Slashdot Mirror
Copyright Industry Calls For Broad Search Engine Controls
The copyright battles going on right now are not all about SOPA, PIPA, or even the wider-reaching ACTA: suraj.sun snips thus from TorrentFreak: "At a behind-closed-doors meeting facilitated by the UK Department for Culture, Media and Sport, copyright holders have handed out a list of demands to Google, Bing and Yahoo. To curb the growing piracy problem, Hollywood and the major music labels want the search engines to de-list popular filesharing sites such as The Pirate Bay, and give higher ranking to authorized sites. ... If the copyright industry had their way, Google and other search engines would no longer link to sites such as The Pirate Bay and isoHunt. In a detailed proposal handed out during a meeting with Google, Yahoo and Bing, various copyright holders made their demands clear. The document, which describes a government-overlooked 'Voluntary Code of Practice' for search engines, was not intended for public consumption but the Open Rights Group obtained it through a Freedom of Information (FOI) request."
The movie and music industry make material available globally and easily themselves or the governments of the world regulate their distribution chain.
Also the governments audit and oversee all their artist contracts and revenue streams.
See how much they like government regulation and scream about the idea.
The Singularity is closer than you think
Quant
They already tried that in Germany.
The publishers of school books wanted to lobby/buy themselves an agreement which requires a percentage of schools and teachers to install a software on their machines to ensure they don't have any unlicensed material on them.
Kinda like Origin, but enforced by the government.
Because they don't give a shit about the internet - in fact, they see it as competition. So the more ridiculous, expensive and useless things they can get the internet to waste money and resources on, the better.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Not at all. I "pirate" media to preview/prelisten before making a purchase decision. Were I not able to preview/prelisten, I'd buy NOTHING.
So "piracy" INCREASES their market share and sales in my case.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
MegaUpload seemed to do quite well and they paid for the content to be uploaded.
An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
These whores are basically wanting to censor for their own interest. No shame. No worries. No hesitation.
Modern carriage industry refusing to die and taking everyone hostage.
These need to be killed. Asap. first should be hollywood. else, we are never going to get 'cars' at this rate.
And, NO - as you can see, this has gotten out of hand - there is no way to make it work. Now, its either us - the cyber age, internet, 'the people', or them.
Read radical news here
I don't give a fuck what anyone else does. I'm LEGALLY ENTITLED to preview media in Canada and to format-shift content I already own. The US is it's own nightmare, and as long as they never succeed in shoving their fucked-up system down Canada's throat, I could give a tinker's damn about what the US does to itself.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
4. Democracy on the web works.
Google search works because it relies on the millions of individuals posting links on websites to help determine which other sites offer content of value. We assess the importance of every web page using more than 200 signals and a variety of techniques, including our patented PageRank algorithm, which analyzes which sites have been “voted” to be the best sources of information by other pages across the web. As the web gets bigger, this approach actually improves, as each new site is another point of information and another vote to be counted. In the same vein, we are active in open source software development, where innovation takes place through the collective effort of many programmers.
6. You can make money without doing evil
Advertising on Google is always clearly identified as a "Sponsored Link," so it does not compromise the integrity of our search results. We never manipulate rankings to put our partners higher in our search results and no one can buy better PageRank. Our users trust our objectivity and no short-term gain could ever justify breaching that trust.
Doesn't this proposal breach both these policies of Google?
http://www.google.com/about/corporate/company/tenthings.html
We are past peak copyright, and they know it, and are desperate.
to prevent piracy Google & bing should drop all references to any all MPAA & RIAA "properties". No Elvis Presley, James Brown, Aretha Franklin, Justin Beiber or OneDirection. For a week. Then watch the xxAA's whine and complain - probably try and get an anti-trust action about it.
The Singularity is closer than you think
Quant
What I want to know is when the politician are going to start legislating the con-committal responsibilities that go with these so called "rights." I was taught that being granted rights meant there were a whole range of responsibilities that went with them. Let us come up with a few for Copyright. 1. If a protected work is out of active circulation (new copies promoted for sale in a currently readable format) for 10 years by any distributer who has purchased the right then the copyright returns to the author. If the author (or his heirs or assigns) is unable to offer the work for sale for an additional 10 years the work falls into the public domain. 2. Should a corporation owning copyrights outright through works for hire be guilty of any serious infraction - environmental, securities, labor, etc. - such work are forfeit to the public domain. Settlement of such charges without any admission of guilt shall not be deemed sufficient to avoid the penalty. 3. Format changes must be updated for similar platforms. If the content is electronic then the producer cannot create a new format for the sole purpose of reselling the content. Product support for older formats must be maintained. Other idea or refinements?
they are the consumers that use the internet and we are the technicians that make the internet work. In essence these people are our food, we are the top of the food chain
You can't be further from the mark there mate. Big Media isn't a consumer of the internet. Big Media's customers are consumers of the internet. Big media makes a movie and wants to sell it at the cinema, or on a Blu-Ray or DVD. They couldn't be happier if the entire internet vanished. Then they could go back to charging thirty bucks for a CD and fifteen bucks for a CD single. DVDs would be back up to full price and a Blu-Ray would probably be sixty or seventy dollars.
They won't move aside in favour of you. While I applaud your verve, you mistake your place on the chessboard. Until the chessboard changes, and politicians start working for their constituents, constituents start to look forward further then the next one or two pay cycles - "us" in your words will remain in the middle paying jobs, taking orders from bosses who you think you are smarter than, and not seeing the utopian freedom that you want.
Don't hate the player. Hate the game. Or better yet, learn to play the game better than those who keep beating you at it.
Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
That next year computer using windows 7-8, and intel's E?{Remember: Intel bought McAfee} something processor will allow BIG BROTHER to be able to brick your computer if it contains software deem inappropriate. Cool Yes! Its a win win senario for the NeoCons, more felony charges to the people, more computers being replaced, more people fearfull of sharing software. Great huh? Now who says the NeoCons dont know about I.T.?
i support this proposal.
if all these pirate sites are delisted from the search engines, they will simply move "underground" (whatever that could mean) and they would still be accessible (for example, someone posts a link on some unrelated website).
but now the big media companies wont be able to find these underground sites via the search engines EITHER, thus making their takedown requests even harder.
How about the fact, that in some countries 500 euros is a good monthly pay, while in others 2000 euros per months means one step above poor. Yet all the goods are priced the same. No, there is more, you see in a country like UK, if you don't like something you have the option of returning it, if it's scratched or damaged, you can get your money back or a replacement. You also have all those neat promotions. You might find it fantastic, but a lot of firms do bussiness that way, they don't bother buying in bulk from the producer, but buy a small quantity from the distributor, simply put because they can't afford to keep that much stock without selling it.
There are a lot of little things that prevent all goods from reaching all markets.
Take manga and anime for instance, until a few years ago, it was impossible to get them in the western countries, let alone translated. So, the option was piracy. Then there was the price, in Japan, Korea, they're dirt cheap, in the rest of the world they're bloody expensive, even with the translation and reprinting the cost isn't justified.
In the end, they're going to lose. You know why? Because anyone and everyone can hold in the palm of their hand, every book ever written in the world.
There's not a whole lot an individual can do about that. Too bad the GP is an AC, because that was an insightful comment that unfortunately will be little seen.
When I was in Thailand in 1974 it cost a nickle to ride a bus anywhere in the country. Dinner for four at a decent restaurant cost a dollar. I bought a tailored shirt for five bucks, my bungalow was $30 a month. The median wage was about $1000 per year, yet they weren't really poor.
It took two decades for them to industrialize, and the average Thai is no better off now than they were then.
Free Martian Whores!
For most of my life, I've been getting increasingly resentful of these corporate pirates for stealing, hoarding, and even sometimes destroying human culture. They have no interest whatsoever in the "the Progress of Science and useful Arts," nor will they ever be satisfied with any "limited Time" regulating their monopolistic control over thoughts.
Now, these assholes have already shown... They cannot be trusted.
With the exception of some governments, NGOs, and a minority of intelligent artists, the public domain, as defined by law, is a thing of the past. My response to this government and corporations mutual disregard for the founders' more than generous monopoly terms, is to disregard those terms myself, with the maximum effect I can bring to bear. No useless letters to government prostitutes involved.
My uTorrent stats show 964GB transferred in the past ten days, and a 1:12.8 dl:ul ratio since install. I put as much as I can on properly stored archival DVDs, but I'm one person with limited resources. One advantage that we "little people" have over libraries and funded preservation/conservation efforts is not having to wait past death to make a copy; I have a copy a minute after an RSS feed update, and at least ten more public copies before I'm done with it. Hopefully some of my peers are doing the same. You know, I find it tragicomical how these industrial copy-Nazis and their apologists get so confused about who's greedy, freeloading, cheap, thieving, and who's really "entitled."
That all said, I'm not certain what I'm actually achieving in the end, but I do know that I'm motivated to try to improve things for maximum people, and the MAFIAA pirates' motive is amassing more corporate welfare; i.e., "transfer of wealth" at everyone else expense.
Thank you, Edward Snowden.
"Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
....then they can pay property taxes on it.
That way the govt is reimbursed for all the services it provides in protecting this "property".
And Sony/BMG will have motivation to let some older works slide into the public domain.
Just putting it out there...if you're going to call it civil disobedience, then make sure that you're down with the road you're choosing to travel. Civil disobedience means that if they decide to sue you that you plead guilty to the crime, take the sentence they give you, and forego appeals. Civil disobedience means that you believe in your cause enough to take the punishment they dish out in order to make an example as to how harmful the rules are with the hope that your sacrifice will influence positive change.
Using the principle famously exemplified by Gandhi and Rosa Parks is admirable, as long as you're willing to go to the lengths that they're willing to go in order to do it. If that's genuinely your goal, and you're okay with it, then I applaud you and support you. However, if you're going at this with even the slightest intent to settle out of court, plead 'not guilty', or appeal a verdict, then you're not following a cause, you're justifying copyright infringement.
Personally, I'll settle for using Spotify.
Do the big search engines really want to take advice from an industry that is out-competed in distribution by *amateurs*? Most people sharing files don't make money off it.
To those who ask "how will creators get paid?", there are plenty of people who will willingly pay for things at a reasonable price, as demonstrated by iTunes, NetFlix, Steam, and even for books, where Baen free library *increased* sales by exposing readers to new authors. I have 100+ DVDs that I got for about $6 each on average over the last decade. I got them used from the video store, and to me that was a reasonable price. $20 new is just too much for me, so I have nearly never bought new ones.
Gandhi-style civil disobedience is for suckers. Governments have adapted and it is no longer an effective tactic.