RIAA and BSA's Lawyers Taking Top Justice Posts

An anonymous reader writes "Following the appointment of RIAA's champion Donald Verrilli as associate deputy attorney general, here's a complete roundup of all the RIAA and BSA-linked lawyers comfortably seated at top posts at the Department of Justice by the new government. Not strange, since US VP Joe Biden is well known for pushing the copyright warmongers' agenda in Washington. Just in case you don't know, Verrilli is the nice man who sued the pants off Jammie Thomas."

Comments

Change you can believe in

[Wonko the Sane]

http://i40.tinypic.com/11tqy52.jpg

Found on this thread

Re:Change you can believe in

[ppanon]

It depends. There's good reason to be able to do some back-of-the-envelope tests of your theories - first order approximations to see if your idea makes sense. You won't be able to do that if you can't do basic arithmetic in your brain. Maybe at some point we'll be able to tie computers directly into our brains so that just thinking an equation provides us with the solution, but until that happens somebody who can do the math in his brain will have an edge. Indeed, unless you always whip out the calculator at the cash register, it could mean you're also an easier mark to rip off.

I'm reminded of a couple of chapters in Vernor Vinge's The Peace War where Wil Wachendon enters a chess tournament where he plays unassisted against computer-assisted chess players. He gets his butt whipped by the computer-assisted players. That changes his attitude regarding using computer assist to solve problems. However I think the reverse would be true as well, the computer-assisted players who had never learned to play without the help of a computer would also be at a disadvantage because some of the pattern recognition abilities required for chess would never have developed as strongly. Sure it's fiction, but good SF writers put some pretty strong reality checks on their fiction

Similarly, while you can use Mathematica to do analytical solving of integration problems or differential equations, if you haven't done some of it by hand then you won't have as good an intuitive feel for what the equations that you are manipulating actually mean. That could seriously limit your ability to make new discoveries. But yeah if your ambition is to work on a road crew, you probably won't need to know all of your times tables up to 12x12 by heart.

change

[DoofusOfDeath]

Well, at least this is change I can believe in. As in, it's certainly not hard to believe.

Damn.

Re:change

[Hordeking]

Well, at least this is change I can believe in. As in, it's certainly not hard to believe.

Damn.

The more things CHANGE!, the more they stay the same. That's CHANGE! you can HOPE! for.

Re:change

[zappepcs]

I don't think that many people in American (or the world for that matter) thought that 'change you can believe in' meant exactly what you imply that it seems to mean. I think the only real change we got was the name plate on the desk in the oval office.

Re:change

[Anonymous Coward]

forcing a religion on people via the government is gone

The problem isn't the forcing of "religion" on the people, it's the forcing of any belief system. That is far from gone, you're just aligned with this presidents beliefs so you don't feel the sting. Others who were aligned with the last president do feel that they are having beliefs forced on them.

I'm not really for or against the man yet as I haven't seen any real results beyond a feel good cult mentality sweeping the nation but I do like the stopping of torture so I'm hopeful. All that said, you're still being fed and likely always will be one mans belief system rather than an adherence to a small set of immutable principles that govern all equally, which was the original goal of this little experiment we call America. Government has become far to profitable for that to return any time soon so prepare to have your beliefs determined for you and disagreement shouted down from both sides.

Re:change

[sumdumass]

The problem is that Obama was all things to all people. He was worse then Ron Paul who you could at least look at his speeches and see where he stood. Obama's speeches and history of actions typically were vague and open enough that this wasn't possible and he didn't fizzle out like Ron Paul did.

Anyways, I do find it funny because these issues are important issues to people on this site. Rewarding RIAAs laywers and appointing oppressive lawyers like the BSA to federal judgeship is something that effects geeks on this site more then funding abortions with tax dollars and the other issues he has supposedly changed.

The test of Obama's presidency, at least for a lot of us here, is going to be "does his cons outweigh his pros". And currently it looks like the answer is no. Change and hope was Obama's message- it appears the message wasn't clear enough for many to expect shit like this. It may have very well been a vote changer if it where.

Re:change

[Chyeld]

And currently it looks like the answer is no. Change and hope was Obama's message- it appears the message wasn't clear enough for many to expect shit like this. It may have very well been a vote changer if it where.

If the folk throwing a shit storm were the folk supporting Obama before, I'd agree. But everytime I hear shit, it's from someone who from the start was attacking Obama. I'm sure there were plenty of people out there who let themselves be blinded in their expectations, but most of them are NOT the people bitching and making snide remarks. It's the people who decided that the rest of us supported Obama not on our opinion of his ability to lead but because we somehow were 'culted' into believing he was the next coming of Christ that are bitching.

It's the ultimate straw man arguement. "Ha ha! Where is your messiah now!", when most of us went in clear eyed knowing that he wasing going to match our world view 100%.

I can tell you one thing though, he's a damn sight better a match at seeing the world the way I dothan the previous guy or the guys he was running up against (Dem or Rep).

Wait a minute

[Bakobull]

So the lawyers brought these lawsuits not the RIAA. I didn't realize Donald Verrilli brought these lawsuits to protect his copyrights. I don't blame the lawyers for this anymore than I would blame the soldiers for fighting Bush's war.

Re:Wait a minute

[geekoid]

But you need to look at the lawyers behavior in doing their job.

Look for NewYorkCountryLawyer to reply in this thread. He put's it better then I do.

Re:Wait a minute

[LordKaT]

It's all about influence. The more influence you can inject into a government, the more you'll see laws that favor your business model.

Re:Wait a minute

[JustNiz]

You're right that its the RIAA not the lawyer, but it still marks him an opportunistic worm that has no scruples.

Re:Wait a minute

[dmomo]

These lawyers have a vested interest in keeping this war going as long as possible.

The soldiers of Bush's war probably want to go home and see their family.

Re:Wait a minute

[Yvanhoe]

I think the good question is : what kind of contact, relation and common interest do they still have with their former clients ?

Re:Wait a minute

[Kamokazi]

There's a key difference here, mate:

Commander: Go to Iraq, soldier!
Soldier: No sir, I don't want to.
Commander: Then get out of the military.

RIAA: Hi lawyer, would you like to sue people for us?
Lawyer: No, I only accept legitimate cases.
RIAA: Okay then.

Lawyers can turn down cases and keep their job.

Re:Wait a minute

[The Moof]

The RIAA didn't create the legal tactics with the lawyers being their drones following instruction. The lawyers came up with the tactics and loopholes and abused them to the fullest extent. They also walked a very fine line on the legality of what they were doing. You want someone who practices law like that to be in a position of authority in terms of justice?

Also, the soldier analogy is terrible. Soldiers get arrested for going AWOL. There are a few options to get out of service on a moral basis, but I imagine they're difficult to pull off (interesting approach taken by this guy). There also also repercussions for doing so. Lawyers just turn a client down and don't get paid.

Re:Wait a minute

[bleh-of-the-huns]

There's a key difference here, mate:

Commander: Go to Iraq, soldier!
Soldier: No sir, I don't want to.
Commander: Then get out of the military.

You are incorrect here.. very very incorrect. If you are ordered to do something or go somewhere, and you disobey.. you get a court martial.

You sign up for the military, you do as you are told till your obligation ends, then you get out.

Pattern recognition

[Clever7Devil]

I suppose putting the attack dogs for anti-competitive businesses in the DOJ is better than putting tax evaders in charge of the IRS...

With two lawyers

[LittleLebowskiUrbanA]

as President and Vice President, what do you expect? Perhaps all of that Hollywood support from actors and musicians bought something from Obama and Biden.....

So, what you're saying...

[Dr.Dubious DDQ]

Cheney|Halliburton = Biden|RIAA

Re:So, what you're saying...

[evilkasper]

Do you think we can get Cheney to take those nice folks at the RIAA on a hunting trip?

There may be some good come of this

[mcgrew]

With those who've sold their souls in those positions, maybe they'll make things so bad that the public sits up and takes notice and demands reform to our seriously dysfunctional copyright laws.

So I, for one, welcome our new plutocratic overlords. At least, I think I do...

Another excellent decision from Him

[Anonymous Coward]

If our Dear Leader likes these picks, then I like them too.

From all of the negative comments I read, I can only conclude that pirates are racist.

As a Brit...

[Xest]

I'm currently more interested in this as a real test of the Obama administration's sincerity:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7870049.stm

If Obama can't come forward and say to us "Yes, your courts can now open that evidence" then it is evidence of one important fact. Obama is a fraud.

He cannot possibly on one hand talk of bringing those guilty of torture to justice and then prevent us doing so on the other.

I think that it's actually our government that's playing up here because they do not want it coming out in the open that our security services were equally guilty of assisting in torture, but all Obama needs to do to make that clear is come forward. By the sounds of it our foreign secretary hasn't even approached the Obama administration yet and if that's true then it's a local issue, if that's not true then the world has bigger problems.

If he can't then yeah, I think he's a fraud and yeah, I think these RIAA appointments possibly are more than just a case of hiring experienced lawyers (i.e. did they work for the RIAA because they believed the cause, or for the money?).

I truly hope it's not too much to ask to at last have an important world leader that can walk the walk not just talk the talk.

Re:Not a bad move IMHO

[mcgrew]

All art, as all science and engineering, is built on the achievements of those who came before. Engineers have it easy, as patents only last 20 years and I'm told are often easy to get around.

Copyrights are forever when compared to an artist's life. I cannot legally build on any work produced in the last hundred years.

This AP story illustrates the folly of our system.

On buttons, posters and Web sites, the image was everywhere during last year's presidential campaign: a pensive Barack Obama looking upward, as if to the future, splashed in a Warholesque red, white and blue and underlined with the caption HOPE

Designed by Shepard Fairey, a Los-Angeles based street artist, the image has led to sales of hundreds of thousands of posters and stickers, and has become so much in demand that copies signed by Fairey have been purchased for thousands of dollars on eBay.

The image, Fairey has acknowledged, is based on an Associated Press photograph, taken in April 2006 by Mannie Garcia on assignment for the AP at the National Press Club in Washington.

The AP says it owns the copyright, and wants credit and compensation. Fairey disagrees.

"The Associated Press has determined that the photograph used in the poster is an AP photo and that its use required permission," the AP's director of media relations, Paul Colford, said in a statement. "AP safeguards its assets and looks at these events on a case-by-case basis. We have reached out to Mr. Fairey's attorney and are in discussions. We hope for an amicable solution."

There is a comparison of the two works, and it's obvious (to me as a content creator anyway) that the Fairey image is fair use.

As to your incredibly ignorant remark, it is exactly like the guy who said "Looks like the days of drunken bums is over" when they passed prohibition. Copyright law is getting worse and worse, and people are responding by ignoring it, just as they ignored laws against alcohol. It WILL reach a breaking point.

I should not have to pay for a digital copy of Jimi hendrix' work. The man is dead and has been for decades. It should be in the public domain as the Founding Fathers wished and as is written in the US Constitution.

See the forest, not the trees

[Simonetta]

When grasping the fact that the copyright barons are taking over the Justice Dept, remember that there is fundamental shift happening in the media industry.

The media industry is basically a 20th-century phenomenon. The technology of the 20th-century created a structure where the best musicians of the world sold their musical in the format of fixed recordings through a centralized company. The recordings are the product. Under this structure, the musicians (and actors) become stars or mini-deities.

  The main idea here is that the recordings (of music or filmed performance) are the product that is sold on concept of a fixed price regardless of the 'artist' or the quality of the performance. The unnoticed aspect of this model is that there is NO interactivity between the recordings and the people who buy the recordings.

  The 21st-century entertainment media model is one of increasing interactivity between the recording and the person buying the recording. Starting with crude television-based video games in the 1980s, there has been a strong increase in the amount of interaction between the person 'consuming' the entertainment product and the entertainment product itself. The RIAA/MPAA can't reproduce this interactivity, neither can the companies who create fixed product (audio CDs, films). But this interactivity is becoming the key aspect of the entertainment experience that people (especially young people in their teens and twenties) are willing to pay for.

  The more that the RIAA/MPAA are successful at forcing people away from obtaining low-cost fixed recordings, the more that they drive their core consumer base into interactive entertainment products that they don't control. They don't seem to realize this, primarily because the RIAA/MPAA companies are stuck in the 20th-century. The Slashdaughters generally grasp this concept, but they are mostly young and technologically oriented. They are the demographic most likely to copy RIAA/MPAA product, this is true, but they are also the first people to move beyond RIAA/MPAA product to meet their entertainment needs.

  As the economic structure of the 20th-century fades, then so will the influence (and bullying ability) of the global media companies. As long as the RIAA/MPAA lawyers don't understand or control the emerging fields of interactive entertainment, it doesn't matter if the control the US Justice Department. They will remain 20th-century wolves chasing 20th-century sheep.

Re:Only they are to blame

[prisoner-of-enigma]

There is no glory in fighting and killing is wrong, period.

If someone is bent on killing you and the only means you have to defend yourself is with deadly force, is it wrong to exercise that force? Or would you stand on your morals and be slaughtered like an animal?

Your lofty rhetoric doesn't stand up to real-world scenarios, I'm afraid.