> Last year, one study reported that digital video piracy costs the U.S. economy $29.2 billion a year.
"One study," funded by people who also -- just by mere coincidence -- gave a lot of money to Thom Tillis' election campaign.
Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming
21–30 of 509 posts
Re: Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming
#22"Last year, one study reported that digital video piracy costs the U.S. economy $29.2 billion a year." Well, I'd say that it in fact saves $30 billion a year. People can use it to buy more important stuff - such as food.
It's a common misconception that piracy is a loss of business. It's nothing more than an overestimation in profits. How can companies say they lose profit when the only realistic way I see for that is someone getting a refund and spending it on a competitor?
When I have sought out an 'illegal' stream, it is because I deemed that piece of media not worth paying for.
Either the price is too high [0] or I can't trust the company to put out good media.
[0]: For instance, paying $30 for a limited license to stream Mulan a month early. You don't own it (Disney can and will take it off Disney+), the only benefit is seeing it early and it costs Disney nearly nothing to distribute to another person.
Re: Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming
#23"Last year, one study reported that digital video piracy costs the U.S. economy $29.2 billion a year." Well, I'd say that it in fact saves $30 billion a year. People can use it to buy more important stuff - such as food.
I suspect those figures are assuming three things...
a) Wildly inflated estimates of views.
b) That the viewer would have purchased the content if the pirated content were not available.
c) All purchases in "b)" would be at the highest price the content was ever offered at.
Re: Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming
#24Can someone explain this? What is illegal streaming? Streaming copyrighted content? Isn't that already illegal?
"Under current law, only violations of the reproduction and distribution rights of copyright owners can be charged as felonies, while criminal infringement via streaming (or “publicly performing”) can only be charged as a misdemeanor. This is known as the streaming loophole – and it is particularly harmful to the U.S. economy because streaming has become the most common form of criminal copyright infringement."
Re: Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming
#25"Last year, one study reported that digital video piracy costs the U.S. economy $29.2 billion a year." Well, I'd say that it in fact saves $30 billion a year. People can use it to buy more important stuff - such as food.
It's a common misconception that piracy is a loss of business. It's nothing more than an overestimation in profits. How can companies say they lose profit when the only realistic way I see for that is someone getting a refund and spending it on a competitor?
It may not be everyone, but there are a number of pirates who would buy a subscription to a legal streaming service if illegal streaming was not as easily available.
Re: Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming
#26If the United States’ populace elects its officials, why do the representatives act against the populace’s wishes? Is this typical of all governments with elected representation? Are they solving different organizational problems that most people are not aware of? I am curious how such a system arises, maintains itself, and is resilient to change.
The agents in a system tends to work in the way the system incentivizes them. Understand the forces of these incentives to predict behavior.
Re: Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming
#27Finally someone stands up for the little guys, like major league sports, film production companies, and cable networks
Re: Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming
#28Still think its all about COVID?
Re: Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming
#29"Last year, one study reported that digital video piracy costs the U.S. economy $29.2 billion a year." Well, I'd say that it in fact saves $30 billion a year. People can use it to buy more important stuff - such as food.
It's a common misconception that piracy is a loss of business. It's nothing more than an overestimation in profits. How can companies say they lose profit when the only realistic way I see for that is someone getting a refund and spending it on a competitor?
The idea is that every pirate copy is a lost sale. Of course, that ignores people who would never buy the product if it cost anything. But it is partly true as some people would pirate over spending if it’s available.
There’s also the flipside of some pirates turning into paid customers (think Photoshop).
Then there’s the fact that the number is vastly inflated as some people use the $150,000 maximum fine as the cost of a pirate copy. Never mind the fact that it was actually $5 (or whatever) of “lost” revenue.
Re: Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming
#30How is this changing anything? We already have DMCA.
YouTube has every show you can think of, including live streams. Will this somehow make it more of a problem for content hosts to screen for ownership?