
MPAA/RIAA Lobbied Extensively In Favor of Domain Seizures - yanw
http://torrentfreak.com/mpaariaa-lobbied-extensively-in-favor-of-domain-seizures-101219
======
grav1tas
Mod me down, but part of me wonders how this is news. Of course the industry
lobby that wants to end "music piracy" that cuts into industry profits is
going to lobby for means to seize offending domain names. It'd be news if the
MPAA/RIAA lobbied AGAINST this practice. As long as the RIAA/MPAA are behaving
in a manner consistent with their interests, they remain an easily predictable
player (anybody could see this coming from miles away). I'm pretty much fine
with that, though. They're entitled to spout whatever BS they want to, really.
The people who think they're wrong need to take steps to reign them in if
they're running so amok. It's easy to complain about them, but harder to do
something about it. I guess that's why we all complain.

~~~
ihodes
I'm absolutely with you here; this isn't surprising (or really interesting,
either).

Just a reminder, from the HN Guidelines (in the footer of this page): "Please
don't bait other users by inviting them to downmod you."

Though I agreed with the sentiment of your post, inviting me to downvote you
really puts a bad taste in my mouth. As long as you're contributing to the
conversation, hell if I'd downvote you. People who use the down arrow as an
expression of mere disagreement make this site a little less valuable.

Cheers!

------
atomical
I support domain seizures. Can anyone give me a good argument why domains
shouldn't go into an administration period when it is discovered that they are
serving up copyright material?

~~~
Helianthus16
Because I personally want to kill the concept of copyright.

Hear me out, I'm articulating probably a more radical position than I probably
personally believe. I don't want to upset the status quo by fiat. I don't want
to just destroy the __AAs in a flash of legislative or judicial action.

But the question of who owns art is getting pressurized. Why should any
particular company be profiting off of the Beatles music now? That is _our_
music, _our_ culture. An artist does not create in a vacuum.

For a brief while in my life I was able to access just about any piece of work
--music, TV, movies--in my culture. It changed how I viewed intellectual
property (along with the usual litany of Lessig et al literature).

Right now our culture is trapped. It is owned by companies that taint our
viewing experience with commercialism, piggy-backing their own signal on _our_
discussion. Marketing means war for your mind, which comes out a lot more
paranoid than I mean it, but I hope you'll see the point. I don't want to have
to think about which car is sexiest for my socio-economic position while
catching up on [Show].

More to the point I don't want to leave a really emotional, poignant moment in
a TV show directly into noise about which razor I should buy. It's like having
a loud friend at the movie theater--except that you can choose your friends,
you can only fast forward through commercials.

And this only happens because of copyright, because some men in suits have the
right to determine what we see.

Copyright isn't about protecting intellectual property, it's about maintaining
control.

Now I've attacked advertisements, which means someone will point out that
advertising funds mosts of our TV shows and movies. As far as I can tell, it
just doesn't have to be that way. We'll be able to set up our own TV studios
soon at minimal cost, and then we won't need anything more than our own
talent.

So you see, the people who are against domain seizures may partially be angry
at the rights violation, the government regulation. But they're probably also
for the open internet--an open internet where copyright becomes less and less
important.

In our lifetimes, we will see the end of copyright. It will come naturally and
effortlessly; it will not be a bloody revolution.

~~~
atomical
This isn't a question about marketing. It's a question of copyright and how to
enforce it properly. It seems a little off topic when the poster's argument
against copyright is a diatribe against companies who make razors. But that's
how the majority of responses read. Very utopian without the least bit of
practical sentiment.

~~~
Helianthus16
>Very utopian without the least bit of practical sentiment.

Yeah. Welcome to the Internet. :)

My point is _that_ most answers to this question will be off topic.

>It's a question of copyright and how to enforce it properly

Many of our answers amount to 'Not at all!'

