| Slimebeast said: YouTube will become less relaxed as they start blocking videos and music from big companies, but apart from that what is the big deal? |
Absolute freedom
ImJustBayuum said:
|
...to get everything for free?
Slimebeast said:
...to get everything for free? |
....to be pirates
It may lead to wider regulations of the internet which is a gigantic platform for freedom of expression. An indirect concern, I guess.
| Mr Khan said: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act Read and be afraid. Be very afraid. And be afraid if you are anywhere in the world and not just in the United States, for the strict self-censorship that websites will necessarily have to enforce so that they don't lose access to the American market will impact all of us |
Nice dramatic intro to your story. You're on your way to becoming a great journalist! Haha, anyway, something needs to happen. Whether its this, or something else in the future, there needs to be some type of regulation/accountability for your actions. I am in support of freedom of speech and general civil liberties, but when you see groups like anyonymous and lolsec go after whoever they want, relatively unpunished, its only a matter of time until the group goes after the general public or their tools/tactics become the norm.
Right now its big corporations that fall victim to this. But what happens when they realize there is money to be made off of general public. Once you become the victim and they go unpushed, you'll want some type of protection.
Consider the internet a new found country. Now there are few rules and no real regulations. But what happens when it sucks to go down the street?
Hornet303 said:
Nice dramatic intro to your story. You're on your way to becoming a great journalist! Haha, anyway, something needs to happen. Whether its this, or something else in the future, there needs to be some type of regulation/accountability for your actions. I am in support of freedom of speech and general civil liberties, but when you see groups like anyonymous and lolsec go after whoever they want, relatively unpunished, its only a matter of time until the group goes after the general public or their tools/tactics become the norm. Right now its big corporations that fall victim to this. But what happens when they realize there is money to be made off of general public. Once you become the victim and they go unpushed, you'll want some type of protection. Consider the internet a new found country. Now there are few rules and no real regulations. But what happens when it sucks to go down the street?
|
The ends never justify the means. And we could debate that the ends in this case are debatable as well (companies are trying to assert far more control over their intellectual property than is morally just), but even if we were to operate under the assumption that companies deserve this level of control over their intellectual property, this is the laziest possible way to go about enforcement: simply pick a site you think is hurting you, go cry at the government, and have them block or shut down the site
This has nothing to do with hacking, which already has legal coverage
Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.
| snakenobi said: thats bullshit.they are trying to regulate everything but it won't work in the end
main reason piracy is this: income inequalities Rich class has most of the money of the country and they make films,songs,etc with it.the poor class that doesn't have money goes and pirates it at first people will accept it not to pirate fearing the law but after a while the income inequalities will grow too big and the gap between the classes will widen and they will know that regulations are to suppress them and taking a toll on their lives examples:occupy wall street,uprising's everywhere
what these protest and revolts will do it bring in a new government which will be fair.and if everybody would have money,they wouldn't pirate |
Being that the most active pirates I know have the money to buy a legitimate copy of the content for their desired use, I think claiming piracy exists because of income inequality is 100% BS ...
Whether you're talking about music, movies, books or videogames piracy is the results of businesses holding onto a broken and outdated business model. With the introduction of low cost high speed internet connections the marginal cost of producing an additional "sale" of content is very low and is getting cheaper all the time, and (at this point in time) content like books and songs have a marginal cost of nearly $0.00. What this means is that the content should be priced at the highest level where the vast majority of individuals see no value in "stealing" the content in order to maximize profit.
As an example of what I mean, music companies would probably sell far more than 4 times as much music if the songs were priced at $0.25 (and more than 10 times as much music if they were sold at $0.10) than they're selling at the $1 per song price.
Now, rather than try to adapt to the new market, companies are trying to force people to pay the prices they dictate by eliminating the black market competition who're selling the product at a healthy margin over the marginal cost; in most cases, the marginal cost is (roughly) $0.00 and the healthy margin is the money they generate from advertising.
The way to "solve" piracy is to tell the media companies to adapt or die ... If a pirate can afford to "sell" a copy of an album for (roughly) $0.00 why do they need to sell it for $15.00+
| Slimebeast said: YouTube will become less relaxed as they start blocking videos and music from big companies, but apart from that what is the big deal? |
My fear is how this law would be abused ...
There is already a problem on Youtube where people are being censored by individuals/organizations who file a copyright complaint against them. Often there is not material with copyrights in these videos, and/or it clearly falls under fair use, but it still goes through and enables those people with some power to effectively censor something they don't like.
To bring it back to this site, suppose this law goes through and EA decides that they want to silence negative reviews for their game being published prior to the game being released and they start claiming that the videos/images of their game on sites with negative reviews violates their copyright. Suddenly these sites are shut down and it takes thousands of dollars of legal fees and weeks to clear up the mess; both of which could kill many small sites.
Hell, I would expect vgchartz to be shut down almost immediately by a copyright complaint from NPD ...
HappySqurriel said:
Whether you're talking about music, movies, books or videogames piracy is the results of businesses holding onto a broken and outdated business model. With the introduction of low cost high speed internet connections the marginal cost of producing an additional "sale" of content is very low and is getting cheaper all the time, and (at this point in time) content like books and songs have a marginal cost of nearly $0.00. What this means is that the content should be priced at the highest level where the vast majority of individuals see no value in "stealing" the content in order to maximize profit. As an example of what I mean, music companies would probably sell far more than 4 times as much music if the songs were priced at $0.25 (and more than 10 times as much music if they were sold at $0.10) than they're selling at the $1 per song price. Now, rather than try to adapt to the new market, companies are trying to force people to pay the prices they dictate by eliminating the black market competition who're selling the product at a healthy margin over the marginal cost; in most cases, the marginal cost is (roughly) $0.00 and the healthy margin is the money they generate from advertising.
The way to "solve" piracy is to tell the media companies to adapt or die ... If a pirate can afford to "sell" a copy of an album for (roughly) $0.00 why do they need to sell it for $15.00+ |
Exactly. It's a question of meddling in economics, and one whereby the meddling will more definitively cost jobs and generate no public gain, so lacks the utility of many government interventions in the market
The fun part is that some media providers are beginning to acknowledge that super-low costs are the only viable route. Funimation, for instance, now posts new episodes of One Piece immediately after the Japanese episode airs, this being the only way to effectively kill the fan-subbers, and in a way that supplies the fans with professional-level translations at a much faster rate
If it weren't for fansubs and piracy, Funimation would release subtitled episodes in groups of 20-episode, $35 DVDs months after their air date
Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.
It sounds horrible, I saw it on memebase yesterday I think
Mr Khan said:
Exactly. It's a question of meddling in economics, and one whereby the meddling will more definitively cost jobs and generate no public gain, so lacks the utility of many government interventions in the market The fun part is that some media providers are beginning to acknowledge that super-low costs are the only viable route. Funimation, for instance, now posts new episodes of One Piece immediately after the Japanese episode airs, this being the only way to effectively kill the fan-subbers, and in a way that supplies the fans with professional-level translations at a much faster rate If it weren't for fansubs and piracy, Funimation would release subtitled episodes in groups of 20-episode, $35 DVDs months after their air date |
You could of just said meddling with the economy.
What i find amusing is how this legislation is mostly "Both sides against the middle."
The level of inovation and jobs this would kill would be outrageous.
It'd basically kill off even "Fair Use" websites, do to the awy it's written now.
Theoretically anyway.... since this is one of those "discressionary" laws... that NEVER work.
It's like the good old "I Know it when I see it threshold."
The problem is... often times you don't. So it breeds inherent inequality which then leads to outright corruption as the inequality and disceresionary reasoning means anything can be explained.
Which largely will mean that big sites will be fine, small sites will be crushed, and the occasional big competitor will be shut down because of campaign contributions here or there.
If this passes no doubt Google, Yahoo, Microsoft and the rest will try and petition each other to try and file copyright lawsuits on each other.
It'll be just like all the android phone bullshit but 100% worse.
Which will lead anyone who can't afford a good lawyer to just avoid it all together.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
