Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Software That Flagged HBO.com For Piracy Will Power U.S. 'Six Strikes' System

Comments Filter:
  • by crazyjj (2598719) * on Tuesday February 05, 2013 @03:15PM (#42800137)

    That "Game of Thrones" show has been stealing blatantly from the "Song of Ice and Fire" book series for 2 years now.

    But if you're going to flag anyone, how about you get those thieves at Fox for pirating music from Jonathan Coulton? I think a fine of $22,500 for everyone who downloaded the Glee version sounds about right [cbsnews.com].

  • Which ISPs? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by CanHasDIY (1672858) on Tuesday February 05, 2013 @03:25PM (#42800283) Homepage Journal

    due to be rolled out by the five largest U.S. ISPs

    Which ones? I'd like to know who doesn't want my money.

  • So, do something (Score:5, Insightful)

    by pablo_max (626328) on Tuesday February 05, 2013 @03:26PM (#42800293)

    Well, you could always stand up and demand your leaders repeal this nonsense. Is that not one of the stipulations of the political system in the US, that one must participate?
    I see a LOT of folks complaining on /., but I never hear about anyone actually DO anything. And no, a strongly worded facebook post is not doing something.
    Say what you want about the French, but they have it right. Their leaders are scared shitless of the population. That is how it must be. When the leaders do the things the US politicians do each day, France burns.
    So, I would say, If you don't like it, "man up" and do something.

  • by mdmkolbe (944892) on Tuesday February 05, 2013 @03:34PM (#42800451)

    It's puzzled me for some time that ISPs are so eager to help with these piracy measures. Can someone explain to my why they are so eager to please when there is no reasonable legal threat against them? (IIUC, the DMCA safe-harbor clauses immunize them.) The same goes for YouTube. Why is Google so eager to go above and beyond the DMCA(*)?

    (*) I am aware of Viacom v. Google, but my understanding is the appellate judgment in many ways reaffirms the DMCA safe-harbor provisions.

  • Americans (Score:5, Insightful)

    by pitchpipe (708843) on Tuesday February 05, 2013 @03:37PM (#42800485)
    I wish we in the US would get as upset about corporations taking away our rights (through the purchase of laws) as we do about gun laws. This would not be an issue if that were to happen.
  • by Crayz9000 (2783019) on Tuesday February 05, 2013 @03:38PM (#42800493)

    It's puzzled me for some time that ISPs are so eager to help with these piracy measures. Can someone explain to my why they are so eager to please when there is no reasonable legal threat against them? (IIUC, the DMCA safe-harbor clauses immunize them.) The same goes for YouTube. Why is Google so eager to go above and beyond the DMCA(*)?

    (*) I am aware of Viacom v. Google, but my understanding is the appellate judgment in many ways reaffirms the DMCA safe-harbor provisions.

    Easy: Two of the biggest ISPs are also content owners. Time Warner and Comcast.

  • by SuperTechnoNerd (964528) on Tuesday February 05, 2013 @03:38PM (#42800505)
    I had to read your comment several times - since you seem to have such a strong and fantastic suggestion - but alas, a lot of hot air and no suggestions on how to go about "DOING SOMETHING." Please inform us sheep what your doing to help, and how we can too - since you got it all figured out.
  • by shentino (1139071) on Tuesday February 05, 2013 @03:53PM (#42800689)

    Fox is a large corporation.

    It is therefore immune.

    Laws are only for poor peons don't you know?

  • by WillAffleckUW (858324) on Tuesday February 05, 2013 @04:00PM (#42800765) Homepage Journal

    The US is the signer of a data treaty with both Canada and the EU that this violates.

    As the holder of multiple copyrights in Canada, the US, Australia, and New Zealand, I do not accept this Six Strikes violation of my International Treaty rights, which are superior to any DCMA legislation in the US.

    Period.

  • by gstoddart (321705) on Tuesday February 05, 2013 @04:05PM (#42800821) Homepage

    a cover of a cover is not theft and never will be...

    The performance is still copyrighted.

    If his version was used in a TV show without licensing it, according to the copyright wonks, that's theft.

    They can't have it both ways.

  • Re:Americans (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 05, 2013 @04:13PM (#42800917)

    You in the U.S. has your gun laws exactly for cases like this. The original idea was, when government (or its minions) eventually gets too tyrannical . . .

  • by hlavac (914630) on Tuesday February 05, 2013 @04:14PM (#42800935)

    They can't have it both ways.

    Oh but they can! They always pick what is best for them, arbitrarily.

    Want to make a backup copy of your DVD? It's a license, you can't.

    You scratched your DVD? It's an item, you have to buy a new one for a full price!

  • Re:Which ISPs? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sqrt(2) (786011) on Tuesday February 05, 2013 @04:17PM (#42800965) Journal

    Many people have noticed the same thing you did. This doesn't make sense for the ISPs unless they are getting financial compensation from the content cartels equal to or greater than the amount of money they're going to lose from lost subscribers AND the cost of implementing the system itself, which is not going to be an insignificant amount of money. So the RIAA/MPAA is footing the bill for the system plus whatever extra the ISPs needed to sweeten the pot and make the whole burdensome hassle actually worthwhile. The other reason they might have for implementing it is that they are involved in both content creation and ISP businesses. This is true for Time Warner at least.You can think of it as a conflict of interest, another bullet point for stronger anti-trust laws.

    There will be a period of about a year when notices, "strikes", will be sent at a furious pace and then some other obfuscated, encrypted, file sharing system will replace bittorrent. Mega seems poised to fill that niche, but there's room for an encrypted, anonymous, p2p filesharing protocol. There are a few right now but there's never really been a need for them great enough to overcome BT's momentum. The six strikes plan will be that need.

    And once you push p2p filesharing that far underground there'll be no technological solution to stop copyright infringement over that protocol short of breaking the fundamental workings of the internet. File sharers will have won, and the content cartels, having shot their last bolt, will wish they had stopped when they were at least not completely powerless. This is a last desperate power grab of a dying business model. We are witnessing the death rattle of copyright as we know it.

  • by dougmc (70836) <dougmc+slashdot@frenzied.us> on Tuesday February 05, 2013 @04:22PM (#42801023) Homepage

    then fine Jonathan Coulton for stealing the lyrics from Sir Mix A Lot

    a cover of a cover is not theft and never will be...

    Sir Mix A Lot wrote the song, and Jonathan Coulton probably paid him writer's royalties. If so, that's no more stealing than getting a candy bar at the store and paying for it.

    a cover of a cover is not theft and never will be...

    Covering a cover could still be stealing from the original song author if they aren't paid, and I suspect that Glee paid Sir Mix A Lot. But Glee didn't just cover the song, they actually used Coulton's performance itself (i.e. actual music from his recording ended up on the show -- not just notes, but part of his recording) -- which could indeed be stealing. I don't know if it was simply sampling [wikipedia.org] or it went beyond that -- but even if it was just sampling, in general royalties are paid for samples too nowadays.

    so cry more.

    You're not helping your case here.

  • by jythie (914043) on Tuesday February 05, 2013 @04:23PM (#42801033)
    Unfortunately, you are about right. If one looks at the various enforcement systems like youtube, the system is wired for who can harass who. Complaints against known entities will be deleted, while ones against small producers or individuals from companies are handled without question.

    You only gets much justice as you can threaten problems for whoever is handling it.
  • Re:Which ISPs? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) on Tuesday February 05, 2013 @04:29PM (#42801121)

    If so...why, what is in the bargain for them, they have immunity anyway over what their users do on the networks...why even bother with this?

    Did you notice how all of them are also cable tv providers? It is in their interest to kill any other forms of entertainment distribution, legal or not, so that they can herd customers to their own products.

    This is how the utterly stupid reclassification of ISPs as information services [wikipedia.org] (from their previous classification as telecommunications services) has become self-fullfilling.

  • by megamerican (1073936) on Tuesday February 05, 2013 @04:38PM (#42801213)

    The US also had a top marginal tax rate like that. It was during the great economic boom of the 50s and 60s. Turns out that trickle-down, voodoo economics is and always will be bunk.

    And as it turns out, nobody paid it. [economicpo...ournal.com] The effective tax rate, i.e. the tax rate people actually paid was around 30-35% at that time.

  • by Sarten-X (1102295) on Tuesday February 05, 2013 @04:41PM (#42801241) Homepage

    Turns out that trickle-down ... economics is and always will be bunk.

    ...But I think I am a good person, and I do good things with my money. Why would anyone not want good things to be done? Surely with more money I could do more good things, but that means I need to be sending less to the government. The government politicians just nickel-and-dime their way through the budget pulling money out of good investments for the future and into gift programs for the lazy.

    A note to the witless: I'm not being wholly serious, but I'm not trolling, either. Just illustrating a particular perspective.

  • Re:Americans (Score:2, Insightful)

    by bored (40072) on Tuesday February 05, 2013 @05:06PM (#42801571)

    No, the original idea was so they could form militia and defend themselves without having an expensive military.

    Against an oppressive government, with a world class military, DUH!

  • by log0n (18224) on Tuesday February 05, 2013 @06:06PM (#42802271)

    What are we supposed to be doing? Violently overthrow media conglomerates?

    I already vote with my dollars. I no longer buy nor subscribe to (or pirate) music, movies, etc. I stopped buying restrictive DRM games years ago. I've cut the cable cord. I prefer indie authors almost exclusively and get my text in print form whenever possible. These companies don't care, they've got more than enough $ already and the only one really being hurt is me (near zero access to pop culture).

    Get off your high horse and be useful. Enlighten me. How else can this battle be fought?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 05, 2013 @06:38PM (#42802543)

    I've said it a hundred times on Slashdot before... we live in a caste system.

    Guess what, if you're reading this, you're in the lower caste.

    And yet still, people boggle and question why laws seem to work differently for individuals than they do for the 1% and corporations.

    CASTE SYSTEM PEOPLE! LOOK IT UP! If the smart people of Slashdot and elsewhere would actually acknowledge this and finally get around to fucking accepting it (because it's already here, and if you're in the lower caste... and you are... you CANNOT fight it. Get this through your heads), then maybe they can put their heads together and come up with a way to make working WITHIN the lower caste more comfortable.

    But just accept it already people. The fight against this has been lost YEARS ago. It's as bad as the USA thinking they didn't lose the war on terror.

  • by Areyoukiddingme (1289470) on Tuesday February 05, 2013 @06:50PM (#42802659)

    Get off your high horse and be useful. Enlighten me. How else can this battle be fought?

    It can't be. As long as Joe Sixpack has to have his live sports package, as long as Jill Sixpack is fascinated by what moronic Celebrity ofthe Minute is doing today, they will have all the money they need to buy any law they like. You (and I) are forever marginalized. Get used to it. Cost of internet access will go continuously up, not down, as the media conglomerates that own the pipes rent-seek us all into oblivion. Internet access will follow exactly the cable pricing model, and for exactly the same reason—access is controlled by exactly the same people.

    And I've lost any hope of Google rolling out fiber any further than Kansas City. They will do it once, discover it's an expensive, thankless job, and stop. I expect tiered internet to be the norm in not less than 5 years, and it's all downhill from there.

Work without a vision is slavery, Vision without work is a pipe dream, But vision with work is the hope of the world.

Working...