Slashdot Mirror


Senator Plans P2P Summit

ClickTheVote writes "Last fall Senator Norm Coleman held hearings on the RIAA subpoena process, now he is going to convene a P2P Summit. At CES last week he said, 'With the advent of technology such as peer-to-peer networking, law, technology and ethics are now not in synch. We need to find other ways to solve the problems rather than issuing lawsuits and lobbying Congress to pass tougher laws.' Here, here."

4 of 266 comments (clear)

  1. Pedantic grammar comment by David+Kennedy · · Score: 4, Informative

    I think you mean "Hear, hear!", not "Here, here!"

    1. Re:Pedantic grammar comment by 1u3hr · · Score: 2, Informative
      Hear hear:
      Meaning A shout of support or agreement.
      Origin Originated in the British parliament in the 18th century as a contraction of 'hear him, hear him'. It is still often heard there although sometimes used ironically these days.

      Phrase Dictionary

      It's understandable for people to mix this up, but not someone who is paid to be an "editor".

  2. Re:the users by Zocalo · · Score: 2, Informative
    Is there a p2p user interest organization in existence?

    Not a specific one that I am aware of, but having someone there to represent the users would be a good idea. There are several more general bodies that could fill the role; the EFF has touched on this area in the past for example. Two other groups with a vested interest that spring to mind are the artists themselves, from both sides of the P2P debate obviously. Also having representatives of those using P2P for 100% legitimate reasons like distros that release their ISOs via BitTorrent to provide the counterpoint to the "P2P is synonymous with copyright infringement" argument you *know* the media corporations are going to use.

    --
    UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
  3. Re:Good idea... by swb · · Score: 2, Informative

    Finally, someone who is on the right track, thinking rationally.

    A recent Minneapolis Star Tribune article showed Coleman voting nearly in lockstep with what the White House wanted. Given the Bush administration's generally pro-corporate stances on most issues, it's hard to see Norm Coleman taking a stance on this issue too far out of sync with what corporate leaders typically want (DRM, limited choice, maximimal pricing).

    What I find unusual about Norm's initiatives is that Minnesota isn't the constituency of either the media empire (although his erstwhile wife, Laurie, is "pursuing an acting career in Hollywood" -- at least that's what we're told about her living in Hollywood instead of with Norm..), or the consumer electronics companies who on the surface seem to work against the traditional media interests. So it's hard to know what motivates Norm in this regard.

    But I personally have a hard time seeing any particularly revolutionary ideas come out of Coleman, at least not any that might anger corporate interests aligned with Bush.