The ongoing and often extreme and overreaching battle against piracy within the audiovisual industry continues to escalate, with recent discussions focusing on devices capable of infringing intellectual property (IP) rights. As stated by Sheila Cassells, Executive VP at the Audiovisual Anti-Piracy Alliance (AAPA), companies in the entertainment sector should be wary of “any technological development” that could potentially grant access to pirated content.
From historical technology like the VCR to modern advances like AI, all technology holds inherent potentials for piracy.
At the center of these discussions are specific devices including set-top boxes, Firesticks, and Android apps, often condemned for enabling piracy. The AAPA’s somewhat radical standpoint is a call to outlaw the production, marketing, and distribution of any such device.
After reading the article this is yet again the same argument that if nothing is done, artists and creators are the one being hurt by the piracy.
Except that it is not.
The claim for banning anything and everything that can be potentially subverted to facilitate access to protected intelectual property is ridiculous. The world would grind to a halt if such request was to be actually enforced, as anyone participating in this thread has already stated.
But what if we were to actually jump on this band wagon?
By definition, any word spoken on a podcast, any video on a video platform, any word or sentence jotted down on any social platform, is intelectual property if by any means can be monetized.
Let’s claim our share of the revenue gained from our intelectual property. Let’s demand that by definition every individual is protected by copyright law, even if we need to create associations to collectively represent us.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
After reading the article this is yet again the same argument that if nothing is done, artists and creators are the one being hurt by the piracy.
Except that it is not.
The claim for banning anything and everything that can be potentially subverted to facilitate access to protected intelectual property is ridiculous. The world would grind to a halt if such request was to be actually enforced, as anyone participating in this thread has already stated.
But what if we were to actually jump on this band wagon?
By definition, any word spoken on a podcast, any video on a video platform, any word or sentence jotted down on any social platform, is intelectual property if by any means can be monetized.
Let’s claim our share of the revenue gained from our intelectual property. Let’s demand that by definition every individual is protected by copyright law, even if we need to create associations to collectively represent us.
How would that work against this pile of idiocy?