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.
And to think everyone thought the bombing was the "Shock & Awe" part of the campaign....
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!
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
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.
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???
Dr. Kevorkian has already been pegged to be their Health Minister.
That's a large part of the point for the RIAA. While Iraq is busy rebuilding it's infrastructure they can effectively impose their brand of IP law on these people with very little in the way of actual resistance.
To your average Iraqi, who CARES if they have no concept of fair use.. after all they have no running water, much less a CD burner.
This is not without precedent. In the wake of WWII our media conglomerates also imposed similiar types of oppressive IP law in France and West Germany which basically shut down their film makers..
Turn s60 photos into awesome videos with mScrapbook for all S60 3rd edition phones!
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."
Copyright law is entirely separate from property law, and as such "intellectual property" as a term is an attempt to sell the concept of copyright as a property right to lessen the outcry over the continuous attack on fair use and the public domain.
Yes, but the point that's being overlooked here is that copyrights don't have anything to do with "what's yours". Copyrights are a grant of exclusive use, for a limited time, by the Government. It is not really a property right.
One can no more own a work protected by copyright than a rancher who is grazing BLM lands owns the land his livestock are standing on.
I do think these important distinctions are being blurred. A lot of people seem to think they own ideas and others think that private property is a grant by the state. I'm not looking forward to the day when either of these beliefs become true.
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
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
If you are thinking of article 17....;
(1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.
Of course Iraq needs proper legislation/laws on this subject, but if you think they (US administartion)are doing this to protect Iraqi copyright holders I think you SERIOUSLY need to rethink your opinion.
I thinks thinks [INSERT disclaimer that maybe the Reg. article aint correct] that this with other stories; for example USA protecting one Minstry in Bagdad; the Minestry of Oil, shows what the real motivation behind the Iraq-war was.
No, I'm not saying that the invasion came because of copyrights or oil alone, thats just a bonus. When someone invade acountry they get to decide the legislation/laws inside that country. But selecting, among others; Hillary Rosen to help doing this says a lot about the current administartion.
After the defeat/collapse of the Third Reich/Nazi-Germany it probably went over a year befor they though about copyrights. IMHO that probably was a good thing. Other needs are far more important than copyrights right now. People are dying inside Iraq and you are thinking on copyrights?
Shame on you.
Melius mori in libertate quam vivere in servitute.
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.
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.
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."
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.
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.
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."
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?
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
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.