Slashdot Mirror
Rosen Believes RIAA is Wrong about P2P Lawsuits
Newer Guy writes "Former RIAA head Hilary Rosen now believes that the RIAA is wrong by pursuing their lawsuits of individuals for using P2P programs.
In a blog post, she writes that she believes the lawsuits have 'outlived their usefulness' and states that the content providers really need to come up with their own download systems. She also is down on DRM, calling Apple's DRM 'a pain.'"
I'd like to see Hilary Rosen contact the current head of the RIAA, Mitch Bainwol, and talk some sense into him. Unfortunately, he's republican, so I doubt that'd ever work. ;-)
It's a Bagel.
I have no intent of redistributing the music and films that they represent. But I would like to be assures that if I create something ... be it a song, a video, or a piece of software ... that I'm free to distribute my creation to all who will take it; and if I want to allow them to build on it, that the RIAA will keep out of my way.
I have other ways of getting money. Not as much as she gets, but enough. Writing software to order, teaching people to use it, and guaranteeing it, mostly.
How about BJ Clinton who militarized the war on marijuana and brought arrest from around 300,000 a year to the 700,000 range its been since he was in power.
What was the first thing he did when he retired?
Told Rolling Stone that the laws on pot are wrong.
Im sure the medical marijuana patients who are still alive and who were rousted by federal agents feel better than this a--hole said he was wrong. Now if he can admit that he helped Al QUaeda in the Balkans when tens of thousands of them were ramaging through the region (but were told by the Clintonistas that they were 'nice' muslims) adn helped them get TWO footholds in europe were many of the 911 organizers stayed after they conquered new lands; then we might get to see him face a fire squad on the white house lawn.
Saying you are sorry or made a mistake does NOT make you less guilty of a crime in the eyes of the law: why should we give these people a break?
Whatever, fag. You're a bore and an asshole.
Have you ever noticed that it's easier to assume the higher moral ground when your job is no longer riding on your views & political statements?
No, I had actually never noticed that before! Thank you, Mr. +1 Insightful, for pointing this out to me! The wool has literally been lifted from my eyes!
All Apple really does is say "hey these tracks will only play on a iPod as is, but if you have even 10% of a brain you will know to burn a CD rerip it and tada music for your nomad."
Yes they are selling iPods, but only idiots and morons who shouldnt touch a computer think that Apple is trying to FORCE you to buy a iPod, not when someone with a shred of techno savy knows how to bypass it.
"Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."
What a flawed argument! I just explained how Apple's DRM wasn't like handcuffs at all, and how you don't come across any restrictions in normal use.
You kind of have to prove that they're as restrictive as handcuffs first for your remark to be valid. You guys are just anti-DRM because Slashdot runs constant headlines telling you to think that way, so you take an absolutist viewpoint that any and all copy protection is 100% wrong. Absolutist mindsets are the real handcuffs in this debate.
"Sufferin' succotash."