Resultados 1 a 2 de 2
  1. #1
    WHT-BR Top Member
    Data de Ingresso
    Dec 2010

    [EN] Sons of Anarchy showrunner attacks Google piracy stance

    By Colin Mann

    Kurt Sutter, executive producer and showrunner of the FX drama series Sons of Anarchy, has accused Google of systematically destroying the artistic future, suggesting it is eroding creative copyright laws.

    In an impassioned and strongly-worded Open Letter to the Creative Community published in the August 5th 2014 issue of Variety, Sutter writes:

    Dear Family, Friends and Enemies:

    Recently, I responded to a Google-sponsored article in Slate. In my retort, I bitch-slapped Google and its half-bright shill for misrepresenting the truth about piracy and copyright laws.

    I won’t bore you by repeating myself, but in summary: Google is the establishment. They are a multibillion-dollar monopoly, and we creatives are just another revenue source. Our work drives their clicks. They don’t care if the click goes to a legitimate site or a pirate site with owners who dabble in human trafficking.

    The truth is, they don’t give a s**t about free speech, and are the antithesis of their own mantra, “Don’t be evil”.

    Not to go all techno-biblical on you, but I’m just a lame, dial-up David, throwing paper pebbles at a 2-terabit army of Robo-Goliaths. So, that’s why I’m disrupting your morning read. Don’t worry, I’m not asking you to donate to a fucking Kickstarter campaign. All I want is to make you aware of what’s happening in the streaming backrooms of the virtual boys club.

    Google is in the process of systematically destroying our artistic future, and more importantly, the future of our children and grandchildren. They’re spending tens of millions of dollars each year on eroding creative copyright laws. I believe that if the creative community doesn’t intervene now, and by now, I mean, f**king now — we will be bound to a multigenerational clusterf**k that will take 40 to 50 years to unravel.

    The last time this happened was in the 1950s, when the tobacco industry spent millions to hide the truth, and convince everyone that smoking cigarettes wasn’t really dangerous to your health.

    In other words, Google’s manipulation of public opinion (read: lies) and their proxy campaign for a free Internet and the dissolution of copyright protection (read: criminal tactics) will become so codified in law and will dominate the debate to such a degree that it will be mindlessly accepted on every level. Then, unfortunately, it will be the back half of this century by the time people realize what’s been done, how it was done and that they’ve been thoroughly f**ked.

    The creative community as we know it will not exist.

    It amazes and terrifies me that essentially all of Google’s fundamental arguments fall into the same template as those used by the Tobacco lobby. And it took five decades to finally reveal the dirty tactics of Big Smoky. We are now just starting to comprehend how those years of lies, extortion and greed created such suffering and death.

    Yes, that’s a dramatic comparison (that’s kind of my job), but unfortunately, the relationship is fundamentally accurate. When you’re worth over $200 billion, a couple hundred mil to buy legislation and good PR is an easy check to write. That’s what is happening before our eyes. And the reason why this information may seem startling is that they’re doing it so well; it just looks like business as usual.

    Look, I know this sounds alarmist, but if we don’t start ringing some bells, it’s going to be too late. The truth is, I’m not worried about myself. I’m a fat cat with enough things on my plate to feed me till I crash and burn.

    I’m worried about our kids. I’ve got a 7-year-old daughter who’s destined to be a live performer (my money’s on bear-wrestling and fire-eating), an 18-year-old son who’s an amazing musician, and a 20-year-old daughter who shines as an actress. They will take on the burden of this. They will wonder how we didn’t see this coming. They will lament that we did nothing to protect their art.

    And their kids? Well, they will be told unbelievable tales of the magical days when creatives flourished, and artists were handsomely compensated for their work.

    If you’re still reading this and want specifics, try Googling (see, they’ve even managed to become part of our lexicon) a report from the Digital Citizens Alliance called Google & YouTube and Evil Doers: Too Close for Comfort.

    And if I’ve pressed your “maybe I do give a s**t button”, I urge you to join CreativeFuture. It’s an organization all about advocating for the kind of creative economy we’d like to pass along to our kids. I’m a proud member. There are no dues, no secret handshakes, no cookie-selling requirements. And at some point there may even be free hats.

    I sincerely thank you for your valuable time.

  2. #2
    WHT-BR Top Member
    Data de Ingresso
    Dec 2010
    Sumário Executivo do citado relatório Google & YouTube and Evil Doers: Too Close for Comfort :

    Since it’s inception, Google adopted the motto “Don’t be evil.”

    In an open letter when the company went public, Google described its “don’t be evil” motto as: “We believe strongly that in the long term, we will be better served—as shareholders and in all other ways—by a company that does good things for the world even if we forgo some short term gains.”

    Google is a great company with brilliant minds. It has demonstrated a willingness to take on huge challenges and solve major problems.

    That is why it is so disconcerting to see a leading American company allowing one of its most prized platforms, YouTube, to be exploited by those selling and promoting illegal narcotics, prescription drugs without a valid prescription, knock-off merchandise, and fake IDs, including driver’s license and passports.

    When Google sells ads on YouTube videos promoting things like drugs, prostitution, and forged documents, it has effectively become advertising partners with bad actors that make the Internet unsafe. That is because when YouTube users click on those ads, Google’s business model is to split the ad revenue with those video producers.

    It’s hard to fathom why Google would knowingly run ads tied to videos promoting unsafe and potentially dangerous activities. While we all know that the price we pay for a free and open Internet will be things we may find objectionable,we are disappointed when a great company like Google profits from them.

    The Digital Citizens Alliance is focused on highlighting the challenges we face with making the Internet a safer place so we can find solutions. Given how popular YouTube is with teens and pre-teens, this report must be an alert for parents to closely monitor their children’s usage.

    By pointing out how YouTube has become overrun with thousands of potentially dangerous and harmful videos, we also call on Google to recognize the responsibility to clean it up. That is what a great company does and why the Digital Citizens Alliance is optimistic that Google can live up to its motto.
    Esse pessoal acabou de chegar de Marte? Qual é a surpresa?

    2011/08/24 Google pays $500 million to settle DOJ case over illegal drug ads

    The settlement represents the revenue received by Google for selling the ads through its AdWords program.

    "This investigation is about the patently unsafe, unlawful importation of prescription drugs by Canadian online pharmacies, with Google's knowledge and assistance, into the United States, directly to U.S. consumers," said U.S. Attorney Peter Neronha.

    The Justice Department said Google was aware as early as 2003 that Canadian pharmacies were illegally shipping prescription drugs into the United States.

    August 30, 2011 Behind Google’s $500 Million Settlement With U.S.

    The Justice Department’s settlement of a criminal investigation of Google for allowing Canadian pharmacies to advertise drugs for distribution in the United States ...

    Google entered into a nonprosecution agreement with the government ...

    By styling the settlement as a nonprosecution agreement, the company will not have a criminal record once it complies with the terms.

    The United States attorney for Rhode Island, Peter F. Neronha, whose office was responsible for the investigation, said Google’s conduct was not the result of a few rogue employees, according to The Wall Street Journal. Mr. Neronha said the company’s chief executive, Larry Page, “knew what was going on.”

    Unlike a private lawsuit alleging negligence, the Justice Department’s nonprosecution agreement with Google involved an assertion that the company aided a criminal violation — i.e., that it was an active participant in a crime.

    The fact that the case was resolved by a nonprosecution agreement can be seen as an indication that the Justice Department understood its position on accomplice liability could be open to challenge if criminal charges were filed in court.

    Unlike a guilty plea, this type of resolution does not require any judicial approval, so a judge will not question whether the conduct rose to the level of aiding and abetting a crime.
    Então ficamos assim: Eu violo a lei e boto o dinheiro do crime no bolso. Se for apanhado, devolvo o que embolsei e não sou processado criminalmente.

    No Brasil, não faltam adeptos desse tipo de "punição". De editorial da FSP a ministrinhos do STF. A diferença é que aqui ninguém precisa devolver o produto do crime, quanto mais US$ 500 milhões (quinhentos milhões de dolares), para não correr o risco de ser processado criminalmente.
    Última edição por 5ms; 06-08-2014 às 12:12.

Permissões de Postagem

  • Você não pode iniciar novos tópicos
  • Você não pode enviar respostas
  • Você não pode enviar anexos
  • Você não pode editar suas mensagens