Incredibly, there’s still some chatter in the infotainment lobbying community about launching another effort this year to pass tough anti-piracy legislation — even though lawmakers decided more than a week ago to scuttle the Senate’s Protect IP Act (PIPA) and the House’s Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). After all, the thinking goes, even people who opposed the Hollywood-endorsed bills agree that the piracy problem needs to be addressed. The idea is to come up with a more palatable version of the proposals, and then try to gain traction with the public by running ads featuring A-list stars talking about how a new law would protect U.S. jobs. But don’t worry. Cooler heads probably will prevail as it sinks in that 2012 won’t be the year when Congress will adopt a variation of Hollywood’s proposal to let the government block overseas sites that traffic in pirated content.
Those who want to keep going say that there might be room to blend the goals of SOPA and PIPA with a bill that the tech industry supports: the Online Protection & Enforcement of Digital Trade Act (OPEN). It would give the International Trade Commission the power to stop U.S. advertisers and payment companies from dealing with overseas sites that have “a limited purpose” and are found to be selling pirated content. Staffers from rival lobby groups in the creative community and the NetCoalition continue to talk about holding meetings soon to see if there’s common ground.
But the political calendar works against Hollywood. Last week everyone focused on President Obama’s State of the Union message. Soon, Washington will pour over his 2013 budget. Lawmakers will want to talk about big issues such as the budget deficit and health care reform instead of proposals to stop some sales of pirated movies, TV shows and music as we approach the nominating conventions and election campaigns. Congress will have no appetite to take up the piracy issue again soon if there’s even a hint of controversy.
And seasoned politicos tell me they can’t envision a compromise that would satisfy everybody. The MPAA has pretty much ruled out a deal based on OPEN, calling it “ineffective and essentially a distraction.” It said that ITC is understaffed, deals mostly with patent law — not copyrights — and typically takes 18 months to decide cases. Meanwhile Silicon Valley reps feel that they’ve got the political mojo. ”Trying to ‘fix’ SOPA and PIPA and all of the bad provisions in those bills is the wrong approach,” Public Knowledge CEO Gigi Sohn — who opposed the bills — said in a recent blog post. “Conceptually, it’s like trying to build a building starting on the second floor. The most logical way to proceed would be to start building a structure from the foundation and working up from there.”
What’s more, the anti-piracy debate can’t be settled in the back rooms — it’s no longer an old-fashioned, inside-the-beltway competition between lobby groups. Wikipedia and others who mobilized this month’s net protests against the bills understood that millions of students, artists, public interest activists, lawyers, librarians, venture capitalists and other people care about Internet policy. They’re ready to to fight proposals that they believe might make it less open. Hollywood was cooked the moment these Internet policy devotees became engaged in the anti-piracy debate, turning it into a populist crusade. Moguls showed that they have a political tin ear, and reinforced the popular perception that they’re over-privileged self-dealers, when they petulantly threatened to withhold contributions from President Obama and other Democrats who felt they had to respond to the public outrage over SOPA and PIPA. What they don’t seem to have realized is that the congressional leaders who withdrew the bills may have done them a big favor. If Hollywood’s pals insisted on pushing ahead, then not only would the proposals have gone down. The industry would have lost so much credibility that just about any new anti-piracy bill it blesses would have become radioactive.


Step 1 for TV – Figure out how to monetize digital ad sales and Netflix streaming licensing fees. Get yourself together and start being able to collect demographic data that you can use to package ad sales.
PROFIT!
You’re on the right track. What TV loses in terms of mass audience on the internet (it’s all a bunch of niches), it can gain in the greater intelligence gathering of personal data (which people squawk about, but let’s face it, that’s the only way internet content can be funded when everyone expects everything to be free.)
Combining law and the law PIPA SAPO seems to me a very interesting initiative, but also too optimistic. The digital freedom with limits, difficult undertaking.
I wonder why the recent signing of the ACTA trade agreement, and the impending TPP agreement, still don’t enter into this story in the media, since their aims have been/are similar to SOPA/PIPA’s. It may be because of the MPAA’s ‘ineffectiveness’ assertion, but it still binds us to other countries in terms of certain copyright enforcements.
Dead? What are you talking about? ACTA is worse than SOPA and PIPA combined. The only reason they failed so quietly is because ACTA covers all the same ground but is a trade agreement so it conveniently does have to go through Congress.
The president is planning on going around the decision by Congress, with the UN’s law ACTA. So stopping PIPA and SOPA does not matter anymore.
The new threat is ACTA. SOPA, PIPA, etc. pale in comparison.
This article makes several references of sites that are “selling” pirated content. I’m probably not the most web savvy person out there, but the bullseye of SOPA was the pirate bay, which doesn’t sell any copyrighted content. Please be a bit clearer when referencing this, because it’s a completely separate issue.
The only place I see unauthorized sales is the flea market, and no one seems to care too much about them anymore.
This strawman strategy used by Chris Dodd and his buddies doesn’t hold water, in any shape or form.
Great way to start the week, Mr. Lieberman… Picking at this open scab without any news to cause it to be re-examined.
At least your true colors are revealed. Why Deadline is anti-Hollywood, I have no idea, but this unprovoked angry blog post sends a clear message.
Note that ACTA, SOPA, etc. are so horrible from a human rights/general freedom to use the Web point of view that plenty of content creators hate those proposals, too.
If content creators are going to mountain a fiery campaign to protect intellectual property rights, then, first, they need to come up with a proposal that protects intellectual property rights while also protecting people’s rights to create content and have access to convenient, affordable systems for sharing data that they actually want to share.
If the government is going to shut down or freeze out industrial-strength pirates: great.
If the government is going to impose rules that could lead, say, to Yahoo message boards being shut down without warning because a few people using the boards to market piracy operations: unacceptable.
Finally: the heart of this problem isn’t really piracy but lack of generally accepted, safe, Web-based micropayment systems.
The iPhone has a 99 cent micropayment system that may or may not be as safe as current Web-based digital wallet payments but just plain feels safer. So, people are spending 99 cents on all sorts of horrible app-delivered content.
I’m sure most people who watch more than 10 minutes of a Web video would gladly pay the creator 10 cents to watch the rest, if it were easy to do so. If there were an easy way to make payments of 1 cent, 5 cents and 10 cents on the Web, there are a lot of people who are now free riders who would cheerfully start paying for content.
It’s not safety. Who is honestly scared to use iTunes? It’s that everyone expects stuff on the internet to be free.
But “free” content will come only at the expense of privacy. The one and only realistic way to pay for all that free content is by accessing personal data to use for more powerful and targetted advertising that can compete with TV (ad dollars need to be split between the media) even though the internet doesn’t offer the same kind of easily accessed mass audiences of TV.
So you can have content and personal data that is both free (freely accessed by anyone who wants it) or you have content and personal data that are both defended from incursions. But you can’t have free content and protect your personal data – that’s contradictory.
If content can be pirated, why does anyone think corporates can’t pirate your data just as easily? It’s naive.
It’s not dead. It’s in full swing without needing any legislation.
Remember this headline….Last Week ?
MEGAUPLOAD GETS BUSTED; FILE SHARERS ARE FRAZZLED G
But do those Hollywood people understand that they are killing themselves? It’s not about movies anymore. People all over the world were watching american TV shows on sites like Megavideo. Americans have their PVR and Netflix. People in Brazil, New Zealand, India, China or somewhere in Croatia or Sweden can’t watch those shows on their TV. Because their countries don’t show 80% of new americans shows. Or there will be season 4 in USA and they will show season 1. That’s why millions of people around the world were watching them.
They come everyday to sites like Dealine or other celebrity or TV related sites. And they read every day about those actors in those shows and they don’t know who they are. Acclaimed shows like Walking Dead, Game of Thrones, Mad Men will just die without public adoration. Even americans can’t afford cable channels. And if no one would be able to see those shows then they will just die on those cable channels.