So apparently Voltage Pictures, the folks who made the movie Hurt Locker, is going after 23,000+ users who downloaded the movie off BitTorrent. They plan to 'sue' them for the infringement. From what I gather the studio put the squeeze on ISP's to give up the IP addresses (and hence associated owners of those IP addresses) of those that downloaded the Hurt Locker file.
What is this really? In reality this is nothing more than a PR stunt and it goes to show the negative side of PR. These lawsuits are nothing but smoke and mirrors designed to scare people in to not using BitTorrent (which is ridiculous because those who are using it have not responded to previous scare tactics in the past).
I'm surprised the ISP's gave up the IP addresses, but at the same time I'm not. The ISP's benefit from users not using things like BitTorrent because if they aren't getting content for free (ie. pirated content) then they (might) are buying it (which is a market the ISP's hope to tap down the road - not just being the pipe to content, but being the distributor of that content also).
So why is this just a big PR stunt?
Put simply you can't prove anything when it comes to what people are doing on the internet. Sure, you can prove that a certain IP address was used to download a certain file, but that doesn't satisfy the onus of proof to charge them.
There are tons of ways through which a person's IP address could be used to download content without their knowledge. Just a few might include:
So how do you sue someone without knowing they actually downloaded the file and did so with intent to break the law?
You can't. So if this lawsuit by Voltage Pictures was actually successful in any way then you'd essentially be telling everyone who is connected to the internet that they are responsible for how their connection to the internet is used. That if someone else uses their computer or hacks in to their wi-fi signal that they (the owner) is legally responsible for anything that other person does.
It's silly and idiotic. Moreover Volatge has to know that it's a giant waste of time and the only thing they can get out of doing this is publicity. I don't know, maybe they are hoping that it will bring the Voltage brand and their movies publicity they otherwise would not get (I have to admit, I had no idea who Voltage was until this story broke).
If they are genuine in their attempt to sue all these people, all I can say is good luck. Even if the music and movie industry launches another assault on P2P, they will fail. People will simply move to services like giganews, where files are stored on servers for download (versus P2P which is simply a network of personal PCs).
You might be able to shut down file sharing if the ISPs really got behind it and inspected all packet tramissions. But then you've crossed the threshold and are then living in a Big Brother society. It's unlikely to happen because the moment one ISP agrees to strip all privacy away from its users, another ISP will come along offering to keep privacy intact and steal all their customers away.
So P2P is here to stay and people need to just accept it. Is it wrong? sure. But hey, if we all cried over all the things that are 'wrong / unfair' in the world the streets would be flooded with tears.
Not to mention the issue is really an economic one and less of a morale one, as I pointed out in a previous post where I link to a good article - Tougher laws won't stop internet piracy: study.
To show you how futile it is, the Hurt Locker, which is now widely known to be a file that could get you sued for downloading, is still being downloaded on BitTorrent. As you can see in the image to the left, right this minute there are approximately 500 people downloading the Hurt Locker (the first seed should be ignored since the file is a fake). Over a 24 hour period (given it probably takes an hour or so to download), that's approximately 10,000 people who will download it today.
This is a movie that is now three years old (I mean, who really cares about it at this point) and which is known to be a dangerous file given ISPs are giving up people's IP address information. And yet, 10,000 people from around the world are downloading it on any given day.
So everyone knows that you can't stop P2P unless you're prepared to launched literally billions (maybe even trillions) of lawsuits. Lawsuits which you can't win because you have no way of actually proving that the person you are suing is the one who downloaded the file (all you know is that their IP address was used).
So I simply have to assume that Voltage is doing this simply as a PR stunt. Personally, I hate when PR is used to 'scare' people. I hated it during the Bush administration and I hate it now. If you really hate pirating that much, then instead of launching a fruitless scare-campaign in the form of lawsuits, launch awareness campaigns to try and convince people that it's really wrong to share copyright material via P2P.
Metallica tried all this in the 90's I think it was. They managed to get Napster shut down. Guess what, it accomplished nothing. People can still get all Metallica's stuff off BitTorrent . A simple search on isohunt and you can see thousands of people sharing Metallica items. So what did Metallica really gain? Not much, other than wasting their time trying to stop something that can't be stopped.
Shut down BitTorrent and they'll go to GigaNews. Shut down GigaNews and they'll go back to the days when peopel shared via IRC.
I'm not for or against P2P services (so this is not so much an opinion piece) I'm merely postulating that any time you see someone going after P2P services I have to believe it's for publicity reasons. Sure, they don't want people stealing their content (that's a given), but at the same time, there's simply no way of stopping P2P, so why waste your time... it's like watching someone swat furiously in the air at a fly they will never hit. At some point you need to simply accept the fly has you beat.
What's next? Are we going to start suing anyone who watches / listens to a Metallica video on YouTube? Who knows, maybe you've broken a copyright law if you watched the video above?
Oh the world can be a silly place =) But it's annoying when PR is used to make it even sillier (or worse, scarier) place.
What is this really? In reality this is nothing more than a PR stunt and it goes to show the negative side of PR. These lawsuits are nothing but smoke and mirrors designed to scare people in to not using BitTorrent (which is ridiculous because those who are using it have not responded to previous scare tactics in the past).
I'm surprised the ISP's gave up the IP addresses, but at the same time I'm not. The ISP's benefit from users not using things like BitTorrent because if they aren't getting content for free (ie. pirated content) then they (might) are buying it (which is a market the ISP's hope to tap down the road - not just being the pipe to content, but being the distributor of that content also).
So why is this just a big PR stunt?
Put simply you can't prove anything when it comes to what people are doing on the internet. Sure, you can prove that a certain IP address was used to download a certain file, but that doesn't satisfy the onus of proof to charge them.
There are tons of ways through which a person's IP address could be used to download content without their knowledge. Just a few might include:
- You have friends / family visiting for a few weeks and they use your Internet while they are there. If you have wi-fi they could be downloading who-knows-what on their laptop in your guest bedroom and you have no way of knowing.
- You have tons of seniors whose Internet is managed by their kids (and grand kids). They can barely type in a URL much less know what their kids are doing with their Internet. How can they tell if the new Rolling Stones album was purchased off itunes or downloaded off BitTorrent?
- Anyone with wi-fi (which is almost everyone) can be hacked by their neighbours. There are people who don't pay for internet but rather just hook in to various wi-fi signals in their neighbourhood and use other people's internet.
- A big one is people using BitTorrent not knowing it's illegal. I know, sounds impossible, but there are tons of people that have no clue what any of this stuff is and may not even realize what they are doing is 'technically' wrong until someone actually explains to them what p2p sharing is and just because you 'can' download something doesn't mean it's legal to do so.
- You're away on vacation, the people house sitting / pet sitting, use your computer and download stuff.
So how do you sue someone without knowing they actually downloaded the file and did so with intent to break the law?
You can't. So if this lawsuit by Voltage Pictures was actually successful in any way then you'd essentially be telling everyone who is connected to the internet that they are responsible for how their connection to the internet is used. That if someone else uses their computer or hacks in to their wi-fi signal that they (the owner) is legally responsible for anything that other person does.
It's silly and idiotic. Moreover Volatge has to know that it's a giant waste of time and the only thing they can get out of doing this is publicity. I don't know, maybe they are hoping that it will bring the Voltage brand and their movies publicity they otherwise would not get (I have to admit, I had no idea who Voltage was until this story broke).
If they are genuine in their attempt to sue all these people, all I can say is good luck. Even if the music and movie industry launches another assault on P2P, they will fail. People will simply move to services like giganews, where files are stored on servers for download (versus P2P which is simply a network of personal PCs).
You might be able to shut down file sharing if the ISPs really got behind it and inspected all packet tramissions. But then you've crossed the threshold and are then living in a Big Brother society. It's unlikely to happen because the moment one ISP agrees to strip all privacy away from its users, another ISP will come along offering to keep privacy intact and steal all their customers away.
So P2P is here to stay and people need to just accept it. Is it wrong? sure. But hey, if we all cried over all the things that are 'wrong / unfair' in the world the streets would be flooded with tears.
Not to mention the issue is really an economic one and less of a morale one, as I pointed out in a previous post where I link to a good article - Tougher laws won't stop internet piracy: study.
To show you how futile it is, the Hurt Locker, which is now widely known to be a file that could get you sued for downloading, is still being downloaded on BitTorrent. As you can see in the image to the left, right this minute there are approximately 500 people downloading the Hurt Locker (the first seed should be ignored since the file is a fake). Over a 24 hour period (given it probably takes an hour or so to download), that's approximately 10,000 people who will download it today.This is a movie that is now three years old (I mean, who really cares about it at this point) and which is known to be a dangerous file given ISPs are giving up people's IP address information. And yet, 10,000 people from around the world are downloading it on any given day.
So everyone knows that you can't stop P2P unless you're prepared to launched literally billions (maybe even trillions) of lawsuits. Lawsuits which you can't win because you have no way of actually proving that the person you are suing is the one who downloaded the file (all you know is that their IP address was used).
So I simply have to assume that Voltage is doing this simply as a PR stunt. Personally, I hate when PR is used to 'scare' people. I hated it during the Bush administration and I hate it now. If you really hate pirating that much, then instead of launching a fruitless scare-campaign in the form of lawsuits, launch awareness campaigns to try and convince people that it's really wrong to share copyright material via P2P.
Metallica tried all this in the 90's I think it was. They managed to get Napster shut down. Guess what, it accomplished nothing. People can still get all Metallica's stuff off BitTorrent . A simple search on isohunt and you can see thousands of people sharing Metallica items. So what did Metallica really gain? Not much, other than wasting their time trying to stop something that can't be stopped.Shut down BitTorrent and they'll go to GigaNews. Shut down GigaNews and they'll go back to the days when peopel shared via IRC.
I'm not for or against P2P services (so this is not so much an opinion piece) I'm merely postulating that any time you see someone going after P2P services I have to believe it's for publicity reasons. Sure, they don't want people stealing their content (that's a given), but at the same time, there's simply no way of stopping P2P, so why waste your time... it's like watching someone swat furiously in the air at a fly they will never hit. At some point you need to simply accept the fly has you beat.
What's next? Are we going to start suing anyone who watches / listens to a Metallica video on YouTube? Who knows, maybe you've broken a copyright law if you watched the video above?
Oh the world can be a silly place =) But it's annoying when PR is used to make it even sillier (or worse, scarier) place.
Comments
Post a Comment