3 ms·

You're still giving the industry way too much credit for being reasonable. This is not a case of 600MB files named "Thor (2011)" that aren't Thor. In the link

You're still giving the industry way too much credit for being reasonable. This is not a case of 600MB files named "Thor (2011)" that aren't Thor. In the link above, you can see that Warner Bros., having the copyright to the film "The Box" and the Harry Potter films went on to issue takedown notices for: - Things that sounded sort of maybe like "The Box", like "The Box That Changed Britain" and "Cancer Step Outsider of the Box" (sic) - Portuguese Harry Potter fanfiction unrelated to the films - Open-source software that Warner Bros. didn't approve of since it might speed up downloads - "URLs" such as "http://hotfile.com/contacts.html http://hotfile.com/contacts.html and give them the details of where the link wasposted and the link and they will deal to the @sshole who posted the fake." Does that really represent a reasonable effort on their part to get it right?

mattmanser 15y ago
Yes, I do agree somewhat, there should have been someone checking the matching as well as some oversight on the employees. I find it odd that someone would get so indignant that they'd take down an OSS piece of software. But in the end the music/film industry has been asked, with little to no programming skills, to try and regulate the web industry, who's livelihood depends on lots of programming skill. I think YouTube have moved strategically as they can see where that's ultimately going to end up, with a swing back towards sites doing the filtering.
- Vivtek 15y ago
  The music/film industry has not been asked to try to regulate the Web industry. Instead, the music/film industry has demanded the right to do whatever the hell they like, with no oversight, no due process, and no hindrance, to ensure their own profits to the exclusion of all other considerations. It's bad for the artists, bad for consumers, extremely bad in terms of collateral damage to the Internet and society alike, and ultimately bad for the music and film industry themselves. Every study done by independent observers, every bit of evidence that is examined by people not being paid for alarmism, every new scandal that comes out, underscores the short-sightedness, venality, and sheer moral failure of the bozos running that show, and yet true to form, Congress continues to lick their spittle for a couple nickels come payday. It's time they got theirs. Seriously.

mattmanser 15y ago

Yes, I do agree somewhat, there should have been someone checking the matching as well as some oversight on the employees. I find it odd that someone would get so indignant that they'd take down an OSS piece of software. But in the end the music/film industry has been asked, with little to no programming skills, to try and regulate the web industry, who's livelihood depends on lots of programming skill. I think YouTube have moved strategically as they can see where that's ultimately going to end up, with a swing back towards sites doing the filtering.

Vivtek 15y ago
The music/film industry has not been asked to try to regulate the Web industry. Instead, the music/film industry has demanded the right to do whatever the hell they like, with no oversight, no due process, and no hindrance, to ensure their own profits to the exclusion of all other considerations. It's bad for the artists, bad for consumers, extremely bad in terms of collateral damage to the Internet and society alike, and ultimately bad for the music and film industry themselves. Every study done by independent observers, every bit of evidence that is examined by people not being paid for alarmism, every new scandal that comes out, underscores the short-sightedness, venality, and sheer moral failure of the bozos running that show, and yet true to form, Congress continues to lick their spittle for a couple nickels come payday. It's time they got theirs. Seriously.