13 or 26 episodes. Compared to most american shows whose primary goal is to stay on the air as long as possible, anime provides a better storytelling experience.
Secondly, animated shows can tackle any subject matter. You don't need block buster CGI effects since everything is animated anyway. So anime shows can feature sci-fi, fantasy, or ridiculous action themes much more easily than an american tv show can.
There are some people who like it because it's Japanese and exotic and weird, but all in all I don't think that's the primary reason. It's simply that the animated medium allows more flexibility and creativity than live action, but is stigmatized in america as being childish.
The laws of probability forbid it!
So unsurprisingly it appears Comcast are acting on behalf of other parties who have never actually complained, let alone asked them too Yet another classy Comcast move.
Just like the CRIA shutting down Demonoid, despite the fact that due to the levies we pay up here on media and players, it's been ruled multiples times by the courts that downloading for personal usage is legal. Also that uploading is legal, as obviously to download, someone has to upload.
The recording industry body still shut down the site, which was hosted in Canada, despite the fact that A) really all they SHOULD be allowed to do is demand the removal of music torrents, and B) torrents which, in the host country, were perfectly legal anyway.
When will people say "ENOUGH IS ENOUGH" and jump off these ISPs and stop being their customers?
When we have another choice besides dial-up.
The truth shall set you free!
If I recall the DMCA letter correctly you have to assure under penalty of perjury that you are or represent the copyright holder.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
Make no mistake, the Japanese -are- pissed because as far as they're concerned, fansubs devalue their product.
Says you.
1. I defy you to cite examples of Japanese anime houses (not US dub shops) objecting to the fansubs of unlicensed shows.
2. No US media company would ever have bought hard-to-categorize shows like Death Note, Nana or Prince of Tennis before the fansub community proved that there was a market for such shows among western viewers. Fansubs are basically free market research for the distributors.
3. The big money in US anime distribution comes from dubbing shows with English-speaking actors and putting it on cable TV. When a show is released to DVD as a subtitle-only set (such as season 2 of SuperGALS!, or the "Uncut" editions of Seasons 1 & 2 of Sailor Moon,) sales have been lackluster at best. Fansubs don't cut in to TV viewership numbers on Adult Swim. If anything, they boost ratings and DVD sales, because by the time, for example, Death Note hit cable TV last month, the show was one of the hottest word-of-mouth topics at anime conventions and on web forums for over a year. No amount of traditional marketing could have done for that show what a few dozen "L" and "Misa" cosplayers at each and every con last summer accomplished to get people curious about it.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
I see some people come up with the logical question, why still use comcast. Because we have no choice people reply. But aren't you americans, the country of the free market that should ensure plenty of competition? How come I as a socialist live in a country with multiple ISP's whose competition is mandated by the goverment, creating a free market and ensuring that any ISP that tried to pull this will be out of business very soon (it is very hard here to even find an ISP who still uses traffic limits other then the speed of your connection)
Shut up the reply then usually is.
Americans seem to be brainwashed when it comes to the free market, they been told that goverment regulation is bad and will scream about it at every opportunity but are totally unable to regonize the results of it.
If comcast is truly the only alternative in some areas, then that is clear evidence the free market does not work. WIth current tech there should be at least two options, cable and adsl, in all areas, using the cable and phone network that any reasonable goverment should have mandated should be available to all homes.
With both networks it is also trivial to mandate open access so that there is a difference between the company operating the cable and the actual ISP.
Is there truly no alternative to comcast (an ISP that charges tripple for a better service DOES count as an alternative, quality costs money) and if so, why are americans so utterly incapable of spotting that this is wrong and needs to be fixed, by the state, because IF it is true it is clear evidence that the free market doesn't work.
I can predict right now that this post will be modded down by an american who just cannot accept that the free market don't work, and get comments spouting why goverment interference is bad without actually ever touching the end result, that in goverment regulated areas people got choice and freedom, and in free areas people have restricitons and are at the whim of their ISP.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
What you're saying is akin to, "murder must be legal, since being murdered is legal, and for somebody to be murdered, somebody must be doing the murdering".
One possible rationale behind laws that say downloading is illegal while uploading isn't, is that there is no practical way for somebody who is merely using a network download can possibly know whether the copyright holder has authorised such distribution. For all you know, the downloads may be sanctioned.
However, when making a file available, you're expected to clear it with the copyright holder. On some level this makes sense, as long as you think along the lines of traditional producer->distributor->consumer lines, and expect normal people to be passive consumers.
The fact that the Internet doesn't actually universally work that way any more, however, has changed the balance. Everybody's uploading and downloading these days, often uploading and downloading the same file simultaneously.
To apply the same logic to modern peer to peer technology, you'd have to change the distinction from uploader and downloader, to a distinction between the person who ripped, encoded, and put the first copy online in the first place, and everybody else. That would effectively decriminalize peer to peer file sharing, although files would still enter the system illegally. Once they're in the system, they'd effectively be fair game though.
I'd prefer the changes to go a bit further myself. Non-commercial copyright infringement should be downright legalized. The copyright system was conceived in the age of the printing press being an instrument of power in the hands of relatively few people -- not a society where practically everybody has access to a global information and media exchange network -- an own personal printing press if you may.
Whenever a series became licensed in the US most groups fansubbing that series stopped.
That used to be the case. More and more I've seen digisubbers whose attitude is "Yes, it's been licensed, but we don't want to wait until they put it out, so we're going to keep subbing/releasing/distributing." I wish I could say these were a tiny minority of subbers, but I don't think so anymore.
This hobby has changed quite a bit since the days when I and my friends would spend $75-$150 on an imported laserdisc and hook it up to an Amiga 500 with a genloc card and a script file to record a VHS fansub.
"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." Col. Jeff Cooper
Well, what is it then? Obviously, it's not "free" - you're paying the levy. I can see how people could easily use the rationale of "well, I'm paying for something - I should get something for it", and proceed with downloading. I mean, what is the money supposed to be paying for?
Taxes (a levy is a tax) are typically used to support things like roads, police, health care (in some countries). There are a few roads that you drive where you are asked to pay a little more (toll roads, both government run and private), but they are not the norm. Typically we expect that if we are all compelled to pay for something then there is some personal or societal benefit to it. Taxes pay for schools for example, but not everyone paying those taxes have kids in school. Yet it's justified because having more people in society educated benefits everyone in that society. So what is the benefit of the music/copyright levy if you're not allowed to download? Maybe it benefits the copyright holders - but they are the ones *not* paying the tax. Is it like welfare? Well, welfare benefits society as a whole, since the indigent can eat and live without resorting to robbery and theft. But copyright holders are typically rich, not starving in the street.
Now, you could argue that the levy mitigates the loss of revenue due to illegal infringement. But all retailers have shoplifters and other criminals that cause losses. Sure the folks buying merchandise in the store are paying a little extra to make up for the shrinkage that the store incurs. But copyright holders have the same ability - to raise prices to cover any perceived losses. Why the levy on everyone? Why an extra tax on every consumer for a specific business, when other businesses subject to losses are not compensated?
The only conclusion possible is one of these:
- The levy is in place so that citizens are provided with free digital content, or
- The government is corrupt and officials have engaged in a quid-pro-quo with the entertainment industry to provide them with revenue that they have not earned.
I want to think that my government is doing The Right Thing, so"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia