Slashdot Mirror
RIAA CEO Hopes SOPA Protests Were a "One-Time Thing"
hapworth writes "After posting a controversial op-ed in The New York Times saying Wikipedia and Google 'misinformed' the public about SOPA and PIPA, Cary Sherman, CEO of the RIAA said in an interview yesterday that he hopes the SOPA protests were a 'one-time experience.' He also said that Wikipedia and Google users were duped into thinking SOPA was a bad bill because they assume "if it comes from these sources, it must be true." In another hilarious comment, Sherman blames the Internet for making it impossible for Congress to get out its side of the story, and for not spreading information with the same 'clarity and integrity' of broadcast journalists."
That's easy enough to accomodate. Stop pressing for draconian censorship legislation and this will never happen again.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Sorry, Mr RIAA CEO, it wasn't a one time deal. As long as you morons try passing this crap, we'll keep protesting. And the protests will only get bigger and bigger.
Thats funny... I was hoping SOPA was the one time thing.
The answer is very simple. Knock it off with your attempts to control the internet.
go fuck yourself, Cary.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Evelyn Beatrice Hall, re Voltaire
From what I recall, those broadcast journalists didn't even cover the bills. I'm sure they would greatly prefer the internet doing the same.
My God! He sure is retarded!
Wikipedia admin here that was quite involved with the shutdown. RIAA guy thinks we were 'deluded'.
Here's what actually happened. We had a discussion on Wikipedia for a few weeks. We asked the Wikimedia Foundation to instruct their General Counsel to prepare us a detailed listing of exactly what the problems are for Wikipedia with the bill. He did so, and produced a document listing a variety of problems that SOPA might cause for Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects. We then had a vote as to whether or not to take action.
By 'deluded', he means we as a community decided to ask a lawyer to look at the bill and tell us what he thinks, and then decided to take action. If that's delusion, I'm not sure what counts as sanity any more.
catch (HumourFailureException e) { e.user.send("You, sir, are a humourless idiot."); }
Let's hope not.
black-march.com
I explicitly release the above into the public domain.
Just like the American Revolution, the French Revolution, the Civil War...
Our way is the only way, our reality is the only reality ...
but just in case, we'll try to be sneakier about it next time so we don't get caught.
SOPA is just part of an exercising of the "door in the face technique". See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Door-in-the-face_technique
Soon, they'll loosen their demands a little and suddenly governments will be okay with it.
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
Nothing encourages like success. More people are aware and ready to participate the next time RIAA tries to bribe a heaping pile through Congress.
Hey Cary: the jerk store called, and they're running out of you!"
My userid is prime!
Clearly,
Since the way we communicate has changed greatly since the arrival of the internet, and there people afraid to embrace that change, we the denizens of the internet are in the wrong.
Seriously, My daughter's arguments for why she shouldn't have to do her homework are more well thought out than Mr. Sherman's.
There's that old saying, don't blame on malevolence, what can be blamed on stupidity.
I think it needs to be flipped around, because I simply cannot accept that these people really are that mindblowingly stupid.
...it was that the public was PROPERLY informed for the *very first* time.
In other words, the public *wasn't* misinformed on these ideas for the very first time.
And look at the amount of effort it took. It proves the posit that we've all been saying: corporate monopoly of information is one of the worst things that can happen to a free society. There is no real marketplace of ideas in the U.S. This is one of the few times in scores of years there has been anywhere near a fair debate on an important subject, and certain players had to scream LOOK AT ME LOOK AT ME to get it.
That's not how you spell "I hope every nerve ending in your body is permanently made to think it's on fire and you live forever", but yeah, the entire Internet is saying this.
of broadcast journalists
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
da da da dum indeed.
> He also said that Wikipedia and Google users were duped into thinking SOPA was a bad bill because they assume "if it comes from these sources, it must be true."
That's because, if it comes from those sources, it probably is true. Yes, that's right, we trust Google and Wikipedia more than some record industry executive. Dupe you.
Now that we've gotten that out of the way, why don't you start letting people download music from your website? You know you could be making money right now, doing that, instead of making a fool of yourself, right?
But don't take my word for it. Google it.
Yeah, where are the NRA nutjobs when you actually need them to get something done. Look, we've let you keep your firearms. Now comes your half of the bargain.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
"... and for not spreading information with the same 'clarity and integrity' of broadcast journalists." I'm with him! I don't use the internet to get reliable information. Why waste time checking the source integrity if you can get all the information you need from Fox News? They even do the job to filter 'bogus' information for me! Right? RIGHT?!?? What? Fox News isn't reliable? I don't trust you! You are probably a terrorist from the internet!
The inferred message here is that the RIAA (and presumably the MPAA, et al) will continue to try to pass this crap.
I have an inferred message right back (holds up a single finger).
In the wake of ESR's open letter to Chris Dodd, do I really need to remind you:
[D]on't screw with the Internet. Because it will screw you right back.
??
I can see the fnords!
They've been spreading disinformation for years on the news. Wikipedia on the otherhand does a much better job living up to standards like NPOV, and all its sub-rules, like no weasal words than any mainstream news source ever did.
Before anyone questions this what did Wikipedia do that comes close to "hackers on steroids"? This was a modern mainstream news segment. Did anyone loose their job over that? Thats not even touching RFC 1392, for what a hacker even was, something that seemed to be ignored by just about every mainstream media outlet(represented by the RIAA/MPAA that is).
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1392
But hey, what do trade organizations know? I mean they just
What was the big media's coverage of SOPA/PIPA to begin with??? Thats right, a total blackout. There was no discussion of this on mainstream news. The tactic was obviously sneak it by without anyone in the general public thinking about it until it was way to late.
As for piracy rules, they are already far too strong. They are basicly forcing start ups and small businesses who don't have the money to hire lawyers out of their own IP by letting well funding legal harrassment campaigns deprive them out of the very IP that is said to be protected?
Anyone who's ever used a free music track on youtube knows this. This is not content creators going after their work, its trolls and bullys stealing from people using the law via intimidation.
We need intellectual property law reform, and we need to place limits and what can and cannot be owned, and big time restrictions on acusations of unauthorized use.
Of course he does, he doesn't get it. SOPA protests didn't hurt his bottom line.
That is why we (I) am participating in Black March. Hit them somewhere they do understand.
while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
Fuck. You.
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
of how weak his own position is that his only response is the cry foul and claim everyone who opposed the bill had been misled. We weren't misled. We knew exactly why this bill was such a horrible piece of legislation. If anyone, it was him and the bills backers who were deluded in thinking that people would not get pissed off by such horribly half-baked legislation. We're talking about something that would have essentially made him and his friends judge and jury on copyright infringement online, will little to no recourse for the accused to defend themselves, and even then only after the fact.
We've seen how well they handled even lesser power in these matters, between frivolous DMCA takedown notices (sometimes on stuff they didn't even own the rights to), and more recently the case of a company claiming birdsong was in violation of its copyrights. The bill demonstrated a blatant disregard for internet security, by potentially crippling DNSSEC. And their response was simply, "Well, you're just going to have to scratch that plan and come up with something else, now aren't you?"
Given their practical disdain for how the internet works, and a plethora of precedents demonstrating they will not hesitate to abuse any power given them, we simply must have been misled into believing they didn't have our best interests at heart. I find this patronizing, "You just don't worry about it, we know what's best for you." attitude completely offensive. I'll be watching for the next time they try and slip garbage like this through, and you can be damn sure I'll be opposed to it then. Don't call me misled when you're lying through your teeth to me. I don't take kindly to it, and I would hope no one else would either. I'd love to see this inane series of statements by him blow up in his face and lead to even greater opposition next time he and his friends try to force something like SOPA down our throats.
...we have such a selfless paragon of virtue to set us straight.
Damned inconvenient, that Internet. Maybe we can have it shut off when we resubmit our legislation to Congress again.
We've got to get people behaving more like broadcast journalists. So we can just call their sales department and remind them who pays their bills.
Have gnu, will travel.
... hoping that the RIAA and similar institutions all over the world (The German GEMA especially) are a "One-Time Thing"
RIAA, if you think you can slip this by, then to "pirate" the old song lyric "You ain't seen nothin' yet."
Cary Sherman did have at least one good point. On the RIAA's Music Notes blog, he discussed how he went through and read every one of the 280 some comments on his very poorly received New York Times op-ed.
I was one of the ones who posted a substantive, up-voted comment on his op-ed, and his blog post addressed something I (and several other commenters) pointed out. Just Googling for the text of the bill leaves one with a misleading impression, because important amendments were not included in that text. I took Sherman to task for what I viewed as purposefully misleading people in his op-ed, doing exactly what he was complaining Wikipedia and Google were doing.
On that particular detail, I was wrong, and Sherman was right. So the point is taken that there is a lot of misunderstanding about what precisely this bill will do and not do. That said, what I think he continually fails to understand is that his association (and really, the entire industry) has virtually no credibility in the minds of the tech-savvy, Internet-using public. We know the record companies rip off actual artists with raw contracts. We know the RIAA supported the ridiculous tactic of suing individual file-sharers for astronomical damages in order to bully them into settlement. We know they inflate their losses, that they massage data, and that they lobby hard for what they want. In fact, that last part is to be expected by any industry trade group.
We're Americans. We know that practically everyone in politics is lying to us whenever they open their mouth. That's not news. I'm not sure why Cary Sherman expects a free pass on this issue... you've got the lobbying money, get in there and play hardball like everyone else.
"Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
While I'm not a supporter of SOPA, headlines with statements like "In another hilarious comment..." come across as more than a little biased. I hope News For Nerds doesn't sink to Blog For Nerds.
"we've let you keep your firearms" !?!??!?!?!? I am glad you got modded 'funny'. {whistle}
dumber people are doing harder things everyday
Are hoping that the stupidity of SOPA and proposals like it are a one time thing. If not, then be sure the protest won't be, either. And if it tries to sneak through, expect things to move to the next level (yes, there is a next level).
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
I can't believe he thinks that Congress has a side to tell. Their job is to listen to the people and not come up with their own version of the truth.
The problem is that Congress' side involves money from the RIAA.
No. Too far. Telling him to go fuck himself is perfectly fine, but inciting people to go kill him is clearly over the line.
Come on slashdot, self-police our nutjobs.
Try and take them. ;)
Sorry, we believe in the liberty to be a moron. We don't like it, but it's your right. If people would stop voting for corrupt sly assholes and actually paid attention to what they do, guys like this wouldn't get a foothold. Ain't a gun-applicable problem yet, but give it another 15 to 20 and it might be.
Cary Sherman apparently lost the use of his ears and eyes at an early age, and has compensated for it by becoming a complete dictatorial moron for the dark side.
not that there's anything wrong with that. oh, hell, yes there is. idiot, most of us have already purchased a use license for media (only crooked lawyers can steal full rights,) and want to utilize the Fair Use Provisions of the Copyright Act to transport this personal entertainment in the most convenient form.
keep demanding full price per thought of usage, fool, and you will wipe out your industry.
and get off my screen with your inanities.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
If it weren't for the fact that these guys were trying to protect bad music, they would be mistaken for a nut-case religious cult spouting their "I know I'm right" dogma.
Sorry, but gray text on gray background is making my eyes bleed.
As someone who once respected IP law, I've long since decided that because of your disproportionate response to violators and your manipulation of our government, that you need to be fought. I now pirate any music I like, go out of my way not to pay, and encourage other to do the same. I do this in order to cut off your supply of money, which you use to oppress people. Pass it on.
Why is this "too far"? Let's say SOPA gets made into law, through this guy's direct efforts. What do you suppose it will take to get our rights back? They certainly won't say, "Oh, shucks! You're right. Our bad." If an eventual SCOTUS ruling makes SOPA permanent, will it result in fighting in the streets over our freedoms? Who knows?
That's why SkyNet so badly wanted to go back in time and kill John Connor before he could become a powerful leader of the resistance.
Two words: PATRIOT Act.
True, we may not have forgotten it, and I'll never forgive the treasonous assholes who foisted it on us, but that doesn't mean we did anything effective about it.
I'm not sure why Cary Sherman expects a free pass on this issue... you've got the lobbying money, get in there and play hardball like everyone else.
I bet a lot more journalists are paying attention there now that Chris Dodd stuck his foot in his mouth and admitted that (at least from the MPAA's perspective if not the congressmen's perspectives) the MPAA was buying votes. They'll have to let that sleep for a while before they can start makin' it rain again.
I would think that the last thing the RIAA wants in a message to the public that has either clarity or integrity, as either would get in the way of their agenda.
We're Americans. We know that practically everyone in politics is lying to us whenever they open their mouth. That's not news. I'm not sure why Cary Sherman expects a free pass on this issue... you've got the lobbying money, get in there and play hardball like everyone else.
Cary's problem is that he doesn't have the money. Music is a pathetically small business compared to other media...only a couple $billion/year. The movie industry is measured in tens of $billions/year, and so are the videogame and TV industries. The very quiet, very boring print industry behemoth is over one $trillion/year. (If that surprises you, compare Lady Gaga's wealth to JK Rowling's. People spend more money on books in one summer than has ever been spent on music ever.)
What the RIAA expected was for every other media industry to follow their lead in drawing a line in the sand and fighting digital delivery and taking a hard-line stance on piracy. They would lead the charge and thought eventually the others would back them up with real resources later. MPAA stuck with them for a little while, but the other industries starting hedging their bets and seeing where the technology goes. Oops.
the RIAA can just leave the internet alone. If you don't like it, dont be a part of it.
love paywalls that restrict free speech
Many of the mainstream media outlets in the US are part of corporate conglomerates that also own content provider members of the RIAA or MPAA. Even assuming that reporters still have 'clarity and integrity', their program managers and others up the corporate hierarchy may strongly discourage reporting on the subject accurately due to corporate conflicts of interest. As someone else pointed out, SOPA got no coverage by most mainstream news organizations until the blackouts of Wikipedia, Google, and other large websites made knowledge of it so widespread that it became impossible to ignore and still pretend to be a provider of news.
Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
Remember Jerry, its not a lie...if you believe it.
Really, I know what I'm doing...Ohhhh, look at the shiny buttons!
Death panels, while hyperbole, was a turn of phrase quite indicative of what will be erected. The government will be forced to cut costs, and that is what happens. It denies treatment. The truly rich will of course still get theirs, and now you'll have added to that every political bloodsucker who might not be very rich or have access to the congressional health plan getting theirs as well. This is especially true as the magic sack of money will go poof in the next 15-50 years and even if you were to completely remove defense spending right now we're still running a large deficit, and it's only going to get worse. The really fucking hilarious part of this is the insurance market is primarily fucked up because of the employer insurance credit and lack of interstate insurance. This makes all moving jobs or losing your job much more precarious than it otherwise would be.
SOPA can't be made permanent by a Supreme Court ruling. It's merely legislation, and legislation can always be repealed. The way to remove SOPA is to elect people who will repeal it. Even Constitutional Amendments can be repealed, although that is fairly uncommon (but it has happened at least a few times).
In any event, no fighting is required. Yes, it may be hard to remove the people in power without guns if they are entrenched in the system, but all you technically need are votes.
Now if they start seriously cheating on the elections...and I don't mean one or two contested elections... that's the time to start consider the guns, because then, there is almost no recourse but that. Just remember that the French Revolution started with the best of intentions, and ended up causing rivers of blood both in France and elsewhere. Let's not get too hasty in our appeal to the gun, even if we should defend our right to have that ability.
The Internet community is in the process of creating the "Universal Library". I'm a librarian at heart, and want to see all of mankind's knowledge available to everyone, everywhere, instantly. The benefit of having that far outweighs the loss to particular people who want to keep knowledge enslaved to their ownership. The last decade has seen enormous progress towards that goal.
Libraries and publishers have always been at odds, but they don't prevent publishers from making money. It's when the publishers get too greedy and restrict the circulation of knowledge that it causes brain damage to civilization. This is why libraries are funded by governments, donations, and universities - on the whole they are a good thing.
Organizations like the RIAA are simply going to be roadkill on the way to the Universal Library. Excuse me while I go work on it some more...
Interesting read. It seems a lot more reasonable than his op-ed piece. I think one of the most telling things from his blog post is this:
"The fact is, content and tech need each other."
He is absolutely correct. Now I wish he would tell us how exactly the RIAA is helping to create content, or protect the artists (aka content creators). Because all I see them doing is protecting the dinosaurs that still run the music industry.
Artists who are true to their craft want people to listen to their music, and if they make a ton of money off of it that's a bonus. If I was an independent musician that uploaded my new music video to youtube and got 50 million views, I would make a nice piece of change on that ad revenue (and using existing laws I could task youtube with making sure other users don't re-post my stuff). The RIAA is all about protecting the middle man from getting screwed out of that money and putting consumers over a barrel while compensating the artist as little as possible. It has nothing to do with protecting or creating content.
but dont you have to find a new child to exploit now that bieber is 18?
Whereas insurance companies would never deny treatment. And people who just pay for their own medical treatment would never not be able to afford something and have to deny treatment.
Let's start referring to them as the "Buggy Whip Protection Association of America", since they are equally out of tune with the times (pun intended).
How do you define "seriously"? http://www.michaelparenti.org/stolenelections.html
I say we compromise and give the *AA the internet death penalty. Kill all of their connections, shut down all their web presence. Send them back to the 20th century (or perhaps they'd be more comfortable in the 19th).
> Telling him to go fuck himself is perfectly fine, but inciting people to go
> kill him is clearly over the line.
Fine...
How about a compromise?
Cary Sherman, go fuck yourself to death.
Log in or piss off.
As long as next Friday is the arrival date and not the construction date, sure.
That is a Republican game, so Fox could label him weak on terrorism. So he says "it doesn't go far enough" and refuses to sign it, thus defeating their game. They then put in safeguards for Americans and he then signs it, but refusing to ever use it.
You come along and try to label it as 'Obama' law. However it was pure politics, and attempt to give Fox a sound bite to scare Americans into changing Presidents.
A Republican game in an election year.
The solution is to not vote for those idiot Republicans and to re-introduce the requirement that broadcast networks be fair and balanced. The recent Fox GOP talking points memo, revealed that the GOP writes Fox's talking points for them, as such they're a campaign company outside the normal PAC limits, and well outside of the campaign finance limits.
Rupert Murdoch should not pick the USA President.
Do you think RIAA would stop seeking a SOPA/PIPA style solution if everyone stopped illegally downloading music and video?
How long would it take RIAA to run out of money for "legal bullying", if everyone stopped buying music and other media(as a protest)?
If a SOPA/PIPA style bill dose eventually get through, will it stop people from finding a new way to download music?
And if all the illegal down-loaders move on, will the ineffective and draconian censorship of the Internet be removed?
The problem with such bills is that they are so susceptible to abuse and manipulation, and ultimately, do not address the actual problem, just a symptom; at the end of the day stealing is already a crime, and law enforcement agency's around the world already have the power to shut-down counterfeiting operations, and do on a regular basis, we don't need "special laws" allowing proper due process and oversight to be circumvented.
The days when corporations and special-interest lobby groups could operate behind the smokescreen of media reporting are over.
There are hundreds of thousands of people interested enough in different issues to monitor the news, Parliament, Congress, twitter accounts, websites, and God knows what else for hints of abuse of the rights of citizens over the power of government and business.
What that means is it's virtually impossible to have another Watergate without someone tweaking to it well before it can escalate into such a debacle.
Witness the way the Harper government is being held to task over the robocalls. Much as they wish it would go away, it's pretty clear that the opposition MPs, the people on the internet, and the media of all kinds are not willing to "let it go" or let it be swept under the rug again. The Harper government has a major credibility problem right now, the same as the US government had when they were caught selling out to the *AA special interest lobbyists by tabling SOPA.
While the *AA have money to keep buying Congress, the people have nothing but free time to monitor Congress for each and every attempt to bring this nightmare legislation back.
Any industry which relies on kickbacks and lobbyists better rethink their strategy. Because while they can buy Congressmen and MPs, the Congressmen and MPs can't get away without getting caught any more.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
seriously, no one "lets me" keep my guns except for me
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
never thought I'd see a democrat actually admit that he thinks the American people are stupid.
> and for not spreading information with the same 'clarity and integrity' of broadcast journalists."
Um, I think I just threw up a little in the back of my mouth. (I hate it when that happens. It's hard on the fillings.)
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
By "counterfeit" he means "generic" - or worse, the exact same legitimate medicine in the same packages from the same factory once exported and sold abroad for less than the US price and then re-imported.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
"The fact is, content and tech need each other."
I call bullshit. Technology does not need copyrighted content to survive or flourish. If profit motive won't drive technological advances, the human spirit will.
this is just the beginning ... of the end.
They would never steal votes I wouldn't think.....
Did you know that by many accounts, Bush Jr lost the 2004 election by over 300,000 votes... OMG ANTHRAX IN THE MAIL! ANTHRAX IN THE MAIL!!!!! Whew, glad that was over, what was I talking about???? Oh, some Florida state investigator looking into voting fraud turned up dead along with a few other people? Oh well, didn't hear about it on any mainstream news station so must not be a problem.....
Now, go mod me down as troll or flamebait anyways......
We're Americans. We know that practically everyone in politics is lying to us whenever they open their mouth.
Not everyone in politics is a lying SOB. Just about everyone in the political ESTABLISHMENT is. There are plenty of good candidates who run for office. They are "in politics" by definition, but almost always not in the political establishment. There are a fair number of people who actually get elected and who at least begin as principled and honorable public servants. Sure, a large majority of them get corrupted when they gradually slide into the political establishment.
Our true problem is that lying is widely EFFECTIVE in politics. Voters fall for it. Or they overlook it because there is some pandering position they agree with.
Yeah, right...I bet he does.
Try pointing your gun at someone randomly and see if "we" take it away. Sorry.
Brave words, but meaningless.
The RIAA needs to stop treating the public like the enemy or the public will treat the RIAA the same.
Paying off a bunch of politicians and running a little secret program to radically change the laws overnight without a proper public debate was a hostile act.
Stop doing that or you'll be regarded henceforth as an enemy to be wiped out.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
the fact that they are trying to sell the intangible
they are not even trying ...
where is the shop that i can go to with my usb stick in one hand and a ten dollar bill in the other hand and buy some mp3 music files, an avi movie file or a piece of software?
it doesn't exist ... and that's exactly the problem.
You are right about the RIAA, but the MPAA is a much larger industry than you are giving it credit. J.K. Rowling only has so much money because the Harry Potter films are a cash cow for her, and they reinforce and encourage book reading.
The saving grace is, the MPAA isn't nearly as affected by the digitization of media, because part of what they sell is the movie theater experience. The DVD sales is icing on the cake for them. However, the RIAA doesn't control concerts. In fact, it's one of the parts of the much larger music industry that they don't control either directly or indirectly. Also, moving pictures with sound are much harder to digitize than just sound. So the MPAA isn't as threatened by file sharing as the RIAA is.
This difference is why the MPAA can take their sweet time in shutting down sites like Suprnova while the RIAA is running around suing their customers' pants off. It's easy to pass an MP3 around even using an ad-hoc network between two proximal devices. It takes considerably more resources to do the same with a feature-length motion picture. The MPAA still has time (while broadband adoption is low).
The print industry isn't going anywhere. Tablets and self-publishing are both threats, but they're not real threats to the industry, only to its growth. There's nothing like picking up a book and flipping through its pages. Until a machine can replicate that experience, books are going nowhere. And piracy is an afterthought, as books ultimately get priced sufficiently low that it's not too expensive for anyone to purchase recreationally.
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
You're off topic and trolling now, but for amusement sake: now you sound like the nutters that claim income tax isn't legal because it wasn't ratified. 2A was signed in as part of the original 10 and happens to be the reason you can enjoy the other 9, and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.
Oh, and the militia is defined as all able-bodied men between 17 and 45 per US Code. But for equality we've let every adult have one if they so choose and haven't had the right taken by court order.
Has he ever given it back? Has he started speaking in the Senate on the issue for you, where before he wasn't?
The effectiveness of your tactic is debatable.
I don't really care if the RIAA comes up with a super duper bill that will solve the world starvation or bring the world peace.
My problem is the whole concept of copyright, how it is enforced and how it invades my privacy and my property rights.
Fist of all is the term of copyright is overblown and kills our culture. How is a copyright term of over 100 years going to encourage anything? It just kills the public domain and thus our culture.
Second, is the dragonical punishment for copyright infringement, even for private, non commercial infringement. Private, non commercial infringement should either be allowed or should have a punishment fee like 50$.
Third, it's the invasion of my privacy, with DRM and with EULAs or TOS. When I buy your stuff, it's mine to do what ever I like in my own home, for private use. That is, I can copy it as much as I like, I can format shift it and I can give it to my friends. I can play it how, when and on what device I like.
Finally, when I buy it, it's mine. I can sell it or lend it. It's my property.
And I don't care how many artists have to starve to death or how "unfair" it is. An artist have no right to be paid indefinitely over a one time job, neither have she the right to be paid or to make a living from her art. And no, that will not be the end of all art as we know it.
So just fuck of RIAA MPAA GEMA and what not. I don't need you, I don't want you, and I don't need your laws.
http://www.mueller-public.de - My site http://www.anr-institute.com/ - Advanced Natural Research Institute
Yeah, where are the NRA nutjobs when you actually need them to get something done. Look, we've let you keep your firearms. Now comes your half of the bargain.
Try and take them. ;)
Uh, take your firearms? No no... Try and NOT stand up for the 1st amendment and watch all the others fall like dominoes. In other words, "Try and Take ANY of my rights." is what should be said instead... perhaps that's what you meant? (I'll just assume so).
Sorry, we believe in the liberty to be a moron. We don't like it, but it's your right. If people would stop voting for corrupt sly assholes and actually paid attention to what they do, guys like this wouldn't get a foothold. Ain't a gun-applicable problem yet, but give it another 15 to 20 and it might be.
Wait 20 years!?!?!? NO. Guns aren't worth piss if the country isn't worth fighting for... Go back and read your Declaration of Independence:
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
You want to see a moron? Look at the fools who "suffer, while evils are sufferable" instead of "abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed." Don't you see? The system is corrupt no matter who we vote in. Look up Gerrymandering, or read about Lobbyists who basically OWN both sides of the fence. If it's not ALREADY bad enough for you to be rallying support to change things, then it never will be. Sit on your pile of useless weapons until you absolutely have to use them... wow, just wow.
Hate to break it to you, but anything you can dream up with satire, they're already dreaming up for real.
SOPA-II is ... wait for it ... PC-FIPA, HR1981 = Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act.
I submitted it a week ago for a Slashdot story. It got voted up Red Hot in the Firehose. Slashdot didn't run it. They ran the Idle piece of "Eternal Copyright" instead.
So yes, RIAA-Guy is partially right. We're already bored with Blackouts.
"If you don't get your bill passed, make it WORSE, change the backstory to the ultimate counter line, and submit it again!"
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
I doubt that people think that "if it comes from these sources, it must be true." for everything what Google or Wikipedia says. However, we can be sure that people think "if it comes from these sources, it must be false." for everything the RIAA CEO says about those laws. So, basically, he reinforced with his comment what people understood about SOPA etc.
What's even worse is that some people think that piracy (something I can't see anyone believing is worse than jaywalking) is so bad that we need draconian, rights-violating legislation to combat it (it won't work, either).
Some artists even support SOPA. And if you're not an artist yourself, I've seen them say, "You're not an artist! Therefore, your criticism is invalid!" as if you must be an artist to reject draconian laws that will affect everyone. This mentality of dismissing all criticism because someone isn't in the same group as you (content makers) is retarded. They don't even see their own bias (as if someone who thinks they directly benefit from such legislation isn't biased).
He misses an important point when he says that people were duped because they believe that if it comes from sources such as Google and Wikipedia that it must be true. That point is that people make another assumption, if it is supported by the RIAA and the MPAA, people assume, accurately in every case I can think of, that it is a bad bill.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Even the famous phrase goes "a well armed militia being necessary for the preservation of a free state, the right for the people to bear arms shall not be infringed" (i may have slightly paraphrased, but that's almost it). This implies that firearms aren't just for organised militamen, rather, the citizens themselves *are* the militia, and therefore everyone shall be allowed to own firearms.
Cary Sherman,
Destroyer of culture, obliterator of freedom, pusher of dreck, worthless massive drain on humanity's resources, blatant unrepentant liar, stinking black stain on human history.
Fuck off and die in a fire you piece of scum. I hope the next breath you take is "a one-time thing." I hope your family loses all their ill-gotten gains and lives in poverty, and has to change their last names and go into hiding to avoid the association with your dark legacy. I consider that a very fair punishment.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
It doesn't matter. The amendment exists now.
They do make a habit of ignoring the constitution.
I was kind of hoping that the existence of the RIAA would be a one time thing and that it had a terminal illness by now... When will it die? Euthanasia anyone?
I'm not sure a multi-party system is much better by default. In essence you have the special interests with actual representation, instead of the interests just paying someone off in one of the two parties (or both). More transparent, sure, but better? There are plenty of examples where small minority parties have controlled the agenda despite not even having close to a majority.
George Washington warned about the dangers of political faction, and personally, I think we'd be better off with two less parties, not a half-dozen more of them. I recognize that people will tend to organize themselves for certain goals, but the way that the two parties have sort of flip flopped and somersaulted over one another in their century or so of existence makes me wonder if they aren't just vehicles for certain personalities, as opposed to even platforms.
Train wrecks are fun to watch.
Yes, from a distance, assuming the train isn't barreling towards your house.
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
Any loss of rights is deplorable, agreed. The 2nd tends to put teeth on the defense of them.
My point was there are still civil ways to enact change. I believe the popular phrase is "Soap box, ballot box, jury box, ammo box: use in that order." While the system is slow, it can still be used if people pull their heads out and stop voting for "both" sides; stop picking those who talk out of both sides of their mouth, and start convincing good local people to run for positions.
Rallying, protesting, and otherwise showing political force is good. The guns shouldn't be pulled out until all else is failed, but that in no way means you should sit while the state crumbles around you. SOPA is a perfect example. Tons of money behind that, but people spoke out in numbers and the politicians backed off (except the few, particularly in CA, who are known to not give a damn what people want).
The copyright fundamentalists should have taken the OPEN Act (which itself still needs some tweaks; see the EFF write-up) and called it a day. It really says something that the voices for fair use—Ron Wyden, Zoe Lofgren, Jared Polis, etc.—were the ones introducing a bill to create a mechanism to starve allegedly infringing sites of funding.
Previous legislative processes, e.g. the development of the ideas that became the anticircumvention proceedings in the DMCA, showed at least some willingness to compromise and listen to critical input—hardly done in a good-faith effort to craft good legislation for the 21st Century, but at least willing to hold multiple hearings and actually hear from all of the critics. That at a time when there weren't nearly as many critics!
This time around, the copyright zealots and their allies in Congress decided on a fingers-in-the-ears, ram-it-through-ASAP strategy. That is, until January 18. Now, suddenly, they're claiming that the tech industry and civil society groups need to be more willing to sit down and talk. This while Chris Dodd won't even make time for lunch with Gary Shapiro—the head of the Consumer Electronics Association, not exactly Richard f'ing Stallman.
The gall these folks have shown in the last two years, the pure nerve, is amazing—even in the context of the copyright debate for the previous 25+ years, a time when they've some real chutzpah.
Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act
Well, we're boned. There aren't enough Congresspeople or Senators that would have the balls to vote against a bill titled as such, no matter what we do.
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
That sounds like an awesome comic book villain.
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
Interesting comment, but your link didn't work for me.
I also read every one of the comments, on into the night. My impression is here. I concluded that this guy should feel so humiliated after reading all those comments he should want just crawl up in a hole somewhere and die.
I wouldn't worry that you discovered you were wrong about some little point. The point is that having the RIAA dictating legislation is wrong to the point of absurdity. Nothing good could have ever come of it. It had to be discarded like tainted evidence brought to a trial, on principal alone, in a swift summary judgment.
Dragonical! Awesome! I think you just invented a new word!
http://www.acetonestudio.com
What you describe about the parties being vehicles for personalities seems correct, from my detached point of view, as somebody that are from another country but is interested in US politics and living in the US. However, my impression is that your parties are vehicles for personalities because you've set up your election system so it elects individuals instead of parties - which also leads to your two-party system.
Where I'm originally from (Norway), the system works quite well. Elections are based on voting for lists of people[1], generally supplied by parties[2] but being possible to set up without forming a party. Voting is tabulated by county (there's only 20 counties in Norway; for US federal elections, this would have to be by state) and the number of positions available is split between the different candidates from the lists based on the number of votes[3]. This will leave some votes for particular lists 'over' - to compensate for that, there's some extra positions nationally that's divided among all parties with >4% of the vote, to even out their left over votes.
The 4% limit is to avoid having too many extremely small/single interest parties, which we worry would make the political process work worse. (I don't necessarily agree, but that's the rationale.)
The overall result of this is a political system with about 8 major active political parties, and some stray parties with a single representative, covering a range of different interests. The overall political process is generally seen to work well.
There's a couple of other important details that are likely significant in this: We prohibit political TV and radio advertising, and parties have automatic access to public debates.
[1] You have to start with an approved list, but you can remove people and add people and re-order; however, as far as I know changing the list has only ever made a difference in city elections, never at the national level. It is certainly not common for changes to have an effect at the national level.
[2] The power of parties is that they can supply the lists as detailed in [1] without having to have more than two signatures, they get some value out of 'left over votes', they get some financial support, and they have an automated right to defense of their name against confusion from other parties or list creators. To create a party you need a certain number of signatures; for the national election it's 5000 signatures from people that are (or will shortly be) eligible to vote. If you don't have a party, you can publish a list for voting: It needs to to have 500 signatures on the list of candidates for the national and county elections, or 2% of the voters in the city for a city (but 300 signatures will always be considered sufficient for a city election).
Doubting the existence of evolution is like doubting the existence of China: It just shows that you're uninformed.
thanks for this link i could use a good laugh ... one time thing, that's like ... really really funny
Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?
So you're saying the MPAA has been secretly bribing the telecom and broadband industry to keep bandwidth artificially low all this time.
Hmmmm.
This is disgusting, because it's supporting child abuse and using children as political pawns, but...
Maybe it's time to donate to NAMBLA?
If NAMBLA was powerful, it'd at least destroy the "but child pornography!" argument for bad bills...
(I'm not being entirely serious here, just for the record.)
Then, but not until then, will most of my apathetic non-voting countrymen bother to get up off the couch.
Perhaps your non-voting countrymen have simply come to the realization that voting for $bad1, $bad2, ... $badN isn't going to change a thing. I mean, come on. Barach Obama, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum; that's a choice? They're all going to end up doing essentially the same shitty stuff and end up in the pocket of rich lobbyists, so why even bother? The game's rigged against you no matter which way you play.
Politics in Syria these days are more interesting than USA politics. At least they know what they're fighting, and dieing, for.
"Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit
That's not how you spell "I hope every nerve ending in your body is permanently made to think it's on fire and you live forever", but yeah, the entire Internet is saying this.
I'm not ordinarily a religious man (far from it), but even I'll say Amen to that.
Feel the hate, Cary. I advocate boycotting *AAs and don't pirate, yet even I feel this way. You're a destroyer of worlds; anathema. :-|
"Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit
They'll have to let that sleep for a while before they can start makin' it rain again.
You can close the barn door as many times as you want once the horse has bolted. It still won't be in there. This kind of !@#$ is pretty hard to forget, even for 30 second attention span sheeples. When the National Post (Canada) has two inch high headlines like (paraphrased), "How To Cope When The Web Goes Dark", even my Mom wonders what's smelling so bad.
"Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit
Both categories can have their places in the world, I just wish that the first group (and Big Media representing them) would not call themselves 'artists', because they aren't.
Chauvenist.
Back when I was into that stuff, we had "Fine Art" and "Arts and Crafts." The former included things like painting, sculpture, & etc. The latter included things like pottery, batique, & etc.
I'd put some of my hand thrown pottery up against a Picasso any day, and it would win on relevance alone. Some of my glazes were to die for; far more subtle than anything *any* painter has ever done. You haven't lived until you've seen what can be done with Raku pottery techniques.
Bite me, Pablo, you pretentious git. Take Jackson Pollock with you when you go.
"Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit
Our true problem is that lying is widely EFFECTIVE in politics. Voters fall for it. Or they overlook it because there is some pandering position they agree with.
I disagree. The true problem is most voters are ordinarily lazy, ignorant slugs. They don't think about the issues. They vote for "their guys" (partisan politics), regardless of what's really going on, because "the other guys" are either socialists/commies/liberals/mushy or fascists/capitalists/religious nutcases/"think of the children".
Last Friday, my provincial premier outright lied to us. "Blah, blah, blah MUST be on the table!" A couple of days later, it came out that it wasn't going to be on the table. The ensuing outroar is damned near deafening. Nobody's falling for it. It's *the* big topic in all local media.
Politicians underestimate us regularly. They think they can get away with anything, but the reality is otherwise, as the SOPA/PIPA/ACTA reaction proves. Unfortunately, even voting them out changes nothing, as the likes of Chris Dodd proves.
"Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit
I think I will trademark it. :p
http://www.mueller-public.de - My site http://www.anr-institute.com/ - Advanced Natural Research Institute
I've regularly asked my Senator for my constitution back, how about you?
Asked!?! For !@#$'s sake man! Any politico not upholding that thing deserves nothing less than a well aimed ice pick.
It's probably a good thing I don't own a sniper rifle and have no idea how to build bombs. Nowadays, I sure wish I did, a lot.
"Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit
I think that I speak for everyone when I openly wonder : Should someone this mentally deficient really be the spokesperson of SOPA and the Congress?
You get what you pay for, and apparently they're not smart shoppers. "Can you lie?" "Yup." "Scruples?" "Nope." "You're hired."
"Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit
...and I don't mean one or two contested elections...
At the risk of godwining the hell out of this thread.. well.. it only took ONE bad government to end up with the holocaust...
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
If someone exposes your dishonest scheme, lie, lie, lie, lie, and lie some more, repeat the same lies over and over again in every venue and on every news network so often that people start to think you are telling the truth. Accuse everyone else of being dishonest, accuse everyone else of conspiring against you, tell everyone who will listen, and if anyone who listens actually believes your lies, praise them for being fair and balanced.
The second rule of PR is...
lie, lie, lie, lie, and lie some more, repeat the same lies over and over again in every venue and on every news network so often that people start to think you are telling the truth. Accuse everyone else of being dishonest, accuse everyone else of conspiring against you, tell everyone who will listen, and if anyone who listens actually believes your lies, praise them for being fair and balanced.