Hilary Rosen from RIAA will write Iraq's Copyrights?

sould writes "The Register is reporting that Hilary Rosen is to assist in writing Iraq's Intellectual Property laws. Can't have those Iraqi's pirating Eminem now can we?"

Comments

Re:How about this - Bitter protest against copyrig

[Viol8]

Some people just have a hard time understanding the difference between physical entities and
written works. *sigh*. Its quite simple Mr argoff really , try and pay attention: If you sell
someone an orange you've grown they can't go and make 100s of copies and give them to their
friends. However thats EXACTLY what they can so if you given them a piece of code or an image etc etc.
Since a writer has no physical protection for his work there must be LEGAL protection , and that is copyright law. If someone wishes
to give away their work under the GPL or whatever then good for them. If however someone wishes to make money out of it and illegal copies
would prevent this then why on earn shouldn't there be some sort of law to help them? Or are you simply yet another member of the "profit = baaaad , free = gooood" movement
that seems based around some hippy ideas that were proven drivel 30 years ago and are only believed by naive dopeheads and RMS these days?

Re:This is just plain absurd...

[glesga_kiss]

I think Tony is getting jealous...the UK is supposed to be the 51st state...

Re:+1 Funny

[Zemran]

Democracy is about letting the people decide who they want and letting everyone have a say. I realise that this is a difficult concept as it is so long since the US has had democracy that it is hard to imagine. If the people truly want an Iranian type gov. then they will eventually get it just like they did in Iran. It does not matter how long we try to stop them from having what they want, they will have it. If we really wanted them to have democracy then we would let them have Saddam in the line up as well and he would get a lot of votes now. Most of the people now think they were better off with him than they are now.

None of this is about democacy as that is just as much idiological crap as communism. The guys in power stay in power and you only get to chose between the guys they want you choose between. It is all smoke and mirrors just like saying the people run the country in China.

As for terrorism... There are more terrorist organisations with there headquarters in the US than there were in Iraq. The US gov still cannot get round to calling the IRA terrorists and even though the Cambodian Freedom Fighters are actively blowing up buildings in Phnom Pehn they are still allowed to have their HQ in NY. Israel is one of the few countries that is actually run by real terrorists (read about the creation of the Jewish state and the bombing of the British embassy in Palestine if you do not believe me) and they are the US's main ally in the region, and they are still blowing up arabs. I think we all know that the US has many times more weapons of mass destruction as well. So it is all bull.

So face reality, the Iraqi people are still being shafted and they will still do all they can to kill those that shaft them. Now they WILL want to kill Americans and British. Before they were one of the few that wanted to be allies.

We have very few chances of winning this war. We just won a battle but the real war is just starting and things are starting to look very bad. We need to get the fsck out quick and send in some neutral peacekeepers. If we let the Iraqi people really decide for themselves, instead of trying to write a legal system for them that will have absolutely no authority because we have no right to tell them how to behave, there is a chance that they may end up actually seeing us as liberators instead of invaders. If we do that (I know we won't) they may not start blowing up our families in retaliation. If we stick around as invaders they will do just as you or I would do if the Russians had invaded, they will start the guerilla warfare and no one can win that stuff.

Re:Bush administration priorities

[inkswamp]

How the fsck is that insightful?

Keep reading.

The soldiers had been in Baghdad for all of 1 or 2 days when the looting started. They (our soldiers) probably didn't even know where the museums were, had no idea what was in those museums, had no orders to protect them - nor would they since they were not there to protect buildings, they were there to fight.

By our own government's admission, resistance to our entrance into Baghdad was minimal, characterized repeatedly by the phrase "pockets of resistance." Furthermore, numerous international groups concerned with the well-being of these priceless treasures had begged the Bush administration to protect the museums. The Bush administration had met with these groups prior to the start of the war, but apparently, the pleas fell on indifferent ears. We knew where these treasures were and we were warned about the potential for looting and destruction, and yet we chose to ignore it, even in the face of little resistance. (There are numerous stories in the press out there about this. I was going to look some up for you, but I will leave it as an exercise to you in your efforts to become an informed citizen of the world.)

On top of that, the Geneva Convention requires that we protect an invaded nation's treasures. I love how we can fail in that (as well as failing to maintain their infrastructure to avoid humanitarian crisis--also a stipulation in the Geneva Convention) and yet we get righteously pissed when the opposing army breaks with the Geneva Convention in showing our solders on TV.

Further, had they protected the buildings civilians probably would have died and you'd be ranting about how horrible it is that we're the new oppressors of Iraq.

Meanwhile, we're shooting protesters in Iraq, telling them that they can have any kind of government they want as long as it's the kind we tell them to have, and are ignoring their demands that we leave now that the goal of ousting Saddam has been achieved. What's you're definition of "oppressor" anyway?

I've about had it with you arm chair analysts who don't bother to look at the reality of a situation before you hand out your jenny jones-esque opinions in public. Morons. And I mean the moderators and the poster alike.

I look forward to you ceasing immediately in handing out your Jenny Jones-esque opinions in public. You wouldn't want to be a hyprocite, would you?

So yes asshole, in perspective it does seem so bad.

Get a grip.