Saw this BS already back in 2006/2007 when some MP's in Toronto were trying to justify bills to extend police powers to enter into your home via the Internet.
Pathetic part, they always use "child porn" as the trigger to get votes, but never mention how under CURRENT laws they have been busting people for actual child pornography WITHOUT invading the privacy of our homes!
The whole rant about piracy is partly to distract politicians and the public from their past price fixing behaviours. We wouldn't want the public knowing the labels, claiming foul against file sharing folks, were ripping off the consumer beyond just 2-hit-plus-filler releases, would we?
Then again, given how quickly RIAA jumps at chances to treat the consumers as criminals, threaten people (proven guilty or not) via extortion, so the labels can continue to shit on both the artist and consumer... I highly doubt the members of these "trade" organizations (The Former Four Families -- EMI going under UMG's wing now) care if this gets out.
Actually enjoy using your wirestrippers. You can wire whatever you like. If you screw up and fail, it's all on your head as your insurance company will not pay you a dime.
Anyone can create music and the public will decide what is good and what is not.
There are many people who do better as hobbyists than professionals (as programmers, musicians, actors, electricians, etc...).
They won't maintain shit by restricting, it's only to block competition!
Talent should NOT be judged by some corporation who's bottom line depends on exploiting talent. There are far better musicians on YouTube than some "professionals" as you call them who are under the employ of the labels.
You will NOT end up with meaninglessness because of a lack of restriction.
Here's the problem with capitalism in this day and age, it doesn't work because it isn't capitalism if you have to have laws to restrict who can compete!
Music is no different. If you have to restrict who can compete (ie: those willing to sign away their rights to their art), instead of relying on actual talent (those unwilling to sign away their rights) then you do not have a free market. You have a monopoly.
The Internet did more for culture and creativity than the labels ever did. Hollywood only had creativity when they had the balls to screw Edison's MPCC group. Now look how's acting like their one-time nemesis?
Do you have any real data? Silly studies from an anti-consumer monopoly like the RIAA members hardly qualify [especially when the 'facts' cannot be replicated and sources cannot be identified, so the claims go unquantified, unverified, and unbelieved - except by those in Congress/House of Commons/House of Lords purchased by lobbyists].
Works both ways. I would trust the SkyIsRising report because at least it is transparent. It doesn't use upper echelon numbers from 1986 counterfeit studies (which also provide worse-case-all-hell-breaking-loose numbers).
And if they can get beyond the government-enforced payment concepts (levies/licenses/taxes) that artist groups seem to come up with (note: groups != individual artists trying creative things).
Are you sure? I've dealt with BoG meetings where they were "In Camera" meaning no one could attend who wasn't invited and it could not be recorded or discussed outside said meeting.
Considering it was the BoG for a dorm/sub-college for a university, I found it strange they would NOT want to include students who's dorm fees provide them with the ability to make changes they propose.
Anyhow, the rule was if In Camera, you could not discuss or anything. You had to wait for what was agreed to be released. Which meant you can't record, audio or video, and share publicly.
If caught, it was implied there would be strong repercussions, legal ones. That's what we were told by a student on the BoG who said she could not say anything discussed. She's not stupid or naive either, so I trust she was correct on that.
If they are meeting with Google it is to see how they can use the data Google has.
Again, they don't want to listen to consumers, they'd rather pay $$ to bribe Congress and Google for data on consumers.
It's just to update their models on "what's the latest trend" so they can reproduce it.
And the open meeting won't fly because you want people there who understand technology and benefit from change (adapt). They might show up if Gene Simmons was there, as he clearly supports their legacy views. But OKGo or Wilco would be out of the question.
Don't hold your breath Mike, but if it does come to pass, make it open to the Internet where we can ask questions too!
It's funny, the comments on the NYT post rip his arguments to pieces.
I wonder if he even reads them (I seriously doubt it).
Mike, you and rant and provide logic all you want. The readers here know this already. We don't have enough of the general public reading your debunking. General public folk don't go searching for things, they see whatever catches their eye, such as Sherman's post in the NYT, which many will read.
The good part is that people who read Sherman's post might read the comments and see Sherman's arguments debunked. Maybe those people will be smart enough to let their MP/Congress-person/Senate Rep know the arguments of the RIAA/MPAA are not valid.
Maybe then people will search, find TechDirt (among other sites) and really educate themselves.
I am saying your voice needs an even bigger megaphone to be heard by the general population. Wouldn't it be great if people were redirected to TechDirt or TorrentFreak? If Anonymous is going to DDoS why not redirect to valid sources of information and debunking?
I don't think it's censorship, it's just reinforcing half-duplex communication mode. You can't have half-duplex if the one device is constantly hogging the communication medium, leaving the other devices stuck in arbitration mode!
Maybe some who can post on NYT could link to TechDirt?
Billy Bragg and Jon Newton (of www.p2pnet.net) setup a website a2f2a.com with the intention of connecting artists and fans directly. The motto was artists deserve to be paid and fans want to pay them. (Of course the implication is that you have something WORTHY of being paid for in the first place -- just because you create something does not mean people should buy it, they need a reason to and if it is good, they WILL pay for it! If you give more reasons to buy it they will PAY MORE too!)
The hope was to engage artists and fans to figure out a means so artists can (not "must") be paid for their work while the fans obtain what the perceive as good value for their money. We hoped to come up with business models.
It fell apart though, as Bragg and Indianna Gregg were focused on the Internet Tax/Levy/License concept and could not see how it would fail:
1) No guarantee artists will be paid fairly (just like SOCAN can't guarantee that now)
2) Software, Gameing, Movie, and News industries would follow suit - making the levy/tax/license unaffordable to most
3) Could not successfully manage which sites were accessed, who downloaded, who didn't (why should someone pay if they don't fileshare)
4) Could not understand that no matter what you charge, it still won't be enough
So on and on we went, back and forth and we know other artists read it, but didn't post anything. Mostly it was back and forth between Gregg or Bragg and the fans/consumers/techies (mostly the latter).
We did have a visit from a bassist Steve something. a2f2a.com is gone so I can't look it up. Sorry.
The point is, we tried very hard to bring the artists up to speed on why levies/taxes/licensing just does not work and mandatory licensing is criminalizing users who may not even fileshare.
This took place in 2009 I think. Check www.p2pnet.net for the dates - search a2f2a.com.
It's definitely worth trying again, because we'd like to help them, of course. Too bad I didn't capture all those posts on a2f2a.com before it was shutdown (last year sometime).
They don the mask, but do they believe in the cause?
Let's not forget politicians are experts at BSing people to gain support. I know, some actually have integrity, but how do we know the Ron Paul's from the Mitt Romney's? Meaning how do we know who's legit, with integrity, and who's just spinning yarn, saying what people want to hear?
Politicos are not stupid, they know the youth love rebellion and the best way to connect with them is to provide the image (or illusion?) of supporting what the youth support (aka: Anonymous).
DDoS is one thing, a form of sensorship if you will, but those on the receiving end are simply being given a taste of their own medicine anyhow.
Cohesion is better. If that takes DDoS's to do that, then so be it! We need to align ourselves with a common goal.
We can't be natural iron ore, domains pointing in all direction. We need to be even stronger than neodymium. We need to be like an electromagnet at the scrapyard. All domains aligned, in a Hallback array, so none of our sub-collective forces repel one another.
That's what we need more than anything!
Too bad we can't DDoS the cable and airwaves. Imagine Synapse (movie Antitrust) broadcasting a message like that, all mobile devices, all broadcast mediums, and all websites.
If Anonymous did that, you'd have everyone's attention (I'm certain the apathetic general population in US/Canada would certainly wake the hell up if you interrupted their favourite shows).
I want full publishing, distribution, licensing, performance rights, and copyright, ownership and control over every copyrighted song and video currently owned by RIAA/MPAA members. Secondly, I want full control and ownership over every patent controlled/owned by Intellectual Ventures, Kodak, Novell, Motorolla, Apple, Sun, Microsoft, etc..
When the bullshit lawsuits stop over "IP violations" and "copyright violations" (and they would because I'd own all of it) only then will I give you my signature and support.
PS: The DOJ cannot act without my permission either.
Seriously though, talk about desperation, paying people to sign in support of legislation.
Well Frankie Sullivan, how about writing something new that sells if you want to make money. You know, work for your income like the rest of us.
No other industry gets paid for past work and people who think that's a business model, especially in this day and age, have no clue how to survive.
Sullivan, you are not a Survivor, pun intended. Get over it. You should be thankful they chose your song Eye of the Tiger, as that gains popularity for your music. Yeah, some will download, but others will search for their cassettes, realize they don't have a functioning tape deck, and possibly buy it on iTunes.
That's free advertising for your old work. Maybe drawing attention to yourself in the process and maybe, just maybe, people will look at what new material you've written.
Or are you just like Novel and Kodak? Can't innovate and create, so your tired old butt decides to litigate!
Get over yourself man, grab your guitar, tease your hair, and write something new! Continue working if you want to be paid!
There has to be a way to acquire the real data, the financial records (both legal and otherwise), the actual sales, the memos depicting cost-cutting decisions with dates on them, the profits, the shares given to artists, etc...
We need the damn data (not a few examples) to back up all of this and make it widely known that companies like UMG are full of it and out to destroy competition.
Why is it their actions are not considered a breach of anti-trust laws?
There MUST be a way to bring those companies into litigation, the CEO's themselves, cease all their holdings, all the documents, have loads of volunteers going through them, and it MUST be public. It must companies like UMG are abusing the law, breaking the law, and not being punished.
They punished Microsoft for anti-competitive behaviour, the broke-up Standard Oil and AT&T, and yet they won't touch the entertainment industry (yes I know, strong tie$$$ with democrats).
Something has to be done. At what point will the public at large stand up and demand criminal proceedings? We know the banking industry deserves it but it won't happen because they have high positions in the current US administration. But what about Hollywood? Yes they have the DOJ, but isn't there anyone in the administration with integrity?
And what will it take to wake the masses up to get off their asses, stop watching American Idol or House Swapping or whatever crap is only TV, and do something to help themselves for once?
It has to be huge, we know apathy is strong in the populous, and we also know people don't want to risk being sprayed with a water canon or pepper spray or sound canon or rubber bullets for trying to right what is wrong in the government. What will it take to make them risk it?
When we have that answer, then we can punish the banks, the media conglomerates (studios/labels, etc..), and the 'defense' industries.
Maybe have we wake up the masses we can accomplish some real change.
Would never work. UMG is too smart for that. Whether you owned it or not, they (and the judge) would not justify the damages in such a case. If you were a large corporation, yes, but because you are little, they'd tell you off, counter sue you for entrapment, bankrupt you with legal fees, and still claim copyright ownership to your works.
And they'd rake in over a million dollars using your work without your permission, but claim they lost $10 million because you posted it up on YouTube. Then they'd drag you into court again on copyright infringement claims, with statutory damages of $150 000 per play per upload ($150 00 x Y-plays x Z-thousands of accounts).
Of course they are happy, not because of removal of infringing content, but because of removal of competition. No variety (the spice of life) permitted, except that provided by the Corporate Content Industry.
You know if Anonymous really wanted to do something to stop this BS they'd actually hack the servers of the media companies, all of them linked with labels and studios. Get the real data on sales, layoffs, price-fixing discussions, costs, payments to artists (should be short list)... all over the last 60 years.
Compile it into simple charts with major events highlighted on the charts (ie: Internet open to public, IRC sharing starts, Napster starts, DMCA publicized, DMCA passed, law suits begin, the Pirate Bay debacle, etc...
It would be VERY interesting to see how the events compare with costs and distribution numbers, store layoffs and such.
I'm willing to bet such data is all safely hidden for a reason (contradiction maybe??).
But if Anonymous can easily hack a "security" firm, they should be able to hack into record labels and studio files and gather all the data. Add to that history of file transfer traffic.
Yes, they'd need something like MegaUpload to store all that data, but once there, once sorted (figure maybe 3 months of clever attacks, including bribing people to copy data to USB keys or portable HDD's, then figure 3 - 5 months sorting data and forming charts and points easy to understand for average person), release it all via all media outlets (if you've hacked them leave a rootkit permitting a mass email spam, website broadcast spam/hack, and even if temporary, a broadcast image/audio file to summarize the data) and websites so all the info is out there, instead of a simple source like Wikileaks the US could shutdown.
Do all that, you'd have everyone understanding the fraudulent activity going on. Yeah, you'd freak out cyber experts and Congress would want a knee-jerk reaction but you'd definitely have the Entertainment industry by the shorts and curlies.
No one would believe them, except for the bought/paidfor congress members, but hey, enough people calling and questioning or demanding refusal of support to studios/labels, you might get the truth known and maybe correct this copyright/IP mess (Yeah, they are considered the same by the Entertainment industry - funny that).
On the post: Canadian Politician: You're Either In Favor Of Letting The Gov't Spy On Your Internet Usage... Or You're For Child Pornography
Re:
On the post: Canadian Politician: You're Either In Favor Of Letting The Gov't Spy On Your Internet Usage... Or You're For Child Pornography
Trying this again are they?
Pathetic part, they always use "child porn" as the trigger to get votes, but never mention how under CURRENT laws they have been busting people for actual child pornography WITHOUT invading the privacy of our homes!
On the post: How Much Of The Collapse Of Recorded Music Sales Revenue Was Due To The End Of Illegal Price Fixing?
Shadow boxing
Then again, given how quickly RIAA jumps at chances to treat the consumers as criminals, threaten people (proven guilty or not) via extortion, so the labels can continue to shit on both the artist and consumer... I highly doubt the members of these "trade" organizations (The Former Four Families -- EMI going under UMG's wing now) care if this gets out.
On the post: Always A Gatekeeper: RIAA Backs .music Proposal... If It's Only Limited To 'Accredited' Musicians
Re:
Anyone can create music and the public will decide what is good and what is not.
There are many people who do better as hobbyists than professionals (as programmers, musicians, actors, electricians, etc...).
They won't maintain shit by restricting, it's only to block competition!
Talent should NOT be judged by some corporation who's bottom line depends on exploiting talent. There are far better musicians on YouTube than some "professionals" as you call them who are under the employ of the labels.
You will NOT end up with meaninglessness because of a lack of restriction.
Here's the problem with capitalism in this day and age, it doesn't work because it isn't capitalism if you have to have laws to restrict who can compete!
Music is no different. If you have to restrict who can compete (ie: those willing to sign away their rights to their art), instead of relying on actual talent (those unwilling to sign away their rights) then you do not have a free market. You have a monopoly.
The Internet did more for culture and creativity than the labels ever did. Hollywood only had creativity when they had the balls to screw Edison's MPCC group. Now look how's acting like their one-time nemesis?
Sorry, but you are flat out wrong!
On the post: Always A Gatekeeper: RIAA Backs .music Proposal... If It's Only Limited To 'Accredited' Musicians
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Works both ways. I would trust the SkyIsRising report because at least it is transparent. It doesn't use upper echelon numbers from 1986 counterfeit studies (which also provide worse-case-all-hell-breaking-loose numbers).
On the post: Open Offer To Chris Dodd & Cary Sherman: Meet The Internet Online And In The Open
Re: Re: An Alternative Suggestion
On the post: Open Offer To Chris Dodd & Cary Sherman: Meet The Internet Online And In The Open
Re: Re: Re: Private Negotiation with Google
Considering it was the BoG for a dorm/sub-college for a university, I found it strange they would NOT want to include students who's dorm fees provide them with the ability to make changes they propose.
Anyhow, the rule was if In Camera, you could not discuss or anything. You had to wait for what was agreed to be released. Which meant you can't record, audio or video, and share publicly.
If caught, it was implied there would be strong repercussions, legal ones. That's what we were told by a student on the BoG who said she could not say anything discussed. She's not stupid or naive either, so I trust she was correct on that.
But I could be wrong, as she could be wrong.
On the post: Open Offer To Chris Dodd & Cary Sherman: Meet The Internet Online And In The Open
Re: Private Negotiation with Google
Yes Google has money, but the RIAA/MPAA can collect more and have more lawyer friends (their only friends?) than Google.
I doubt Anonymous would support Google in such a situation given Google's data mining actions.
On the post: Open Offer To Chris Dodd & Cary Sherman: Meet The Internet Online And In The Open
Google's Data
Again, they don't want to listen to consumers, they'd rather pay $$ to bribe Congress and Google for data on consumers.
It's just to update their models on "what's the latest trend" so they can reproduce it.
And the open meeting won't fly because you want people there who understand technology and benefit from change (adapt). They might show up if Gene Simmons was there, as he clearly supports their legacy views. But OKGo or Wilco would be out of the question.
Don't hold your breath Mike, but if it does come to pass, make it open to the Internet where we can ask questions too!
On the post: RIAA Totally Out Of Touch: Lashes Out At Google, Wikipedia And Everyone Who Protested SOPA/PIPA
Comments on NYT
I wonder if he even reads them (I seriously doubt it).
Mike, you and rant and provide logic all you want. The readers here know this already. We don't have enough of the general public reading your debunking. General public folk don't go searching for things, they see whatever catches their eye, such as Sherman's post in the NYT, which many will read.
The good part is that people who read Sherman's post might read the comments and see Sherman's arguments debunked. Maybe those people will be smart enough to let their MP/Congress-person/Senate Rep know the arguments of the RIAA/MPAA are not valid.
Maybe then people will search, find TechDirt (among other sites) and really educate themselves.
I am saying your voice needs an even bigger megaphone to be heard by the general population. Wouldn't it be great if people were redirected to TechDirt or TorrentFreak? If Anonymous is going to DDoS why not redirect to valid sources of information and debunking?
I don't think it's censorship, it's just reinforcing half-duplex communication mode. You can't have half-duplex if the one device is constantly hogging the communication medium, leaving the other devices stuck in arbitration mode!
Maybe some who can post on NYT could link to TechDirt?
On the post: Canadian Songwriters Want To Embrace File Sharing, But Do They Have The Right Approach?
We tried with a2f2a.com (gone now)
The hope was to engage artists and fans to figure out a means so artists can (not "must") be paid for their work while the fans obtain what the perceive as good value for their money. We hoped to come up with business models.
It fell apart though, as Bragg and Indianna Gregg were focused on the Internet Tax/Levy/License concept and could not see how it would fail:
1) No guarantee artists will be paid fairly (just like SOCAN can't guarantee that now)
2) Software, Gameing, Movie, and News industries would follow suit - making the levy/tax/license unaffordable to most
3) Could not successfully manage which sites were accessed, who downloaded, who didn't (why should someone pay if they don't fileshare)
4) Could not understand that no matter what you charge, it still won't be enough
So on and on we went, back and forth and we know other artists read it, but didn't post anything. Mostly it was back and forth between Gregg or Bragg and the fans/consumers/techies (mostly the latter).
We did have a visit from a bassist Steve something. a2f2a.com is gone so I can't look it up. Sorry.
The point is, we tried very hard to bring the artists up to speed on why levies/taxes/licensing just does not work and mandatory licensing is criminalizing users who may not even fileshare.
This took place in 2009 I think. Check www.p2pnet.net for the dates - search a2f2a.com.
It's definitely worth trying again, because we'd like to help them, of course. Too bad I didn't capture all those posts on a2f2a.com before it was shutdown (last year sometime).
On the post: Bulgarian MPs Wear Anonymous/Guy Fawkes Masks To Protest ACTA
Are they sincere?
Let's not forget politicians are experts at BSing people to gain support. I know, some actually have integrity, but how do we know the Ron Paul's from the Mitt Romney's? Meaning how do we know who's legit, with integrity, and who's just spinning yarn, saying what people want to hear?
Politicos are not stupid, they know the youth love rebellion and the best way to connect with them is to provide the image (or illusion?) of supporting what the youth support (aka: Anonymous).
DDoS is one thing, a form of sensorship if you will, but those on the receiving end are simply being given a taste of their own medicine anyhow.
Cohesion is better. If that takes DDoS's to do that, then so be it! We need to align ourselves with a common goal.
We can't be natural iron ore, domains pointing in all direction. We need to be even stronger than neodymium. We need to be like an electromagnet at the scrapyard. All domains aligned, in a Hallback array, so none of our sub-collective forces repel one another.
That's what we need more than anything!
Too bad we can't DDoS the cable and airwaves. Imagine Synapse (movie Antitrust) broadcasting a message like that, all mobile devices, all broadcast mediums, and all websites.
If Anonymous did that, you'd have everyone's attention (I'm certain the apathetic general population in US/Canada would certainly wake the hell up if you interrupted their favourite shows).
On the post: CreativeAmerica Literally Resorts To Buying Signatures
Sign Me Up
I want full publishing, distribution, licensing, performance rights, and copyright, ownership and control over every copyrighted song and video currently owned by RIAA/MPAA members. Secondly, I want full control and ownership over every patent controlled/owned by Intellectual Ventures, Kodak, Novell, Motorolla, Apple, Sun, Microsoft, etc..
When the bullshit lawsuits stop over "IP violations" and "copyright violations" (and they would because I'd own all of it) only then will I give you my signature and support.
PS: The DOJ cannot act without my permission either.
Seriously though, talk about desperation, paying people to sign in support of legislation.
On the post: Like Clockwork: Copyright Holders Mistakenly Freak Out About Presidential Candidates Using Their Music
Getting paid?
No other industry gets paid for past work and people who think that's a business model, especially in this day and age, have no clue how to survive.
Sullivan, you are not a Survivor, pun intended. Get over it. You should be thankful they chose your song Eye of the Tiger, as that gains popularity for your music. Yeah, some will download, but others will search for their cassettes, realize they don't have a functioning tape deck, and possibly buy it on iTunes.
That's free advertising for your old work. Maybe drawing attention to yourself in the process and maybe, just maybe, people will look at what new material you've written.
Or are you just like Novel and Kodak? Can't innovate and create, so your tired old butt decides to litigate!
Get over yourself man, grab your guitar, tease your hair, and write something new! Continue working if you want to be paid!
On the post: Apparently Veoh Isn't Dead Enough For Universal Music; Asks For Rehearing Of Its Bogus Copyright Lawsuit
Need proof
We need the damn data (not a few examples) to back up all of this and make it widely known that companies like UMG are full of it and out to destroy competition.
Why is it their actions are not considered a breach of anti-trust laws?
There MUST be a way to bring those companies into litigation, the CEO's themselves, cease all their holdings, all the documents, have loads of volunteers going through them, and it MUST be public. It must companies like UMG are abusing the law, breaking the law, and not being punished.
They punished Microsoft for anti-competitive behaviour, the broke-up Standard Oil and AT&T, and yet they won't touch the entertainment industry (yes I know, strong tie$$$ with democrats).
Something has to be done. At what point will the public at large stand up and demand criminal proceedings? We know the banking industry deserves it but it won't happen because they have high positions in the current US administration. But what about Hollywood? Yes they have the DOJ, but isn't there anyone in the administration with integrity?
And what will it take to wake the masses up to get off their asses, stop watching American Idol or House Swapping or whatever crap is only TV, and do something to help themselves for once?
It has to be huge, we know apathy is strong in the populous, and we also know people don't want to risk being sprayed with a water canon or pepper spray or sound canon or rubber bullets for trying to right what is wrong in the government. What will it take to make them risk it?
When we have that answer, then we can punish the banks, the media conglomerates (studios/labels, etc..), and the 'defense' industries.
Maybe have we wake up the masses we can accomplish some real change.
On the post: Universal Music Claims Copyright Over Song That It Didn't License, Just Because One Of Its Artists Rapped To It On A Leaked Track
Re: Hmm
And they'd rake in over a million dollars using your work without your permission, but claim they lost $10 million because you posted it up on YouTube. Then they'd drag you into court again on copyright infringement claims, with statutory damages of $150 000 per play per upload ($150 00 x Y-plays x Z-thousands of accounts).
On the post: Megaupload Shutdown Means Other Companies Turning Off Useful Services
RIAA Cheering?
You know if Anonymous really wanted to do something to stop this BS they'd actually hack the servers of the media companies, all of them linked with labels and studios. Get the real data on sales, layoffs, price-fixing discussions, costs, payments to artists (should be short list)... all over the last 60 years.
Compile it into simple charts with major events highlighted on the charts (ie: Internet open to public, IRC sharing starts, Napster starts, DMCA publicized, DMCA passed, law suits begin, the Pirate Bay debacle, etc...
It would be VERY interesting to see how the events compare with costs and distribution numbers, store layoffs and such.
I'm willing to bet such data is all safely hidden for a reason (contradiction maybe??).
But if Anonymous can easily hack a "security" firm, they should be able to hack into record labels and studio files and gather all the data. Add to that history of file transfer traffic.
Yes, they'd need something like MegaUpload to store all that data, but once there, once sorted (figure maybe 3 months of clever attacks, including bribing people to copy data to USB keys or portable HDD's, then figure 3 - 5 months sorting data and forming charts and points easy to understand for average person), release it all via all media outlets (if you've hacked them leave a rootkit permitting a mass email spam, website broadcast spam/hack, and even if temporary, a broadcast image/audio file to summarize the data) and websites so all the info is out there, instead of a simple source like Wikileaks the US could shutdown.
Do all that, you'd have everyone understanding the fraudulent activity going on. Yeah, you'd freak out cyber experts and Congress would want a knee-jerk reaction but you'd definitely have the Entertainment industry by the shorts and curlies.
No one would believe them, except for the bought/paidfor congress members, but hey, enough people calling and questioning or demanding refusal of support to studios/labels, you might get the truth known and maybe correct this copyright/IP mess (Yeah, they are considered the same by the Entertainment industry - funny that).
Pardon the run-on sentences.
On the post: What Is Ron Paul Thinking? Sues To Unmask Anonymous Internet Users
It's Simple
On the post: Anti-SOPA/PIPA Protest Songs
Re:
"I make my living drawing XK-CD,
Just give them something, something for free
They're all people just like you and me
We need open web
Well I coulda been a failure drinkin' plenty beer
Sued by corporations, it's totally clear
Lawyers try to fill us with fear
We need open web"
Sue 'em 'cause they're poor
Sue 'em if they're dead
Sue 'em for competition
Sue 'em enough said"
Well you get the idea, it made me think of Dirty Laundry.
On the post: Lamar Smith & MPAA Brush Off Wikipedia Blackout As Just A Publicity Stunt
Fine, I'll Do It!!!
Shall I setup a PayPal account? Perhaps call it BuyBackOurPoliticians@PayPay.com?
Next >>