Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Rights Holders See Little Point Creating Legal Content Sources

Posted by timothy on from the regulatory-capture-has-only-just-begun dept.

aesoteric writes "Six weeks after Hollywood lost a landmark internet piracy case in Australia, it appears the film studios have gone cold on the idea of helping develop legal avenues to access copyrighted content as a way to combat piracy. Instead, they've produced research to show people will continue pirating even if there are legitimate content sources available. The results appear to support the studios' policy position that legislation is a preferable way of dealing with the issue." The industry-controlled kill switch is a popular idea all over the world.

9 of 417 comments (clear)

  1. Of course, thieves will try to keep the stolen by siddesu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Over the years, the social contract between publishers and the society that has created the copyright monopoly has been abused to such extent, and has created such disproportionate amount of wealth for the few lawyers that run the business, that it is hard to see how they are going to accept a scheme that potentially cuts deep not only in their revenues, but in the justification of the existence of copyrights in their present form.

  2. It's the money, stupid by Baron_Yam · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I just can't care about 'fair' when there's enough money being milked to make multimillionaires out of actors. Maybe the end product wouldn't cost as much if, say, an actor in a top end show made $80k/year. Maybe content producers could then produce MORE good content to get their profit.

    I dunno, I guess I'm just crazy.

  3. Black Markets 101 by Githaron · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Black markets form when there exists a market that is not being serviced through legal channels. By not competing with the pirates by addressing the desires of the populous, the content companies are actually encouraging piracy. Listen up content providers. We want use our content when, where, and how we want it all at a reasonable price. Yes, there are those that pirate because they don't want to pay but most of us are willing to pay but can't without going through major headaches. Make it simple. Netflix and Hulu are prime, albeit not perfect, examples. I think most people would be willing to pay more if the selection was bigger and we could save movies offline for later when we do not have a network connection. In other words, a TV/movie version of Spotify and Rdio.

  4. Re:Content Paradox by C_amiga_fan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    According to J.Michael Straczynski (jms), just because the viewers demand content in a certain format or certain time (immediately rather than wait 1 week for the USA-to-BBC feed), does not mean they are entitled too it. He thinks we should stop infringing on his copyrights, as that means he (and others) don't get paid.

    According to me, JMS is a stodgy old man who may be internet-literate (using it since the early 90s), but doesn't understand the old "scheduled TV viewing" model is dying and being replaced. If ye put the show on Hulu I'll watch it... even if I have to wait a week (the FOX & Syfy model). But if ye refuse to put the show on Hulu, then yes I'll go find an illegal copy. I am not going to bend-over backwards waiting for a rerun 4 months from now.

    And as long as ye keep insisting "DVDs are not returnable for refund or store credit", then I'll keep downloading them too. I have a right to make sure I don't waste my money on feldercarb.

    --
    FREE magazine : http://clarkesworldmagazine.com/prior/
  5. If it's unavailable for the foreseeable future by tepples · · Score: 5, Insightful

    According to J.Michael Straczynski (jms), just because the viewers demand content in a certain format or certain time (immediately rather than wait 1 week for the USA-to-BBC feed), does not mean they are entitled too it. He thinks we should stop infringing on his copyrights, as that means he (and others) don't get paid.

    If, for example, Disney isn't selling DVDs of a given movie and has no plans to within the next decade, then Disney makes no more money off me if I don't pirate than if I do. What's the sound public policy behind keeping such a work out of the public's hands if it isn't being distributed or even prepared for distribution?

    1. Re:If it's unavailable for the foreseeable future by CanEHdian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      According to J.Michael Straczynski (jms), just because the viewers demand content in a certain format or certain time does not mean they are entitled too it.

      If, for example, Disney isn't selling DVDs of a given movie and has no plans to within the next decade, then Disney makes no more money off me if I don't pirate than if I do. What's the sound public policy behind keeping such a work out of the public's hands if it isn't being distributed or even prepared for distribution?

      Two fine examples of the "Soup Nazi" attitude of the Copyright Industry. While the fictional character has a physical product that's in limited supply to sell, the Copyright Industry sells nothing more than an arrangements of bits, a.k.a. Extremely Large Numbers. Once this number has been published, it effectively becomes unlimited in supply and at near-zero cost.

      The only thing that would stop someone to partake from the horn of plenty would be a moral code. Adhering to this code would be a lot easier if one were able to obtain a copy conveniently, cheaply, and at a fair (in the eyes of the consumer) price.

      Displaying an attitude of "you can have a bone, when we decide to throw you one, and you better show some gratitude!" is not going to help encourage people to adhere to that moral standard.

      --
      When the copyright term is "forever minus a day", live every day like it's the last.
    2. Re:If it's unavailable for the foreseeable future by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Shareware utilities got outcompeted by free software. 7-zip beats winrar any day. Winrar is still around, though.

      Shareware games are now "indie games", and are on Steam, and in the Humble Indie Bundle that was just released. Or maybe they're flash games on the Internet, plastered with ads.

  6. Re:Sounds right by JWW · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I disagree.

    If its on Netflix, why would I even bother to download the torrent?

    of course my corollary for that is....

    If the content industry ever kills Netflix I am going to steal everything and pay for nothing.

  7. Re:Sounds right by Fjandr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This.

    When I started using Netflix my usage of torrents to get shows I missed or otherwise had a hard time seeing via legitimate means dropped to basically zero.

    If Netflix survives, the studios will continue to get money of which they would otherwise not see a dime.

    My order of preference is:
    1) Watching via legal, on-demand ala carte means.
    2) Watching via illegal means.
    3) Not watching at all.
    4) Watching via current mass media distribution networks.