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.
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.
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.
...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.
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.
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.
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
So by your logic, beheading a lot of people to end a monarchy/empire just to give rise to Napoleon was a good thing.... so was a war AGAINST state's rights which ended in the slaughter and pillaging of the southern half of the then-existent country? Last I checked, we are now having state's rights issues that we wouldn't have if the south had been allowed to assert that the states could secede and form a new confederacy.
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.
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.
Revolution isn't a one time thing, you have to keep doing it on a regular basis.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
"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.
there's no more ammo box stage. you seriously think any citizen group can fight ANY modern 1st or 2nd world country's government?
when the balance of power existed, gov lived with us. now, they live over us and its never going to go back again.
ammo box is a null idea. it was great while we had it but its GONE. gone gone gone.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
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
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
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).
It doesn't matter. The amendment exists now.
They do make a habit of ignoring the constitution.
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.
While this is technically true, it should be pointed out that because of the very free flow of information we now experience we are also highly subject to massive amounts of information overload. This makes it very difficult for the uninformed person to make an accurate judgement on the information that is presented to them and when they get 18 different wildly different viewpoints, how do you know what to believe? Clearly some of these are exaggerations of the truth. Some are pretty close to the truth. Some are disingenous or ill informed themselves. Some are just downright lies fueled by a hidden agenda. Then you find 200 disparate sources arguing over whether the hidden agenda for opinion X even exists or not.
So the flow of information can no longer be controlled, but it can be obfuscated for the vast majority to the point where you create bitter divides and polarities in society allowing you more control and freedom to gain more power and influence. The game has changed, the vast majority are still misinformed and greatly outnumber the handful of people who actually see and can understand what is actually going on, so the powers that be pretty much can just ignore them.