Dancing on the grave of Hollywood and the reformation of the music industry

Written By: - Date published: 7:57 pm, August 3rd, 2014 - 144 comments
Categories: business, copyright, Economy, film, internet, music, us politics, you couldn't make this shit up - Tags:

During every revolution there will be winners and losers, change can mean pain for some, especially for the bloodsucking leaches & parasites, that have entrenched their positions, after years of mediocrity.

Yes the death of Hollywood and current Music industry would cause financial pain for some, including some of the arguably overpaid actors and performers as well, but a bonus for those of us that like to listen to their music live, and a boon for entertainment entrepreneurs.

The death of Hollywood and all those that support it, ‘including or current PM’, can’t come soon enough! Hollywood through my eyes has become nothing but another United States propaganda machine and like the music industry a whore to the almighty dollar, how many times have you sat there watching Rocky 7 or something similar, with that empty sickly feeling in your stomach, not dissimilar to the feeling you get after eating the United States range of fast food, that feeling of, ‘haven’t I seen this movie before’, with an United States flag flying in the back ground, as the hero in-braces the girl.

In the future though hopefully we may look back with thanks, on how Kim.com helped facilitate the long overdue death of Hollywood and the reformation of the Music industry.

Like him or loath him, Kim.com is a entrepreneur, a result of the internet revolution, he saw the demand and supplied it.

Oh the irony that the country that prides itself on entrepreneurship, freedom and rags to riches stories, is now trying to shut him down and throw him in jail.

MrSmith

144 comments on “Dancing on the grave of Hollywood and the reformation of the music industry ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. infused 1
    3 August 2014 at 8:24 pm

    Urgh.

    I’m losing my will to even troll this site anymore.

    Don’t like Hollywood? Watch some movies done by armatures. It’s good. There’s so much out there these days.

    The only reason kim is mad, is he got caught. He didn’t give a shit before that. It’s quite ironic that you go on about overpaid actors when that’s exactly what kim became, profiting off Hollywood.

    Kim wasn’t that start of the internet revolution. It started way before him in the ‘warez scene’ aka hacker/cracker scene. Kim just glorified and benefited from it. I bet a lot of you don’t know that’s where a lot of his origins come from as a hacker. Do some research.

    This is embarrassing to read. A year or two ago, this site actually had some substance. Now it’s just hacked togeathor pieces of dribble shit.

    • Lanthanide 1.1
      3 August 2014 at 8:44 pm

      Don’t like Hollywood? Watch some movies done by armatures. It’s good. There’s so much out there these days.

      Yip, my exact thoughts too.

      Hollywood ain’t going anywhere.

      Now, the music industry players, they are likely to look quite different in 20 years than they do now. But most of them will continue to exist in some way. They likely won’t be raking in huge cash off their indentured artists, since the artists got other options these days.

      But if you want to spend $200M to make a blockbuster movie (which are still profitable, Hollywood-accounting aside), you’re hardly going to do that without the funders to back it and the massive corps of skilled technicians required to make it a reality.

    • lprent 1.2
      3 August 2014 at 9:47 pm

      Watch some movies done by armatures.

      Made by stick figures? Most of the directors tend towards that I’d agree. Especially in their personal presentation and in the way that they back fill most characters.

      Oh I see – you meant amateurs?

      I’m losing my will to even troll this site anymore.

      What an incentive….

    • felix 1.3
      3 August 2014 at 11:59 pm

      “I’m losing my will to even troll this site anymore.”

      5 years without a bite, surprised you’ve lasted this long.

  2. Ad 2
    3 August 2014 at 8:26 pm

    You call it a revolution, I call it accelerated cultural entropy. It may well not be reversible, but that don’t necessarily make it good.

    • You can now have the choice of a thousand tv channels instead of 3, but wall to wall are you more satisfied? I ain’t.
    • You can now watch all the porn you could wish for in complete privacy, but overall do we have greater erotic fulfillment? Sigh.
    • You can download music of all kinds and qualities and yet still those radio stations that prefer mainstream pop still reign, and are we surprised? Not here.
    • You can even avoid shopping in downtown shops by ordering anything on line, but have we really replaced it with a deeper meaning to our lives? And what would that revolution’s success be measured by? Simply, I’d suggest, merely different kinds of multinationals to the old cultural ones.
    • You may not miss industrial scale superstar prog rock and in fact may feel its absence a triumph, but in the end that’s merely your taste, not a personal capture of cultural virtue. I Gotta Whole Lotta Lerve
    • You may not like blockbuster movies on the scale of David Lean, George Lucas, or Peter Jackson, but without a studio and distribution industry you are unlikely to get that scale of greatness again, because it needs industrial scale. Sic transit gloria Frodo.

    So once these cultural “revolutionaries” sit triumphantly on their pile of dead industry, plucking their ever-so-soulful guitar, us crusty old modernists can regale them round the campfire with the olde worlde stories of the epic, the saga, the common cultural language, the masterpieces that shook the world.

    • Hanswurst 2.1
      3 August 2014 at 8:35 pm

      Absolutely. The post doesn’t seem to present any particular vision for what the artistic landscape would look like after this “revolution”, so I very much assume that it would end up as you suggest. In fact, the article doesn’t really say much at all except that there are some American films that the author doesn’t like, and that Kim DotCom is good.

      • greywarbler 2.1.1
        4 August 2014 at 1:55 pm

        @ Hanswurst 8,.35
        I have not noticed your comments inspiring thought. This one is much the same as others. Try again. Harder.

        What you say about the post –
        “In fact, the article doesn’t really say much at all except that there are some American films that the author doesn’t like, and that Kim DotCom is good.” –
        applies to the gist of your reply.

        This piece –
        Yes the death of Hollywood and current Music industry would cause financial pain for some, including some of the arguably overpaid actors and performers as well, but a bonus for those of us that like to listen to their music live, and a boon for entertainment entrepreneurs.

        says that there would be financial loss for some and some actors and performers are overpaid. Also it says that music live fans will find it a good thing, and it will be a great thing for entertainment entrepreneurs.

        You could try to reply to those points, or ask for further information.

        • Hanswurst 2.1.1.1
          5 August 2014 at 8:38 pm

          I have not noticed your comments inspiring thought. This one is much the same as others. Try again. Harder.

          I’d be surprised if you’d noticed my comments here doing anything much at all, seeing as you could probably count them on the fingers of one hand. Besides which, I was making a brief reply to an article that made very sweeping statements with very little, and very selective detail. As far as I’m concerned, a post is trying to make an argument that is complete in some sense, whereas a comment on that post is simply about making observations based on the material in the article. I wasn’t especially keen to reply in detail to this post, but seeing as you asked so nicely, and without trying very hard:

          The article mixes up its categories, meaning that it isn’t clear whether it’s arguing against legitimate artists being fleeced by “overpaid” actors and the profiteering big studios, or whether it’s about the predominance of an apparently vacuous American culture and the need to cater for “those of us that like to hear their music live”. Either way, I’m not seeing how a wholesale undercutting of copyright via networks like the former megaupload would help the industry flourish. Not all actors or musicians who are reliant (indirectly or indirectly) on major labels are overpaid, and I think handwaving threats to their livelihoods as “financial pain for some” while implicitly lumping them in with (putatively) overpaid individuals and profiteering studios is disrespectful and dangerous.

          That this occurs on the basis of arguing for an apparently consumer-led revolution (on The Standard, no less), catering for “those of us that like to listen to their music live”, is doubly galling. It invites a parallel with the mainstream media catering to their audiences’ appetite for entertainment in order to sell advertising, rather than informing with a high level of analysis. Music (and the arts in general) suffer from a relatively low valuation by society as a whole. Music is something that one can study for many years; putting notes together vertically (harmony) horizontally (melody) or a mixture of the two (counterpoint), and instrumentating those notes, is a difficult business about which most people – including many who make money off it professionally – understand almost nothing. Improvising is no less difficult, playing an instrument is in itself a highly skilled discipline, recording sound or producing synthetic timbres requires equipment and considerable know-how… the list goes on. Many people undertake these without either formal training or an exceptional degree of aptitude and manage to be financially and popularly successful. That is fine, but the results are distinctly samey, because their understanding of music is limited to a couple of chords on a guitar, a 4/4 metre and a melody which is easy for them to sing to the words they have written.

          Now, on one level, that’s fine. Why should people pay to hear something complicated and challenging which they don’t understand, when they can get easy entertainment for a much lower price? I recall Michael Laws making a similar argument a couple of years ago in favour of ceasing funding for the NZSO. This is a symptom of the low value attributed by society to the serious endeavours of musicians. In view of the study and practice required, live performers are scandalously underpaid. That is partly due to the very high quality of recorded music available, and the general contentment – and indeed, preference – of audiences for hearing material that they already know. I don’t see how making recorded music more readily and cheaply available will improve that situation. What I do see is what Lanthanide refers to above: large studios and recording labels being able to produce big projects that require a critical financial and infrastructural mass to get off the ground. Yes, they produce much that I would consider to be disposable and derivative, but so do small independent labels; Hollywood also brings the sound of more challenging and complex music to popular ears from the pens of John Williams, Jerry Goldsmith and even lesser practitioners like Hans Zimmer. Those who take notice then have the possibility of looking further afield to discover what other, more challenging fare is available. Large labels also have divisions that produce less lucrative projects for niche markets; that is on the back of the initiatives that make large profits. Because of the aforementioned low valuation of musical endeavours by society, I have a very strong fear that reducing the industry to a bunch of niche-players servicing smaller markets would result in an industry that almost exclusively reflected a popular taste for a few simple chords and melodies that just serve no further purpose than making words audible to the listener.

          Finally, why does the article refer to Rocky VII? Why not to Vertigo, 2001: A Space Odyssey or Saving Private Ryan? Oscar Wilde observed that we have bad popes to thank for some of the greatest art ever produced, and good popes to thank for some of the very worst. The quality of artistic work and the lot of artists does not, unfortunately, automatically go hand in hand with enlightened governance and a socially equitable means of distribution. In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the quality of complex and learned art was preserved by the patronage of an aristocracy that endeavoured to understand it and considered its upkeep to be a matter of prestige. That wasn’t a perfect system. Nowadays, it is preserved by the crumbs on offer from large and (increasingly less) profitable studios. That isn’t a perfect system, either – or even a good one. However, it does ensure that a significant body of practitioners remain with the skill and understanding based on a couple of millennia of research and thought. How to replace this system and cut out the exorbitant profiteering that goes on is a complex subject, and coming up with models for intellectual copyright and distribution that achieve that is difficult. Ironically, the simplification in the above article seems to me to reflect the low social valuation of music that sees it as a bunch of songs woven from moonbeams and the heart and soul of mediocre performers, designed to entertain people who know very little about it.

          You could reply to these points, or ask for further information.

  3. karol 3
    3 August 2014 at 8:42 pm

    Reformation does not necessarily mean a revolution that will make a fairer world where people and communities have more control over the way they live.

    I’ve been seeing people talking of the digital revolution delivering stronger democracy since the 90s. In the 70s-80s the young entrepreneurs of Silicon Valley promised many things. Many started in garages and on shoe strings. And out of the crowd came Bill Gates and Apple, etc.

    And we had google promising never to do evil, and then came Facebook…. but while the networks of the corporate, wealthy and powerful are still strong, they will continue to rest control of any entrepreneurial change.

    It was much the same with the rise of the Hollywood industry out of the milieu of various independent and entrepreneurial film makers.

    The real revolutionaries, still building their networks, are the collaborative networks of open source – without flashy stars… and the likes of Tim berners Lee – not in it for the money.

    At best I see KDC bringing screen, music and game productions more fully into the digitally networked age….. but without substantially changing the capitalist under-pinnings of the entertainment industry.

  4. outofbed 4
    3 August 2014 at 9:22 pm

    The Hero embraces the girl in braces

  5. Populuxe1 5
    3 August 2014 at 9:59 pm

    I’ve read this four or five times now. Is it some kind of abstract prose poetry? It’s a bit of a worry if The Standard is reduced to inarticulate rambling moans

    ” It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.” – Shakespeare

    If you don’t like Hollywood movies, fine. Don’t watch them. There’s loads of interesting stuff available on line. You may, however, have ignored that Dotcom’s piracy is just as, if not more damaging to independent makers.

    I am assuming you probably you’re just a passive consumer rather than the creative type, otherwise you wouldn’t be so blase about intellectual property. Unless you are a big celebrity who can make a living off endless grueling tours, some percentage of the profit from record sales is vital.

    Artists can’t live off applause. They have a right to make a living from their work the same as anyone else.

    • karol 5.1
      3 August 2014 at 10:03 pm

      It’s a bit of a worry if The Standard is reduced to inarticulate rambling moans

      Sound like some sort of robotic sci fi.

    • Clemgeopin 5.2
      4 August 2014 at 12:01 am

      “You may, however, have ignored that Dotcom’s piracy is just as, if not more damaging to independent makers”

      I want to make a few points for your consideration.

      [1] How do you say it was ‘piracy’? It was a cloud private storage website with rights given to copy right holders to have copy right materials removed. Not different from thousands of such cloud storage facilitating websites AROUND the world. There IS absolutely no way any one can stop distribution of digital material around the globe (and beyond) any more. This has already become the norm and will only get more widespread.

      What needs to happen is a different, smarter, fair and profitable adaption to the modern reality of technology and need.

      [2] I am not happy/comfortable with the alleged way Kim.Com was ‘induced’ into getting his residency here by FBI aided by our government, and then subjected to illegal surveillance and the subsequent over the top raids and ill treatment. What happened to the ‘Innocent until proved’ principle of law and justice?

      [3] I am also not happy in New Zealand losing our own independence and becoming an obedient lap dog agent of USA.

      [4] Regarding his hacking ‘criminal’ episode in his teenage or youth, here is quite a revealing interview of him that may shed some light on the matter. I was impressed. See what you think.

      ZBTV: Kim Dotcom – Starting the Internet Party
      http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/auckland/video/zbtv-kim-dotcom-part-1-20jul2014

      ZBTV: Kim Dotcom – Early life, hacking etc
      http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/auckland/video/zbtv-kim-dotcom-part-2-20jul2014

      ZBTV: Kim Dotcom – NZ’s internet and Hollywood licensing
      http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/auckland/video/zbtv-kim-dotcom-part-3-20jul2014

      ZBTV: Kim Dotcom – Heroes, kids and technology
      http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/auckland/video/zbtv-kim-dotcom-part-4-20jul2014

      • infused 5.2.1
        4 August 2014 at 12:13 am

        sigh

        You know nothing.

        Since I run a site that’s similar, I can explain.

        Mr Dot.Com was sneaky. When a file was uploaded, it used an algorithm that located an identical file via hash/md5/whatever he was using. it would then create a link to said file.

        So, there could be 100,000 links to one file.

        When copyright holders filed a claim to remove said link, it was only removing the link, not the file.

        This is what the whole case is based around. Kim knew this. Yet he was telling copyright holders it removed the file.

        It was only by some external digging that this got found out (but everyone knew anyway).

        It wasn’t ‘just some cloud site’.

        And your argument is further bullshit when you say you can’t stop this. It’s fucking easy. Kim wanted to make more money, hence using the link method.

        Youtube has no problem removing copyright material. If you upload copyright material, it’s detected within a matter of seconds. Google had to make this technology. There was nothing stopping Kim and Mega doing the same.

        Feel free to continue to excuse mega/kim.

        • Colonial Viper 5.2.1.1
          4 August 2014 at 12:30 am

          Tell it to the judge.

          Also, YouTube got good at taking down copyrighted material. It didn’t do it effectively, for years.

          • Draco T Bastard 5.2.1.1.1
            4 August 2014 at 8:36 am

            And don’t forget the false positives where companies claim ownership of stuff that isn’t theirs.

        • Clemgeopin 5.2.1.2
          4 August 2014 at 12:40 am

          “Mr Dot.Com was sneaky. When a file was uploaded, it used an algorithm that located an identical file via hash/md5/whatever he was using. it would then create a link to said file.

          So, there could be 100,000 links to one file.’

          You know this how? or is it just your guess? Remember the FBI/USA took the files away from NZ illegally in spite of our court orders, but they did not have the passwords, key etc to open them and KDC had offered to give it to them or even go to USA voluntarily with some specific conditions (which I don’t remember now)?

          • Chris 5.2.1.2.1
            4 August 2014 at 8:29 am

            He knows this because he obviously works in the industry as that’s how any sane person would run a file sharing system. De-duping is one of the first things you’d do as it increases your storage capacity massively. Even IF kdc didn’t do for piracy per se, the pirated content was the most popular (surprise, surprise) and thus the most efficient to host in terms of storage space vs. ad impressions, so he was incentivised to make sure lots of people got their fix on his site. If he was so sure of his innocence, then how come Mega is just dropbox with encryption, rather than operating on his old, filelocker style business model?

            I appreciate kdc for taking to Key’s hypocrisy, that doesn’t mean he’s not also a tool though.

            • Colonial Viper 5.2.1.2.1.1
              4 August 2014 at 8:42 am

              He knows this because he obviously works in the industry as that’s how any sane person would run a file sharing system. De-duping is one of the first things you’d do as it increases your storage capacity massively

              You’re making a tonne of unsubstantiated assumptions that require fundamental internal technical knowledge of Mega Upload.

              If Dotcom was so guilty, why didn’t Hollywood bring up standard copyright charges against him, instead of organising some complex NZ based FBI/NZ govt takedown?

              • infused …
                4 August 2014 at 9:59 am

                If you actually read the material that’s out there, you’d have some sort of clue.

                • weka …
                  4 August 2014 at 11:56 am

                  Your implication is that you have read the material yourself, and yet you can’t answer the question in lay terms. Why should I believe what you say then?

                  • infused …
                    4 August 2014 at 1:26 pm

                    It’s in the document linked at 6.1.1.1.2.

                    • weka …
                      4 August 2014 at 1:39 pm

                      If you want the general public to understand the issues, then linking to legal documents isn’t the way to go about it. Try just answering the question.

                    • infused …
                      4 August 2014 at 1:45 pm

                      If I just answer the questions, then you guys spin the same shit about ‘where is the evidence’.

                      So take it or leave it. I don’t care.

                    • weka …
                      4 August 2014 at 6:08 pm

                      I’m not ‘you guys’. I’m actually interested in an answer to CV’s question from someone who thinks KDC is a criminal waiting to be convicted and has enough technical expertise to give rationales for their view.

                      Sure, people are going to want backup. But citations without opinion are pretty useless IMO and a lazy way of debating. Throw a whole bunch of specialist info out there knowing that most people aren’t going to bother reading it or have the expertise to understand it.

          • nadis 5.2.1.2.2
            4 August 2014 at 10:10 am

            It’s clearly explained in the court filings from the US.

            Also there are numerous articles online – the likes of gizmag and wired – which explains why the dotcom model was different to the youtube, dropbox etc implementations. These companies removed the file on receipt of DCMA takedown notice, not the link.

            There are also internal dotcom communications referenced in the US court documents which show mega stuff talking about removing individual links but not the files which had numerous other links to them.

            The multiple link/single file implementation only makes sense from a “beating DCMA” approach. Store 1 file, have 1000 unique links to it. DCMA takedown notice references a link. Mega removes that link leaving 999 other valid links to the offending file. No other mainstream cloud storage facility uses this.

            Even under his new business, Dotcom is allowing illegal filesharing. Try an experiment – look for a copyrighted file on mega.co.nz or dropbox.

            I’ve just searched for the movie “Zero Dark Thirty”. Within 45 seconds I have started a download to my PC of an avi file. Its easier and quicker than torrenting. On Dropbox – no luck, no matter how hard you look it is impossiblee to find a publicly available link to a copyrighted file.

            There are numerous link catalogues for mega.co.nz for instance mega-search.me

            • Colonial Viper 5.2.1.2.2.1
              4 August 2014 at 11:46 am

              DCMA takedown notice references a link. Mega removes that link leaving 999 other valid links to the offending file. No other mainstream cloud storage facility uses this.

              So Mega fully complied with the DCMA notices as delivered.

        • Lanthanide 5.2.1.3
          4 August 2014 at 8:58 am

          I don’t really see that particular mode of operation as being substantially worse than just storing multiple identical copies of the file and removing each identical copy.

          There would still be 99,999 other copies remaining, pointed to by 99,999 other links.

          Sure, this minimizes his back-end storage requirements, but I don’t see any practical difference between removing a link, and removing the file that the link pointed to.

          • infused 5.2.1.3.1
            4 August 2014 at 10:00 am

            If it was copyright, the file should have been removed, not the links.

            • Lanthanide 5.2.1.3.1.1
              4 August 2014 at 11:07 am

              Right, so Mega could have just stored 100,000 separate copies and had exactly the same result as what we see now.

              • infused …
                4 August 2014 at 1:27 pm

                He could of. But that would be pretty unfeasible to run.

                • Lanthanide …
                  4 August 2014 at 1:50 pm

                  Don’t see why. All it would take is more storage space.

                  Instead of indexing on a unique hash, index on the user + filename and you’ve got a unique identifier for each file right there. In fact such a system would be simpler to implement than the hashing one would be.

                  • infused …
                    4 August 2014 at 1:55 pm

                    Yes and that’s the way I use to do it.

                    However, your space requirements increase a thousand fold, easy.

                    Storage is cheap. Distributed storage still isn’t.

                    Hashing is not that hard, and it’s easier for me. If a copyright complaint is filed and found to be true. I just have to nuke one file (which is what kim should have done).

                  • infused …
                    4 August 2014 at 1:58 pm

                    Incidentally, it was medgauploads raid that made me implement hashing. I always had it on the table, but it was in the too hard basket.

        • Draco T Bastard 5.2.1.4
          4 August 2014 at 9:56 am

          When a file was uploaded, it used an algorithm that located an identical file via hash/md5/whatever he was using.

          Which wouldn’t work because every file uploaded would have a different hash. Different recording lengths, different recording methods and compression algorithms and different sound all act on the hash. They would have to ask Ah, I see that you’re uploading a file named ‘Batman Returns’ do you mean this ‘Batman Returns’? and that would be so bloody evident that it wouldn’t be funny.

          It was only by some external digging that this got found out (but everyone knew anyway).

          I suspect, after reading what you said, that the external digging and ‘everyone knowing’ was just people such as yourself making unsubstantiated and very, very wrong assumptions.

          • infused 5.2.1.4.1
            4 August 2014 at 10:03 am

            It does work buddy, because every file storage site does it. Storage isn’t infinite.

            When works get released, by ‘warez groups’ they are one standard length. These are mostly what people were downloading.

            “I suspect, after reading what you said, that the external digging and ‘everyone knowing’ was just people such as yourself making unsubstantiated and very, very wrong assumptions.”

            No. It was people getting the same file from a different link. With the information some of the copyright holders had who had access to the megaupload system. Go read.

            • Draco T Bastard 5.2.1.4.1.1
              4 August 2014 at 10:16 am

              It does work buddy, because every file storage site does it. Storage isn’t infinite.

              That doesn’t make any sense unless you expect everyone to always upload exactly the same content and that’s something that you cannot do. If you did you’d end up replacing peoples files with other files (yes, I have come across two different files with the same MD5 hash).

              When works get released, by ‘warez groups’ they are one standard length. These are mostly what people were downloading.

              Which sounds like another unsubstantiated assumption on your part. Sure, file-sharing via software like BitTorrent may mean that some people were uploading those same files but a lot of people would have been uploading their own legal copies.

              • Lanthanide …
                4 August 2014 at 11:09 am

                Draco, infused is right, in that most copies of movies are identical.

                It is not the case that 100,000 copies of a popular movie stored on various people’s computers are totally unique.

                It more likely that there 200 different versions of that popular movie, the top 5 of which would comprise about 90,000 copies, and the remaining 195 versions would make up the final 10,000 copies.

                So, Mega Upload would end up storing 200 different copies of the same movie, instead of 100,000.

                • Draco T Bastard …
                  4 August 2014 at 1:46 pm

                  infused is right, in that most copies of movies are identical.

                  He’s right about that but that doesn’t mean that most of the ones uploaded to Mega were all illegally downloaded in the first place. It is, after all, completely legal to format shift. Which is the big question really. It really wouldn’t be any cloud storage facilities place to question if the copy uploaded was legal.

                  So, Mega Upload would end up storing 200 different copies of the same movie, instead of 100,000.

                  Perhaps.

      • Colonial Viper 5.2.2
        4 August 2014 at 12:40 am

        The above ZBTV interview of Dotcom in one 41 min video. He is excellent in this.

        http://www.nzherald.co.nz/national/news/video.cfm?c_id=1503075&gal_cid=1503075&gallery_id=144347

  6. Pete 6
    3 August 2014 at 11:18 pm

    Look, the fact is Kim Dotcomm hosted unauthorised copies of copyright material on his website. Now you may very well – as I do – take issue with the heavy handed raid on him. You may also question why this is being pursued as a criminal matter rather than a civil one. I have a whole lot of issues around fair use and the term of copyright that I think need to be addressed. But Dotcom has a case to answer.

    In the case of Hollywood and the music industry, Sturgeon’s law applies: 90% of everything is crap. But I’m not prepared to write off the industry that gave us jazz, the blues, R&B, rock and roll, rap, hip-hop, grunge, country and so on. Similarly we are in a golden age of television – The Wire, Breaking Bad, Mad Men, Game of Thrones, The Daily Show, This Week With John Oliver, Boardwalk Empire. I could go on. It’s the summer blockbuster season at the moment, so most of the stuff coming out of the US at present is pure spectacle. I’m not going to apologise because I’m looking forward to Guardians of the Galaxy or hoping Disney’s efforts with the Star Wars franchise won’t be as disastrous as George Lucas’s last 3 attempts. The 10% of non-crap in my view probably isn’t the same as your 10% and that’s ok, but the American cultural hegemony isn’t as total as you imply, either.

    • Colonial Viper 6.1
      4 August 2014 at 12:32 am

      Look, the fact is Kim Dotcomm hosted unauthorised copies of copyright material on his website.

      Usual practice is to charge the person who infringed upon the copyright and license. That is, the person who uploaded the file for distribution. You don’t sue the video tape manufacturer because someone was using their video tapes to make pirate copies of movies.

      • lurgee 6.1.1
        4 August 2014 at 6:38 am

        To quote from infused’s post, above:

        When a file was uploaded, it used an algorithm that located an identical file via hash/md5/whatever he was using. it would then create a link to said file.

        So, there could be 100,000 links to one file.

        When copyright holders filed a claim to remove said link, it was only removing the link, not the file.

        So no at all the same as being a video or audio tape manufacturer, who makes a neutral product that has the potential to be abused; it is designed [u]and operated[/u] to be abused.

        Dotcom relies on Hollywood drek and banal pop tosh – does anyone think the people using his services are downloading the works of Jean Luc Godard and Duke Ellington? His ‘service’ is a symptom of the problem, not a solution.

        • Colonial Viper 6.1.1.1
          4 August 2014 at 8:45 am

          Where’s the technical documentation to prove that infused’s claims are correct? That when Dotcom was complying with a Hollywood takedown notice all he was doing was removing one link out of many?

          Again – why is the person who is doing all the sharing of pirated material not being the one pursued, but instead the IT storage provider?

          • infused 6.1.1.1.1
            4 August 2014 at 10:07 am

            Because he was making it harder for the works to be removed.

            The information about this is out there. The lawsuits came when they figured out what was happening.

            Copyright holders had access to his system to remove the files. But they could only do so on reported links. So that one file needed 100,000 copyright notices.

            • Colonial Viper 6.1.1.1.1.1
              4 August 2014 at 10:31 am

              Copyright holders had access to his system to remove the files. But they could only do so on reported links. So that one file needed 100,000 copyright notices.

              They say that Mega Upload was issued with several millions of notices. They also say that Dotcom’s system was used for child porn. (Usual smear tactic). How come they are pursuing him on Hollywood copyright infringement, but not distribution of child porn?

            • Draco T Bastard 6.1.1.1.1.2
              4 August 2014 at 1:48 pm

              The information about this is out there.

              Then you should be able to provide it. Of course, even then it’ll only be hear-say as it hasn’t been proved that that was what he was doing.

          • nadis 6.1.1.1.2
            4 August 2014 at 10:13 am

            summary in paragraphs 10 and 11 here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/192754949/Mega-Evidence

            Numerous further discussions later in document

            • Colonial Viper 6.1.1.1.2.1
              4 August 2014 at 10:32 am

              OK. And all this required an armed FBI raid – why? You do realise if the govt screws up its allegations, arrest or prosecution in such a huge way, the whole lot deserves to be thrown out?

              • nadis …
                4 August 2014 at 10:45 am

                Well the raid was over reaching – I suspect some gung ho Police management got a raging erection at the thought of an armed raid with the FBI. The GCHQ screw up was more administritave rather than malicious. But ultimately the raid doesn’t matter. All that matters is does the reqquest for extradtion of DotCom meet the requirements of the Extradition Act of 1999. I’m not a lawyer but people who are says it does, and reading the US summary of evidence, I suspect Dotcom and his mates are off on holiday to the US at some point.

                If NZ authorities over stepped the market, then DotCom may have remedies for that (apologies, civil settlement), but as long as the extradition request doesnt rely on illegally found information in NZ, then the extradition hearing will go ahead without reference to that.

                One very minor possibility for DotCom is that he could throw his mates under the bus. He seems to have been very careful not to put things in email or skype, but his underlings talk very freely about breaking the law knowingly. DotCom tends to be referenced in thee third person, not directly. So the main thrust of the extradition from DotCom could be “show me evidence that I knew these things, and it is not just my staff being dodgy”

      • Clemgeopin 6.1.2
        4 August 2014 at 9:27 am

        I think so too.

        Besides, the fact that there were so many dodgy illegal wrong stuff that went on through the immigration process, ministerial (and FBI) knowledge and interference, illegal surveillance, illegal warrant execution, Key’s apology to KDC, blatant disobedience of judicial order not to send the confiscated materials abroad etc should have resulted in the aborting and dismissal of this case long time ago.

        Is New Zealand supposed to independently uphold the law and justice or is it supposed to simply do whatever USA wants and tells us to do?

        • Colonial Viper 6.1.2.1
          4 August 2014 at 10:33 am

          The latter it would seem…

        • nadis 6.1.2.2
          4 August 2014 at 10:35 am

          I think you are conflating two separate issues here. Issue 1 is the case against Dotcom in the US. Not for NZ to opine upon except for where it intersects with issue 2, the extradition.

          My understanding is that he will likely be extradited if:

          • it is an extraditable offence (sentence greater than 1 year in both countries, and is a criminal offence in NZ) – this does aplly
          • or the offence is in a treaty between NZ and the other country (this, I think, does not apply)

          In addition NZ can refuse to extradite on the grounds that the extraditee is being persecuted on humans right grtounds (ie sex, sexuality, religion,. nationality etc), has already been punished, is mentally ill etc.

          The fact that some of the things done to DotCom in NZ may have been illegal won’t in the end matter, if there is sufficient evidence from other legal sources to meet the extradition requirements. Colleagues who have worked as lawyers both here and in the states see no solution for Dotcom to avoid extradition save political interference. Hence the Internet Party. Prepare to stand strong David Cunliffe (if you become PM). I suspect there will be one bottom line in any IP coalition negotiations.

    • weka 6.2
      4 August 2014 at 12:42 am

      Golden age of tv maybe, but given the state of technology why do people in NZ have to wait so long to see many things, and be denied access to others? NZ is part of a global market that gets to control access to content. Back in the day that was ok, because the TV networks in NZ were still largely serving NZ, albeit within a commerical context. Now they serve global colonisation, so fuck ’em. If it takes years for a tv series to turn up in my local video shop, and in the meantime broadcast tv is full of let’s make everyone stupid programming, why wouldn’t I get a copy of what I want to see off the internet? This really isn’t rocket science, and the corporate side of the industry are by and large a bunch of greedy fucks who don’t like to share. They have no-one to blame but themselves.

      I stopped watching broadcast tv some years ago when both TVNZ and TV3 adopted practices like taking series off half way through and not giving notice of when they started them again. They basically treat tv watching as a grab the viewer for the night, rather than people with brains who want to follow what is going on over time. The whole 70 minute hour, or cutting scenes from programmes to make them fit the excessive advertising needs were another reason to say fuck ’em.

      • Lanthanide 6.2.1
        4 August 2014 at 9:03 am

        or cutting scenes from programmes to make them fit the excessive advertising needs were another reason to say fuck ‘em.

        I actually think that very rarely, if ever, happens in NZ.

        • karol 6.2.1.1
          4 August 2014 at 9:31 am

          In NZ they have tended to use compression more: i.e. speeding up the programme slightly. This tends to make the sound a bit cartoonish to the discerning ear.

          • Lanthanide 6.2.1.1.1
            4 August 2014 at 9:47 am

            Do you have any reference for that? Because I’ve never experienced that, to my knowledge.

            Also it’s actually pretty common to see schedules where programmes end/start at odd times, like 8:40pm etc, particularly on TV1, so that would suggest the stations have no problem with shows that don’t quite fit into a commercial hour.

            Finally, programmes from English speaking countries all have pretty much the same commercial content time scheduled, so anything from Australia / US / UK will fit our networks without requiring any sort of editing.

            • karol 6.2.1.1.1.1
              4 August 2014 at 10:44 am

              It’s not something I notice much. But people in the industry have talked about NZ’s use of time-compression in the past. e.g. Lucy Lawless once said she couldn’t watch herself as Xena on NZ TV because she sounded like a chipmunk, because of the compression.

              It’s done so they can fit in more ads.

              On searching, it looks like the digital switch over has changed how programmes are compressed.

              This article outlines some of the technical details about compression.

              People on this forum discuss the use of time-compression for Friends, in both the US and NZ.

              • Lanthanide …
                4 August 2014 at 11:29 am

                The first link is a technical description of bandwidth compression, it has nothing to do with the video content being time-compressed, as you are alleging.

                The second source I don’t find particularly reliable. Personally I am very sensitive to time shifts in video footage, and I have not noticed this in any shows I’ve seen broadcast.

                Certainly shifting from NTSC to PAL could result in time-compression, and I suspect in poor quality conversions this does happen, but it’s a very basic problem to be aware of and to fix. It seems extremely unlikely to me that the distributors would “allow” a degradation like this on purpose as a by-product of the conversion. If they wanted to time-compress shows, I am sure they would choose a certain % they wanted and then adjust it to fit that rate, not just end up with whatever the NTSC to PAL conversion process throws out (unless of course, that factor is value they want, or close enough).

                Finally, if this were really true, then every time someone says they download shows from the internet to watch them, their primary reason wouldn’t be “to see it ASAP”, but would include the time-compression that goes on when viewed on broadcast TV. This is literally the first time I have ever heard this allegation and I’m certain the complaint would be more prevalent, if time-compression were a common occurrence for broadcast TV.

                • Lanthanide …
                  4 August 2014 at 11:40 am

                  Right, did some research, and Pete is of course correct about the NTSC -> PAL speedup, which is 4%.

                  So, things that are originally shown in NTSC, if converted from NTSC to PAL, will be speedup very slightly here. But that’s still nothing like the 10% talked about in the 2nd reference where clearly one particular cable station was ruining the programmes to fit more adverts in.

                  Purely digital sources however, when aired in digital, will not have any speedup. All terrestrial TV in NZ is now digital, and increasingly shows are filmed in digital as well, so there should be no runtime difference in them.

                  • karol …
                    4 August 2014 at 12:26 pm

                    OK finally found some online references to use of Time-compression techniques on radio and TV in the US. I found it by searching through Auckland Libraries, academic databases in their digital library:

                    Honey, I shrunk Rush Limbaugh — and made room for more commercials
                    Alex Kuczynski N.Y. Times News Service. Journal Record [Oklahoma City, Okla] 10 Jan 2000:
                    It says:

                    With no fanfare, the digital program — called “Cash” in the direct manner of software nomenclature — has established a foothold in the radio industry in the last six months. General managers at about 50 radio stations across the country are using it, to speed up talk programs so that they can wedge in more commercials.
                    […]
                    Prime Image, a Silicon Valley technology company, introduced Cash last spring after its device for television stations — the Time Machine, which compresses both audio and visual signals to make more time for commercials on live programming — caught the eye of a radio station owner in Philadelphia.

                    The notion of time compression began to take hold in television about a decade ago, and has been used to moderately shrink syndicated programming like talk and game shows.

                    New York Times reported on it here.

                    • Lanthanide …
                      4 August 2014 at 1:21 pm

                      Yes, I can fully believe it happening in the US, but they have a hugely larger market than NZ for radio and TV so it’s not surprising that dodgy techniques would be going on somewhere at somepoint over there, and it would easily fly under the radar simply because of the variety of choice.

                • karol …
                  4 August 2014 at 12:00 pm

                  Lanth, fair enough on the difference between compression and time-compression. I don’t understand the technology. Trying to search for links on “compression” just throws up that sort of info.

                  People involved in the industry have said this to me in times past. It was pretty widely known.

                  A few years ago I checked this using analogue video tapes of off air recordings – same TV programme recorded in the US and a version recorded in NZ. Both shows were identical with neither having anything edited out. The NZ recording was running a couple of minutes faster for the 40-+ minutes of the programme time.

                  It has been done for a long time in NZ so I guess people had just got to accept it. I understand it was also done for radio shows.

                  • Lanthanide …
                    4 August 2014 at 1:22 pm

                    Yeah, I’m not surprised the result you got was about signal compression etc, was just pointing out what the reference was about.

                    And yes, it looks like any time-compression that is being done in NZ is purely a result of NTSC -> PAL conversion, rather than any deliberate choice made by the TV stations in NZ to cram in more ads.

                    • karol …
                      4 August 2014 at 4:40 pm

                      I’m pretty certain deliberate use of time compression techniques, to fit in more ads, has been happening in NZ and also flying under the radar – as I understand it, even more so than in the US for drama/fiction series.

          • Pete 6.2.1.1.2
            4 August 2014 at 10:06 am

            It’s to do with framerate differences between PAL and NTSC. If you compare an NTSC and PAL dvd of the same movie, you’ll see that the PAL one is shorter than its NTSC counterpart – by around 4%.

          • Colonial Viper 6.2.1.1.3
            4 August 2014 at 10:34 am

            with digital sound processing there should be no frequency change in sound when they do that…(unlike old analogue tape media)

        • weka 6.2.1.2
          4 August 2014 at 11:58 am

          “or cutting scenes from programmes to make them fit the excessive advertising needs were another reason to say fuck ‘em.”

          “I actually think that very rarely, if ever, happens in NZ.”

          I rarely watch broadcast TV now, so I have no idea how common it is currently. It wouldn’t surprise me if they don’t do it so much now because it annoyed people so much. There have been some high profile examples. One was Blackadder I think, where they were chopping out bits for some reason. As you can imagine that sent fans into a publicity frenzy and the network stopped doing it. The other was Coro, which had bits chopped for years, because TVNZ broadcast slower than the programme is produced.

          I also remember they cut a whole 20 min segment of a tv series that was continuous over each episode, because the Queen Mother’s funeral went on longer than they thought. I asked why they couldn’t just run everything 20 mins late for the rest of the evening, but that wasn’t to be done, something to do with the advertisers. Which is weird, because they do it for sports.

          It would have annoyed people using VCRs/DVDRs too, not that I expect TVNZ to care about that. Which reminds me of the other reason on why I gave up – scheduling used to change at no notice, so I had to set the DVD recorder for at least 30 mins either side of the programme in order to be sure to get the start and end. Like I said, there was a time when all networks started to treat viewers as grab them for the evening, rather than people that turned the tv on to see programmes they actually wanted to watch.

          They also stopped playing the best of British drama on Sunday nights, and most of the really good British TV simply wasn’t available here. But because of the contracts between NZ and the UK, those programmes also weren’t being released on region 4 DVD. So fuck ’em, that’s another reason why people go to the internet. Not to mention people wanting to see the latest series right now. TV really hasn’t kept up with what people are wanting.

          One thing I’m watching for is when TV series makers start making episodes with the idea that there won’t be a week’s break inbetween and that many people will be watching them back to back.

      • karol 6.2.2
        4 August 2014 at 9:40 am

        Actually, with my freeview, I find plenty of good stuff to watch on FTA TV. I record anything I want to watch and skim through the ads. A lot of the better drama series are on later at night, or all competing with each other on the same night in prime time slots.

        I record more stuff than I ever get to watch. I’m not bothered if it’s the latest episodes or series. If it’s good, it’ll stand the test of time. The “newest is better” meme is pure commercial pressure to keep buying new stuff – and is part of the problem.

        The Good Wife and Vera are must see viewing for me. Game of Thrones – I have a load of unwatched eps, ditto House of Cards – they don’t grab me so much, and are all about the nasty ruthless power games angle to politics – with human compassion, caring, sharing, etc, taking the back seat.

        I also like the survivalist, post apocalyptic sci fi western, Revolution. Extant, Ressurection, and Last resort are interesting, though not sure if they will hold me in the long term. There’s some good movies, especially on Maori TV. There are also some good Aussie and UK dramas and mini-series.

        • Lanthanide 6.2.2.1
          4 August 2014 at 9:49 am

          You might like Firefly if you’ve never seen it.

          • Pete 6.2.2.1.1
            4 August 2014 at 10:08 am

            I’m a longtime fan of Firefly. I was channel surfing last week and noticed Maori TV is currently screening it.

          • karol 6.2.2.1.2
            4 August 2014 at 10:19 am

            I have seen Firefly, and I did like it. When I consider the shows I like, I tend to prefer shows that may be in traditionally masculine genres (action, crime, gritty dramas) – but that also include assertive female characters, and a bit of a focus on characters and relationships.

            And I particularly like shows that include a focus of social and/political, or ethical issues.

    • ghostwhowalksnz 6.3
      4 August 2014 at 1:30 pm

      In the UK they have 13 cinema releases a week of new films, that makes 700 new films a year in cinema

      There is no way most of them last more than a few days.

      Digital projectors are making this possible but there isnt much of an audience in cinemas. Then there is the films that dont get released into cinemas.

      The truth about IP is that ever since the first sewing machines or what ever, your IP will be stolen.

      Has always been true long before the first integrated circuit came into being.

      In fact the biggest stealers of IP are the biggest companies.

  7. Richard Christie 7
    4 August 2014 at 8:58 am

    the death of Hollywood and current Music industry would cause financial pain for some, including some of the arguably overpaid actors and performers as well, but a bonus for those of us that like to listen to their music live,

    I’ve almost despaired at finding another who realises this truth.

    Music industry =/= recording industry.

    In fact, over the past century the recording industry has played a large role in debasing the currency of the average professional musician’s livelihood. This accelerated greatly with the advent of digital recording formats and the ease reproducing and playing recorded product anywhere at any time.

    The coin of the performing musician has been debased, as recorded music is everywhere, from airport lavatories to our supermarket aisles. When any business can slot in a CD or IPod and effectively steal product why would they bother employing expensive live artists.

    These observations don’t even mention the loss of benefits lost when through the demise of the social activity of creating music at social gatherings by our own amateur aws well as professional efforts as opposed to plugging in a device.

    As a professional musician all my life I’ll dance on the grave of the recording industry.

    • shorts 7.1
      4 August 2014 at 10:06 am

      what do you propose Telecom employ musicians to play the hold music live?

      there is no bonus for the live industry in the recording industries decline… the recording of music has added many billions of dollars to touring/working musicians (and associated parties) lives creating fans and thus a huge market for experiencing music in a live capacity

      as you dance on the grave of the recording industry spare a thought for the thousands of once working musicians who no longer have a place to play thanks to the corporatisation of venues and the global live music circuit – sure there are many independent venues and artists still going (thankfully)… charging the same actual prices they were 30 years ago

      I’ve friends who bought houses off their live earnings in the 80s… now the same door charge (what the market will pay) means they get to fill their car with petrol, if they are lucky

      • Richard Christie 7.1.1
        4 August 2014 at 10:36 am

        Worried about your canned music while on hold?

        Man, you miss the big picture.

        It’s not the corporatisation of venues and the global live music circuit it’s the use and availability of recorded music in our environment.

        I’ve friends who bought houses off their live earnings in the 80s… now the same door charge (what the market will pay) means they get to fill their car with petrol, if they are lucky

        Exactly, been there done that. And go back further, the 1930’s, the 1880s. Remember the bands on TV shows. Remember the bands at socials and school balls. Dance bands on friday nights in every community hall, country fairs. Parlor music at parties and social gatherings. Music at such social gathering produced by live human beings, on the spot.

        Over 95% of this activity of which is now replaced by DJs and recorded music, radio, muzak etc. Hell, even the self appointed bastion of NZ live theatre, The Court Theatre in Ch Ch, has stabbed the musician in the back and uses sequencing in its so-called “musicals” (sequencing being only a hair’s breadth from a recording.) Next we’ll have Opera doing away with the orchestra.

        The currency of the musician was once invested not only in the music itself but in its very mystic, its unavailability unless produced by human beings (musicians), live and immediate. Not debased by the familiarity by being heard virtually everywhere, relentlessly, constantly. Try doing the simple act of shopping without being bombarded by music.

        There is a place for music recording, but to ignore its role in the decimation of live music throughout the fabric of our society is being blind to the evidence.

        • shorts 7.1.1.1
          4 August 2014 at 11:54 am

          The decimation of live music has little to do with recorded music… radio, TV and film (not to mention travel, sports and other outdoor pursuits) did the damage to that entertainment option decades ago – as in people have almost unlimited ways in which to socialise and entertain themselves, music is but one

        • ghostwhowalksnz 7.1.1.2
          4 August 2014 at 1:34 pm

          Killed off the printed music sheet business too, probably back in the 30s and 40s.

          Who now plays live music in the home for family and friends. Gone are all the piano shops, the printed music shops

  8. The Al1en 8
    4 August 2014 at 9:01 am

    A nothing piece ended with a little fluff about kdc. 3/10

  9. TightyRighty 9
    4 August 2014 at 9:19 am

    So destroying all those Hollywood jobs is a good thing due to the internet/globalisation/consumer demand, even if a few thousand kiwis get caught up in it, because the leaders are “class enemies”

    But losing a few hundred jobs in manufacturing due to internet/globalisation/consumer demand means we need full scale govt intervention in the forex market and heavy handed fiscal policy as it’s a crises.

    The left sure don’t understand the meaning of consistency, or macro economic theory

    • Clemgeopin 9.1
      4 August 2014 at 9:36 am

      Technology changes, World evolves, methods change…The industry needs to smartly adapt to their advantage…if not, we would have been still using type writers, snail mail, and oh, candles.

    • Draco T Bastard 9.2
      4 August 2014 at 10:03 am

      The problem is capitalism. Get rid of that and more people will be in ‘work’, more innovation will happen and society will be far better.

  10. shorts 10
    4 August 2014 at 9:29 am

    another vote for this being a shockingly bad post

    Megaupload was a very late starter to the tech lead charge that has lead to many changes the entertainment industries have and continue to face – he is but the most recent subject of blame for some in some industries

    lets not vilify nor celebrate him for being anything but one small part of a very large equation

  11. Puckish Rogue 11
    4 August 2014 at 10:16 am

    This sounds like someones trying to put positive spin on KDC, sounds like KDC is going to get a judgement in court hes none to keen on

    • One Anonymous Bloke 11.1
      4 August 2014 at 10:54 am

      I note the wide range of views about KDC. I’m assuming he’ll be extradited, although the Crown may have a problem with Section 8.

      I wonder whether his US lawyers can attack the chain of custody over the evidence that was illegally taken from a sealed evidence room. It certainly doesn’t demonstrate good faith, and neither did Wormald’s testimony.

    • Sable 11.2
      4 August 2014 at 11:29 am

      As long as we have a US lapdog government what other outcome could there be for Kim? I’m not a huge fan of the man but at the end of the day when did we start treating our own people like cattle to be shipped off at the whim of foreign governments?

      • Puckish Rogue 11.2.1
        4 August 2014 at 11:53 am

        Yeah its pesky thing extradition treaties and laws and such like

        • Colonial Viper 11.2.1.1
          4 August 2014 at 1:21 pm

          It’s NZ immigration law that National seems to have found particularly pesky. And since when does NZ extradite for what should be a civil copyright case???

          • Puckish Rogue 11.2.1.1.1
            4 August 2014 at 1:33 pm

            I have no doubt that his case will be heard fairly and then, if the decision is made impartially, he’ll be hauled off to the USA so he can have his day in court and see if their courts can prove his guilt

            • Colonial Viper 11.2.1.1.1.1
              4 August 2014 at 1:44 pm

              Yes it will be all fair and square like knocking down his door with armed FBI and command choppers, for a copyright case

          • nadis 11.2.1.1.2
            4 August 2014 at 2:22 pm

            If it is only a civil copyright case then DotCom won’t be extradited. One purpose of the extradition hearing is to determine whether the charge he is being extradited for is a criminal offense with at least a one year sentence. If not, then no extradition. There is no extradition for civil cases.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 11.2.1.2
          4 August 2014 at 1:35 pm

          Pesky things like respecting court orders regarding the custody of evidence, not telling porkies on the witness stand, having a legal warrant.

          Like I said: read section 8: has the Crown acted in good faith? Has the FBI? I may be way off beam here, I’ll be surprised if KDC doesn’t raise the issue though.

          The trouble* is, he’ll still be leaving a cashed up IMP behind whatever happens.

          *experiences may differ according to political allegiance 😈

          • Tiger Mountain 11.2.1.2.1
            4 August 2014 at 1:39 pm

            “why are you turning red prime minister?”

            Heh, there will be steam coming out of Key’s ears soon enough.

          • Puckish Rogue 11.2.1.2.2
            4 August 2014 at 1:41 pm

            The trouble* is, he’ll still be leaving a cashed up IMP behind whatever happens.

            • I wouldn’t worry about it too much its not like they’ll be around for long after the next election, no matter what happens and those votes will go back to Labour or the Greens
            • Tiger Mountain 11.2.1.2.2.1
              4 August 2014 at 2:09 pm

              Get back to us on Sept 21 Puckish and see if toryville wants to relook at “worrying about it too much”. CV is right about the civil case aspect but MPAA and the courts don’t have to accept Standard commenters rulings unfortunately.

              Dotcom has had more success with the NZ courts than a political cynic like me would ever have expected and really anything more for him from this point is a bonus. The “wrecking ball” as the right have labelled him has done the country quite a service when you think about it.

              • Government Departments failure to follow own rules exposed
              • Security Service apparatus investigated for not following the law and receiving training, tech advice and resources from the NSA
              • Police role in assisting a foreign power agency on NZ soil exposed
              • Did his duty and helped bring a corrupt sitting MP to justice
              • Circumstantial case built for the Prime Minister and Minister of GCSB and SIS and Police special ops to have connived with US corporates
              • Played a role in civic affairs and encouraged young people to learn about and participate in politics

            • One Anonymous Bloke 11.2.1.2.2.2
              4 August 2014 at 3:12 pm

              Shall we add that to the list of PR predictions like “He’ll be found not guilty because hes not guilty…”?

              Yes, we shall.

          • nadis 11.2.1.2.3
            4 August 2014 at 2:25 pm

            Section 8 of what? Not the Bill of Rights?

            • One Anonymous Bloke 11.2.1.2.3.1
              4 August 2014 at 2:53 pm

              The Extradition Act.

              • nadis …
                4 August 2014 at 3:19 pm

                Ok. Not sure why that would have any relevance? Presume you are talking about “the accusation against the person was not made in good faith in the interests of justice”.

                How could DotCom argue that the US govt isnt acting in good faith? I don’t see anything in this case that is outside the norms for US justice and there seems to be clear evidence (yet to be argued against) that DotCom and his minions have broken the law. It wouldn’t be unjust or oppressive to surrender Dotcom if the NZ court believes there is prima facie evidence he committed a crime in the US that would also be a crime in NZ. I think DotCom is dead in the water if he tries to relay on procedural arguments – his only hope is to deny all knowledge and throw his staff to the wolves.

                Also, I think you have to be careful not to comingle the raid with the US allegations. The good faith only applies to the laying of charges by the foreign government.

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  4 August 2014 at 3:32 pm

                  I expect that the FBI’s illegal interference with sealed evidence might be an issue. If there is further evidence of collusion in regard to breaches of New Zealand immigration and surveillance law, well, who knows.

  12. Sable 12
    4 August 2014 at 11:27 am

    Hollywood is not what it used to be. I’m finding myself watching oldies from the 50’s through to 70’s and they are often thought provoking and genuinely well made.

    Now all we get is mostly mindless spam backed up by lots of brain rotting eye candy. Or worse still, as the author states, pretty blatant, typically militaristic pro US propaganda. Its little wonder people have had enough.

  13. Phil 13
    4 August 2014 at 12:54 pm

    Its [sic] little wonder people have had enough.

    Walt Disney and Marvel’s Guardians of the Galaxy debuted with a powerhouse $94 million opening weekend. That’s the third biggest opening of the year, behind Captain America: The Winter Soldier ($95m) and Transformers: Age of Extinction ($100m).
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2014/08/03/box-office-guardians-of-the-galaxy-zooms-to-94m-weekend/

    Apparently we’re not ready to say ‘stop’ just yet…

    • Puckish Rogue 13.1
      4 August 2014 at 1:29 pm

      People can say what they like but the marvel movies are damn entertaining now all they need to do is get the Hulk right, do a proper Punisher and maybe look at The Preacher and The Boys 🙂

    • Sable 13.2
      4 August 2014 at 2:31 pm

      No accounting for taste or lack of it…

      • Puckish Rogue 13.2.1
        4 August 2014 at 3:10 pm

        Yes because heaven forbid a movie might want to entertain people

        With an attitude like yours its no wonder the left is out of touch with ordinary people

  14. Dramaticus 14
    4 August 2014 at 2:18 pm

    All this entertainment is what the money hoarders need to keep the masses in the west subdued by distracting them from their limited lives which is one lesson we can learn from our mister Ki who had nothing and driven by pure greed and ego gratification has managed to achieve his boyhood dream at the expense of all the people who went to work 40hrs + a week on a year in year out basis when the only real interest they needed in politics was to vote because their brains werent duped every day by the media talking politically biased shite and paying taxes to keep highly paid tv presenters sucking the life out of their inherent right to know what was going on in the country
    The entertainment industry does not create intellectual growth books do
    Movies suck time, rock n roll abuses musical creativity, 3 cords and fucking stupidity .But send your kids to learn how to sing and you give them a soul
    and teach them how to write and play music and learn their own drama and you have your own life
    Also get our politicians to stop killing our country and your a bloody legend

  15. Weepus beard 15
    4 August 2014 at 3:55 pm

    I’m not interested in the film and TV industry in Hollywood. I am interested in the industry in New Zealand because it is the industry that I work in. It is what puts food in my children’s mouths.

    The export film and TV sector in NZ is on it’s knees and I can tell you it is not Kim Dotcom’s doing.

    The fault lies squarely at the feet of Steven Joyce, amateur economist but supposed minister of economic development, and his cult of personality master, John Key.

  16. dave 16
    4 August 2014 at 4:34 pm

    If you thought Mega was good give popcorn time and its clones ago it really is Hollywood’s worst nightmare its creators. Open source the code to general public licence its really unstoppable Mr nobody to sue, its slick fast free and rich in content and currently morphing by the day it coud just be the end game as far as movie industry goes we can argue about leagle aspects all we like but the technology is there its not going disappear and people will use it for better or worse.

  17. john 17
    5 August 2014 at 4:09 pm

    Talk about extreme naivety. Kim Dotcom has repeatedly made his money from ripping people off.

    Insider trading, embezzlement, pirating music and movies – even the young girls on his porn site weren’t getting paid – how is that for exploitation?

    In NZ it’s all the small operators – musicians, artists, writers, photographers, film makers etc who are gettign screwed.

    Companies around the world download illegally pirated material from thousands of Kiwi creatives.

    The idea that it’s just the big studios who are suffering, as suggested by your guest, is the idea of a simpleton.

    I’ll bet good money that out of 300 students enrolled in Southern Institute of Technologies photography course, that less than 1% will get a photography job. Ditto with dozens of other photography courses around the country.

    • joe90 17.1
      5 August 2014 at 4:29 pm

      even the young girls on his porn site weren’t getting paid

      Your persisting with this vile allegation makes me think you know a wee bit about porn sites and young girls so I’ll ask you again – put up or shut up.

      • weka 17.1.1
        5 August 2014 at 4:48 pm

        +1

      • john 17.1.2
        5 August 2014 at 5:02 pm

        It’s well known that Kim Dotcom was making money peddling porn on a stable of porn websites.

        His porn sites are even listed in the official indictment from the US.

        It’s also known that the girls on Dotcom’s porn sites weren’t getting paid.

        That’s why he got sued. That’s why he paid up.

        There’s a lot of references to it, including in NZ media – here’s one in Sydney Morning Herald
        http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/dotcoms-boom-to-bust–he-was-trying-to-make-half-a-buck-on-every-occasion-20120228-1u03x.html‘

        • joe90 17.1.2.1
          5 August 2014 at 5:14 pm

          It’s also known that the girls on Dotcom’s porn sites weren’t getting paid.

          So you do know all about porn sites featuring young girls.

          btw, you were asked to put up or shut up and the best you could manage was a nearly two year old article – pathetic.

          • john 17.1.2.1.1
            5 August 2014 at 5:32 pm

            It’s not my job to teach you how to use google.

            Dotcom was peddling porn and wasn’t paying the girls.

            You defend that by saying the allegation is vile.

            When in any person apart from a sicko, it would be Dotcom’s actions that were vile.

            • joe90 17.1.2.1.1.1
              5 August 2014 at 5:37 pm

              You’ve been called on your accusation twice and both times you’ve failed to provide any evidence. Moran.

            • weka 17.1.2.1.1.2
              5 August 2014 at 11:54 pm

              “Dotcom was peddling porn and wasn’t paying the girls.”

              The link you gave doesn’t say anything about that.

              btw, when you use the word ‘girls’ in a conversation about porn, you sound like you are talking about children. Please use the right word, it’s ‘women’.

    • weka 17.2
      5 August 2014 at 4:52 pm

      “I’ll bet good money that out of 300 students enrolled in Southern Institute of Technologies photography course, that less than 1% will get a photography job. Ditto with dozens of other photography courses around the country.”

      If that 300 number is correct, why is SIT taking in so many students?

      And what does this have to do with KDC or Hollywood’s/the music industry’s business model?

      • john 17.2.1
        5 August 2014 at 5:24 pm

        Because institutes like SIT have a focus on churning out students with qualifications – not students with jobs.

        And it has everything to do with the way megaupload was making money off illegally pirating everything and anything from movies to music to pictures to writing to art.

        Piracy is not the only reason, but it’s a very big part of why no photography students can get jobs and why in the latest survey for photographers in NZ, average annual income has now dropped to just $28,000. And that “average” – i.e. a large number are earning much less than that.

        • McFlock 17.2.1.1
          5 August 2014 at 5:44 pm

          What morons like you haven’t figured out is that a qualification isn’t only used for the career sticker. The skills transfer. Same with photography.

          A good example is a friend of mine who has a theatre degree. As a store manager, you’d think that the degree is worthless to her. She reckons not – selling is dealing with an audience, the logistics of a small business were all part of the degree, and so on.

          But that’s a more complex thought than you can deal with.

          • john 17.2.1.1.1
            6 August 2014 at 12:12 am

            That’s a tired old argument run by people who want to convince themselves that four years and tens of thousands of dollars on the wrong degree wasn’t really time and money totally wasted.

            • Colonial Viper 17.2.1.1.1.1
              6 August 2014 at 12:17 am

              Capitalism has downgraded “education” into vocational degree mills for capitalist enterprises.

              Real education is about teaching people about culture, arts, history and the humanities. In other words, about human civilisation and how to advance it.

              All the things that capitalists would like driven out of a society because it makes people realise how shite being a wage serf in an undemocratic dictatorship of the private sector actually is.

            • McFlock 17.2.1.1.1.2
              6 August 2014 at 12:32 am

              That’s the typical response of someone who does not know the value of an education.

              • john …
                6 August 2014 at 12:48 am

                That’s the typical response of someone who does not know the cost of the wrong education.

                • McFlock …
                  6 August 2014 at 12:53 am

                  Um – you must just be talking about cash, because the value of an education is never negative.

                  If you are talking about cash, even completing the wrong education is associated with an above median income.

                  Oh, and Bob Jones also sees benefits to an education beyond just getting a job in that industry. And he probably knows a lot more about business than you, if you do want to reduce “value” to cash.

                  • john …
                    6 August 2014 at 1:17 am

                    Of course it can be negative, especially if you’ve wasted four years of your life, have a $50,000 debt, then have to start all over again on a qualification that’s actually wanted by employers.

                    Why don’t you tell the 22,000 graduates sitting on the dole with huge loans that they did the right course.(figures from a couple of years ago show 40% of unemployed under 25 are were graduates).

                    We’ve got massive skill shortages for some qualifications, but 60% of law grads will never get work in law – a large number will struggle to get any work at all.

                    A boyfriend of someone who worked for me did law, excelled at it, even got admitted to the bar, then sat on the dole for three years and ended up getting work in forestry. There’s only law jobs for 40% of grads – it’s been that way for years.

                    There are numerous stories of people leaving low paying jobs, spending tens of thousand and years getting an unwanted qualification, and ending up back in the same low paying job, with a huge debt and having missed out on years of pay.

                    http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/9110729/Graduates-frustrated-at-lack-of-jobs

                    • McFlock …
                      6 August 2014 at 12:44 pm

                      Just as I thought – your only measure of value is cash.

                      And yet the lowest quartile of grads still has a median income higher than the national median.

                      BTW, the boyfriend’s legal training would come in useful negotiating employment conditions, given the high mortality rate in the forestry sector. So not a complete loss, if it saves his life.

                    • weka …
                      6 August 2014 at 1:04 pm

                      “Why don’t you tell the 22,000 graduates sitting on the dole with huge loans that they did the right course.”

                      Hate to break it to you mate, but we have a permanent unemployment rate in this country. That means there aren’t enough jobs to go around. This isn’t a new thing, it’s deliberate neoliberal govt policy.

                      My point being, even if you could put everyone in the ‘right course’ (which is doubtful because the job market and economy change so much and so quickly), there still won’t be enough jobs to go around. You think unemployment is only for uneducated people?

        • weka 17.2.1.2
          5 August 2014 at 8:19 pm

          Still not sure what you are on about john. If the SIT is churning out too many graduates then surely that is part of the problem in them not being able to get jobs that don’t exist.

          AFAIK, historically, photography has been a poorly paid job except for the elite.

          How exactly does KDC’s business reduce photography jobs in NZ?