Want To Know How Weak The GOP's Internet Freedom Platform Is? The MPAA Loves It

from the which-means-it's-not-at-all-about-internet-freedom dept

Thu, Aug 30th 2012 9:31am — Mike Masnick

We were already skeptical of the GOP's claims about supporting "internet freedom," and it seems that our concerns have been more or less confirmed by the fact that the MPAA seems positively thrilled by the GOP's official position on internet freedom. If the MPAA is pleased with someone's policy outline for the internet, you can bet that it's bad policy. Here's what Chris Dodd had to say:

The Republican Party platform language strikes a very smart balance: it emphasizes the importance of us doing more as a nation to protect our intellectual property from online theft while underscoring the critical importance of protecting internet freedom. As the party points out, the internet has been for its entire existence a source of innovation, and it is intellectual property that helps drive that innovation. Copyright is the cornerstone of innovation; it allows creators to benefit from what they create. As Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor -- herself once a Republican elected official -- wrote, '[I]t should not be forgotten that the Framers intended copyright itself to be the engine of free expression. By establishing a marketable right to the use of one's expression, copyright supplies the economic incentive to create and disseminate ideas.'

I agree wholeheartedly with my friends in the Republican Party that we must protect the free flow of information on the internet while also protecting American innovators. It is imperative to our national economy and our national identity that we protect an internet that works for everyone.

As he is prone to doing, Dodd is presenting a very distorted version of history and intellectual property. There is no evidence (none, zip, zilch, zero) that "intellectual property helps drive innovation." Historically, it's been shown that competition and need is what drives innovation -- whereas intellectual property laws tend to lock in place legacy players, holding back disruptive innovation. Either way, the MPAA's support pretty much shows that the Republican's "internet freedom" platform isn't serious.

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: chris dodd, internet freedom, republicans
Companies: mpaa

110 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Tim K (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 8:42am

Who needs facts anyways?
doing more as a nation to protect our intellectual property from online theft

We don't have to worry about IP theft there is no such thing...

Copyright is the cornerstone of innovation

Cause again, everyone knows before copyright there was no innovation, just like there was no authors or fans either
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lowestofthekeys (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 9:45am

Doesn't Dodd know that every time he bullshits, his chin recedes a little?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 9:46am

And while it is problematic and weak in theory, the alternative (Obama) is problematic and weak in practice. Oh how the Americans are screwed...

I can't say much, it's the municipal elections here and not a single candidate that has any chance of winning is a good choice. And we got at least 5 candidates that have some expressive electorate. Imagine with 2 and with both being complete and utter shit?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 9:47am

Mike Masnick just hates it when intellectual property laws are supported.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Tim K (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 9:48am

Re:
FTFY:
Mike Masnick just hates it when bad intellectual property laws are supported.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 9:49am

Re: Re:
FT-FTFY:
Mike Masnick just hates it when ANY intellectual property laws are supported.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 9:49am

Re:
Anonymous Coward just hates it when people question the motives of those trying to enact laws with little or no ACTUAL facts/evidence to support them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

bob, 30 Aug 2012 @ 9:50am

Uh, creators are voters too
It seems like you think "internet freedom" means the freedom to take anything you want, whenever you want. Others think "internet freedom" should mean the freedom to conduct business without being ripped off. I'm guessing the Republicans, the Democrats and most parts of the government like the second definition. Why? Because you can't tax piracy and the other "sharing" that this site continues to endorse.

So it's not that the Republican version is "weak", it's just a different vision from your embrace of the freedom to be ripped off. Admit it. You're only concerned about the rights and freedom of Big Search, Big Hardware and Big Piracy. You could care less about the rights and freedom of the creators.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 9:50am

Sorry, Dodd, but I'm too flabbergasted by Justice O'Connor's baldly contradictory statement. How can establishing exclusive rights to the use of expressions be an engine for free expression?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 9:52am

I can throw around quotes too!
According to Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor (Feist), �The primary objective of copyright is not to reward the labor of authors, but �[t]o promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts.�

Take that, Dodd!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 9:55am

Re: Re:
"Anonymous Coward just hates it when people question the motives of those trying to enact laws with little or no ACTUAL facts/evidence to support them."

yes, especially when the opposition to those laws is almost entirely all "faith based" with little in the way of real world consideration taken into account.

Let's trash copyright, patents, and trademarks while we are at it, and then let's see what happens. This is the faith based approach at it's finest.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 9:56am

We protect an internet that works for everyone lol. Yeah right its just the MPAA happy that Republicans seem willing to screw Americans as easily as Democrats in favor of big business.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 9:57am

Re: Re: Re:
I'm sure if some good ones showed up, he'd be all for them. Problem is, Hollywood can't write good ones.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
:Lobo Santo (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 9:57am

Re: Re: Re: Perfect prefect!!
Sounds like AC and AC are in agreement--we need evidence based law-making, pure and simple.

Let's just stop passing laws without adequate scientific evidence as to the net benefit to society.

I'm glad we've come to an agreement.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jeremy Lyman (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:00am

Really?
Copyright is the cornerstone of innovation; it allows creators to benefit from what they create

I certainly hope there is benefit from innovation/invention beyond the ability to own said creation. Otherwise I'm not sure why the first caveman tied a pointy rock onto a stick in the first place.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:00am

Re: I can throw around quotes too!
She further wrote:

It may seem unfair that much of the fruit of the compiler's labor may be used by others without compensation. As Justice Brennan has correctly observed, however, this is not some unforeseen byproduct of a statutory scheme....It is, rather, "the essence of copyright," ibid., and a constitutional requirement....To this end, copyright assures authors the right to their original expression, but encourages others to build freely upon the ideas and information conveyed by a work.... This result is neither unfair nor unfortunate. It is the means by which copyright advances the progress of science and art.

I'm surprised and pleased to hear that Dodd supports O'Connor's views on copyright.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jeremy Lyman (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:04am

Re: Who needs facts anyways?
I dunno, certainly seems like forgoing prior art, allowing Apple to own things they didn't come up with and depriving others the use of them sure seems like Intellectual Property theft.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
weneedhelp (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:05am

Re:
Well, well, pooey poo-face to you too.

Idiot.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
David (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:07am

Hmmm...
I didn't know that Chris Dodd could spell "innovation".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jeremy Lyman (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:07am

Re: Uh, creators are voters too
Very true, but lets vote with votes instead of dollars. Yeah?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mike42 (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:11am

I always heard "Necessity is the mother of Invention." I guess we have to update the old books, and re-record Schoolhouse Rock.

"Without Mother Copyright, where would we be?"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:14am

Well there's the answer for all of the Obama-bashers- vote for the Republican ticket and see how you like what comes next. The R's say they don't want government interference in the internet (net neutrality anyone?) and have (at the Congressional level) been supportive of industry agreements to reign in piracy. This will put people like Issa in a box when the industry acts to enact private, SOPA-like agreements and the R's platform is to be hands-off of regulating the internet.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:15am

Re: Uh, creators are voters too
You forgot to mention paywalls.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:15am

Re: Uh, creators are voters too
It seems like you think "internet freedom" means the freedom to take anything you want

You're making stuff up again.

Others think "internet freedom" should mean the freedom to conduct business without being ripped off.

And still others think that "internet freedom" is more than that. Freedom form being ripped off, yes indeed! But not just in the context of business.

A 100% business-friendly internet would be one of the least free forms of internet I could imagine. It'd be, essentially, cable TV.

I want an internet where I can communicate freely and without fear, where I am not punished for the actions of others, where I am not subjected to tracking or monitoring except when I consent to it, and where I don't have to worry about the capricious abuse of the legal system to restrict my legitimate freedoms and rights.

If business can operate in that environment (and I know that it can), awesome! If business cannot, then business should go elsewhere.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jeremy Lyman (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:17am

Motivation at any cost.
the internet has been for its entire existence a source of innovation, and it is intellectual property that helps drive that innovation.

Much like in Terminator 2 when the T-1000 was "helping drive" the car by hanging on the back trying to kill the passengers inside. What? They drove faster than they would have didn't they?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:18am

Re: Re: Re:
Let's trash copyright, patents, and trademarks while we are at it

Honestly, why not? Do a hard-reset on intellectual property, and as problems crop up we can fix them in a reasoned way, in the context of the world today as opposed to the world 80-200 years ago.

(The exception might be Trademark, which is a consumer protection not intellectual property, but I'm not convinced we even need that.)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jason, 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:20am

fun with antecedents!!
So, you're totally all for those trying to enact laws with little or no ACTUAL facts/evidence to support them?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
weneedhelp (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:21am

Re:
" vote for the Republican ticket "

Ahh the good ole us vs them, dems repubs bullshit.

All parts of the same machine.

At least the repubs are in your face about the f'ed up shit they want to do. Those cockroaches are a little less afraid of the light.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jeremy Lyman (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:25am

Re: Re: Uh, creators are voters too
If they want a 100% business friendly Internet, they can go build their own. It'd be a ghost town, but it would be just what they want.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
SujaOfJauhnral (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:25am

Re:
Soon he is going to look like the Judge from The Wall by Pink Floyd.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Dark Helmet (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:25am

Re: Uh, creators are voters too
Bob, have you ever been right about anything ever? I imagine you walking down the street with your shoes on teh wrong feet, wearing a shirt for pants and vice versa, slamming into revolving doors going the wrong direction and then shaking your fists at these "turnwalls" that refuse to make you orgasm....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:26am

Re:
Because when you're free to be paid for what you say, you can say anything they pay you to.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
SujaOfJauhnral (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:27am

Re: Re: Re:
the support to those laws is almost entirely all "faith based" with little in the way of real world consideration taken into account.

FTFY
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:29am

Re:
"Well there's the answer for all of the Obama-bashers- vote for the Republican ticket and see how you like what comes next. The R's say they don't want government interference in the internet (net neutrality anyone?) and have (at the Congressional level) been supportive of industry agreements to reign in piracy. This will put people like Issa in a box when the industry acts to enact private, SOPA-like agreements and the R's platform is to be hands-off of regulating the internet."

- Well here's a crazy idea, how about none of the above. I'll go with the populace, we were sick of the Rs 4 years ago and now it seems people are sick of the Ds. So how about we do something crazy and move away from those parties completly.

Obama's AMA on Reddit didn't give me much more hope either. Both parties don't have a clue where we are going and how to get us there.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
SujaOfJauhnral (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:30am

Re: Hmmm...
Must've used his spellcheck. Or had someone proofread/edit/write it for him.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:33am

Re: Uh, creators are voters too
You seem to have confused Big Content, an industry of middle men that force actual creators to give up copyrights on their creation as collateral on loans, with the creators themselves. When we talk about rights and freedom we're talking about for the largest group of creators: the 'consumers' who aren't part of 'Big' anything. Those are the people whose rights and freedoms need protecting from 'Big Search' AND 'Big Content.'
[ link to this | view in thread ]
SujaOfJauhnral (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:34am

Re: Motivation at any cost.
Hahaha. This should become a meme.

the internet has been for its entire existence a source of innovation, and it is intellectual property that helps drive that innovation.

Just like in FPS games when you shoot a rocket up someone's ass and their bloodied corpse goes flying 500 meters into the air before crashing down and exploding in a shower of blood and guts.

They wouldn't have been able fly those 500 meters without that rocket, would they?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:34am

Re: Re: Re:
Let's trash copyright, patents, and trademarks while we are at it, and then let's see what happens.

Let's get real for a second. While many commenters here advocate eliminating these laws altogether, I don't think that's the majority opinion. The majority opinion appears to be that these laws have become too oppressive and deviated too far from their original purpose. As such, they should be reformed (made closer to what they used to be). Reformed is not the same as trashed.

I'm in the reform camp, personally. I think these laws, properly written, can be a great benefit to society. That said, I do not think they're properly written right now, and if the choice is between the laws as they are now and no laws at all, less harm is done by having no laws at all.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:34am

Re: Re:
suit yourself
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:37am

Re: Re:
The unfortunate truth is that first-past-the-post voting structure inevitably leads to a two-party system just like the one we've got now. No matter how many parties you start with, one by one they reach the point where they cannot win such an election and the votes essentially become votes for the winner among the other parties; and at that point voters will usually start hedging by voting elsewhere.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:37am

Re: Re: Re:
What's faith based about the assertion that if we don't pass a law that abridges our rights we'll have fewer abridged rights?

What's faith based about the assertion that a proposed law with no factual support for its purpose has no factual support for its purpose?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jeremy Lyman (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:38am

Re:
Because once we copyright all the essential building blocks it will be easier than ever for our dipshit users to pick out specifically crafted and approved snippets to express whatever they want! Provided, of course, they have a current subscription to English�*, French�*, German�*, Spanish�* or Latin�*. Only 34.99 a month for the first 6 months**!

*No mixing languages into unapproved sentences. Sentences that are mistrustful of the Languages� system, Copyright, or Intellectual Property in general are not allowed. Frequent phrases can and will be revoked and broken into smaller blocks, necessitating a separate charge for each.

**After 6 months rates rise to as much as you can pay and increase monthly by 4%.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Josef Anvil (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:38am

Re: Really? Yes really
"I certainly hope there is benefit from innovation/invention beyond the ability to own said creation. Otherwise I'm not sure why the first caveman tied a pointy rock onto a stick in the first place."

That was actually the first attempt at IP enforcement. The caveman tied a pointy rock to a stick and then charged all the other cavemen a fee to make their own. They all gladly paid and then killed the inventor. IP enforcement was not attempted again for many millennia.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
SujaOfJauhnral (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:38am

Re: Re: Motivation at any cost.
Doh. Should've been 'drive' a rocket, not shoot it. Oh well. Still covers the utter assrape and demolition their 'driving' has caused.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:39am

Gop do as i say corruption
http://youtu.be/B39W91O-rUg

View of teleprompter, proof of no rushing or scipted.....well..scripts
http://youtu.be/77W5OKStO5s

Its a sad day when a citizen of another country cares more for some of you americans, why is,nt techdirt covering this bullshit, at least a front page mention, regardless of your take on it,
[ link to this | view in thread ]
SujaOfJauhnral (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:40am

Re: Re: Motivation at any cost.
Doh. Should've been 'drive' a rocket not shoot it. Oh well. Still covers the utter assrape and demolition their 'driving' has caused.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:41am

Re: Re: I can throw around quotes too!
I'm surprised and pleased to hear that Dodd supports O'Connor's views on copyright.

+funny for that ;)

But indeed a very sane and reasonable view.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
SujaOfJauhnral (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:42am

Re: Re: Re: Motivation at any cost.
Someone should take their driver's license away.

(Getting laggy)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:44am

Re: Re: Motivation at any cost.
Bloody Flying Motherfucking Eagles?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jason, 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:45am

Re: Uh, creators are voters too
Nobody's ripping you off. We're the ones getting ripped off. You're the pirate. YOU ARE THE PIRATE.

See, the deal was you get copyrights, patents, etc, (in spite of the fact that those artificial rights infringe on my far more fundamental ,basic rights to freely copy, modify, and distribute whatever information I have lawful access to) IN EXCHANGE FOR promoting the progress.

Well, the deal's off. No promoting the progress, no copyright. No promoting the progress, no patent.

NO PP, NO IP! NO PP, NO IP!

Pirate! Blackguard!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lowestofthekeys (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:47am

Re: Re:
OR Senator Kelly from X-men

http://www.toyarchive.com/XMen/MovieSenatorMutant2Up1a.jpg
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lowestofthekeys (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:48am

Re: Re: Re:
FT-FT-FTFY:

I wish they'd make a Mike Masnick Tiger Beat poster.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:49am

Re:
* "cares more about your country then some of you americans"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
SujaOfJauhnral (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:52am

Re: Re:
What happened to the rest of the languages?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 10:52am

'I agree wholeheartedly with my friends in the Republican Party that we must protect the free flow of information on the internet while also protecting American innovators. It is imperative to our national economy and our national identity that we protect an internet that works for everyone.'

Given howm hard the copyright maximalists are working to control the Internet, the above equated to ;_
The free flow of information is what we let you have, after we have decided to publish it and you have paid for it. And by the way we need to control all your devices so that you can't cheat.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jeremy Lyman (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 11:03am

Re: Re: Re:
Other languages are deemed piratical* and Languages� system users are prohibited from using them, doing so would be grounds for subscription termination.

*Until we change our minds and annex said language, at which point only Languages� users will be allowed its use.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ruben, 30 Aug 2012 @ 11:05am

Re: Re: Re: Uh, creators are voters too
This raises an interesting point. If businesses think that this internet is such a terrible thing, then why don't they make a better one?

Oh wait, I remember. They grew complacent and apathetic and as a result are inept and too blinded by hubris and their own delusions of grandeur to do anything of relevance.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 11:06am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Honestly, why not? Do a hard-reset on intellectual property, and as problems crop up we can fix them in a reasoned way, in the context of the world today as opposed to the world 80-200 years ago."

People are still quoting Ben Franklin around here to justify mouthing off to the cops. There's no money in that one.

A "hard reset" as you call it would mean killing industries generating billions to the curb, hoping like hell we make it up somewhere else. Just doing that is entirely faith based, and therefore not a very good move.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lowestofthekeys (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 11:07am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
AC troll, you should be happy...I made this just for you

http://i45.tinypic.com/2chq906.png

Behold, a Tiger Beat poster for Masnick haters.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 11:07am

Re: Re:
The ron paul movement is a product of internet freedom, you may not agree with him on certain stuff, but we use the same tool and we all have a right to that tool, if you want to bring focus to internet freedom, im pretty sure the supporters of liberty would not be a bad idea

Liberty on everything
[ link to this | view in thread ]
silverscarcat (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 11:11am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"People are still quoting Ben Franklin around here to justify mouthing off to the cops. There's no money in that one."

Why shouldn't we quote someone who's a lot smarter than any cop could ever hope to be?

"A "hard reset" as you call it would mean killing industries generating billions to the curb"

What industries?

The Tech industry (which DOES generate billions and new jobs) would prosper.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
silverscarcat (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 11:12am

bob!
Hey, bob, how ya doing? Snarling at the mouth again?

Didn't we give you some rabies shots last time?

No? Well, too bad, go to the vet and come back when you're calmed down, 'k? Thanks.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
silverscarcat (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 11:16am

Re:
"Without Mother Copyright, where would we be?"

In Mother Russia?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
JEDIDIAH, 30 Aug 2012 @ 11:19am

Cue the comparisons...
Hollywood can't help molesting and corrupting a good copyright law.

Take out the term extensions and the heavy fine for small scale copyists and remove the restrictions on cracking and THEN you've got something balanced.

That would be the copyright of my youth.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jeremy Lyman (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 11:21am

Re: Re: Uh, creators are voters too
NO PP, NO IP! NO PP, NO IP!

I feel like I heard this through the bathroom door when my nephew was potty-training.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
JEDIDAH, 30 Aug 2012 @ 11:22am

The Franklin Principle
OK then.

Reset copyright and Patents to 1790 or so.

That's perfectly "safe" despite all of your crocodile tears. Genuine innovation would be protected. Creativity would be encouraged.

The fiefdoms of Disney and Apple might be at risk. However that is not such a bad thing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
JEDIDIAH, 30 Aug 2012 @ 11:25am

Artificial Rights expire.
> It seems like you think "internet freedom" means the freedom to take anything you want, whenever you want.

Yup. 28 years for art. 20 years for inventions.

A good bit of my multimedia stockpile should be fair game for sharing. This goes triple for works where all of the relevant artists are DEAD already.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
JEDIDIAH, 30 Aug 2012 @ 11:29am

Beat me to it...
I need to pull a copy of that onto my phone so I can keep it with my "E Pleb Nista" snippet.

The whole thing (America Rock) takes up about 367M.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
silverscarcat (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 11:30am

Re:
That first one made me sick.

Urgh...

I wish I had more money, I'd move to Sweden.

Yeah, I'm an American and I'm sick of this country and hate the path it's taking.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nom, 30 Aug 2012 @ 11:38am

Re: Uh, creators are voters too
You know, your first paragraph was decent. Not to say I agree with it completely, but you presented what I would consider a valid argument.

And then I read your second paragraph, and did a spit take. Went from being reasonable to potentially retarded rather quickly.

Sorry about calling your potentially retarded, I really could not think of a less insulting word or phrase to describe the second paragraph. Spent like 5 minutes trying to do so.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lowestofthekeys (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 11:39am

Re: Re: Uh, creators are voters too
I heard that if you say "paywall" 5 times in front of a mirror, bob appears and non-sensically relates whatever you're doing to supporting Big Search.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Karl (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 11:43am

Re: Uh, creators are voters too
Because you can't tax piracy and the other "sharing" that this site continues to endorse.

First: This site endorses legal sharing, so if there is money involved, it would be taxed.

Second: You're the same one who (falsely) believes "Big Search" and "Big Hardware" are the ones behind "Big Piracy." Now, both "Big Search" and "Big Hardware" do pay taxes - in fact, they pay far more taxes than "Big Content." So, by your own definitions, you can tax "piracy."

You never get sick of being wrong, do you, Bob?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 11:51am

Re:
Keep fucking that chicken
[ link to this | view in thread ]
dennis deems, 30 Aug 2012 @ 12:03pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I think you meant to write "kicking industries generating billions to the curb". "Kick to the curb" is a well-known metaphorical idiom. If there are really people saying "kill to the curb" they are confusedly mixing metaphors.

Any industry that "generates" billions simply by virtue of the concept of intellectual property -- that is to say, that could not survive absent that poisonous concept -- deserves to die.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
dennis deems, 30 Aug 2012 @ 12:07pm

Re: Re: Re: Re:
I think these laws, properly written, can be a great benefit to society.

How so?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
MrWilson, 30 Aug 2012 @ 12:15pm

Re: Cue the comparisons...
Heck, sound recordings and movies weren't originally covered under copyright either. At this point, I'd settle for returning to the original Copyright Act of 1790. 14 years plus 14 on renewal.

I'll start worrying about protecting the "property"/monopolies of wealthy corporations as soon as we solve society's real problems like inequality in education, employment, and healthcare.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
gorehound (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 12:16pm

Re: Who needs facts anyways?
Chris Dodd is a piece of shit.Democrats also want to screw us when it comes to the Internet.Equal Opportunity Greedsters.
Boycott the MAFIAA
Support INDIE Art.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 12:20pm

Re: Re:
For those of you wondering, this is happening righ now, forth day of the gop
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Fanic, 30 Aug 2012 @ 12:24pm

I hate having to choose between:
Republican: AKA: Slowly removing all civil liberties and freedoms.
Democrats: AKA: Slowly converting the U.S.A. into a socialist republic.

Both options are not particularly good in my opinion.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
silverscarcat (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 12:38pm

Re: Re: Re:
What? Seriously?

Where's the news networks? They could eat this up all day long and kill any credibility...

Wait! Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert! Do it man!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
mudlock (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 12:46pm

Re: Re: Re:
Yup. Time for a better voting structure.

http://www.electology.org/approval-voting
[ link to this | view in thread ]
cosmicrat (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 12:46pm

Back to "theft" again?
It's a small point of semantics, but didn't Dodd back away from the term "theft" in comments earlier this year, saying it was divisive and not in keeping with their new strategy of engaging advocates of online freedom?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
mudlock (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 12:47pm

Re: Re: Re:
Yup. Time for a better voting structure.

http://www.electology.org/approval-voting
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Simple Mind (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 12:48pm

how crafty is Dodd, anyway
Could Dodd be trying to poison the well? That is, he actually wants the Dems to win.

I don't think he is actually smart enough to think of that himself. But perhaps his masters are.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Shmerl, 30 Aug 2012 @ 12:56pm

Either way, the MPAA's support pretty much shows that the Republican's "internet freedom" platform isn't serious.

And what parties are really serious about it? May just some individuals in the congress, but no party as a whole.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 12:58pm

Heres a more extensive look at what happenend yesterday
http://youtu.be/jw1Pz0mzLV4
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 1:03pm

Re: Re: Re: Re:
Hahaha, major media are part of the problem, what a sorry state
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 1:04pm

Re: Re: Re: Re:
Would love to see jon stewarts take on this
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 1:06pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
With copyright, by ensuring that works unambiguously enter the public domain and become available for the use of everybody.

With patents, by discouraging people and companies form keeping their inventions a secret, thus encouraging the distribution of new discoveries.

With trademarks, by preventing companies from intentionally tricking consumers into buying one thing when they intended to buy something else.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 1:10pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Why?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 1:13pm

Re: Re: Uh, creators are voters too
LOL, Google has offshore tax dodges out the wazoo...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Divide by Zero (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 1:38pm

Re: Uh, creators are voters too
"You could care less about the rights and freedom of the creators"

You're right, I could care less, since I care a great deal. But because I care a great deal about creators, I would quite like to see gatekeepers - sorry, Big Gatekeeping (just to translate for you) kept out of copywrite, and let the ACTUAL creators have a reasonable amount of time to monetise before they then are given further incentive to create something new.

You on the other seem like you COULDN'T care less about creators - it's all about Big Gatekeepings ability to make Big Money off Small Creators.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Loki, 30 Aug 2012 @ 2:01pm

Re: Re: Who needs facts anyways?
Personally I didn't bother reading anything Dodd had to say. The only useful data to be taken away from his comments is the knowledge that a staunch "democrat" supporting part of a "republican" agenda simply shows how interchangeable the two parties have really become.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 2:24pm

Human stupidity is infinite.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 2:25pm

Probably wishful thinking but...
I think at this point the best, and perhaps only hope, is that Obama's slip-up a while back, about how in his second term he can do what he wants, means that he plans to grow a backbone and actually try and stand up to corporate owners of the country for once.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 3:11pm

The Republican party's reaction to Todd Akin shows how it feels about freedom of speech.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 3:13pm

Re:
Left-wing future: 1984.
Right-wing future: The Handmaid's Tale.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nicholas, 30 Aug 2012 @ 3:54pm

He's telling the truth
..."from online theft while underscoring the critical importance of protecting internet freedom." He doesn't mean "underscore" like the rest of us would mean it - he means "underscore" as in, "soft, incidental background music". He doesn't mean "critical importance" as in "indispensable; essential importance" - he means it as "importance to its critics".. He's a media guy after all. Tl;dr Translation: ..."from online theft whilst reducing the noise made by its critics to a soft background hum."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
JMT (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 5:25pm

Re: Re: Re: Uh, creators are voters too
And the movie studios and record labels don't? Sorry, given their well known unethical accounting practices, tax avoidance is a very safe bet.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2012 @ 6:07pm

Re: Re: Who needs facts anyways?
No, it's just anti-competition motivated abuse of the legal system (in my opinion).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jeremy Lyman (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 8:08pm

Re: Re: Uh, creators are voters too
I didn't mean to detract from the gravity of your statement with a comedic riff. Big corporations are definitely pirating the pubic domain for private gain. I want to take your comment out behind the middle school and get it pregnant. Oh yeah.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Karl (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 9:03pm

Re: Re: Re: Uh, creators are voters too
Google has offshore tax dodges out the wazoo...

Major labels have been dodging taxes since the 70's:
http://www.shit-fi.com/interviews/AaronMilenski

And, according to "Hollywood accounting," Return of the Jedi never made a profit:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110912/13500315912/hollywood-accounting-darth-vader-not- getting-paid-because-return-jedi-still-isnt-profitable.shtml

Even if Google does have "offshore tax dodges," they still pay more taxes than the RIAA or MPAA clients.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Karl (profile), 30 Aug 2012 @ 9:17pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Uh, creators are voters too
And, according to "Hollywood accounting,"

...not to mention the film subsidies from state governments, which in 2010 totaled $1.5 billion; or the tax breaks from the federal government, which totaled $30 million.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 31 Aug 2012 @ 12:43am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
If said industries are generating billions why the fuck are we paying for laws to protect them on the faith-based claim that they're all dying?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Tim Griffiths (profile), 31 Aug 2012 @ 2:12am

Re: Re: Re: Uh, creators are voters too
"Pirating the public domain for private gain"

That's a hell of a sentence, I may pirate it off you for future debates. I honestly think this really needs to be more of a talking point, that the social contract on which modern copyrights are founded has been broken. By lobbying for extensions to copyright that have left us with a century that has a ghost town of public domain works.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
martyburns (profile), 31 Aug 2012 @ 4:31am

Re: Re: Uh, creators are voters too
+1 for Big Gatekeeping
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 31 Aug 2012 @ 7:31am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"The Tech industry (which DOES generate billions and new jobs) would prosper."

No, YOU THINK that would happen. There is no proof it would. It's equally likely that they stop major innovations altogether (why invest in what will be stolen 10 minutes later) and instead we get stuck near or around the current technology levels, very slowly plodding forward as someone makes a 0.00001% incremental improvement, probably by accident.

See, you don't know, and I don't know either. Your assertion that X or Y would happen is "faith based" with absolutely no basis in fact.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 31 Aug 2012 @ 7:34am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Any industry that "generates" billions simply by virtue of the concept of intellectual property -- that is to say, that could not survive absent that poisonous concept -- deserves to die."

Example, let's look at movies.

How many billions of dollars of ticket sales? What happens if the moment a new movie is released, it becomes public domain and any and every movie house who wants it can play it for any price, without paying for the content?

How many minutes do you think the movie industry would last after that?

(Oh, and for the nit pickers in the audience, yes, some people would still be making movies. But even the business models for indie films would be ruined, effectively leaving us with hobby films).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
@DBCOOOPA, 31 Aug 2012 @ 1:28pm

SOPA
As awful as the republican position on freedom of expression is, you shouldn't get the impression that democrats support internet freedom by any stretch of the imagination. Here's one of SOPA's largest supporters: Debbie Wasserman Schultz. And that probably stems from the 70,000 dollars she received from movie and tv lobbyists. Currently, David Seaman is planning to run for her seat in 2014. You should look him up on twitter: @d_seaman. He's running on a very pro-internet platform. Here's her record on SOPA: http://projects.propublica.org/sopa/W000797. Don't forget that it isn't just about freedom to express yourself. SOPA and PIPA were job killing bills that threatened the integrity and economy of internet businesses. When it comes to supporting the internet, you're going to have to dig a little deeper than just picking a political party. At least Sweden has the Pirate Party.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 31 Aug 2012 @ 5:15pm

Re: SOPA
If he wins, there will be Seaman in her seat.
[ link to this | view in thread ]