• n1ckn4m3@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    136
    ·
    3 months ago

    Instead of working to create a cost effective, quick method for users to buy (AND OWN, NOT LICENSE) digital movies, the MPAA is instead going to try and censor the internet. Brilliant move, idiots.

      • ulkesh@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Let’s take that logic outward a step…

        Stocks are digital these days. Cryptocurrency is digital. So you’re basically saying those should be licensed to people, not owned.

        Ownership has nothing to do with the tangibility of the thing in the age of the Internet. And to say otherwise is missing the point of ownership in the first place.

        If I outright buy a movie, whether digital or not, I should own it – be able to download it, play it whenever I want, in perpetuity. If I subscribe to a service such as Disney+, then I fully know that I am purchasing a license to view their content.

        The logistics of providing such ownership is the cost of doing business, just like it is for Blu-ray. I would argue that ownership should be even easier, logistically, for digital goods because there is no actual manufacturing effort involved (aside from initial production of, say, a movie).

        The only reason companies want to license digital goods, instead of providing ownership to those who buy it, is greed (edit: and control).

        • BolexForSoup@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          You chose funny examples because a lot of people basically own a “license“ of those things and don’t even know it. Especially if they’re using a crypto exchange. They don’t own shit

          • ulkesh@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Yes, they actually do. They’re tokens of ownership that can easily be converted to money. It’s called an asset.

            This is why this world is so fucked. People quibble over definitions of things while the rich assholes running the show get richer.

            And so many in this thread want to keep it that way.

            Oh well, not like I can convince anyone here of anything, nor do I care to try. Keep believeing what you want.

            • BolexForSoup@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              If you buy on an exchange and don’t transfer to your wallet no you do not own it. Until it’s in your wallet, it’s theirs. They will transfer it to you when you call for it. THEN it’s yours.

              Not your keys, not your crypto.

      • n1ckn4m3@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        3 months ago

        I can own an ebook or an MP3, while some services license them many of them actually just sell you the media outright. Why are movies any different?

        Otherwise, I agree, if we’re (for some legitimate reason) forced into licensing instead of purchasing, the license needs to be perpetual and irrevocable.

          • n1ckn4m3@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            3 months ago

            You’re confusing ownership of media with ownership of copyright. I’m not suggesting that I can buy an mp3 and reshare it (or the same for an ebook), that’s a violation of copyright. I’ve never suggested that buying them lets me remove DRM, re-share, etc. It’s a strawman argument that you and conciselyverbose seem very attached to, but not an argument I’m making.

            Ownership is not strictly limited to physical items, and I’m very curious why people think it is. There’s significant outstanding case law precedent that proves that ownership can apply to digital files as well.

            • BolexForSoup@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              Subscribe to netflix, put up flyers that you are streaming all of Ozark all week for free at your house. Then tell Netflix that you’re doing it. Let me know what happens.

              Try it with a blu-ray and alert the copyright holder. Try it with a CD of your favorite album and alert the record company. Again: free, at your home, your physical or digital media you “own.” See what happens.

                • BolexForSoup@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 months ago

                  I never said it was unethical. I said it violates the license,which it does.

                  Do I think it’s bullshit? Absolutely. Do not paint me as anti-consumer, anti-ownership, or even anti-piracy. I’m saying what reality is.

                  We don’t own shit when it comes to music and movies and that’s a serious problem. Arguing with me doesn’t change that. I am saying we need to fix this.

      • SorteKanin@feddit.dk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        Of course you can actually buy movies, but that involves millions or billions and a lot of contract work.

        Couldn’t you say the same about video games? And you can definitely own your video games, and they’re digital too.

      • melpomenesclevage@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        And they never ever ever will be. Its a condition of capitalism; give a man a fish, you’ve just fucked yourself out of one days fish sales. teach a man to fish and youve blown a customer for life, irrevocably shrinking your market share.

      • fuzzzerd@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I fail to see the distinction:

        story >> book (paper) == own

        story >> movie (DVD) != own

        That doesn’t add up. I realize this post is more about streaming than physical discs, but the point remains.

      • Colonel Panic@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I don’t think even possessing a physical CD or DVD counts as “owning” per our legal system. No? Even that is considered leasing the right to play the thing at will, but you still don’t own anything.

    • uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      3 months ago

      They’re spoiled from selling you the same movies over and over again whenever a new medium becomes normalized, despite all your previous licenses. Then they complain when your media breaks or you want to share with your best friend.

      They want your money for not doing anything new.

  • Kumatomic@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    118
    ·
    3 months ago

    What else will corporations pay Congress to decide that is in corporations’ best interest for us to not see?

  • Drewski@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    69
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    He [MPAA CEO Charles Rivkin] added that almost 60 countries use site-blocking as a tool against piracy, “including leading democracies and many of America’s closest allies.” The only reason why the US isn’t one of them, he continued, is the “lack of political will, paired with outdated understandings of what site-blocking actually is, how it functions, and who it affects.”

    No, you’re the one who doesn’t understand. We don’t want censorship, and we have this thing called the 1st Amendment.

    • TassieTosser@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      3 months ago

      Australia’s version is a dns block. It only stops people who don’t know how to google or change thier dns.

    • BolexForSoup@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      48
      ·
      3 months ago

      the growth has already been staggering since states starting requiring ID’s for pornhub. I’m glad tech literacy is increasing in the face of these recurring laws. Small silver lining I can latch on to lol

      • theneverfox@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        It’s almost like John Oliver’s NSA street campaign. No one cared until he started talking about how the NSA was cause inappropriately “handling” dick pics

        They’re half the way there. One does not simply turn off the porn. People will go through great lengths to see nudes

        Now we just have to make them understand that their porn history is being collected along with their legal identity. Hackers will get it before long, and if the government doesn’t have it already, it’s just a matter of time

        The violation we’ve felt having all of our movements and habits tracked is apparently only felt by the masses when their junk is analyzed. Which I find weird, but hey, whatever makes people realize privacy isn’t something to shrug off

      • pbjamm@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        3 months ago

        When that song came out it hit 19yr old me HARD. I am now 51 and it still does.

      • ililiililiililiilili@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        Its not even a free market. Check the protectionism keeping Chinese EVs out of the US. Its more like the land of corporate profits.

        • CmdrShepard42@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          There’s no such thing as a free market unless you’re talking about places like Somolia where there is no government.

          • Telorand@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Free Market is to economics what The American Dream is to immigrants and citizens.

            Reality inevitably shines a harsh light on both.

  • callouscomic@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    53
    ·
    3 months ago

    The least productive Congress since the Great Depression? The same Congress who couldn’t pass a budget for the government until 6 months into the very fiscal year it’s for? That Congress? Priorities.

    • aphonefriend@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      3 months ago

      What are you talking about? The current congress is incredibly effective. They just have way more important things to focus on then whatever you peasants are yammering about. Like banning tiktok.

  • ivanafterall@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    3 months ago

    A bunch of old white guys who literally don’t understand the internet vs. the entire internet. Okie doke.

    • Pixel@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      wait can you explain what this is/how it works? I’ve never heard of it before

      • golden_zealot@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Sure, i2p or the invisible internet project is a FOSS project which acts as an anonymous network anyone can potentially access, and host on.

        It does this by creating end to end encrypted peer to peer tunnels between its users and then sending data through itself via a path between some of the 50,000+ volunteers that make up the project. The path data takes is random so a third party seeing any communication in full is highly unlikely, and even at that, its still encrypted.

        The software that implements this is the i2p router, and when using the i2p router you become a node on the network like everyone else using it, allowing pieces of anyone’s data to move through your router, just as your data moves through theirs.

        The UX/UI is very good for new users and makes it easy to access, or host. Particularly, to my understanding, i2p is also very popular for torrenting due to the nature of how it works (in comparison to similar projects such as tor, there is an entire built in solution for torrenting included with i2p).

      • golden_zealot@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        Similar in some ways different in others, actually surprisingly fast for what it does though and I find the user experience a lot nicer than tor.

  • chalk46@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    and I’m sure they’re paying them lots of money to do it because God forbid the rich assholes aren’t rich enough 🙄

  • retrieval4558@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    3 months ago

    Just hoping private torrent sites and Usenet remain relatively unscathed. Honestly I’m surprised about how many of the big private trackers have lasted so long.

    • Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      3 months ago

      They’re not smart enough it figure out anything not mainstream. I heard most of the big sites blocked recently were live TV feed sites.

  • snownyte@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    3 months ago

    Curious, I checked out Chris Dodd and wonder what he’s up to. He’s a close advisor now to Biden so I’d imagine he’s whispering in Biden’s ear and whoever will listen, about how much of piracy is ‘bad for ya’. In case anyone forgot, Chris Dodd was a major asshole during his 6 year stint (2011 - 2017) with MPAA and he ultimately failed in stopping piracy.

    I don’t think this latest tactic will work. Congress couldn’t even understand Facebook and they couldn’t even hold Mark Zuckerberg of all people, accountable for his shit. Congress, MPAA and all the forces in the world couldn’t stop Kim Dotcom. MPAA, ACE and whatever, still cannot shut down The Pirate Bay.

    They’ll just keep bashing their heads on the brick wall. The only victories they’ve gotten in all of the 20+ year decade war on piracy, is that most times, the sites go down because of lack of funding and support. They only take down big sites because they’ve found weak links or they’ve found those run-a-mouth pirates who’ve gotta go around talking shit about pirating to the point where they’re a liability then wonder why their favorite service/site is shut down.