I think the author is singling out IP-Law when his problem is with our legal system in general. For better or worse our modern legal system is built around overly strict limits that are, by design, rarely enforced.
To give an example consider the freeway. Where I live most cars drive 70 to 75 mph without causing a safety risk and I know it's CHP policy to ignore anyone driving less than 10 miles over the limit. But they could pull over all those people because the official speed limit is 65 mph. So they've established a speed limit that's stricter than it needs to be and have encouraged the breaking of that limit. This allows them to pull over virtually anyone they want for any cause they feel like.
This is true throughout our legal system. There's actually a recently published book called "3 Felonies a Day: How The Feds Target the Innocent" that makes this case quite well. The premise being every American inadvertently commits 3 felonies a day just by living a normal life.
So while the blog post is right to point out the illogical nature of IP-Law he should understand it was written that way by design to allow for easier prosecution.
(prosecution might not be the right word since IP issues are civil but you get the point)
This is a great example of what deeply bothers me about these sorts of IP rules. The best description I've read of the mindset of those who support these rules, but still not a sufficient argument to convince me: "What Colour are Your Bits?" at http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/lawpoli/colour/2004061001.php.
The author is simply wrong. You can get episodes for Fox shows on Fox's website & episodes appear for free on Hulu as well. I've watched other Fox shows on my cable's "On Demand" feature, so maybe The Simpsons is on that too. That's three other ways to watch The Simpsons legally.
I agree the letter of the law can be silly & content owners tend to cling to old business models rather than innovate, but please give credit where credit is due. Fox & others are making programming available to us via different methods.
I did try to get the episode from the Fox site. (I watch South Park on line this way all the time.) It didn't work. I also tried -- successfully -- the get it from iTunes. It cost me $6 (because I somehow accidentally downloaded it twice). But then IT WOULDN"T PLAY because my display is a DVI display and not an HDMI display!
Hmmm did you try watching one? I tried watching a Simpsons episode on the Fox site. Site took ages to load. Eventually there was a weird selection of random full episodes (6). When I clicked on the latest one, it took a while to load again and then went nowhere. Maybe it's because I live in South Africa? Either way, we have satellite TV showing The Simpsons as well as PVRs here so it's pretty much the same situation as described in the article - far simpler for the average person to just google 'Simpsons SxEyy torrent' than to go the "legitimate" route to exactly the same bits. (Not that I own a TV or watch series, but in theory.)
To give an example consider the freeway. Where I live most cars drive 70 to 75 mph without causing a safety risk and I know it's CHP policy to ignore anyone driving less than 10 miles over the limit. But they could pull over all those people because the official speed limit is 65 mph. So they've established a speed limit that's stricter than it needs to be and have encouraged the breaking of that limit. This allows them to pull over virtually anyone they want for any cause they feel like.
This is true throughout our legal system. There's actually a recently published book called "3 Felonies a Day: How The Feds Target the Innocent" that makes this case quite well. The premise being every American inadvertently commits 3 felonies a day just by living a normal life.
So while the blog post is right to point out the illogical nature of IP-Law he should understand it was written that way by design to allow for easier prosecution.
(prosecution might not be the right word since IP issues are civil but you get the point)