Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA)

Online piracy is here to stay. Sure they'll start with the websites but eventually movie studios and record companies are going to want to move on to individuals who download music and movies. I'm glad that a good amount of Republican Senators and Congressman oppose the bill seeing as how they currently have a lot of seats in both houses.

The sad thing though is that the studios and record companies charge way to much for their products. Hence the appeal of piracy. They said back in the 80's when CD's first came out that the price would eventually go down as the cost of production decreased. Some 10, 15 years later companies are still trying to get $14 or $15 for a CD.

An HBO series single season on DVD cost something like $40 or $50 and anywhere from $60 to $80 on Blu Ray. Companies are trying to get $15 or $16 for a single movie on DVD and now are trying to squeeze more out of legitimate companies like NetFlix for the rights to other movies. ITunes had a great model for legitimate music downloads. People could buy 2 songs for $2. Then the record companies got greedy and pushed for the price to be raised. Now you have people downloading 1 song for $1.29 instead of 2 for $2. And worse then that the record companies now realize that in the digital age artist need them less and less.

I'm all for capitalism but the studios and record companies brought this on themselves and are now getting this ass kicked in a true free market system. And the ironic thing to is that piracy has increased exposure. People that wouldn't watch a TV show before because they had no idea what was going on could get caught up with previous episodes and then watch the current episodes with commercials. Musicians that they never heard of that get bunched with theme based torrents suddenly get noticed by illegal downloaders. And believe it or not a lot of people that download music illegally will go back to itunes and purchase legitimate versions of the songs they download.

Bottom line though is that this is censorship and an extension of the Patriot Act that will lead to more and more basic liberties being taken away.

Ironically if this gets passed VPN sales will probably end up going through the roof.

Really so if I decided to sell my 2004 Ford Explorer for $16,000 and because I have asked too much it will be my fault if someone just steals it.

Really so if I decided to sell my 2004 Ford Explorer for $16,000 and because I have asked too much it will be my fault if someone just steals it.

:doh: Is the Ford Explorer something you yourself mass produce for the masses? Do you earn money related to it in thousands of other ways besides selling it in one form to consumers?

if you ask for 30% over value you're going to have a hard time selling it, especially when other people are offering it for free. I don't know how you got to there from that post though fd.

Really so if I decided to sell my 2004 Ford Explorer for $16,000 and because I have asked too much it will be my fault if someone just steals it.

You're talking about outright theft with your Ford Explorer example. I think Matty posted this, or something like it, a while back.
http://www.megaleecher.net/uploads/piracy-is-theft.jpg

Either way it's apples to oranges. And on top of that regardless of your feelings on piracy, as stated before this law does little, if anything to reduce piracy. Forget stopping it, it barely reduces it. All while screwing up the rest of the internet and crippling the last major competitive advantage for the US economy. Everyone should be opposed to this law, not just people that use torrents.

For the most part it boils down to a lot of hollywood big wigs and technologically illiterate politicians with little or no understanding on the inner workings of the net trying to control something they can't. And the sad part is, if the CNET example I posted earlier is legit, the studios that are spearheading this law are the same ones that gave us the damn software to begin with.

Lucky for us reason is likely to win out but the fact that this proposal has gotten as far as it has is disturbing.

Theft is theft you guys just don't want to call it that because you fell its OK to do.

So using that example I guess you don't have a problem is someone slips you a fake $100 bill. After all the original is still in the hands of the owner.

Theft is theft you guys just don't want to call it that because you fell its OK to do.

So using that example I guess you don't have a problem is someone slips you a fake $100 bill. After all the original is still in the hands of the owner.

That's not the same. A fake $100 bill is valueless. Pirated content is not.

Whats amazing to me is the power of populist movements that occure over the internet. When netflix, tried to introduce Qwister the online community rebelled and taught Netflix a lesson. When BoA rolled out 5 dollar ATM debit card charges the internet got pissed and stopped them from implementing that fee. Most recently Verizon tried to start a 2 dollar charge for one time phone or online payments... it didnt work out. GoDaddy lost 80k domains and pulled its support of SOPA.

That's not the same. A fake $100 bill is valueless. Pirated content is not.

So your saying that pirated content has value and is actual a bigger crime. Good point.

Theft is theft you guys just don't want to call it that because you fell its OK to do.

So using that example I guess you don't have a problem is someone slips you a fake $100 bill. After all the original is still in the hands of the owner.

Again apples to oranges. You're comparing outright fraud that results in actual shrinkage to copying a file. If I take a fake $100 bill to Best Buy and buy $100 of merchandise, Best Buy has lost a $100 of inventory that they can never sell again. Any college student thats taken Business 101 understands the value of physical inventory and the significance of someone actually stealing it.

Technically, inventory costs include warehousing and insurance expenses associated with storing unsold merchandise.

Also remember if you've ever recorded a song off the radio, you've engaged in piracy. TV companies tried to get time shifting technology like VCR's to be marked as a violation of copyright law. So it's all right to record a show on DVR and skip the commercials but if someone downloads it off bittorrent they should be sued or thrown in jail?

Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc. - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corp._of_America_v._Universal_City_Studios,_I nc).


Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc., 464 U.S. 417 (1984),[1] also known as the "Betamax case", is a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States which ruled that the making of individual copies of complete television shows for purposes of time-shifting does not constitute copyright infringement, but is fair use. The Court also ruled that the manufacturers of home video recording devices, such as Betamax or other VCRs (referred to as VTRs in the case), cannot be liable for infringement. The case was a boon to the home video market as it created a legal safe haven for the technology, which also significantly benefited the entertainment industry through the sale of pre-recorded movies.

The piracy and console vs PC discussions are probably better suited for another thread.

Firstdown. The problem with this bill is it doesn't actually do anything to combat piracy. People that want to pirate can easily get around this and still get all of the content they want. What it kills is forums, help sites, youtube, etc.

What we're suffering from is ignorance from our elected official. Most of these people are the age of our grandparents... Anyone elses grandparents have trouble checking their e-mail, let alone writing legislation for something they can't comprehend?

What it comes down to is this bill is about censorship. I don't have a problem in taking strides to reduce actual piracy. However, people posting videos while doing a review of a product can get taken down for trademark issues. That, to me, is a huge problem.