Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) loses backing of Business Software Alliance (BSA)

The SOPA, which is currently being debated in Congress, has lost the backing of the BSA, a group made up of tech giants like Apple, Google, and Microsoft.

Some may wonder why the BSA would not back the SOPA, which would seem a good thing for tech giants. BSA CEO Robert Holleyman wants to bill investigated first to see if its passing would cause unneeded consequences.

BSA members argue that if passed, the bill would give too much power to the Justice Department and violate US citizens' rights and privacy. The SOPA would allow the Justice Department to order Internet service providers (ISPs) to block websites that contain pirated material. The BSA says this violates piracy and free speech rights.

Citation:

http://www.techspot.com/news/46381-sopa-loses-backing-of-tech-giants-amid-policy-concerns.html

Where there’s a will there’s a way, is it all in vain?

So far in our blog we have covered what piracy is, who it impacts, how it impacts, and what is being done to counter act piracy.  We have talked about how it is bad to pirate, but I get the feeling this is all very redundant of what everyone has been hearing.  So let’s look at pirating from a different stand point.

It’s all in vain!  They can tell people it’s morally wrong, they can shut down sites, and they can try to make examples out of people that get caught pirating.  This doesn’t do anything there is always another person waiting to risk it , and willing to figure out how to get around the rules.  So why is the government and almost every media industry wasting their time trying to figure out how to stop it? It’s not going to happen.  Companies spend thousands of dollars holding conferences, and hiring teams that  are supposed to  come up with ways to stop pirating.  Yet as soon as the team comes up with a plan someone else finds a way to get around it.  If we used the money for these conferences to employ more artists and in teams that discover talent.  This isn't the first industry hit by stealing of product.

In the retail market almost all companies have a certain area in their budget that accounts for what they will lose in theft.  In this case they are trying to come up with other ways to make up for what they lose.  They attempt to have a better product that you want to pay for, and they also realize that there time can’t be wasted expecting society to be honest and trustworthy.  Of course normal stores have surveillance as well as laws against shoplifting.  Yet it still happens and this is what is happening in the online industries.  They need to realize they can only set up so many laws and regulations until they all just become repetitive and no one cares anymore.  So really all their anger and their attempts to stop what humans seem to do as second nature is in vain.  What do you all think should companies worry so much about pirating of their product?  At this point it seems pointless because as long as there is someone willing to find a way to get the product for free then the companies will continuously lose money. 

Edwards, Joe. "Online Music Piracy Topic of Nashville Meeting - BusinessWeek."Businessweek - Business News, Stock Market & Financial Advice. Web. 20 Nov. 2011. <http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9OE6KOO0.htm>

Government Measures Being Taken

In a 2010 letter to the President and Congress, regarding the protection of intellectual property, lays out a six point strategic plan to attack the growing concern of piracy.

1)                      Leading by example

2)                      Increasing Transparency

3)                      Ensuring Efficiency and Coordination

4)                      Enforcing our Rights Internationally

5)                      Securing our Supply Chain

6)                      Building a Data-Driven Government

New laws this year are bringing about debate on how far the government can take this issue. Grant Gross reports about the law SOPA, Stop Online Piracy Act, introduced in late October allowing US law enforcement officials to shut down websites alleged to enable or facilitate copyright infringement, causing critics to say the government will gain censorship of the internet. The Consumer Electronics Association accuses the government of allowing the law enforcements to shut down legitimate e-commerce site. The other opposing issue is that we would see a private sector police power grow to a point smothering the fundamental openness of the internet.

This year we also saw the finalization of negotiations between top internet providers and Hollywood and music industry to systematically identify customers suspected of copyright infringement and alerting them through email or other communication. They broke it down to six levels of warnings before significant action be taken. Based on the three strike rule, simple email notifications, reduced connection speed or blocked browsing. These consumers will have a chance to contest the complaints brought about them. The process gets progressively more severe as the user doesn’t cooperate, ending in whatever the defendant’s wishes to sue on behalf.

The biggest question we have to ask ourselves, is it worth the money and efforts to attempt to stop illegal downloading? Is it interfering with our freedoms? Is the government gaining access to everyone’s privacy through illegal measures?  

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/jul2011/isps-j13.shtml

http://www.justice.gov/criminal/cybercrime/Joint_Strategic_Plan_On_IP_Enforcement.pdf

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/08/technology/to-slow-piracy-internet-providers-ready-penalties.html?pagewanted=all

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/243200/debate_on_new_copyright_enforcement_bill_heats_up.html

Copyright Laws are Useless

Copyright laws prevent ideas from being stolen.  However, in this post, I argue that ideas cannot be taken away from anyone.  Therefore, it is unnecessary to have laws preventing ideas from being stolen because it is not possible to steal ideas.

In order for an idea to be stolen, it would be logically necessary that
(1) An idea can be owned by a person.
(2) Another person can take the idea from the person who owns it.

I first examine the assertion that an idea can be owned.
To address this point, the philosopher John Locke argues that a person owns his or her own body. In addition, "The labour of his body, and the work of his hands, we may say, are properly his." Expanding upon the ideas of Locke, the philosopher Georg Hegel proclaims that it is possible for a person to "set aside the mere thing and recreate it as his own". In other words, once a person's ideas are infused with the "mere" thing, the "mere thing" becomes an extension of the person.
Takeaway: Yes, an idea can be owned by a person.

Next, I investigate whether an idea can be stolen.
Evaluating the ownership and transference of ideas, Thomas Jefferson writes: "...an individual may exclusively possess [an idea] as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine"
Takeaway: No, ideas are not be taken from anyone in the process of sharing.

Why do copyright laws exist?
Copyright laws are said to "protect" the ideas of copy right holders. However they are not protecting the ideas from being taken away from their owner. So, my question is:

In what sense do copyright laws "protect" ideas?

John Locke - Second Treatsie of Government - CH 4 "Of Property

Richard T. De George, “14. Intellectual Property Rights,” in The Oxford Handbook of Business Ethics, by George G. Brenkert and Tom L. Beauchamp, vol. 1, 1st ed. (Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, n.d.), 417.

Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Isaac McPherson (August 13, 1813)

To What Extent?

So today is a little less about the facts of pirating; is it right or wrong, does it hurt the producer’s bottom line, or how it affects the economy. Today I want to look at a pirate. Someone I know who has agreed to let me look through their computer and talk about the pirated material they have. I just want to show a little insight into whom the pirate is and let the audience decide if the impact is significant knowing that this person is repeated possibly hundreds of thousands of times across the US. Below is a list of items currently being used (everything on their computer) by a single individual.

Windows 7 Ultimate $166
Adobe Acrobat Pro X $389
Adobe CS5 Extended $915
Alcohol 120 – Virtual drive software $55
Perrla – Formatting for Word $35
DVDFab – DVD/Blueray copying $124
Eset Smart Security A/V $40
Hallmark Card Studio (5 versions) $125
J. River Media Player $50
MS Office Pro $257
Norton Internet Security – Not installed $70
Quicktime Pro $30
Roxio Creator 2011 $63
System Mechanic Utilities $60
Winzip Pro $60
Several game titles (6 x $60) $360
55 Gb of music (approx. 15000 titles, most pirated)
2500+ ebooks

As can be seen from this one instance, there is approximately $2800 of pirated material on this one computer before figuring in the hundreds of dollars of music and possibly thousands of dollars of ebooks. Talking further to this individual, I was also made aware that many of these same software applications are present on multiple computers in their possession and they are in possession of approximately 250 copied movies.

My question to the readers is how much is ok if any, and how much are individuals such as
this impacting, good or bad, the particular industries?

Internet Piracy Bill

The Stop Online Piracy Act was introduced this past Wednesday into the House of Representatives by two Democrats and two Republicans. The Act would expand the power and scope of the FBI in cases involving piracy.


If passed, the FBI would be allowed to issue injunctions against foreign websites that host or allow the download of pirated material made by US companies. For example, if a Russian website is hosting a pirated version of a song created by an American musician, the FBI could issue an injunction against that Russian website. The FBI would also be allowed to go after payment processors, such as PayPal, that process payments to these websites.


Critics of the Act say that it gives the FBI too much power and would harm businesses. Some say that this would put a burden on the Internet and prevent it from working the way it is supposed to. "'There is no need for a bill this sweeping and this Draconian. There are simple, easily implemented solutions on which industry and others agree — such as cutting off the ability of credit-card companies to fulfill payments to sites that traffic in copyright infringement,' said Gigi Sohn, president of the public interest group Public Knowledge."

Variety and Quality are they important to you?

Do you like movies, music, or art?  Well if you do then pirating your materials probably is not the best idea you have ever had.  When you pirate media you not only get a free download but you also injure the industry itself.  Each day music, art, media, and software industries are losing money from pirating.  As they lose money they lose the ability to supply the quality material we are all so accustomed to. 

The screenwriters, song writers, and artists themselves don’t feel the need to work without pay.  And while it seems only fair that they should get a decent cut of the profits they are the last in line when it comes to released products.  Thus as we download more and more we make these artists want to find other jobs that can support them.  No one in today’s world is willing to work for free.  While we continually demand more variety the lack of funds is making it difficult for industries to offer high quality sounds, looks and software.  If you think what they are offering now is satisfactory then it might intrigue you that they are operating at only a fraction of their potential.

So the next time you download something thinking "this is really awesome"  enjoy it because the next items that come out probably won't be by the same artists and might not be nearly as good because most artists putting their work out there are brand new to the industry and haven't realized that there isn't much money to be made due to all of the pirating and their status on the food chain.

Sweney, Mark. "Global Recorded Music Sales Fall Almost $1.5bn amid Increased Piracy | Business | Guardian.co.uk." Latest News, Sport and Comment from the Guardian | The Guardian. Web. 01 Nov. 2011. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/mar/28/global-recorded-music-sales-fall>.

"Why Pirating Hurts Art." JM Frey —. Web. 02 Nov. 2011. <http://jmfrey.net/2011/01/why-pirating-hurts-art/>.