Slashdot Mirror


Warner Brothers Hiring Undercover Anti-Pirates

An anonymous reader writes "TorrentFreak reports that Warner Brothers UK is hiring college students with an IT background to participate in an internship that will pit them against pirates on the Web in an effort to crack down on illegal digital distribution. The intern will literally be on the front-lines of the epic battle against pirated content, ensnaring users in incriminating transactions, issuing takedown requests, and causing general frustration amongst the file-sharing population on the Internet."

92 of 443 comments (clear)

  1. My only question is... by bit9 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Where are all the anti-anti-pirates?

    1. Re:My only question is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      right ahead of the anti-anti-anti-pirates.

    2. Re:My only question is... by sopssa · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's not a competition. What they should do is offer Spotify like service for movies all around the world, not just in US, and either ad-supported version or $10-$19 per month paid subscription with perks like PS3 and mobile streaming and so on. After Spotify came around 1.5 years ago people haven't had a need to pirate MP3's anymore. It's actually nicer to use than P2P - that's something that movie industry needs to have to combat piracy (hopefully Voddler will get there). When the service works good and is reasonably priced, you win a lot of customers.

    3. Re:My only question is... by h4rr4r · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Spotify is not available in most of the world. Only 6 countries and no linux client. I would rather just buy non-drmed music.

    4. Re:My only question is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      those would be the interns that end up posting information from these companies on wikileaks showing that they are doing illegal things... ah to the companies that think us geeks care about company loyalty... yeah you pay their cheques... and yeah, we can get cheques elsewhere

    5. Re:My only question is... by h4rr4r · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They were going too is no excuse, they still have not.
      They still violated the copyrights of the XBMC developers and then expect to make money from copyrights. They are hypocrites who believe in copyright when it is good for them and not when it does not suit them. These are not the sort of folks people should give money to.

    6. Re:My only question is... by tepples · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They are hypocrites who believe in copyright when it is good for them and not when it does not suit them.

      But are they much worse than the major motion picture studios, which moved to Hollywood just to be out of range of Thomas Edison's patent goons?

    7. Re:My only question is... by h4rr4r · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Nope just the same. Mind you most folks don't know about that either, and the people who moved the studios are long dead.

    8. Re:My only question is... by mmelson · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Where are all the anti-anti-pirates?

      On 4chan. May as well give them something productive to do.

    9. Re:My only question is... by westlake · · Score: 2, Insightful

      yeah you pay their cheques... and yeah, we can get cheques elsewhere

      tell me why your new employer should trust you after you betrayed your old employer.

      tell me why he keeps you around after he's pumped you dry of anything useful you could tell him.

      tell me how you stop the word spreading around that you are high maintaince, high risk.

    10. Re:My only question is... by h4rr4r · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sounds like all the disadvantages of pandora and none of the advantages.

      A good example of combating piracy is cheap non-drmed MP3s.

    11. Re:My only question is... by sopssa · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Pandora is an internet radio. Spotify is like your mp3 player, but instead of your local files you have access to their full huge library.

    12. Re:My only question is... by xilmaril · · Score: 2, Insightful

      yeah you pay their cheques... and yeah, we can get cheques elsewhere

      tell me why your new employer should trust you after you betrayed your old employer.

      Because they have no idea. wikileaks and the like are anonymous, and if that's not enough protection for you, you won't post it there.

      tell me why he keeps you around after he's pumped you dry of anything useful you could tell him.

      If you got hired based on your insider knowledge of a few secrets, as opposed to insider knowledge of techniques and development practices, you're absolutely right.

      tell me how you stop the word spreading around that you are high maintaince, high risk.

      By never starting it, obviously.

    13. Re:My only question is... by rtb61 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Employers, employees, nah, this is about uni students paid to dob in other uni students. Those naughty students who use the tech skills to minimise the content expired whilst racking up tens of thousands of dollars in long term eduction debt. So future fellow staff members, seriously, would anyone trust a part time pigopolist narc that ran around pretending to be other's students friend and entrap them into sharing content so they can pick up a prosecution commission.

      This is not so much about peer to peer file sharing, this is about those floating USB terrabyte hard disk drives, where content is added from many personal sources, and the drive spends each night at a different home. Getting all that inside information on how people share the content they have bought once they start to get bored with it and swap it around.

      Interns for the copyright police, whose only future career will be pursuing children who swap usb thumb drives. That would be their only career choice because they would bot be trusted by any of their current students targets and potential future fellow employees. Not that they won't get plenty of volunteers to get paid bugger all and most of that on commission, you know, the anal retentive types.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    14. Re:My only question is... by fat+bastard+of+doom · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hey! I might be a 28 year old basement dweller, but I get my allowance from the government...

    15. Re:My only question is... by purpledinoz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You see, the problem was, the music corps had an oligopoly on distribution, and profits were very easy. They essentially became big fat and lazy. Now that the Internet has crushed their oligopoly, the easy money disappeared, and like any fat lazy person would do if the free food was taken away, they're whining and complaining (through the courts), rather than competing. Of course they don't want to work hard and provide customers more value.

    16. Re:My only question is... by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Mod parent up! If you have issues with sound stuttering, upgrade your version of WINE. It's fixed in 1.1.31

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
  2. A fools errand by downix · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Rather than exploit the free publicity and growth of revenue, they fight against the rising tides with their swords. If the movie and music industries collapse, it will not be due to piracy, but anti-piracy.

    --
    Karma Whoring for Fun and Profit.
    1. Re:A fools errand by DrMrLordX · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's what collector's editions and in-box premiums are for. People who bought Ultima IV got a nifty little ankh in the box to keep with them while playing the game. Ultima V had awesome box cover art (Denis Loubet rocks) and a coin with the symbol of the Codex of Ultimate Wisdom on it.

      Also, in a more sane universe, legally-owned copies of software are generally more convenient and easy-to-use than pirated copies. Someone pass that memo along the Ubisoft, please.

    2. Re:A fools errand by suomynonAyletamitlU · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Let's all stop for a moment to remember that we are talking about the entertainment industry. Let that sink in. Entertainment: something affording pleasure, diversion, or amusement, esp. a performance of some kind. (ref)

      All of these people--RIAA, MPAA, and their equivalents across the world--are fighting tooth and nail because some people do not consider entertainment to be worth the sometimes exorbitant fees required to access it, and because some people get their entertainment and chafe at being told they have to jump through hoops to enjoy it.

      There are still people starving in this world. There are people fighting for their lives and their beliefs. There are human rights violations. And there is so much else.

      And these people are fighting for the right to overcharge and micromanage your entertainment.

    3. Re:A fools errand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Inform yourself.

       

      Canadian survey and study, which shows a direct positive influence on purchases due to downloading.

      http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/ippd-dppi.nsf/eng/h_ip01456.html

      The key findings of above study

      http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9086/canadian_govt_study_p2p_increases_cd_sales/

      A Harvard Business School study with clear proof that sales are affected by downloads, for the positive.

      http://www.unc.edu/~cigar/papers/FileSharing_March2004.pdf

      A recent Norweigen school of management study, which shows not only are filesharers increasing sales they themselves are the largest purchasers of that media.

      http://www.zeropaid.com/news/86009/study-pirates-buy-10-times-more-music-than-they-steal/

       

      This may sound in your head as something quite insightful, however when its broken down its clear it has very little meaning at all. Are you suggesting that the initial profit increase is somehow not an increase in sales? Or are you suggesting that a higher initial profit has nothing to do with sales? Or is it a preemptive statement and you are hoping to deflect arguments about current profit increases by the big media houses? Furthermore how does this statement help your case? You are agreeing and disagreeing with yourself in the same sentence.

    4. Re:A fools errand by TheVelvetFlamebait · · Score: 3, Insightful

      if we go back to the first time copyright was a issue, we find the printing press. Basically it was a big, expensive machine that was labor intensive to operate. At that time, the issue of copyright was between the author and the owner of said press, the printer. Basically, printers where snatching up texts left and right, and creating copies using their press, that they then sold for profits. The issue was that printers where not paying authors a part of said profits.

      now however the act of "printing" is so simple that the last book in the harry potter series was scanned, turned into a text file by OCR and translated from english to german within 48 hours of the initial book release. And none of the people involved where payed to do so, or even expected to earn something from it.

      Rewind even further. Books were copied by monks, taking much time and labour (if not money). Copying was extremely slow and extremely difficult. Copying was such a painful process, and distribution channels were so slow, that the idea of protecting a work against copying was laughably superfluous.

      Copyright was introduced when copying became easier and distribution became cheaper, in the prediction that eventually it would become even more-so. The problem for artists wasn't that the technology was slow and expensive (compared to today), the problem was that it was quick and cheap compared to earlier times, and that technology was only making the process quicker and cheaper.

      It is indeed the simplicity of the distribution system today which is the threat to artists. Anybody can create as many copies as they like. Now, it's not just a handful of printers eating into your royalties, it's any person who feels like it, with little investment of time or money. The natural protections of the inherent infeasibility of copying have been removed, and now the artist is completely at the mercy of the public and regardless of popularity guaranteed only a single sale (from which others may or may not copy).

      Essentially, you have it backwards. It was the simplicity, not the complexity, of copying that caused the need for copyright. And today, we have it in spades.

      the people fighting over copyright today are not the authors of old, tho they claim to represent them, its the descendants of the printers of old, fighting for the privilege of monopoly on cultural distribution.

      Don't kid yourself. It's more than Big Media fighting for copyright. There are many indie artists similarly disposed towards piracy, as well as ordinary people.

      --
      You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
  3. It's A Fight To The Death ... by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 2, Informative

    ... on the swashbuckling seas of downloads.

    I'd say "let the best pirate win", but I'm afraid it's going to be anti-climactic. The real pirates will swab the decks with these amateur wanna-be's.

    1. Re:It's A Fight To The Death ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      It may be anti-climactic, but how about anti-climatic? Are anti-pirates good or bad for global warming?

  4. Keep going by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I want some serious action to encourage the development of the completely anonymous protocols.

    Keep pushing, studios.

    1. Re:Keep going by Tassach · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's why I'm not worried about this.

      The only people who are going to take a job like this are untalented drones of marginal technical ability who can't get a job elsewhere, especially at the . Furthermore, peer pressure is going to be enough to discourage most people (talented or not) from getting paid to turn narc / sell out to the man.

      The smart, creative people are going to be on the other side of the fight.

      Anyone with half a brain can tell that the copyright cartels are fighting a losing battle, desperately clinging to a business model that has been rendered obsolete by modern technology. P2P would largely disappear overnight if there was a legal alternative that offered a perceived benefit (guaranteed quality, good search, high speed download, brand loyalty, etc) over a pirate source. The studios are unwilling to do that because then they would have to charge prices that are dictated by the market, rather than by monopolistic fiat.

      There will always be some people who will take free over speed or convenience, but there are plenty who won't -- just witness Starbuck's ability to sell a quarter's worth of coffee at a 1000+% markup.

      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
    2. Re:Keep going by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Oddly enough, the most exclusive of the darknets are considerably more dangerous to be members of than being part of a large and very public crowd. I personally know one person who went to a halfway house, two who went to jail, and one who plea-bargained out of cell time because they were running servers for an extremely small and exclusive group of copyright infringers. They got taken out so hard because the FBI took an interest based solely on their reputation, and not on any possible damage done to rights holders. It was very much a case of flies and sledgehammers.

      Personally, I recommend avoiding invitation-only darknets. First, because they encourage law enforcement to see it as a challenge, and second because that's not how to win the dispute. The only way the assertion that copyright powers are wildly out of control and out of proportion will carry the day is if it's a cultural movement. The entire population has to be involved, and has to stick to it even when some of its members go down.

      That's what's happening now. The current situation is basically civil disobedience on an epic scale, despite the resounding lack of large crowds and firehoses. If you retreat to hidden darknets, you're losing.

      The rights holders still think they can preserve their rights, and even expand them, and with them their revenues. They're doomed. I've seen what the 11-17 year old crowd is doing, and I've heard how they think. They share. A lot. They're barely aware that the proverbial powers that be don't like it, and they get grumpy when their favorite Youtube video gets taken down because it used copyrighted background music, but they don't for a minute believe there was any justification in the takedown. They literally don't recognize the rights being claimed. I don't see that attitude going away because it's almost completely passive. They are not taking a principled stand. They're not aggressively standing up and demanding the distribution restrictions on Steamboat Willie be rescinded. The decision happens much more subtly than that. Each one of them is just a little snowflake in an avalanche: the avalanche is not their intention - it's their very nature.

    3. Re:Keep going by mandelbr0t · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm actually not that interested in availability of things online. It is ridiculous to claim that the entertainment industry doesn't lose anything due to P2P sharing. On the other hand, seeing the industry target people who have nothing to do with the original seeding of copyrighted material and sue them for everything they have and will have for several years makes me want to violate their copyright, just to piss them off. I've actually downloaded things just to seed them, and not actually to watch or play.

      I could be happy with the lack of availability of copyrighted material on BitTorrent if we could get there without giving into every demand of the copyright lobbyists. Really, I wouldn't mind going to Blockbuster to rent things if DRM provisions in copyright law were struck down. In my mind, this is the way things have always been: I can go to a Public Library and borrow copyrighted material. I can copy some or all of this material, and keep it for myself. In the early 90's, me and my fellow students would borrow CDs from the library and copy them to a cassette tape. No one ever complained about this; no one threatened to sue us for doing so. A levy was introduced on blank cassette tapes and life went on.

      But then MP3s got popular and it was easier to simply download them. Sure, we were told it was wrong, but the alternative was just a pain in the ass. Why rip the CDs when somebody has already done it? And, what happened? iTunes was born. The music industry was finally forced to give us music in the format we wanted, not because we were patient and waited for them to provide the MP3s without DRM, but because the music industry recognized that the free product, unlawfully obtained, was superior in convenience. Given that the profits of ITMS in the last while have been well into the billions per year, clearly this distribution model works, and the music industry avoided obsolescence by adapting.

      Now we're seeing the same thing in the movie industry. While it's taken an extra decade for the average user to have the relative bandwidth:content ratio that makes online music distribution convenient, we're there. The movie industry would do well to learn a lesson from their counterparts in the music industry and pull themselves back onto the cliff they're heading over. Refusal to provide movies in a convenient, DRM-free format will only force people to go elsewhere for the same thing.

      The DarkNets are not that important. There will always be closed rings who distribute over secure connections. The number of people who are actually members of these rings are very few. So yes, take away the public distribution, but provide a reasonable alternative. And stop suing people already.

      --
      "Please describe the scientific nature of the 'whammy'" - Agent Scully
  5. Sweet deal by Brian+Boitano · · Score: 3, Funny

    During the 12 month internship the students will have to maintain accounts at private BitTorrent sites, develop link-scanning bots, make trap purchases and perform various other anti-piracy tasks.

    Sounds like a sweet deal! I'll just copy that to my USB hard drive...

    --
    What would Brian Boitano do?
  6. What qualifies as IT background? by radicalrendell · · Score: 2, Funny

    Have you ever used BitTorrent? [X] -- Congratulations you are hired!

  7. Better look out by Aurisor · · Score: 3, Funny

    Better hope /b doesn't get a list of those interns. It would be really awful if someone were to leak a list of the chosen interns, post it to 4chan, and then have them torture and harass them until they curl up in the fetal position, crying.

  8. So? by Locke2005 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Why is this an issue? Warner Brothers does have a legal right to enforce their copyrights. While I would prefer they focus on those that are profiting from unauthorized distribution of copyrighted material, they also have a right to issue take-down notices. What would be unethical would be: uploading copyrighted material and then suing anybody who downloads it. Clearly, if WB themselves are freely distributing it, then they are implicitly granting permission for it to be distributed freely.

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    1. Re:So? by selven · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When we argue, we don't argue about what the law is. That's for the courts to decide. We argue about what the law should be. And, as the discussion here shows, it is not at all clear that Warner Bros is morally right in legally enforcing their copyrights against individual file sharers.

    2. Re:So? by timmarhy · · Score: 5, Insightful
      no they don't, the government has the right to enforce copyrights. Warner Brothers has the right to ALLEGE an infringement and make a complaint. anything more grants them the roles of judge, jury and executioner all in one.

      If you want to argue ethics, lets debate about movie producers and actors with net worths in the 100's of millions sueing single mothers and college kids for downloading a few movies they otherwise wouldn't pay to see anyway.

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    3. Re:So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, it annoys me to no end that I have to go through a variety of legal and procedural hoops to ensure content I create can be consumed, used and re-purposed by other people (creative commons share-alike, GPL, etc.). I just want people to have access to my work, and be able to build off of it (assuming it is useful to them). That's how the world works. This closed up copyright/IP BS is a recent (like only a few centuries old) invention and I do not think it serves us well.

    4. Re:So? by timmarhy · · Score: 2, Funny

      good point. they should have to prove you seeded 100% of the file before your guilty of infringement.

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
  9. They keep spending money on this by kawabago · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The entertainment industry keeps pouring money into anti-piracy and they keep getting further behind. The millions of dollars the industry spends on these campaigns bring in absolutely zero in increased revenue. If the industry took the position that file traders don't matter and that people who buy movies and music are the ones that do matter, they could then spend this money reaching out to people who will buy and bring in increased profits. Continuing to invest in the people who aren't interested in buying is only going to increase costs and drive paying customers away.

  10. Interesting tactic, won't work. by dgatwood · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, it might work in the short term. All content protection, whether through DRM, laws, takedown notices, or any other mechanism is fundamentally founded on the principal that "we're smarter than you are", which in the long term is always an untenable position merely because of the scale involved. For every one person they employ to defend their copyright, there are a thousand people looking for ways to break whatever measures they put in place.

    For example, it is possible to design a P2P system that does not rely on trackers (e.g. the DHT scheme that TPB uses). With such a system, content is not hosted anywhere that can get a takedown notice. Combined with onion routing (crypto), you can also make it highly infeasible to determine who is actually seeding the content, nearly guaranteeing that anyone you attack is an innocent victim, thus making the courts take progressively more negative attitudes towards your attacks. Put simply, the harder they try to clamp down on P2P, the greater the security measures that will be put in place to thwart it.

    You cannot compete with P2P by attacking it. You can only compete with it by providing a better experience (or at least a comparable experience) through legal channels for a price that the market is willing to bear. Start by reducing the price of Blu-Ray movies to the same price as their DVD counterparts. That alone will take a huge chunk out of P2P.

    --

    Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    1. Re:Interesting tactic, won't work. by russ1337 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      quote]You cannot compete with P2P by attacking it. You can only compete with it by providing a better experience (or at least a comparable experience) through legal channels for a price that the market is willing to bear. Start by reducing the price of Blu-Ray movies to the same price as their DVD counterparts. That alone will take a huge chunk out of P2P.

      Start by offering 700MB XVID downloads for about USD$5 from fast servers with fantastic bandwidth.

      In the movie file, show one add for an upcoming movie, then show the credit card details and user account information for about 5 seconds. "this copy of $movie is licenced to $name $address $credit_card_number" . The customer will protect your movies with the same level of care as their card information, and will share it at their own risk or have to go to the hassle of editing the information out before putting it on p2p.

      As parent said, only by competing with the product (p2p) will the movie companies win. And they have a chance to make some big money off that 'long tail'. Apply suitable methods to discourage sharing, and consumption will increase. Using this method, the movie industry would kill TV and make Billions.

    2. Re:Interesting tactic, won't work. by Xelios · · Score: 5, Insightful
      "Start by reducing the price of Blu-Ray movies to the same price as their DVD counterparts."
      And why stop there? Here's a few other things that need to go:
      • Why are there anti-piracy warnings displayed at the beginning of the movie I just bought? Why can't I skip them?
      • Why are there commercials and trailers in this DVD that I just bought? If I want to see a trailer I'll go look it up online.
      • Region locking? We've had region-free players for a while now, it's pointless and it needs to go.
      • An "extended Directors Cut" version of the same DVD I just bought released a couple months later? Great, thanks, I love wasting money.
      • Yes, I see your flashy menu. It's nice. Now can we get on with the playing of the movie please? No? Oh good, now you're showing me all the funny parts of the movie in the menu before I've even seen the movie. Can I turn subtitles off now? More animation? All I did was press a button, I don't need a damn light show congratulating me on it.

      Sigh. You're very bad people.

      --
      Murphey's fighting Occam, and we're in the stands.
  11. Shit job, Shit Pay. by Jackie_Chan_Fan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This to me reads as "Warner Brothers is ripping off intelligent college students"

    Keep your shitty check. If you want to pay people to do your dirty work, you better pay them a damn good wage.

    I dont know of any US or UK mercenaries who work for minimum wage.

    1. Re:Shit job, Shit Pay. by cptdondo · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, I expect the pirates to be at the head of the line. At least, if I was in the business of stealing content, what better way to get to know the enemy?

      And, for the icing on the cake, I get a paycheck for it! Yippee! Where do I sign up?

    2. Re:Shit job, Shit Pay. by glwtta · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This to me reads as "Warner Brothers is ripping off intelligent college students"

      If they were intelligent, they wouldn't be getting ripped off, now would they?

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
  12. Make that unauthorized file-sharing by John+Hasler · · Score: 2, Insightful

    > causing general frustration amongst the file-sharing population on the
    > Internet.

    Make that unauthorized file-sharing. There are people who have no interest WB's crap: they are unaffected.

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  13. Epic? by Eggbloke · · Score: 2, Funny

    The intern will literally be on the front-lines of the epic battle against pirated content

    I'm not sure court cases can be described as epic...

    --
    I care not for your karma and your mod points.
  14. They are fighting nature by erroneus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    When fighting nature, either nature always wins or everyone loses. In this case, they are fighting artistic and entertainment nature. Art and entertainment need to be free and need to be shared. It is an important part of what it means to be a human being. What big media is doing is wrong in the sense that they think they can control and limit and even "bottle up" art and entertainment to maximize their profits.

    What people are doing with their collecting and sharing is natural human behavior. It doesn't feel like a "crime" to most people to share because it's quite natural and it's everywhere.

    And please, I have heard the arguments before "but people wouldn't create if there were no money in it!" Pure nonsense. Fan films and other amateur work if littering the internet like never before. People love creating and building and showing off. They don't do it for money. They do it for attention or as an outlet or just to make people smile. Yes, there are many who are attracted to the media market because there is a lot of money to be made, but that's not why the TALENTED people do it... just the greedy ones.

  15. Won't work by allometry · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When you pirate a movie, you don't have to contend with ads, previews or screens you can't force your way past. When you legitimately buy a movie, you are forced to watch previews, get stuck waiting for the FBI warning and often times contend with other annoyances.

    Perhaps shafting your legitimate clients isn't the best way to do business?

    --
    http://www.allometry.com
    1. Re:Won't work by h4rr4r · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Get a better DVD player. VLC is great at skipping that crap, dealing with scratched discs and upscaling.

    2. Re:Won't work by Hurricane78 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      When you legitimately buy a movie

      There is no such thing as buying a movie... unless maybe if you are the producer.
      Since you only get a license for limited use.

      But even if you could freely use it, there still is no such thing as ownership of information. Because ownership is defined as having certain abilities, like control over it. Which for information, is only possible, if it has never left your mind. But then you can also not prove its existence.
      As soon as you let it out, you just split control with whoever received it.

      Which means that it’s absurd to speak of “ownership”, when talking about information.
      Information is free. Period. And just like with gravity, there is nothing, anyone can do about it.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    3. Re:Won't work by calmofthestorm · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The problem is that these are people used to legislating their way to a business model. They have laws to create artifical scarcity, perpetual copyright, and once ACTA passes their own private police and lawyer force on tax dollars. If they viewed it as "competition" they might have a chance.

      Instead, a whole generation of children are being raised with absolutely no respect for the copywrite bullshit. I don't think this is entirely due to the MAFIAA, but they are a contributing factor. Kids look at their BS ads about how "piracy is no different from stealing a tangible good" and realize the facts just don't add up...just like my generation looked at the "smoke marihuana once and become a crack whore" ads from DARE, GREAT, etc. All those lulzy comics about the kid who downloaded a song being dragged into criminal court (technically possible under DMCA but never happened yet -- good luck proving it beyond a reasonable doubt.), it just adds to the cynicism and disillusionment. The vast majority of people just don't give a fuck, and those who do don't tend to swallow this bs.

      I'm not really sure precisely where this is going, but I do have to say that the fundamental disconnect in perception here is going to make for quite the firefight. After all, the internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.

      --
      93rd rule of Slashdot: No matter how obvious my sarcasm is, my comment will be taken seriously by someone.
    4. Re:Won't work by Symbha · · Score: 5, Informative

      The Invention of Lying had *Literally* 20 minutes of previews.
      You could not skip them.
      You could not reach the title screen through top, or menu.
      You could not scan through them (at the end of the first trailer, it would simply repeat.)
      Ultimately had to use a title/chapter search feature of my dvd player to get to the title.

      20 minutes of unskippable bullshit? seriously, it made me want to crack the disk before sending it back to netflix.

    5. Re:Won't work by Chuck+Chunder · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There is no such thing as buying a movie... unless maybe if you are the producer. Since you only get a license for limited use.

      That's funny, all the times I've bought a DVD I've never recieved such a license. Can you tell me what law necessitates that I have a licence to watch a DVD?

      --
      Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
  16. Shouldn't that be ... by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 3, Funny

    anti-anti pirate-pirate-pirates?

    (Look, Natasha! Is moose and squirrel!)

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:Shouldn't that be ... by genner · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's been forty-five years. Now why do I remember that?

      Some memories just never die

      ....they just wind up on hulu.com

    2. Re:Shouldn't that be ... by Killjoy_NL · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What is funny for me is that I have never ever seen anything from that show.
      The only way I know that it is from some Rocky and Bullwinkle thing is because of all the references to that show from other american media over all the years.

      --
      This is the sig that says NI (again)
  17. say goodbye to friendship by Triv · · Score: 2, Funny

    Wow. I used to think being a dorm RA was the fast-lane to friendlessness, but clearly this is worse.

  18. Traitors beware! by Hurricane78 · · Score: 4, Funny

    My grandmother told me, that when the Nazis took over Luxemburg (our country), there were people who collaborated with the Nazis. They were called “Gielemännchen“ (yellow mankins), and often wore yellow rain coats. Everyone hated them.

    Wanna know what happened to them when the Nazis were gone?
    They were brutally killed by the villagers. Every single one of them. Often in cruel ways and with blunt objects.

    So beware, if you dare to collaborate with the enemy. Cause they might not be there, when we come for you later.

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    1. Re:Traitors beware! by Grail · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The moral of the story is... don't keep living in a town when you've spent the last three years helping kill their friends and family.

      I really don't think there's much comparison between lynch mobs and the Third Reich.

    2. Re:Traitors beware! by domatic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In what world should collaborators not be made to pay? The big difference between those villagers and the occupiers is the fact they lived there. You expect to be oppressed by occupiers but when your neighbor licks their boots and helps out the oppressor that makes the collaborator more reprehensible than the occupier. If such a one had turned some of your loved ones over to the SS or maybe just took something he wanted backed by an invader's gun then perhaps you wouldn't be so quick to toss off such quick moral judgments.

    3. Re:Traitors beware! by fyoder · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So beware, if you dare to collaborate with the enemy.

      I know you're being humorous, but it does feel that way which is kind of sad. I think most of us would be happy to pay a reasonable price for a non-DRMed copy of a movie we wanted to see. That is to say, I think most of us are willing to be customers. In fact, I bought a DVD the other day. It had two movies on it for ten bucks. And because I watch DVDs using an open source OS, I don't get the complaints about being forced to watch previews and FBI warnings. Do DVD players or whatever you watch on really enforce that?

      --
      Loose lips lose spit.
    4. Re:Traitors beware! by MikShapi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, the moral is that the idea of an internship is to help you get hired for a job in the IT industry.

      Making yourself IT-lynch-mob-fodder is not necessarily the best way of going about doing that.

      Had I had such a background (and for the protocol, you'd need to point a loaded gun at me to get me to do this), I most certainly would not advertise this on my resume.

      --
      -
    5. Re:Traitors beware! by tecnico.hitos · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They were called “Gielemännchen“ (yellow mankins), and often wore yellow rain coats. Everyone hated them.

      Wanna know what happened to them when the Nazis were gone? They were brutally killed by the villagers.

      Remember me to never use a yellow raincoat in Luxemburg.

      --
      The good, the evil and the vacuum tubes.
  19. Re:They will not collapse! by teh+moges · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That makes sense if someone is willing to pay $100 million for the first copy of the movie. A more reasonable suggestion would be that once a movie starts to profit, they allow free copies to be distributed. Even then, there is an issue of making an overall profit as some movies fail, and what the level of 'enough profit'. I am completely against many of the claims and practises that the *AAs perform (download != sale, poor profits given to recording artists), but they release a product under a set of conditions. If you don't like those conditions, don't get the product. Eventually free market forces will allow the studios that make the best use of the Internet to profit and the rest will catch on. Yes they have a near-monopoly on the industry and they advertise particularly well, but people lived perfectly well before Avatar came out, so if you don't want to pay to see it, you don't have to see it right away. Wait until the movie is showed with advertising for free or don't even see it at all.

  20. Re:Could be worse by zblack_eagle · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Someone is far less likely to sue a 'poor student' than a rich company for improper takedowns.

    I've got two words for you: Vicarious Liability

  21. Does this remind anybody of anything else...? by Lead+Butthead · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The entertainment industry keeps pouring money into anti-piracy and they keep getting further behind.

    Why does this remind me a lot of "war on drugs" that USA is presently still losing (as it escalates to neighboring countries as well.)

    --
    ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
  22. Re:Doh! by h4rr4r · · Score: 2, Funny

    You could always watch it on hulu.

    HAHAHAHA, ok sorry could not keep a straight face.

  23. Re:What a bunch of pussies by Nadaka · · Score: 2, Informative

    Additionally they are essentially working as unlicensed private investigators. This is illegal in many jurisdictions and any evidence they may gather is likely to be inadmissible. The RIAA has already been sanctioned for exactly this.

  24. Re:What a bunch of pussies by GumphMaster · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If the papers they sign state that they are responsible for their own actions, it would get WB out of any counter-lawsuits for thing done.

    Curiously, this would leave the WB "employee" liable for any sharing of WB material that they participate in while attempting to entrap others. Let me think, how could that be useful to WB... I see, wait six months after you hire your tranche of stooges, fire and then sue them using the evidence they supplied (thinking this was about others). Win the cases and then point to the stack of precedent you have amassed when you go after future cases. Sweet ;)

    --
    Patent litigation: A doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction... in which everyone seems willing to push the button
  25. Re:They will not collapse! by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You can't compete on price with P2P. How do you undercut "free"? But that doesn't mean you can't beat P2P. You only have to offer more, not (as it is now) less. And the first step towards that is to know your audience.

    If the (quite successful) "metal box" releases should give a hint, it is that movie enthusiasts are willing to pay for their product if the product is to their liking. In other words, stop selling the movie. Sell the "experience". Sell the "exclusivity". Sell your customers the feeling that they got something great, something they wouldn't get if they just copied the movie.

    The movie is not just a disc to insert into the player. The movie is also a box that will rest on the customer's shelf while he's not watching it. He will actually see that box a lot more than the movie, because it will always be there in his room, on his shelf, on display. Sure, they could make their own "presentable" cover. So you have to also instill the feeling that not having the "real" thing is phony, that they would sink in their friends' esteem if they did that. Teenagers are notoriously short on cash, yet they buy TCGs and Warhammer figurines, despite both being easily replaced by cut-out cardboard DIY cards and play tokens. Why don't they do it, why do they buy the overpriced cardboard and plastic? Because it would not be accepted by their peers if they did that. You have to do the same for movie enthusiasts! It just isn't cool to have a DIY cover on your DVD box!

    To achive that, you have to make that cover something your customer will want to show off. That needn't be more expensive than the cheap looking nondescript plastic covers you use today. Get creative! You employ an army of PR goons, have them work for their money!

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  26. I'd do it. by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Two reasons:

    1) I agree that the majority of file sharing is illegal.

    2) I agree that the media companies are pretty evil. I should learn all I can about them and they should learn all they can about me. They need help figuring out the best ways to curb piracy, and make their own offerings more palatable to the general public. They should be allowed to make money for their work, but their should be harsher limits on their control of media. If they want me fighting for them, they'll need to agree to reform.

    --
    Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    1. Re:I'd do it. by Zorque · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I appreciate your optimism, but I don't think the people being hired for this are really in any position to make demands about how the industry carries out their business. If you tried you'd probably be let go.

  27. By what means by esocid · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Are they going to upload fake torrents, because that already happens, and thanks to ratings, the fakes are found and banned.
    Are they going to pack viruses in torrents? That already happens, maybe not by them, but see above.
    Are they going to upload fake articles (because this is where the leechers [seeders] get their material).
    Are they going to troll irc and try to trade with people....Does this seriously happen still? It's not 1995.

    I thought we'd already cleared up that the legal avenues that the **AAs pursue are scurrilous already, and anything of this nature would start to be illegal.

    The intern could also learn a very valuable lesson that the studios would have no interest in hearing. The underground exists because you aren't doing anything to monetize on it. You put out an inferior product that is crippled, and what these people offer is what everyone wants. An easy to obtain, high quality media product, without all the garbage that you force people to accept (unskippable menus, DRM, non-digital stores). You'd still see people not willing to pay, but you'd see profits skyrocket if you'd just accept that this is what people want instead of fighting it, and pretending it's still 1991.

    --
    Absolute power corrupts absolutely. indymedia
  28. I've seen this BS before... by BlackBloq · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This issue is complex because the students who are being hired have no legal rights as any type of law enforcement. Therefore as shown in prior cases where private investigators gather information illegally (wiretap laws etc) from the inside of a persons computer the evidence is useful in a case by case basis, depending on the state, province or country's laws. Computer evidence is like the old time date stamp on a video tape; you can forge the whole thing (See Strange Brew :P). Prosecution cannot bring in evidence created in a vacuum, the state has to gather it. That's why lawyers supina records from ISP's through the court, otherwise evidence would just "pop up" as needed, if you get my drift. So really who cares about this weak lame attempt at coercive entrapment. All they are trying to do is get some dirty goods on you so they can convince you to settle for big bucks. Anyone who can should rotate MAC addresses and not use P2P, grow up and use encrypted torrents. Maybe a P2P or Torrent client should rotate your MAC address every 1-4 days so the end user cannot be railed in the ass.

  29. I can already hear it, 10 years from now... by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Funny

    "I was young, and I needed the money!"

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  30. Motion Picture Patents Company by mister_playboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_Picture_Patents_Company

    The MPPC was preceded by the Edison licensing system, in effect in 1907–1908, on which the MPPC was modeled. Since the 1890s, Thomas Edison owned most of the major American patents relating to motion picture cameras. The Edison Manufacturing Company's patent lawsuits against each of its domestic competitors crippled the American film industry, reducing American production mainly to two companies: Edison and Biograph, which used a different camera design. This left Edison's other rivals with little recourse but to import foreign-made films, mainly French and British.

    Since 1902, Edison had also been notifying distributors and exhibitors that if they did not use Edison machines and films exclusively, they would be subject to litigation for supporting filmmaking that infringed Edison's patents. Exhausted by the lawsuits, Edison's competitors — Essanay, Kalem, Pathé Frères, Selig, and Vitagraph — approached him in 1907 to negotiate a licensing agreement, which Lubin was also invited to join. The one notable filmmaker excluded from the licensing agreement was Biograph, which Edison hoped to squeeze out of the market. No further applicants could become licensees. The purpose of the licensing agreement, according to an Edison lawyer, was to "preserve the business of present manufacturers and not to throw the field open to all competitors."

    Many independent filmmakers, who controlled from one-quarter to one-third of the domestic marketplace, responded to the creation of the MPPC by moving their operations to Hollywood, whose distance from Edison's home base of New Jersey made it more difficult for the MPPC to enforce its patents. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which is headquartered in San Francisco, California, and covers the area, was averse to enforcing patent claims.[citation needed] Southern California was also chosen because of its beautiful year-round weather and varied countryside, which could stand in for deserts, jungles and great mountains.

    --
    Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law ::: Love is the law, love under will
  31. Re:They will not collapse! by Buelldozer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    No movie makes a profit in Hollywood. If you don't believe go look at the many, many, lawsuits. Titanic cleared over a billion and they STILL tried to claim it as a loss.

  32. Re:They will not collapse! by wisty · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It takes hours for me to torrent a movie-sized file (i.e. a distro CD). I would rather pay a few dollars for a better download rate, better quality movie, etc.

    But it's hard to justify $30 / movie for legal downloads, which is what the big distributors would like.

  33. Re:Could be worse by shentino · · Score: 2, Informative

    Two words: Agency Theory.

    If you find out who sent that overzealous intern after you, good ole Respondeat Superior will take care of the big dog.

  34. Re:Just buy the effing movie! by Zorque · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Let me guess, you're one of the people the article is talking about.

  35. Re:They will not collapse! by Cidolfas · · Score: 3, Funny

    Oh, that's just creative accounting. Why pay taxes on a profit when you can claim it as a loss and still get the money?

    --
    I am become /dev/null, destroyer of data.
  36. Narcs by earlymon · · Score: 2, Informative

    That's what we called 'em when I was in college - exact same principles - exact same ensnarements.

    The intern will literally be on the front-lines of the epic battle against pirated content, ensnaring users in incriminating transactions, issuing takedown requests, and causing general frustration amongst the file-sharing population on the Internet.

    Exact same cluelessness, all the way around.

    --
    Pathological kinda promises Path + Logical - but instead, you get stuck with pathetic.
  37. Hmmm... what's missing from the job description? by seeker_1us · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Nowhere does it say anything about verifying that the employer has any legal rights to the alleged "pirate" material.

    During the 12 month internship, duties will include: monitoring local Internet forums and IRC for pirated WB and NBCU content and in order to gather information on pirate sites, pirate groups and other pirate activities; finding new and maintaining existing accounts on private sites; scanning for links to hosted pirated WB and NBCU content and using tools to issue takedown requests; maintaining and developing bots for Internet link scanning system (training provided); preparing sending of infringement notices and logging feedback; performing trap purchases of pirated product and logging results; inputting pirate hard goods data and other intelligence into the forensics database; selecting local keywords and submitting local filenames for monitoring and countermeasure campaigns and periodically producing research documents on piracy related technological developments. Various training will be provided.

  38. Slaves will do anything for a buck by chord.wav · · Score: 2, Funny

    "I was young and I needed the money" isn't what it used to be...

  39. Catch-22 by theswimmingbird · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The best part of all this will come when the guys who decide to do this work for WB have charges pressed against themselves for p2p. I mean, really, what self-respecting IT grad would do this kind of shady work?

  40. clash with college culture? by deetoy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Given the culture of some residential colleges, I'd suggest the recruited anti pirate move off campus. If you thought hazing at some colleges was bad, imagine the consequences of busting your professor for pirating on your assignment and exam grades. Not all college professors follow official university ethics standards, hence the official ethics standards existence.

  41. One word ... by daveime · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Entrapment.

    ensnaring users in incriminating transactions

    The police aren't allowed to do this, why are movie studios ?

    Maybe the authors of torrent clients should implement an IP checklist, so that any known movie studio IPs that are found to be seeding get snapshotted and can be included in court submissions as illegal entrapment tactics.

  42. Short lifed career by LostMyBeaver · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Taking a pirate and turning them into corporate drones where they have ready availability to free media (I used to get a box of 100 DVDs at a time for free from Warner) makes it so that their pirate instincts turn dull quickly. Fact is, while these guys would be resourceful in the beginning, they would quickly become dead weight since they'd stop thinking like pirates.

    It would make more sense to hire computer science graduates and have the work on the problem from a technical aspect as opposed to the social aspect.

    1. Re:Short lifed career by maxwell+demon · · Score: 2, Funny

      Taking a pirate and turning them into corporate drones where they have ready availability to free media (I used to get a box of 100 DVDs at a time for free from Warner) makes it so that their pirate instincts turn dull quickly. Fact is, while these guys would be resourceful in the beginning, they would quickly become dead weight since they'd stop thinking like pirates.

      OK, so they simply should do it to all people, and the piracy problem would be solved soon. :-)

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  43. Re:Antimatter by maxwell+demon · · Score: 3, Funny

    If a pirate and an anti-pirate collide, do we get a large release of energy, and could this be a way of powering the planet. No more need for fossil fuels...

    Be aware that such annihilations usually produce large amounts of dangerous DRM radiation.

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  44. Lets rephrase this and see how it looks : by unity100 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Duke of Cornwall hires Swiss mercenaries to crack down on illegal trading of grain to protect his hereditary rights"

    history repeats itself. if you let groups and people become feudal lords, they crack down on the people,f or their 'rights'. whats absurd that, after a point, they start to define what is a 'right' themselves, totally free of the people's will.

    see, copyright was intended for 20 or so years at the start. now its 90 years. trademark was invented to protect well known brand names, now it has become something that you can lay claim to words, anywhere, any use. patents were supposedly to spur innovation, now they are tools with which you can lay claim to genes, and soon laws of nature. (well because you found them first, right ).

    its stupid. we need to abolish these before we end up with a new, this time intellectual feudal aristocracy.

  45. UK rushing through law to disconnect filesharers by Cato · · Score: 3, Informative

    The UK government is rushing through a law on filesharing in the last week of parliamentary business before the general election. It's bypassing the normal line by line debate in committees etc.

    The proposed law, which will become law shortly after April 6th on current plans, will essentially enable the copyright holder to get warning letters sent to those who are believed to be illegally sharing files - these go to the broadband account holder, and if the incidents continue, they can be disconnected (or other unspecified "technical measures" may be taken). It doesn't matter if a family member or guest did the file sharing, or someone freeloading on your WiFi.

    See http://www.openrightsgroup.org/campaigns/disconnection/why-care for more details and what to do about this.

    The relevance to this story is that the UK students that Warner is recruiting might well uncover the "filesharing incidents" that would feed into this heavy handed enforcement mechanism.

  46. Edison = huge asshole by GameboyRMH · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You know, the more I read about Thomas Edison, the more I realize he was a giant flaming asshole. His positive contributions to society were quite nearly overshadowed by his negative ones IMO.

    In 50-100 years people will probably look back at Bill Gates the same way - and it would be worse if not for his philanthropic pursuits.

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel