Posted in: News and Legal, DRM, Piracy & IP by Fraser MacInnes on August 3, 2007
27 People Are Speaking Their Mind
Have Your Say
Ask a Question Or Offer Your 2 Cents:
Return to the full post
Keep up to date with Web TV, Video and IPTV News:
Subscribe to Web TV Wire via RSS
Google Video Got it Wrong Three Times | Road to Online Video Domination » Web TV Wire Says:
August 3rd, 2007 at 10:53 am[…] Google got it wrong again… people are happy buying movies and TV shows in the normal offline fashion, a habit that is proving hard to change thanks to aggressive DRM. People wanted short free clips to keep them quickly entertained. […]
Greedy People Suck Says:
August 3rd, 2007 at 12:55 pmI hate greedy people. This is what it all really boils down to. The pirates are greedy by wanting to keep their money and avoid paying a fair price, whereas the broadcasters are greedy in that they want to scrape every penny out of something they can. IMHO, the consumer has already paid for the content, either through CATV/SATV fees or watching advertisements.
As I said, greedy people suck.
JD Says:
August 3rd, 2007 at 12:56 pmThis is ridiculous. How much longer till we grab the ol’pitchforks and torches and fix things up properly once more?
Pretty soon that’ll be the only option.
Dan Galasso Says:
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:07 pmThis is total trash. To use combat of piracy as an argument for their case to charge me 3 times for the same dvd so I can watch it on the players in my home is an outrage. It’s times like these where I’m glad we have other entertainment options like youtube or google video, or countless others. The fact is, most of what we watch as entertainment has a single view lifespan. How many of you out there have DVD’s in your collection that you’ve actually watched more than once or twice? It’s stories like this one that give me the increasing feeling that I’d be better off disconnecting from the grid and abandoning/boycotting the whole entertainment industry. I don’t go to movie theaters because it doesn’t make sense to spend $15.00 a person for the ticket, $5.00 for the popcorn, and $10.00 for two drinks, when I can sit in my more comfortable chairs, rent the movie on dvd for $2.00, eat a $0.50 bag of popcorn, and a $1.00 2 liter bottle of pop. I’ve got DTS decoding on my surround sound system, and a powered subwoofer. I’ve got no screaming kids in any aisles near me, losers with cell phones going off, or any other distraction to deal with.. and when I’ve got to go to the bathroom, I can pause the movie and come back when I’m done. I haven’t been to the theater in 5 years, and I don’t miss any of the hassles associated with it.
I’m serious. Enjoying entertainment shouldn’t be an inconvenience. If that legislation goes through, not only will I simply stop caring about or paying for their entertainment, I’ll also send them a picture of my bare backside complete with the chocolate starfish, and tell them it’s time to play the trumpet.
Eric Says:
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:11 pmTrying stunts like this makes it harder to take them seriously when they have legitimate complaints (such as about piracy etc). This kind of thing is going to make law-abiding citizens start down that slippery slope towards piracy. Why make it so difficult to do the right thing? It makes no sense. Do they *want* us all to become pirates?
Mike Says:
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:41 pmI think its about time that consumers stand up and say enough is enough! Either let us control our own media that we pay for or just boycott buying all forms for media for 90 days. And if they think this could never happen then they are don’t know the internet.
Duncan Blackthorne Says:
August 3rd, 2007 at 2:18 pmI know many people who do not watch television at all. If legislation like this was allowed to be passed into law, it would be the final nail in the coffin of my television watching, which has already been ebbing in recent years to an all-time low.
If the broadcast television industry wants to increase their revenues, they should produce high quality programming that will draw in and captivate viewers, not lobby for ever-tightening restrictions on how programming can be viewed — and take pages from the RIAA’s playbook. As is, I’m beginning to think that the age of broadcast media, at least in the form we’re used to seeing it, is drawing to a close.
Paul Says:
August 3rd, 2007 at 2:26 pmSo, I would have to pay separate fees for a DVD if I was watching it on my DVD player / TV in the livingroom, but I wanted to put it in my laptop and watch the rest in bed?
Isn’t that akin to charging me twice for reading the morning paper? Once on the doorstep and once when I read it at the breakfast table?
Travis Says:
August 3rd, 2007 at 2:35 pmDear Jim Burger:
FUCK YOU.
Sincerely,
Every Media Consumer On the Planet.
Nix Says:
August 3rd, 2007 at 3:10 pmDear broadcasters,
Gouging your customers for every penny isn’t the smartest business action. Remember companies rise and fall based on their customers.
Pushing your customers away; and they just may not return. Quick example from another media:
RIAA, I no longer buy music from “ANY” major label. All my music is from small independent publishers. Also got all my friends hooked on various independent labels. Most of my friends don’t pay the major labels; all go to the little guys. I vote with my wallet.
MPAA, your turn is coming with my dollars.
slick_rick Says:
August 3rd, 2007 at 3:20 pmPeople still watch TV? You guys should get out and enjoy life, it is a big beautiful world out there and there isn’t enough time to waste it zoning out in front of a tube!
Seriously though, stick it to the media conglomerates. Break free of your TV addiction, listen to live local music, read a book… Then these moronic idiots can’t nickel & dime you to death.
studebaker hoch Says:
August 3rd, 2007 at 3:35 pmIf the hollywood media cartel controlled the Earth’s atmosphere, you would have to pay to inhale, and then pay another fee to exhale.
Rawvegas.tv Says:
August 3rd, 2007 at 3:36 pm[…] Although were we think they are going is pay per performance, any performance of the media anywhere, pay 1.99, no matter what, even if you purchased the DVD at the store, if you want to watch it some one is going to want their 2 dollars. That would be equally as lame along the board as well. The good part though is that the video game industry, specifically Microsoft and Sony have been developing gaming systems, and computing systems specifically designed to allow this kind of media sharing. Maybe there will be enough of a rebellion at the top and bottom to keep big media from doing more bizarre stuff. [?] Share This Sphere: Related Content […]
justjoeindenver Says:
August 3rd, 2007 at 3:41 pmListen up Tivo, Apple, Microsoft. I have four tivos, an Ipod and a Zune in my house. The Tivos already have a monthly surcharge, and the very reason I purchased multiple boxes was for the convenience of wireless transfer on my home network. If you don’t fight this, I will no longer have any Tivos, etc., nor will you be getting your monthly payment from me. I don’t think that I am alone in this fight, either. Go ahead and try to charge us and watch how fast we cancel our services with a big F You…….. Of course, we all know that it will take about a minute for someone to figure out a way around your locks.
pESt Says:
August 3rd, 2007 at 3:46 pmonce you’ve paid for a dvd, it is legally yours.
you can do what you want with it.
if the industry want it otherwise,
they shouldn’t sell it in the first place.
what will be next.
can i use my refrigerator for own use,
but not for my wive’s, my neighbour’s or my friend’s?
cmon.
sold is sold.
Chris Says:
August 3rd, 2007 at 4:00 pmThis is absolutely ridiculous. What do they care if you listen to it in every room of your house? If you didn’t pay for it, then yes they have a reason to gripe. If you paid for the download, or bought the CD and ripped it, and kept the CD, it’s still yours and should be able to listen to it within your own walls whenever and however you want.
furbyides avaE avdpwv Says:
August 3rd, 2007 at 4:13 pmhow many times have you seen the villain shot, mortally wounded, and stumbling toward the edge of the roof BUT just before he falls to his death he tommyguns like four women, two childrens, and a chia pet that never got a chance to grow furgrass BECAUSE IF HE’S GONNA GO HE’S TAKING AS MANY ANYTHINGS AS HE CAN WITH HIM.
THE JOY!! WE WITNESS IT YET AGAIN!
bgkorn Says:
August 3rd, 2007 at 4:25 pmI’d better stop using that “A/B” speaker switch to send music to another room…. Not much different than sending a picture.
Tube Stake Says:
August 3rd, 2007 at 4:32 pmWhat will you do if you have to pay each and every time you view or listen to a recording you made with the devices you purchased for just such a purpose?
And…
If it’s such a hardship for the broadcasters and copyright holders to suffer Fair Use, then why not make all electronic devices incapable of anything but streaming. Then pay-per-use will be universal, and anyone caught with a copy of anything will be a criminal.
— Remember: Devices don’t proliferate illegal copies… people do.
AC Says:
August 3rd, 2007 at 5:01 pmCurrent copyright law is probably unconstitutional, unless anyone really believes that your entire life plus 80 years is a reasonable period. I wonder about corporations, and the presumption that they will remain ‘going concerns’ (accountant speak for being effectively immortal) - forever plus 80 years seems a bit too long to be considered a reasonable time limit for copyright to persist. I’d say 15 years is a reasonable term for copyright, and no longer.
It is likely that the DMCA, and successive laws, are also unconstitutional, because they will permanently subject materials to DRM restrictions even after these materials have fallen into the public domain.
I feel that the DRM perverts belong in an insane asylum, or prison - society would be better off without them
ShadowLife » Blog Archive » It reminds me of a bad Capital One Commercial Says:
August 3rd, 2007 at 8:19 pm[…] What was i rambling about? Oh yes: The Mafiaa wants you to pay every time you share stuff on your local network. […]
dooche Says:
August 3rd, 2007 at 8:49 pmfuck that
El Hombre Says:
August 3rd, 2007 at 9:24 pmhttp://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070712-research-optimal-copyright-term-is-14-years.html
An interesting article, a deviation in regards to copyright law and application. As an artist myself, these laws are unworkable and stifle not only this generations endeavors but is lethal to any future creative output.
hahaha Says:
August 3rd, 2007 at 9:48 pm“Make a move and plead the fifth cuz you can’t plead the first”
Gary Imhoff Says:
August 3rd, 2007 at 10:21 pmIf I buy a book, I can read it anywhere — at home (and in any room in my home), while traveling, or in an office. I don’t need to buy separate copies of the book to read in Europe and Asia, because the book doesn’t come with region restrictions. I can read the book as many times as I want, with no time limitations. When I’m finished with the book, I can put in on my bookshelf to keep; I can loan or give it to a friend to read, resell it to a used bookstore, or donate it to a library or charity. Until and unless electronic media — DVD’s, electronic books, downloaded music, recorded off-air television, etc. — give me the same freedom and flexibility, they won’t have the same value as a book.
Aeriana Says:
August 4th, 2007 at 5:55 amTell them to screw it by supporting indie filmmakers. Watch films like “Venus Rises”:
http://www.venusrises.tv
It’s an original sci-fi vidcast series broadcast on the internet. Good story, quality sets, and CG spaceships. And they don’t charge you to view it!
kenglish Says:
August 4th, 2007 at 9:05 amWhere do they get this “the Broadcasters” stuff?
“Broadcasters”, by definition, want to BROAD-cast to as many viewers as possible. If someone is trying to gouge anyone, it is, either the satellite and Cable TV people (who want to sell you a box+subscription for every device), or (more likely), the programmers, who want to restrict your “sharing” the programming with other devices that assist you in making copies (which THEY would like to SELL you).