What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
204 Comments
- tlogank, on 10/12/2007, -5/+69Want to call the MPAA people that made the press release? Here are their number's and extension's to their direct deskphone. Those of us in the US can just call from Skype...it's private and free! These are the contact people on that infamous press release made by the MPAA:
Dan Glickman (MPAA President): (202)293-1966 ext.112
John Feehery: (202)293-1966 ext.193
Gayle Oserberg: (202)293-1966 ext.139 (she is actually in the office today)
Kori Bernards: (818)995-6600 ext.130
Elizabeth Kaltman: (818)995-6600 ext.293
Give them a call and tell them thank you for creating a stronger community among us. - szelij, on 10/12/2007, -3/+33It was an excellent speech. It sounds much better i presume in the original language but even translated-it's politically charged.
- Falconwing, on 10/12/2007, -6/+32That I am, sir. :-)
- Falconwing, on 10/12/2007, -7/+32We don't somehow believe sharing is legal, today, no. In Sweden, mind you, which is a different country than the US. However, we are going to MAKE it legal.
/ Rick - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+28Because obviously people will NEVER pay to see something they enjoy.
I'm a pirate. I still buy stuff I really like, because I support those people! - Jeffrey903, on 10/12/2007, -3/+20Yes
- rauz, on 10/12/2007, -5/+21Hey Mr Falkvinge - I know you're on Digg too... :)
- jakethecake, on 10/12/2007, -4/+20Both the Bay and The Pirate Party are strong FSF supporters, the party even has a separate section in it's party program just for open source. They are a major supporters of the movement.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -9/+21Great speech. I wish I could have been there. He's one of the few people I agree fully with on every subject it seems.
- jer2eydevil88, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14Stop biting the teet of these organizations for one minute and think about piracy on a much less evil level. When netizens download digital entertainment off the web through an easy to use service like Kazaa or Bit Torrent they end up showing friends how to do likewise. These less technical friends of ours often help spread Virii and other fun malicious software disguised as digital entertainment. Then the entertainment industry comes in with a fair and reasonable business model to tap into this new market and they sweep up new customers who have been put off by these unmanaged p2p networks.
I can argue and argue but regardless of what I say many of us have opinions deeply routed in our moral beliefs and upbringing. My feelings on the subject of intellectual property theft are not a by the books opinion, there are events of corporate theft occuring often and the patent system has been very broken for decades. - richbradshaw, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13Evidently yes, as people have voted for it to be on the front page...
If you don't want it don't digg it. If it comes up anyway, don't read it! Simple! - bradsully, on 10/12/2007, -8/+18That was a great article.
- radu79, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11It is the government of which country who controls the media in that respective country, be it local media or foreign media.
If other governments do not like how their media is handled in that country, what they can do is impose sanctions or declare war. - h4ppydotcom, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10@Skrot - you say that "Either way, the media industry as we know it today *WILL* die if file sharing of copyrighted material is made legal." but this is not the case.
If filesharing is made legal there are two clear ways that content creators could make money.
1) subscription model - pay a fixed amount per month, and listen to/watch all you want
2) honesty payments - download and consume *then* pay for the things you enjoyed
On top of this, there are numerous other models that I'm sure people will think of when they are forced to figure out a solution to this problem. At the moment time is being spent trying to stop people sharing (legal actions, DRM, copy protection, etc) which I have to feel is like King Kanute's attempt to hold back the tide. I'd sign up to Napster and pay £10 (~$19) a month tomorrow if (a) I could get tv shows, movies and music and (b) all the content was DRM free. Or I'd set aside £10-£20 a month for honesty payments if they were quick and easy to make (this is less than a cable/satellite TV subscription).
People want content. However and wherever they can consume it.
People are not stupid. Everyone knows that it takes serious time and money to produce high quality content and people will pay for things they like (and want to see more of).
Personally, I still buy CDs and DVDs (and keep them in the shrink wrap) if I enjoy a film or music. I've even got a couple of DVDs of films that I saw once (eg. in the cinema) and just thought it was so great the creators deserved an extra buck or twenty for their troubles. - ekso, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12Yeah, but in the USA it seems it's the other way around. It's the media that controls the government. This is just a proof of it. The MPAA sent their government puppies after the Swedish government because of TPB.
And it's Fox News who decide who's gonna be the next president. People just vote accordingly. Democracy?? I call it "Mediacracy". - mikal, on 10/12/2007, -17/+26Please see the following Slashdot thread arguing the exact same thing:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=187072&cid=15434691
Many good points there, e.g. the thread following NickFortune's comment:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=187072&cid=15435931 - Piglith, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14Many people are missing the point here. It’s not what TPB was doing. It was how the government officials basically sold out to the Mega Corporations (The industries that are affected by the piracy). The reason the US Officials are supporting these industries is they get voting and money support from them. If you haven’t noticed that here in the US we have a tendency to create laws to support those industries with out truly looking at the impact of the outcome. Bills are drawn up, later they are revised. Many of those revisions are direct influence by these companies for their benefit (to make more money).
The only reason TPB was raided was because these industries were pressured by the US government officials into pressuring the Swedish government. What gets me is how the US can pressure Sweden. I thought that Swedes prided themselves, where they fell that they had “better” legislation and laws then the US.
It just goes to show that in the end “money talks, ***** walks.”
It should be proven that the US influenced the Swedish government into jumping into an action they didn’t think too hard on. I would love to see all the parties involved that got hurt as by-standards turn around and sue the hell out of all the influencing parties.
When the **AA looses their influence over the artists who are supplying them with their monies, go independent and figure out that there is more money to be made with out paying them. The **AA’s will dry up and the IP laws will then have to be re-written.
To truly fix the problem:
The only way and I mean the only way. To get this to happen is for the public to STOP supporting them PERIOD. The world needs to do something now before all governments become so corrupted by them. (Well they all ready are *sigh) We won’t be able to whistle Dixie with out being billed for the reproduction.
If you are upset in anyway with this issue then get off your “Fat ARS” and do something.
BOYCOT them….
(Don’t buy DVDs or CDs, don’t go to the movies, and don’t buy the products advertised from these Medias)
SPREAD THE WORD…. Don’t let the media tell you what going on. Find the real facts on these issues.
WRITE your government officials. Tell them to quit taking the influence from these companies. Tell them to try something different get some real compromise working that benefits all. When a bill is about to become a law, follow it and find out if it is what you really want. (Many of the problems with the US laws are that they are getting “Slipped” in.)
If we can all hold out and boycott them for a long enough period of time. We will finally change things. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11By Nick Farrell: Friday 03 June 2005, 09:17
SWEDISH Bittorrent outfit, ThePirateBay.org has admitted that its shutdown yesterday was faked.
Note the date. - plod, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12ahh... duh, im a moron
- RadiantBeing, on 10/12/2007, -14/+21One can make the argument that piracy increases the control that corporations have over culture. Afterall, if it is true that the people who pirate wouldn't have bought the movie, cd, or program anyway, then the pirates are simply extending the corporations's influence to people who would otherwise have had their own subculture. While the RIAA and MPAA are almost universally condemned by pirates, their products are the most popular downloads.
Although pirates aren't paying with their money, I would argue that they are giving away a lot more by paying with their time and attention. By making hollywood blockbusters available to people who can't or won't pay, the pirates are homogenizing culture, not regaining control of it.
Finally, the pirates's own tactics legitimize the powers used by trade groups and governments have over media. This story will probably end with ever harsher laws, mandatory hardware encryption, etc. Even if the pirates win and make it impossible for people to make money by selling media, the little guy still loses. Big culture will always find a way to make money. Advertising and marketing companies will become the new media companies, paying fees and advances to the big artists who can bring in the eyeballs and move merchandise. - jer2eydevil88, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12Now we all add The Pirate Chief to our friends list so we can follow his stories, or at least I am.
- Guye, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8I think part of his point is that the money involved is still just another form of control.
Or did you not get that from his speech. - hackwrench, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13You must have missed my other posts... We are already at war. This is more like the Gettysburg address. Anybody got a better comparison?
- RadiantBeing, on 10/12/2007, -7/+13yukvester, why don't you point out the bits that confused you, that way I can dumb down the parts you didn't understand.
- mikecubed, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9The MPAA doesn't limit freedom? The DMCA has never harmed innovation or legitimate products? Maybe you should pull your head out of their asses for a second and actually take a look at the actions of your beloved companies. Read this article from the IEEE and quit defending those who wish to control you and your government.
Death by DMCA
http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/jun06/3673 - Grayfox777, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Yes there is... ever heard of a thing called "greed"?
- Guye, on 10/12/2007, -7/+13Look at the bigger picture though. I get a sense that what he is saying about sharing, he's also imagining (dreaming?) as being something much larger.
So what if they stop making money off their music or films. Maybe that means we'll start seeing music and film produced by people that have a passion for it, that genuinely want to create something for others to enjoy, and not cranked off an assembly line to make money. - tarellel, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11Arr matey, I'm all for The Pirate Party's cause.
But ya know, if you read the article they mention the Church and British court limiting print and media. That kind of makes me think of how the United States is currently going against what our fathers stood for. The government is limiting our rights and ability to do as we please. In order to please corporations (like AT&T), the media, and the powers that be. I mean who gives a *****, why do they need to limit our rights and opinion when in the Constitution it explicitly guarantee's them to us. Everyone not just P2P users should use this as an example, to take a stand for what you believe is right. In this day and age we have no martyrs we have no hero's to look up. A group like this is a something society needs to learn from and use. - Falconwing, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10Interesting, link got broken when updating the comment... trying again:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6233253543530099794&q=rick+falkvinge - there, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8"im amused by the guy that thinks $100 is too insane a price for an operating system."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm amused by people who think this is simply an issue of freeloaders or "stealing" (media gibberish programmed into you). Are people around here arguing the merits of bank robbery or carjacking.? Are you so naive to believe that creating information laws comes without consequences? Or without creating an information police?
For the first time in my life my eyes are open and I see what's going on. The freewheeling nature of the Internet did it and it wouldn't have happened if the RIAA/MPAA or government could have foreseen the explosive nature of its growth. I now can see pictures of dead Palestinian babies...or coked out movie stars... or starving children in Africa....satellite shots of a disappearing Artic.....the treatment of Americans in New Orleans.....or even read the views of Objectivists, Aryans, communists and my next door neighbor.
A million and one other things that have been carefully controlled in the past.
Freedom of the press ISN'T only for the press! Freedom of expression isn't only for those that can afford to buy off politicians with good media relations.
They are now quickly scrambling to pass one crazy law after another in an attempt to get that power back-- and so they now parade pedophiles, terrorists and anything else they can think of to scare you...because they fear they will lose the control and righteousness they so desperately crave.
The church analogy is quite appropriate.
And you want to help them. From my point of view.... you are a peasant arguing in favor of continuing the churches control. Well meaning... but completely oblivious to reality. Many downloaders are just freeloaders. However gentleman like RMS and this guy in the Pirate party (that have devoted their lives to this cause) see this as an issue of freedom
They are heroic. - rauz, on 10/12/2007, -6/+11Welcome!
- gregmo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Well said no doubt, but this is going to be a long struggle for legality of filesharing. I can't wait to see what this turns into over the next few months
- hackwrench, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7@RadientBeing
"By stooping to the level of the RIAA,"
Maybe you missed my previous post about the topology of morality not being that simple. Perhaps playing that 5D Rubik's cube might help you with that concept.
"the very fact that pirates believe they have an inalienable human right to pirate movies, tv, and music"
Also, you are lumping all pirates together on the one hand and oversimplifying the argument on the other. It's the difference between what you have the right to do during war time and what you have the right to do during times of peace.
@brundelfly
It seems you may have confused psychological legitimization with romanticization.
@Stoutlimb
Nicely said. I couldn't put it as eloquently as you so I forsook the attempt to say so. - mofomojo, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9Piracy will not change the culutre, it only changes the way it's distributed. I don't believe that torrents will allow for more freedom of information, it's the blogs, the "YouTube"s and the "Newgrounds"es out there that allows this. I only see excuses, I don't see moral high ground.
The culture isn't relavant, it's the knowledge that's relavant. It doesn't matter if we're all sharing the first season of the OC or whatever, what does matter is that we're still watching it, meaning that the Piracy has done nothing - NOTHING - to change our culture. It only changes how we get our entertainment.
Nobody can just upload their own content to ThePirateBay and have it get incredibly popular, original content on these sites doesn't get promoted. ThePirateBay and music and video pirates do nothing to help benefit society. Bands don't grow if people don't buy their albums, Movies don't sell if people don't go. While I am using the argument of the industry, I feel that peoples' right to view an entire season of such-and-such TV show or movie or song is not relavant and it isn't something worth fighting for.
On the other hand, there are things that are relavant and are worth fighting for; such as the freedom to be able to publish news and research articles that, to my knowledge, are true and important and the freedom for each denizen of the internet to be able to do so themselves without restriction of their ISP or local police.
In short, there are things outside of the realm of piracy that are helping to take away the power from large media monopolies, such as free internet forums, the ability to freely (of cost and restriction) broadcast my own video or audio content is very important and piracy does not promote original content only the redistribution of the knowledge and content of others. Galileo wasn't redistributing Bibles of the Holy Roman Church, he wanted to distribute his own knowledge of astronomy. Right now, piracy is just that : the redistribution of bibles. - Falconwing, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9Ah, I just love this org. Turns out somebody has already posted the speech on Google Video.
It's in Swedish and a bit dreary as I go over the course of history and background - if you don't understand Swedish, you might want to skip until 9 minutes into the speech when I start to tie things together. And of course, having read the text of the speech helps understand the context. :-)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6233253543530099794&q=rick falkvinge
Rick
UPDATE: Wow, Fredrik Neij's speech is in the same video! People should be listening to him, he's the real hero here. - nilsonsfj, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Swedish media is now trying to manipulate people against The Pirate Bay:
http://digg.com/technology/Swedish_newspaper_links_The_Pirate_Bay_with_right_extremists_and_porn - iSEPIC, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10RadiantBeing - YES! and that is EXACTLY how Microsoft got so big, even Gates himself has admitted in the past (google it) that Piracy has helped homogenize the world to use MS Office and MS Operating Systems (especially the early versions of Windows). (don't worry, the Sheep (who feed off of the MPAA/RIAA *****) won't ever have a clue to what you are talking about.).
- hackwrench, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8"The MPAA and RIAA wouldn't even have to use distasteful tactics"
The MPAA and RIAA don't have to use distasteful tactics. They could just surrender.
Part of fighting a war is goading the enemy into using distasteful tactics so that they turn away the less committed. - Grayfox777, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9Many things to tell you....
Number one: When you download something, you're not getting a physical copy.
Number two: It's sharing. The person you download from still keeps what he has. You're not taking anything from that person. You get a copy. No one loses anything.
Number three: Companies can't say they lost money just because someone downloaded something. How do you know that person would have ever bought it in the first place? They can't lose money they didn't have in the first place.
Number four: Some people can't afford to pay the ridiculous prices companies ask for things. At one time, downloading things wasn't possible because of slow connections. Before that, people didn't even have personal computers. Back then, it wasn't possible to get movies and songs for free. But now that it is possible, that means it's time to accept it. Technology makes it possible and technology isn't going anywhere.
Number five: Most people that share and download things aren't making money off of it. They're just downloading for personal use. There should not be anything wrong with that.
Number six: This applies to mostly software (but not only). Companies sometimes sell software for ridiculous prices. MS sells Windows XP for over $100! That is completely wrong. They know people need it, so they intentionally sell it for tons of money. It's exploitation... and they don't even reasonably drop the price over time! It takes ages for the price to go down! Of course, Linux is a good alternative option to Windows, but some things just aren't compatible with Linux. Windows should be sold for like... $20-$50 (though 50 might be a little much, it's great compared to what they charge now). Windows isn't the only overpriced program though... there are other programs that sell for $300, $500, $1000, and even higher! - bennyboy371, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4It should be noted that people on here like "actorboy" I had the pleasure of speaking with on here the other day literally do make a living in movies through the revenue they generate. While the MPAA is justified rightly in their cause, they are certainly not justified in their actions. I believe those that cheer on their cause are also justified if they keep a cool head, but those who cheer on their actions are not thinking of the people they target as people, but more as numbers.
- Guye, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7In an attempt to put it more simply, just because something is a law, doesn't mean its right. And violating a law is a very different thing than violating human rights.
"What a bunch of hypocrites. They ignore copyright, but are outraged when someone messes with what they claim are their rights."
Maybe I'm making a poor analogy, as it is admittedly a bit of a stretch, but what the hell if it helps get the point accross:
Somehow I don't feel you would say Rosa Parks was a hypocrite for refusing to give up her seat. Segregation laws or no. Same with voting rights, the list goes on. The question here is where do you draw this line about piracy.
I see a lot of people on here just chiming in "Well, it IS illegal! so its wrong!" like they've been brainwashed. That isn't the argument. The question is wether its right or wrong to allow the free flow of information, data, etc accross people and nations. - Panna, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8"I wouldn't buy a Porsche, but just because I wouldn't buy it doesn't mean it's OK to steal one."
The more realistic analogy is whether it would be ok for you to build one with the help of a friend who owns one. - Stoutlimb, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8Radientbeing: That's an exellent strategy. Before, only the people running the servers were incriminated, and there were relatively few of them, so governments and copyright holders could largely do what they wished to them (once caught).
Now with P2P, the entire downloading public is criminalized. So now it's the Government vs The People. Who do you think deserves to win such a battle? - Guye, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9Excellent speech. Right on.
- steponsnyder, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4There are so many things wrong with the many arguments this speech presents that I do not know where to begin.
Don't get me wrong, I've used bittorrent, DC , etc. to acquire copyrighted material in the past. I do not claim to stand on any moral high ground. Moreover, I do not condone the unwarranted arrests of those involved in the TPB raid, nor the civil rights violations that resulted therein. But as an argument, this speech just falls apart.
"They want us to believe that this is about their dropping sales figures, about some dry statistics. But that is only an excuse. This is really about something totally else."
It is about dropping sales figures. Businesses have seen their investments threatened by the illegal efforts of individuals to acquire their products for free. While what The Pirate Bay was might not have been illegal according to Swedish law, Falkvinge's speech isn't about that; it's pretty clear he's defending both the legality and the ethics of piracy as a whole. As others here have already curtly pointed out, acquiring copyrighted material without paying for it is punishable by international copyright law. While it certainly seems that the U.S. government and U.S. business interests have pushed the Swedish authorities into the raid (and yes, I do find this tremendously upsetting), there's a huge difference between a political gesture in a certain direction and "culture and knowledge monopoly...control."
Falkvinge's "the Church of 400 years ago analogy" does not apply here. The effect of the invocation of this analogy is to associate the heroism that many ascribe to people like Galileo Galilei with those involved with piracy. This comparison cannot be drawn. We revere Galileo because he (according to popular legend anyway, read a history book and you'll find out how quickly he recanted his beliefs in front of the Church...but that's irrelevant for now) stood up for what he believed in in the face of adversity. And sure, pirates do this. But being willing to stand up for what you believe in is not an admirable thing in itself. People can believe things that are wrong. If anyone wants to challenge me on this count, then go ahead; I will not draw an example here at the risk of falling into the same deceptive rhetorical strategy that Falkvinge succumbs to - the association of figures that are known (Galileo) to those whose characters are suspect (pirates).
We do, however, greatly respect those who created the printing press. The Church did have a monopoly on information; their priest were the only people offering interpretations of the Bible. With the printing press and the popularization of the beliefs of people such as Martin Luther (who contended that even lay Christians had both the ability and the right to interpret the Bible), that monopoly on information was broken.
But this emancipatory function does not have a connection to the pirate movement. Pirates are not showing people new ways of thinking, they are merely distributing that which already exists. Observe:
"And this very thing is undergoing a fundamental change today - because the Internet does not follow the old model anymore. We not only download culture and knowledge. We upload it to others at the same time. We share files. The knowledge and the culture have amazingly lost their central point of control."
What Falkvinge indicates is important about filesharing does not actually apply to filesharing itself; here, he's making a vague reference to the popular (and true) fact about the nature of the Internet: like the printing press, it allows for the dissemination of information that could not otherwise be obtained, the opinions of those who might be oppressed or have had their rights violated. While filesharing, by definition, allows for this, to say that any and all data should be freely distributed is absurd. In an age in which products can be transformed into data and distributed for free to others without the consent of publishers or artists, this opens the door for all products to become illegally and freely be distributed. Like it or not, music, movies, etc. are products, and just because they can be imported from a physical medium to a hard drive and sent over Internet connections to others doesn't mean that they should.
Obviously, my fundamental disagreement with Falkvinge is with his argument that "This is not about a group of professionals getting paid...This is about control over culture and knowledge." No knowledge is being controlled on this issue as it was 400 years ago; this is entirely about professionals receiving due compensation for the consumption of their products.
"But whoever believes that it is shameful to be a pirate, has got it wrong. It is something we are proud of." -- If you find a law to be unjust, then yes, I'm fine with your rebelling against it. But if you're going to do this, you've got to keep your mind open to arguments; you have to break the law lovingly (civil disobedience?) and be receptive to those who try to understand you. Falkvinge's proud conclusion is as equally close-minded as the media corporations who just keep saying "you are wrong, and we are right" to those who steal files. This war is being waged by two extremes according to Falkvinge, and this kind of discourse will only perpetuate the kind of stalemate that accounts for why we are talking about this anyway. We need reconciliation, not further polarization.
I've done my best to present a cogent argument, and I've neither labeled people "anarchists" or made dumb one-liners in an attempt to win people over. If you disagree with me, fine. Just please don't digg this comment down just because you disagree with me; if you do, you're no better than the those who would attempt to squelch the public's attempts to have an open and free discussion. - SmokedL, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@jakethecake
How conveniently you forget that their political opposites in Moderaterna take the same stance. Judging by recent policy with regards to DMCA like laws, software patents, and data retention laws, the sad truth appears to be that all the big parties in Sweden have succumbed to the lure of Big Money. I'm rather split as to how I will vote next time around. One thing is certain. It will not be for one of the big and corrupt parties. - da_bradler, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7To bad they don't even make enough to pay for there bandwidth and server costs eh you ***** moron.
- ekso, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5twinklyjesus: Have you ever tried shift+dragging something in windows explorer?
That's called copying. :) - kindrobot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"Nobody can just upload their own content to ThePirateBay and have it get incredibly popular, original content on these sites doesn't get promoted."
Absolutely untrue. Completely pulled directly from his backside.
I know one so-called "unknown" (and not signed, never will be)
band that has seen hundreds of
thousands of downloads and as a result now has seen international
radio airplay. This is utter and complete BS. It can be done and
IS being done.
The artist continues to make music and makes not one single penny.
On purpose. As a single , erect middle finger to people who do it
for the money only or buy into the "we'll make you a star" BS. - iSEPIC, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7copying digital content is NOT ***** STEALING, when will you sheep stop feeding off the MPAA/RIAA propaganda *****... *****!
-
Show 51 - 100 of 204 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is