MPAA Sues Pullmylink
Movie Piracy is bad. We on the same page here?
Ok, just checking. Because news has come forward today that the MPAA has chucked its most recent spear at the piracy industry laying charges against Pullmylink.com (a link farm for pirated materials) and I think it is a poor target for their message.
Yahoo reports:
The Motion Picture Association of America on Thursday sued Pullmylink.com, a Web site featuring links to free — and allegedly pirated — movies and TV shows, claiming the site promotes and profits from copyright infringement.
What Pullmylink.com does is offer links to these pirate sites letting you know where to find this content. They themselves are not providing the content. This is an ambiguous infringement but not neccessarily a crime. Not that I condone it or say they are “right” but legally speaking this is not actually commiting the act of copyright infringement.
Their claim is that they PROFIT from copyright infringement, which I feel is innacurate. The site isn’t selling the information but rather benefits from the advertisement on its site which is a gray moral issue because this traffic is coming from people seeking to violate copyright.
For example, if I was walking down the street and someone says “Hey have you got any pot?”. I am fully aware of the legallity of trafficking a restricted substance, and though I myself am not selling it, if I say, “No, but that guy over there has some for sale” am I now trafficking? No.
Morally, I am still assisting in the act that individual is pursuing, and I did offer some information. But can I go to jail for selling pot? No. I didn’t sell it. If I say “Give me 20 bucks and I will tell you where” am I now profiting from the information? Is that illegal? Probably. But is that what Pullmylink is doing? No. They are being sued because they benefit from the traffic that views ads, and that traffic is from alleged copyright violators.
The MPAA needs to go after the PROVIDERS to track its source. Hell, Pullmylink is HELPING you find them!! Much like drug busts go (and I know because I was a big fan of 21 Jump Street), they will not waste their time arresting every dealer on the street because they are more interested in the people growing and producing the narcotics. Arresting dealers mean they have to find new dealers. If the dealers have nothing to sell, they are more effective in stopping the crimes. It makes sense.
So why are the MPAA making an example of websites that direct you to illegally provided content? Well some would say they are attempting to curb the ease of access.
Napster was shut down for the same reasons, and it just birthed 50 more providers in its place.
Ironically, in an attempt to close down this provider they simply brought more traffic to their site. News of their action against Pullmylink will only bring more awareness to the existence of this site.
And now by talking about this I have helped them. (And compared movie piracy to pot.. a lot)
Am I in trouble?
10 Comments, Comment or Ping
nbakid2000
Movieforumz got done in the same way, except they were told to keep information on their customers for prosecution purposes, so they shut down instead of complying.
It’s BS.
Apr 18th, 2008
GODFATHER
Rodney, I’m going to disagree with you on this one… You can get shut down and charged with aiding and abetting. Not necessarily the same thing as “selling” the content (whatever content that is), however, you are still enabling the act when morally and lawfully you know it is wrong. Promoting the fact that “that guy down the street does it” keeps him in business, and your statement of “that guy down the street does it” keeps him going. You didn’t technically do anything to warrant a “dealer” charge, but you did enable someone to still make an illegal transaction, and that puts you at risk. The best option is to just say “nope” and move on. That ends your involvement.
Apr 18th, 2008
Seb
Could someone explain to me why the MPAA has any authority in these matters at all?
They dont own any of the copyrighted materials they keep suing over.
Seems to me that it’s the same as though someone were to steal content from this site, and I were to sue someone over it.
It just doesn’t make sense to me.
Seriously, what’s the deal?
Apr 18th, 2008
GODFATHER
Governing body…
Apr 18th, 2008
dingo101
Hopefully they leave pullmyfinger alone….
Apr 18th, 2008
calviin
I think your example only works with a minor adjustment.
Instead of walking down the street, say that you are standing on the corner to advertise someone’s product (which does happen often in the city) and then someone came up and said, “Hey have you got any pot?”.
Still the same example, and it’s only as minor change, but it at least includes the part where you are getting paid while you stand there.
Apr 18th, 2008
Patrick
This is retarded (my apologies for anyone reading this that is retarted, MPAA) Are they going to sue Google next? You can find movies there, just type “Movie Title” and avi…guess what, you find illegal ways to download that movie. It’s just another sign of how f*cked up they are. They wont win this war on piracy because they don’t know how to fight,
Apr 18th, 2008
Patrick
haha retarted :P
Apr 18th, 2008
cib3k
“We’re only pointing to illegal content” is an old excuse, it works also for torrent sites, it makes sense, yet nobody cares. MPAA is big enough to sue anyone even slightly related to pirated content and they will continue to do so.
And I couldn’t care less. They are fighting a losing war. There are thousand of sites out there, lots of different ways to share files and most file-sharing is now decentralized. They shut down the most popular servers, the next ones in the list become the most popular. They close a popular site, people simply start using some of the other sites. They just can’t win.
Also, in my opinion piracy is wrong only when the quality of the pirated content is too low. In this case it negatively affects the content itself, which doesn’t have the impact it should have on the consumer. Otherwise, I see nothing wrong with it, for several reasons. First, the price of the original content is way too high - especially for people outside US. A few years ago I would have had to pay almost my entirely monthly salary to get the complete Star Trek TNG on DVD. Second, much of the pirated content is basically art and education (movies, books, music, software) - which in my opinion should be freely available. For the many poor countries around the world, free access to books and software is god’s gift. I know what it meant for me and most of the people here.
Apr 18th, 2008
HisDivineShadow
This kind of activty is only going to increase now that the WGA strike is over.
Apr 18th, 2008
Reply to “MPAA Sues Pullmylink”