Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 23rd Dec 2010 00:10 UTC, submitted by SReilly
In the News "Spain last night killed a controversial anti-P2P bill that would have made it easier to shut down websites that link to infringing content. The move was a blow to the ruling Socialist government, but it may be of even bigger concern to the US, which pushed, threatened, and cajoled Spain to clamp down on downloading. And Wikileaks can take a share of the credit for the defeat."
Thread beginning with comment 454534
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I always wondered
by reduz on Thu 23rd Dec 2010 01:10 UTC
reduz
Member since:
2006-02-25

Why does the US think it's so important for their monopolic media companies like Disney or Warner to protect their IPs internationally so much, since that's pretty much the only IP that gets exported?

It only benefits a few big companies and it's not like most of the world consumes US-made content so much (well, maybe some countries do?). Many countries even have plenty of laws regarding the % of foreign movies, TV or music that can be shown/sold and the US lobbies do not even seem worried about that.

Reply Score: 2

RE: I always wondered
by whitehornmatt on Thu 23rd Dec 2010 03:30 in reply to "I always wondered"
whitehornmatt Member since:
2005-07-07

They do. The Free Trade Agreement between the US and Australia included a clause stopping any increases in our television local content requirement.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: I always wondered
by Valhalla on Thu 23rd Dec 2010 04:08 in reply to "RE: I always wondered"
Valhalla Member since:
2006-01-24

It was a long time since I read Neuromancer, but as I recall he described a future where huge multinational corporations controlled the governments and the gap between the rich and the poor were enourmous. Who knew it would turn out to be true. Well, all the crappy stuff came true, we still don't have that cool matrix thingy...

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE: I always wondered
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Thu 23rd Dec 2010 15:56 in reply to "I always wondered"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Uhm.... If there are many large alternative sources of media, then Disney and Warner are not Monopolistic.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: I always wondered - depends
by jabbotts on Thu 23rd Dec 2010 19:38 in reply to "RE: I always wondered"
jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

If there are large alternative media outlets which reduce Disney's share of the market bellow 90% or so then Disney may not be a monopoly. They gotta be pretty close to legal monopoly status in kids entertainment at least. Outside of Diego/Dora.. it's pretty much all Disney.

Alternatively, if it can be shown that Disney is not capable of manipulating the market or leveraging success in one market segment to drive competition out of another then they may not be a Monopoly. Not saying they don't go out of there way to try and monopolize the market.

To complicate matters, it may very well be that Disney is in fact a Monopoly by legal definition. However, if they don't use that position as a competitive strategy, they compete through products rather than market maneuvering, they may be a natural Monopoly. The only real issue with being in monopoly position in any market is when you use that influence for anti-competitive advantage. My uneducated examples would be jacking the price of product because you are the only vendor, bundling a smaller product in with your main product so that competitors of that smaller product can't fairly compete ("fair" in legal not social sense) and similar.

Around these parts, we get a lot of US media and it really is staggering how much flows out of one or two parent companies. Companies like Disney and Viacom own absurd amounts of media production and display space.

Sadly, politics is like business.. it's not about a fair price for your product but about the maximum price you can convince people to pay. It's not about what legislation is fair for the citizens but what legislation can be snuck past to benefit the big businesses (ie. non-human legal entity campaign contributions).

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: I always wondered
by jeepercreeper on Mon 27th Dec 2010 12:31 in reply to "I always wondered"
jeepercreeper Member since:
2010-08-29

Why does the US think it's so important for their monopolic media companies like Disney or Warner to protect their IPs internationally so much, since that's pretty much the only IP that gets exported?

It only benefits a few big companies and it's not like most of the world consumes US-made content so much (well, maybe some countries do?). Many countries even have plenty of laws regarding the % of foreign movies, TV or music that can be shown/sold and the US lobbies do not even seem worried about that.

LOL! This reminds me of another discussion earlier, why USA protects big media companies. It was a quite fun and hilarious discussion. I copy and paste from another thread:

"
It is true! I am not lying!

Marlon Brando says "Jews run Hollywood, they own it" look here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marlon_brando#Comments_on_Jews.2C_Holl...

And read this, this is the most important text you can ever read! It will change your life forever!!
www.natvan.com/who-rules-america

Yes, many Jews have German sounding names: Spielberg, Beckham, Portman, Goldman, Lehman, Hilton, Silverstein, Sandler, Stiller, etc just read about them on wikipedia in the section: "Early life"!

And the Israeli lobby AIPAC rules the white house! That is the reason USA blocks every UN resolution against Israel! Look here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aipac#Steiner_resignation

So, White House is run by Israel. And Israelis own Hollywood and big media companies. That is the reason the White House protects Hollywood's interests!

Google on "AIPAC" and read more! I am not lying on this!
"

Reply Parent Score: 1