Slashdot Mirror


White House Holding Piracy Summit

DesScorp writes in to let us know about a White House piracy summit, which is going on this afternoon. Judging by the press accounts, the sort of intellectual property criminals they are interested in are large-scale DVD bootleggers, not individual downloaders. "Hollywood once again demonstrates its close ties to Washington DC, regardless of who is in power, with a White House summit on piracy to be attended by the top executives in Hollywood, as well as the music industry. Vice President Joe Biden will be leading the summit to discuss organized cooperation between the federal government and the entertainment industry on all matters of piracy. Also at the summit will be the Obama Administration's new Copyright Czar, Victoria Espinal. The summit comes after Congress has earmarked $30 million dollars of taxpayer funds for anti-piracy efforts." According to one attendee's tweet, the press was kicked out of the meeting around 20:45 GMT.

38 of 268 comments (clear)

  1. !change by Shakrai · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Amazing how the more things change the more they stay the same, isn't it?

    I can't wait to hear all of the partisans who rightfully complained about Dick Cheney's energy task force come out of the woodwork to tell us why this is "different".

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    1. Re:!change by Moryath · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Al Gore Senior was one of the MafiAA's pet stooges who wrote/pushed the 1987 predecessor to the DMCA that tried to criminalize DAT tape unless it had a "copy protection flag" built in.

      Amazing how some things never change, indeed!

    2. Re:!change by Shakrai · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hooray, I've pissed the right-wing partisans for a change!

      Answer me this: What makes you think that because I said Gov. Palin was unqualified that I think that Senator Obama was?

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    3. Re:!change by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, of course he was.

      • Natural-born citizen.
      • Over 35 years old.
      • Lived in-country for at least 14 years.

      Yep, he's qualified. Oh, and:

      • Elected.

      ;-)

    4. Re:!change by j00r0m4nc3r · · Score: 2, Funny

      how's she gonna hack it against Vladimir Putin

      Maybe she can drink him under the table.

    5. Re:!change by TubeSteak · · Score: 2, Informative

      I can't wait to hear all of the partisans who rightfully complained about Dick Cheney's energy task force come out of the woodwork to tell us why this is "different".

      Reasons why this is different:
      1. Dick Cheney never put out a press release announcing there was a meeting
      2. Dick Cheney never released any of the names of the people he or his Task Force met with
      3. Most of the activities of the Task Force have never been/will never be disclosed by the government

      Here's most of what we know about the Energy Task Force (two articles)

      I find it distasteful that the press is getting kicked out, but none of this is happening in Cheney-esqe secrecy.
      I'm going to save my outrage for something more substantial like the secret Anti-Counterfeiting Treaty negotiations.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    6. Re:!change by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Ah yes, a governor who did a lot for her state

      Citation please.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    7. Re:!change by MightyMartian · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Oh good grief. The only thing that did "it" for Alaska was obscenely high energy prices. You could have replaced Palin with Mr. Hanky and got the same effect.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    8. Re:!change by MightyMartian · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ron Paul is a Republican only slightly more than Joe Lieberman is a Democrat. Paul seems to be regarded with bemusement by fellow Republicans, sort of like Borat's village rapist.

      My point is that all the swirly eyed Paulites ran around insisting how different things would be if a Real Libertarian got the nod, with little appreciation that his more radical notions (like going back to the Gold Standard) would more than likely be blocked by Congress anyways. They seemed to consistently ignore the fact there is more to government than the Executive, and a lot, if not most, of the decisions since Abraham Lincoln came along were Congresses as much as the President's.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    9. Re:!change by BobMcD · · Score: 3, Interesting

      He could have done a lot of my favorite things on the first day, without the approval of anyone:

      1) End the wars and bring home the troops

      2) Fire everyone in the Department of Education, or any other Executive Department

      3) End the NSA domestic spying programs and the CIA espionage

      4) Close Gitmo

      5) Pardon everyone in a Federal Prison for drug possession

      There are many, many more. In fact most of what Bush did was done via abuse of Executive power. It is entirely possible to wield it in a good way as well as a bad.

      I'm not sure what parts of that are 'swirly eyed', but none of it is outside the realm of possibility.

    10. Re:!change by MightyMartian · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I've never met a Palin lover that wasn't either pondering what getting inside her pants would be like, or just simply liked the idea of a fellow religious zealot being one bullet away from the Oval Office.

      Huckabee would certainly have been the more logical choice if you were looking for a VP with at least some skills, but I don't think he was sufficiently uber-religious to get past the hump McCain needed to. McCain was deeply unpopular with the various brands of social conservatives in the GOP. He largely got in because he was simply the last man standing. Let's remember here, too, that early on, a lot of GOP strategists thought they were going to be facing off against Clinton, and that had been the common wisdom for a couple of years. McCain vs. Clinton would have been a much different dust up, and certainly a more conventional kind of campaign. But when it became clear that Obama was going to beat Clinton, the whole game changed and McCain's strategists grew very conservative in their maneuvering, and actively sought out someone who could both deliver the Evangelicals and other related conservatives, but not overshadow McCain himself (which Huckabee most certainly would have).

      I don't think anyone expected the kind of response to Palin, particular in the McCain camp. I mean, really, a running mate is just, well, a running mate. They get some attention, but all in all they're the sideshow, relegated to a level of importance below the candidate's wife, kids and pets. But Palin become a phenomena in and of herself. She certainly managed to rally the faithful, who were (and still are) quite happy to ignore the fact that the woman was woefully inadequate to the job. I expect that over the next couple of years that will change to some degree, but to be honest, I can't imagine the GOP flinging her at Obama. They'll be looking at Huckabee again, and its probably better that he didn't get tarred with being McCain's running mate.

      By the way, this is the same logic that Obama applied to picking Biden, as opposed to Clinton.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  2. Well by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I guess the EFF's and other consumer groups' invites must have gotten lost in the mail.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:Well by yincrash · · Score: 2, Interesting

      tbh, it'd be nice if even creator rights advocates were there at least. mpaa and riaa do not truly have the content creators best interests at heart

  3. Re:oh joy. by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Insightful

    yeah that organized crime commited by pirates is really bad for your nation.

    It is if your nation makes billions of dollars developing movies and music. Anyone find it interesting that we routinely run massive trade deficits with China but stand mute while their Government tacitly condones piracy on an industrialized scale? As much as I despise the mafia there are real people working in these industries. It's a safe assumption they don't want to work for free. Can't we find some balance on this issue somewhere between "some teenagers downloaded Britney Spears, lock 'em up!" and "information wants to be free"?

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  4. Makes nominal strategic sense... by nebaz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As much as I hate the idea that the Federal Government is in the interest of helping the RIAA, it seems that "intellectual property" is just about the only thing left that our country exports. I can understand thinking that it should be a national economic priority if you think in those terms. That doesn't address the reality of the "value" of said property, or its constitutional justification, however.

    --
    Rhymes that keep their secrets will unfold behind the clouds.There upon the rainbow is the answer to a neverending story
  5. Information just wants to be free by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As we said early on, and have continually been proven right, Information just wants to be free.

    And no amount of trying to stop that will end up working in the end.

    Restore copyright to 17 years renewable only by the author of the work, remove patent protection for software, and let's get back to creating and away from lining CEO's pockets.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  6. Wrong way round by newhoggy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Hollywood once again demonstrates its close ties to Washington DC"

    should be

    "Washington DC once again demonstrates its close ties to Hollywood"

    It's your political system that's broken - not Hollywood.

    1. Re:Wrong way round by bananaquackmoo · · Score: 5, Funny

      What... can't it be both?

  7. Full text by oDDmON+oUT · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "are interested in are large-scale DVD bootleggers, not individual downloaders [for now]. "

    --
    Some days it's just not worth
    chewing through my restraints.
    1. Re:Full text by The+Archon+V2.0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "are interested in are large-scale DVD bootleggers, not individual downloaders [for now]. "

      You can scratch the "for now" even. Any laws that start in meetings like this aren't going to be "If you bootleg DVDs, you get punishment X per bootleg disk." they're going to be "If you infringe copyright, you get punishment X per infringement." where "infringe" can be taken to mean "bootleg, copy for a friend, download, upload, format shift for yourself, write an unfavorable online review of" and so on, however much the lawyers can twist the word and destroy the spirit in a court of law.

      See also: Laws against pedophiles and child pornographers that somehow apply to pairs of consenting teenagers and individual teenagers photographing themselves, laws against racketeers that apply to people not running a racket, laws against drug dealers that apply to people with a lot of cash, etc. etc. etc.

  8. Unfortunately... by rickb928 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    " the sort of intellectual property criminals they are interested in are large-scale DVD bootleggers, not individual downloaders"

    The law won't discriminate. Neither will the lawyers.

    If they write it, someone will sue.

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  9. Re:oh joy. by causality · · Score: 3, Interesting

    yeah that organized crime commited by pirates is really bad for your nation.

    It is if your nation makes billions of dollars developing movies and music. Anyone find it interesting that we routinely run massive trade deficits with China but stand mute while their Government tacitly condones piracy on an industrialized scale? As much as I despise the mafia there are real people working in these industries. It's a safe assumption they don't want to work for free. Can't we find some balance on this issue somewhere between "some teenagers downloaded Britney Spears, lock 'em up!" and "information wants to be free"?

    We will have that balance the moment our social and governmental attitude towards the media companies consists of: "adapt your business model to the 21st century and create an online product that people want to buy, or go bankrupt. Your choice." Until then we're trying to make sure that buggy whip manufacturers still have jobs after the advent of the automobile.

    --
    It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
  10. Fair and Balanced by westlake · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Hollywood once again demonstrates its close ties to Washington DC, regardless of who is in power

    Industries that generate significant export dollars are guaranteed a hearing in Washington.

    Bonus points for cultural exports.

    If you are a Brit, ask yourself what the return has been on Sherlock Holmes, The Beatles, James Bond, Harry Potter.

    Bonus points for clean industries. Bonus points for tech. Bonus points for skilled labor and labor-intensive industries.

    1. Re:Fair and Balanced by Shakrai · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Industries that donate significant campaign dollars are guaranteed a hearing in Washington.

      Fixed that for you :)

      (Snarkiness aside I do get and agree with your main point)

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  11. !change nor the first time... by megamerican · · Score: 4, Informative

    This isn't surprising in the least. Less than two weeks ago they had a workshop for Federal employees on openness in government and it was closed to the public.

    Don't forget that Obama promised to have debates on healthcare on C-Span. (google cache)

    I’m going to have all the negotiations around a big table,” Obama said. “We’ll have doctors and nurses and hospital administrators. Insurance companies, drug companies — they’ll get a seat at the table, they just won’t be able to buy every chair. But what we’ll do is we’ll have the negotiations televised on C-SPAN, so that people can see who is making arguments on behalf of their constituents and who are making arguments on behalf of drug companies or the insurance companies.

    Then he goes on to have closed door meetings with drug companies and insurance companies. Not to mention that he promised to not support any health care bill that forced people to get healthcare.

    You'll find very few people here who ever worshiped the Obamassiah. It's no secret that the Dems are just as much in the pocket of the media companies as the Republicans.

    As a person who was continually modded down for saying there was (and will be) no difference between Obama and McCain before and during the election I find your statement very funny.

    --
    If you have something that you dont want anyone to know, maybe you shouldnt be doing it in the first place -Eric Schmidt
    1. Re:!change nor the first time... by causality · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As a person who was continually modded down for saying there was (and will be) no difference between Obama and McCain before and during the election I find your statement very funny.

      It's not about the candidates, for they are like puppets. It's about the monied interests who finance their campaigns and put them into office. That's where the real power is, and it's not up for a vote. It's more of a plutocracy. Whether it's Obama or McCain who won the election, either of them has a career in politics only because they know better than to piss off the people who had the clout to put them into office. Therefore, those people always have their interests represented in Washington. Every candidate from either the Democratic Party or the Republican Party is elected only because those interests have carefully vetted him/her and are convinced that he/she is not going to rock that boat.

      The individual either understands this reality or chooses to believe in the fantasy that the popular vote for major-party candidates has the potential to change the status quo. That popular vote is the direct result of mass media, which in turn is the result of advertising dollars that the candidates receive from those monied interests. The only change permitted under this system is of the "becoming more so" variety. Using copyright law as an example, that's why it becomes more and more restrictive over time (becoming more of what it is) and it's why those restrictions are never reversed.

      People who can't understand this and people who are in denial about the fundamental brokenness of this system are going to get upset when you criticize a particular candidate. They can't imagine anything outside of the "Democrat or Republican" duality, and that's the real (and terrible) triumph of our current system. To those people, any negative statement about Candidate A must be equivalent to a positive statement about Candidate B. Asking them to see the fallacy of that kind of thinking is also a request to confront all of their insecurities that revolve around an extreme sense that "something's not right here", a task for which they may lack courage. In the absence of such courage, it's much easier for them to mod you down or insult you. Unfortunately neither response is very surprising when you consider the source.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    2. Re:!change nor the first time... by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How can a party that regulates morality possibly advocate personal choice or liberty? Are we speaking the same language here?

      --
      Palm trees and 8
  12. Joe Biden? by NullProg · · Score: 2, Funny

    Vice President Joe Biden will be leading the summit to discuss organized cooperation between the federal government and the entertainment industry on all matters of piracy.

    You mean this Joe Biden: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=joe+biden+plagiarism&aq=0&oq=joe+biden+pl&aqi=g10

    Maybe someone will ask Joe the difference between bits in a track and the letters in a book.

    Enjoy,

    --
    It's just the normal noises in here.
  13. Now we know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    where to drop a bomb to rid us of all of the MPAA Assholes in one shot. It gets the RIAA as well. Sweet.

  14. Should start with huge commercial organizations by RichMan · · Score: 2, Insightful

    CRIA is a huge violator. I suspect the RIAA is a similar violator. These organizations should be made to pay in full.

    http://www.zeropaid.com/news/87347/can-cria-recover-from-the-largest-copyright-infringment-case-in-canadian-history/

    ---
    Canadian Recording Industry Association (CRIA) was sued for $6 billion (not $60 billion as initially reported) for commercial copyright infringement. The case was only filed and already, it is seemingly beyond the point of damage control for CRIA. The question is, can CRIA recover from what may be the biggest blunder in its history?
    --

  15. No need to wait, read story summary! by SuperKendall · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I can't wait to hear all of the partisans who rightfully complained about Dick Cheney's energy task force come out of the woodwork to tell us why this is "different".

    Your wish, it is granted:

    Judging by the press accounts, the sort of intellectual property criminals they are interested in are large-scale DVD bootleggers, not individual downloaders.

    Well thanks for clearing that up! This copyright summit would never harm you, citizen! It's utterly different than any that have come before because it only goes after lrge scale infringers, or so the spin goes! Ignore the fact Hollywood is attending and we know what they always want.

    I'll bet if this were Bush's (or any Republican for that matter) copyright summit, we wouldn't see such a helpful sentence explaining how what these guys are doing is all for the good.

    Sorry, but I didn't like large scale expansion of copyright under any administration no matter how much you try to handwave and explain Democrats are all OK in this regard.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  16. Vote Cthulhu! by babblefrog · · Score: 2, Funny

    Why settle for the lesser of two evils?

  17. Re:Ummmm by Amouth · · Score: 3, Insightful

    if i remember the random story yesterday they are slated to break 30bn this year which puts them at 0.2% of the US GDP or better phrased 1/500th of the US GDP.

    0.2 doesn't sound like much but 1 in 500 is.. think if they where to disappear 1 in 500 people wouldn't have a livelihood.

    i'm not advocating for them - nor do i think the taxpayers should give them anything or pay for their troubles. BUT i think 1 in 500 is enough to justify a meeting at the white house.

    while there are bigger companies and sectors - Hollywood isn't small

    --
    '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
  18. !Piracy by AP31R0N · · Score: 5, Informative

    For the 88th Time:

    Piracy is ship to ship armed robbery. Calling copyright infringement piracy makes light of murderous thugs, and makes infringement sound worse than it is. It doesn't even work as a metaphor. When we use their misnomer, they win. Then one of two things will happen. Either infringers will be demonized people sharing 1s and 0s or the word piracy will lose its gravity.

    Cue the "langwijiz morf, get/it" crowd.

    And yeah, get off my lawn, or whatever other dismissiveness you want to conjure. Disagree all you want, but try to do it without dismissing me as pedantic or a grammar nazi. Try some substance.

    Language matters; word choice matters. All actions start as thoughts, thoughts happen in words. By calling a government a regime, we can make overthrowing it more palatable. By calling a person a kike, nigger, rag head, witch etc, we can make them not human, so killing them won't be murder. Hacker was a positive term. The "man" (media, law, etc) has corrupted the word hacker to refer to criminals. It's like calling Nazis German over and over until the word German means Nazi. When we blur the distinction between words we lose expressiveness and have to invent awkward ways to regain specificity that we threw away out of laziness and ignorance. Yeah languages change over time, but there is evolution and there is devolution and corruption. Change is not inherently good.

    And stand up for yourselves.

    Last time you guys modded this "redundant", let's see if you do better this time!

    --
    Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
  19. Republican? by mollog · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The Republican party in the north, the party of Lincoln, was Fiscally Conservative, pro-business, Politically Moderate, and Socially Moderate. They were certainly liberal in the sense that they liberated the black slaves.

    When Texas Democratic President Lyndon Johnson signed the voting rights act in 1964, he remarked that it was going to deliver the deep South to the Republican Party for a generation. He underestimated.

    The deep South segregationists that now control the Republican Party are only Socially Conservative. They are Politically Liberal (intruding into people's personal decisions) and Fiscally Spendthrifts or corrupt. Newt Gingrich and his fellow 'Movement Republicans' are not actually conservative at all. And I would hold that they are hardly Republican.

    Ron Paul is truly Politically Conservative, Fiscally Conservative and Socially Conservative. There are few others like him, but they exist. Joel Hefley of Colorado, perhaps Chuck Hegel of Nebraska. Governor 'Butch' Otter of Idaho. The vast majority of the Republican party are simply pro-business (or more accurately, pro-corporation) proto-fascists. Opportunists. Thieves. Corrupt.

    The Democratic Party has evolved into an aimless, populist mob. They currently have no guiding principles. They seem to exist only in reaction to big business and the corrupting influence of money.

    Getting back to the article; it seems that piracy has a lot to do with intellectual property similar to software programs. If a person creates a work, it would be better if that person could maintain control over its provenance. This encourages continued production of similar work. China, India and other Wild West type newly minted capitalistic systems care little for hypothetical rights such as intellectual property. With good reason, it's unenforceable.

    --
    Best regards.
    1. Re:Republican? by pwizard2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The Republican party in the north, the party of Lincoln, was Fiscally Conservative, pro-business, Politically Moderate, and Socially Moderate. They were certainly liberal in the sense that they liberated the black slaves.

      Lincoln was no saint and greatly exceeded his power. The war was not actually a true civil war, since the south had no intention of taking over Washington DC and gaining control of the country. (just like Washington had no intention of taking over England during the American revolution) We only wanted our independence from the tariffs that we had to unfairly pay the north for manufactured goods. Of course the revisionists would say that the war was over slavery and that the southerners were nothing but a bunch of bigoted slaveowners, but that's the way it often goes when the winners of a war get to write the history to cover up their own transgressions. Lincoln was actually more for big government, so he would probably be more in line with the democrats today.

      When Texas Democratic President Lyndon Johnson signed the voting rights act in 1964, he remarked that it was going to deliver the deep South to the Republican Party for a generation. He underestimated.

      Never mind the fact that the Democrats have historically opposed civil rights legislation up to that point. (the south has historically been predominately democratic or "dixiecratic" for a very long time) The republicans were the ones who pushed it through congress. Johnson probably only signed it because the democratic party wanted the black vote and the actions of the president are much more visible than those of congress. It's too bad that more people don't know how much they've been scammed by these politicians.

      The vast majority of the Republican party are simply pro-business (or more accurately, pro-corporation) proto-fascists. Opportunists. Thieves. Corrupt.

      And the Democrats aren't? You have more back-room dealing and arm twisting than ever before these days. (for instance, look at what happened to Lieberman recently and how the Louisiana governor got bought off recently)

      --
      "It is a denial of justice not to stretch out a helping hand to the fallen; that is the common right of humanity."
    2. Re:Republican? by VShael · · Score: 2, Informative

      Now hang on. I know you have dozens on replies to this already, but... how come you can safely divide up the Republican party into different factions, and then give examples you like and presumably approve of (eg. Ron Paul) but the Democrats can get lumped together into one bucket of crap?

      The Democratic Party is even more divided than the Republican. They range from the practically Republican Joe Lieberman, the very left-wing Dennis Kucinich, and everyone in between.

      It's one of many reasons the Dems can't get stuff done. They aren't the party of the rubber-stamp follow-the-party-line.

  20. Re:Ummmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    think if they where to disappear 1 in 500 people wouldn't have a livelihood.

    "My business model depends on it" is no reason for a law.