This post is great
An exerpt
Shortly after the matter of cloth weaving has been disposed of, the button makers guild raises a cry of outrage; the tailors are beginning to make buttons out of cloth, an unheard-of thing. The government, indignant that an innovation should threaten a settled industry, imposes a fine on the cloth-button makers. But the wardens of the button guild are not yet satisfied. They demand the right to search people's homes and wardrobes and fine and even arrest them on the streets if they are seen wearing these subversive goods."
Requiring permission to innovate? Feeling entitled to search others' property? Getting the power to act like law enforcement in order to fine or arrest those who are taking part in activities that challenge your business model? Don't these all sound quite familiar?
I really don't understand why they don't realize the damage they are doing to themselves and to their industry. I suppose it is the frog in a pot being brought to a slow boil.
Showing posts with label MPAA and RIAA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MPAA and RIAA. Show all posts
18 January, 2007
11 December, 2006
More on RIAA, MPAA, and KAZAA
This seems to be a pretty decent blog on the RIAA, MPAA and other organizations attacking their customers.
Ray (the author of this blog) didn't seem to read the content of the third article I linked to in my weekend RIAA post but did provide some good factual context.
"After years of cat-and-mouse legal games, Zennstrom, Friis and Kazaa settled with the music industry in July for $100 million. They've rid themselves of Kazaa ownership, selling pieces in a series of legal maneuvers."
On the other hand perhaps I didn't articulate the issues in the post properly. My point was that although they had successfully settled in at least one the major cases they were in, they are apparently still being harassed. (admittedly from a different direction) This bothers me. There is no way to tell for sure but it certainly seems possible that this is a coordinated action. I would love to see someone look into who the lawyers are in the class action that Ray mentions. Are they associated with the Record Industry? If they are at the very least this is distasteful and a further example of how they are being bully's.
It is a shame that the recording industry continues to harass its most dedicated and innovative customers. If these "advocacy" organizations did their job properly then the industry's companies would see their profit margins expanding exponentially along with the growth of the Internet. Instead they choose to sue and hide their head in the sand. This is causing them to loose a lot of money.
The thing I was really stoked on was that the founder of Kazaa has set his eyes on another venue. It should be interesting to see what happens.
Ray (the author of this blog) didn't seem to read the content of the third article I linked to in my weekend RIAA post but did provide some good factual context.
"After years of cat-and-mouse legal games, Zennstrom, Friis and Kazaa settled with the music industry in July for $100 million. They've rid themselves of Kazaa ownership, selling pieces in a series of legal maneuvers."
On the other hand perhaps I didn't articulate the issues in the post properly. My point was that although they had successfully settled in at least one the major cases they were in, they are apparently still being harassed. (admittedly from a different direction) This bothers me. There is no way to tell for sure but it certainly seems possible that this is a coordinated action. I would love to see someone look into who the lawyers are in the class action that Ray mentions. Are they associated with the Record Industry? If they are at the very least this is distasteful and a further example of how they are being bully's.
It is a shame that the recording industry continues to harass its most dedicated and innovative customers. If these "advocacy" organizations did their job properly then the industry's companies would see their profit margins expanding exponentially along with the growth of the Internet. Instead they choose to sue and hide their head in the sand. This is causing them to loose a lot of money.
The thing I was really stoked on was that the founder of Kazaa has set his eyes on another venue. It should be interesting to see what happens.
09 December, 2006
RIAA Class Action
This isn't the class action I was thinking about here.
Shame
Especially since he just started this and settled with the RIAA.
I wonder if this is being manipulated behind the curtain.
Shame
Especially since he just started this and settled with the RIAA.
I wonder if this is being manipulated behind the curtain.
06 December, 2006
Bittorrent - and true virtualization - Crazy Idea?
Yesterday in my MPAA post I was a bit harsh on Bittorrent.
A number of religious adherents jumped to its defense.
My reply was basically, yes it can be used for good a tool is not in and of itself evil, but lets be honest it usually is insecure and used for less than reputable things.
They do have some good backing. They managed to Raise Money.
This is probably because they do have very innovative mechanisms of transferring data.
Something that I think would be interesting to see is a combination of Grid computing with file storage and transfer mechanisms wrapped with security layers that are easy for the end user to configure and easy for the user of the grid to use to protect their data.
A number of religious adherents jumped to its defense.
My reply was basically, yes it can be used for good a tool is not in and of itself evil, but lets be honest it usually is insecure and used for less than reputable things.
They do have some good backing. They managed to Raise Money.
This is probably because they do have very innovative mechanisms of transferring data.
Something that I think would be interesting to see is a combination of Grid computing with file storage and transfer mechanisms wrapped with security layers that are easy for the end user to configure and easy for the user of the grid to use to protect their data.
05 December, 2006
MPAA - Commits Fraud to catch "petty theft"?
Digg This
A recent Wired Article spreads some light on the mechanisms the MPAA (and probably RIAA) uses to gain information on ISP customers.
If I was a lawyer defending people being accused of trading songs I would ask questions as to how exactly they obtained the IP addresses, MAC addresses and then most importantly linked them to individuals. From a technical standpoint these items are notoriously inaccurate, with changing processes and different mechanisms between providers. It is not that it cannot be done properly but if false pretenses are used to develop the data then a chance of error is much higher.
Of course most of the people being sued by these two organizations can't afford a lawyer.
So they are essentially assumed guilty and the evidence used to accuse them is obtained by at the very least questionable practices. Possibly illegal ones.
Let me be clear here. I strongly support the rights of people or organizations to choose what they do with data they own. If they want to lock their songs and movies down so tight that no one can reasonably watch or listen to them then I support their right to do so. I have not and will not steal music. I won't let my children do it and have taken steps to make it hard for my 13 year old to even try. I basically think that anyone who installs bit torrent, Limewire or any of the other p2p products on their home computers are essentially insane and asking for a problem of some sort.
Update in Comments on the "insane" statement.
If companies want to use legitimate tactics to track down people illegally profiting on their intellectual property then I support and would even help them.
If these companies want to irrationally impede even legitimate access to a product that they make money on by trying to get as wide a paying view as possible then more power to them.
but
They will go out of business in the long run. That too is their right.
I would, however, like to know how much money the RIAA and MPAA make on these essentially indefensible law suits. How much gets passed to the members? Any?
If I was a member of one of these organizations I would be asking why it is good for an organization that I pay to advocate for me to be suing my best customers and generating such consistently bad publicity.
I would also ask them how employing questionable or outright fraudulent activities has helped reduce my declining market share and profits. Activities that only recently resulted in the ouster of the CEO of a major tech company and a shake up of its Board.
Once more, for legitimate and warranted investigations I have no problem with this. It isn't hacking or fraud if you go to a company with warrant or evidence in hand. In the long run poor decisions and tactics hinder legitimate investigations. Real hacking and fraud are bad and usually illegal (the law is often one step behind) and should be treated as such by every reputable organization. If HP didn't teach that I don't know what will.
I saw some motion for establishing a class action against these organizations based on their methods. It would seem to me that there is a growing class of individuals out there that has lost a good deal of money based in part on deceptive and possibly illegal practices. I wonder if this would help or hinder that from occurring? Any Lawyers want to educate me?
This is a continued off topic rant from here
and from Rich here
Digg This
A recent Wired Article spreads some light on the mechanisms the MPAA (and probably RIAA) uses to gain information on ISP customers.
If I was a lawyer defending people being accused of trading songs I would ask questions as to how exactly they obtained the IP addresses, MAC addresses and then most importantly linked them to individuals. From a technical standpoint these items are notoriously inaccurate, with changing processes and different mechanisms between providers. It is not that it cannot be done properly but if false pretenses are used to develop the data then a chance of error is much higher.
Of course most of the people being sued by these two organizations can't afford a lawyer.
So they are essentially assumed guilty and the evidence used to accuse them is obtained by at the very least questionable practices. Possibly illegal ones.
Let me be clear here. I strongly support the rights of people or organizations to choose what they do with data they own. If they want to lock their songs and movies down so tight that no one can reasonably watch or listen to them then I support their right to do so. I have not and will not steal music. I won't let my children do it and have taken steps to make it hard for my 13 year old to even try. I basically think that anyone who installs bit torrent, Limewire or any of the other p2p products on their home computers are essentially insane and asking for a problem of some sort.
Update in Comments on the "insane" statement.
If companies want to use legitimate tactics to track down people illegally profiting on their intellectual property then I support and would even help them.
If these companies want to irrationally impede even legitimate access to a product that they make money on by trying to get as wide a paying view as possible then more power to them.
but
They will go out of business in the long run. That too is their right.
I would, however, like to know how much money the RIAA and MPAA make on these essentially indefensible law suits. How much gets passed to the members? Any?
If I was a member of one of these organizations I would be asking why it is good for an organization that I pay to advocate for me to be suing my best customers and generating such consistently bad publicity.
I would also ask them how employing questionable or outright fraudulent activities has helped reduce my declining market share and profits. Activities that only recently resulted in the ouster of the CEO of a major tech company and a shake up of its Board.
Once more, for legitimate and warranted investigations I have no problem with this. It isn't hacking or fraud if you go to a company with warrant or evidence in hand. In the long run poor decisions and tactics hinder legitimate investigations. Real hacking and fraud are bad and usually illegal (the law is often one step behind) and should be treated as such by every reputable organization. If HP didn't teach that I don't know what will.
I saw some motion for establishing a class action against these organizations based on their methods. It would seem to me that there is a growing class of individuals out there that has lost a good deal of money based in part on deceptive and possibly illegal practices. I wonder if this would help or hinder that from occurring? Any Lawyers want to educate me?
This is a continued off topic rant from here
and from Rich here
Digg This
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
