Slashdot Mirror
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?"
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
I thought that when we ousted Sadaam, that meant the end of cruel and merciless regimes for the Iraqi people. ;-)
;-)
I wonder if the Republican Guard will instinctively rally around Ms. Rosen?
Someone might shoot her!
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
Yeah, freedom, freeeeedoooommm!
"Not knowing when the dawn will come, I open every door." - Emily Dickinson
And to think everyone thought the bombing was the "Shock & Awe" part of the campaign....
Haven't the Iraqi people been OPPRESSED enough already? Why would they welcome new draconian laws like the RIAA would suggest they have? I thought we just liberated these people....
. I love the sound of burning women and screaming rubber....
As if the Iraqi people were not burried in oppression, now we're going to mire them up in US patent and IP nonsense. By the time we're through, the people will never have a foothold to get any technological endeavor off the ground. They'll be forever burried by our stupid laws. Of course, bad patent & IP laws are better than being murdered by your government, it's still kind of a sinister trade. The Iraqi people have no idea what we may be getting them into -- until they try to make any significant advances in the global technology industry. Someone explain to me how this isn't colonization?
Join Tor today!
Rather than waste time writing copyright laws, why don't they fix their infrastructure, health/education systems and provide essential services. No offense to copyright holders (I myself being one of them) but basic human rights should come before protecting whats yours.
What are they going to do, copywrite broken bricks and bits of windows?
Where ever you go, there you are.
Guess somebody has their priorities straight...
... if they make her wear veils all the time.
Garg
Garg
Alumnus, Xavier's School for Gifted Youngsters
Did you know that there is a 2% surcharge on all CD recorders sold that goes directly to the RIAA, and a 2% hidden tax associated with the AHRA that is collected by the RIAA to give to artists, yet only roughly 36% of that 2% goes to the artist. www.boycott-riaa.com
If I said I didn't have an incentive to grow oranges uness I could plant a tree in your yard, or if I said I didn't have an incentive to grow cotton unless I could own slaves on the plantation, most people would see this is these as the worthless shallow arguments that they are. But if I said I didn't have an incentive to to make beneficial or creative works without a copyright monopoly, then all of a sudden people just take it on faith, they don't even question it, they just assume that society would fall apart without them. In my humble opinion, this is intellectually dishonest, especially considering that the entire Renassance happened without copyrights.
The simple fact is, there is no equivalency relationship between copyrights and property rights - incentive does not a right make. The moral and historical foundation of property derives from the fact that property has physical limits, while the foundation of copyrights dervives from kings who granted publishers monopolies in return for not publishing bad things about the monarchy. The history of Copyrights is not one of rights, but controll of sharing and restricting the open use of knowledge.
That is why people who copy are not criminals, thiefs, or akin to pirates who board ships and murder people. No, infact they are really victims of a cruel deception. A deception that copyrights somehow financially benefit artists and creators. The simple fact is, that for every artist that makes it "big" there are litterally thousands who copyrights haven't helped a bit, even hindered, or destroyed.
However, this is not the only failure of copyrights - it is just one in many issues related to copyrighrts that are just blown off ignored, or glossed over. Like the failures of Hollywood culture, the failures of big media to provide quality material, the failures to provide reasonably priced books to college students while tabloids are dirt cheap, and massive anti-trust behavior in the software industry to name a few.
While the problems associated with copyrights might have been bearable 20 years ago when the biggist issue was Xerox machines, today we are entering into the information age where information is so easy to copy and manipulate that there can be no middle ground. Our society will either half to controll all of it or none of it. Our communications will either half to be monitored or free, our privacy to be either contunuiously probed or protected
In that sense, copyrights are like a vine that will never stop growing to choke off our freedoms until we cut it off at the root. The DMCA, infinite extensions, billion dollar lawsiuts, are all just symptoms of a poor belief system - not the cause. So the efforts to find a "middle ground" on copyrights are a failure because they do not address the core issue. That contrary to copyrights, the right to copy and distribute creative works and knowledge is a right!
Like freedom of religion, and freedom of the press, the right to copy things is a right that exists above government. It is a moral right, it is an inherent right, it defines the very nature of the human condition. It is beyond politics and the petition of leaders.
In fact, the entire foundation of politics rests on the notion that it's better to fight wars with words than wars with bloodshed. But to copy things does not require coercion or viloence at all, the rules are not the same. We will not change the copyright situation by petitioning our leaders, or voteing to change the system. No it can only be changed by defiance.
Defiance by holding the belief that people have rights, even if those rights appear contrary to the popular mob or to the system. Defiance, by shedding off the guilt and shame that those who try to impose copyrights impose on us and understanding that they are the ones who should be guilty and shamefull. Defiance by copying and sharing creative works whenever we have acess to them. Defiance by using technologies that make it harder and harder for copyrights to be imposed upon us. And defi
Or maybe we're going to write the laws, and then if their elected representative doesn't enforce them, we'll get a new representative. Or even better, we could help enforce them ourselves. Joy.
this is why she retired/is retiring? Maybe it wasn't about Oil... it was really about securing all that Iraqi IP and Music! The REAL conspiracy is uncovered!
-- Having a Creationist Museum is like having an Atheist place of worship
Is she willing to relocate? That would be awesome.
This will most certainly help the poor image of the US in the middle east. We're showing our strong corporate interests. It's such a nice, clean, humanitarian image the US partrays, isn't it?
Developers: We can use your help.
This is ironic since the Iraqi Information Minister has apparently been writing the RIAA's sales statistics reports.
You know, it's refreshing that rather than being saddled laws which are based on wisdom and forward-thinking ideals, the Iraqis will be able to skip straight to having laws based on short-sighted greed.
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
So the war wasn't about oil after all.. It's about piracy! ;)
"It's too bad that stupidity isn't painful." - Anton LaVey
I don't know -- reading the article didn't fill me with lots of confidence in the accuracy of this story. The whole tone seemed awfully biased to be a 'reputable' source. Can anyone else confirm this information from an alternate news source?
GMD
watch this
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that this will make Iraqis hate Americans more and more. For God's sake please stay away from imposing our rules (and ways) on them. Thats probably the last thing you want to do if you want to prove that we are there for liberation and not to force ourselves on them.
Jalil Vaidya
Hillary "Heinous Hil" Rosen, Iraqi I.P. Minister
Obliteracy: Words with explosions
Isn't this equivalent to having Michael Jackson run a child care center???
While the quote is both a funny and insightful comment, it is truely a sad situation that we live in a world where this could happen under any circumstances.
That said, with the freedoms we have we choose to go for a clearly biased party to create other countries laws.
This is world is crazy.
__
cheap web site hosting and reseller packages
I used to have the unfettered loathing for Rosen that most Slashdotters have. However, that changed after I read the Wired article that was profiling her.
It was very interesting to see that she did have some disagreements with the methods that the RIAA members wanted to use, but that she did her job by pushing for what the people the RIAA represented wanted, instead of what she personally wanted. (She was in favor of online music distribution and other details, if I remember correctly)
I do think that copyright law has gone way overboard - but that is still a minority view. I think many people, even those involved in enforcing it, haven't given proper thought to what it's all about, what it affects, and what it should be - either they just accept it as it is, or they're corporate folks who are looking at profit and being capitalists - doing whatever they can to make more money.
If Iraq ends up with a government that is trying to catch up to the international community, then what should we expect other than copyright laws that fit the rest of that community. And if they end up with a different gov't, perhaps an Islamic fundamentalist one, copyright law is not going to be high up on the agenda of things to worry about.
Work to get copyright law changed in those countries that are leading the charge to extend copyright periods, and smaller countries will follow their lead.
"You know your god is man-made when he hates all the same people you do."
I rather expect as soon as the minders are gone they'll do whatever they damn well please, and IP crap dumped on them from american special interests will chafe and be the first things to go or be utterly ignored.
Maybe Jack Valenti can be embedded next time, eh?
"That's right, Bob, we've found a stash of illegitimate Backstreet Boys CD's in An Nasaryah, so the president was certainly justified in this invasion!"
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Bush lauded the work being done to restore basic services and order in Iraq after Saddam's ouster, but warned "the building of a new Iraq will take time." He said the United States will help Iraqis create a democratic society.
"America has no intention of imposing our form of government or our culture," he said. "Yet we will ensure that all Iraqis have a voice in the new government and all citizens have their rights protected."
My emphasis added. That's what Bush said in a speech in Michigan on Monday to Iraqi-Americans. Guess we're tossing that one out the window...
"Mod, mod, mod...and another troll bites the dust."
This is ridiculous, yet shows how the Bush administration intends to administer Iraq: as a colony. Luckily, the administration isn't very good at hiding their evil intentions, so now we know about it.
Congratulations! Now we are the Evil Empire
This news proves, in a weird way, that the recent war was about imposing "our" will (the will of a few well-connected insiders, actually) on Iraq, not on bringing it democracy.
I'm reminded of the lyrics of on old Phil Ochs tune (and may the ghost of Phil forgive me if my quoting violates any of his rights):
----------
Manifesto for the Peoples of the Third Millennium
A US corporate figure is going to have a word about how future LAW will look like in Iraq ???
If there was any doubt that the USA is just acting in the interests of it's corporations, then that doubt is now dead.
echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb572CCB9AE9DB03273snlbxq' |dc
Depends on whether it's the US or the Iraqis who want the real Saddam Hussein to please stand up.
To-do List: Receive telemarketing call during a tornado warning. Check.
Copyrights can and do benefit artists, when applied correctly. All the problems of the present copyright system are an outgrowth of the misapplication of copyright.
Copyright is supposed to benefit the whole of society by making sure that creative people get some recompense for being creative. Furthermore, the copyright laws of the US include a provision for fair use (like burning a disc for your friend); however, we currently have a copyright system that exists soley for the profit of CEO's. Copyrights now never expire, making them couterproductive to their original purpose, and the scope of what is considered fair use is being reduced everyday.
Simply ignoring copyright is not a solution. It gives the likes of Valenti and Rosen more amunition in their crusade for DRM and will lead to laws even worse than the DMCA.
If copyright really were a temporary thing, lasting, at most, 28 years, like it is supposed to, we would be able to freely trade almost everything ever recorded by The Beatles, The Doors, Buddy Holly, Elvis, etc. A great many novels would enter the public domain. Many films would be free to distribute. There would be a plentiful, rich, and significant public domain. As it is, books written by men long dead at the beginning of last century are still under copyright, a short cartoon of a rat is still locked up, and Michael Jackson owns the rights to Jahn Lennon's music. I agree that system is bad, but I think just ignoring will make it worse. The RIAA/MPAA/etc. will have even more fuel for their fires, and will be able to get laws passed that make the situation even worse than it is already. Fight for a return of reasonable copyrights, and artists and consumers will benefit.
my pet machine
How on earth did this get modded to 3:Interesting?
"If I said I didn't have an incentive to grow oranges uness I could plant a tree in your yard, or if I said I didn't have an incentive to grow cotton unless I could own slaves on the plantation, most people would see this is these as the worthless shallow arguments that they are."
Not only are these arguments shallow and worthless, they are not relavent to any discussion of copyright. In what way does copyrigt give anyone ownership of your property or personal freedom?
"A deception that copyrights somehow financially benefit artists and creators. The simple fact is, that for every artist that makes it "big" there are litterally thousands who copyrights haven't helped a bit, even hindered, or destroyed."
Keep that bit or tripe in you mind as you go to see X-Men 2 this weekend and ask yourself if the studio, writers, actors, etc., would have invested their time and hundreds of millions of dollars to create this work if there was no financial benefit in it for them. Yes there are thousands of of artists who haven't made a dime from their creations - this is a result of a free and capitalist economy, not the fault of copyright. Would those artists have made money without copyright?
I am a book publisher, and I can tell you with absolute certainty that people who write for a living actually like to make a living from their writing. Those that don't...generally cut way back on their production or quit writing altogether.
Your mind looks a little cramped. Why don't you stretch it a little?
...the source of the story: Democracy Now radio. It's a show at Pacifica.org, probably the most left-wing radio you can think of. While Democracy Now is still pretty decent by the radio's standards (for example, when a caller said that he wished more people died in the 9/11 attacks, the talk host didn't expressly agree with him as it happened on other shows of that radio), they are still highly unreliable. I don't trust some of the right-wing media, such as FOX News, but I trust even less what is being said on Democracy Now. Move on; there's nothing to see; the whole thing is most likely a hoax.
Should'nt laws be made by legislators, and in the Iraq's case a constitutional assembly?
Funny how US won't impose the form of Iraq's new regim, but already said no to ismalic constitution and now is writing their laws alone and already... very weird thing...
Employing Hilary Rosen for this task is shameful. She is the human equivalent of a Weapon of Mass Destruction against Iraqi rights and fair use. Who said this wasn't an occupation?
Billy Bragg's "It's all about the price of oil" MP3... enough said.
Why would Hilary need to worry that we would want to pirate it? Have you ever heard that stuff?
I can't believe that. I'm sure that at least one of our proud 24-hour news stations would be all over that. Someone check the No-Spin Zone!
Face it, folks: This is an administration which plays the press perfectly and gets away with an astounding amount of this bullshit. We're just lucky it's not in the US this time -- he could be appointing more Enron lackies to head the army or obviously business-biased people to set policy. And he gets away with it 'cause the 24 hour "news" channels don't have the will or the stones to make, afraid that they'll lose interviews or access or credibility among people who made the WWE and NASCAR such powerhouses.
(sigh) Sorry, I guess my cynicism got out for a run again. I'm off to watch a few more hours of Fox News and MSNBC. Maybe I can hear another eloquent defense of that poor Senator from PA who's under attack by crazy lefties just because he hates homosexuals.
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
Ryan T. Sammartino
"Ancora imparo"
And no, I'm not trolling.
Please don't fall into the trap of believing that all Iraqis are necessarily tribal, tent-dwelling folk - Iraq has a sizeable, educated, (and often relatively westernised) middle class.
Remember, they had running water until the US and UK bombed them.
Mod early, mod often.
Tom Lehrer wrote this song ("Send the Marines") in 1969. It's scary that it's all still true... :)
When someone makes a move
Of which we don't approve,
Who is it that always intervenes?
U.N. and O.A.S.,
They have their place, I guess,
But first - send the Marines!
We'll send them all we've got,
John Wayne and Randolph Scott;
Remember those exciting fighting scenes?
To the shores of Tripoli,
But not to Mississippoli.
What do we do?
We send the Marines!
For might makes right,
And till they've seen the light,
They've got to be protected,
All their rights respected,
Till somebody we like can be elected.
Members of the corps
All hate the thought of war;
They'd rather kill them off by peaceful means.
Stop calling it aggression,
Ooh, we hate that expression!
We only want the world to know
That we support the status quo.
They love us everywhere we go,
So when in doubt, Send the Marines!
The Bush Administration has stated over and over, VERY clearly that the Iraqi people are now "free" to build any government they want and "free" to write laws.
However, recently the Bush Administration has stated that it is unacceptable if the Iraqi people attempt to build an Islamic government (like that in Iran). And, Rosen is "writing" Iraqi law?
Does anyone see the double-standard here?
"You're free, as long as you agree with what we think is best for you."
In a sense, intellectual property laws substitute a temporary monopoly for patronage. This allows the creator to reap patronage benefits through the marketplace of ideas, instead of relying on one aristocrat's misguided taste. Can you imagine what Dubya would sanction? Or Santorum?
Nightmares aside, the problem isn't with the concept of copyright, but with the way it has been institutionalized. (The abuse of copyright has been comcomitant with the overall corporate takeover of American Democracy, but that's for another rant.) A 7 year copyright with solid fair use rights is a great idea. A one hundred year limit with 50-year or total rights transfers being the norm is an abuse. The problem isn't with copyright - it's with the way copyright law has changed over the last 20 years.
Free exchange of ideas only takes place if the inventor has some reason to share the idea. Otherwise, human nature is to protect the idea and use it for your own benefit. Thus, elimination of intellectual property laws in this day & age would stifle expression of ideas, not increase it.
BTW, get arrested if you want credibility on the whole protest thing. Copying Eminem late night using campus computers isn't a protest statement unless you get caught (and don't back down). You wanna protest? Go to the front steps of the Capitol building & start clearly & publicly making & distributing CD's to which you do not have IP rights. Now that's a protest. Spend several years in jail & then you'll have a following.
Okay, I'm sure this thread will be overbrimming with vitriol against Rosen, Bush, the RIAA, etc., but I encourage Slashdotters to, instead of, or in addition to, venting your frustration & anger here (a.k.a. preaching to the choir), write to anyone and everyone who has either the power to inform the world of this colonialism/nepotism/whatever it is, or to do something about it. The discussion at Slashdot is often excellent, but sometimes I worry that we spend too much time talking and not enough time fighting for what we so passionately argue for here.
Here are some news stroies (Google is your friend):
* Palast, BBC journalist, says war is profit-maker for Bush allies
* Post-war carve-up to benefit CDMA standard, record industry
* Journalist says media is biased on war
I encourage you to check out Greg Palast's site. He is the BBC reporter that the original article mentions and the author of "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy". Interesting read.
They have announced they've resurrected Hitler to write the civil rights laws in the 'New' Iraq.
Kenneth Lay will be spearheading the committee on democratic corporatism.
Ronald Reagan will come out of retirement to direct the operations of the new Iraqi dept of mental health.
Bush has assigned his brother, Jeb (who will be taking a paid leave of absence from his duties as Governor of Florida) to ensure the Iraqi people have free and full access to fair democratic elections.
Larry Flynt is coming out of seclusion to assist with writing laws regulating morality in print media.
Michael Jackson is relocating his 'Neverland' ranch to the outskirts of Baghdad so he can be on-hand to advise in the creation of child decency legislation.
OJ Simpson, who recently discounted rumors that he would be starring in a new reality series, was asked to provide input on the formation of a forensic unit in the new Republican Republican Guard.
Jeffrey Dahmer's memoirs were found to contain startling revelations that will help solve the problem of food shortages in no time.
Finally, further tests have shown that 55-gallon barrels once thought to contain chemical weapons actually only held 'special sauce' for former President Bill Clinton's big macs. When questioned about the news, one coalition soldier in charge of the search said "Nope, nossir, we haven't found any WMDs yet. But, we do think we might have located Jimmy Hoffa."
These people looked deep into my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined.
I realize that Iraq is not an islamist nation in the sense that the laws of the land closely follow the teachings of the Koran as in Iran or Saudi Arabia, but Isn't intellectual property contrary to the teachings of Islam? this is what came up after a bit of google searching. Even though Iraq is largely secular, sending IP fanatics there to write their laws seems pretty culturally insensitive.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
If they're already saying "The laws will be created by the following people", listing amongst them people who aren't even Iraqi, then why are they not being called on it? Why is no media entity asking why the US and UK governments are imposing laws on a country they claim to have liberated?
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Wasn't she the joker, I think?
I suggest you read Slashdot
Back in the day, the colonists "brought a new religion and civilization to the heathens in Africa"... and exploited the natural resources.
Now The United Corporations of America goes and "liberates the Iraqi from despotism in order to instore a democracy"... and exploit the natural resources.
Nothing changed, just the name and the countries doing it.
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
"To wish death upon a person simply because her viewpoints are different from yours is completely barbaric."
Republican. Barbaric. Whichever.
More seriously, WTF is up with worrying about IP laws in a country that collectively doesn't have running water? Are photocopiers and CD burners so much a problem in a nation where most "modern" technology has been embargo'd for the last 12 years?
I can see it now: "Whip the camels faster, Ali, we almost have 'Jagged Little Pill'"
OTOH, Ms. Rosen is free for the first time to establish her dream: The Elite P2P Death Squad.
-- I wanna decide who lives and who dies - Crow T. Robot, MST3K
They're writing a copyright law for a country that needs clean water and food? give us a break.
Besides, as somebody else mentioned here, Iraq already has copyright laws.
They are not cavemen you know.
...they just don't have copyright with a life + 75 year span. (They have life + 25 up to a maximum of 50 years) They also don't have 97.000.000.000$ fines for copyright violation.
<rant-mode>
One could reasonably argue that when it came to copyright, if nothing else, Iraq actually had more sane laws than both the US and the EU.
I'm, sure that will change real soon now though.
</rant-mode>
"First lesson," Jon said. "Stick them with the pointy end."
Well at least prostitution is legal in Iraq!
5 3. htm
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L29238
Yes, Iraq is becoming a corporate colony of the United States of America.
There are far worse things it could be. The personal fiefdom of a brutal dictator, for example. However, the idea that the US is going in there for strictly altruistic reasons is pure B.S. The case that the invasion of Iraq was for national security reasons is not much stronger.
It's not all about oil either, though oil plays a role. Iraq is an extremely large potential market for US goods and services.
Here's the scenario:
US Oil companies pump lots of oil out of Iraq. But at the same they pump money in to Iraq. This raises the standard of living for the Iraqi people causing them to demand more consumer goods and services.
The same thing happens with the infrastructure. U.S. companies make lots of money rebuilding Iraq, but they also create Iraqi jobs in the process.
The U.S. controlled government makes mutually favorable trade agreements with the US, giving the US an untapped and open market.
US companies want laws favorable to their interests in Iraq, like they do in the US.
Since no one will notice copyright laws when they have no running water, now is the time to enact laws that favor the corporation over the consumer.
Don't get me wrong. I like capitalism. I like the free market. I supported the war in Iraq (to get rid of Saddam) Politically, I consider myself Conservative/Libertarian. I voted for Bush (or more accurately, against Gore)
However, to say the Government is being less than honest with the American people in Iraq is an understatement.
(note sarcasm)
--aiee
I'm sure I'll get moderated down for this post, but how dumb are some people anyways?
/. readers think that because a US citizen suggests something to another country, that it means US government is forcing US values on that country.
According to the article the US government did not write this! So wtf are so many poeple blaming the US goverment for this???
Also, is not a law! It's a freaking draft that a US citizen is writing up to give to the new Iraqi government, when established. It's totally up to the Iraqi goverment if they want to make the draft a law or not.
Apparently half the
My God, did anybody even read that article?!
- Houdini
What cracks me up is the moral high-ground they all have; despite starting all of the holy wars, we still get told to view other religions as "barbaric" and "disrespectful".
The soon the bible is scientifically proven to be complete nonsence, the sooner we can get on with building that Eutopia it speaks of. Oh, and if the worlds oil runs out soon, that'll help as well.
The oil industry makes campaign contributions. Result: US troops are sent to protect the oil wells and the Oil Ministry.
The RIAA makes campaign contributions. Result: US lawyers are sent to protect the latest Britney Spears and Eminem albums.
The Iraqi National Museum doesn't contribute to the campaign. Result: The museum gets looted, and priceless artifacts thousands of years old are stolen or destroyed.
Perhaps property owners in Damascus should take notice? Or is this just a wild conspiracy theory?
Remember the days when Republicans were the party of fiscal responsibility?
I know people will dismiss it because it was in the Mirror, but there are a lot of stories like this...
All the creatures will die, And all the things will be broken. That's the law of samurai. (Jubai, 1605)
An occupying power that respects their international treaty obligations simply cannot rewrite laws like this. See The Geneva Convention.
I highly doubt intellectual property law is:
Unless the RIAA itself is administrating the occupation.
I have to confess--I didn't expect the US would move quite so blatantly or aggressively to recreate the middle-east as an American colony. Then again, I hadn't read the "Blueprint for a New American Century" yet. Scary shit, maynard.
I honestly believe that Blair figured he could direct and rein-in George "Warmonger" Bush a bit, and would be seen as a hero. Now he's in it up to his neck, and there's nowhere to shovel but deeper.
Nonetheless, the US government has clearly stated that its goal is to implement regime change in the middle-east as a means of extending their sphere of influence. They aren't even pretending to "liberate" anyone, except when talking to the press (which in the US at least, seems to lap it up uncritically). The rest of the world sees just how hypocritical it all is, but until we get China and the UK to stand firmly against the US, there's not much chance to stop them.
Having Rosen rewrite the (fairly intelligent) copyright laws into a hideous mess of excessive cash-protection doesn't surprise me at all. It's perfectly in line with the stated policy of forcibly instituting US-style legislation throughout the world.
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
First the *Israeli-run* antiquities looters lobby wants to "free" the trade of Iraq's heritage, then a US congresman introduces legislation that changes Iraq's mobile phone standard from GSM to the American CDMA system and now Hillary *Rosen* of the RIAA wants to write the new "free" Iraq's copyright law and change it into one under which consumers have no rights.
Geez, what more "freedom" is in store for the Iraqi people?
How about Diane *Feinstein* rewriting the Iraqi firearms laws from ones that allow gun ownership to new "free" ones that ban everything more lethal than a potato peeling knife.
They are already kicking doors down searching for guns in homes and roadblocks. It's LEGAL (by Iraqi law) in Iraq for ANYONE to own an AK-47 machine gun.
Freedom New Style [TM] - Having an *alien* people run your affairs and tell you how you should feel about that.
We in the west should know we have tasted that freedom for decades. We learned how "outmoded" our old culture was and that we should be happy that there is a group of people from a *certain middle eastern region* who know best how to change it.
The Iraqi people don't know yet how "free" they're gonna be!
The thing the invaders always seem to forget is that the locals are far faster at getting organized, even if they don't have the same resources. In particular, it's essentially impossible to eliminate or supress the religious authorities in those countries and retain any popular support, so there is a network of clerics that remains in place even under oppressive governments such as Iraq. Under Saddan Hussein, the religious orders were permitted to continue as long as they kept out of politics, a situation which they were able to follow, but never fully accepted.
Back in Iran, these were the groups who organized the revolution that threw out the U.S-backed Shah, and organized a new ruling elite - that's why Iran immediately implemented fundamentalist Islamic laws when it happened. In Iraq, they have already organized the Shia majority into a political movement, now that they're free to do so. The demonstrations among the general population and demands for an Islamic government in Iraq have started rising rapidly.
Basically, the mullahs have an already established "transitional government". The question then becomes, how long will the occupying forces prevent the Islamic government from taking over?
Chances are that the occupiers are so against the idea that they will form their own interim, then "final" Iraqi government against the popular opinion, as in Iran. In that case, it will only be a matter of time before foreign involvement tapers off enough for a revolution to overthrow the imposed government, as happened in Iran.
Again.
I wonder what the Koran has to say about copyright...
Greg Palast has an interesting record regarding Investigative journalism. Unfortunately, because he actually does investigation, he is not quoted in the US.
2 8.html )
b le?client.id=utne_web_specials&story.id=10452 or even killed. source: http://www.lovearth.net/fortunateson.htm)
He was the first to talk about the Ballot issues within florida in the 2000 election, but when he tried to get it on the air in the US, (I believe it was with CBS), the editors there told him that his facts did not check out. When asked who they contacted to fact check, the editorial staff replied that they contacted Jeb Bush's office.
I'm not one to believe what someone tells me is true, but, looking at the facts, and putting it all together leads to a certain way of thinking.
1. Most of the government offices in Iraq were either bombed or looted. The only one not bombed or looted? the Oil ministry (thanks to US military guards. Source: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/119505_oil
2. The US will install a government loyal to itself, IE a Secular Democracy. This at the same time that the shrub is tearing away the separation between church and state here.
3. People that oppose the bushes have a tendancy to get sued Source: http://www.utne.com/cgi-bin/udt/im.display.printa
"the difference between myself and a madman is that I am not mad" -Salvadore Dali
Remember the good ol' days when the worst thing a president did was bang an intern? Doesn't seem quite so bad in perspective, now, does it?
--Rick "If it isn't broken, take it apart and find out why."
There is no nation on this earth as good at making enemies as fast as you Americans do.
This choice bit of freedom loving news, along with the news that American soldiers fired into a crowd of demonstrators yesterday is sure to help the Iraqi people's view of the occupying armies as being something to ensure their freedom.
I don't know what's going to happen in Iraq in the long term but I know that it isn't going to be nice.
I've heard that statement before... concerning Vietnam. I recall it also concerning Iran.
In both places, the US had their wondeful little puppets (Ngo Den Diem and Shah Resa Pahlavi respectively) ruling in a 'democratic' state that very quickly degraded into totalitarianism that only stood because they were backed by the almighty military support of the United States.
What did the public want? In Vietnam, they wanted the Vietminh. They WANTED communism. They HATED Ngo Den Diem; buddhist monks lit themselves on fire in protest.
In Iran, they wanted the Ayatollah Khomeini and his Islamic state. The Shah had serious military backing, however, from the United States (It was Rummsfeld et all who did this, btw, along with war criminal Harry Kissenger).
So what happened? Eventually 'popular opinion' won, but not until long after many abuses of human rights and freedoms by the US-supported governments. Ngo Den Diem was assassinated, and the Shah was exiled. Both countries abhor the politics of the United States to this day for a VERY GOOD reason.
Want to take a bet on whether this is EXACTLY what will happen in Iraq? The US is already abusing their rights and freedoms, and this is BEFORE they've put in the puppet government.
As you can read here and here, USA benefitted from IP theft in 1790 when Samuel Slater stole the blueprints of the the water-powered spinning frame from England and used it to build a textile industry in USA comparable to England's. England called him a traitor, but USA called him a hero and the father of the industrial revolution. Today, USA is the capitol of IP and China benefits whenever they steal some.
Most likely, enforcing US IP laws in Iraq will help USA but hurt Iraq.
Zoellick is a former advisor to Enron.
Colin Powell is reported in a later PR to have said "that power usually comes responsibility and some level of respect and some level of resentment -- my three R's. Hey, write that down." (Laughter.)
Presumably the laughter was coming from Mr Joe "I wasn't responsible" Zoellick's end of the table.
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
Then I looked closely at the Register article. The source of this "news" is one man: Greg Palast.
Who is Greg Palast? Here's a taste of what he's written.
In an interview Palast said, "This guy (Dictator Hugo Chavez) is the real voice of democracy in Venezuela. ... Chavez is the Nelson Mandela of his country."
He accused Bush of "ethnic cleansing of the voter rolls" in the 2000 Election. Then he tried to one-up Baghdad Bob with this statement: "The 2004 race may already be decided - and the vote's just a formality." If he would've used just a little more Saeed-speak, he might have said: "My initial assessment is that the candidates will all lose. In fact, they are already committing concession of the race to Bush. There are no candidates within 1000 miles of the Washington. Never!"
Palast claimed that Saddam is "a Frankenstien created by Bush." Then he tried to discredit Bush by saying: "In the USA, Bush has successfully put a turban and beard on Saddam Hussein - most Americans have no idea that Osama and Saddam have no connection." This is quite funny, now that we have detailed documents on the meetings between Osama and Saddam going back to the 1980s. We've known about other evidence for a long time. IMO, the al-Qaeda training camp we found in northern Iraq should have at least make you think that the ties were more likely to exist than not
From what I've read of Palast, his perception about the motives of the Bush administration couldn't be more off-base. He is a virulent Bush hater and is blinded by his rage. His columns and interviews are full of exaggerated ad hominem and over-the-top crackpot conspiracy theories. This guy is a kook and a muckraker.
But that's true of a democracy too, especially when there are more than two parties.
If the majority of Iraqis want a theocracy, should they be denied? Isn't that un-democratic?
Part of the problem here is that there are a lot of people that simply can't imagine that someone would freely choose not to have democracy. But such people exist in droves.
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"