Sorry my comments were indeed oriented towards the entertainment industry and I do acknowledge that intellectual property is a broad term which applies to many different types of information. Of course there should be different rules suited to different categories. For instance an invention is not the same as creative entertainment.

But of course neither am I saying that there should be no copyright protections even for music and other entertainment. But when a new technology comes along that undermines their current business model they should be expected to adapt and find revenue elsewhere rather than to impose draconian new measures to try and prevent the inevitable.

What I do oppose is moralizing about intellectual property without recognizing that the rules around it are practical in nature designed to strike a balance between the interests of the creator and the interests of society at large.

Incidentally I understand the actual reason you can’t advertise e-cigarettes with nicotine is that nicotine can only be derived from tobacco, so these products are effectively a tobacco product

Nicotine patches and gum are freely advertised in Australia. That would seem to be a particularly narrow-minded, counter-productive law if that is the case in NZ.

The result? 10x more free promotion by the mainstream media. Well played, I say!

Do you mean because it is on the web that IP should be available to everyone, or is your definition of IP music orientated?

I can assure you that our IP is real property, in fact it is the heart of our business, and is kept very very secure indeed.

We know that our IP sure can benefit society, but it aint free. And only we can use it. Thats business.

Mega is all legal and nice yet, profiting off stolen IP.

Good. Intellectual property was always intended as something to benefit society by encouraging the creation of creative works. This concept has now been bastardized. Indeed the very term “intellectual property” conveys a notion that it is analogous to real property which is bogus in my view.

Profits may be falling. Good job I say. It’s fat for a bloated industry. Artists which are truly valued will always be rewarded for their popularity and sorry but if you are mediocre you might just have to get a real job to live off. You were never going to be rich anyway (and no one is bothering to download your crap, you probably can’t give it away).

It’s been over a decade since rampant file sharing has “threatened” the entertainment industry. And yet movies and music are more widely available than ever before. Society has nothing to lose by telling the industry to suck it up.

LMAO

Yeah. Heres how they stay within the law.

Shitbag #1 uploads some music and posts links all over the net.

Shitbags #2 – 24,587 download said music.

Someone finally lays a complaint. Mega removes said file.

Mega is all legal and nice yet, profiting off stolen IP.

And the open market means that we have the right to use or not use the services of those who, in our judgement, make such stupid decisions.

A year or two ago a distributor of electronic cigarettes (that dispense nicotine vapor) wanted to run radio ads with Mediaworks. The MW legal team spent a fair bit of time and effort trying to get a definitive ruling on whether these things are legal – clearly the ad revenue was going to be worth the effort. The end result was they couldn’t get a definite yes, so no ads and no revenue (Incidentally I understand the actual reason you can’t advertise e-cigarettes with nicotine is that nicotine can only be derived from tobacco, so these products are effectively a tobacco product)

I also support their right to reject advertisers for commercial reasons.

Yes but when you have a name and reputation like Dotcom, people are going to jump to conclusions about your activities, that’s life.

(It’s business too, I work in my construction industry and my boss just won’t get involved with projects for a couple of fairly high-profile crooks in this town who are known to be bad payers… just as a different sort of example of the positive power of negative reputations! )

threatening to stop working with MediaWorks radio stations if they allow ads for a competitor product to be aired.

Saying “competitor product” is being generous… file-sharing and file-storing web services have traditionally been tools for ripping off the copyright and I.P. of record companies, rather than “competing” with them.

lol we should apply that logic to gas stations. just start taking petrol for free. when they complain just say – you guys need to learn how to innovate!

One more example of the labels attempting to swim against the tide rather than innovate…

It goes to show the level of critical assessment skills we have as a nation.

Protest with your feet (or fingers): http://www.thepiratebay.se

Google? No…

YouTube? No…

Twitter? No…

MySpace? Arguably… (I used to hear “and don’t forget to check out their page on MySpace” quite often.)

Facebook? No…