
Keeping the Trans Pacific Partnership from changing our copyright laws - wingworks
http://fairdeal.net.nz/
======
beloch
The funny thing about this law is that it will actually _promote_ piracy.

The primary function of region codes is to allow license holders in different
regions to release titles when they want instead of when the title is released
in other regions. This way slothco in Region B can release the latest nerdgasm
flick 6 months after it comes out in region A without worrying about people
importing the region A bluray. That's a bad thing, since slothco paid a lot
for the region B rights and any sales direct from region A are effectively
lost revenue.

The thing is, even if this law worked people in region B would still have the
internet. A lot of them are fairly honest and well-off people who would love
to pay to watch that nerdgasm flick, but waiting 6 months for slothco to get
around to releasing it is just too long!

The Slothco's of the world are in for a rude awakening if they think they can
outlaw both airmail and the internet. This law is practically unenforceable.
They should be focusing on bringing films to market in a timely manner. This
will remove the motivation for importing out-of-region discs while
simultaneously curbing piracy.

~~~
flyinRyan
Further, if you are, say American and the target movie is american this means
waiting 6 months to get a dubbed version.

------
Animus7
Forget ethics; just from a business standpoint, each new piece of legislation
like this makes piracy an increasingly better alternative, costing Hollywood
more and more money. Pirates don't have to deal with ridiculous restrictions
like not being able to legally watch the movie you paid for.

And hilariously, it's not even a matter of price. Dotcom's 15 Ferraris are
evidence people are quite willing to _pay_ for the superior piracy experience.
This is money that Hollywood could have had if only they gave their customers
what they wanted.

Instead, Hollywood's plan seems to be

1) increased litigation and screwing over of existing customers

2) ???

3) profit!

 _sigh_

~~~
skymt
Are people willing to pay _enough_ for that superior experience? Making movies
is far more costly than hosting them. I can't imagine film executives could
afford even one Ferrari if they charged Megaupload's rates for unlimited
access to their studio's library.

~~~
CognitiveLens
The increasingly profitable examples of Netflix, iTunes, and other online
digital media stores have clearly demonstrated the viability of digital
distribution, and it's still a very young industry with room for refinement.
Yes, making movies is far more costly than hosting them, but paying
distributors to be the middle man in getting the media to consumers is even
more expensive, and creates the kind of problems discussed by the OP.

~~~
SoftwareMaven
Those are _distribution_ based profits. It's questionable whether those could
cover _production_ based activities. Hopefully Netflix' venture into
production will prove you can profitably make content at streaming prices
(though even their experiment with Arrested Development will be on the cheap
side, since all the sets and the initial story were already there and
purchased on the cheap).

~~~
CognitiveLens
Netflix pays studios for their content, which compensates them for production
(as determined by their own contract negotiators). Netflix then makes a profit
beyond that contract cost, which means that digital distribution is covering
both the costs of production and distribution. Ultimately, production costs
must be covered in order for distribution to be profitable, and that's exactly
what we're seeing.

~~~
SoftwareMaven
Except we are rarely seeing the best content being distributed through Netflix
because the studios believe that distribution mechanism will eat the profits
from theaters and DVDs.

Do you believe Marvel could make up the entire cost of the new Spiderman movie
if they distributed solely on Netflix? Could Netflix remain profitable if they
had to pay enough to Marvel to cover that (e.g. would people be willing to pay
that much more for Netflix)?

I really believe the studios see Netflix as a way to get a little more milk
out of the bottom of the bucket. If they believe there is some other way to
get more milk, it doesn't show up on Netflix.

~~~
CognitiveLens
Sorry for the slow reply.

Studios might believe that digital distribution will eat the profits from
theaters and DVDs, but that doesn't appear to be happening - at least, the
"lost" profits appear to be recouped as part of digital distribution deals,
and there is definitely room for improvement in this business model.

I should also clarify that I am not at all advocating digital-only
distribution, I am advocating a model that is not physical-media-only. It must
be possible to have a happy medium that allows consumers to get their hands on
the media they are willing to pay for without having to decide between waiting
for regional distribution deals or piracy.

Studios are shooting themselves in the foot by not implementing a more
effective way of getting in-demand products to consumers using available
digital distribution technology.

------
ioquatix
I'm a New Zealander and I think this is ridiculous. Anyway, I don't support
mainstream media and instead buy as much as I can direct from the artists.

What I don't understand is why the government thinks this is a high priority..
there are far more serious issues to address and deal with.

~~~
jasonlingx
Yes it is ridiculous. The next logical step is to make it illegal to watch
media you buy directly from the artists.

~~~
tokenizer
That would never happen. At least, I hope this would never happen...

That would require all forms of media be passed through a distribution chain,
which would be ridiculous. But then again, this law seems ridiculous so let's
wait and see.

~~~
batista
> _That would require all forms of media be passed through a distribution
> chain, which would be ridiculous._

It will happen. It's very easy for the bad guys to mandate at some point that
all media must be passed through a distribution chain.

It _has_ happened in other forms. For example, once (not that long ago, a few
decades) you could buy food products direct from the source. Now it has been
outlawed in almost extinction, e.g in France (similar laws exist in the US).

Food (cheese, wine, tomatoes, etc) to be sold, has to pass several BS tests
and production criteria, that are "for the good of the public", but that in
essence prohibit anyone but large industries to be selling it, putting an end
to a centuries old tradition of small local producers.

------
mtgx
Isn't a "free trade" supposed to be about making it as easy as possible to
make as many exchanges with other countries as a "free trade". How are they
getting away with putting more and more restrictions and still calling it a
"free trade" agreement, if it goes the opposite direction?

~~~
anamax
> How are they getting away with putting more and more restrictions and still
> calling it a "free trade" agreement, if it goes the opposite direction?

Humans often use names in such ways. For example, "for the children" is often
used in arguments for things that are bad for children.

The idea seems to be "{phrase} has good associations and we need to {idea} to
have good associations, so we'll use {phrase} to describe/promote {idea}".
Note the absence of any dependence between the "meaning" of {phrase} and
{idea}.

In this case, "free trade agreements" is how humans regulate trade.

This doesn't explain why they didn't call them "cuddly puppies and children
agreements". I suspect that humans prefer oxymorons to nonsequitors.

Or, perhaps they're using "free" mean something different than what you're
expecting.

------
yobbobandana
_A range of difficulties have emerged for TPP seeking to strengthen IP
standards beyond those agreed to in TRIPS. Analysis of the costs and benefits
of IP protection shows that there is a tendency towards overprotection of IP
in all our societies, particularly in the areas of copyright and patents. The
analysis also shows that the optimal rate of protection differs between
countries and that it can differ across time as countries move through
different stages of economic development._

The second linked document - New Zealand's submission - was quite readable and
seems fairly rational.

The essays by NZ organisations opposing TPP were also pretty much all
interesting reads.

------
rplnt
Isn't it illegal already almost everywhere? This is a question, I don't know,
but here's my reasoning: DVDs are region locked. And breaking
restrictions/protection is not allowed, even if your dvd drive supports it out
of the box.

~~~
bodhi
According to Wikipedia[1]:

> Under New Zealand copyright law, DVD region codes and the mechanisms in DVD
> players to enforce them have no legal protection

I have a vague recollection of it not being possible to buy region _locked_
DVD players in New Zealand, but I may be incorrect, or the law may have been
changed.

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD_region_code>

~~~
archangel_one
I'm pretty sure it's been _possible_ to buy them in the past (certainly PS2's
were region locked by default) but it was also pretty easy to get a region-
free player if you wanted.

Also, I suspect they may have legal protection now; I was under the impression
that the poxy copyright amendment bill of a couple of years ago added
something along those lines, but I don't remember specifically enough to be
sure (since I no longer live in NZ it's a bit less relevant).

------
cashmonkey85
People still watch movies on DVDs? We should just do it if it gets us a trade
deal with the US even if it is insanely illogical.

~~~
adaml_623
Your comment is a bit unclear but I think you're being positive about getting
a 'trade deal' with the US.

Do you realise that the US 'delegation' for any of these negotiations are very
well funded professionals who are well connected with industry and are often
being groomed for industry jobs. Some of the delegates are probably actual
industry reps. There will be a lot of them and they are paid to throw their
weight around. And their weight is the weight of the US economy. The only
people in the US who will pay attention to this negotiation and protest if it
displeases them are the industry groups.

On the other side the NZ delegates are probably keen for a trade deal.

This truly a case of Lions meeting gazelles. And unless the NZ population
stays informed and vocal enough this won't be a deal that brings a net
positive to them.

~~~
nl
NZ isn't going into this as some naive player.

I'm not sure if you realize, but free trade deals are very important for
primary-producers like NZ (and Australia).

The US has significant trade barriers in place for things like farm goods, and
for many nations almost any price is worth paying to get around those
restrictions.

The GP comment is because - from the NZ perspective - being able to access the
US market maybe worthwhile taking some restrictions on a dying technology like
DVDs.

I think it was meant in jest, but the idea behind it is valid.

------
icebraining
_the TPP could stop future governments from making their own decisions on
important issues including how long copyright lasts_

Pretty sure that was already done when NZ signed Berne in 1928 and TRIPS in
1995, both of which impose a minimum duration of copyright terms.

~~~
Retric
Treaties don't actually bind governments all that much. Generally, there is
pressure to sign them and not leave, but many governments agree to do things
behind the scenes without formally signing a treaty.

~~~
icebraining
So how is TPP different?

~~~
Retric
It's not. My point is what's binding is the internal and external pressure and
TPP is almost irrelevant.

------
zb
Can we get rid of the editorialising in the title? The linked article mentions
no such law or proposed law, and in fact encourages the NZ government to
maintain its existing position in ongoing multilateral trade negotiations.

Edit: thanks for changing it.

------
sheckel
Do people like using these sites with scrolling backgrounds? I find it quite
difficult to actually read the page...

~~~
r00fus
The only part that annoyed me is the silly "Share" widget that covered up text
as I scrolled, and couldn't be minimized.

I thought the scrolling was nice - it even had parallax (lightbulb section).

------
hastur
The Content Industries and their supporters are a threat to the intellectual
and cultural lives of our societies and the development of the human
civilization.

They need to be liquidated using all possible means within the bounds of law.

Politicians and govt officials working for the copyright extension and
enforcement agenda need to be deprived of all power.

~~~
batista
> _The Content Industries and their supporters are a threat to the
> intellectual and cultural lives of our societies and the development of the
> human civilization._

Yes, but not so much for restrictions such as mentioned above.

Primarily for the content they produce.

------
maeon3
I challenge anyone to find a completely legal use of a single DVD
purchase/usage/storage event.

The people are in desparate need of a new updated Human rights list.

1\. Governments may not BAN digital storage mediums for use by the people. The
right to store data on a device of our choosing shall not be made illegal.

These governments would ban talking if they could.

~~~
noarchy
I have a hard time believing that governments today would be able to examine
changes to basic rights that did not involve removing them. This is the
direction of things, unfortunately.

