Suing downloaders won't solve piracy: expert

[Baker Street]

Veddy interesting

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-10-07/film-companies-advised-against-pursuing-downloaders/3339262

 

[noobItUp]

Oh great, that's my ISP.

noob lyfe!

 

[i0nwr1t3r]

Trying to sue ISP's for customer's consumption habits is like trying to sue Telstra for people prank calling on their telephone network or sue state governments for people killed on road ways , they facilitate a service with the old saying "At Your Own Risk".

The sue the end user strategy was tried in the US from memory & in one case a civilian was ordered to pay millions of dollars for downloaded music by the courts but the PR backlash did irreparable damage to those industries involved.

When did financially bankrupting kids for the rest of their lives for an act of stupdity they
lacked the forsight to see the implications beyond their own computer become acceptable ?

Should Australia's laws be compelled to be inline with another countries in the interest of a Free Trade Agreement ?
How much emphasis do we put on it & is it worth the cost long term?

Commercial interests & the interests of the general populace are not always in sync.

My 2cents.

 

[Baker Street]

I like this particularly cogent observation...

But Professor Fraser says while he wants to see content-makers fairly remunerated for their artistic work, he does not think pursuing downloaders is the way to go about it.

"I don't think that this approach will solve the problem. I don't think it is the answer," he said.

"I think that the industry groups like AFACT and the ISPs will come to an industry-based solution.

"Sending out letters of demand to individual downloaders I don't think will result in the kinds of industry-wide changes that are needed to ensure that consumers get lawful access to content and that piracy is shut down."

Professor Fraser says negotiations are ongoing between organisations like AFACT and the Communications Alliance, the peak telecommunications body, to set up "legitimate supply chains that meet the demands of access but that ensure the creative industries are sustainable by having a reasonable return to the creators and the investors".

"That is the way that this problem of almost ubiquitous piracy will be solved," he said.

A fair user pays system may be the way to go. Hypothetically, if 20mil people go to see a movie at $15 a pop against 200mil paying to see it for say $2 online - do the maff.

 

[i0nwr1t3r]

They won't go that approach though Bakes , it's geared to support & uphold an old retail distribution system that was relevent until the end of the 1990's.

Why would they allow $2 pay per view on net when they charge $30 to buy per movie?
They'll never undercut their own distrubuters profits , it'll make franchises worthless.

 

[Synonym]

They won't go that approach though Bakes , it's geared to support & uphold an old retail distribution system that was relevent until the end of the 1990's.

Why would they allow $2 pay per view on net when they charge $30 to buy per movie?
They'll never undercut their own distrubuters profits , it'll make franchises worthless.

Unfortunately I agree with i0n on this one as well Baker. While your suggestion would take advantage of the current market-climate and meet a largely underdeveloped streaming market they wouldn't settle for charging less than they already do. Hence why I don't utilize the Netflix streaming options for my Xbox. They charge full retail price for virtual access to a product.