Slashdot Mirror
Obama Taps a 5th Lawyer From the RIAA
risingfish writes "Looks like Obama did what many organizations have asked him not to do. In a disappointing move, he has tapped a fifth RIAA lawyer to a top spot in the Justice Department."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Once he's been bought off, he STAYS bought off.
I wonder how much "donation money" we'd need to offer him to get this policy to "change."
!surprised
OJ was able to get off because he hired an incredibly talented set of lawyers.
It makes sense that those with a lot of money would hire the best lawyers. Now that Obama chooses the cream of the crop, suddenly these guys are somehow no good?
sorry, Mr. President, but you're building another nest of evil, just like Bushie did, in hiring RIAA weasels.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
If these guys are that good, then it is the RIAA's loss so that's good. Lawyer's are not usually paid to represent their own positions. They are hired by clients to represent theirs. A defense lawyer for a murderer isn't necessarily a murder or in favor of murder. The defense lawyer may even believe the client is guilty, but legal representation if still their right.
Very often, people confuse simple with simplistic. The nuance is lost on most. - Clement Mok
Before coming to Jenner & Block in 1997, Mr. Gershengorn served for two years in the U.S. Department of Justice, first as Special Assistant and Counsel to Deputy Attorney General Jamie S. Gorelick, and then as Assistant to Attorney General Janet Reno. At the Justice Department, Mr. Gershengorn worked on a variety of civil and civil rights matters, and also coordinated the Department's responses to the Judicial Conference of the United States, the American Bar Association, and other organizations on rules-related issues.
Full "bio" listing is here.
Big name firms took the RIAA/MPAA cases, so it's not surprising that many of these top lawyers are getting positions in the Justice Dept. While I'm completely against the RIAA/MPAA tactics, how many lawyers would turn down the payday they were throwing their way?
Federal criminal copyright statutes are right around the corner for casual filesharers.
Potheads move over, there is another class of evil felons threatening to overthrow America in this decade's War On $VOTEGARNERINGTOPIC.
You realize these lawyers no longer support the RIAA, right? They have a new client.
Obama Taps a 5th Lawyer in order to summon a horrifying beast!
(Someone, please, make a better "Tapping" joke then mine. I haven't touched Magic for over 10 years)
Assuming these guys are among the best lawyers in the country, who would you rather they work for?
I guess it all depends on who you are. If you're a heavy internet user (downloading illegally or not), you probably would rather they work for the U.S. government. If you happen to fit the wrong demographic group, you might prefer that they work for the RIAA.
This space left intentionally blank.
Since when has the "nerd" community ever bought into the concept of shunning someone based on their "social" standing as opposed to their talent? I remember being proud of the fact that this community used to think like I did, that talent and skill would always mean more than one's affiliation with a group. I say if this lawyer has talent, and is worthy of the appointment, what does it matter if he did work with the RIAA? Since when have "nerds" thought it was ok to ostricize people?
And I can already hear the replies, "Ohhh the RIAA is evil" and "Wahh the RIAA stolez my MP3's" and "OMG my 3m4cs p0wn the R144!"
Get a grip, if people do their jobs well, they deserve to be recognized, regardless of a minority's stance on the issues that said person was hired to work with.
"This is the value of a summer spent and a winter earned"
You don't like the fact *AA cronies now occupy the highest offices in the land? Instead of hitting iTunes and Netflix for your entertainment needs, close your wallet and head on over to The Pirate Bay. Change happens when people are pushed over the edge and many famous instances of civil disobedience proves it.
It would be nice to see this question directly asked to Obama in a press conference.
One thing any lawyer will tell you is that they work for whoever pays them. The RIAA was paying these lawyers, so they came up with arguements to prove that people owed them money. They didn't sue students and grandmothers out of evil and malice, they sued them because that's what they were paid to do. Lets not lie, the RIAA lawyers are VERY good; they have won a lot of cases and have a lot of experience in and out of court. I don't know why we wouldn't want someone like that working for the Department of Justice, so long as we don't want an inept Department of Justice (which is a different arguement entirely. Maybe we do).
By removing whatever competent lawyers remain for them it makes it even harder for them to win a case. It's win-win. RIAA loses the lawyers that enabled them to "win" these silly cases by stupid means, and the government gains a pitbull they can use to win cases. The only downside is if the pitbull/government go after cases that are not pro-human rights, common sense, etc. I leave that to be seen.
I'm so awesome I don't need a sig file -Me
There are three possibilities here:
- he just sucks at gift-giving, and picked up something he had laying around the house.
- he wants to give what is most precious to his donors: intellectual property and entertainment.
- he wants to put the spotlight on how absurd it is that his gift to the queen is potentially illegal.
Fourth possibility: The issue never crossed his mind or those of his advisers.
Note that it matters. Despite attempts to criminalize copyright violation this is all about CIVIL liability. So if the copyright holders are aware of the copying there's no foul unless they think there's a foul and claim it. Given the situation, and the value of keeping Obama in their pocket, they're no doubt quite happy to treat this particular set of copies as "authorized" and let it go. They'd probably have paid for them and gifted them themselves if it wasn't more legal trouble and protocol clumsiness than the current situation.
If they're concerned about the precedent they could explicitly announce they've authorized this particular set of copies, putting the issue to rest without waiving any other rights. But I'm sure they're more than happy to watch us all waste effort wringing hands about it. B-(
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
I'm a right-wing loon if I think criminals shouldn't hold cabinet positions? The company Hillary was running was found to have broken the law. Everyone else went to jail. A judge ordered her to turn over court documents, she refused, and everyone let the matter slip because why should she be held accountable to the law?
And Obama isn't holding people to higher standards. He has been appointing people with known corruption issues, and then in many cases standing behind them.
Obama made a campaign promise not to appoint any "Washington politicians or lobbyists" to cabinet positions. He appointed Daschle, who not only didn't pay taxes, but is a Washington lobbyist, who lied about being a Washington lobbyist. Obama said that he supported the appointment either way.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
... is that Washington is full of "revolving door" groups which work in the private sector for a specific company, then go into the government and work for a department in charge of regulating that same portion of the private sector. They then leave when the administration leaves and go back into the same industry. While they were in the government, they create policies, procedures, and precidents which give their industries an advantage. Obama seems interested in reform in general, but still, there are tons of great lawyers out there who have ethics and believe the RIAA is a bad thing. Why tap 5 RIAA lawyers when there is a chance they'll go back to working for the RIAA or a similar organization when they leave?
Ability counts for a lot in government, but so does position and motivation. It's not a bad thing to question if these guys, given their background, will chose to go after the RIAA for malicious prosecution, or not help the RIAA go information scrounging and threaten organizations that don't submit to warrantless searches of personal information. If the government went after the RIAA, would the RIAA accept them back? Would they be willing to find a job somewhere else?
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
It isn't a conspiracy theory but a matter of public record.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_pardoned_by_Bill_Clinton
You should check the names of the list (almost 200 strong).
Many were members of mafia families who donated directly to Bill Clinton, also a matter of direct public record which you can fact-check within 30 seconds.
Next time, instead of living in fantasy land, try Google.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
i dunno... how much are bullets these day?
ha, ha, just a joke, folks! ;-)
A very risky joke at the best of times. But especially during the runup to fascism. It's right up there with waving at your friend Jack whom you've just noticed on the other side of the plane and yelling: "Hi, Jack!"
Security personnel are paid to have NO sense of humor. This is at least partly because REAL bad guys often talk about things as they work themselves up to doing them - and try to claim they were joking if anybody calls them on it.
Back during the "Vietnam Era" (it was undeclared so I STILL won't call it a war) there was a guy who wrote "P*ss on LBJ" on the outside of letters he sent. After a while he noticed that Secret Service agents were following him around. He confronted one and, upon finding out he was Secret Service asked him why he was being followed. Answer: "If enough people p*ssed on LBJ it would kill him."
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Now that Obama has given the order to shoot pirates...
Thanks to file sharing, I purchase more CDs
Thanks to the RIAA, I buy them used...
Wow..... Obama, the precious little thing of the Democratic Party, has changed masks and broken SEVERAL firm campaign promises in the first 3 months of being in office.
He has broken his promises and shown the country the hard on he has for Big Brother that he managed to hide the whole election.
Where's the change?! It's still the same corrupt, two-faced, lying, promise-breaking, Orwellian bullshit that we had to put up with during the Bush years.
Obama: What a fucking joke.
Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
I really hope "taps" doesn't mean what I think it means.
Let us not become the evil that we deplore.
The fact that Bush also pardoned people doesn't prove that Bill Clinton didn't pardon mafia heads whose families donated to him, or major federal drug dealers.
Find me a name that Bush pardoned who was a known mafia member whose family donated to Bush, and then all you will have proved is my parent point, that both sides are dirty. But at the moment, all you are doing is diverting from the fact that you were spouting BS personal ad hominem partisan attacks while my point flies above your head.
It is dangerous to assume one party is evil and the other is perfect, which you are so determined to prove for me. Thanks.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
Right, Bush is one of those slick greasy MBA types. Completely different I'm sure...
The blog (which I haven't updated since my computer died) does not run merely conservative points. My wife is a Republican and I disagree with her all the time. Most of my friends are registered Democrats are I disagree with them a lot of the time.
The primary reason is because neither party really upholds the beliefs they are supposedly based on.
I am a liberal because I subscribe to political beliefs of individual civil rights and freedoms. I get upset when Democrats in office don't uphold those rights they promised to protect. So by your definition, that makes me a right-wing loon because I don't blindly support lying politicians.
I love your logic.
If I failed to list over 200,000 in income, I would go to jail. Daschle did not list income or pay taxes on it. When his salary (excluding benefits such as the car) alone is 2 million dollars from his lobbying firm (which he lied about, claiming he isn't a lobbyist), he can afford an accountant to make sure he is doing his taxes correctly.
Daschle (like many Republicans I assume as well, since it seems more systematic of wealthy bastards rather than following party lines) has the money to pay taxes, but opts not to, while those of us with far less money struggle to pay our bills in a difficult economy.
We should hold our leaders to high standards, expecting them to set good examples, and maybe even (heaven forbid) follow the law.
And perhaps you aren't familiar, but not declaring income is a criminal offense.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
Come on, you don't really think he hired all those people because of some personal RIAA fetish, do you?
I'd bet on a front organization with a vague but nice-sounding name. It could be named something like "People for Democratic Change in America" or the "American Change 2008 Committee". This is the norm for fake grassroots fundraising and PR.
I'm not defending Republicans. I'm saying you can't assume one party is evil and one party is perfect. You're missing my message completely.
And for the record, for the past two years, Democrats have controlled the House, Senate, and most of the Governor seats, and I have always maintained that most of the power is in Capitol Hill. Yet most people I talk to insist Republicans were controlling the government, and should be blamed for all the problems of the past two years.
Both parties voted for the Patriot Act, and continue to vote to renew and extend it. Both parties voted to go to war. Both parties voted for domestic spy programs. Both parties voted for corporate welfare.
It is true that on some of these votes, Democrats have statistically had better voting records that Republicans. And I do praise them for that. But when Dems control both the House and Senate, we shouldn't see domestic spy packages get passed.
Americans need to educate themselves.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
There are alternatives. Everybody could have told you Obama's a demagoge 15 years ago.
Before he even held office? Or is that just your way of telling us you're full of shit?
If you've read both linked Wikipedia entries, you would have noticed a stark contrast in the first paragraph:
"George W. Bush used this power only to eliminate the collateral effects of conviction (e.g., prohibitions on felons voting or owning a gun). He did NOT pardon anyone who had NOT SERVED A FULL SENTENCE pursuant to a conviction."
(emphasis mine)
I didn't like George W. OR Billy Cigar Clinton more than anyone else, but on the singular issue of pardoning criminals as presented in really really well cited Wikipedia entries, Clinton and you are dead wrong.
Just look at the conviction dates of people pardoned by Bush, he pardoned seasoned, tough criminals who accepted a bribe of 50 Dollars or made Moonshine, both back in the Sixties, come on.
My karma's going to burn for this thought, but lawyers generally do what's in the best interest of whomever their client is... if the *AAs said, "make a rock-solid contract that essentially screws the artists while ensuring we rake in the dough," then that's what the lawyers will (and do) do. Who's to say those lawyers will maintain their practices when not in the employ of the labels anymore....... never mind, who am I kidding?
But Maaa! Everyone else has a
...turn off, tune out. Don't buy music, don't steal music, let them have their own world and do not participate in it. Get together with friends, make music on your own, share with your family and on and on. If you can't do that, STFU, you are part ot the problem. Only by cutting them off will you win. Otherwise, you fail.
No incumbents, not no where, not no how.
Vote them out every term.
I guess this community is what it is, but there sure seems to be an odd and misplaced anger over this.
I support and approve of President Obama generally.
But seeing him appoint 6 people from the same law firm to the Department of Justice, mostly to very high positions in that department, who were working on and supporting a legal campaign that was frivolous, meanspirited, unnecessary, based on nonexistent legal theories, and unsupported by evidence, and which represented an abuse of our federal judicial system, was a serious mistake on his part IMHO.
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful