My Response to Common Piracy...aw, fuck it

I give up.

I feel like I'm pretty much alone in my point of view...and so many smart folks that I respect tremendously disagree with me. It's at that point when I start saying, "Jesus Christ! No one understands this but me!!!"

Of course, when I find myself saying that I immediately start thinking, "Wait...am I the one who's wrong about this?"

It's like that old poker saying: "If you can't spot the sucker...you are the sucker."
Being wrong happens...and it's usually pretty embarrassing when it does, but this is a forum I use primarily to broadcast embarrassing things about myself (see this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, and this). I mean, I enjoy it when I'm wrong (or proved wrong), and I typically read views I disagree with before I try to digest any consenting viewpoints just to see if I am wrong about something.

I'm wrong a lot. It's rare that I broadcast my wrong-headed views (or the eventual realization that they are wrong), but when it happens, I'm fine with it.

So, am I wrong about SOPA?

I don't know. It's possible. I can't say "Yes" definitively, but I've certainly modified my stance since I first read the thing a couple of months ago. I stand by my support in general, even if the strength of that support has weakened considerably.
I came into this discussion with a lot of knowledge about online piracy -- knowledge that only a handful of people possess (I'm not bragging, it's just that this is a small community comprising the pirates, and the anti-pirates).

So I read SOPA, and it looked fine to me. Pretty good, actually. It was that magic bill that could actually address some of the piracy frustrations I've been faced with at my job, and it looked very good for my employer. It was vague at points, sure, but not more so than any other regulatory bill or law (I mean it's not a technical manual, it's legislation -- there has to be room for interpretation).

Then I started reading what people were saying about it. The law was pretty much universally reviled. It seemed to me that people immediately went looking for "abuse potential," instead of considering the "practical application" (seems everyone assumes that any law passed will be immediately abused to its fullest extent...a view I consider to be quite cynical, and I do not share).
Basically, I thought that people were just getting riled up over nothing. The fear came from a lack of knowledge about online piracy. So I attempted to educate...sharing my unique perspective as "actor," "producer," and "anti-piracy enforcement professional."

I started to notice that powerful tech companies were driving the paranoia. I found myself on the opposite side of my favorite companies (Google, Wikipedia, and Amazon have long been favorites of mine). I found myself defending some asshole Texas Republican, and disagreeing with friends and colleagues that I respect tremendously.

"Fuck," I thought. "Am I missing something?"

I examined the claims of the anti-SOPA crowd:

• SOPA overreaches.
• No due process.
• Piracy is largely the entertainment industry's fault because they failed to innovate (I hate this one -- it's blaming the victim and shitting all over an industry whose product is easier to copy and distribute than any other intellectual property out there).
• SOPA could close down many legitimate websites.
• SOPA is unconstitutional.
• The entertainment industry is making record profits, so obviously they're not being affected by piracy.
• Piracy numbers are debunked, and over-inflated.
• SOPA is censorship.
• Movie stars make too much money anyway.
• The entertainment industry doesn't want to innovate, since there's more money in the status quo.
• SOPA wouldn't fix piracy anyway, since people could just enter the IP address of the infringing site.
• Tech companies would be forced to police their users, placing a unfair financial burden on them.
• Innovation depends on the open flow of information, and SOPA would destroy that open internet, thereby destroying innovation.
• Congress is out of touch, and wrote an out of touch potentially devestating bill.
• Input from the tech industry was ignored.
• Et cetera.

I'm sure I missed some...but those are the points I recall off the top of my head.

None of them swayed me...and I have an answer for each charge...but I'm frankly tired of defending it at this point.

Like I say, I give up.

I'm not looking for support or sympathy or anything, I don't need encouragement or whatever...I'm just telling you where my head's at.

So where does this put us, now that SOPA is fucked?

A compromise bill could pass, but if it doesn't contain many of the provisions outlined in SOPA, it'll be toothless.
It's also possible that no compromise bill passes...but the populace becomes much less tolerant of piracy than it has been up to this point...and (consequently) more tolerant of piracy enforcement efforts (putting the ugly RIAA lawsuits behind us). However, after the shit went down with Megaupload today, and the response from Anonymous, I think it's unlikely.
On the other hand, the issue could be totally forgotten next week, the news cycle will turn its turny-turn, and piracy will continue as before. If this happens, either the entertainment industry comes up with the magical "innovation that pleases everyone" that can never exist (and has already been attempted by Hulu, iTunes, Netflix), or the industry starts to feel the full impact of piracy and people (like myself) start to lose jobs.

That would suck, but what can you do, right? There's no competing with internet vigilantism, and I can't convince people on my own...I'm just not eloquent enough.

Plus...fuck it. I could be just be wrong about the whole thing. There's no point in fighting any more.

Explaining Piracy

So, okay...I think we can all agree that SOPA is DOA. The bill is poison, and any elected official who is caught supporting it would no doubt fall prey to the internet vigilantism that wrecked the thing in the first place.

The SOPA backers are now discovering, do not mess with the internet.

Where does that leave us? Well, obviously, I think everyone has now seen that a handful of tech companies can whip their members into a frenzy. If these supposedly neutral corporations decide to weigh in on political matters, they can have a tremendous influence.

Sour grapes? Not really...at least, I hope not. Like I said before, if SOPA were to pass, I would probably eventually find myself out of a job. I'm honestly agnostic on the bill. I thought it was a good idea, and I was annoyed by the misinformation and hysterics...but as for actually passing the damn thing...it would probably complicate my life more than it would help it.

But, lost in this whole thing is the piracy issue. Maybe not lost, necessarily, since people are now talking about piracy and hopefully a compromise bill can be passed in the near future. However, anything that does not include the provisions outlined in SOPA will be toothless, and nothing will change.

Consequently, I feel the need to explain how piracy works, because no one really seems to know. I'll also explain why anti-piracy efforts have been largely ineffective up to this point (I can't go into a lot of detail...but hopefully I can give you all the gist).

Online piracy is a moneymaking endeavor for everyone involved; that is why people do it. I can't tell you how, because this could be construed as a "how to make money off of piracy" article...but you'll just have to trust me. From the lowliest uploader to the multi-million dollar rogue hosting companies, everyone is making money off of piracy...and none of it is going back to the content creators. Not a damn cent. That's the shittiest thing about piracy.

But here's the main problem with enforcement: internet piracy is global. "U.S. exports of film and entertainment media often attain shares in international markets in excess of 90 percent due to high global interest in U.S. filmed entertainment" (source). This means that the vast majority of entertainment content consumed worldwide is produced in the United States. So, foreign websites can distribute illegal content free to US consumers with impunity. Anyone can see how that's a problem.

So how do we stop it? We use the DMCA. Seems fair, right? I mean, not very much has changed since the law was passed in 1998...especially not on the internet. 56k modems!? Lightning fast!!!



Yeah, there are many problems with the DMCA...which is not a terrible law; it's just out of date. Here's three biggies:

1) Jurisdiction. The DMCA only applies to websites hosted in the United States. Very few pirate websites are hosted in the United States, which pretty much breaks this law from the get-go.

2) ID Requirements. A lawful take-down notice must include "identification of the copyrighted work claimed to have been infringed." This means that copyright holders must personally verify each link they are examining. That's fine with the little 1998 internet, spearheaded by those tech giants AOL and Prodigy...but the 2012 internet scoffs at your feeble attempts to quantify its vastness. There is just too much out there now, and we poor enforcement folk are getting buried.

3) Safe Harbor. It's a great idea in theory...but in practice it just ends up making enforcement impossible. Here's how it works -- one "linking" site allows anonymous users to posts links (their defense: "we don't host any content, so we're not breaking laws"), a second, "hosting" site allows anonymous users to post videos (their defense: "safe harbor; we remove content only if we receive an official letter from the copyright owner"). One site points to the other site, and everyone makes money. If a video is removed, it can be immediately uploaded again with no repercussions (some sites even offer multiple URLs for a single video -- if one URL is removed, you don't even need to re-upload). Unless this safe harbor loophole is closed, piracy will continue ad infinitum. Simply put, websites must be held accountable for their content, whether it's user-generated or not.

So there it is. Any new anti-piracy law must close those loopholes. SOPA would have done that, but everyone freaked out and now SOPA is going away. The OPEN Act is limp-wristed and impotent, and will make enforcement even more of a bastard than it already is (Really? The tiny, underfunded International Trade Commission? Really?).

The truth, as I've said before, is that the anti-SOPA hysteria is being fed by major corporations. This is not some kind of "grass roots movement." Both industries stand to take a financial pounding; entertainment via piracy, and internet via loss of piracy (which accounts for 1/4 of all web traffic -- source). In this propaganda war, the massive billion-dollar entertainment corporations lost to the massive billion-dollar internet corporations.

Why Piracy?

This is a true story.

Over the weekend, I celebrated early Christmas with my wife.

Because she's awesome, and because she listens to the things I say, she got me a Kindle Touch.

"Yaaaaaay!" I said, flailing my arms happily.

The next day, started in on the nasty business of "setting up my Kindle." I configured my wireless connection, synched up my account, and prepared to make with the digital downloading.

I decided to buy a Kurt Vonnegut novel -- he's my favorite author, and I've read quite a few of his novels, but there's still a lot of quality "lesser works" that I've either never read, or started and stalled halfway through.

"Bluebeard!" my Kindle screamed at me.

"Okay!" I screamed back.

"Awesome!" shrieked my Kindle. "That'll be $11.00, please!!! LOL!!!!!"

"Oh," I balked.

I looked at the listing for the paperback version. I could get a used copy for $6.49 (after shipping). Heck, I could get a new copy for $10.20 (with free shipping). I thought this whole "digital distribution" thing was supposed to be cheaper. Wha...?

And I quickly realized, you know what? I could find this in PDF format for free. If I wanted, I could actually find the complete works of Vonnegut in every digital format available from one download link (I did so just now, using a simple Google search that took less than a minute).

I mean, how cool would that be -- I could just fire up a complete library of books on my Kindle the first day...and leisurely make my way through the works of one of the greatest authors of our generation, if I so desired.

So, not only would that save me $11.00...it could potentially save me over a hundred dollars, and it would cost me nothing. Besides, I've already purchased several of his books in paper copy -- what would be the harm in simply transferring them over to digital copies?

And Mr. Vonnegut is dead anyway (So it goes). The only people profiting from this would be the goddamn publisher.

I was tempted. Very, very tempted. I could load up my new sweet new gift with books that, to be honest, I probably would never have bought anyway (I'm never going to purchase Galapagos, Timequake, or Hocus Pocus, so it's not like the publisher would be losing any real money). And hell, I paid for the Kindle, and I already buy tons of stuff on Amazon...is me pirating one little book going to make an impact at all with that enormous company?

And what the hell? $11.00? Who charges that much? It doesn't cost $11.00 to make one little frigging e-book. I was being fleeced. Some asshole publisher with and OCR scanner is making a butt-load of money, and little-to-no expense.

Screw those guys. They doesn't deserve my money.

This is the mindset of our generation. And thus, the true danger of piracy.

I did buy the e-book...not just because if I didn't I'd come off as a huge stupid hypocrite if I pirated that stuff after my recent pro-SOPA ravings, but also because I'm really trying to break myself of that "piracy is okay in small doses" mindset...which, even after three years working in anti-piracy, I still find myself fighting. Even sitting here now, typing this, I'm thinking, "Aw, who's gonna' know about those books? Or even care?"

I don't know. Certainly not one of the commenter in my last post, who branded me an "industry shill," "dinosaur," and an out of touch liar who has "no idea of how things work."

I mean, I know the guy who wrote that...and he's a complete asshole, so I'm not really bothered by any of his accusations. But there are others out there who might think that, because I'm so close to this stuff, and because I get a paycheck from enforcing this stuff, that I'm not the most reliable, unbiased source.

I disagree.

First off, SOPA might just put me out of a job. I'm a very busy man at work, but that's only because the company I work for goes out of its way to abide by the DMCA and US copyright law (more than most companies do, in my opinion). If SOPA were to be passed, it's very possible that my job would either change dramatically, or go away altogether.

Secondly, I would argue that I'm much more in touch with the realities and dangers of piracy than the average person. I've seen the numbers (and generated my own). I've done the research. I've looked at the "confidential" numbers reports. I've seen the breadth, depths, and realities of the problem first-hand. Like I say, this is what I do for a living. I ought to be allowed to express an informed opinion without being accused of bias.

Finally, although I'm a fan of the company I work for, I'm fully capable of my own free thought, and in the past I have been critical of facets of not just my own company, but of the industry as a whole. And like I said, no one in my office has even expressed an opinion about this law one way or the other, and I believe some of them might actually even be opposed to it.

I am neither industry shill, nor uniformed liar.

So what I want to do (after that super-long preamble) is talk a bit about "why" otherwise law-abiding folks pirate intellectual property. Or, rather, my three theories as to why they do so.

1) Convenience. Seems like a no-brainer, but, for those of us born before 1990, think about what "watching a TV show" used to entail. You'd have to learn about the show (talking to friends or reading about it in the newspaper), find out what time the show starts (by checking the TV Guide), then you'd have to stay at home and watch the show in its entirety, commercials and all. Now, with DVR and Video-on-Demand, you can skip commercials, and you've achieved what was once only a dream: full control the when and the where you view content.

But with piracy, you can now add what to that list. Studios are interested in limiting availability, because it means the consumer will want to pay a fee to increase their content choices.

For the consumer, circumventing this inconvenience is the most obvious excuse for accessing pirated content.

For instance, you hear that Boardwalk Empire is a show worth watching. It sounds like a pretty cool show (and it is), but HBO is expensive. You could wait until it comes out on NetFlix, or until the DVDs come out, but that takes forever.

Well, what if I told you about a site that has every single episode of Boardwalk Empire available, right now, for free? Pretty sweet deal, yeah? It's not like you want to pay for all the other shows on HBO or anything, and you're bored tonight...so...why not? Maybe just a couple of episodes...to see what all the fuss is about.

Seems like a pretty obvious, yet seemingly harmless decision.

Or maybe you finally grew a goddamn brain, and started watching the best show on television: Community. You go to NBC.com, and holy crap! Full episodes! High def! Free!!! You realize that you want to watch the full series!

Wait, where the hell is season 2!?

Nope. Not on NBC.com. Only the 5 most recent episodes are on NBC. Hulu? Nope. Have to subscribe to Hulu Plus ($7.99 a month) to watch season 2, and you already subscribe to NetFlix and Time Warner Cable. NetFlix doesn't have it available for streaming, so you'd have to rent the DVDs...but you're not signed up for Qwikster (lol), and the second season DVDs cost over $20.

Once again...hold the phone. Turns out you can see every episode for free online! No subscriptions, advertisements, or anything. Sweet!

Besides, if you do download it, it's probably good for NBC in the long run, because they have a new fan (you already subscribe to cable, and you have NetFlix) and you'll definitely start watching the future episodes...once you're fully caught up with the adventure of those kooky kids from Greendale Community College.

Again, it's that convenience factor, coupled with this notion that people are somehow gifted with the "inexorable right" to consume any entertainment content they desire...and that to withhold (or make them work for) that entertainment is just "corporate bullshit."

It's a culture of entitlement...and it's empowering piracy.

2) Access. Imagine this nightmare scenario. You're a Browns fan (yes, that alone is a nightmare), but you moved to Minneapolis to pursue your dream of becoming the next Gregg Steinhaffel (as if there could be another Gregg Steinhaffel).

Sunday rolls around, and you're totally geeked about the prospects of watching the high-powered, Colt McCoy-led offense catapult the Browns to a Super Bowl. Problem. The Browns will never, ever, ever be shown on national TV, and for some reason, the people in Minneapolis would rather watch the Vikings.

So you go to a sports bar to watch the game. It's pretty cool...but you end up plunking down $30 a week in beer and cheeseburgers. After 16 games of mediocrity, that'd cost you $480 damn dollars.

You could sign up for NFL Ticket, but you don't have DirecTV, and that anyway, the additional service costs $100 a year (which would save money in the long run, but it's still too damn expensive). You used to be able to get these games for free back in Cleveland...but now it's just a huge pain in the ass.

Hold the phone (no, seriously, hold the goddamn phone), you mean there's a website that offers all of these games for free? And I can watch it on my couch, in my boxers, eating a $1 Hot Pocket!? Hot damn! What a bargain!

How on earth could you say "no" to that? Why on earth would you say "no" to that?

No matter what a company does, or how easy and cheap it offers its services, it will never be able to compete with free. This is great for the consumer, because piracy is driving down costs from legitimate streaming services.

But it's very bad for the content producers and distributors, who must now (in order to compete) find a way to distribute content for "next to nothing." This includes forcing viewers to watch advertisements intermittently (the "free" Hulu model), or charging a small subscription fee (the "Hulu Plus" model). It's not sustainable, since those fees will never ever cover production costs (which is why Hulu does not actually create content), so the studio will end up losing in the long run.

This is why studios need to limit content availability. There needs to be a reason for consumers to plunk down that extra $8.00 a month. If the content providers lose control of that, why would a consumer ever sign up for a $99 NFL ticket? Or go to a sports bar for $30 a week?

Once again, piracy wins, because it's not playing fair.

3) Because...fuck you! This is the most insidious. These are the people with a chip on their shoulder about the profits that the various studios, record labels, and distributors are pulling in. They are anti-corporation, and think that studios create easy-to-digest bullshit for the consumer to turn a quick buck.

To them, movie studios are gluttonous assholes ripping off the American consumer with terrible content. Film a Smurf's movie?! Great! It made $142 million in box office receipts! VICTORY! How about the Chipmunks movie? $217 million! Awesome! People love this shit, and it costs us next-to-nothing to produce! Transformers: Dark of the Moon? $352 million!!! Wait, what's this? The Descendants? Only $28 million?! Who is responsible for this bullshit?! You're fired!!! Goddamn, we hate our customers, but we'll keep shoveling out the shitty content and they'll keep lapping it us as our wallets get fatter and fatter!

So why should those assholes be getting any of my money? Screw them. I'll hop on a torrent and just grab every movie I ever wanted (including first-run theatrical releases) for free. I don't need a TV or cable box, I can just stream everything online. I'm not going to feed the corporate machine to churn out shittier and shittier content. Those guys can suck it (and by "it," I mean "my wiener").

Ah...that felt good.

Thing is, these people are not totally wrong. The MPAA posted record profits last year, mostly based off of terrible, terrible, terrible remakes and sequels. Good shows (like Community) get shitty ratings, while shitty shows (like Two-and-a-half Men) are just killing. Everywhere we look, corporations and are getting richer and richer, while content is getting dumber and dumber.

But...

If you really believe this, what are you watching? Obviously if you're a discerning viewer, you're staying away from dreck like Wipeout or X-Factor. But you're still downloading stuff, right? Who do you think makes that shit you're downloading for free?

Yep. Studios. Record companies. Artists. The assholes you're railing against. The ones with the talent and the money that you lack.

So how can you simultaneously be a fan of something, while hating the people who created it?

The hell is wrong with you?

Face it...you're just a greedy asshole, cloaking your theft in the guise of this "stick it to the man" bullshit.

I have no patience for people like you...who are just so cynical and hypocritical that they see nothing wrong with what they're doing, and feel no obligation to pay for any entertainment they digest.

I hope there are not many people out there like this...because if so, anyone hoping to make a buck off of a creative endeavor is screwed.

But I know they're out there...and I'm pretty sure that "industry shill" guy is one of them.


In Conclusion

Sorry, I couldn't figure out a way to transition out of that list format that I had set up, so I went all "10th grade history essay" on your ass.

Basically, I get it. There's a lot more going on with people turning to piracy other than the fact that "it's free." It's also a question of quantity. Content producers want to restrict access, while pirates want capitalize on that. Who could blame someone for watching pirated movies...something that they don't really consider to be harmful in small doses?

But it's our culture of entitlement that makes us think that way. It's hard to break free, but we must...because more and more people are going to realize just how much free content is available out there...and how easy it is to get. And it will start to have a financial impact.

Maybe it hasn't happened yet...but it will. Remember when no one had heard of Skype? Now, it's the only way to communicate long distance with someone. As piracy grows and overwhelms the companies trying to contain it, there will be a cost.

I believe that we need to address it, and that it should not be tolerated.