Digital piracy of movies is 'wrong,' college students chided [by -- ugh -- Jack Valenti]

Cox News Service ^ | 02/26/2003 | Nora Achrati

[GeneD]

WASHINGTON -- As part of an uphill battle against Internet movie piracy, entertainment industry lobbyist Jack Valenti offered university students a lesson in morality Tuesday.

"Too many students don't believe it's wrong to steal these movies," Valenti told students at Georgetown University Law Center. "It is fracturing the moral contract to take something that does not belong to you."

The appearance was one of several that the president of the Motion Picture Association of America plans at prominent universities over the next few months. Students are among the heaviest online traffickers of illegally copied material.

Since the late 1990s, a host of file-sharing sites have flooded the Internet with digital copies of music, television shows and films that can be downloaded at no cost. The recording industry says digital piracy was a factor in last year's unprecedented decline in compact disc sales, and Hollywood fears it could be next.

Driving those fears are the booming popularity of high-speed Internet connections and the recent appearance of low-cost DVD recorders on the consumer market.

Valenti said that around half a million movies are illegally downloaded each day from sites such as KaZaA, Morpheus, Grokster, Gnutella and Limewire. The extremely fast fiber-optic Internet connections common at major universities and the students' high interest in pop culture make campuses a center of digital piracy.

Valenti lauded the "vast benefits" of broadband Internet access, but said that the file-sharing is in violation of copyright law, and is plain wrong.

His moral appeal faced mixed reviews from the law students.

"I didn't feel he completely addressed all the questions we had," said Puraj Puri, 21. "The moral argument doesn't convincingly get the argument across."

One student was dissatisfied with Valenti's black-and-white version of the file-sharing issue.

"I think you're simplifying the argument beyond a level that's appropriate for this audience, I'm sorry," he told Valenti during a question-and-answer session.

Others said the moral appeal against file-sharing resonated strongly.

"No question, it's wrong, it's stealing," said third-year student Rudy Salo, 25.

Earlier this month, major companies received a five-page "Corporate Policy Guide" from MPAA and its sister, the Recording Industry Association of America, urging corporate heads to stamp out illegal downloading activity by employees at work.

The memo came with a stern threat of legal action, citing a $1 million settlement paid in 2002 to RIAA by Arizona-based Integrated Information Systems, whose employees had been downloading music files.

Movie industry representatives are now meeting with universities to develop a similar code of conduct for students, Valenti said.

Like many universities, Georgetown already has an "acceptable use" policy that students must read before receiving online accounts.

Georgetown's current guidelines, which have been in place since 1997, state that university equipment "may not be used to violate copyright or the terms of any license agreement. No one may . . . distribute or copy proprietary data . . . without proper authorization."

"It is working well on our campus," Georgetown Law Center spokesman Pablo Molina said of the policy. Violations happen "very infrequently," he said, and offending students must remove illegal files from their computers.

But MPAA continuing its campus campaign aggressively. A few months ago, college presidents received letters from the organization asking them to monitor student computer use more closely.

And Valenti's tour will continue. Earlier in the week he spoke to Duke University students, and he'll head to Stanford University next.

Nora Achrati is a Washington correspondent for Cox Newspapers.

[BrooklynGOP]

Well, I am not going to have my money supporting these anti-american celebrities. Just got my Pioneer dvd burner 2 weeks ago... and 20 blanks...

[DrDavid]

I wonder, if taxes were lower, perhaps people would have more money to spend on legal copies of movies...

[BlkConserv]

Valenti is addressing a problem that, for the most part, hardly exists.

You buy any motion-picture now on DVD for under $20. Besides, there is video on-demand, the premium channels on cable and satellite, the video rental stores....who is going to waste time trying to download a movie and wait about 10 hours? Even so, the quality wouldn't be as near as good if you just went to Walmart and bought it.

If anyone should be shaking in their boots, it should be the myopic RIAA and the stupid record companies.

[nononsense]

The only time entertainment industry cares about morality is when it hurts their pocketbook.

[TADSLOS]

Much to do about nothing. Valenti is just being Valenti, the Hollyweird's mouthpiece.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

When will pompous dinosaurs such as Valenti and the record suits are going to pull their heads out of the fricking sand and realize that the digital asteroid is coming to blow them to smithereens?

[mikeb704]

I trace the deterioration of the quality of films to the late 60s when Jack Valenti moved from being a toady for Lyndon Johnson to head up the Motion Picture Association of America. The first thing he did, he boasts, “was to junk the Hays Production Code, which was an anachronistic piece of censorship that we never should have put into place."

Much of what Hollywood now turns out is coarse, demeaning and depressing.

IMHO.

Michael M. Bates: My Side of the Swamp

[JoshGray]

The problem is when you doanload it for free, realize how badly it sucks (MIBII, Star Wars II, Goldfinger, ST:Nemesis, etc), and save yourself the money.

[ServesURight]

Valenti is just blowing fart through his mouth. If Hellwood can solve the dilemma about people copying movies in their VCRs, then they should be prepared for the digital age.

BOYCOTT THE 75TH ACADEMY AWARDS SHOW!!

[Sloth]

Valenti is a vile excuse for a human being.

[Hodar]

You beat me to it. A DVD movie for $~18 isn't worth the time, energy and material it takes to 'steal' it. The movie snips I have seen are of poor quality, no bonus features, and without the ability to index to specific scenes. Why bother.

On the other hand, the RIAA is complaining that CD sales are down, and are blaming file-swapping. I think they missed the boat on 2 counts.

First, I listen to a song or two before I buy a CD. I always get a preview. No exceptions. File sharing is what caused me to replace my tons of cassettes to the 200+ CD's I currently own.

Secondly, if the average person has a fixed amount of disposable income to buy 'stuff' with, he has a choice. Buy a DVD movie, or a CD. Considering that DVD sales are up 300%, it only makes sense that CD sales would be down.

[wizzler]

Once again, the attitude here regarding this issue is dismaying.

The justifications used to rationalize stealing (i.e., I am not going to have my money supporting these anti-american celebrities) are sadder still.

Don't like the politics of certain celebrities? Then, sure -- don't spend your money on their products. But to take the leap to stealing those products is something else altogether.

[John Robertson]

Up to post 11, EVERYBODY here is wrong. It's stealing. Someone spent money and made it. Valenti is a major mouthpiece, of course. And the quality of most of this stuff is mediocre, and its morality nonexistent.

But does that justify stealing it? No way, no how.

Try telling a cop you shouldn't be pinched because you just took a Chevy Malibu, a car that isn't all that great.

Wake up, people.

[Sloth]

If the owner still has the Chevy Malibu, it ain't stealing.

Is piracy inherently wrong? Perhaps. Is it illegal? Definitely. But that doesn't make it stealing. The crime is copyright infringement, NOT theft. Theft necessarily takes something of value without permission. Piracy doesn't involve "taking" anything, because any supposed lost profits are imaginary, not real.

[wizzler]

Copyright is apparently a difficult topic for most average joes to get their heads around. Because watch -- we're probably about to get hit with a bunch of irrelevant responses. Among the possibilities:

- CDs are "overpriced."
- The record industry "rips off artists."
- If I download something, the original still exists and nobody has been hurt.
- Kazaa is no different than the public library or Blockbuster.
- The entertainment business "should have embraced Napster."
- Etc., etc.

Wouldn't be surprised if someone has already launched one of these illogical gems by the time I finish writing this and hit the POST button.

[HamiltonJay]

Not to defend digital theft... but I have a hard time when a group that has been guilty of gouging for years, stands up and calls others theives.

I don't 14 crappy songs for $17.99 for the 1 song I want... I'll pay you the $1 for the one song I want... CD production cost is well under $1 per disk to copy... yet the price of a CD hasn't changed one iota since they were introduced.... DVD's have come down, and I damn well know it costs more to produce a movie than a record..... but I can go buy a brand new release DVD for $15 or less...

Your sales are off, because your product sucks and your prices are too high... that's the facts. Sure pirating hurts, but its not your major problem... poor product quality and too high a price point is your problem.

[wizzler]

Well, there we go.

Anyway... Sloth, you're right: Words like "theft" and "stealing" in this situation are not legally accurate. But for the purposes of conversation, they are semantically sound.

[John Robertson]

right you are, and right on. look at 15, then 17. One guy is trying to argue that one class of federal felony is superior to the other. the other guy is arguing this: hey, grocery store owner, i'm taking this three-pounder of ground meat right because some time ago i feel i was overcharged for another pack o' meat that turned out not to be as tasty as i hoped (oh, and i, uh, bought it in another store). These guys are hopeless. But let someone take from their labors, and we'll need howl-squelchers.

[John Robertson]

right you are, and right on. look at 15, then 17. One guy is trying to argue that one class of federal felony is superior to the other. the other guy is arguing this: hey, grocery store owner, i'm taking this three-pounder of ground meat right now because some time ago i feel i was overcharged for another pack o' meat that turned out not to be as tasty as i hoped (oh, and i, uh, bought it in another store). These guys are hopeless. But let someone take from their labors, and we'll need howl-squelchers.