Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Key Music Industry Lawyer Named EU Copyright Chief

Posted by Soulskill on from the conflict-of-what dept.

halfEvilTech writes "The European Union's new point person on copyright policy won't take up her post until mid-April, but she's already stirring up controversy. That's because Maria Martin-Prat spent years directing 'global legal policy' for IFPI, the global recording industry's London-based trade group, before moving back into government. The appointment raises new questions about the past private-sector work of government officials, especially those crafting policy or issuing legal judgments on the same issues they once lobbied for."

20 of 74 comments (clear)

  1. Regulatory Capture at Work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yet another example of regulatory capture at work.

    1. Re:Regulatory Capture at Work by rajeevrk · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yet another example of regulatory capture at work.

      Isnt it so much fun when the Industry shills get into policy positions? They make a lot of noise, and formulate some of the most arcane policies that just happen to fall right into the lap of the same industry groups that the policies are supposed to police :P can there be no end to the constant churn of people between lobbying groups and the lobbied groups?

      P.S. - HTTPS on a wikipedia link! dont think i've seen that too often ;)

      RkR

  2. There is no more democracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We now live in a global oligarchy. What is the peaceful solution to this?

    In the meantime, DO NOT GIVE YOUR MONEY TO THESE PEOPLE. Yes, I know you love your new Lord of the Rings DVD box set, but you're financing the copyright cartels. Either pirate or go without.

    1. Re:There is no more democracy by erroneus · · Score: 2

      You are simply not reaching enough eyes and ears posting here. And the people who have the most access to eyes and ears will not let you speak. What can be done?

    2. Re:There is no more democracy by russotto · · Score: 2

      Well first off, you can forget about a peaceful solution. 'What can be done?' now becomes a little easier to answer.

      I'm sure you're not suggesting shooting music industry executives from a distance using a scoped rifle. Or arranging to have their cocaine cut with cyanide. Or rigging their Ferraris to explode. Because the first two would be too good for them and the last would be a waste of a Ferrari.

    3. Re:There is no more democracy by seifried · · Score: 2

      I'm teaching my children that "sharing is caring" and you need to route your Internet traffic through a VPN provider in a country with strong privacy laws.

  3. Obligatory anagram by srussia · · Score: 2

    Ram A Rat In Mi Prat

    --
    Set your phasers on "funky"!
  4. It's part of the US/EU war by Coeurderoy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So the US lobbies successfully imposed to EU the same stupidity that they got at home...

    Basically copyrights and patents are the "semi religious framework" that justifies sending money from all over the world, and preferably reasonably rich countries to the US without stating the obvious, we should anyway because the US got the biggest army and secret services...

    this sucks

  5. Let's just put Manson in charge of women's issues by mykos · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Seriously, why do they keep putting people in charge who only see one side of the issues? Why even have the position at all?

    Wouldn't it just be easier to just come out and say "We are the puppets of the copyright industry and we will go with whatever they say". It's honest, to the point, and everyone knows where they stand.

  6. Re:People Entering Politics by Znork · · Score: 2

    Would there be concern if a previous Anti-Copyright campaigner got the seat?

    A lot less, as they actually would represent the people and their interest rather than a specific economic group.

    passion can come from being paid to care

    Eh, no. It cant.

  7. Re:People Entering Politics by next_ghost · · Score: 2

    The summary reads like this is of extra concern. Would there be concern if a previous Anti-Copyright campaigner got the seat? Would you rather someone with no knowledge on the topic got the position?

    If an anti-copyright campaigner got the seat, the copyright lobby would obviously freak out WAY more than this. There are tons of lawyers out there who know the copyright and patent law inside out but are not affiliated with either side of the copyright war. Your argument about "someone with no knowledge on the topic" is a false dichotomy.

  8. Re:People Entering Politics by countertrolling · · Score: 2

    The concern isn't over the experience. It's over corruption of the political process. That is what this is. It is to protect industry interests.

    I would wager that most people aim for positions in political office because they either know about, care for, or are passionate in some way about the seat for which they aim. (and yes, passion can come from being paid to care)

    You would lose that wager. Most people who enter big time politics are narcissistic sociopaths. Those that aren't are pushed aside. That just the nature of the business.

    --
    For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
  9. you do need a certain level of expertise by boguslinks · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If you're going to appoint an attorney in charge of government copyright policy, the thing to do is to get someone with relevant experience. Would you prefer an attorney whose expertise is in Animal Husbandry to get this job?

    And if you think it's one of the "bad guys" instead of one of the "good guys" (girls) getting the job... well, working attorneys in copyright (and other "intellectual property" areas) are usually working to protect and monetize the "property" in question. You'd probably have a tough time coming up with a good list of candidates, with good resumes, for the job who share your ideology (or mine) on the issue. Someone like Stephan Kinsella would be both qualified and share our sentiments, but I'm sure he doesn't want the job, nor the job him.

    1. Re:you do need a certain level of expertise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Would you prefer an attorney whose expertise is in Animal Husbandry to get this job?

      I would prefer somebody who represents the general population, not a tiny vested interest, and not your false dichotomy.

      Expertise in copyright law, not policy, is a technical function that should be done by juniors and not policy people.

      The fact that I even need to tell you that shows that you are probably part of that vested interest and untrustworthy.

  10. On the plus side at least Gaddafi will have a job by Lord_of_the_nerf · · Score: 2, Funny

    ....when they start appointing new judges to the European Court of Human Rights.

    He's a 'former civil servant.....put in charge of dossiers' directly related to his former employer/dictatorship....

  11. This will likely be unpopular... by NoobixCube · · Score: 5, Insightful

    My opinion will probably be an unpopular one on Slashdot, but a job's a job. There should be an impartiality regulator in all goernments, something of an Inquisition who can thoroughly investigate the lives, private and public, of high level government employees. I understand the recording industry and actual careers like law are more than a little different, but just because someone has been working for McDonalds for a few years doesn't mean they're going to go work for KFC and actively sabotage them. In practice, in the US, officials with this background have proven time and time again they are NOT impartial, but all people have the right to quit one job and work somewhere else. Everyone here treats a recording industry job like the slaver tatoo in Fallout 2. A permanent black mark that everyone will recognise on sight.

    I don't mean to say we shouldn't care where our officials come from, by all means be wary, but not everyone is going to be evil (I think that may be the biggest compliment I've ever paid anyone).

    --
    Admit it. You post strawman arguments as AC so you get modded Insightful for refuting them, rather than Troll
    1. Re:This will likely be unpopular... by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 2

      I understand the recording industry and actual careers like law are more than a little different, but just because someone has been working for McDonalds for a few years doesn't mean they're going to go work for KFC and actively sabotage them.

      I think a better metaphor would be:

      just because someone has been working for McDonalds for a few years doesn't mean they're going to go work for the Vegan Rights group and actively sabotage them.

      Anyone really supporting Vegan Rights (whatever those would be) wouldn't last working in McDonalds for a few years. Anyone who could stomache it already has a non-partial worldview.

      Possibly the same issue here.

    2. Re:This will likely be unpopular... by bzipitidoo · · Score: 2

      This line of reasoning is what most recent US Supreme Court nominees have used in their hearings. They say their job is to determine the meaning of the law impartially, according to precedent, and the wording of statutes. Congress makes the law, they do not. They do not "legislate from the bench", that is, make things up or creatively interpret wording in predictably biased ways. Of course this impartiality is an idealistic view.

      I would be more concerned with the quality of her reasoning and thinking than her career. But I fear that her choice of employer is indicative of poor judgement and poor critical thinking skills. Possibly she may rise above her chosen indoctrination, having always secretly doubted her employer's sophistries and rationalizations, and recognized their real motives, seeing through them. Or she may suffer a revelation and a change of heart. But I doubt it. Much more likely she is of one mind with the music industry's view. So she will sally forth to tilt against windmills on a new battleground.

      Legal professionals are annoyed that geeks believe they by and large do not understand the implications of technology. But until they demonstrate better understanding, by never again attempting such obviously bad legislation as ACTA, COICA, DMCA, and others, we are correct to view the legal profession with skepticism on this matter. Until the day comes that it is unthinkable for a judge to say we "created a monster", over mere P2P software, they should be doubted. That's the sort of language that should be saved for nuclear weapons. If they do sort of understand, they are entirely too reluctant to admit it. Perhaps they fear losing their livelihood, have some unworthy ulterior motive for their actions. The IP lawyers and proponents are self interested, greedy, manipulative fools. They're only too willing to take music industry money in exchange for bad service, trying to bend nature with laws, trying to do what cannot be done. Better to have someone with competence but no legal experience, than one who is either an idiot or a cheat.

      --
      Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
  12. Copyright thief? by fph+il+quozientatore · · Score: 2

    Funny, I read "copyright thief" at first.

    --
    My first program:

    Hell Segmentation fault

  13. Parliamentary question by mmcuh · · Score: 2

    Two MEPs, Christian Engström from the Swedish Pirate Party and Marietje Schaake from Dutch liberal party D66, have submitted a formal question to the European Commission (the EU government). The commission is obliged to reply within a couple of weeks, though there will probably be no real answer.