Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. Senators Introduce SMART Copyright Act to Combat Piracy

torrentfreak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 105 posts

Re: U.S. Senators Introduce SMART Copyright Act to Combat Piracy

#41

Post by drusepth »

rhn_mk1 wrote: post #25
bitwize wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are not entitled to any movies or television shows at any quality at all because it's not your IP. If someone wants to shoot a movie and then lock it in a vault, never to be seen by anyone, Prince-style, that is their right. If they want to change it to remove and permanently memory-hole offensive elements, that is their right. If they want to release it only in certain formats, up to and including theatrical-onl…

Well I don't like the law. Should we keep it just because it's the law? That'd be committing the is-ought fallacy: https://www.txstate.edu/philosophy/resources/fallacy-definit...

I would guess the general consensus is that you should change the law, but abide by it while it's still the law.

Re: U.S. Senators Introduce SMART Copyright Act to Combat Piracy

#42

Post by uncomputation »

uncomputation wrote: post #35

Fascinating how greed and the demand for ever increasing profits leads to these cycles of purchase and privacy. First we had physical DVDs but studios’ greed in extending the theater playtime as long as profitable resulted in bootleg recordings so people could watch at home. Then torrenting was the final nail to this physical media strategy. Netflix arose, consolidating content into an even easier experience than tor…

Also framing the discussion of whether or not you are entitled to view media or not is a dead end IMO. Rather than do the typical Western philosophy thing and try to define and rationalize “property” or “rights,” let’s look at the world as is, as a system of incentives and rational actors.

If it is easy to watch $(UK-licensed TV show) from America, people will do it and then the production and distribution companies get exactly 0 dollars and in fact will lose money fighting a losing whack-a-mole war against torrents.

If it is easy to log in to netflix dot com (NOTE: netflix, not (NFLX | DIS | HBO | AMZN | HULU | NBC)) to watch $(show), people will do that and you can let Netflix and production companies fight about the beans.

Re: U.S. Senators Introduce SMART Copyright Act to Combat Piracy

#43

Post by [deleted] »

uo21tp5hoyg wrote: post #5

I don't pirate music, I don't pirate games, I don't pirate software, I don't pirate anything but TV and movies and the reason is simple: piracy is a service problem for me. I know where to get music/games/software, I have no idea where to get the movies and TV I want to watch, they're spread over 20 different services, 90% of which are not available in my country and the ones that are don't have that specific content…

[deleted]

Re: U.S. Senators Introduce SMART Copyright Act to Combat Piracy

#44

Post by [deleted] »

sschueller wrote: post #7

What sucks is how the US will pressure the rest of the world to also implement this garbage. https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/downloading-and-uploading_what-... I am going to cancel my Netflix and start pirating because am not going to pay more than Germans for netflix and get an even smaller catalog than they get. Germany already pays more than the US for a much smaller catalog. We just get take to the cleaner just beca…

[deleted]

Re: U.S. Senators Introduce SMART Copyright Act to Combat Piracy

#45

Post by jacobolus »

542458 wrote: post #6
Arubis wrote: post #4

Setting aside the arguments around infringement equaling/not equaling actual theft, is the actual incidence of piracy high enough that it's on beancounters' radar? I may be wrong, but my impression is that streaming made it a non-issue. This feels like a smokescreen.

I can't speak to media piracy, but I previously did work with a large supplier of professional software. This is not stuff people often use for fun, and the software had free and easy-to-get student versions available. The software still saw 80+% piracy in many markets according to internal metrics. This is a big part of why companies are so enthusiastic about cloud everything - recurring revenue is nice, but unpirat…

Tools like Photoshop, Ableton, ArcGIS, Maya, AutoCAD, or Matlab rely on widespread piracy to remain the industry standard (also cheaper student versions and university site licenses, but those aren’t enough by themselves), and make up the lost income by soaking professional users from established firms. If large numbers of people can’t affordably access these, they will adopt some alternative cheaper tool and ultimately bleed users, understanding, and activity away.

Re: U.S. Senators Introduce SMART Copyright Act to Combat Piracy

#47

Post by ASalazarMX »

uo21tp5hoyg wrote: post #5

I don't pirate music, I don't pirate games, I don't pirate software, I don't pirate anything but TV and movies and the reason is simple: piracy is a service problem for me. I know where to get music/games/software, I have no idea where to get the movies and TV I want to watch, they're spread over 20 different services, 90% of which are not available in my country and the ones that are don't have that specific content…

If companies don't make content available in your country, they don't have a reasonable case for complaining about piracy. You were never a customer to begin with, so no profit is being lost.

Yes, they might complain that they were going to make that content available in your country after they have extracted as much profit as possible through geofencing, which further erodes their case because then they already made more profit than they would without geofencing.

Re: U.S. Senators Introduce SMART Copyright Act to Combat Piracy

#48

Post by xanaxagoras »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #32
perihelions wrote: post #9

Would a government-mandated upload filter pass constitutional scrutiny?

Interesting question. My first instinct was to answer "no", but after thinking a bit more, I'm less sure. Does a red light camera pass constitutional scrutiny? I think it's kind of the same logic: the law in question is constitutional; the new thing is just automating enforcement. The upload filter might be a bit different, though, because it's mandated on private servers . Is that enough to swing the question? I rea…

> The upload filter might be a bit different, though, because it's mandated on private servers.

Would it be? They can make you do all sorts of things on private land. Ever tried to renovate a home in CA?

Re: U.S. Senators Introduce SMART Copyright Act to Combat Piracy

#49

Post by Program_Install »

I can't believe this is still a thing, from both sides. There is no stopping piracy or greed, maybe some speed bumps here and there. For the pirates its an access issue, that can range from "can't afford" to "can't see it" to simply just "I am cheap". For the companies, it's profits, pure and simple. I always wonder though how they quantify taking into consideration most pirates weren't going to purchase movie/music anyway.

Re: U.S. Senators Introduce SMART Copyright Act to Combat Piracy

#50

Post by kobalsky »

ipnon wrote: post #8

It's getting to the point that services will simply be hosted outside the United States, the index page will say "this site shall not be used by United States citizens," and then people can go about using the Web like it already works anyway . It seems Senators don't understand well what it is they're trying to accomplish because they don't understand how the Web works.

> this site shall not be used by United States citizens

so megaupload with a disclaimer? kim dotcom is still fighting extradition.

Post reply on HN