Ray Beckerman Sued By the RIAA 725
An anonymous reader writes "Ray Beckerman, known for questioning the RIAAs legal tactics (also for frequent Slashdot contributions), was sued by the RIAA over his blog Recording Industry vs. People. In question is the 'vexatious' claims that the RIAAs legal tactics is a 'sham.' Beckerman is quoted as saying that the litigation against him is 'frivolous and irresponsible.'"
Pot, meet kettle? (Score:5, Insightful)
I believe strongly in the idea of free speech, and don't much care for censorship or other speech restrictions. That said, on some level I think I can agree with the idea that lawyers are part of our legal justice system, and therefore to be held to a higher standard of conduct than we mere mortals. I mean, I have no problem saying the same thing about judges or police officers. I certainly believe they should be held to higher standards.
But the idea that the RIAA would say of Ray's blog, "Such vexatious conduct demeans the integrity of these judicial proceedings and warrants this imposition of sanctions." is completely beyond absurd.
The RIAA has been conducting a multimillion dollar ad campaign in an attempt to paint copyright infringement as a crime in the same class or worse as theft, and further attempting to equate their inflated 'losses' due to 'piracy'. Ray might joke and jab more than is 'proper' or 'expected' as a lawyer, but in my mind, that makes him a better agent of the court, not worse. And I fail to see how this lawsuit is anything other than a legal attack upon Ray in an attempt to smear his good name and discredit him as a lawyer.
The guy can at least defend himself (Score:5, Insightful)
Honestly, this is a fortunate turn of events. This gentleman is at least capable of defending himself against whatever accusations RIAA is making against him, while at the same time consuming time and legal resources that the fuckwits at RIAA could be using to put another party in legal jeopardy.
In fact, since this is not the same as the boilerplate legal case that RIAA makes against thousands of consumers annually, it probably also consumed more resources. We should all be thankful that RIAA has chosen this course of action.
This whole thing is stupid... (Score:1, Insightful)
You know, what this comes down to is plain and simple. If everyone payed the artist including the recording industry, then we would not have this problem. Is there a reason you want an album and then won't pay for it? Just GO BUY THE CD or BUY THE MP3'S. If the artist intended for you to have th emusic for free, they would put it up on their myspace account for download. Since they DON'T, PAY FOR IT!!! This includes movies. You don't need something that bad you need to steal it do you. I wish all sides would just grow up on this deal and REALIZE the only people getting rich are the stupid Lawyers.
Re:Pot, meet kettle? (Score:5, Insightful)
Wow. Talk about taking his argument and twisting it up. If I as an individual tell my friend that I think this natural herb pill is the best thing I ever took, I have no legal problems if it turns out to do nothing. If my friends' doctor suggests a sugar pill to cure his multiple melanoma, I think Doc would be looking at a law suit.
In this case the RIAA is suing for something a lawyer did in the course of his profession. It is meritless but does not invalidate the gp argument.
Thanks RIAA (Score:4, Insightful)
Understanding complicated matters, such as law, is always hard because of the bad advice that goes about. I commend you RIAA for your services to education.
Re:Pot, meet kettle? (Score:5, Insightful)
Ahh, so special classes of people have special rights and responsiblities? In other words, all men are not created equal?
Some people are held to higher standards due to their position or job. There are good reasons for this, such as preventing conflicts of interest and prejudicial actions in legal proceedings. Without such standards, our legal system would suffer.
Re:Pot, meet kettle? (Score:3, Insightful)
---I believe strongly in the idea of free speech, and don't much care for censorship or other speech restrictions. That said, on some level I think I can agree with the idea that lawyers are part of our legal justice system, and therefore to be held to a higher standard of conduct than we mere mortals. I mean, I have no problem saying the same thing about judges or police officers. I certainly believe they should be held to higher standards.
But everybody should be held to the same standard. When people are said to be a higher standard, it reminds me of the dukes, earls, princes, and kings of old Europe. We all are equal here.. Though, the Bar could disbar him, though I highly doubt they would even consider that. Disbarment only really happens for illegal acts and consistent harassment using the legal system (the retarded ex-lawyer who badmouths games).
Judges are also majority voted in, and they can be voted out. I, by principle, vote the non-incumbent for judges. If they were good, sorry. If they were bad, thats good they're out. And I think they need a "break" anyways.
Everyone thank RIAA (Score:5, Insightful)
Let me be the first to point out what everyone's been thinking.
Thank.
You.
RIAA.
Morons.
I mean, honestly. We all are acting all high and mighty, but what we're really thinking is,
"What IDIOT up there thought it would be a good idea to sue one of the most competent, intelligent, LAWYERS who has already expressed a will to fight against their unsound tactics"
Lets take odds, who wants to bet they try to pull out of this the minute someone realizes what they just did, and someone is definitly getting sacked.
Way to respond to a legal challenge (Score:5, Insightful)
In question is the "vexatious" claims that the RIAAs legal tactics is a "sham"
The best way to show that criticism of your valiant, righteous lawsuits is a sham is to sue the critic for being so irritatingly vexatious. Now I (and I imagine this goes for everyone else here on Slashdot) take the RIAA completely seriously. I suspect a million geeks just stopped filesharing a few minutes ago, and that the torrents of the tubes have all gone dead: Seeders 0, Leechers 0. The RIAA has won.
Except ... all sarcasm aside, this is really desperate.
Re:Pot, meet kettle? (Score:3, Insightful)
All men are created equal. What they do later in life is a different matter.
Re:Defending file-sharers (Score:5, Insightful)
Indeed.
Actually I wonder if this is just an extension of the RIAA's legal tactics to the lawyers themselves. Previously, they would sue people in order to intimidate them into settling and/or not file-sharing. Now, they are applying the same logic to lawyers: suing lawyers with the audacity to defend file-sharers, so as to intimidate other potential defense lawyers from even taking a file-sharing case.
As usual, even if the RIAA loses (or eventually drops the case), they "win" in the sense that they send the message that they are willing to make life hell for anyone who opposes them (including other lawyers).
Such a tactic from the RIAA is presumably illegal... but it's probably very difficult to prove in court that this is their intention.
Re:Pot, meet kettle? (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:RIAA = Scientology (Score:5, Insightful)
they are some pest that needs to be eradicated for rational functioning of u.s. legal system. they need to be made an example of, for future generations.
to [mis]quote a movie:
"we're the US government. we don't DO that sort of thing."
seriously - we don't seem to make examples of bad businesses. in fact, we BAIL THEM OUT with taxpayer money!
don't expect the US legal system to 'fix itself'. doctors can't operate on themselves, in a similar analog.
Who will pay legal fees? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Everyone thank RIAA (Score:3, Insightful)
Sigh... (Score:3, Insightful)
I've tried saying that here before, but you run into a brick wall of nitpicking denial. Somehow the idea that it's not physical media makes it impossible to steal. Or it's the record companies that lose out, the artist gets shafted anyway. Or real artists should just want their music listened to. Like there are no costs involved in creating music.
I've long since reconciled myself to the fact that while I believe in intellectual property rights, most people around me don't. Of course the vast majority of those people have never tried to make a living by producing something for the mass market.
Re:The guy can at least defend himself (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't give in to them, Ray. It's important for us to have this blog asa counter-attack to the RIAA BS machine.
Streisand effect (Score:3, Insightful)
This is a good thing (not for Ray, obviously).
Re:Pot, meet kettle? (Score:4, Insightful)
All men are CREATED equal. What we do after that is up to us. Yes, special classes of people have special rights and responsibilities based upon their qualifications: Parents. Doctors. Teachers. Lawyers. Members of the Military. Politicians...
You should be held to the same standards as a doctor? When was the last time you swore the Hippocratic oath?
Re:RIAA = Scientology (Score:5, Insightful)
thank you.
this is obviously an attempt to harass him. these lawyers should be de-barred (or whatever the correct term is).
Re:This whole thing is stupid... (Score:3, Insightful)
Silly AC, reason is not for this site.
Really though I think the rationale comes across as the belief that the content isn't worth the asking rate, so taking it for free is OK. I think it's reasonably arguable that the proper action would be to just not buy the item. Otherwise you're dealing with an item that is so worthless that it's not worth buying, yet so valuable that it's worth violating the copyright. If the content owner isn't willing to offer the item on the terms that you desire, it doesn't give you the right to procure it by different means.
Re:Defending file-sharers (Score:5, Insightful)
It wouldn't matter. Unlike college students, lawyers have both the experience needed and the money to take these cases to court. Given the RIAA's shaky prosecution tactics, I wouldn't be surprised if not only every lawyer being sued in this manner takes the case to court, but a number of them are secretly wishing to be sued just to make an example out of their opponents and get their name out.
This hurts Mr Beckerman. (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm reminded of the adage that a person who represents themself in court has a "fool for a client". Is this a case where someone like the ACLU or EFF could help Mr Beckerman? Maybe he will need to hire a lawyer to handle this nonsense so he can continue fighting the good fight? If the latter is the case then maybe it's time for
Re:Where is Ray?.. (Score:3, Insightful)
I know nothing about legal procedure in the USA, and precious little about it in my own country. But I suspect that it would not be wise for NYCL to comment on his own case here on /. and it might also be against the legal rules in the USA. Of course, we all wish Ray well but we might just have to wait until this one is over before we can get the full story.
Good Luck, Ray, for the way you have helped others you deserve some good fortune yourself.
It's Time to Give Back Now (Score:5, Insightful)
All,
Mr. Beckerman is, as most of us know, one of the most respected members of the Slashdot community. He's posted many, many stories and innumerable comments, all with great insight and actual legal information from a real lawyer (yes, HIAL). Over quite a long time, he's become one of us, and he probably has the highest karma in the history of Slashdot. He's done a great deal to help us all, and now it's time to return the favor. There are a lot of comments here about how dumb a move this is on the RIAA's part, and how they'll finally get embarrassed by NewYorkCountryLawyer himself. I happen to agree.
However, Ray is only one man, and the RIAA has the means, and probably the will, to throw so many of their lawyers and arcane procedural motions at him to make his personal life a living hell. So it's time now that we thank him and make it clear that were behind him. As for how, that's up to you. Maybe send encouraging emails. If he comments here, reply with your support. Spread the word about the RIAA trying to sue a legal critic into silence. Please, everyone who's been enlightened, informed, and amused by Ray's comments here, do your part in return.
Years from now, when this is all old history (Score:5, Insightful)
Being slapped with such silly and pointless lawsuits over a blog is just a mark of how desperate some of those behind these campaigns of harassment really are, and can only serve to highlight that they are slowly running out of options of who else to blame for their own demise into obsolescence.
Hang in there!!
Z.
Re:Everyone thank RIAA (Score:4, Insightful)
I think Ray has been chomping at the bit, baiting the RIAA every step of the way to go head to head against them to bring to a very public light what a sham their propoganda is. The RIAA loves to preach copyright, and yet they conveniently ignore and even go so far as to claim the Fair Use clause and rights defined under the Home Recording Act do not apply to anyone. Ray, might RICO apply in this case here? :)
Ray, thank you for your hard work. I do not think that copyright holders should be deprived of their just income, but not all copying is copyright infringement (even when bypassing technical measures, the DMCA allows provisions for interoperability, which transcoding/ripping IS FOR). Also, the "punishment" for casual "infringement" is not only unjust (hundreds of thousands of dollars for one $.99 track?) but is illegal in the case where the MP3/MPA/AAC file has been burned/copied/etc. to media (Music CD-R, DAT, etc.) where levies have been paid to the RIAA. Those levies pay for the copyright, which makes it legal for you to make a mix tape for your gf/bf/etc.
Re:Reading between the lines (Score:5, Insightful)
In reading between the lines, I think it is important that he is not being sued for calling the Media Sentry investigations Illegal. If the RIAA thought they had a case in which to sue, I would have expected an attack on this. The silence is deafening.
I wonder if Ray can keep his blog entries up if he simply stated the line in contention as in my opinion.
The stating an opinion as fact is the basis of the action. His opinion may indeed be fact. It would be interesting if the RIAA lost and it was proven in court to be fact. I think the RIAA may have a tiger by the tail on this one.
ray: (Score:3, Insightful)
milk it for all its worth
this is called free public relations
when you ignore your critics, they tend to fade away
but when you attack your critics, you stimulate neutral party's interests in the issue under contention, and often times, if you are on the right side of history, summon new support for the good cause
keep up the good fight ray. consider the RIAA suing you a gift: you yourself are now fodder for newsworthiness
thank you RIAA, you fucking morons
So... he's trying to make them look bad? (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm not sure they've really thought this through... according to TFA, one of the things they're accusing Ray of doing is trying to make the RIAA look bad. He doesn't need to: they do a pretty good job of it themselves.
Re:It's Time to Give Back Now (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps that's the entire point (Score:5, Insightful)
It wouldn't surprise me if this ploy by the RIAA was simply an attempt to distract Mr. Beckerman, who has become a bit of a thorn in their side. If he's busy defending himself he won't have time to defend other RIAA victims.
Re:This whole thing is stupid... (Score:4, Insightful)
However, the issue at hand isn't so much the payment aspect. The RIAA has demonstrated that it is a cartel, engaged in anti-competitive and anti-consumer practices. They have their business model from the 1950s and they will see everyone in the nation financially ruined before admitting it's outdated and they need to change it. It employs underhanded tactics that are an abuse of the legal system, use unlicensed investigators in clear violation of state laws, and show very little in the way of ethics in their prosecutions. Attempting to interview an underage child at their school in defiance of the parent's wishes can never be excused for a private entity.
Also bear in mind, NONE of the lawsuits filed target the people who downloaded the files. Their entire campaign relies on the "making available" theory that putting files into a download folder is copyright infringement, so these are the people providing the uploads. These people could very easily have full legal license to the music they are being sued for, and in fact many of them do. This is not a redistribution license, but to say they "stole" the music is to confuse the facts of the cases. Given the lack of computer saavy some people have, they might not have even realized they were sharing the files, as the courts have determined before in these cases. The RIAA simply doesn't care...
Throw on top of it the idea that copyright is intended to enhance SOCIETY in the long-term and the farce that idea has become and you see a strong civil disobedience movement against a system that long ago ceased serving the people's interests. When you don't serve the greater good, as it were, don't be surprised when things don't go the way you want them to go.
Re:RIAA = Scientology (Score:0, Insightful)
And what are the penalties for defaulting? What? There are none? Fantastic.
Re:Or even better ! (Score:5, Insightful)
clearly, you hate freedom. i must kindly ask you to get the fuck out of america, not for your nationality of origin, but your diametrically opposed to our values views.
Someone might have believed that line 10 years ago, but considering the state of the US at the moment, it is obviously just flamebait. The American government certainly doesn't value freedom, and the citizens aren't doing anything about that, so how can you claim that freedom is at the core of your values? Is this the freedom to have a gun and be able to say whatever you want, as long as you don't actually do anything about it, like have a non government-sactioned protest (which is pretty much the dumbest idea ever)?
Re:Pot, meet kettle? (Score:5, Insightful)
Certain forms of piracy certainly do! It is common knowledge that certain gangs in the London area mass produce pirate DVDs to sell to fund other, more sinister, activities. If it is true in London, it is probably true in many other parts of the world (I just happen to live near London).
Criminals, by definition sell bootlegs.
But it is one HELL of a leap of logic to go from that fact to the supposition that bootlegging funds terrorism.
It doesn't even come close to passing the laugh test.
Re:Sigh... (Score:5, Insightful)
The "stop pirating" argument is irrelevant because the RIAA is suing people based on bad evidence, i.e. IP addresses. You typically can't nail an IP address to a single person because IP addresses change and multiple people can be using the Internet from the same IP. This doesn't even include the person they sued that had never used a computer.
Get a clue please.
Re:RIAA = Scientology (Score:3, Insightful)
AIG won't default. AIG has plenty of assets--the problem with AIG right now is liquidity, and that's what this loan is supposed to cover (operating income while the assets are made liquid). If the money's out more than a month or so I'd be outright shocked.
And the federal loan is first on the repayment list.
Re:Bad summary; wait for facts (Score:3, Insightful)
The facts tend to get ignored on slashdot when it gives people an opportunity to have a go at the RIAA. Facts are only facts if they support your case apparently....
Re:RIAA = Scientology (Score:5, Insightful)
This is completely off-topic, but an important enough discussion that I think it's worth chiming in anyways.
Yes, many will feel the pain either way. However, I think the most fair and equitable distribution of pain and accountability follows the plan of letting those investors that propped up AIG take the fall for its bad business practices.
I feel much the same way about bailing out fmae and fmac. Sure, people are losing thousands of dollars in their home "values" and their retirement investments. However, the drops in home prices are a natural market balance that reflects a lowered ability to pay. More accurately, it better represents the real ability to pay, when the mortgage balloon game is ended. Today thousands of homes sit on the foreclosure market, rotting away from the inside out and developing crippling mold issues that ultimately can completely destroy the value of a home. Yet, the banks refuse to unload these homes at a price that would move them off the market immediately, choosing instead to let them rot to maintain their inflated prices. Let us not forget that from 2000 -> 2005, home prices DOUBLED. Their prices prior to this "collapse" were in fact inflated, are still inflated, and taking out the exhorbitant mortgages to purchase them at their inflated value, was a mistake.
So lets summarize - banks are holding houses they aren't willing to sell for what the market will bear, plenty of people need homes and don't have them, and the government solution is we need to bail out the poor, poor bank at the expense of said non-homeowners?
NO.
One can argue how taxes should or should not be used, but I think we can mostly agree taxes should not be used to redistribute wealth to the wealthy.
I think things are fine. This clearance sale on housing is bringing the price of a home back into the range that a young couple starting a family may be able to afford one on a real income. When the next generation can buy homes, the price will stabilize. And maybe the younger generation, which is currently piddling away all their money the Middle East, will learn something from the older generation, which did the same thing in the Far East, and instead invest their money here at home, so that when it's time to retire we don't have to resort to robbing our children.
Re:Who will pay legal fees? (Score:3, Insightful)
Not only that, but Ray's specialty is in a certain area of law, not necessarily constitutional, as I would deem this matter may be within the realm of constitutional and procedural law. To me, at least, bringing litigation against an opposing attorney who is representing in multiple cases against you is highly questionable. Ray needs to be able to focus on his current litigations for his clients, and this act seems to me to simply be an attempt to violate the constitutional rights of Ray's clients through malicious litigation and a disruption and interference with due process.
I have not read the article, and the article probably does not even give enough information to make an educated statement and opinion anyway, but if the RIAA has a beef with Ray, and Ray has truly done something wrong, there are procedural rules to take in order to remedy the situation. Anything outside those rules, in my opinion, is an attempt to disrupt justice and due process, and is unconstitutional as it interferes with the rights of Ray's clients to be properly represented ("fair trial") without harassment and duress by the opposing party against the representing attorney.
I would also assume that we will not hear from Ray on this subject matter, as he should say nothing, until this situation has been alleviated. But good luck to him, and if every /.er sent him even $10 (lunch money), he should be able to gain some pretty good representation on this matter.
Re:RIAA = Scientology (Score:5, Insightful)
Actual there are very good non racists reasons to ahve a national language.
Cost.
Once you interpret a document into one language, you must do it for all languages. This is very expensive.
Culture division.
Creating segments of the population that has difficulty communicating with other segments leads to an US v Them scenario; which leads to civil unrest.
A cheaper and more long term solution is a more widely available English language courses.
Encouraging people to speak the language.
Many people with 'Mexican' decent in California are multiple generation and speak English.
Re:RIAA = Scientology (Score:5, Insightful)
Expecting people to learn the dominant language is not bigotry, it's a reasonable expectation of a person putting in effort to work with society. I don't have anything against some random immigrant into the US. Good for him, I hope he does well for himself. If he chooses, however, to not attempt to learn English, which is the de facto national language, that's just plain rude.
If you want to let rude people who don't want to put forth the effort to work together with our society be accepted in our nation, that's your problem. I, for one, want people who actually give a damn, and try to become better citizens.
Re:RIAA = Scientology (Score:5, Insightful)
Have you been to Spain recently? There are more British expats in some parts than native Spanish people, and they really do expect to have their every whim catered for. English speakers are one of the most arrogant groups in the world, linguistically. The fact that our language is dominant in many areas puts us at a natural advantage.
But let's get this into perspective. Slashdot is on the Internet; it's not a country. Someone who posts here with less-than-excellent English might be posting from Mexico, or Lithuania, or Uganda. They're not refusing to learn the language of their country of residence, they're just not great at the language Slashdot chose for its website.
Re:Or even better ! (Score:1, Insightful)
call it ignorant if you want, but i'm not learning a new language every time i get a neighbor who cant talk mine and wont try to learn.
Clearly you don't have time to learn a second language. You've barely mastered your first.
Re:Sigh... (Score:2, Insightful)
"I've long since reconciled myself to the fact that while I believe in intellectual property rights, most people around me don't. Of course the vast majority of those people have never tried to make a living by producing something for the mass market."
I, too, believe in intellectual property rights. I believe that, as the Constitution of the United States lays out, that limited protection of an original work for a reasonable period of time, followed by the turning over of that work to the Public Domain is a just and proper incentive for creation of new works, and does promote the Useful Arts and Sciences. Furthermore, I believe in both the Doctrine of First Sale and the Fair Use defense which means I believe that I am allowed to acquire a secondhand copy from someone who no longer wishes to use their legally-acquired copy at a discount (or free) and furthermore, I am allowed dispose of my legally-acquired copy in any way I see fit, and that I may make copies, derivative works, or otherwise use the copyrighted material in incidental, non-infringing ways.
Unfortunately, the RIAA, MPAA and their ilk do NOT believe in intellectual property rights. They believe in something entirely different - the UNlimited protection of an original work for AN INFINITE PERIOD OF TIME, WITH NO turning over of that work to the Public Domain is a just and proper incentive for the creation of new work, NEVER MIND THAT STRUCTUING THINGS THUSLY DOES NOT promote the Useful Arts and Sciences. Furthermore, THEY SEEK TO ELIMINATE both the Doctrine of First Sale and the Fair Use defense which means THEY believe that I SHOULD NEVER BE allowed to acquire a secondhand copy from someone OTHER THAN THEM, AT FULL PRICE AND NEVER at a discount (or free) and furthermore, THEY WOULD PREVENT ME FROM DISPOSING of my legally-acquired copy in any way I see fit, and THEY WOULD USE TECHNOLOGY, LAW, AND ALL MEANS AT THEIR DISPOSAL TO UTTERLY PREVENT ME FROM MAKING copies, derivative works, or otherwise use the copyrighted material in incidental, non-infringing ways.
I fully believe in intellectual property rights; the problem is that the RIAA et al believe in something altogether different - I'm not sure *WHAT* it is, but it sure as heck doesn't look anything like intellectual property rights to me.
Re:RIAA = Scientology (Score:3, Insightful)
If I could get money loaned to me at the rates the government does (0% or close to it), and was then able to loan that money out at 12%, I would call it a windfall. The government is going to basically get something for nothing out of this.
Re:Reading between the lines (Score:4, Insightful)
I wonder if Ray can keep his blog entries up if he simply stated the line in contention as in my opinion.
"in my opinion" is not a magic word that lets you defame people with impunity.
Re:RIAA = Scientology (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd agree, but to allow these banks and insurers to go under would result in a massive cascade of bankruptcies that would plunge the entire world economy into a depression, forcing people out of their homes and out of their jobs. Then we'd see the re-emergence and re-popularisation of radical politics like fascism and communism. There's a good chance we would end up in another war, possibly a big one since that's what happened after the great depression of the 1930's.
So although I agree in principle, I'd rather see a bailout.
Re:RIAA = Scientology (Score:5, Insightful)
There shouldn't be a financial industry! Industry produces and commerce sells. Finance == value. You can print money, but that actually causes all money to lose value, which is the opposite of what a finance "industry" should be doing. There's a lot of financial commerce happening, though; our money is being bought from us at a deflated rate and sold to the rich for even less.
You sir, are a naive tool. The financial industry provides the capital upon which industry is built. Without it, the only people with enough capital to create industry are the rich.
Re:RIAA = Scientology (Score:3, Insightful)
Most of the private individuals getting shafted by AIG probably didn't even KNOW they were dealing with AIG.
Re:RIAA = Scientology (Score:2, Insightful)
Sure AIG might insure them, but the problem is that they insured without the capital reserve in place to back the insurance. They insured risky loans without the money to fulfill their finanical obligations should those loans fall through.
"If AIG goes under, its backing becomes worthless"
And one might argue that their backing was worthless from the start, just nobody knew it until the shit began to hit the fan. What's the point of having insurance if the insurer can't cover the claims?
Don't get me wrong, I agree with your assessment of the disaster that would take place should AIG go under.. But lets make no mistake, they dug their own grave here. They didn't start the chain of events that led to this collapse, but neither are they the innocent victims that some people claim them to be.
Re:Or even better ! (Score:3, Insightful)
All of them aren't necessarily "doing anything about it". I live in Minneapolis and when the RNC was in town, there were plenty of people "doing something about it". I can tell you because I witnessed some of it firsthand.
Re:Language isn't the real issue (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:RIAA = Scientology (Score:1, Insightful)
I don't own any bonds. I don't have any investments. I don't even own a credit card. So, why should I be contributing to keeping AIG alive?
Now, in a related note, I also can't get a mortgage. Been rejected. Why are the tax dollars I pay being used to keep Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac alive? Let's see. I apply to purchase a house and get a mortgage... where if accepted my money would provide a house. Now, these companies get my money anyway, except I don't get the house.
Maybe it is time for the entire world's financial industry to take a massive hit.
I'll continue to grow my own vegetables, thanks.
Re:RIAA = Scientology (Score:0, Insightful)
Re:RIAA = Scientology (Score:4, Insightful)
Don't be silly. The US government doesn't spend taxpayer money when a ridiculously overblown problem is presented, the US government spends DEBT.
We're basically handing our kids money to companies. Don't worry though, all the middle-aged losers who are spending the money will be long dead before the time comes to pay most of it back.
Re:Language isn't the real issue (Score:4, Insightful)
If their culture stands between them and learning the language, then yes, ditch it.
Their culture is of zero worth (as mine is), and that much importance. Culture is just tradition, which is stuff we do for no good reason. (Or it wouldn't be traditional, just reasonable. Canadians shovel sidewalks, but not for fun or culture, but because they get covered in snow.)
Of course, they can follow whatever cute little traditions their people traditionally have, no matter how stupid, like cutting down a perfectly good tree to celebrate the birth of a space ghost. But these things are worthless, and we shouldn't cater to the traditionalist's demands for "respect" for their culture or we'll still be chopping down trees for this in another two-thousand years. Nutty old crap is nutty old crap.
Re:no, you get a clue (Score:3, Insightful)
Racist.
Well, countryist. "Us asshole Americans"...
Way to lump a few ignorant god-botherers ranting about racial impurity and anti-furriner idiots rating about welfare money into a group and label it "everyone in America".
I wouldn't mind a guest who spoke little to no English, as long as they realized the delay in finding a bathroom was their fault... But a neighbor, who then started to demand that I spend money translating street signs, no.
Depends on the context.
Re:RIAA = Scientology (Score:5, Insightful)
All it takes to create industry is ingenuity and drive, the money comes (should come, rather) later.
How do you propose to buy equipment, rent office/factory/warehouse space, etc. without any money? Suppliers and landlords won't take "ingenuity and drive" as payment. If the subject of your ingenuity is something that's expensive to make, you'll probably need investors (i.e. a loan) to make it happen.
Re:badsummary (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh the irony. It's almost painful.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:RIAA = Scientology (Score:3, Insightful)
The trouble is that such bailouts then teach people to take even more risks next time around. When the executives of a large company such as AIG are next faced with the choice between taking a risky road with a great reward or a safe road with small rewards, why should they not choose the risky road? After all, they're too large to fail, so Uncle Sam will save them if the risk doesn't pay off.
I don't have an answer. I can see that letting them fail isn't good either. But this is just going to make it worse next time around, the way I see it.
Carve 'em a new one, Ray (Score:3, Insightful)
"New York Country Lawyer" Ray Beckerman has probably done more to publicize the RIAA's thuggish, bullying tactics in clear, concise, non-legalese language than just about anybody else in the United States. And he's certainly done more than his share against them in court, if I understand correctly. It's no surprise they're targeting him.
I hope the Slashdot community is ready to help the guy out if necessary, because he's helped keep the RIAA and similar scumbags off all of our necks.
Re:Or even better ! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Language isn't the real issue (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:RIAA = Scientology (Score:2, Insightful)
Ok, mods, come the fuck on. Overrated != Disagree.
Post a fucking response if you disagree, instead of abusing the moderation system. The Overrated mod is meant to negate a bad positive mod, it should never be the first (or only) moderation on a comment.
Re:RIAA = Scientology (Score:3, Insightful)
American Patriot (Score:3, Insightful)
America's founders were capable, wealthy men who took significant risks and turned down opportunities in supporting the formation of the U.S. I know you don't have to worry about having you house torched and family killed, but we know there are more profitable ways to make a living then defending people who can't pay you against very wealthy aggressive corporations. You give American Patriots a good name. Thanks for all you do.
Re:RIAA = Scientology (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:no, you get a clue (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm from the USA, and recently traveled to Italy with little warning and thus little preparation. I speak a decent amount of Spanish, but no Italian. I put forth an effort to learn as many useful parts of the language as I could, as fast as I could, but was obviously still woefully unprepared to carry on a conversation in Italian when I arrived.
Some people were nice about it. They'd wait patiently as I consulted a translation dictionary for the missing word, try to help with hand signs or synonyms, or find someone who spoke English if all else failed. (And they were generally happy for my tourism dollars, too.)
Some other people... not quite. I knew enough of the language to know when I was being berated for not speaking correctly (they always say the first words you learn are 'yes', 'no', 'hello', 'thank you', and then all the curses). One gas station attendant even physically shoved me while cursing me (in Italian) for my lack of comprehension when I asked him which gas type my rental car used.
I mean, I live in Silicon Valley and hear at least 5 different languages between the office, the park, and my apartment every day. (And yes, I'm a Midwestern Caucasian of Italian descent.) The only time I'm bothered is when I feel guilty for having to ask someone to repeat themselves because of their accent (and my hearing difficulty).
So yeah. I think people will be people and continue to be widely distributed in their views and bigotries. I wish more Americans would be more understanding of culture differences, and, after traveling to Italy, I wish more Italians would be, too. (And I've never heard someone seriously use that argument, but I can certainly see some people being closed-minded enough to try.) Us "asshole 'Americans' " aren't all bigots, nor are "they" all perfectly welcoming fellows.
*shrug*
Re:Pot, meet kettle? (Score:3, Insightful)
Just out of curiosity, what does genital mutilation have to do with Ray Beckerman being sued by the RIAA?
Re:Perhaps that's the entire point (Score:4, Insightful)
Probably true. I didn't rtfa but last I heard, being "vexatious" was not a crime, except to tyrants.
It's truly funny that all Ray does is point out the legal absurdities in their activities and they respond with yet another absurdity. This is a classic case of a big moneyed interest abusing the legal system against people who can't afford to defend themselves. From another perspective you might call it racketeering.
Vex on, Ray.
Re:RIAA = Scientology (Score:3, Insightful)
Insurers always have the risk of not having the money to cover claims. It's part of the bet that insurers (and the insured) make when figuring out premiums.
(The following is just general mention, not specifically to you, midnitewolf.) No insurance company can cover 100% of its claims at any one time. A company may insure $50 billion in real estate, but they don't keep $50 billion on-hand to cover it. They factor in the payouts over time against expected premium and investment gains, and adjust things accordingly.
Back to your points, there aren't many innocents in this market. It was out and out greed that got things to this spot (kind of like some of the problems in the financial industry in the 1980s), and a severe lack of caring about the futures of families that had no hope of paying off their mortgage. Business may be primarily about making money, but it shouldn't be outright lying to consumers, either. (Cue Slashdot cynicism.)
I'm not worried about Ray.. (Score:3, Insightful)
This guy is so used to translate RIAA gibberish into the cleartext nonsense it is that I personally think they have made their biggest mistake since starting their campaign.
Ray, thanks for showing that the legal profession DOES have people with old fashioned ethics.
I can't speak for others, but I am certainly 100% behind you. Thanks for your work.
Re:RIAA = Scientology (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't own any bonds. I don't have any investments. I don't even own a credit card. So, why should I be contributing to keeping AIG alive?
Do you have money in a bank? Do you ever want to see that money ever again?
Re:RIAA = Scientology (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:RIAA = Scientology (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: Bailouts as investor protection (Score:4, Insightful)
And if I understand the news about AIG correctly, the stock is only taken temporarily as a security. So if AIG recovers and can pay back the money, these investors get off way too lightly as well.
The feds took stock warrants totaling nearly 80% of the company as collateral. The warrants are basically options, at anytime they can be turned into stock that the feds will permanently own. There is good reason not to make it 100%, no one wants the fed to actually have to own or oversee the dissolution of this company. It would be far better if they paid back the loan and went on to be a successfully company.
So if AIG recovers and can pay back the money, these investors get off way too lightly as well.
I don't agree with this. This is not entirely AIGs fault. AIG insured a lot of bad debt its true, however their current liquidity problems are also the product of fear (due to LEH, BS) driven increases to what amounts to interest rates on loans that they (like all banks/insurers) need. When these rates went up then AIG's costs shot up causing the recent problem. Nothing changed at AIG, its just that because of LEH/BS/etc the market fearfully drove AIG's debt costs up, prior to that they were fine.
Also keep in mind that the the Feds didn't write AIG a check for $85billion, they gave them a line of credit. The presence of this line of credit could make AIGs debt costs go down (remember they are artificially high due to fear) without ever actually using it fully.
Anyway I think seeing one's investment go from $70/share to $2 is probably PLENTY of punishment.
What about Morgan Stanley? The exact same thing could happen to them and they are currently turning a profit! Right now the market is so fearful that profit/loss doesn't matter. Should investors loose all of their money because a panic induced mob crashed prices? I certainly don't want to see profitable companies like Morgan Stanley go out of business and fire all of their workers because of a panicked crazed mob.
Re:RIAA = Scientology (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm going to stick my neck out again, it's my duty as resident /. asshole.
I say let AIG fail. Let the dominoes fall. It's the slap in the face the world needs to get back on the wagon. Treat the banking industry like a drug addict - let it bottom out and come back crawling for mercy.
We will suffer in the short term, but we will prosper in the long term.
Re:RIAA = Scientology (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't really think people "choose" whether to learn English or not learn English, as if they could push a button. I think these people have a lot of problems to deal with, the language being just one, and they don't have time to do whatever they want. Poverty is not so easy.
The RIAA is obviously scared of him (Score:1, Insightful)
My, that old Chinese saying is true: "sha ji gei hou kan" - means "kill the chicken to warn the monkeys". Or attempt to anyway.
The RIAA has plenty to fear from this guy because they've obviously gone too far with their heavy-handed approach. Goodness, They feel he's embarrassing them? Give me a break. With the way they're going, they don't need his help.
Solution is simple: stop buying music directly from any of the RIAA members.
Re:RIAA = Scientology (Score:4, Insightful)
...or dyslexic, or badly educated because your teachers didn't care, or the child of illiterate parents, or just plain tired after a long day, or a potentially hyper-intelligent foreigner who just hasn't mastered English yet...
I'm not a fan of poor English either - I teach the subject at Oxford, so I'm probably more aware of mistakes then the average reader. But when someone is obviously a learner rather than a sloppy native speaker, let's give them a break, huh?
Would you rather participate in an inward-looking forum where only native speakers with the requisite educational level are allowed, or one where you have a far broader range of opinions and ideas which are sometimes marred by poor (but nonetheless understandable) language usage?