Slashdot Mirror
GOP Study Committee Director Disowns Brief Attacking Current IP Law
cervesaebraciator writes "Saturday an article was featured on Slashdot which expressed some hope, if just a fool's hope, that a recent Republican Study Committee Brief could be a sign of broader national discussion about the value of current copyright law. When one sees such progress, credit is deservedly given. Unfortunately, others in Washington did not perhaps see this as worthy of praise. The committee's executive director, Paul Teller, sent a memo today disavowing the earlier pro-copyright reform brief. From the memo: 'Yesterday you received a Policy Brief or [sic] copyright law that was published without adequate review within the RSC and failed to meet that standard. Copyright reform would have far-reaching impacts, so it is incredibly important that it be approached with all facts and viewpoints in hand.' People who live in districts such as Ohio's 4th would do well to send letters of support to those who crafted the original brief. I cannot imagine party leadership will be happy with so radical a suggestion as granting copyright protection for the limited times needed to promote the progress of science and useful arts."
of course the GOP is not for this.
I said as much and got modded down during the last time this came up, a few days ago.
most of us knew that the gop would not support this. they are so much NOT into the concepts given here that it had to be a 'mistake'.
and we were right.
yes, the republicans are this predictable. and untrustworthy.
nothing has changed with them and probably won't in the short term, either. if anything, they double-down on their derp when called on it.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
The original memo was probably a sneaky way of trying to get just enough reform through to let politicians use songs by musicians who don't want them to. It's surprising how often the politicians feign ignorance of copyright laws when they want something like "Eye of the Tiger" as their campaign's theme song.
With this, I guess the GOP's chances of redeeming themselves by letting go of the corporate backscratching will lose forward momentum. Without additional engines in the party, there's no steam left to do some good in the copyright world.
- Cassius
Yesterday you received a Policy Brief of copyright law that was published without adequate scrubbing of any truth or fact the RSC sets as a standard for supporting, so I'm disavowing the brief after the fact.
Copyright reform could severely cut into campaign contributions--contributions that amount to little more than kick backs from rent seekers over the economically unsound practices that the Policy Brief spells out--, so it's incredibly important that we allow the copyright industry to present "facts" and present their "viewpoints" to counter anything that the brief lays out. I mean, sure, we don't do the same thing when it comes to climate research or currently illegal drug studies. But, we really don't want to fiddle around with the status quo and upset our power base. I mean, did you really thing think we were any less in bed with Hollywood than the Democrats? We'll gladly take their money; we just wish they were less gay or liberal or whatever.
PS - I think we all saw this coming. :/
Eurohacker European paranoia, gun rights, and h
*sigh*
I was hoping a whole day would pass without a political thread.
What happened to new for nerds? Is it just me or has the quality of articles been slipping?
...radical a suggestion as granting copyright protection for the limited times needed to promote the progress of science and useful arts.
...radical a suggestion as doing what the Constitution says.
*I shake my head slowly.
No doubt they got a lot of phone calls from MAFIAA lobbyists with totally convincing $facts and $viewpoints.
They must have realized that it made sense. Can't have any of that.
since I'm a dirty foruhner from socialist Europe, but isn't
"I cannot imagine party leadership will be happy with so radical a suggestion as granting copyright protection for the limited times needed to promote the progress of science and useful arts."
going totally against the spirit and literally wording of the Constitution of the USA? He admits he considers the current law blatantly unconstitutional and still knowingly supports it. If he is a member of congress or any other public politic body and has swore any oaths on the constitution, he's now in breach of said oath, no?
At least this report is out there. Its now up to us to contact Republican congresspeople and let them know that we want them to pursue this.
When your writing your representative, don't forget to remind them that nearly everyone involved in the music and movie industries hates their guts and believes they're evil and says so openly. Let them know that what the industry says it wants and what the people want and need from copyright are chasms apart.
It's time for someone to stand up for the people's rights in this copyright fight, and the Republicans can do that. They really dont have much to lose and have a lot to gain.
Innundate them with letters supporting this proposal. Show overwhelming support for it. Let them know that "we the people" think it's time for them to tell the copyright maximalists to go straight to hell.
For a party that bitches and moans about excessive regulations as much as the GOP, it astounds me that they cannot see how current IP law is smothering proper innovation.
(Okay, it doesn't astound me; in the context of corporate power in the US, it makes perfect sense. I guess what's most surprising is the doublethink required to enable these guys to spout off anti-regulation propaganda while wholeheartedly supporting complex systems of regulation, rail against welfare while supporting vast corporate welfare programs and subsidies, etc. etc.)
I suspect the tactic you suggest will itself fail. Bills that change the budget must originate in the house which is currently R majority. However copyright can be proposed for change by the House, the Senate, or even the president or any of the many Federal Regulators. The problem is not getting something proposed. It is getting something likely to get the support of a wide range of constituencies. If anybody in the /. or other forum communities want to have real impact, I wojuld focus on the particular language and circulate that and carefully record feedback you get from politicians and lobbying groups.
I have helped craft several house bills and I assure you logic and reason are in no way involved. It is 100% political, posturing, and misleading criticism that is involved. It has to survive that crazy environment.
This in an era where economics is trumped by politics ti the point it could actually financially crash the entire country.
Like the Republican's view of legitimate rape, or that God odranes rape as a viable conception method,
they are concerned about legitimate copyright - let's face it, works going into the Public Domain is a give-away
to those 47% slackers who take, take, take and are a scourge on their hard work.
The public doesn't deserve that entitlement.
They really believe this stuff; it's not an act.
CAPTCHA = shooters (Hey, not my suggestion)
He got a call from a massive donor who benefits from restrictive copyright (Disney, etc.) and he was told to immediately 'review' this position or he'd see an impact on national funding.
They're all such whores. Simply whores....except whores at least make one other person happy, they're not QUITE as selfish as politicians.
-Styopa
Here are three links to the text form of the brief:
On One of My Boxes
On Reference Blog
On Pastebin
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
You portray the Republicans as being one, cohesive entity, but that's extremely far from the truth. The reality is that there is much division within the party.
So you've got the so-called "neoconservatives". These are holdovers from the Bush administration. They're generally pro-big-business, pro-war, and in favor of anything that'll make them more money. The GOP is more of a tool to them, than it is something that they hold any inherent belief in.
Then you've got the "religious fundamentalists" and "teapartiers". These are the ones who are against abortion, against homosexuals, and who are crazy for their twisted idea of Jesus Christ. They are less focused on business, but rather on social issues. They have shown themselves to be the less-intelligent of all of the groups within the GOP. These are often the Southerners who receive significant amounts of direct government assistance, but then turn around and protest the very government social programs that they leech off of continually.
Over the past decade or so, the neoconservatives and religious fundamentalists have courted one another, in order to gain control over the Republican Party. They've been the public face of the GOP during this time.
There are other major groups within the party, however. There are also the "paleoconservatives" and the "libertarians". They're the ones who advocate smaller government, less involvement of the government within the daily lives of Americans, and so forth. Since these views often conflict with those of the neoconservatives and religious fundamentalists, these groups have been marginalized recently, although they formerly were a large part of the GOP.
The most interesting subgroup, however, are generally referred to as the "sensibles". These are often younger Republicans who are generally completely against the craziness of the religious fundamentalists, against the domestically-harmful warmaking of the neoconservatives, and who generally have a more relaxed view than the paleoconservatives or the libertarians.
One other thing to consider about the sensibles is that they represent a much wider swath of American society. They include blacks, Hispanics, Middle Easterners and Asians, for instance. People like this are generally shunned by the rest of the Republican subgroups. Interestingly, although these people don't have white skin, they have adopted political stances that have traditionally been held by whites.
They are willing to openly admit to facts that otherwise haven't (or politically couldn't) be admitted to by the existing Republican groups, nor by the Democrats. They're more than willing to admit that blacks are responsible for more crimes than other races, even when there are many more whites and Hispanics who are far worse off, economically and socially. They'll admit that the unbridled illegal immigration from Central and South America has been extremely harmful to the American economy. They see that existing IP laws and practices are hindering the American economy. They know that American military involvement in the Middle East and in other areas of the world has been harmful to America as a whole. They see the War on Drugs as a waste of valuable resources. They don't care if one man wants to stick his penis up another willing man's rectum.
I think that it's these "sensibles" who are the Republican's best bet for relevance in the future. They're the only ones who don't hold antiquated, or just straight-out insane, views. They hold a much more realistic view of the world. They see truths that the other Republicans can't see, or that they refuse to see. They are the only ones who present a sane, viable alternative to the Democrats. And while they're relatively small in number now, it's likely that they'll become far more prominent as time goes on.
Just one more issue the GOP is on the wrong side of!
I wrote a quick email to my congressman, who is a Republican. I was a little sleepy when I did because I get I'll from time to time. I voted for him. Basically, I feel as though copyright law has oppressed people from time to time. More than you'd think. There are areas of our country that never get many books to read, artwork, or music. There are countries that would never get to read the Bible or even Edgar Allen Poe's poetry because of censorship. I'm all for paying the fiddler, but take a ride through the south right now if you have the guts to do so and see some of these areas I speak of man. Piracy can oppress or bring you out of it, depending. Literacy is important to the GOP, right?
The people benefiting from copyright law being where it is are the big media and entertainment types.
These give all of their money to Democrats.
The Republicans need to grow some balls and attack the media establishment. Their best move would be a high rate of tax and zero copyright protection, which would drive Hollyweird and big media into bankruptcy.
Yes, it would be an industry destroyed, but it's also clear that outside of Fox News, the media is almost uniformly pro-left and anti-right.
Any lessening of the power of media would be a strategic win for the Republicans.
Futurist Traditionalism
You appear to be using your brain, rather than following in mindless lockstep with the [insert web site here] crowd. That might get you labeled as one of those dangerous subversives everyone is urged to report to the authorities.
At this rate you might end up in a re-education camp... or as they're called now, "sensitivity training".
Since doing this almost automatically gets you marked as one. (Oh, and I should mention the other instance of getting marked as a troll? Moderator didn't understand joke.)
"I cannot imagine party leadership will be happy with so radical a suggestion as granting copyright protection for the limited times needed to promote the progress of science and useful arts."
So they out right SAY they don't want to "promote the progress of science and useful arts"
People who live in districts such as Ohio's 4th would do well to send letters of support to those who crafted the original brief.
Ohio's 4th has been Republican since 1938.
It's 93% white, 40% rural, with a median income of $40,000. Ohio's 4th congressional district The only city in the district you are likely to recognize is Marion, population 35,000, and the home town of Warren G. Harding, Marion, Ohio
Jordan called for fiscal responsibility and noted his strong beliefs in traditional family values. Slone [Democrat] pointed to his labor and union background while calling on Washington to help create jobs. Kalla [Libertarian] cited a number of government reforms that would reduce federal regulations while bolstering freedom in the country.
Jordan, Slone, Kalla vie for Ohio 4th congressional district
The Libertarian candidate drew 5% of the vote, which is as good as it gets for his party in Ohio,
In a district that is old industrial and agricultural, talk of copyright reform excites no one. There are much bigger issues on the table.
1. overlong terms on copyrighted materials of mostly entertainment goods (mind you, not patents, but copyrights)
or
2. the wholesale theft of intellectual property developed in the USA, including nearly all forms of entertainment media and very considerable theft of all manner of industrial process and design by foreign firms in virtually every market imaginable?
By anything even approaching a rational or numerate analysis, the second answer is obviously correct.
But what do we get from /.ers like agStypopa?
[QUOTE]
He got a call from a massive donor who benefits from restrictive copyright (Disney, etc.) and he was told to immediately 'review' this position or he'd see an impact on national funding. They're all such whores. Simply whores....except whores at least make one other person happy, they're not QUITE as selfish as politicians
[/QUOTE]
Right.
"Copyright reform would have far-reaching impacts,"
Example: Content owners wouldn't keep pouring money into our campaigns.
"..so it is incredibly important that it be approached with all facts and viewpoints in hand."
Fact is, we would get less money, and our viewpoint is that anything that reduces the amount of money we receive is a bad thing, regardless of viewpoint of the public.
"I cannot imagine party leadership will be happy with so radical a suggestion as granting copyright protection for the limited times needed to promote the progress of science and useful arts."
-- Translation: Advancement of science and the useful arts play second fiddle to profits for donors to the RNC.
"People who live in districts such as Ohio's 4th would do well to send letters of support to those who crafted the original brief."
-- Translation: You people in Ohio's 4th CD can go pound sand. Your elected representative is irrelevant because copyright law will always be made by members subservient to the recording and motion picture and IP litigation industries -- people like me.
Everyone should be on the lookout for more head fakes by the GOP trying to convince us all that they are something they are not with the hope that they can fool enough people into voting for them. This is a perfect example that emphasizes that GOP policy is determined by those at the top to trickle down to those at the bottom, who then follow along behind to parrot the talking points provided on Faux News. Since about half of the electoral has an IQ 100 and below, this strategy always has a good chance of winning. With the GOP it's not about the issues. It's about the marketing of what the 1% wants.
This is something politicians of all stripes do with concepts they're considering.
You have some odd group, loosely connected with the mainline, release a paper on some odd policy shift. You immediately decry the readiness of the idea, but never actually put the idea down.
Then, you sit back and watch what people do with it. Do your party bigwigs panic? Does your base embrace it? What do the major money sources say about it?
If you watch politics long enough with an eye for this sort of thing, you'll see this done everywhere.
So, considering it's the Republicans, I'm sure Reince Priebus and a few others will be monitoring talk radio, Breitbart, and the major news outlets to see how this is received. They'll also poll their elected officals to see if anyone called/wrote in about it.
So, if you like this, TALK ABOUT IT. Call into Rush Limbaugh or your local version of it. Call or email your R representatives, if you have any. Tell them you like this. Highlight the positives. Talk it up. Argue for it!
Keep in mind that the Republicans are, *right now*, reevaluating their platform for ideas that get people elected. Instead of being a snarky ass, this is a great time to show them that thoughts like this could get them the "youth vote". If you're willing to shed some of your preconceptions about politics in general and Republicans in particular, that is.
I 100,000,000,000,000% agree with what Mitt and The Republicans say about in that above statement, I only wish
Mitt and the Republicans really believed in that (and God), which clearly, they don't at the point where the rubber meets the road.
I pay significant amount in taxes. These taxes prevent me from exercising the opportunity to get ahead - if The Republicans are sincere,
return the financial means for me to accomplish their goals - reduce taxes to a maximum of 10-12% of my income, not the 70-80% it is now
(income tax, sales tax, property tax, etc.). Fact of the matter is, they (The Republicans) are unwilling to perform their part of the deal.
Mitt (I don't know the exact number because Mitt was not forth coming about his returns) earns over 20 million U.S. dollars/year and pays
virtually no income tax on that. If Mitt were honest and sincere, his fair share in taxes should be over 16 million U.S. dollars/year. I don't
believe he currently pays even 1% of his rightful debt to society. Further, Mitt's wealth is very dirty - I'd like to say it's drug money, but it's far
more insidious than that, I'm afraid.
Mitt's being one of The Republicans is more a coincidence; Mitt's a reflection of being a Mormon. Mormon's practice a "cast" system (much like
people from India). They really believe poor people are the scourge and are thus treated appropriately. I have first hand experience in this matter.
So, yes I'm on-board with The Republicans - but they aren't there yet themselves.
CAPTCHA = inform
GOP elder-spirit here. Totally support the brief. Anyone with a brain will remember the core tenets of the founding of the Republican Party: Free land, free labor. Not free as in beer but free as in freedom.
"The check from the RIAA cleared."
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
The brief has been pulled from the RSC website. It's as good a guess as any that it was pulled so fast because someone at the MPAA or RIAA put the kibosh on this. Copies of it still circulate about the internet.
The original brief was written by congressional staffer, a young guy by the name of Derek Khanna. It seems it was not a committee-wide document. Khanna continues a discussion on the matter over at Reddit. I should imagine by now that Khanna has his balls in a vice for this embarrassment.
If you're the kind of person who regularly complains about IP laws, but would rather do something about it, write Khanna a note of support by email or twitter. That doesn't mean you have to agree completely with the brief or other things Khanna has to say. It just gives him the ammunition to say that copyright reform is a good direction for the GOP and that his writing about it was not a mistake. As daemonenwind notes about, the GOP, particularly the younger elements of it, is now taking a hard look at its platform. You may be rather jaded, as I am, and believe that the old neo-con guard is likely to carry the day. They are. But if there's any hope of changing the discourse on this it will be at a time right now, when the older ways of the GOP have received electoral repudiation that a flood of cash couldn't stop. The promise of real electoral support that could come from a pro-reform platform will be particularly attractive now, especially if they get the sense that those under 35 care about this.
The thing that always surprises me is that people don't realize that the two main parties are basically the same with slightly different boogeymen.
This is completely naive. Most politicians really believe in issues, and generally cannot see their own hypocrisy. There is ideological warfare in Washington. The first step to understanding human nature is recognising that 95% of people really believe the bullshit that comes out of their mouth.
/really/ believe it.
/really/ believe that government is the problem -- an internalised narrative that can exist in a fact-free zone.
Take McCain's assault on Susan Rice: Mark Twain said "it is easier to fool a man then convince him he has been fooled." Congress is populated by the fooled. Only the wise know they are fools, which cuts out most of the political faithful.
When Exxon-Mobile pays think-tanks to drum up anti-science nonsense, everybody from the CEO, the "researchers", the news-anchors, to the rank-and-file republicans who repeat the claims as fact -- all these people fool themselves with a story about how they are the good guy, protecting something sacred. Once committed to the narrative, they
We're going to see a fight over a carbon tax, letting tax holidays for the rich expire, and the GOP will attempt to use the deficit crisis as a cudgel to destroy government (other then the military), because they
The Dems are not so reformist and reactionary (the Dems are truly the conservatives in this case), and they need to fight harder, and one D senator recently declared that they will "fight to the teeth".
But continue on with your narrative that both political parties are really the same.
Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
Contrary to popular notion it is not about the money. For both parties it is about the power. Money was just a tool to get reelected. This latest election however changed a lot. Dick Morris has observed this. He noticed that states in which GOP bought tons of advertisement and spent millions voted pretty much the same as states that were barely contested. In other words money did not bought election this time. For the Democrats the effect was the same. The election percentage was not much different from 4 years ago regardless of money spent. Democrats have succeed in promoting class warfare and exploiting divisive politics. GOP must change and evolve or it will become irrelevant. It cannot rely on just money and bunch of conservative ideas. They must play the same divisive game as Democrats do. Why the hell GOP is protecting Hollywood ? California will not vote for GOP in foreseeable future. If they want to win election, they should screw the Hollywood and attract young generation by fighting for less restrictive copyrights. Why GOP is protecting Wall Street ? Do they expect New York to vote for them ? What a joke. They made such a drama from auto bailout. They dragged Rick Wagoner from General Motors and throw him out. They clearly did not though about Ohio then. It seems some smart, younger GOP members already see the light.
JAM
The PDF of the brief has been deleted and replaced by a blank page. It has now disappeared down the memory hole. Some ideas are just too dangerous to propagate and must be silenced. The author must keep his mouth shut otherwise he soon may become an unperson.
High minded idealism, meet 3/4" diameter 4' long steel pipe in backalley. There is no way that the teamsters/MPRIAA would go for this, allow it, or even let it be discussed. Fair has nothing to do with is. We are talking about money. Money that gets people elected. Money that corporations make in a day. Money that pays the Chicago branch of La Casa Nostra what they need to perform what they call "A Whack Job". High minded idealism is introduced not just to the memoirs of Jimmy Hoffa, but to Mr. Hoffa himself. They explain the situation to the politician this way: "On one hand, you have hookers and blow, and a very happy retirement". On the other hand, we make you an offer you can't refuse, and if you try, you go swimming with the fishes wearing concrete shoes. Take your time. Think it over. How ya doin?
I could see one case where they might be for it: to attach the financial base of the industries that support the Dems. It seems that Dems are closer tied to the entertainment industry, which is closer tied to patents etc.