Slashdot Mirror
MPAA Puts Words in Mouth of CA Attorney General
An anonymous reader writes "In another example of Microsoft Word meta data coming back to bite you, Wired News reports that a document circulated by the California Attorney General to fellow lawmakers supporting new restrictions on P2P software was actually authored by a senior vice president of the Motion Picture Association of America."
Use the Antiword!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Flamebait? Honestly guys, give the massive negative moderation a break. The MPAA gives money to politicians. Here's an old PCworld Article.
So you say P2P is protected by the constitution so the federal government can't restrict it, but then you say that a state should be allowed to restrict it?
Maybe you failed Government 101 but when something is in the United States constitution no states can have laws against it.
Tsuyoikoto ha taisetsu da ne, dakedo namida mo hitsuyousa (Strength is an important thing, but tears too are necessary)
This is a big reason why anarchocapitalists (and most libertarians) are anti-democracy: in a democracy, power tends to trickle up to the connected few who can say they have the mandate of the many.
This country was founded on a Constitution that limits the power of the majority. 51% of the country could vote to kill the other 49%, and the Constitution does not allow them to. Don't believe the hype presented by Democrats and Republicans alike, the only mandate they have is for powers specifically delegated to them by the Constitution. Those powers are small, not wide reaching, and very limited in scope.
Living document it is not. If we are to return to personal responsibility, we need to disrupt the current authoritarian control of the federal government.
The California Atty. General is an elected office, not appointed.
But note: if the goal is to "legitimize" p2p so that artists get paid, how would you do it? The EFF has come up with a solution called Voluntary Collective Licensing that would allow artists to be paid for filesharing that is going to occur anyway.
Now, what was it Mussolini said about Fascism being about the merging of the State and Corporation? Welcome to the future
I think the actual quote was:
"Fascism should rightly be called corporatism as it is a merger of state and corporate power."
The same has happened in Ohio (here and here) where a new bill has been signed and is now law (thank you MPAA & Gov. Taft) directly written and influenced by big-cinema. When the public (and media) starting questioning the bill and the stealthy way it was snuck through -- also the nagging fact that a cell-phone that takes video snippets can now make you a felon if you bring it to a movie theatre.. (ok, I am exagerating, the first offense is a misdemeanor; the next one is a felony) The MPAA responded to the effect of "just pass the law like it is written and you can always go back and amend it". And, YES, in Ohio you are now a criminal if you press record on any electronic recording device in any public place that has a movie being played (ie. Walmart or BestBuy).
MPAA is also trying to sneak one through in Hartford and probably also your own state legislatures. (A similar law took effect Jan. 1 in California. Michigan lawmakers introduced legislation in December, and Wisconsin and Pennsylvania passed equivalent bills in 1999)
And you truely are a fool if you are one of those who say, well even though *technically* it is the law, they'll never *really* enforce it that way. Forget police state. Just go look at EFF, I'm starting to be worried we'll all soon be living in a corporate state.
Go to hotbot.com, click on "Advanced Search", check the "MS Word" box under "Page Content". Then search for whatever you're interested in.
.doc file relating to SCO. One wonders what facinating goodies might be hidden in metadata in SCO documents...
For example, checking this box and then searching for "sco" returns 4600 web pages containing a link to a
May we never see th
> corporation. Unfortunately, I forget the name
> of the person that introduced this.
> -- ravind
The company is called Semco, it's in Brazil, and the CEO is Ricardo Semler. You can read about it in his excellent book Maverick!. He's written a follow up called The Seven Day Weekend which I'm getting when it's available here in paperback.
"If democracy and self-rule are the fundamentals, then why should people give up these rights when they enter their work place? In politics we fight like tigers for freedom, for the right to elect our leaders, for freedom of movement, choice of residence, choice of what work to pursue -- control of our lives, in short. And then we wake up in the morning and go to work, and all those rights disappear. We no longer insist on them. And so for most of the day we return to feudalism. That is what capitalism is -- a version of feudalism in which capital replaces land, and business leaders replace kings. But the hierarchy remains." - Kim Stanley Robinson, Blue Mars, 1996
That's in a case where the water isn't nearly as muddy as with the MPAA's shenanigans. There are legitimate reasons for which copyright laws exist, the MPAA is maneuvering behind those.
I have 10-year-old twins, one of whom once testing a little high for lead levels in my old apartment; gee, I guess there was no danger after all. Is there any cover at all for stacking a CDC board's medical decision with voices from the paint industry?
"Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
Not illegal. Not even close. In fact, there are many currently-standing laws that are:
- written entirely by private organizations
- copyrighted by those organizations, with a limited license granted to the government for enforcement purposes
- if you want to read the frickin law you must buy a copy from the private company
And for the grand finale: any other person who makes copies of these laws available to the public is prosecuted for copyright violation! Note that the this case was appealed to the US Supreme Court, but they refused to hear it.The law of the land is: you don't talk about the law of the land.
You should look at the memos of the Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
It was totally unethical of the Republican staffers to even look at the memos, let alone leak them to the newspapers and ultimately the web. But the memos are very revealing.
Pressure groups determined exactly which of Bush's nominees they would oppose, when to raise opposition, and exactly how to oppose them.
Of course I am not naive enough to think that it's any different for Republicans.
The point is: right now the legislative process, on both sides, is almost entirely determined by a few alliances of special interest groups. The entire system seems to be set up to punish heavily any congressman who dares to think for himself and not toe what used to be called 'the party line'... though it seems that the parties themselves are slaves to the special interests.
Well.... Actually.... If you are Jewish, yes...
scribe
"Jewish law demands that these objects be written by hand and comply with the strict standards conveyed to us by Moses at Mount Sinai over three thousand years ago. All products I sell conform to Jewish law."
Well... Actually.... yes.... Believe it or not there is a market for sextants.
buy your sextants here...
Why can't independents thrive off of the merits of their work?
Scenario:
You publish some of your creative content. Once published, content is essentially accessible to the general public at no cost. That's the nature of it. Your ideas become public property because ideas, once released, force themselves onto everyone who comes in contact with them, just like Jefferson said.
Now, your copyright identifies you as the original creator and the source for potential future works. Perhaps copyright will protect you from parasites who might try to hijack your work for their own exclusive gain, but nothing more.
You have made little or no money from your initial offering to the public. Your work, so far, is merely an investment. If you are any good, people will appreciate you. They will hope for more.
You will say: I own other ideas; ideas that are uniquely mine, and that nobody else has but me. These ideas are worth something to the public, and I will release them to you if you make it worth my effort.
If the public, based on the merits of your previous ideas, would like to be edified by your continuing work, then they will support you in your work. And if you become so astoundingly popular, why not hire a publishing house to get the word out to the masses? They could even take a small cut of your earnings. What a novel idea.
How can this go wrong? Why not use a system that actually cultivates excellence by feeding the true masters? Why not let the mediocre find something else they truly excel in? Why do we celebrate mediocrity? If the people still want the latest sexed-up teenage sensation, why, they can still vote with their money.
Isn't it time for people to think about what they really want? Why is it that we are force-fed our culture, as it were, through an I.V.?
It is not a hard issue. Why is there such debate?
"Your analogy was of new technology coming in and displacing the old. But the analogy is wrong, and it doesn't event make sense, because there is no "new music" coming in and replacing the "old music." What has happened is that technology has given us a way to very easily deny artists compensation for their work."
Thats not whats really happening. Recorded music WAS a new technology and income stream to musicians when it was invented. Before that, as someone mentioned, the only way for musicians to make money was live performance or commisioned compositions. Now, that income stream is drying up and the smart musicians are moving on and using recordings as advertising for thier shows or other media products.
"I forgot my mantra."
Actually, the untruncated quote is:
The first stage of fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and Corporate power.
Look out honey, 'cause I'm using technology; Ain't got time to make no apology
Mannheim Steamroller is a great example of a successful music group that can't live on concerts, IMHO. I love Chip Davis' work and own all the Fresh Aire and Christmas CDs. But I don't like going to their performances.
I've been to a couple, but the problem is, they sound just like the CD. One, the Ice-Capades-alike, I honestly didn't realize the band was there until the end, when they stood up for applause. I thought they were just playing a CD. Thanks to synthesizors, amplifications, click tracks, and a few other technology bits, the performances are indistinguishable from playing the CD.
If the CD can stand in that well, I don't know why they perform at all. I'd rather just have the CD, thanks.
I know they aren't the only group who does this. I know I've also seen a lot of things like Superbowl performance or Emmy performances that are indistinguishable from the CD (and I don't think they were all lipsynching, though maybe I'm wrong). Living on performances isn't a good idea for a lot of groups who make good music, but don't really gain any benefit from giving a "concert".
That one's at least understandable, because peanuts are legumes, not nuts.
Yep. That's incredibly necessary.
My daughter is allergic (as in "drop dead allergic", not as in "itchy itchy allergic") to nuts (tree nuts -- walnuts, cashews, pecans, etc...), but not to peanuts (which, as the parent notes, are legumes). So, if I look at a jar of peanuts, I need to know if it's been processed on the same equipments as tree nuts (aka "nuts"), so that I won't buy it and give it to my daughter.
The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
Write and complaint to the Office of the Robot, er, the Office of the Attorney General of the State of California.
CA State AG Public Inquiry Unit
or
You can contact the Public Inquiry Unit at (916) 322-3360 or, within California, by calling (800) 952-5225.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
Of course, you just did exactly what I'm talking about, flow the dialog into the same old anti-RIAA thing.
Look, I agree that P2P tech itself should not be held accountable. And I agreed with the EFF when that was their position. And note also that the EFF used to suggest that the RIAA should be suing infringers.
But the EFF has come to adapt a pro file-sharing-even-when-it's-copyrighted schtick, and that's when they got off track.
You need to read the EFF site a little. The EFF isn't trying to get rid of copyright, or make file sharing (in its current form) legal. Their trying to get the law to catch up to the technology in a way that benefits both consumers and artists (but not necessarily the RIAA/MPAA). The reason the RIAA/MPAA are portrayed as 'evil' is that they fight these efforts at every step (as they probably should, for the sake of their business).
The EFF has not adopted a anti-copyright view (as you suggest). If you would read their website, you would see that the "EFF advocates offering fans a legal way to use P2P programs while ensuring that artists get paid."
Rather than assuming you understand the position of the EFF based on conversations on
``Replace "more concern for the weak" with "eagernesss to play to the demands of those who don't like to work" and you've captured the growing economic woes of France and Germany almost perfectly.''
There are always people trying to abuse the system. Care for the weak and people will fool you into thinking they are weak while actually they're lazy. Don't care for the weak and they will be crushed by greedy big shots. I happen to prefer the first one.
Incidentally, I and many others believe that the economic downturn in Europe was mainly caused by the economic downturn in the USA and the belief and FUD that there _was_ an economic downturn, which is a self-fulfilling prophecy. Speaking from experience, I know that in the Netherlands things weren't so bad. There were a few market segments where people had abused the switch from guilder to euro to inflate prices, and many businesses were seeing their revenues drop once people were realizing how expensive things had gotten. Prices have fallen now, and people are starting to buy again. Go figure.
As for the elderly who died; well, if you didn't care for the weak they would have died by default. It's not like France is a poor country that can't support its population. If you want numbers, go check the CIA World Factbook and you will find that the population below the poverty line is twice as high in the USA as in France. And the current governments in western countries (in particular the USA, western europe, and Israel), are mainly right-wing, liberal, leave-the-economy-alone-style. I'm not saying that's what caused the economic downturn, just arguing against the notion that the relatively leftish, socialist, support-public-interests politics in Europe caused it.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.