Slashdot Mirror
Study Deconstructs Canadian Copyright Lobby Deception
An anonymous reader writes "A new Canadian study deconstructs how copyright lobby groups manipulate public opinion by laundering proposals through seemingly independent groups. The study started after the Conference Board of Canada was shown to have plagiarized several of its IP reports and now shows the connections that all lead through the MPAA and RIAA. Michael Geist writes, 'It is not just that these reports all receive financial support from the same organizations and say largely the same thing. It is also that the reports each build on one another, creating the false impression of growing momentum and consensus on the state of Canadian law and the need for specific reforms.'"
an anonymous reader is really the chief Pirate of Pirate Bay!
I think that we'll need to look closer at copyright ``movements'' in other parts too. But do take a moment to savour the delicious irony. It really is quite sublime, and telling in its own right.
It stands to reason that if you can mashup web content, you can also demashup.
What's newsworthy? This news will be forgotten. What will be remembered is that IP is violated on a large scale. This will fuel incentives towards more grotesque punishments of the violators.
</sarcasm>
This is a red herring.
There is no such thing as "independent groups" in the way that the author implies (except the ones that agree with the author?), all "issue" groups have a point of view and so bias.
The author doesn't like the Copyright Lobby's "independent groups", the Copyright Lobby doesn't like the author's favorite "independent groups". Surprise, surprise.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Reports that build on one another, creating the false impression of growing momentum and consensus, with some invisible hand guiding everything and everyone... where have I heard that, before?
Time for the backlash. Destroy DMCA.
Hah. Too bad I don't have mod points for "Troll".
Slashdot is not a lobby group or think tank. It is a news aggregator. The blurbs it posts do not claim to be original work.
These lobby groups are front organizations for the Canadian versions of the RIAA and MPAA, and cite each other even though they are essentially the same organization. This is like a scientist create a fake identity to peer review his own papers, and/or to cite himself repeatedly.
Psssst -- just because a word is new to you doesn't make it a new word.
It is also that the reports each build on one another, creating the false impression of growing momentum and consensus...
So it's pretty much like Global Warming Theology, then?
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
I look forward to the day when astroturf is ineffective.
Not to mention that Slashdot has one very important advantage. If something is posted that is demonstrably false, anyone can post their own follow-up right there in the same forum and successfully call bullshit. The mods around here may be too trigger-happy when it comes to down-modding but they are quite good at recognizing the value of such dissent and making sure that it becomes prominent and noticable. The one-to-many, "spotlight" nature of most mass media means that there is no such ability, causing even easily debunked BS to quickly be repeated over and over again until the average person considers it something "that everybody knows."
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
On the one hand, this sort of shit needs to see the light of day. On the other hand, it give me a (rare) reason to feel ashamed of being Canadian. What the hell do these idiots think they're doing? Pulling the wool over our eyes?
Wake up and smell the coffee, you idiots. We're not going to let you get away with crap like that. Thanks for letting us know! (Shuffles off to some networking sites to start some more news stories re: this!)
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro. ~~ Hunter S. Thompson
Well, past experience has shown that eventually these things affect politicians. They see variations on the same thing proclaimed by multiple groups and think they have to do something. That something is usually increasing the levy/fee/tax on blank DVDs and CDs, coupled with proclamations that you are championing Canadian home-grown talent. The difference between levy and tax? You can put GST (5%) on a levy, but you can't put GST on a tax.
The same thing happens here in the US. FreedomWorks is a front group for Political Insiders. The scary part of is that people that have joined this organzation have no idea they are apart of a front group.
Slashdot's advantages over traditional media is not just because of the comments and mods, but also that mod points
1) are more than simple agree/disagree flags, they also indicate why the mod chose the mod they did
2) are lost if the moderator subsequently comments in the same story
3) aren't always available to a given reader, and are a limited resource
That last is key. In Canada, CBC's online news discussions are superior to CTV's site (where only select stories can be commented on, and all comments are weighted the same), but it's still just a giant popularity contest that uses agree/disagree flags. Trolls routinely hit disagree on a comment just to be asses, whereas if their "opinions" were limited in quantity and timeframe, their damage would be negligible.
Granted Slashdot has problems with collective moderator biases as well, but it's far and away a much better system of balancing the good and bad aspects of public participation.
HAW! You told him, motherfucker! And wouldn't deconstruction make a mashup a mash-down?
Thank you, thank you, I'll be here all week. Try my wife's pussy, it tastes of fish.
You mean the commercial entities with a revenue stream to protect are funding lobby groups to manipulate public opinion and corrupt the political process?
I'm shocked! Shocked I tell ya!
Well, OK. I'm not that shocked. In fact I'm pretty sure this has happened before.
Exxon is pretty good at this sort of thing:-
http://www.exxonsecrets.org/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jul/01/exxon-mobil-climate-change-sceptics-funding
And groups like the Heartland Institute ( http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Heartland_Institute ) are whoring for so many masters I fully expect to see them expand into the "intellectual property" debate any day now.
Its pretty important for citizens to hone their bullshit detectors to try and figure out when they are the target of a snow job.
Here are a few tools I use to pretty good effect when employing my bullshit detector:
"Who benefits" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cui_bono
"You can't get something for nothing" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_law
"The simpler theory is often correct" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occams_razor
( be careful with that last one - it can be a slippery sucker)
(I firehosed this story too with some extra information about how the Copyright Lobby primed the Australian Media to run a ridiculous piracy=terrorism story, complete with a claim by Australian Reporter Mike Munroe that pirates could "burn a DVD in 3.5 seconds":)
Australia's Fairfax group published an article by Journalists Eamonn Duff and Rachel Browne claiming that people who download films from illegal file-sharing websites are financing terrorism. The article only quoted media industry sources and was basically a warmed-up press release. That evening Channel Seven "Sunday Night" current affairs program claimed how how movie piracy is being used to fund terrorist groups including Hezbollah and Jemaah Islamiah, responsible for the Bali bombings in 2002 which killed hundreds including 94 Australians. Reporter Mike Munro claimed pirates "could burn a DVD in 3.5 seconds."
While technically-savy voters can sort fact from fiction, technically-illiterate politicians are easily swayed. What's the best way to combat this sort of misinformation? Is it possible to educate our politicians that there are two sides to every story? Or are they hopelessly in the lobbyists pockets.
The only reason copyright exists is to allow a 3rd party to benefit from the works of an artist.
The artist seeks a 3rd party to exihibit his works for publicity, but this should not be withstanding ad infinitum.
Perhaps artists need to include a clause in their contracts opening up their works (for derivitives, etc) within a
reasonable timeframe.
Copyright is about control. Control of the artists, control of the audience.
Why does the university feel the need to employ a liar as a professor?
He writes:
"clearly just a part of a much larger strategy to influence Canadian copyright policy by creating a narrative of crisis and the false impression of Canada as a piracy haven."
One of the sources he links to for support, and who links back to him for support, writes the following article:
http://www.slaw.ca/2009/06/26/maybe-the-jury-didnt-like-the-songs/
Hence it's clear that Canada IS by all reasonable definition a piracy haven, according to the most reasonable definition that piracy is not punished, as is clearly evident from the article.
Why does Geist feel the need to lie about the strictness of enforcement in Canada?
I must congratulate Michael Geist on this work.
I for one knew this was all hoo hoo when I first read about how Canadians loose between $10-30 billion a year. That's $333-1000 per man, woman & child. I would barely consume the $333 myself in a year. My 99 year old grand mother would be in the order of 50c a decade these days. And my newborn child well he's a software junky at oh lets say NOTHING. Sure I could find a 16 year old girl that eats $1000 a month in itunes alone. But on average for every breathing person in Canada a number like $333 is insane.
The per capita income of every person in Canada is $39,300USD (2008 est.) or $45,674.47 CAD. before tax. These reports are basically saying that every person in Canada steals any where from 1-3% after tax income in the form of download-able music/movies and software. Assuming a 30% tax rate ( I pulled 30% out of thin air ). This is not saying that ALL consumption is illegal, All it is saying that every breathing human in Canada steals the equivalent of 1-3% of their net income on a subset of media. This is an insanely huge number people.
Bottom line is the media companies are lazy and greedy. One of the most fundamental reasons why people download entertain is quite simple. It comes in a form that is easy to use and extremely convenient. The entertainment industries really missed the opportunity back in the 90's when all this started. Instead of actually looking at this consumption path as a HUGE source of revenue that s$%t themselves and paniced. Instead of investing in this essentially new industry they took the easy route ( so they thought ) and tried to get the courts and governments of the planet to essentially make it law that traditional consumption methods must be adhered to. This at the relatively trivial cost of lobby groups and legal consults ( so they thought ).
I'm no Apple fan boy. But you gotta respect Apple when they basically said. âoeWe are doing this and you will play along and you will make a profit through us. So sit down shut up and this the damn cheque already. Oh and you have no manufacturing or shipping costs. That's now free. So The cheque is basically 100% profit.â I'm still amazed the media companies tried to stop them. Absolutely stunned. ( I'm ignoring the whole DRM thing, that rant is already done. )
So back full circle. After 15+ years of this borderline moronic adventure the entertainment industry they are still at it. ( Even my dog learns faster than these people. ) They are still trying to manipulate world governments and laws so that they can have an easy ride to the money. Guys clearly it is not an easy ride the path you are on. Wake up, Apple, Amazon are making easy money for you. They are clearly on the easy path. Stop the lying and cheating and just start delivering product in forms people want. You will make more easy money.
Good point, however a minor quibble:
I wouldn't say spotlight for one to many. There's already an apt term for the idea: broadcast.
I bet you don't know what it means either. It certainly doesn't mean "refute" or "disagree with" like 99% of cretins who use it seem to think.
At the bottom of the
Except for the fact that something like 90% of Slashdot viewers never, ever click on the comments, much less register for an account and post.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
The labels benefit from the artists' work. The artist almost never (and usually ONLY when they start up their own label, see the Beatles AFTER they broke up).
Hollywood accounting is another example where you have it wrong: they aren't benefiting on BEHALF of the artist, they're benefiting from the exploitation of the artist.
In my own case, I wrote to every Opposition and Cabinet Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA) in Alberta challenging the logic of electricity deregulation a few years ago. Since Alberta is a one-party state in effect, I got replies from all Opposition MLAs, but only one from the Government, directly from the Minister in charge. At first I had to admit it was a well-written reply and seemed to have some "weight" in that it referred to Alberta's achievements in electricity deregulation and promoting free markets. However, a quick Internet search revealed that the whole letter was just a cut and paste job of speeches delivered to various groups in Canada and the US. Moreover, some of the groups were pure sham. One named in the letter purported to be a Marketing Association or something based in Washington and they lauded Alberta as leading the way in a group of five or so "progressive" provinces and states. Other than the minister's speeches, I couldn't find any evidence that they actually existed!!!
The most egregious claim in the letter was that since some point in time in 2000 or 2001 (I forget the exact date selected) Alberta's electricity rates had declined by a significant amount. WTF? They chose a date that was the highest point in terms of price. Prices are still not close to pre-2000 levels, especially when you factor in tacked-on transmission and delivery charges (money grabs).
The final kicker was that despite the Alberta Government's new rules about patronage appointments, several years later, after the damage was done, the Minister got a plush posting in Washington.
My final comment is that it was embarrassing how simplistic their "deception" was. I guess given that since the late 70s Alberta's government has been run by leaders and ministers that average, probably, no better than a high school education and have that eroded by populist, short-term focused politics I shouldn't be surprised.
I can't wait for copyright taxes to be challenged in the courts here in Canada, and hope to be able to watch, if not support, an educated and articulate public battle the real interests behind all this...
Slashdot is a news aggregator? Funny, I don't think I've ever actually seen news linked from it. Sure, there are links, but I don't ever really click on them. That might explain something.
(I'm obviously not new here, that is to say ; -- Also, I generally avoid the comments section and ONLY read TFA.)
I know, not an original idea. And probably not a perfect solution.
But it'll do, pig, it'll do.
I agree with you on the pertinence of Slashdot/Slashcode's moderation system, however, Slashcode is dead now... see the related replies (mainly on the slashcode-general mailing list) of this journal entry.
Animoog.org
Well said. I mean, look at how often he used the word *new*.