The Audacity Of File Sharing & CopyrightsAdded: Friday, December 4th, 2009
Category: Extra Torrent Related > Random Thoughts
Tags:File Sharing, ET, Extra Torrent, p2p, MPAA, extratorrent.com, RIAA, bittorrent protocol, copyright protections, copyright claim, antipiracy, entertainment industry, peer to peer file sharing
In my recent years in the BitTorrent community, I have learned many things about torrents, and why they are such a target. It seems that there are tempting organizations, who try to create an absurd claim that the BitTorrent Protocol is used specifically to infringe upon copyrighted material.
What they fail to mention, are the heavy advantages of the BitTorrent Protocol, which are used for the intention of spreading knowledge and creativity within the community, for the greater good of expanding the amount of information available to the world. By doing this, we make leaps and bounds which at one point in time, were not possible.
In this case, the amount of knowledge which is shared, only creates a more informed and educated world, on how software works, operates, is commanded, and how to use it. This kind of "evolves" the world at a rapid pace, for what they can use to possibly invent new technologies, or help the human race with advancements that even fifteen years ago we're not thought possible.
These types of benefits, can happen when information is shared at high rates, to places in the world, which normally couldn't access the similar tools needed for their project. So by allowing the world of information available in some places, to reach places where they lack the same advantages, such as libraries, or internet cafe's, or schools with high speed internet, for example, all prove great cases for the BitTorrent Protocol.
That's the goal of those of us whom care, while we share. We truly believe file sharing is a right, and must be defended as such. We can go on about copyrighted material, and how that could be used as a defense that the BitTorrent Protocol is being used to cause some industries, mainly the Entertainment Industry, to lose "potential" financial gain.
Let me debate this case. I feel the urge to explain the audacity of any claim such as that.
Let me begin by winding down what the internet does in a 2010 post Millennium era of technology. It has created so many advancements, for businesses, for corporations, for governments, and for their people, that along with pros of any situation, of course there will be windfall cons as well.
What I mean by this, is by the email, text messaging communications ran through the databases of any network carrier, or ISP, the fax communications, the rapid access to orders, shipment paperwork, legal processing, claims, or any type of information used while a government, business, or industry, are attempting to quickly accomplish their goals, that no person in the world cannot claim that the internet and fast file or information sharing, has gained them the ability to profit very fast, and finalize agreements much quicker. This results in a huge profit gain, by the industry, as result of the internet and file and/or information sharing.
Imagine living still in an era where all paper based information had to travel by postal or delivery service. The amount of time, between when a transaction could complete for example, would come to such a slow pace, businesses, governments, or even people would be set to a slow growth in advancements, which in turn would lead to a smaller profit margin than most see today. I think that's a fair assessment of the situation, and by all means, anyone who thinks otherwise I'd feel free to debate that as well.
Moving on though, what I am trying to explain though, is that with any advancement, such as file or information sharing, will come with a cost as well. Some of the cons, are that some entertainment industry representatives can claim well now that copyrighted material is shared, and that this costs them as businesses of an industry where the selling of information, or data, is essential to their success, cannot afford to lose the "potential" profits that are being lost due to the "alleged" illegal file sharing. Ok, I think that's a fair statement too from the industry, absolutely. Now let me debate it.
My return to them is this, without the quick spread of material, data, documents, transactions, that they also use upon the internet, then they would be losing much more than they claim to lose just from the "alleged" illegal file sharing. As I said previously, if they were still using "snail" mail to deliver their goods they sell online, and there were no online sharing of information, then their profit margins would be MASSIVELY less than they are now. I believe that's a completely true statement too.
So if they want to use the complaint that file sharing is killing their profits, and want to remove the internet from the world, I suggest to them do this for one month. Due to their huge investments in other worldwide projects, I doubt they would do this. They would probably go bankrupt, without all the profits they receive online.
Think about it, ringtones which a percentage are given to the record companies, games which can be mailed and processed online, movies which can be legally mailed online, albums that can be paid for to download, or mail to them, there is just so much, that they gain, by using the internet, that it's created an "industry within the industry", in my eyes. They could not possibly ignore this.
They first, before claiming that the file sharing information digital age is harming them, need to consider the gains in which it also benefits them. The war against file sharing, is a war against themselves, a war against the world.
I believe we all know very well, that if the entertainment industry, used certain forms of file sharing to their advantage, in example, the BitTorrent Protocol, they would realize the potential gains they would receive would magnificently increase their profits. Let me give them examples. If they would optimize file sharing, using high speed servers, to transfer movies, or music, for pay per download services, they could reach a HUGE range of peers, paying peers, fast, whom would be customers to them.
There is an amazing market out there for this, and a simple programming of a high speed 1-10GBPS server with massive bandwidth, would be able to allow 10,000-50,000 minimum paying customers to receive a movie, or music album each day, per server, @ for example one dollar per download, that's $50,000 per day, per server. 20 servers, would be a million dollars per day.
Wow. Why they are failing to recognize this, and use it to it's potential, is beyond me. I still cannot imagine, why the industries of entertainment, would claim that they maybe have a billion dollars per year in losses, but do not use this method, that with only 20 servers, would make around $356 million per year.
Add it up. BitTorrent has more than 150 million users worldwide. If more than 150 million users per year, are using BitTorrent, and file sharing, then it's the laws which need to change, not the users.
Maybe the industry is failing to see that, not only along with what their companies can do using the information technology for fast processing, that if they would capitalize upon the potential that remains, they would be gaining at least $356 million per year, per one million users. There are an estimated 150 million users currently, in these types of networks.
That's a one dollar per download, of a movie, and an album. Of course I made an extremely inexpensive number, just as example, of their potential earnings. At five dollars per movie, and five per album, they would make $1.78 billion dollars per year, from twenty servers. Wow. That's simply amazing. We're talking only one million people per day, downloading a movie or album, each day. There is an estimated 150 million users who use the networks, and at that rate, that's less than one percent of them downloading each day.
At that ratio, they would make a fortune, and of course, it would probably be more like fifty times that amount of users per day, I would say fifty million downloads a day, that they could reach. That would multiply their total again, from $1.78 billion per year to $89 billion per year.
According to a 2006 study by the internet consultancy Envisional, file sharing networks account for at least 60 per cent of all internet traffic. So if even a large majority of those users leaped upon the legal service. the entertainment industry would gain such massive increases, that the potential earnings would be astounding. An "industry, within an industry", which is something I say time, and time again.
This is my counter to any claim, that the file sharing networks of the world and the information age as we know it are harming the entertainment industry, and copyright protections. The fact they they continue to not monopolize this industry, which right now sits as an untapped diamond mine, only shows their own ignorance.
The US Supreme Court reached this decision, here is a copy of the text they once wrote, about file sharing software.
The United States Supreme Court wrote:
On June 27, 2005, the US Supreme Court decided to hold companies that make file sharing software responsible for copyright infringements perpetrated by the software’s users. Everyone expected that they would rule as they did when Universal City Studios sued Sony over the Betamax in 1984: there were legitimate uses of the technology, and it shouldn't be held responsible simply because it can be used unlawfully. Instead, however, they ruled that file sharing software actively encourages piracy and the makers should be held accountable.
The Supreme Court's action has done the exact opposite of what MGM and the other content distributors who brought the suit hoped it would. File sharing software will become open-source and public domain. File sharing will continue to grow ever more popular, but now there will be no one to sue. The Supreme Court's ruling hasn't even delayed the inevitable; it has actually brought it closer.
They could encrypt and compress the information which is being shared, for a fee, and reduce network traffic. This would also solve, the current disputes, that networks cannot handle the massive peer to peer file sharing that is going on today.
We can kill two birds, with one stone. Everyone enjoys doing that right? (Sorry PETA) Someone is going to completely capitalize on this opportunity, my question to the industry, is will it be them? Or will it become independent record labels, movie production companies, game designers, or software companies, which break the walls down, so to speak? As of now, they are the ones making new ground, and creating a movement of the masses, which is backing file sharing.
It's time to get with the program for the industry of big entertainment, or give up the battle. We can dispute you on any ground, and we are already showing you what you are missing. People require efficiency, reliability, and speed, and that's what the peer to peer networks give them. A friend calls and says "I'll be over in two hours, you wanna check out a classic slasher film tonight?" You would probably be so busy, with your situation, that instead of just going to make a trip to buy the movie, or rent it, you'd just set your PC to grab it, and know it will be done when your friend gets there.
Why is this not being capitalized? Something only they can answer I'm sure. I just hope when it's all said and done, that the audacity of some to realize what's in front of their faces, does not over-rule those who intend to implement it. When something such as the world of file sharing, can only evolve and revolutionize the entire world, if it was used to it's potential.
Just my thoughts on the situation. Yet whomever does actually seize the opportunity before them, will be in complete control once they reap huge profits, and will be able to compete with the big business that runs things now, if in fact, big business fails to use this chance they have now. Only time will tell I presume. Until then, the situation will remain as it is.
A war, against a positive file sharing potential pool of great profits and rewards for mankind, being attacked with audacity, instead of being used to it's advantages. Tisk tisk, to the entertainment industry.
December 4th, 2009Posted by: Date:
Friday, December 4th, 2009
|posted by (2009-12-04 09:41:46)|
|Your articles just get better and better OBSCENE.|
All i can say is WOW, it blew me away.
I just wish someone in the entertainment industry would read it
and act upon your thoughts.
|posted by (2009-12-04 10:26:08)|
|Great article. Let me add some information to you: why Itunes Store was a success? Because they give the option to buy to the user. One thing it's true: if you have an option to buy something legally at a fair price, why bother to go illegal? I dare someone to say that Itunes models wasn't profitable!|
But, there's another side in the coin: I live in Brazil. When Lost was launched in Itunes store, I'd try to buy the episodes (even without portuguese subtitles), but they didn't allow downloads to Brazil, because we have no DRM regulations here. The first season of Lost was aired almost 18 months after US, and starts at 01:30 AM!!!! I don't wanna spend my night in front a TV to watch a year and a half old series. So, the options are: 1) wait a year, or 2) use bittorrent and watch the episode the next day. Guess which one i choosed?
Other thing: there are a lot of people that translate the episode, and about 6 hours after, they release FOR FREE a srt file, so that anyone can watch with only 1 day after. Since they can't stop the bittorrent, they begun to shut down subtitles sites! They say the copyright include the audio, so "we are no allowed to translate it without permission". People that write the subtitles have faced lawsuit, and have their sites shutdown.
Instead of thinking ways of make downloads legal and make money with that (as you pointed in your article), the just spend (a lot of) money to persecute home viewers.
By the way: Itunes store Brazil was opened this year, but still don't have series episodes to sell (sniffâ€¦)
|here! here! thx OBS|
|posted by (2009-12-04 12:01:18)|
|Piracy ftw |
It stops fans from buying crap
It is a great marketing tool
If given the chance, we will pay for good work
It helps artists who are actually good
c/p ftw :D
|posted by (2009-12-04 13:24:35)|
|Great read as always Obs, I think that the entertainment industry looks at there "lost money" as what and how many people download a particular torrent. With torrents I check a lot of things out that I wouldn't have paid for anyway, so in fact they weren't loosing anything at all. Now with the attacks on P2P world I find that I feel guilty buying something as I am handing money over to the enemy, But at a $1-$5 or so a movie I might just be able to be bought. (Come over to the dark side. SnakeyB)|
|Killer post OBS. As always, severely informative delving deep into the heart of sharing morality.|
|Exactly what taker said,if I watch a film and it's really good I'll go buy the dvd to support the film and for the bonus features,making of,and all that good stuff,but,if a film sucks and is a waste of my time at least I won't be out any real money,wich would piss me off even more than the time I wasted watching it,nobody likes throwing money away.|
|posted by (2009-12-04 17:43:37)|
|It's a true article,good stuff like always Obscene.|
|posted by (2009-12-05 02:18:58)|
|thx obscene that was a great read|
|posted by (2009-12-05 06:29:31)|
|xxxOBSENExxx is the man. Nice right hook. Long live ET........|
|posted by (2009-12-05 08:05:26)|
|man ur articles just keep getting better & better as i read them everyday i just wished more people in the industry would understand y there are bit torrent communities so that we can check out whats out b 4 we actually buy it i mean who wansts to buy a crappy movie when they check it out here 1st & if they like cool if not oh well its not are fault u make such crap get better at it & u might see a difference|
|posted by (2009-12-05 10:25:37)|
|TY for the information OBS :)|
|Very nice article, a lot of eye-material but very interesting to read!|
And totally agree with taker and jdpennington, when a movie or album is great
i won`t hesitate to buy it...
|posted by (2009-12-05 23:02:15)|
|Thanks OBS, I agree with most of what you say. Remember the days before internet. You could have a DUI, DWI, child support or whatever in one state and move to another state undetected. I know that's a bad example, but like you said, challenge the Government or banks, corporations etc..to carry on w/o internet, they would probably go bankrupt. But as far as charging $1.00 per movie not a good idea, it's already being done by net flicks et al..Except it won't be a dollar it will get way out of hand. So let's just keep it the way it is for now. Lets not forget the internet was started as open source, free as in freedom and information to all. Entrepeneurs got involved. The rest is history, anyway thanks for keeping us all up to date.|
|posted by (2009-12-05 23:23:02)|
|I would like to know just what is legal! If I set my VCR to record a movie off free to air TV using numbers printed on my TV guide specially for that purpose is that illegal? I buy a PVR and it has an EPG to help me set the recording of a movie am I breaking the law? Or is the printer of the guide or the designer-seller-importer of the PVR doing so? Is it only what I do with that file later that matters - watch it at someone else's home - burn it to a DVD etc? What is the difference to downloading a movie of P to P or recording the same movie from free to air TV? If one way is legal and one is not where is the changeover point? I have hundreds of bought movies and go to the movies with my family many times each year, but most of the films I (don't DL) I would not go to the theater to see or buy or rent for that matter.|
BTW great article, and thanks for all your ups. Sorry for going on a bit!!!
|posted by (2009-12-06 04:01:15)|
|I completely agree with Kaiser. Why is it illegal copyright infringement if I download the movie from a p2p but not from tv? I can record so many movies and use for my own enjoyment as long as I don't "profit" from the recording. I should be able to give it away right? Am I profiting from giving a movie away on p2p??? They claim that piracy "steals" profits or royalties from the POOR artists. As far as I can tell the artists are doing just fine, Eating caviar and lounging in gold bathtubs. BUT after they think they have made all the money they can off a movie they put it on "free tv" and all the sudden no one cares about copyright infringement, AS LONG AS IT IS NOT SHARED P2P, then they care. There are many, many movie buffs and cult classic fans that will keep wanting these forms of entertainment. These movies will be making money generations from now and yet they are in the free tv realm because they won't make MILLIONS a day like HOT NEW RELEASES. They do not make any money off each person who watches it once they release it onto the airwaves. So, why is it they care so muchabout p2p but apparently disreagard free TV, VHS recording and DVR recording? Isn't copyright infringement the same whether it is digital files, DVDs or VHS? If so why do they spend MORE on proseciting digital internet based piracy than they CLAIM to lose, but seem to completely disregard all other forms of copying copyright materials? Maybe the whole idea of copyrights is out moded. Maybe we need to rethink the whole concept of someone owning an idea. Ideas should belong to society and everyone should have access. Down with entertainment industry dictators. Down with governments trying to own our minds!!|
|posted by (2009-12-06 16:07:42)|
|Ok, I get the point - the only problem is that while free torrent sites exist few people are likely to use a record company system that's basically the same, but charges ... anything.|
I'm one of those 'artists' the previous poster thinks is eating caviar and lounging in a gold bathtub. I'm not, I make less than the minimum wage and have very little money. Even so, I make and release music on a very small scale, and my last release has so far sold about 200 copies on CD and a handful of legal downloads. A recent search on just one torrent site revealed 2,548 files of it, ready to download. While I'm of course happy that this reflects more people than I was aware of enjoying the music, I'm also aware that at the current low rate of income, I won't be able to afford to make music and the quality I'd like to - I simply won't have the money.
I know many other 'artists' like myself who are finding it harder and harder to continue to make music, because we cannot even break even on the activity. While I accept that many think this is beneficial, and that all music making should become a 'hobbyist' activity, I'm not so sure. To get really good at something takes time, and time is money. I'm convinced that the quality of music, both the writing and the recording of it, will decline. I hope to be proved wrong, but I do think this will happen.
So by all means download all you want - and I'm not stupid enough to think anyone will stop- but do at least consider, occasionally , supporting the artists whose music you enjoy. Not all of us are on big labels, and most of us rarely make any money at all from what we do. Yes, it would be better if all 'art' was free, both to make, and enjoy. But that world doesn't exist yet, and probably never will. Making music costs money, and not all artists can afford to be charities.
|posted by (2009-12-06 17:36:18)|
|Much (though not all) of contemporary digital piracy follows the logic of spectacle. It builds and conveys a fantastical drama of right and wrong, of new possibilities, of freedom from the noose of the law; it signals and speaks to the thrill and fun in twisting, even breaking, existing structures and constraints|
LoL. Wow. What "artist" are you? Oh right not a soul has heard of you. Wait!!!! 2548 people at minimum, according to your logic have now heard of you! Congrats! File sharing benefits you. Maybe if you put out something worth buying, they will follow and buy it!
|posted by (2009-12-07 19:11:55)|
|lmao.... nice obs|
|posted by (2009-12-14 07:59:15)|
|Hi tomafold, struggling artists will always struggle until they hit the "big time". The only way to do this is by giving away you're music - art until you're recognized, which it looks like is happening. The latest 'Australian' movie success "Samson and Delilah" was just shown ad free on free to air TV!!!! It won at the Arias (Aussie version of the Oscars) it was made for about $3M (most of which came from the Government) and has just about broke even so not that many people saw it. Personally I thought the movie was crap and thank god I didn't pay to see it. There had my grumble! If your music sold on the net for about a $1 a time and you got half you would be $1274 richer and people who paid and didn't like it wouldn't worry so that would be a good thing. Personally I hate buying albums and find 85% of the tracks are crap. I have about a 2 meter stack of vinyl disks but I am not allowed to copy them to CD.||
Most Popular Stories