Why I don't rent movies

Three associations of rental movies stores, one Portuguese, one Spanish and one French, joined efforts and created an "anti-piracy civil movement". While I could argue that "civil" is a bad word to describe such movement, this wouldn't catch my eye for long, but it did, since they created that movement for the purpose of getting the Telecoms Package to be approved by the EU Council without the emend 138 (that states that whatever the Package says, personal rights should not be trumped over), and they actually managed to get what they wanted. Anyway, when confronted about how bad for European citizens it would be if the amend was dropped, they failed to justify why they don't like it, and instead mumbled over and over about piracy piracy financial losses piracy piracy piracy... I tried, for three days, to get them talking about 138, and why they don't want that, but instead of getting a justification, I've heard tons of things about piracy and how bad their business was.

During the discussion, and because they felt that I must be pro-piracy (which I actually am not) because I don't agree with them, they tried to confront me by asking a curious thing: what was the last time I rented a movie?

Now, more sober from the discussion, I started to think more about that question. There are lot's of people that never really were into renting movies, but that's not my case. My reply was something like "for years", but now, thinking more about it, I can say with some certainty that the last movie I rent was more or less four years ago. Why?

Well, I lived in Lamego in my youth, and there I never was really into renting movies. The offer there was poor (and last time I checked it was even worse), so there was really no point in spending money and rent a movie when I could spend the less drinking beer, hanging out, or even acting like a potato couch and seeing silly TV shows. When I moved to Coimbra all was different. Specially in my first years there, I was quite addicted in cultural stuff: almost every day I had a concert to see, a theatre play to attend, and exposition to watch, a movie to see. I spent lots of money in one of the cinema's there, where I usually watched all the movies that were shown in that venue. Also, I used to attend to every thing that was going on the Academic Theatre (TAGV): mainly movies, plays or concerts. And I also started renting movies, specially when with friends: we would get a couple of movies, crash in someone's house, and do a "movie party". Life started getting busier and busier, but it wasn't uncommon to see me browsing in Tintarella's shelves, since that particular movies rental store had a quite nice stock of recent and good alternative movies, European cinema and science fiction, and a catchy section with weekly highlights. In my latest years in Coimbra, sometimes I was found in the middle of the night with a couple of friends on the multimedia room of one University department, watching a just-rented movie.

Then I came to the big city of Lisbon, and I never rented a movie again. Do you think it is my fault? First I lived in Carnaxide, now I really live in Lisbon. I know where a/the movies rental store in Carnaxide is: I went there exactly three times, sold there used CDs, bought there one second-hand CD, and their movies selection was... unattractive. I live in "real Lisbon" for almost three years now. And I never saw a movies rental shop.

Now, do you really think that it is my fault that I never rented a movie anymore? Is it caused by piracy? No way. I don't rent movies because I don't have the habit of doing so, I don't know any rental store and I don't feel any urge of finding one. If you take into account that I used to be a client of that kind of stores, their "industry" lost a client. They did not know how to keep me. They failed as business people. They did a bad job. They are doing a bad job. They can throw rocks to piracy, freedom, rights, or anything they like. They might even get the chance to implement any laws and regulations they dream of. They will never have a successful business until they realise and admit their flaws and mistakes. Hurting people is not a way of making them your clients. Slowly, really slowly, the music industry is starting to learn their lesson. Movies rental businesses should too.

Motorola no more

If you know me for some time, you'll know that I am, or used to be, a Motorola fan on cellphones. The first time I bought a Motorola cellphone the choice was easy: I wanted a cellphone from a company that wasn't lobbying in Europe for the adoption of Software Patents, which discarded the chance of Siemens mobile phones, which was what I was used to use, despite not being really fond of them. Buying my C650 was a really cool choice: I really liked that cellphone, and it was that cellphone that made me think more about cellphones as mobile devices - mobile computers. At the end of 2005 the phone was getting ill, and in December it made me really pissed off. I decided that C650 was older than it should, and that I should put it to rest. Sonaecom (where I work) helped that decision, deciding to give me a cellphone. That time the choice was not so easy, but I knew I wanted a Motorola. I wanted to choose one inside my budget, and E1 was the only one with a music player, so I quickly went for it, replacing both my C650 and my portable music player. It was also a good bet: I both liked the cellphone and the company that made it, with their strong relationship with Open Source et al... and then using it as a modem via bluetooth made it an important piece of my digital life.

With all the hype around iPhone (curious this post being today, after an afternoon talking about this exactly), I even wrote about why, for me, E1 is better than the iPhone. Heck, I'll say it again: if E1 was from company A, and iPhone also was from company A, where A is a company I like, I would choose E1 over the iPhone.

Last March I decided that I should replace my E1 phone, and, once again, the choice was being made around several Motorola models. Other things stepped in the way of choosing one (basicly I've been dedicating more time in this blog - which is almost abandoned - than to choose and order a new phone), so, until today, the choice was postponed, with thoughts going to V3xx or K3.

But today... I read at Last100 that Motorola launched an online store, "selling" both music and movies for cellphones... crippled with DRM. Well, as you might already know by now, I don't support companies that like to spit on their costumers freedom. After this years, my relationship with Motorola as a cellphone costumer is now over.

So, I'm still searching for a new cellphone. The decision about the vendor is already made: it will be a Blackberry. I only have now to decide which one: Blackberry 8100 or the more powerful Blackberry 8800. Oh, and for those talking about the iPhone, here's already why BlackBerry is better than the iPhone, even the 2nd version of it ;-)

Green Party says: sharing is not stealing

I've told you before how much I hate that "piracy is stealing" bullshit we're forced to see everytime we are paying to those guys who are lying to you: for instance when you go to the cinema, you're forced to see a stupid video like this ( http://www.youtube.com/v/l5SmrHNWhak&rel=1 )...



Of course that, being such a lie as this, and for so many time, people started to create their own rebutal clips, like this ( http://www.youtube.com/v/MRVHUbrbEUA&rel=1 )...



But what's cool now is that there's a new video out there, with the slogan "I wouldn't steal", that is a part of a Green Party campain [1]! Let's hope this will have some political attention...



(This post has embeded flash videos, if you don't see them and don't want to click in each one individually, consider seeing the post in the blog and not in your RSS reader)

[1] - http://www.iwouldntsteal.net/

Copyright news links

http://blog.marques.cx/2007/11/25/digital-russian-rights-management/
ZML is the "AllOfMp3 of music". I wonder how long will it take to have MPAA threatning Russia (again)...

http://smallr.net/label-that-get-it
Suburban Home anounces “I Celebrate Their Entire Catalog” digital sampler, proving that there are music labels that "get it". They encourage you to download the entire sampler and share it with everyone.

http://smallr.net/distributor-gets-it
...and a music distributor that also gets it. Basicly: stop whining and act!

http://smallr.net/who-cares
Yeah, Facebook is evil, but who cares? Seems that Techcrunch readers care, but that's surely not a representative slice of Facebook users...

http://www.daniweb.com/blogs/entry1845.html
French polititians are doing drugs. No, really!

http://smallr.net/europe-oss
Europe the leader, not the follower in open source

http://smallr.net/swpat
Finaly, someone getting nailed for trying to use that software patents to get money. Why not working instead of bullying?

http://smallr.net/music-industry
A nice and actual music idustry overview. Where are we heading to?

http://smallr.net/korea-music
The Asian market is quite ahead of us, specially in the music industry. This article is nice to see that, but what I liked the most was to see that in Korea this year they'll reach 4x more sales of cellphones that are also music players than music players that aren't cellphones...

Five Movies

So, there's this meme out there, about "five movies you loved". Paula nominated me [1] to do this thing, so here it goes... Notice that this isn't the "best five movies ever" or "the five movies I recommend you to see" or "my favourite five movies". I didn't really think hard about this, so this is more "the five great movies I remembered of that I recommend you to see"...

Metropolis - Fritz Lang (1927)

A great movie to introduce you to the works of Fritz Lang, and that I'm not going to talk about here, since I already did it in the past [2].

If you already saw and liked it, than I recommend Fritz Lang's "M" as a way to keep knowing his work. I already talked about "M" here [3].

Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb - Stanley Kubrick (1964)

This Kubrick's movie is one of those comedies that really have a message within: in this case a satire about power, politics, and the paranoia that usually comes with it. I could write extensively about the movie, but instead I'll link to a pretty small review [4], since, despite being small, it quite sums up what is this movie about.

The Wicker Man - Robin Hardy (1973)

Notice really well: this is the movie directed by Robin Hardy, not the stupid remake with Nicholas Cage. The Wicker Man is a cult movie (and awsome soundtrack, BTW), and was considered in Cinefantastique as "The Citizen Kane of Horror Movies", at Total Film as "the sixth greatest British film of all time" and won the 1978 Saturn Award for Best Horror Film.

So, if you're thinking about stopping now, 'cause you don't like horror movies or something, think twice. This is an horror movie even for those who don't like the genre. From Wikipedia [5], "the idea of an idealistic confrontation between a modern Christian and a remote, pagan community continued to intrigue Shaffer, who performed painstaking research on the topic. Brainstorming with director Robin Hardy, the film was conceived as presenting the pagan elements objectively and accurately, accompanied by authentic music and a believable, contemporary setting."

Take into consideration that there are several versions of this movie, and the most complete version of it is the one from Canal+ [6]. The soundtrack is a piece of work worth being analyzed for itself [7], since the movie is sometimes even considered a musical. To have an idea of its impact, just take into account that there's even an anual music festival called The Wickerman Festival [8], that happens where the movie was shooted.

Baraka - Ron Fricke (1992)

96 minutes that show you everything about the world and humanity. Baraka is an ancient Sufi word, which can be translated as "a blessing, or as the breath, or essence of life from which the evolutionary process unfolds." The movie has no words, actors or plot. It's a ride that will make you smile and cry, a touching experience if you let it be. This website tells you everything [9].

If you liked it, know that a sequel is going to be released named Samsara [10].

Lost Highway - David Lynch (1997)

Lost Highway is probably my favourite David Lynch movie. If you dislike David Lynch forget it: it's heavilly Lynchian. According to the official website,

"A 21st Century Noir Horror Film.
A graphic investigation into parallel indentity crises.
A world where time is dangerously out of control.
A terrifying ride down the lost highway."

It's website is full of info [11], so visit it if you want to know more about it.

If you liked it, be sure to check Detour [12] (since the movie is in public domain, I'm linking to where you can download it), the biggest "Lost Highway" influence.

---

The meme followup? http://remixtures.com/, Susana from http://blog.felisberto.net/, http://joaomartins.entropiadesign.org/ and http://blog.centopeia.com/.

[1] - http://paulasimoes.org/blog/?p=18
[2] - http://mindboosternoori.blogspot.com/2006/11/metropolis.html
[3] - http://mindboosternoori.blogspot.com/2007/08/2007-so-far-movies.html
[4] - http://www.opendemocracy.org/arts/strangelove_4001.jsp
[5] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wicker_Man
[6] - http://steve-p.org/wm/
[7] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wicker_Man_soundtrack
[8] - http://www.thewickermanfestival.co.uk
[9] - http://www.spiritofbaraka.com/samsara.aspx
[11] - http://www.lynchnet.com/lh/
[12] - http://www.archive.org/details/detour_ipod

My trip to Berlin in 10 little items

1. Berlin first impressions: it's great to be a walker there;
2. 15 Portuguese people on Web 2.0 Expo Berlin, that I know of;
3. Berlin's public transports are great, but it's somewhat hard to get used to them;
4. The idea that Portuguese hospitals are a lot worse than other European countries isn't quite true: they are worse but not that much;
5. You have to love Berlin's traffic lights;
6. German people have something against double beds, maybe it's something that comes from Jewish traditions?
7. I hoped that music there was cheaper, but that's not quite true: average price at 17.50 €. On the other hand, every store is better than any music Portuguese music store I know of regarding stock quality. Plus, they have quite a lot more percentage of stuff in vinyl;
8. Movies and Books, specially books, are obscenely cheap there, comparing to Portugal. And their bookshops' are awsome. And it seems that adiobooks is the next big thing there...
9. If you're to go there, remember: go to the DDR museum and the cinema museum. If to choose one of those, choose the first.
10. It was great being there, and mind-thrilling too. There's a lot of new stuff gereminating in my mind... You might see the results sometime.

relax, we understand j00

Do you like music, movies and books, but you simply don't like to pay for them? Relax, we understand j00.

I've been advocating countless times that art should be free, but one of the most reactions I get is something like "oh, but artists should get money for their work". I try, in vain, to explain that giving the art for free doesn't mean that you'll get to money for it. Graphs and numbers show rising numbers on the money made by concerts and tours, but those cases are allways refuted with something like "what about the bands that don't act live?"... I also wrote about getting money from publicity, and was quite happy to see someone going in the right direction for it: two weeks ago I wrote about ReverbNation [1] giving 50% profit share for musicians registred there, which made musical projects as my own [2] start making profit while giving songs for free. But sometimes people just don't get it... They're too used to think of the industry that chokes art as if that industry was the only way to access to art.

So, today I'm going to talk about another example, and this time it's not music. Some of you just want to have access to everything, for free. Some of you prefer to buy the art, either because you prefer the physical item, or because you care about the artist and want to feed him, or both. Relax, we understand j00. As a matter of fact, understanding you is being able to satisfy both "markets": those who like to have free stuff and those you prefer the "classic way". MegaTokyo [3] is a webmanga and a manga. Well, it started as a webmanga, in 2000, started and continued free, and started gathering a legion of fans. (Almost) every monday, wednesday and friday you get one more page of story, and in the meantime you allways have a forum where fans discuss the story and try to predict where it is heading. Being free, in fact, was the factor that made it get its legion of fans, and, with it, and opportunity came for him to release those same strips (so, same story, just in paper) as books. From then until now already five numbers are out, and you can be sure than whenever there is enough strips to release a new one - oh - it will surely be released. See - despite all of the work being online, legal, for free, and despite that fact being announced everywhere in the books, MegaTokyo is the best selling original English-language manga, and the #3 graphical novel seller in USA. So, what to say about it? Is it being free hurting the sales, or - as a matter of fact - making it sell more? One thing is for sure: there are several books that have continuation, but if the next issue takes too long to be released, less people will buy it when it does. At least these cases are minimized by MegaTokyo, where you can allways keep reading, strip by strip, as the work is being done, three times a week...

I, for one, used to be a real fan of MegaTokyo, since 2001. I used to visit the website everyday, I would stay awake until way too late just to read a new strip, I was heavy involved in the forums and community around MT. Time passed and I started to have less time to check MegaTokyo, until the time I stopped being a regular reader. No problem - of course - I'm now a proud owner of the books, having a better way to read MegaTokyo. Oh, you prefer to save your money? No problem... relax, we understand j00.

[1] - http://tinyurl.com/2fvw2c
[2] - http://www.reverbnation.com/merankorii
[3] - http://www.megatokyo.com

Bazaar Blanket - Blanket Licenses done right

Bazaar Blanket, a term I've just invented, is my intention to (re)define blanket licenses in a way that they might in fact work. For that matter I'm going to try to explain the concept of blanket licenses, what are the flaws of that licenses, and how could they work.

We're, fortunately, starting to hear about "Blanket Licenses" more and more, specially related to the music world. This is a concept that appeared as a way to redifine copyright and its issues. As you surelly know piracy is growing more and more, and while we're allways listining that "piracy is bad", "piracy is wrong", there are two statistics that should not be ignored: for one people are listening to more and more varied music, and seem to be more interested in music and art in general; on the other hand most people who practice any form of that so-called "piracy" don't consider or feel that they are doing something wrong, even if they know that they're doing something that society says it is wrong. So, copyright might be outdated (I believe it is, and I may talk about that later, but that's not the point of this article). But do we really need copyright? Some people thought that, while the concepts behind copyright might be good (I say might because you have to believe that copyright is aimed to give financial and moral retribution to artists) they also think that the actual scenario is wrong, with big corporations get the big stake of the profits and the control of the art without being really involved in the process, while artists win nothing but exposure with the deal, and consumers are treated as criminals (and these are really the two parts related to the art itself). So, they think that all this mess could be solved with a "blanket license": people pay a fair fixed price per month and have the right to have access to any form of copyright material they want to (legalizing the big bulk of p2p traffic that entities like RIAA or MPAA want to anihilate). Those same people usually point out uniquely one downside of this: its implementation would have to allow the perfect calculation of what content and how many times is being transfered, as a way to pay for the copyright holders for it, and that's difficult.

Now my part: I've allways said that I don't agree with blanket licenses, which amazes many people. Here's why: I don't believe you could implement a fair blanket license.

First, you would have to force people to pay, or they wouldn't. See, I pay my water bill, but if I don't I'll stop having water at home. Now, if you would have water in the pipes anyway, do you really think that people would pay for the water? Notice that we're talking about the same people that many times can buy the music they're downloading in an online shop, but they don't. Of course that you can avoid that and do what some countries, including Portugal, do with physical media: every CD, DVD, hard drive, pen disk or other physical media they remembered of pays a "copyright tax", so everytime you buy a CD-R you're paying a copyright fee, and every time you're buying a CD burner you're also paying a "copyright tax". The problem here is quite obvious: I never burnt on my CD/DVD burner any CD-R or DVD-R with copyrighted material without permission, but still I payed that tax, and I don't like it. So, if you force people to adhere for that blanket license and pay for it, is it really good?

Then, the question of retribution: how can you see which copyright holder gets 100 and which ones gets 10? Thinking that you can implement such scheme is completely ridiculous: that doesn't even work (nor is fair) in radio station licenses, where there's a similar scheme implemented, with the particularity that it is a closed environment (one entity to pay to, one list per month to report to that entity, each licensee needs to give that list). But let's look wider: if RIAA can't stop (and is avidly trying to) piracy, do you think they could do the tracking necessary (basicly the same) to make blanket licenses fair, specially when they're getting their money anyway (so they don't really get any monetary benefict in doing such an effort)?

So, how to fix "blanket licenses" and turn them into something praticable? Welcome to the "Bazaar Blanket". First of all, this is almost a request for comments, this ideas I'm writting aren't really well defined. This is something that must evolve until reaches a state of "full praticability", meaning that it must be in a way that it turns out to being the obvious way to lid with this matter. Also, I know quite well that this is almost "radical", utopic, and I know that the actual copyright industry would never let such thing to be implemented.

Abolish the concept of copyright. Copyright is outdated. Copyright doesn't work. Plus, copyright isn't needed, at all. I'm starting with this so you understand from the start why I say that the copyright industry would never accept this: without copyright there's no copyright industry. But that's exactly the particularity of abolishing copyright that makes that abolition necessary. See, to get the most of art, you need artists that are free to be artists, and you want that anyone, in any case, can get access to art. Societies without art do not evolve (I really should put a reference here, but if you fuss a little you'll find thousands of resarch papers telling you this). Copyright could be defined as the process of putting barriers between the artists and the general public, so, as we don't want barriers, we don't really want copyright. Oh, BTW, abolishing copyright is what I'm really calling "Bazaar blanket", since it solves everything.

Let me explain. The first issue I pointed out to blanket licenses is that people would be force to aquire such licenses. Well, without copyright they don't, no copyright means no need to have a license that lets you have access to the content. The second issue is that artists should get money fairly. Well, paying for the art is a astonishing concept that we're forcing to accept, but I defy someone to really understand and deffend it. See, I understand that artists should get money - I really do, and I want that they can get that money with this Bazaar Blanket, but if you can reproduce something tending to the infinite with a cost tending to none, then the price of the thing you're reproducing tends to none. Damn, I'm listening to an awsome music that I didn't pay nothing for, and I'm not taking nothing to no one while doing so: this CD was bought by a friend that lended it to me, but since there's nothing like "while you're listening to it I can't" (remember, the reproducing cost is virtually none) I'm not priving anyone of anything. So, should music be free? YES! That doesn't mean that artist shouldn't make money. See, there are physical costs with being an artist. For instance, I'm listening to a CD, and while the music in it does not have costs, the CD itself has. As going to a concert has. As a DVD has, as a book has. You don't need copyright to be able to sell stuff if you abolish stuff. Plus, you stop having to worry to who deserves more money. Pick Don and Joe. Don has a musical project, makes some gigs and people dig him, he records some CD's at home and do some nice DIY packaging for them, with some photos and an autograph, he goes to the next retail store with 50 CD's and sells them to the store so the store sells those CD's. He's making money. No copyright - no rules - no laws - he makes money and all this is legal. Jon though "hey, that's easy money!" so he decided to make something simillar but since he doesn't know nothing of music he skips the concerts part, and just into recording a CD. He makes 50 CD's full of, er, grunts and burps and tries to sell them. No one buys, of course. This is the Bazaar Blanket.

Bazaar Blanket - a concept disruptive and caustic, but fair and praticable, more than Copyright. Just so far from the actual reality that most people won't get it. What are your thoughts?

2007 so far - movies

Keeping up with my "2007 so far" series, today I'm going to talk about the movies that I've seen so far this year and that I think are worth talking about, and maybe convincing you to see them. It's quite hard to write about movies and books without spoilers, which I refuse to write here, so I'm just giving my relation with each movie. If you get curious about some of the movies, but still not decided to see it, I encourage you to check more info about it on IMDB or such.

On Piracy. I talked about this movie by the time I saw it. This is basicly a movie about what's usually called "Digital Piracy". It shows an imparcial vision, allways talking to both sides on each issue, and focusing on several aspects of Piracy. It is refreshing to see a documentary of this kind, since we're used to see allways the same stuff from the content industry, saying that "piracy is evil and is a form of terrorism", and here we see the real oppinions of both sides, and not only the legal side of the question (what is legal? what is not? what is moral? what is not? what is fair? what is not?) but we also see the cultural issues (Why do people download music? Why does the music industry refuse to reinvent their business model?). To make it even better, this movie is free.

Les glaneurs et la glaneuse is another documentary, but this one reflecting on human nature. Of course, the theme isn't real that one: it's a documentary were we see various examples where people live with what others don't care to see. What is garbage for ones, can be vital for others, or can be used as art (just to give you a pair of examples). Also, with this you see alternative lifestyles, away from what's commonly accepted, and yet, it seems, more human. This movie is, in fact, a reflexion, but the great thing about it is really the fact that, while it explains and explores each argument for that reflexion, it settles the ground for you to do a reflexion of your own.

PlayTime, or my introduction to Jaques Tati. And, well, I'm way too curious to see all the other stuff he made (I actualy didn't stop with PlayTime, as you'll read in a moment). A futurist movie, describing the mechanical world and the mechanical animals. Each angle has ninety degrees, each city works the same way, everything has a place to fit. What happens if someone just doesn't fit in? Probably the world doesn't care. While a far topic from dystopias, I imagine that the fan of PlayTime will be those who are fans of dystopias - specially mathematicly inspired ones, like Zamiatyn's "We".

Fahrenheit 451, an addaptation of Ray Bradbury's book. I was talking about dystopias, so here is one of those stories that I consider the "obligatory four dystopias": We, 1984, Brave New World and Fahrenheit 451. The adaptation of the book to the big screen is better than I was hoping, and every little storyline change is well justified and justifiable. Also, this story has the particularity that even Ray Bradbury liked to change and adapt it to the medium it was going to be told - from several forms of writting to several forms of playing. I wonder if Ray was living only nowadays he would like Clive Barker's thoughts on art, and release it as a game instead...

Mon Oncle, another Jaques Tati movie. Far lighter that PlayTime, extremely funny, it ends talking about the same kind of concepts than PlayTime - it almost seems that it is a previous chapter of the story (which maybe it is, I don't know the release date of one and the other). Also an excelent movie, this one that tells a story of a family of father, mother and son, and their new home. Of course, there is also the uncle, best friend of the kid but not really into the social standards of the family... It's fun to see that, while PlayTime is "one society black sheep", Mon Oncle is more about a culture clash between social levels, told in the funniest way.

Having Cypher on this list is somewhat like cheating, since this was not the first time I saw it. What made me wanting to see it for a long time was the fact that it was made by the same guy from "Cube" (an awsome movie, IMHO), but I didn't really know much about it when I saw it. When I did, I really liked and it was one of those movies that I didn't forget about, and several times recalled it. The problem is that I never thought of it as "Cypher" but allways as "that movie where 'a' and 'b' happens", so when the movie was being played again in a movie festival in Coimbra, this year, I read the movie descriptionand didn't relate it to the movie itself. I had the same thought, "if it's directed by the same guy who worked on Cube it must be good", and I only recognized it as being the same when I first saw the movie start. And I'm glad, 'cause this is one of those movies I don't mind watching more than once.

Four Eyed Monsters is an exquisite movie: it was made by too persons that met via the web, and the movie is about their story. But that's not it: the movie not only was made, hyped and distributed using a lot of new technology, namedly social networks, blogs and so on, they also focus that new means of connecting and getting toguether in the movie. The movie can still be viewed and downloaded for free on YouTube (I don't know for how long), being the first featured movie on YouTube. The movie was all made with money from a huge bunch of credit cards, that they're now paying for. It's arguably the first "Movie 2.0", and while that would be encouraging enough for you to see it, the story and plot are also very good - even better than the concept itself.

M - Eine Stadt sucht einen Moerder is another movie that you can download and see for free, but this time not on YouTube nor because the author lets you do, but because this is a Fritz Lang movie that is already in Public Domain, so you can get it (with subtitles of your choice) at archive.org. As you might remember from an earlier post of mine, I'm a fan of Fritz Lang's Metropolis, and I was curious for a long time on "M". Seeing it was a great experience, and I really recommend this movie almost-dystopian movie, that shows a dark side of humanity and society, while telling you a preety easy to follow plot: a child murderer is out there, and everyone is both afraid and wanting to catch him. What scares the most is that the movie is as actual now as it was at the time.

Det Sjunde Inseglet is a movie from Ingmar Bergman, that recently died but will never be dead, and is considered one of the movies that helped defining the European cinema. From 195, this black and white movie was the only one that I've seen from Bergman (yet), but that something that I have and want to fix soon enough. This movie reflects about death, God, religion and myths, and shows, among other things, that Bergman had guts. While the movie itself is excelent, I felt that I need to see more of his works (specially those made near this one) to have a full understanding of what's going on Bergman's mind with some particularities of this movie. But making me wanting to see more of his movies is one good indicative that I liked it, and I really expect to like his other works.

What are you doing?

Hey, what are you doing? I mean, how do you spend your time? Why don't I see you in the usual places? Lately I've been noticing a lot of trends, like places/spaces that usually had people and now are usually empty. What are you doing? What were you doing yesterday at the end of the afternoon? What were you doing this evening, from dinner time until now? I didn't saw you - I used to see. I used to see the people, see the trends, and now only empty chairs and too much silly noise trying to catch your eyes off the screen. Yesterday I was there, seeing those movies in a row (Indie Lisboa, you know?), and I saw some of you people, but with each movie that passed the room got emptier and emptier. I came back tonight, to see how François Truffaut adapted the excelent Fahrenheit 451, you know, in that coffee in the middle of a crowded FNAC, but when I thought we would be three we were only two. What are you doing? Did you swap movies for popcorn? Did you all swap movies for popcorn?

Downloading copyrighted material in Italy

(First an off-topic rant: after writting a lot about this issue, this "new and improved" - and buggy - version of blogger decided to send it to /dev/null, so I'm writing this again but I'm not feeling like expanding myself again on the issue...)

Several news sources, but none as extensive and factual as I would like, are reporting that "Italy's top criminal court has stated that downloading computer files containing films, music or software is not a crime if not done for profit", while "analysts noted that violating a copyright, for example by breaking a copyright protection, remained illegal even if downloading the material had been decriminalized."

First, take into consideration that, by analyzing various sources, I reached the conclusion that analysts don't really said that, but "insinuated" that what the court ruled goes against the Italian laws. SIAE, the Italian RIAA, said in a statement that

the ruling did not bring any "revolutions" in terms of author's rights because the case predates current legislation calling for a fine for anyone who shares protected material over the Internet without financial gain.

What I want you to know about this issue is that, regardless what the media are saying:

• file sharing never was and it is not illegal whatsoever in Italy nor in any other country that I know of;
• despite some attempts, no country that I know of state peer-to-peer networks as illegal;
• downloading the copyrighted material has not "been decriminalized";
• a court rule isn't law, even if this case can be referred by the defence of a similar one in the future.

So what does all this mess means?
Simply that all this issues aren't, and should be, clarified. Not only in Italy, not only the judges, record and movie industries, the media, the laws, but everything and everyone else. There should be a real effort, by states, governments and people - and never companies, to state clearly what's all this about: IP, copyright, download, file-sharing, peer-to-peer and all those buzzwords that, everytime that appear on the media, are used in an insulted way for technologists, artists and consumers.