Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

RIAA CEO Hilary Rosen to Become CNBC Commentator

Comments Filter:
  • Jeezus (Score:3, Funny)

    by ObviousGuy (578567) <ObviousGuy@hotmail.com> on Thursday June 19, 2003 @08:11PM (#6249133) Homepage Journal
    It's like they are TRYING to piss me off.
  • don't count on it (Score:5, Insightful)

    by the_2nd_coming (444906) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @08:11PM (#6249139) Homepage
    HR did not make the policy, she was just the mouth piece of the companies.
    • by NanoGator (522640) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @08:33PM (#6249297) Homepage Journal
      "HR did not make the policy, she was just the mouth piece of the companies. "

      More like a sphincter.
      • Re:don't count on it (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Blue Stone (582566)
        "HR did not make the policy, she was just the mouth piece of the companies."

        What if... *shudder*.... she was a moderating voice amongst the companies?

        • Scary thing is.... (Score:5, Interesting)

          by Sven The Space Monke (669560) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @09:03PM (#6249488)
          The scariest part is that she was. At least according to her Wired interview - she made it sound like she was the lone voice of reason. I remember her saying she tried to convince them (the real power holders in the RIAA) that they won't be able to end file sharing through legal means or DRM, and that they will have to embrace the future (easy & cheap digital distrobution) if they don't want to go under. I also seem to remember her saying she has an iPod loaded with mp3's.

          Not that I'm defending all those PR statements she made, or anything like that.

          • by cshark (673578) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @09:56PM (#6249845) Homepage
            You can't fault her for that. The RIAA is a terrible organization. Even in her position, I would imagine that there isn't much she could have done to change things.

            I mean would you want to work with a consortium that takes more pleasure in suing defensless college studants than actually producing a viable product? I don't blame her for stepping down. Any other sensible person would have done the same.

            Given her experience with the RIAA though, I would be curious to see what stance she takes as a commentator.
          • by chundo (587998) <jeremy@jongsma.oCOWrg minus herbivore> on Thursday June 19, 2003 @11:00PM (#6250240)
            Here's an interview with her [wired.com] from 2000... she almost sounds downright reasonable at times. I wouldn't be surprised if she was more ready to embrace new technologies than the member companies, and was forced in the other direction.

            -j
      • Damn, and I'm out of mod points.

    • B5 quote... (Score:5, Funny)

      by Rob Simpson (533360) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @08:34PM (#6249298)
      "But once you've been inside of one of those ships for a while, you're never... quite whole... again. But you do as you're told!"
    • Re:don't count on it (Score:5, Informative)

      by ccady (569355) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @08:54PM (#6249431) Journal

      If Hilary Rosen did not make the policy, who did? Which particular people should we know about who are pulling the strings?

      President Cary Sherman [riaa.com]? The board of directors [riaa.com]? Jack Valenti [mpaa.org] of the MPAA?

      • If Hilary Rosen did not make the policy, who did? Which particular people should we know about who are pulling the strings?

        The stockholders (possibly including your relatives and even you, if y'all have any money invested in mutual funds). Most of them are over 40, don't know or care what a "P2P" is, and don't want to lose what's left of their retirement investments just so college students can download songs for free.

        Good luck convincing them that the RIAA needs to die or radically change...

    • by Pieroxy (222434) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @08:57PM (#6249452) Homepage
      change in the way record companies think

      Compilation error: Bad syntax at line 1.
      Words like "change" and "think" cannot be used in a sentence along with "record companies".
    • as i was driving home listening to wnur (northwestern university radio), the student dj refused to play a request, mr. bungle, because it was warner brothers. your customer is getting pissed! but alas, you deserve it!
  • by DoofusOfDeath (636671) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @08:13PM (#6249150)
    CNBC will initiate a reverse class action suit against all of its viewers, for viewing its valuable television programs without paying.
  • Fat chance! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by imadork (226897) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @08:13PM (#6249153) Homepage
    Maybe this is going to signal a change in the way record companies think about file sharing?

    Fat chance, considering who wants to replace her! [wired.com]

    • Mary Bono's Raring to Run RIAA

      That reminds me: I've got no U2 mp3s on my puter, better go get some off Kazaa.
    • Re:Fat chance! (Score:3, Interesting)

      by binarybum (468664)
      I'm not sure exactly how the RIAA works, but I imagine record companies have some say about this position, no?

      People in powerful high-paying positions like that often don't step-down so much as they are asked to step down. Is it possible that the record companies are looking for someone who's even more of a total bitch than Rosen? Like Bono perhaps?
    • by Cyno (85911)
      wonder if she's related to Sunny Bono..
  • Uh oh. (Score:5, Funny)

    by Masque (20587) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @08:14PM (#6249158)
    Guess this probably means an end to those late night CNBC BitTorrents. Sigh.
  • by AMuse (121806) <slashdot-amuseNO@SPAMfoofus.com> on Thursday June 19, 2003 @08:14PM (#6249162) Homepage
    She's reportedly been paid big money by the news organization to act on her strategy for preventing TIVO users from pirating their news feeds..... by making people stop watching!
  • by Qzukk (229616) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @08:14PM (#6249163) Journal
    As long as people like Senator Hatch are around, there will no doubt be plenty of psychos to take the helm and try to steer the RIAA against the winds of change.

    Somehow, the crew of the ship just doesn't understand that its about to capsize. Or they're too afraid to break their contracts and mutiny.
  • of course (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 19, 2003 @08:15PM (#6249169)
    Just like Cheney quit his CEO job to become VP of the USA and conquer up some oil for his buddies back at Haliburton so it is that Hillary Rosen will quit the RIAA to spread propoganda for her RIAA industry chums on the TV.
    • by GoofyBoy (44399)

      Its a business channel.

      The vast majority of viewers are stock traders. Not the target RIAA is aiming for.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    The Pirate [wired.com]?
  • by Desult (592617) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @08:15PM (#6249172) Homepage
    On one hand, most of the pieces I've read on the RIAA/Rosen have either directly indicated, or been chimed in upon, that Rosen was just a mouthpiece for the big bad record labels, who don't want you to be able to copy your CDs. She's been more or less a scapegoat/forerunner for a lot of negative ideas about what you can and can't do with your licensed recordings.

    On the other hand, this story is posted with the question "Maybe this is going to signal a change in the way record companies think about file sharing?"

    This seems rather silly, also noting that Rosen is stepping down to become a news commentator, aka a talking head, aka a mouthpiece. I have very little inclination to believe that Rosen has had, or will have any large influence on RIAA policy. Am I wrong?

    -Greg
    • who don't want you to be able to copy your CDs


      My CDs? Since when have they been my cds? I only pay money to purchase them. Has the US Govt suddenly decided that because somebody's paid money for something that it actually belongs to them??

      • by Uart (29577) <feedback.life-liberty-property@com> on Thursday June 19, 2003 @09:11PM (#6249547) Homepage Journal
        I sense a certain degree of sarcasm in your comment, but you are absolutely right. You pay money for something alright, you are buying two things when you go to the record store:

        1) The physical media - the CD itself
        2) The right to listen to that physical media

        You are not purchasing the music itself - your rights in terms of how you may use that music are limited. This has a strong basis in copyright law. Ever wonder what, "All Rights Reserved" means? The artist in question reserves all rights to their work, their intellectual property.

        Copyright legislation can be found at Title 17 [cornell.edu] US Code. You can read all about it, but the gist is that you don't buy the copyright, or any rights, other than those that the copyright holder is willing to give you - in the RIAA's case, they say you only have the right to listen to your CDs in private. Deal with it.

        Copyright law has an important purpose, it protects the rights of those who generate the IP. This encourages people to do this, adding to the culture and technological prowess of our nation. Without copyright laws, Musicians, Authors, Poets, Software companies, and others would be either unable to make money or would recieve greatly diminished returns.

        What kind of music will you be listening to when Radiohead has to work the day shift at the 7-11 just to make ends meat? Perhaps J.D. Salinger's work would have been better if he had worked full time as an accountant and only wrote on the weekends? By denying copyright protection, that is what you create, a rotting cesspool of a nation with diminished culture (art/music/literature/etc). You would surely stifle technological advancements, why would a software company even bother to invest their money in research if others can benefit from their work at a far-lesser cost?
        • What kind of music will you be listening to when Radiohead has to work the day shift at the 7-11 just to make ends meat?

          This is just BS. In human society it is always possible to turn musical (or literary) talent into fame and it is always possible to turn fame into money. Beethoven and Shakespeare did not make money from copyright. They had sponsors, they had live performances, they did commissioned works etc. Once in a while they probably even did art for its own sake without worrying about who would

        • Actually, I have every track off Radiohead's Hail to the Theif on MP3. I downloaded them off KaZaA. I burned them to a CD. I listened to it in the car on the way to buy the CD. So, they're not gonna have to work at McDonald's.

          Radiohead and other really, really good bands will get my money, simply because I like them. The crap will not, and perhaps, those who aren't good enough to produce more than a few good tracks shouldn't rely on their craft for their income. Consider it shareware. If I like it, I'm mor
        • What kind of music will you be listening to when Radiohead has to work the day shift at the 7-11 just to make ends meat[sic]? Perhaps J.D. Salinger's work would have been better if he had worked full time as an accountant and only wrote on the weekends?

          If you could ask Charles Ives, who sold insurance for a living, that question, he'd probably claim just that. To answer your question seriously, I'd probably do what I do now in large part--listen to and buy music by people who do in fact have day jobs (OK,

        • by alizard (107678) <.moc.sice. .ta. .drazila.> on Friday June 20, 2003 @03:25AM (#6251523) Homepage
          What kind of music will you be listening to when Radiohead has to work the day shift at the 7-11 just to make ends meat?

          Next time, get all of the facts from your bosses before posting. Had you ever heard of Radiohead before getting your assignment?

          Radiohead is a case study in the use of Internet promotion:
          Radiohead's honour follows the group's decision to ditch traditional marketing methods for their recent album Kid A in favour of internet promotion.

          That's from a winter 2000 BBC news article. [bbc.co.uk]

          Radiohead is a long-standing Internet success story, and if they'd listened to your friends, they'd be making a hell of a lot less money today.

          An increasing number of artists have found that distribution of MP3s via Internet Radio and the networkss your OwN3rZ want to get rid of plus touring and direct sale of CDs at gigs and via the Net is a perfectly reasonable way to make a living. One has to sell a lot less records to make a living when one is getting 90% of the gross profit off a $10 CD than 1% of a $20 CD. Search for Janis Ian on slashdot. She's been making records longer than you've probably been alive. Find out if she thinks the record industry protects the rights of musicians.

          With respect to your. . . interesting interpretation of copyright law, was your omission of any mention of "fair use" in your post deliberate, or left out of the RIAA propaganda you obviously based your post on.

          Speaking as a published writer, I certainly support reasonable copyright protection. I don't need my copyright extended to 50 or 75 or 1000 years after my death. I don't want anyone to destroy computers by the millions to "protect" my work. I don't want protecting my work to come at the price of eventually forcing consumer electronics development to move out of the US and if EU follows the US lead as it seems to be doing, following software development to India and China. If someone xeroxes a copy of one of my print articles at a public library, I don't want any of your buddies to burn down the library to "protect" my copyright.

          Oh, BTW, I'm working with an independent musician now. I can't find any friends willing to host her work for P2P networks because they're afraid of attack by the people who you are being a paid or unpaid mouthpiece for. So promoting her outside the RIAA framework is more difficult. Tell your bosses "Thanks, assholes"...

          I don't know if you are on the RIAA payroll or not. You certainly parrot their party line perfectly.

          However, since you do such a good job of playing a mouthpiece for RIAA viewpoints, if you aren't getting paid by them, you're awfully stupid. Go to their site and apply for a job. Use your post as proof that you're good at spreading "the good word" in a hostile forum.

          Perhaps there are even a few people stupid enough to believe you.

    • I don't know if she will still be spewing the RIAA party lne at CNBC, but either way, Don't buy CDs, [dontbuycds.org] unless you buy them directly from an independent artist. The recording industry doesn't deserve our business.
  • Change?! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Dirtside (91468) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @08:16PM (#6249175) Journal
    Maybe this is going to signal a change in the way record companies think about file sharing?
    Not bloody likely. The record companies haven't changed their business model, and the odds of Rosen being replaced with someone who doesn't believe the exact same things she does (or, at least, is getting paid to believe them) are essentially nil.
  • I honestly doubt it (Score:4, Interesting)

    by jesse.k (102314) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @08:18PM (#6249186) Homepage
    I really don't see how hilary rosen resigning is gonna signal any change in how the RIAA does business, if anything it might get worse. I can easily see her replacement being yet another lawyer headed shark from one of the big record labels.

    If the record industry wanted to save itself, they'd drop the cost of CDs down to $8 or less and partner with someone like Apple to deliver a real legal digital music service. Then they might find a more sympathetic ear in regards to piracy.
    • If the record industry wanted to save itself, they'd drop the cost of CDs down to $8 or less and partner with someone like Apple to deliver a real legal digital music service. Then they might find a more sympathetic ear in regards to piracy.

      Hum. I think it is pretty clear that the record labels will keep fighting to get the old days back.

      What I don't understand is that the artists haven't realized that they don't need record labels anymore. They can record their songs for cheap and sell them over the
  • by Frac (27516) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @08:18PM (#6249193)
    I wouldn't be surprised if Hilary Rosen would become more open to digital media in general.

    Afterall, she was simply the talking head for RIAA - when Hilary Rosen speaks out against P2P, it's not because Rosen hates P2P, but rather it's because the five record companies tell her to do so. I recall reading articles on Rosen quietly expressing frustration at times with the record companies' unwillingness to compromise or embrace new business models.

    She obvious has a very strong domain of knowledge in the recording industry, and now that she's free from the shackles of being the public face of RIAA, I'm actually looking forward to hear her personal opinion on digital distribution.
  • by wfrp01 (82831) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @08:19PM (#6249201) Journal
    What's the difference between NBC, CNBC, and MSNBC? And gee, do you think there's any conflict of interest in having an IP lawyer not only work, but anchor a media organization?!

    Someday naming your daughter Hillary will be as favorable as naming your son Adolph.
    • Someday naming your daughter Hillary will be as favorable as naming your son Adolph.

      For some people of a certain political persuasion that someday has already come.
    • Someday naming your daughter Hillary will be as favorable as naming your son Adolph.

      Amen. We've seen some real dumb shit Hillarys in the news over the past few years.

      I think that "someday" is upon us.
    • no differerence (Score:3, Insightful)

      by twitter (104583)
      What's the difference between NBC, CNBC, and MSNBC?

      No difference they are owned by the same people. They and different but identical people own the RIAA member companies as well. So, the opions are the same. How else could a corporate loudmouth be taken seriously as a journalist unless journaists mostly reported for corporate loudmouths?

      Every aspect of traditional electronic publishing is regulated, degenerate and obsolete. It's not a free press and their choice of talking heads only proves the poin

    • NBC, CNBC, and MSNBC?


      NBC is the core company. They have a local network in many places. It too is called NBC.

      CNBC, is the cable network for NBC.

      MSNBC is the brainchild of MS and NBC (der). Geared more towards news.

      Couldn't you use google? ;P

  • No it wont (Score:2, Insightful)

    by chunkwhite86 (593696)
    Maybe this is going to signal a change in the way record companies think about file sharing?

    No, it will just signal a change (read: increase) in the amount of negative media attention that file swapping gets ;-)
  • Or maybe.... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by MortisUmbra (569191) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @08:23PM (#6249219)
    She just didn't have sharp enough teeth?

    MAYBE, they will replace her with somebody ten time s worse? Considering her lack of accomplishments (i.e. all those evil filesharers are still walking free) I wouldn't be suprised.
  • "They are looking for me to do the larger picture on some of the content convergence and media consolidation issues and know that I have a point of view on many issues as a longtime advocate," she wrote in the e-mail.

    Yeah, and her opinions, as before, will be wrong, wrong, WRONG!

    (Who was the liar who told Hilary the public wants to hear more of her rants anyway?)
  • by Sophrosyne (630428) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @08:25PM (#6249235) Homepage
    10. Mud-wrestle lesbians in Japan.
    9. Box Lesbians in Japan.
    8. Become a "consultant".
    7. Start Rosen.com, publish a super duper blog and live off ad revenue.
    6. Join Kathy-Lee Gifford on her music tour.
    5. Write a book!
    4. Star in Playboy's "Women of the Internet" issue.
    3. Go into rehab.
    2. Get married to Ted Turner- make lotsa babies!
    1. Get a job with those scumbags at CNBC....
    • by Anonymous Coward
      Star in Playboy's "Women of the Internet" issue.

      Don't copy, don't copy my vagina!

      My vagina is licensed for only one orgasm. In order to use my image to enhance your masturbation, you must buy a copy for each ejaculation. My image can not be used at circle jerks as it's a violation of copyright laws.
      • by Anonymous Coward
        By looking at the vagina, you agree to the terms of the Vaginal User Licensced Viewing Agreement. If you do not agree to the VULVA, you must promptly return your copy to the vendor for a refund.

        -- Captain Chaos
    • 4. Star in Playboy's "Women of the Internet" issue.

      um, have you seen [google.ca] Ms. Rosen? I don't think you could pay playboy to print that...
  • Will this is going to signal a change in the way record companies think about file sharing?

    Lets Fvcking hope so.
  • by ryder (111) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @08:26PM (#6249242)
    And that's not a good thing.

    I saw a bit about Mary Bono wanting the job a few days ago. Here's a link to the wired story [wired.com] This can't be a good thing considernig the 1998 copyright extension bill bares her late husbands name.
  • because she disagreed with the RIAA's nazi-positions on music, right?

    Fact is, if Rosen didn't agree with those positions, she wouldn't have been doing that job.
  • I'm sure her reporting as a news anchor will be fair and unbiased.

    I did NOT have a sarcasm tag on that last statement. It was all in your head.

  • Too bad ... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by emkman (467368) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @08:38PM (#6249327)
    Too bad she didn't take a position at Fox News. Then we wouldn't have to accuse her of being a biased media personality, it would be implied.
  • Lets hope its the radio version of CNBC, I don't want to look at this when I wake up in the morning or go to bed at night, or well any time [google.com] ;).

  • CNBC. Maybe this is going to signal a change in the way record companies think about file sharing?"

    always two there are, no more, no less, a master, and a apprentice.

    only time will tell which she was/is...
  • Well, it looks like we've found a candidate for the first thing to be slung-shot into orbit [slashdot.org].
  • Maybe this is going to signal a change in the way record companies think about file sharing?

    It probably signals that CNBC is going to support RIAA in a big way.
  • Oh, god... (Score:5, Funny)

    by SamMichaels (213605) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @08:48PM (#6249394)
    Now we get to hear this idiot wind bag on TV even more? On a regular basis?

    $5 says it was a settlement. The RIAA caught CNBC people sharing music at work and rather than sue the pants off them, they offered her a show.
  • Hilary Rosen leaving RIAA to become CNBC anchor

    maybe that means...

    Hilliary Clinton leaving Senate to head up RIAA.

    and that would leave...

    Hilary Swank quits her acting career to become NY Senator!

  • by c0d3h4x0r (604141) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @09:03PM (#6249482) Homepage Journal

    Many of you keep saying Hilary was just a mouthpiece of the RIAA and had no hand in setting policy. You actually think that she might turn out to be some kind of ethical human being after leaving the RIAA.

    Let me give you a bit of a wake-up call: if she were an ethical human being then she wouldn't have allowed herself to serve as the RIAA's mouthpiece for any amount of money. Any ethical human being with any concern for the public welfare would have rejected any carrots the RIAA dangled in front of them and given them the big "Fuck you". There are plenty of other jobs out there that deal with media and technology that wouldn't require a daily sacrifice of ethical principles.

    No, this is seriously bad news. Now not only is she evil, but she's evil being pumped straight into homes on a nightly basis. It wouldn't surprise me if this move was secretly orchestrated by the RIAA so as to get someone with their bias into the mainstream media in an unsuspecting, insidious way.

    • Let me give you a bit of a wake-up call: if she were an ethical human being then she wouldn't have allowed herself to serve as the RIAA's mouthpiece for any amount of money.

      You know, it is possible to disagree with someone and still think that they are ethical. Some people have a strong ethical negative reaction to music swapping.

  • Isn't this commentator sharing? Who can we see about putting a stop to this???
  • A scary combination (Score:5, Interesting)

    by drdale (677421) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @09:05PM (#6249496)
    Don't forget that CNBC is a venture between NBC and... Microsoft. Go to the CNBC page [cnbc.com] and see where you end up.
  • I think the best strategy is to make HR unsuccessful, bordering on radioactive (figuratively, of course). Make an example out of her.
  • Even more effective (Score:2, Interesting)

    by wardk (3037)
    Rosen will be exponentially more valuable to RIAA interests as a "news commentator". Her valuable insight into the plight of the music industry will help illuminate to the viewers what a horrid menace to society P2P really is.

    she will help bring truth to this simple good vs. evil story. plus she's always fought the good fight, so she's a patriot too.

    what an inspirational piece of news. pass the tums please.
  • hmm according to our own mouth she was retiring to spend time at home with famliy..

    Once again lied to and duped..

    as long as she is in media in any form its bad news..
  • by di0s (582680)
    Well, at least if CNBC's ratings go down, they can't blame it on us pilfering grabasses [campchaos.com].
  • Rosen's quitting was announced [nwfusion.com] in January. Most of the comments being made now could and maybe were made then.
  • Anchor? (Score:3, Funny)

    by Esion Modnar (632431) on Thursday June 19, 2003 @09:35PM (#6249668)
    Try tying her to an anchor, now that i'd like to see...
  • This is just one more hour of television lost to staged controversy, with one loudmouthed buffoon pitted against another, WWF-style. They may use bigger words, but the intelligence level is the same. As far as I'm concerned, it's just one more reason not to watch television.
  • riaa guy [grateful.net]

    borrowed from an old slashdot posting. was so good I kept a copy around. (isn't that appropriate?)

    enjoy. its pretty funny (no, I didn't write it).
  • Who is she going to blame for bad ratings? I haven't heard of anyone filesharing CNBC programming.
  • by bgeer (543504)
    Not only is she getting a promotion from shill for record labels to shill for GE and Microsoft, but also she'll be pleased to know that there is a 0% chance of her show ever being traded on p2p.
  • by Mordant (138460) on Friday June 20, 2003 @01:10AM (#6251023)
    The gloves will -really- come off - no more Mr. Nice Guy! ;>

If a subordinate asks you a pertinent question, look at him as if he had lost his senses. When he looks down, paraphrase the question back at him.

Working...