Without this warning you would definitely go and start making copies of the movie, right? Sure you would…
You know those annoying FBI Warnings(1) that show up at the start of every movie on VHS or DVD? (Maybe even on streaming? I wouldn’t know — I don’t “stream”) Besides being insulting with the implied assumption that without this warning I would just steal all of their property(2) [as well as insulting because of the implied assumption that I am Sheeple enough to NOT steal their property because of this warning], besides telling me that even though I PAID FOR THIS COPY of the movie it still isn’t mine (which should have been made clear at time of purchase, BEFORE laying down money for it), and besides bringing Law Enforcement into my living room uninvited, it is also saying quite plainly that the FBI is there to enforce their Intellectual Property Rights as a corporation while leaving me almost afraid to watch the movie, unless Men in Poorly Fitted Suits start showing up at my door, with search warrants written in incomprehensible language.
Further, shouldn’t any such warning actually be implemented as an agreement with the customer AT TIME OF PURCHASE? At the check out stand, not later on, after it has been purchased?(3) This amounts to an after-the-fact change in implied contract. The implied contract is “I just bought a copy of the movie.” After having laid down my money, getting it home, then I am told in the most intimidating terms available that this isn’t the case.
Insulting. Boorish. Deceitful. Al Capone would have found it distrubing behavior.
(Just for reference, while the implied contract is “I just bought a copy of the movie,” the real contract (unbeknownst to the customer) is something like “you have a very limited license to only view this product, subject to change without notice.” Should not that be made completely, certifiably clear at time of purchase?)
The FBI? Surely that level of law enforcement (protecting some entity’s private property) is way down the list of things that National Law Enforcement (aka, FBI) ought to be concerned with? Aren’t there axe-murderers, terrorist cells and evil politicians to protect the Nation (i.e., the Citizens, who in the final analysis are the Nation) from?
So, fine… for whatever reason the FBI thinks protecting Intellectual Property is a National Concern. But here’s the real question: what about my Intellectual Property, then? Would the FBI bring all its power to bare if my intellectual property was threatened?
Let us not be silly. (I happen to know this is not the case.)
Whom does the FBI serve? My intellectual property is my problem, but Universal Studios’ property is of national importance? Why did We allow corporations to get that powerful?(4) And that vain? Pompus? Arrogant…
We the Sheeple can be Mighty Stupid.
[30]
(1) Some even include an Interpol warning and then, the very, very worst, you might have to sit through the legal verbiage in six different languages, each one using up 5 – 10 seconds of your life. On DVDs these segments are sometimes not skipable, to add insult to injury (or injury to insult).
(2) Not being a lawyer I am not sure, but it seems to me that the implied insult to the consumer is actionable. The corporations are saying “you are a thief and without this warning you would steal our property.” I have a two syllable phrase that comes to mind in response to that implication. Maybe you too?
(3) Yes, it should. After-sale changes in agreement are null and void, by definition. When the money changes hand, the contract is in effect. Not afterward, unless that was a clear agreement before hand, signed and wittnesses by all parties.
(4) There’s another final agument, as well. There is occasionally some DVD that does NOT include all that insulting garbage… er, verbiage. Since those do NOT include the “don’t you dare!” warning, does that mean I can steal that movie? Again, let us not be silly. Of course not. So why do I have to have bits of the most limited coin I possess (the minutes of my life) used up with stuff I didn’t volunteer for, and isn’t even necessary? This kind of “theft” (why that’s in quotes is a whole ‘nother posting, never mind for now) is also considered a problem in the computer game industry. Except for one company who put NO copy protection on their game and then boasted of their game (that year) as the Most Pirated Game of the Year and they actually cleared more profit than any other game that year, because they were not spending money on preventing the theft. There’s an old adage (and quite true) that you get what you put your attention on. Put energy on preventing theft, guess what you end up with? (I’ll leave the answer as an excercise for the student… [yes, that’s sarcasm]).