Can we fire the RIAA?

I didn't vote for them... why are they making my laws?

SurfaceTension: I'll say it again to the RIAA and MPAA: I want to stream your product and I'm willing to pay for it. Please make that possible. Thank you.

MPAA: Thanks, but under our new industry model it makes more sense to wait for court awards than actually do any licensing.
RIAA: LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU OVER THE SOUND OF ME SLOWLY AND PAINFULLY GOING OUT OF BUSINESS.

Assignment: Type 2 paragraphs defending PIPA and SOPA without puking on your keyboard or committing hari kari in shame and self loathing.... ready... go!

I'm just going to use video games as an example of how dense these people are.

I've pirated games since the days of BBS's and the Blobby CD's being sold at the local market.

But plenty of those games I've sat and gone "Ya know? I'd like feature X and that isn't in this version." Be it online multiplayer or an update that fixes a bug I've encountered... usually something quite trivial.

How much to change my pirate edition to a legit license? Well that's the full RRP. Ahh.... no sale. If I could go to a website pay £5 - £10 for a license key I'd be doing that quite a bit.

Cognitive dissonance

The RIAA also warns that the need to hire an attorney to navigate the ITC's arcane legal process will "put justice out of reach for small business American victims of IP theft."

liverpoolumd: Can we fire the RIAA?

I didn't vote for them... why are they making my laws?



Lobbying groups are people, my friend.

sarah_t_s: I'm just going to use video games as an example of how dense these people are.

I've pirated games since the days of BBS's and the Blobby CD's being sold at the local market.

But plenty of those games I've sat and gone "Ya know? I'd like feature X and that isn't in this version." Be it online multiplayer or an update that fixes a bug I've encountered... usually something quite trivial.

How much to change my pirate edition to a legit license? Well that's the full RRP. Ahh.... no sale. If I could go to a website pay £5 - £10 for a license key I'd be doing that quite a bit.

Ya know, not to defend the RIAA, I think they are sleazy as the next guy does, but your excuse for pirating has always bothered me. It sounds like a guy who steals a car off of a car lot drives it around for a few months and then says "Ya know, now that the car needs a tune up and oil change I'd really like to just go back to the dealership and get it done. If only they would let me pay for the tune up and oil change and not turn me into the cops I'd do that quite a bit."

Gig103: smooshie: Ah, so now the scum at the RIAA want to throw "innocent until proven guilty" to the list of rights us commoners don't deserve.

We already threw that away with the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

I agree, the 1991 NDAA went to far with: `(a) The Coast Guard band may produce recordings for commercial sale.

/Seriously, at least bother to specific which NDAA

Torqueknot:
If only they would let me pay for the tune up and oil change and not turn me into the cops I'd do that quite a bit."

Community taxis. Good idea. I like it.

FTA: The trade group warns of "indefinite delays" as claims of infringement are investigated

So their argument is "but it will take too long to investigate if our claims of infringement are real or not!"
Sure, no need to bother with investigating anything, just let the RIAA decide all by themselves.

the_sidewinder:
Why do you feel that you should be granted a discount because you misappropriated a copy of it?

Well, to continue the argument. I've got the game, I don't want the packaging, I don't want the manual/keyboard overlay or trinket in the packaging. I just want the piece of paper with the unique sequence of numbers/letters on it.

I can buy a media pack from Microsoft for £10 or so. It costs a LOT more for the piece of paper with the serial number on it.

Why shouldn't the same apply to video games?

/As an aside, I'm just playing devils advocate, my Steam library is massive.

sarah_t_s: the_sidewinder:
Why do you feel that you should be granted a discount because you misappropriated a copy of it?

Well, to continue the argument. I've got the game, I don't want the packaging, I don't want the manual/keyboard overlay or trinket in the packaging. I just want the piece of paper with the unique sequence of numbers/letters on it. I can buy a media pack from Microsoft for £10 or so. It costs a LOT more for the piece of paper with the serial number on it. Why shouldn't the same apply to video games?

/As an aside, I'm just playing devils advocate, my Steam library is massive.

Ahh, I see you're looking to trap someone into saying that the true price should also reflect the 'cost' it took the original creator to make the content that goes on that otherwise extremely cheap media. The disconnection though between something like say steam vs dealing with the RIAA is that sales going through steam make it back to the developers in a much higher percentage then sales of music through the RIAA over to the musicians. The further extension of that the RIAA cartel's live stock's revenue is from their tours, endorsements and basically everything but the sales of those songs themselves. End result is when someone steals a song rather then pay for it the real entity affected is the RIAA and its various components not the artists. That's what lets music thieves sleep so soundly, knowing they can claim they'll just buy a tshirt from the band at the next live show they'll never bother to attend.

Just what I thought, the part they have a problem with is due process. Over time they've gradually stopped trying to hide it. Give it a few more years and they'll openly admit they want their own police force that operates outside of any law.

I'm so tired of RIAA and MPAA... let's just make 2012 the year where no one sees movies or buys music from artists and studios that are RIAA or MPAA members. I mean, come one... boycott them for 2012, maybe 2013 as well and hopefully they will go out of business, and in the meanwhile it will give the funding that indie artists and studios need to start producing something a little more sophisticated than what they can do with a camcorder...

FTFA: The basic approach of OPEN, which is sponsored by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), is to shift enforcement against rogue sites to the International Trade Commission, which has become a popular venue for international patent disputes. The ITC would investigate claims that a foreign site is dedicated to infringement. If the ITC found a site was dedicated to infringement, the site would be cut off from American advertising and payment networks.

Huh? That actually makes a lot of sense. Of course the RIAA is going to be against it.


/seriously, it surprises me that a couple of congresscritters managed to devise such logical approach.

BumpInTheNight:
Ahh, I see you're looking to trap someone into saying that the true price should also reflect the 'cost' it took the original creator to make the content that goes on that otherwise extremely cheap media.

Honestly? I can't say that I was. Just having a fun discussion and a bit of banter.

I think the MPAA & RIAA should allow for far more payment channels and options than they currently do. I think the video game industry should be doing the same (why can't I upgrade from regular to digital deluxe if I decide I like the game?).

I'd like to buy movie X but don't care about the special features... so I shouldn't have pay for those and they shouldn't be available on my version sort of thing.

My slashie about steam was to further point out that this is not a serious discussion more than anything else.

BTW, I want somebody to answer me this question:

How much money is the MPAA losing due to piracy? I hear that they're posting record revenues every year.
How is it possible? Do they assume they're "losing money" because someone pirated a movie?

I know the same argument can't apply to the RIAA since profits have diminished. But not that much anyway, they're still a very profitable business.

There's a reason for that and I think the lesson is pretty clear:

The RIAA is obsolete. it's not needed anymore. Artists or independent labels can do their work just as fine in this era.
The MPAA is not still neded since nobody can't just finance their own big blockbuster movies. Film is a very expensive art.

rocky_howard: FTFA: The basic approach of OPEN, which is sponsored by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), is to shift enforcement against rogue sites to the International Trade Commission, which has become a popular venue for international patent disputes. The ITC would investigate claims that a foreign site is dedicated to infringement. If the ITC found a site was dedicated to infringement, the site would be cut off from American advertising and payment networks.

Huh? That actually makes a lot of sense. Of course the RIAA is going to be against it.


/seriously, it surprises me that a couple of congresscritters managed to devise such logical approach.

Well, I know Wyden sent out e-mails suggesting ideas. I've never been to Oregon, but I still get his e-mails.

Gig103: smooshie: Ah, so now the scum at the RIAA want to throw "innocent until proven guilty" to the list of rights us commoners don't deserve.

We already threw that away with the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

I wish that people who talk about that would refer to the specific provision they object to. That is, there was a NDAA in 2005. And 2006. And 2007. And 2008. And 2009. And 2010. And 2011. And 2012, which contained (amoung a million other things) Title X, Subtitle D, sub-sections 1021 and 1022, which potentially have bad implications if abused. Maybe.

In any case, it's a must pass bill-it's the thing that funds the military every year, which is one of the reasons it passed-if there is no NDAA, soldiers don't get paid.

sarah_t_s: BumpInTheNight:
Ahh, I see you're looking to trap someone into saying that the true price should also reflect the 'cost' it took the original creator to make the content that goes on that otherwise extremely cheap media.
Honestly? I can't say that I was. Just having a fun discussion and a bit of banter.
I think the MPAA & RIAA should allow for far more payment channels and options than they currently do. I think the video game industry should be doing the same (why can't I upgrade from regular to digital deluxe if I decide I like the game?).
I'd like to buy movie X but don't care about the special features... so I shouldn't have pay for those and they shouldn't be available on my version sort of thing.
My slashie about steam was to further point out that this is not a serious discussion more than anything else.

Options are always good for the consumer but terrible for creativity based media companies, why would I ever buy a deluxe copy of a game if I could just buy the regular one first and only decide after installing it and seeing it for the barely considered a beta release that it is. Those deluxe things are pathetic out-dated money grabs any ways, they're latching on to DLC-right-on-release-day now and that's going to be more your style where you can buy the basic game and then buy extenders ala-carte.

Meanwhile with the RIAA, what could they possibly offer you? A song is a song and a buck a song is a buck a song. The MPAA agreed could probably stand to release basic rentals style versions of the movies for cheaper but then again why would anyone ever buy the deluxe one up front if they know they can always upgrade to the features but won't bother because they've lost interest the second the credits roll. Oh and this also assumes that the MPAA in any way will ever warm up to the idea of the IPs they protect being even easier to steal then they already are. They've proven they'd sooner die then let up even a fraction of the control and by god at this rate they may succeed. To this I say godspeed and 'well, bye'.

the_sidewinder:
In addition, I would say that they should stop region limiting releases, and either offer content DRM free (for recorded, non subscription content. Video games should ideally also be DRM free) and/or though every available channel. Does your exclusivity deal with X content platform (ie: digital store eg: iTMS, Zune) prevent people who are not on that platform from buying your content?

My answer would be yes, exclusivity with store X prevents sales. Some people will never install iTunes, even if it offers them a blow job and steak (frankly I agree with them, it sucks balls on Windows and always has done). I see similar things game wise with SteamCloud and ImpulseReactor, shouldn't they just be DLL's you can link against and access via a standard and therefor interchangeable API?

There are so many little ways these companies could get me to part with my cash yet none of them seem overly interested in doing so.

the_sidewinder: They lose lots of money if you consider every illegal download as a lost sale, which the MPAA does, but is often not the case in reality.

Have a semi related infographic, for the hell of it

Yeah, I knew about that ranking.

That's what I'm saying. There you have some of the highest grossing movies EVER done. For the MPAA to say that they LOST money on Avatar, Dark Knight, Transformers and Pirates is ridiculous and clearly a blatant lie.

The only movie from that list that is a red flag and you could argue for is Kick-Ass.

How odd that none of the Harry Potter movies were among the most pirated. Which supports the argument that they're not losing money.

BumpInTheNight:
Meanwhile with the RIAA, what could they possibly offer you?

Top my head. There are some bands I'd like a making of video available to watch. Or backstage footage if it's a live show.

I'd pay extra for that on occasion.

This chart is something they need to see. But the fact is that as price goes down to zero that more people will want to watch a movie, those same people are NOT going to watch the movie if it costs more. This type of thing is on the first chapter of economics. Send them out of congress and back to Econ 101.

Tin-eared, graph-paper brained accountants, instead of music fans, call all the shots at giant record companies now. The lowest common denominator rules. Forget honesty, forget creativity, the dumbest buy the mostest, that's the name of the game. But sales are slumping and no one will say why, could it be they put out one too many lousy records?!?

Gig103: ProfessorOhki: /Seriously, at least bother to specific which NDAA

Geotpf: I wish that people who talk about that would refer to the specific provision they object to.

Okay, I assumed that for someone who is up to speed in current events, and given the attention it was given on Fark, that it was clear I am referring to the indefinite detention clause of the 2011 NDAA.

Not sure if trolling. National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012

BumpInTheNight: sarah_t_s: the_sidewinder:
Why do you feel that you should be granted a discount because you misappropriated a copy of it?

Well, to continue the argument. I've got the game, I don't want the packaging, I don't want the manual/keyboard overlay or trinket in the packaging. I just want the piece of paper with the unique sequence of numbers/letters on it. I can buy a media pack from Microsoft for £10 or so. It costs a LOT more for the piece of paper with the serial number on it. Why shouldn't the same apply to video games?

/As an aside, I'm just playing devils advocate, my Steam library is massive.

Ahh, I see you're looking to trap someone into saying that the true price should also reflect the 'cost' it took the original creator to make the content that goes on that otherwise extremely cheap media. The disconnection though between something like say steam vs dealing with the RIAA is that sales going through steam make it back to the developers in a much higher percentage then sales of music through the RIAA over to the musicians. The further extension of that the RIAA cartel's live stock's revenue is from their tours, endorsements and basically everything but the sales of those songs themselves. End result is when someone steals a song rather then pay for it the real entity affected is the RIAA and its various components not the artists. That's what lets music thieves sleep so soundly, knowing they can claim they'll just buy a tshirt from the band at the next live show they'll never bother to attend.

Do we really need to go through this old saw of explaining the difference between theft and infringement?

Because if you're going to insist on being so damn obtuse, I'm going to charge you with raping my brain cells.

MusicMakeMyHeadPound: Do we really need to go through this old saw of explaining the difference between theft and infringement?

Because if you're going to insist on being so damn obtuse, I'm going to charge you with raping my brain cells.

I refer to it as stealing specifically to remind pirates of what they're really doing to the people who rely upon the sales of their creative works to make a living, oh and to bug people like you.

SurfaceTension: I'll say it again to the RIAA and MPAA: I want to stream your product and I'm willing to pay for it. Please make that possible. Thank you.

The RIAA is willing to let you stream content. For the small price of eleventy billion dollars a month.

Fizpez: Assignment: Type 2 paragraphs defending PIPA and SOPA without puking on your keyboard or committing hari kari in shame and self loathing.... ready... go!

I lost. And need a new keyboard.

BumpInTheNight: MusicMakeMyHeadPound: Do we really need to go through this old saw of explaining the difference between theft and infringement?

Because if you're going to insist on being so damn obtuse, I'm going to charge you with raping my brain cells.
----

I refer to it as stealing specifically to remind pirates of what they're really doing to the people who rely upon the sales of their creative works to make a living, oh and to bug people like you.

BumpInTheNight: I refer to it as stealing specifically to remind pirates of what they're really doing to the people who rely upon the sales of their creative works to make a living, oh and to bug people like you.

So people who sell creative works should demand massive payment up front from a patron or sponsor instead of releasing it into the wild and relying on strangers to nickel and dime themselves.

Bam. Problem solved.

/That's why I'm in science and engineering - we actually get stuff done.

MusicMakeMyHeadPound: BumpInTheNight: I refer to it as stealing specifically to remind pirates of what they're really doing to the people who rely upon the sales of their creative works to make a living, oh and to bug people like you.

So people who sell creative works should demand massive payment up front from a patron or sponsor instead of releasing it into the wild and relying on strangers to nickel and dime themselves.

Bam. Problem solved.

/That's why I'm in science and engineering - we actually get stuff done.

Be independent and show some initiative.
RIAA does not want the ITC to be EVIL, they see that as their own job.

liverpoolumd: Can we fire the RIAA?

I didn't vote for them... why are they making my laws?

Because you can't be trusted to vote in their interests.

RedVentrue: MusicMakeMyHeadPound: BumpInTheNight: I refer to it as stealing specifically to remind pirates of what they're really doing to the people who rely upon the sales of their creative works to make a living, oh and to bug people like you.

So people who sell creative works should demand massive payment up front from a patron or sponsor instead of releasing it into the wild and relying on strangers to nickel and dime themselves.

Bam. Problem solved.

/That's why I'm in science and engineering - we actually get stuff done.

Be independent and show some initiative.
RIAA does not want the ITC to be EVIL, they see that as their own job.

Why? He's not interested in doing art or charging for it. Also, Adam Sandler movies aren't "art".

Anyway, going back to Patronage is...well, backwards.

After patronage, came investment, which is the system we have now where those who in the past were patrons, now are investors and executive producers. Then they get rich by nickeling and diming the populace promising something that probably isn't true. That's right. Media consumption is a lottery ticket. You pay money for the possibility to be dissapointed.

The future is an inversion of that and more power to the people.

Crowdsourcing.

The populace will be nickeled and dimed voluntarily, before the project starts and the final project is going to be what everyone expects.

Imagine if the Star Wars prequels had fan input to be exactly what we wanted instead of the abortions Lucas pushed?

The collective hivemind it's the ultimate creative source.

Memes are proof of that. No comedy writer can stand up to the hivemind. Why? Because even if the writer can have 20 funny ideas and a regular person can only have 1 in their whole life, when you stack up a billion people, you'll have a billion funny ideas. After you distil the best ones, you'll end up with a tremendously funny cache of ideas. Which is why memes are so succesful.

The RIAA needs to use the anti-smoking method. Start small - "Oh, there's no smoking in the dining room when children 12 and under are eating a meal on a weekday from noon to 6PM" - get that passed and then start chopping words off, a couple every year or so, until you wind up with NO SMOKING.

MADD is going a similar route with BAC, first it was 0.10%, then 0.08, now I think they want 0.05, something like that, all you have to do is be in the same time zone when someone opens a beer and you're too wasted to drive a nail, let alone a randomly-targeting instantaneous-death machine.

If they just take baby steps you'll never notice freedom disappearing, not even when it's completely gone.

I can't believe no one seems to have pointed this gem out-

The RIAA also warns that the need to hire an attorney to navigate the ITC's arcane legal process will "put justice out of reach for small business American victims of IP theft."

I couldn't help it, I sputtered and laughed when I read that piece of drivel.

BumpInTheNight: That's what lets music thieves

How are they thieves? Nothing has been stolen.

They are copyright infringers.