Mitch Bainwol To Succeed Hilary Rosen As RIAA Head 480
bmarklein writes "The RIAA has announced that it has named Mitch Bainwol, former chief of staff to U.S. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, as chairman & CEO. He replaces Hilary Rosen, who left earlier this month. This confirms the speculation that the RIAA would appoint a well-connected Republican (Rosen was a Democrat)." Several readers have submitted links to CNET's coverage as well.
Update: 07/29 12:30 GMT by J : Lobbyists wield incredible power nowadays, and Slate's report on why was enlightening. Here's
part 1
and
part 2.
Includes lyrics to the rap recorded for Rosen's going-away party by some of the most powerful people in the world: "Who wants the job of Hilary Rosen? / How 'bout the dream team of Bono and Tauzin?"
Hey (Score:5, Funny)
Is this a Frist Psot?
Re:Hey (Score:2, Redundant)
Re:Hey (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Hey (Score:4, Informative)
(Im too lazy to look it up too)
Re:WELCOME TO MY FOES LIST U FAGGOT! (Score:5, Insightful)
Walking the walk (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Walking the walk (Score:2)
N.
Re:Walking the walk (Score:2)
Re:Explain for the rest of the world... (Score:3, Funny)
Just stay where you are, we'll send some people over to assassinate your political leaders and "liberate" you, just as soon as we get them back from Iraq. We'll phone you when it's done.
protecting property (Score:2)
Re:protecting property (Score:5, Funny)
You mean simething like: "Can you imagine a Bainwol cluster of these?"
Political wars (Score:5, Funny)
Well, I suppose from this wording there will not be any political flame wars generated from this....
It's because Republicans are on top (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's because Republicans are on top (Score:3, Insightful)
Or you could stand up and fight for what you believe in.
Former? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Former? (Score:5, Funny)
He was just carried along by the angular momentum of the congressional/lobbyist revolving door.
Re:Former? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Former? (Score:3, Funny)
"Look out, here comes BAINWOL"
I'll hazard a guess that having all your underlings laugh whenever they hear your name would tend to undermine your authority somewhat...
Is this a real name, or something made up? He's not so much an enigma as an abbreviation:
Bastards
Allied
In
Neutering
W
Of
Law
frick! er frist er... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:frick! er frist er... (Score:5, Insightful)
Sigh... I am a Republican but on this issue they are pissing me off...
Funny how Americans say "I am a Republican" while a Dutchman would say "I voted VVD last election"... Did you get some sort of label when you were born? :-)
Seriously, it seems like people in the US pretty much always vote what they always voted, simply because that's the camp they feel they belong to... Nothing's ever going to change that way.
Tattoo (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Tattoo (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Tattoo (Score:2)
Re:Tattoo (Score:2)
So... (Score:5, Funny)
I think I'll have a good cry.
Re:So... (Score:2)
Conservative? (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't forget Frist is from TN, the center of the country music industry - probably the closest you can get to Hollywood without actually going to Hollywood. And he has plenty of pull of his own [commondreams.org].
I'm rather sick of these radical modern day liberals (as opposed to old school liberals, who actually believed in liberty) being called "conservatives." These modern day robber barrons are not conservators of anything except greed. I have in mind a much appropriate word [reference.com] to describe them...
Re:Conservative? (Score:2)
Congratulations, you just figured out what the rest of mean when we say 'conservative'. You're a little late, but welcome to the party anyways.
Bad thing (Score:5, Insightful)
You know this is a bad thing. He's a right-wing Republican; the GOP is pro-rich, pro-big corporations, and pro-personal interest.
Expect even more tyranny from the RIAA.
I shudder at this prospect... not that the old person was good, though...
Re:Bad thing (Score:3, Insightful)
Personally, I'm not going to let who the RIAA appoints as their CEO dictate who I vote for in '04.
Re:Bad thing (Score:4, Insightful)
Would you really want a candidate who's pro-poor??? "What we need in this county is more poverty!"
Re:Bad thing (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Bad thing (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm guessing before today's story, you've never heard of this guy. I haven't either so don't feel bad. Sure we all know Frist, but he is hardly a galvinizing conservative icon.
Of course...your second line shows your true colors. Pro-rich, pro-big corporations, blah blah. Same 'ole line from the liberals. Who paints who with broad brush strokes?
Maybe you should give him a chance, before damning him. A
Riiiiight... (Score:5, Insightful)
Who said property rights was a great American tradition? And rewarding for whom? Certainly not for us.
Re:Riiiiight... (Score:2)
The way he starts his RIAA job is atleast up to the normal RIAA standards; spreading BS about "property rights" as if property has anything to do with copyright.
Re:Riiiiight... (Score:5, Funny)
property rights almost DEFINE America!
But of course I wonder what the hell does that have to do with Copyrights and music.. copyright takes the concept of property right and flips it upside down.
I can just imagine if the RIAA was around in the early days of America:
RIAA exec: Hi there Farmer Joe, I'd like to talk to you about potential copyright infringements, specifically your Friday-night get-togethers where you sing unlicensed performances of Little Brown Jug.
Farmer: Git off mah property, monkey-suit boy! I bought that there sheet music fair an' square!
RIAA exec: I'm sorry, but I'm afraid you only purchased the rights to perform it in the presence of yourself and one optional family member. Inviting the neighborhood over to "sing along" constitutes an infringment of the our rights.
Farmer: What the hell are you talkin' about! I BOUGHT that there sheet music, that there sheet music is mine, same as the door you're a-standin' in, and the gun I'm a-gettin right now to blast a hole in your flabby gut.
RIAA exec: Now now Farmer Joe, that's not how copyrights work, the rights to perform the song still belong to us. Now, we can settle this matter if you pay us $15,000, and we promise not to take away your house.
Farmer: You're an ijit. *BLAM* *BLAM*
Re:Riiiiight... (Score:3, Funny)
Tell that to the indians ... or I will, when I'm done gambling
Re:Riiiiight... (Score:2)
Who said property rights aren't a great American tradition?
It's sort of the basis of large chunks of the Constitution.
Re:Riiiiight... (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh nobody...just the FIFTH AMENDMENT!
"No person shall...be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law"
The original vision the founders had for property rights (including the original 14+14 copyright), is what made the American middle class possible. So they're very rewarding, for you and everyone else. If you don't have personal property rights, you have no incentive to work because the fruits of your labor can be taken from you at the whim of the government.
Now music...that's a whole other story...
Re:Riiiiight... (Score:3, Insightful)
We almost did, but then we punted the conservatives out, and Treudeau took great pains to 1) ensure that we don't become an oligarchy (by not entrenching property rights), and 2) piss off the American president at the time (just for sh**s and giggles)
will you people calm down... (Score:3, Insightful)
Hit me.
Re:will you people calm down... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:will you people calm down... (Score:2)
Re:will you people calm down... (Score:2)
Re:will you people calm down... (Score:5, Funny)
And we are just practicing.
Hence... (Score:2)
Key word being yet. Somebody help me heat up this tar while we're at it...
Wait a second... (Score:5, Funny)
Damnit... And all along I thought it was baseball and barbeques.
Re:Wait a second... (Score:2, Insightful)
He really meant exploitation of artists and monopolies.
Re:Wait a second... (Score:4, Funny)
You misspelled "beer."
Now I know who to vote for. (Score:4, Insightful)
(Now that I mentioned politics, I'm readying for flame)
Re:Now I know who to vote for. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Now I know who to vote for. (Score:5, Interesting)
The reality is that so far I haven't seen a very convincing defense of music piracy. That isn't to say I wouldn't be receptive to one (I am) but most of them boil down to a general denial of property rights or good reasons why the artist/label/retailer would benefit if they decided to allow copying. If I haven't heard a satisfactory defense (and I'm looking) it's no surprise that people with more important things to worry about haven't, either.
Fair use provisions in copyright law, shorter lifetimes for copyrights, etc. are all very noble, and well-advocated. But that's different from justifying the sharing of music recordings, when the copyright holder doesn't want this. The tactics used by the RIAA are objectionable-- but again that's a question of means not ends.
So ultimately, lawmakers who have much bigger things to worry about (like war and the economy) see the following facts:
To be honest, I may not like the RIAA, but I can see the problem. Unless there is a good reason why a copyright holder doesn't have to the right to limit copying of his work (hence copyright), then I might limit some of the more odious enforcement provisions, but I can't see why they shouldn't be allowed to protect their rights.
Again, I'm receptive to such an argument. I do think that we're foolishly crushing fair use rights. I also think that copyrights (and while we're at it, patents) should be returned to their founding-father era lifespans. And criminalizing a good percentage of the public is a little silly, too. But that isn't the same as removing copyrights entirely.
The music industry (and especially artists) would greatly benefit from circulating free but low-bitrate versions of their music to drive CD and concert sales-- I think that they're shooting their profits in the foot by not embracing the technology (they're already streaming low-bitrate audio wirelessly anyway, aren't they?-- and to great effect). But they have the right to shoot their profits in the foot if that's what they want to do.
Instead of modding me down, post a reply telling me why forcing a copyright holder to allow free sharing of his work is good public policy. I want to believe, I just haven't heard a satisfactory argument yet.
Nitpick. (Score:4, Interesting)
This can be important. Various artists, some big name (I believe the Smashing Pumpkins were one) were far more ready to embrace music on the Internet than the copyright holders, but of course, the artists couldn't really do anything about it as they were under contract to the label.
Is it their fault for signing to a major? Technically yes, but it's hard to blame them, even for me. It's nice to see someone like the Yeah Yeah Yeahs get mainstream radio play, but it doesn't happen very often. If you want the big audiences, you sign to the big labels, and lose your rights.
I think that the limits on copyright should be much shorter than they currently are, but I think that within those limits, people should be free to do what they want with their work. It's a shame it's often not up to the artists, but I don't think we can rightly change that with legislation.
Re:Nitpick. (Score:3, Insightful)
First you rightly see that the artists are not part of the current market for 'tunes'. The RIAA sees the artist much like Ford sees a lug-nut (important, but easily replaced by any number of near identical lug-nuts).
Secondly, you are correct that the copyright holders should be allowed to do what they want with their content. Again, the thought of forcing a copyright holder to do something in particula
Re:Now I know who to vote for. (Score:4, Interesting)
The reality is that so far I haven't seen a very convincing defense of music piracy.
I'm not going to take a stab at this, but I'd like to hear what you think about a few points. Who knows, maybe it'll clear up the debate a little bit.
Let's say that distribution of pro-abortion material was deemed offensive in your district. Further, it was deemed obscene. Now let's say that people really do feel that way, and it's not just an attempt to squelch free speech.
If you were to distribute informational pamphlets that discussed abortion in a positive light, you would be committing an illegal act. Furthermore, you would be distributing (or attempting to distribute) these pamphlets to people who truly found them offensive.
Would you be right in doing it, even if it's illegal?
Sorry that I used "abortion" but I'm in the buckle of the bible belt, and we run into those questions down here.
How does this relate to "music piracy"? Because it serves to illustrate several assumptions:
The trick is how copyright works. Consider for a moment what copyright means. It is not property. It can be bought and sold, but it is not quite property. It is a government granted, sanctioned, and enforced monopoly granted for a limited time. It is literally taking out phrases, ideas, and images from our freedom of speech.
Is that wrong? Well, I'd be hard pressed to say that was wrong, because we do have the sense that someone who makes something owns it, whether draftsman or craftsman. But at the same time, for freedom of speech to exist we shouldn't have to worry so much about what we say.
Also, consider what freedom of speech is: it's a description of a lack of controls upon an interaction. Copyright is intrinsically an interaction between two people when its value is assessed.
A work of art can be enjoyed solely by its creator without copyright coming in to play, much as land can be enjoyed only by its owner without needing someone else to desire that land.
So, copyright is a restriction upon speech and a restriction upon interaction, and it is granted for a limited time.
If that is true --- that copyright is a restriction, not a restriction in the sense of "two people cannot both own 100% of something" like land or material items, but a restriction in the sense that "I can own what you say" --- then perhaps the onus is not upon we the public to justify our use of something so much as it is upon the copyright holder to justify our lack of "permission" to use it.
Why do I mention this? You ask for a justification for "piracy." I think that's a bit turned around on its head.
When copyright was set out in America (note that I can only speak for America), most of the argument boiled down to "alright, we'll put up with this abomination, but only for a short while, and only if it benefits us" because copyright was not viewed as a "right."
Maybe it should be. I don't know. But regardless, if you're going to argue about the current copyright system, you need to consider upon whom the responsibility for justification is. Much of the law comes from discovering upon whom obligation for justification lies.
Most of the good arguments I've heard against music trading is that it dilutes the value of their property[1]. Does that hold up? Well, that's an argument for the statisticians.
These are just some things to consider. I'd like to hear anything you have to say concerning the subject. Please note that I am not "for" music piracy. Not really sure how I feel about it. I just would like to see a clearer discussion.
[1] - Please don't make the mistake of saying "it's bad because it's against the law." I've heard that a few times, and it's useless because when you're talking about right and wrong it makes little sense to discuss the factuality of the law. The premise behind the law, sure. But not the factuality.
Re:Now I know who to vote for. (Score:4, Interesting)
Three things mar what would be an otherwise great justification of the practice here.
Errrm...but I really wasn't trying to justify it, just set up portions of a discussion. Either way, looks like someone does want to have the discussion, so maybe we can clear some things up.
there is a difference between distributing materials on the street[...see above post for rest...]
That does tend to block off the "moral crusader" route, which is probably the route you should take if you want to see the law repealed.
Perhaps, though, the distribution on the street and the distribution at the computer methods do differ.
Thinking this through: what is it about the computer that makes it to where people feel free about distributing files? It's not anonymity for the most part, as many traders set up nicknames or handles for themselves, establishing pseudonymity. Often they tend to like talking to one another and talking about what they like and don't like, and what's cool and what's not. ShareReactor is a good example of that. Most of the hugely successful communities either offer 1) incredible selection, or 2) a chatting community that leads people to "cool stuff."
Most tend to succeed at the latter, if they succeed at all. Note that this does not have to be intrinsic to the network, it can grow up around the network (BitTorrent, for example).
Well, you can get that from doing it on the street, too.
On the other hand, what's the likelyhood of you just plopping your butt down on the sidewalk and finding some psychadelic trance fans who have some nice tracks that they want you to check out for no reason at all but because they're cool.
Pretty low, unless you're at a trance convention, and then you're likely to run into marketroids and others who try to work the marketing system.
Also, on the street unless everyone has laptops or something along those lines and headphones and a way to connect, people aren't going to be able to listen as they trade and chat. LAN parties tend to be that way, but they aren't the sidewalk.
Come to think of it, LAN parties are very, very much like the P2P systems in some respects: lots of files swapped across, lots of stuff shown, listening while you trade, going off and doing other stuff, etc.
Most likely on the street you're going to have to give people tapes or CDs, and then you look like a radio station or a promoter.
So maybe there is something different between the examples. One is what the community is, and one is purely a protest, and probably wouldn't win any sympathies.
Maybe we should advertise the fact that at our next LAN party we will have files available to trade? Even that doesn't sound like the community. Hmmm...can you think of a way to do what the community is like and also have it be very public and "moral crusade"?
When in the culture of file trading, it often becomes very difficult to say that it's wrong. Most of the time, it's not people in dark trenchcoats saying "I got what'chu need, ese", it's more of "check this shit out, man! You liked that track by Infected Mushroom, right? Well, check out Trance Cowboy. Here's my collection, check a few of them out, they're righteous."
Has more in common with people sitting around with discmans and headphones swapping CDs.
But of course, they're not "swapping CDs" they are duplicating them. There isn't any burning need for them to buy the album so they can get that music. Maybe when we're in the culture it just *seems* right without *being* right.
Just something to consider. I'd like to hear your thoughts on that.
They explicitly stated the reasons: in order to promote further development and creativity.
But at the same time, most don't feel that that is the case, nor do they feel that the justification fits the extension. That means that the "justification" is a bit shaky, if not wrong.
Example: you and I are friends, and we both love The Simpsons. I
Re:Now I know who to vote for. (Score:4, Interesting)
The world is moving towards an era of exceedingly low barriers to manufacturing and distribution. (See previous story on peer-to-peer manufacturing [slashdot.org].) Incumbents are selfishly seeking to impose artificial barriers, such as claiming property rights over ideas and information.
We will have an opportunity to abolish resource shortages and largely solve material needs. The alternative is people dying from disease and starvation due to artificial barriers, such as intellectual 'property rights', preventing them from receiving things such as drugs and food. These things will be affordable if artificial barriers, such as intellectual property', are removed. (It is is okay to charge competitive prices for materials, labour and other scarce resources.) Okay you may argue R&D needs to be recouped, but as simulations become more accurate R&D costs will plummet, rendering such arguments moot.
Re:Now I know who to vote for. (Score:5, Interesting)
I hate to disappoint you but Hollywood(MPAA/RIAA) is one of the primary contributors to the Democratic party, the other two being trial lawyers and labor unions. Have you already forgot who signed the DMCA into law?
Email? (Score:2, Funny)
Time to flee to Canada? (Score:4, Funny)
Well, in the time honoured tradition, repressed citizens of the freedom loving USA, can still flee to Canada. Maybe, just maybe, claiming persecution by the evil RIAA, will get you refugee status.
If anything, it will probably get the Vietnam vets and slave traders to spin in their graves at 45rpm...
Re:Time to flee to Canada? (Score:3, Funny)
Forget that. I think we're going to go with the time honoured American tradition of overreacting [canada.com] and turn you guys away at the border.
HOWEVER, if you come bearing A&W Sparkling Vanilla Cream Soda, I will greet you at the border myself.
Re:Time to flee to Canada? (Score:2)
Yes because darnit (Score:3, Funny)
Are you sure that the CRIA can do anything about this, they may only have authorization over matters of Canadian artists.
More rewarding.... (Score:5, Funny)
What would be more rewarding that promoting music and property rights? Hmmmm tough one there.
How about the immense joy, convenience and satisfaction associated with obtaining music online? Heck, how about masturbation for that matter.
Influence abounds... (Score:5, Insightful)
Hmm. Pre-paid senators...
Already I see there's gonna be some problems with this. Mainly the RIAA getting laws that people know aren't kosher passed. And possibly a little too much influence on some issues...
And before I forget:
"What could be more rewarding than helping to promote two great American traditions: music and property rights?"
When the F**K did property rights become a "great american tradition"?!?
Re:Influence abounds... (Score:2)
When the F**K did property rights become a "great american tradition"?!?
So I guess you don't care if I burn your house down, steal your car, or eat your food? After all, who cares about property rights?!
Re:Influence abounds... (Score:2)
Your point's well taken. It's hard to overemphasize the point that government and business stances on the inviolability of strict property rights have hardened in last 10 years or so.
However, keep in mind that the Fair Use America we like to think about is as much a pipedream as Music As IP. Please refer to initial drafts of the Declaration of Independence, whose writers heavily depended on Locke and Montesquieuian ideas of property being the basis of the social contract.
The original thought is right ther
Re:Influence abounds... (Score:3, Interesting)
Ever since the Bill Of Rights. Ever read Amendments 3, 4, and 5? All pertain to private property rights.
Big deal (Score:3, Insightful)
The only difference I can see this concievably making is that now the constant anti-RIAA snipes on slashdot will no longer be occationally seen to contain unhelpful sexist comments, now that the RIAA has a spokesman and not a spokeswoman. Other than that I do not imagine the quantity or nature of slashdot RIAA posts, nor the actions of the RIAA, will change one bit.
Re:Big deal (Score:2)
who's paying who? (Score:4, Interesting)
From Obscurity to Infamy (Score:2)
Obligatory Python quote: "NOOOOBODY EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION!!!"
Armageddon (Score:4, Funny)
Republican in the RIAA? (Score:5, Funny)
Thank God I'm not sharing Midnight Oil or I could end up being 'liberated' in the head.
*knock, knock*
Hold on a sec....
Hey! What the..?! *PFhhT*
*thunk*
I FULLY SUPPORRT OUR NEW REPUBLIC KAN OVERLOARDS!!
More info needed. (Score:2)
Re:More info needed. (Score:2, Funny)
Hey now! at least give the guy a day to prove he's right in line with the rest of the recording industry.
Ya never know, maybe being a conservative republican (and therefore presumably a good businessman) he will figure the P/E ratio of litigation and public intimidation isn't nearly as high as say, lowering the prices of CDs and driving up sales which is ultimately what I think this debate all comes down to.
Then again maybe I will magically get enough money for that Z5 convertible I've been wanting the
In other news . . . (Score:2, Funny)
Everyone complains about Republicans (Score:2, Insightful)
Both parties deserve the bashing, but you're talking out of your ass if you think the Democrats are a safe haven from RIAA/Disney/et. al.
oooooooo new target! (Score:2)
A bit of reasoning (Score:2, Insightful)
Any good California law firm (as you know, we tend to have the most experience in such a field) will have hired one attorney into partnership for every State Supreme Court Justice, each attorney having previously been a different justice's clerk. After a while of typing all the J's decisions, they know what the Justice wants to read when going over correspondances and court pleadings.
This new head is entirely about the personal experience of working with the head of the senate majority l
The bitch is back in town... (Score:2)
We could solve the problem once and for all (Score:5, Interesting)
Notice how Congress fears the NRA, and not just because they have guns. There are more file sharers than NRA members. Consider the possibilities.
first fatal flaw (Score:3, Insightful)
If those "file traders" would just leave behind the music of the corporations that sue them we wouldn't need a lobby - the problem would take care of itself because the publishers wouldn't find enough profit in the music industry to justify sustaining an RIAA. The problem is "file traders" - like the MP3.COM of yore - don't necessarily believe in that stuff about empowering the artist or in helping build a new model of distribution that would help t
Re:first fatal flaw (Score:3, Interesting)
Most of them pay their dues; $35/yr. They have an incredible number of members, so it really adds up.
"And if you're paying a lobbyist
Granted, there is no such thing as "free" file sharing if you have to pay a lobbyist to defend the concept, but there are other desirable goals. It would be worth something to have competition in the music distribution industry, elimination of all the well-known unpopular business p
Better spelling (Score:2)
Gasp! Less-biased reporting! (Score:3, Interesting)
The New York times just says, "A decline caused by online file-sharing sites...." The LA Times does the same. CNN is owned by AOL/Time-Warner, and obviously just states it as though it's a credible fact. NBC/ABC/CBS ignore the issue, and follow CNN's lead when they don't. Fox... well, Fox will be Fox.
And here Reuters is at least insinuating that a doubt may exist. What's that Eric Blair/George Orwell (real name/pen name) quote about times of lies and revolutionary truths?
Sing along with Mitch! (Score:4, Funny)
"Gone are the days when Auto-Tune carried a song! I will bring back talent to the Industry!", Mitch crowed at a Republican fund raiser, to the applause of many rich, white fat men.
"It's high time the kids of today learned what music should sound like! I remember when talent drove the market, not the other way around! When I ascend to the throne, I will bring talent! I will bring value! I will bring CDs unencumbered with copy protection, and chock full of value!" Mitch puctuated these remarks with a pounding fist and spittle.
Mitch finished his speech to the attendees with a rousing cry, "The RIAA will no longer be the 'bad guy'! We will sponsor new artists and stick with them, developing careers and encouraging creativity! We will offer all signed artists with new contracts, spelling out exactly what they will make - no hidden accounting!"
"We will no longer chase file-sharers, who only do us a favor by expanding both our horizons with music, and purchase more CDs than ever before! We will never allow another American Idol or Making of the Band or manufactured marketing-friendly boy band again! All copyrights will revert to the original artist!"
"I will personally include a puppy with every single sold! *HAHAHAAHAHA.cough cough..oh shit, I thought I could keep a straight face! Pass the bong guys, *wheeeezee* this is going to be great! I can't wait to absolutely wreck music forever! These shits are gonna be scared to look at a guitar, much less pick one up when we get done with them..I am gonna be SHITTTIIING moooonnnneeey, muthafuc...*hack* Oh, Bushies here!!! WHoooHOOO! Let's DO SOME LINES!!! Where's the White Lady??HAHAHAhaha..."
This re-enactment is for entertainment only. It is not intended to portray Republicans as evil, rich, fat white, self-serving drug monkeys. Nor did Mitch ever say any of these things in front of me. Thank you, and please drink republicanly. ;)
Well, that's a stupid stratagy (Score:2)
But no one ever said that the RIAA was very forward thinking.
(Seriously though, aren't republicans basically the antithesis of everything the American music industry stands for? Does this mean we're going to see less sex, drugs, and black people on mtv?)
Statement of boycott-riaa.com on Mitch Bainwol (Score:3, Insightful)
A new head for the RIAA? (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe not such a bad thing.... (Score:4, Insightful)
This may affect several points:
1. Yes, the GOP is in power, but Hollywood and the Music industry are standard DEM strongholds. They may not like their new boy, or at least won't invite him to the parties at Rob Reiner's house.
2. They have now unzipped their fly, and are acting pretty brazenly partisan with such a move. This will turn many democrats in congress into automatic defense mode, who may slow legislation down 'just because'.
3. In the end, Bush & Co. may end up having to choose between supporting a major US export (entertainment) vs. giving money to those 'liberal jack-offs in hollywood'-- depending on what Karl Rove says about electoral trends, that could break either way.
Change the Law (Score:5, Insightful)
Copyright is not a constitutional right, like free speech. While Congress is empowered to legalize copyright, it is not required to do so. Filesharing could be legalized tomorrow if Congress just passed a bill to repeal copyright.
Change the Law [goingware.com] explains this in more detail, and suggests some steps to take to legalize filesharing. You can take these steps in almost any country, not just the US:
- Speak Out
- Vote
- Write to Your Elected Representatives
- Donate Money to Political Campaigns
- Support Campaign Finance Reform
- Join the Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Practice Civil Disobedience
If you feel as I do that what I have to say in my article is important for others to read, please link to it from your own website, your weblog, or other message boards.Thank you for your attention.
The Big Picture (Score:3, Insightful)
Krugman writes: "Lobbying jobs are a major source of patronage -- a reward for the loyal. More important, however, many lobbyists now owe their primary loyalty to the party, rather than to the industries they represent. So corporate cash, once split more or less evenly between the parties, increasingly flows in only one direction."
Truth in Sentencing (Score:5, Funny)
- $40-$200 fine
Petty Theft:
- $200 fine to 90 days' jail
Aggravated Assault:
- 90 days to 5 years' jail
3rd Degree Murder:
- 3 to 10 years' jail
2nd Degree Murder:
- 8 to 20 years' jail
Associating With A Person Who Is Known To Have Had KaZaa Installed On Their Hard Disk:
- 25 to life!
Mitch Bainwol anagrams (Score:4, Funny)
omni law bitch
wino itch balm
blow manic hit
him can blow it
i bowl in match
nail mob witch
mail bitch now
howl at ibm inc
i watch no limb
climb a hit now
octal whim bin
hint i blow mca
Re:It figures. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It figures. (Score:2)
Are they going after shoplifters now? If I may make my own 'Minor Distinction' - 'file sharing' is not 'stealing', it's copyright infringment.
Minor distinction ;) but it's an important distinction just the same. I'm sure some DoJ attorneys would disagree with me, however.
Re:Now that they've got a Republican in the post.. (Score:2)
Are you suggesting that GW is going to do something more drastic...maybe something along the lines of burglary?
Re:Now that they've got a Republican in the post.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Has anyone realized that the navy commercials now end with "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of those who threaten it"? What the hell is that?
As the government and corporations fuse, they are solidifying of new aristocracy. This means that our individual voices get drowned out. Where in the constitution does it say they get representation? Last time I checked, the government was of the people, by the people, and for the people.
I know it will never happen, but I think the only way to save our government, is to ban lobbying (legalized bribery). How can we compete w/ business giving out hundreds of thousands of dollars in 'incentive'?
I think I need to start my own country (think of the exodus from Battletech). No RIAA, no DMCA, no waste of our lives to get better profits on oil.
Re:Rosen gone already? (Score:2)