# respectcopyright.org... kiss my furry white ass **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [January 3, 2004, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/respectcopyright-org-kiss-my-furry-white-ass/222517 "2004-01-03T20:46:06Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Ms2001](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ms2001/32/18463_2.png) [@Ms2001](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ms2001)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2004, 12:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/respectcopyright-org-kiss-my-furry-white-ass/222517/121 "2004-01-17T12:25:06Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by yosemitebabe_ > **That [sponsorship] sounds simply awful. Just what movies need—more blatant commercialism. And do you think that sponsorship will be able to single-handedly fund these several million dollar blockbusters (like LOTR)? Obviously product placement is pretty much out with a film like LOTR.** No, I imagine there would be fewer multi-million dollar blockbusters, if any. > [@](#): > > **So you think that filmmaking in general would be improved by big banner ads streaming at the bottom of the screen, all through the movie?** Do you think television and radio are improved by commercial breaks every few minutes? Are newspapers, magazines, and web pages improved by advertisements? Not really. But it lets them make money without depending on people to pay per copy, and that’s an improvement in itself. > [@](#): > > **How will that [serialization] work for non-fiction, or poetry? And what about certain kinds of novels which don’t “translate” well to the serial format? They’ll just never get funded, right?** It can work for non-fiction and poetry the same way it works for novels; just substitute “chapters” for a more appropriate division. Release a little work, ask for a little money. Release more, ask for more. If no one is willing to pay you to keep producing, then find something else you’re good at. Works that don’t translate well to a serial format can be funded some other way - I sure wouldn’t mind flipping past ads in a book, if it meant getting the book for free or at cost. Or maybe some of those works won’t be funded at all, and the people who would’ve made them will have to find some other way to support themselves. :shrug: Just because a person has made a living doing something in the past doesn’t mean he must be able to make a living doing it in the future. Changes in law and technology lead to changes in the job market all the time, and society keeps on going. ---
**Author:** ![yosemite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/3ab097/32.png) [@yosemite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yosemite)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2004, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/respectcopyright-org-kiss-my-furry-white-ass/222517/122 "2004-01-17T16:52:05Z")
And you’ve supplied a non-answer, only relevant for a few kinds of work, as Princhester points out. > [@Mr2001](#): > > Or maybe some of those works won’t be funded at all, and the people who would’ve made them will have to find some other way to support themselves. :shrug: Ah. So a lot of creative folk wouldn’t be able to make a living if you had your way. They’d have to get a “real” job, eh? We’re back to that again, I see. Right now, people make work that other people want (and have paid for), but you want that all to end. Make it free, and make these people who used to make a living (doing something that other people felt was worth paying for) find something else to do for a living. That is no solution, and certainly no answer to storyteller0910’s question. After all, he (she?) very well might be one of the people that you would :shrug: at being forced out of the writing business. So are you telling storyteller0910 that as far as you are concerned, :shrug:, too bad, you can’t make a living off of your work anymore? _That’s_ your answer? That’s no answer. ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2004, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/respectcopyright-org-kiss-my-furry-white-ass/222517/123 "2004-01-17T21:29:12Z")
So I take it that your answer to my question namely how, without selling copyable IP, could certain existing and very popular artforms make money in your copyrightless world is: they couldn’t and would largely disappear. Fair summary? [sub] By the way, > [@Mr2001](#): > > It can work for non-fiction and poetry the same way it works for novels ie in Mr2001’s dreams. You’ve already pointed that this scheme has been tried and didn’t work for one of the most popular novelists alive. If it didn’t work for Stephen King, who exactly do you think it might work for? Clinging desperately much?[/sub] ---
**Author:** ![Dead\_Badger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/848f3c/32.png) [@Dead\_Badger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dead_Badger)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2004, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/respectcopyright-org-kiss-my-furry-white-ass/222517/124 "2004-01-17T22:11:21Z")
> [@Mr2001](#): > > One business model that may work for both filmmakers and authors is sponsorship. It already exists in movies and TV - six feet from my desk, there’s a sticker sheet commemorating Reese’s Pieces’ appearance in _E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial_. Sponsorship doesn’t have to mean product placement, though; it could mean incorporating a sponsor’s themes into your work, or even just selling ad space on screen or along the bottom of a page. This would still require copyright legislation, or else there would be nothing to stop someone stripping out the advertisements and re-publishing, rendering the business model unworkable. As it is, there is nothing to stop someone using this model; it’s perfectly possible to publish something for free with advertising included. However, it’s no coincidence that the model is limited to a very few areas like newspapers. If it were an economic business model, it would already be being more widely used. As for “incorporating themes” into a work, well, I wonder at that, I really do. I thought you were against commercial pollution of artworks? Call me odd, but I’d _much_ rather pay for a book than have to read about a Coca-Cola executive leading a one-man crusade against the mob whilst suitably caffeinated and refreshed. ---
**Author:** ![yosemite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/3ab097/32.png) [@yosemite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yosemite)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2004, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/respectcopyright-org-kiss-my-furry-white-ass/222517/125 "2004-01-17T23:58:51Z")
Let’s just recap this: > [@storyteller0910](#): > > The thing is, I am a professional writer by trade, and have been a fervent supporter of existing IP laws for the simple reason that without them, I’d have no way of getting paid for my efforts - anyone to whom I showed my work would be free to reprint it, modify it, do almost anything to it they wished, without my permission and without paying me. Absent such protection, I would probably be working in a very different field. Without IP laws, how would I go about getting paid for my work? Then: > [@Mr2001](#): > > Sure, storyteller0910. I’ll try to post an answer tonight or tomorrow. And then his answer includes this: > [@Mr2001](#): > > Or maybe some of those works won’t be funded at all, and the people who would’ve made them will have to find some other way to support themselves. :shrug: Just because a person has made a living doing something in the past doesn’t mean he must be able to make a living doing it in the future. So, your answer to storyteller0910’s question about how would he still be able to get paid for his work, is that, well, :shrug: maybe he wouldn’t, and he’d have to go into a new line of work. That’s pathetic. ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2004, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/respectcopyright-org-kiss-my-furry-white-ass/222517/126 "2004-01-18T02:57:35Z")
The other point, yosemitebabe, is that when Mr2001 is pressed on this point, he always refers (and only refers) to the effects that destruction of artists and entertainers’ ability to earn a living has _on them_. He concentrates on that aspect so that he can then shrug and say “so what, the world doesn’t owe them a living”. And that may be true. But what Mr2001 consistently ignores is that artists and entertainers have customers and customers _want those artists and entertainers to produce their work_. Quite simply, Mr2001’s philosophy (or whatever he might call it) proposes the destruction of something that the greater population wants (books, movies) to achieve some “let the information be free” ideal I am yet to hear any coherent arugment as to why Mr2001 thinks this is a worthwhile tradeoff. ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2004, 4:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/respectcopyright-org-kiss-my-furry-white-ass/222517/127 "2004-01-18T04:07:36Z")
And another thing. > [@Mr2001](#): > > Changes in law and technology lead to changes in the job market all the time, and society keeps on going. Mr2001 you have often made comments along these lines. Jobs disappear all the time, businesses disappear all the time, too bad. Problem is, you miss the point. Jobs disappear because someone finds a way to produce a particular thing without so much manpower. Industries disappear because they are selling something people no longer want. How do you go from that to the suggestion that there is nothing untoward about jobs and industries _that are necessary to produce what people want_ disappearing, to be replaced by nothing except unsatisfied consumer demand? ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2004, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/respectcopyright-org-kiss-my-furry-white-ass/222517/128 "2004-01-18T04:17:20Z")
Sorry I keep thinking of something else. > [@Mr2001](#): > > Do you think television and radio are improved by commercial breaks every few minutes? Are newspapers, magazines, and web pages improved by advertisements? Not really. But it lets them make money without depending on people to pay per copy, and that’s an improvement in itself. This is crux of it. You have a set of values that dictates that “not depending on people to pay per copy” is _an improvement_ even if it means that arts and entertainment would be (as you yourself say) worsened as a result. Of course as Dead Badger has already said, your model is already available. Anyone is free to stop charging for movies and instead rely on sponsorship etc right now. Books could be given away but contain advertising tomorrow. Why does this not occur? Because it’s not what people want. You are free to have whatever values you want, Mr2001, but I think that I am far from alone when I regard your values as dumbass. ---
**Author:** ![netscape\_6](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/8c91f0/32.png) [@netscape\_6](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/netscape_6)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2004, 6:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/respectcopyright-org-kiss-my-furry-white-ass/222517/129 "2004-01-18T06:16:44Z")
[I think it might be possible to make everybody (artist, and public) almost happy](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=4424750&postcount=92). Except stuff like the RIAA, but they suck anyway. ---
**Author:** ![yosemite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/3ab097/32.png) [@yosemite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yosemite)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2004, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/respectcopyright-org-kiss-my-furry-white-ass/222517/130 "2004-01-18T16:44:25Z")
From the other post: > [@netscape6](#): > > A work is created be it music, a book, a movie, or something else, It is uploaded to a goverment server of some kind and put up for download. Server logs keep track of many of each file is downloaded and dilly up the creative works tax fund accourdingly. The tax could be monthly and figured into the isp bill. Just as inFlash-57’s plan. Artists get rewarded, consumers get an all you can to eat buffet of media. The RIAA gets null, which is the fate those antiConstitution bastards deserve. All done without draconian measures on technology. I was typing farther down and I had this idea. How this: Each website can have one hit counter with the FCTS (see below). That way website owners would be paid for their work without advertising! This would remove a lot of the annoying things on the web. Popups, banner ads and the like. In some cases, this might a good idea, but would still not work even remotely all the time. Some people (hell, probably a lot of people) create stuff that they don’t want _anyone_ to use in _any_ way they please. I know some composers of religious music that sure don’t want their music used for other “commercial” purposes. They feel that the music was specifically meant for a religious context, and nothing else. Also, how will this government server keep track of derivative works? Like, for instance, someone using the melody in an aforementioned religious work, re-tooling it and changing the lyrics so it is a popular tune, etc.? Even if the composer of the original (religious) work is okay with someone re-doing it, how will they get paid for the use of their melody, if the re-tooler doesn’t step forward and make sure they (the religious composer) gets credit? > [@](#): > > Why would people get the file from the file copy tracking server (FCTS) instead of p2p? Simple the download over the FCTS would be a high quality version and be a heck of a lot easier to download then p2p. Plus the costs are about the same, you get taxed no matter what medium you use for downloading anyway. So why not get the high fedility version and at a faster speed off the FCTS? How would this apply to written works, which would be relatively low-bandwidth, and easy to share on any server? And some artworks? A high fidelity version of artwork may be on the government server, but what if all someone needs is a low-res version of the artwork for a small graphic, or web graphic? They don’t _need_ to go get the high-res version from the government server then, and they might not. Thus cheating the artist out of royalties for using a (low-res) version of their artwork. Maybe I missed this part of your answer, but I don’t remember you offering a solution on how to control derivative versions of works, (and “derivative” in this case could be nothing more than a lower-res version of artwork or photography, resized in Photoshop). I know of no (inexpensive, at least) reliable watermarking technology that can _always_ keep watermarks in graphics, _especially_ if the artwork is cropped or otherwise altered in Photoshop. In my experience, watermarks are pretty fragile. (Of course, if some new technology has come out, I’d love to hear about it.) So how would this work for graphics? ---
**Author:** ![brianbertz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/3bc359/32.png) [@brianbertz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brianbertz)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2012, 5:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/respectcopyright-org-kiss-my-furry-white-ass/222517/131 "2012-09-20T05:16:11Z")
> [@blowero](#): > > First of all, I agree that there shouldn’t be _any_ advertisements of any sort at movies; they cost enough already. But I have to take the unpopular view here, and ask exactly what “facts and figures” you want to show that piracy hurts movie-makers? If you copy a movie for free and don’t pay to go see it, the studio doesn’t make any money from you. It’s not rocket-science. How people can possibly believe that it doesn’t hurt the studios is beyond me. > > I don’t doubt that the executives in the industry command fantastic salaries, but aren’t pretty much _all_ high-level corporate execs overpaid in the US? Should I rob my local 7/11 because the president of 7/11 Corporation is making 7 figures? You think that’s gonna come out of _his_ pocket? You think that by illegally copying movies you are going to convince them to take a pay cut? Dream on. The first people who are going to get hit are the bottom rung. “It’s o.k. because those rich bastards deserve it” - that’s the oldest and stupidest rationalization in the book. In my case which this is what i told to the lady at the MPAA, it is not hurting there profits if i download a movie that is still in theatres or thats out on dvd. it is a fact. why is it a fact? because i would and never will go see a movie in the theatres. 1. i hate the movie theatres. 2. overpriced food and drinks. 3. why the fuck would i pay 10 dollars to see a 2 hour movie? i havent been to a theatre since it was like 5 bucks. in other words a very long time! i dont go to theatres and dont buy dvds and i never will so they arent losing money from me watching a movie that someone who already paid to see it uploaded. they never would get my money either way. i told that to the bitch at the mpaa after i got a message from my internet provider about me illegally downloading a movie that is in theatres. i also told her i would download what i want and to go fuck herself. have a nice day people. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2012, 5:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/respectcopyright-org-kiss-my-furry-white-ass/222517/132 "2012-09-20T05:25:48Z")
The philosophical essence of a valid ethical stance. It’s nice to know the universities are doing their job in educating a new generation to articulate moral viewpoints so eloquently. I eagerly look forward to reading his doctoral thesis. ---
**Author:** ![saje](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saje/32/3631_2.png) [@saje](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/saje)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2012, 9:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/respectcopyright-org-kiss-my-furry-white-ass/222517/133 "2012-09-20T09:02:49Z")
I suspect things have changed a bit in the EIGHT YEARS since the original posting. eta: [respectcopyright.org](http://respectcopyright.org) doesn’t even exist anymore ---
**Author:** ![D\_Odds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/d_odds/32/2882_2.png) [@D\_Odds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Odds)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2012, 1:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/respectcopyright-org-kiss-my-furry-white-ass/222517/134 "2012-09-20T13:04:03Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > The philosophical essence of a valid ethical stance. It’s nice to know the universities are doing their job in educating a new generation to articulate moral viewpoints so eloquently. I eagerly look forward to reading his doctoral thesis. I look forward to using the paper it is printed on to start my next charcoal fire. Yes, I got your sarcasm - and enjoyed it. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2012, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/respectcopyright-org-kiss-my-furry-white-ass/222517/135 "2012-09-20T13:31:53Z")
> [@saje](#): > > eta: [respectcopyright.org](http://respectcopyright.org) doesn’t even exist anymore See? The OP bankrupted the film industry! [QUOTE=brianbertz] In my case which this is what i told to the lady at the MPAA, it is not hurting there profits if i download a movie that is still in theatres or thats out on dvd. it is a fact. why is it a fact? because i would and never will go see a movie in the theatres. 1. i hate the movie theatres. 2. overpriced food and drinks. 3. why the fuck would i pay 10 dollars to see a 2 hour movie? i havent been to a theatre since it was like 5 bucks. in other words a very long time! i dont go to theatres and dont buy dvds and i never will so they arent losing money from me watching a movie that someone who already paid to see it uploaded. they never would get my money either way. i told that to the bitch at the mpaa after i got a message from my internet provider about me illegally downloading a movie that is in theatres. i also told her i would download what i want and to go fuck herself. have a nice day people. [/QUOTE] Welcome to the SDMB, Mr. Bertz. Think about this, for a second: what’s the difference between someone who downloads a film illegally because they weren’t going to pay to see it, and someone who does it and _claims_ they weren’t going to pay to see it? ---
**Author:** ![Coustralee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f05b48/32.png) [@Coustralee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Coustralee)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2012, 1:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/respectcopyright-org-kiss-my-furry-white-ass/222517/136 "2012-09-20T13:41:19Z")
i think what offends me most is the movie following it will be about gunning people down and doing all sorts of nefarious things. It’s just a bit rich them taking the high moral ground, or having any message at all. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2012, 1:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/respectcopyright-org-kiss-my-furry-white-ass/222517/137 "2012-09-20T13:43:22Z")
It offends you that movies _you choose to see_ are about gunning people down and other nefarious things? ---
**Author:** ![Coustralee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f05b48/32.png) [@Coustralee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Coustralee)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2012, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/respectcopyright-org-kiss-my-furry-white-ass/222517/138 "2012-09-20T13:47:14Z")
no, it offends me that they’re taking a stance on something, then dish up something which is often dubious ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2012, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/respectcopyright-org-kiss-my-furry-white-ass/222517/139 "2012-09-20T13:50:45Z")
They’re taking a stance on getting paid for their work. What does that have to do with the content of their films? Were you offended by Metallica taking a stance on Napster because they had a song called _Battery_? ---
**Author:** ![Inner\_Stickler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inner_stickler/32/318_2.png) [@Inner\_Stickler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inner_Stickler)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2012, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/respectcopyright-org-kiss-my-furry-white-ass/222517/140 "2012-09-20T13:54:25Z")
[QUOTE=Sean Lock] It’s a bit like someone who’s got a nut allergy going into a nut shop. “I don’t like them! They make my head blow up 3 times its normal size. You bastard.” [/quote] [from here](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UvI_vh8S5E) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/respectcopyright-org-kiss-my-furry-white-ass/222517.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/respectcopyright-org-kiss-my-furry-white-ass/222517.md?page=8)