Skip to main content

View Diary: DNC hires RIAA shill (267 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Hilary Rosen (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Aexia

    has been a pretty good attack dog for the Dems, however, since she left RIAA.  I've seen her more than hold her own on talk shows.  Maybe they are glad to get out of such a bloodsucking industry and go somewhere moire in line with their politics. I dunno, just saying.

    "False language, evil in itself, infects the soul with evil." ----Socrates

    by Mimikatz on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 04:44:22 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  but her ideas on Internet governance ... (9+ / 0-)

      ... are quite similar to China's.  The RIAA and Hollywood want the Internet to be a police state, where everyone's actions are monitored at all times.  They want to abolish free WiFi and restrict access in libraries because an anonymous person might upload a song, or describe a technical flaw in a DRM system, or otherwise harm business.

      We need to find ways to make sure that artists get paid that don't require a police state.

      •  That's simple enough (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Fred in Vermont, quokkapox

        Let them get paid for the time they spend working, like anyone else who provides a service. There are a few ways that could be implemented, from public funding of art, to an entirely private system similar to campaign funding where individual fans fund recordings by contributing small amounts that add up to millions... but the way to get it all started is to declare:

        "You will no longer be able to make money just by selling copies. Anyone can make their own copies these days, and you cannot compete in the copying business. People still want to hear new music, and that means your talent is still in demand; the money is out there, now it's your job to convince them to give it to you."

        •  It is about property not work (0+ / 0-)

          We need to find ways to make sure that artists get paid that don't require a police state.

          Let them get paid for the time they spend working, like anyone else who provides a service.

          That really gets down to it.  It is not so much a question how to "pay artists" as is a question of whether performed art becomes property once it is in a reproducible form.

          It is to protect that property interest (one that is often in large part already alienated from the artist) that groups like the RIAA want to turn cyberspace into cyberprison.

          •  Right (2+ / 0-)

            They want to treat it as property, and on the surface that almost makes sense (especially if you're used to music being an object you buy off the store shelf).. after all, we talk about "making" a song, "creating" an album, etc. But it breaks down under any serious scrutiny.

            The thing about physical property is you know where it is, and you can keep people from taking it (or at least notice when it's been taken and send the cops after it). That's what makes it sensible to spend your time making an object for free, hoping to make money by selling it later - because you know that until it's sold, you still have control over it. That will never be true of information, no matter how many laws are passed, because copying is undetectable and unpreventable.

            Work, however, is something that you can always control, which makes the service model one that will stand up no matter what new technologies come along. The only ways someone can take your labor away from you would be to kidnap and enslave you, or to promise to pay and then run off when the bill comes, both of which are problems we've been dealing with for centuries and which are much easier to detect and prevent.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site