SOPA

[Professor S]

As for the problem of intellectual piracy, this is an issue of policing, not prevention.

[Typhoid]

(For the record I basically agree with your entire post, I just don't want to quote the whole thing.)

The only way to prevent things like this from happening is to put a firewall between business and government. You might say this will lead to corporations running the country... but um, isn't that kind of what's happening now when we have more regulations than at any time in US history?

I was just having a joking conversation the other day and said "Within the next 10 years considering corporations are people, I can see a company running for President of the US. 'Tyler Perry presents Coca-Cola's United States of America.'"

But the more I think about it, the more I can tangibly see some corporation actually attempting to run for President, and just use the CEO as the figurehead of that corporation, thusly he becomes the one running for President under the name of (company).

I just think someone in the near future (Not mega-near) will probably grow a giant sack overnight and have that "I've got the perfect idea" moment, and then a room of like-minded businessmen (also working for the same company) will inevitably like that idea. I'm sure a few people have tossed the idea around legitimately, but there just haven't been the right amount of yes-men in the room with him at that time.


Unrelated rant:

I hate the stampede to stop piracy of music and movies. A lot of people act as if it's a brand new ideal that just popped up. Like there were never any bootlegged concerts in the 80's/90's, or like nobody recorded sports events or movies from TV as soon as the VCR and blank tapes were invented. How many people taped songs onto a casette from the radio. I'm sure most of our parents (if not us ourselves) probably still have boxes full of (formerly) blank VHS tapes with old cartoon movies or favourite sporting moments from your local (or favourite) sports team on them. Just boxes and boxes of 20-30 year old pirated material that never gets watched. At least when people pirate music/shows nowadays it keeps that show/band relevant. Pirating may be keeping a lot of bands and shows alive a lot longer than it would be if people actually had to pay for the music/Blu-Ray of show.

How many bands started out simply because of some kids illegally downloading one or two tracks that caught on like wildfire. Then that band gets signed, and the people who want to shut down piracy ironically don't really realize that sharing the media, or leaving it there for all to enjoy is the best option for everyone, long-term. Look at Chuck Norris. Old clips of his show from online made him relevant again. Now he endorses bullshit products - but still, because of piracy (technically), he can have a career in the 21st century, and completely random products are more likely to sell because of that.

What about taking a picture of a painting. (I wonder if you could circumvent that if you're taking a picture of someone taking a picture of a painting - or taking a picture of a picture of a painting.)

What bugs me is that some act like nobody buys things, and 100% of people download the music/show/movies for free. Whenever piracy is occurring, no matter what it is - for every pirate you have pirating something, there are 5 times the amount of people (if not more) legally buying your media. So what if 1 kid from white suburbia downloaded 4 tracks from your new CD, what about all of the people who physically bought a copy, or paid for the download. Always focusing on "we're losing so much money", and not "wow, people are still actually willing to pay us for this! We should be grateful we're making a meaningful product for the consumer!" But everything to them is "me me me, money money money. When do I get mine?"

Even look at legitimate pirates from hundreds of years ago. For every pirate you had, you had 5 people who were not pirates. Or the Somali pirates now. For every Somali pirate there is, there's probably at least 8 regular Somali people. Y'arr.

[KillerGremlin]

You know things are bad when Prof S is rallying for Ron Paul.

I kid, I kid....

I have a few observations, and a couple of questions that I want to ask as launching points for future discussion in this thread. My observation is that we now face a global crisis similar to the Religion vs. Government crisis that resulted in many revolutions in the 1700s and 1800s. The US Constitution is a system of checks and balances that attempts to limit government. I feel like the next big war is going to be a global war where we flush out both politicians and the business folks who pull the strings in politics. We need a separation of Government from Business/Lobbying. This is a topic well beyond my area of expertise...and obviously the Government needs to regulate ethical business practices so that we do not have another Great Depression. But you get the feeling that we need A) Transparency, and B) A law that prohibits conflicts of interest.

What is a conflict of interest? When someone who gets to decide on laws also receives funding that could influence that decision.

The US Political system is bloated beyond belief anyway. You don't need a billion dollars to run for President, or at least you shouldn't. And more importantly...if you are running a business...you shouldn't have elevated influence because you can throw money at a problem. Everyone should have the option to vote equally: whether you are a poor inner-city family or a billionaire CEO of some huge banking company.

My observations/questions:

It seems like the economy is going to get worse again before it gets better. How will that impact the state of government affairs?

There is a myth that the US doesn't manufacture things. That's not true. So I won't even go there. However, it seems like many of the industries that do a lot of lobbying are made up of FARTS: Forced ARTificial Scarcity.

The RIAA and MPAA shouldn't exist. They peddle an industry funded by FARTS.

Big Pharma also peddles an industry funded by FARTS. Medical pricing has inflated ridiculously over the past few years.

I'm sure there are other industries peddled by FARTS. If you kill lobbying, the RIAA/MPAA will disappear in a few years, I think. I think you will also see a huge drop in the cost of healthcare and medical expenses.

The issue is...there are wealthy, powerful people who want to sell American culture and profit on these FARTS. The goal of SOPA seems to be to spread FARTS to all corners of the world.

I honestly think that the world is going to be a shitty, depressing, dystopian society if we cannot nip this in the butt. You will have governments being strung along by a handful of uber powerful billionaires, while a lot of poor people will just manage to get by. You have laws like SOPA and the Patriot Act which allow the government the shortest route to imprison people for violating the wishes of people peddling FARTS. Pretty depressing.

Thoughts? What to do? Where to go? How do you stop the lobbying and create a separation of Business and Government, but still keep some of the necessary regulation...

To me, it is all about healthy boundaries. Your doctor or therapist doesn't hit on you because it is a violation of boundaries. Teachers shouldn't flirt with their students: it is a boundary issue. To some extent, you probably shouldn't fuck your coworkers....because it is a boundary issue. When you become a Congressman or a Governor or a Senator or the President, you shouldn't have certain conversations or accept money from groups/people/organizations that you will then go vote on.

The Government is supposed to support the interests of the people, not a few business CEOs.

[Typhoid]

3 joint-spawned posts in one. Oh glorious day. I need a hobby.

I honestly think that the world is going to be a shitty, depressing, dystopian society if we cannot nip this in the butt.

Buds.
You nip a bud.
Like cutting the bud off of a weed before it can bloom.
Just a personal hate.

Like when people say "I could care less".
Oh, you can? That's nice. Me, on the other hand, I couldn't care less. My capacity for caring is already at it's minimum.

To some extent, you probably shouldn't fuck your coworkers

Woah woah woah. What if they're incredibly sexy?




I think this paragraph should be read by every person in your country. No joke.

The US Political system is bloated beyond belief anyway. You don't need a billion dollars to run for President, or at least you shouldn't. And more importantly...if you are running a business...you shouldn't have elevated influence because you can throw money at a problem. Everyone should have the option to vote equally: whether you are a poor inner-city family or a billionaire CEO of some huge banking company.

[KillerGremlin]

Yeah...I confess...if your coworker is smoking hot you should probably go for it. Something about not passing up a golden opportunity....

You could even go for it at work. I do think the desk fantasy is hot. And the copy room is definitely hot....


I realize that lobbying has been going on forever. Maybe it wasn't a big deal in the past. Sure, the Oil Companies lobbied in the past. But for most people, driving is more important than the ocean or some obscure piece of Alaskan wildlife. I think most people are okay with cutting down a forest so that they can use their car.

Now we have reached a point where lobbying is resulting in the government passing Draconian laws...we also see the bloat in industries like medicine. Add in things like the declining education and the current state of the economy and EEEK.

I seriously think the solution is flushing DC out. Something akin to a revolution with a drafting of something like separation of Church and State. Only separation of Government and Business. And that should include "charity" and "off the book" exchanges. If the IRS can track me down for missing a bill and unleash the wrath of a full audit, the IRS should be able to keep tabs on its politicians.

[Teuthida]

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/st...acy/52760484/1

They're dropping like flies.

[Typhoid]

So here's a question I have, I mean the answer might be obvious, but you never know.


So who exactly is against this; the spread of media for free.
Is it the people who would profit the most off of it (The 'corporations'), or is it the people who are making the music/art/movie?

[Vampyr]

Originally Posted by Typhoid

So here's a question I have, I mean the answer might be obvious, but you never know.


So who exactly is against this; the spread of media for free.
Is it the people who would profit the most off of it (The 'corporations'), or is it the people who are making the music/art/movie?

I don't have any statistics, but I would say a combination of both. Obvioiusly, media like music, books, and movies are the lifeblood the corporations that sell them. They can't simply be given away for free, nor should they.

These works take a massive amount of talent, people, and money to create. If no one paid for them, they wouldn't even exist.

And put yourself in an artists shoes. You spend a ton of time and put a lot of work into creating something, then you see people taking it without compensating you at all. They're essentially telling you that your labor of love is worthless to them.

But at the same time, artists get ripped off by corporations. Corporations take about 90% of the sale of media. Not to mention media is expensive to purchase, because of how bloated corporations are. They have a lot of people to pay, so a movie that should cost $5 costs $20.

In order for these corporations to survive, they have to adapt. They need to stop applying an old business model to a world where it doesn't work any more. They need to embrace digital distribution and build a service that is better than the one you can get for free.

They can probably continue to get away with ripping artists off, because artists are desperate to make it big.

The bright side is, once you do make it big, you can do whatever the hell you want. Nine Inch Nails gave away their latest album. Louis C.K. sells his stuff directly to fans at like $5 a pop and makes a killing. Once you're name is out there and you have a fan base, you don't need the corporation any more.

[TheGame]

Originally Posted by Typhoid

So who exactly is against this; the spread of media for free.
Is it the people who would profit the most off of it (The 'corporations'), or is it the people who are making the music/art/movie?

That depends on what type of "media" you're referring to because it has so many different meanings. It is hard to draw a line.

For example: (This is 100% opinion)
1) Jane jailbreaks her iphone and downloads hundreds of dollars of music for free that was intended to be sold. - Should Jane go to jail? No. Should Jane be fined? Yes, and the fine should be no more then the amount an average american makes in a month. And for first time offenders, if they can provide details on how they obtained their pirated materials then the fine should be waved.

2) Jane purchases a music track legally, but then she turns around and makes a music video with the sound playing for youtube. Should she go to Jail? I'd still say no. Should she be fined? No, that would be youtube's legal issue to deal with because they provided the forum to post the video. Unless they can prove that Jane profited from posting such a video it's on the site.

3) Jane purchases a music track legally. The track is 6 minutes long, but she uses a 2 minute exert of the track as background music for something she puts on MegaUpload. Should she go to Jail? Nope. Should she be fined? Nope. Once again, it depends on if she profited from placing that video up. If she used the music to sell a product or promote a website that she gets a paycheck from, then fine her.

----

I guess to sum it up. I have a problem with individuals being harshly punished for obtaining or using copywrited material. I have the samethoughts on the war on drugs, even though listening to stolen music is less harmful then being hyped up on meth and being on the streets.

Yes individuals should be held accountable IF they're directly stealing content or using it in the pursuit of profit. But stopping the people who enable it is a lot more important.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by TheGame

That depends on what type of "media" you're referring to because it has so many different meanings. It is hard to draw a line.

For example: (This is 100% opinion)
1) Jane jailbreaks her iphone and downloads hundreds of dollars of music for free that was intended to be sold. - Should Jane go to jail? No. Should Jane be fined? Yes, and the fine should be no more then the amount an average american makes in a month. And for first time offenders, if they can provide details on how they obtained their pirated materials then the fine should be waved.

For clarity's sake, what if Jane broke into a record store and stole hundreds of dollars of CDs. Should Jane go to jail then, or just be fined?