7 Jul
2003
7 Jul
'03
7:22 a.m.
I did a session a few days ago and the client was
telling me that he paid the entrance fee to a movie
theatre in India. I forget the film, probably one of
the Tolkein movies. He said, it was hole in the wall
theatre that smelled like urine, served flat cola and
stale popcorn. The movie had been pirated with a hand
held camera and was constantly jerking around. LoL
ron
--- Daniel James <daniel(a)mondodesigno.com> wrote:
the name Mickey
duplicates (My
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com
What's
really interesting is that the RIAA and
MPAA are
constantly bitching about p2p ripping them off
but
in almost all of
the big cases recently (Harry Potter, Madonna)
the
cat's been out
of the bag before the film or CD was even
released. So yes, they
get p2p traded, but DRM wouldn't have helped
a
bit.
Apparently, commercial pirates (those with their own
pressing plants)
have targetted the workflow systems that studios use
to distribute
material internally. You can buy an encrypted
workflow system
designed just to address this problem.
However, I can't help guessing that most of this
material is either a)
released onto p2p deliberately to help build
pre-launch hype or b)
sold by someone within the industry to pirates. I
think a) is much
more likely than b) because anyone involved with b)
will never work
in the industry again.
I saw a copy of The Two Towers before it came out -
lent by a friend -
that appeared to be a preview copy for the Oscars.
Perhaps there's a
member of the Academy who owes their dealer a lot of
money...
I actually don't
understand the MPAA's position on DeCSS.
As a Region 1 customer it probably doesn't make
sense, but here in
Region 2 we are supposed to wait a year to see the
movie you are
talking about today, then pay more for it. Needless
to say,
region-free hacks are taken for granted here.
> Actually Disney have a long history of suing
parodies - Air
Pirates
being the most famous I think:
http://reason.com/links/links011703.shtml
I haven't seen this, however, if they were using Mouse and/or making the character look almost
exactly like Mickey
Mouse then that's not a parody and they
should
lose.
I'm not sure where you can draw the line on parody,
but my point was
that there are some organisations who are very keen
to take material
from the cultural commons, but are not at all keen
to see the
material return to that commons. It's a bit like
taking free
software, changing it a bit and releasing it as
proprietary.
> To illustrate the point, the RIAA
> could now sue an original Delta bluesman with a
freely downloaded
> Clapton track on his hard drive. Doesn't
that
possibility, albeit
theoretical, strike you as a bit odd?
Not a bit. Each song, with the exception of near Sweet Lord) is a unique work of art.
Again I think it's hard to draw the line, but I
don't think 'unique'
is a word you could use to describe the songs in the
pop charts.
Derivative might be a better term, and there's
nothing wrong with
that - as long as you acknowledge the fact and
credit your sources.
Whether you like his work or
not, Andy Warhol was an artist. Did the guy that
originally did
the Campbells Soup labels sue him?
I think that's a good point - it sounds like a
ridiculous idea, and
yet that's what the intellectual property industry
is all about. If
Warhol was around today and came up with those
paintings, he would
either be sued, or worse still adopted as a
corporate artist in
residence!
Cheers
Daniel