Archive for June, 2005

Hollywood wins Internet piracy battle

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) – The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday that software companies can be held liable for copyright infringement when individuals use their technology to download songs and movies illegally.

The unanimous decision handed the music and movie industries a crucial victory in their battle to curb Internet piracy.

In MGM v. Grokster, the high court overturned a ruling that had barred Hollywood and the music industry from suing Internet services used by consumers to swap songs and movies for free.

I cringe whenever I see such acts as being considered a “win against piracy”. This isn’t a win against piracy – its a win for a corporation. No more, no less. To assume that undoing filesharing software is equivalent to undoing piracy, as this article insinuates, is blatant misinformation.

The implications are a loss to the consumers, as criminilizing any technology on the basis of its potential unlawful uses rather than its overt lawful applications may do. This is the equivalent of suing pen manufacturers [and winning] because pens make good stabbing-weapons.

“One who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright … is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties using the device, regardless of the device’s lawful uses,” Justice David Souter wrote in the ruling.

It’s difficult not to be a cynic in these times. I am positive that were this sort of corporate mentality present ten years ago, they would have succesfully managed to ban the Internet. This case won on a basis of ignorance; no more. It is the lack of technological savviness on the part of those ruling that has won this case.

The same logic that has been used as the principle of justification for this case also has dire consequences. By making technologies liable for the acts of individuals, a luxury not even awarded to gun manufacturers, future innovation will be at the mercy of the corporations who can afford the biggest lawyers.

By stifling technologic innovation, who will win? Certainly not us consumers.

Whatever your stance on the sharing of copyrighted materials may be, it is clear to anyone with any mild technological background that this path chosen by the Supreme Court is not the appropriate solution. That is why I must make this Piracy film.

Life is busy. Between constant 12+ hour shifts at work; an upcoming physics exam of some importance; japanese lessons; piracy film… it leaves me little time to update this blog for the next little while.

As life slows down in mid-July, mildly relevant entries on my behalf should begin seeping back. But until then, please have the lowest expectations from this site.

To note that the EYNTO DVD ISO torrent has been updated with a new URL. This time it uses DNS (vs. an IP), so it should never have to change again.

If you’re halfway downloading the movie, just load up the new torrent and point it to where your download is located. It will resume from that point on. Give it a day for the DNS to permeate.

Plan to extend copyright on pop classics
…The government wants to extend copyright laws to ensure pop songs are protected for almost twice as long as the current 50 years.

…It will mean Beatles classics such as Love Me Do and Please Please Me, released in 1963, need not automatically lose their copyright in 2013. The Rolling Stones could also benefit with songs such as Satisfaction having their copyright extended beyond 2015.

James Purnell, the new minister for creative industries, believes the change will allow record companies to generate extra revenue to look for new talent and nurture it.

This defeats the purpose of the public domain. Wheras the funds might permit some new talent to be “discovered” and leeched upon by the record industry, it will be at the expense of the very origins of that newfound talent.

Full Article