'Six Strikes' piracy warning system headed to the US this year

[Nick D]

"How exactly does the general consumer "pirating" affect innovation?"

Well when a movie comes out, almost everyone has seen it. 30 years ago, if a movie came out, people read about it or skipped it. Very few people could afford to watch every new movie that came out even when prices were low and more people had careers. So if pirating was limited severely, the saturation and publicity that tv and movies have now would shrink drastically. This is a long subject and this is not a place to get into all of this. Basically piracy improves quality of product. In order to make money, the artist/creators have to be innovative.

 

[Zoltan Head]

Basically piracy improves quality of product. In order to make money, the artist/creators have to be innovative.

Absolute baloney! I am "an artist/creator" and piracy acts as a deterrent to creativity, as there is less incentive to produce things if the reward is gone.

 

[TJGeezer]

Well, considering how arbitrarily corporations can throw cease and desist orders for smaller entities in the cyberspace, that will be the end of freedom of speech of the internet. It will become the tube for governments/corporations like radio and TV before. I wonder if one could setup a new, independent global network using existing hardware with modified firmware like they did in Egypt during revolution with the ancient fax/short wave radio or whatever they were using.

It's a fine idea, but not needed anyplace that doesn't have a government-owned total "Off" switch - log-free VPN connections and fast proxies are not expensive. Anyone streaming a lot of TV from Hulu or Netflix can match bandwidth usage with P2P downloaders anytime. Someone with enough IQ to set up a torrent client or a Usenet account who then gets six warnings must want to be chum for the copyright mafia's briefcase sharks.

 

[Nick D]

"Absolute baloney! I am "an artist/creator" and piracy acts as a deterrent to creativity, as there is less incentive to produce things if the reward is gone."

This idea that Piracy is a big impact on sales has to stop. The RIAA pushed this idea very hard when illegal music p2p happened. The majority of Piracy is used by people who had no intention of buying in the first place. The benefit to this is market saturation. This gives smaller companies a chance, word of mouth. Much more powerful these days with things like texting, facebook, and twitter in common use. People who enjoy a product will generally still buy it. App/Game wise, they will do it for the updates.

Note: A lot of big companies will say the pricing is bad because of piracy. If there wasn't any piracy, the prices would be higher. Right now they are trying to compete with free. If they had no competition, do you really think they'd lower prices?

 

[Tygerstrike]

@ Nick
I can only assume that you are a general consumer. Anyone in a retail businees, like myself, looks at your argument and shakes their head. Im also going to go out on a limb and guess that you prolly pirate yourself. Its the only answer that can put your argument to any sort of sensability. First pirates who would have never bought something anyways?? Really!? Why would they bother to pay for what they are in essence stealing? They dont pay for it, they get the use out of whatever the item is same as the ppl who DID pay for it. How exactly is that not stealing. Thats no different then walking up to a strangers car and joy riding in it. You had no intention of actually purchasing the car, you just wanted a ride. The cops most certainly wont buy that. I would have agreed with your argument had you atleast been somewhat honest. Most ppl that pirate, CANT afford the item they are pirating. At that point they are stealing because they are poor. Thats a lot more understandable then they stole because they would never have purchased in the first place. When your poor you have to prioritize your spending. But when you are that poor you find innovative ways to strech you money. I know, Im poor. However if I cant afford something I dont steal it and try to justify that theft. There is no valid excuse for theft other then your stealing something to save someones life. If your pirating your pirating because you wont get caught and you believe its ok. Its not ok. I didnt even have parents and even I know that. If youre pirating because you can, then you are no different then a common thief. Good news is soon you wont have to justify to others online. You will be doing it in a court of Law. Then try and pass off your justifications to a Judge. Good Luck with that.

 

[Nick D]

Fairly huge difference when pirating electronically. Though I didn't claim that it was completely without harm, it doesn't do as much harm when a digital copy is pirated versus stealing someones car or purse. Stealing something intangable is not a 1:1 loss. It does have benefits that I do believe help balance its worth. This really is just the next level of recording from TV. The difference is that Electronics is a larger part of our lives (phone/computer vs old tv). It was okay back then because although everyone had a TV, recording tv shows or movies was limited by technology (cable tv availability). However now there are various more options and people have more options than companies can compete with. Instead of trying to compete, larger companies would rather limit things again to return to the good old days of fewer options and less money in the consumer hands.

Companies still make millions/billions and we have more minimum wage workers than ever, I can't imagine what would happen to this age of electronics if the internet was limited. It would probably take a drastic hit and simmer down to the relevance of television (social media, nice to have but can be cut out if you need to save money).

Note: My original point was that innovation is better than limitation. As things advance, its either going to be limitation and restriction or innovation. It seems our system is built on restriction when technology is pushing for innovation. I side with technology.

 

[Tygerstrike]

@Nick
I can understand your desire for innovation but the fact remains that because the media is now digital and easy to steal, companies have to lock down their products. Previously when the media, movies music or games, was on physical disks, no one would have given stealing it off a stores shelf. Because of everything going digital, now that theft is done from the saftey of ppls homes.
If these companies have to keep trying to stop ppl from pirating, then we will lose out on innovation. The capital and resources that would be used for innovation is going to line lawmakers pockets because these companies need to protect their money making potential. Companies have to secure it because they have employees and overhead. Every argument that has been posted over digital theft fails to take into consideration all the variables. Everyone states that the theft is "ok" because these companies make enough money. REALLY!? Who the hell do these ppl think they are that they can dictate how much anyone should make. Companies have to spend money to make money. Anyone who has to use that argument needs to take their lazy butt to a third world country and try living there.
I agree that innovation in electronics is important. But what good is that innovation when it allows ppl to steal. Where is the man in all this innovation. Where is the moral high ground in all of this? We have become so enamored with our devices that ppl feel its ok to steal and then TRY to justify it. I live in America. Land of the Free home of the Brave. However the pirates are turning it into "America, Land of the Free cause no one is looking". We are better then pirates. We are better then the petty ppl. We need to start showing how good we are by ignoring the temptaion to pirate. Morals, not just for church anymore.

 

[KennC]

Well, considering how arbitrarily corporations can throw cease and desist orders for smaller entities in the cyberspace, that will be the end of freedom of speech of the internet. It will become the tube for governments/corporations like radio and TV before. I wonder if one could setup a new, independent global network using existing hardware with modified firmware like they did in Egypt during revolution with the ancient fax/short wave radio or whatever they were using.

Look up "Meshnet" or Darknet. There are some pretty extreme projects already in place that offer a completely isolated network environment on a large scale.

 

[KennC]

I just laugh when I see this. I doesnt effect me at all. I dont download anything. I dont use my PC for entertainment( movies ect). The only ppl who really should be worried is the super abusers. They are the ones the ISP is going after. The little ppl who download a movie or a song will prolly glide in under the radar. Ten to one there will be protocals that dictate certain levels of downloads or amounts of downloads will process a strike. Also im sure the ISP will keep track of those companies that do legal torrent downloads like WoW. I mean really ppl, what did you think they were going to do? Keep allowing ppl to "steal" from them? This is only the begining. Im sure there are even more draconian plans in the works to keep ppl from pirating. All it would have taken is a drop in piracy. So you only have yourselves to blame. All you the individual person had to do is not pirate for awhile. But you reap what you sow. Im going to enjoy watching this one play out. Im 100% sure that this will be intereseting to watch.

That's a silly stance to take. Did you happen to read about the first ever case of French HADOPI "three strikes" law being held recently? An elderly guy was held accountable for his ex wife (who testified under oath in court, that she had actually downloaded two songs) using his wireless router that was unsecured.

Two songs, not even his own doing, court did not care. Let that roll about in your head for a bit. Now look at how the MPAA and RIAA go to such extreme lengths at times to get small time offenders and sometimes, people who have only breached copyright law in the minds of the RIAA or MPAA. If this doesn't concern you, you are a fool.

 

[PinothyJ]

Except this would not happen. You are asking: Maccas to stop serving obese people; prostitutes (100% legal in my country so this is not some dirty hush-hush word) to stop 'serving' married men/women; search engines to stop indexing porn; and many other analogous examples that highlight how damaging it would be to the ISPs bottom line. Not only that but it is taking a cut out of its OWN bottom line to boost someone ELSE'S bottom line.

Can you honestly see this being enforced?

 

[Guest]

Music distribution is bullshit these days. if your an artist wanting to make money off ur music, controling your own internet source is a must!
the same goes for movies.
if music or movies are successful people/fan will come and buy from the artist and contribute money. if its crap your out of luck. atleast through internet distribution your only out the cost of your power bill to run your upload server.
the record lable distribution is fighting back with lobbying and law and its ****ing things up in ways that may cause long term problems.

I especially do not like how big money is attacking smaller money who uses the internet to compete, with internet legislation.

 

[Tygerstrike]

@KennC
The only fools are the ppl who put all of us in this situation. Do you think that someone in power just woke up one day and said "Hey I want to screw everyone who surfs the web" Nope didnt happen that way. Im going to do you a small solid here and explain this. One, media that has been digitized gives ppl more access to it. Two, when that media was previously only available as a physical media. Three, add to this that instead of BUYING the physical media ppl are pirating the digital media. Four, add this all up and you get lost potential revenue. That is why you see the MPAA and the RIAA cracking down on piracy. Yea its not fair. Guess what, thats the world for you. It runs on the money.
To address you comments about the French gentleman. Of course the ISP and courts dont care who downloaded the music. The internet was in his name. Obviously they feel he is the responsable party. He was given 3 previous warnings to stop downloading copyright protected material. NOTE: 3 previous chances to change what he was doing. Regardless of who did the downloads. So he has to pay roughly 200$ for breaking the Law. Thats a small price to pay when you match it against the $25,000 and 5 years in jail that would normally be applied to any copyright violations.
If you dont pirate copyright protected products then you will be safe. Secure your home network, instruct those that use your network to not do downloads. You should be fine. Heres something to roll around in YOUR head. When the 6 strikes Law hits, how many ppl will end up loseing their internet and have to beg someone else to get the internet in their name. The behaviours that caused the individual to lose their internet prolly wont stop just because they lost internet. They will continue to download and put someone elses ability to get online in jepardy. Eventually we will see some serious draconian efforts going into play here to stop piracy. This is just the begining. So yea as someone who has never, and will never download pirated materials, this will be fun to watch. I get to sit back and watch as all those ppl who post here and other sites who sat there and tried to justify theft. They now get to rant on about how unfair it all is.