Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming
41–50 of 509 posts
Re: Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming
#42If 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.
Re: Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming
#43Re: Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
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
#45Re: Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming
#46"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.
Re: Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming
#47Good thing there is TOR.
part of my job is to monitor tor and find people from using it, easier than you'd think.. so i wouldn't bankshot on that alone
Re: Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 distribut…
Re: Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming
#49Re: Tillis Releases Text of Bipartisan Legislation to Fight Illegal Streaming
#50If 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.
'that rich people and organizations representing business interests have a powerful grip on U.S. government policy. After examining differences in public opinion across income groups on a wide variety of issues, the political scientists Martin Gilens, of Princeton, and Benjamin Page, of Northwestern, found that the preferences of rich people had a much bigger impact on subsequent policy decisions than the views of middle-income and poor Americans. Indeed, the opinions of lower-income groups, and the interest groups that represent them, appear to have little or no independent impact on policy.
“Our analyses suggest that majorities of the American public actually have little influence over the policies our government adopts,” Gilens and Page write:
Americans do enjoy many features central to democratic governance, such as regular elections, freedom of speech and association, and a widespread (if still contested) franchise. But we believe that if policymaking is dominated by powerful business organizations and a small number of affluent Americans, then America’s claims to being a democratic society are seriously threatened.
In their conclusion, Gilens and Page go even further, asserting that “In the United States, our findings indicate, the majority does not rule—at least not in the causal sense of actually determining policy outcomes. When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites and/or with organized interests, they generally lose. Moreover … even when fairly large majorities of Americans favor policy change, they generally do not get it.”'