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

Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

torrentfreak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 290 posts

Re: Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

#51

Post by wredue »

absrec wrote: post #36
wredue wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people pirate to get stuff for free. If everything was cheaply, easily available, piracy would exist at similar numbers. Now, I do agree that “one pirate number doesn’t necessarily equate to one lost sale”. But that’s not what you’re arguing. Pirates have been saying this for decades, and yet despite content being easier than ever, with pricing falling faster than ever (non-streaming services), piracy is as heal…

Music piracy is almost non-existent post spotify. Streaming service fragmentation and geolocking has resulted in more video piracy but it still is less compared to what it was.

Did you actually look that up, or are you just believing it cause piracy forums say it? Cause I did just look it up, and you’re not correct.

The ways that music piracy occurs has changed, for sure.

Re: Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

#52

Post by nikanj »

pessimizer wrote: post #43

I like this case. It's about recordings that are 70 years old or more, the vast majority are out of print, and the rest are often precariously in print. If I'm reading correctly, the silly nature of the claim that > [...] of the 2,749 recordings listed in the complaint, all but a “small sample” are already available to stream or download from licensed online platforms so they “face no danger of being lost, forgotten,…

Oh no, not free and unlimited access to art! Anything but that!

Re: Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

#53

Post by raincole »

isykt wrote: post #18
xhkkffbf wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How? Set up your own record label and implement your wish list of better terms. If you're reading hacker news, there's a good chance you can do most of the coding for free/stock/spec. Then you can be like totally cool about piracy and drink all of the kool aid about how piracy is just a different form of promotion. My guess is that you'll come to the same conclusion as me: piracy destroys marketplaces. It forces the…

> how expensive it can be to market music. Did you write this comment in 2001? The cost to produce and promote music has dropped to near zero. SoundCloud rappers have become millionaires. Billie Eilesh recorded her first album in her bedroom.

Recording album is not marketing.

If you think there is no marketing and PR people behinds those "grassroots superstars", you're utterly naive.

Re: Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

#55

Post by sschueller »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #37
vaylian wrote: post #5

What is the best way to let these greedy bastards know that we disagree with their conduct? Not buying records will only lead to them wrongfully claiming that they "lost revenue due to piracy".

Ransomware with no key provided from a jurisdiction that won’t extradite if discussing threat modeling around generic org weaknesses. Everyone is vulnerable to a sufficiently resourced attack, one simply needs to understand their adversary’s defense budget (incident response arrangement, cyber insurance limits) and attack surface. Educational purposes only, not legal advice, don’t do this.

So DRM...

Re: Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

#56

Post by ghaff »

absrec wrote: post #36
wredue wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people pirate to get stuff for free. If everything was cheaply, easily available, piracy would exist at similar numbers. Now, I do agree that “one pirate number doesn’t necessarily equate to one lost sale”. But that’s not what you’re arguing. Pirates have been saying this for decades, and yet despite content being easier than ever, with pricing falling faster than ever (non-streaming services), piracy is as heal…

Music piracy is almost non-existent post spotify. Streaming service fragmentation and geolocking has resulted in more video piracy but it still is less compared to what it was.

An analyst I know once argued pretty strongly that Napster became popular not because it was free but because it was more convenient than going to the record store and buying a CD. I disagreed fairly strongly at the time. But today? Times are quite different of course but widespread streaming music with a near-universal (at least mainstream) catalog suggests that a ton of people are fine with paying $15/month to not bother seeking out content through torrents.

While the situation is obviously messier with video, it's also the case that many of us don't feel a burning need to watch most specific content and are fine with having access to enough stuff we want to watch without hassle.

Re: Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

#57

Post by dano »

vaylian wrote: post #5

What is the best way to let these greedy bastards know that we disagree with their conduct? Not buying records will only lead to them wrongfully claiming that they "lost revenue due to piracy".

The answer is not palatable because it will take forever: contact your representatives in the federal government and lobby for copyright reform. IA might be luck they were not sued for more. I believe the MP3.com lawsuit is relevant reading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UMG_Recordings,_Inc._v._MP3.co....

Re: Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

#58

Post by isykt »

echelon wrote: post #27
drewbug01 wrote: post #21

> “When Defendants exploit Plaintiffs’ sound recordings without authorization, neither Plaintiffs nor their artists see a dime. All of the artists are dead. > Not only does this harm Plaintiffs and the artists or their heirs by depriving them of compensation, Hereditary wealth and continued rent-seeking is a very, very poor argument in favor of eternal copyright protection. > but it undermines the value of music,” th…

[flagged]

Copyright should be life of the authors full stop. My dad dug ditches for half his life but I don’t get checks in the mail every time water flows through them.

Re: Record labels hit Internet Archive with new copyright lawsuit

#59

Post by kmeisthax »

naasking wrote: post #9
staplers wrote: post #3

The movie and music business sure spends a lot of money fighting piracy. This fruitless endeavor draws a lot of parallels with the war on drugs.

> The movie and music business sure spends a lot of money fighting piracy. If they spent it on providing a no-bullshit, reasonably priced platform that provides access to their whole catalog, then they would be making a lot more money than they would from lawsuits, and piracy would be virtually non-existent.

Yes and no. Making music ubiquitous has been great for stomping out piracy but terrible for revenues. This isn't just a problem of underpricing. In the movies and TV space, all the studios found out that exclusive licensing makes more money because you can drag viewers from one subscription service to another. At the most extreme you have shit like the Disney Vault, which works because some creative work is worth more dead than alive.

If you were correct we would have stuck with everything being on Netflix and Spotify for $10/mo each because it keeps piracy rates down. In practice, while piracy rates have gone back up, they don't hurt the bottom lines of publishers as much as they've claimed[0], at least relative to how much they make from people buying multiple subscriptions. But the law allows them to continue crying crocodile tears about how much money they're losing from old sound recordings being on an archive site.

[0] In other words, one pirate copy is not one lost sale

Post reply on HN