avocets
Avocets
rss 2.0 subscribe to this page
search


view all
•  projects
•  owners
•  tags
This project is about the future of the Pirate Party, whether their recent attainment of an EU Parliament seat launches them into a promising future or if their strength is simply the tenuous reaction of young file sharers to the Pirate Bay trial. I would also like to address the party's focus on the retention of privacy and what the party could be capable of should they prove a tenable force in influencing internet policy.


The case of MGM (backed by MPAA and RIAA) versus the peer-to peer file sharing Grokster is one of the most important copyright infringement cases in recent times.  The case came about because MGM thought that both Grokster.com and StreamCast.com were liable for copyright damages due to their supposed encouragement of illegally sharing movies.  Both Grokster and StreamCast were actively marketing particular software that aided in the downloading of both pirated movie and songs.  The two sites targeted the earlier ruling in the Supreme Court 1985 Betamax as their defense.  The Betamax ruling asserted that VCR manufacturers are not responsible for a VCR users who copy movies illegally.  The Supreme Court ended up ruling against Grokster and StremCast, saying that they could not hide behind a the 1985 Betamax ruling because unlike the VCR companies, they were actively promoting file sharing.  The fact that the Supreme Court wholly disregarded a past copyright ruling is poignant, because previous rulings on copyright legislature are often factored heavily into new decisions.  Two other points make this case specifically interesting.  Firstly, the Supreme Court highlighted the fact that although file sharing tools have the ability to be used illegally, the file sharing software itself and the activity of file sharing is not considered to be illegal.  Secondly, they state that the manufacturers of the specific file sharing products cannot be held responsible for how users choose to proceed once they have access to the software.  The one exception is when the manufacturer actively promotes or encourages infringement.  Ironically, it seems that although Hollywood thought that they scored hugely in this case, file sharers actually profited from this case as, ultimately, it was decided that file sharing itself is not illegal.

This article analyzes the effectiveness of the public relation strategies of the MPAA and the RIAA in dealing with piracy. The RIAA's public relation strategy is to use aggressive legal actions while minimizing negative publicity. Because no anti-piracy campaign was in place early on, it has been harder for the music industry to recover. Piracy was rampant early on because the pay download sites could not compete with prolific free download sites. RIAA in turn relied on their legal strategy to target P2P networks, such as Napster, to cut off the source. Although successful initially, with loses to Grokster and Morpheus, the RIAA turned to the users. This received a huge backlash since the industry was attacking its own consumers. In one case where they sued a 12 year-old girl, they later used her in an advertisement for iTunes to spin the negative publicity and promote legal downloading simultaneously. In essence, the RIAA publicizes major lawsuits in order to scare other potential offenders. Most of the minor cases are settled out of court and the offenders receive little punishment as long as they agree to stop illegally downloading music.

Unlike the RIAA, the MPAA has taken an educational approach to stopping piracy. By educating consumers through "consumer awareness" advertisements that play in movie theaters and on television and appeal to audience's conscious and emotions. The ads depict employees of the film industry in fear of losing their jobs due to piracy. Ads also target the youth to educate them of such illegalities at a young age. Rather than rely on lawsuits, the movie industry is looking to provide better protection and legal alternatives to piracy. Current intiatives include digital watermarking and legal download sites such as Movielink.com.

The article goes on to explain the media's involvement in portraying news. Through agenda setting and framing the media influences how the public perceives issues. By comparing the press releases for the public relations agenda and the individual news stories for the media's agenda, the author conducts an analysis based on a two-year time span. The results showed the RIAA mentioned legal action far more than the MPAA in their press releases and the MPAA focused more on the harm caused from illegal downloading.

This study is fascinating because it compares two major industries reacting to a similar problem, online piracy. The data is significant for my paper because it displays how the movie industry is using the media to combat piracy, in addition to legal and digital means.

belongs to The Movie Industry and Technology project
tagged digital_piracy mpaa riaa by milich ...on 25-NOV-08