Slashdot Mirror


RIAA Afraid of Harvard

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "According to a report on p2pnet.net, the RIAA's latest anti-college round of "early settlement" letters targets 7 out of 8 Ivy League schools, but continues to give Harvard University a wide berth. This is perhaps the most astonishing display of cowardice exhibited to date by the multinational cartel of SONY BMG, Warner Bros. Records, EMI, and Vivendi/Universal (the "Big Four" record companies, which are rapidly becoming less "big"). The lesson to be drawn by other colleges and universities: "All bullies are cowards. Appeasement of bullies doesn't work. Standing up to bullies and fighting back has a much higher success rate.""

38 of 425 comments (clear)

  1. The reason is much simpler by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Harvard is the lawyer breeding ground. I'm fairly sure, almost everyone working in the legal departments of the various RIAA members comes from there.

    Now, who do they have their knowledge from? The profs there. When you teach, do you tell your student everything you know? More important, when you learn, do you know afterwards as much as your teacher does?

    Rarely loses the master against his padawan. So to challenge him, a fool you must be.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:The reason is much simpler by minvaren · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That, and strong is the money at Harvard. Even stronger, the privilege of those who attend. They have all the resources to take the RIAA's campaign down. No wonder why they avoid them.

      --
      Big! Strong! Wow! Tada-O!
    2. Re:The reason is much simpler by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I can see you are a Humble Person.

      In the process of getting a PHD is normally a process or specialization. It is quite common for New CS Undergrads to be better versed in newer technologies then many the professors especially near the end of your degree. First Computer Science as a study is a new area of study and Many of the CS professors have their Undergrad and Graduate Degrees in different areas of study, Engineering, Accounting, Physics, Mathematics, Business... Then got the Masters or PHD later on, in that process you just focus more on one area... Software Optimization, Artificial Intelligence, Neural Networks, Operating Systems, Programming Languages, etc... So they were privy to your general education in Computer Science as well because of their focus they tend to stay focus on their focus.... So you may be able to Out Program most professors in most applications, but if you go up against them in their speciality they can blow you away with concepts and designs that you may never have considered. Also if they did study the degree for their Undergrad they were focused on the current modern methods, Punch Cards, Fortran, Basic (no visual about it), Pascal, etc... they were concerned about application that run on mainframe terminals, reading off of tape, etc...

      I am not saying that college Professors are super human ultra intelligent people who can code a computer using a metal file. As well I am not saying you are a bad programmer, I have never seen your work. But there is a tendency among programmers to think they are the best programmer in the world which in case they are actually average. And College Professors shouldn't be underestimated because then you will loose a lot of good education because of you closed mindedness. As well you cannot assume the Professor knows it all because it will reduce you ability to extend beyond what is taught by these specialist.

      I am talking for experience, I use to be a Hot Headed programmer, slamming my profs behind their back because I could out program them. But I am a good generalist programmer so I can do most programming well, but I rarely able to do any thing exceptional. I am good at what I do and my clients agree. But can I do it all no.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    3. Re:The reason is much simpler by ScrewMaster · · Score: 5, Funny

      They have all the resources to take the RIAA's campaign down.

      That would make a good senior project: "Students, your assignment this year is to put the kibosh on the Recording Industry Association of America's lawsuit mill."

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    4. Re:The reason is much simpler by tkiesel · · Score: 4, Funny

      Thank youuuu Yoda.
      Yoda, thank you I do!
      There...for you fixed that
      Welcome, you are.
    5. Re:The reason is much simpler by elronxenu · · Score: 4, Funny

      There...fixed that for you

      Fixed that for you, I did.

  2. Cowards, maybe... by Henry+V+.009 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Nobody in their right mind sues a lawyer assembly plant, coward or not.

    1. Re:Cowards, maybe... by spirit+of+reason · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Right, and that's why they're not suing anyone at Yale. Oh wait...

    2. Re:Cowards, maybe... by pz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Nobody in their right mind sues a lawyer assembly plant, coward or not ...

      ... especially when that assembly plant has over $35 billion in liquid assets. Doubly so when it also happens to be the stomping grounds of high-profile personal-rights lawyers like Alan Dershowitz. To keep this amount of money in perspective, the Presidents and Fellows of Harvard could decide to spend less than 3% of the endowment -- not even this year's interest -- and have ONE BILLION DOLLARS to keep the RIAA in court for the next handful of decades.

      No, do not disturb the 350-year-old 800-lb gorilla who has lots of friends and big piles of cash.

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    3. Re:Cowards, maybe... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well, Harvard has been around since the pre-industrial days ... what I want to know is, are the attorneys still hand-assembled, or is the process more automated nowadays?

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  3. Cowardly? Give me a break. by radicalskeptic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you're a laywer for the RIAA, you are not paid to be brave. You are paid to further the agenda of the recording industry. If they believe suing Harvard students would hinder rather than help their cause, well is that really being "cowardly" or is it being smart? Would suing Harvard be "brave" or would it be counterproductive to their goals?

    I'm as disgusted with the RIAA's tactics as anyone, but this childish name calling is getting old. It seems like every day on the front page of Slashdot is some article title with an overblown ad hominem attack against persons, groups or companies that rub us the wrong way. C'mon, people. We're smart, educated and savvy, do we really need to stoop to this?

    --
    WARNING: If accidentally read, induce vomiting.
    1. Re:Cowardly? Give me a break. by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 5, Informative

      f you're a laywer for the RIAA, you are not paid to be brave. You are paid to further the agenda of the recording industry. If they believe suing Harvard students would hinder rather than help their cause, well is that really being "cowardly" or is it being smart? Would suing Harvard be "brave" or would it be counterproductive to their goals? I'm as disgusted with the RIAA's tactics as anyone, but this childish name calling is getting old. It seems like every day on the front page of Slashdot is some article title with an overblown ad hominem attack against persons, groups or companies that rub us the wrong way. C'mon, people. We're smart, educated and savvy, do we really need to stoop to this? If you'd spent as much time as I have interacting with the people who are the victims of this litigation madness, I think you'd have a different take on it. This is really a very nasty campaign being run by some very nasty people. And the vast majority of its victims are defenseless people who don't deserve the anguish they are being put through.

      And the tactics the RIAA lawyers use are inexcusable.

      I've been in the litigation field for 34 years, and I've never seen anything like them.

      Question. You say "I'm as disgusted with the RIAA's tactics as anyone". If you're aware of their doctored non-evidence, their misstatements of fact, their misstatements of law, their abuse of the federal judicial system, and their inappropriate tactics... are you suggesting something like that is not "stuff that matters" or "news for nerds"?
      --
      Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
    2. Re:Cowardly? Give me a break. by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 5, Insightful
      If they believe suing Harvard students would hinder rather than help their cause, well is that really being "cowardly" or is it being smart?

      If they thought what they were doing was legitimate they'd take on Harvard too. Harvard gets sued all the time. Just not by people like this.

    3. Re:Cowardly? Give me a break. by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 5, Informative

      If you're aware of their doctored non-evidence, their misstatements of fact, their misstatements of law, their abuse of the federal judicial system, and their inappropriate tactics Sorry, I honestly was not aware that they doctored evidence and lied in court. Do you have any relevant links that give examples of their treachery? Sounds like a good Sunday afternoon read to me ;-) However, I still stand by my statement that calling the RIAA a coward for not suing Harvard is like calling me a coward because I won't pick a fight with Bas Ruten. I could spend the next 2 days giving you examples; my blog is replete with examples. Here are just a few.

      Here they were caught in a lie to the Judge; here the Judge figured out that they were lying about an "emergency" need to file their cases WITHOUT NOTICE to the other side; here we discuss the fact that even though their expert witness has admitted that their investigator did not "detect" an individual, the RIAA's lawyers continue to sign false court papers stating to the Court that their investigator "detected an individual"; here's a recent pack of those lies which they submitted, in an undefended case, where the Judge realized that their first presentation of evidence didn't point to an infringement by the defendant; here's that Judge, and here's the State Attorney General of Oregon, catching them in those lies; and here's the junk science put forth by their 'expert', whose real 'expertise' is getting LAN operators to fork over $76,000 at a time in protection money in order to make the RIAA and him go away.
      --
      Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
    4. Re:Cowardly? Give me a break. by ceoyoyo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They're not cowards, but it does indicate that they think their case is weak. If they believed they were in the right, both legally and morally, they wouldn't hesitate to sue Harvard as well.

      The fact that they DO hesitate indicates that they really are bullying -- they're taking cases they know have problems and pushing them only against those they see as weak enough not to recognize that weakness.

    5. Re:Cowardly? Give me a break. by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      From what I have seen, more than 50% of the defendants are people who did not do the allegedly infringing filesharing. I have one client who has never even used a computer. And many who have never even heard of, let alone engaged in, filesharing.

      --
      Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
    6. Re:Cowardly? Give me a break. by earlymon · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Hi Ray,

      Many thanks for your fine work in this area.

      I have an experience leading to a question. I was involved in a civil suit, the other side's attorney pulled shenanigans, lying to the court, etc. My lawyer was incensed, and it seemed the suit was going to drag on for years, so he offered to settle with me for my hoped-for amount out of his pocket provided I release him to sue the other attorney (he was going to make way more money that way, he was that confident). I was ok with that, so that's how it went down.

      From that, I learned that attorneys can be sued for shenanigans - malfeasance? - and that's my question(s). Could the RIAA be stopped that way? Attorneys are officers of the court, that makes them liable for malfeasance charges, doesn't it? If not in court, what about the Bar Association(s)? (All I know about the bar I learned on TV.....)

      Can't the attorneys be punished and thereby discourage those practices? Is our system so broken that the answer is really no?

      Thanks,
      Earl

      --
      Pathological kinda promises Path + Logical - but instead, you get stuck with pathetic.
    7. Re:Cowardly? Give me a break. by syousef · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I wonder if with this many clear examples of deceit, whether there may be either a case legal against either individual high profile lawyers or some other kind of action or censure can be taken against them. I'm just thinking off the top of my head about something you do for a living but my first instinct is that if a few of these lawyers were actually disbarred or their reputations were tarnished rather than embellished by working for the RIAA, might that be an effective tool against their using such tactics? At the very least some of the smarter lawyers who use these tactics might deem it not worth the risk?

      I also wonder if there might be a way to bring in this evidence at each and every trial. Unfortunately I can think of one very negative side effect for those defending against such tactics - weighing this evidence might make trials more costly (favouring the RIAA's deep pockets). However if it were presented well might it not be the difference between winning and losing? If done right is there any chance that showing this consistent abuse might result in similar actions being thrown out summarily?

      Surely there is something in the system that attempts to limit repeated abuse/harassment? Some kind of provision for those who cry wolf and tie the courts up. If not there sure ought to be.

      Are these thoughts pure fantasy or might this work in the real world? I defer to your wisdom in this. I am certainly not a lawyer. (I'm not even an American).

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    8. Re:Cowardly? Give me a break. by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 4, Informative

      Can't the attorneys be punished and thereby discourage those practices? Yes they can be.
      --
      Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
  4. Harvard = death star by module0000 · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's the comment I was looking for, seems pretty cut and dry to me.

    Pushing around smaller and less reputable colleges and students may be fine and dandy...but trying to shove your weight around against Harvard is like lil timmy firing his peashooter at the deathstar, the RIAA would be decimated and a huge precedent would be set. Better to just leav'em be.

    --
    Trackball users will be first against the wall.
    1. Re:Harvard = death star by Dephex+Twin · · Score: 5, Funny

      Rumor has it there is a 2 meter wide desktop computer in the president's office, and if they can successfully sue that then the whole campus goes down.

      Many paralegals died to bring us this information.

      --

      If you want to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe. -- Carl Sagan
  5. Try Freenet by FreenetFan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It is well worth trying out the Freenet p2p network. It is an anonymous distributed data storage system that is ideally suited to filesharing. I have been using it for the past few years and just recently it has got a lot faster and more usable. Music and movies are regularly shared and it can only take a few hours to get a full album. Speeds are slower than bittorrent etc., but that is to be expected - you never get something for nothing.

    1. Re:Try Freenet by ScrewMaster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why would you need an anonymous network when you're only sharing files licensed under Creative Commons and the like?

      Well, here's one good reason:

      1. You've correctly realized that the media companies don't really care if you're sharing files legally or not.

      I'm sure the rest of you can add to this list.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  6. Re:Elephant and Mouse situation by youthoftoday · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I would say that the RIAA is a white elephant

    --
    -1 not first post
  7. What's happening at Yale? by jc42 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As everyone knows (;-), Yale and Harvard are also primary competitors in their law schools, and Yale turns out about as many lawyers as Harvard. In fact, there have been some interesting studies done comparing the two schools, which have radically different teaching cultures in their law schools. The conclusion seems to be that both work quite well, and their graduates have roughly the same success rate after graduation.

    So what's going on between the RIAA/MPAA and Yale? Does Yale's reputation as being the "nice" law school (if that's not an oxymoron) result in them being attacked more or less? Anyone have data?

    Just curious ...

    --
    Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    1. Re:What's happening at Yale? by Comatose51 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yale Law is one of the smallest in this country and very selective. Their philosophy is also different from Harvard. They place a great deal of value on public service with strengths in constitutional law and focus on human rights. This is why the school produces quite a few politicians and judges: the Clintons, Gerald Ford, justices Alito and Thomas, and Michael Mukasey.

      --
      EvilCON - Made Famous by /.
  8. The Reason by phiz187 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think one likely reason that the RIAA/MPAA are avoiding Harvard is because of the Berkman Center for Internet & Society which is an outgrowth of the Harvard Law school. You may be familar with Berkman through the Chilling Effects Clearinghouse, OpenNet Initiative (mapping government repression of the Internet worldwide), and the Stop Badware projects.

    Berkman is very forward-looking and proactive regarding emerging issues of Law and Technology. The various fellows have been vocal and supportive of copyright reform. With such an interested, knowledgeable band of law professors and law students, it would be a serious black-eye if the RIAA attempted to litigate on the Harvard campus. I have to believe that they would be handed a bruising defeat, that would establish precedent regarding their campaign of extorting* settlement monies from poor college students.

    * I mean extortion in the common, non-technical sense. Don't sue me for libel please.

    --
    Pretend I said something meaningful or insightful here.
  9. Re:Submitter is Charles Nesson, Professor of Law by Zocalo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Actually, "NewYorkCountryLawyer" is the Slashdot ID of Ray Beckerman, attorney at Vandenberg & Feliu and long standing pain in ass of the RIAA. Charles Nesson and John Palfrey wrote the original Harvard response to the RIAA which was orignally covered at Information Week, then picked up by P2PNet and Ray Beckerman's own blog, amongst others.

    --
    UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
  10. Re:No it's not by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 5, Informative

    The submitter of the story is Charles Nesson, who is Professor of Law at Harvard Law School. See also Wikipedia. I'm not sure if you're confused or just being a karma whore with the links, but no, the submitter of the story is not Charles Nesson. It would appear to be Ray Beckerman. Or better still, Ray Beckerman. Guilty as charged.
    --
    Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
  11. Re:Still... by PixelScuba · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Completely off topic... but I have always hated that phrase. I know plenty of people who "do" but don't actually "know" what they're doing... and plenty of people who "Don't" who teach... that DO know. The phrase always struck me a a snide comment against teachers, as though we are incapable of anything else so we teach. Many people who know what they're doing would make TERRIBLE teachers... which happens quite frequently in college. They are hired for their status and intellect for the college... but they don't know the first thing about teaching that knowledge.

    Sorry, it's just that that phrase seems to carry a certain hubris that irritates me.

  12. Berklee and Julliard also immune seemingly by TibbonZero · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Everyone thinks it's just Harvard that isn't being touched. To the best of my knowledge (haven't checked recently, but I tried to find any instance of this about 6 months ago), they have yet to touch a single Berklee College of Music, or Julliard student/faculty member. I mean, it's not surprising. It would be pretty funny for the RIAA to have tried to sue John Mayer a few years ago (when he was attending Berklee) only to have some of their member companies trying to woo and sign him a few months later.

    Then again, while music students have more music downloaded/shared in general than almost anyone else I know, they also actually purchase more music than anyone I know.

    --
    Tibbon
    tibbon.com
  13. Re:Incorrect Information by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 4, Informative

    This article is incorrect. Only 6 out of 8 Ivy League schools were targeted. The author seems to have mistaken Duke for Cornell. You are absolutely right, I stand corrected. Duke was incorrectly included. The Ivy League schools targeted in this round were Brown, Columbia, Dartmouth, Princeton, Penn, and Yale. Cornell was targeted in September.
    --
    Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
  14. As a lawyer... by BlabberMouth · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I find the cowardice suggestion highly unlikely. It makes absolutely no difference that Harvard has a law school. Yale's is arguably better. Sometimes you make strategic decisions in litigation. If there is one defendant who is going to fight very hard, and has let you know as much, sue the other defendants first and create precedent. Not suing Harvard now doesn't mean Harvard won't be sued.

  15. Re:The funny thing is... by mr_matticus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I do not care about actors, musicians, directors, managers, producers because they all get paid no matter what. No, they don't. The majority of them also do not make the kind of money that you (in your infinite wisdom, I might add) have deemed excessive. Most people in the industry, including many actors, live relatively normal lives. At most, if a project is successful, they'll use the unusually high return to buy a house (for financial security) or a nice car (to celebrate). Most of them don't have one "supercar", let alone three or four. Most don't live in Malibu estates.

    Actors and musicians also don't get paid for the time they actually spend doing most of the work--creating, rehearsing, making modifications, planning performances, and the like--you know, the kind of things YOU do at work while the money keeps rolling in before you finish. Artists, on the other hand, don't get paid until the work is done and rely on income for the performance. They get paid a lot because they get paid in lump sums.

    I am sorry but actors/actresses don't need to be paid millions for their roles in movies. But I bet you shop at stores run by corporations. Chances are you also work for one, contributing to their bottom line. Their executives make far more than most artists, even the very successful ones you so despise. Do you watch ESPN? Why do professional athletes get paid so much for so little. How about venture capitalists, lottery winners, and financial speculators who make huge amounts of money at once--but then make almost none for years?

    Frankly, people like you who reduce an entire industry filled with legitimate artists, millions of middle-class employees, and hardworking entertainers who love what they do to the same level as some slimy fat cats in it are just as bad as the RIAA. By your logic, doctors are cheap hacks, too. You shouldn't pay your bill because you don't think they should charge so much or have unattractive offices. They don't deserve nice houses or things that you, Joe Armchair, would be jealous of.

    90% of that stuff I wouldn't of seen to begin with so I don't feel guilty about taking what I wouldn't of seen or heard or enjoyed. A lot of it is educational Not educational enough, apparently. But you're right; there'd be plenty of income and jobs for everyone and a roaring economy if people just didn't pay for the things they didn't plan to buy. I mean, we wouldn't have enjoyed it if it weren't for the five-finger discount.
  16. I'm a senior at Harvard by ystar · · Score: 5, Interesting

    and from what I can tell
    1) most kids here are too busy with chairing their Model-UN-Investment-Banking-Labor-Movement meeting to even care about music, so they listen to a few cds and buy tracks from itunes (like many college campuses with high tuition, most kids have some hardware from apple) and hear most of their music on the loudspeakers at god-awful binge drinking parties
    2) the few kids who listen to a lot of music are into indie bands, and the RIAA seems to go after folks who download more popular tunes. also there's pretty significant downloading/computer-illiteracy here (kids dont have the time to waste playing with the computer, and thus dont really understand where to get music illegally)
    3) there's only like a couple hundred cs majors here, and there's only one out of that group with immaculate taste in music (me!) so I'm probably the only person at harvard that the RIAA could ever be angry at, but I don't download music.

    There's nobody to sue!

    Note to reader: The error bounds on this comprehensive study may be non-trivial. :)

  17. Circumstantial Evidence by Symbha · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That:
    1) They know they're case(s) are weak
    2) Their campaign is most certainly not about suing wrongdoers. It's about calculated methods to change copyright by case law.

    Really this won't stop until someone with resources starts playing in their playground.
    That is, attacks the xIAA for racketeering, price fixing, extortion, by way of the civil courts this is not likely to end soon.

    The US legal system is simply broken. Our society treats corporations as equals, yet they are designed to pool capital. Anyone can sue, with little recourse, and if you have enough money, you can make it so the average man cannot possibly fight back. Meanwhile, all the time that you spend fighting the lawsuit, you find it very difficult to better your life in any other way, even save and/or invest.

    And if you start talking about methods to put the system back in check... well then you are labeled a socialist or a communist. There has been legislation all throughout the preeminent authority's tenure on free market capitalism, but I dare you to start talking about Antitrust legislation now.

    But I digresss...

  18. Re:RICO by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Recording Industry and Creationist Organization

    And that's not a troll, exactly how?

    How on earth did Creationists get categorically thrown into the same class of groups as the RIAA, Nazis, and patent lawyers?

    I'm agnostic, but I know many Creationists who are just trying to find the world view that makes the best sense of their experiences, their reasoning, and various bits of historical evidence. I'm getting pissed that popular sentiment on /. is becoming that Creationists are a bunch of evil, ignorant bastards who are out to wreck the public teaching of science.

    Creationism is a world view and a particular take on history, not a political practice. You might judge some Creationists to hold their views for bad reasons or insufficient evidence, but the same could be said of many reductionist evolutionists. But I know plenty of people smart, articulate reasons who understand the debate and have judged it more probable that creationism (not necessarily young-earth creationism) is the most-likely correct account of natural history.

  19. An Open Letter to Dorks and Losers by kamapuaa · · Score: 4, Funny
    "All bullies are cowards. Appeasement of bullies doesn't work. Standing up to bullies and fighting back has a much higher success rate."

    Hello. My name is Terrence "Mongo" Rennet, and I represent the American Council of Bullies, Toughs, and Schoolyard Ruffians. I'm here to clear up some tragic misconceptions about bullies and their place in the academic hierarchy, misconceptions that have gone unchallenged for too long. It is my hope that by "clearing the air," as it were, bullies and bullied can walk with head erect or cower behind lockers respectively with a newfound respect for one another.

    Myth: Bullies are just jealous of your intelligence, sensitivity, or ability to play the oboe.

    Fact: Bullies have no more jealousy of your mental abilities than we have of your clean, well-ironed, unfashionable clothing. To the contrary, we are profoundly glad that you have chosen to develop your mental prowess, leaving your body weak and defenseless against our brutality. For that we thank you, even as we elevate your underwear.

    Myth: Bullies suffer from low self-esteem, and victimize others to make themselves feel better.

    Fact: While each bully has his (or her, as is increasingly the case) own deeply personal reasons for bullying, I can assure you that a poor self-image is not one of them. To the contrary, bullying is a high-pressure occupation, and only someone with an unusual amount of self-confidence will have the elán to shake down younger students efficiently while evading authority. Children without self-confidence tend instead to spend recess in the library, the computer lab, or pretending to be warriors in ridiculous fantasy games. Sound familiar?

    Myth: If you stand up to a bully, he will reveal himself to be a coward.

    Fact: This is perhaps the most hurtful stereotype of them all, in the sense that if you try it we will hurt you. Endless movies and after-school specials depict a tormented victim finally working up the courage to attack his neighborhood bully, after which said bully runs away crying and -- I must chuckle here -- calling for his mommy. What writers of these "entertainments" don't realize is that bullies invariably establish a complex ritual pecking order through constant low-level violence against each other. Haven't you noticed us punching each other in the shoulder at the bus stop? Then you've witnessed the magic of our social structure. Even if you, with your weak, gelatin-like arms were able to do us physical harm, I can assure you that we would recover faster than you can recite your grade point average and teach you a few things about savage poundings you can't learn from Spider-Man comics.

    With that thought, I take your leave, confident that I have, in my own small way, improved the world's understanding of the art and craft of bullying. Good day, and if I see you after school you're dead meat.

    brunching.com

    --
    Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.