Convicted Linux user, sk0t, is forced to use Windows because the government cannot support Linux to monitor his Internet activities. Do they even need to install software to monitor his traffic? I don’t think so.
I guess they just want to monitor what he is doing on his computer. Still I think there is probably a hardware/software neutral device that could work here. How can the government force something to use a certain software product? It makes no sense.
This is the guy who is responsible for leaking Star Wars III onto the net before it opened. Yes all by himself, he was responsible. Again, I don’t think so. But he faced charges and is paying his dues. Torrentfreak has a great article on the entire ordeal.
I really feel this is a case of our government just not getting it. To punish a person, IMO cruelly, for doing something that the movie industry refuses to do. If you don’t adjust your business model to changing technology you will be left behind. The technology is there, people want to use it, they are using it, but the movie/music industry refuses to change.
Rant done.
9 responses so far ↓
1 Durwin // Aug 29, 2007 at 6:58 pm
It’s not the government ‘not getting it’. The judge has to inforce the law. It’s the movie industry that doesn’t get it. We should be able to copy our movies to our portable divices. Some sharing is going to happen, there’s no way around that. But forcing us not to rip, makes us rip.
2 brent // Aug 30, 2007 at 9:43 am
That’s true. If we buy something it should be ours! to do with it what we want.
The RIAA/MPAA/etc etc is just working within the law. The government is just working within the law. This is inheritly flawed. We’re just following the law excuse only works so long. The laws are flawed. DMCA is flawed. The Internet is a series of tubes! Our government doesn’t understand technology.
That’s my opinion
3 Colin Temple // Aug 30, 2007 at 3:07 pm
The argument you’re making stands to reason better with the laws about ripping DVDs/CDs and digital distribution. Regardless of whether or not we have the right to view multi-million dollar productions for free because it’s easier than getting up and going to the store, this is a different situation!
This guy released it BEFORE it was in theatres. Even if the movie’s owners released content online — even if they did it FOR FREE (which would be stupid) — this guy STOLE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY before the company chose to make it available, even to paying customers. That’s not an issue with law, that’s not an issue with how content is distributed. The guy did it with an UNRELEASED movie.
So in this case, his right to do what he wanted with his purchase is irrelevant. It wasn’t his to begin with.
4 Colin Temple // Aug 30, 2007 at 3:11 pm
(Actually, to add to that point - it’s dumb that he should have to switch operating systems for this reason. Obviously the guy could probably get around any Windows tracking anyways.)
5 brent // Aug 30, 2007 at 6:02 pm
Yeah that’s true he would probably get around any Windows tracking software, but says he wouldn’t, I hope somebody got him a Windows box.
I feel, look he got the movie before it was released and it was a ready version. So why not release it to theaters? Because they mathematically calculate how to gross the most money? I don’t know. But look at all the people that downloaded it. There’s a market here. Just because you are making the movies doesn’t mean you can define your audience. I mean you can define it, but it won’t stay.
The movie industry is a consumer driven market. You have to bend to the consumer. Look this guy released it for free, why can’t the movie company/industry do it for a fraction cost of a movie ticket. Here in the States we are running close to $10 a ticket it’s basically buying the DVD.
It is like other industries. Customers are the ones that make the decisions, adaptation is key to survival.
6 Colin Temple // Aug 30, 2007 at 6:26 pm
If I spend $113 million dollars to make a movie, as was done with Return of the Sith, do I not deserve to own the rights to that movie?
If people steal it, distribute it for free, and I no longer earn a profit, I’m not going make any more movies.
Yeah, people wanted to see the movie. There’s a “market”. That in no way justifies someone stealing that movie and releasing it for free online.
Customers make decisions, yeah. But they don’t have total authority. That doesn’t mean people do whatever the hell they want. If I sell a product, you don’t steal that from me. It’s my product until you give me money for it. And I also get to choose the day I start selling the product. Because it’s my product.
If the movie industry doesn’t cater to them, then they make less money — but that in no way gives people the right to do whatever they want with the content. You can’t just say “I don’t like the way movies are distributed so I’ll steal them instead”.
If I don’t like the way McDonald’s advertises, I don’t steal their hamburgers. I buy from Wendy’s instead. Or, if nobody sells them the way I like, I make my own hamburgers.
If the government steps in and says “sell movies this way”, then they’re stepping all over the freedoms that America, Canada and other free nations are based upon.
Adaptation is key to survival… but adapt to what? Revenge of the Sith made $850 million in the box office. So obviously consumers are still willing to pay. Why should they change?
The bottom line is that Fox and Lucasfilm chose a release date, for marketing reasons. So they can make money, yes. Don’t like it? TOO BAD! The U.S. is a capitalist country, and they spent money to make this movie. Making money is the entire purpose of the movie’s existence. Whine all you want if you don’t agree with their call, but it’s their right to profit off their movie, that they spent their money to make. It does not belong to the public, it belongs TO THEM.
If you don’t like it, fine. If the current model is so bad for their businesses, they’ll fail on their own. You can’t go be a vigilante and steal from them. That’s not right either, and it makes you a thief.
7 KingJacob // Aug 30, 2007 at 7:27 pm
As much as I want to defend this guy because he isnt really completely to blame for leaking the movie as it takes multiple people for a torrent to succeed. But come on why would you leak a movie online?
8 brent // Aug 30, 2007 at 8:07 pm
That’s true Collin. I wouldn’t want someone stealing my movie or program or anything I created. I think this will ultimately be the downfall of movie/music industry. We are already seeing with more and more indie music. More and more indie movies. The Internet is the new medium and is revolutionizing the way we do things. It will be fun to see it all unfold.
9 Colin Temple // Aug 30, 2007 at 9:19 pm
You’re right, and we’re starting to see some big companies slowly adjust to it. I don’t think it will spell the end for big-budget productions, of course, but it will be nice to see some innovation in the delivery. I’m with you on that.
Leave a Comment