Mandelson launches crackdown on file sharing

Lord Mandelson launched a crackdown on internet piracy just days after meeting a leading Hollywood critic of illegal file sharing.

The business secretary plans to criminalise the estimated seven million people - one in 12 of the population - who illicitly download music and films over the internet.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1206901/Mand...

I wonder how many mysterious brown envelopes stuffed with cash are exchanging hands within our government. Maybe these people should look again at the fraud/theft they have been committing with their claims on their second homes.

I don't use P2P but i fully agree with your statement regarding government theft of tax payers money. And who put Mandy in charge of this operation to criminalize Mums and Dads and their children?

Is this going to be yet another thread which discusses the questionable ethics of our elected represenatives or should we concentrate on the very real issue of piracy and how it *should* be dealt with? Ignoring piracy is not an option.

I'm afraid, like most threads, it's going to get sidetracked. The same is happening with the parallel thread in FC.

How strange this has come up today...... last night my wife & I watched a (perfectly legal) copy of Pink Panther 2 starring Steve Martin on Blu Ray, and before the actual movie started we had to sit through a 1 minute trailer telling us why we shouldn't download copies of movies (not that we ever do), but now there's a new tack to these trailers. Now they are not telling us that piracy is theft, but now the film producers were telling us how inferior the quality of downloaded movies is, and how it can take so long to download one. If you want the best quality, you have to buy the DVD, allagedly.

Well, whilst watching Pink Panther 2 in "HD", I had to stop the player and look at the packaging, to make sure I hadn't inadvertantly bought a pirate copy (I got it from Tescos), because the movie was such poor quality that I had my doubts. The movie was full of compression artefacts that really should not be there on Blu Ray, and coupled with the very poor plot and acting, I really felt that I was the one that had been ripped off !

Paradoxically, the copyright warning and minute long guilt trip aren't included in the scene rip.

Assuming that's the article suggesting a 50K GBP fine, then however many film and record industry executives have put their case to Mandelson, the Government is going to look (more) follish if they pass it into law. The first time some single Mum with a teenager downloading Oasis (or Coldplay, or whatever other trash they download) gets caught, and pleads poverty, there will be MPs from all parties saying it is a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

Sure, if someone is making CDs/DVDs to sell on a big scale at markets or backstreet shops, hit them with 50% of the estimated takings as a fine, but 50K for pretty much any individual or family means bankruptcy, selling the family home, and a greater burden on the state because prices for films and music are still too high.

I saw something months ago about the split between record company and musicians, and the fiver (and the rest!) that a CD sells for means very little in income to the bulk of newer artists. The older, established, artists might make a bigger cut, but music fans are being massively screwed when they pay OTT prices for merchandise on top of rip-off ticket prices to see people live, and when the box office figures rate films by how many tens or hundreds of millions was taken on the opening weekend, it shows there's a lot of cash sloshing about.

So, is it like the football, where 'stars' get massive payments (and producers etc) all the way down and the 'fan' is the gullible moron who has paid for it? Yes, and yes again. If people were to boycott CDs. DVDs, live gigs, and the cinema, for a year, the studios would understand they are considered to be ripping off the public. Will it ever happen, no, unfortunately not. Those who have some cash pay the outrageous prices, and the whole thing escalates because of greed.

Some years back there was a marketing report which showed how a tube of toothpaste costing 30p to produce was sold for over a pound in Europe and for 30p in S America. They knew the people could not afford more, so priced it at cost, because they could make major profits (and keep market share because all the other toothpaste was at similar prices in Europe). It's a case of "market forces" and while people continue to pay, prices continue to rise.

In the mid-90s I bought some brand new (sealed) CDs in a second-hand music store in Chicago for $8 each (about a fiver) and vowed not to spend more than 8 quid on any CD after that. I made one exception, a double album for a friend's birthday (she was happy!) have bought very little music since - just listen more to the radio - don't even own an iPod...

Sure they will hit some pirates, but they will be considered too harsh when it hits some families, if the fine is fixed at 50K.

Edited by deleted (Mon 17-Aug-09 11:14:23)

I believe that the proposals are somehat more finely grained than an immediate £50,000 fine for a first offence. The proposals that I have seen say:

"Serious repeat offenders would be tracked through their computer ID numbers and sent a written warning. Those who failed to desist could have their broadband slowed down or blocked altogether. And fines could be issued to the worst offenders."

I would have thought the first warning letter would be reason enough for the single Mum to have a severe talk with her offspring.

The whole thing is quite funny really.

First that it should happen just after that holiday dinner.

Second that the Watson chap thinks uploaders should be the ones targeted. Maybe someone should explain P2P to him.

Third the Labour Party recently announced it was thinking of lowering (intending to lower?) the voting age to 16. Big vote-winner this new law would be then !