Digital piracy of movies is 'wrong,' college students chided [by -- ugh -- Jack Valenti]

Cox News Service ^ | 02/26/2003 | Nora Achrati

[wizzler]

I have a hard time when a group that has been guilty of gouging for years, stands up and calls others theives.

You may have a "hard time" with it, but it doesn't in any way negate their argument.

I don't 14 crappy songs for $17.99 for the 1 song I want... I'll pay you the $1 for the one song I want...

Oh yes! How could I have forgotten to include this winner on my list of anticipated responses? Ahh, the old "only one good song on a CD" justification. Don't like the risk of paying for a whole CD? Then don't buy it. But don't steal it either.

CD production cost is well under $1 per disk to copy.

Duh -- I left this one out too. Quick economics lesson for you: Cost doesn't determine price. Supply and demand determine price. Browse your favorite jewelry store or car lot sometime for an easy reminder.

[Sloth]

One guy is trying to argue that one class of federal felony is superior to the other.

How so? For all you know, I think copyright infringement is worse than theft. I just disapprove of using fallacious language to describe it. Heck, why not call it 'kidnapping'?

[wizzler]

Why not? Because the unauthorized appropriation of someone's intellectual property is not analogous to "kidnapping." It is, however, analogous to stealing.

[HamiltonJay]

. Quick economics lesson for you: Cost doesn't determine price. Supply and demand determine price.

Exactly, and demand isn't there, and the RIAA and their convicted price gouging members haven't adjusted their price accordingly. Demand for their product has dropped pure and simple, and they continue to price as if it hasn't. THen when they don't sell enough crap because they have priced themselves out of the market, they blame others that they aren't selling enough records.

Sorry, I have a digital reciever with XM, I record the song off my XM onto my hard drive, I haven't broken any law and I have a digital copy of the music for my own personal use... no theft at all.

[Sloth]

No, it's not analogous to stealing. It's more analogous to fraud. But you're still using fallacious language. There's no such thing as 'intellectual property.' An idea cannot be owned. If you don't want other people to have access to it, keep it to yourself.

[wtc911]

This practice is theft. To couch your intention to participate as some sort of patriotic statement is vile.

[wizzler]

You're right: An idea cannot be owned. But the original expression of an idea can be owned, and that is what copyright protects. Those expressions are what we call "intellectual property." The language isn't fallacious, except to those wishing to hinder debate by toying with semantics.

I'm not saying precision with language isn't important. It certainly is. So with that in mind, perhaps you could explain, with precision, why illicit downloading is analogous to fraud.

[wizzler]

Exactly

OK, so you DO understand this. Why, then, did you imply earlier that CDs should be priced based on their manufacturing costs?

the RIAA and their convicted price gouging members

Please tell us which RIAA members have been convicted of "gouging." (I'll set aside for now the arguments against the whole notion of "gouging" in the first place.)

Demand for their product has dropped pure and simple

What evidence do you have that demand has dropped? The activity on Kazaa and other "file-sharing" services seems to indicate quite a robust demand for their products.

they continue to price as if it hasn't.

Presuming for the sake of argument that demand has indeed dropped and prices haven't been adjusted accordingly, then those misguided pricers will die a natural death. It doesn't justify unauthorized downloading.

[wtc911]

A film is not an idea. It is the result of up to five years of work on the part of many people and up to tens of millions of dollars investment. Sloth, Your assertion that there is no such thing as intellectual property is absurd and contradicted by the copyright and patent laws of every civilized country. Your argument that these "ideas" belong to everyone is communism defined.

[Cooter]

Duh -- I left this one out too. Quick economics lesson for you: Cost doesn't determine price. Supply and demand determine price. Browse your favorite jewelry store or car lot sometime for an easy reminder.

And sometimes RIAA members determine price. Browse the Compact Disc Minimum Advertised Price Antitrust Litigation Settlement sometime for an easy reminder.

BTW, if you wish to file a claim, the deadline is less than a week away.

[HamiltonJay]

Please tell us which RIAA members have been convicted of "gouging."

So, Sorry they were PRICE FIXING, not PRICE GOUGING.... so much better..

States settle CD price-fixing case

What evidence do you have that demand has dropped?

CD Sales volumes have only dropped in the past 2 years:

Nielsen SoundScan reported this week that 2002 album sales fell from 763 million in 2001 to 681 million. Overall music sales in 2001 had been down 5 percent _ the first decline since SoundScan began tracking music sales in 1991.

By 2001 Napster the granddaddy of the file swapping was already effectively dead... if Digital sharing were the cause for the drop the drop off would have started well ahead of 2001. Fact is, good artists and good albumns still sell well, even in the downard trend, and with file swapping there. Dixie Chicks, Shania, Eminem, Alan Jackson, Avril Legrin have all had very successful sales numbers during the past 2 years in spite of the overall drop in sales.

Reality is this, music industry does not invest in long term artists, they are focused on the next 15 minute person. And when the markets go down because of economics and boredom with new artists, labels traditionally go to catalogs to sell albums.. since they aren't developing artists largely for the long haul, only the big pop one or 2 timers they don't have those catalogues to go to... they have created their own problems.

Country has done a better job at this than pop, which is why it is actually growing its share of sales even in a down market.. it has been making bankable long term stars instead of just the next britanny/spice girls like pop has done.... they have the go to catalogue in the down market, and their sales reflect it.

People were recording free music off the radio and trading it long before digital file sharing. DFS make make it more convient to share, but it isn't the root of the RIAA's problems... their refusal to look truly at the root of their problems is why they continue to decline. Slower economy, less good new music, no established newer artists in their catalogs = fewer sales period.

I am not arguing that digital file sharing is illegal, but i am not in the least convinced that DFS is the reason RIAA is losing sales. Their ineptitude and poor management is what is losing them sales... DFS is a threat to their stranglehold on distribution and they hate that, but its not the primary reason that I can see for their lower sales numbers.

[Cooter]

Please tell us which RIAA members have been convicted of "gouging."

"Convicted" in a civil court.

Who are the Defendants?
The Distributor Defendants are: Capitol Records, Inc. d/b/a EMI Music Distribution, Virgin Records America, Inc., and Priority Records LLC; Time Warner, Inc., Warner-Elektra-Atlantic Corp., WEA, Inc., Warner Music Group, Inc., Warner Bros. Records, Inc., Atlantic Recording Corporation, Elektra Entertainment Group, Inc., and Rhino Entertainment Company; Universal Music & Video Distribution Corporation, Universal Music Group, Inc., and UMG Recordings, Inc.; Bertelsmann Music Group, Inc. and BMG Music; and Sony Music Entertainment Inc. The Retailer Defendants are: MTS, Inc. d/b/a Tower Records, Musicland Stores Corp., and Trans World Entertainment Corp.

[Leto]

Don't have any pirated movies. BuTTTTT.... igotta admit is really funny to hear Hollywood mouthpiece Valenti lectuing about morality given the products and 'morality' Hollywwod and the rest of the entertainment industry are promoting to the culture. It seems in many respects they are now reaping what they have sown.

[wizzler]

Yes, RIAA members determine the prices of their products, guided by supply and demand. The nifty retort you're trying to make would have more impact like this: "And sometimes RIAA members determine prices by getting together and fixing them."

That said, the MAP settlement you're referencing was a sham. Nobody held a gun to anyone's heads forcing them to buy CDs for any particular price. Your use of the word "claim," of course, reveals where you stand. And I thought this was a "conservative" board...

[Sloth]

You're right: An idea cannot be owned. But the original expression of an idea can be owned, and that is what copyright protects. Those expressions are what we call "intellectual property."

Again, there is no such thing. There is a right of the creator of an original work to control (to some degree) how that work is distributed, sold, changed, etc. It is NOT an ownership right. It is a copyright. A right does not have to be an ownership right to be real. For example, I have a Constitutional right to petition my government, but that does not somehow magically create a "government petitioning property" that I now own. Someone who hinders me from petitioning my government has not stolen property from me, they have violated a different right. It's still wrong and illegal, but it would be dishonest of me to say they "stole" something from me.

The language isn't fallacious, except to those wishing to hinder debate by toying with semantics.

Fine, let's call it "child rape" then, since it's so silly to argue semantics. Calling music pirates "child rapists" should facilitate reasoned and valuable debate on both sides.

I'm not saying precision with language isn't important. It certainly is. So with that in mind, perhaps you could explain, with precision, why illicit downloading is analogous to fraud.

What I have in mind as fraud is not mere free downloading, but copying for the purpose of resale. If I burn copies of a $15 music CD and sell them at $3, I am acting as though I am someone who has a legitimate right to market this material -- as though I were its creator, or his authorized agent. The creator's copyright is intended to protect his or her right to receive the profits that accrue from the work. In the scenario above, I have no right to sell another's work, so I am violating the creator's copyright. I am NOT stealing from him. I am fraudulently distributing his material, much like collecting rent on a house I don't own. Yes, you can call this 'stealing' if you want, but it's about like my wife 'stealing' my side of the bed when I get up to go to the bathroom -- it's not a property crime.

Incidentally, what is your opinion of FR's unauthorized reproduction of news articles?

[HamiltonJay]

Cooter, wizzer's minds made up, don't bother confusing him with the facts :)

[wizzler]

So, Sorry they were PRICE FIXING, not PRICE GOUGING.... so much better..

Which RIAA members were convicted?

What evidence do you have that demand has dropped? CD Sales volumes have only dropped in the past 2 years

Sales are down. But what evidence do you have that demand has dropped? Activity on Kazaa and other "file-sharing" services seems to indicate that demand for the music industry's products is quite robust.

[Sloth]

Your argument that these "ideas" belong to everyone is communism defined.

Feel free to quote where I said such a thing. In fact, I indicated the exact opposite.

[meadsjn]

"Too many students don't believe it's wrong to steal these movies," Valenti told students at Georgetown University Law Center. "It is fracturing the moral contract to take something that does not belong to you." ... the president of the Motion Picture Association of America ...

Are these the same liberals who feel it is acceptable to tax working Americans to death for every liberal pet cause, while at the same time choking off every means of making a living in the country?

[HamiltonJay]

Wizzer go follow the links provided, the info's there.

And activity on IRC (predates even Napster), napster, Gnutella etc were all there before sales fell... if anything their sales volume drop off coincides with the economy slow down over the total number of files swapped via DFS. You show me 1 study that shows DFS increase inversely affects sales.... just one.

The tie between slower economy = less entertainment discressionary spending is well recorded through history. So you are the one claiming its the "new variable" causing this issue, not a repeating existing historical trend... so please, provide me with one single shred of evidence that the DFS is a primary cause of cd sales falling.