What is Digg?Sponsored by newegg
Tips to be first in line without camping out in the cold! view!
newegg.com - The Pre-Black Friday Sale. No Lines, No Crowds; Click and Save in the comfort of your own home.
54 Comments
- inactive, on 01/23/2008, -2/+74***** THE MPAA
- smacksaw, on 01/23/2008, -2/+50But the MPAA's numbers were PEER REVIEWED! They asked the RIAA and CRIA confirmed the data through their methodology!
Peer reviewing is INFALLIBLE!!! - HHP2K, on 01/23/2008, -0/+47"Millions of jobs! MILLIONS!!" Uhhh huh..
- inactive, on 01/23/2008, -0/+47MPAA... hmm... they must be drinking the same water as the Hollywood media moguls who are telling the writers about the "uncertainty" of internet revenue from downloads, streaming, etc...
- simplistics06, on 01/23/2008, -0/+41They used evidence they made up themselves in a case study and the courts accepted it LOL.
- ToadLeg, on 01/23/2008, -1/+33I guess by definition "intentionally exaggerating the numbers by over 100%" falls under "human error". I bet if you were to look at their "methodology" you would find that the 15% number is pulled out of the same ass as the 44% number.
- TxAggie08, on 01/23/2008, -1/+27That's like having Enron look over Halliburton's accounting.
- mCanada, on 01/23/2008, -0/+25This is NOT about file sharing. This is about control. Traditional media 15 years ago controlled what you watched, what you heard, what you bought and all the mindclutter that came with it. They don't like that. They don't want you listening to non-RIAA approved bands, a movie made in someone's backyard for $10,000. They claim it's about piracy, but deep down inside they know that this is the end of the old establishment whether it be print, film or music, because they can no longer force their sub standard prune juice down our throats. What happens when the teens of tomorrow figure out that there's more to music than Brittney or N-Sync? They're screwed. Why are they suing people with no consideration to opportunity cost (ie. they don't care if they win / loose make money on the deal). It's because file sharing isn't about piracy, it's about a revolution in free thought that hasn't been seen in free society in a very, very long time. How do I know? The ruling class wants to stop it. That's how. Download and be free.
- RandomGorilla, on 01/23/2008, -0/+25Wasn't the MPAA accused of pirating software at one point?
- NoShelterHere, on 01/23/2008, -1/+24there's a strawman argument for the ages. Which generation? The one spends billions on gaming platforms and hardware? The one that has made ring tones an industry?
- Meep3D, on 01/23/2008, -0/+21No, its the generation that has grown up around computers and sees the massive potential in them while dealing with an industry that has a fetish over DRM, suing consumers, proprietary technology and an obsession with physical mediums.
The thing is the pirated version will be easier to get, cheaper, higher quality and not restricted to only a few devices.
The whole problem is that the industry simply isn't giving consumers what they want, instead preferring to try to bend the market to their business model rather than actually embracing (inevitable) change. - masterc, on 01/23/2008, -1/+21Is anybody surprised by this? I'm sure as hell not. Those sneaky bastards will do anything to make it seem like they're actually doing something useful.
- TxAggie08, on 01/23/2008, -1/+16Buy a movie on VHS, Buy it again on DVD...by the time I got to HD for the same movies I just downloaded the *****. Why should I pay for the same movie 3 times?
- JohnDBandit, on 01/23/2008, -0/+14The tactics employed by the MPAA and the RIAA are not only daconian, they are self defeating. Why are they using such scorched earth tactics agains't their best customers and turning a blind eye against the real pirates who make poor quality CDs and DVDs to sell by the thousand? I imagine that it is because it is easier to sue a grandmother, or a college student, gathered through I.P. addresses, than it is to do real detective work and find the real criminals.
- finknottle, on 01/23/2008, -0/+13The MPAA lied...NO WAY!
- trotskyist, on 01/23/2008, -0/+13*whoops*
- theOster, on 01/23/2008, -0/+12i think itunes has proved that people (especially *that* generation) ARE willing to pay for music. just not 12 bucks for a bunch of *****. the industry has to change it's model. simple.
- Jerky1312, on 01/23/2008, -1/+12There goes what little credibility they had.
- spyrochaete, on 01/23/2008, -1/+11I'd be willing to pay $1 per movie to upgrade from VHS to DVD, and another $1 to upgrade to the next platform. I'd also be willing to pay $1 for a DVD of a movie I've seen in the theatre. After I pay full price for my first viewing I consider the industry to be compensated, unless I watch the pirated version first and the movie is bad enough that I'm glad I didn't buy it. Otherwise I buy it after the fact.
- BigBallistix, on 01/23/2008, -1/+10Aye, this is bigger than just a wee mistake in the vilification of pirates, said pirates have been jailed for offences and that report is grossly misleading. Quite a few mistrials as a result, I imagine.
- Failchan, on 01/23/2008, -2/+10Don't see why not, seeing how they ***** us over constantly.
- falafelkiosken, on 01/23/2008, -0/+8there are no big losses because of piracy, most people wouldn't afford/want it anyway, like students with very little money to live on. On the other hand, there is a positive effect because good products gets promoted by the word of mouth which organizations like MPAA never take into consideration.
- insomniac8400, on 01/23/2008, -0/+8I still don't understand how someone who never would have paid to see a movie or buy it can be considered a loss. I bet if someone did a real study more money is going to be lost from people renting movies for free from the library or from a service like redbox that allows people to copy dvds for a dollar.
- Amric, on 01/23/2008, -1/+8You mean that you actually belived anything they were saying before this?!?
- spyrochaete, on 01/23/2008, -0/+7The Canadian Prime Minister, Stephen "dubya" Harper, folded like a napkin when Ahnold visited him and implored him to enforce tougher camcording laws, liberally quoting the MPAA's loss estimates. Harper enacted the laws in literally record time. Entertainment is more important to my country's leader than the homeless or public health.
- smacksaw, on 01/23/2008, -1/+7Actually, I bet you that they both have/had Artie Andy-son cooking their ***** books IRL
- lex0nyc, on 01/23/2008, -1/+7"hum error" ... which human? can we talk to this person out back?
- flashfox, on 01/23/2008, -0/+6Wow an MPAA lie! We're on a roll finding these!
- meells, on 01/23/2008, -0/+5Washington D.C. and Ottawa? Just a guess.............
OOoooh....capitals... - ronaldinho, on 01/23/2008, -0/+5MPAA, RIAA, CRIA.....***** THEM ALL
- tempfd, on 01/23/2008, -0/+5The RIAA and MPAA are constantly using a sensationalist approach when they discuss online piracy, as if it were an epidemic that needs immediate action. I'm suspicious of any person(s), company, or organization that acts like this, because their statements are either based on fear or an agenda. Rumors of layoffs is a great example of fear magnifying the reality, making some people come to outlandish conclusions if they get axed. Guilianni would be a good example of an agenda where if you don't vote republican, we're all gonna die.
Knowing this, I can't help but think the RIAA and MPAA are after something more than piracy. Think about it: their pursuance of online piracy has resulted in profit loss since day one. I have not seen or heard of one successful case lead to recuperating the cost of the prosecution. They can't handle losing “billions” from piracy, but they're just fine spending millions upon millions investigating and prosecuting only to settle for a pittance? It doesn't add up. No company would see that as a worthwhile expense, even if it was to “spread the fear” of getting caught.
The internet and computer technology have removed every single obstacle that musicians needed a label for in the past. Computers, software, and audio accessories are capable of creating professional-sounding music. Anyone in the world with an internet connection is seconds away from listening and/or donating. Dedicated fans can submit design (album art, shirts, stickers, etc.) audio contributions (remixes, samples, vocals, etc.), advertise in their area, etc. Technology to make a professional music video is readily available. A business owner may like what he hears/sees and arrange a live performance. Nothing is out of reach anymore. There is an opportunity for a billion-dollar industry to be taken over and controlled by musicians and fans.
So, perhaps piracy is the least of their concerns. Perhaps their real goal is to lay groundwork to maintain their control. For what's at stake, I wouldn't doubt it. - etandrib, on 01/23/2008, -0/+4Yeah, the "uncertainty" that they know how to do it right. I wouldn't trust them with my writing on the internet platform.
- Krpano, on 01/23/2008, -0/+4well, it has been some post now....i think its time again for the usual:
***** MPAA/RIAA - badenglishihave, on 01/23/2008, -0/+4You know you're hearing the truth when somebody "admits" to something.
- sj200, on 01/23/2008, -0/+3*****. No surprise.
- kinggimped, on 01/23/2008, -0/+3So the MPAA aren't just douchebags, they're unreliable and fraudulent, too?
Blimey. - wflan, on 01/23/2008, -0/+3you know, I'm not SURE about this point, but I think you're supposed to get in some sort of trouble when you lie to congress. Just something worth looking into.
- inactive, on 01/23/2008, -0/+3They only want to make it look like they are doing something about file sharing by going after some easy targets and getting big media to cover their little court wins. Real pirates have lawyers and money to fight back, they also have influence with people in high places in their country's. No it's much easier to go after someone who is defenseless and spend big money to win a judgment they will never collect.
- theneubie, on 01/23/2008, -0/+3It's a Trap!!!
They are attempting to win some "Honesty" points while in Washington. Don't let our representatives fall for it. They were not being honest at 44% and they are not being honest at 15%. Don't fall into the argument of how big the problem is, Just let them know they are wrong. - bioskope, on 01/23/2008, -0/+2I dont think that was quite it. They were just using a blogging app which was under a linkware license and they didnt pay for a purchasing license which would have prevented them from having to link back to the creator's site, but they decided not to link back anyway.
- ronaldinho, on 01/23/2008, -0/+2I'm surprised they even admit they made a mistake from their secret reports......personally I'm just not going to believe anything that people will not make transparent, like the MPAA report. They haven't proven to me that piracy is hurting them. And even if it is, ***** them. If you want our money, stop producting crap and then charging an insane amount of money for them
- bonni07, on 01/24/2008, -0/+1LOL!
- andycr512, on 01/23/2008, -0/+1Just like the entire generation brought up taught to believe that something more infinite than air can be called "property" and sold as though there were a limited number of copies of it? The generation brought up to believe that the laws we have today, a complete perversion of their original intent to control use of the printing press to protect writers from publishers, are normal? Most of all, a generation which does not see the absurdity in the term "illegal sharing"?
I say it's about time they had a different perspective. - badlogik, on 01/24/2008, -0/+1They were just using the American Pie version of the rule of 3. It's like saying "I slept with 3 girls last night, bro!" Translation: 1 or 0.
- Yage2006, on 01/23/2008, -0/+1Ya ***** the mpaa but in your country were the majority of people probably agree with you it seems that its you lot that are all getting bent over the table.
- trickyt, on 01/24/2008, -0/+1Only 3 times? They're just trying to play down the fact that it was actually more like 30 times.
- protium, on 01/23/2008, -0/+1yea 0 * (credibility loss coefficient) = 0.
- Jerky1312, on 01/23/2008, -0/+1I'm not speaking on my behalf, but they did have some credility in the eyes of others and with this news, it is completely lost. Personally, I did not believe any of their numbers. They were all exaggerated.
- makkaveli19, on 01/23/2008, -2/+2hah sorry about that i realized after the edit countdown was up. :(
-
Show 51 - 55 of 55 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is