Misleading Metaphors That Drive The War On Online Sharing

[sabredog]

Originally Posted by Freeshadow

@sabrerdog take into consideration that the BD encryption of "Avatar"actually prevents that loads of legal buyers can view the movie on their devices due to absence of a firmware update...

Yep, aware of that. I might be facing a similar issue with my Samsung player soon, though so far it is playing the latest releases fine.

This simply highlights why legit owners turn to casual downloading to simply be able to get the product they paid for. Updating firmware on any device is pretty daunting and scary for the average punter so it is far easier to "go a browsing".

[Freeshadow]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

Narrator: You wouldn't steal a handbag. You wouldn't steal a car. You wouldn't steal a baby. You wouldn't shoot a policeman. And then steal his helmet. You wouldn't go to the toilet in his helmet. And then send it to the policeman's grieving widow. And then steal it again! Downloading films is stealing. If you do it, you will face the consequences. [SWAT team member bursts in behind the girl downloading the film and shoots her; cut to a pool of blood on the keyboard]

Roy: [sitting with Moss in a dark room] Man, these anti-piracy ads are getting really mean.

I'd be maybe laughin' at that, were I sure it's meant ironic. Actually I don't know if it is, or if its an existing spot described.
In case you wonder I'll offer the spot and a fractional translation of such a piece as was used in Germany (I'm NOT making this up!):

prisoner 1: Copypirate
prisoner 2: Another copypirate (the one rolling the "Rs" of the word "Raubkopierer" like purring)
prisoner 1: Yeah, but mine has the hotter ass!"

p.s.:you noticed that the on the very top of the freshmen issued stuff were pieces of soap ?
So as you can see at least in Germany the powers behind all that made the freudian slip of truth: They won't be happy until we all get screwed really, really badly.

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by Freeshadow

I'd be maybe laughin' at that, were I sure it's meant ironic. Actually I don't know if it is, or if its an existing spot described.
In case you wonder I'll offer the spot and a fractional translation of such a piece as was used in Germany (I'm NOT making this up!):

prisoner 1: Copypirate
prisoner 2: Another copypirate (the one rolling the "Rs" of the word "Raubkopierer" like purring)
prisoner 1: Yeah, but mine has the hotter ass!"

p.s.:you noticed that the on the very top of the freshmen issued stuff were pieces of soap ?
So as you can see at least in Germany the powers behind all that made the freudian slip of truth: They won't be happy until we all get screwed really, really badly.

Though it would be a fair punishment for those UPLOADING.

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by Freeshadow

I'd be maybe laughin' at that, were I sure it's meant ironic. Actually I don't know if it is, or if its an existing spot described.

It is a parady of a real spot which went like:

"You wouldn't steal a car, you wouldn't steal a handbag, you wouldn't steal a television."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmZm8vNHBSU

(Ironically the above link seems to be an illegal copy of the spot)

[Thasaidon]

From today's BBC news.

There is a small cafe near where Tolkein used to live in the UK called "The Hungry Hobbit". It has used the name for six years.

The lawyers for the big US corporation which purchased the copy right to Tolkein's work has written to them telling them to stop using the name. They say "it could cause confusion" and was an infringement of copyright (theft?).

I think the argument is risible and just another way big corporations try to extend "their rights". As far as I am concerned is a potential PR disaster for the company. Similar to the Harry Potter domain owned by a young girl who was similarly approached by the film company who claimed exclusive "rights" to the domain name.

How does the above add to the income of J. R. Tolkein as he died at a ripe old age some years ago?

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

I can live with that.

The question is: Would everyone else be happy with that (commercial message)? I suppose we could add a Scrooge-type character as the publisher, mean and curmudgeonly, and show kids throwing snowballs as he snarls at them... then cut to the Cratchit character left behind at his day job. Or would that be piling it on too thick?

At any rate, I think the concept would work as a PSA, and possibly be redone with other "oppressed" characters from literature... for instance, Cinderella could check her sales, move out of her stepmother's home, and buy her own glass slippers.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

It is a parady of a real spot which went like:

"You wouldn't steal a car, you wouldn't steal a handbag, you wouldn't steal a television."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmZm8vNHBSU

(Ironically the above link seems to be an illegal copy of the spot)

Wasn't it from The IT Crowd or something like that?

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

At any rate, I think the concept would work as a PSA, and possibly be redone with other "oppressed" characters from literature... for instance, Cinderella could check her sales, move out of her stepmother's home, and buy her own glass slippers.

While it would be quite funny for an anti-piracy message to bring forth the wrath of Disney Corp, I wouldn't use Cinderella if I were you.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Thasaidon

From today's BBC news.

There is a small cafe near where Tolkein used to live in the UK called "The Hungry Hobbit". It has used the name for six years.

The lawyers for the big US corporation which purchased the copy right to Tolkein's work has written to them telling them to stop using the name. They say "it could cause confusion" and was an infringement of copyright (theft?).

I think the argument is risible and just another way big corporations try to extend "their rights". As far as I am concerned is a potential PR disaster for the company. Similar to the Harry Potter domain owned by a young girl who was similarly approached by the film company who claimed exclusive "rights" to the domain name.

This is nothing to do with copyright - these are both trademark violations, and that's a VERY different kettle of fish. The trademark holder has no choice but to take action in such cases when they become aware of them; if a trademark is not defended, the holder can lose the trademark as a result.

You may think it risible, but I'm afraid that's the way that trademarks work.

With a Hobbit film in production (two films, in fact), it's especially important that the trademark holder defends its rights, because otherwise they would have no control over unauthorised merchandising related to the film - anyone would be able to turn round and say "but the word 'Hobbit' is in common use, and you haven't stopped it" and use this cafe as an example. It's vital for them to take action here.

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by stonetools

Not really: what matters to the owner of the IP in the end is SALES of the books. The more more free copies there are in circulation, the fewer SALES will be likely.

Quick, tell that to the authors with free ebooks promotions!

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

It is a parady of a real spot which went like:

"You wouldn't steal a car, you wouldn't steal a handbag, you wouldn't steal a television."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmZm8vNHBSU

(Ironically the above link seems to be an illegal copy of the spot)

Top Comments

I wish I had her download speed!

[stonetools]

Actually, the problem probably starts with the metaphor " ebook". Once we started calling these items "ebooks" , instead of say, "specially formatted electronic documents" the way was open for a whole series of misleading metaphors. People started identifying ebooks with pbooks, although they are different items altogether with different properties. Frankly, an ebook is as to a pbook as a decoy duck is as to a real duck, but that didn't stop people insisting that we should have the same rights with an ebook as we do with a pbook. People speak of "lending" ebooks and and even passing them on to their children, as if ebooks are physical objects!
Such misunderstandings would not arise if the name kept it in the front of our minds that these "ebooks" are in fact digital documents. When we work with electronic documents at the office, for example, we understand that we can't "lend" documents. We can send, move, or copy documents, but we don't lend the original file. The ebook designation tends to hide that fact so we get people wistfully asking why we can't "lend" ebooks the way dear old Uncle Joe lent us pbooks from his library.
In the same way when we " share" documents at work, there is no doubt in our mind that by " share" we mean send a copy to coworker for his review, and that the original file stays with us.
When we talk about "sharing" ebooks in a non-office setting, people seem to get confused about whether that involves distributing copies of an original file that stays with the "sharer".
I guess we may need different metaphors all the way down, but its unlikely that will happen.

[stonetools]

Some other metaphors that could be useful, from the world of finance:

1. Debasing, as in "debasing an author's IP rights".
2.Devaluing
3.Counterfeiting.

The useful thing about such metaphors is that they move away from the idea of theft as physical act, but keep the idea of harmful conduct that causes unspecified damage to specific people or public.

This metaphor game interesting is!

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by stonetools

Actually, the problem probably starts with the metaphor " ebook".

"Ebook" is not a metaphor, it's the name for electronic books.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by stonetools

Some other metaphors that could be useful, from the world of finance:

1. Debasing, as in "debasing an author's IP rights".
2.Devaluing
3.Counterfeiting.

The useful thing about such metaphors is that they move away from the idea of theft as physical act, but keep the idea of harmful conduct that causes unspecified damage to specific people or public.

This metaphor game interesting is!

Of those, counterfeit comes closest... though, since there is at heart no difference between a legal and illegally-copied ebook file, and counterfeit usually denotes an inferior or good-but-worthless copy, that might be a stretch.

Better to call them "wrongly-copied" or "wrongly-distributed" ebooks than counterfeit.