IFPI & Other Lobbyists Tell Parliament That ACTA Protests Silence The Democratic Process

Free Speech

from the actually,-it's-the-opposite dept

Thu, Feb 16th 2012 8:55am — Mike Masnick

This is really incredible. Apparently IFPI (the international RIAA, basically) penned a letter to European Parliament members concerning the widespread ACTA protests claiming that these "protests silence the democratic process."

Over the past two weeks, we have seen coordinated attacks on democratic institutions such as the European Parliament and national governments over ACTA. The signatories to this letter and their members stand against such attempts to silence the democratic process. Instead, we call for a calm and reasoned assessment of the facts rather than the misinformation circulating.

That's quite a statement. We'd heard some SOPA/PIPA supporters hint at views like that, but not quite so blatant. Let's be clear: the protests and the public speaking out are the democratic process. They're not silencing the democratic process in any way. To suggest that people speaking out over their own viewpoint somehow silences the process, is to redefine "the democratic process" to be something entirely different than what most people believe.

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: acta, democracy, europe, free speech, protests
Companies: ifpi

93 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:04am

Well, I always suspected that the definition of "democracy" was changed at some point, only not all people managed to catch up with the change, and so there's always confusion.

"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:05am

Clearly the democratic process is whoever can buy the most votes makes the laws.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Torg (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:05am

No, protests and the public speaking out are democracy. The democratic process is that lobbyists give representatives money and the representatives give lobbyists laws, and the public is only allowed to speak every other November.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:12am

i suppose if you tell the same lies often enough, you end up believing them yourself!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Rikuo (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:12am

What the letter means is that these protests are disrupting the hard work of the democratically elected kings and queens. What democracy actually is, is electing a master to rule you and tell you what to do. Those in the EU parliament who are trying to pass ACTA are only doing their jobs.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
:Lobo Santo (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:14am

Re: Suspect
I suspect you're highlighting the differences between a direct democracy and a democratic republic.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:14am

Another one for the archive
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Violated (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:15am

P O W E R
Once again the 1% of those rich enough to have power totally ignore that the other 99% exist or have a democratic voice which means they treat us as trash. Their own actions are undemocratic and so they ignore democracy.

They are not fully wrong when corporations often control the Government. But then the Government aims to serve the people while being paid to not do so by the corporations. This makes the whole system confused about who does wield the real power.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
MrWilson, 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:16am

Re:
"and the public is only allowed to speak every other November..."

...in order to determine who gets to receive lobbyists funding and dole out the lobbyists' laws.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The eejit (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:18am

Heh. I read it as a Who's-Who of clueless fuckwit groups.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:19am

No, ACTA initially being negotiated in secret silences the democratic process.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:22am

These protests do often limit the true democratic process, by looking for a second bite at the apple. These are people who voted the politicians in, they should accept the results of their choices.

Further, it also is an issue of the noisy 1% of the population dictating to the other 99% how things should go. Are we seeing a majority of the population protesting, or just (gasp) a smaller group, mostly centered around the student demographic making the protests?

It ends up as politics by who yells the loudest, rather than by doing what is good for the people as a whole. That isn't very good, is it? It's certainly not very democratic.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:23am

Re:
So the people are not smart enough to have a active voice in the discussion?
The talks for ACTA were held in secret....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
codeslave (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:26am

Voters
Voters, why should we should listen to them? They don't even have a registered lobbyist!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Rikuo (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:26am

Re:
"hese protests do often limit the true democratic process, by looking for a second bite at the apple. These are people who voted the politicians in, they should accept the results of their choices."

So...when people voted in Obama, who campaigned on such promises of transparency in government and closing Gitmo, it's now the people's fault that he's reneged?

Besides, I'm Irish and I can't recall the last time I was asked to vote for an MEP.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:26am

Re:
"These protests do often limit the true democratic process, by looking for a second bite at the apple. These are people who voted the politicians in, they should accept the results of their choices."

You're an idiot. Elected representatives take input from those they are representing. This is why they host meetings, correspond with constituents, etc.

"Further, it also is an issue of the noisy 1% of the population dictating to the other 99% how things should go. Are we seeing a majority of the population protesting, or just (gasp) a smaller group, mostly centered around the student demographic making the protests?"

Ah yes, that evil noisy democracy. The sneaky 0.01% of lobbyists influencing policy are a much better choice.

"It ends up as politics by who yells the loudest, rather than by doing what is good for the people as a whole. That isn't very good, is it? It's certainly not very democratic."

And now we're back to: you're an idiot. But you know that already. No one is stupid enough defend lobbyists, who by definition are "yelling the loudest" without a single care about what is "good for the people as a whole."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chosen Reject (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:27am

Re:
Silenced seems a bit weak. ACTA silenced the democratic process like John Wilkes Booth silenced Abraham Lincoln.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
BeachBumCowboy (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:27am

Point of view
It all depends on your point of view. From the IFPI and RIAA point of view modern democracy has developed into economic formula to be manipulated. Corporations spend money to get legislators elected, corporations get closed door access to policy makers, legislators pass laws benefiting those corporations, corporations profit from their investments into legislators.

To IFPI and RIAA, the anti-SOPA and anti-RIAA crowds aren't acting in a manner that fits their democratic reality. The crowds should by their own legislators and let them "compete" with IFPI and RIAA in that way. They can't "compete" if there is single entity to compete against.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hulser (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:30am

Guilt by Conflation
If by "attacks", they're referring to the general uproar on the Internet and the negative feedback, then their statement is patently absurd. But..if they're talking about literal attacks i.e. DoS attacks or other forms of hacking, I can at least see some shred of logic.

If you pull off some traditional civil disobedience, like chaining yourself to a tree or marching in the streets without a permit, you may be inconveniencing others, but you're not taking away their freedom of speech or their ability to be involved in the democratic process. But if you take down a website which represents an opposing opinion, you are in effect censoring their speech. So, at least in this way, they may be right.

But overall, these attackers do more harm than good. Yes, it may draw attention to the issue, but it allows big media companies to use one of their standard tricks, Guilt by Conflation: associate two different things together and respond to objections using whichever one better supports your position. They did it with counterfeiting and infringement and certainly looks like they're doing it now with "attacks" and "protests".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Almost Anonymous (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:31am

Re:
"When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less." -- Humpty Dumpty (Through the Looking Glass)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Josef Anvil (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:33am

Re:
Lobbyists don't yell the loudest, they pay the most.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Josef Anvil (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:33am

Re:
Lobbyists don't yell the loudest, they pay the most.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:33am

Re:
"These are people who voted the politicians in, they should accept the results of their choices."

Your argument incorrectly assumes that people are psychic and can possibly know what a politician will do before voting for him or her. So, when Obama promises transparency and doesn't deliver, it's not the fault of voters for not knowing he was telling a lie and so we ought to protest.

I do agree, to some extent, that we could somewhat know what a politician might do based on his voting history and that can raise a valid argument. Such should have lead us to vote for Ron Paul, if only the government established mainstream media didn't traditionally try to ignore him and paint him as an extremist (though he has been getting a lot more positive attention in more recent elections partly thanks to the Internet and the Internets influence on the MSM). But, aside from our lack of protesting, it's otherwise not our faults that the government has established a one sided self interested mainstream media (through government established broadcasting and cableco monopolies) that brainwashes us into voting how they want us to vote (ie: By censoring arguments, information/data, and positions they don't like while presenting only their own position of various issues). The solution is that we should protest.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:34am

Re: Re:
"So...when people voted in Obama, who campaigned on such promises of transparency in government and closing Gitmo, it's now the people's fault that he's reneged?"

You don't mean Obama who...
...stopped the hemorrhaging of the economy by Republican policies that favored the rich over the middle class
...lowered the unemployment rate
...believes that what happens to a woman's body is the woman's choice, not a male religious fanatic's whim

Yeah, must be that Obama....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:35am

You see, it's a simple thing.

-Giving big bags of cash to politicians as 'campaign contributions' so that they vote how you want them to is the democratic processes' way!

-Protesters protesting bills that politicians who received big bags of money are supporting is stifling free speech! In the words of other politicians it's also 'thuggery'.

If these protesters really wanted to engage in the democratic process then they'd start throwing big bags of cash around the politicians to buy their own votes on these issues!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Gwiz (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:35am

Re:
These protests do often limit the true democratic process, by looking for a second bite at the apple. These are people who voted the politicians in, they should accept the results of their choices.

Further, it also is an issue of the noisy 1% of the population dictating to the other 99% how things should go. Are we seeing a majority of the population protesting, or just (gasp) a smaller group, mostly centered around the student demographic making the protests?

It ends up as politics by who yells the loudest, rather than by doing what is good for the people as a whole. That isn't very good, is it? It's certainly not very democratic.

Is it just me or did this whole comment feel like a snake oil sales pitch as to why our elected officials should keep on listening to all those very well paid "policymakers" inside the Beltway instead of the constituents who elected them?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Keroberos (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:38am

The signatories to this letter and their members stand against such attempts to silence the democratic process.
You just have to remember the part of the "democratic process" they are concerned about--you know...the part where they hand politicians money and get the laws they wrote to be favorable to them passed. All this protesting is bringing too many eyes on this process making it much harder and more expensive to get these things passed (cause you know, them damn politicians start trying to show some scruples when people are watching them).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Adam J, 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:39am

For serious? Silencing the democratic process? Do these legacy asshats realize that we don't have millions upon millions of dollars to buy our very own politicians, so this is one of the ways that we make sure that we are heard. Does IFPI consider signing an international treaty in secret that only benefits a very small amount of people and corporations, democratic? I suppose if I wore my ass as a hat, I might think that too.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chosen Reject (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:40am

Re: Re: Re:
I noticed you didn't say anything about reneging on promises about transparency in government and closing Gitmo.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:43am

Re:
And what is best for the people as a whole? Secret agreements made in backrooms that are for the benefit of only a few people/companies, done so at the expense of people's rights (including free speech, due process, the public domain, etc)?

As for it ends up in politics by who yells the loudest, isn't that what's been happening already? A small group, mostly centered around the studios/labels (and not the entire creative industry as a whole) making protests about their own interest and bottom lines being hurt (contrary to actual evidence which shows they're still raking in record breaking profits on a regular basis).

These protest DO NOT limit the democratic process. The people elect representatives to REPRESENT THEM (GASP!). To do what is in THEIR (the people's) best interest. Not to do what is in the best interest of a handful of legacy players who refuse to adapt to changing times and technologies and market practices.

But yes, continue trying to dismiss this as a minor group of "students" dictating to politicians and circumventing the democratic process. Apparently the back peddling and temporary shut down of SOPA was accomplished because of the voice of a "minority".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Keroberos (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:43am

Re: Re:
...it's not the fault of voters for not knowing he was telling a lie and so we ought to protest.
Well I knew he was lying--his lips moved.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
:Lobo Santo (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:44am

Re: Re: AL,VH!
...a bad stage show with a sex-symbol male lead actor?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
weneedhelp (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:44am

Re: Re:
"I do agree, to some extent, that we could somewhat know what a politician might do based on his voting history and that can raise a valid argument."

And when I pointed out the most of what he was claiming as accomplishments, he was merely a co-signer at best on, I got called a racist.

When I pointed out shady doings by him and his wife in Chicago, I got called a racist.

We do know what a politician will do based on his voting history and that SHOULD raise a valid argument, but most will just ignore it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jeffrey Nonken (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:47am

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Some Guy, 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:47am

Yeah, because everyone knows that the entertainment industry is all about the democracy. Just ask them, they'll tell you.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:51am

Re:
You think the democratic process ends at voting?

You're ridiculous!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:51am

Re: Re:
How about every 5th of November?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:56am

There is an obvious interest in turning legislation into work for hire.

That favors incredibly the corrupt politicians, who shed their party beliefs and even their personal ones. After all, all you need to do is get elected and wait for the lobbyists to start throwing their money at you.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:59am

Re: Re: Re:
You don't mean Obama who...
...stopped the hemorrhaging of the economy by Republican policies that favored the rich over the middle class
...lowered the unemployment rate
...believes that what happens to a woman's body is the woman's choice, not a male religious fanatic's whimction with Obama... I'll need a citation on that please.

Oh my, take me to that sweet reality of yours! The last sentence is gold, he may believe that. I also believe every teenager should have a pony and yet most of them don't have one.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 10:00am

Re: Re: Re:
Yes, exactly that Obama. He's done all four of those things. Do you really believe that if someone does something you like, you can't criticize them for doing something different you dislike?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 10:02am

Response to: Anonymous Coward on Feb 16th, 2012 @ 9:56am
Pressed send by accident.

Companies that rely in unethical behavior or benefit from not being liable for causing great damage to the common wealth also get a free pass, since it is cheaper to buy politicians to legislate in your favor than to respond for your crimes.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Torg (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 10:07am

Re: Re: Re:
This raises a good point. Voting for someone is almost never a sweeping endorsement of "we trust this person to make all the right decisions under all circumstances"; even for the perfectly informed and rational voter it's more like a cost-benefit analysis for who disagrees with us the least. Those things were all good, and that's why Obama was voted in. Copyright law wasn't an important issue, so it didn't enter into most people's calculations. People didn't vote for him to increase IP law, they voted for him to decrease unemployment.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bengie, 16 Feb 2012 @ 10:10am

peasants
How dare those peasants interfere with out costly democratic process!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
freehtcdownloads, 16 Feb 2012 @ 10:11am

RE:RE
Hmmm Sound good! It�s been ignoring that a very large segment of internet users have been activated on these issues.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hephaestus (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 10:12am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
You forgot the 5 trillion dollars added to our national debt, signing ACTA as an executive agreement, appointing content types to the DOJ, the Carp Czar (kid you not), etc
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Togashi (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 10:16am

Re: Re: Re:
Funny, I don't seem to remember that date...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 10:20am

freetard voters

what have they ever given to the democratic process? nothing. that's what.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Togashi (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 10:21am

Re:
By Jove, this man is right! Politics is an issue of the noisy 1% of the population dictating to the other 99% how things should go!

He's just a little confused as to which 1% is doing the dictating.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 10:22am

Re:
Further, it also is an issue of the noisy 1% of the population dictating to the other 99% how things should go

Oh you mean the lobbyists and big content industries.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
SJ, 16 Feb 2012 @ 10:26am

We live in the best democracy money can buy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The eejit (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 10:27am

Re: Re:
You want to know hilarity?

this is far better than in the 1700s UK. There, if you were a woman or not a Christian, you couldn't vote, and hte only person you could vote for was the Baron for the borough. AND they didn't get paid, so only the rich (who could afford a second home in London) could do it.

Those Brits were right pros at rigging elections!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
letherial (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 10:29am

Re:
If thats a democracy then i guess the recording industry is correct. If the protesters wanted to change it, the should buy politicians like every other corporation.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jay (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 10:35am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
You're telling me that you don't remember?

Remember, the 5th of November?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chuck Norris' Enemy (deceased) (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 10:52am

Re: Re: Re:
...continued the hemorrhaging of the economy by government policies that favor the rich over the poor and middle class

ftfy

Nobody lowered the unemployment rate except the economy. Hell, Gingrich even claimed that while he was House speaker so and so many jobs were created. Puh-leeze! Just at the right place at the right time.

You should have thrown something about the children onto the list.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Howard the Duck, 16 Feb 2012 @ 10:56am

Re: P O W E R
The tea party is branded racist radicals, and OWS - a democratic gathering of non-violent protestors. OWS hates the Tea party. Both are cut from the same cloth. When the democrats ran away in Wisconsin to avoid voting bad things on public unions, the republicans were accused of fucking democracy, even though Walker was elected by the people. What is it with the 99%?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 10:58am

Yes, protests, emails, etc. are inherent in a system that strives to be democratic vs. authoritarian.

Of course, it always helps if those protesting, emailing, etc. are doing so with accurate information in hand, which was hardly the case regarding SOPA and PIPA.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chief Semantics Officer, 16 Feb 2012 @ 11:00am

Democracy can be inconvenient for aristocrats
"The signatories to this letter and their members stand against such attempts to silence the autocratic process. Instead, we call for misinformation circulation rather than a calm and reasoned assessment of the facts."

There, I fixed that for you.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 11:01am

IFPI and Co. are getting desperate already.
WTF!

The most ridiculous statement ever to be delivered by an idiot yet.

The sad part is that I will have to endure some bought politician piece of shit talking in the same terms trying to convince the public that protesting for your rights is bad for democracy.

This is a lesson to all you morons who believe that people are stupid and would not raise to the occasion, there you have it, all your plans are belong to us now.

The next time you pieces of $h!% try to ram BS rules to the world through backroom deals and trying to hide it from the public be prepared to pay the price.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 11:02am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Completely slipped my mind
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Howard the Duck, 16 Feb 2012 @ 11:02am

Re: Re:
You're the idiot. He's obviously talking about the general population, not lobbyists. Read.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 11:04am

Techdirt is being read a lot on the hacker community apparently.

https://userscripts.org/scripts/search?q=techdirt&submit=Search

I never thought about how big Techdirt is, I just assumed it was just another blog, but it is not.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Howard the Duck, 16 Feb 2012 @ 11:09am

Re: Re:
"It ends up as politics by who yells the loudest, rather than by doing what is good for the people as a whole. That isn't very good, is it? It's certainly not very democratic."

Sounds to me like he's against lobbyists, or any special interest group that can be heard above the din, paid or not.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 11:22am

Re: Re:
Here in USA, money is speech! The supreme court ruled it so.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
al, 16 Feb 2012 @ 11:26am

It sounds like the IFPI and these lobbiyst's have Democracy confused with Corporatocracy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Richard (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 11:34am

Re:
These protests do often limit the true democratic process, by looking for a second bite at the apple. These are people who voted the politicians in, they should accept the results of their choices.

Except that there has NEVER been a choice on these issues -

and of course representative democracy elected HItler - should everyone have just accepted the result of that choice?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Richard (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 11:37am

Re: Guilt by Conflation
. But if you take down a website which represents an opposing opinion, you are in effect censoring their speech.

No - that's not censorship - since it is short lived and doesn't effectively prevent them from communication - it's really just electronic heckling.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 11:43am

Re: Re:
It's still true though, as in politics money tends to 'talk' quite loud indeed when it comes to it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mike Masnick (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 11:46am

Re:
Of course, it always helps if those protesting, emailing, etc. are doing so with accurate information in hand, which was hardly the case regarding SOPA and PIPA.

I don't know. If you compared who had more generally factual info: those in favor of SOPA/PIPA or those against, I'd argue that those against were generally more factual.

And, since those in favor were almost exclusively professional lobbyists/industry interests I find their dishonesty much more questionable, because it was almost certainly willful.

The public's -- quite justified -- concerns with SOPA/PIPA may have strayed into hyperbole at times, but mostly it was based on factual information.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 11:53am

Re:
Under their view, Black March will probably be considered treason.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 12:02pm

Re:
No, politicians are voted in by claiming they are going to do certain things. When they instead choose to willfully ignore what they say they are going to do, this is the sort of response they can expect.

They have been able to get away with it for a while now, because people weren't really paying close enough attention to hold them accountable. People are paying attention now.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 12:03pm

Re: Re:
Yeah, but the supreme court ruled money is speech. Donate lots, and it's yelling.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 12:05pm

Re: Re: Re:
K-Street should be shut down.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I-Blz, 16 Feb 2012 @ 12:30pm

Re: Re: Re:
This, THIS, angers me the most. Because he's black, any criticism brought apon him must not be because he made bad decisions, it must be because he's black, and the arguer is racist. Ass-pull of the highest order.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hulser (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 12:35pm

Re: Re: Guilt by Conflation
it's really just electronic heckling

I would agree that it's not cencorship in the same way that taking down a whole site for an undefined period of time for an indefined reason is, but it's close enough for the big media companies to have some justification in their claim of curtailing their ability to participate in the democratic process.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 12:35pm

that's some big balls

protesting IS part the democratic process

backroom deals hidden from public view is what silences the democratic process
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 2:55pm

Re: Re:
Perhaps where we differ is that while the process by which the legislative language in the two bills was not the paragon of openness, at least the language was published for all to read. There were the original bills, there were complaints about the language in the bills, there were amendments to the language attempting to accommodate complaints, etc.

In my view the major proponents attempted to rely on legal arguments, which were...again in my view...hamfistedly wrapped up as "it's all about jobs". Many who opposed the bills did so with great sincerity and concern, but far too many of them focused almost exclusively on extreme hypotheticals to make their point. I happen to believe it was from these hypos that the buzz-words were created which rapidly took root in the minds of others within the US and elsewhere.

I have no doubt that "Son's of SOPA and PIPA" will once more be presented in Congress. Hopefully, both sides will engage in reasoned debate next time around so that the bills can be examined on their merits with all relevant facts fairly presented.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 16 Feb 2012 @ 2:58pm

You Know What They Say ...
... it takes years of hard work to become an overnight success.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Dementia (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 3:19pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Google can be your friend too.....

Guy Fawkes Night
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 5:29pm

Re: Re: Re:
D-, failure in reading comprehension.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
MrWilson, 16 Feb 2012 @ 5:30pm

Re: Re: Re:
Yeah, I took a few English History courses in college. As I recall, there were many voting districts where there was only one significant land owner, so they solely determined who got elected and could thus curry favor with the possible candidates.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 5:40pm

Re:
>Of course, it always helps if those protesting, emailing, etc. are doing so with accurate information in hand, which was hardly the case regarding SOPA and PIPA.

So the RIAA/MPAA were accurate in that foreign sites couldn't be taken down without SOPA?

Are you sure they had accurate information?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Just John (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 6:08pm

Re: Re:
Godwin's Law, you just invoked it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Just John (profile), 16 Feb 2012 @ 6:24pm

Re: Re: Re:
You are failing to make the point though that there is a need for this.
Currently, SOPA/PIPA style enforcement is becoming more commonplace, so why do we need it? Currently, the content industries are making more money than ever before, so why do we need it?
Stop the war on drugs, it has failed and we loose more than is gained.
Stop the war on terrorism, it has failed and we loose more than is gained.
Stop the war on piracy, it has failed and we loose more than is gained.

Reasonable debate would be debating why we need to keep expanding copyright once every 2 years. Reasonable debate would be debating why we need to keep allowing patents that are common sense. Reasonable debate would be allowing the process to be transparent, and actually listening to all sides, not just the side throwing money at you.

It is not about profits, they have them.
It is not about channels, they can make them.
It is not about protecting the artists, they are still exploiting them.

It is all about control. Total, and complete control. Don't kid yourself, the government also does not object too heavily, since they can use the same laws to expand their own control.

Feel free to respond to these issues. I will be waiting with bated breath.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bend-Aid, 16 Feb 2012 @ 6:24pm

Sign the petition
h ttps://secure.avaaz. org/en/eu_save_the_internet/?f��p
There's a new petition SIGN IT.
WE NEED 1 BILLION AT LEAST
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Feb 2012 @ 9:41pm

Re: Re: Re:
"at least the language was published for all to read"

Eventually ... only after the documents leaked.

and these negotiations took place in secrecy, with industry interests present, exactly because the government-industrial complex knows that the public doesn't want these laws, otherwise there is no good reason they should have taken place in secrecy. A representative government has no business passing non-representative laws.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chargone (profile), 17 Feb 2012 @ 2:07am

Re: Re: Suspect
you mean between direct democracy and representative democracy.

republic contrasts with monarchy.
a democratic republic could be direct or representative (or, in fact, oligarchical, but the oligarchs vote on stuff, though that would be stretching the term somewhat)

a constitutional monarchy is usually run largely on a mix of representative democracy and bureaucracy, these days.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Feb 2012 @ 3:25am

Re: Re:
...says the Fear-Mongerer-in-Chief...

hahahahahahahahahahaha

It's so amusing to see Masnick spout this tripe and think any rational person would actually believe it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Feb 2012 @ 3:43am

Re: Re: Re:
Someday you'll need to go outside, you know, in the real world where nobody gives a shit what crazy old man Hollywood says. Until that day enjoy masturbating to your favorite MPAA/RIAA press release, like the fucked up weirdo you are.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Tomias, 17 Feb 2012 @ 5:33am

IFPI (secretly internet terrorists?)
Seems to me the IFPI wants to be labeled as internet terrorists whose goal is to block the basic democratic process.

Throw them all in jail...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Feb 2012 @ 6:42am

in other words shut up sheelpe we know whats best for you.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
AJBarnes, 17 Feb 2012 @ 7:53am

What it REALLY means
Silence the democratic process? That means they can't buy politicians outright and have to compete by paying more or risk losing influence.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
wec, 17 Feb 2012 @ 7:59am

Where are the Lobbyist entrepreneurs? There could be a Lobbying Company that could pick certain topics (Copyrights,patents and trademarks, treaties or laws) and then ask for for public contributions to fight for/or against depending on where the corporations stand. They would oppose the corporations stand. Although, lobbyist for the most part are 'bottom feeders', if an honest group verified by say EFF or some other respected association were to be formed maybe the public could then be heard by by the backers of some of these laws and treaties.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Oct 2012 @ 2:32pm

The content of this article is drawn from an original by Monica Horten of Iptegrity.com, and another article by IP Watch. Check : http://www.iptegrity.com/index.php/acta/744-ifpi-accuses-protests-silence-democratic-process
[ link to this | view in thread ]