Yahoo Dumps US Chamber Of Commerce Over Its Extremist Position On PROTECT IP
from the join-the-club dept
We've been covering the intellectually dishonest extremist position of the US Chamber of Commerce (once again, a lobbying group, not to be confused with the federal US Department of Commerce) when it comes to the PROTECT IP Act. The US CoC has been creating a variety of astroturf groups, and putting out ridiculous statements and videos trying to shove through PROTECT IP before Congress realizes what a dreadful, job-destroying, innovation-hindering bill it is. There was the video that conflated counterfeit drugs with copyright. Then, my favorite, was the video of four content creators who were "hurt" by infringement -- but when we dug into the stories of all four, none of them checked out.We honestly couldn't understand the US CoC's extremist position on this particular topic. Sure, the entertainment industry legacy players are members of the US CoC, but so are plenty of big tech companies that would be hurt by PROTECT IP. Of course, that may be changing. The news came out this morning that Yahoo has quietly left the US Chamber of Commerce over its extremist position on PROTECT IP, and it appears that others are thinking of following suit. At the same time, the US CoC's other major extremist position, concerning fighting against anything that results in reduced greenhouse emissions, has already made Apple leave the US CoC, along with a few other companies as well. At the same time, many various local Chambers of Commerce -- who often do help small businesses -- are disassociating themselves from the US Chamber of Commerce.
As this kind of thing continues, our elected officials are going to finally begin recognizing that the US CoC is an extremist organization that clearly does not represent the business interests of today's innovators and job creators -- but instead represents a few increasingly obsolete legacy organization whose unwillingness to adapt leads them to demand dangerous protectionist policies.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: copyright, extremism, lobbying, protect ip
Companies: apple, us chamber of commerce, yahoo
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Do you know this as a fact, or is it only opinion? The story says it the one area they don't agree, but without statements from either party, it would appear to be only an opinion or an assumption, not a fact.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
SPLITSVILLE FOR YAHOO, U.S. CHAMBER – Yahoo has quietly left the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, MT has learned. For Yahoo’s part, a spokeswoman would only say to MT that the company “has memberships with numerous trade associations and belongs to a number of organizations that promote a free and fair marketplace which enable Yahoo! to innovate on behalf of our more than 700 million users. As our membership renewal time neared and we reviewed our membership, we decided not to renew."
As the gentleman above me pointed out... Reading is Fundamental.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I laugh at jokes aimed at men all the time on reddit.
I'm just tired of the same comments when I mention my gender, so I rarely do.
Despite the myth, girls are on teh interwebs. We just pretend not to be.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
This is true. I know several women (real ones, not the other 98% who are really guys pretending to be women) who essentially have to lurk on forums and chat rooms or be bombarded by the lunkheads that make up most of the interwebs. The needle has not moved much from "a/s/l?" of about 15 years ago, unfortunately.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
thank you
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: @"Lobo Santo": "There's no way it's really a female human; Unless she's killing time on techdirt between 'private shows' on her webcam site."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: @"Lobo Santo": "There's no way it's really a female human; Unless she's killing time on techdirt between 'private shows' on her webcam site."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: @"Lobo Santo": "There's no way it's really a female human; Unless she's killing time on techdirt between 'private shows' on her webcam site."
At least I haven't seen a "There's no womenz on teh interblags!1!!" yet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: @"Lobo Santo": "There's no way it's really a female human; Unless she's killing time on techdirt between 'private shows' on her webcam site."
hope you are happy now :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Well, us male humans here are mostly killing time between web enabled polishing sessions of the one-eyed gopher. Sometimes one needs a break to reload, that's when techdirt comes in handy (no pun intended).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
You guys (and girls) are reading things into it that they did not explicitly say.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
it seems to be the general consensus. Especially considering Yahoo has been very vocal in opposing protectIP (do your own damn google search). So, we know Yahoo dislikes protectip and coc is pushing for protectip. Then yahoo leaves COC(k) and says its because they only participate in groups that promote a free and fair marketplace and innovation. That is pretty explicit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Ahem further down the link - if you bother to read.
"Yahoo didn’t elaborate any further, and the Chamber said it does not comment on membership changes. But we know one thing for sure: The two didn’t see eye to eye on at least one issue. That’s the PROTECT IP Act, which the Chamber strongly supports and Yahoo greatly opposes. "
Now it's not an explicit causal connection but - put together with the comment above that "the company “has memberships with numerous trade associations and belongs to a number of organizations that promote a free and fair marketplace which enable Yahoo! to innovate ""
It does not require a brain the size of a planet to deduce why they are leaving.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
You have to be careful here, you are falling for the conclusion that is drawn and treating it as fact, when the "fact" has not been established.
Yes, it's a logical conclusion, but it isn't a fact.
Perhaps they are leaving because the fees are too high, or they are paring back their memberships, etc. We don't have all the facts, do we?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
They were asked very directly why they left, if it wasn't for political reasons, something like fees, I would imagine they would come right out and say that. However they gave this indirect but pointed response. Until I have a reason to believe otherwise I am going to stick with what I believe to be the most likely and logical meaning they hid between the lines.
But semantically you are correct, they have not confirmed this as the reason, it is not a fact. Just the highly probable and likely meaning they veiled in that statement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I make a point of it only because while in this case it is narrow, it is a common problem. "near facts" presented as facts tend to cloud many discussions here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It is an opinion from the original source, not Mike.
And that source is hardly alone in thinking this:
http://www.rollcall.com/news/Yahoo-Quits-US-Chamber-of-Commerce-209457-1.html
There are lots of other sources who are also saying this (Daily Kos, ThinkProgress.org, etc) but they mostly link to either the Rollcall story, or the Politico story.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
If you insist on that level of confirmation before you beleive anything I guess you must be a solipsist!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Of course, in thirty years we would probably be writing articles about how the F-TJ-C is just about protecting legacy industries, but at least they would have a decade or two of productive work before that happened.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: _Notably_
Thanx!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Once the innovators and job creators are gone then the RIAA, MPAA and Authors Guild of this world get another lobby group.
Made of those grassroot organisations that the elected officials already listen to.
Are we sure they're going to notice?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Is there any way to fight it, other than complaining?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Step 2: "Dontate" to PACs
Setp 3: Wait
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fixed
Step 2: "Dontate" to PACs
Setp 3: Wait
Inflation, dude. Yer still trippin' in the '60s.
You got a lot of multi-billionare's to outbid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
although i would like to see something from yahoo.com. as opposed to anywhere else...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ya know ... when I'm in a hurry, I really do not read every word - I just skim over them.
Why are these charlatans allowed to continue with their charade?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yahoo!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
PROTECT IP will shut down legit online pharmacies
PROTECT IP's definition of what constitutes a rogue site is far too broad. It doesn't distinguish between the “good guys”--the licensed, legitimate pharmacies that require a doctor’s prescription--and the “bad guys” who sell everything from diluted or counterfeit medicine to narcotics without a prescription.
International online pharmacies sell brand-name prescription drugs for roughly 50 to 80 percent less than U.S. prices. Americans can't afford to lose access to this virtual lifeline.
RxRights is a national coalition of individuals and organizations dedicated to promoting and protecting American consumer access to sources of safe, affordable prescription drugs. The Coalition is encouraging consumers to send letters regarding PROTECT IP's threat to affordable medicine to Capitol Hill and the White House. For more information or to voice your concern, visit www.RxRights.org.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]