Google Only Cares About One Thing - Google.

This was originally posted as a comment in this article, fueled by the combination of cynicism and pirates' indignation from other commenters. I wrote enough, however, that I thought it would make a good blog post, so here goes.

As happy as I am to see these bills going down in a huge ball of fiery death, I'm not really in the mood to celebrate, mainly because of the internet's reaction.

Most people on the internet aren't so much upset because this legislation is bad (it is), but because they don't want ANY regulation at all. I get the distinct feeling sometimes that these protests are less about "free speech" and more about "free beer." The fact is that, thanks to many countries' blatant disregard for copyright law (I'm looking at you, China and Sweden), it's piss easy to get anything for free on the internet, and whether people here want to admit it or not, piracy is a real issue that does impact the economy at large. Will anything completely stop piracy? Of fucking course not! There will always be people trying their damnedest to steal shit online, just like there will always be people willing to commit any crime in the real world. That doesn't mean we stop trying. Just because rape will always happen doesn't mean we don't try to persecute rapists and shut them down where we can. The point is to make this, like any crime, carry enough consequence that only the most determined will do it.

Look, we've all been frustrated by DRM and similar private anti-piracy measures. I myself have gone on an emotional rant about the issue, which remains my personal shame. Of course piracy will always be a horrible thing, and when it's so rampant, I can't honestly say I blame companies for leaving open platforms, in our case abandoning PC in favor of the consoles, or being more restrictive about their media, in our case crazy ass DRM. Gotta try SOMETHING, I guess.

No matter what the detractors and cynics say, we're winning ourselves a great victory here, and the government now knows that we'll rise up again the next time the internet is threatened. However, it's time for us now to grow the fuck up and realize that the free ride is going to end sooner than later. Maybe instead of folding their arms and whining (and doing PLENTY of their own lobbying, BTW), tech/internet companies should be offering suggestions on how to tackle the issue of piracy... This is, of course, assuming Google and other internet companies weren't just exaggerating the issue to protect their own bottom line (I imagine actually taking pirate sites off their search engines would require actually paying people to keep track of what goes on the engine).

Make no mistake, ending SOPA and PIPA is a huge victory. However, it's time for us to become part of the solution, not the problem.

This was originally posted as a comment in this article, fueled by the combination of cynicism and pirates' indignation from other commenters. I wrote enough, however, that I thought it would make a good blog post, so here goes.

As happy as I am to see these bills going down in a huge ball of fiery death, I'm not really in the mood to celebrate, mainly because of the internet's reaction.

Most people on the internet aren't so much upset because this legislation is bad (it is), but because they don't want ANY regulation at all. I get the distinct feeling sometimes that these protests are less about "free speech" and more about "free beer." The fact is that, thanks to many countries' blatant disregard for copyright law (I'm looking at you, China and Sweden), it's piss easy to get anything for free on the internet, and whether people here want to admit it or not, piracy is a real issue that does impact the economy at large. Will anything completely stop piracy? Of fucking course not! There will always be people trying their damnedest to steal shit online, just like there will always be people willing to commit any crime in the real world. That doesn't mean we stop trying. Just because rape will always happen doesn't mean we don't try to persecute rapists and shut them down where we can. The point is to make this, like any crime, carry enough consequence that only the most determined will do it.

Look, we've all been frustrated by DRM and similar private anti-piracy measures. I myself have gone on an emotional rant about the issue, which remains my personal shame. Of course piracy will always be a horrible thing, and when it's so rampant, I can't honestly say I blame companies for leaving open platforms, in our case abandoning PC in favor of the consoles, or being more restrictive about their media, in our case crazy ass DRM. Gotta try SOMETHING, I guess.

No matter what the detractors and cynics say, we're winning ourselves a great victory here, and the government now knows that we'll rise up again the next time the internet is threatened. However, it's time for us now to grow the fuck up and realize that the free ride is going to end sooner than later. Maybe instead of folding their arms and whining (and doing PLENTY of their own lobbying, BTW), tech/internet companies should be offering suggestions on how to tackle the issue of piracy... This is, of course, assuming Google and other internet companies weren't just exaggerating the issue to protect their own bottom line (I imagine actually taking pirate sites off their search engines would require actually paying people to keep track of what goes on the engine).

Make no mistake, ending SOPA and PIPA is a huge victory. However, it's time for us to become part of the solution, not the problem.

You're asking the Internet to grow up? You do realize how impossible that is, right?

@Video_Game_King said:

You're asking the Internet to grow up? You do realize how impossible that is, right?

I agree, that's quite the tall order.

However, if it doesn't happen, and soon, we're going to get exactly what we deserve.

Then buckle the eff up, because the Internet is gonna suck in...*looks at watch, taps it a bit*...OK, so I don't have an exact time frame, but you know what I mean.

Breaking news: Google not a charity. More at 11.

Yeah, google is totally in it for themselves. Thats why they host free public DNS servers for anyone to use. Also, they like to make money because they are a company. This is new and exciting. =\

As I understand what has happened with this SOPA/PIPA clusterfuck is that Congress decided to write this legislation without any input from those who will be affected by the legislation. Entrepreneurs who create websites like Redd.it, sysadmins who help maintain them, and content creators (think people who would not have gotten big on the internet without the ability to host their own work and let it spread freely (anyone on YouTube / whoever writes those awesome xkcd comics), not the RIAA) had nearly zero say in what was written in this legislation.

No matter the intent of the legislation, it's the implementation of vague legislation that scares people. Just from what I have read, the experts of the internet (who will be most affected by any sort of legislation such as this) want to be part of the solution, just those dopes on Capitol Hill won't let them.

Did you just piss on Google...because a bunch of whiny suits in an aging industry wanted to ruin the internet?

Dude...what the fuck?

Breaking news: Google not a charity. More at 11.

I thought this was very well written, people not reading the article and just replying to the title are a tad annoying.

Nice job comparing somebody downloading a movie from the internet to rape.

@jozzy said:

I thought this was very well written, people not reading the article and just replying to the title are a tad annoying.

I don't know...

I think the part where because China and Sweden don't give a shit about copyright that they're wrong is insanely funny.

Laws change from place to place, pushing weird agendas made by companies to criticize another company and then dictate what another country should do is beyond ignorant.

We have certain laws in America, lobbied thanks to Disney among other things, where the copyright is taken very seriously. So Sweden should bend over and respect that? Crazy talk.

Of course Sweden ended up bending to that will and will continue to make efforts, but I think if people just eased up a little bit we'd all be better for it.

PIPA was defeated? I wasn't aware that had actually happened yet. I knew SOPA was toast, but I thought SOPA was just a diversion to make PIPA seem more "palatable".

Too bad people didn't get this fired up over the NDAA torture bill. For whatever reason congress seems to be leaning towards restricting our civil liberties more and more every year.

We need to get corporate lobbyists out of Washington before they take all our remaining freedom from us.

Every business ever to exist has been more concerned with profits than what its customers want. That's why I find it funny that people assume devs like Valve and DICE want to create the games you want, they don't, they want to make the most money possible in the long run.

And of course our awesome fun time internet party is going to get rained on eventually, but not like this.

@Slag said:

PIPA was defeated? I wasn't aware that had actually happened yet. I knew SOPA was toast, but I thought SOPA was just a diversion to make PIPA seem more "palatable".

Well, when you have people jumping off the sinking ship, it's pretty obvious that PIPA isn't going to do well. If not dead, it's at least comatose.

And calling the NDAA as a whole a "torture bill" is a bit hyperbolic. The National Defense Authorization Act is something that's done yearly, pretty much. It's mainly the budget for the military, something that's especially important now with the war in Afghanistan and the Iraq pullout. This year also had the sanctions against Iran on the bill. The problem with the enemy combatant provision is that there are compelling arguments on both sides of the issue of whether or not it authorizes the indefinite detention of US Citizens involved in terrorist acts. I'd link you to Wikipedia, but, you know... Obama managed to get some compromise by getting language in there stating that it couldn't override existing law, but this was a political grab by Republicans, as not signing the military budget would all but guarantee that Obama would be attacked as being anti-military.

The issues in both the NDAA and SOPA/PIPA are a lot more complex than the buzzwords people throw out all the time. I really wish that people would look things up and think for themselves sometimes.

OP compares piracy to real world crime.

OP compares rape and piracy.

*Grabs popcorn*

You're making SOPA and PIPA an issue of piracy and "free rides". People how actually give a shit see it as an issue of censorship and encroachment on what has become a simple liberty. The second you give organized government power over what you see on the internet is the second you set a dangerous precedent.

Why do you want the internet restricted? Piracy is not that big of a deal, the companies have blown it out of proportion just like they always do, and in any case, it's not worth losing the most powerful free platform we have just to make a bunch of billion dollar suits happy.

@YukoAsho said:

@Slag said:

PIPA was defeated? I wasn't aware that had actually happened yet. I knew SOPA was toast, but I thought SOPA was just a diversion to make PIPA seem more "palatable".

Well, when you have people jumping off the sinking ship, it's pretty obvious that PIPA isn't going to do well. If not dead, it's at least comatose.

That's a pretty big assumption in my opinion. That could change in a heartbeat, I've seen it happen before. Perhaps the Bill is indeed in as much trouble as it seems with Rubio and Hatch withdrawing support, but the Bill's not dead until it's dead. And should it indeed fail, PIPA is likely not the entertainment industry's lobbyist last attempt either unfortunately if the past is any indicator.

Complacency results in lost freedoms.

And calling the NDAA as a whole a "torture bill" is a bit hyperbolic... The problem with the enemy combatant provision is that there are compelling arguments on both sides of the issue of whether or not it authorizes the indefinite detention of US Citizens involved in terrorist acts. .. Obama managed to get some compromise by getting language in there stating that it couldn't override existing law, but this was a political grab by Republicans, as not signing the military budget would all but guarantee that Obama would be attacked as being anti-military.

The issues in both the NDAA and SOPA/PIPA are a lot more complex than the buzzwords people throw out all the time.

It's not really that complex.

The US gov't either can or can't indefinitely detain a US citizen without a trial (which UN treaties consider a form of torture to my understanding). A copyright holder either can or can't get an alleged site infringing site shutdown more or less on demand. These bills either allow those actions or they don't. My interpretation of the respective bills' language is that they do allow these actions to take place, and even if legal experts think they don't, that they still are worded sloppily enough that they risk it.

How much more complex does it need to be? The faux complexity is merely there to confuse the public imo. Whether it was done as political power play for BS reasons or not isn't the point and shouldn't be the point. Legislating away our freedoms because it's inconvenient or because not signing might make someone "look bad" politically is no excuse.

Perhaps "torture bill" is a bit hyperbolic given the usual understanding of the term, I'll concede that. But in my opinion that's where this version of the NDAA leads to, in a precedent based legal system.

I really wish that people would look things up and think for themselves sometimes.

I agree with that. And I'm glad I have!

anyway think we're on the same team here, even if we disagree on details.

(p.s. I agree with your title- I do agree that Google is only looking out for number 1 here. )

@YukoAsho: You're making one huge miscalculation about why people have antagonized SOPA/PIPA so much - the fact that its provisions enabled unconstitutional abuse of arbitrary federal regulatory bodies to the point of censorship is more than enough of a reason for people to be frustrated the bills were even suggested.

And if you're complaining about Google looking out for Google, haven't you noticed how SOPA/PIPA surfaced in the first place due to Hollywood? They've been complaining about piracy for losses in revenue and jobs when they're actually making record profits. What makes me sick about Hollywood above all is that they continue to insult my intelligence with the crap they keep pushing out. Their hissy fit that caused politicians to sponsor SOPA/PIPA does not help my disposition with them at all. At least Google still respects their users to a fairer extent than how Hollywood treats its audiences.

@YukoAsho: Well said, you are in the right. As I see it, there really is no way around regulation of some form. We're emerging into times of 1 gigabyte per second download speeds. The sort of shit that would be able to be transferred via the internet, and very quickly at that, sort of concerns me. Moreover, as the internet continues to pervade every facet of our lives in increasingly inescapable ways, regulation will surely be necessary.

Edit: And in case I was unclear, I think SOPA and PIPA are boneheaded, but I do believe regulation to be an oncoming necessity.

@YukoAsho: Well thought-out and well written.

Most people seem to expect the internet's infancy to last forever. And it may eventually return close to this current state of unorganized lunacy, much as printed media has. I certainly don't think SOPA would help one bit, but by hook or by crook something is going to force responsibility on the internet and its users.

@Slag Well, in an era where uniforms are history, there has to be more clear rules on how to handle terrorists, as civilian rules are clearly not enough. Whether the NDAA's detention regulations allow INDEFINITE detention. While it's certainly a bit weird talking about things like UN treaties and the Geneva Convention, which call for release of prisoners of war once hostilities have ended, to be discussed outside of a designated battlefield, to say that they're going to snatch up people who've violated no wartime rules forever is a bit much. It'll be interesting to see how it goes, obviously.

And I'm glad you at least see that we're on the same team. Obviously there are many who viewed SOPA/PIPA as under-thought and a threat to the free flow of information online. I count myself among them. However, a lot of comments on forums like this one seem to balk at the idea of ANY regulation of the internet, a situation that is going to happen eventually, just as surely as civilization crept into the Wild West of old (Red Dead Redemption is pretty awesome, BTW). While Congress made a huge misstep in not inviting the tech industry at large during the bills' initial "fast track" stage and got us to this point to start with, for decades the only thing we've heard is "don't do anything," and eventually that's not gonna cut it. I think we can safely say that the tech industry has Congress' attention now. I just hope they use said attention in a constructive way.

Basically, all I'm saying is "great job, guys. Now what?"

Google is a company. A publicly held company. They are obligated to do whatever is necessary to increase value for their shareholders. SOPA is one of the worst things that could ever happen to Google. It's one of the worst things that could happen to any internet company. You'll notice that internet companies don't support it, with the exception of GoDaddy. The people who support it are intellectual and real property companies. Those that make software, movies, books, music clothing, and watches. SOPA threatens to destroy google as they would become accountable for every single thing they link to in their search engine and any mere accusation about possible content somewhere on the internet that Google links to from said search engine would easily result in them being taken down until resolved.

Anyone who thinks that Google would ever support SOPA doesn't understand what google does and how they make money.

One thing I find interesting (and offensive) is the constant conversations about "well, copyright owners durp durp!". First, there is no conclusive evidence that copyright infringement actually negatively impacts business (except a couple studies where it was discovered the numbers were falsified by the music and movie industries). There are even some studies which conclude the opposite. Second, there's all the bullshit about "jobs jobs durpa jobs durpa durp!". Yes, we have to save all those precious American jobs that are impacted by people who buy fake Rolex watches over the internet. You know, all those AMERICANS who make SWISS watches for a SWISS company. Or the countless other products, usually made by people in China or elsewhere. In other words, not impacting American jobs.

Anyway, back to the first issue. Regarding the theory that business is actually negatively impacted. If it is. So what? All these conversations seem to end up having a portion centered around "but we obviously have to do SOMETHING to protect copyright on the internet". Why this compromise? The fuck we do. Copyright is miserably fucked up, as it is. But regardless, SO WHAT? We're talking about the liberty of the individual, here. When the conversation veers toward that, it baffles me. What people are actually saying is that - at some point - the money becomes more important than liberty. Absolutely not. Under every condition, civil liberties must trump economic considerations. There is never ever a point when something that impacts one's rights is acceptable, because it enforces someone's copyright. Ever.

As for the whole NDAA thing. Look, people don't give a fuck. They are ignorant fucking tools with their heads buried in the sand. Not all of them. Not all of us. But enough to overwhelm the rest in the voting booth, every time. The population is more concerned with making sure we are still denying constitutional rights for gay people, teaching theology in science, rooting for our favorite ball-throwing pro-athlete retard, and bitching about the price of gas for our SUV. They don't care about the NDAA and they won't care about the bill after it. The same way they haven't cared about our last president's war-mongering and constitution-eroding activities or this president's war-mongering (Nobel Peace Prize winner - fucking really?!) and constitution-eroding activities. The same way they didn't care about the DMCA or the PATRIOT act or any of the countless other things that makes referring to ourselves as the "land of the free", a god damned farce.

Here is a fantastic article that I was shocked to see in the Washington Post (I'm glad to see it, but why has it taken mainstream journalism over a fucking decade to catch up with the concerns the rest of us have had since day-one?!):

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/is-the-united-states-still-the-land-of-the-free/2012/01/04/gIQAvcD1wP_print.html

@Demoskinos said:

Yeah, google is totally in it for themselves. Thats why they host free public DNS servers for anyone to use. Also, they like to make money because they are a company. This is new and exciting. =\

Actually, that isn't a public service. It performs the same function that much of the rest of their activities do. It promotes internet use (the more people use the internet period the more they benefit) and it provides Google with far more data-mining. That's entirely fine if people understand and accept that and if you're using a large ISP, they're probably doing exactly the same, anyway. But it's far from an altruistic offering.

So did you just say that all rapists shouldnt be persecuted?  What the....

You know I don't mind regulating software piracy, however when it comes to certain media i.e. music, and movies I get really pissed when companies, actors, and artists get involved. Now I'm going to ignore the fact that 90% of the people in that "creativity" business are only in it for money and are complete sell outs who aren't actually changing the face of our society but more or less selling bullshit. I'm gonna stick to the fact that I pay from $60-100 dollars for a ticket just to see a band perform live, and I purchase $30-60 dollars worth of merchandise from just one band, I watch their videos online which many companies make money off of for the adds that they run on such websites. Oh and I tell all my friends, coworkers, and family members about certain artists which attracts them more fans and customers. But for some reason a "Loyal fan who supports their artists" has to pay $15 for the artists' album which as soon as their computer get's wiped loses all that $15. Now don't get me wrong I purchase my music, not because "I support" the artist, but because I like the sound quality, however when the day came that my computer broke down, and I was not allowed to get any of my music back (I spend roughly around $800 for all my music) I began to support downloading music. Like I said, I don't steal music myself, I like my sound quality, however when such bands as "Asking Alexandria" get on stage and call out anyone who doesn't buy their album an asshole (sorry can't find the video but it's on Youtube), seriously fuck you, you're pathetic, you stand for an art form that should be freely expressed, however you have to charge $15 for them to not own, but borrow this art, because all you are is a tool.

Now movies I have another problem with due to the fact that I pay $12.50 just to go see these movies, and their ads clog up my TV, internet, and even other movie time.

Oh and to Rupert Murdoch: Gee, it looks like this whole piracy has really been making life difficult for your coffers, say.... How much money have you lost? Cause I'm pretty sure it was all paid off with all that money from the bailouts we gave you and all your friends. Fucking asshole.....

BTW just if your wondering: I'm not a Democrat.

@YukoAsho: Too bad you can't prove to me that is affects "the economy at large" and not just the bank accounts of the asshole that run Interscope, Viacom, and their ilk. What would happen if the music industry died tomorrow because of "piracy". Oh look, now we just pay people directly for their albums after they blow up on Youtube or Soundcloud or whatever. No effect at all to the general economy, except Jimmy Iovine doesn't get his cut for DOING NOTHING AT ALL. Murdoch doesn't get to say what gets published or talked about, because its all out there for free on the open net.

These companies are not doing this because of piracy. "Piracy" is barely a blip in terms of the economy. What matters is that Viacom is not the sole provider of your content anymore. Now, you can get your content anywhere, and you can pay artists and creators directly instead of forcing them to rely on these massive behemoths that milk them dry for vast profit. No one actually gives a fuck about piracy, which you RIDICULOUSLY compare to "rape".

They are, simply put, obsolete. That scares them, and so they invest vast resources and time into keeping themselves as the middle man.

@Doctorchimp said:

We have certain laws in America where the copyright is taken very seriously. So Sweden should bend over and respect that? Crazy talk.

Finally, someone that can actually "think outside the box" if that's what you want to call it.

I'll oppose anything that even hints at stopping piracy not because I'm a pirate but because our fucking politicians should be concerned with 6 billion other topics than who the fuck is getting free HBO.

"The pirates, whatever you do on whatever system, they will crack it," he says. "It might take no time... I think the longest it's taken to happen is two days. Someone will crack it somewhere and there's not much you can do about it." However, he's not too concerned about that. The real problem, West says, is that "second-hand sales cost [Lionhead] more in the long-run than piracy these days."

http://www.diedagain.com/fable-iii-dev-thinks-used-game-sales-are-worse-than-piracy

Go and buy some more second hand games, while ranting about piracy. Many of the people who pirated a games would've never bought it to begin with, it therefore does less damage then one might think. The people who buy second hand games are actually hurting the developers big time, over a few dollars they get to pay less. Throwing the money instead at the middleman who's bleeding the developers dry.

I don't get it. Why should information be free? Especially refined (created) information (i.e movies, music, games). We do not live in Sovjet Russia. "We" are also "Me", and "I" do it for money, riches, fame, bitches and ho's. Few, if any, do everything for free. We do something for free, and somethings for the money.

I do not mind pirate downloading (as I see it as an advanced "sharing" between "friends") but when people try to be political about it and make an argument that true artist would be satisfied that people gave a s..t about what they have made is nonsense. Artist work they don't just create. There goes endless hours of research, finding that special note, fighting writers blocks. They need food and perhaps even got some family to take care of. Artist do need their money, and creative work should not be free because it's "information".

Also, I do not like "internet culture" (i.e "meme") as much and I fear that if piracy/copyright infringements is allowed to become a really big problem then all we get are youtube poop videos, lol kittens and independent (aka weird) games as stimulation.

What I do not like is this extreme "poor rich me" whining from many of the greatest companies in the world. They do not starve.

No, Big Content needs to grow up, not the internet. Government shouldn't be charged with protecting a corporation's antiquated business model, and certainly not at the expense of civil liberties. Piracy and secondhand sales have been around since forever and neither one has been a burden on content providers who's profits are at all all time high, especially in Hollywood.

So please cry me a fucking river.

@YukoAsho said:

This was originally posted as a comment in this article, fueled by the combination of cynicism and pirates' indignation from other commenters. I wrote enough, however, that I thought it would make a good blog post, so here goes.

As happy as I am to see these bills going down in a huge ball of fiery death, I'm not really in the mood to celebrate, mainly because of the internet's reaction.

Most people on the internet aren't so much upset because this legislation is bad (it is), but because they don't want ANY regulation at all. I get the distinct feeling sometimes that these protests are less about "free speech" and more about "free beer." The fact is that, thanks to many countries' blatant disregard for copyright law (I'm looking at you, China and Sweden), it's piss easy to get anything for free on the internet, and whether people here want to admit it or not, piracy is a real issue that does impact the economy at large. Will anything completely stop piracy? Of fucking course not! There will always be people trying their damnedest to steal shit online, just like there will always be people willing to commit any crime in the real world. That doesn't mean we stop trying. Just because rape will always happen doesn't mean we don't try to persecute rapists and shut them down where we can. The point is to make this, like any crime, carry enough consequence that only the most determined will do it.

Look, we've all been frustrated by DRM and similar private anti-piracy measures. I myself have gone on an emotional rant about the issue, which remains my personal shame. Of course piracy will always be a horrible thing, and when it's so rampant, I can't honestly say I blame companies for leaving open platforms, in our case abandoning PC in favor of the consoles, or being more restrictive about their media, in our case crazy ass DRM. Gotta try SOMETHING, I guess.

No matter what the detractors and cynics say, we're winning ourselves a great victory here, and the government now knows that we'll rise up again the next time the internet is threatened. However, it's time for us now to grow the fuck up and realize that the free ride is going to end sooner than later. Maybe instead of folding their arms and whining (and doing PLENTY of their own lobbying, BTW), tech/internet companies should be offering suggestions on how to tackle the issue of piracy... This is, of course, assuming Google and other internet companies weren't just exaggerating the issue to protect their own bottom line (I imagine actually taking pirate sites off their search engines would require actually paying people to keep track of what goes on the engine).

Make no mistake, ending SOPA and PIPA is a huge victory. However, it's time for us to become part of the solution, not the problem.

So-called "piracy" is the public's way of demanding change in the way content is delivered. Games do cost a lot, ticket prices at theaters are creeping up every year and paying for music seems antiquated in a world where a growing number of artists are offering their stuff for free or for donation. The entire market is changing because of the internet. Yes, jobs will be lost, but the number of industries that will fail because of it pails in comparison to the number of people that benefit from such a transition. All of this is resisting change. Valve figured it out with Steam. Offer more stuff in a safer environment for insanely good prices. If other mediums can adjust in a similar way, those industries will survive. Those that won't will end. Adapt or die, essentially. More unnecessary legislation won't solve anything.

This is definitely one of the more stupid and dense blog posts I've read in awhile. Everybody thinks they have a great idea, eh?

@Napalm said:

This is definitely one of the more stupid and dense blog posts I've read in awhile. Everybody thinks they have a great idea, eh?

Explain, please.

Every time someone brings up piracy in any way, I try to bring them to this link just so they could open their eyes a bit.

http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy_1.html

Basically, I think OP makes several good points, even if the analogies to rape and stuff are kinda out there.

No, Big Content needs to grow up, not the internet. Government shouldn't be charged with protecting a corporation's antiquated business model, and certainly not at the expense of civil liberties. Piracy and secondhand sales have been around since forever and neither one has been a burden on content providers who's profits are at all all time high, especially in Hollywood.

So please cry me a fucking river.

My favorite part about people getting on their high horse about piracy is that they are the same people that look at all the free porn on the internet and never think twice about it. Most of that stuff is illegally copied from their source, but because it's so wide spread and common place that there's nothing the industry can do about it they just accept it as part of dealing business and work around it. If you seriously care about piracy as an issue in any way look at the porn industry and how they are handling it, because they are affected by piracy more then any other industry going and they still find ways to make billions.

Yeah, Google. Who do you think you are, providing a free service to hundreds of millions of people?

@crusader8463 said:

My favorite part about people getting on their high horse about piracy is that they are the same people that look at all the free porn on the internet and never think twice about it. Most of that stuff is illegally copied from their source, but because it's so wide spread and common place that there's nothing the industry can do about it they just accept it as part of dealing business and work around it. If you seriously care about piracy as an issue in any way look at the porn industry and how they are handling it, because they are affected by piracy more then any other industry going and they still find ways to make billions.

@Marokai said:

@QuistisTrepe said:

No, Big Content needs to grow up, not the internet. Government shouldn't be charged with protecting a corporation's antiquated business model, and certainly not at the expense of civil liberties. Piracy and secondhand sales have been around since forever and neither one has been a burden on content providers who's profits are at all all time high, especially in Hollywood.

So please cry me a fucking river.

This is basically my opinion. I try to have a "balanced" view of this problem, but every time I try to force myself into taking some middle of the road position, what I come back to every time is that; Hollywood's problem isn't piracy. Hollywood's problem is that they hate the internet for merely existing. Piracy and used sales have existed forever, and will exist for forever, and although there's certainly things that can be done on the legal end to stop piracy, the solution to this problem is commerce, not legal action.

If something must be passed; pass the OPEN Act. But Hollywood still opposes it. Why? Because it's not completely fucking draconian. It doesn't allow entire swaths of the internet to be shut down for insignificant complaints based entirely on the whim of an increasingly politicized Justice Department. The internet is not at fault here for merely existing, and it has nothing to do with people unable to accept getting rid of the "free ride." The archaic business models of the entertainment industry have to evolve, and they are the ones refusing to change, far more so than the Internet. Google supports passing the OPEN Act. Hollywood refuses to give any ground.

The right way to curb piracy is iTunes. It's Steam. It's Netflix. It's a Roku box, it's Amazon; hell, it's Origin, as much as I hate it. Distribution models and entertainment outlets that have risen up and been forced to innovate because of piracy. The music industry would've loved to continue selling you overpriced CDs at the record store, making you buy entire albums until the end of time. But they were beaten into the ground after years of fighting music piracy until record companies finally wised the fuck up and made iTunes what it is today. It is easy, cheap, quick, and convenient to buy music on iTunes, and so people do it now.

Hollywood needs to stop living two generations behind the times and realize that they can no longer force people to spend increasing amounts of money on theater tickets (and ridiculous refreshment prices) and 20+ dollars for copies of 90 minutes of entertainment, or 50-100 dollars for a single season of a television show. The internet is a vast outlet of piracy, partly because some people are just gonna be pirates no matter what you do, but because this business model is outdated and increasingly inconvenient to the normal consumer. People are right, that some people need to grow up, in this debate, but it's Hollywood and the music industry (and even the video game industry) that needs to do that far more than the entire structure of one of the greatest inventions in human history.

@Branthog said:

Google is a company. A publicly held company. They are obligated to do whatever is necessary to increase value for their shareholders. SOPA is one of the worst things that could ever happen to Google. It's one of the worst things that could happen to any internet company. You'll notice that internet companies don't support it, with the exception of GoDaddy. The people who support it are intellectual and real property companies. Those that make software, movies, books, music clothing, and watches. SOPA threatens to destroy google as they would become accountable for every single thing they link to in their search engine and any mere accusation about possible content somewhere on the internet that Google links to from said search engine would easily result in them being taken down until resolved.

Anyone who thinks that Google would ever support SOPA doesn't understand what google does and how they make money.

One thing I find interesting (and offensive) is the constant conversations about "well, copyright owners durp durp!". First, there is no conclusive evidence that copyright infringement actually negatively impacts business (except a couple studies where it was discovered the numbers were falsified by the music and movie industries). There are even some studies which conclude the opposite. Second, there's all the bullshit about "jobs jobs durpa jobs durpa durp!". Yes, we have to save all those precious American jobs that are impacted by people who buy fake Rolex watches over the internet. You know, all those AMERICANS who make SWISS watches for a SWISS company. Or the countless other products, usually made by people in China or elsewhere. In other words, not impacting American jobs.

Anyway, back to the first issue. Regarding the theory that business is actually negatively impacted. If it is. So what? All these conversations seem to end up having a portion centered around "but we obviously have to do SOMETHING to protect copyright on the internet". Why this compromise? The fuck we do. Copyright is miserably fucked up, as it is. But regardless, SO WHAT? We're talking about the liberty of the individual, here. When the conversation veers toward that, it baffles me. What people are actually saying is that - at some point - the money becomes more important than liberty. Absolutely not. Under every condition, civil liberties must trump economic considerations. There is never ever a point when something that impacts one's rights is acceptable, because it enforces someone's copyright. Ever.

As for the whole NDAA thing. Look, people don't give a fuck. They are ignorant fucking tools with their heads buried in the sand. Not all of them. Not all of us. But enough to overwhelm the rest in the voting booth, every time. The population is more concerned with making sure we are still denying constitutional rights for gay people, teaching theology in science, rooting for our favorite ball-throwing pro-athlete retard, and bitching about the price of gas for our SUV. They don't care about the NDAA and they won't care about the bill after it. The same way they haven't cared about our last president's war-mongering and constitution-eroding activities or this president's war-mongering (Nobel Peace Prize winner - fucking really?!) and constitution-eroding activities. The same way they didn't care about the DMCA or the PATRIOT act or any of the countless other things that makes referring to ourselves as the "land of the free", a god damned farce.

Here is a fantastic article that I was shocked to see in the Washington Post (I'm glad to see it, but why has it taken mainstream journalism over a fucking decade to catch up with the concerns the rest of us have had since day-one?!):

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/is-the-united-states-still-the-land-of-the-free/2012/01/04/gIQAvcD1wP_print.html

These are QFT.

Woah.

Are you telling me that the top priority of a company is their financial success.

Mind = Blown.

Spread the word. The corporatization of societal morality is an economical tool of the wealthy elite.

@Nettacki said:

Every time someone brings up piracy in any way, I try to bring them to this link just so they could open their eyes a bit.

http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy_1.html

Basically, I think OP makes several good points, even if the analogies to rape and stuff are kinda out there.

Man, I SO should have linked that article! I remember seeing it long ago, but it slipped my mind.

I'd also like to apologize for the perceived rape connection. I was only trying to say that offline crime will also happen forever, but we still try to enforce there. I'll make a more concerted effort to choose words carefully in the future.

You bring up China and Sweden being notorious for piracy, but I raise this question to you, do you have any fucking idea how restrictive companies are with media access outside of the United States? And I mean this. I reside in Canada and I can't even get access to hulu to play videos. Has anyone thought that that could be an issue? The very fact that I live a few hours north of an inconsequential invisible line in the dirt that says I'm this and you're that restricts me from content that is distributed in my country in the first place is fucking preposterous.

Gabe Newell was 100% right. Piracy boils down to a service issue. If you provide a better and more secure service than the pirates people WILL come to you. There will always be assholes that won't because they're self-entitled pricks that think they have the right to everything out there and it is indeed a "free" world in the most literal of senses, but most people actually have moral beliefs and ethics. The simple fact that film studios and recording labels are still using this moronic archaic method is the problem. It isn't piracy. It's shit lobbyists that are supporting shit businesses with shit business models that are telling shit politicians a pile of shit bullshit. And until they get their fucking act together and lose the crap I have zero sympathy for businesses like that. Especially in the case of the film industry which just reported a 107% or so profit margin. I have more sympathy for the pornography industry because they're the ones getting fucking raped repeatedly by streaming websites that get away with it because porn is a "dirty" business.

Also Google, a publicly traded company with several different interests, is interested in making money? Stop the fucking presses! This should be page one material in the New York Times. How dare they! As a Google stock holder I am shocked and appalled that they are making me money.

Bravo, you've said absoultely nothing new or interesting. Apart from "man up internet!" and "come on guys, piracy is bad, mmkay?" Great stuff.

You bring up China and Sweden being notorious for piracy, but I raise this question to you, do you have any fucking idea how restrictive companies are with media access outside of the United States? And I mean this. I reside in Canada and I can't even get access to hulu to play videos. Has anyone thought that that could be an issue? The very fact that I live a few hours north of an inconsequential invisible line in the dirt that says I'm this and you're that restricts me from content that is distributed in my country in the first place is fucking preposterous.

@YukoAsho said:

The fact is that, thanks to many countries' blatant disregard for copyright law (I'm looking at you, China and Sweden)

I think you are mistaking Sweden for Pirate Bay.

Sure, we have a (political) Pirate Party, but that's not about theft either.

That said - and I'm not a pro-piracy advocate - copyrights and patents are pretty shit, the way they are used and abused.

you know whats funny? the big movie companies complaining that piracy is affecting their sales so much.. yet here in Holland 2011 was a record year in theater sales for movies.. so does piracy affect them? im sure it does.. but its more like, i want to earn 2 billion instead of 1.5 billion.

we all know stealing is wrong and we all know piracy is wrong but we also know that even the people working for the law and the big media companies have downloaded content on their own computers at home.. plus, i think they underestimate how much advertisement they get out of all of it.. the internet gets their name out there more than any ad could

@YukoAsho said:

@Video_Game_King said:

You're asking the Internet to grow up? You do realize how impossible that is, right?

I agree, that's quite the tall order.

However, if it doesn't happen, and soon, we're going to get exactly what we deserve.

It can't happen. We have grown men (With slight God complexes) pretending to be fictional kings of fictional forms of entertainment. We can't grow up.