WebProNews

Tag: Internet Piracy

  • New Anti-Piracy Plan: Kindergarten Copyright Class?

    The United States’ largest copyright lobbies, the Motion Picture Association of America and the Recording Industry Association of America, have initiated a highly controversial program nudging the educational system to shoulder the burden of teaching kids about how evil piracy really is.

    The LA Times reports that a nonprofit group known as the Center for Copyright Information has commissioned a program to teach kids between kindergarten and sixth grade about intellectual property ownership.

    The program is to be called “Be a Creator,” and the proposed curriculum includes lesson plans, videos, and activities that promote “being creative and protecting creativity” with topics like: Respect the Person: Give Credit; It’s Great to Create; and Copyright Matters.

    The president of a nonprofit organization (iKeepSafe) that focuses on helping keep kids safe on the internet, Marsali Hancock, defended the program by saying “It’s important to prepare children to succeed and thrive and learn how to share and create and move files in a way that’s ethical and responsible.”

    Even though nothing of the plan has even been written yet, the idea of implementing it has come under intense scrutiny. Frank Wells, a spokesman for the California Teachers Association, said “While it’s certainly a worthy topic of discussion with students, I’m sure some teachers would have a concern that adding anything of any real length to an already packed school day would take away from the basic curriculum that they’re trying to get through now.”

    In one curriculum draft acquired by Wired a couple months ago, a property attorney described the information being disseminated as “thinly disguised propaganda” because the program omits any mention of the concept of Fair Usage, such as satire, parody, or commentary.

    Corynne McSherry, the intellectual property director for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said “It sends the message that you always have to get permission before you can copy anything and that sharing is always theft and that if you violate copyright law all kinds of bad things will happen to you. It’s a scare tactic.”

    Stephen Smith, a managing partner with Greenberg Glusker and an expert on copyright law, said “The idea that time would be taken out of kids’ days to teach them copyright law, when they ought to be learning reading, writing and arithmetic, I find to be strange… I just don’t think it’s appropriate curriculum for kindergartners to sixth-graders.”

    Meanwhile, in spite of the MPAA’s constant whinging about immense profit losses caused by online piracy, recently conducted economics studies suggested that their “losses” are sensationally inflated and that the music and film industries are fiscally performing better than ever.

    [Image via ThinkStock]

  • Google’s Going After YouTube-To-MP3 Site

    It’s actually surprising this thing has lasted as long as it has, but now that Google’s turned its attention towards the YouTube-MP3.com conversion site, it’s doubtful the service will be in existence much longer, at least under its current guise. The site does exactly what it says it does. That is, it rips the audiotrack from a YouTube video and converts it to the MP3 format, which can then be downloaded by the user who prompted the conversion.

    As pointed out by TorrentFreak, Google has apparently dropped a lawsuit threat on the site’s owners, which, from their perspective, is completely understandable. Considering all the intellectual property/copyright issues Google has faced with YouTube, the idea of them going after a site that makes a form copyright infringement, one that makes use of YouTube’s content, only makes sense. It’s actually more surprising that it took this long for Google to act.

    A quick WhoIs search reveals the service in question–YouTube-MP3.org–has been registered since September 2009, meaning it took Google almost three full years to respond. In the meantime, the service has converted untold amounts of YouTube content into downloadable MP3s. Even better, the site uses the YouTube API to rip the soundtrack out of the video “submitted” by the user. As far as the “untold amounts” go, the TorrentFreak article also reveals the service gets around 1.3 million viewers a day, which is an incredible amount of potential infringement, courtesy of YouTube’s content.

    To their credit, and my surprise, the site owners aren’t just turning tail and running away. Instead, they are trying to negotiate with Google, intimating that their service serves a lot users. The site owner, who goes by “Philip,” had this to say to TF’s author:

    “We would estimate that there are roughly 200 million people across the world that make use of services like ours and Google doesn’t just ignore all those people, they are about to criminalize them. With the way they are interpreting and creating their ToS every one of those 200 million users is threatened to be sued by Google.”

    Seeing how Google is going directly after the site owner, I’m not sure his “200 million users” reasoning is accurate. Google doesn’t seem to care about those that use the service. They just want the site itself to stop ripping audiotracks out of YouTube files, which, considering Google’s position, is reasonable enough.

    To that point, the article also reveals the YouTube-MP3.org (pretty slick move going with the .org TLD) has been blocked by Google from accessing YouTube and its content; although, their efforts don’t appear to working that well. Before posting this article, I tested the service to see if it still works. The answer, as the upcoming screenshot indicates, is a resounding yes:

    YouTube MP3

    So much for blocking the service from YouTube’s content. Maybe this, like other Google updates, is undergoing a gradual rollout.

  • Tech Giants Back Off of SOPA Support

    Last week, a consortium consisting of Adobe, Apple, Dell, and Microsoft — to name a few of the well known members — offered their support of SOPA, under the guise of the Business Software Alliance (BSA). After companies like Google and Mozilla had spoken out against SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act), it was surprising to see companies like Apple and Microsoft side with the government on this particular subject.

    There are 29 members of the BSA, most of which are well known among those who follow the tech industry. Aside from the four indicated above, other companies include Intel, Symantec, McAfee, and Corel. However, the reason Apple and Microsoft are the focus is because they are two of the most well known companies in the world, and their initial support of SOPA was all the more dumbfounding. Apparently, however, the backlash against this support has caused the BSA to reconsider its position in relation to SOPA, which led to the following blog post, featuring the following title:

    “SOPA Needs Work to Address Innovation Considerations”

    Essentially, the BSA backtracked, saying the Alliance supports the elimination of piracy, but that SOPA needs to be refined. The post in question was written by BSA President & CEO, Robert Holleyman. In it, Holleyman offers the adjusted position of the BSA:

    The idea behind SOPA, as Chairman Smith explained at last week’s hearing, is to remove pirates’ ability to profit from their theft. We think that is the right approach as long as it is done with a fine touch.

    Valid and important questions have been raised about the bill. It is intended to get at the worst of the worst offenders. As it now stands, however, it could sweep in more than just truly egregious actors. To fix this problem, definitions of who can be the subject of legal actions and what remedies are imposed must be tightened and narrowed. Due process, free speech, and privacy are rights cannot be compromised.

    Which is exactly the position many who oppose SOPA. It’s not that they are asking for permission to pirate. Instead, policing these actions does not need to be done with sacrificing the freedoms Holleyman discussed. Too bad the entertainment industry is too blinded by their pursuit of the bottom line to see how much the bill, largely influenced by these entities, attacks the ideas of privacy and due process.

    As long as that teenage girl down the street gets busted for downloading the new Twilight movie, all’s well. Unfortunately, SOPA doesn’t even work that way. Instead of going after the Twilight downloader, the bill goes after the site that hosted the torrent that facilitated the download.

    The BSA post winds itself up with the following:

    BSA has long stood against filtering or monitoring the Internet. All of these concerns should be duly considered and addressed.

    My question is, did the BSA not know SOPA included such stipulations when they offered their support? Better late than never, I guess.