Current Insight Community Cases

The Importance Of Skilled Immigrants To The American Economy

Help A New Kind of Music Label Revolutionize The Industry

Mandates To Buy American Should Be More Carefully Considered

Navigating The New Business World After This Recession

How To Prevent Copyright From Interfering With Innovation

CwF + RtB

-- get "looooots of t-shirts"

Brought to you by Floor64 and the Techdirt crew.

stories about: "sony"
Overhype

Overhype

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
box office, movies, piracy

Companies:
sony, sony pictures



Sony Pictures Having Its Best Box Office Year Ever... Still Blaming Piracy For Killing The Business

from the something-doesn't-seem-right-here dept

Sony Pictures' CEO is Michael Lynton, the guy who recently claimed that "nothing good" has come from the internet, and that piracy is killing the movie business. He made that statement less than a month ago. And yet, as Dave Title points out, Sony Pictures just announced that its international box office results have already set a new record for the year, hitting $1.63 billion. The company is bragging about this new record -- as it should. But it does seem a bit disingenuous to brag about revenue records just weeks after claiming that piracy was destroying your business and asking for government help to protect the business model. Someone might notice that these two things do not seem to agree.

38 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
News You Could Do Without

News You Could Do Without

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
competition, downloads, kiosks, movie rentals

Companies:
blockbuster, sony



Once Again, You Don't Compete With Innovative New Services By Being Lame

from the in-case-you-weren't-paying-attention dept

A couple years back we pointed out how the entertainment industry kept trying to "compete" with new (legal and not-so-legal) online services, but always seemed to do so by being incredibly lame. And, you don't compete by being lame. It appears that this message still hasn't quite gotten through to some yet. With the movie industry facing new challenges concerning online distribution and innovative services like Redbox, here are two stories of old school players trying to "compete" but missing out on the part where they make their offering compelling.

The first comes from Josh in CharlotteNC, who points out that Blockbuster is trying to compete with Redbox and its widely available kiosks (and Netflix with its larger library of downloadable movies) by setting up kiosks in its stores where you can download movies. But... you can only download them to proprietary SD cards, and then it can only play on special proprietary hardware that participants in this program need to have. How is that a better experience then, well, anything? If you want a movie that can be downloaded, why not just let people download it at home? Why have people go out to download it?

Then we have a story sent in by Loydster, about how Sony Pictures is offering owners of new Sony/Bravia HDTV's the chance to download and watch the movie Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs before the DVD release. While that is actually a nice tie-in between Sony's content business and its consumer electronics business, Sony (of course) has to screw it up. That's because the company thinks it can charge $25 to download the movie. The company seems to admit that it's charging this much because it doesn't want to piss off its retail partners (like WalMart), but it's difficult to see why it's worth doing the project at all if the pricing is going to be so ridiculous.

Experimenting with ways to compete is good... but being so obviously lame is not.

25 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
Say That Again

Say That Again

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
copyright, intellectual property, internet, michael lynton, movies, piracy

Companies:
sony



Internet Hating Sony Pictures CEO Insists Piracy Is Killing Movie Business; But Facts Show Otherwise

from the whoops dept

Ah, remember Michael Lynton? The Sony Pictures CEO who earlier this year insisted that nothing good had come from the internet at all. When everyone started mocking him for this statement, rather than back off, he doubled down and insisted it was true, using examples that were easily debunked. Apparently, he hasn't learned his lesson. He's back at it, pushing for the UK (and others) to pass laws kicking people off the internet (so-called "three strikes" laws) while insisting that due to piracy there's less money to make movies and fewer movies being made. Of course, those are things that can be fact checked, and the folks over at TorrentFreak did exactly that, pointing out that more movies are coming out each year and more money is being made. Oops.

The way Lynton tries to get around this is by not actually talking about how many movies are coming out, but just counting the number of movies that came out of "the leading studios." I find this quite amusing, because in the podcast we discussed last week involving Paramount's Scott Martin, part of his argument was that while the big studios were fine, the independents were all suffering and fewer movies were coming out because of it -- and, as a "fan" of independent movies, he found that sad. I didn't bother to check the numbers, but it appears that Martin was simply wrong. More movies are being made, and it looks like an increasing percentage of them are coming from smaller independent shops.

The problem, again, seems to be that the folks at the movie studios (just like those at the record labels) only like to count the big hits as successes -- rather than the smaller projects that actually make money and make up the majority of the actual market. It's the same sort of thinking that makes movie studio people insist that we need to explain to them how they can keep making $200 million movies. That's the wrong question. The question is how do you make profitable movies. The technology has advanced such that it's cheaper and cheaper to make movies (which is why we have more of them). But notice that the studios never focus on ways to make movies in a more economical way, but how can they keep spending. Perhaps that's a bigger problem than "online piracy."

32 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
Legal Issues

Legal Issues

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
ethernet, innovation, patents

Companies:
3com, acer, apple, asus, dell, fujitsu, gateway, hp, sony, toshiba



Can't Innovate? Litigate! 3Com Goes Patent Lawsuit Ballistic

from the ghosts-of-companies-past dept

Remember back when 3Com was a big innovative company coming up with interesting new products? What happened since then? Well, as we've seen over and over again, once a company runs into trouble continuing to innovate, its last ditch effort to stay in business is to start suing everyone for patent infringement. Step up to the plate, 3Com. The company set up a subsidiary specifically for suing other companies for patent infringement and just sued Acer, Apple, Asus, Dell, Fujitsu, Gateway, HP, Sony, and Toshiba. Oh, and take a guess where this "subsidiary" set up shop? East Texas... of course. All the better to file patent lawsuits apparently...

17 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
Overhype

Overhype

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
drm, psp go

Companies:
sony



DRM Ridiculousness Just A Part Of The PSP Go's Problems

from the how-unappealing-does-this-sound dept

A bunch of folks have been sending in various versions of the stories popping up all weekend about the disastrous PSP Go launch, with a product that seems designed to piss off as many consumers as possible. And, of course, one of the big problems? DRM. Apparently a promotion in Europe gave people free downloads of games -- but if you have both a PS3 and a PSP and were used to downloading games to the PS3 to put on the PSP, you're out of luck with the PSP Go. The games are locked to the platform where they were downloaded.

Sony, Sony, Sony. This is the same company that has been locking things down for years, and always regrets it. Way back in 2005, the company admitted that it needed to stop locking down content, and learn to open up more. The company got a lot of press for that statement... and kept locking stuff down. Earlier this year, Sony got a ton of press for basically saying the same thing about being more open. So what does it do? It goes and releases another device using locked down content. At some point you have to wonder who's in charge at Sony.

26 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
Legal Issues

Legal Issues

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
company town, free speech, video games

Companies:
sony



Judge Tells Gamer That Sony Doesn't Violate His Free Speech Rights By Banning Him

from the sony-ain't-the-government dept

Back in July, we wrote about an annoyed videogamer who sued Sony for banning him from the Playstation 3 game "Resistance" for things he said to other players in the game. He claimed it was a violation of his First Amendment rights -- though, as we explained at the time (and, as anyone actually familiar with the First Amendment already knows), the First Amendment only covers actions by the government, not private corporations. Sony has every right to bring down the banhammer if it wants to. It should come as no surprise then, that the judge wasted little time explaining this to him in the process of dismissing the case. However, there is one interesting aspect, as highlighted by Eric Goldman in the link above. The judge rejected the idea that Sony might be covered by the First Amendment as a "company town." Goldman points out that some have suggested this argument in the past, and now there's at least one ruling that totally rejects it:

Sony's Network is not similar to a company town. The Network does not serve a substantial portion of a municipality's functions, but rather serves solely as a forum for people to interact subject to specific contractual terms. Every regulation Sony applies in the Network is confined in scope only to those entertainment services that Sony provides. Although the Network does include "virtual spaces" such as virtual "homes" and a virtual "mall" that are used by a substantial number of users (Pl.'s Reply in Supp. of Opp'n. to Dismiss 1), these "spaces" serve solely to enrich the entertainment services on Sony's private network. In providing this electronic space that users can voluntarily choose to entertain themselves with, Sony is merely providing a robust commercial product, and is not "performing the full spectrum of municipal powers and [standing] in the shoes of the State." Hudgens, 424 U.S. at 519 (quoting Lloyd Corp. v. Tanner, 407 U.S. 551, 568-69 (1972)).

Sony does not have a sufficient structural or functional nexus to the government. Plaintiff has not suggested that Sony is part of the state or federal government. The Network was not created to further government objectives. The government retains no permanent authority to appoint any directors of Sony or the Network, or any other private body associated with the Network. There is no indication that Sony has assumed functions traditionally reserved to the government, or that the government had any part in encouraging Sony to create the Network. Count one of the complaint does not state a plausible First Amendment claim for relief, and therefore must be dismissed.

16 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
Overhype

Overhype

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
commercials, fraud, nigeria, ps3, scams

Companies:
sony



Nigeria Demands Apology From Sony For Mentioning Nigerian Fraud In A Commercial?

from the really? dept

I have to admit that this story seems so bizarre that I'm not quite sure I believe it. A bunch of folks have been submitting the news that the Nigerian government is apparently so upset by a Sony Playstation commercial that it's demanding an apology from Sony for allegedly "portraying Nigeria as a home of fraud where its citizens hardly do genuine business." Must be quite a commercial right? The only problem is that the commercial does no such thing:

It just mentions, in passing, as a part of the joke of the commercial that "You can't believe everything you read on the Internet. Otherwise I'd be a Nigerian millionaire by now." I don't quite see how that implies that Nigerian citizens hardly do genuine business. It just suggests that there are Nigerian scammers out there -- which is hardly something the government can credibly deny. Hell, there are popular songs in Nigeria all about fleecing dumb Americans in online scams. Honestly, the whole complaint from the Nigerian gov't seems so odd, that it feels like part of Sony's marketing campaign...

27 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
Legal Issues

Legal Issues

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
games, mmo, patents

Companies:
activision blizzard, ncsoft, paltalk, sony, turbine and jagex



Paltalk Sues Pretty Much Every Multiplayer Gaming Company Over Patents

from the don't-speak dept

Last time we wrote about Paltalk, it was an article talking about how the company had put together a decent business charging for the use of its chatting software. Apparently that business model wasn't decent enough, because the company has gone into all out patent lawsuit war. A bunch of folks have sent in various versions of the story, but basically, Paltalk has sued a bunch of the big name multiplayer online gaming companies, Activision-Blizzard, Sony, NCSoft, Turbine and Jagex. The back story is that the company bought some patents a few years back (anyone know which patents? -- a quick search doesn't turn up much) from another company. It claims that the patents cover "technologies for sharing data among many connected computers so that all users see the same digital environment." Initially, it sued Microsoft, and spent years fighting that case, until Microsoft figured it was cheaper to settle earlier this year, and handed over an undisclosed amount of cash. With that new bankroll, Paltalk has launched this new suit. While it likes to claim that the Microsoft settlement validates the patent, all it really does is show that Microsoft realized it was cheaper to settle than to fight. It would be rather useful to know which patents these are, specifically, because virtual worlds that let multiple people see the same thing have a pretty long history.

27 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
Too Much Free Time

Too Much Free Time

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
laughter detection, patent drawings, patents

Companies:
sony



If Your Computer Detects You Laughing At This Patent Drawing, You May Have Infringed On The Patent

from the laugh,-it's-funny dept

ChurchHatesTucker alerts us to the news that Sony has applied for a patent on an emotion detection device that could, for example, recognize when someone viewing a television or playing a video game is laughing. I don't have much of an opinion one way or another on the actual patent application, but (like others on the original article about this) did find the patent drawing to be rather amusing:

Of course, if you laugh at that, and your computer detects it, you may be infringing. So... be careful.

36 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
(Mis)Uses of Technology

(Mis)Uses of Technology

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
drm, ebooks, openness

Companies:
sony



Sony Recognizes That Openness Is A Competitive Advantage

from the finally dept

It may have taken the (very) long way to get there, but it looks like at least some folks over at Sony have figured out that openness can be a competitive advantage, and have decided to support the open ePub ebook format for its ebook reader. Now, there are lots of caveats here. Amazon has effectively been able to capture the leadership position in this market, while Sony has languished, so partly this is a hail mary pass -- which we've seen happen elsewhere as well. And, of course, despite it being an open format and the fact that Sony is ditching its own DRM, the new format will still have Adobe DRM -- so this isn't a truly opened up solution, but it is a step. It may be difficult for Sony to recapture the lead in this market by this point, but it seems like that the open ebook platforms will only gain steam (and eventually Amazon will end up supporting it as well). It's the natural progression that we see over and over again: a closed platform may help define the market, and then weaker competitors often circle around an open platform, realizing it's their only chance to fight back against the lock-in of the market leader. While it often takes some time, the open platforms do tend to get better and better, even to the point that the original leader is eventually forced to adopt it as well.

41 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
Legal Issues

Legal Issues

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
ban, first amendment, free speech, video game

Companies:
sony



Gamer Says Sony Violated His 1st Amendment Rights By Banning Him

from the that's-not-how-it-works dept

It's amazing how badly some people misunderstand the First Amendment. It only limits the government from passing laws that limit your free expression (with certain exceptions). It has nothing to do with what a private company or individual can do. In other words, it's not a right to say whatever you want with no consequence. So, I doubt that the following lawsuit will get very far. Apparently a video gamer is suing Sony saying it violated his First Amendment rights by banning him from the PlayStation 3 game "Resistance" for something he apparently said while talking to other players (found via Digg). But, of course, as a private company and not the government, Sony has every right to ban whoever they want, for a wide variety of reasons. So, kids, remember, the First Amendment isn't a right to say whatever you want without getting kicked off of a video game system for being annoying.

47 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
Say That Again

Say That Again

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
music, price increase

Companies:
emusic, sony



eMusic Tries To Defend Price Increase... Still Seems To Be Missing The Point

from the nice-try dept

We recently posted about the incredibly poor communications job eMusic did in announcing a price increase at the same exact time as it signed up with Sony Music, its first major record deal. For many eMusic customers, the two events were (not surprisingly) seen as being connected. Even worse, some users were then apparently censored when complaining about it. There was a little mini-drama after we posted about that -- as eMusic contacted us to insist that it was absolutely not true, and that they had not deleted any comments. So we updated the post... and then more and more people demonstrated increasingly damning proof that eMusic flat out lied to us, and that they had, in fact, removed comments.

Either way, eMusic's CEO spoke with Wired earlier this week to try to explain the situation and defuse some of the controversy, and the best he could come up with was basically claiming that the price increase had nothing to do with Sony Music at all, but that it was the indie labels who had been demanding it. So why tie the announcement to the Sony announcement?

We were looking for a "catalyzing event" to do it. And really, the catalyzing event is adding catalog, adding more content. We used this as an opportunity to do it, but we didn't do it because of Sony. We did it because in order to sustain the economics for our label suppliers and their artists, we needed to do it.
While this is what I had assumed happened in my original post, it still doesn't excuse the actions of the company. It makes you wonder how eMusic could be so tone deaf to the sort of customers it has (folks who love indie music, for the most part), that they would think that people wouldn't automatically associate the inclusion of a major record label's content with the price increase. Waiting for a "catalyzing event" doesn't make much sense -- especially when that "catalyzing" might not be at all what users want.

13 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
Failures

Failures

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
major labels, music, subscriptions

Companies:
emusic, sony



Did No One At eMusic Think About PR Impact Of Raising Prices At The Same Time Sony Signed?

from the braindead-PR dept

eMusic is a rather successful indie music e-commerce player (reports put it at the 2nd largest music store), that has focused on charging people a subscription that lets them download a limited number of songs each month. It also supported DRM-free MP3 files long before others finally came around. I have many friends who love the convenience that eMusic provides (I tried it, and didn't find enough of the music I liked to stick around) and are willing to pay for the convenience alone. However, it's almost hard to believe that no one on the PR/marketing side of eMusic failed to predict what would happen this week when the company made two announcements: that it had signed its first major label, Sony, and that it was raising prices. The reaction was quick and almost universally negative.

The complaints hit on a number of points, but the two big ones (obviously) are the price increase and the fact that many people signed up with eMusic because of its indie music focus, and related to that: their dislike of major record labels. What's stunning is that eMusic couldn't foresee what a negative reaction this would bring. The company has raised prices in the past, which also created some level of anger -- but people had to know that announcing both the Sony deal and the price raise at the same time, was going to be a PR nightmare. What I can't understand is why they didn't separate out the announcements. They may have felt it was a "pulling the bandaid off quickly" sort of moment, where they could take flak for both announcements at the same time, but they didn't seem to consider the fact that the two issues are completely linked in users' minds. It's not "eMusic had to raise prices" and "eMusic added Sony music." It's become: "eMusic had to raise prices to get Sony Music's catalog into the system."

That makes both eMusic and Sony Music look dreadful -- because here's a major record label, whose music many eMusic subscribers didn't want in the first place, now being seen as having made life worse (and more expensive) for everyone. By connecting the two issues, it seems like both eMusic and Sony Music are getting hit a lot harder than if the announcements had been separated.

63 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
Say That Again

Say That Again

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
copyright, intellectual property, internet, michael lynton, movies, piracy

Companies:
sony



Sony Pictures CEO: The Internet Is Still Bad

from the digging-a-deeper-hole dept

A week and a half ago, Sony Pictures CEO Michael Lynton made some news for saying that nothing good had come from the internet, period. Plenty of online sites (including ours) took him to task for that, wondering how one gets to be the CEO of a major content company without understanding the internet. Today, Lynton hit back at critics -- not by saying he was quoted out of context or misunderstood, but by standing behind the statement and adding some gems to it as well. Let's take a look...

In March, an unfinished copy of 20th Century Fox's film X-Men Origins: Wolverine was stolen from a film lab and uploaded to the Internet, more than a month before its theatrical release. The studio investigated the crime, and efforts were made to limit its availability online. Still, it was illegally downloaded more than four million times.
And, as was widely noted, the movie still opened to a massive box office take, despite pretty dreadful reviews all over. In fact, the movie had a lot more buzz leading up to it because of all the talk about the leak. Funny that Lynton seems to ignore that part. Could it really be that the CEO of a major motion picture studio doesn't understand that people go to the movies for the experience, and not just the content?
I actually welcome the Sturm und Drang I've stirred, because it gives me an opportunity to make a larger point (one which I also made during that panel discussion, though it was not nearly as viral as the sentence above). And my point is this: the major content businesses of the world and the most talented creators of that content -- music, newspapers, movies and books -- have all been seriously harmed by the Internet.
This is like saying "the major transportation companies and the most talented creators of transportation devices -- horse carriages, buggy whips, blacksmiths -- have all been seriously harmed by the automobile." Markets change. They may cause trouble for dinosaurs unable or unwilling to adapt, but they have not harmed content creation or the content business. And it's not "the internet" that has harmed the "most talented creators of that content." It's folks like Michael Lynton who seem to be funnelling them towards bad business models.
Some of that damage has been caused by changing business models (the FTC just announced an inquiry into the impact of new media on the newspaper industry). But the primary culprit is piracy. The Internet has brought people with no regard for the intellectual property of others together with a technology that allows them to easily steal that property and sell or give it away to everyone, with little fear of being caught or prosecuted.
Wow! At least he's able to admit that business models play a role, but he's flat out wrong about blaming piracy. He claims that it's "people with no regard for the intellectual property of others," which is hilarious coming from Hollywood -- a town built on showing no regard for the intellectual property of Thomas Edison. You know what comes out of showing no regard for artificial scarcity? Amazing new industries. Lynton is a product of piracy... and yet now that he's in charge, it's evil? Funny stuff...
To be clear, my concern about piracy does not obscure my understanding that the Internet has had a transformative impact on our culture and holds enormous potential to improve the prospects of humanity, and in many instances already has. I am no Luddite. I am not an analogue guy living in a digital world. I ran an Internet company and my studio actively uses the web to market and sell our movies and television shows. We create original content for new media.
If you think that "using the web to sell and market our movies and television" or "creating original content for new media" represents what the internet has to offer, you really need to educate yourself on the internet. It's not about selling and marketing. It's about interactivity. Hire someone who doesn't hate the internet, please.
And yes, new talents have emerged thanks to the democratic and viral impact of the web. Yes, the rise of new distribution platforms for existing content is exciting and rich with promise.

But at the same time, I cannot subscribe to the views of those online critics who insist that I "just don't get it," and claim the world has so fundamentally changed because of the web that conventional practices concerning property rights no longer apply; that the Internet should be left to develop entirely unfettered and unregulated.
It's not that "conventional practices concerning property rights no longer apply," it's that content isn't property. You've been blinded by the phrase "intellectual property" into believing it's something that it is not. The internet is neither unfettered nor unregulated. What you're really complaining about is that technology has put a crimp on your old business model, and rather than adjust, you want new laws to force things back to the way they were before -- back before we had the rise of new distribution platforms and the ability to share content that we like with one another.

Back when automobiles were first introduced, laws were passed requiring people to walk in front of every automobile waving red flags. Officially this was for safety, but it was really an attempt to limit the automobile and keep things the way they used to be for carriage makers. You're not asking for reasonable rules and regulations. You're asking for red flags and a speed limit of 5 mph when cars can easily go 120mph.
In no other realm of our society have we encountered so widespread and consequential a failure to put in place guidelines over the use and growth of such a major industry.
There are guidelines. You don't like the ones that are there, and the market has decided that many of them don't make sense. Let history be a lesson to you: when the majority of people think that "guidelines" don't make sense, making them even more stringent isn't going to fix things. Instead, it's time to look for opportunities within what people are doing.
I'm not talking here about censorship, taxation or burdensome government restrictions.
Yes, you are. You'll just call them something different.
I'm talking about reasonable boundaries, "rules of the road," that can help promote the many positive attributes of Internet technology while curtailing its hugely damaging effects.
Right, just as reasonable as the guys waving flags in front of cars. Those were designed to promote the many positive attributes of the automobile while curtailing its hugely damaging effects. The problem then, as now, is that people looked at the automobile through the prism of the horse carriage (that's why they were originally called horseless carriages). So the idea that they could travel much faster was seen as a bad thing (ooh, dangerous!) rather than a good thing. The same thing is true today. The fact that people can share content and help promote and distribute it for you is seen by you as a bad thing (oooh, dangerous!), but once things shake out, those who don't hate the internet will realize it's actually a huge opportunity for new businesses to grow and thrive. It's 1904. Do you want to be the CEO of the Durant-Dort Carriage Company or do you want to run Buick? William Durant made the right choice. You're making the wrong one.
And this becomes even more critical as governments around the world are subsidizing and promoting the ubiquity of high speed broadband to make their economies more efficient and competitive. With this increase in speed, content will travel that much more easily on the Internet. But without restraints, much of that content will be contraband.
Yes, as nations around the world are subsidizing national highways, this becomes ever more important. With this increase in speed, automobiles will be able to travel that much more easily. Without restraints, much of that travel will break the speed limit.
I've already seen it happen in South Korea, which has one of the most highly developed broadband networks in the world. But piracy has also become so highly developed there that we and virtually every other studio has recently had to curtail or close down our home entertainment businesses. It's hard to sell a legal DVD when it can be stolen without any repercussions.
And yet, there are new businesses springing up every day to take advantage of this wonderful abundance. JY Park is building a massive entertainment empire in South Korea by embracing the fact that everything he does will be "pirated" in some manner. But he's still bringing in a ton of money. That's because he's not focused on how to sell horse drawn carriages any more, but how to make automobiles go faster and faster.
Contrast the expansion of the Internet with what happened a half century ago. In the 1950's, the Eisenhower Administration undertook one of the most massive infrastructure projects in our nation's history -- the creation of the Interstate Highway System. It completely transformed how we did business, traveled, and conducted our daily lives. But unlike the Internet, the highways were built and operated with a set of rational guidelines. Guard rails went along dangerous sections of the road. Speed and weight limits saved lives and maintenance costs. And officers of the law made sure that these rules were obeyed. As a result, as interstates flourished, so did the economy. According to one study, over the course of its first four decades of existence, the Interstate Highway System was responsible for fully one-quarter of America's productivity growth.
But that highway is already built. You're not asking for reasonable guidelines. You're asking people to walk in front of automobiles waving red flags, while everyone else is already zipping around in their automobiles.
We can replicate that kind of success with the Internet more easily if we do more to encourage the productivity of the creative engines of our society -- the artists, actors, writers, directors, singers and other holders of intellectual property rights -- yes, including the movie studios, which help produce and distribute entertainment to billions of people worldwide.
We're already replicating that kind of success. Your problem is that it's happening without you.
But, without standards of commerce and more action against piracy, the intellectual property of humankind will be subject to infinite exploitation on the Internet.
Imagine a resource that is infinitely exploitable? Imagine that wonderful abundance? Who could possibly complain about that? Oh right, those who benefited from the previous scarcity. Still, it's quite amazing to see someone actually complain about abundance.
How many people will be as motivated to write a book or a song, or make a movie if they know it is going to be immediately stolen from them and offered to the world with no compensation whatsoever?
Well, considering how many people create content today already, I'd say plenty. And, of course, this statement has an implicit fallacy embedded in it: that because content can be shared (not "stolen") that it means there's "no compensation whatsoever." Need we remind you that despite Wolverine being "stolen," compensation came in at about $90 million in its first weekend? If that's the kind of "no compensation whatsoever" we can expect when content gets "stolen," sign me up.
And how many people whose work is connected with those creative industries -- the carpenters, drivers, food service workers, and thousands of others -- will lose their jobs as piracy robs their business of resources?
Oh, right. The poor carpenters, drivers and food service workers. Well, since we've already pointed out that there's still plenty of compensation, they'll continue to be just fine. They don't get paid based on some obsolete business model. They get paid by the hour. That continues.
Internet users have become used to getting things when they want it and how they want it, and those of us in the entertainment business want to meet that kind of demand as efficiently and effectively as possible.
You say that as if you mean it, while the entire rest of your article is about how you don't want to meet that demand, and how you want that efficiency walled off and blocked via gov't fiat.
But what has happened online is that if it is 'beyond store hours' and the shop is closed, a lot of people just smash the window and steal what they want.
No one is "stealing" anything. What are you missing? No windows are broken. And, part of your problem is the fact that you think the shop "closes." If you can't recognize that the shop doesn't close anymore, you shouldn't be running a major content company.
Freedom without restraint is chaos, and if we don't figure out some way to prevent online chaos, the quantity, quality and availability of the kinds of entertainment, literature, art and scholarship we need to have a healthy, vibrant culture will suffer.
I don't know which culture you're looking at, but it seems to be me that entertainment, literature, art and scholarship are all thriving like they never have before. Where's the problem, other than your own inability to adapt?
In my own household I know it is my responsibility, along with my wife, to monitor how my family uses the Internet for school work and enjoyment. And I know the web can play a big role in our daughters' future. But I also want their future to be filled with the kind of music and books and films and other creative sparks that have enlivened my life and our culture through the years.
And, thankfully, she'll be able to experience a lot more of such culture thanks to the internet and the efficiency it allows. Many authors, musicians and filmmakers today are purposely putting their works of art online for free. Would you like some pointers to help with your daughters' cultural education? We're more than willing to help.
Because actually I'm a guy who wants to see lots of good things come from the Internet. But it's not going to happen the way it should if we do not act now to safeguard the fruit of our world's most imaginative and talented minds. Period.
The only "safeguarding" you've suggested is your own obsolete business model. It's got nothing to do with culture and content creation. It has nothing to do with the internet. It has everything to do with the fact that you're viewing all content creation through the distorted prism of the movie making industry, where content creation comes from a big corporation and is then mass marketed and sold to the people. You need to step out from behind that prism, put down the red flags you're waving in front of automobiles, jump onto a passing car, and look at all the wonderful things the internet allows in terms of creativity and new business models. Don't let Sony Pictures be the Durant-Dort Carriage Company, clinging to the past.

121 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
Say That Again

Say That Again

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
internet, michael lynton, movies

Companies:
sony



Sony Pictures CEO: Nothing Good Has Come From The Internet

from the and-that-is-why-you-fail dept

We were just talking about how Sony CEO Howard Stringer was lamenting the fact that Sony didn't embrace openness and new technologies like the internet earlier. Perhaps part of the problem is the execs who work under him. Mathew Ingram points out that at a recent panel discussion the CEO of Sony Pictures, Michael Lynton, said: "I'm a guy who doesn't see anything good having come from the internet. Period."

Perhaps that explains why you're failing to figure out how to embrace it?

I recently wrote up something for Open Forum talking about how every threat is really an opportunity. A threat just means that someone else may have figured out how to serve your customers/community better. That should be seen as an opportunity for you to serve your community/customers better. An exec today who views those opportunities as threats, as apparently Michael Lynton does, shouldn't still have a job. It's bad for business. It's bad for shareholders. And it's bad for customers. Saying that there's nothing good that has come from the internet suggests someone so lacking in vision that it's scary he still has a job running a major motion picture studio.

107 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
Say That Again

Say That Again

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
drm, howard stringer, ken kutaragi

Companies:
sony



Sony Says It Should Have Been More Open... But It Said That In 2005 Too

from the actions,-not-words... dept

There's a bunch of buzz around a recent interview with Sony's CEO Howard Stringer, where he admits that Sony should have gone with an "open" music solution from early on, and if it had done so, how it could have "beaten Apple." Sure, those sorts of quotes sound great... but it's action that matters.

Because... it was nearly four and a half years ago when we wrote about top Sony exec Ken Kutaragi saying almost the exact same thing. He talked about how Sony made a huge mistake focusing on proprietary formats and DRM and how the company was going to change and focus on more open and free solutions rather than limited DRM-encumbered solutions.

And what happened?

Not much. Sony kept DRM with things like ATRAC for three more years and continued to use DRM in a variety of different settings, including the very famous case of Sony subsidiary Sony BMG putting rootkit DRM on music CDs (which occurred months after Kutaragi's original point that Sony needed to move away from DRM).

So... consider us skeptical that Stringer's comments are meaningful. We've heard it before. If the company really is embracing a more open solution, it's time to show people, not just speak about it.

16 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
Legal Issues

Legal Issues

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
lawsuits, streisand effect, trademark, video games, violent video games

Companies:
sony



Sony Considers Lawsuit Over Its Controller Being Used In Anti-Video Game Ad

from the probably-not-the-best-idea dept

Steve points us to a story in the UK about how Sony Computer Entertainment Europe is considering taking legal action against the folks behind an anti-video game advertisement because a photo in the ad includes a boy holding what appears to be a Playstation controller. The whole thing seems pretty silly. The anti-video game ad is pretty ridiculous itself, but Sony overreacting to it seems even worse. First of all, other than hardcore gamers, who's even going to notice that it's a PlayStation controller? Instead of suing and drawing more attention, Sony might want to just focus on reasons why the ad is misleading and that video gaming doesn't lead to "cancer, diabetes, and heart disease." Suing over the use of the controller just makes it look like they have something to hide.

21 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
Culture

Culture

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
copyright, gary stretch, jean epstein, jokes, pink panther, robert simonds, steve martin

Companies:
fox, mgm, sony



Pink Panther Studio, Producers And Star Sued For Joke Theft

from the a-lawyer,-a-copyright-and-a-loser-walk-into-a-bar... dept

Historically, jokes have always been things that were shared and passed on. The power of a joke is not in the idea behind the joke, but in the telling. Yet, in this era when people have it drilled into their brains over and over again that every creative thing is "ownable," we're now seeing this great tradition of joke sharing and joke telling stifled by claims of "ownership." The latest such example, found via Michael Scott, is that two people are suing over jokes in the Pink Panther movies. Specifically, Jean Epstein and Gary Stretch have sued "MGM, Sony, Fox, producer Robert Simonds, star Steve Martin and others" because they say the Pink Panther movies violate their copyright on certain jokes. Apparently, Epstein and Stretch made a short film that they placed on YouTube and iFilm, which included a few jokes that are similar to jokes in the movies. So, be careful next time you're "performing" a joke you heard somewhere else. Perhaps you'll get sued for copyright infringement.

52 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
Legal Issues

Legal Issues

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
australia, blame, busines models, copyright, isps, lawsuits, movie industry, movie studios

Companies:
disney, fox, iinet, paramount, seven network, sony, universal, village roadshow, warner bros



Movie Studios Sue Australian ISP For Not Waving Magic Wand And Defeating Piracy

from the blame-someone-else dept

A few years ago, after realizing that blaming consumers wasn't a particularly effective strategy in covering up for the entertainment industry's own inability to adapt to a changing market, industry insiders chose a new strategy: blame ISPs. That sent them down a path of trying to force ISPs to do a variety of things, such as installing filters, policing their networks for copyright-infringing material and, of course, kicking users off their networks. In the mind of entertainment industry execs, a failure to do any of these things should be a crime. Note how the industry totally shifts responsibility here. Rather than admitting that they should change with the market, it's always someone else who needs to change to protect the entertainment industry's obsolete business model.

While the industry has been able to get some politicians and ISPs to agree (amazingly, often against their own best interests), it's now gone a step further. A bunch of the biggest movie studios (Village Roadshow, Universal Pictures, Warner Bros Entertainment, Paramount Pictures, Sony Pictures Entertainment, Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation, Disney Enterprises, and the Seven Network) have teamed up to sue Australia's largest ISP, iiNet, for failing to stop copyright infringement. iiNet, you may recall, is the same ISP that has been mocking the Australian government for requiring filters. So, naturally, it's response to this lawsuit is rather direct. While the studios complain that iiNet isn't doing anything, iiNet responds that this is not true at all. They pass each complaint on to the police, because if there's a crime, then the police should deal with it:

They send us a list of IP addresses and say 'this IP address was involved in a breach on this date'. We look at that say 'well what do you want us to do with this? We can't release the person's details to you on the basis of an allegation and we can't go and kick the customer off on the basis of an allegation from someone else'. So we say 'you are alleging the person has broken the law; we're passing it to the police. Let them deal with it'.

We are not traffic cops. We can't stand in the middle of it and stop the individual items that might be against the law. These guys are asking us to be judge, jury and executioner.
Even better, iiNet's CEO Michael Malone gets to the heart of the matter:
I think they genuinely believe that ISPs have a secret magic wand that we are hiding and if we bring it out we can make piracy disappear just by waving it. And it doesn't exist.
Indeed, but that might mean that the entertainment industry has to actually take responsibility for their own business model failings, and they can't do that. So they have to blame others.

30 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 
Legal Issues

Legal Issues

by Mike Masnick


Filed Under:
patents, settlements

Companies:
immersion, microsoft, sony



Immersion Settles Up With Microsoft: Hands Over $20.75 Million Of Money It Got From Sony

from the patent-dealing dept

Apparently this is the week for force feedback "haptics" company Immersion to settle its various patent lawsuits. We already noted the infamous teledildonics case has been settled and now it's settled an ongoing lawsuit with Microsoft as well. We wrote about the details back in May. It's a case that highlights just how wasteful some patent lawsuits can be.

In this case, Immersion had sued both Sony and Microsoft for violating its patents, and it offered them a deal that's becoming all too typical: giving competitors a chance to settle first in order to join the other side of the case. It's a neat trick. Basically, you tell both sides that they can just pay up, and close out the case, while also getting the chance to claim some of that money back if Immersion wins against their competitor. Of course, Immersion took it to another level after Microsoft agreed to this deal, originally handing over to Immersion $26 million. After it got Sony to pay $130 million, it told Microsoft that the deal wasn't technically a "settlement," and thus it was excluded from the terms of the deal it gave Microsoft. Hence the lawsuit from Microsoft.

This latest settlement has Immersion apparently realizing it was never going to win the case, and forking over $20.75 million back to Microsoft, ostensibly from its winnings against Sony. It makes you wonder what's up that Immersion seems to be rushing to settle its various cases. Either way, it shows another aspect of how the patent abuse game is played these days, with patent holders pitting competitors against each other to pressure companies into settling.

5 Comments | Leave a Comment..

 

More Stories >>

Search Techdirt
And now, a word from our Sponsors..



Popular Posts
Poll

Which Internet Concern Worries You The Most?

 

 

 

 

 

 


Add Techdirt RSS To Your Reader
rss Add Techdirt to your Bloglines
Add Techdirt to your Google Add Techdirt to your My Yahoo
Add Techdirt to your Netvibes Add Techdirt to your Newsgator
Subscribe to Techdirt's Daily Email Newsletter

Techdirt's Daily Email Newsletter

Older Stuff

Thursday

4:52pm: What Does It Say When A Comedy Show Does More Fact Checking Than News Programs? (56)
3:33pm: Nordic Music Week: Optimism Galore And Found Songs (10)
2:10pm: Would Top Sites Really Opt-Out Of Google Based On A Microsoft Bribe? (37)
12:57pm: Intel Lawyers Again Go Too Far In Trademark Bullying (21)
11:43am: Mandelson Wants Gov't To Have Sweeping Powers To Protect Copyright Holders (40)
10:47am: Once Again, Walmart Stops People From Printing Family Photos Due To Copyright Law Claims (41)
9:39am: Essayist Writes Popular Essay... Then Sends 'Non-Negotiable' Invoice To Church Who Posts It Online (59)
8:23am: ASCAP, BMI And SESAC Continue To Screw Over Most Songwriters: 'Write A Hit Song If You Want Money' (75)
7:07am: Kicking People Off The Internet Not Enough In South Korea, Copyright Lobbyists Demand More (26)
5:33am: Are The Record Labels Using Bluebeat's Bogus Copyright Defense To Avoid Having To Give Copyrights Back To Artists? (42)
3:53am: Larry Magid Calls For News Tax To Fund Failing Newspapers (29)
1:35am: Judge Says 'There's An Ad For That...' And It's Ok For Now (14)

Wednesday

11:01pm: Oh Look, Some Police Do Know How To Use Craigslist As A Tool (8)
8:43pm: Netherlands The Latest To Propose Mileage Tax That Requires GPS For Tracking Driving (30)
6:40pm: Spain Says Broadband Is A Basic Right (12)
4:22pm: Entertainment Industry Wants More People To Know About OpenBitTorrent Tracker (25)
3:00pm: It's The TSA, Not CSI: Actions Limited To Security, Not Crime Investigation (25)
1:49pm: The More Innovative You Are, The More You Get Sued; Yet Another Patent Lawsuit Over Shazam (7)
12:36pm: Oh No! Nobody Reads! Oh No! It's Too Cheap For Everyone To Read! (18)
11:15am: We See Your 'Copyright Contributes $1.5 Trillion' And Raise You 'Fair Use Contributes $2.2 Trillion' (17)
9:55am: Cable Industry Joins MPAA In Asking FCC To Allow Them To Stop Your DVR From Recording Movies (45)
8:44am: Sony Pictures Having Its Best Box Office Year Ever... Still Blaming Piracy For Killing The Business (38)
7:30am: Jenzabar Finds 'Expert Witness' Who Will Claim Google Relies On Metatags, Despite Google Saying It Does Not (38)
5:52am: China Says Microsoft Violates IP With Windows, Bars Sales (26)
4:01am: Don't Post Comments On StlToday.com Or They Might Tell Your Boss (44)
1:50am: Recording Industry Making It Impossible For Any Legit Online Music Service To Survive Without Being Too Expensive (45)

Tuesday

11:01pm: Crackdown On Loyalty Program Scams Shows How Ridiculously Sucessful They Were (11)
8:56pm: Just Because People Say They'll Pay For Something, It Doesn't Mean They Will (21)
7:02pm: Yes, Bad People Use Facebook Too (7)
5:29pm: Folks Can Digg Shoes For Needy Kids (2)
More arrow
Quick Links
Close
E-mail It