President Picks Another RIAA Lawyer For DOJ

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
I’m not sure how most tech savvy people are going to like having another RIAA lawyer running things in Washington D.C. but I guess we’ll just have to see how this all turns out. I think that feeling in the pit of my stomach is me trying to be “cautiously optimistic” right now.

Donald Verrilli announced Wednesday that he had been named associate deputy attorney general. Verrilli is the lawyer who pulled the plug on Grokster, sued Google on behalf of Viacom, and represented the Recording Industry Association of America against a Minnesota woman named Jammie Thomas who's accused of illicit file sharing.
Click to expand...
 
yeah, read about that last week... and it makes me laugh a little.

Hope all the people who praise this guy likes the kind of change that's coming... business as usual
 
Ugh, this is so disappointing. Business as usual is exactly it. Sugar coated piles of crap.
 
I'm not sure you guys can honestly say "business as usual".....


...when is the last time we got two RIAA lawyers in the DOJ in a two week span?

:eek:
 
Well, bad for pirates (good for ninjas?), but I can only hope that:

a: the current move by the industry to DRM-freeness will continue, despite these guys' presence.
b: this signals an inclusion of tech-savy individuals in his admin.
 
I'm not too worried about it, Lawyers are like hired guns. Pay them enough and they will sue anyone for anything. Besides aren't all these copyright cases aren't criminal cases, but instead they are civil.

Think about it this way, the RIAA probably lost two of their better lawyers.
 
well what did we expect. Obama has Biden as his VP, this guy (Biden) has been bought and paid for by the entertainment industry for years
 
Anyone that gets pissy in their panties over these hasn't got a clue.

a lawyers job is simple: represent their client to the best of their abilities. it has nothing, at all, to do with what that lawyer personally believes.
 
It's not like he put the President / Leader of the RIAA in these positions right?

People are so quick to judge and far too slow to admit when they are wrong when it's all said and done.

I'll give you my opinion on this in 2 years or so time. :p
 
He's a lawyer. I don't think he cares who's paying him. If he was hired to defend Jammie Thomas, bet he'd do it. Just another paycheck to him.
 
I wish I could get this message across to these a-holes:

HEY! Now that music is becoming more and more DRM free and prices are getting better, guess what ...

I'M BUYING MORE MUSIC.
 
I don't care what anyone thinks, I say it doesn't bode well.

Thats the thing about "change".......you might not get the change you want, and it's not always good.
 
Actually, the whole thing is a bit scary. I know lawyers are like someone else said “hired
guns” but do they all have to be from the same place?

Tom Perrelli Associate Attorney General (ex-head RIAA attorney)
Donald Verrilli Associate Deputy Attorney General (ex-RIAA attorney)
Neil MacBride Associate Deputy Attorney General (ex-BSA attorney)

and so on.

All I am saying is that if an attorney is an attorney is an attorney, why do we need all RIAA, MPAA and BSA people? Would you say the same thing if they were all ex-MOB boss lawyers?
 
Derfman said:
It's not like he put the President / Leader of the RIAA in these positions right?

People are so quick to judge and far too slow to admit when they are wrong when it's all said and done.

I'll give you my opinion on this in 2 years or so time. :p
Click to expand...

no but Obama's VP is firmly in the pocket of the RIAA/MPAA
hows that 'change' working for you now?
 
Steve said:
All I am saying is that if an attorney is an attorney is an attorney, why do we need all RIAA, MPAA and BSA people? Would you say the same thing if they were all ex-MOB boss lawyers?
Click to expand...

It's cause large companies have the money to hire lawyers with a very good career background. Probably the exact same reason the President picked them for the DOJ. Very good career background. I don't think their employers should weigh negatively on their merits.
 
apparently they have some quality that is appreciated...I'd like to know what though (probably just the buddy system). anybody who can convince a judge and jury to level a massive fine against someone for downloading a handful of songs is probably pretty convincing.
 
maademperor said:
hes just a lawyer, he'll represent anyone who pays him.
Click to expand...

id bet the RIAA and MPAA are STILL paying them if not now they will get nice contractor deals when there terms are up just look at our old friend Kevin Martin over at the FCC
now that he's out he has a nice cushy job at GASP AT&T :rolleyes:
 
himmy said:
Anyone that gets pissy in their panties over these hasn't got a clue.

a lawyers job is simple: represent their client to the best of their abilities. it has nothing, at all, to do with what that lawyer personally believes.
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure if Jack Thompson will agree with you.
 
maademperor said:
Jack Thompson represented his own views
Click to expand...

Hence I quoted him. He said lawyers are for hire and doesn't generally have opinions of their own. They defend whatever their clients ask them to defend.
 
C'mon...Ari Emanuel (Rahm's brother), pretty much runs Hollywood. I wouldn't be surprised if you see a more agressive stance on IP protection from this administration.

I was emailing Obama when he was my senator here in IL and he's always had that same, middle-of-the-road, neutral, bs, standard reply of, "I believe in working fairly to promote innovation of intellectual property and reaching a fair use by consumers".

Technically, any new anti-consumer legislation would have to pass congress. The attorney general's office doesn't make the laws, they just might give advice or push for a bill to be introduced. ...and it could be worse. At least Obama understands technology enough to make an informed decision. I'm sure he'll side with businesses a little more (especially in this economy) but, the RIAA is a small part in a big ecosystem. I'm sure that Microsoft, (now) Apple, Google and a couple of other companies are pushing for less restrictions on content to promote their products. In the end, it probably won't make that big of a difference in who he picks for those positions.
 
Could one of his supporters tell me how this correlates to "HOPE & CHANGE" in any way shape or form?
 
So if a lawyer represents a murderer he should be cast out of society because he clearly advocates murder? Face it, these guys are probably good and they were working for the RIAA to make money.
 
Just one more thing reason I'm glad that I didn't vote for "The Empty Suit Messiah".

If you voted for him, don't bitch. Just bend over and take your butt fkn like a man.
 
I'll keep my money, my rights, and my firearms. And you can keep the change.
 
I'm seeing a pattern here. Bush was an oil tycoon and we clearly see what the result of that was. I'm thinking Obama is a media tycoon and prices of movies/music is going to quadruple while he is in office. heh
 
RAF_OldBuzzard said:
Just one more thing reason I'm glad that I didn't vote for "The Empty Suit Messiah".

If you voted for him, don't bitch. Just bend over and take your butt fkn like a man.
Click to expand...

Don't be stupid. If our elected officials are not doing their job to our satisfaction it is our civic duty to make it known, and see that they do their job as well as we would like them to.
 
ShagnWagn said:
I'm seeing a pattern here. Bush was an oil tycoon and we clearly see what the result of that was. I'm thinking Obama is a media tycoon and prices of movies/music is going to quadruple while he is in office. heh
Click to expand...

No, he's a lawyer who has the media in his back pocket. The media has clearly admitted that they are in his back pocket and that they will do everything in their power to protect his hope & change image. They've also admitted that they will do everything in their power to see to it that his message not only gets out, but they will his cheerleaders for it.
 
Tokamak said:
So if a lawyer represents a murderer he should be cast out of society because he clearly advocates murder? Face it, these guys are probably good and they were working for the RIAA to make money.
Click to expand...

I think you are misrepresenting the role of a lawyer. A lawyer is an advocate for the rights of his client who in this case is a defendant. Let's say that defendant is accused of murder, the lawyer isn't or wouldn't be advocating murder since the lawyer is advocating his clients innocence. It isn't about truth, it's about making sure that your client isn't prosecuted for something he is being accused of and as a lawyer for that client it is your job to do everything in your power to see that doesn't happen. If the defendant just so happens to be a murderer, it isn't his defense lawyers responsibility to judge him on that, but to keep him from being found guilty of it. It sucks, but that's the way it works.
 
It's up to the lawyer. No 2 lawyers are the same. Some want to make money and that's all they care about (I'd say pretty much all personal inj. attorneys fit this), some care about their client's cause and don't want money.

Personally, if I were a lawyer, I'd join the aclu, sue the shit out of my city's public school division, take not a dime, and go to the supreme court to get the "mid-thigh rule" permanently retired. It is Anti-Constitutional. Funny, how we're lied to and told we'll get "change we need" by all these modern liberals, when they have every intention of strengthening "tyranny we don't need." If I were a lawyer, I'd also probably sue obama's campaign team for being fraudulent, and donate all of it to libertarian/Constitutional organizations, including Dr. Paul's F.R.E.E.
[/OffT]
Anyway, the government should stay the hell out of popular industry. So we're not getting "change we need" and I've warned people for what seems like an eternity now, but 99% of them voted for McCain or Obama anyway.

It's funny how one minute modern liberals like Joe Biden are trying to get regulation passed to restrict games, and then the next they're trying to help them sue kids, which is sad that they're out to "protect the children" one minute, then the next they're trying to sue the children. Any politician that will support "protection" for kids, and support hurting kids/protecting business will protect neither and hurt both. In other words the politicians will only hurt the kids and deserve to go to hell.
 
bpmurrGT said:
Someone watches too much Entourage... :)
Click to expand...

Actually, I don't. I've only seen a few early episodes. ...I've met Jeremy a few times though and I can tell you that that's how he really is. The real Ari...I have no idea.

My comment was alluding to the fact that Ari Emanuel's firm represents most of the major talent in Hollywood.

[obligatory Wikipedia link here] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endeavor_Agency

Literally...he's got most of the major talent at his firm.

So, if his brother whispers a little something, something into Obama's ear about Hollywood's IP needing more protection...I really wouldn't be surprised.
 
tskiller said:
Don't be stupid. If our elected officials are not doing their job to our satisfaction it is our civic duty to make it known, and see that they do their job as well as we would like them to.
Click to expand...

unfortunately nowadays they seem to feel it's their civic duty to tazer us for dissention or lock us away for lawful protest. because you know...that's just so consitutional :rolleyes:

Our elected officials haven't done their job since 1913 or so... and they ones that do end up dead or marginalized.


no2censorship said:
It's up to the lawyer. No 2 lawyers are the same. Some want to make money and that's all they care about (I'd say pretty much all personal inj. attorneys fit this), some care about their client's cause and don't want money.

Personally, if I were a lawyer, I'd join the aclu, sue the shit out of my city's public school division, take not a dime, and go to the supreme court to get the "mid-thigh rule" permanently retired. It is Anti-Constitutional. Funny, how we're lied to and told we'll get "change we need" by all these modern liberals, when they have every intention of strengthening "tyranny we don't need." If I were a lawyer, I'd also probably sue obama's campaign team for being fraudulent, and donate all of it to libertarian/Constitutional organizations, including Dr. Paul's F.R.E.E.
[/OffT]
Anyway, the government should stay the hell out of popular industry. So we're not getting "change we need" and I've warned people for what seems like an eternity now, but 99% of them voted for McCain or Obama anyway.

It's funny how one minute modern liberals like Joe Biden are trying to get regulation passed to restrict games, and then the next they're trying to help them sue kids, which is sad that they're out to "protect the children" one minute, then the next they're trying to sue the children. Any politician that will support "protection" for kids, and support hurting kids/protecting business will protect neither and hurt both. In other words the politicians will only hurt the kids and deserve to go to hell.
Click to expand...

I voted for Paul and Barr, we don't need protection or regulation...well scratch that, we need protection from our government... not by it. I'm tired of all of this crap, mention children or terrorism to fire everyone up and then pass heavy handed crap during the fervor. Telling us how to live is not the job of the government, if i want to pirate music or movies, that's between the corporations and myself, a republic doesn't exist to protect corporate entities.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top