President Signs Law Creating Copyright Czar 555
I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "President Bush has signed the EIPRA (AKA the PRO-IP Act) and created a cabinet-level post of 'Copyright Czar,' on par with the current 'Drug Czar,' in spite of prior misgivings about the bill. They did at least get rid of provisions that would have had the DOJ take over the RIAA's unpopular litigation campaign. Still, the final legislation (PDF) creates new classes of felony criminal copyright infringement, adds civil forfeiture provisions that incorporate by reference parts of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, and directs the Copyright Czar to lobby foreign governments to adopt stronger IP laws. At this point, our best hope would appear to be to hope that someone sensible like Laurence Lessig or William Patry gets appointed."
Czar (Score:5, Funny)
If it doesn't sound like an utterly useless, powerless post, it sounds like we should be running for our lives from this all powerful czar - neither is particularly good, from my perspective.
Re:Czar (Score:5, Informative)
Establish a secret police to rout all revolutionaries and anti-royalists. Establish a serfdom and enforce it with an iron fist. Confiscate the property of radicals and starve them and their families. Get lined up against a wall and shot when the revolution comes.
Re:Czar (Score:4, Insightful)
Establish a secret police to rout all revolutionaries and anti-royalists. Establish a serfdom and enforce it with an iron fist. Confiscate the property of radicals and starve them and their families. Get lined up against a wall and shot when the revolution comes.
{sigh} unfortunately, we're talking about an unelected bureaucrat, not a real Czar.
So, this guy won't get shot, much as he'll probably deserve to be. He'll be in office until the next President fires his happy little ass and installs a new model.
The people responsible for this travesty won't suffer at all. That's the downside of being a civilized nation. How does the joke go? "Some people are alive only because it is illegal to kill them."
You don't vote for Kings (Score:3, Informative)
"unfortunately, we're talking about an unelected bureaucrat, not a real Czar."
The real Czars weren't elected either...
Cue the "In (pre) soviet Russia " jokes..
I believe the term Czar (later spelt Tsar) comes from the name Caesar - which orriginally was the given name of the first Roman emperor (Gaius Julius), and only became a 'Title' when adopted by his Nephew (Gaius Octavius - AKA Augustus)
Re:You don't vote for Kings (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Czar (Score:5, Funny)
They get shot, bayonetted, dunked in an acid bath, then thrown down a mineshaft, by Communists.
A spectre is haunting America - the spectre of Piracy ;-)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Czar (Score:5, Interesting)
The national idiots.. I mean congress, have apparently realized that we don't actually produce anything of tangible worth in our own country anymore. So this is one of those prohibitionist efforts to criminalize significant portions of the population in the name of IP Protectionism.
And after the horrendous financial bleeding we've caused, the rest of the world these days is more likely than ever to ignore the nannering coming out of Washington D.C. ...Seems like the dumbest time ever to have gone ahead with this mess of a law.
Re:Czar (Score:4, Insightful)
The only government that could have such power is a global totalitarian state. I used to use that as an argument for why copyright law cannot be enforced.
You say that like it's a bad thing? silly rabbit. The people in power have seen that as a flaw for quite some time. Most people over 40 don't give a damn about personal rights as long as they can drive SUVs and own Guns (but not "bad" guns) Nobody believes in PERSONAL freedom anymore, they want the govt to fix marriages, stop gays, make people have good credit because it's a guy borrowing $200k for his house that caused this mess. But the people at the top can live better than rockstars and do no wrong because they live the dream and worked hard and got rich... so they must be good people!
Re:Czar (Score:5, Funny)
When hundreds of millions of children can "manufacture and distribute" copies of works more easily than they can tie their shoes...
Personally, I blame Velcro.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It means we've got another unaccountable political appointee running things.
Re:Czar (Score:5, Informative)
Because departments tend to be ultra-introverts and power crazy zealots a "Czar" is sometimes created to cross these boundaries to encourage (and enforce) cooperation to a common goal. (e.g. Drugs, terrorism and now copyright)
It has more impact and is (arguably) more cost-effective than creating a new department to carry out tasks which are the same as other departments. This also assumes that the departments will fail to work together effectively and squabble over funding and power.
Sometimes there is a double up. There is a department that deals with drugs specifically, so the Czar's main role would be to coordinate all the interested departments.
Re:Czar (Score:4, Interesting)
Who is really in charge? Is it really the FCC or is it really the czar? If it's the FCC, why have a czar
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Two parking spots, actually. Striped, dark, 3 piece suit as mandatory uniform at all times and occasions. Cigars (not Cuban, those are reserved for people who matter). An enormous apartment with ridiculously large balconies where people of less terrifying ranks party every night, with scenes of dark cities in the background. Bodyguards. Guns. A black limousine. Video game adaptations and thrilling articles in the Washington Post.
And of course, hookers.
What this looked like in the legislature: (Score:4, Insightful)
All those who have already spent the large amounts of money placed conveniently on their doorsteps from an "Anonymous DonoRIAA" last week, say "Aye" -- any opposed? The Ayes have it. Send it to the president!
It's easy to start a grassroots campaign to get a new bill instated that will have this one eclipsed or overturned. We just need everyone we know to write letters to their congressmen -- Letters written on hundred dollar bills.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's also easy to write prospective presidents and urge them to not appoint this position.
Civil damages require civil remediation. The governments job is to issue patents and copyrights, and provide a court system to litigate them within. Without regard to what I might think of the RIAA's tactics, they are at least using the system somewhat as intended. Civil damage, civil remedy.
Let's tell our leaders to be exactly what we think of these shenanigans.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Think about it. Copy "rights" only exist because governments invent them to provide incentive to create new works. This sort of thinking don't exist in nature or even in commonlaw AFAIK. The only "damage" that takes places is against those invented "rights", not against anything tangible.
and some extra "quotation marks" for good measure.
Re:What this looked like in the legislature: (Score:5, Interesting)
Why would politicians care about money? They are only allowed to use campaign contributions for their campaigns. What will their campaigns spend the money on? Publicity!
Who do you think lobbied congress for this law? It was the major media conglomerates that control 95% of all the media we are exposed to. What would happen to a politician that challenged the media? They would be torn apart in the press. This is why politicians always vote in favor of the media.
By the way, this bill went down just like the DMCA. Less than a month before a major election the bill came up for a vote. Virtually everyone in congress blindly voted for it with effectively no debate. The major media companies didn't publish anything on it.
In summary, congress did not vote for this law to get campaign contributions. They voted for it to keep the press from shafting them. Any attempt to persuade congress to create balanced copyrights will have to take that into consideration. This is not about campaign funds!
Re:What this looked like in the legislature: (Score:5, Insightful)
"They are only allowed to use campaign contributions for their campaigns. What will their campaigns spend the money on?"
Yes, but they're allowed to use bribes whenever they visit foreign countries, or when they've been retired for long enough that no one cares anymore, or when their foreign shell corporation purchases vague services from their domestic LLC.
and back in the real world (Score:4, Insightful)
.
The production budget for WALL-E was $180 million.
If you know a congressman who doesn't like to see hundreds of millions of dollars being invested in clean industry, skilled labor and high-paying jobs in his home district, I would very much like to meet him.
I doubt you are going to find him in California, New York, or Florida - not in this election and not in an economy where every export dollar matters.
Just like a Drug Czar eh? (Score:5, Funny)
Does that mean copyrights will now be available on every street corner?
Whaddaya mean the wasn't the goal?
Re:Just like a Drug Czar eh? (Score:5, Insightful)
Does that mean copyrights will now be available on every street corner?
Whaddaya mean the wasn't the goal?
Those who forget history and all that. Prohibition doesn't work, no matter what country you happen to find yourself. Well, it doesn't work in terms of forbidding access to products or services that the people really want. It may work when it comes to illegitimately extending government authority.
What this debacle should teach us (as if we didn't already know) is that the levels of corruption, malfeasance in office, and influence peddling in Congress are much higher than was previously thought. "Elected" leaders of banana republics whore themselves out in similar fashion, and really, not for much less money.
Depressing, really.
Civil Asset Forfeiture = Really Bad (Score:5, Insightful)
http://fear.org/ [fear.org]
Assets should only be forfeited when the owner of said assets has lost a case (civil or preferably criminal).
Cases such as "County of X against $10,000" are just wrong and evil, and should be in violation of the 4th Amendment.
Re:Civil Asset Forfeiture = Really Bad (Score:5, Informative)
Drugs were but an excuse. The government wanted to increase their ability to track money through the economy, reduce gray/black market activities, force people into using banking for every penny they could, increase taxation success, reduce currency in circulation, increase plastic usage, etc, just give it some thought. I can remember when successful farmers and ranchers carried rolls of hundred dollar bills with them often, no idea if they still do that or not but if they do they are at risk while just trying to do their daily business. Used car dealers on buying trips have had their money seized in forfeiture as have many others that don't have anything to do with drugs. For law enforcement, it is a license to steal and even kill. One of the examples being:
Wonder how many similar things were just swept under the rug?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I would go so far as to say that failure to recognize and understand sarcasm will always lead to making stupid comments.
He understood the post perfectly. You just misunderstood his.
Post 1 was indeed sarcastic, and implied that police keeping seized assets could (or would often) lead to corruption.
Post 2 said that not only would it _often_ lead to corruption, it would _always_ do so.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:As if parents needed another "war" to worry abo (Score:5, Funny)
A public hanging of Santa Claus will teach the little bastards a thing or tw0.
Re:As if parents needed another "war" to worry abo (Score:5, Funny)
Just think of how powerful the prison guards' union will be...
"How long are you in for, comrade?"
"Eight years."
"What are you in for?"
"Nothing, nothing at all."
"Lies. The penalty for nothing is ten years!"
Re:As if parents needed another "war" to worry abo (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm old enough to remember when this would have been assumed to be a Russian joke. Now it's an American joke.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"Mark my words. A lot of families will suffer terribly because of this."
But somehow, not enough to cause an uproar. They learned a valuable lesson from Prohibition: Don't have too many high-profile raids.
And a corollary: People who think they can "buy" other people's stuff for way less than it's worth probably won't protest reason too much.
America is dying (Score:5, Funny)
Unintended consequences. (Score:5, Insightful)
The intention: Since very little is manufactured in the USA any more, one of the few things we have to sell to the outside world is our IP, so we have to protect it.
The Unintended Consequences: As Lawrence Lessig has pointed out, draconian copyright and patent laws are a strong disincentive to building on the works of others, so there will be less IP to sell.
I guess we're sunk.
Re:Unintended consequences. (Score:5, Interesting)
What I don't get about our lack of manufacturing / exports:
1) there is a huge demand for wind energy
2) most wind turbines are manufactured overseas, and there is a severe shortage of them
3) the rust belt has tons of infrastructure for manufacturing
4) the rust belt is severely underemployed
What the hell are we waiting for?
what's next? (Score:5, Insightful)
Are they going to make a fast food czar?
How about an SUV czar?
I mean, people are buying less SUVs than ever before, so we must have a cabinet level position to figure out how to get people to buy more SUVs right?
And people need to buy more fast food too. Let's create a cabinet position for that.
This is not unprecented. I mean, there's already a banking czar who is taking over the banks now.
Next will come the porn czar. "Sir, put your hands up and your penis back in your pants!"
Bush certainly is tying up the loose ends in the fascism loop ins't he?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
A Czar Czar of course.
Preferably they can find someone with the surname "Gabor"
You're kidding, right? (Score:5, Insightful)
I hope you're kidding. In case you've been asleep for 8 years, the US has gone further and further towards Big Brother to the point where having our rights suspended in a city where there's a Republican National Convention is no longer shocking. Whoever is appointed to this post will be as dumb, vicious, and bloodthirsty as possible. I mean, really, do you think for a second that Dick Cheney and Karl Rove are going to appoint someone like Lessig?
No, they'll pick someone who is about law enforcement and headlines. Somebody who probably works or worked as a lawyer for the MPAA or RIAA. It's going to be a real shitstorm. Expect to see new, harsher mandatory sentence laws passed soon. There's money in prisons and fines!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
That is the curious part, when it is signed in to law. That alone should be evidence of the one party system we currently suffer. Then there is the nationalizing of banks, again right before an administration change. It seems like these handover periods were always stall points, times of nothing being done, in D.C. before now. Now, big stuff happens just before the hand off.
Both parties are pro-business, and have voted to keep the consumers in line. I'm not sure where we are going.
So is anyone going to do something about it? (Score:3, Interesting)
Or are we going to keep complaining that copyright law gets worse each passing year?
Nerds are going to have to start running for office to get this fixed. I'd rather not have to do it myself, but as my sig indicates, I've got the spare time.
Four score and seven years ago... (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, Abe, this shows that our government is clearly now of the corporations, by the corporations, and for the corporations.
The lovely bill was signed by what is likely the most corrupt president since Andrew Jackson. Ironically, he is from your party, the Republicans (you were the first elected Republican president). And the republicans were formed by former members of the Whig party, which existed to fight the tyranny of Jackson.
What would you say if you were here today, Abe? Is this what America has been fighting for?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
"Stop having sex in my bedroom! And where is my god damn hat?" --Abe Lincoln
So what does this mean for kids? (Score:3, Insightful)
We need a constitutional ammendment... (Score:5, Insightful)
...to abolish "civil forfeiture". It's bad enough when it happens to someone falsely accused in a drug case, or even acquitted. Expansion of CF? Absolute oppression. No other way to put it. I understand that you probably need to have *some* civil law apart from criminal law; but I think that if the founders knew that impoverishment was being used as "the next best thing" to imprisonment, they'd be turning in their graves.
At a time when the decline of property values has caused so much trouble; expansion of CF makes no sense at all. I know that as I've considered investing in property, the possibility of CF has given me serious pause. I don't do drugs; but what if my tenant does? And then they come along and, without the stricter standards of a criminal case, they deprive me of the property. Now I have to worry if the tenant is a warez guy? Maybe there's a way to insure against CF, but then that's just one more thing that cuts into the bottom line for an investor.
Slashdot (Score:5, Insightful)
I think at this point I only read /. to depress myself thinking about the affairs of government.
Get ready to fire up your freenet nodes (Score:4, Interesting)
This could backfire... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:This could backfire... (Score:4, Insightful)
That's just the excuse they will look for to justify the harsh punishments and remove what semblance of privacy and due process that remains. Read up about the Reichstag fire [wikipedia.org], it was Hitler's excuse to bring in the "Ermächtigungsgesetz" or "Enabling Act" [wikipedia.org] in English. It will only help them assosiate piracy with the grim spectre of terrorism, a scared population is easy to control, Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia should have taught us that.
Copyright infringement is a FELONY NOW?!?!? (Score:5, Insightful)
Wait a minute........
FTFB: "Copyright infringement is a felony"
If I steal a CD from a store that is a misdemeanor....
If I download a song...THAT IS A FELONY?!?!?!?!?
WTF?!!?!?!?!?
Don't worry. They are already have massive surveillance in place. It won't be hard to pick out the offenders. I think we need to start looking at the RIAA under RICO statutes.
Aren't the jails already full of non-violent drug offenders???
Disgusting. How much longer before we can convince the nation to pick up some rifles and march to DC?
Easy way to bring change (Score:3, Interesting)
There is an easy way to bring about a revolution in IP laws.
Make every copyright holder enforce their IP rights through the courts for
EVERY infringement that they become aware of, otherwise their claim to that
IP is null and void.
In essense, this would force the RIAA and MPAA etc, to sue for every breach
of copyright they know about (eg. the Senators daughter, the Fortune 500 CEOs son etc)
- to the point where the general public is forced to wake up to the faults of the
system and demand change.
At the moment, these bodies can selectively sue whoever they want as a show of
strength, but by and large leave the masses alone. As a result, they pick and
choose which infringements they want to fight for to ram home the message.
A case in point - under Australian law, it is still technically illegal to make a
copy of copyright content YOU OWN. As such EVERY iPod and MP3 player in Australia
(and probably every PC and laptop) contains illegal music. But are the music companies
enforcing this ?? No. Its not in their best interests to highlight the fact that you
can't legally copy a CD that you legally bought, to your MP3 player or a backup.
man this will suck (Score:4, Funny)
Actions to take, in a few minutes. (Score:4, Informative)
So yes ths bill is awful. The Civil Forfeture provisions alone are foul let alone the Czar. While it may not roll things back overnight here is something simple that you can each do.
1) Find your senator/representative on the list of supporters (see below)
2) Call their office or contact them via the Senate [senate.gov] and House [house.gov] websites.
3) Ask them why they voted for the bill. If their response does not convince you politely explain that this is an awful bill and one that has cost them your vote. Inform them politely that you will not vote for them or donate money to their campaigns again.
4) Repeat.
I would be shocked if any of them read this bill or have a reason for voting other than that they were in favor of good stuff. But the act of informing them that you will not support them because of it makes the point.
For those of you not in the U.S. I would recommend contacting your representatives with the message that you will not back them if they consider a stunt like this.
Now the Senators who voted in favor are here [house.gov].
The house members in favor of the PRORIP act which became this are here [house.gov]
Lobbying? What, more? (Score:4, Interesting)
Whatever "lobbying" was being done previously, it seems to have been completely effective. Many countries have signed, without dispute, so-called "free" trade agreements which essentially codify every US-corporate-friendly dream that could be devised by the Bushites - including DMCA-ish and software patent provisions, to speak of 2 issues in the IT area. [builderau.com.au] In non-IT areas, similar capitulations are even worse. [archive.org] Pharmaceuticals, agriculture, all get twisted into poisonous American corporatised pretzels, to pave the way for overpriced patent drugs and monstrosities such as GM products (which should be flat-out illegal anywhere). It's as if the "sovereign" countries didn't even read the agreements, [aph.gov.au] let alone take heed of the public outry that always accompanies them. [bilaterals.org]
It must be so easy for them, when the signatories are Bush-puppet governments such as the Howard government in Australia (thankfully rejected at last) and Harper (which malignancy we should pray is thrown out tomorrow, or at least held safely to a minority).
Let's be honest. "Globalisation" never meant anything more or less than "America buys your stuff cheap, you buy America's stuff dear". The world does not need Wal-Mart, Microsoft, McDonald's, or any other substandard, exploitative American brand. The height of absurdity is Wal-Mart selling rice to Indians. What do the Wal-Marts in China sell? Crappy plastic Chinese crap back to the Chinese? The whole concept is absurd. What is Wal-Mart even doing in Canada?
The ultimate irony is that those tilting the playing field towards the USA, and who would most vehemently deny the insuperable insult to sovereignty [irc-online.org] that these agreements represent, also claim to believe in a "free market" - the Bushites, the Reaganites, the Friedmanites, the corrupt fuckwads, the ignorant lying Sarah and Todd Palins, the criminal Cons and neo-Cons whose chickens, we hope, are coming home to roost at last. If you're wondering why you're having trouble competing [yahoo.com] - maybe it's because you're not competitive! Top example - Microsoft can't compete on merit. They have to be anti-competitive; and you betcha they love them some FTA help. Pity they got caught at it. [iht.com]
But perhaps as the world wises the hell up, we finally see some logic in Bush's response: More lobbying. [export.gov] "Bring it on", in the Texan moron's famous catchphrase: Just expect more pushback!
But we'd prefer if you'd just Bugger off. [worldpoliticsreview.com]
I think the time has come... (Score:4, Interesting)
... to finally emigrate to Sweden. The writing is so clearly on the wall, with both this and the Wall Street Bailout getting rammed through even an allegedly Democratic-controlled Congress. McCain is likely to be worse than Bush, and Obama isn't messianic and nowhere close to revolutionary enough to kick the money changers out of the damned temple. Kucinich would have done it, though. Hell, he's risked his career trying to drive stakes through the hearts of a couple of them (impeachment). Who else had the balls to do that?
This country is irrecoverably ruled by greed and dominated by stupidity now. We The People are too stupid to revolt again as they once did.
Re:Fist Prose (Score:5, Insightful)
1. Countries without extradition treaties to the US, as the act makes pirating a criminal offense - one that you can be extradited for.
2. Countries without friendly relations with the US, as part of this act involves convincing other nations to join.
That's about it on requirements, I think...
On a serious note, it's nice to know that with the economy in the crapper, rather than trying to correct problems with the US banking system, they've instead decided that the US's biggest concern is people downloading MP3s.
Uh, no. The US probably wants to forget that the industrial revolution started in the US thanks to one massive effort in corporate espionage. Cracking down heavily on IP actually harms the economy.
The US has signed its death warrant, again. This act can only hurt the economy, and it really doesn't need to be kicked while its down.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Extradition is not a magic teleportation to another country, it must be justified.
Two standards must be met before someone may be extradited.
There must be enough evidence against the accused so that its likely a conviction could be reached, and most importantly in this case;
Condition number two.
It must be shown that extraditing the accused serves justice.
This one is most notably brought up for people being extradited for capital crimes. If its likely you will receive the death penalty if extradited and the
Re:Fist Prose (Score:5, Insightful)
Which of course won't stop the Alphabet Agencies from kidnapping you from said non-extradition treaty country if they deem it a Good Thing. Remember Panama? Sure, Noriega was a scumbag that the United States put in power, but sending armed men across borders to forcibly remove him at gunpoint wasn't the height of diplomacy, it was outright invasion.
Outside of the UK, Afghanistan ('friendly' government installed at gunpoint by the US), and Iraq (see 'Afghanistan'), that's just about everywhere on the planet.
No, this is just a bait and switch from the Powers That Be to draw attention away from the fact that we're in a depression. It gives said Powers That Be the excuse to squeeze yet more taxes, spend more money, and do nothing but make examples of people who do not have the means to fight back without the ancillary effect of making a certain class of criminals ('drug dealers') rich in the process.
And of course, it has the Seal of Approval from the Senator from Disney.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, President Bush did sign it into law....BUT remember, the President makes NO laws whatsoever. He only signs them in.
If you really don't like this, and I don't either...look to your state's representatives and senators in congress up there.
They came up with the law...debated it and still passed it on to the president to sign.
I'm guessing BOTH of our lovely parties had people voting for this.
Any idea which way our presidential c
Re:Fist Prose (Score:5, Informative)
I've done some research and it appears that out of Barack Obama, Joe Biden, John McCain and Sarah Palin none of them bothered to vote on it.
OK... Palin's my least favorite from that list. But blaming her for not voting on that bill is more than a little unfair.
You do realize that she's neither a senator nor a representative, right?
Re:Fist Prose (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Fist Prose (Score:4, Insightful)
They are successful. So long as you remember that the goal is to make the police force so big that a dictator can rely on them to keep the population in check.
BTW, if we weren't all criminals yesterday, and we're aren't all criminals now, you can be sure we will all be criminals soon.
Re:Fist Prose (Score:5, Insightful)
They are successful. So long as you remember that the goal is to make the police force so big that a dictator can rely on them to keep the population in check.
BTW, if we weren't all criminals yesterday, and we're aren't all criminals now, you can be sure we will all be criminals soon.
We've all been criminals for a long, long time. It's just that nobody has bothered to prosecute us yet.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Ca Ching!
Re:Fist Prose (Score:5, Funny)
Open source advocates believe in free software for all, and will likely try to destroy the position of Copyright Czar.
This isn't just money wasting legislation, someone has actually set up a very elaborate experiment to test if history repeats itself under controlled conditions.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No surprises there.
Open Source software is a creative product that, when it leaves the nest, is likely to continue to develop and improve, and come back to the creator greater than when it left.
Passive entertainment is different: why would I spend a bunch of time and money creating some product for a bunch of parasitic consumers? Yes, in theory many versions of the CC license allow modification, but in practice I think that this is much less likely than with software, largely because while code fills a
Re:Fist Prose (Score:5, Funny)
Ones that don't have extradition agreements with the United States.
Re:not making money off "criminal" behavior? (Score:4, Interesting)
well, you would have to first come up with a complex equation that:
in order to see the full picture you need to analyze all of these variables and see how they affect the market. in the end i think one will find that piracy/file-sharing has actually increased music-related spending and is actually a valuable source of free exposure/advertising. giving consumers the option to try out music cost-free allows them to explore a greater variety of music and artists. this results in lower sales for crappy artists, but increased sales & fan bases for good artists.
i don't doubt that the major labels are hurting and sales for pop albums are dropping. but that isn't entirely due to piracy, and it doesn't mean the industry as a whole doesn't benefit from piracy. part of this is caused by a new distribution paradigm emerging. the old means of promoting music by using Payola to get top-40 radio stations to drill catchy hit singles into the heads of consumers is losing its effectiveness. increasingly people are using the internet to discover music on their own--music that actually suits their tastes. and for the people who do still listen to the radio, they can just buy the singles from iTunes rather than spend $20 on a pop album full of filler tracks that they won't listen to.
the new digital music distribution system gives consumers what they want rather than telling them what they want. and as a result, a lot of consumer spending is being shifted away from the major artists and towards indie artists. studies have shown that music pirates spend more on music than the average person, so how can piracy be hurting the music industry? it may be hurting the major labels and fad musicians who put out derivative bubblegum music which aren't worth paying for, but being able to download an album for free won't stop real fans from purchasing music & merch from, or otherwise supporting, the bands they like.
file sharing is actually great for the music industry because it evens the playing field for indie artists who have previously been locked out of the promotion network and distribution system controlled by the major labels. and this democratization of the market may even lead to a rise in the quality of mainstream music.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Man that's a lot of trouble to go through just because I downloaded Celine Dion's "My Heart Will Go On".
There can be no punishment that is worse than the crime itself. Surely you must be allowed to go free.
Re:Fist Prose (Score:5, Insightful)
Said the geek who has rarely left his mother's basement, let alone the USA.
Re:Fist Prose (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh yeah, it's a living hell here in Australia.
Can't stop to talk more, the weather's heating up and we're all off to the beach now, then maybe a barbeque later. We'll throw a prawn on for you.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And a "-1, bashing twitter for no good reason" moderation. I'm all for nuking his karma further into oblivion, but it simply adds nothing for ACs to troll him... especially when he doesn't actually say anything particularly stupid or abusive (like the post above).
Re:USA + Bush = FAIL (Score:5, Informative)
Your government is out of control. Perfect timing. This will get zero media attention.
In the subject, you name Bush.
In your post, you name "your government"
Guess what, they are not one and the same.
Bush has issued 12 vetoes during 8 years.
4 of those vetoes were overridden.
The blame for this rests on the Senators and Congressmen who allowed themselves to be lobbied into passing such industry serving legislation.
Re:USA + Bush = FAIL (Score:5, Insightful)
No, let's be fair. The blame is with those who voted them in.
Fellow people of the United States of America: You do a horrible job of voting. I don't expect clairvoyance, but I do expect you to see past the fit of the suit and the quality of the dentistry.
And when you make a wrong choice, I do expect you to take responsibility for having voted in the evil-doers.
Re:USA + Bush = FAIL (Score:5, Interesting)
No, let's be fair. The blame is with those who voted them in.
I didn't vote for Bush in 2004, nor did I vote for Rep. Mark Souder (R-IN) in 2006. What should I have done, other than vote for other candidates and encourage friends and family members to do the same?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
People need to think logically, and vote their hearts. They need to stop voting for the popular candidates, and look at all the choices individually. And this means eliminating someone as a possible voting choice when they see them do something foolish.
Re:USA + Bush = FAIL (Score:5, Insightful)
Doesn't work like that (Score:5, Insightful)
People need to think logically, and vote their hearts.
Impossible. They are usually at odds. For an example, try to fall in love with someone based on a rational argument of what positive qualities they possess. You will not succeed. You will instead fall in love with a total nutcase, nine times out of ten.
Them's the breaks. The heart does not submit to reason. Politicians know this, too. They're actors first and foremost. Each and every one.
And this means eliminating someone as a possible voting choice when they see them do something foolish.
Also impossible. It's been Red vs. Blue now for decades. Nobody thinks anymore. Politics has become a sporting match. Doesn't matter what anyone says or does - you just want your side to win.
Besides, you aren't allowed politically to pick and choose good ideas from either "side". If you're for gun control it's assumed you also think global warming is man-made. They are two entirely unrelated ideas, but the left-side claims them both, so someone from the right-side cannot claim either. They must say they are against gun control and they think global warming is nonsense.
A candidate that came along and actually spoke their mind rather than quote the party line would probably at this point make people's heads explode. They would see it as impossible. Like saying it's day and night at the same time.
In short, they have us trained. Pick a side and line up. And for God's sake don't reach any of your own conclusions. If you're on this side, your position on topic X is Y. If you're on the other side, your position on topic X must therefore be !Y.
It's hideous, really. Both major parties don't do jack for the people. Remember when everyone got all happy that the Democrats won Congress, and finally something would put a stop to W's free ride? What happened? First thing Congress did was roll over and take it up the tailpipe about warrentless wiretapping. "Oh sure, that's ok, especially since it was just this once. No problem W, carry on."
Same horseshit, different crew. Doesn't matter who gets voted in anymore. Big business lobbies to get what it wants, and both Red and Blue will bow before Green.
Re:USA + Bush = FAIL (Score:4, Insightful)
Rep. Souder isn't responsible for this bill making it out of committee. He is not a member of the majority.
It is time for people to learn that we had a Republican majority in the recent past for a reason. The reason is that Democrats were colossal failures at leadership too.
By all means, though. Elect Obama, and keep Pelosi in power. Just don't delude yourself into thinking this will change anything.
It's not good enough to vote for "other candidates". You need to encourage intelligent, strong-willed, highly ethical people to leave their otherwise profitable and rewarding day jobs and run. Then you have to convince the sheep that watch 80 hours of reality television and CNN to vote for them even if their platform doesn't rhyme. Either that or pick up a Bible and start a'thumpin.
Re:USA + Bush = FAIL (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem is that both sides are equally bad.
No matter who they vote for, they are screwed.
Oh well. Doesnt affect Australia *too* much. :D
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:USA + Bush = FAIL (Score:5, Insightful)
All I do know is it really couldn't get much worse.
Please don't tempt fate.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"because the wrong lizard might get in" [williams.edu] is not a good enough excuse to keep repeating a mistake. voting for bush once -- hey, everyone makes a mistake, right? voting for bush twice? as they say in texas: "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice...-foo..ma...won't get fooled again."
what i'm saying is, why not try asskisser b? just for the variety?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Here in Brazil we have a multi party system. And by multi party I mean, once we had 22 presidential candidates. I'm pretty sure all brazilians around will remember what happened: Fernando Color de Mello for elected, and ended up "borrowing" (according to him, other words would be "confiscating", "stea
Re:USA + Bush = FAIL (Score:5, Insightful)
P.S.
"Copyright Czar" and "Drug Czar" are appropriate terms. I can not think of a title more appropriate for describing our loss of freedom than the word "czar" who terrorized Russian serfs (slaves) for centuries, or the "ceasar" that killed the Roman Republic and turned it into a virtual dictatorship. These new "czar" positions within the U.S. government represent a gradual but definite loss of republicanism, liberty, and individual sovereignty.
My downloading of Star Wars Clone Wars harmed no one. (It was trash; I saved money by Not buying it.)
My smoking of weed while watching said movie also harms no one. It only harms me, and it's my body, therefore my choice how I treat it. Besides: If we can abort babies on the grounds that a woman controls her body, then surely that same woman has a right to inhale some smoke.
Re:USA + Bush = FAIL (Score:5, Funny)
When I get a bad Cheesburger, I don't blame the Server, I dont blame the Cook, I don't blame the store manager. No I blame Ronald. He is the figurehead that represents everthing about McDonalds so he is to blame. Also, when I get nice tasty fresh fries, he gets my high-five.
When the Government is out of control, the President is accountable. Just like Ronald.
Re:USA + Bush = FAIL (Score:5, Insightful)
Bush is like Ronald McDonald.
When I get a bad Cheesburger, I don't blame the Server, I dont blame the Cook, I don't blame the store manager. No I blame Ronald. He is the figurehead that represents everthing about McDonalds so he is to blame. Also, when I get nice tasty fresh fries, he gets my high-five.
When the Government is out of control, the President is accountable. Just like Ronald.
So instead of faulting anyone who had a hand in the making of your cheeseburger, you place the blame solely on a fictional clown that was invented by marketing people? That's an interesting philosophy you have.
Re:USA + Bush = FAIL (Score:5, Funny)
So instead of faulting anyone who had a hand in the making of your cheeseburger, you place the blame solely on a fictional clown that was invented by marketing people?
The difference being...?
Re:USA + Bush = FAIL (Score:5, Funny)
One is a made up amusement park quality attraction and the other one is a corporate mascot.
Re:USA + Bush = FAIL (Score:5, Funny)
That's an excellent way to describe the president: "a fictional clown that was invented by marketing people".
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
There's also another part of the analogy. Both Bush and clowns are evil.
This act is fucking stupid, and I'm quite sure it'll see as much success as the war on drugs has. In 30 years time we'll have a TV show like "The Wire" but instead of busting the heads of dealers, they'll be busting the heads of those trading music.
Fuck your country in it's stupid braindead ass. Seriously, my closest friend is American. She's awesome. It's also quite clear a lot of American's on here are sensible, rational individuals.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:USA + Bush = FAIL (Score:5, Insightful)
The world: America, you've got a corrupt lunatic for a president. You suck!
America: Actually, half the stupid stuff we do is because our senators and congressmen are corrupt lunatics too.
The world: Uhh...
Re:USA + Bush = FAIL (Score:5, Funny)
America: Uh, heard of the War on Drugs?
The World: Y'know, on second thought, maybe you need to just get some better weed and chill out a little.
Re:USA + Bush = FAIL (Score:4, Insightful)
Before the "war on drugs" we had a "war on poverty". They both had czars, and each was as effective as the other. Allow me to predict that the copyright czar will rise to unprecedented levels of negative success. I think something was lost in translation here. In the original russian I don't believe the word "czar" means "ineffectual idiot tasked with the impossible". I could be wrong about that.
Any russian linguists in the house?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:How many copyright cases criminal court standar (Score:4, Informative)
In criminal cases they send the police to kick down the door of the accused, and they present such evidence as "we caught him red handed".
They get the name and address of the accused, not by an absentee discovery order, but by a search warrant. Or, with new legislation that is likely to follow, by just looking up the data that ISPs are required to retain without even the need for a warrant.
This is what happens when you appoint a Czar.. a fuckin' WAR is declared and any allusions that people have about their rights go quickly out the window.
Re:How many copyright cases criminal court standar (Score:5, Interesting)
This is what happens when you appoint a Czar.. a fuckin' WAR is declared and any allusions that people have about their rights go quickly out the window.
Well, the only saving grace here is that the Justice Department (who, after all will be responsible for prosecuting these "cases") is dead set against it. As they said in their rather concise letter to Congress, they have better things to do with their time and our money.
... music lovers?! Huh. Just wait until all the voting public using P2P realize that they're now subject to criminal prosecution. It's gonna get ugly: they're making yet another run at Prohibition, and it didn't work the first time.
... but this is going to be different. It will have to be higher profile if it is going to have the desired effect: keeping it out of the public's eye won't do any good at all.
All in all, I have the feeling this probably won't go anywhere. If they start successfully screwing over too many people it's going to be political dynamite. Most likely this is just a step up in the RIAA's terror campaign, "Okay, so maybe you weren't afraid of us, but we're betting that you're just terrified of the United States Federal Government, so there!" This is one of those things for which you're not going to find much popular support. Drug dealers? Sure, why not: nobody likes them (even if they are supposed to have the same civil liberties as everyone else.) But
So, they'd better play this very carefully. Not too many people are aware of the DMCA, or it's implications
Re:How many copyright cases criminal court standar (Score:5, Insightful)
You know what? I'm actually happy now. The government did something for me, for once.
They listened when I said we need to mass-educate the population about the DMCA and just how bad it is; now they're implementing a program to do it.
Re:Luckly... (Score:5, Insightful)
The more the US leans along these lines, the more other countries will. Sadly.
Re:Country Suggestions? (Score:5, Informative)
They already have.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halliburton [wikipedia.org]
How right you are... (Score:5, Interesting)
Ask yourself if he wasn't right: Does your local department store not stock blank DVD's and CD's in bare pallets of 100 packs because they move too fast to put on the shelves? Do you know anybody who doesn't have an MP3 player large enough to store more music than they can afford to buy? Is there not a vast network of servers from which any copyrighted work extant can be received without compensation for the creator, available in nearly every home?
By making stupid laws that should not and will not be obeyed and cannot be enforced we train the citizen from his youth to scoff at the law. That is far more damage than even the most egregious piracy can cause - it's promotion of anarchy. It would be better to do away with copyright entirely than to do further damage to social order.