|
NEW TECHNOLOGY & THE INTERNET:
VIABLE DISTRIBUTION OUTLET OR HOLLYWOOD’S LATEST PRISON BITCH?
By Lloyd
Kaufman and Adam Jahnke
The seemingly never-ending battle between
entertainment conglomerates and technological progress has entered a new
phase. Now that the record companies have neutered Napster (a process
that involved putting a tight rubber band around Napster’s testicles and
waiting until the balls dropped off so they could be crushed under the
mega-conglomerates’ boot), studios have aimed their sights on other forms
of digital duplication. According to a New York Times article on Thursday,
March 14 entitled “Piracy, Or Innovation? It’s Hollywood vs. High Tech”
by Amy Harmon, the entertainment industry is putting the screws on the
good folks who make DVD players, CD players, and computers, demanding
they create a fool-proof technology that prevents us from copying and
distributing copies of music and movies.
OK, let’s ignore for a second the fact
that doing this is going to prevent people from making perfectly legal
copies of the movies and albums they shelled out hard-earned dough for.
Our founding fathers took great pains to introduce concepts of fair usage
into copyright law, so that intellectual property did not remain controlled
by just one person, company, or vast devil-worshipping conglomerate, no
matter how powerful. Let’s also ignore the suggestion that what the studios
are demanding would screw up the machines that play these things, making
computers run even slower than they already do and causing DVD and CD
players to freeze up. Instead, let’s focus on the fucking arrogance displayed
by the studios in demanding that somebody else protect their property.
In the New York Times article, Intel chairman Andrew S.
Grove asks, “Is it the responsibility of the world at large to protect
an industry whose business model is facing a strategic challenge?” The
simple fact is the landscape is changing. It’s changed before…in the
1950’s with the advent of television, in the 80’s with home video and
now with new technology, including the Internet. Every single time there’s
some innovation that benefits consumers, the movie studios have reacted
by pissing and moaning about how (insert new technology here) will kill
Hollywood. If this were true, the Troma Team would be doing backflips
of joy. But even though it isn’t true, we’re still in favor of all forms
of technological innovation. The more methods of delivery we have to
get our movies to as many people as possible, the better. The
fact is that the conglomerates are desperately afraid of competition and
anything that might make them have to think a wee bit. It’s much easier
for them to simply recycle the content from every tentacle of their corporation
a gazillion times. Not only do you see the same stories over and over
(articles from Time, Sports Illustrated, and Entertainment Weekly are
read out loud verbatim on the Time Warner/AOL-owned CNN), but now you
see the same talking heads on every channel repeating themselves. News
anchors have always been pre-fabricated Barbie and Ken types, but now
it’s the exact same Barbie and Ken on three different channels.
A representation of the conglomerates covering up
the benefits of new technology
|
The media conglomerates have a history of crying
to the lawmakers in Washington whenever it seems like they’re about
to make only $700 billion a year instead of $100 trillion. In 1998,
they fucked with the copyright law to make it perfectly legal for
Mickey Mouse to remain protected by copyright in virtual perpetuity.
Copyright law was established to protect artists and make it possible
for them to earn a living. The “artist” who created Mickey Mouse
has been buried in a cryogenic tube for over thirty years now, so
obviously this new copyright law is in place to protect the Global
Disney Axis from losing control of a character they haven’t even
bothered to put in a movie for about a decade. If Mickey Mouse
was in the public domain, Disney would still make billions off the
character and its related merchandise. But talented artists like
Bill Plympton or Jan Svankmajer would also have an opportunity to
reinvent the character and use it creatively in ways Disney never
imagined. Some of the greatest art of all time is a re-imagined
variation of an existing work, from Shakespeare’s Romeo &
Juliet to Walter Murphy and The Big Apple Band’s “A Fifth of
Beethoven”. Art is a process of building on what has come before
and the copyright law of 1998 puts a big chunk of what has come
before off-limits.
While the copyright law fiasco changed the law of
the land, the Napster disaster was fought in the courts. When record
companies realized that Napster was exposing its users to good music
by unsigned bands instead of corporate-approved horse puke by teen
pop-tarts like Britney Spears, they got the whole thing shut down,
bought out by Bertelsmann and re-invented as yet another slave to
the corporate machine (for more on Napster, copyright law, and the
whole ball of wax, check out the entire Napster series of essays
beginning here: http://www.troma.com/lk2/napster/index.php3).
|
Now, instead of making an effort to seize the opportunity presented
by new digital technologies, the big boys are trying to cut it off
at the knees so that everything remains just as it is. The last truly
subversive movement to grip the cultural landscape was punk in the
late 1970’s and once that seemed to be growing out of control, the
mainstream media stepped in to put the kibosh on it (symbolized with
extreme subtlety in Terror Firmer when the punk production
assistant is cut off at the knees by a pair of colliding semi trucks
with razor-sharp loading platforms). But it really doesn’t matter
what the conglomerates do to try to stop this runaway freight train,
because things aren’t going to stay the same. Technology is going
to keep on plowing ahead, with or without the blessing of the mega-conglomerates.
Independents like Troma will continue to explore how to use this technology
to everyone’s benefit. Because we listened to our fans, Troma was
one of the first studios to have its own website and was one of the
first studios to fully embrace the interactive qualities of DVD.
Once the independents have figured out how to benefit from new technologies,
the big guys will jump aboard and act like it was all their idea in
the first place. Until that day comes (and it will, just as it did
with home video and pay TV), our only hope is that the techno-nerds
in the computer sector are strong enough to withstand this attempted
ass-rape by the devil-worshipping media giants. |
Proof that mainstream media
is harmful to your health
|
The conglomerates are quickly alienating themselves from
the people whose money keep them in business by acting in ways that are
counterproductive to what consumers really want. It’s our hope that disillusionment
with these tactics will reach a point where supporters of truly independent
art will rise up and demonstrate against these Goliaths. A perfect site
for such a mass demonstration would be the Cannes Film Festival in May
2002. The eyes, ears and anuses of the world are upon Cannes each year,
so a protest against the fear-mongering and bullying of the entertainment
industry at Cannes would reach far and wide. It’s time for the people
to make their voices heard and show the world that there is more to film,
music, and performance art than what’s being forced down everyone’s throat
at the local mall. We can and must show the suits in the glass towers
what the people really want. The leaders of the World Trade Organization
ignored the legion of complaints lodged against it until groups of brave
students and citizens in Seattle and Genoa, Italy demonstrated loudly
and visibly against them. These people succeeded in getting the attention
of both the WTO and the world. Today, at the very least the WTO is pretending
to listen to the protestors and paying lip service to their complaints
by putting fashionable anti-authoritarian spokesmen like Bono on panels.
At this point, the entertainment cartel isn’t even doing that much. They
are denying us the inalienable rights given to a democratic society by
creating a system of nepotism that serves no one but themselves. We must
remind them that this is a democracy and democracy is a work in progress,
changing at the behest of the people, not at the command of a few cantankerous
zillionaires who own half the planet and a good chunk of the moon. If
our voices are raised in protest, I firmly believe the conglomerates will
realize that they continue to ignore us at their peril.
|