Aussie Government Brings Back Piracy Talks

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Aussie Government Brings Back Piracy Talks

Posted by Unknown on Monday June 4, 2012 @02:01PM from the flog-the-messenger dept.

joshgnosis writes "The Australian Attorney-General's department is set to hold a closed-door meeting with internet service providers, film lobby groups and consumer groups over proposals to reduce piracy on Thursday. The meetings were at a stalemate after sources said that neither the ISPs or the film groups could see eye to eye on the best proposal but the department confirmed that the meetings will go ahead and will this time include consumer advocate groups, who were previously excluded from the meetings."

79 of 114 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Surprising by multiben · 2012-06-04 14:09 · Score: 5, Funny

I didn't know Thursdays were particularly bad for piracy
1. Re:Surprising by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-04 14:17 · Score: 1
  
  That's how they start! Then they will want to talk about piracy on Sundays and Saturdays, which is my favorite! It will be chaos!
2. Re:Surprising by six025 · 2012-06-04 16:26 · Score: 1
  
  I didn't know Thursdays were particularly bad for piracy
  Patch Thursday it notorious for piracy in these parts. ARRR!
3. Re:Surprising by niftydude · 2012-06-04 17:00 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  For some reason, many governments around the world have always had a specific and disproportionate dislike of the use of Piracy On Thursdays (or Pot).
  
  Don't ask me why though.
  
  --
  You can never know everything, and part of what you do know will always be wrong. Perhaps even the most important part.
4. Re:Surprising by Centurix · 2012-06-04 17:21 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  I could never get the hang of them.
  
  --
  Task Mangler
What about the price of piracy enforcement by GoodNewsJimDotCom · 2012-06-04 14:12 · Score: 5, Insightful

Calculate both the price of piracy enforcement and the price of piracy honestly, and see which costs more.

You don't even need to calculate the benefits of a society with free access to all the works of man, where poor people have just as much access to culture as wealthy individuals. For if you start calculating the benefits for a society to have free educational books, and as much culture as it wants, a more educated populace far outweighs a kings ransom. You start getting into the realm of,"While we'd need to rework compensation, we can't discount that a better educated populace would have the ability to create superior works."

So yeah, there's untold wealth to be gained for limited copyrights, but lets just focus on the cost of piracy vs cost of enforcing piracy. The cost of enforcing piracy according to PIPA and SOPA is freedom of speech. Wait, you're saying we'll give away everything that matters to us just so a couple people could hold onto an antiquated profit model of limited distribution channels? Well I guess it isn't really calculating societal costs at all, but just making sure the select few continue to be catered to.

--
God spoke to me
1. Re:What about the price of piracy enforcement by Darkness404 · 2012-06-04 14:14 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  What really needs to happen is we, as a society, need to realize that intellectual "property" is not property at all and we should stop treating it as such. IP and property have nothing in common.
  
  --
  Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
2. Re:What about the price of piracy enforcement by CanEHdian · 2012-06-04 14:54 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Calculate both the price of piracy enforcement and the price of piracy honestly, and see which costs more.
  But that's the whole dirty, nasty trick. It's totally irrelevant which costs more. The point is that the costs of piracy enforcement are assumed by the tax payer, not the beneficiaries. The call for an Intellectual Property tax is in part to offset these costs.
  
  You don't even need to calculate the benefits of a society with free access to all the works of man, where poor people have just as much access to culture as wealthy individuals.
  For sound recordings, the 'works of man' start to become interesting with the advent of the vinyl sound recording (and not many people appreciate mono recordings, stereo was introduced later). Can you guess how many vinyl LPs have passed into the public domain?
  
  --
  When the copyright term is "forever minus a day", live every day like it's the last.
3. Re:What about the price of piracy enforcement by bhlowe · 2012-06-04 14:58 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  1. Monetary investment and man-hours go into making things--be they widgets, houses, software, photos, or movies.
  2. Stealing physical property is "wrong" and usually "illegal".
  3. Someone who invests in the creation of a product has some right to expect to be able to sell their works for a profit.
  4. Massive downloading and viewing "pirated content" deprives the creators of some financial return.
  5. This lost revenue could impact every aspect of the creative process--from salaries and jobs to taxes collected.
  6. Governments, creators of content, and ultimately consumers have an interest in preventing mass piracy.
4. Re:What about the price of piracy enforcement by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-04 15:22 · Score: 1
  
  1. Monetary investment and man-hours go into making things--be they widgets, houses, software, photos, or movies.
  2. Stealing physical property is "wrong" and usually "illegal".
  3. Someone who invests in the creation of a product has some right to expect to be able to sell their works for a profit.
  4. Massive downloading and viewing "pirated content" deprives the creators of some financial return.
  5. This lost revenue could impact every aspect of the creative process--from salaries and jobs to taxes collected.
  6. Governments, creators of content, and ultimately consumers have an interest in preventing mass piracy.
  Non-sequitur in regards with the interest of consumers - the consumers interest is still "get me my consumption at the lowest price possible".
5. Re:What about the price of piracy enforcement by Necroman · 2012-06-04 15:30 · Score: 1
  
  Non-sequitur in regards with the interest of consumers - the consumers interest is still "get me my consumption at the lowest price possible".
  For the individual consumer that actually pays for content, it is in their best interest to get other consumers to pay for content. The more people that pay, the more money that goes to the creators, so they can hit their break even point and then make a profit. If producers can guess they will have more people purchasing their product, the initial price may be lower.
  
  --
  Its not what it is, its something else.
6. Re:What about the price of piracy enforcement by AHuxley · 2012-06-04 15:38 · Score: 1
  
  Calculate both the price of piracy enforcement and the price of piracy honestly, and see which costs more.
  The problem for Australia is the US always has some gun boat diplomacy hidden away.
  If Hollywood goes back to the State department and reports that they tried in good faith to 'reason' with Australia...
  Australia has its good named ruined up and down the US gov
  No more cheap jets, cheating on crypto, weapons systems other 'export' allowed nations can only beg for, code to older systems Australia ends up on the 2nd or 3rd table with the loser nations...
  Better to join the fun, re write some extradition laws and let the US sort out the bad Australians.
  3 strikes and your on a jet.
  
  --
  Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
7. Re:What about the price of piracy enforcement by Dan541 · 2012-06-04 17:01 · Score: 1
  
  What really needs to happen is we, as a society, need to realize that intellectual "property" is not property at all and we should stop treating it as such. IP and property have nothing in common.
  We don't recognise it as property, and the copyright industry acknowledges this. They argue that more than half of all Australians pirate content.
  The copyright industry is the most powerful organisation on earth, they don't need to side with the majority.
  
  --
  An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
8. Re:What about the price of piracy enforcement by Hyperhaplo · 2012-06-04 18:06 · Score: 1
  
  You missed a really good opportunity for the 'common sense is not that common' application there.
  
  --
  You have a sick, twisted mind. Please subscribe me to your newsletter.
9. Re:What about the price of piracy enforcement by tbird81 · 2012-06-04 18:18 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  3. Someone who invests in the creation of a product has some right to expect to be able to sell their works for a profit.
  Not true at all. (Well, what you've said is techinically true, they have a right to expect profit, not to make a profit.)
  If I go around making balls of dust from the vacuum cleaner bag, I don't have some entitlement to make money from that. Even if I worked really hard to make them, and even if I hired staff to help me make them. It's something no-one wants and it's something people can make themselves, so I'm not going to make money.
  If I paint my fence outside my house, I can't expect people to have to pay to view it. Even though mucheffort went into it.
  In short, there's no inherent reason why anyone should be paid for writing a song. There's some rules that governments have made to get these guys money - but now they've forgotten that, and they expect to earn millions for doing nothing.
10. Re:What about the price of piracy enforcement by SuricouRaven · 2012-06-04 19:00 · Score: 1
  
  It is very difficult to quantify the effects of piracy. A download does not equate to lost sale, and even if it did the glazier's fallacy must be accounted for.
11. Re:What about the price of piracy enforcement by rtb61 · 2012-06-04 20:27 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  1. Normal people often do stuff for free and even pay for the privilege, be it sports, hiking, handicrafts, or making music or being in plays. Why should the community pay for some else's hobby?
  2. Copying is not stealing it is copying. If you want no one to copy it 'shh' keep it a secret, we wont care.
  3. No one is taking your work from you, you still have your copy and you can sell it.
  4. We don't believe you about massive downloading, you always lie, always. You lie about the quality of your content. You lie about the value of your content. You pay off politicians to lie for you. You sell advertisements which most often are lies. You infected news which now sells lies as news. You are lying liars that always lie.
  5. So what? Get a real productive job to subsidise your hobby just like everyone else. You lie about the taxes, yet another lie. Money not spent on your content will be spent elsewhere in the economy, often with far better social returns and, still generating taxes, liar.
  6. Yet another lie. Consumers for a start would be far better off spending that money on better quality food for example rather than on dubious quality often anti-social content. Besides when do we have enough content, there is already more than any one person can consume in a life time. Why should an artificial creation of value continue when it supplies something we already have to an excess.
  7. All your points are distorted PR=B$, lies for profit and greed. It is what you do. To further the 'USEFULL' arts and sciences, an 'ARTIFICIAL' opportunity to profit was created, when that work fails in that regard it is not entitled to that artificial monopoly, when that work is not 'TESTED' to ensure it meets that requirement it is not entitled to that artificial temporary monopoly.
  8. You are your industry are not a benefit to the economy it is a parasite upon the economy, that can only be afforded when the economy produces as surplus. Right now global economies are tightening due to increasing population and depletion of resources, guess where that places you parasitical industry versus food, clothing, healthcare, transportation, education, energy production, potable water provision, heck you're even way below refuse disposal on the requirement scale.
  
  --
  Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
12. Re:What about the price of piracy enforcement by TFAFalcon · 2012-06-04 21:10 · Score: 1
  
  Or higher. If they could completely prevent piracy, the prices would probably rise. After all, there would be no competition.
13. Re:What about the price of piracy enforcement by barv · 2012-06-04 21:40 · Score: 1
  
  huh?? Anyhow, you don't own the land. Try not paying land taxes for a few years and the government will take it from you.
14. Re:What about the price of piracy enforcement by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-04 23:04 · Score: 1
  
  If producers can guess they will have more people purchasing their product, the initial price may be lower.
  Nope, this assumes competition. Companies will always work to maximize profits, without competition the price factor will be determined at what point people will stop purchasing the product.
  At this time the music industry is organized in an anti-competitive way. This means that the only price regulation that occurs is where customers decides that the risk of getting caught for piracy is less than the cost of the product. (Yes, the kind of music we are talking about here is a production rather than a work of art, at least that is how the music industry treats it.)
  To resolve the situation it is not enough to combat piracy, it is also necessary to break up the cartel. It might even be necessary to split the larger companies in smaller parts to encourage competition.
  Piracy is not going to go away until this happens. (Or the risk of getting caught and the punishment outweights the price for music but that is an undesireable outcome that wouldn't be tolerated on any other market.)
15. Re:What about the price of piracy enforcement by mcgrew · 2012-06-05 03:03 · Score: 2
  
  Someone who invests in the creation of a product has some right to expect to be able to sell their works for a profit.
  Yeah? Tell that to someone with an underwater mortgage, or who bought faceBook stock.
  Massive downloading and viewing "pirated content" deprives the creators of some financial return.
  
  Fallacious. When Lou and Randy in Britain want to see the latest Big Bang Theory and they pirate it because its simply isn't available there, how are they costing the producers any money? If they download a movie thay think might suck that they would never have paid for, how are the studios losing money? Especially if they're happily surprised that it doesn't suck and they buy a copy?
  When Joe McDonalds cook and Suzie college kid who can't afford to buy a movie downlod one, how is the studio losing money?
  The truth is, Hollywood keeps making these claims of loss with no proof whatever of veracity, and studies all show they're wrong. But keep the lies going, fellow.
  What's worse, I buy my movies at WalMart but lately I;ve been thinking of simply going to TPB. Why? Because the pirate version is superior to the paid version! When I buy a DVD, I have to sit through often unskippable trailors (yeah, I REALLY want to be forced to watch commercials in a product I already paid for, you're making me pay TWICE you damned thieves), wait for a lame animated menu to stop animating, and hit "play" again, and then am assaulted with three separate unskippable piracy warnings when I'm not pirating in the fisrt damned place! If I start pirating, I just hit "play" with the mouse and the movie starts.
  Listen up, Hollywood, if you want to keep me as a customer, you're going to have to make the paid for version at least equal to the pirate version. When I put the DVD in, start the god damned movie NOW you stupid fuckweeds! You can have your menu when the movie's done, with trailors as an option, not forced.
  Piracy is rampant because the entertainment industry is run by idiots.
  
  --
  Free Martian Whores!
16. Re:What about the price of piracy enforcement by mcgrew · 2012-06-05 03:56 · Score: 1
  
  The more people that pay, the more money that goes to the creators, so they can hit their break even point and then make a profit.
  Yeah, piracy really hurt The Avengers, didn't it? Funny how they release it world-wide at the same time and break box office records, isn't it? The industry you work in suffers from extreme stupidity. Nobody that stupid deserves a damned dime.
  
  --
  Free Martian Whores!
17. Re:What about the price of piracy enforcement by bhlowe · 2012-06-05 04:31 · Score: 1
  
  1. Consumers want and expect excellent quality entertainment. Hobby level Tosh-0 content has some good stuff, but it isn't what most people want.
  2. That is like a crook who steals and justifies it by the weak weak security system in place... So I guess you would be in favor of stronger anti-piracy technology added to digital media?
  3. Anyone who doesn't pay for something because they can get it for free has stolen the creators ability to sell it. Yes, some people could never afford to buy a movie legitimately because they need to feed their family. But I'm guessing you're not arguing from Africa.
  4. Bittorrent traffic is easily measurable, and it is on the scale of NetFlix, a legitimate company. The content of the bittorrent traffic is also measurable and I'm pretty sure most is not meant to be free content.
  5. What productive job would you like programmers, movie makers, photographers, authors, artists, and musicians to do instead? Are you really suggesting that all of these people should "get another job" so that a few people like yourself can have their content for free until go out of business? As far as taxes go, local governments in, say Hollywood, care a great deal that taxes are collected from local studios and not collected by a widget vender in another state.
  6. Ah, you like the command-driven economy, where the great tzar like yourself knows what is best for people to buy and for how much. And since the digital content isn't that good, so it is ok that we steal it so that we can spend more money on organic vegetables.
  7. Yes, I think profits are good for the creators and investors. I don't know what you do for a living (if anything) but illegally taking a person's ability to make money is simply not cool, even when you use all caps on parts of your Marxist gobbledegook.
  8. My industry? I'm a self-employed programmer. (What do you do for a living rtb?) I am not much affected by piracy.. But I have a great deal of respect for the people who create content and would like them to be able to do so and make a nice living...
18. Re:What about the price of piracy enforcement by Samantha+Wright · 2012-06-05 05:36 · Score: 1
  
  3. Someone who invests in the creation of a product has some right to expect to be able to sell their works for a profit.
  Licencing is not selling. Selling would be granting an exclusive licence and giving up your own rights to the product in question. Even people who don't think that IP is baloney hesitate when the argument is made that you should be able to profit forever from a work.
  
  --
  Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
19. Re:What about the price of piracy enforcement by P-niiice · 2012-06-05 07:01 · Score: 1
  
  I have yet to see that argument work in real life, but the opposite has (monopoly has increased price and/or reduced service) .
  
  Cable tv, air travel, healthcare, etc. Music went down in price, because the music companies got spanked in court. There must be a basis in fact for that argument to be repeated so much, and I'd like to hear it.
20. Re:What about the price of piracy enforcement by CCarrot · 2012-06-05 08:49 · Score: 1
  
  The answer is actually yes
  And I'm guessing pretty soon piracy will be dead .... All you need is encryption chips on every motherboard that decrypt the content on the HDD/SSD ... So the only way to get content is buy it from an appstore that will encrypt it for use on your machine (the chip will only decrypt, so you need to have it encrypted... and of course you will not have the key to do that) ... Dell already ships computers with such chips ... for the time being they are off ... until they turn them on ... Free spech will still exist .. but it will be just that ... the ability to post stuff online ... as word on a forum/ or a pic of your cat ... post a program and it will be useless to everybody else (cause it's encrypted only for you machine)
  Okay, so you're saying sacrifice media portability entirely, then? In this day and age, where typical electronic device lifetime hovers around a year, and people are replacing their content-viewing devices every three to five years?? Your shilling is exceptional today, as you just proposed a model that would not only prevent the purchaser from backing up their purchased works in any meaningful way, but it would also force them to re-purchase their entire collection every time they got a new device, or had to replace a stolen one...wow. Just wow.
  Okay, so lets say all content moves to an iTunes-like central server, then, so you can re-download your re-encrypted content on your new device(s). We won't even get into artificial limitations on number of devices you can re-download content to, as set by the greedy content suppliers (yes, I'm looking at you Apple). Riddle me this: how can you be sure your content will still be there for you when you go to download it? Is the provider going to sign some sort of perpetual availability agreement (yeah right, not bloody likely). So there you are, three years down the road, new laptop in front of you and half your purchased content is simply not available anymore. But the re-processed, extra-digitized, super duper HD-ized version is conveniently available in the store, they inform you...
  Not to mention that your little scheme wouldn't work anyway. White hats would simply focus on intercepting the video/audio/etc. downstream of the decryption chip, and re-encode it to an unencrypted HD format. Unless you're proposing that home movie formats should also be subject to your so-called plan? "Sorry Grandma, we can't play that video of little Johnny for you, we recorded it over two years ago and our old computer crashed...yes we have backups, but they're, well, useless"
  No. When I buy something, I expect to be able to use it how and where I want, without having to call in and 'beg permission' from the control freaks whom I have already paid for the privilege of viewing their content again, or on a different device. If I want to back it up and not watch it for ten years, then decide to watch it every day for the next five years straight on all of my devices, I will. If I can't, it's no sale, buddy.
  
  --
  "I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
21. Re:What about the price of piracy enforcement by bhlowe · 2012-06-05 09:28 · Score: 1
  
  Couldn't the same be said for making perfect counterfeit copies of currency? And since it is a perfect copy, no one is at risk for getting stiffed at the bank. So instead of making a resource scarce, you're "helping" it become less scarce.. Right?
22. Re:What about the price of piracy enforcement by Darkness404 · 2012-06-05 11:00 · Score: 1
  
  Every single property system be it capitalism, communism, etc. relies on the one defining characteristic of property: it can only be used to its fullest one way.
  
  For example, neither me and my neighbor can get 100% enjoyment out of one car. If I want to take the car and drive to Canada and my neighbor wants to take the same car and go to Mexico at the same time, we can't. I cannot have a piece of land and grow beans on it and someone else put a parking lot on that same land. I cannot have a DVD and play it at my speed starting it at 1 PM and have my neighbor start the same physical disk at 1:30 PM and watch them both at the same time (assuming the movie is longer than 30 minutes!).
  
  Intellectual "property" doesn't have the same restrictions. A copy of song.mp3 does not replace my copy of song.mp3. If a thief steals my car, it deprives me of that car. If someone makes a copy of my car, it in no way deprives me of that car.
  
  If it can be copied with no loss to the original, it is not property. Property by definition cannot be used fully in two different ways at the same time with both parties getting everything they want.
  
  --
  Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
23. Re:What about the price of piracy enforcement by bhlowe · 2012-06-05 12:22 · Score: 1
  
  How about counterfeiting a $100 bill? That way you and your neighbor can both use it.
  
  There are plenty of examples of intangible "property" that cannot be legally (as defined by the US courts) copied. You seem awfully passionate about how you and your ilk are entitled to see commercially produced creative work without having to pay for it. Get off your wallet, you tightwad.
24. Re:What about the price of piracy enforcement by Darkness404 · 2012-06-05 14:31 · Score: 1
  
  First, a $100 bill is worthless and represents nothing. If we had a sane monetary system, that $100 bill would be $100 worth of gold, but that is beside the point.
  
  Secondly, if we had a sane monetary system, that $100 would be the same thing as a check and while you should be able to legally copy it, it should not be able to be used as a $100 bill because there is not $100 extra worth of gold in the treasury. In the same vein, you're free to take a copy of my check and to take as many copies as you'd like, but you can't go to the bank and cash any but the original. The laws that govern that are separate from intellectual "property", fraud has always been wrong even before the advent of intellectual "property".
  
  And thirdly, I don't pirate music, I've got rather obscure tastes and so I buy the music I listen to (and attend their concerts when they tour anywhere close!). I have nothing against people making money off of their talents the difference is -how- they should be making money off of them. Rather than hiding behind laws and protecting imaginary property money should be made through performance and advance payment the same way that people have for thousands of years. For example, if I'm a fan of X band, not only would I go to concerts but because I liked their songs I'd fund the development of their next album in the same way that I'd go to an artist to get a portrait painted. I liked their past work, so I'm willing to pay for their future work. No one is going to pay $$$$ for a portrait without seeing their past work and in the same way no one is going to support a singer without hearing their songs.
  
  --
  Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
25. Re:What about the price of piracy enforcement by Pieroxy · 2012-06-05 17:28 · Score: 1
  
  if people stop paying for content then people will stop investing in producing content.
  Hmm. Interesting. Care to enlighten us on what exactly you can find that is pointing to that assumption?
  Well it should be pretty obvious, the incentive to produce such content is monetary, if people stop paying for the content that incentive goes away. If you believe such content will continue to be produced then what do you think the incentive will be? (bearing in mind the huge amount of work that goes into some productions)
  There are plenty of models where people don't pay and money still flows in. Money doesn't have to come from the users.
  But all that is preposterous. What shred of evidence is there to suggest that people don't want to pay anyways?
  
  --
  Write boring code, not shiny code!
26. Re:What about the price of piracy enforcement by mpe · 2012-06-05 19:53 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, consumers want quality. Part of quality includes being able to do whatever they want with a product, including making copies of it using their own resources (in this case, their own software, their own disks, etc)
  The addition of these laws which restrict how consumers can use the product is a reduction in quality, and people discovered there's a way to get that quality back, so most went that way.
  
  If someone is never going to buy something in the first place then they will never be a "customer" in the first place. (For reasons which include it not being on sale or the seller isn't prepared to even take someone's money unless they happen to be in the right part of the planet.) The whole "lost sales" argument is a false dichotomy which assumes that the options are "pirate" or "buy".
So let me guess... by Darkness404 · 2012-06-04 14:12 · Score: 5, Insightful

So let me guess, media companies are going to complain about all the "lost" revenue due to "piracy" and completely ignore the fact most of the highest grossing films have been in the internet age....

--
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
1. Re:So let me guess... by hashish · 2012-06-04 14:38 · Score: 1
  
  That's because the population and ticket prices are larger. Monies made and tickets sold at box office has never been a good metric to measure a film.
  Back on topic, I am not happy that my internet charges will go up to implement and police a system that will not fix the problem.
2. Re:So let me guess... by vanyel · 2012-06-04 14:39 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, they "lost revenue" when I bought legend of the seeker, sea patrol and a couple of other dvd sets after torrenting the series because it was the only way to get them (at the time) or just to see if they were any good... foot meet gun
3. Re:So let me guess... by Lord_of_the_nerf · 2012-06-04 14:39 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  They could also bring in the struggling artists, technicians and producers that piracy really hurts like James Cameron, Joel Silver and Joel Silver's coke dealer?
4. Re:So let me guess... by cheater512 · 2012-06-04 15:00 · Score: 1
  
  Don't you know? If you hadn't pirated those shows, you would have bought *two* DVD sets!
  You clearly cheated the industry out of a few hundred bucks just from those examples.
5. Re:So let me guess... by Dunbal · 2012-06-04 15:05 · Score: 1
  
  They will claim this is irrelevant, you see, because they _could_ have made more...
  
  --
  Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
6. Re:So let me guess... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-04 15:07 · Score: 1
  
  Don't forget that if you buy a DVD and then invite a friend over to watch it with you that constitutes an unpaid viewing the the movie industry's opinion since your friend didn't pay them anything to see it.
7. Re:So let me guess... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-04 16:06 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  At least you had the option to buy... in the arse end of the world, (Australia according to most media types) I have had literally no choice but to Pirate some shows as they were unavailable by any other means. I literally went to 3 shop,s and tried online to buy the TV series Felicity before giving up and heading to The Pirate Bay, where I had all 4 series available within 3 days. This was a few years ago so the situation may have changed, but they did loose $100+ of sales that day.
  BTW Legend of the Seeker was another series incredibly difficult to buy here for a long time.
8. Re:So let me guess... by Wowsers · 2012-06-04 19:26 · Score: 1
  
  Things are SO bad in Hollywood, that all those big blockbuster films actually make a loss. All those "poor" multi-millionaire actors, directors, producers can't make any money?!? Hollywood Accounting Why this outright fraud is allowed to continue is anyone's guess. Must have the politicians around the world in media companies back pockets.
  
  --
  Take Nobody's Word For It.
Dear Australian Government, by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-04 14:40 · Score: 4, Informative

Please tell the content providers to stop attempting to control my life.
If there was a reasonably priced method of getting my movie, music and gaming fix online, but without any kind of DRM, I would happily use it.
Without the channel for getting these items legally at a reasonable price online, I am left only with stupidly over priced CD/DVD/BlueRay (why is a BR so much more expensive than a DVD when production cost is almost the same?), paying a pay tv provider to watch ads, or piracy.
Without the channel being free of DRM, I am left only with piracy. If I have some new or innovative way to watch or use my music and movies (they are mine, I bought them), then I have to break the law to do so.
For now, I wait for the movie on TV where I use a PVR with ad skipping to watch it. I only listen JJJ for my music (No ads!), or purchase from something like bandcamp. I only buy the humble bundles for games.
Content providers - you do not control me. You have lost. Wake up and change, or go bankrupt.
1. Re:Dear Australian Government, by Dunbal · 2012-06-04 15:06 · Score: 1
  
  Oh they don't want to control your life - they just want to control your computer.
  
  --
  Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
2. Re:Dear Australian Government, by balzi · 2012-06-04 15:07 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  "then I have to break the law to do so."
  I don't pirate because the people who created media have expressed their wishes quite clearly;
  If I value it, then I'll pay the price they ask.
  However, suggesting that you are forced to break the law is absurd. There is no real threat to your well-being by having the latest music/TV/movies/software. Even if you argued that your quality of life would suffer without your favourite show or game (a BIG stretch), there's plenty of other crap to choose from.
  Do I think the typical media owner is driving people away with DRM measures? Absolutely.
  Do I think there's a happy medium where everyone could be happy? Yep.
  Do I feel entitled to anything? No.
  This argument gets very heated, and from my armchair it makes both sides look like spoiled brats! You can continue for my [free] entertainment as long as you like. :)
  Matt out.
  
  --
  "I split coffee all over my wife's nightie .... serves me right for wearing it" -Speelberg, no 'Spar
3. Re:Dear Australian Government, by xenobyte · 2012-06-04 18:48 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  "then I have to break the law to do so."
  I don't pirate because the people who created media have expressed their wishes quite clearly;
  If I value it, then I'll pay the price they ask.
  However, suggesting that you are forced to break the law is absurd. There is no real threat to your well-being by having the latest music/TV/movies/software. Even if you argued that your quality of life would suffer without your favourite show or game (a BIG stretch), there's plenty of other crap to choose from.
  Excuse me, but... bullshit!
  Why should I have to wait/live without while John Doe can get everything, just because he lives in a different place than me?
  I have money in hand - I want to pay! But they don't want to sell.
  I find it perfectly reasonable that if they refuse my money I'll just steal the stuff instead. After all, it's their choice that it is so.
  
  --
  "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
4. Re:Dear Australian Government, by Uberbah · 2012-06-04 19:18 · Score: 1
  
  it makes both sides look like spoiled brats!
  Uh huh. But what's the functional difference between someone who downloads a product without paying for it and someone who respects copyright but would never pay for it?
5. Re:Dear Australian Government, by Pieroxy · 2012-06-04 19:31 · Score: 1
  
  I find it perfectly reasonable that if they refuse my money I'll just steal the stuff instead. After all, it's their choice that it is so.
  Rest assured, you didn't steal anything, you didn't deprive anyone of anything. There was nothing you would have done to get it from them, so they cannot claim you deprived them of anything.
  Wait...
  
  --
  Write boring code, not shiny code!
Re:What about the other six days? by balzi · 2012-06-04 14:56 · Score: 1

I think the First poster beat you to that joke.
It was the first thing I thought of aswell.
We are all cut from the same foolish cloth here on /.

--
"I split coffee all over my wife's nightie .... serves me right for wearing it" -Speelberg, no 'Spar
Pointless talk fest(thankfully) by Eskarel · 2012-06-04 14:59 · Score: 4, Informative

The Greens won't go along with anything they decide, the opposition will support anything the government tries to do when hell freezes over, and so no one has the numbers to do anything. Copyright issues barely even get a blip on the radar here so the government isn't going to expend a whole lot of energy on it. They'll talk about it, try to make the content people feel they care and then do nothing much at all.
Stop Consuming by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-04 15:00 · Score: 2

Consume only those works for which you can pay the artist directly, and absolutely ignore everything else.
If everybody followed that rule for a year, we could be rid of this backroom deal piracy enforcement nonsense.
1. Re:Stop Consuming by Opportunist · 2012-06-04 22:44 · Score: 1
  
  Then we obviously need more severe laws because it can only be because of copyright infringement that people don't buy, because as everyone knows you die if you don't get the latest rubbish from Hollywood.
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Good Luck by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-04 15:00 · Score: 1

Come on people lets be serious, do you really think the Australian Gov. can actually do anything??! There is only one poly in the whole system who can organise a root in a brothel...
1. Re:Good Luck by nedlohs · 2012-06-04 20:17 · Score: 2
  
  And he claims it was an imposter looking just like him and using his phone.
Piracy is mayhem at sea. by ColonelZen · 2012-06-04 15:15 · Score: 3, Informative

Can we *stop* calling unautorized use of information "piracy".
It rather by definition cedes criminal conduct when in many casesm however draconian laws are worded, proving criminality is way beyond plausible.
Most "piracy" is at a civil matter and usually of dubious merit, not murder, and theft on the high seas.
Call it what it usually is. Retrieving information without a license. Enjoying a film or song without having paid a corporation for the privilege.
-- TWZ
1. Re:Piracy is mayhem at sea. by Mashiki · 2012-06-04 18:20 · Score: 2
  
  Arrrrr.
  Just remember the jackholes are trying to make it criminal instead of civil in a lot of countries. Arrrrr...now where's me swag and parrot-cat.
  
  --
  Om, nomnomnom...
This is why people pirate TV Shows by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-04 15:26 · Score: 1

http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/television/mad-mens-most-shocking-twist-yet-spoiler-alert/story-e6frfmyi-1226384383310
We are bombarded with information from FB and News sites. Why should we be left behind the rest of the world. I read so many times about "what outlandish thing jermey clarkson has said now" weeks before we can watch it and see that the joke was actually funny
1. Re:This is why people pirate TV Shows by Opportunist · 2012-06-04 22:41 · Score: 1
  
  Want to have it worse? Imagine you're from a country that isn't speaking English but is also a large enough market that they don't simply subtitle but actually dub shows. Then you know what pain really is about.
  It is virtually impossible to get any original shows over here. Not 3 months after release. No even the year after release when we finally get to see the butchered (aka dubbed) show. Not even on DVD. Recently I went to Amazon to see what I could get in form of the shows I like to watch. Well, first of all, I cannot buy the season that is currently offered on DVD in the US. Why? Because it hasn't been shown on TV in my country yet. "Not available in your country" it would say. But I can of course buy the seasons before that. Dubbed. In German, Spanish, French, Italian and a few languages I don't speak, but (surprise, surprise) I can NOT get the original English version. WTF??? I'd have to buy it from Amazon.uk, pray that our customs don't go bonkers as they usually do (free trade within the EU? My ass...) and then I might watch it. Again, the season before the current one, because that one even Amazon.uk won't send to me.
  Now it MIGHT make sense why people torrent shows a lot around this corner of the world?
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Arr! Thar'll Be No More Talkin'! by Greyfox · 2012-06-04 15:43 · Score: 1

Just be handin' o'er tha booty, and ah'll be on me way!

--
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Oh good. I can't wait go. by Sasayaki · 2012-06-04 15:46 · Score: 5, Insightful

I'm an Australian author with two novels, seven short stories and a couple of other things under my belt (sequel's out, woot woot http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0080XLF2Q/). As a natural born citizen and rights holder, I'm sure that the people at this conference would love to hear my voice as a representative of local grown IP, especially one distributed digitally and therefore quite prone to copyright infringement. I look forward to being able to give my piece -- that, in summary, the best way to combat copyright infringement is to:
- Produce a better product than pirated copies (so DRM/FBI warning/copyright warning free)
- Which is easy to obtain (Amazon's 1-click buy process)
- With sufficient safety nets (7 day no questions asked return policy)
- Cheaply (my novels are $5, shorts $0.99)
- In a timely fashion all over the world (Australians are used to waiting 3-6 months for TV shows they can bittorrent the day they're broadcasted in the US)
- And with sufficient protection for derivatives and fan-works (a Creative Commons, CC-BY-SA-NC licenced universe bible is due out as soon as I apply the last of the polish and hit submit).
- Without alienating people who do pirate it anyway (some people, even if it's cheap, readily available, DRM free, timely, safe and reasonably free-as-in-freedom, will not pay and attempting to coerce those people into being customers is not only pointless but detrimental since it makes you look like an arse and writers trade based on their reputation)
I eagerly await my invitation to this discussion which I'm confident will not be dominated by direct representatives of Hollywood insisting we DRM the universe and filter all aspects of the Internet, all in the name of protecting foreign interests to the detriment of domestically produced IP.

--
Check out my sci-fi book "Lacuna" at http://goo.gl/MVxX8
1. Re:Oh good. I can't wait go. by future+assassin · 2012-06-04 17:13 · Score: 1
  
  I foresee a band of crazy warriors chasing you down the Australian road to keep you from making a statement. One suggestion don't break the deal...
  
  --
  by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
2. Re:Oh good. I can't wait go. by sapphire+wyvern · 2012-06-04 17:36 · Score: 1
  
  I mostly agree with you, but a seven-day-no-questions-asked returns policy for content which can be completely experienced in the space of less than three hours (e.g., most movies) is a bit over the top. I'm definitely in favour of more consumer rights but that policy is just asking for trouble. Would you expect to get a refund at a cinema just because you ask for one?
3. Re:Oh good. I can't wait go. by hairyfish · 2012-06-04 17:39 · Score: 1
  
  I am also an Australian, but I do not produce anything, I consume. And when I consume I do it the most efficient way possible regardless of local customs and traditions, and I agree with everything you wrote. How does one qualify as a "consumer group"? I am a consumer unit so all I need is some more consumer units and we can then form a group? Is that how it works?
4. Re:Oh good. I can't wait go. by Sasayaki · 2012-06-04 18:28 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  It's interesting, but that's what Amazon has. It actually really relies on what I wrote about purchasing being easy and cheap; to buy is easy, just a 1-click process, but to return you have to go to "My account" / "Manage my Kindle" / "Books" / Scroll down to the book in question / Click / Apply for refund / Enter refund reason / Click go.
  For 99c, or $5, or whatever, it's just not worth it for some people. That said, there are a number of people on readers forums who boast that they've never paid for a book because they always just return it when they're done reading it, or return it then buy it again if they want to "keep" it for another 7 days.
  I get probably 3-5 returns per 100 sales so I just don't really worry about them and I'm guessing Amazon isn't either, or they'd start tightening the return policy. The only main issue with a lot of returns is if you get a flood of returns all with the same reason ("copyright issues", "poor quality", "typos/editing issues", etc) you can get your book pulled for review.
  Look at it this way. If you were at a cinema watching a movie and, at any point for 7 days after watching a film you could stand in line and fill in a short form to get an immediate refund... would you? And we're not talking about $13 or $14 here, it's $5. Or $0.99. Most people can't be bothered.
  Some people will, some people will even if they make you fill in a mountain of paperwork, but they'd probably just pirate it anyway. I don't think the 7 day returns policy affects sales much and it's a definite selling point. "Try my book!" I say, "If you don't like it, 7 days, no questions asked return policy, even if you read the whole thing."
  
  --
  Check out my sci-fi book "Lacuna" at http://goo.gl/MVxX8
5. Re:Oh good. I can't wait go. by Sasayaki · 2012-06-04 18:30 · Score: 1
  
  I'm guessing they mean the ACCC. Can't think of who else they might mean.
  
  --
  Check out my sci-fi book "Lacuna" at http://goo.gl/MVxX8
6. Re:Oh good. I can't wait go. by Kjella · 2012-06-04 22:19 · Score: 1
  
  Look at it this way. If you were at a cinema watching a movie and, at any point for 7 days after watching a film you could stand in line and fill in a short form to get an immediate refund... would you?
  There's a floating scale:
  - Hell no, it was the best movie since sliced bread
  - Good movie and money well spent
  - It wasn't memorable but worth the money
  - I wouldn't have paid for it again, but okay
  - Give me my money back
  - Give me my money and my two hours back
  - Give me my money and restitution for two hours of torture
  I'd never go for the "Hell I loved the movie but if I can get my money back I will" though.
  
  And we're not talking about $13 or $14 here, it's $5. Or $0.99. Most people can't be bothered.
  Yeah, there's a few things though - then you can only sell things that sell for "can't be bothered" money, no more $60 games just $0.99 Angry Birds clones and such. And the market can easily be trashed by crap and ripoffs because people can't be arsed. I've paid for a few apps for my iPhone that were practically fraud, but for $0.99 yeah you're right I haven't bothered to get a refund. It's not exactly healthy for the market though.
  
  --
  Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
7. Re:Oh good. I can't wait go. by mcgrew · 2012-06-05 06:45 · Score: 1
  
  Interesting, I'd like to read some of your stuff, is it in the public library? Because I won't buy a pig in a poke. Those two dozen Asimov volumes wouldn't be on my shelf now had I not read a few of his other books checked out from the library, and I wouldn't have those two Doctorow titles on my shelf if he didn't give them away as free downloads from boingboing.
  
  --
  Free Martian Whores!
8. Re:Oh good. I can't wait go. by mcgrew · 2012-06-05 06:57 · Score: 1
  
  That said, there are a number of people on readers forums who boast that they've never paid for a book because they always just return it when they're done reading it, or return it then buy it again if they want to "keep" it for another 7 days.
  
  I use the public library for that. I only buy books I've already read, and know I'll want to re-read them.
  The only main issue with a lot of returns is if you get a flood of returns all with the same reason ("copyright issues", "poor quality", "typos/editing issues", etc) you can get your book pulled for review.
  
  Which is why I never buy a book by an author I've never read. Only a fool buys a pig in a poke.
  
  Look at it this way. If you were at a cinema watching a movie and, at any point for 7 days after watching a film you could stand in line and fill in a short form to get an immediate refund... would you? And we're not talking about $13 or $14 here, it's $5. Or $0.99. Most people can't be bothered.
  I get my movies from the library, too, or rent them from Family Video for a buck each.
  Try my book!" I say, "If you don't like it, 7 days, no questions asked return policy, even if you read the whole thing."
  
  It sounds like you get it.
  
  --
  Free Martian Whores!
Re:Irony by BluBrick · 2012-06-04 16:07 · Score: 1

Oh, come on now - Razorback was alrig-

I'm sorry, I can't even keep a straight face while typing that!

--
Ahh - My eye!
The doctor said I'm not supposed to get Slashdot in it!
September 19 already? by BluBrick · 2012-06-04 16:10 · Score: 1

N/T

--
Ahh - My eye!
The doctor said I'm not supposed to get Slashdot in it!
Wrong premise by heretic108 · 2012-06-04 16:29 · Score: 2

Framing the discussion as "piracy reduction" is long obsolete. Might as well call it a "reduce gas diffusing in a vacuum" conference.
They need to restart with a premise of "finding ways for content creators to be rewarded for their works". Then we might start getting some workable and relevant ideas.

--
-- In the beginning was the WORD, and the WORD was UNSIGNED, and the main(){} was without form and void...
Do nothing by countach · 2012-06-04 17:15 · Score: 1

It seems to me the prudent thing for the government to do is to do nothing until some other country figures out a viable solution to the problem. I don't see why we in Australia should be the guinea pigs for the latest hair brain scheme proposed by the content owners. Let some other country find a solution that works for everyone, and we should wait on the sidelines until that happens.
1. Re:Do nothing by tbird81 · 2012-06-04 21:27 · Score: 1
  
  It seems to me the prudent thing for the government to do is to do nothing until some other country figures out a viable solution to the problem.
  New Zealand is being used as a guinea pig in regards to Kim Dotcom. We've also rushed through a "three-strikes" Iaw under urgency during the Chch earthquake. Guess Aussie's going to be a guinea pig for some other idea.
Re:For a start... by Yoda's+Mum · 2012-06-04 17:29 · Score: 1

Except for books, parallel importing is actually legal in Australia. Most retailers simply choose not to because it's also legal for distributors to refuse to sell to a retailer who parallel imports. For retailers it's often an all or nothing proposition.
Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · 2012-06-04 18:24 · Score: 3, Funny

Oh, so you're the one pirating Aussie movies! Shame on you!
Re:What about the survival of the fattest? by Weatherlawyer · 2012-06-04 18:36 · Score: 1

> Non-sequitur with regard to the interest of consumers - the consumer's interest is still "get me my consumption at the lowest price possible".
After all if it works for major supermarkets.
Ah, wait...
But not for producers for supermarkets
Ah, wait...I see your point
Supermarkets sell plastic discs, that cost pennies to produce, for pounds. Whereas they pay farmers pennies for produce that is really useful.
This is far too difficult for me. What I need is a government committee to sort it all out.
ABOLISH COPYRIGHT by barv · 2012-06-04 22:18 · Score: 2

Start out by halving the term of all existing & new copyright licences.
If, after a year that seems to be working, halve it again. Recursively.
Copyright is theft. And it is just not true that creative work would stop in the absence of copyright.
Motion picture companies make their money in theatres. DVDs etc are a trivial offshoot.
Musicians can make a living playing live. Recordings would be free or cost 99c from their website, (See Apple)
Artists could sell the original painting. Copies would be free advertising to make new works more valuable. Authors could make a living by publishing chapters on their website. Advertising would pay for their work. XKCD, Girl Genius, Questionable Content are proof that that is a workable model.
At the moment, the people who make the lion's share from copyright fees are the agents and distribution corporations. Not the artists.
There is a much better distribution model. Its called the internet. We must cut out the middle man.
That's the new kind of democracy by Opportunist · 2012-06-04 22:31 · Score: 1, Insightful

You know, in the good ol' days, we used to have law propositions that were introduced and sponsored by some parties, and depending on whether it got a majority or not, it was brought into law, or it simply wasn't.
Not so today. Today, what will become law has been decided long ago. This will become law. If it gets shouted down (again), it will just resurface in a few months, waters will be tested and if it gets shot down again, we'll see it again. And again. And again. Until finally enough people got tired of fighting it and have more pressing problems (like, say, a law that's even a worse burden on liberties and democratic principles). And then it's in and we'll have to endure it because as usual the "law abiding citizen" will jump up as soon as you protest it and complain that it's the law and that you have to heed it.
This is how dictatorships have started in the past. Are we really doomed to repeat history eternally because the collective history memory is that of a goldfish?

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:For a start... by Opportunist · 2012-06-04 22:46 · Score: 1

So it's legal to press DVDs in Malaysia where you can manufacture them for .05 instead of .08 cents but it's illegal to buy them there?
Free trade only seems to apply where it benefits certain companies, as soon as the consumer would benefit from it it's very obviously a nono.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Re:For a start... by marka63 · 2012-06-05 01:28 · Score: 1

No. Commercial parallel importing of a feature film (over 20 minutes) is still illegal to Australia. Private importing of a feature film is not illegal.
Books not published in Australia within 30 days of being published anywhere else in the world can be commercially parallel imported. Private importing of a book is not illegal.
http://www.ag.gov.au/Copyright/Pages/Wheniscopyrightinfringed.aspx