Slashdot Log In
Movie Industry to sue File Sharers
Posted by
samzenpus
on Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:05 PM
from the juast-a-matter-of-time dept.
from the juast-a-matter-of-time dept.
Wack Valenti writes "SiliconValley.com reports that the motion picture industry, taking a cue from the RIAA, is planning to file copyright infringement lawsuits against file sharers it says are illegally distributing movies online. The first suits could be filed as early as tomorrow."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Movie Industry to sue File Sharers
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 572 comments
(Spill at 50!) | Index Only
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Not so long ago, the EFF suggested just this. (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.turnstyle.com/)
Re:Not so long ago, the EFF suggested just this. (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.outshine.com/)
What bugs me about the EFF statement is that they've backed away from it. I thought it was right all along to sue the individuals responsible for copyright infringement, and I still do (although I'm crass enough to make disparaging comments about the RIAA/MPAA as they sue). I currently use Kazaa to share out a handful of audio sermons from my church's pastor -- content that we own the copyrights to and are fully, legally allowed to distribute however we wish. So I have a vested interest in Kazaa and BitTorrent remaining legal. They have a legitimate use: they diminish the load on our Web server (and by extension, the cost) by distributing the load.
As the Web sites I volunteer for begin experiementing with video and other large chunks of data, it is imperative that technology assist us in moving forward. If we artifically limit the technology, then we will be unable to offer up content, even though we own the copyright on it, and wish to provide it for free!
Of course, suing thousands of naive kids and tech-illiterate grannies isn't really going to stop an onslaught of millions of infringers, and does have a chilling effect on legitimate uses such as mine, and does play right into the old line about making all citizens into criminals to keep them under control. So even though it's the right way to do it, I'm not sure what good it does.
Re:Not so long ago, the EFF suggested just this. (Score:5, Funny)
(http://gotmyselfhigh.blogspot.com/)
You're tricking a bit the kazaa credit system, eeh? Cool way of having a gig of mp3 available that you know nobody is gonna download.
Now that we have proven... (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.pobox.com/~rwhite)
As far as I am concerned, at this point we should all be doing our best to hasten the decline.
Everybod jump on the pendlum and push. It's gotta swing trough it's arc before there will be any relief. The United States of America has to legislate and litigate itself into its role as a backwater far off the information super-highway, before anything here can get fixed.
The sooner the rest of the world leaves us in the economic and Intellectual Property [sic] dust, the better.
In fact, if the corporations can make enough of a mess SOON ENOUGH, it could even prevent the stupid legislation.
Sue Away, MPAA! (hey it rymes, it should be their new slogan! 8-)
As environmental pressure increases, the organisim is forced to evolve.
So it will be _best_ for the world if we can all get the pressure up as fast as possible.
Plus we know how much credibility the US now has overseas. The more they win here, the freer the rest of the world will be. They *know* (hopefully) that if they follow our lead, then they will enevitably end up with a Bush of their own.
Re:Now that we have proven... (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Saturday June 04 2005, @11:50AM)
The MPAA has the financial resources and the political might to possibly "tie" that pendulum down as soon as it swings far enough their way. If you help swing it, are you so certain that they won't nail it in place at the edge of its arc?
Politics and Business Pendlum analogy works (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.pobox.com/~rwhite)
When you repress your own businesses, the market goes elsewhere. That is the free market theory at least. To date the swing of the pendlum often leaves countries totally devistated in its wake if it goes to far, but the regions recover even if the political systems don't.
I beleive that the current economic trends are tanamount to disaster and if the "ugly" can come on fast enough to be noticed by the populace they may act to fixe it.
We are boiling frogs here (to mix a metaphore). If the "Broadcast flag" (for instance) were to "suddenly go live tomorrow" it would be gone in a year. If we let it ease in slowly we may be stuck with it for decades.
As it is now, the "rising rate-rate of litigation" (yes, rate twice) is enough that our economic partners around the world are starting to notice and scatter. But consider that this change of rate has been exhibited almost solely in my lifetime (or more correctly in Ralph Nader's professional lifetime). It has not yet become ensconsed in our "perminant" way of life, it hasn't outlived a generation cradle-to-grave. It isn't "tradition", so it is possible to escape it *IF* we can get the public to see the precipice.
I don't really "wish" for the colapse as some kind of nielist orgastic ideal. I have just become convinced that it is essentially enevitable.
(To continue to mix metaphores) we *really* need to pull the band-aid(tm) off quick, or we are going to lose a _heck_ of a lot of hair... 8-)
But even if the entire United States colapses economically (which would be hard to do given that we grow lots of food) business and creativity will simply rise somewhere else.
It's not a pretty pendulum. It's not a "local" pendulum. But the cycle persists.
Wehn it gets totally out of wack, we (editorial we not royal or possessive we) throw a war...
Oh wait...
How many wars does any given "we" get before the world calls a time-out? 8-)
Re:Now that we have proven... (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Friday September 24 2004, @01:13AM)
"As far as I am concerned, at this point we should all be doing our best to hasten the decline. Everybod jump on the pendlum and push. It's gotta swing trough it's arc before there will be any relief. The United States of America has to legislate and litigate itself into its role as a backwater far off the information super-highway, before anything here can get fixed."
Amen to that brother! I was rooting for Shrub to win the election for that very reason! He is pretty much despised (and rightly so) down here in Australia, and you'd better believe that the people I told that to reacted with shock and disbelief.
The sooner the U.S. destroys itself, the sooner the rest of us can carry on our lives without being subjected to every base pop media fad to emerge from the rancid American slum-culture de jour.
Just why a middle class Australian would want to emulate the lifestyle of a crack addicted black urban slum dweller eludes me.
Re:Now that we have proven... (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://jeffd.ca/)
You know what? You're absolutly right. Of course we dont deserve the right to other people labor. But people dont deserve most of what they get in life. Be it good or bad, lifes not fair that way. But that doesnt mean that its wrong to take advantage of the situation and get ahead while you can. If ive got a means to gain somthing, be it knowledge, entertainment, or anythign else, if it doesnt take away from or harm someone esle, im going to go for it. Nerds in their rooms using bit torrent will NOT bring the industry to its knees. It will just anger them, make them more strict and less likely to listen to reason.
On that point I'd like to point somthign out. Nerds sitting in their rooms have made a difference. Ever heard of iTunes, movielink, or netflicks? It would be impossible to download movies or music online legally if people hadn't pirated them first. We'd still be stuck having to go to the store and purchase or rent hard copies of evreything if hollywood and the music industry hadn't had their hands forced.
And participate in our government. people who disagree with the system should become consumer rights advocates. raise money, hire lobbyists, support candidates, make tv commercials. co-opt the current political parties. work the system
I never suggested not working the system. But working the system doesnt mean you cant also work outside of the system. Not all people can afford to put out TV commercials for propaganda, hire lobbyists, or switch careers. That doesnt mean they should be unable to play a part. Part of the process in changing society is doing what you feel is right, and then working to make it legal. Unjust laws should not be followed, they should be broken, and shown to be the mistakes that they are.
Anyways, im tired and im going to bed. I doubt that I will be able to bring you over to my way of thinking (and tahts not really the goal anywyas), or you me. If anyone continues this line of discussion further, I'll take a look and comment on it tommorow.
Movie-goers Sue Movie Industry (Score:4, Funny)
Re:what has the world come to (Score:5, Funny)
(Last Journal: Saturday December 09 2006, @10:46PM)
Um, I think the point is that they are NOT paying customers...
Re:what has the world come to (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://slashdot.org/)
Fill me in here in case I missed something, but how are the movie theaters stealing money from anyone? I mean, at least you can claim (however implausibly) that stealing music is okay because the companies make rediculous margins and rip off the artists. That doesn't even remotely apply to movie studios though, it's not like actors are underpaid (in fact, I understand they have a very strong union), and the amount they charge customers is far less relatively speaking. I mean, paying a few bucks to see a $200million movie isn't a bad deal.
So to reiterate my question, how are the movie companies stealing your money?
Re:what has the world come to (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://slashdot.org/)
Well, if you're going and paying that, you must think it's worth it. If you're not going, well, then you clearly haven't been robbed of anything at all. Besides, $13NZ for movies which can cost tens of millions of times that to produce is hardly unreasonable. Nor is $40NZ for a DVD, and the simple fact it is illegal so complaining "how dare they accuse me of being a criminal" when you pirate the movie is rediculous, since you quite simply are a criminal for it.
I should add the note here that I do have a number of downloaded movies off the internet, so I'm certainly not passing moral judgment on people for doing that, since it'd be simply hypocritical. What pisses me off isn't people who download copyrighted material, it's people who are self-righteous about it, convinced they have a god-given right to do so, and think any copyright owner who dares try to stop them is evil for doing so. If I got busted for piracy, sure I'd be pissed off, but I wouldn't think it unfair, any more than I'd be annoyed at getting a traffic ticket for driving 10kph over the speed limit, it's annoying, but a fair cop.
Re:what has the world come to (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://www.metlin.org/ | Last Journal: Friday July 20, @01:58PM)
Nobody takes away the God-given right of a Slashdotter to share music and movies, not to mention watch movies for free. And anybody who makes money out of anything that has anything to do with the movie or music industry is evil, and it is the right of a Slashdotter to rip them off and distribute the spoils among the poor downtrodden geeks of the Slash-wood forest.
On the other hand, when EFF suggests the same thing [com.com], these same people stay quiet and not say a word.
Bloody pirate hypocrites. ARRRRRRRR! x-(
Re:what has the world come to (Score:4, Insightful)
Who modded this interesting? Have I just been trolled?
Re:what has the world come to (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://www.pobox.com/~rwhite)
The presumption that the ones who don't buy, WOULD buy if they couldn't download is specious at best.
The total, _ACTUAL_ "lost revenue" to movie snarfing is almost certianly LESS than the cost of one lawyer for one case.
These people should be persuing the people who MINT and SELL full bootlegs. This online trading stuff is literally NOTHING.
It's actually probably even a net gain from word of mouth.
(And I have *NEVER* downloaded a movie via USENET, any p2p application, or similar. I BUY DVDs.)
The people who will buy, buy. The people who won't, don't. The people who *may* don't exist.
Only the industrial bootleggers represent actual lost revenue. The "traders" are only a threat the the CERTIAN DREAMS OF AVERICE of certian ??AA organizations.
So it is STUPID to piss off your customers and splashing them with shit because you are chasing the shadow of a penny you _thought_ you _might_ _have_ seen rolling down a sewer.
Re:what has the world come to (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.metlin.org/ | Last Journal: Friday July 20, @01:58PM)
So this is what the third horseman looks like
Ahoy, folks. The end is nigh.
Re:what has the world come to (Score:5, Funny)
Something to think about next time Bush talks about god.
Stargate Atlantis (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Stargate Atlantis (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bA-DReZYftg | Last Journal: Sunday November 12 2006, @01:05AM)
I wish they'd find a way to solve their problems without being outwardly hostile to the Internet, computer users, and/or their customers.
conspiracy theorists rejoice (Score:5, Interesting)
seriously though, it is kinda interesting that after a couple years of wait and see, they've suddenly decided to file these suits after bush (friend of corporations, etc) is firmly back in power
mod me down as flame-bait if you want, I just find it an interesting point, not conspiracy but it makes sense; they waited until they knew the party that would support them was going to be in power for a while before they moved.
Re:conspiracy theorists rejoice (Score:5, Informative)
The Ninth Circuit is considered the most liberal in the country, and yet it has been very friendly to the members of the RIAA and MPAA.
Poor government knows no party.
Re:conspiracy theorists rejoice (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.slashdot.org/~lukewarmfusion/journal/ | Last Journal: Tuesday August 02 2005, @02:49PM)
That said, I think there is a strong point to be made about companies being hesitant or cautious around election times.
Re:conspiracy theorists rejoice (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.angelfire...epublican/index.blog | Last Journal: Thursday July 27 2006, @12:00AM)
Hollywood was solidly backing Kerry, maybe this is their temper tantrum because "their guy" didn't win.
LK
Re:conspiracy theorists rejoice (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Friday September 24 2004, @01:13AM)
Sheesh
Re:conspiracy theorists rejoice (Score:5, Informative)
Unless you have been living on Mars for the last eight months, you might have noticed that George Bush [opensecrets.org] is not the darling of the entertainment industry. If you look at the top contributers [opensecrets.org] not one of them are from the entertainment industry. One cannot say the same for John Kerry [opensecrets.org]. The top contributors [opensecrets.org] include Time Warner and Viacom. If you look at the RNC [opensecrets.org] ($2.8M) and the DNC [opensecrets.org] ($5.7M) who do you think is more beholden to the entertainment industry?
I think it is obvious that the actions of the entertainment industry is independent of the occupant of the White House. The Democrats are as friendly to corporations as the Republicans. If you believe otherwise, then you have tasted to much of the Kool-Aid. I hope you voted Nader, because both the Democrats and the Republicans are not for you.
Re:conspiracy theorists rejoice (Score:4, Informative)
(Last Journal: Monday March 28 2005, @11:39AM)
The Democrats created the DMCA.
It's traditional to cite such things. It often makes for a stronger argument, assuming the facts support it.
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (Public Law 105-304) was sponsored in the House by a Howard Coble [loc.gov], a republican (NC-6th). In the senate, it was sponsored by Orrin Hatch, also a Republican (UT).
The Democrats extended copyrights.
The Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act (Public Law 105-298) was also sponsored by Orrin Hatch [loc.gov]. It was named for a Republican congressman. In the House, it was sponsored by, (get this!) Howard Coble of North Carolina.
Yeah yeah, some Democrats are listed as cosponsors. And both bills did garner the votes of both Republicans and Democrats. Details, details.
Please (Score:5, Funny)
What ?! (Score:4, Funny)
May I plug i2hub.... (Score:4, Interesting)
(Last Journal: Tuesday June 24 2003, @09:38PM)
I have fully moved to private networks like this, and my University's DC++ hub. I was shocked when i saw all these people at school using public networks like Kazaa (corrupted now) and Ares and BT.
Re:May I plug i2hub.... (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://harry.blogdns.com/)
Re:May I plug i2hub.... (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://stephen.evilcoder.com/)
Sure, the i2hub users are probably not using the Internet2 for research or education, but it's not like the users are circumventing any systems to use the Internet2 - university networks are just routed that way. If you're really concerned about i2hub users wasting your valuable tax dollars, perhaps you should contact the appropriate people and convince them to implement systems to route P2P traffic over the regular Internet.
Besides, it might actually be CHEAPER for all this data to go over the Internet2...
Funny thing is.. (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.classicwfl.com/)
Re:Funny thing is.. (Score:4, Insightful)
It's not legal in any case (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Friday December 24 2004, @08:49PM)
To be honest, I'd rather see a return to the days of 5 dollar tickets and extra extra buttered popcorn and a Coke for a couple bucks more than see the movie industry devolve into this legal sewer. With DVD sales doing well, it becomes more and more reasonable to watch a movie in your house. With the proliferation of file-shared movies online, the quality of playback becomes less an issue as viewers get attuned to the lower bitrates.
Personally, I'd rather go see the films in a theater and don't mind paying a couple bucks to do so. Lately, it's been getting outrageously expensive, well passed the point where one could argue that it was merely inflation. I'm not saying that file sharing would be curbed by cheaper theater tickets, god knows the addictive powers of the free movie drug. But I do think that they could really recreate the concept of the "blockbuster" with a little less take at the box office.
In short, file sharing copyrighted works is illegal. The movie industry probably shouldn't do this, but are well within their rights to litigate. I'd like to watch movies at the theater but not pay so much.