Discussion in 'Networking, Telephony & Internet' started by Asgaldh, Nov 20, 2008.
Case dismissed, in favour of iiNet.
What now? The Government has already organised multiple secret negotiations between ISPs and AFACT in an attempt to get a resolution. But there is still no users represented directly and we have to rely on ISPs to represent us, even though they too are all associated with content production (Telstra has music and Foxtel partnership, Optus has Foxtel partnership, iiNet has their own digital TV distribution).
That's the next step. Blocking copyright companies from making ISPs become internet police is a major blow as is as it has prevented a nasty precedence. A related precedence is BREIN making the dutch court order the dutch pirate party to take down their proxy to TPB, but BREIN then took a step further to outstretch what the court had permitted, so they're due to be put back in their place.
Very good news for all internet users in Australia. It is still yet to be seen what the Federal Government's copyright reforms will lead to - but this is a good thing for internet freedom and preventing the blocking of legitimate technologies that just happen to get used illegitimately.
And now we wait for the film company for their attempts at hacking iinet instead lol
Optus has a foxtel partnership?
heh....I had a sly grin on my face when I read that one today : )
I am not wholly convinced iinet did it for internet users, I think that they did it to force big contents hand to provide them with an on-ramp for content deployment and get themselves leverage over helstra and uptarse pay tv offerings
the film industry needs to change its business model to make use of the internet instead wasting money on law suits!
Unfortunately that means most of the silly fuckwits who file these lawsuits would be out of a job.
This is what they fear. How many times have you heard of a *director* suing about their films? It's the distributors.
Same goes for music, games, and soon, books.
and some of us are just lapping it up!
Great job iiNet. Good on yas.
Interesting read though.
"Illegal downloading 'more like trespass than theft'"
Page not found
What really shits me about this sort of mentality is that it's all based on old-school greed. We have the technology to make piracy work FOR the studios (embedded advertising, product placement, link-backs, micro-transactions, other things that nobody has thought of yet) and yet no-one is willing to let go of their old-school thinking and practices in order to embrace a fundamentally different paradigm.
So instead of investing money to adapt to a new climate, they throw money at trying to force everyone around them to maintain the status-quo. What makes it so retarded is that it works against them and just helps justify people's piracy.
I owned and operated a DVD rental business and I can tell you flat-out that people do NOT consider it theft. I had so many of my customers tell me that they pirated and the only reason they came to me was because I was cheap and sometimes good copies were hard to find. Everyone from old grannies to 'upstanding' mums and dads. Where I work now I constantly hear about how people download things, TV series especially, because nobody thinks it's a 'bad' thing.
The big media corporations need to realise that they can't win this fight. Instead they need to embrace it and utilise it to their advantage. Imagine a movie where there was embedded advertising and product placement where the film-company got more money the more the film was downloaded. If the movie was provided on fast servers that anyone could download from for free, who would bother pirating?
Even without embedded advertising, perhaps even just a small transaction to stream the movie in high quality on demand.
Going to the movies nowadays is getting prohibitively expensive. $15-20 per ticket, add in whatever else over priced snacks you might buy and you'll be lucky to get away with ~$40/pp for a movie. We've almost all got high quality home equipment these days and there's this bleeding opportunity to just allow it into the home for a nominal price. A few bucks no one ever sneezes at. Take Fruit Ninja - $0.99 for a game and it's downloaded hundreds of millions of times. A few bucks for a movie would have the same result.
Compare the differences also between pirating to "legit-ing". How many anti-pirate and "coming soon!" advertisements have to be trawled through before you can actually get to the movie? FFS we have the BD/DVD! We've put money into it already, why do you have to try and ram it down our throats?
Then of course there's the concept of "IP". In the fashion industry, there's no such thing as IP. You can knock it off easily and happily without fear of retribution - just don't knock off the logos and you're home and hosed. Same goes for the car industry. 4 wheels cannot be patented. Tech within it may but good design flows through to all cars eventually.
Ive noticed the price for tickets is going down, v-max for example is 10 bucks per ticket, regardless of the movie or the time of day etc, thats pretty acceptable to me for a cinema ticket.
Yeah, for sure. I don't claim to have all the answers, only to state that the big media corporations need to start thinking outside the box instead of trying to jam everyone back into it.
And you're totally right. The biggest thing that stops me from using my Sony Bravia's streaming service is the price. $7 for a "HD" (their version of HD being 720p or even 576p) just to rent a movie for a night. Yeah... no.
Where the hell are you getting V-Max tickets for $10, any night? The Village website still charges $18.50.