The RIAA Was For Freedom Of Speech Before It Was Against It

from the say-what-now? dept

Tue, Nov 22nd 2011 9:20am — Mike Masnick

Reader Noah was surfing the RIAA's web site recently, when he found something odd. Under the "About" section, between "services" and "licensing", there's what appears to be a totally out of place section defending free speech rights, in which it claims that the RIAA "takes an uncompromising stand against censorship and for the First Amendment rights of all artists to create freely. From the nation's capital to state capitals across the country, RIAA works to stop unconstitutional action against the people who make the music of our times--and those who enjoy it." It also quotes the First Amendment.

Considering that the RIAA is one of the leading backers of PROTECT IP and SOPA, which would look to undermine the First Amendment and place massive regulations on the internet, especially harming those who make music in new ways, such as via sampling and mashups, this all rings a little hollow. Of course, if you click through to the details (which still don't explain why this section is in the "About" category), it appears that what the RIAA means as "free speech rights," is the rights of minors to buy their music. Ah, that kind of First Amendment...

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: censorship, free speech, sopa
Companies: riaa

39 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 22 Nov 2011 @ 9:25am

"it appears that what the RIAA means as "free speech rights," is the rights of minors to buy their music."

That's nothing new, they've been claiming this for years.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- gorehound (profile), 22 Nov 2011 @ 1:49pm
  
  Re:
  Fucking Assholes who want to take our freedom away and control the Internet.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Nov 2011 @ 9:29am

C**ts.

That is all
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Nov 2011 @ 9:30am

Only for artists
The double-standard here is that they only want free speech for artists.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Chuck Norris' Enemy (deceased) (profile), 22 Nov 2011 @ 9:51am
  
  Re: Only for artists
  The double-standard here is that they only want free speech for label executives.
  
  FTFY
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
:Lobo Santo (profile), 22 Nov 2011 @ 9:30am

As always
RIAA definition of Free Speech: our right to express ourselves and our right to make you shut the hell up while we express ourselves in any manner we see fit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 22 Nov 2011 @ 10:16am
  
  Re: As always
  Too long.
  
  RIAA definition of Free Speech: Shut up! Buy CDs!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 22 Nov 2011 @ 12:27pm
    
    Re: Re: As always
    Well said, Well said indeed.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Nov 2011 @ 9:38am

RIAA: We stand up for free speech... until we change our minds that is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
out_of_the_blue, 22 Nov 2011 @ 9:38am

This piece isn't just lame, it's legless.
Kind of wormy. Read your own 'About' page and get back on track.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- MrWilson, 22 Nov 2011 @ 9:47am
  
  Re: This piece isn't just lame, it's legless.
  Please cite exactly where in the About page that Mike has stated something that he has since gone in the exact opposite direction regarding.
  
  It's not a valid comparison to say, "this is a tech blog, but we talk about copyright a lot" is the same as, "we are for freedom of speech except when we're for censorship."
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Marcus Carab (profile), 22 Nov 2011 @ 9:51am
  
  Re: This piece isn't just lame, it's legless.
  About Techdirt:
  
  the Techdirt blog uses a proven economic framework to analyze and offer insight into news stories about changes in government policy, technology and legal issues that affect companies ability to innovate and grow.
  
  Where's the problem exactly?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Rikuo (profile), 22 Nov 2011 @ 9:53am
  
  Re: This piece isn't just lame, it's legless.
  Your comment to attack Mike is so rushed that again, you've only made yourself look the fool.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 22 Nov 2011 @ 10:20am
  
  Re: This piece isn't just lame, it's legless.
  Kind of wormy.
  
  maybe kind of techwormy rolling about in techdirt?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - The Groove Tiger (profile), 22 Nov 2011 @ 11:25am
    
    Re: Re: This piece isn't just lame, it's legless.
    what are you a techsmurf?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- jeremy7600 (profile), 22 Nov 2011 @ 10:39am
  
  Re: This piece isn't just lame, it's legless.
  The about page specifically states "analyze and offer insight into news stories about changes in government policy, technology and legal issues that affect companies ability to innovate and grow."
  
  Guess what, every article ever posted on Techdirt is about exactly those things.
  
  Simply because it doesn't deal with whatever it is *you* think this blog is only about, doesn't mean the OWNER of the blog can't put whatever he wants on the blog.
  
  The above being said, government policy, technology AND legal issues are whats discussed here. Hate to break it to you, but calling someone wormy and asking them to read their own page shows just how much you fail at reading comprehension. And on top of that, you don't even make a case. You just state your opinion as if it were fact and leave it at that.
  
  All you need to remember for the future is government policy, technology and legal issues. If you don't have the comprehension to understand what those three things mean, remedial education may be in order.
  
  And again, no one is forcing you to read the articles here. The problem is between your ears, not sitting at the CEO's desk of Floor 64.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- hmm (profile), 22 Nov 2011 @ 2:01pm
  
  Re: This piece isn't just lame, it's legless.
  By 'wormy' I take it you mean Mike managed to worm his way into the heart of the RIAA/MPAA and their employees in congress (pretty much most of them) and wriggle around until he uncovers what they're REALLY up to with our elected officials?
  
  Nothing wrong with worms my friend, they help to aerate the dark places that some people would prefer remain in darkness.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The Devil's Coachman (profile), 22 Nov 2011 @ 5:24pm
  
  Re: This piece isn't just lame, it's legless.
  Try not being such a twat, will you? just once? You hopeless, vapid twat!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Nov 2011 @ 9:39am

Sure you can have free speech in a dictatorship that censors the opposition.

The dictator gives you the right to say whatever speech the dictator wants you to say! And if you say something the dictator doesn't want you to say the dictator has you thrown in handcuffs and put in jail for the next few decades without trial as a political dissident/traitor.

Isn't that what free speech is all about, the right to say what those in power want you to say?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- nasch (profile), 22 Nov 2011 @ 8:16pm
  
  Re:
  The dictator gives you the right to say whatever speech the dictator wants you to say!
  
  Exactly. Any other speech is illegal, and therefore it's OK to censor it.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Nov 2011 @ 9:45am

I'm all for stopping SOPA and covering this issue but Techdirt you've begun boring me to tears on this subject. It's become almost comical in its repetition. It's all you talk about anymore and you are on the endangered list on my RSS feed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Chuck Norris' Enemy (deceased) (profile), 22 Nov 2011 @ 9:53am
  
  Re:
  The way things are going you may not be able to have an RSS feed anymore.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 22 Nov 2011 @ 5:31pm
    
    Re: Re:
    I hear SOPA requires all puppies and cats to be sacrificed too.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- weneedhelp (profile), 22 Nov 2011 @ 9:53am
  
  Re:
  It's all you talk about anymore and you are on the endangered list on my RSS feed.
  
  Ohhhh nooooossss an AC might go away.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Jay (profile), 22 Nov 2011 @ 10:05am
    
    Re: Re:
    Let's be nice. If the ac is not satisfied with the stories of hypocrisy, censorship, unneeded barriers to entry, copyright abuse, patent abuse, trademark fraud, impediments to the First and Fourth Amendment, plutocracy of US democracy, and the occasional story about food
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Jay (profile), 22 Nov 2011 @ 10:06am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      ... Then he should do what needs to be done. (Damn entry button on phone...)
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 22 Nov 2011 @ 12:27pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Where does one find the "Entry" button?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 22 Nov 2011 @ 12:27pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        ooooooooooo, is that why phones vibrate?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- hmm (profile), 22 Nov 2011 @ 2:03pm
  
  Re:
  SOPA would actually outlaw RSS feeds because technically there are parts of a "copyrighted" site that may be pushed to you, such as the site's URL or title.....
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- nasch (profile), 22 Nov 2011 @ 8:17pm
  
  Re:
  You know you don't have to read them, right? You can just mark it as read and move on.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
ScytheNoire, 22 Nov 2011 @ 9:52am

Notification Memo
In case you weren't aware, America had a slogan change from "Land of the Free" to "Land of Hypocrisy". Please adjust your expectations accordingly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Nov 2011 @ 10:16am

They just want to protect THEIR freedom of speech and to create. Its makes them money when Rhianna's new song about being a sex slave does not get censored for depravity. (I don't think it is Im just creating a scene here). But when that same freedom that they and their artists have suddenly I am a pirate who is stealing from them when all I have really done is disagree with their position.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 22 Nov 2011 @ 10:48am

The RIAA is a strong proponent of the freedom of speech, and has taken this stance for decades. However, it is possible to be for freedom of speech while being against the unlawful dissemination of speech as to which copyright pertains. These are not inconsistent positions, but it takes more than broad generalizations to appreciate why this is the case.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Beech, 22 Nov 2011 @ 11:14am
  
  Response to: Anonymous Coward on Nov 22nd, 2011 @ 10:48am
  The people here generally aren't opposed to companies protecting their copyrights. The problem is that these new bills have huge potential to be abused to the point of censoring those who are not actively engaged in infringement.
  
  That said, it makes it look like the riaa is for the first amendment until they decide its hurting their bottom line.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 22 Nov 2011 @ 12:18pm
  
  Re:
  It takes blindness, deafness and mutness to understand that position.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Psyga Sanichigo (profile), 22 Nov 2011 @ 12:21pm

Oh Hai Hypocrites!
I sure like how you're so spineless. You say you're all for freedom when you even considered suing boy scouts for using Happy Birthday.

You people make me sick.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
heyidiot (profile), 22 Nov 2011 @ 1:10pm

Just a typo
In the last paragraph, just take out the "un" in "uncompromising" and their position becomes perfectly consistent.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
hmm (profile), 22 Nov 2011 @ 1:59pm

well
RIAA stands for free speech, but you have to pay $12.99 for the dvd its recorded on!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Devil's Coachman (profile), 22 Nov 2011 @ 5:28pm

In other news, RIAA execs have not been found guilty........
of fondling young boys and girls in recording studios.........yet. Now that the seeds of doubt have been planted, they will feel compelled to deny it furiously until just one case surfaces, and then go into spin control. Just like always.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]