Slashdot Mirror
RIAA CEO Hilary Rosen to Become CNBC Commentator
alen writes "According to a story by the New York Post the CEO of the RIAA is stepping down. She is going to be an anchor on CNBC. Maybe this is going to signal a change in the way record companies think about file sharing?"
It's like they are TRYING to piss me off.
I have been pwned because my
HR did not make the policy, she was just the mouth piece of the companies.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
Now that our attention is focused on the other evil organization, it's the perfect time to perform all sorts of nasty deeds that might go unnoticed. At the very least, it might not make the front page. I mean, you can only fit so many articles on the front page, and 35% are about SCO.
Maybe she could club some baby seals quick before she's gone, and then report on their species' diminishing numbers at CNBC! She could even blame it on pirates and terrorists and get some shock value.
CNBC will initiate a reverse class action suit against all of its viewers, for viewing its valuable television programs without paying.
Fat chance, considering who wants to replace her!
Guess this probably means an end to those late night CNBC BitTorrents. Sigh.
Perhaps this will encourage the way the major media reports about file sharing.
She's reportedly been paid big money by the news organization to act on her strategy for preventing TIVO users from pirating their news feeds..... by making people stop watching!
As long as people like Senator Hatch are around, there will no doubt be plenty of psychos to take the helm and try to steer the RIAA against the winds of change.
Somehow, the crew of the ship just doesn't understand that its about to capsize. Or they're too afraid to break their contracts and mutiny.
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
June 19, 2003 -- Hilary Rosen, the outgoing head of the Recording Industry Association of America, has landed an on-air gig at CNBC, The Post has learned.
Rosen, who will officially step down from her powerful RIAA post at the end of the month, has inked a deal to be a commentator for CNBC, she recently told music industry executives in an e-mail, a copy of which was obtained by The Post.
Her gig will begin Aug. 1. According to the e-mail, she will discuss politics on the network's evening show, "Capitol Report," and give commentary on the media industry on the shows "Power Lunch" and "Squawk Box."
"They are looking for me to do the larger picture on some of the content convergence and media consolidation issues and know that I have a point of view on many issues as a longtime advocate," she wrote in the e-mail.
She added that she will assist the network in its coverage of Congress and the upcoming presidential election.
Rosen, who has been the chairwoman and CEO of the RIAA since 1998, announced in January her intention of stepping down.
Tim Arango
Just like Cheney quit his CEO job to become VP of the USA and conquer up some oil for his buddies back at Haliburton so it is that Hillary Rosen will quit the RIAA to spread propoganda for her RIAA industry chums on the TV.
The Pirate?
On one hand, most of the pieces I've read on the RIAA/Rosen have either directly indicated, or been chimed in upon, that Rosen was just a mouthpiece for the big bad record labels, who don't want you to be able to copy your CDs. She's been more or less a scapegoat/forerunner for a lot of negative ideas about what you can and can't do with your licensed recordings.
On the other hand, this story is posted with the question "Maybe this is going to signal a change in the way record companies think about file sharing?"
This seems rather silly, also noting that Rosen is stepping down to become a news commentator, aka a talking head, aka a mouthpiece. I have very little inclination to believe that Rosen has had, or will have any large influence on RIAA policy. Am I wrong?
-Greg
-Greg
"Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
Understanding is a three edged sword. - Ambassador Kosh Naranek, Babylon 5
So, it's a career based infomercial the RIAA arranged for her.
nice.
I really don't see how hilary rosen resigning is gonna signal any change in how the RIAA does business, if anything it might get worse. I can easily see her replacement being yet another lawyer headed shark from one of the big record labels.
If the record industry wanted to save itself, they'd drop the cost of CDs down to $8 or less and partner with someone like Apple to deliver a real legal digital music service. Then they might find a more sympathetic ear in regards to piracy.
I wouldn't be surprised if Hilary Rosen would become more open to digital media in general.
Afterall, she was simply the talking head for RIAA - when Hilary Rosen speaks out against P2P, it's not because Rosen hates P2P, but rather it's because the five record companies tell her to do so. I recall reading articles on Rosen quietly expressing frustration at times with the record companies' unwillingness to compromise or embrace new business models.
She obvious has a very strong domain of knowledge in the recording industry, and now that she's free from the shackles of being the public face of RIAA, I'm actually looking forward to hear her personal opinion on digital distribution.
If Rosen has some rough edges, it's not surprising, given the difficult task of leading her industry through the perils of the Internet revolution. So far, her strategy has been to fight aggressively to control Internet distribution channels through new legislation, standards for copyright protection technology and aggressive litigation.
What's the difference between NBC, CNBC, and MSNBC? And gee, do you think there's any conflict of interest in having an IP lawyer not only work, but anchor a media organization?!
Someday naming your daughter Hillary will be as favorable as naming your son Adolph.
--Lawrence Lessig for Congress!
Slashdot'ers and rethorical questions don't mix.
Maybe this is going to signal a change in the way record companies think about file sharing?
;-)
No, it will just signal a change (read: increase) in the amount of negative media attention that file swapping gets
I'd rather be a conservative nutjob than a liberal with no nuts and no job.
...record companies think about file sharing?
Um, Not likely.
Next question?
She just didn't have sharp enough teeth?
MAYBE, they will replace her with somebody ten time s worse? Considering her lack of accomplishments (i.e. all those evil filesharers are still walking free) I wouldn't be suprised.
"The saddest words of mice and men, are not those which were, but should have been."
"They are looking for me to do the larger picture on some of the content convergence and media consolidation issues and know that I have a point of view on many issues as a longtime advocate," she wrote in the e-mail.
Yeah, and her opinions, as before, will be wrong, wrong, WRONG!
(Who was the liar who told Hilary the public wants to hear more of her rants anyway?)
SEO Copywriter. Just Say ON
Sonny Bono's wife, who is also a Senator, stated she would like this position.
10. Mud-wrestle lesbians in Japan.
9. Box Lesbians in Japan.
8. Become a "consultant".
7. Start Rosen.com, publish a super duper blog and live off ad revenue.
6. Join Kathy-Lee Gifford on her music tour.
5. Write a book!
4. Star in Playboy's "Women of the Internet" issue.
3. Go into rehab.
2. Get married to Ted Turner- make lotsa babies!
1. Get a job with those scumbags at CNBC....
Will this is going to signal a change in the way record companies think about file sharing?
Lets Fvcking hope so.
And that's not a good thing.
I saw a bit about Mary Bono wanting the job a few days ago. Here's a link to the wired story This can't be a good thing considernig the 1998 copyright extension bill bares her late husbands name.
Lets make 50 cent the official rapper of the /. movement
yo you say that you's a gansta
but you never popped none
i say you're a wanksta
you need to stop frontin'
you are a deal flip
nigga look at my big dick
you been hustlin' a long time
and you ain't got nothin'
yo yo yo
Does that explain to you how she looks?
..who was running the RIAA and sent out out all those legal letters.... I wondered when this person might surface;)
A little fat^H^H^H^H endomorphic to be an anchorwoman, don't you think?
I'll have to get wide screen after all?
Grousing about rejected submissions is, I know, verboten. But seriously, I miss the old /. days when the site had no lawyers and lots of balls. The editors these days seem to have a stuck "Boring" key or something, A better title (e.g. mine) would have been:
:)
CNBC rewards Rosen's failure, incompetence by making her rich
Now that's a title that says something. I had some witty line the body about the Peter Principle. It was all good.
Pussies.
I think there is a world market for maybe five personal web logs.
because she disagreed with the RIAA's nazi-positions on music, right?
Fact is, if Rosen didn't agree with those positions, she wouldn't have been doing that job.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
"But once you've been inside of one of those ships for a while, you're never... quite whole... again. But you do as you're told!"
I'm sure her reporting as a news anchor will be fair and unbiased.
I did NOT have a sarcasm tag on that last statement. It was all in your head.
Can You Say Linux? I Knew That You Could.
Too bad she didn't take a position at Fox News. Then we wouldn't have to accuse her of being a biased media personality, it would be implied.
Moderation Totals: Flamebait=2, Troll=1, Redundant=1, Insightful=6, Overrated=1, Underrated=1, Total=12. (not mine)
Chances are she'll be encrypted anyway - you'll just get snow on the screen and static through the speakers.
You'll be able to buy the broadcast afterwards for $10. Three stories will be mediocre and everyone will be talking about them, but the rest will be shit that you're not interested in.
Lets hope its the radio version of CNBC, I don't want to look at this when I wake up in the morning or go to bed at night, or well any time ;).
can't sleep slashdot will eat me
CNBC. Maybe this is going to signal a change in the way record companies think about file sharing?"
always two there are, no more, no less, a master, and a apprentice.
only time will tell which she was/is...
Jesus saves souls and redeems them for valuable cash prizes
Put down the light saber TV remote and go outside. Have an ice cream cone and meet a girl.
Ding Dong! The Witch is dead.
Which old Witch? The Wicked Witch!
Ding Dong! The Wicked Witch is dead.
Let me introduce you to the concept of the ends justifying the means.
Well, it looks like we've found a candidate for the first thing to be slung-shot into orbit.
Maybe this is going to signal a change in the way record companies think about file sharing?
It probably signals that CNBC is going to support RIAA in a big way.
-kgj
Now we get to hear this idiot wind bag on TV even more? On a regular basis?
$5 says it was a settlement. The RIAA caught CNBC people sharing music at work and rather than sue the pants off them, they offered her a show.
It is Darl McBride.
In other news, RIAA slogan has been changed to 'We're going to SUE YOU!' pfft... file sharing hippies
- Joe
Hilary Rosen leaving RIAA to become CNBC anchor
maybe that means...
Hilliary Clinton leaving Senate to head up RIAA.
and that would leave...
Hilary Swank quits her acting career to become NY Senator!
wonder if she's related to Sunny Bono..
Anchors do influence how people think of the news presented. When she frowns as she talks about people 'stealing' songs, smiles when she reports their arrest, and flirts with her co-anchor when she mentions a new DRM product, people will get the idea that d/ling is bad, arresting p2p'ers is good, and DRM is sexy.
Mmmmmm. Cactus datashield. You're sooooo hot.
Yay me!
What? It's not that kind of anchor?
Never mind...
This is important! The people must know!
(want to piss her off? mod this post insightful!)
Is this truly the only Earth I can live on?
Many of you keep saying Hilary was just a mouthpiece of the RIAA and had no hand in setting policy. You actually think that she might turn out to be some kind of ethical human being after leaving the RIAA.
Let me give you a bit of a wake-up call: if she were an ethical human being then she wouldn't have allowed herself to serve as the RIAA's mouthpiece for any amount of money. Any ethical human being with any concern for the public welfare would have rejected any carrots the RIAA dangled in front of them and given them the big "Fuck you". There are plenty of other jobs out there that deal with media and technology that wouldn't require a daily sacrifice of ethical principles.
No, this is seriously bad news. Now not only is she evil, but she's evil being pumped straight into homes on a nightly basis. It wouldn't surprise me if this move was secretly orchestrated by the RIAA so as to get someone with their bias into the mainstream media in an unsuspecting, insidious way.
Moderator hint: a comment is neither "Flamebait" nor "Troll" if it is true.
Isn't this commentator sharing? Who can we see about putting a stop to this???
President ISES
(International Society for Elimination of Sigs)
Not that I'm defending all those PR statements she made, or anything like that.
A man who can't pronouce "nuclear arsenal" shouldn't have one -sig ends here.
Don't forget that CNBC is a venture between NBC and... Microsoft. Go to the CNBC page and see where you end up.
This post is dedicated to all of those
Oh please...have you watched CNN/MSNBC/CNBC/any other American news station lately?
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley
Consider yourself added to my modbomb queue.
as i was driving home listening to wnur (northwestern university radio), the student dj refused to play a request, mr. bungle, because it was warner brothers. your customer is getting pissed! but alas, you deserve it!
Same as the first
mod me down as a troll if you wish...
BUT have you seen this Cow?!?!? she AINT photogenic
(not saying iam, but i know she aint!!!)
The More Knowledge you have the Luckier you Get- J.R. Ewing
Does the Post have problems with Moz? I opened it fine.
Accourse, this is on OS X.
I think the best strategy is to make HR unsuccessful, bordering on radioactive (figuratively, of course). Make an example out of her.
Rosen will be exponentially more valuable to RIAA interests as a "news commentator". Her valuable insight into the plight of the music industry will help illuminate to the viewers what a horrid menace to society P2P really is.
she will help bring truth to this simple good vs. evil story. plus she's always fought the good fight, so she's a patriot too.
what an inspirational piece of news. pass the tums please.
Is it just me or does riaa.org seem to be down?
All I get when I try to visit their site is:
"?âÃ-?âÃ-HTTP/1.0 302 Moved Temporarily Location: http://www.r"
hmm according to our own mouth she was retiring to spend time at home with famliy..
Once again lied to and duped..
as long as she is in media in any form its bad news..
Don't Tread on OpenSource
Why would her becoming another 'Talking Head' on out increasingly conglomerated, heavily biased news media have a fucking thing to do with a 'shift in attitude' on the part of the owners of those conglomerates?
The same asshole is now getting even more airtime to spew retoric.
Aren't we lucky the FCC has our interests at heart?
Just think, with the latest BS from the FCC, she might be on 'THE CHANNEL' in a year or so. (think Newspaper, TV, and Magazines all being like ClearChannel is now on radio. You can travel coast to coast and hear the same shit you hear everyday at home, now.)
Truth isn't Truth - Guliani
Well, at least if CNBC's ratings go down, they can't blame it on us pilfering grabasses.
This guy's got it going on, and strong, too.
Although I think slut is a bit too... wack?
Yeah - WTF is up with flaming of infringers when he's one himself.
Why didn't Slashdot run a follow-up? Then we could all post the obligatory jibes about how "hypocritical senator" is redundant and start a betting pool about whether Hilary uses a popup-blocker.
THIEF! You have to READ those x10 wireless ads!
Rosen's quitting was announced in January. Most of the comments being made now could and maybe were made then.
Its a business channel.
The vast majority of viewers are stock traders. Not the target RIAA is aiming for.
The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
Try tying her to an anchor, now that i'd like to see...
They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
Uh, okay. (someone please mod parent -1 Sexist Maroon)
This is just one more hour of television lost to staged controversy, with one loudmouthed buffoon pitted against another, WWF-style. They may use bigger words, but the intelligence level is the same. As far as I'm concerned, it's just one more reason not to watch television.
cnbc is a business news channel... it was fine until MS took it over... now i am not watching it anymore for sure.
How about some flying pigs?
hey, not to be a dick but...
I got launched to msn.com, blah blah blah. All expected. But what I didn't expect was a nasty-ass looking site. Horrible layout, clearly missing some important element of styling.
Surely they haven't confounded Opera 7.11 with some magic, proprietary stylesheet. A quick flip to Identify as MSIE 6.0 revealed a much cleaner stylized site. I guess they still haven't cleaned up their act.
Let me give you a bit of a wake-up call: if she were an ethical human being then she wouldn't have allowed herself to serve as the RIAA's mouthpiece for any amount of money.
You know, it is possible to disagree with someone and still think that they are ethical. Some people have a strong ethical negative reaction to music swapping.
So, either Hillary Rosen has no principles, or she has the principles of a nazi.
Neither is particularly flatterous towards her.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
riaa guy
borrowed from an old slashdot posting. was so good I kept a copy around. (isn't that appropriate?)
enjoy. its pretty funny (no, I didn't write it).
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
No difference they are owned by the same people. They and different but identical people own the RIAA member companies as well. So, the opions are the same. How else could a corporate loudmouth be taken seriously as a journalist unless journaists mostly reported for corporate loudmouths?
Every aspect of traditional electronic publishing is regulated, degenerate and obsolete. It's not a free press and their choice of talking heads only proves the point.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Who is she going to blame for bad ratings? I haven't heard of anyone filesharing CNBC programming.
Not only is she getting a promotion from shill for record labels to shill for GE and Microsoft, but also she'll be pleased to know that there is a 0% chance of her show ever being traded on p2p.
Are you stoned, stupid, or just that optimistic? *sigh* I wish they thought differently...
it was just a karma whoring, no problems with mozilla here either
The fact that this could be labeled as anything but 'funny' makes me want to cry
The proper way for U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents to screw the Bono estate is to sign a petition to pass a law to take a bite out of the Bono Act.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Why should music be public domain and freely available if software (also easily copied and distributed) can be held down under a license?
I have to separate my views on music itself from my views on recordings of that music. I understand that performing artists need to eat and that record labels need to recover their costs somehow. That's why I buy after I try.
But songwriters and their publishers have become too litigious as of recently, winning court decisions and setting precedents that, when taken together with basic music theory, seem to indicate that under U.S. copyright law's definition of originality, it's impossible to write original music.
(I admit that this issue is tangential to the RIAA topic because licensing of musical works is the domain of BMI and Harry Fox rather than the RIAA.)
Will I retire or break 10K?
Most seem to be under the delusion that P2P networks don't hurt sales.
Does P2P file sharing hurt record sales more than a slow economy and fewer new titles?
And many who aren't under that delusion believe that a one-line disclaimer saying "don't use this software for copyright infringement" is plausible deniability.
In the USA: If a product is capable of substantial non-infringing use, then making or selling that product is not contributory infringement of copyright in works that the product is able to copy (RIAA v. Grokster, citing Sony v. Universal).
Personally, yes, I'm against copyright law
I agree that copyright as we know it is fundamentally broken, but what alternative model gives authors an incentive to create works without copyright's drawbacks? I know of patronage (that is, commissioning of original works for use in advertising) and the Street Performer Protocol (which is useful for series), but are there other models with as wide applicability as copyright?
Will I retire or break 10K?
The gloves will -really- come off - no more Mr. Nice Guy! ;>
Wrong. When you buy a copy of a piece of music, you own it. Copyright is just that -- the right to copy. The owner of the copyright does not give up the right to copy (All rights reserved), nor do you gain the right to copy (aside from fair use) but you own the copy. It is your property to do anything you please with, except make further duplicates or make derivative works.
Copyright is the exclusive right to duplicate, perform, or make derivatives of a work. These are the rights an author has, and no others. Just because the author created a work, doesn't mean he has the right to force you to use it a certain way.
The Physical media is a copy. And you paid for it. So you own it.
You don't need a license to use property you own, except for things like the drivers license, and that is really a license to use the road, not your car.
Since you own the copy, you have the right to listen to it, since it is not one of the explicit copy rights. If you are deaf, or just curious, you have the right use an oscilliscope to watch your music, instead of listen to it, since that is not one of the explicit copyrights. You have the right to use it as a coaster, since that is not one of the explicit copy rights. You have the right to use the media as a shotgun target, or do anything else you like with the media, except those things explicilty laid out as the copy rights.
Lots of technical and environmental problems are solved by the application of vast amounts of nuclear power
Maybe this is going to signal a change in the way record companies think about file sharing?
Apple did just that.
Slashdot Eds Link Anonymous Posts With Logged Posts
They Are Vermin Feeding On Each Other's Feces.
I Hate \.
WTF? How is her getting a job on a news channel going to affect the record industries? That's like saying because I own a car, I'm going to change the way NASA thinks about spaceflight. Unrelated (and a bad analogy, but you get the point).
I like the part where she said, "They are looking for me to do the larger picture on some of the content convergence and media consolidation issues and know that I have a point of view on many issues as a longtime advocate."
How the f**k has she EVER seen the larger picture? The only point of view I've ever heard from her is if you listen to music that isn't yours, you should be locked in jail with murderers and rapists.
today is spelling optional day.
If she did not whole-heartedly agree with the RIAA's position, she would NEVER have been considered for the position in the first place. Come on, nobody is going to hire a PR flack who doesn't truly believe in what they are doing.
My wallet also reads "all rights reserved" -- RIAA/MPAA *You* deal with it.
I haven't bought a single CD in the last 3 years. and no i haven't 'pirated' a single song either. i make my own. especially since i have that extra time from not having to make *MY* ends meet in order to buy that radiohead CD.
Pictures at 11.
Actually, the grandparent post was not a troll, but you rightly expressed a major problem the FSF has identified in a class of licenses called "copyleft". Unfortunately you have used terminology that suggests you misunderstand the philosophical basis of the movements you refer to.
Saying "The intent of GPL is to make sure that open code stays that way" can lead to confusion because you're talking about the GNU General Public License--a product of the Free Software movement, not the Open Source movement. The FSF wrote the GNU GPL over a decade before the Open Source movement began. More recently, they also wrote a description of troublesome language (including phrases such as "closed" source) so people won't confuse the goals of the Open Source movement with those of the Free Software movement.
Digital Citizen
A correction: "copyleft" should read "non-copyleft" above. The problem with maintaining the freedom to share and modify programs is with non-copylefted Free Software licenses, not copylefted Free Software licenses.
Digital Citizen
Next time, get all of the facts from your bosses before posting. Had you ever heard of Radiohead before getting your assignment?
Radiohead is a case study in the use of Internet promotion:
Radiohead's honour follows the group's decision to ditch traditional marketing methods for their recent album Kid A in favour of internet promotion.
That's from a winter 2000 BBC news article.
Radiohead is a long-standing Internet success story, and if they'd listened to your friends, they'd be making a hell of a lot less money today.
An increasing number of artists have found that distribution of MP3s via Internet Radio and the networkss your OwN3rZ want to get rid of plus touring and direct sale of CDs at gigs and via the Net is a perfectly reasonable way to make a living. One has to sell a lot less records to make a living when one is getting 90% of the gross profit off a $10 CD than 1% of a $20 CD. Search for Janis Ian on slashdot. She's been making records longer than you've probably been alive. Find out if she thinks the record industry protects the rights of musicians.
With respect to your. . . interesting interpretation of copyright law, was your omission of any mention of "fair use" in your post deliberate, or left out of the RIAA propaganda you obviously based your post on.
Speaking as a published writer, I certainly support reasonable copyright protection. I don't need my copyright extended to 50 or 75 or 1000 years after my death. I don't want anyone to destroy computers by the millions to "protect" my work. I don't want protecting my work to come at the price of eventually forcing consumer electronics development to move out of the US and if EU follows the US lead as it seems to be doing, following software development to India and China. If someone xeroxes a copy of one of my print articles at a public library, I don't want any of your buddies to burn down the library to "protect" my copyright.
Oh, BTW, I'm working with an independent musician now. I can't find any friends willing to host her work for P2P networks because they're afraid of attack by the people who you are being a paid or unpaid mouthpiece for. So promoting her outside the RIAA framework is more difficult. Tell your bosses "Thanks, assholes"...
I don't know if you are on the RIAA payroll or not. You certainly parrot their party line perfectly.
However, since you do such a good job of playing a mouthpiece for RIAA viewpoints, if you aren't getting paid by them, you're awfully stupid. Go to their site and apply for a job. Use your post as proof that you're good at spreading "the good word" in a hostile forum.
Perhaps there are even a few people stupid enough to believe you.
Tech Public Policy stuff
Hilary: And now back to the newsroom.
Viewer 1: What did she say?
Viewer 2: "And now back to the newsroom."
Hilary: Gotcha!
A crazed Aibo springs from a hidden panel on the TV and subdues Viewer 1 until the cops arrive...
Opinionated Law Student Strikes Again!
If I knew that the RIAA was going to have evil policy anyway, I would be perfectly willing to spout it out for sufficient funds. It would come down to the fact that who's saying it doesn't make any difference, but who's making the money does. (Although I'd probably eventually let myself get caught molesting children or killing puppies or something to make the entire RIAA loose credibility in the eyes of the knee-jerker home news viewers).
Little Brother, watching the watchers
And that's an excuse for being a drooling idiot?
You a liberal arts major?
If your indie artist owns her own copyrights,
You must be. Copyrights don't have to be registered. I own my own words and you own yours, though I really don't see why you'd want to own yours. Though registering your copyright if you plan commercial use is a good idea, and you can go to The US Copyright Office and find out how.
I'm not surprised that you don't know this, given the improbablility that you'll ever come up with anything that remotely looks commercially valuable, there's no reason why you should.
I know IP (that's Intellectual Property in this context, not Internet Protocol) law a bit better than you, I've filed patent apps on two technology-related patents and I'm also published writer on computers and the Net. This means that people pay for what I write on occasion.
Who knows, study and learn and maybe you'll think of a business method patent you can slip by a patent examiner who isn't paying attention someday.
and she is dumb if she doesn't, then the RIAA can't attack your friends for hosting her.
There's a real world out there. In that world, scanbots search sites looking for .mp3s with names resembling that of songs belonging to RIAA member labels, and bots send DMCA takedown notices to ISPs. Your choices if you find your site or account unplugged are to remove your content or be willing to hire a lawyer to represent you in Federal Court. It is not required that a DMCA takedown notice be fair or reasonable.
Why don't you read up on how the DMCA is applied by corporations against individuals in the real world before you expose your abject ignorance any further? Of course, this might puncture your delusion that corporations can do no wrong, and I doubt even having your college money tied up in Enron stocks would have taught you better.
commies like the people who would argue with me
You think anyone who disagrees with you is a communist?
Just what kind of nut are you?
Note: there are several statutes that have to do with copyright law. Perhaps you should look the other ones up if you can count to several on your fingers. Though 1, 2, 'many' might be close enough to your purposes.
As for fair use:
United States Public Law 102-563
Audio Home Recording Act of 1992
SUBCHAPTER D. PROHIBITION ON CERTAIN INFRINGEMENT ACTIONS, REMEDIES, AND ARBITRATION Section 1008. Prohibition on certain infringement actions:
No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of copyright based on the manufacture, importation, or distribution of a digital audio recording device, a digital audio recording medium, an analog recording device, or an analog recording medium, or based on the noncommercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings.
Elsewhere in the text of the law is how digital audio recording is treated differently, and the DMCA expands on this further.
The difference between recording off the radio to analog tape (legal) and recording to disk (illegal) is because the *AA organizations per$uaded Congress to make the difference using this as the original law in the area. In the recent debate between an RIAA attorney and Lessig, the RIAA attorney correctly identified this. Is everybody wrong except you? Or are you getting your info from Rush Limbaugh?
If you know how to use google, find the cite yourself.
I don't have to use a "straw man" in arguing with you, you are one. Why don't you run along and play with matches?
This is as much time as I can conveniently waste on someone ineducable. The waste of taxpayer funds on educating you might be worth getting concerned about, but there are bigger things to worry about than some pissant born-again right-wing GOP crazy who managed to get promoted off the short bus you were taking in high school. Tardbashing is fun, but it gets old after a while. I've wrung as much entertainment value as you have out of you.
Say something stupid later and maybe I'll take another poke at you.
Tech Public Policy stuff
- Copyrights can be transferred, therefore, I cannot assume that your artist owns her own copyright. Check it out, thats what this whole SCO suit is about. Think before you type.
.mp3s with names resembling that of songs belonging to RIAA member labels, and bots send DMCA takedown notices to ISP ...It is not required that a DMCA takedown notice be fair or reasonable." Which is true, but you CAN represent yourself, someone who is (self proclaimed) as knowledgable about IP laws as yourself should be able to handle it. Besides, it would be a silly move to name all of your songs with the names of copyrighted songs, change the names on the MP3s and they won't get busted. The RIAA also doesn't stand a chance in hell of beating you in court if the MP3s aren't in violation of a copyright.
- I have studied IP law. I know it like the back of my hand.
- you said "There's a real world out there. In that world, scanbots search sites looking for
-You win on fair use I guess, my definition did not take into account for the cited legislation. (I'll conceed to you on that one)
-"Why don't you run along and play with matches?" No problem, just tell me where your house is...
-I attened a private high school and college. Tax-payer funds weren't "wasted" on me.
-I am not a member of the GOP, and, in fact voted (mostly) for independant candidates in the last election. You are still a communist. I am not a born-again, I am an athiest. You are an ignorant biggot.
-You are still ignorant. I am only fortified in this belief by your insistence on ad hominem attacks (which I must admit that I too am guilty of, in retaliation). You are a typical pinko liberal shmo who probably would suck Bill Clinton's dick if he promised to end capitalism as we know it.
In theory I like the DMCA. Thats right, mods, do your worst. In many ways the DMCA has provisions that protect parties from being wrongfully charged with infringement. That said, it does have its abuses - these are holes that should be plugged.
To oppose fair enforcement of copyright laws is anti-capitalist, and against the essential principals that define this country. Unless you believe that Communism works (worked real well in the USSR) or hell, even socialism (worked out perfectly in the UK), you should stop trying to convert this country to one of those systems.
"I'm also published writer on computers and the Net. This means that people pay for what I write on occasion. "
God help those people.
Opinionated Law Student Strikes Again!
Almost forgot.
You are the king of the trolls. Congrats.
Opinionated Law Student Strikes Again!
No, they are only encouraging you to exercise your fair use rights, nothing more. You do not need their permission to do so.
Now, I'm not sure...
"This encourages people to do this, adding to the culture and technological prowess of our nation."
So having longer copyright terms encourages artists like Elvis to produce more music?
Perhaps we should limit copyrights to 17 years? Maybe 17 years is enough?
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
Maybe this is going to signal a change in the way record companies think about file sharing?
Did anyone else see that pig fly past?
Well it looks like she either had a change of mind, never wanted to, or doesn't want it publicly known that it could happen.
your program is a PIECE OF SHIT! And the emperor agrees with him. Better go looking for a new job.
All that really matters is: is she going to show some cleavage?
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
I think you're attributing integrity to her, when I wouldn't.
It really depends on what serves her interests, since that seems to be where she's coming from. You can have an ethical system based on valuing only yourself. In that case, the carrot is the only important thing. Everything else falls or is shoved into place so you can get that carrot. If her new employer has some interest in promoting views contrary to her previous positions then I think she'd do that.
Being that it's NBC and Microsoft I don't think we'll see too much change in her attitude. But let's say MS does something the RIAA doesn't like (I can't imagine what that would be but I'm sure some of you can), then I bet Rosen would be first in line to say "The views the RIAA currently espouses are not the same as the views I held when I was there."
Ravi
When the axe came to the forest, the trees said, "Look out - the handle was once one of us."
What it signifies is the end of my watching anything on NBC and a snail mail letter to them advising them of such. Pay Hillary and lose my set of eyes on your advertising. The only legitimate vote I have left....
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
No way, guys.
For an old broad, she's kinda hot.
To say that the GPL and RIAA policy are so closely linked (because they both rely on copyright) that you can't accept one without the other is like saying that the Constitution and a ransom note are morally equivalent because they were both written on paper, or that a surgeon and a murderer are no different because they both slice human tissue.
You're confusing vehicle with intent.
Sure, they both ride on copyright law, but you can use any instrument for good or for bad, and just because one accepts the work of surgeons as good doesn't mean that one has to support the rights of murderers to cut up people.
The RIAA is using copyright law as an excuse for denying the natural outcome of the new technology for distribution of digital content and hence continuing the torrent of cash into their coffers, and they are doing that very largely at the expense of the actual authors of that music. The GPL in contrast really just creates a symbol or meme for publicly-minded developers to follow, and while its legal basis is of course copyright, just ask anyone (apart from a lawyer) how relevant that really is. To the people that matter to (and that's most definitely not the lawyers, despite one or two of them being nice people), it is utterly irrelevant. It's just a necessary vehicle in a silly world where some people think that these things matter, so bend with the wind and put that clause in to keep them happy. That is seriously the full extent of it.
But really we trade only in symbols. And the symbol that the RIAA so proudly wears is most definitely not one that is even remotely related to that of the GPL.
"The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
Why should we be giving authors incentives to create works in the first place?
Surely you're joking.
The whole "why copyright exists" argument could (and should, for many Slashdotters who don't live in the real world) fill a book, not a post on a RIAA thread. So I won't belittle the depth of reasons for the concept by giving an overly abridged recounting of them.
Let's just put it this way: giving people protective rights over their creative output (words, music, art, whatever) enables them to profit from those works. (Don't try that tired Slashdot "but musicians should only give concerts" crap with me. I'm talking about all creative works here, and authors won't work to do public readings, and painters aren't going to get paid by painting for an audience.)
Why is profiting from their work important? Because it allows them to be professional artists. And professionals can refine and improve their craft, creating superior works of art/music/literature/poetry/whatever that people (at least those who don't hang out on Slashdot) are willing to pay to enjoy.
Don't give me that "all artists should starve and work in their free time" bunk. The books/music/etc. that most people (maybe not you, but most people) enjoy was professionally created by someone who profited from their work and hence was able to do it full-time. Would James Joyce have been able to write "Ulysses" while holding down his part-time job at the pub? Would Miles Davis have been able to create "Kind of Blue" recording in his bedroom after working in a kitchen or a warehouse? I don't think the Who could have all taken time off from their jobs to meet up in the studio long enough to write and record "Quadrophenia." And Andy Warhol would have quit art in a nanosecond if he couldn't sell his art (yes, I know that's an interesting example). Yes, plenty of people create great works in their spare time if they have a job like "college professor" that gives them gobs of free time ... but that's not most people.
The point is that you have to give artists (in the broader sense) the incentive/ability to control their works so they can profit on it, so they have the freedom to pursue their art professionally. If you think a world full of part-timers will produce works as enjoyable as those of the current system, I think you are seriously underestimating how hard it is to make good art, and how important it is to allow someone to pursue their craft full-time through profiting from controlling the copying and distribution of their own works.
"95% of all Slashdot
haha!
?Who controls the past now, controls the future.
Who controls the present now controls the past.?
Background: Bestbuy, CDR section
You see: Her standing next to a pile
"yes kent, it's outrageous here, look at the extreme piracy. A mere CD at no profit selling at 18 dollars a pop is being criminalized by the common folk getting music CDs at 25 dollars for 50."
Heads over to the CD Recorders section
"furthermore, average citizens can simply buy illegal copying machines easily, readily available to any pirate. This is a critical moment for anyone. Absolutely unacceptable and must be stopped, let interrogat....interview these crimin....consumers."
Interrogates anyone, including workers near CDR media and recorders
That would be you CNBC special daily
From the "Wired" article "Hating Hilary"...
Rosen admits that "it's probably just a handful of record executives who think I'm too soft on the issue. Everyone else thinks I'm a total hard-ass monster. And that's fine.
"I think that was very much part of their strategy," she says, referring to the labels. "Everybody could hate Hilary without getting at them. And I wasn't victimized by that. I'm part of it."
Make no mistake people -- there is nothing good about this woman. The only things she could be qualified to report on are avoiding antitrust, creative accounting, contractural servitude and maybe the meetings of the National Liars' Club.
But the Wicked Witch and Evil Bill make an interesting team. A match made in hell.
The copyright runs for 50 years, and you can pay $1.00 for ANOTHER 50 years?
It's not exactly like the old 28+28 scheme of 1909-1963. The Eldred Act proposes 50 years, and $1.00 per year for another 45 years. The goal there is to put an expensive bookkeeping burden on those who want to keep a copyright.
And any politician who supported that bill should be voted out of office for stupidity,
THOMAS tells me that Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah sponsored the Bono Act, and that the following senators co-sponsored it. Vote them out if they're still in office.
Because not even 20 percent of the House or Senate opposed the Bono Act, they cast a voice vote, which does not record who voted for or against a bill. (Twenty percent of either house can force a roll-call vote in that house.)
Will I retire or break 10K?
Ulussies wtf why woula I have interest in such a thing. Idon't read books!whose udience are youa ppealing to? This is slagsdot!
Dope
Ripper is a gangster!