China's New Anti-piracy Initiative Targets Beijing's Internet Cafes

26

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

Carlidan

 This is what we should have been doing in the first place. Having a debate rather than people just namecalling or threating people because the have a diffrent view point. It's good to read something that invokes your mind. 

 

“Animals, whom we have made our slaves, we do not like to consider our equal.”

avatar

Elric

You know, you guys just knee jerking on Mark's posts are missing some interesting food for thought. I'm not sure that as Mark seems to suggest, dropping the concept of IP is the right thing to do, but I also think the idea that intellectual property can and should be treated like physical property is ABSURD. And that we need to rethink the concept and come up with a better working compromise.

I think one problem is that in America 'bread and circuses' rule... We've become hopeless entertainment gluttons... so if something entertains us, half of us thinks the creator has some kind of RIGHT to be set for life in terms of personal wealth and the other half immediately fire up bittorent.I mean, two hours movies that gross half a BILLION dollars? Someone is clearly gaming the system and it's the giant corporation not these "creators" everyone puts on a pedestal during the debate.The system is BROKEN.

avatar

meat67

For some more interesting ideas about IP, you should download the movie, “Steal This Movie”. You might not
agree with everything it says (I didn't) but it does give you something to think about.

avatar

Jelson

Interesting, I muss say. This is one of the most interesting arguments I've red in awhile, Mark gets points from me (whether I agree with him or not) for keeping his cool. As for his position regarding IP, I can't help but think how well it would work in a world where everything was free, or at least cheaper, I'm talking about bills by the way. thee alternative to that would be, a world where all artist had a second job, you know, what some people would call a real job. because they most defiantly wont be making money with out IP rights, or maybe they could just do this http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2010/07/tell-all-author-riffs-on-music-industry-in-crisis-part-2-of-2?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+wired/index+(Wired:+Index+3+(Top+Stories+2))

 as for a 2hour movie raking in billions of dollars, that's just corporate greed. the studios make most of the money, or maybe its just personal greed, if one actor makes X amount why shouldn't the rest. we could all get by with less, but not much people want to.

What is the brain of the internet. What is the Master of the Web. What is the Essence of Digital Matter.

avatar

Mark17

I don't think that you can say that artists wouldn't make money without property rights. Take a live performance by a band for example. Some can make a few hundred thousand on a single performance. Multiply that by 20 performances a year and I think that would be a pretty good amount of money. Or look at movies, some movies make like you said, billions of dollars. 

Also, I don't mean that everything would just be free. I don't have a problem with artists being able to make money from their content. Though, I think that there should be a system much like open source software. Or a system in which the consumer decides what they would pay for that content. Why couldn't we have a system like that? I think the value should be determined by the consumer. You could make a donation or give a monetary reward to the producer of the content. I guess the concept would be similar to giving to charity, or tipping the pizza guy which are two things that aren't required by law that people do anyway because that's what they believe is right. Look at open source software for example, I've seen people use a piece of open source software and think it's the greatest thing in the world, and they say they would pay hundreds of dollars for it, and then someone else who has used that exact same piece of software will say that it's worthless and the worst software they've ever used. That's why I think the value of the content should be what the consumer decides it's worth to them.

 

avatar

Jelson

Okay, but there's one thing your missing. Most musicians and actors, do not consider themselves to be intellectuals. there entertainers, and they expect to get paid to entertain. so maybe your right, maybe IP rights should not even be applied to that industry. The real intellectuals, like say a scientist who releases a paper on global warming, don't tend to have a problem with people using there work for free, thats what its meant for. Actor and musicians on thee other hand, they seldom contribute anything meaningful to society nowadays. it's all about money, though I must say, the studios are more to blame, whatever helps them make more money. But I completely get your point. 

{What is the brain of the internet. What is the Master of the Web. What is the Essence of Digital Matter}

avatar

opulent_rigs

some of it. Being a law grad, this is of immense interest to me. I personally advocate a moderate

approach. While i dont think IP should be trashed completely as that would have dire finacial 

consequences for artists, industries (industrial design and patents) and science. There will be no real

motivation for producing anything original, for innovation. We don't live in an ideal world and so we have

to deal with what we have while striving for something better. However, the judicial system needs

to have zero tolerance for frivolous claims and intrigues. Like how on earth can you let 5,000 people

be sued in one suit. And since we don't live in an ideal world no one should be allowed to recover

ideal damages. For gods sake, people are doing worse than downloading unauthorized content.  "You, sir, became the AQ Khan of unauthorized  downloads the moment you downloaded

your first track and now are liable to pay thousands of dollars in damages for every song or movie." Ridiculous!

 Where are the safeguards against such machinations? IPR law can be a joke at times.Clearly businesses

and law firms have forged a strong alliance to exploit these flaws.  That said, those who want

to waive their IP ownership rights are most welcome. But no one can be faulted for pursuing 

a remedy at law that is rightful and in good faith. 

avatar

Fray

Notice that no serious action has ever been taken against the massive DVD stores that sell pirated DVDs throughout the country. Instead they are cracking down on the one place people can speak out, in a somewhat safe way, against the Communist dictatorship - the Chinese internet cafes. Maximum PC is supposed to be a site that covers how to make your computer do cool stuff - not a rah rah mouthpiece for the Communist jackboot and in favor of specious anti-piracy initiatives. Please let the poor Chinese watch a god-damned movie now and then - don't cheer their oppressors who are basically just tightening the screws on free speech. Jeesh.

avatar

Mark17

Anti-piracy is a step in the wrong direction. There is no reason for anti-piracy laws, well, no good reason. Anti-piracy puts a major restriction on individual freedom and the freedom of information. Society needs to move away from the idea that "intellectual property" has any kind of monetary value. The only reason there are copyright and anti-piracy laws is because people believe in this concept of "intellectual property". They believe that they can restrict the freedom of people to share information, restrict the power of the Internet, and restrict the sharing of ideas and information through any new technologies.

Unfortunately, we will probably see more these anti-piracy laws in other places since many people's minds lack the mental faculty to understand that "intellectual property" is just a concept, and a bad one at best. Though, I can see how people believe in this concept of "intellectual property" as many have been indoctrinated their entire lives to just simply accept these ideas.

avatar

snapple00

Mark17, this is why you don't make movies, write music, or make software. You lack a major part of brain tissue.

I kinda feel bad for you.

avatar

gendoikari1

Do you?

avatar

Mark17

...And you're evidence of this comes from where?

avatar

Zachary K.

so tell me, how do people make money off of their hard work of everyone is taking it for free? we need anti-piracy laws, though the the way people apply it is restrictive, they will create a way to stop piracy without bad DRM in due time. so shut up and pay for what you want,if you cant afford it, or mommy does not give you the money, tough luck.

avatar

Mark17

You're still in the mindset that "intellectual property" has a monetary value and that it is no different than physical property. I don't understand how one can rationalize this. Sure, some people and groups work hard on their creations, but how can they say that once it is released that only people that pay the amount they decide upon can access it when in reality, it can easily be shared with others. Logically, it doesn't make sense to me. Now, I'm not saying that I am against making a donation or giving a monetary reward to the person or group that created the content, but it doesn't make sense that they can determine a cost and force you to pay it. Take open source software for example, you aren't required to pay to use it, yet it still exists. Many open source software projects give you the option to donate to them, which I don't have a problem doing. I also don't have a problem paying for any other kind of media, the problem I have is the fact that people and companies think they can put any price on it that they want and make people pay their price by threatening them with copyright laws. 

Also, if a person can't afford it, then what difference does it make either way?  

avatar

Muerte

I wasn't sure before but now I'm sure your just a troll.

No one is this ignorant.

avatar

Mark17

I am not. I'm sorry you don't have the ability to see things from another point of view. You are the ignorant one. It's too bad that everyone doesn't subscribe to your views.

avatar

Zachary K.

i don't see how you don't see how wrong it is to have one person buy it, then give it out to hundreds of others! you need to grow up and learn that you are not entitled to everything! if you want something, you have to pay for it. jsut because you can, does not mean you should. intellectual property as valute just as physical property does. people put time and effort into creating it just like physical goods. you pirate everything and give nothing back, you are a leach that needs to be removed.

avatar

Mark17

You miss the point. How is the value of intellectual property determined? If intellectual property is no different than physical property, then why do they want to charge me $15 for a book, or $12 for a music album when it can easily be reproduced for almost no cost? A physical product would be a television, that say for example costs $2000. Why does it cost that much? Because of the PHYSICAL goods required to create it. If you don't pay someone to acquire or produce the goods required to create the TV then no TV is created. Not only that, but there are competitors that  produce the same type of products which keep the cost of the TV competitive. If a piece of intellectual property is no different than physical property then why do we need these anti-piracy and copyright laws to defend it?

avatar

Zachary K.

HOW DENSE ARE YOU!!! you are paying for the work and effort that went into making it! in your example of televisons, you pay 2K for the TV, it does not cost that much to make, you are also paying for the effort that went into designing it, and by paying for i, you are showing that you like that product and that money helps them make other, better products. if you dont pay for it, they will say "no one like this, lets stop making anything better" even though a lot of people used the product. what if we could just magicaly multiply iphones? one person bought it and make a million of them and passed them out, apple only sold one, they think its a failure and dont make more, other companies also think the iphone was a failure and do no go into the smartphone market. i pay for products because i think they are worth that much, if you think your video game is worth nothing, then don't play it.

avatar

meat67

Wow, dude, talk about dense.

You should try some reading comprehension.

avatar

Mark17

Exactly, I pay for the TV, and usually the money will be used to by the company to stay competitive and produce other, better products. So why don't we say nobody pays for it, and they stop producing TVs. What's going to happen, is the world going to end? No, it's not.

And yes, what if we could magically multiply iPhones and somone gave them away, and then Apple quit producing iPhones. That would be awesome, but don't use magic to try to rationalize why you think people should't be allowed to share information. This is the real world, magic does not exist. Sharing data and information does not use magic, it uses technology. 

avatar

Zachary K.

and........i give up. i am not going to bang my head agenst the brick wall that is your pathetic set of values. perhaps oneday you will make something good, that will get reproduced for nothing and you will get nothing for your idea and realize how wrong you are, but that will never happen, you never have any good ideas.

avatar

meat67

I have no idea what Mark17 does, but I'll give you an example from my life.

I worked on a cable access TV show for more than a year. Not only did I not get paid for it, but I had to use some of my own money to do everything I wanted to do for the show. I won an award for the show.

I've also worked on some so-so TV shows in the editing department which I got paid for (although I'm not doing that currently).

Which do you think I'm more satisfied with, the money or the award?

avatar

Mark17

Perhaps one day I will, and I won't cry about people reproducing it. I will be happy and proud that I made positive contribution to society. I'm sorry you don't have the ability to see things from another point of view and imagine a society that is open to sharing ideas and information. You have your ideas and values and I have mine, but pathetic? I think not.

avatar

Carlidan

 I'm sorry to say but Mark does make a valid point. And I think Zachery your the one that is dense. He's not saying you shouldn't pay for content or not. He's just giving a diffrent perspective on what intellectual property means. 

“Animals, whom we have made our slaves, we do not like to consider our equal.”

avatar

Zachary K.

its not that they can't comprehend it, its that they get paid poorly for their work and can't afford to pay for video games.

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.