Thread: Modern Copyright Laws

As technology improves and more and it is easy to copy large amounts of data through computers and the internet, copyright laws are being broken at alarming rates. Never in history has so much information been available at your finger tips. The ability to download a copyrighted work in just a matter of seconds and give it to someone else in just a few more seconds is unbelievable.

The copyright laws have seemed to not apply or not fit these circumstances. If anyone has seen "Steal This Film," a documentary about file sharing put out by the creators of The Pirate Bay, you will know what I am talking about here. There was a similar event in history like the p2p revolution today. It was called the printing press. Information use to be locked up from many people and not accessible without the copyright owner's permission. When the printing press was created, smugglers started smuggling the copyrighted works out of the country of France and making copies and sharing the information.

Because of this invention, there were copyright wars against the smugglers and the police and French governments. Many citizens of surrounding countries were seen as loyal citizens, but in France, they were seen as "Pirates" and were wanted men.

In 1788, the French government collapsed and a new public opinion and views emerged. People saw copying books and sharing information as acceptable. Copying is in our human nature. When a new technology is created that allows copying, it changes how we share information and it can shape peoples' habits and how they relate to other people.

New media must adapt to the circumstances, not fight it or prevent them. What the government and what the copyright owners are doing today, is the exact opposite from what they should be doing. They should not be preventing us from sharing information or communicating, but rather adapting to it or encouraging it.



Personally, I believe that the copyright owners must stop what they are doing and begin to handle p2p in a different way. Rather than viewing as a bad thing, they should change their laws and adapt to the changes in technologies of today.

Source: YouTube - Steal This Film II

What do you think?

Not like they could apprehend every single person that downloaded a copyrighted ******* .mp3 from somewhere...

One of the idea that i liked few bands have come up is to distribute songs for free via p2p till they are popular and then they hold concerts.In this way they earn a lot of money , they also sell the cds of that concert just after the concert is over.Most people tend to buy them.

I agree with this. Companies need to adapt a new business model. In regards to movies and music, CDs and DVD's are a lazy business model. The companies take one product and reproduce them at next no to cost and markup a ridiculous amount for the product. The cost was already covered through theater and concert sales, so why push for more when they are not willing to do the work?

To think, this may have all been accepted had Metallica not sue Napster.

Copyright Laws were always meant to be broken. Publishers keep forgetting that in the past they were the ones who were the copyright infringers. Books printed using the printing press from handwritten copies were the first examples of copyright infringement. In fact, if the "copyright" holders had won, we would still be copying books and other printed material by hand. Intellectual laws are meant to be pushed. Everytime we push, it seems a new methodology or a new technology is developed to break it. In this way, our society is advancing as a whole.

people will be caught for violating them, but i can safely say not all. Its too much a hassle to round up all copyright infringers. That would be like almost 50% of the population. or more.

Originally Posted by OrangeTicTac

I agree with this. Companies need to adapt a new business model. In regards to movies and music, CDs and DVD's are a lazy business model. The companies take one product and reproduce them at next no to cost and markup a ridiculous amount for the product. The cost was already covered through theater and concert sales, so why push for more when they are not willing to do the work?

To think, this may have all been accepted had Metallica not sue Napster.

I agree with you here. But it is a business, and the greed is what started p2p to begin with. If it cost total of $1.00 to make a CD/DVD and the company sells this for 1000 to 2000 percent markup($1.00 x 1000% = $10.00) you have to figure that people are going to figure out how to get that CD/DVD cheaper.

Originally Posted by RonWD

Personally, I believe that the copyright owners must stop what they are doing and begin to handle p2p in a different way. Rather than viewing as a bad thing, they should change their laws and adapt to the changes in technologies of today.

Source: YouTube - Steal This Film II

What do you think?

Perhaps industries ought to form a united front online for trade. They could build ERP's and CRM's based upon a proven customer buyer ratio offering discounted incentives. If all the game suppliers sold through a few main outlets it could be regulated in a capitalist way. Imagine paying 50 $ a year to play new Steam games at 10 $ a pop from the author legally vs. 60$ per license per game... I might do it. Suppose I get 0 dayreleases that are R5 or better type for movies, by buying into Universal Studios site for 50$ a year. Not like paying cable, this is a cheap resolution for some possibly expensive habits like renting games trying out software or buying a DVD. Although this sort of altruism requires an effort, seeding in order to promote the product via word-of-mouth. Most people never buy the software and just leech which defeats the entire purpose. That is, getting the best value by shopping in your pajamas using cutting edge technology.:001_tongue: