Is This For Real?! (RE: Stop Online Piracy Act)

[Anjasa]

I don't know what they thought they'd accomplish by that. Did they think that removing a legal avenue for people to get these things would just stop people from getting it illegally?

It's just a knee jerk reaction.

Even though I boggle at who is possibly buying these ebook Strategy Guides, I have to admire that they're actually trying to adapt by offering them in an online format AND through Steam where it's paired with the game they're buying. At least they're offering people the option!

[Callie Del Noire]

I don't know what they thought they'd accomplish by that. Did they think that removing a legal avenue for people to get these things would just stop people from getting it illegally?

It's just a knee jerk reaction.

Even though I boggle at who is possibly buying these ebook Strategy Guides, I have to admire that they're actually trying to adapt by offering them in an online format AND through Steam where it's paired with the game they're buying. At least they're offering people the option!

Hasbro's argument was that their watermarked PDFs were being used to create high quality bootleg PDF files by pirates and that all they were doing was providing pirates with the materials to steal their content.

That is to say that mostly pirates were getting legal copies, stripping the DRM out of them and reporting them online for others to download for free. 

SUPPOSEDLY at some point the ebooks will come back for sale, but only through Wizards' own site but it will be some sort of subscription service that will require you to be online to access you content.

[RubySlippers]

The hackers and pirates will find a way past any attempt to protect content its only a matter of time. I think this is actually great it frees up creative content and intellicutal content as no longer privileged but open to all. The companies are not going broke they get their costs back in most cases and then some alot of people still like seeing movies on the big screen and the offical dvd's have content for an example not on freedom copies on-line (my terms since the content is freed from the corporations) don't have and are rarely as good in quality.

Maybe the companies need to lower their costs for official goods then maybe it will make the piracy of them less likely if it costs $3 to make a dvd of a movie then why sell it for $13.99, you could double that and still make a profit say asking $5.99. That is how you get people loyal sell the goods at high quality at a fair price.

This can be true for video games, music, books and the like.

[Callie Del Noire]

The hackers and pirates will find a way past any attempt to protect content its only a matter of time. I think this is actually great it frees up creative content and intellicutal content as no longer privileged but open to all. The companies are not going broke they get their costs back in most cases and then some alot of people still like seeing movies on the big screen and the offical dvd's have content for an example not on freedom copies on-line (my terms since the content is freed from the corporations) don't have and are rarely as good in quality.

Maybe the companies need to lower their costs for official goods then maybe it will make the piracy of them less likely if it costs $3 to make a dvd of a movie then why sell it for $13.99, you could double that and still make a profit say asking $5.99. That is how you get people loyal sell the goods at high quality at a fair price.

This can be true for video games, music, books and the like.

See the problem is (largely) the industries such as Book Publishing and Music Recording industry are still mostly operating on century (or so) business model where THEY set the medium, costs and controlled distribution. A few things like Wal-Mart have caused them pause but unlike a lot of other companies that deal with Wal-Mart they can still control a lot of the price and distribution elements.

Now electronic vendors and the internet as a business venue is something they can't as easily control and moves in areas that they haven't classically considered. They have been padding their costs on hard backs for decades and it took A LOT for some publishers to move past the 'paperbacks are low class' outlook some publishers had.

Now you come along with the internet, electronic publishing and the ability to bypass traditional publishers (both of music AND books) and they get rabid in their protection.

Right now, I could take my first novel (bad though it is) and with a few hours of editing and a little tweaking of layout publish it for the Kindle and on Smashwords without having to see an editor, talk to a publishing agent or making a contract that lets the publisher get the lion's share of the cash off of it.

I mean I know folks who are filching fanficts, original stories and even online erotica from sites like Fictionmania, Nifty and other sites and putting their online name to them and selling them online.

Additionally, it's easier for these folks to blame pirates and online uploads than consider the fact that the best way to protect their IP is to do as the President of Steam has stated and provide better service. Music and Book Publishers aren't used to dealing with the public at large and the concept of CUSTOMER SERVICE is still largely alien.

[Vekseid]

Companies wouldn't have to go to any lengths to protect their product from thieves if thieves didn't exist.  Punish the thieves?  Sure.  How much jail time and how big of a fine are we talking about?

There is not excuse for stealing.  None.  If you steal you're a thief.

Of course, downloading songs from the Internet isn't theft, no matter what the recording industries claim, nor is it actually illegal. It's illegal to distribute such works unlawfully (that is, for money, or outside of your normal circle of friends). Thus, that is in general where crackdowns occur. Even if the RIAA managed to get some sort of mandatory DRM-in-all electronics law passed, it would still not make

Personally, I think it's a pretty fucked up set of priorities to declare that pirating music is worse than murder. Note this is actual piracy, at least - the poor fellows involved ended up redistributing the music they downloaded.

The 'it's the law' canard is flat-out bullshit. It's the law that any commercial venue which allows public performances has to pay three thuggish companies who represent copyright holders, even if no such songs are played. Paying a racket or not has nothing to do with ethics, the person running said racket is the one lacking them.

In order for a law to be respected, it must first be made respectable. If it isn't respectable, it will not get respect. The recording industry, and the laws it has set up around itself - many of which are directly set up to screw over the very artists they claim to represent - are in no way respectable. Michael Jackson made billions for Sony, and died effectively bankrupt. Prince had to change his name to a fucking symbol because they 'owned his name'. TLC sells ten million CDs, declares bankruptcy because they only 'earn' 64 cents per, and have to pay back the recording industry for the 'debts' they've incurred in its production. Then the recording industry lobbies to prevent bankruptcies from discharging such debts.

I'm pretty careful about following the letter and intent of the law. But eventually, this crap is going to end.

Personally, I don't think it's ethical to financially support an industry like the recording industry.

True.  But in my opinion, that's not a technology problem.  Even if the United States hadn't allowed them, there would be other countries who would develop them.

A VCR or cassette recorder is just a piece of technology, it can be used for good and evil alike.

The problem we have is that the entertainment industry and apparently Congressmen think that the average American person can't be trusted to be ethical and moral and use technology responsibly.  This isn't tech, it's ethics.

Rather ironic, when you consider some of the things the entertainment industry and Congress have done in the past.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/02/08/riaa_wants_filters_for_end_users/

It's a few years old, but I always remember it.

Note that this law does require a trial, unless the owner of the domain cannot be personally contacted. I set up a business name, with PMB, number and all, for just this purpose.

If the owner cannot be contacted, then said owner can be in quite a lot of trouble.

You can tell it was written by people with very little knowledge of how the Internet works. The US gives ICANN its jurisdiction, I'm rather surprised that they didn't go straight to the source, there. Then again that might have been too obviously far.

A part of me does want this to pass, if only so we can get some impetus behind creating a newer, better DNS system. The current one blows. A distributed one would take a lot of thought, however.

[RubySlippers]

I remember my parents saying when VHS came around it would kill the movie industry that actually saved it and made it better with not just big studios but many smaller ones doing direct to video movies on low budgets, DVD continued this trend. So they just need to adapt I watch streaming movies on Youtube for 99 cents to $3.99 and its great and they must get a cut. They just need to be competative and maybe sell dvd's not blue-ray to be more affordable with good content.

[Oniya]

I remember my parents saying when VHS came around it would kill the movie industry that actually saved it and made it better with not just big studios but many smaller ones doing direct to video movies on low budgets, DVD continued this trend. So they just need to adapt I watch streaming movies on Youtube for 99 cents to $3.99 and its great and they must get a cut. They just need to be competative and maybe sell dvd's not blue-ray to be more affordable with good content.

That's exactly what they were saying about cassette recorders and the music industry.

[Serephino]

I had a rant about this the other day.  It's the RIAA that's being greedy.  True, there are some unscrupulous people who will take advantage of the situation, but most people just don't like being cheated. 

A while ago when they were being really ridiculous, I signed up for an account with Rhapsody through Real Player.  I could pay per song, which is what I did. I bought 4 songs.  The thing of it was, because of their coding, I could only play the song on their program, and any devices I registered with them.  The songs could not be put on any computer other than the one it was downloaded to.

Only months later I ended up getting a new computer.  What happened to those songs I paid for?  Gone.  I couldn't transfer them over.  So, basically, my options for not pirating were either re-buy my music every time I upgrade, or never upgrade.

I know you're generally not supposed to blame the victim, but the music industry brought this on themselves.  They're royally pissing me off, and I'm not the only one.  Give me an MP3 file that is reasonably priced, and that I can put on any device or computer I want, and I will happily never pirate again.     

[TheKhan]

Well look at Wizard's solution for ebook copying. They went from 'some legal and mostly illegal' to 'all illegal' by removing all electronic content they WERE getting paid for offline. You want ANYTHING of Wizards in pdf or ebook format.. forget it.

I lost like 2 dozen 3.5 books and modules from Drivethrurpg because I was on deployment duirng the 2 day grace period before they had to pull content.

This is exactly the same thing that irritates me. Not because I want 3.5 ebooks. I want 2e books. All of Planescape and most of Dark Sun used to be on DTR. After Hasbro pulled their pdfs, they also pulled all of TSR's pdfs. It hasn't help piracy at all, its made it much worse since the other alternative is to go try and hunt down the rare physical copies which can go for hundreds of dollars at best and are in such a short supply that you can't reliably find them.

[Vekseid]

I had a rant about this the other day.  It's the RIAA that's being greedy.  True, there are some unscrupulous people who will take advantage of the situation, but most people just don't like being cheated. 

Keep in mind the RIAA is the 'bad publicity front' for the industry - it handles the lawsuits. The industry is Sony, EMI, Warner, Universal, etc.

[Serephino]

Whoever is behind it, they done shot themselves in the foot, and I don't feel the least bit sorry for them.  They pass this and they'll be shooting themselves in the gut because they'll have very angry hackers to deal with. 

[Vekseid]

I wouldn't expect - nor would I advocate - 'hacking' in any malicious sense.

Making the Internet less controllable, however, is a worthy goal, and if anyone knows anyone brainstorming a distributed DNS project, please let me know so I can lend my skillz >_>

[Callie Del Noire]

I had a rant about this the other day.  It's the RIAA that's being greedy.  True, there are some unscrupulous people who will take advantage of the situation, but most people just don't like being cheated. 

A while ago when they were being really ridiculous, I signed up for an account with Rhapsody through Real Player.  I could pay per song, which is what I did. I bought 4 songs.  The thing of it was, because of their coding, I could only play the song on their program, and any devices I registered with them.  The songs could not be put on any computer other than the one it was downloaded to.

Only months later I ended up getting a new computer.  What happened to those songs I paid for?  Gone.  I couldn't transfer them over.  So, basically, my options for not pirating were either re-buy my music every time I upgrade, or never upgrade.

I know you're generally not supposed to blame the victim, but the music industry brought this on themselves.  They're royally pissing me off, and I'm not the only one.  Give me an MP3 file that is reasonably priced, and that I can put on any device or computer I want, and I will happily never pirate again.     

I was curious about rhaspsody for a while, till I found the 'BUT' in their setup. I use iTunes..and given the latest update which allowed me to reacquire songs I lost to a drive crash some time ago. (About 12 albums worth of stuff) I think I'll stick with them and my practice of backing up my iTunes library every month or so.

[Serephino]

Yes, I've noticed they now have Home Share, which would allow me to say install the software on my boyfriends computer, and get my library uploaded there too by logging in with my account.  It's improved since I last looked at it.  Now the major downside is it can only be played on their software, and I refuse to buy an ipad, iphone, or ipod. 

[ReijiTabibito]

Well, the good news is that the vote that was scheduled for today didn't happen because Congress is in recess, so there's still another month or so for people to write and lobby to stop this bill.

What astounds me about this is that in the debate hearings about the bill, the committees have admitted that the speakers they've brought to the table have no technical expertise, no ability to tell the legislators what will happen if this bill is instituted.  As well as one Representative's comment that they're just dismissing what the Internet people have to say, because oh, it's their livelihood, they'll say anything to defend it.  As if the entertainment industry isn't currently guilty of the same thing.

Is Hollywood truly so desperate to gain control of the media back that they'd rather start this country down a road that could lead to them being censored than try and keep up with the times?

[Anjasa]

Unfortunately it also gives people time to grow less passionate about this as something else crops up :\

[Tamhansen]

Is Hollywood truly so desperate to gain control of the media back that they'd rather start this country down a road that could lead to them being censored than try and keep up with the times?

The ones supporting these bills are just interested in making money, and like most American SI groups only think about their short term goals, without thinking about their long term consequences

[Chris Brady]

Unfortunately it also gives people time to grow less passionate about this as something else crops up :\

And this is the real enemy here.  All they need to do is deflect attention, and the sheep will follow like it's a carrot or something.

[Tamhansen]

The odd thing about SOPA is though, that the bill is probably going to be amended to make an exception to domestic sites. I.E. you'd be allowed to download illegal content, but only if it comes from American criminals. How's that for chauvinism.

[pandaandthelion]

Actually From what i heard It actually does affect everyone Because if you're caught doing it, they will jail you doesn't matter if it's domestically or Not they will still Give you a Jail Sentence, Plus It will also block a lot of websites a lot of them ones you probably use daily, Youtube Being probably one of the main ones that i watch, And funny thing how its america doing this but it affects the whole world yet america is the only one who can stop it which is why american need to go to their local Senate and petition to stop SOPA from being introduced Into Office :D

[Tamhansen]

Actually SOPA will not affect foreigners as it is a national law, and will only block these sites within the US. What worries me as a European more is the ACTA agreement. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting_Trade_Agreement An international treaty which will allow foreign governments to decide what is illegal in my country, and yours.

As for SOPA, the amendment that lies before the house specifically states that content obtained through domestic channels will be exempt from legal action. The original bill does not.

[ShadowFox89]

http://www.opencongress.org/articles/view/2461-Six-GOP-Co-Sponsors-of-PIPA-Ask-Reid-to-Cancel-Vote

PIPA is a sinking ship, let's cross our fingers and hope SOPA get's torpedoed next.

[Vekseid]

The White House has declared opposition to both bills. The official response can be found here.

Since US government works aren't copyright protected, I'll reprint the response in its entirety:

Official White House Response to Stop the E-PARASITE Act. and 1 other petition

Combating Online Piracy while Protecting an Open and Innovative Internet

By Victoria Espinel, Aneesh Chopra, and Howard Schmidt

Thanks for taking the time to sign this petition. Both your words and actions illustrate the importance of maintaining an open and democratic Internet.

Right now, Congress is debating a few pieces of legislation concerning the very real issue of online piracy, including the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), the PROTECT IP Act and the Online Protection and Digital ENforcement Act (OPEN). We want to take this opportunity to tell you what the Administration will support—and what we will not support. Any effective legislation should reflect a wide range of stakeholders, including everyone from content creators to the engineers that build and maintain the infrastructure of the Internet.

While we believe that online piracy by foreign websites is a serious problem that requires a serious legislative response, we will not support legislation that reduces freedom of expression, increases cybersecurity risk, or undermines the dynamic, innovative global Internet.

Any effort to combat online piracy must guard against the risk of online censorship of lawful activity and must not inhibit innovation by our dynamic businesses large and small. Across the globe, the openness of the Internet is increasingly central to innovation in business, government, and society and it must be protected. To minimize this risk, new legislation must be narrowly targeted only at sites beyond the reach of current U.S. law, cover activity clearly prohibited under existing U.S. laws, and be effectively tailored, with strong due process and focused on criminal activity. Any provision covering Internet intermediaries such as online advertising networks, payment processors, or search engines must be transparent and designed to prevent overly broad private rights of action that could encourage unjustified litigation that could discourage startup businesses and innovative firms from growing.

We must avoid creating new cybersecurity risks or disrupting the underlying architecture of the Internet. Proposed laws must not tamper with the technical architecture of the Internet through manipulation of the Domain Name System (DNS), a foundation of Internet security. Our analysis of the DNS filtering provisions in some proposed legislation suggests that they pose a real risk to cybersecurity and yet leave contraband goods and services accessible online. We must avoid legislation that drives users to dangerous, unreliable DNS servers and puts next-generation security policies, such as the deployment of DNSSEC, at risk.

Let us be clear—online piracy is a real problem that harms the American economy, and threatens jobs for significant numbers of middle class workers and hurts some of our nation's most creative and innovative companies and entrepreneurs.  It harms everyone from struggling artists to production crews, and from startup social media companies to large movie studios. While we are strongly committed to the vigorous enforcement of intellectual property rights, existing tools are not strong enough to root out the worst online pirates beyond our borders. That is why the Administration calls on all sides to work together to pass sound legislation this year that provides prosecutors and rights holders new legal tools to combat online piracy originating beyond U.S. borders while staying true to the principles outlined above in this response.  We should never let criminals hide behind a hollow embrace of legitimate American values.

This is not just a matter for legislation. We expect and encourage all private parties, including both content creators and Internet platform providers working together, to adopt voluntary measures and best practices to reduce online piracy.

So, rather than just look at how legislation can be stopped, ask yourself: Where do we go from here? Don’t limit your opinion to what’s the wrong thing to do, ask yourself what’s right. Already, many of members of Congress are asking for public input around the issue. We are paying close attention to those opportunities, as well as to public input to the Administration. The organizer of this petition and a random sample of the signers will be invited to a conference call to discuss this issue further with Administration officials and soon after that, we will host an online event to get more input and answer your questions. Details on that will follow in the coming days.

Washington needs to hear your best ideas about how to clamp down on rogue websites and other criminals who make money off the creative efforts of American artists and rights holders. We should all be committed to working with all interested constituencies to develop new legal tools to protect global intellectual property rights without jeopardizing the openness of the Internet. Our hope is that you will bring enthusiasm and know-how to this important challenge.

Moving forward, we will continue to work with Congress on a bipartisan basis on legislation that provides new tools needed in the global fight against piracy and counterfeiting, while vigorously defending an open Internet based on the values of free expression, privacy, security and innovation. Again, thank you for taking the time to participate in this important process. We hope you’ll continue to be part of it.

Victoria Espinel is Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator at Office of Management and Budget

Aneesh Chopra is the U.S. Chief Technology Officer and Assistant to the President and Associate Director for Technology at the Office of Science and Technology Policy

Howard Schmidt is Special Assistant to the President and Cybersecurity Coordinator for National Security Staff

I've bolded different parts than the original, as it shows that they do know exactly what, technically and morally, is wrong with these bills.

[ShadowFox89]

Wasn't this the same kind of response given to the NDAA? Wasn't that given Obama's seal of approval?

[Vekseid]

No, you can see the full list of responses: https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petition-tool/responses