Slashdot Mirror
Mitch Bainwol To Succeed Hilary Rosen As RIAA Head
bmarklein writes "The RIAA has announced that it has named Mitch Bainwol, former chief of staff to U.S. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, as chairman & CEO. He replaces Hilary Rosen, who left earlier this month. This confirms the speculation that the RIAA would appoint a well-connected Republican (Rosen was a Democrat)." Several readers have submitted links to CNET's coverage as well.
Update: 07/29 12:30 GMT by J : Lobbyists wield incredible power nowadays, and Slate's report on why was enlightening. Here's
part 1
and
part 2.
Includes lyrics to the rap recorded for Rosen's going-away party by some of the most powerful people in the world: "Who wants the job of Hilary Rosen? / How 'bout the dream team of Bono and Tauzin?"
U.S. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist
Is this a Frist Psot?
My journal has hot
Well, being a republican at least means that you folks in the US are less likely to have to foot the bill for his jackboots.
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
This confirms the speculation that the RIAA would appoint a well-connected Republican (Rosen was a Democrat)."
:-)
Well, I suppose from this wording there will not be any political flame wars generated from this....
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
Former Chief of Staff? Why did Bainwol get fired from / leave his previous position?
I had but a simple dream, to destroy all humans.
This RIAA appt. is blatant politicking. I bet if ;) the democrats regain control, they will replace Bainwol with a Rosen clone. Sigh... I am a Republican but on this issue they are pissing me off...
----
In Soviet Russia, the overlords welcome you!
Damn, now I need to get that "Death to Hillary" tattoo removed.
Bugs are just features that have been fixed.
I think I'll have a good cry.
You know this is a bad thing. He's a right-wing Republican; the GOP is pro-rich, pro-big corporations, and pro-personal interest.
Expect even more tyranny from the RIAA.
I shudder at this prospect... not that the old person was good, though...
"What could be more rewarding than helping to promote two great American traditions: music and property rights?" Bainwol said in a statement.
Who said property rights was a great American tradition? And rewarding for whom? Certainly not for us.
He hasn't even DONE anything yet.
Hit me.
I had a sucky sig.
Bainwol said in a statement. "What could be more rewarding than helping to promote two great American traditions: music and property rights?"
Damnit... And all along I thought it was baseball and barbeques.
As opposed to the previous administration who signed into law the DMCA and had the most pro-censorship bored housewives club (Tipper Gore) - not to mention Censorship Joe Lieberman himself. Also note who the media companies are cozying up to. Hint: it ain't the Republicans.
I'm not a member or supporter of either major political party, but now I guess I should vote democrat, during this upcoming presidential election. That way maybe partisan politics will work to a benefit, and a democrat president will shoot down whatever laws the RIAA lobbyists try to create.
(Now that I mentioned politics, I'm readying for flame)
SuPz.orG
/me sits back and waits for people to start making fun of his name.....
You mean simething like: "Can you imagine a Bainwol cluster of these?"
The dogcow says "Moof!"
So, is everyone going to email him and congratulate him on his new job? I'm sure he'd love to hear what slashdotters think he should do first..
Twenties Retirement
Well, in the time honoured tradition, repressed citizens of the freedom loving USA, can still flee to Canada. Maybe, just maybe, claiming persecution by the evil RIAA, will get you refugee status.
If anything, it will probably get the Vietnam vets and slave traders to spin in their graves at 45rpm...
Oh well, what the hell...
What would be more rewarding that promoting music and property rights? Hmmmm tough one there.
How about the immense joy, convenience and satisfaction associated with obtaining music online? Heck, how about masturbation for that matter.
"Although Bainwol has little experience inside the music industry, he brings deep connections to the Republican Party, something the RIAA has largely lacked under Rosen's leadership."
Hmm. Pre-paid senators...
Already I see there's gonna be some problems with this. Mainly the RIAA getting laws that people know aren't kosher passed. And possibly a little too much influence on some issues...
And before I forget:
"What could be more rewarding than helping to promote two great American traditions: music and property rights?"
When the F**K did property rights become a "great american tradition"?!?
Why yes I am paranoid! Thanks for asking!
The Worm That Eternally Devours Its Own Flesh has shed its skin and now has a new one. Big fucking deal. It's still the same worm. It's still evil, and it still wants to consume all that lives.
The only difference I can see this concievably making is that now the constant anti-RIAA snipes on slashdot will no longer be occationally seen to contain unhelpful sexist comments, now that the RIAA has a spokesman and not a spokeswoman. Other than that I do not imagine the quantity or nature of slashdot RIAA posts, nor the actions of the RIAA, will change one bit.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
aren't the democrats traditionally the ones who get big bucks from the entertainment industry? they had an almightily funded effort to ease off the MPAA ratings debate a while ago, and it was democrats getting their pockets padded. i'm pretty angry to see the republicans getting in with the recording industry, firstly because i vote republican, and secondly because i don't agree with the RIAA. all politicians are starting to suck. (i thought frist was a nice guy in person. hopefully this is not indicative of his true nature.)
I can't help getting the feeling that as the inevitable ganging together of the forces of evil accelerates, armageddon can't be far off.
Thank God I'm not sharing Midnight Oil or I could end up being 'liberated' in the head.
*knock, knock*
Hold on a sec....
Hey! What the..?! *PFhhT*
*thunk*
I FULLY SUPPORRT OUR NEW REPUBLIC KAN OVERLOARDS!!
. . . rumors from unnamed sources on the Hill are that the only MP3 file that will be able to be shared within the U.S. and its possesions without fear of prosecution by the Department of Homeland Security will be Horst Wessel Lied.
Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.
but forgets about people like Senator Disney Hollings who is a Democrat.
Both parties deserve the bashing, but you're talking out of your ass if you think the Democrats are a safe haven from RIAA/Disney/et. al.
Don't forget Frist is from TN, the center of the country music industry - probably the closest you can get to Hollywood without actually going to Hollywood. And he has plenty of pull of his own.
I'm rather sick of these radical modern day liberals (as opposed to old school liberals, who actually believed in liberty) being called "conservatives." These modern day robber barrons are not conservators of anything except greed. I have in mind a much appropriate word to describe them...
Follow me here...
Any good California law firm (as you know, we tend to have the most experience in such a field) will have hired one attorney into partnership for every State Supreme Court Justice, each attorney having previously been a different justice's clerk. After a while of typing all the J's decisions, they know what the Justice wants to read when going over correspondances and court pleadings.
This new head is entirely about the personal experience of working with the head of the senate majority leader, and less about being qualified to lead the RIAA into a rational future that isn't based on getting money through suing people, who by their definition aren't likely to be able to afford a good lawyer.
After I have received the wisdom of good teaching, I will untiringly teach all people. - The Teachings of Buddha
Study NRA tactics. Organize a boycott. Pick one record label and concentrate on driving them into bankruptcy. Enforce a new reality on the music market. Then it wouldn't matter who is running RIAA, would it?
Notice how Congress fears the NRA, and not just because they have guns. There are more file sharers than NRA members. Consider the possibilities.
The record industry has seen CD sales slump for three years, a decline it blames on online file-sharing sites where music can be traded freely and sometimes before it is even released.
The New York times just says, "A decline caused by online file-sharing sites...." The LA Times does the same. CNN is owned by AOL/Time-Warner, and obviously just states it as though it's a credible fact. NBC/ABC/CBS ignore the issue, and follow CNN's lead when they don't. Fox... well, Fox will be Fox.
And here Reuters is at least insinuating that a doubt may exist. What's that Eric Blair/George Orwell (real name/pen name) quote about times of lies and revolutionary truths?
Whatever it is I'm complaining about, I'm sure the Republicans did it. This is
Hey now! at least give the guy a day to prove he's right in line with the rest of the recording industry.
Ya never know, maybe being a conservative republican (and therefore presumably a good businessman) he will figure the P/E ratio of litigation and public intimidation isn't nearly as high as say, lowering the prices of CDs and driving up sales which is ultimately what I think this debate all comes down to.
Then again maybe I will magically get enough money for that Z5 convertible I've been wanting the last few years. I'm telling you, $6 DRM-free CDs... people will buy them buy them by the truckload, p2p networks or not. Maybe by some small chance he'll figure it out.... don't hold your breath though.
The sending of this message pretty much inconveniences everyone involved.
"Gone are the days when Auto-Tune carried a song! I will bring back talent to the Industry!", Mitch crowed at a Republican fund raiser, to the applause of many rich, white fat men.
"It's high time the kids of today learned what music should sound like! I remember when talent drove the market, not the other way around! When I ascend to the throne, I will bring talent! I will bring value! I will bring CDs unencumbered with copy protection, and chock full of value!" Mitch puctuated these remarks with a pounding fist and spittle.
Mitch finished his speech to the attendees with a rousing cry, "The RIAA will no longer be the 'bad guy'! We will sponsor new artists and stick with them, developing careers and encouraging creativity! We will offer all signed artists with new contracts, spelling out exactly what they will make - no hidden accounting!"
"We will no longer chase file-sharers, who only do us a favor by expanding both our horizons with music, and purchase more CDs than ever before! We will never allow another American Idol or Making of the Band or manufactured marketing-friendly boy band again! All copyrights will revert to the original artist!"
"I will personally include a puppy with every single sold! *HAHAHAAHAHA.cough cough..oh shit, I thought I could keep a straight face! Pass the bong guys, *wheeeezee* this is going to be great! I can't wait to absolutely wreck music forever! These shits are gonna be scared to look at a guitar, much less pick one up when we get done with them..I am gonna be SHITTTIIING moooonnnneeey, muthafuc...*hack* Oh, Bushies here!!! WHoooHOOO! Let's DO SOME LINES!!! Where's the White Lady??HAHAHAhaha..."
This re-enactment is for entertainment only. It is not intended to portray Republicans as evil, rich, fat white, self-serving drug monkeys. Nor did Mitch ever say any of these things in front of me. Thank you, and please drink republicanly. ;)
Heh, interesting that you would mention that, kind troll. Since coincidentally, Frist is actively supporting a constitutional amendment to officially ban gay marriage. This would effectively be the first constitutional amendment since the 18th(prohibition), ratified in 1919, that is specifically intended to revoke the rights of citizens instead of granting new ones. If this is any indication of the behavior his cronies are prone to, well we're in for a real treat then!
- "Hear that?! The percolations are imminent! Cease your ingress!"
Actions speak louder than words. By appointing Mr Mitch Bainwol as its new chairman and ceo, the Recording Industry Association of America proves once again that its members and board of directors will seek to continue to desperately shore up their antiquated business model through legislation instead of innovation. Rather than seeking someone who's respected by both sides to actively work for solutions, they've hired another Washington insider to push their myopic agenda in Congress. The RIAA often calls for a "Free Market Solution," but nonetheless continually balks at solutions, usually rejecting them out of hand. Its members are all for a "Free Market" - as long as they control it. So instead of celebrating a wind of change by calling off our protests on August 1 and 2, we'll re-double our efforts to make them dates the music industry in general, and the RIAA in particular, will remember. Bill Evans founder boycott-riaa.com
Nobody copies our country music and gets away with it (even if they don't get caught, they suffer)!!!
Are you sure that the CRIA can do anything about this, they may only have authorization over matters of Canadian artists.
If those "file traders" would just leave behind the music of the corporations that sue them we wouldn't need a lobby - the problem would take care of itself because the publishers wouldn't find enough profit in the music industry to justify sustaining an RIAA. The problem is "file traders" - like the MP3.COM of yore - don't necessarily believe in that stuff about empowering the artist or in helping build a new model of distribution that would help the creators while bypassing the suits. They generally don't care about anything but free music. And if you're paying a lobbyist to defend your (narrow and shortsighted) interest, it ain't free any more.
Now the PAC's are no longer the enemies that the Republican Revolution of '94 denounced them as, they've been co-opted.
I'm seeing less and less of a deliniation between the GOP and good old fashioned fascism. And why is nobody looking at this? There have been numerous authors who have attempted to predict what the "American" brand of fascism would look like going back to the 30's. While most of these were American communists (fascism's 'natural enemy'), many were pragmatic moderates concerned for democracy. Look at media critic George Seldes who published 'In Fact' during the 40's. He invented the entire industry of media criticism and fact checking news sources to bring to light biased reporting.
Many people were worried about corporate America's designs on democracy, such as their plot against Roosevelt. From "The Nazi Hydra In Fascist America":
The Republican Party was infiltrated by Nazi's during the 30's, on October 22, 1936, the New York Post reported:
This was backed up by a report on the 30th in the New York World-Telegram stating:
The pre-WWII fascist designs of the Republican Party have transformed into a message that claims anyone who doesn't conform to their model of what American life is supposed to be is an enemy of America. Rather than the old heirarchy of race and nationality, it's a new one of wealth and productivity above all else. The Nazi's didn't sell an unpalatable message to the German people, the Republicans aren't about to try and sell their unappetizing designs to Americans.
Dig through history, look at the patterns and relationships, the small tweaks don't hide the same old plan. The idea is to create a new heirarchy to lawfully subjugate those who don't belong. To insure that the morality and beliefs of the ruling class of this new heirarchy live forever. It's based on faith and the support of Right Wing Christian organizations like the Southern Bapti
Arrogance is Confidence which lacks integrity. -- me
The copyright holder, in the case of musical compositions, is not usually making decisions about "his work", but someone else's. The artist almost never has the rights to their own work.
This can be important. Various artists, some big name (I believe the Smashing Pumpkins were one) were far more ready to embrace music on the Internet than the copyright holders, but of course, the artists couldn't really do anything about it as they were under contract to the label.
Is it their fault for signing to a major? Technically yes, but it's hard to blame them, even for me. It's nice to see someone like the Yeah Yeah Yeahs get mainstream radio play, but it doesn't happen very often. If you want the big audiences, you sign to the big labels, and lose your rights.
I think that the limits on copyright should be much shorter than they currently are, but I think that within those limits, people should be free to do what they want with their work. It's a shame it's often not up to the artists, but I don't think we can rightly change that with legislation.
WMBC freeform/independent online radio.
Republicans own the government right now. You'd have to be a damn *idiot* to side with the underdog when you're about to try pushing through a seriously dicey move that could piss off a lot of Americans.
May we never see th
Interesting... I've always assumed that the RIAA wasn't lead by a head, so much as a collection of asses...
With such an overt political appointment, the RIAA may have just committed a tactical error: now they are seen as sitting on one side of the bench, whereas before they were seen as a 'legitimate' lobbying group for a powerful industry.
This may affect several points:
1. Yes, the GOP is in power, but Hollywood and the Music industry are standard DEM strongholds. They may not like their new boy, or at least won't invite him to the parties at Rob Reiner's house.
2. They have now unzipped their fly, and are acting pretty brazenly partisan with such a move. This will turn many democrats in congress into automatic defense mode, who may slow legislation down 'just because'.
3. In the end, Bush & Co. may end up having to choose between supporting a major US export (entertainment) vs. giving money to those 'liberal jack-offs in hollywood'-- depending on what Karl Rove says about electoral trends, that could break either way.
davejenkins.com |
Copyright is not a constitutional right, like free speech. While Congress is empowered to legalize copyright, it is not required to do so. Filesharing could be legalized tomorrow if Congress just passed a bill to repeal copyright.
Change the Law explains this in more detail, and suggests some steps to take to legalize filesharing. You can take these steps in almost any country, not just the US:
- Speak Out
- Vote
- Write to Your Elected Representatives
- Donate Money to Political Campaigns
- Support Campaign Finance Reform
- Join the Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Practice Civil Disobedience
If you feel as I do that what I have to say in my article is important for others to read, please link to it from your own website, your weblog, or other message boards.Thank you for your attention.
Request your free CD of my piano music.
Krugman writes: "Lobbying jobs are a major source of patronage -- a reward for the loyal. More important, however, many lobbyists now owe their primary loyalty to the party, rather than to the industries they represent. So corporate cash, once split more or less evenly between the parties, increasingly flows in only one direction."
How long until file traders are considered "terrorists" trying to destroy the "American"(corporate) way of life.
Has anyone realized that the navy commercials now end with "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of those who threaten it"? What the hell is that?
As the government and corporations fuse, they are solidifying of new aristocracy. This means that our individual voices get drowned out. Where in the constitution does it say they get representation? Last time I checked, the government was of the people, by the people, and for the people.
I know it will never happen, but I think the only way to save our government, is to ban lobbying (legalized bribery). How can we compete w/ business giving out hundreds of thousands of dollars in 'incentive'?
I think I need to start my own country (think of the exodus from Battletech). No RIAA, no DMCA, no waste of our lives to get better profits on oil.
Im glad
Parking in a 'No Parking' zone:
- $40-$200 fine
Petty Theft:
- $200 fine to 90 days' jail
Aggravated Assault:
- 90 days to 5 years' jail
3rd Degree Murder:
- 3 to 10 years' jail
2nd Degree Murder:
- 8 to 20 years' jail
Associating With A Person Who Is Known To Have Had KaZaa Installed On Their Hard Disk:
- 25 to life!
-- In the beginning was the WORD, and the WORD was UNSIGNED, and the main(){} was without form and void...
limit bach now
omni law bitch
wino itch balm
blow manic hit
him can blow it
i bowl in match
nail mob witch
mail bitch now
howl at ibm inc
i watch no limb
climb a hit now
octal whim bin
hint i blow mca
The problem here is that you're furthering a common misconception. Copyright is not actually a right, as most 'rights' are understood. The right to free speech, the right to not be discriminated against based on race, etc, are all fundamental or basic--they are almost universally agreed upon in free society.
Copyright on the other hand is a privilege. It is a grant of monopoly on a particular creative work for a "limited" time. I feel like my last few posts have almost all been to this point, but I may as well hammer it home again: The Founders of this country were wary of ANY monopoly. As such, copyright was created in a very limited fashion, for the explicit purpose of encouraging creativity. But your conception of copyright as a right is by no means uncommon, and as you pointed out, logically the term 'copyright' taken in pieces seems to indicate a right of copy. But whereas the term copyright should theoretically apply to that very narrow definition that the Founders meant for it, it has been conflated with the idea of a basic right, a fundamental like free speech.
I say as emphatically as I can that copyright, taken as a personal fundamental right, is absolutely incommensurable with the idea of free expression. In England such a thing as you are suggesting is called Moral Right, and it is indeed perpetual. Do you want to write a Sherlock Holmes derivative that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's descendants disagree with? Well, you better be prepared to defend yourselves.
Again, I hate sounding like a broken record, but our culture is inextricably linked to mass-, privately owned media. The Founders didn't grant a basic right to copyright so that the nation wouldn't be deprived of a more valuable right which is dependant on the free access of ideas and expressions--the right to culture.
By the way, the "rest of the world" is becoming more liberal, not less. Gay marriages are becoming far more common outside the U.S. For example, they are now completely legal in Ontario as of a few months ago, and the Canadian government is drafting law to make it legal throughout Canada.
Just stay where you are, we'll send some people over to assassinate your political leaders and "liberate" you, just as soon as we get them back from Iraq. We'll phone you when it's done.
First of all, up until very recently, if both partners worked, marriage resulted in a tax increase. Second, if the supposed marriage tax breaks were for bearing children, then why would there be a separate child tax credit?
Obviously wrong as well. The so-called "marriage penalty" only applied to a fraction of two-income married couples, generally when they earned widely disparate incomes. There are a number of financial/legal benefits to being married, at least in U.S. society.
if you think it's the government's place to say what marriage is intendted to be, you should probably move to a country where those views are shared.
Well, the government (in the U.S. as well as other places) already is in the business of saying what marriage is. And I think that is the point of gay marriage advocates. If marriage was simply an institution defined and administered by religious institutions, without any sort of government involvement or benefit, then this would be a different story. Gay couples could get married all they want by establishing their own church institutions with other like-minded individuals or by seeking out friendly denominations. But the government is in the business of sanctioning marriages, which creates a completely different scenario, and in all fairness, it is marginalizing a group of people and denying them priveleges that are given to others, something that is antithetical to what we would like to believe the U.S. is about.
Back on-topic now...
fuck you.
Look at the Enron situation. So many politicians had their hands in that cookie jar. When it collapsed, no one was interested in prosecuting the guilty - everyone was more interested in saving their own derriere.
The time to push for such a thing is now, before the corporations become even more fused with our government. We are quickly reaching a point of no return, and if the people lose their power in the government to the corporation, we will never get it back.