Slashdot Mirror


Grubb for Congress. By Weblog.

An anonymous reader writes: "Wired is running a story about a (Libertarian) candidate for Congress in North Carolina whose platform explicitly supports P2P file-sharing activity. She's running against one of the big supporters of the Berman P2P hacking bill." The weblog community is all excited over her because she drank the Kool-aid.

4 of 281 comments (clear)

  1. Libertarian... by Peridriga · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I am a Libertarian
    I don't believe in music piracy
    I do believe in P2P.
    I disagree with how the RIAA/MPAA is trying to solve their problem.

    If you don't agree w/ me, reply. I agree w/ the idea of copyprotected music. It is a produced object. Something that has time and money invested to produce an item that really does have actual value. If I produced a song that I specifically did not want to give away for free, I would try to keep it off P2P networks. I would contact those who are sharing these files and explain that they don't have permission from me to distribute this.

    Now, let me step back and say. I do understand fair use. If you purchase my CD and rip it to MP3 that's fine. You purchased the CD, you purchase the rights to listen to the music but, you did not purchase the rights to re-distribute my works in a way I don't see fit.

    OK.. Now step forward again. Why don't I like the way the MPAA/RIAA is protecting their property. There are/have been laws on the books that protect the copyright holders rights to published works. These laws explicity spelled out the fair uses of these works as well as protecting the creators. These laws worked for years on end. The change in technology didn't change the laws. The change in technology didn't make these laws less effective. You could easily still bring suit against a P2P user for sharing your music under the current legal system, it's just harder to do. So instead of attempting to protect their rights the hard way they simply bought laws to help them. These laws(DMCA, etc.) are what I have a problem with.

    I abhor the creation of laws that violate my rights in any way shape or form. It is not the purpose of government to pick and choose winners by passing favorable laws it is the purpose of government to protect my rights.

    1. Re:Libertarian... by smallpaul · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you are a libertarian, I am surprised that you support government-backed monopolies at all. After all, that's what IP is!

  2. Refreshing by shd99004 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Read her weblog, and Grubb seems like an honest person, with great ideas and views. Enthusiastic. Libertarian. We need more of those kinda people...

    --
    Will work for bandwidth
  3. Re:Libertarian by BattyMan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    libertarian = liberty from excess government?

    Yes, that's the core idea. Less Gub'ment, more liberty.
    A smaller government both oppresses the people less and co$t$ less.
    Of course, NO incumbent will have anything good to say about such a concept.

    Unfortunately this doesn't draw much largesse from big corporations looking for favors, which is today's primary source of campaign funding, so you won't see many Libertarians on TV, or doing well in many elections, either.

    Get ahold of and check out the list of contributors to both candidates of any major political campaign. SURPRISE! The _same_ companies are hedging their bets by supporting _both_ sides! No wonder there's not a gnat's ass worth of difference between their policies!

    --
    Exceeding the recommended torque is not recommended.