EPIC FU for 4/30/09 - internet to hollywood: your copyright can kiss my ass

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Dr Satori on April 30, 2009 at 4:53am

From your site: >>>>>>> © 2009 Created by Zadi <<<<<<<<<< What self-indulgent self-serving, idealistic hypocracy you're dishing out. I'm copying your episode - deleting the promos from your sponsors - broadcasting it, and letting them know they're paying you for nothing. And the saddest part is you have become so self-involved, and psuedo-anarchistic, you won't even try to see how wrong you are on this copyright issue. An artist has a legal right in most developed countries, through international treaties and national laws, to protect any economic worth of any fruits of their labour. Some artists might reject the need for this at times - free choice. You must really think you're something special poo-pooing these rights and freedoms as if they were merely some overly zealous capitalistic conspiracy by The Man to keep the masses isolated from their inherently earned access to be entertained, and deciding all artists must surrender these rights. These are usually well thoughtout and implemented protections - you have also accepted and applied (see above) - which you conceitly refute with the wave of your electronic wand. I might agree that sampling visual, audio or other parts of creations should be subject to more relaxed legislation, but in practical terms this is almost impossible to consider because at what per cent of copy is it no longer recognized as the original? Your arguments about the messenger not being responsible for the message - citing the post office - is not accurate, as an important consideration is intent. It's one thing if I lend you a machete to cut a tree - another if I lend it to you to kill someone. ~ Take the copyright symbol off your site you hypocrites.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Zadi on April 30, 2009 at 8:18am

The © on this site is Ning's and unfortunately we can't change it - otherwise we would make it Creative Commons.

Here's a blog post further explaining what we mean: http://epicfu.com/blog/2009/04/why-piracy-is-winning-against.html

In no way are we saying copyright should not exist and that artists shouldn't make money, of course they should!

The discussion we want to engage people in is that copyright laws need to change to PROTECT people who are now becoming part of the conversation by remixing and mashing up content. We are in an age where we are communicating visually. Storytelling is changing.

We also talk about the way we're distributing and sharing content is also changing. The Pirate Bay is a tool. Millions of people are using it. Some of it is copyrighted material. There are MANY questions we have to ask ourselves here.

We think it's AWESOME that you're able to cut up the episode and republish it -- further engaging people in this conversation. We release the episode under a Creative Commons license. :D

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Matt Gowdy on April 30, 2009 at 10:17am

@Dr Satori:

Protip: If you're going to start an argument or rant on specific points, use the enter key and make some paragraphs. Otherwise, you're almost defeating yourself because nobody likes reading blocks of text that big on the internet.

Distribution modes are important. More important than most people think. ;)

Using Ning as an example of hypocrisy isn't going to work. Maybe try looking at the main site and see if you can maintain your argument (I'm going to go out on a limb and say you won't really be able to).

Artists don't always have legal rights in other countries. But that's relative to history and perspective. Many artists, writers, and scientists fled to this country when they found they had no rights in their own. I can cite Germany or Russia as examples and various other conflicts around the world have forced people to migrate against their will or be executed for expressing opinions.

Copyright is a privilege granted legally by a country or culture. Beyond that, it is normally granted to the creator of a work. The issue here is that copyright is being used as a weapon instead of as it was intended to be used. Letter of the law vs. the spirit of the law as it were.

Another issue here is that larger companies are controlling copyrights and intellectual properties as though they were stocks or bonds or monetized assets. The existence of patent firms dedicated to buying IPs is enough to curdle most people's blood.

The counter-idea here is that we would like the money to go to the artist and whoever actually helped in the distribution, in essence it's a rebellion against the massive over-bloated organizations that are being too resistant to change and are thus going after their customers.

That's not self-indulgent, that's just a perspective of the market. Artificially sidelining the market for the corporations is self-defeating both to the market and the culture.

Also remember, ideas are extremely hard to kill.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Derek on April 30, 2009 at 8:47am

Uh, Zadi. Uh, your moonwalk, moonwalking...

Uh, that was frikken GREAT!

But, why the same clothes as last time? Is it like a moonwalking uniform? :-)

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Matthew on April 30, 2009 at 11:36am

This was a great show! I live in a town of about 90,000 people... There is just about ONE record store here. It has ONLY chart topping music... I am into underground hip hop and Electronica. Well, in general, I typically like non-mainstream music. On top of only having ONE record store... there is not the most hype music scene here either. The web is the place I discover new music. I usually find tracks that are available for download and bump those. I find something curios though as I was thinking about piracy and all the changes happening. When I find an artist I really like I want to go out and support them by grabbing their CD. I feel like this is the way to do it. I get a chance to listen to a snippet of each track on a given CD and, if I am loving it, I give my support via CD or merch.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Zadi on April 30, 2009 at 1:11pm

I do the same thing Matthew. :) When I find an artist I like, I go and buy their music and support the artist directly.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by missbhavens on April 30, 2009 at 12:42pm

That was a delicious glass of smartsies freshly squeezed from your mind-grapes! Yes, and yes, and so on.

But when will Big Media Fatcats ever get "it"? Soon? Ever? Sure, you or I may be willing to pay a fee for across-the-board-accessible high-quality content, but we're a niche, really, and not the massive population that Big Media Fatcats aim for. We're like pesky flying insects, really, waiting to be swatted away.

Copyright laws are wildly outdated and the punishments being doled out do not fit the crimes.

Sh*t's got to change.

But I don't think Change will really get rolling 'till the youngest of the new media generation -- interested parties born, say, five/ten years ago -- come of age and make big noise.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by MosesMonster on April 30, 2009 at 4:08pm

You know, this whole copyright thing is getting out of hand, on both sides of the fence. On one side, you have the "major players" or the "big companies", as most put it, setting up rules and regulations for the distribution of their works and the punishments if you do not abide by them. Their punishments can be harsh, and overall, upsetting to the general populous.

On the other hand, you have the people. The people who demand, that these policies and punishments change and adapt to the new form of media and to their generation. Thing being is, their way of demanding is quite upsetting to me as I find it a bit childish and most of all, archaic. We are talking about progressing into a new era of reform and distribution. Why are we resorting to day old tactics to achieve what we want?

SITUATION:
An artist comes out with an album that I want, but don't have the money for.

The consumer in me says buy when you get the chance, while the person in me wants that "instant gratification." In today's standards, you can achieve both LEGALLY! There are services out there that stream whole media to you, and you can sample their new album, judging on if you want to buy it or not. Why would someone resort to piracy? So they can put it on their music player? You didn't buy it so you don't own it. And that is stealing.

Piracy is stealing no matter how you slice it. It's not a tangible thing at times, but it is stealing. You are hindering revenue of a company that uses that to keep itself a float. Your download might not seem much (I'm stealing $13 from this company by downloading) but it all adds up. You download 10 albums, that's $130 that a company doesn't get.

Then comes the argument; "They are a big company, they don't need it." What gives you the right to say that? What makes you the "god-like" figure that passes judgement on who should get paid for their content and who doesn't? "It's not going to hurt them" When everyone is doing it though, then you have a problem. When I say everyone, I don't mean it in the literal sense, but when you look at your music library, and you factor in what you paid for, and what you didn't (and then price out the actual amount of what you should of paid for of what you downloaded), chances are, that number is high.

I'm not trying to be a hypocrite here. I'll go on the record and say I've done my share of downloading. Thing is, I call it what it is. And I've stopped. I see a record I want, I hop on last.fm and stream all the tracks I can to see if I want to buy it, then I wait till I have the money. I have a wishlist of all the things I want to buy when I get the money and I check them off as I purchase them. I wait, because if I don't have the money for it, I shouldn't get it. I don't go out and steal bread or apples when I don't have the money for it. Why should I do that with music, games, and videos?

This instant gratification feeling that everyone is on is ruining the media. It's the pirates who want the music now (and free), and the companies who want their money now. It's the "NOW" that's ruining everything, in a world where patience is nearly dead.

If people want change, then they themselves have to change as well. Don't download illegally. Don't resort to old tactics. You use the current trends of media to work with you. Companies will see how that works well (Example Hulu) and broaden the horizons for you in the future.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by MosesMonster on April 30, 2009 at 11:20pm

I believe the protesters are unreasonable in some stance where they don't really provide much of alternative for the companies to look to. They resort to the simple, easy and somewhat selfish plan of just pleasing themselves. Why not come up with a solution where BOTH parties can win?

I'm not saying who is more unreasonable because to me that's a silly arms race. "They are wronger than I so they should change... not myself." Wrong is wrong is wrong. Unreasonable is unreasonable, I don't care what way you look at it. "That painting is blue, even if it's a different hue of blue." I figured since most people seem to be harking on big bad companies, some retrospect was in order. Light should be shined where all are wrong.

And for the record; Google, yahoo and hotmail don't host trackers and torrents (not the content files but the torrent themselves) as The Pirate Bay did. They merely link you to sites that do. Should they have gone to jail? I don't think so, but was what they were doing illegal? To a degree, yes. They were hosting these trackers that housed the means to the illegal content. They became an accomplice. Last time I checked though, accomplices didn't get harsh jail time and felony fines. I was only a little surprised when I heard the verdict. I thought they found them guilty for the wrong reasons, or at least they worded it incorrectly. Reading transcripts and hearing about their behavior in the court room though, they weren't helping out their own cause.

And like I said, copyrights have really gone sour. It's an archaic system to keep things in check so credit goes back where credit is due. When everything evolved though, the old laws of copyrighting remained just that... old. It needs to be updated and reformed to this day and age. Everyone is part of THIS generation. I'm not JUST talking about generation y and generation x, the baby boomers and the late bloomers. I'm talking about EVERYONE who is alive in THIS day and age. This is the current generation, and every generation before it that is alive and kicking is a part of it. It's a blend of generations that create what we have today, and they all need to drop the act and work together to sort things out. Find a middle ground, shake hands and call it a day.

Sure it's not going to be that easy but this pointing fingers, name calling, and as you put it "bullshit" is not doing anything productive. You want change? Fight to keep Pandora and Last.FM alive. Come up with new ways for advertising to be inserted into your popular forms of media where it doesn't upset you or the advertiser. Develop that next great thing that can progress us into the future. Don't fight fire with dry wood, because that's what we are doing. Pirating is not an answer, it's just another problem added to the already huge shitpile we have going.

Take your ideas and grow them into reality, otherwise, we are doomed to do this song and dance for maybe another 30 or 40 years.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by MosesMonster on May 1, 2009 at 8:14am

Clarification: I'm mainly speaking about one side here, but I am in no way saying the "big bad companies" are relieved for their unreasonable wrong doings. Sorry for the mix-up. Law and wrong sort of go hand in hand don't you think? If one is breaking the law, that is wrong. If one is bending the law, capitalizing on opportunities that weren't meant to be part of the equation, that's wrong too. "Wrong is wrong is wrong." See it from both sides and you can see I wasn't making a pop-shot at the people fighting this, I was calling wrong what it is... wrong.

After this, I won't say wrong for a while because it sounds weird now.

I could go on to say that I believe companies are taking the childish approach to the situation at hand, suing anything that has two legs and remotely looks like their product, even if it isn't. Companies like Fox, Scholastic, Warner Brothers Music Group and organizations like the Recording Industry Association of America and the Federal Communications Commission aren't out to regulate, but more like compensate and line the pockets of CEOs who are going to do anything within their power to hold onto their money, doing the selfish and the unreasonable. It shouldn't be up to the organization to sue a person who illegaly downloaded their song, it should be up to the artist, the one who created the song, or even to SOME extent, the publisher. Pick a punishment that fits the crime. One album doesn't constitute for a $100,000 fine. Someone embezzles from a company, they pay back what they stole, and any damages they caused. Since when is a lost album a $100,000 lost to a company, and not even the company who published it. Last time I checked, it wasn't Avril Lavigne and RCA records who brought up charges against the girl who downloaded Sk8ter Boi. RIAA came out and said they put a tracker on the song to locate the ISPS and IPS of those downloading them. (Source). Fear Mongering is not a way to tell your point. Don't scare people straight, work with them so you can better understand their side of the story, and they can for your side. Suing one person isn't going to do much, other than start a ruckus.

They are so into the idea of themselves as being the authority, the lose sight of why they exist. They exist because we make them exist, we let them exist, we want them to exist so we can buy their music, movies, books, etc. Even going a little broader, we want them to innovate and create. Why sue the little man if he's just following in your footsteps? Case and point; Apple v. Psystar (Source). It's a whole world gone mad for greed and that instant gratification.

And for the record, I probably got the quote from a Dr. Seuss book or interview subconsciously. Man is my idol. He saw a problem and instead of complaining about it or going to some disembodied figure that was connected to it by 2 degrees, he took matters into his own hands and fixed the problem himself. California had a low literacy rate when he came back from the war, so he sought to fix that. If anything, say it to everyone you know and maybe you can inspire someone to fix our problem. Who knows, maybe someone will create the next great format. "Oh the places you'll go!"

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Steve Garfield on May 1, 2009 at 8:36am

Loved that Beyonce clip. Just shows you need to be a critical consumer of media.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Derek on May 1, 2009 at 9:12am

yeah, I liked that also. Something like that could SINK a career. But Beyonce's "got back" to bring that career back in a hurry!

▶ Reply to This

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page