AfterDawn: Tech news

P2P users move to TV-Series downloading?

Written by James Delahunty (Google+) @ 26 Nov 2004 4:41 User comments (19)

P2P users move to TV-Series downloading? It seems the MPAA has realized that the "new" major thing on P2P networks is to trade TV Series. This may seem a bit late to most of you as Series was always one of the most traded material on P2P. The COO of the Fox empire outlined 10 rules at a consumer forum two months ago and ended it by saying, "All the other rules are meaningless, if content is not protected from digital thievery.". High quality copies of TV Episodes are available online usually within hours of their first airing, or even before it. You can even download High Definition TV copies of episodes, which produce higher quality than most cable and satellite networks worldwide.
"People are ignoring the old notion that you watch your program at 8 o'clock when CBS or NBC decides you should be watching it," says Mike McGuire, a digital rights expert with research company Gartner Inc. "And they're using the Internet to do that." Once again, the attention has turned to BitTorrent, which is a clever invention by Bram Cohen to make it easier and faster to spread large files around a network. Despite the fact that it was created for this legitimate purpose, the MPAA would like the world to believe its an evil invention to assist in evil file-sharing, as they have already made indirect threats against Bram Cohen in statements made earlier this year.

The RIAA has sued nearly 7,000 P2P users to date for sharing music with each other and has made a claim that they are winning the battle and file-sharing is decreasing. However, if you take a close look, P2P sharing has never been so big as the numbers are just increasing every month and developers are looking for, and finding ways to build P2P networks where privacy is restored. You would think the entertainment industry would have learned from previous decades that you cannot fight a new technology, especially if it has the backing of most consumers. I still don't understand why they are selling Digital DRM protected music downloads online, but not selling protected TV episodes online. It doesn’t take an expert to tell you that this mass sharing of TV Episodes might just mean there is a huge demand for them.

So lets see, first we were told the P2P craze was music as early as Napster, then we were told the pirates were turning to movies, threatening to cripple the multi-billion dollar studios. The Software Industry has long being complaining about the mass sharing of cracked software on P2P, but lawsuits haven’t come there yet. Oh yes there was also other claims made too like the RIAA's claims about P2P users spreading child pornography to try to blacken the name of P2P. So now we are being told the craze is to use evil BitTorrent to share TV episodes with each other. Let’s see what the entertainment industry has missed out on. One major thing they forgot is the spreading of educational material like Documentaries, which are very popular on sites like Also lets not forget the millions of eBooks available. So what will we hear next? That P2P is threatening the Education "Industry" by allowing users to share Documentaries and eBooks with each other? Would we actually be surprised?


Previous Next  

19 user comments

126.11.2004 4:53

ok..this stuff is starting to get just plain annoying. someone needs to get up on the podium and tell the MPAA and RIAA and all the rest to shut the hell up.

226.11.2004 7:03

What is telling them to shut the hell up going to do? Probably nothing, as there is no one who can just rule that it is okay. Yes, it is starting to get annoying, but we all know they are just trying to make money and keep attention from all the crap movies and music they are producing. Not all new movies and music is bad, but come on Spanglish? What the hell is that? The MPAA is trying to keep in the spotlight with these lawsuits and follow the RIAA, which as far as I know is slowing down their attack. Hunter007

326.11.2004 8:35

Yet another well put together news letter by Dela.Personally i think rather than working against P2P sharing they should try and focus on working with the company's that make the P2P sharing software.What is the point of working against P2P sharing when the benefits could be so much more rewarding if they put there energy in to making a legal p2p sharing system where you paid say a monthly fee to use a bit like sky movies.I think this would benefit all and all would gain from this and save all the pointless crap that there doing at the moment.

426.11.2004 9:14

what you guys arent keying on is the fact that the MpAA and the RIAA are on there last legs in this. It is only a short short matter of time before no one will be able to track IP info and everything will be annon. when downloading, and then what will they do? go back to suing the companies? Its to late. everyone got so fed up with 18 dollar cd's and 25 dollar dvd's and 12 dollar movie tickets with 8 dollar popcorn. We have been GOUGED for so many years that its just evolutionary, if you "oppresS" someone or something long enough, they will create a counterbalance for it, and thats what happened...and really...i would say about 85% of all Downloaders WOULDNT BUY ANYTHING ANYWAYS. mainly kids that cant afford to buy movie after movie, so it will never hurt there precious sales, which are at record numbers by the way...

526.11.2004 10:11

Very well said gsuscrazy. 90% of the stuff I download I would never buy, so either way they wouldn't be getting money for me. However, I have download things that got my intrest and I have bought them. Example. I d/led Unreal Tournament just cause I could...never would have paid money for it at the time...played it...loved it...bought a retail return I bought Unreal 2k3 and 2k4. There is money the company is getting they would have NEVER got if I didn't download the game. Filesharing is here to stay so they best give up on trying to stop it and find a way to gain from it.

626.11.2004 10:12

gsuscrazy i totally agree with you.The is the reason they should have worked with rather than against.They have put alot of time and money in to persuing this which would have been more of a benefit put to a good cause.Suing the arse off someone is not a good cause.If they can't afford so they download how the hell can they pay the fine.Simple fact is it's all been a waste of time and money.

729.11.2004 6:28

I can visualize the MPAA Mafia going house to house, breaking in doors, looking for people that have video tape recorders and video tapes and dragging those who possess such vile items off to jail. We have to protect the multi-millionares. First, one has to remember who these people (MPAA types) are. They are the people that can be arrested for any crime that would put an average person so far back in jail that you would have to pump oxygen in to keep them alive, yet, when one of these Hollywood types are arrested, they may do public service if anything at all. I remember one that was arrested for shoplifting on three different occasions involving over $5,000.00 each time and nothing happened..This would be a third strike for any of us lower lifes. Another was arrested over ten times for drugs in an amount that classify him as a dealer..result, nine sentances to public service, one eight month suspended jail sentence.. Another so-called super star assualted a police officer by striking him in the face..result, a good talking to by a judge. If you pulled the same thing, you would either be shot to death or twenty cops would beat you to a pulp. One has to realize that these Hollywood types are pampered, spoiled people that when they are not playing make believe are trying to tell everyone else how to live. Each one of these entertainment elite knows more about anything than any one of those little people sitting out there in the dark and admiring them from afar.. The politicians, judges, and others in power sit in awe and will usually back the entertainers in most things. (The tax on VHS tapes that is collected and paid to the entertainment industry for the possible recording of a tv show or movie is an example of how the entertainment industry is coddled and looked after..) Yes, I am jaded when it comes to the entertainment industry. After living in southern Cal and being around these people for a long time, I have found that they are the most hypocritical, unethical, selfish,snobbish, my way or not at all people that anyone could ever meet. There are exceptions, of course, but these exceptions are rare... Enough rant....................

814.12.2004 18:14

Who are the MPAA and the RIAA really working for? " evil invention" sounds like these people are religous fanatics. Or, are they working for the cops? Where does the MPAA and the RIAA get "their" paychecks. This is getting out of hand. If these self-rightous bastards want to put an end of everything, why don't they just get the whole entire Internet shut down? All of this is making me sick I just want to s***. MPAA this and RIAA that. Everywhere you read now. People getting busted. Evil this and evil that. Who the hell said that sharing is wrong? In school, we were all taught that if you had something, you should share it. Then blame the f***ing teaches for teaching us then. If only the movies would get better and the music would be worth paying for the whole album, then yeah, I'm pretty f****ing sure that people would stop file-"sharing" and wouldn't complain that they're getting they're hard-earned money's worth. I download a s***load of documentaries. If they want to bust down my f***ing door because I want to learn something, then go ahead. F*** the MPAA and double f*** the RIAA for what they are, stand for, and will ever become in this "Evil" society. Ever heard the phrase "Social Breakdown"? It's going to happen.

930.12.2004 20:23

Ya know if our Government would just realize that we still are capitalists and stop trying to save Blockbuster, and Best Buy, nun of this would be a problem. Blockbuster give 2 out 3 dollars back to the movie company. Best buy gives 10 out 20.If Halo 2 costed us $20 to buy would any of us burn it? If we could go and buy a DVD for $10 would we waste our time and money burning it? Do you know why we arent alowed to buy a $7 dollar movie off of a P2P legally? Cuz George Bush knows that if that happens bloackbuster would go out of business, which means shipments would stop coming in, which means trucks would stop polluting our environment hich means the overall sale of gasoline would be down. Political ass whole.

Compaq computer- $1200
Dell computer- $500
monitor- $150
DVD burner- $100
PS2- $300
Xbox- $150
PSTwo- $150
Wirless kit- $50
The pain and frustration I go through with all of this Crap- priceless. Some things in life are free... others suck...

108.1.2005 21:23

i live in canada so the RIAA cant tuch me hahahaha

1124.10.2005 12:30

I can share anything that the law does not prohibit me from sharing. This is unfortunately where the confusion comes. As an example, in Canada I can legally share music I own a copy of. I am not allowed to "upload", but Canadian courts have ruled P2P sharing is not the same as "uploading". I presume it becomes uploading when I publically post the link... On the other hand, Canadian law strictly prohibits copying movies without explicit authorization from the copyright holder. TV shows are not explicitly mentioned in Canadian law. Some assume that TV shows are the same as movies. However, reciently Canada's media tax was ruled illegal. Why? The law only explicitly mentioned tapes and CD's, but the government was trying to apply it to all media. The courts ruled that the law only covered what it explicitly mentions. When Canada passed its legislation against copying movies, TV shows were not listed. It is not reasonable to assume that a law covering movies also covers TV shows. The question is then, are there other more encompassing laws that would protect TV shows? My own oppinion is that since the shows are broadcast on public airways, the public has been granted a right to access these shows. Consiquently, sharing of TV shows should be allowed. Remember, copyright law was invented as a way to serve the public, not serve corporations. It serves the public to have information made publically available. Copyright law does this by promising some limited time limited protections in exchange for making the information available. The "limited time" and "limited protection" clauses are essiential. If the protection was absolute, then the public would not be served. The law exists for the benefit of everyone, not the few with power and money. Bill

1224.10.2005 13:05

Copyrights, for $1.00 can be extended to infinity now. In 1998, the entertainment industry lobbied the politicians [under Clinton's watch... Att: ag22] to allow the owner of any copyrights to get them extended by paying, near the end of the copyrighted work's protection, one dollar per each copyrighted work to add another 20 odd years of control. This can be done over and over again. Micheal Jackson does this with his Beatle copyrights and makes $3,000,000 a year off their songs. Elvis INC. does the same thing to the tune of around $5,000,000 a year. Many of the studios have aquired the extended rights to both music and movies.

1424.10.2005 15:23

I would contend that if a documentary is aired on a tax paid public broadcasting sydtem [PBS] that it would immeadiatly become public property by the fact that tax dollars are paying a generous percentage of PBSs operating budget. The government uses this same logic when it grants a company a sum of monies to invent an item or process. Whatever the company comes up with is available for anybody else to use and sell....

1524.10.2005 15:50

Addendum...Public domain, unless the copyright owner place a work there is dead....Along with the one dollar renewal, the politicians also added a new feature as noted below... snip............................ The Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act was passed in 1998. Named after the late singer-Congressman, the law extended the term of copyright protection by 20 years. Works by corporations were given protection for 95 years from the date of creation. The legislation soon became known as the Mickey Mouse Act because Disney had pushed to have it passed before the expiry of its copyright in Mickey Mouse expired in 2003. As the law currently stands, Mickey Mouse is protected until 2023. The law brought the US position largely into line with that in the EU. By a Directive of 1993, copyright protection became, for most works, 70 years from the date of death of the author and, for corporations, 70 years from the start of the year in which the work was created. In 2023, all Disney has to do is pay a dollar to protect Mickey Mouse or any other works for all intents and purposes, forever.....

1624.10.2005 18:23

That is assuming the USA still exists in 2023...

1724.10.2005 18:37

Well,...Mickey Mouse and Twinkies will make it.. ;->

1824.10.2005 20:04

I should clarify. As much as I love my country, I do not realistically expect it to last my lifetime. I can not say what will ultimately cause the collapse. But I can observe trends. Currently 2.1 million US residends are in jail or prison and a much larger group is on parol or under house arrest. That number is increasing by 5% per year. Which by my estimates makes it impossible for the system to be substained for another 50 years. My best estimate is 20-30 years until the current US government collapses or is overthrown. Currently the largest percentage of the prison population is for drug crimes. However, I expect that to be surpassed by people being punished for copyright voilations in less than 20 years. My hope is it is a peacefull movement that replaces the current government, but only time will tell.

1925.10.2005 7:46

docbill.... What is ironic about your statement is that during the 60s through the early 70s, the movie industry made quite a few movies about how the corporations would eventually gain so much power that if they didn't run the country outright, they would control the politicians who do run the country. The irony is that the very companies [movie studios] that used their public forum [movies/entertainment] to complain about this future scenerio, are they, themselves propigating this power for themselves. Those early movies depicted the young people of the time saving America and the world by disrupting, stealing and otherwise creating problems for the corporations that were seeking or that were already in control. Sort of a self fulfilling prophacy.. Also, there are around 19,000 new laws and regulations placed in the books each year, usually at the bequest of some special interest orginization. [ Facitious comment as follows: At some point, the very act of breathing is going to be deemed a crime.] When politicians are so eager to regain/keep their power base that they will screw millions of people can't vote for them to buy the votes from those that can, things will only go downhill as they have been. The people in California cannot vote for someone in Massachusetes or Alaska, yet, powerful politicians from those states screw Californians all the time. It happens the other way around also. In any individual state, this goes on between the counties/parishes, etc also. This country used to be a "freddom to [insert freedom here]"... When America flipped to a "freedom from [insert pet peeve here]", everyone loses because freedoms are being slowly chipped away. Eventually, a group is going to come around stating that they want 'freedom from' what ever you are doing and you are going to lose that freedom. In these cases, the attitude is usually "Do as I say, not as I do.." meaning that you do not have the right to tell them how to live, but you had better clean up your act or they are coming for you. Welcome to the entertainment industry...... Carl Reiner and Rob [Meathead] Reiner were on a rampage over SUVs. They were at the point of wanting them outlawed altogether. Yet, Carl Reiner owns a fleet of 24 large SUVs. His statement, upon the discovery of this fact, was that was different, he needs them. Do as Carl says, not as Carl does.

Comments have been disabled for this article.

News archive