Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Media Media Privacy The Almighty Buck United States Your Rights Online

Media Industry Wants Mandated Spyware and More 373

Posted by timothy
from the give-'em-an-inch-they-take-a-file dept.
An anonymous reader writes "The joint comment filed by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) requests anti-infringement software on all home computers, pervasive copyright filtering, border searches, forced US intellectual property policies on foreign nations and a joint departmental agency to combat infringement during major releases." The MPAA would also like to have its rent paid a bit by Congress, with a ban on what seems to me like a useful tool (for those in as well as outside the film industry), the recently-discussed futures market for box-office receipts.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Media Industry Wants Mandated Spyware and More

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Indeed.

    • by Pikoro (844299) <init AT init DOT sh> on Saturday April 17, 2010 @09:52AM (#31881280) Homepage Journal
      Actually, it sounds like a great idea. No wait, here me out:

      People who want peace of mind to not be sued for something they're not sure they did or not could install and run it on their system since they aren't going to actively download infringing content anyways.

      The rest of us, will simply download a cracked version of this watchdog software which, when it runs, never finds anything. Hence, "the pirates" enjoy the same protection from the xxAA that the ignorant get.

      "But your honor, my client downloaded and ran the program provided by the prosecution and it never found any infringing content. Clearly any content found on my client's hard drive is legal or it would have been automatically deleted."
      • by netsharc (195805) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @10:01AM (#31881350)

        Makes me think of the movie Brazil... in the xxAA future you'll go to jail or not based on a boolean return value.

        Of a closed source program.

      • by Aldenissin (976329) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @11:13AM (#31881796)

        There was a guy in another article who stated that he believes that piracy is as much of an enemy to open source as it is to proprietary software companies. His theory was that Adobe for example turns a blind eye to college kids pirating Photoshop so they will be hooked and pay for it later when they work for or start their own business. Also, Microsoft would rather you pirate Windows and keep the mind-share as he called it instead of downloading Linux. I agree, and hope this idea backfires, similarly to Apple backtracking on the political cartoonist and Opera browser.

        Imagine, everyone (average Joes) starts to see just how invasive these snobs are and say, NO we don't want your spyware watching me (I like porn, or whatever, I just want a little privacy and not to wonder if my webcam is on while I get dressed), I don't want to be searched at the border for a DVD that (I feel) looks clearly legit. I want to be able to freely trade and invest in movie futures and just because you don't like it, tough titty. I do it with everything else that involves money. One day, perhaps they will cross that line. All it takes is the media seeing green and watching everyone else make money and they will fall like dominoes not wanting to miss the story.

        • by TheRaven64 (641858) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @11:39AM (#31881918) Journal

          As Jeff Raikes (Microsoft buisness group president) said on the subject of piracy:

          If you're going to be a software counterfeiter, then please copy and illegally use Microsoft products.

          It's not just open source that suffers, it's smaller competitors. In the '90s, MS Office was probably the best office suite around, but there were lots of ones that were good enough for most people and cost a tenth of the amount. Given the choice between MS Office for $200 and SmallCo Office for $20, it was a trivial decision; MS Office was not worth $200 to a typical home user, or even a lot of small businesses. If you're pirating though, it's a choice between MS Office for $0 and SmallCo Office for $0. You pick MS Office, because it has more features.

          The product that you're pirating comes from MS, but the company that lost a sale is SmallCo. This seems to be something that the RIAA and friends miss when they equate one download to one lost sale. Even if the person would have bought if they couldn't pirate, they often would not have bought the same thing that they downloaded.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by tsm_sf (545316)
        "But your honor, my client downloaded and ran the program provided by the prosecution and it never found any infringing content. Clearly any content found on my client's hard drive is legal or it would have been automatically deleted."

        "We don't care, you're fucked if we say so."
      • by Surt (22457) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @11:57AM (#31882062) Homepage Journal

        I'm afraid that they'll insist this software runs on the TCM only, and that every personal computer has a properly operational TCM. Then if you've cracked your TCM, you'll be in much bigger trouble.

      • by suomynonAyletamitlU (1618513) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @12:06PM (#31882122)

        Or we could just leave any nation stupid enough to pass laws like that.

        It's not like those countries need us for taxes or anything, right? I mean, they have all those rich people. Rich people have to pay the greatest share of the taxes anyway, right? Right? Because that's the only sane way to do it. So all the decent human beings who are tired of being treated like they are somehow lower class leaving shouldn't have any effect at all. And since those rich people have so much money, I'm sure they can just pay people in other nations to do all the work anyway without those workers living under the stupid laws they don't accept but never had agency to change.

        Seriously, now.

        I've said this before. RIAA == ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY. E-N-T-E-R-T-A-I-N. You do not have the authority as an entertainment organization to fuck up millions of peoples lives. The government is tasked with law enforcement, military defense, et al, and they STILL don't have the authority to be tyrannical dickheads. They try, lord do they try sometimes, and hell, sometimes they manage, but they do not have the authority.

        xxAA should not be thinking they've found a loophole in that system. If they are thinking they have a loophole, they should be shot, along with anyone in the government who is enabling them to do so.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by w0mprat (1317953)
        You can bet that there will be a clause that running the software isn't a get out of jail free card. Running a cracked version will also be made a crime.

        This kind thing has never been shown to work. The choices they have with this:

        1. It won't perform very well. False positives, false negatives and generally slowing down your machine
        2. It'll cost an enormous ammount of money that the taxpayer will pick up part of.
        3. It'll be easily cicumvented,as you described, with the inevitable cracked version.

        Pi
    • by rtfa-troll (1340807) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @10:02AM (#31881356)
      There is method in their madness. They ask for the moon and then, whilst you are arguing about how outrageous that is, they slip 100 dollars out of your pocket. Even if you catch them, the police just shrug their shoulders "100 dollars sounds like a pretty good price for the moon sir; what are you complaining about? Now please move along and let's not have any funny business".

      Sometimes the position of the pirate party looks more and more sensible.

    • by flyneye (84093) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @10:07AM (#31881388) Homepage

      I think they can "want" in one hand and sh*t in the other hand and see which hand fills up first.
      How about what I want for a change?
      I "want" everyone involved with the *IAA to be gelded so their genetics are not passed on to further generations.
      I "want" constant IRS scrutiny of all their books.
      I "want" constant webcam surveillance of every room in their houses, their cars, their offices and GPS bitch collars so their whereabouts can always be known.
      I "want" those who would invade my privacy to have their skin peeled off and used for lampshades in my house.

    • This is hilarious (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 17, 2010 @10:15AM (#31881436)

      Seriously, this is all to be done in the name of protecting movies? Not nuclear secrets or D-Day invasion plans, but movies? I don't want whatever it is they've been smoking, as it's clearly too powerful and causes grandiose impairment of one's general reasoning abilities.

      Puh-lease. They're acting like guarding the earning potential of Waterworld should rank right up there with National Security secrets.

  • by arcelios (1244426) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @09:36AM (#31881156)
    People in hell want ice water, too.
  • Oh Yeah? (Score:5, Funny)

    by WrongSizeGlass (838941) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @09:36AM (#31881162)
    Well, fat chance. The government is not going to mandate big media sponsored spyware on everyone's computers. It would conflict with the DoJ & NSA software already installed ;-)
    • by cpghost (719344)
      Nope, the already installed NSA or DoJ spyware will simply be "upgraded." ;-)
    • Don't be TOO sure (Score:5, Informative)

      by Runaway1956 (1322357) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @10:01AM (#31881346) Homepage Journal

      Who remembers stoppoliceware.org ? (don't bother clicking - the site has been abandoned, and it's for sale now)

      Word was, some years ago, that "Da gubbermint wants to install spyware on your computer to track what you do, and it will report if you have any pirated software, among other things"

      Stoppoliceware was one part of a multipronged attack on that idea, and those politicians who were considering it seemed to have abandoned their idea. So, the site was neglected, and finally ceased to exist.

      We see that whole thing coming back, around the world today. RIAA and their ilk are looking for antipiracy, but da gubbermint is willing to go along with that program, so that they can install monitoring software of their own.

      Unless, of course, there is enough of an outcry against the concept. Australia and New Zealand have been pretty effective in blocking this kind of crap - but I have little faith in the US. So precious few people have the least clue regarding the issues, and those who have a clue often buy into the "Think of the children" nonsense.

      Thank God (and Torvalds) for Linux. There won't be any spyware on my machine. The bastards can spy from my internet gateway, but that's as close as they get, unless they come in with a warrant. At that point, I'll most certainly be joining the revolution!

      • Re:Don't be TOO sure (Score:5, Informative)

        by Runaway1956 (1322357) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @10:58AM (#31881712) Homepage Journal

        http://74.125.45.132/search?q=cache:7AOx1mO30NoJ:www.erollisimarr.com/forum/showthread.php%3Ft%3D18794+stoppoliceware&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a [74.125.45.132]

        It's a forum, where a member copy/pasted some of the old site's mission, and asked about them. There is probably more interesting stuff available on the web, regarding stoppoliceware, if anyone is interested. Or, google for any of these terms:

        "The CBDTPA is a bill (S. 2048) proposed in Congress by Senators Fritz Hollings (D-SC) and Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), along with Senators Daniel Inouye (D-HI), John Breaux (D-LA), Bill Nelson (D-FL), and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA). The acronym stands for "Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act". Note that the CBDTPA was originally known as the "SSSCA" while in draft form."

        Ahhhh - here's the bill:
        http://www.politechbot.com/docs/cbdtpa/hollings.s2048.032102.html [politechbot.com]

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        There won't be any spyware on my machine. The bastards can spy from my internet gateway, but that's as close as they get, unless they come in with a warrant.

        Not having spyware will be considered probable cause, allowing them to get a warrant.

      • by cpghost (719344) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @11:56AM (#31882052) Homepage

        Thank God (and Torvalds) for Linux. There won't be any spyware on my machine.

        Only if you're not installing binary blobs, i.e. drivers (*cough* nVidia *cough*) in the kernel and closed source programs (*cough* Flashplayer *cough*). And who knows what's lurking inside your closed-source BIOS (both on the motherboard and in network adapters)? I'm not saying that those binary blogs contain spyware, but I have no way (short of reverse-engineering them) to be sure they don't... and never will on subsequent updates.

        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by Blakey Rat (99501)

          You should get that cough looked at.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Mista2 (1093071)

          And as much as you have thinking about it, Richard Stallmans way of life starts making sense. The thing I do like about stallman, is that unlike many ofther extremists, he doesnt push his ideals where they aren't wanted. If asked to speak on the topic he will, and at lenght, but he doesnt go around lobbying govertment to make sure all software development is open source and free, he just wants to make sure there is enough of it that you can create a "free" computer system if you want to.
          The hardest stuff to

  • by Noxn (1458105)
    WHAT ARE THEY SMOKING?
  • by Cheerio Boy (82178) * on Saturday April 17, 2010 @09:38AM (#31881170) Homepage Journal
    When are these bastards going to be prosecuted for racketeering?

    When are people going to finally be fed up with being treated like criminals for the sake of a greedy cartel of Suits that have no morals to speak of?

    When are people going to finally wise up and put these assholes in their place?

    Yeah...I know. I'm delusional because they hold almost all the cards and have the gooberment in their pockets.
    • by j0hnyquest (1571815) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @09:45AM (#31881226)

      Yeah...I know. I'm delusional because they hold almost all the cards and have the gooberment in their pockets.

      That's the sad part :( This makes me want to not pay for next album or movie just that much more...

  • A joint comment by me and my dog Boog has just been filed on Slashdot.

    "RIAA and MPAA, go fuck yourselves".

    Thank you for your time.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Noxn (1458105)
      In the name of me and the internet, we too would like to file a comment here.

      "RIAA and MPAA, go fuck yourselves".

      Thanks.
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Sponge Bath (413667)

      A joint comment by me and my dog Boog has just been filed on Slashdot.

      Be honest. Your dog wrote the whole thing, didn't he?

      RIAA v Boog : Illegal download of "How much is that doggy in the window?"
      RIAA: Your honor, since defendant can't pay the 100 billion dollar value of this single download, we request Boog be put down.

      There you have it: RIAA wants to kill your pets.

  • Eh, the typical (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Megaweapon (25185) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @09:40AM (#31881192) Homepage

    1. Propose something to Congress so wacked out it would never ever pass
    2. "Negotiate" it down to "semi-reasonable"
    3. Pass legislation, GOTO 1

    They won't get what they want this time, but something bad will still likely get whittled out from this.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      Yup, they're just using the old tactic of pushing the comfort boundaries. This is what really worries me ... they'll "water this down" so that its "fair in comparison to the original proposal" after much debate, but in absolute terms it will still be ridiculous.
      • Re:Eh, the typical (Score:5, Interesting)

        by ScrewMaster (602015) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @10:42AM (#31881622)

        Yup, they're just using the old tactic of pushing the comfort boundaries. This is what really worries me ... they'll "water this down" so that its "fair in comparison to the original proposal" after much debate, but in absolute terms it will still be ridiculous.

        It will be interesting to see what happens if and when Congress attempts to mandate spyware on every single operating personal computer in the United States. And, I might add, not a program that reports to a legitimate law-enforcement agency (if any such Federal organizations exist in the present time), but to the private sector. If that does happen, the next question will be what penalties would be applied to an individual who attempts to circumvent, disable or uninstall said spyware. You know, like most of us on Slashdot. This puts a bad taste in my mouth, it really does, and anyone who claims, "hey, it's just entertainment" isn't seeing the bigger picture.

        Besides, given the RIAA's demonstrated inability to reliably sue the right people, unwillingness to admit mistakes and offer redress (and absolute willingness to write off the collateral damage with out a second's thought) I have zero doubt that this would also be highly destructive, only more so. Remember folks, the MPAA is composed of people just as amoral and fundamentally dangerous as the RIAA crowd: hell, they're cut from precisely the same mold. Don't forget Jack "The VCR will DESTROY the industry!" Valenti ... there are plenty more where he came from.

        Not the America I grew up in, let me tell you.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by shentino (1139071)

          Not to mention Microsoft would be tickled pink.

          I would not be surprised if such a spyware program didn't have linux or osx versions.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by nurb432 (527695)

      That's how we got the DMCA.. and most all other invasive laws.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Hey, maybe those Tea party people could help. Couldn't you frame this as one more branch of the evil Obama administration's efforts to take our rights away? ...

      Psshshshthahahahahahaha...heh... ...

      *cry*

  • Dupe? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Bearhouse (1034238) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @09:40AM (#31881194)
  • by adosch (1397357) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @09:48AM (#31881240)

    Yet another lost cause for MPAA and RIAA with failing to provide a legit and legal way on their own to produce and distribute digital content to the masses, so now you're going to hit up the government like every other 'Big Corporation' or 'Big Industry' has to help some failed quest.

    Never once have I seen these two organizations do anything more than indictments, court battles and really lame 4 minute short films on why 'piracy of copyrighted material is bad'. Come up with a real solution. Software implementation will not even put a dent in this and it'll be worked around in 24 hours or less at best. More tax dollars at waste!

  • by mfnickster (182520) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @09:50AM (#31881256)

    RIAA, MPAA - why don't you just sell your product for a reasonable price so that more people will buy it? Make it easily downloadable and hassle-free (standard formats with no DRM).

    Wouldn't that be easier than the technical and legislative shenanigans you seem so enamored of??

    • RIAA, MPAA - why don't you just sell your product for a reasonable price so that more people will buy it?

      What price beats free?
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by mfnickster (182520)

        > What price beats free?

        People will buy something if they get a perceived value, and the convenience saves them the trouble of going out and finding it. Witness iTunes Music Store.

        If they feel they're being ripped off, they'll go out of their way to pirate it.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by JohnBailey (1092697)

        What price beats free?

        Fair.

    • by sznupi (719324)

      They don't want people buying more movies or music; they dream for return of times when people were buying only from them.

    • by shadowbearer (554144) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @10:25AM (#31881514) Homepage Journal

        Because charging *less* would cut into their hooker and blow money. Duh.

      SB

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Culture20 (968837)

      RIAA, MPAA - why don't you just sell your product for a reasonable price so that more people will buy it? Make it easily downloadable and hassle-free (standard formats with no DRM). Wouldn't that be easier than the technical and legislative shenanigans you seem so enamored of??

      You seem to think they're after money. I think they have loftier aspirations. Who needs gold when you can order your subjects to do anything at sword-point?

  • by M. Baranczak (726671) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @09:52AM (#31881274)

    I'm really torn about this one. The movie industry hates it, but the finance industry likes it; which one is more evil?

  • What about Linux? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by javacowboy (222023) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @09:52AM (#31881276)

    Well, if this happens, people who never before even considered running Linux will start installing it en masse on their PCs or Macs. People who never before would have made the effort to learn how to install it will become quite proficient at doing so.

    I'm guessing nobody will bother writing such software for Linux. Even then, how do you ensure it's installed with every single distro? What are they going to do? Ban Linux? They'd have to either shut down or block every single site that offers a Linux ISO.

    One way or another, this isn't going to fly.

    • by Zumbs (1241138) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @10:07AM (#31881394) Homepage
      If it is illegal to have a home computer without the "anti-infringement" software, and such software does not exist for Linux, it will in practice become illegal to run Linux. A gray shade will be if the software will need to run, that is, will it be legal to dualboot with Windows/Mac (with the software) and Linux (without the software)? Either way, the requested law is a draconian invasion of privacy, as well as a backdoor into your system for anyone from malicious hackers, spies or blackmailers to use.
    • by WrongSizeGlass (838941) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @10:08AM (#31881406)

      Well, if this happens, people who never before even considered running Linux will start installing it en masse on their PCs or Macs. People who never before would have made the effort to learn how to install it will become quite proficient at doing so.

      Um, would these be the same people who call me for help when their "e-mail is broken" because they accidentally sorted it by something other than 'Date'?

      What are they going to do? Ban Linux? They'd have to either shut down or block every single site that offers a Linux ISO.

      Let's not give them any more bad ideas, m'kay?

    • Re:What about Linux? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Mornedhel (961946) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @10:37AM (#31881588)

      We're supposed to get one of those spywares any day now, over here in France, thanks to the HADOPI legislation.

      When confronted with the problem of making people voluntarily run spyware on FOSS systems, Christine Albanel (ministry of Culture and Communication, proponent of HADOPI), said (my translation):

      About software... about free software, of course free software, when you buy, of course, software, for instance the Microsoft pack (this is not free software): Word, Excel, Powerpoint, there are of course firewalls, I just said that, there is security software. But on free software there are also firewalls, which by the way, of course. For instance, we in the ministry, we have a piece of free software, called Open Office and there is indeed security software that prevents the Ministry of Culture to have access, obviously, and the free software editors release firewalls, and even release free [gratis] firewalls. So that argument has no grounds. That is what I wanted to say.

      And that is basically the last we heard of it, and they moved on with the project. She said that in front of the entire Assemblée Nationale to the representative who had asked her if she had considered the problem of FOSS systems, including the half-dozen "évidemment" and the unfinished sentences.

      Now what happens is that when accused of infringing copyrights, it's the HADOPI authority's word against yours, and despite this being -- supposedly -- a country where you are innocent until proved otherwise, for some reason the burden of proof rests with the infringer here. So your *only* way of demonstrating that you are not guilty is to be running the government-approved spyware, which you can't, because it's HADOPI-style multiplatform, which probably means you can run it on Windows Vista *and* Windows Seven.

      Before anyone storms in declaring that's what France gets for being a socialist country and that socialism inevitably leads to governments spying on their citizens: our current government is right wing (on our spectrum), and the Parti Socialiste is against HADOPI.

      To conclude, the most likely answer to your question ("What are they going to do? Ban Linux?") is "no, they're just going to pretend it does not exist, and when the time comes to explain why you are not running the spyware, good luck trying to convince them it's related to ethical questions".

  • by Mr. Slippery (47854) <tms.infamous@net> on Saturday April 17, 2010 @09:56AM (#31881296) Homepage

    Of course, if they want spyware on every computer, then you can no longer have control of your computer. Software development will have to be heavily regulated.

    RMS saw it coming over a decade ago; go read his little parable The Right to Read [gnu.org] , if you don't know it already.

  • by John Hasler (414242) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @09:57AM (#31881300) Homepage

    Surely this is one of those evil, nasty derivatives that will soon be banned by financial regulation anyway. After all, everyone knows that speculators and derivatives caused the recession, right?

  • by Stormwatch (703920) <rodrigogirao.hotmail@com> on Saturday April 17, 2010 @09:58AM (#31881316) Homepage
    The MAFIAA read this [gnu.org] and thought it was a good idea.
  • by ev1lcanuck (718766) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @10:00AM (#31881336)
    Should these asinine ideas come closer to fruition I would urge the union of which I am a member: IATSE Local 700 Motion Picture Editors Guild to go on strike and encourage other IATSE unions to do the same. The ideas being proposed can and will harm our industry and our livelihood by creating distrust and distaste of the media in the general public. It is unacceptable to treat our customers as criminals.

    If entertainment industry workers took a stand for the country as a whole then public opinion would be on our side. The producers would have to take us seriously.
  • I think that artists should be rewarded for their efforts and as such I buy all of my music; however, I now realize that this means I am ALSO supporting these thugs? Maybe i should reconsider my activities, because I DO NOT WANT TO SUPPORT THESE GUYS. What should I do?
    • by sznupi (719324)

      Just don't listen to the music under the umbrella of RIAA members, simple.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      In your position I would pirate everything, and send a couple of bucks straight to the artist I like. And for the artists, it might very well mean _more_ money, since they only get peanuts per sold CD anyway... For the record companies, though, it will mean _less_ money. I am not sure that is a bad thing though ;-)
  • Exactly how? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by headkase (533448) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @10:02AM (#31881358)
    Exactly how is this proverbial scanning software supposed to tell the difference between an illegal file and a legitimate one? Based on file name? Based on hash? Easily defeated and ineffective. The only way to truly tell if a file is infringing is to have a Turing complete artificial intelligence to watch it, listen to it, read it, or play it. Nothing short will do. Since websites hosting questionable content are having such difficulty separating out the files when forced to we can only conclude that Turing quality AI is not available yet. So, although the design specs call for a magic wand none are available.
  • Not only NO (Score:3, Insightful)

    by shadowbearer (554144) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @10:16AM (#31881442) Homepage Journal

      But FUCK NO.

      Who the hell do they think they are? Arrogant bastards.

      You know what we need in this country? A presidential administration with the balls to dissolve the RIAA and MPAA and put their executives in prison, where they rightly belong. Any corporate executive who would sign off on an idiot statement like this badly needs a reality check.

    SB

     

  • ..."If you could have anything you want, what would you ask for?", what do you expect?

    BTW if they want a pony too I have several for sale. That they might actually get.

  • And this is (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Dunbal (464142) * on Saturday April 17, 2010 @10:59AM (#31881722)

    exactly why I don't go to the movies anymore. Blame piracy if you will (despite the fact that some movies keep breaking records). A lot of us are fed up with being ripped off at the box office, raped at the confection stand, and then accused of being pirates (talk about preaching to the choir) before the movie starts, only to be ripped off again by movies that fail to deliver.

    Back in the day, there were basically two forms of entertainment - staying home and watching tv, or going to the movies. Nowadays there are many more things to do that entertain, from playing multi-player games, to playing with consoles, to watching people ignite their farts on youtube. Your market share will drop accordingly.

  • by andydread (758754) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @11:17AM (#31881814)

    Unfortunately this is MORE LIKELY to happen than not. The Vice President is fully influencing the President [tinymixtapes.com] on this matter and it's not in a way we like. Joe Biden's pro RIAA history [cnet.com] will almost guarantee it.

    As Senator, Senator Biden had sponsored five pro-copyright bills and co-sponsored three. Among these bills includes the Family Entertainment and Copyright Act of 2004, of which the similar yet brutal 2005 edition became law. Another was the Perform Act of 2006, which intended to restrict the recording and playing back songs off satellite and internet radio (this died in committee).

  • by Pascal Sartoretti (454385) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @11:59AM (#31882078)
    I am always surprised that people associate the MPAA and RIAA together. To me, there are huge differences between them.

    RIAA - Music
    • Music is a natural human activity.
    • Music existed many centuries before the RIAA, which may one day be seen as a small blip in the history of music.
    • Technology has become so cheap that great records can be made at very small costs.
    • Music belongs to the artist who wrote or played it.

      MPAA - Movies
    • A movie is always the work of tens, hundreds or thousands of people.
    • Even a low budget movie costs millions.
    • A movie is nearly always the product of an industry (save for a few documentaries).
    • Movies could not exist without the movie industry, which is nearly as old as movies themselves.
    • A movie belongs to those who financed it.

      I don't want to excuse all of what the MPAA is doing, but I understand that an industry defends itself against its ennemies. For the RIAA, however, "racket" is the only word that comes to my mind.
  • by Skapare (16644) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @12:04PM (#31882108) Homepage

    .. to run on Gentoo Linux.

  • by Da w00t (1789) on Saturday April 17, 2010 @12:16PM (#31882184) Homepage
    Disable all analog outputs on my high definition devices (such as blu-ray players) - this is coming up in a couple years.
    • This makes a feature I paid for on my $1000 USD receiver for "multiple zones" absolutely useless. That very same feature is also crippled by default by Sony such that *only analog* video and audio can be piped to the other zones.

    Charging extra for "digital download" for content I have already purchased a license for

    • I've intentionally not purchased many blu-ray discs because of the absurd crypto on them preventing me from watching that content on something besides a severely locked down combination of HDCP compliant players and display sets. When blu-ray's crypto is 100% broken like CSS for DVDs, then I'll start purchasing all my favorite shows in high definition on blu-ray. Until then, I'm downloading shows that I watch on TV in the US via BitTorrent.

    Cable Companies that set the CCI bytes such that TV shows can't be transferred from one DVR to another

    • http://www.zatznotfunny.com/2009-09/tivo-and-the-cci-byte/ Cox Communications (my cable TV and cablemodem internet provider until I get Verizon FiOS) sets the CCI bit to prevent me from moving content off my TiVo. FiOS doesn't set these CCI bytes, and permits "multi room viewing" on both TiVo DVRs and their own FiOS DVRs. I've been working approximately a 66 hour work week for the past month and a half, and I can't be sure that when I have time between work and sleep to watch a TV show that it will be present on my DVR because other programs have been recorded and replaced it. So, back to BitTorrent.

    MPAA/RIAA/friends suing their consumers instead of getting with the program and adopting the new world that they find themselves in

    • I stopped buying CDs entirely. I stopped buying music entirely. I now find music that I enjoy much more than the cookie cutter "formula" stuff I hear on the radio that artists put on their own website available for free. And you know what? I paypal them money as a thank you for producing the music. Direct cash to the artist. If you like ambient/chillout electronica, go to http://www.scene.org/ [scene.org] and look up the artist Xerxes.

    Take away features with a software update

    • Yep, I'm pissed that instead of Sony fixing a software problem with a patch, they remove a feature all together. When was the last time that Microsoft told you that they were retroactivly removing support for Mice and all pointing devices in Microsoft Windows because of a Click-Jacking vulnerability? Fix the hardware or software bug you made and don't negativly impact your consumers, or live with the fact that users will get what they want out of what they purchased. Licenses be damned, I'll take a soldering iron to my Sony PS3 if I damn please.

He keeps differentiating, flying off on a tangent.

Working...