Megaupload shitdown

[pablo d]

Sure have from this thread...



Yet that doesn't mean its right or i'm gonna defend it.

So we have............exactly the same viewpoint :s

I just think it's bullshit that Kim/MU is being made the scapegoat and that we're sucking the states' cock because of their industry-funded lobbyists.

[Retardobot]

I'm happy to see this Kim guy fall.

Purely because he appears to be a giant douchebag.

This tirade that the anons have going on due to his capture however seems to be a bit misguided.

Fucking love the thread title by the way.

[Bell]

So we have............exactly the same viewpoint :s

I just think it's bullshit that Kim/MU is being made the scapegoat and that we're sucking the states' cock because of their industry-funded lobbyists.

My rant was aimed not just at you but at the large group of users on this site that spout the same arguments about why their piracy is ok.
Most of us do things that go against our principles all the time and we are experts at coming up with justifications for our actions, it's part of the human condition.

MU is in the wrong, it's hard to pin them on the law due to the way the internet works but a blind man can see they are in the business of piracy.
The court case will be interesting, hopefully they can pin him for something and they get afew others.
I'm guessing they actually found something solid on this group, and that's why they have been targeted.

[nick247]

So we have............exactly the same viewpoint :s

I just think it's bull$#@! that Kim/MU is being made the scapegoat and that we're sucking the states' $#@! because of their industry-funded lobbyists.

His company at most was refusing to remove copyrighted content that they did not own the distribution rights to and at the very least was doing nearly nothing to police the content following requests from copyright holders.
Youtube, on the otherhand, is very active at taking down copyrighted material at the behest of the copyright holder.

[nick247]

Their decision is fine - they don't want to distribute their creation freely. Thats great, but there is a difference between free distribution and copying on the internet. Not to mention the Irony that the industries that are pushing for these changes got Rich by blatantly and intentionally breaking Copyright/Patent laws. There is also a fair amount of evidence to backup the assertation that a looser approach to copyright enforcement promotes creativity which ultimately benefits the Industry by driving more revenue.
 

They arent free under the status quo because people will just take what they want regardless of the creator/license holders wishes. They dont get to make that decision. Just because something is good business doesnt mean the consumer gets to force a company to adopt that practice. That is the business' choice and it is very important that they are free to make that choice.

If it turns out that putting out free music is a great way to drive sales elsewhere then it would be great to see more companies doing that. But I completely support the right of the that one company to NOT do that, even if it puts them out of business.

We dont live in a society where we can just take what we want. The right to own and control your property is a very important right in our society. It far outweighs this sense of entitlement to music,TV, movies etc.

[pablo d]

His company refused to remove copyrighted content that they did not own the distribution rights to.

Inaccurate and misleading statement. MU actively complied with DMCA takedown requests, the problem was that they keep some of that content on their backend servers (for lulz??).

[The Demon Lord]

They arent free under the status quo because people will just take what they want regardless of the creator/license holders wishes. They dont get to make that decision. Just because something is good business doesnt mean the consumer gets to force a company to adopt that practice. That is the business' choice and it is very important that they are free to make that choice.

We dont live in a society where we can just take what we want. The right to own and control your property is a very important right in our society. It far outweighs this sense of entitlement to music,TV, movies etc.

Funnily enough, they do make that decision with frequent regularity. such as Apple vs Android, this incident etc.

As for the Consumer forcing a company to adopt practices - there is a phrase for that: Free Market Economy - The customer is always right. In this instance, Consumers can and DO get to force companies to adopt better business practices - just look at the difference in the Internet Market in NZ over the last 10 years when public pressure (and eventually Government intervention) forced companies to do away with Profit maximising business practices in favour of more equitable and Free market practices.

And while it is the business choice to choose practices designed to restrict content in order to maximise profit and screw the consumer, I personally have no sympathy when the consumer bites back at the outdated and draconian business practices in order to de-restrict content which history has shown promotes creativity and the generation of New content.

There is a right to own and control your own property - like I have the right to own a car and drive my car when I like.

but now I sell you my car, hand you over the keys after you pay me a fee for my car.

You now have the right to own that Car and Drive that car when you like.

Except when it comes to entertainment media, this isn't the case. You don't own the car, the company does. Sure you can drive it when you like, but you can't drive it with more than 4 people in, you can't recieve gas money from your friend for giving him a lift, you can't lend your car to your mate. You can only drive on supported roads and if you try and circumvent the measures put in place to stop you from driving on other roads, you are doing something illegal.

I agree with some points that the Copyright laws ARE outdated and a lot does need to be done to protect both the companies and the consumers. The problem is that the companies want to make laws (by Bribing - I mean 'Lobbying' US congress) that tip the scales completely in their favour, to the Detrement of an entire industry that has done far more good in 30 years than a lot of these companies have done in 100 and also to the detrement of the public at large.

Whereas what they should be doing is working on ways to make content more freely/easily availible to the global market. Someone in Uzbekistan wants to watch the lates Game of Thrones online? Sure! no problem, here is a site where he can watch it for a reasonable monthly fee. Someone in Venezuala wants to watch the latest blockbuster a few days after its US release? No worries - the movie is already showing in his local Cinema. but instead of working towards a Solution, they insist that might and greed is right. When you combine this attitude with the obscene profits that they are still making whilst playing the 'O Woe is me' and 'Poor, financially crippled us' cards, it makes it impossible for me to have any sympathy for the large corporations who are responsible for the lobbying - I mean bribing governments into making laws in their favour.

[5tacK]

http://www.3news.co.nz/Kim-Dotcom-is-worlds-best-Call-of-Duty-MW3-player/tabid/418/articleID/240456/Default.aspx

http://kotaku.com/5878337/arrested-megaupload-boss-cheated-his-way-to-video-game-glory-opponents-say

[Zarkov]

Bell owns you guys.

[Bell]

As for the Consumer forcing a company to adopt practices - there is a phrase for that: Free Market Economy - The customer is always right.

Pretty hard to break out the economic theory when the customer is paying nothing for the goods.

[The Demon Lord]

Pretty hard to break out the economic theory when the customer is paying nothing for the goods.

on the contrary - Consumers NOT paying for a commodity is probably one of the biggest forms of Economic protest...

[Bell]

I hate apples prices so i'm going to steal some iphones?

I think you meant not "BUYING" as in not paying anything or receiving the good because you feel it isn't priced correctly.

[pyro]

My rant was aimed not just at you but at the large group of users on this site that spout the same arguments about why their piracy is ok.
Most of us do things that go against our principles all the time and we are experts at coming up with justifications for our actions, it's part of the human condition.

MU is in the wrong, it's hard to pin them on the law due to the way the internet works but a blind man can see they are in the business of piracy.
The court case will be interesting, hopefully they can pin him for something and they get afew others.
I'm guessing they actually found something solid on this group, and that's why they have been targeted.

Where have I ever said piracy was ok and defended it. My point was the same idiots that are jumping up and down about MU much like yourself, have no problems with places like Youtube purely because it doesn't have material that you want. To say youtube has its procedures in place and it keeps it 100% clean is trash. There are music clips, tv shows and docos that have been up for years which are in clear breach of the copyrights. Youtube has only more recently been pulling music files from clips after it figured out a way to make money of it.

You can say all you like but its a fact youtube has a shitload of copyrighted material exactly like all the filesharing websites, just because its not in the amount that the filesharing sites have doesn't mean its above the law.

[pablo d]

This is a stupid argument.

Bell - are you suggesting the entertainment industry doesn't need to evolve? We just need more legislation to punish their potential customers? And people should feel more guilty about pirating stuff?

[Bell]

It's not above the law, but I disagree that youtube is in the business of making money of piracy, yes technically it happens but they actively take steps to stop it.
Music files and recent movies get taken down really quickly with the use of automatic software.

If the executives running youtube are actively seeking to make money from piracy then sure lock them up.

I bet if we could somehow get the numbers of copyrighted material vs legal material on youtube vs MU there would be a vast difference.
You guys aren't stupid, you know that the place to get your favourite TV show isn't youtube its a filelocker.

It's about intent and intent is nine tenths of the law.

[Bell]

This is a stupid argument.

Bell - are you suggesting the entertainment industry doesn't need to evolve? We just need more legislation to punish their potential customers? And people should feel more guilty about pirating stuff?

No, Yes and Yes

[pablo d]

No, Yes and Yes

Fair enough.

Can I add that content producers still make money out of consumers when they watch a pirated movie or tv show?

[Bell]

I don't see how any of the artists on my playlist right now have made any money from me pirating their stuff.

[pablo d]

I don't see how any of the artists on my playlist right now have made any money from me pirating their stuff.

I specifically didn't mention music

[Bell]

Alright how did me pirating 4 seasons of 30 rock help make content creators money?

[pablo d]

Alright how did me pirating 4 seasons of 30 rock help make content creators money?

Product Placement.

[Bell]

So how do the advertising companies know I've watched the show?

[5tacK]

Product Placement.

lol

[pablo d]

So how do the advertising companies know I've watched the show?

They may not know that *you* have watched the show but they know roughly how many hundred thousand pirate scum like you have downloaded it. You think you don't count in the viewership numbers because you didn't pay to watch it?

lol

How does advertising work on your planet then?

[Retardobot]

I got uber-ragey when playing Alan Wake.

OH HEY, I'M A FUCKING VERIZON BILLBOARD, LOOK AT ME, I TAKE UP 90% OF YOUR SCREEN. FUCKING LOOK AT ME.

If you're going to do product placement, whore the shit out of it so it looks like belongs.