French President Busted For Copyright Violation 317
An anonymous reader writes "ZeroPaid has an interesting take on the story of Nicolas Sarkozy being accused of copyright infringement. The irony, of course, is Sarkozy's pushing of a 3-strikes law — disconnecting from the Internet those accused of file sharing — in France and across the EU. The French president had apparently offered to settle the copyright infringement accusation for one Euro, but the band rejected the offer, calling it an insult. The article notes that each year since 2006, a high-profile anti-piracy entity has been on the wrong end of a copyright infringement notice. In 2008, Sony BMG was sued for software piracy. In 2007, anti-piracy outfit BASCAP received a cease and desist order related to pirated software. And in 2006, the MPAA was accused of pirating 'This Film is Not Yet Rated'."
Do. (Score:5, Insightful)
Do as I say.
Not as I do.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Do. (Score:5, Insightful)
Miss Bruni is the French president's wife?
What I found funny abotu this article was the president's arrogance - "Yes I did violate copyright, but I'm only giving you 1 Euro." Can you imagine any of the rest of us getting-away with that? "Yes RIAA I received you letter demanding $5000. I'll give you 5 instead." Fat chance. ----- Politicians think they don't have to follow the laws that we do. They think we poor schmucks have to pay $5000 settlement to RIAA, or $75,000 per song according to the law, but for THEM.... well now, 1 Euro should be sufficient. Right? After all politicians are "special".
So much for the 1700s ideal of creating a classless society where everyone is treated equally. Politicians still believe they are nobility.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I read his sig as an argument against the argument that "media is left-leaning". The Fox News brand is based on a manufactured "underdog" image, and a ridiculous one.
Anyway, even if it weren't, there's no contradiction. Rich people aren't one cohesive whole - I wish people would realize this.
Re: (Score:2)
because the s***'s so deep you can't run away
I beg to differ and on the contray
a victim of catch 22....
Re: (Score:2)
I do what gets me money and power...
Not what I say.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Is this what they call sarcasm?
It is a very good way to put a point across, but overdone it just makes one look like an extremely frustrated lunatic.
I'm sure there are valid points on your side of the debate, but you're preaching to a highly biased and relatively intelligent crowd. There ought to be a less self-destructive way of making your case.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Cheer up, emo kid. I guarantee that you think very highly of yourself or you wouldn't have typed out that long, holier than thou, rant. You really should, as you tell others, hate yourself more, because you're a pretentious cunt and your message isn't worth the hard drive space it's saved on.
Re:FUCK ARTISTS (Score:4, Insightful)
Hate yourself more for your failures, and show some humility.
It doesn't work like that, at least for me. Love yourself more. There's a difference between loving oneself and trying really hard to think of oneself highly. If you love yourself you'll accept your shortcomings, and find it more easy to examine and learn from them.
I'd rather somebody say something obvious, if it were true. To a child it may be less obvious, and there have been countless times growing up where I've wondered why people didn't just point something out. And once someone knows something is obvious (because other people are constantly talking about it), then they can take it one step further and maybe reach something less obvious more quickly.
I agree with you on the moderation. I find myself using +1 Insightful for a post I believe is true, and +1 Interesting for a post I don't think is true but which raises a point. There's always some information about the moderator in a moderation, because terms such as 'insightful' and 'interesting' depend upon the opinion of the moderator.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
>>>Do any of you guys reading or posting on Slashdot ever think to yourselves that you might be, in broad intellectual terms, at or below average?
My IQ is 120, so yes I am 20 points above average.
I doubt very many slashdotters are at or below 100.
Most of us are above-average intelligence.
Re:FUCK ARTISTS (Score:5, Funny)
That's exactly what the RIAA says too.
http://cosmo7.com/safety/safetyriaa.jpg [cosmo7.com]
Re:FUCK ARTISTS (Score:5, Interesting)
It's all about capitalism... Pirates are making available a cheaper and often superior (no drm) product. It is our duty as good capitalists to get best value for ourselves.
Re:FUCK ARTISTS (Score:5, Insightful)
For the sake of capitalism, I truly hope your statement has boundaries. There is no media that can't be ripped and distributed for LESS than the folks that produce it, or ever will be
That is the quintessential form of capitalism.
If I am producing software, and 1 person buys it, copies it, then distributes it for 1/100 (arbitrary number for "best value") of the cost, what incentive do I have to continue producing software?
You don't. At least not for money. You would continue writing software for the same reasons musicians will still sing and play instruments, artists will still paint and sculpt, and authors will still write books: because you want to.
Or maybe some company hires you to work on something they need, much like medieval artists were hired by rich patrons to produce works of art for them. See: Linux
Re:FUCK ARTISTS (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The band in question (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:The band in question (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh, yes, a black out will work... That scares the hell out of them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It must have been a terrifying experience to have left such an impression on you ;-)
Re:The band in question (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Wasn't Attali also instrumental in swaying European opinion against software patents?
Re: (Score:2)
Well, obtaining a french phonebook shouldn't be too hard. Beyond that point it is just a question of setting up a distributed system for sending out infringement notices (they should not come from one source or look too identical, since that makes them too easy to filter). This will clog up the courts, and will knock the entire nation of France of the internet in short order.
Presumed innocent? (Score:5, Informative)
Well, you got that wrong then. It were the French that introduced the concept of presumption of innocence in the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen [wikipedia.org] and later structured the way laws are written down in the Napoleonic Code [wikipedia.org]
Of course, The Enlightenment was the source for these ideals as well as the inspiration for the the US Declaration of Independence and the constitution...
This had a major influence on European law making since Napoleon occupied most of it...
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry to do this but the concept of presumption of innocence goes a LOT further back than 1789.
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2003/01/12/153/23800 [talkleft.com]
Re: (Score:2)
There's a scene in Les Miserables where Jean-Valjean is sentenced to 20 years in prison because he failed to prove his innocence. While the law has almost certainly changed since then, and it's somewhat foolish to base your understanding of a nation's legal system on a scene set over two centuries before, it is an honest mistake.
All the hate and vitriol directed at Americans in general because of this one mistake is another matter entirely. The racists making these comments should be ashamed of themselves.
Re:Presumed innocent? (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't hate Americans. I consider religious fanatics dangerous, I find arrogance offensive, I think excessive patriotism leads to conflicts as does ignorance about history. And I expect higher standards from self proclaimed 'leaders of the free world' where you can find that kind of persons as well as you can find them in other parts of the world.
When Bush and Rumsfeld proclaimed my country to be part of 'old Europe' because we did not accept their reasons to go to war in Iraq, I was offended.
Can you imagine what Guantanamo did to the image the free world has of the USA, its previous government - and ultimately those who elected it?
But hey, I like some Americans, I admire a few and I find some very dislikeable. But the same goes for most other nationalities on our planet.
Do people even read the links? (Score:2)
The possibility for justice to endorse lengthy remand periods was one reason why the Napoleonic Code was criticized for de facto presumption of guilt, particularly in common law countries.
It's not merely Wikipedia where this opinion is expressed. McKillop [austlii.edu.au] notes that
It is sometimes suggested, particularly by those from a common law system, that there is no presumption of innocence in the French criminal justice system, but rather a presumption of guilt. This is an understandable reaction by those observing French hearings, particularly in the lower courts, and if aware of the considerably higher conviction rates at hearings in France as opposed to trials in common law countries.
Re:The band in question (Score:5, Informative)
You are misinformed. The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, adopted in 1789 and part of the French constitution, explicitly enumerates the presumption of innocence. There is no official English translation of it, and slashdot does not do accents correctly. The original text is here [justice.gouv.fr]. Article 9 is the one for you.
In English that means, "Everyone is presumed innocent until they have been declared guilty, if it is deemed essential to arrest, all onerous treatment that is not necessary to hold that person must be severely circumscribed by law."
Many democracies have similar explicit constitutional guarantees of this right. Curiously, not the USA: it was read into the constitution by the Supreme Court in Coffin v. United States [wikipedia.org] . Damnable activist judges!
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
And this proves a major prejudice about non-Americans: Most of you immediately assume that anyone on the internet who makes an idiotic or misinformed comment is American.
Re:The band in question (Score:5, Insightful)
I know, it's awful and unfair. But after only 8 short years of Bush being in power, it looks like its going to take a while for these prejudices to subside.
Re:The band in question (Score:5, Funny)
And this proves a major prejudice about non-Americans: Most of you immediately assume that anyone on the internet who makes an idiotic or misinformed comment is American.
In fairness, the guy's handle is "ScrewMaster", so he prolly is American.
You're probably American just for speaking English (Score:3, Insightful)
And this proves a major prejudice about non-Americans: Most of you immediately assume that anyone on the internet who makes an idiotic or misinformed comment is American.
The population of the United States (304 M) and anglophone Canada (25 M excl. Quebec) is more than thrice that of the UK (61 M), Ireland (4 M), Australia (21 M), and New Zealand (4 M) put together. So given a random native English speaker who uses no Indianisms [wikipedia.org], you'd be right more often than not to guess that he or she is from North America.
Besides, Slashdot is in the United States.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Statistically, this is a correct assumption for most of the time. ;) :)
Then come the Japanese and the Germans I think...
I only do it, to prevent conversations like this:
Thaikonnu. Shohei javasa koooi shetegeh wasabi san!
Sense makin. Ur doin it rong. Repeet plzkthx?
NAIN! VERBOTEN!
Re: (Score:2)
After all, I thought Slashdot users had an above average intelligence.
There is always someone more intelligent than us; the wiser ones among us know this implicitly but the fools know only that which they permit themselves to see, hear, and think.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Non-Americans love to throw out stereotypes like that. And yet when I ask them something like "What is the capital of Florida?"--they don't know. They know as little about our country as we do about theirs. They might even be worse, because they form almost all their opinions about America through portrayals in TV shows, which is really, really stupid.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:The band in question (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
We see statistics coming out of America like 92% of Americans believe in a God [washingtonpost.com]. This speaks volumes.
I believe in God you twit. You atheists are worse than the religious nuts, oh wait, you _are_ religious nuts! I'm not American, though, so I must be substandard anyway. Me and my silly God, that is.
Re:The band in question (Score:4, Insightful)
The truth is that I am agnostic towards the idea of an almighty being or beings. I believe what I see, what is testable and falsifiable. If you had a testable and falsifiable hypothesis positing the existance of such a being, that didn't require me to accept that 'God Did It' at any stage of the reasoning, I'll gladly eat my words.
Re:The band in question (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm going to put this as simply as possible. Religious belief requires the suspension of critical and rational thought.
Not at all. One can critically and rationally assess religious doctrine to determine whether it seems to make sense. Or do you also think philosophy is the province of the mentally ill?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Religious belief requires the suspension of critical and rational thought. At some point, you have to just accept that God Did It, and stop asking 'why'.
And this makes it different from any other belief how precisely? Epistemologies must be inherently circular: at their root they all say that we can know things because X, but then we can only know X because X. Fundamentally any logical system constructed by critical and rational thought must be built on top of axioms which are not constructed by critical and rational thought.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I believe what I see, what is testable and falsifiable
Why do you believe what you can see? Sight is not objective it's merely the brains interpretation of electrical signals from the eyes. You see everybody has to simply accept something as being true at some point or else you're left with nothing but existing in someway because you are thinking.
Re:The band in question (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm going to put this as simply as possible. Religious belief requires the suspension of critical and rational thought. At some point, you have to just accept that God Did It, and stop asking 'why'.
Not necessarily. For example, I believe that at best, images of God are a loose personification of a divine force that cannot even necessarily be characterized as having a self as we understand the term. 'God' doesn't violate the laws of physics, so anything 'God' does can be explained through physics provided we know enough about physics to do so.
In my view, there can BE no God vs. science. 'God' exists outside of our scientific understanding (that is, the existence or not of God or gods is not a scientific hypothesis at this time).
Spiritual belief is subject to error since even if inspired by the divine, our understanding comes through imperfect non-divine entities (that is, human beings, including ourselves). Where science concludes something counter to spiritual belief, the spiritual belief must be re-evaluated to fit the new knowledge.
Personally I believe that spiritual pursuit mandates the study of science. Know the creation and you gain insight into the creator.
Unfortunately, much of what passes for religion is more like wagging the dog. So-called religious leaders shaping spiritual teaching to conform with their personal preferences rather than the other way around. That and turning simple disagreements into eternal damnation with little or no justification.
So, while I could be said to be one of those in the 92% who believe in 'God', it doesn't necessarily mean what you think it does.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
We see statistics coming out of America like 92% of Americans believe in a God [washingtonpost.com]. This speaks volumes.
Uh... it does?
These anti-American rants that have been showing up on Slashdot in the last few years are making less and less sense.
The CIA World Factbook ( https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/fr.html#People [cia.gov] ) says that France has the following religious distribution:
Roman Catholic 83%-88%, Protestant 2%, Jewish 1%, Muslim 5%-10%, unaffiliated 4%
So... what nega
Re:The band in question (Score:4, Insightful)
Also really.. just national capitals would be nice, capitals of states is a much longer bow to draw since the corollary question would be to ask what the capitals of places like Hunan, Alsace, Free State and Tasmania would be.
I think most people would probably assume the answer is Miami because it's the most known of Floridian cities, I knew it wasn't but had to look up the answer. I'm not from the US and do not live there.
I think in broader terms you're right about ignorance not being uniquely a US trait and that entertainment TV shows are a poor educational tool (because they're not meant to be) but if you're trying to change the preconceptions of people then I would say your post isn't doing it.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Isn't it er, you know, "F"?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
How many US citizens know what the capital of Florida is?
Disney World, duh!
Re:The band in question (Score:5, Funny)
How many US citizens know what the capital of Florida is?
had to look up the answer. I'm not from the US and do not live there.
It's Tallahassee. ;-)
Didn't have to look it up; Learned it from Animaniacs
Re:The band in question (Score:5, Insightful)
Was this some kind of self-deprecating meta-ironic remark, or did you really extrapolate to all Americans (which you accuse us of doing) based on one anecdotal example and honestly consider that "proof"? And here I thought Europeans were more culturally aware than us lowly Americans.
your extremism is showing (Score:3, Funny)
Was this some kind of self-deprecating meta-ironic remark, or did you really extrapolate to all Americans
Yes, he clearly extrapolated that "ALL Americans [x.]"
Not that "a depressingly large number of Americans [x.]", that couldn't be possibly what he meant.
Hypocrisy as the norm... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's amazing that most people simply accept that Hypocrisy is the norm. That's sad.
The copyright organizations call for "zero tolerance" and are then caught themselves.
The congressmen who rail against finding teenagers attractive are caught lusting after them.
Preachers who rail on homosexuals are caught fucking gay prostitutes.
Vigilantes who claim to catch online predators are found to be employing young teens in their exploits and having child pornography on their computers.
Educators who rail against drugs and demand for instant lockup of drug offenders... are found to be drug users themselves...
These are all real stories.
Instead of stepping back and recognizing that their viewpoints may be of questionable value and that they may have made errors in judgment... they just ignore their mistakes and continue in their hypocritical ways.
And the world is a worse place for it.
Re:Hypocrisy as the norm... (Score:5, Insightful)
People often hate most of others what they hate most of themselves. They're angry with themselves that they can't control their own behavior, so they lash out at others and attempt to control theirs. It's a compensation mechanism. Either that, or it's plain old game theory--an attempt to persuade others to cooperate while one defects, thus maximizing personal gain.
I once had a lengthy discussion with a mother who was bat-shit loco against people looking at kiddie porn. She thought anyone who looked at kiddie porn should be sterilized, and that producers should be locked away forever. Deeper into the conversation, she admitted to having looked at kiddie porn, and further admitted to having posted pictures of her nude son on her blog (bathtub pictures). She conceded that she was a hypocrite, but defiantly refused to change her opinion about what should happen to OTHER people who did what she did.
Re:Hypocrisy as the norm... (Score:5, Interesting)
These things have *always* happened.
The only difference is that cameras, record-keeping databases, and surveillance have all gotten much better over the last thirty years.
Hell some of the early popes had mistresses.
Power corrupts.
The only real solution is shrinking the amount of power and wealthy any one person can have. And that boat has sailed.
Re: (Score:2)
Hell some of the early popes had mistresses.
Hell, if you believe some of the now discredited early histories, there was even a woman pope, Pope Joan [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's amazing that most people simply accept that Hypocrisy is the norm. That's sad.
You're telling me that hypocrisy isn't the norm?
Re: (Score:2)
See,
Re: (Score:2)
It's amazing that most people simply accept that Hypocrisy is the norm. That's sad.
The copyright organizations call for "zero tolerance" and are then caught themselves.
The congressmen who rail against finding teenagers attractive are caught lusting after them.
Preachers who rail on homosexuals are caught fucking gay prostitutes.
Vigilantes who claim to catch online predators are found to be employing young teens in their exploits and having child pornography on their computers.
Educators who rail against drugs and demand for instant lockup of drug offenders... are found to be drug users themselves...
I don't find that so unusual. If a person is doing something wrong and knows that he is hurting someone, that does not mean that he has the power to stop himself. That could be just the reason that politician X is against action Y. He knows how bad Y is because he cannot help from doing it himself.
In fact, this is the situation in my own home. I spend way too much time on the intercords, but I don't let the kids online for more than a few minutes at a time. Mostly because I am aware of my own addiction.
Re: (Score:2)
I think there's something else going on. All of those folks making the draconian rules can't be that stupid. They just automatically know they don't believe it, and only follow it as much as they hope is necessary not to get caught.
Meanwhile, we're in a time where Aggression Wins, because if you lose a round, "Awww, someone caught me this time. Give it 3 months and a new co-angle, and maybe they'll miss their chance".
In the Game Theory grid, there's no serious penalty for losing and everything to gain with
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Our planet would be very empty suddenly.
Re:Hypocrisy as the norm... (Score:4, Insightful)
but still a better place. Remove them from power at the first offence would be better, sarkosy wouldn't have made past student rapresentative...
Well, if he gets cut off (Score:4, Insightful)
He'll just start mooching off his neighbor's wifi.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
He'll just start mooching off his neighbor's wifi.
And if that fails, he can mooch off the neighbor's wife.
Retroactive exemption for political purposes in (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
This is the case with Israeli anti-spam laws. In December, spamming from Israel became illegal. Except for political spam, which was very common in the elections last month. WTF?!?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Great, so now Israelis have to deal with offers to enlarge their penises from their politicians? Don't those people have enough problems already?
We have our Sarkozy in Chile, too (Score:5, Interesting)
Here in Chile, the president of the SCD (Society of Author Rights) was caught with pirated software, in a powerpoint lecture about... you guessed it... PIRACY! (they are triying to copy the spanish law, taxing the internet connection for the "lost of revenues")
http://www.elnortero.cl/admin/render/noticia/18164
An our congress try to pass a 3-strikes law for ISPs... with a word document created by a SCD lawyer with a pirated copy of windows ("UE, The Houze"). There are even commemorative t-shirts!
http://url.ie/10xd
http://www.elfrancotirador.cl/2009/01/15/ponte-la-camiseta-con-el-acceso-a-cultura/
There are RIAAs scammers in every country.
Not the first time for this stuff (Score:4, Insightful)
He's not directly involved (Score:5, Informative)
The french president Nicolas Sarkozy is not directly sued for this copyright infringement. His own party (UMP) used the song during a meeting, and didn't reported it to the french RIAA (SACEM) for artist compensation, wich generally is pretty low.
The UMP party is sued for this, but not the french president, who was not in charge for the organization of this meeting, and has presidential immunity.
But's that's pretty funny anyway.
Re:He's not directly involved (Score:4, Interesting)
Well again it is not the the UMP party fault either. It's their advertising firm that used this song illegally. And it's this firm that is paying for the song. After all they are paid by a political party to make them looks good to the youngters and used, without permission this song.
Let's be clear here, it's not that old party of old folks that knows about MGMT. It's like Reagan and "Born in U.S.A"'s Springsteen song all over again.
Excellent-- and not just for schadenfreude (Score:2)
We need to enforce these laws against the children of music/movie executives and politicians and the wealthy.
Then the laws will be changed quickly.
But most of those groups think they are immune to the same treatment as the rest of humanity.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
We need to enforce these laws against the children of music/movie executives and politicians and the wealthy.
Then the laws will be changed quickly.
But most of those groups think they are immune to the same treatment as the rest of humanity.
They are _not_ enforced. There was an incident about a year or so ago in which some music exec's kids were caught downloading illegal music. What did they get? A stern warning from dad.
The title is inappropriate (Score:5, Informative)
I know Nicolas Sarkozy being an omnipresent president and all, but it's not like he personally chose the song, right? It's actually some people among his political party (the UMP) that decided to play the song in two meetings.
Otherwise, the result is the same: the political party from which Nicolas Sarkozy is has been busted for copyright infringement. It's a further proof that copyright laws are being way too tentacular. Can't they just see it?
Re:The title is inappropriate (Score:4, Informative)
It wasn't just played in 2 meetings.
"The party has admitted to using the popular track, Kids, at its national congress in January, in two online videos and in political advertisements. " - From the link inside TFA. (TFA is more of a blog post than an article.)
But the ire at Sarkozy isn't from the playing of the song and violating the agreement, it's at him trying to offer 1 euro to buy his way out of breaking the law he wrote.
Re: (Score:2)
I know Nicolas Sarkozy being an omnipresident and all
It's a further proof that copyright laws are being way too tentacular. Can't they just see it?
They know. They just don't care. The only important thing is to make sure that their cronies get as much as they can and as they can get away with.
That law hasn't be discussed by MPs, it's been written down by the majors and the SACEM (local equivalent to the RIAA) who don't even understand its unredeemable defects. Some MPs from Sarkozy's party may even be against it, but most don't care and they'll all vote yes since they want endorsement for the next elections.
The worst of it is that it goes agains
May he get the worst possible treatment (Score:5, Insightful)
May Sarkozy get the worst possible treatment allowable under law. I hope he gets all his computer (and other electronic devices) seized and thoroughly examined.
Not out of any hate of Sarkozy, or any need for vengeance for the wrongs committed by the RIAA against innocent people.
The purpose is this: I believe that those in power should be feel the impact of their decisions.
You want greater surveillance? Fine, we'll start around your house. You want to wage a war? Fine, any of your eligible children get "volunteered" for army service. You want to give the police power to search people without a warrant? Fine, you'll get searched daily both near your home and near your workplace.
Then, maybe, just maybe, people would think twice. They tend to when there's something at stake for them.
This is really an extensions of Schneier's idea about security: the one in charge will make the decision that matches their own agenda. We the people have to make it a part of the agenda of the people in power to make sure their decisions are sane. I've proposed a way.
May this makes Sarkozy's life really shitty for a while.
All people are equal... (Score:2)
All people are equal, just some are more equal than others. Somehow this story reminds me of this statement again and how true it is. :-/
Now infringing on copyright in the fair use realm is one thing, infringing on copyright to gain financial or professional benefits is something I object! Trying to settle for 1 Euro is indeed rediculous! :-
Obligatory (Score:5, Insightful)
If the president does it, it's not illegal.
Re:Smart move (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe they don't like his agenda?
Re:Smart move (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe they don't like his agenda?
Seriously, artists are not all automatically on the side of big media. And you're right: they probably saw this as a way to make a point, that they don't like where he's trying to take copyright.
Of course, offering a single Euro as compensation was kinda ridiculous.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, ridiculous. Way beyond what one song would be worth.
By the time you buy a song from iTunes, do you seriously believe
the artist got anywhere near a Euro?
Re:Smart move (Score:5, Informative)
In short, this wasn't a case of Joe User downloading a song; it was unauthorized commercial use.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re:Smart move (Score:5, Insightful)
Sigh.
They were hardly protesting against having their music spread to the big masses. They obviously intented to point out that the most influential politician/pro-copyright spokesman of France is a hypocritical asshole.
It's incredible how anyone could miss the point.
Re: (Score:2)
Sean Hannity?!? Is that you????
Naboleon (Score:5, Informative)
Sarkozy compares himself to Obama a lot. It's beyond ridiculous. Especially considering the fact that he LOVED Bush, and that he is about as inspiring as him in his speeches. His vocabulary is ~1000 words at most. He's hit quickly hit 35% popularity (although he's bounced back up a bit).
Re: (Score:2)
Uh, that's beside the point. The penalty being pushed is far worse than a 1 Euro compensation.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Smart move (Score:5, Interesting)
Seriously, artists are not all automatically on the side of big media.
you have no idea how right you are.
I have noticed that the 'artists' who produce schlock and hope someone will hand them a paycheck haven't even looked into copyright.
Serious artists who are making a serious effort to comment on contemporary culture are usually very much against copyright. my next show requires a camera to view the images (photographing a painting is a violation, technically).
I know a few bands who encourage people to film their shows, post them to youtube, then they make copyright claims and post ads on that video page. ( no idea how that works out).
they no longer want to be 'picked up my a major'
now, they talk about 'making it somehow without signing...by using teh internets or something...'
i have yet to find a serious artist who supports strict copyright laws. (and I know a lot of artists; being one myself, and associating mainly with other artists, and I work with musicians fairly often.)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
thank you.
for every Metallica that you hear on the radio, there are 100 other bands out there who are just as good that you have never heard of, and they are the majority of artists that I am talking about.
they don't make millions sucking the corporate tit, they do what they do, (often at a great financial expense) for the love of creating and performing and expressing themselves. to these artists, local recognition and applause at the end of the night are a concern, not busting fans for making unauthorize
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
For most of its history, the band chose to stay away from the political realm. However, in 2004, upon learning that George W. Bush's presidential campaign was using "Times Like These" at rallies, Grohl decided to lend his public support to John Kerry's campaign. Grohl attended several Kerry rallies and occasionally performed solo acoustic sets. The entire band eventually joined Grohl for a performance in Arizona coinciding with one of the presidential debates.
http:// [wikipedia.org]
Re:Smart move (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Will the 3 strikes policy affect him? (Score:5, Funny)
Fat wife [courant.com]?
Re: (Score:2)
I understand that most people will be in a rush for carla bruni pictures. But don't forget she's also an artist whose music is strangely not selling well.
Of course this is because of piracy!!! She's obviously too nice to sing poorly and now that she's the wife of the president she's also too famous to hold a concert in a stadium to raise some money by actual work.
I hope that the french three strikes policy will correct this unfair stealing of her precious music from those filthy bastards that got her husban