tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38495605.post4962747818472869620..comments2023-09-07T04:13:08.133-04:00Comments on johndegen.com: follow the money... out of the creators' pockets and into Google'sUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38495605.post-87623267859049930412010-10-05T10:11:28.989-04:002010-10-05T10:11:28.989-04:00One reason the focus is on Google is because Googl...One reason the focus is on Google is because Google is the only member of the group of companies that serve ads to pirates that is (A) a public company with many and varied accounting and conduct responsibilities (such as not profiting from theft) they undertake in exchange for being allowed to raise money in the public markets, and (B) the only one of that group of public companies that serve advertising that is also a defendant in at least two of the largest copyright infringement lawsuits of all time--both class actions and both involving creators as plaintiffs.<br /><br />Therefore while it is true that others engage in the offending behavior, Google is in a special class.<br /><br />I always say that a top CEO can't really lay claim to being a honcho until he's taken the 5th before Congress and survived. So I guess that lies ahead for some people.<br /><br />And for the record, we represent artists, songwriters and indie labels, but also have represented technology companies for 10 years and have the distinction of being on the seller's side of several of the 10 "worst" tech deals. Which I guess is why they made me a fellow of the World Technology Network.Chris Castlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09652154277551773055noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38495605.post-55433688946498847452010-09-11T01:49:13.254-04:002010-09-11T01:49:13.254-04:00I'm not quite sure why the focus is so much on...I'm not quite sure why the focus is so much on Google here. We're talking about a site that provides automatic adds for websites, which in this case apparently have not been found illegal, and it provides links to sites who provide links to a locker site that may or may not contain a copy of a film. Considering that about 5 clicks can get you from any site to any other site these days, that doesn't impress me too much.<br /><br />It seems the DMCA works as advertised as far as notice and take-down is concerned, but what the author neglects to mention is the need to go after those who uploaded the files. They are the ones who created the infringement, and who should be liable for their actions. That's a relatively small group, especially as far as original uploads are concerned, but no action seems to be taken against them whatsoever. Why all this focus on Google, which according to the law is doing nothing wrong here?Pieterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07040703013730850578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38495605.post-34357148596287314922010-09-10T13:53:09.013-04:002010-09-10T13:53:09.013-04:00But if you'd looked a little further you would...But if you'd looked a little further you would have found Most Sony ads delivered by Microsoft<br />Microsoft <br />Microsoft<br /><br />You've and axe to grind with Google<br /><br />Maybe if Multi Billion Dollar corporations like Disney and Sony stopped using these methods of delivery we'd have less of a problem.<br />There's no one here more guilty than the other<br />But everyone gets left out of the story but GoogleGruesomehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13993466573477002853noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38495605.post-38197198896994213722010-09-10T13:01:02.938-04:002010-09-10T13:01:02.938-04:00Gruesome,
I'm not sure we're at all on th...Gruesome,<br /><br />I'm not sure we're at all on the same page. Here's what Ms. Seidler writes on her blog:<br /><br />"Aside from the companies whose ads appear on various pirate sites, and perhaps more significant, are the companies that generate their own revenue stream by providing the interface for the pop-up ads themselves. The companies whose advertising appears on these pirate websites do not place the ads on those sites directly. Instead, they sub-contract with various ad agencies to place online advertising throughout the web."<br /><br />As I mentioned in my last comment, I think all companies should take care about where the ads they purchase show up... but the point is they are purchasing those ads. The bigger problem is the companies selling the ads -- like Google.<br /><br />Wait, did I say Google again?<br /><br />Google.Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04803855978550653817noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38495605.post-33851775858599160102010-09-10T12:28:37.760-04:002010-09-10T12:28:37.760-04:00There you go again,
Google Yes!
But what about So...There you go again, <br />Google Yes!<br />But what about Sony, Microsoft, Net Flix, I'm not talking about Bias in copyright.<br />I support many of your positions on copyright<br />But overall it's not as simple as it seems when I Goliath like Sony who makes billions off of copyright is a contributor to adds on these sites.<br />Most of the adds for Sony were not served up by adsense but direct from Sony.<br />Maybe your headline should be "If you can't beat em join em...Sony sells to pirates"Gruesomehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13993466573477002853noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38495605.post-44191283238572210362010-09-10T10:10:26.051-04:002010-09-10T10:10:26.051-04:00Gruesome,
I don't think I've ever been op...Gruesome,<br /><br />I don't think I've ever been opaque about my "bias" on the issue of copyright. I believe in protecting rightsholders. To me, that's the point of copyright.<br /><br />Furthermore, I believe copyright is a bundle of important <i>individual</i> rights, and that separating creators from users is a false dichotomy, since anyone seriously interacting with the Act is both creator and user at once.<br /><br />I am completely sympathetic to Ms. Seidler in her dilemma, and excuse no-one who is making money from her work through association with infringing practices. <br /><br />I DO believe companies should be extra careful about where their ads appear. I also believe the enablers of those ads - in this case Google and their adsense program - have a primary responsibility to make sure their program is not profiting on the toil of uncompensated creators. I agree with Ms. Seidler's assessment, expressed in the NPR interview and elsewhere, that Google is more than technologically capable of taking this responsibility seriously.Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04803855978550653817noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38495605.post-58704328679345836052010-09-10T09:33:00.915-04:002010-09-10T09:33:00.915-04:00Hmmm perhaps I wasn't clear, john uses Google ...Hmmm perhaps I wasn't clear, john uses Google int he headline with follow the money in an article related to money flowing from illegal sites. However, Ms. Seidler clearly makes the same accusations against the companies mentioned above but for some reason absent from John's article.<br />You're right nothing to do with the central issue, just the biasGruesomehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13993466573477002853noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38495605.post-37041601155323668882010-09-09T21:26:24.351-04:002010-09-09T21:26:24.351-04:00Hmmm...I'd say nothing.
WSHmmm...I'd say nothing.<br /><br />WSAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38495605.post-22681762371676774442010-09-09T14:29:08.142-04:002010-09-09T14:29:08.142-04:00I'm not sure what either The Mad Hatter or Gru...I'm not sure what either The Mad Hatter or Gruesome's comments have to do with the central issue of the posting.Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04803855978550653817noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38495605.post-51301235947710793052010-09-09T14:23:05.261-04:002010-09-09T14:23:05.261-04:00don't get me wrong, I do have some sympathy fo...don't get me wrong, I do have some sympathy for what happened. <br />But.. there's always a but<br />other than stories about the misfortune of this movie, I'd never heard of it and I can't find a legal venue on line to view it.<br />Netflix is coming and perhaps that will fill some void in the delivery of these films to those willing to pay but if you can't get your film in front of your audience what do you expect?Gruesomehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13993466573477002853noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38495605.post-27002441661637724362010-09-09T14:16:41.291-04:002010-09-09T14:16:41.291-04:00I think you've learned something from your sen...I think you've learned something from your sensational headline writing.<br />I knew you were good at editorial license.<br />The headline has google but does she also not mention Sony(rather ironic as a member of the mpaa)<br />Microsoft<br />Netflix<br />Dell<br /><br />Ya I know, none of these guys have the resources to ensure their advertisements aren't on cyber lockers for streaming movies.Gruesomehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13993466573477002853noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38495605.post-48729190414206710672010-09-09T11:50:48.268-04:002010-09-09T11:50:48.268-04:00I have no idea why the Mad Hatter chose to post a ...I have no idea why the Mad Hatter chose to post a comment that had virtually nothing to do with the article above, since the interview subject is Ellen Seidler, not Chris Castle. I'll stick to the issue and post that I find it absolutely galling that everyone seems to be getting rich off this film except for the people who actually created, funded, produced, directed and performed in it. The unfathomable greed of people who believe they can simply take what they want and worse, make money from it, is truly repellent.Jennannenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38495605.post-13125696787111616452010-09-09T00:40:04.082-04:002010-09-09T00:40:04.082-04:00Ah, but you didn't mention that Chris is a law...Ah, but you didn't mention that Chris is a lawyer who works for the 'Entertainment Industry'.<br /><br />I'm not saying that he shouldn't have an opinion. I just like to see disclosure.<br /><br />FYI, I have my own small recording studio, so yes, I have an interest too, and yes, I disagree with Chris.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18354974465136846413noreply@blogger.com