Tenn. passes bill that makes it illegal to share your netflix account

And this is apparently coming to all states.

Tenn. passes Web entertainment theft bill

State lawmakers in country music's capital have passed a groundbreaking measure that would make it a crime to use a friend's login - even with permission - to listen to songs or watch movies from services such as Netflix or Rhapsody.

The bill, now awaiting the governor's signature, was pushed by recording industry officials to try to stop the loss of billions of dollars to illegal music sharing. They hope other states will follow.

The legislation was aimed at hackers and thieves who sell passwords in bulk, but its sponsors acknowledge it could be employed against people who use a friend's or relative's subscription.

While those who share their subscriptions with a spouse or other family members under the same roof almost certainly have nothing to fear, blatant offenders - say, college students who give their logins to everyone on their dormitory floor - could get in trouble.

"What becomes not legal is if you send your user name and password to all your friends so they can get free subscriptions," said the bill's House sponsor, Rep. Gerald McCormick.

Under the measure, download services that believe they are getting ripped off can go to law enforcement authorities and press charges.

And those SOBs at the RIAA win again.

reply to post by Vitchilo


SOB!

It's time to protest with your pocket book.
Don't buy or support any band or label that is aligned with the RIAA.

If they aren't making money then they can't exist.

reply to post by Vitchilo


what a waste of tax payer time and money... that just sucks.
soon you wont be able to let your friends play on your xbl or psn account.


and seattle is the capitol not crap ass tenn.

They were all about this digital thing when they saw it as a chance to get richer, but once everybody figured it out from their end (how to get around) and they started losing a little they got upset. I think lawmakers need to concern themselves more with the Constitution, and less with the special interest groups. A weak foundation makes a weak building, whether it's a hospital, a country or a system of beliefs...

I wish my senators in this stupid state would actually work on something important, like JOBS. First it's the "don't say gay" bill. Now this ridiculousness.

How are they going to enforce it? IP tracking won't work because everyone is so mobile now. Prove you weren't watching video in my house. Stupid, stupid stupid. And the majority keeps electing these dummies. If the music and movies weren't turning into such crap, people would still be buying it. It'd be worth the investment. The RIAA needs to be mentoring better artists. The money would come if we felt we were getting good value. I think free radio will be next. There's already talk about making radio stations pay per play in the pipeline.

I think this is complete garbage. I pay money for the services (or lack thereof) and refuse to be told who I can let use it. They can keep trying to draw their lines in the sand, but I will keep crossing it.

Theft by politicians makes you mad, but then you defend stealing by individuals.
On the whole, we are getting the leaders we deserve.

Try working as a musician/filmmaker for a while, then you might understand who drew the short straw.
It's just plain wrong to resist legislation which demands that people pay for the services they receive while complaining there is nothing being done about jobs.

If you don't put in and you get out, you're the thief and you are worse than the record labels who, at least, pay artists when they make enough to pay off their debts which were fronted by businessmen on a gamble. And I say this as someone who has experienced the music industry first hand. Most labels lose money on 10 or 12 artists for every 1 they profit by. That 1 artist and the label usually keeps the others afloat with a chance at success and allows all the greedy and silly software/music/movie/etc thieves access to entertainment they might otherwise have never known of.

reply to post by Dasher


I actually listen to Pandora when I want to hear music. I've discovered some wonderful artists through there I ordinarily would not have been exposed to. Pandora even provides links when you favorite a song so you can purchase it from ITunes. 99 cents is a good deal for a song. I haven't pirated anything.

I understand as an artist that all the money goes to management and things like the RIAA. Both consumer and producer are getting the short end of the stick.

And in the case of Netflix, if you're paying for the service, you should have some freedom as to who can use it. I'm not saying that sharing it with dozens of people isn't wrong. That is. But it shouldn't be wrong to share it with your own family, and on paper, that is what this bill does. Under this bill, my daughter couldn't use my account even though I am paying for it.

TN has problems a heck of a lot bigger than digital piracy. My problem is the priorities are screwed up.

Alternately, artists should simply start distributing directly and very cheaply ($.02 per minute for music and $.01 per minute for a movie, etc) while making extra money on live performances/large screen showings. You'd see a whole lot less intrusion into government by corporations, but that begins with artists working hard rather than putting their hopes in a distribution deal funded by a big label/movie studio (bank).

Some math:
$.02 x 45 minutes = $.90
$.01 x 2.5 hours = $1.50

$.90 x 1,000,000 = $900,000
$1.50 x 1,000,000 = $1,5000,000

So if everyone who benefited from a particular piece of entertainment paid something similar to these rates at this time in history, it should be easy to ensure that artists are paid, investors see a profit, and individuals get entertainment cheaply. Meanwhile, if things stay the same, thieves will battle the thieves and the artists suffer the most.

reply to post by tncryptogal


I hear you clearly regarding household use.

99 cents is still too expensive, in my mind, for a song.

99 cents for an album should be sufficient, even with digital distributors taking 10%, for musicians to make a living. Obviously that would mean that their music is enjoyed by many, but isn't that the way it should be? Crappy music shouldn't be payed for. But that's what happens in our current system despite consumers stealing so much.

Originally posted by violence=answer
reply to post by Vitchilo

 

what a waste of tax payer time and money... that just sucks.
soon you wont be able to let your friends play on your xbl or psn account.


and seattle is the capitol not crap ass tenn.

oh you poor thing, Are they going take your precious xbox away??

Seattle??? Are you on drugs? When is the last time you heard someone say "I'm going to move to seattle and become a country singer"?

Pretty soon everyones "excessive breathing" will be a felony. Seriously, what has this world come to? I've been sharing my friends Netflix with him for months, now I'm a criminal?

reply to post by Ancient Champion


country blows and is dying
THANK GOD

Originally posted by Vandettas
Pretty soon everyones "excessive breathing" will be a felony. Seriously, what has this world come to? I've been sharing my friends Netflix with him for months, now I'm a criminal?

Yes. Enjoy the rape in federal prison.

dont you know by now the only people in this country that are allowed to steal from anyone

is your us government.


so you get arrestted for this and spend 5 to 10 years in prison and your cellmate tiny asks what did you do ?

you respond i let my little sister watch a movie.

someone needs to prosecute and lock up our congressman but no wait they can not be prosecuted for any law they make.

i hate washington dc.

reply to post by Vitchilo


No thanks. I think I'll stick to basic cable.

Originally posted by violence=answer
reply to post by Ancient Champion

 

country blows and is dying
THANK GOD

you just proved how much you know about the music industry right there.......

Its safe to say youre not an authority on what should be done and what shouldnt

reply to post by ManBehindTheMask


tell me what makes country music so great?
how good are those musicians?
and how does an opinion on country show any authority on anything?

This is complete nonsense!

I pay for Netflix. I called Netflix (this past December) and asked if I could setup my parents Wii with my Netflix account (two different households). They said "Sure, you can share your Netflix on at least two devices simultaneously." So we did. She said I could share it on more than two devices but that only two could be in use at one time. Their servers would prevent any more than two simultaneously. The Netflix rep was excited about me sharing my account and said that she shared hers also! She said they encourage sharing that they "want as many people to experience Netflix as possible because once they see what it is like they will want their own instant queue instead of having to share it" and get DVDs sent to them. In short people will want their own account.

Idiot politicians should have called Netflix and asked them if they even care about sharing passwords? No instead of letting the company handle it themselves they thought they would just pass broad new laws that give even more excuses to expand the prison population.

Can I share it with my girlfriend in the next room? After all we are watching two different things at the same time AND using the same account. Good Lord! Heaven Forbid! Call the cops!!! .... wait a second ... NETFLIX said I could!!

This country is out of control.

-----------------------------------------

I have a very basic cable package and the fastest internet they have available. I watch Netflix almost exclusively. I never watch cable/ network TV.

People are getting a little bent out of shape over this.

It's not about me letting one of my friends use my netflix login every now and then. It's about the companies out there that literally buy and sell shared logins - where a dozen people (or more) are sharing a -subscription- account.

Which is a breach of the terms and conditions - and really a form of theft. Restaurants don't allow you to share one soda with "unlimited refills" amongst the whole party of 6 for the obvious reason that it's a deliberate abuse.

The difference is that, in a restaurant, you have to show your face and walk inside the restaurant... try that sort of stuff too many times and you'll simply be unwelcome and turned away (or the whole party charged for having a soda and told to deal with it - depending upon the restaurant.... we had a guy who used to eat the entire basket of crackers on the table and our manager would charge him a few dollars for the crackers every time he came in). On the internet, however, accounts and logins are like unique individuals - you can create a new one at any time and share 50 $15/mo subscriptions across 300 people paying $5/mo (or a 'free' service with copious amounts of advertising).

That's the problem they are trying to address - and the companies are simply playing a game of whack-a-mole - when an account is suspected of being shared, they can cancel it due to T&C violations - but another can be created and abused for a few weeks/months before they can really say it's being abused and close it down. Someone has to be able to find the dicks responsible for this type of behavior and get them to knock it off.

That said - the bill should include specific wording to exclude the individual who is just sharing his account with a few too many friends and specifically target the 'password industry.' Not having the bill in front of me - I can't really say whether or not it does - just that it really should make the distinction.