Disney Joins NBC And Viacom In Demanding UK ISPs Kick File Sharers Off The Internet
from the sorry,-bob dept
While Disney is quite often painted as the leader of the pack when it comes to ridiculous and draconian copyright-related proposals, much of that can be attributed to former CEO Michael Eisner, who helped push for the Bono Copyright Extension Act to “protect” Mickey Mouse. Eisner, famously, loves to talk about the history of intellectual property law — though, he’s almost entirely wrong, attributing much of copyright law to Abraham Lincoln, who had nothing to do with it. After Eisner left, Robert Iger took over, and for a while, it seemed as if he might actually understand that he needed to learn how to embrace new technologies and not treat users as criminals.
Apparently Iger doesn’t fully believe that, though. Joining with previous statements made by the folks in charge of NBC Universal and Viacom, Iger was recently in London saying that ISPs should ban users who are caught downloading unauthorized material. While UK ISPs have agreed to send out industry warning letters, so far they’ve resisted banning users from the internet. Iger, however, thinks that’s not enough:
“We are simply asking for people who are downloading illegal files to get a warning initially then to get their service cut off.”
He then falsely suggests that ISPs are effectively relying on their content to be effective. This is the lie that Big Content likes to tell itself. That it’s really Hollywood content that gets people online, rather than communication tools or other content. But to Iger, the internet’s main purpose is apparently to distribute Disney’s content:
“Most distribution businesses succeed because they have a distribution process in place. They also have product. We contribute to that mightily. It is a joint partnership.”
No, actually, it’s not a partnership. Disney’s using the internet as a platform because that’s what customers demand. If Disney doesn’t like it, it’s free not to bother — but everyone knows that wouldn’t make much sense. And, then, of course, Iger (the same guy who said the entertainment industry should recognize that file sharing was just customers showing content companies what they wanted) falsely equates copyright infringement to “stealing.” So much for Disney taking the high road.
Filed Under: bans, copyright, internet ban, isps, robert iger, uk
Companies: disney
Comments on “Disney Joins NBC And Viacom In Demanding UK ISPs Kick File Sharers Off The Internet”
if we did this for everything else...
What if every time someone broke a rule, they got one warning and then their means for breaking the rule was removed?
For example, what happens if you’re charged for public urination twice?
Re: if we did this for everything else...
what if you’re charged with misleading a country to war?
Re: if we did this for everything else...
That was nice.
Re: if we did this for everything else...
Unfortunately for your analogy, you have no right to Internet access.
F*ck Disney!
Gods chosen never fail to amaze.
just sayin’
Won't last long
This won’t last long if it is passed into law. When 25% of citizens find themselves without internet access, the uproar will be impossible to ignore. Not to mention the unimaginable consequences to the economy of cutting off so many people from an increasingly popular purchasing platform.
Re: Won't last long
“Not to mention the unimaginable consequences to the economy of cutting off so many people from an increasingly popular purchasing platform”
good point.
Re: Won't last long
Until the ISP figure out they can charge their own customers a “restoration fee” to bring them back on-line.
Since When
Since when is a company in one industry allowed to tell a company in a completely different industry how to run their business?
Why should ISPs even be listening to this? ISPs provide connectivity for their customers… that’s it. They have a right to provide that to anyone willing to pay for it.
If shooting victims can’t go after gun manufacturers for how someone uses their products, why should NBC, Viacom, and Disney be able to go after ISPs for how someone uses bandwidth?
Die in a Fire, Disney!
I guess I’ll just change my vacation plans and pass on Disney World. DoH!
Not 1 cent!
Change your vacation plans
I did. I enjoyed Busch Gardens much more than I did Disney. They appreciate your business.
Re: Change your vacation plans
I agree, went to Williamsburg in June. Never did go to Disney World, and when I saw Disne land I was about 10, 28 yrs ago.
I won’t go to Disney anywhere now, and I’ll also look into how I can send them ‘Not 1 cent!
They’re just trying to get the UK politico’s to agree on some sort of punishment for file-sharers, knowing that if they tried something like that in the United States – particularly around election time, they would get laughed out of Congress.
Look out, because once they get all of their cronies elected or re-elected – Hear me ‘Hollywood Berman?’ They will be trying it in the United States. – Even if it is some fine-print amendment attached to an appropriations bill that funds the war in Iraq or Afghanistan for another year.
What a Joke
Nobody really downloads Disneys stuff anyway. Those who know how are a bit older than their target base. Maybe there is a group of rogue soccer moms who figured out how this torrent thingy works. Disneys stuff is pure crap anyway, why would anyone waste the bandwidth. Now the others, take it as free advertisement, or you could send mean letters to Peter at TPB, I think he needs some new material for his legal section, all the mean letters are getting old. 😛
Kick Disney off the net!
Re: Re:
Ha! Let’s test their theory and execute an experiment. We’ll ban Disney from having anything whatsoever to do the ‘net and see if it collapses.
Any have a hypothesis?
I’m curious as to what the submitter believes the correct course of action should be. And how would this compare with getting illegal DVD’s of the same content?
What do they expect to happen...
…when they make their product completely inaccessible for purchase? The whole “Vault” idea, where movies are sold for a limited time and then locked away for months or years, was a stupid attempt to create artificial scarcity. Lo and behold, people want content at their convenience. If the company won’t provide it, someone in the Netherlands will…
Disney
Well, if you could go and buy the old Disney stuff that is banned now, them maybe we would not have to download. So many things are Politically Correct that we lose our true freedoms of expression. Remember the Frito Bandito? How about Speedy Gonzales? But, Yet, here in the States, we let a man steal an election twice. Let him LIE to start a war. Let his OIL buddies raise our gas prices. Remember Chaney? He used to work as a CEO for Halliburton. Who is halliburton? The ones in charge of the oil rigs in Iraq.
Let File Sharing Continue, and USE PEER GAURDIAN !!! At least we can find the content that we want, AND NOT the content they want us to have, by ways of that is all you have to choose from. What is this; the old U.S.S.R.??
I’m beginning to think that, by some weird set of circumstances, TechDirt has become popular among the high school crowd. Talk of “if they don’t sell it the way I want them to sell it, then I’ll just steal it” is very small minded. Since when are companies obliged to act the way that consumers want them to? If you don’t like the way something is sold, then you don’t have to buy it – but that doesn’t mean stealing is suddenly fair game.
The rant about Bush and Cheney was pretty good though.
Re: Re:
Since when are companies obliged to act the way that consumers want them to?
Um, basically since eternity. That’s how markets work you know. If you don’t treat your customers right, then you don’t get any business.
Welcome to capitalism. Look around, you might like it here. 🙂
Re: Re:
Talk of “if they don’t sell it the way I want them to sell it, then I’ll just steal it” is very small minded.
Of course, that isn’t what TechDirt is advocating at all. It has simply stated that if a company refuses to meet consumer demands, there are a number of situations that will develop:
1) Some customers will acquire the product through illegal means.
2) Some customers will find an alternate supplier for the product.
3) Some customers will do without the company’s product.
4) Some customers will cave in and deal with the company’s stipulations.
Three of the four situations result in a loss of revenue for the company, and the fourth results in a customer that is now less satisfied with the company. None of these are typically considered favorable results. Therefore, as TechDirt points out, it makes economic sense to give the customers what they want. Pointing out that some people will invariably gain what they want illegally is not an advocation – it’s merely pointing out the reality of what will happen.
If you don’t like the way something is sold, then you don’t have to buy it – but that doesn’t mean stealing is suddenly fair game.
None of the articles has said that it was.
Ummm - wait a sec
I have read about this and other such attempts to stop the “Bloody Pirates”, however there is a lack of details about haow such a system would work.
How is it determined that a particular IP addr is a pirate ? Will there be false positives ? If so, what percent ? What recourse do the falsely accused have ? So many questions, too little time to get adequate answers.
Disney
If it’s one thing I’ve surely learned in my 64 years it’s that the HAVES will do damn well what they please and there’s not much the HAVE NOTS can do about it.
p2p and copyright law
the jamie Thomas case has been referred back to the court, the judge having said he thinks he mis-directed the jury
the courts insist that their decisions must be consistent. the principle in law known as stare decisis requires that “where the material facts are the same the decision must be the same as that established by a higher court”
and in copy right violations the precedent is that offering to share is not a violation- plaintiff must show that an actual transfer occured. and it seems that they are not going to consider download by the questionable private gum-shoe “MediaSentry” as a violation being as that group has been retained by the plaintiffs — essential providing authorization to download
it appears to me that the music industry will have to petition Congress to amend the Copyright law with a section to deal with computerized file sharing
as things stand we will have to wait and see how the Jamie Thomas case is decided. I think Jamie is going to be held harmless but it ain’t my decision to make
read the AUP ( acceptable use policy ) that you signed when you obtained service from your ISP. putting p2p up on your computer might be construed as establishing home server and that might be a violation of your AUP
Bobby's World of Iger needs to GO!
Bob is just out of control an his Communist Ways our showing just like his former boss,hey Bob your Isner is showing better take care of that real quick like. Just Fire Bob Iger Already,he is such A Communist of the Media and Internet file swapping.
Who is Bob Iger to try an stop people from file swaping, an at the same time he thinks he can tell the U.K. and others Goverments what to do! who Died and made Bob King of Bobby’s World.
So your saying he will say I an many others our Criminals even if I want to download something for my ownselves of their an others movies,music ect. WHATS NEXT A BAN ON Using Pictures of Disney Charaters and other Charaters,actors on the net ect.
I knew this Man Bob Iger was trouble and A Back Stabber to me,others from the start, even his Deals and Agreements, down to the Company of his People he keeps kissing A’s of dayly (some of his board members,shareholders,suits,heads, ect.), to keep his Job.
Word to The Goverment of Walt Disney Heads that Agree with Us the People (since I know not all will) Get Another CEO that is down to Earth more with the People and the Way things Our.