4 ms·
No I do not mean copyright should be abolished. No It's fundamental security guard for producers. But as you mention current situation with copyright handling i
by fsniper 15y ago
No I do not mean copyright should be abolished. No It's fundamental security guard for producers. But as you mention current situation with copyright handling is a mess.
File sharing must be a right and this desire should be fulfilled via content producers. Making people ache for buying content and going after people making it easier is not a way to make consumers happy.
Nobody wants to watch 15 minutes of undesired videos and adds. Instead they go pirate. Nobody wants to buy physical media anymore. Nobody likes DRM content which disables them even using two different players for their enjoyment. Even yet, Hollywood and Music producers are making more and more money.
This is where the producers are making the wrong. They believe they have the every sole right to put their consumers to agony. And if someone tries to lower this pain, it's in no way can be rightful. They just try to punish them for their efforts. As we have seen with Hulu.com, Groveshark.com or last.fm. The producers are greedy. If these sites pay royalties or not, they are not happy and they do want more. They want them to make their way of restriction for their customers. In the first place these sites are here for not using that restrictions.
So everytime the consumers lose. Government and producers could sit on a table with piratebay or btjunkie and think how could the situation be solved by working together. Everybody could win.
For the SOPA side of the story,
I'm living in Turkey. And I do know what could SOPA do to Internet. Because we have 5651 and BTK and living in agony. Turkish government department for information security mails websites to do self-censorship. They do hijack dns without court orders and without reasoning. SOPA is not about filesharing. It's about Governments and Producers right for censorship.
And by the way these two subjects are really not related.
- furyofantares 15y agoI agree with the majority of this post. It would benefit everyone involved if those who produce content would get up to speed with technology. However! > This is where the producers are making the wrong. They believe they have the every sole right to put their consumers to agony. They are not putting us through agony by producing content and then fumbling the delivery. They have no obligation to us to produce the content we want in the way we want to consume it: At worst they are not affecting us at all. We can simply not consume the content. If you consume content in a way that agonizes you, that is your own decision. > And by the way these two subjects are really not related. Presumably you mean SOPA and btjunkie are not related? This discussion thread is stemming from the claim that they are related. I assumed that was where you were coming from.
- fsniper 15y agoI'm sorry about saying these subjects are not related. I was wrong. But consumers are why these producers are in business. They must fulfil their needs and desires to stay in business. But you are right about not consuming. But this would be possible if there are alternatives. But there is a war on alternatives because they can not be legal, or they are pushed to their limits where they can not compete with the mainstream players. By the way, by saying producers, most of the time I mean, distributors or production companies. Not actors or musicians.
- batista 15y agoBy the way, by saying producers, most of the time I mean, distributors or production companies. Not actors or musicians. A lot of the times, and for a lot of popular content, the production company IS the producer/artist and not the actor or director. I.e the whole "vision" of the thing is not artistic in any way, just a scheme by some marketing guys in a production company to make some dough. Like almost all blockbuster movies, lots of top-10 billboard artists, teen idols, etc. Those aren't much "created" as they are "produced", usually by committee.