RIAA Says Google and Wikipedia Manufactured Controversy

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Holy cow, this guy can play "the victim" with the best of them. I damn near started crying as I read this. Well, laughing until I cried but that is close enough. :D

Since when is it censorship to shut down an operation that an American court, upon a thorough review of evidence, has determined to be illegal? When the police close down a store fencing stolen goods, it isn’t censorship, but when those stolen goods are fenced online, it is? Wikipedia, Google and others manufactured controversy by unfairly equating SOPA with censorship.
Click to expand...
 
Kind of hypocritical of him saying that "censorship is a loaded term" when he called hearing a song without a license "theft" two paragraphs prior.
 
I don't get it, SOPA and PIPA wouldn't have taken down sites, it would have radically altered the DNS to prevent people in the US from accessing those sites. If that isn't censorship, I don't know what is.

I'm all for actually taking offline servers that are clearly distributing pirated material, but mucking around with the DNS system in a way that DNS security standards like DNSSEC are supposed to protect against is an extremely horrible way to go about it.

Plus, I don't think anyone appreciated the fact that while the RIAA/MPAA had 5 or 6 different groups that were for this legislation, only Google was allowed to argue against it and they were routinely cut off when trying to answer questions. And some of Congress was clearly bought and paid for by lobbying groups.

This guy is mad because democracy actually stopped this crap and they didn't get what they paid for!
 
Wash out his mouth with SOPA. I'm certain many of those phrases and words he used are copywritten.
 
Poor Cary--he simply will do anything to avoid facing how unpopular the RIAA and the MPAA have made themselves in the last decade--suing their customers, suing old ladies, sending extortion letters, suing minors and juveniles while trying to hold their parents hostage, the racketeering, and all the rest of the warm and cuddly stuff people have seen out of the RIAA in the last decade.

He talks about how great the music business was in the same year that Napster took off. OK, so is his point to mourn the passing of Napster and to assert that he'd like it to be like it was in the good old days way back in '99, Napster and all? I don't think Cary means to say that--it's just that he's so confused. Cary is so abysmally confused that apparently he's willing to stake his reputation on his assertion that prior to Napster in 1999 there was no bootlegging going on in the world anywhere, and the RIAA ne'er lost a penny to piracy. Mixed up? Yeah! I'll say.

Talking about "misinformation"--when most people think of the word "two-faced" or "misinformation" is it a coincidence that "RIAA" is right up there at the top of the recall pile? I don't think so. The RIAA has done a lot, over and over again, to earn its place in the pantheon of least liked and trusted groups inside the US since 1999. Until Cary can crack that particular nut I'm afraid he has many more crocodile tears to shed in the coming years. "Slow on the uptake" doesn't begin to describe these guys.
 
It should be a crime when a website is shutdown or impeded because the MPAA or RIAA thought they might have copyrighted content, but actually didn't.

Fix this ^^^, Cary, and you might have more credibility.
 
Is the really any point arguing this anymore. This dude will never get it. Let's move onto to others we can change their mind and leave these people to the sharks.
 
He got his "spin" out there. That's all that mattered to him. It doesn't matter that he's completely out of his mind with some of the stuff he's saying.
 
BTW, in Greek SOPA means STFU.

I think we're at a point where the RIAA and MPAA are at a point with their reputation that anything they do say will only hurt them. Not that they have anything intelligent to say. Complaining about Google or Wikipedia's ability to inform the American public about two bills that were going under the radar is just stupid. Anyone can read the bills for themselves. Nobody disputed any of the claims that "experts" were claiming. Yes, they're experts not nerds.

If Cary Sherman is crying a river, then someone do the rest of us a favor and collect the tears. Some of us would like to drink it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owzhYNcd4OM
 
choppedliver said:
Man, that made me lol. Hard to believe someone can be that much of a dumbass.
Click to expand...

Sp many of the MBA's have the book smarts and nothing else. Have grown up with sheltered lives.The real meaning of "Idiot" sums it up.
 
JosiahBradley said:
Is the really any point arguing this anymore. This dude will never get it. Let's move onto to others we can change their mind and leave these people to the sharks.
Click to expand...

The problem is that he does get it. His greed is simply such that he will do anything for just one dollar more to add to the already mountainous pile he and the industry he serves already have.

While not exactly wrong, there are just certain things one does not do for a dollar. Racketeering, extortion, twisting laws meant to prevent commercial copyright infringement, and then using them to sue grandmas, preteens, and dead people.

I don't even buy music anymore. I listen to it on the radio. If a song really strikes my fancy, I record it off of XM, or the regular radio, or get a copy from a friend. The first two options are not loss less, but I am not an audiophile anyway.
 
Ashbringer said:
BTW, in Greek SOPA means STFU.

I think we're at a point where the RIAA and MPAA are at a point with their reputation that anything they do say will only hurt them. Not that they have anything intelligent to say. Complaining about Google or Wikipedia's ability to inform the American public about two bills that were going under the radar is just stupid. Anyone can read the bills for themselves. Nobody disputed any of the claims that "experts" were claiming. Yes, they're experts not nerds.

If Cary Sherman is crying a river, then someone do the rest of us a favor and collect the tears. Some of us would like to drink it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owzhYNcd4OM
Click to expand...

Besides, thats what the Internet is all about, getting information. His idea of the net is for only commercial products. All of us are to use the net to buy their products as digital downloads and pay the same as hard copies. Its been alleged that He's dumber then an Idiot.
 
This is complete misinformation about why google and wiki were against it.

The way the SOPA wanted to work was by penalizing LEGITIMATE sites for coincidentally linking to other sites.
SOPA was not about blocking any distributors or hosts of pirated material.

Mitchell Baker explains very well (quote lifted from coding horror)
Mitchell Baker said:
Assume there's a corner store in your neighborhood that rents movies. But the movie industry believes that some or even all of the videos in that store are unauthorized copies, so that they're not being paid when people watch their movies. What should be done?
SOPA/PIPA do not aim at the people trying to get to the store, or even the store itself. The solution under the proposed bills is to make it as difficult as possible to find or interact with the store:

Maps showing the location of the store must be changed to hide it.
The road to the store must be blocked off so that it is difficult to physically get to there.
Directory services must delist the store’s phone number and address.
Credit card companies would have to cease providing services to the store.
Local newspapers would no longer be allowed to place ads for the video store.
To make sure it all happens, any person or organization who doesn’t do this is subject to penalties. Even publishing a newsletter that tells people where the store is would be prohibited by this legislation.
Click to expand...
 
Hay guys, I have a better idea to combat theft. Let's put a gun in every American's hands and let them first decide who is infringing, then take down the suspect, and finally consult the courts after all is said and done.
 
dagamer34 said:
I don't get it, SOPA and PIPA wouldn't have taken down sites, it would have radically altered the DNS to prevent people in the US from accessing those sites. If that isn't censorship, I don't know what is.

I'm all for actually taking offline servers that are clearly distributing pirated material, but mucking around with the DNS system in a way that DNS security standards like DNSSEC are supposed to protect against is an extremely horrible way to go about it.

Plus, I don't think anyone appreciated the fact that while the RIAA/MPAA had 5 or 6 different groups that were for this legislation, only Google was allowed to argue against it and they were routinely cut off when trying to answer questions. And some of Congress was clearly bought and paid for by lobbying groups.

This guy is mad because democracy actually stopped this crap and they didn't get what they paid for!
Click to expand...

Don't worry they don't need to worry about the dns. lol

"They also argued misleadingly that the bills would have required Web sites to “monitor” what their users upload, conveniently ignoring provisions like the “No Duty to Monitor” section".

I can see it now, Website admin "If one of users decides to do something they decide is illegal we might get shut down, that's going to cost use money". SOAP "don't worry there is a No Duty to Monitor clause". Admin "O great all is well then", 10 days latter, SOAP "i am sorry but we are blocking your site due to piracy. Admin "what how did that happen... we didn't need to monitor...
 
I love how they like to say that the court is on their side, but one of the reasons for the bill is to bypass the courts and due process. So the question is, if you can squash these sites with existing law because the courts agree with you, why do you need a new law that bypasses the courts?
 
All I can think after reading this:

Lolwutpear.jpg
 
look at how the radio waves were made illegal if they didn't belong to a few broadcasting monopolies in the 80s in England for example- there's no such thing as ''piracy''...
 
I sometimes hope these aholes get what they want. Then when they find out that they really aren't going to make any more money and they have pissed off the whole world, we can all say HA HA!
 
xxEIEIOxx said:
I sometimes hope these aholes get what they want. Then when they find out that they really aren't going to make any more money and they have pissed off the whole world, we can all say HA HA!
Click to expand...

Problem with that is by then they can retire very very comfortable.
 
"We all share the goal of a safe and legal Internet. We need reason, not rhetoric, in discussing how to achieve it."

This is why rhetoric has always been absent from the halls of the RIAA :rolleyes:

Hard to taste your own bile is it?
 
Uncle said:
Problem with that is by then they can retire very very comfortable.
Click to expand...

Their lives are only so long, but their ineptitude will live on in infamy. Even a family fortune diminishes over time if not managed correctly. The members of this small RIAA/MPAA circle have proven themselves time and time again that they are not in tune with their customers and more like old school CEOs with bad financial advisers, not to mention even worse business models.
 
I actually spoke with the main IP guy for my university today. He was talking about how SOPA and that was a huge deal because it would have forced internet companies to enforce and regulate IP instead of how it is now where the IP owners are responsible for this.

Basically the RIAA/MPAA/etc was just trying to offload the hard work of protecting their IP to other people. (Without getting into a piracy debate)
 
djoye said:
Hay guys, I have a better idea to combat theft. Let's put a gun in every American's hands and let them first decide who is infringing, then take down the suspect, and finally consult the courts after all is said and done.
Click to expand...

I'd trust this system over anything the RIAA, MPAA, and politicians ever put together.
 
xxEIEIOxx said:
I sometimes hope these aholes get what they want. Then when they find out that they really aren't going to make any more money and they have pissed off the whole world, we can all say HA HA!
Click to expand...

You don't seem to understand. They are generally CEO's who get a big bonus from shareholders if they can make the shareholders think they did something significant.

They just have to convince the shareholders they solved a major problem. Cha-ching.

And most shareholders are idiots. Our public ownership model is broken. By that I mean we need private investors to be even more deeply concerned about the actual fate of the company. Right now you have these fickle investments by people who have a 'peanut gallery' level of expertise in running the business they own.
 
To those that think google or wikipedia didn't produce controversy are kidding themselves. If this bill would of went through it would have taken the power away from these extremely powerful companies and put it in the hands of the worthless mpaa/riaa. They were doing this because the bill was radically a conflict of interests, and I don't blame them. I agree with what the bill was trying to accomplish, just don't agree with its absolute power, not do I think anyone from the mpaa/riaa should bd even remotely involved south writing it.

That said fuck the riaa/mpaa.
 
Trimlock said:
To those that think google or wikipedia didn't produce controversy are kidding themselves. If this bill would of went through it would have taken the power away from these extremely powerful companies and put it in the hands of the worthless mpaa/riaa. They were doing this because the bill was radically a conflict of interests, and I don't blame them. I agree with what the bill was trying to accomplish, just don't agree with its absolute power, not do I think anyone from the mpaa/riaa should bd even remotely involved south writing it.

That said fuck the riaa/mpaa.
Click to expand...

It wouldn't take power away. It would end Wikipedia. It would end many of Google's initiatives. Anything open to commenting or public posting would be shut down if it wasn't possible to moderate every single post before it went up. Wikipedia becomes impractical if that happens. Or, say youtube becomes fee based so they can hire an army of moderators. etc.
 
jpm100 said:
It wouldn't take power away. It would end Wikipedia. It would end many of Google's initiatives. Anything open to commenting or public posting would be shut down if it wasn't possible to moderate every single post before it went up. Wikipedia becomes impractical if that happens. Or, say youtube becomes fee based so they can hire an army of moderators. etc.
Click to expand...

I don't think it would end them, it would drastically slow these services down and in return ruin their power. Its possible to exist with it, but its like walking against a sand storm.

But Im not dissagreing with them drumming up the controversy, SOPA and PIPA were the worst written peices of shit I've ever seen, whats worse is they had GOOD intentions until the RIAA/MPAA got their hands on it and turned it into the sith lord.

I just love how these CEO's are crying a river when their pet project got rejected and for obvious reasons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top