In AU, Film Studios Issue Ultimatum To ISPs 227
bennyboy64 writes "The Australian court case between the film industry and ISP iiNet drew to a close yesterday after the film studios issued an ultimatum: Take copyright responsibilities seriously or leave the industry. 'Businesses such as ISPs want to enjoy the benefit of being able to make money out of the provision of Internet service facilities and they enjoy that benefit. But it carries with it a responsibility,' said Tony Bannon SC, the film industry's lawyer. 'They provide a facility that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes. If they don't like having to deal with copyright notices then they should get out of the business.' iTnews has done a short one minute interview with iiNet's CEO Michael Malone as he left the court on the final day. Also on the final day, the judge dismissed the Internet Industry Association's involvement in the case."
I agree with the recording industry (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:The auto industry creates death machines! (Score:2, Interesting)
hopeless (Score:2, Interesting)
Actually, I think the ISPs should fully agree (Score:4, Interesting)
We've known for quite some time that exposure actually CREATES sales, not reduces it. As it so happens, I just came back from a party where one discussion was "I got this copy of xyz, and I liked it so much I went and bought the album" - which happened to be an answer to someone who did buy a whole book series of an author after reading a library book.
If I were leading some kind of ISP club I'd call all of them and ensure that indeed NOBODY carries that traffic anymore - absolutely nobody. I'd give it 2 months before the media industry realises just how deep they've cut their own flesh. At that point discussions will become a lot more sensible. There is really no better way to nuke their business that indeed following what they want to do and let them feel the resulting pain. Because it will prove just how Pyrrhic that victory is.
So, if you hang together you will either end up with a more reasonable discussion, or they'll go bankrupt - which also not a bad thing IMHO, that's merely another bubble where bursting was long overdue.
I don't think piracy is good, but there are pirates and home users - the two are different. One type will become your client if you treat them well, the other type does things in volume and belongs in jail (and has been proven to go out of business if you lower margins).
If you stick your *customers* in jail for being interested in your product the results will be pretty obvious. In the US there already a whole generation growing up knowing people of their own age whose life has been destroyed by the RIAA. Do you really think they will EVER buy another record in their life?
I give it two months, maybe three.
And the same advice goes for you (Score:2, Interesting)
The plain truth of the matter is that it isn't the ISP's problem. The problem belongs to the person who is harmed. Maybe it shouldn't but the world simply isn't fair like that.
Re:Oh really? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:I agree with the recording industry (Score:3, Interesting)
You mean like AV vendors profiting from virus writers and hackers?
Re:Oh really? (Score:1, Interesting)
No, that's the just-beneath-the-surface 'apparent' reason for their actions.
The more likely one, in my deeply-suspicious opinion, is that they, together with government want to suppress the increasingly chatty exchange of information provided by the net and file-sharing.
File-sharing makes everyone a content producer, removing their dependence on thoughtless and unnecessary remakes from hollywood and returns control to the masses, where it belongs.
Likewise, these communication technologies make ordinary people far more difficult to control - they start to organise themselves, to spread awareness of pressing issues and abuses of power, casting light into the shadows where, previously, a cunning opportunist could hide and profit.
Are we to believe that the many independent press releases accidentally over-generalize to state that file-sharing is illegal or that they are part of a co-ordinated smear campaign with the goal of putting the cat back in the bag?
Re:Oh really? (Score:3, Interesting)
Actions of entertainment industry go far beyond "shifting the cost" or even "sharing the cost".
Forums took over other support means because it is really faster and better. Being cheaper (to manufacturers) it is plain side-effect. In fact manufacturers in some industries still dismiss user support forums and insist on expensive support contracts.
Re:Oh really? (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm going to reply to my own post.
The department of motor vehicles is a good example. This is akin to asking the department to pass on infringement notices because somebody in a car was doing burnouts on my front lawn. You can actually do that in several ways. The only way that won't cost you money is involve the police on a destruction of property charge. If you want to access the DMV database you need a warrant and to pay money.
Why should ISPs be any different? They incur costs and if the music and film industries had to actually pay some of these costs they'd probably realise they're being greedy cunts and return to only chasing the bastards who _sell_ pirated films.
Re:Oh really? (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm not sure about AU, but in the US copyright infringement, while unlawful, is not criminal. One cannot be arrested for it, convicted of it, or subsequently incarcerated (with exceptions.)
Suing for bazillions of dollars is precisely what the offended party is supposed to do.
Moreover, it's up to the offended party to decide who to sue. If A downloads a movie from B, with software written by C, over a communication medium owned by D, who is to be sued? One; All? If this is a simple problem, then please, offer your solution. Maybe we can get this whole copyright/internet thing sorted out over the weekend
(but don't take my word for it: http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html [copyright.gov])
Re:And the same advice goes for you (Score:3, Interesting)
The mission of many pirate groups is to make their product so pervasive as to displace the "legal" products. You want to download a movie and the first hit on Google is the pirate site. They get ad revenue and that is all.
Yes, it is coming down to that.
If I were an ISP... (Score:3, Interesting)
It’s really a joke. The teeny tiny industry of films, wants to put an ultimatum on the behavior of the whole ISP economy!
Most people do not know how ridiculously small the film and music industry is compared to others. It’s not far from the toilet seat and brush industry.
You know what I’d do? I’d say they forced me to block everything that could be copyright infringement, and then go to its logical conclusion:
Block every single video, image, text and just everything from them. Because as we all know, every time you look at one of those things, you made a copy on your computer. Even multiple ones. In the RAM, in the hard disk and CPU cache, in the VRAM, on the screen, etc.
I would also tell all my competitors to do it. And the TV and radio stations (as much as possible.)
The world wouldn’t even know they existed at all! Nobody would hear of their movies. And they would go bankrupt.
Then if someone came to me, telling me that that was anti-competitive / monopolistic behavior, I would take out the aggressively written threat letters from the movie studios, and tell him that they forced me to do it against my will.
(If my lawyer team would recommend it, I’d provoke the studios to send me a court order.)
So go on, movie studios. Please do (literally) fuck yourselves. ^^
This applies to ALL recordable media (Score:3, Interesting)
Businesses such as recordable DVD manufacturers / VHS, Betamax, Blu-Ray recorders want to enjoy the benefit of being able to make money out of the provision of recordable media and equipment and they enjoy that benefit. But it carries with it a responsibility,' said Tony Bannon SC, the film industry's lawyer. 'They provide a facility that is able to be used for copyright infringement purposes. If they don't like having to deal with copyright notices then they should get out of the business.'
Business such as movie studios want to enjoy the benefit of being able to make money out of a rapidly dying horse (I see they've remade Nightmare on Elm Street now, ffs can't these people come up with an original idea anymore), while trying to keep that industry firmly locked in 1970s style price-fixing. If THEY don't like having to deal with offering reasonably priced products based on the distribution method (i.e. higher price for physical media, liver concerts, cinema seats etc, and a lower price for digital distribution), then they should get out of the business.
Re:Agreed (Score:3, Interesting)
If I'm downloading copyrighted material so what?
It's not my responsibility to make sure that everyone sending me data has the right to send me data.
If I'm downloading something from sky.com or NBC how do I know they've paid the royalties to the content creators?
If some site sends me data how do you know I even asked for it?
If someone starts firing a copy of some movie at a random port on my PC there's not even a grantee that I've asked for it.
The only thing I'm responsible for is what comes from my machine.