Pirate Bay in court, to-day!

[Montag]

I might be a stodgy old fuddy-duddy but explain again how it's okay to take and distribute someone's work without paying the asking price?

I realize that the larger battle is to protect freedom of information, but aren't many of these file sharing website owners making money (and lots of it)?---while the artist might be left with debts and little else for the ass-busting work they put into it?

I could see a political rationalization for lifting mass-market works of evil megacorps but where is the line drawn?

I've had this discussion with some file-"sharing" friends who just say, "Hey, once it's digitized, fuggetabout it"---as if digitizing it somehow places it in the public domain. I can't quite get the ethics of this.

Well yes, I think the smaller the entity distributing/manufacturing the album, movie, whatever the case, the more argument you can make that it should be supported. If you know something is self-released or you are supporting someone or something that is not en extremely wealthy/affluent entity than you should probably buy it -- rather than getting it from Pirate Bay or wherever.

[Elvis]

Thanks for the replies, SonicG and Montag. I must admit I'm not pure in this; I've asked the same friend I argued about it with to send me files of a couple of songs I wanted to learn. *And* I more or less profit from it if I then play the song in a bar. But I guess at least the composer might get an ASCAP or BMI payment covering that situation (which they would get anyway).

[Montag]

Thanks for the replies, SonicG and Montag. I must admit I'm not pure in this; I've asked the same friend I argued about it with to send me files of a couple of songs I wanted to learn. *And* I more or less profit from it if I then play the song in a bar. But I guess at least the composer might get an ASCAP or BMI payment covering that situation (which they would get anyway).

I'm not either... I realized I downloaded some things recently by some rather small artists that I probably should have purchased. If my bank account improves, I intend to practice what I preach in the future!

[8bitagent]

I might be a stodgy old fuddy-duddy but explain again how it's okay to take and distribute someone's work without paying the asking price?

I realize that the larger battle is to protect freedom of information, but aren't many of these file sharing website owners making money (and lots of it)?---while the artist might be left with debts and little else for the ass-busting work they put into it?

I could see a political rationalization for lifting mass-market works of evil megacorps but where is the line drawn?

I've had this discussion with some file-"sharing" friends who just say, "Hey, once it's digitized, fuggetabout it"---as if digitizing it somehow places it in the public domain. I can't quite get the ethics of this.

Piratebay will be one of the first places Im putting my album up when its done soon. Ive discovered an insane amount of documentaries and underground/indie films put up there by the makers.

But Ive also downloaded and watched hundreds of documentaries from piratebay put up by fans. And really, what difference is there if you watch it from a torrent or a streaming netflix? If I made an important political documentary, Id want as many people as possible exposed to it(heck even Michael Moore says that)

[Elvis]

And really, what difference is there if you watch it from a torrent or a streaming netflix?

um... that Netflix is paying the artist a royalty?

I like Michael Moore, and it's nice that his personal earnings of around $25,000,000 allow him to encourage the free sharing of his films.

What if your important documentary cost $10,000 or $100,000 to make, with money invested by other people? When the documentary is finished, do you just tell those people, "sorry, but y'know, I think people should just own it for free"?

on edit: Even if you're selling it (if only to repay the people who put up the money) is it cool for people to "share" it without your permission and not paying you something for it?

[Elvis]

Let's take the example of Jeff's book. It'd be great if millions of people read it. So should someone digitize it (or get their hands on an existing PDF) and post it to Pirate Bay etc? Every download is potentially depriving Jeff (and his publisher) of a needed sale.

(Maybe Jeff would chime in with his view of this example. I'm assuming he can definitely use the royalty payments.)

[psynapz]

Every download is potentially depriving Jeff (and his publisher) of a needed sale.

Potentially, not actually. I started pirating software as a kid, when I had absolutely $0 budget for top-of-the-line photo or video editing software or integrated software development environments. There was no way I was going to pay $350 for Photoshop, $500 for Premiere, or $1,000 for CodeWarrior (or whatever their SRP's were at the time), but as a result of having lots of exposure to them, I now as an adult have college-educated income levels with $0 college tuition bills, and my software recommendations affect purchasing decisions within my sphere of influence.

Likewise, almost nobody that hasn't heard of RI is going to read the book, unless it's face-featured on the "Alternative History / Conspiracy" shelf (grumble) when they walk by, and their preexisting seething hatred of the faces on the gorgeously-designed cover cause them to pick it up. They might buy it.

But nobody I tell about it has gone out and bought it. One person was surprised I didn't tell him about it before he found it already half-read on my toilet bookshelf, and since I borrow about a dozen books a year from him, lending it away (once I was done with it) was the least I could do for that friendship. No sale there either.

I would suppose that most pirates downloading book PDF's, demographically, are underaged and/or underprivileged, and if they're downloading Jeff's book, they're also over-aware, lie-sick and truth-starved. I'm glad you used the word "potentially" Elvis, because otherwise I'd go off on a rant about absolutism here.

Moore knows that every time he does a theatrical release, he's going to do similar or slightly larger box office than last time, I think regardless of downloading. The downloaders will drag their friends out on opening night. You're right though, he holds a privileged position on the matter.

When I pirate from Big Music, I'm saying Fuck You to the graceless, inelegant violence with which the old model is dying. "Do better," I'm saying.

When I pirate entire seasons of commercial-free episodes of Big Television, I'm saying Fuck You to the time-wasting, anti-action, intellectually-devoid mind-heroin and the capitalist national or global brands which make it possible, and hastening the much-needed demise of either. In the meantime, I use it like methodone, weaning me and the wife away from commercial television as much as possible by at least eliminating the commercials and random time wasting in favor of efficient, intentional viewing. It makes cancelling cable TV service easier too, which is terrific because those fuckers are sketchy from the top down.

When I pirate from Big Movies, I'm saying Fuck You to Hollywood, and I don't think I need to condescend here by explaining why.

Now when I pirate indies, it's because I want to spread the message rapidly (rather than at lending-library speed, or having to burn off a dozen DVD's myself), and the message was the reason for the production. I know I'm way more likely to order their DVD though, than to buy just about any Big Movie, either of which I'd rather see in the theater, partially because theater popcorn makes the wife nearly as happy as my tongue, and that's saying something.

But just like with the other entertainment media business models, it's up to the producer to get creative about paid distribution in the age of effortless and nearly-untraceable piracy. After all, you're the one who duped everybody you could find into pooling a movie budget together for your bright idea the whole world's going to fall in love with. They should know small-potatoes indie financing is a high-risk investment unlikely to see tangible ROI, so they better be doing it first for the bragging rights, out of love for you, or love of the material. If that's not made clear in the investment portfolio, you're doing it wrong.

That said, if you market it well (or varietally, if you don't have an exclusive distribution arrangement) online, you will get DVD sales, and in some channels maybe even PPV revenue. Ancillaries are where it's at, yo. It doesn't need to be action figures, so get creative. What will people want to pay to own that will help spread the message, or help them utilize the message practically? Don't forget markets are a conversation, and issue-based documentaries calling for social action are more efficiently mobilized by strong community, so build one around the picture (but don't require purchasing for access, this is everybody's issue, even the free viewers!) and keep marketing to them, maybe bulk DVD+poster/handout packages, and keep them engaged in improving your distribution from their local end of the chain.

I'm at a loss as to how to execute product placement in a documentary, of course, and I've given it considerable thought. All I can manage is incidental, untargeted placement for which you either extort or blur. But if you can get one good one made, you might be able to score a patron distributor on cable, satellite or perhaps even a distro partnership via impressing a scout at a festival, and that's got to be better than having Kodak's new printer in the background of an interview about industrial poisoning.

Piracy isn't going to touch any of these revenue streams, and they might, if you do it right, add up to 100% repayment of investment.

Speaking of which, Jeff, how's the kid's CafePress college fund coming along?

[Stephen Morgan]

Let's take the example of Jeff's book. It'd be great if millions of people read it. So should someone digitize it (or get their hands on an existing PDF) and post it to Pirate Bay etc? Every download is potentially depriving Jeff (and his publisher) of a needed sale.

(Maybe Jeff would chime in with his view of this example. I'm assuming he can definitely use the royalty payments.)

Yeah! And don't get me started on them damn socialist libraries. Letting people read for goddamn free! And second hand shops: what fool made it legal to trade used books without paying the proper royalties? What we need is a team of armed government agents to forcibly extract moneys from people who don't want to pay and hand them over to people who can't make money without coercion because of their own woeful incompetence. Because their books are so overpriced people would rather read them on a computer screen than on lovely paper, because a DVD is kept back from release for so long in an effort to wring money from cinema goers that it's easier and quicker to forgo the pitiful extras and just download it, and so on.

“It’s quite bleak in so many ways. Amazing music will suffer. Only rich kids will be able to afford to make music, as a hobby. There’s so many BRIT school middle class artists already.
“There’s no way bands can survive. But cutting off internet connections isn’t the answer. Attitudes need to change. Kids don’t realise they’re stealing from artists. The frustrating thing is the record companies should have dealt with it a long time ago so there would be an easier transition.
“Labels don’t know what the fuck they’re dealing with. Fuck the labels – it’s the artists that need to make money. I’m all for fucking record labels. I don’t expect to make any money from record sales. The only way is to tour."
-- Charlotte Hatherley

[Twyla LaSarc]

As long as classic movies such as Ken Russell's "The Devils" languish in a twilight zone of their distributor's making, I will be downloading.

[Elvis]

Potentially, not actually. [....]

Yes psynapz, good points, and I was careful to say "potentially." Good books should be passed around after reading. But I doubt (assuming here) that Jeff or TrineDay would like to see it dpwnloadable for free on the Internet as long as they're selling it themselves.

Your whole response is pretty sensible, thanks. Broadcast TV is, after all, free, and even the Supreme Court allowed that taping it for home use is cool. I don't care much about Big Music because they suck and I don't use their products (not much anything past 1975 or so anyway; see, I really am a stodgy fuddy-duddy). The same is almost true for me with Hollywood, though I did buy two tickets to Avatar. I might even have a pirated Big Software program on my computer. The lines are gray and getting grayer, and if someone can state their rationales as you have, I won't quibble much. But for someone to grab a copyrighted work for free just because they can, I think they should give it some thought first.


As to those who might suggest that borrowing a book or movie from a public library is no different than lifting it and passing it free to the whole world at once, they've probably never created anything of their own to sell.

[8bitagent]

And really, what difference is there if you watch it from a torrent or a streaming netflix?

um... that Netflix is paying the artist a royalty?

I like Michael Moore, and it's nice that his personal earnings of around $25,000,000 allow him to encourage the free sharing of his films.

What if your important documentary cost $10,000 or $100,000 to make, with money invested by other people? When the documentary is finished, do you just tell those people, "sorry, but y'know, I think people should just own it for free"?

on edit: Even if you're selling it (if only to repay the people who put up the money) is it cool for people to "share" it without your permission and not paying you something for it?

I am curious how much the makers of films are getting everytime someone watches it or rents it on netflix. I just know if I made a serious documentary I'd want as many people to see it as possible, since very few people seem to even be into documentaries compared to other films.

[SonicG]

Let's take the example of Jeff's book. It'd be great if millions of people read it. So should someone digitize it (or get their hands on an existing PDF) and post it to Pirate Bay etc? Every download is potentially depriving Jeff (and his publisher) of a needed sale.

(Maybe Jeff would chime in with his view of this example. I'm assuming he can definitely use the royalty payments.)

Yeah! And don't get me started on them damn socialist libraries. Letting people read for goddamn free! And second hand shops: what fool made it legal to trade used books without paying the proper royalties? What we need is a team of armed government agents to forcibly extract moneys from people who don't want to pay and hand them over to people who can't make money without coercion because of their own woeful incompetence. Because their books are so overpriced people would rather read them on a computer screen than on lovely paper, because a DVD is kept back from release for so long in an effort to wring money from cinema goers that it's easier and quicker to forgo the pitiful extras and just download it, and so on.

“It’s quite bleak in so many ways. Amazing music will suffer. Only rich kids will be able to afford to make music, as a hobby. There’s so many BRIT school middle class artists already.
“There’s no way bands can survive. But cutting off internet connections isn’t the answer. Attitudes need to change. Kids don’t realise they’re stealing from artists. The frustrating thing is the record companies should have dealt with it a long time ago so there would be an easier transition.
“Labels don’t know what the fuck they’re dealing with. Fuck the labels – it’s the artists that need to make money. I’m all for fucking record labels. I don’t expect to make any money from record sales. The only way is to tour."
-- Charlotte Hatherley

Interesting points all around and some good ones here but I really don't think it is a case of right or wrong, good and evil. How are you fucking major labels by stealing their processed crap? Will you buy a tshirt? Go see them live? Then they will profit. The major corps. are already figuring out other ways to generate revenue streams. TV shows are available for free online, etc. Like I said before, we are at a crossroads and things are taking longer to work themselves out on a social exchange level as the technology steams full speed ahead...I fin McLuhan instructive here...The library and second-hand examples are great. How is trading tapes in the mail comparable to trading mp3s online? Because the scale is different? Because it is with people "I don't know"? But when I was on Soulseek, I ended up having very long and interesting conversations with people, and there were a few cool frenchmen and spaniards who would always offer a standing invite to stay at their house- so don't I know them? Of course, the difference here is scale and ease of accessibility. Anyhow, home-taping and second-hand stores were supposed to kill the music business beast but didn't. Will mp3s? Who knows but I couldn't really care less, I prefer Billy Childish...Once a way is found to easily and directly provide someone with direct monetary recompense, better than paypal, then hopefully truly independent artists will be able to reap the maximum for their valiant efforts...of course, any contribution made to the "arts" should be 100% tax-free but we aren't there yet either...
Sorry for the rambling...

[MinM]

If Pirate Bay is an FBI Trap it Isn’t a Very Good One

By Andy February 8, 2015 C: 18

Oh noes! Apparently The Pirate Bay has fallen into enemy hands and is now an FBI-run honeypot gathering data on the pirate masses. Fortunately and despite some big publications picking up on the 'story' this week, people can rest easy. TPB is not a trap and even if it was, it wouldn't be a very good one.

When confronted with an outrageous story this week our immediate thoughts were to ignore it in the hope that it would quickly go away. Sadly that isn’t how things have played out.

Faced with the fantastic and outrageous proposition that The Pirate Bay’s return was facilitated by United States’ authorities keen to position the site as an FBI-run honeypot, the temptation to regurgitate the ‘news’ was just too great for several big publications.

As the week progressed, more and more sites reported on the doomsday scenario with varying levels of excitement and belief. For our part we dismissed the story as nonsense. But with Sunday here and time on our hands, let’s pretend that the allegations are true and that the FBI has indeed commandeered the world’s most notorious torrent site...

http://torrentfreak.com/if-pirate-bay-i ... ne-150208/