Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Don't Copy That Floppy! Gets a Sequel

Posted by timothy on from the not-the-jailhouse-fantasy-I-signed-up-for dept.

theodp writes "Back in 1992, the SIIA released Don't Copy That Floppy!, a goofy video in which anti-piracy rapper MC Double Def DP convinces a young lad not to copy a game by appealing to his sense of right and wrong. Now, to address what it calls 'new generations and new temptations,' the SIIA has uploaded a trailer for a new anti-piracy rap video — Don't Copy That 2 — that will be released this summer. To underscore the video's it's-not-just-a-copy-it's-a-crime message, the new film is a tad darker than the original. A smug teen who's downloading files from 'Pirates Palace' and 'Tune Weasel' finds his world turned upside down when automatic weapons-toting government agents break down the door and take his Mom away in handcuffs. The teen finds himself in a prison jumpsuit forced to tattoo shirtless adult inmates who eventually turn on him, physically attack him, and make him run for his life back to his jail cell (image summarizing his plight)."

101 of 523 comments (clear)

  1. BILLY MAYS HERE... by BillyMays · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...with scare tactics!

    Seriously though, the first DCTF was happy and upbeat (and for good reason, as many people simply didn't know that copying a floppy was piracy). What happened to that feel? Are we really at a point where we're so influenced by the RIAA/MPAA's ways of doing things that SIIA's first sequel in 17 years immediately jumps to scare tactics?

    Maybe it's just me, but I see this quickly becoming one of those "You wouldn't steal a car" type of things - jumping to such an extreme that it becomes a satire piece.

    1. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by MBCook · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Watch the preview video. It's there now.

      I agree that at least DCTF served a purpose. This one is exactly where the RIAA/MPAA is. Kid copies some software, ends up making prison tattoos and being chased (so he can be beaten/killed) because he wasn't good at making the tattoo.

      It's clear cause and effect here: own a computer, be annoyed by an 80s reject rapper, get shanked in prison.

      What they need is another DCTF, just not corny. If they ran PSAs saying it's important to buy software, otherwise people won't be able to make The Sims 4, Crysis 5, or Barbie Horse Adventures 7: The Mysterious Case of the Calico Clydesdale, they could probably get a whole new generation of kids to think twice about copying.

      Instead they made themselves a joke again.

      Even if they had to do this campaign, did they really have to tie it into DCTF? That can't possibly lend them credibility. I bet if I showed this new video to the average 12 year old, they'd think it was some kind of internet sketch comedy thing.

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    2. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Since he's "running for his life," does that mean they're essentially saying "You wouldn't steal a car, but if you copy Microsoft Office, we'll kill you?"

      Sounds like a threat to me....

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
    3. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The efficacy of the ad (which Roger Ebert rated two middle fingers up) depends on copyright infringement actually involving jackbooted thugs and jail time, and we know that the content providers have agents in Washington. As others have noted below, the ad itself seems to be goofy and not necessarily the scare-tactic public service announcements we saw during the Bush I and Reagan eras.

      Also, one more Association to add to my shit-list.

    4. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by Zero_Independent · · Score: 5, Funny
      Even if they had to do this campaign, did they really have to tie it into DCTF? That can't possibly lend them credibility. I bet if I showed this new video to the average 12 year old, they'd think it was some kind of internet sketch comedy thing.

      You mean it's not?

    5. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by snowgirl · · Score: 5, Insightful

      People seem to have a big problem with understanding what "illegal" means. You cannot go to jail for every illegal action. Some illegal actions create a civil liability, and some create criminal liabilities... and then criminal liabilities are separated into misdemeanors and felonies.

      I've had issues with people commenting that "prostitution is like murder, it's illegal", and I point out, "No, prostitution is like jay-walking... it's illegal." Prostitution is a misdemeanor and will not get one a lot of time in jail. It's why prosecutors (hell, law enforcement themselves) are so eager to offer a prostitute immunity in order to testify against their pimp (which is a felony).

      People just have a very hard time understanding that you cannot be sent to jail for every illegal action. ESPECIALLY, a hard jail. Typically the worst that you can be hit for with copyright violation is fines... it can make your life difficult, or even hell, but it can't take away your freedom.

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    6. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by fractoid · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The "you wouldn't steal a car" ad always annoyed the hell out of me. Bad analogy, and all that. It wasn't until just now that I realised that this Peugeot ad is what you're actually doing when you download media. You're using your own hardware to create a (usually lower fidelity) replica of the car.

      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
    7. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by MBCook · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That was literally my first thought when I saw this, but I checked out other videos by that YouTube user and it looks totally legit. If this is a joke, they went a long way.

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    8. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Moreover, the unlawful activities fall under different Acts (or statutes? What do Americans call them?)

      For example, murder is against the Criminal Code of Canada.

      Speeding is in the Motor Vehicles Act. (And there's a great loophole there, should you care to read through this Act.)

      Practicing Engineering without a licence is against the Engineers and Geoscientists Act.

      Unauthourized duplication of copyrighted material is against the Copyright Act.

      The list can go on and on but I won't bother.

      Anyway, all of the aforementioned activities are unlawful, but the difference in enforcement and penalties is extreme. It varies from a $125 file to life without parole. Like you, I've always hated the "if you've ever driven even ONE MILE over the limit, that's the same as SERIAL MURDER. IT IS ILLEGAL!!1!ELEVEN!" argument.

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    9. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by DMalic · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yeah, but honestly. Wouldn't someone at the marketing department mention the fact it looks identical to parodies of piracy PSAs, and that releasing it just might be counterproductive?

    10. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by hamburgler007 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      But it can take away your freedom. Most prosecutors won't touch a file sharing case but that doesn't mean they can't.
      From www.copyright.gov:

      (a) Criminal Infringement. â" (1) In general. â" Any person who willfully infringes a copyright shall be punished as provided under section 2319 of title 18, if the infringement was committed â" (A) for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain; (B) by the reproduction or distribution, including by electronic means, during any 180-day period, of 1 or more copies or phonorecords of 1 or more copyrighted works, which have a total retail value of more than $1,000; or (C) by the distribution of a work being prepared for commercial distribution, by making it available on a computer network accessible to members of the public, if such person knew or should have known that the work was intended for commercial distribution.

      This doesn't apply to every file sharer, but it does apply to many more than prosecutors would ever want to go after. But to say they can't take away your freedom for it, when they clearly can if they desire to, is false.

    11. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by Goldberg's+Pants · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Got into this argument with someone today. They said they wouldn't be STEALING a movie they want to see. I pointed out that downloading it is hardly stealing when, by my downloading it, I am not depriving a single person from seeing it.

      The car analogy doesn't work unless when I download Big Robots Part 8, someone going to see the movie gets turned away. "Sorry, Goldberg's Pants pirated this film so you can't see it."

      And yet these idiots just don't get how their analogy is utterly flawed. The thing is the media have spent so much time yelling IT'S STEALING! IT'S STEALING! IT'S STEALING! that the majority have bought into the lie put forward by the RIAA, MPAA etc... Despite the fact that they can say it a million times, and it still won't make it true.

      People who get hauled up for downloading are NOT charged with stealing or theft. It'd be better for them if they were because theft, rape etc... Carry far lesser sentences than what they are ACTUALLY charged with. Criminal copyright infringement.

      On a related note, I saw a nice piece of juxtaposition the other day that highlights the insanity. The RIAA verdict saying $84,000 or whatever it was per song, right next to a story saying the victims families of the Air France crash would get $24,000.

      Three human lives are worth one song apparently.

    12. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by EdIII · · Score: 4, Funny

      Instead they made themselves a joke again.

      Which works exactly again them. It tends to make young people take them less and less seriously. You might as well run a PSA against teen age sex by convincing young men there are teeth in young women's vagina's and their peepee's will turn green and fall off if they touch themselves.

      Of course nobody takes them seriously anymore.

    13. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by TheSpoom · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I bet if I showed this new video to the average 12 year old, they'd think it was some kind of internet sketch comedy thing.

      Ah, but what happens when they target it at a younger audience who doesn't know any better?

      Throw it into a DARE program (anti-drug education for those outside the US; called VIP in some areas of Canada) targeting 10-year olds who don't yet understand its stupidity, let it sit for a few years. Bingo, a generation of well-trained consumers who think free information is pure evil.

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    14. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The goal is not to prevent piracy but rather appear to be trying. This way they can still count all the "lost sales" on their taxes. They want it to be ignored, the apparent effort makes all the difference.

      http://taxation.lawyers.com/income-tax/Business-Casualty-and-Theft-Loss-Tax-Deductions.html

    15. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by Kadin2048 · · Score: 5, Funny

      If it works anything as well as DARE has, I predict the Pirate Party will sweep the midterm elections in 2022 and we'll be singing "Arr to the Chief" in 2024.

      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    16. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Throw it into a DARE program (anti-drug education for those outside the US; called VIP in some areas of Canada) targeting 10-year olds who don't yet understand its stupidity, let it sit for a few years. Bingo, a generation of well-trained consumers who think free information is pure evil. "

      Great idea! They can eliminate all illegal copying using the same techniques they used to win the war against citize^H^H^H^H^H^Hdrugs!

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    17. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by emjay88 · · Score: 2, Informative

      You might not like the original, but you might like this...
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d82Lq2rVB_4

      --
      1178161 is prime...
    18. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by EdIII · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They're gonna be really pissed when we get Star Trek-style replicators that allow just that.

      Why would they? Answer is pretty simple, and pathetic. They would lose control. Not just money, but control.

      If we did have replicators it would solve a huge amount of problems on this planet. Direct conversion of energy into materials we need to sustain life. No more pollution and environmental damage due to manufacturing processes. Starvation would be eliminated, and so would wasteful destruction of food for the purposes of economic voodoo.

      The whole idea of copyrights, and intellectual property is to allow artists and inventors to profit from their work. After a reasonable time period it should be in the public domain. If replicators really could exist, then it could be a direct path for inventors to sell something without needing huge companies and marketing departments.

      Costs would plummet. Well at least, they would be the cost of the replicator and the energy. It would be a great thing for humanity and creators, just a disaster to businesses.

    19. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      You might as well run a PSA against teen age sex by convincing young men there are teeth in young women's vagina's and their peepee's will turn green and fall off if they touch themselves.

      Wait, that's not true?

      Woo Hoo! Hold my calls!

    20. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by GrpA · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Are you kidding?

      Their marketing department didn't even notice that they made an unauthorized reproduction and depiction of a well known anime character in their video...

      So I would guess that they don't even understand the meaning of the word irony.

      On several levels.

      GrpA

      --
      Enjoy science fiction? "Turing Evolved" - AI, Mecha, Androids and rail-gun battles. What more could you want?
    21. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Please tell me this is sarcasm. I remember going through DARE and how my peers became interested in cannabis and alcohol soon afterwards. DARE had little to no effect on my age group.

    22. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by esrobinson · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you could use my car without having any chance of crashing it and with no wear/fuel usage, I'd be completely fine with it. I'm not going to be upset that you gained some benefit with no negative consequences for me.

    23. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by QuantumG · · Score: 5, Funny

      No crime has been committed. Where the fuck do you live? Saudi Arabia?

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    24. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by TheSpoom · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I remember going through DARE and how my peers became interested in cannabis and alcohol soon afterwards. DARE had little to no effect on my age group.

      Thank God for that. I suspect it does have a lasting effect on more people than you suspect however. Consider that your peer group is not the same as other peer groups, who may be more susceptible to such indoctrination. Geeks tend to be more questioning than most.

      Don't get me wrong, I despise the "war on drugs" just as much as the current attempts to move technology back twenty years. I'm just saying that judging by the previous DCTF ad, they're aiming this at kids, and we should have some sort of counter argument ready for those who don't see the flaws of it immediately.

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    25. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by Tatisimo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I hope they got permission to use Klingons in their video. If not, I suggest whoever owns Klingons sue the hell out of them! And they better not make one of those retarded "fair use" arguments, those are totally not valid.

      --
      Give Kashyyyk back to the Wookies
    26. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by Opportunist · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Only if I can use the car while you're using it and still neither of us has trouble finding a parking space despite the other one already using it.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    27. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by socsoc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Believe me, as a DARE "graduate" we definitely understood how stupid it was at age 10, even if we had yet to ever try any drugs

    28. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by complete+loony · · Score: 2, Funny

      There was a recent piece of "journalism" in australia that tried to make a tenuous link that "if you buy a DVD at a flea market you are funding terrorism", sigh.

      --
      09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
    29. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by caerwyn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not the same situation. A single car can only be used by a single driver at any given time during the day. If you make use of the car for free, you are depriving the owner of the ability to rent that car for a period of time.

      On the other hand, if you could wave a magic wand and make an instant copy of the car, your driving of that copy would not deprive the owner of the ability to rent the original in the meantime. It might decrease the value of said rental due to the availability of a free alternative, but it does not, in fact, deprive the owner of any property or any period of time.

      --
      The ringing of the division bell has begun... -PF
    30. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by Sobrique · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Always thought the best 'anti-piracy' ad would be from e.g. a set carpenter on a blockbuster - saying something like: "hi. My name's Mike. I work on the set here, where they're making the ${latest_big_blockbuster}. I'm not a 'big name' - I get paid ${reasonable_amount} per (day/month/year), and I quite like my job - I like making movies, that you can see in the cinema or on DVD. I'd like to thank you for paying for (your cinema ticket|this DVD). You see, it's the sales of the film that determine whether they make another one or not - and that means I get to keep my job, and you get to enjoy another film."

    31. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by Sobrique · · Score: 2, Informative

      Even if there were a crime committed, it wouldn't be 'theft'. (Adultery also, isn't illegal in a lot of places)

    32. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Funny

      Throw it into a DARE program (anti-drug education for those outside the US; called VIP in some areas of Canada) targeting 10-year olds who don't yet understand its stupidity, let it sit for a few years. Bingo, a generation of well-trained consumers who think free information is pure evil.

      Have you looked around the schools today? 10 year olds are too busy seeding so they can get more out of those private trackers. While stoned.

    33. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by CmdrGravy · · Score: 2, Funny

      Actually no, it would be a disastrous thing for humanity since the very first I am going to use my replicator for is to churn out a billion strong army of 50M long venomous flying crocodiles with a taste for human blood.

    34. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I honestly think they are just wasting their cash. Kids today are a HELL of a lot more cynical than we were in the 80s. They see the corruption, the obvious payoffs, the lies and the bullshit.

      Remember a few years ago when they had that little forced 'public service message" that they forced kids to watch at school? They did that at my oldest's school, and when he told me about it he was standing with a whole bunch of other kids waiting to be picked up. Nearly all the kids had iPods or Sandisks or some other MP3 player blasting in one ear while they had the other free for bullshitting. So I asked the kids "what did you think about it?" and their answer was pretty much variations on "RIAA are greedy pigs".

      So I really don't think it'll work. They have watched as every politician from Obama on down have been more than happy to do a 180 for a nice fat check, they think the entire system is total bullshit (I can't even convince mine to vote when they turn 18 "what is the point? They'll just take bribes and ignore you anyway" is what I get) and therefor are gonna do whatever the hell they want and give you the finger if you say something about it. So much for that whole "youth can change the world" huh?

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    35. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by Fred_A · · Score: 4, Funny

      So I would guess that they don't even understand the meaning of the word irony.

      On several levels.

      But then, why would metallurgists work for the RIAA ?

      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    36. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by DangerFace · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hold on just one second. You mean that, because I downloaded this copy of Ubuntu for free, and maintain it with free software, that there will never be a new version of Ubuntu! Oh no!

      Except, and bear with me here, I had Ubuntu when it was 5.10, and they are currently planning the release of 9.10. Also, when I dl software straight from the Ubuntu servers I'll get a few hundred KB/s, but on Windoze I get a few tens of KB/s.

      It must just be like all those artists that give away their work for free - really we all know that they are SECRET MAGICIANS, funded by OSAMA BIN LADEN in order to BRING DOWN THE CORPORATIONS THAT LOVE AND PROTECT US!

      To be judged a success nowadays, films have to make a profit pretty much immediately upon release. By the time they go on sale as DVDs they are a massive commercial flop if they haven't made profit. Music should be free because it costs practically nothing to produce - many musicians play music at a stunning loss, and still keep doing it - Christ, I've spent a couple of grand easy on musical equipment, and have made £~100. Games should be paid for, because they are expensive and hard to produce, but if I bought every game I wanted to play I wouldn't have any money left over to pay my electricity bill, rendering the purchases pointless.

      --
      Be smart, help people!
    37. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by TrekkieGod · · Score: 2, Informative

      That was literally my first thought when I saw this, but I checked out other videos by that YouTube user and it looks totally legit. If this is a joke, they went a long way.

      They went a long way. If you go to their user page, you can see that the user joined youtube on April 1st this year. I guess they liked the joke too much to let it go after april fools.

      --

      Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.

    38. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Funny

      Which works exactly again them. It tends to make young people take them less and less seriously. You might as well run a PSA against teen age sex by convincing young men there are teeth in young women's vagina's

      Of course not... not with gums like that! Sheesh.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    39. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by elrous0 · · Score: 3, Funny

      DARE cracked me up. The essential message was "Kids, if you ever smoke a joint, you're going to end up dying in the gutter." Especially funny now, considering that our last three U.S. Presidents were all avowed "druggies" (by DARE's standards). Maybe they should create a new "Kids, if you don't toke, you'll never get to be President" campaign.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    40. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by tbannist · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well, they actually did that PSA.

      The only problems were:
      A) They hired an actor to pretend to be a set builder.
      B) He was griping that he "only" worked 8 months a year.
      C) He was griping that he "only" earned $88,000 USD a year.
      D) He accused everyone watching the movie of being thieves.

      We talked to a local movie theater owner and politely explained that the anti-piracy advertisement was insulting his customers and making them feel unwelcome in his theater. We also mentioned that the message that his customer's hard earned money (most of whom make less in a year than the fake set builder makes in 8 months) should go to pay a relatively well off guy living in California to work less and earn more than them was not going to be received the way it was intended. Lastly we pointed out that the people in the theater have already *paid* for their ticket, if they were going to steal the movie they'd be at home in front of their computers and never see the PSA. Since that chat, I haven't seen that PSA or any other anti-piracy PSAs in theaters around here.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    41. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by Xenious · · Score: 2, Funny

      I am so calling my wife on her bluff now! ;)

      --
      -Xen
    42. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I've been wondering for about a week whether our society is has gotten more cynical or if I've just been noticing it more. I'm 27, so my adult years have coincided with Oklahoma City, OJ Simpson, Monica Lewinsky, Kosovo, the 2000 election, 9/11, and George W. Bush. Not a fun time for a person who is taking their first looks at the wider world. Since I wasn't that aware of the world before that, I've generally assumed things have always been like this.

      Then an odd thing happened last week. This famous singer died. I never really listened to his music as a kid, so, like millions of others, I thought I'd try it out. As I expected, it was good but overrated. But there was one thing I did not expect. It was positive. Shockingly positive. I realized I hadn't heard something so devoid of cynicism in years. Decades.

      So I have evidence that society may not always have been like it was today. And now I read this anecdote about kids being more cynical than I was.

      I have to know. So older slashdotters, has the last decade been more cynical than the decades before it? Did people really used to believe in things, or is that looking at history with rose-colored glasses?

    43. Re:BILLY MAYS HERE... by hairyfeet · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, let me put it this way. Once upon a time my grandma believed in government, that police were honest, and that voting was a duty all should perform. After 2004 she quit with a "what's the point?" attitude. When I asked her why she said "You would have to be blind to not see how corrupt the have all become, and I may be old but I ain't blind". The same thing has happened with my mom and as I said my boys, not matter how hard I try to convince them, refuse to vote as they figure it would probably be rigged if anyone but a D or an R looked like they might have a shot.

      You can't watch everyone from the President on down flip flop every time a treasonous whore...err I mean lobbyist breaks out his checkbook before you say "why bother?". Look at Obama, who has changed just about every single thing he ran on during the election for big fat checks. Or McCain who actually could have run against his 2000 self and would have had completely different platforms. The corruption has gotten so bad, and the MSM is now owned by the cartels and releases "news" about as real Pravda during the cold war, so why wouldn't everyone just say "WTF?" and not care?

      The simple fact is our elected thieves will happily sell out the safety, security, and the people of this country to multinational corporations that don't give a shit if the whole country burns as long as they get the insurance money. How exactly are you supposed to compete with those that can write 6 zero checks as easily as you buy a stick of gum?

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  2. So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Anyone got a link to the torrent?

  3. A better video by Aphonia · · Score: 5, Funny

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGXavXZwRcg From the IT crowd (BBC) - an anti piracy ad. Except its for films. yet its a better video.

    1. Re:A better video by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      "This video is not available in your country due to copyright restrictions."
      so use: instead try http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x9ovyz_the-it-crowd-anti-piracy-ad_fun

      p.s and the show is on channel4 not bbc

    2. Re:A better video by RevWaldo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'll see your IT Crowd vid (funny!) and raise you -

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXkxSl4f6vw

      - The Boondocks!

      --
      Prisencolinensinainciusol. Ol Rait!
    3. Re:A better video by FrostedWheat · · Score: 2, Informative

      Nothing to do with the BBC. It's on Channel 4.
      The only good program on the entire channel ;-)

    4. Re:A better video by funkatron · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That link just gives me a demonstration of why piracy is better than legit: "This video is not available in your country due to copyright restrictions. ".

      --
      "Welcome to our world. We are the wasted youth. And we are the future too." Yes, I know these are stupid lyrics.
  4. British TV by jciarlan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Forgive the youtube link, but a British TV show called "The IT Crowd" did a pretty good anti-piracy warning.

    1. Re:British TV by omz13 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Forgive the youtube link, but a British TV show called "The IT Crowd" did a pretty good anti-piracy warning.

      Its not an anti-piracy warning... its satire of the anti-piracy warning that is shown at the start of DVDs sold in the UK. As satires go, its very funny is you know the original warning. (And, to be blunt, one reason to rip your DVDs is to remove the very f*****g annoying anti-piracy warning that is shown at the start of DVDs sold in the UK, especially as you can't skip through it, grrrrr. When I buy a DVD, I just want to watch its content, not get bombasted with crappy anti-piracy warnings and all the stupid trailers they are starting to add now).

  5. DP by tnok85 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Is it just me or does MC Double Def "DP" sound like a black porn star's stage name?

    1. Re:DP by BlackSabbath · · Score: 2, Funny

      That would be MC Double Dong "DP".

  6. Since When Does Infringement Equal Jail Time? by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A smug teen who's downloading files from 'Pirates Palace' and 'Tune Weasel' finds his world turned upside down when automatic weapons-toting government agents break down the door and take his Mom away in handcuffs. The teen finds himself in a prison jumpsuit forced to tattoo shirtless adult inmates who eventually turn on him

    Huh, that's funny. Last I checked you normally don't get jail time for copyright infringement. Search warrants? For your computer maybe. Serving papers for a court date? Sure. Arrested on the spot? Don't think so. Jail time? Not to my knowledge. The only legal consequence the SIIA lists on their site are "significant fines for copyright infringement." Unless the kid was uploading unreleased Guns N' Roses tracks or orchestrating the huge operation of The Pirate Bay I don't think he'll be doing time.

    Maybe they should do a little more research before they imply that you will end up in a gulag tattooing cartoon characters on convicts?

    Don't get me wrong, I'd be fine with the kid (assuming he's 18+) getting a letter in the mail saying he has to appear in court and then a slow five year montage ending with him settling out of court and not being able to go to college or only attending a community college. That'd be pretty realistic. I still don't agree with it but that's how it works these days. Who knows? Maybe the over emphasized results will backfire on them and the general populace will see how unrealistic the charges are for copyright violation? I mean, that's not going to change until a politician looks bad taking a sack of money in campaign contributions ... or realizes that it bothers his constituents that lives are being ruined over something that maybe isn't so serious that a person should be financially hobbled for the rest of their life or next seven years from bankruptcy or whatever results. Huge fines are enough to stop me from copyright violations but lets face it, you're not going to jail if you do it. You're not a hardened criminal with a rap sheet serving time next to murderers if you're convicted of file sharing. You're most likely going to settle out of court and be financially stunted.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Since When Does Infringement Equal Jail Time? by corsec67 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Just look at the "You wouldn't steal a car..." videos.

      The MPAA didn't seem to care that they were comparing unrelated crimes.

      --
      If I have nothing to hide, don't search me
    2. Re:Since When Does Infringement Equal Jail Time? by Asclepius99 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, I think the fastest way to see a change would be if a senator's/governor's/etc. son/daughter was caught pirating their favorite song/movie/whatever.

    3. Re:Since When Does Infringement Equal Jail Time? by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I bet the RIAA have already traced sharers to an IP, gotten a home address, found out it's the home of some celebrity or politician and immediately dropped it.

    4. Re:Since When Does Infringement Equal Jail Time? by vux984 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually, I think the fastest way to see a change would be if a senator's/governor's/etc. son/daughter was caught pirating their favorite song/movie/whatever.

      Unfortunately not. The copyright holders would treat them with kid gloves, drop the case, and give them a gentle, 'hey don't do it again speech'.

    5. Re:Since When Does Infringement Equal Jail Time? by influenza · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Or maybe SIIA has been given a preview of what's being negotiated for the secret ACTA treaty.

      National security my ass...

  7. Dangerous stuff by harmonise · · Score: 5, Informative

    ...finds his world turned upside down when automatic weapons-toting government agents break down the door and take his Mom away in handcuffs. The teen finds himself in a prison jumpsuit forced to tattoo shirtless adult inmates who eventually turn on him, physically attack him, and make him run for his life back to his jail cell

    The message I get from this is, "Wow, movies and music sound like dangerous stuff. I better avoid them at all costs whether purchased legally or not."

    --
    Cory Doctorow talking about cloud computing makes as much sense as George W Bush talking about electrical engineering.
  8. So, basicly, by Minwee · · Score: 4, Funny

    it's RIAA-porn.

  9. Well, at least it's truth in advertising by RLiegh · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Because we've seen that the RIAA will go after your family if they don't think they can get any money out of you; regardless of whether or not any of you even own a computer!

  10. is the entertainment industry by Presto+Vivace · · Score: 2, Insightful

    endorsing prison rape of children? Because that is what it looks like. There is a better way to fight software piracy.

    1. Re:is the entertainment industry by Hershmire · · Score: 2, Insightful

      SPAMming on /.? I've been away too long.

      --
      if(!toilet_paper) roll.replace(new roll); //Stupid roommates.
  11. Remember Children by HavePatience · · Score: 2, Funny

    If you make copies of intellectual property, liscensed video games ans software programs, you will be erased with state violence.
    It is okay to kidnap and possibly kill people with state violence for things they do with ideas.

  12. Well, of course. by Nebulious · · Score: 2, Funny

    How else can he afford another solid gold Humvee? And diamond studded swimming pools? These things don't grow on trees.

  13. Don't download this song by orkysoft · · Score: 3, Funny

    This one's much better:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32wmepTVM3I

    --

    I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
    1. Re:Don't download this song by TBoon · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ironically, "This video is not available in your country due to copyright restrictions."

  14. And now... our corporate anthem... by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Do what's best for the corporation... or we'll throw your ass in jail.

    What a joke...

  15. SIIA Members: Google, IBM, Adobe, Intel, Oracle... by theodp · · Score: 2, Informative

    A selection of U.S. companies from the SIIA Member Directory: Accenture, Adobe, AOL, Barclays, Bloomberg, CNN, Charles Schwab, Citi, Cognizant, CollabNet, College Board, Deloitte, Deutsche Bank, Fidelity, Goldman Sachs, Google, IBM, Infosys, Intel, Intuit, JPMorgan Chase, Lazard Freres, McGraw Hill, Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, Novell, Oracle, Reuters, Salesforce, SAP, SAS, Standard & Poor's, Sun Microsystems, Symantec, Time Warner, UPI, The Wall Street Journal, Wells Fargo Bank.

  16. Sweet! by dufachi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They are intimating that you can end up in Federal "Pound-You-In-The-Ass" Prison for making a dupe. Nice! The industry just needs to realize that it's free advertising and treat it as such instead of endorsing child rape.

    --
    -Kinsey
  17. The new U.S.: Violence is entirely acceptable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The new United States: Violence and corruption is entirely acceptable.

    Pay taxes to kill Iraqis? Sure.

    Many hours spent playing violent video games? Sure.

    Government run by thieving banks? Sure.

    1. Re:The new U.S.: Violence is entirely acceptable. by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Informative

      Don't give Cheney too much credit. State violence in support of corporate interest has been as American as apple pie since before he was a gleam in the milkman's eye.

    2. Re:The new U.S.: Violence is entirely acceptable. by Repossessed · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think you underestimate how long Cheney has been around. Where do you think we got the oil in the first place? Cheney had the dinosaurs slaughtered.

      --
      Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite (TM)
    3. Re:The new U.S.: Violence is entirely acceptable. by Grishnakh · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There's nothing "new" about it. The US has been corrupt for a long time.

      Pay taxes to kill Iraqis? Sure.

      40 years ago, it was paying taxes to kill Viet Cong, who were certainly no threat to Americans. At least with Iraq, they had the flimsy excuse that Saddam had WMDs; back then, there was zero threat to Americans from the jungle-dwelling Viet Cong, except some vague threat of Communism spreading, though the real reason for US involvement was to protect French colonial interests.

      Pay taxes to kill Iraqis? Sure.

      The Federal Reserve has been around for most of the 20th century, so again, nothing new.

      The only thing new now is that the corruption has become more visible than ever, and the economic house of cards is breaking down, as the US can no longer rest on the inertia of the post-WWII economic boom.

  18. Scare tatics by Lord+Byron+II · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Or like the anti-drug commercials that aired immediately after 9-11 that attempted to link smoking a joint with supporting Osama Bin Laden.

    1. Re:Scare tatics by it0 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Just to put it into perspective. Al Queda is pressuring farmers in afghanistan to grow poppies to make cocaine. There is a large effort to convert to convert the farmers to grow something else like saffraan.

      But cocaine!= weed, but there is some truth in that message.

    2. Re:Scare tatics by SplashMyBandit · · Score: 5, Informative
      Just to put some facts into perspective (you unfortunately appear to have crossed some facts, otherwise your post is otherwise relatively sound - must all be the weed you're getting)
      • Opium poppies are used to produce opium and can then be refined into heroin. Initially the Taliban (who are not Al Qaeda, but host them) were against drug production but have now resorted to hosting drug lords to fund their fight against the Western infidels (this really does remove what little moral high ground they might claim to have had).
      • Cocaine is derived from coca leaves (mostly grown in South America, which is rather far away from Afghanistan), and the Columbian government has had some success in reducing this (during its grinding war against FARC that has picked up successful momentum).

      In both cases (Afghanistan, Columbia) the drug trade (opium, cocaine) is used to fund rebellion against the central government. Destroy the drugs and the rebellion struggles. The Afghan farmers complain that legitimate crops pay poorly compared to poppies so pressure the Afghan government to resist Western suggestions of aerial crop eradication. It is unlikely that demand in the West for recreational drugs will be reduced completely (the recession helps aparently) so it crop eradication is a better bet in winning the drug war. Saffron is a substitute that pays better than wheat (provided it can be grown successfully).

    3. Re:Scare tatics by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      OK. Now let's really put it into perspective. One of the most dangerous drugs on the planet is Alcohol. It is legalin the US. Osama isn't running any alcohol production/smuggling/distribution rings. Given that Marijuana, Cocaine, Heroin, etc. are only profitable to terrorists because the government chooses not to legalize and regulate them (in true hypocritical fashion), whom do we have to blame if they are making tons of money on the black market the government created and fuels again?

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    4. Re:Scare tatics by Ihmhi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Heroin is dangerous because it's addictive as all hell.

      --
      Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
    5. Re:Scare tatics by chooks · · Score: 2, Insightful

      By that logic, the entire Civilization series should be outlawed and Sid Meier thrown in jail for all eternity.

      --
      -- The Genesis project? What's that?
    6. Re:Scare tatics by MozzleyOne · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Oh thank you my government from saving me from myself!

      I'll just go start bashing my head into a wall - the government hasn't banned it, so it must be ok!

      --
      Ayjay on Fedang
    7. Re:Scare tatics by Blue+Stone · · Score: 2, Interesting

      >Heroin is dangerous because it's addictive as all hell.

      No. Heroin is a threat to a person's freedom because it's addictive. Heroin is DANGEROUS because it is illegal AND it has a low threshold of overdose.

      Illegality means that there are no guarantees over purity which means that (ironically) a particularly pure batch of heroin can lead to a user overdosing after taking the same dose as they normally do (same dose but of a purer mix = death). That's dangerous, but wouldn't be happening if the user (however misguided) was able to source a guaranteed level of purity. The government could do this by legalising and regulating. It will not happen so long as the supply is in the hands of criminals. (And this is aside from tha harm caused by the loss of limbs, etc, to injecters of heroin because of the junk that is used to cut it).

      The government's continuing war against drugs does nothing to minimise the harm of people who are caught by their addiction to heroin. In point of fact it is RESPONSIBLE for the majority of the harm caused.

      Where heroin is able to be supplied legally, under prescription for instance, a user suffers no risk of overdose, unless it's through their own gross stupidity. They suffer no chance of blood-clots and the like through injecting cutting impurities (brick dust, ajax powder etc) and they do not need to inflict their addiction upon society by stealing to fund their habit. The danger to the user and to society is reduced. Enourmously.

      In addition the addict can stabilise their life, maintain a job (assuming the assinine policy of drugs tests is not employed by their employer (if they can do their job OK, then it doesn't matter what they're smoking/injecting FFS)) and have a normal family life. In this state they can tackle their addiction and its underlying causes in a state of support and stability. A child gets its father or mother back, a family reclaims their son or daughter.

      The addict can even use for the rest of their lives. Although this probably won't be considered ideal (at least in terms of their freedom from addiction) their will be few consequences for their health, since all of the major threats to their physical well-being come from the heroin being in the control of criminals.

      --
      Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
    8. Re:Scare tatics by Psyborgue · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Stanton Peele, a Psychologist who studies addiction wrote an article in support of your claims. Heroin is only dangerous in it's illegal form where purity is an unknown. Before it was made illegal, heroin overdose was practically unheard of.

    9. Re:Scare tatics by DavidTC · · Score: 2, Informative

      How on earth does 'addictive' mean 'dangerous'?

      Heroin is, indeed, a very addictive drug. Not just 'mentally' addictive, but your body very rapidly becomes dependent on it and you will die if cut off from it rapidly. (Not 'may die'...'will die'.)

      That said, when steadily supplied at invariant quantities, it is entirely, 100%, safe to take your entire life.

      When morphine was first introduced and used during the US civil war, a lot of soldiers got addicted to it. It was basically the only battlefield medicine. If you got injured, or even ill from disease, which was a good percentage of people, and didn't die, which was almost no one who was sick, you'd end up addicted to morphine.(Heroin turns into morphine when ingested.) And you'd stay addicted to it your entire life.

      And that's not counting the patent medications and laudanum and paregoric which hooked a bunch of civilians.

      Estimates of 200,000 addicts are probably too high, but quite a large number of people got addicted in the last half of the 1800s, and never really got unaddicted.

      And this was in days where quality control was a lot looser, and yet most people managed to have absolutely no medical problems whatsoever from their morphine addiction.

      In modern day, there's absolutely no reason to believe that someone could not stay addicted to morphine or heroin their entire life with no medical complications at all.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  19. Re:IN SOVIET RUSSIA by fractoid · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In evolutionary biology, floppy PREVENTS coppy.

    --
    Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
  20. This sounds familiar by Boawk · · Score: 4, Funny

    The teen finds himself in a prison jumpsuit forced to tattoo shirtless adult inmates who eventually turn on him, physically attack him, and make him run for his life back to his jail cell

    Sounds like an average day working tech support.

  21. Many, MANY inaccuracies in this video! by Doug52392 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I thought I would point out the many inaccuracies in this film:

    1. The mother was fighting back to the evil paramilitary force that, without warning, smashed down her door and entered her house. She would have been shot because she clearly "endangered" the armed men's life.

    2. ANIME ANGEL TATOOS? In an American prison??? I doubt there are any anime nerds in lockup...

    The phrase "copycrime" really reminded me of "thoughtcrime" from 1984, which isn't a good message propaganda should be sending...

  22. ... a 7 letter word for synonym ... by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "What's hilarious is that you seem to be misusing "illegal" yourself. Hint: it doesn't mean the same thing as "unlawful"."

    Good point! So many people here are using the terms interchangeably. It is as if these people think that the two words are synonymous!

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  23. awesome! by Nekomusume · · Score: 2, Insightful

    An anti-piracy video that portrays the RIAA/MPAA/Law Enforcement as being a bunch of over-reacting psychotics? Sounds like a pirate-party recruitment video.

  24. Definition of Theft by YttriumOxide · · Score: 4, Informative

    Anyways, stealing is not necessarily defined by depriving one person of an experience or possession, it's defined by obtaining said item without giving the original author or owner the compensation requested for your copy.

    Are you sure? IANAL, but here's a few definitions I found from different legal texts around the world... (bold emphasis mine)

    • "A person is guilty of theft if: he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it.": UK Theft Act 1968, Section 1
    • "Unlawfully appropriating property with intent to deprive the owner of property" : Texas Penal Code, Title 7, Paragraph 31.03
    • "Every one commits theft who fraudulently and without colour of right takes, or fraudulently and without colour of right converts to his use or to the use of another person, anything, whether animate or inanimate, with intent to deprive, temporarily or absolutely, the owner of it, or a person who has a special property or interest in it, of the thing or of his property or interest in it;": Canada Criminal Code, Section 322
    • "A person is guilty of an offence if: the person dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of the property.": Australian Criminal Code Amendment (Theft, Fraud, Bribery and Related Offences) Act 2000, Part 7.2, Division 131.1

    I certainly won't argue that piracy isn't a crime, but it definitely does NOT appear to be "theft"...

    --
    My book about LSD and Self-Discovery
    Also on facebook as: DroppingAcidDaleBewan
    1. Re:Definition of Theft by Danse · · Score: 2, Informative

      At any rate, the common vernacular leans to theft; and that's the usage, form a non-legal standpoint, that will probably win out as well. Though, in the end, what you call it doesn't change that it it is wrong to use copyrighted material without permission, except in a few very limited cases.

      Actually it's illegal to infringe on a copyright. I'm really not convinced that it's wrong to do so given the current state of copyright law. Also, the Supreme Court has already made it clear that copyright infringement is not theft:

      The phonorecords in question were not "stolen, converted or taken by fraud" for purposes of [section] 2314. The section's language clearly contemplates a physical identity between the items unlawfully obtained and those eventually transported, and hence some prior physical taking of the subject goods. Since the statutorily defined property rights of a copyright holder have a character distinct from the possessory interest of the owner of simple "goods, wares, [or] merchandise," interference with copyright does not easily equate with theft, conversion, or fraud. The infringer of a copyright does not assume physical control over the copyright nor wholly deprive its owner of its use. Infringement implicates a more complex set of property interests than does run-of-the-mill theft, conversion, or fraud.

      --
      It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
  25. It scared me by thofle · · Score: 2, Funny

    Does anyone know of any good "learn how to tattoo" torrents?

  26. funny by jdcope · · Score: 3, Funny

    I bet if I showed this new video to the average 12 year old, they'd think it was some kind of internet sketch comedy thing.

    Funny, this whole thing makes me think of the IT Crowd piracy video... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wRxfz_6E7o

  27. Ethics in software? by V!NCENT · · Score: 2, Insightful

    For me the only ethics in software is being able to share it with your friends. Did your mother teach you nothing?

    You know what is truely ethical?; Marking something and then sharing it with the rest of the world!

    And the only thing that is truely attacking the digital age are the proprietary software vendors and the pro-copyright bodies.

    Now get the fsck off my lawn!

    --
    Here be signatures
    1. Re:Ethics in software? by Peaker · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Share car --> I don't have the car to use, it gets worn and torn over time, you might have an accident and destroy it.

      Share software --> You gain software, I still have software, no damage done.

      POOR ANALOGY: YOU FAIL.

  28. What we really need... by Bones3D_mac · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ... is a PSA that warns viewers that the content of most PSAs are rarely objective and are often funded by organizations trying to push their own agenda. (Some of which may actually be worse than the crap they're PSAing to us about.)

    --


    8==8 Bones 8==8
  29. This just confirms it. by oDDmON+oUT · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The *IAA's want to become the next SS/KGB/Stasi, using paramilitary actions as a way to keep the dollars trickling into their dying business models.

    The truly scary part?

    That suits in both Hollywood and on the Beltway believe that this is a viable way to treat the American people.

    --
    Some days it's just not worth
    chewing through my restraints.
  30. Weird Al did it first by scharkalvin · · Score: 2, Informative

    The description of the video sounds like Weird Al's "Don't download this song" video.

  31. I love how... by Civil_Disobedient · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I love how they use the coercive threat of prison violence. These days it's just accepted as fact that the prison system is completely and utterly broken beyond repair.