Skip to main content

There might not be any bigger scumbags in the corporate world today than the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). And that's not my take. There's a reason for that:

The liberal blogosophere is united on many fronts -- not just disliking US foreign policy. We also hate the RIAA -- for suing our friends, for lobbying for laws that suspend due process rights of the accused (the RIAA's favorite law, the DMCA, was used by Diebold to suppress information about failures in its voting machines), and for demanding the right to "pretext" (commit wire fraud) in order to catch "pirates."

Worse still, the RIAA are part of the initiative to corrupt net neutrality, imposing centralized controls on the transmission of information across the network.

And now, the Howard Dean and the DNC have apparently hired the RIAA's top shill, Jenni Engebretsen, as a "Deputy CEO for Public Affairs" for the upcoming convention in Denver.

It has been Engebretsen's job to sell these initiatives to the American public. She's failed to sell this to the American public. Not only does she take a paycheck for selling gangsters to the public -- she's not very good at it!

As Boing Boing notes, the DNC could do better.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 03:13 PM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Its so exasperating being a democrat sometimes. (24+ / 0-)

    "Liberty will not descend to a people, a people must raise themselves to Liberty." -- Emma Goldman

    by Autarkh on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 03:09:20 PM PDT

  •  Great, now we'll have to pay royalties to (11+ / 0-)

    pricks like Lieberman when we quote their speeches.

    Once in a while you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

    by darthstar on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 03:09:53 PM PDT

  •  I say (0+ / 0-)

    hire the guys from Metallica to be Joint Deputy CEOs. They're careers have quieted down somewhat, though I guess they're pro RIAA as well.

  •  Did she also sell fraud? (12+ / 0-)

    In CA, the RIAA has been asking for an exemption to fraud laws, so that they can "pretext" to obtain confidential personal information from phone companies and ISPs.  

    Was she also involved in selling this scheme to the public?

  •  Ugh (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    GW Chimpzilla

    At least they didn't hire Hilary Rosen.  

  •  Hey Kos, thought (13+ / 0-)

    your were taking some time off to spend with that beautiful new daughter of yours.  I guess even proud new fathers with a progressive bent just can't get enough!

    And what's up with Howard Dean and this hire?  WTF?

    Practice random acts of kindness (favorite bumper sticker)

    by Sally in SF on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 03:11:38 PM PDT

  •  I would rather have all our debates on Fox (9+ / 0-)

    ...than partner with the RIAA.

    •  Years ago, a latter-to-the-editor.......... (0+ / 0-) Rolling Stone cited a line that used to appear on album covers throughout the 1960's - as best I recall, the letter asked:


      All I want to know is, what the hell is the RIAA high-frequency roll-off characteristic with a 500 cycle crossover?"

      "We should pay attention to that man behind the curtain."

      by Ed Tracey on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 04:53:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Back when they were useful (3+ / 0-)

        Setting standards to help improve the quality of high fidelity music.

      •  ask and ye shall receive (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Ed Tracey, greenchiledem

        a Wikipedia link.....

        Due to recording mastering and manufacturing limitations, both high and low frequencies were removed from the first recorded signals by various formulae. With low frequencies, the stylus must swing a long way from side to side, requiring the groove to be wide, taking up more space and limiting the playing time of the record. At high frequencies noise is significant. These problems can be compensated for by using equalization to an agreed standard. This simply means reducing the amplitude at low-frequencies, thus reducing the groove width required, and increasing the amplitude at high frequencies. The playback equipment boosts bass and cuts treble in a complementary way. The result should be that the sound is perceived to be without change, thus more music will fit the record, and noise is reduced.

        The agreed standard has been RIAA equalization since 1952, implemented in 1955. Prior to that, especially from 1940, some 100 formulae were used by the record manufacturers.

        In other words it's an encode/decode process that makes music sound better and fit better on one piece of vinyl.

        Dreams of empire die hard; empire, that goes away quickly.--Juan Cole

        by nota bene on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 06:11:10 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Sounds like... (13+ / 0-)

    ...we need to send a few emails to Howard asking him an explanation for this decision.

    God gave us his own child as a sacrifice. Bush wants to take yours...

    by Palamedes on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 03:12:47 PM PDT

    •  Here's mine (11+ / 0-)

      Dear Dr. Dean,

      I am a longtime supporter of yours, and gave more than $1K to your presidential campaign, something unprecedented for me.  I am also a repeat contributor to the DNC.  I applauded your election as DNC chair because I was hoping to see a change, to see a grass-roots-driven party instead of the corporate-apologist party as run by your predecessors.

      I am bitterly, bitterly disappointed that you appointed one of the top shills for the RIAA, Jenni Engebretsen, as deputy CEO for public affairs for the Democratic Convention.  The RIAA is perhaps the most hated organization in America these days, and Mr. Engebretsen regularly appears in public to defend the indefensible, usually extortion suits against children.  She's also an advocate for crippling the Internet and turning it over to corporations; if she had her way a few years back, your insurgent campaign would have been impossible.  Her organization wants to stop any technical innovation that might have any negative impact on her employers' business models, no matter how badly it craters Silicon Valley.

      Young people in particular despise the RIAA.  You need to push back against your friends in Hollywood; we can find ways to make sure artists are paid without creating a police state.

      Generally speaking, the progressive blogosphere is outraged.  You need to pick: K Street or the people.  If it's going to be K Street, then I'm afraid you'll have to go with their money and not mine.

      Please dismiss Ms. Engebretsen and hire someone who does not have a blatant conflict of interest.  Corporate lobbyists should not serve double duty as PR people for the Democrats.

  •  Is she some sort of RIAA true believer (7+ / 0-)

    or just someone doing a job?  If the latter, my first reaction is, so what?  

    No one likes armed missionaries. -- Robespierre.

    by Gator Keyfitz on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 03:13:01 PM PDT

    •  Yeah (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ChicagoDem, Aexia, Gator Keyfitz

      That's my reaction.  Is the only complaint that she worked for RIAA, or is there something else?  

      Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?

      by johnny rotten on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 03:15:28 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Adam B has some mitigating info (4+ / 0-)

        just below.  Kos' reaction seems a little overheated to me.  And for the record, I despise the RIAA.

        No one likes armed missionaries. -- Robespierre.

        by Gator Keyfitz on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 03:21:40 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  So does the entire music industry (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          alizard, Autarkh

          except for the five or seven largest record companies for whom RIAA is a shill.  They screw over any musician and small recording outfit they can find.  They're the point person in the fight against all downloading, self production, and every other methodology that's other than selling their CDs through their tightly controlled distribution and marketing networks.

        •  Yeah, I'd have to agree (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Gator Keyfitz

          except for the RIAA she's had some decent communications gigs.  Not sure she'd be at the top of my list, or that she's all that talented, but it doesn't sound like the worst thing in the world, either.

          "I believe that ignorance is the root of all evil. And that no one knows the truth." - Molly Ivins

          by littlesky on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 03:32:53 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  isn't working for the RIAA enough? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Progressive Moderate

        It is difficult to imagine a more anti-consumer organization than the *AA organizations.

        Isn't a person whose job description previously included justifying putting rootkits on CDs sold to the public sufficiently evil to preclude her public association with the Democratic Party?

        Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

        by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 01:09:43 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  If she's just "doing a job"... (6+ / 0-)

      ...then her soul vacated her body a long time ago.

      You don't "just work" for the RIAA.

      "Liberty will not descend to a people, a people must raise themselves to Liberty." -- Emma Goldman

      by Autarkh on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 03:39:28 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  You Think? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Aexia, jmcgrew, Great Uncle Bulgaria

      Seem to me that Dean is going to hire the best person available for the job.

      Do you trust everything blogs say? Some people here do and have said so.  I have disagreed with them for a reason. Here is why"

      From the press release on the hiring:

      Jenni R. Engebretsen is currently the Director of Communications for the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), the Washington, DC-based trade group that represents the U.S. recording industry. Before joining the RIAA, Engebretsen spent eight years working in Democratic politics, most recently as a Regional communications Director for the Kerry-Edwards for President campaign, where she was responsible for developing campaign communications strategy for top-targeted states including Florida and New Hampshire. During the 2004 presidential cycle, she also served as Deputy Communications Director for the Democratic National Convention in Boston and as Press Secretary for the Edwards for President campaign during the primaries. Before that, she worked on Capitol Hill in the communications offices of Senators Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and in the White House press office during the Clinton Administration. She is a graduate of Northwestern University's Medill School of Journalism.

      OK? So she has some credentials as you see in this area of politics.

      "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

      by talex on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 04:01:45 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Don't Trust Blogs (0+ / 0-)

        Don't ever ALWAYS trust blogs.

        As I have said here before - one blog posts something and gets it wrong and then another one and another one copies it as gospel. Kos is famous for that. This is not the first time you will find something here borrowed and posted where the info was wrong or the entire story was not told.

        We complain about the MSM doing this exact thing but it also happens on blogs all the time.

        Beware. Do your own google before ripping someone - especially when someone like Dean is involved.

        Who you going to believe - boing-boing or Howard Dean?

        nuff said.

        "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

        by talex on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 04:05:53 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  in this case, trust blogs (3+ / 0-)

          There are tons of careerists who go back and forth between shilling for corporations and working to promote Democrats.  Ms. Engebretsen is one of them.

          Such people should pick.  Terry McAuliffe represented corporate Democrats.  We pushed for Howard Dean to shake things up.

          •  ??? (0+ / 0-)

            The point I was making was that she has credentials for the job. Neither boing boing nor Kos let any one know about that. That is exactly what the MSM does and we all despise that - I assume you do too. But yet here you are going to ignore that because you have a bias against the person? Sorry pal - fact are facts and that is what I was presenting. Maybe facts don't matter to you much and bias does, I don't know - but to me facts matter.

            As for your opinion that people should choose who they work for according to your criteria - I can only chuckle. You talk about corporations like they are all the most evil thing ever - yet you purchase products from them everyday and even listen to music that is done by artists who record for and are affiliated with corporate entities like RIAA. Who are you kidding? You probably bitched about Fox News and don't think twice about watching their broadcast TV shows. You are no purist would be my bet. I'll trust Dean's judgment over yours thank you.

            "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

            by talex on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 06:13:11 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  I don't automatically give Dean (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          talex, alizard, BOBAUBIN com

          the benefit of the doubt just cause he's The Howard Dean. I will say he is one of the few individuals alive who's run for President that I would trust further than I could throw, which is saying something.

          Anyway, I agree with you that her non-RIAA resume makes this hire a lot easier to swallow, although (as violently as I loathe the fucking RIAA) my concern in this instance is less about the RIAA in particular and more about the revolving door between the public and private sectors.

          Then again, spokespeople are's a dirty job and lots of people seem to be willing to do it, so they might as well, I suppose....

          Dreams of empire die hard; empire, that goes away quickly.--Juan Cole

          by nota bene on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 06:22:32 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  The Revolving Door (0+ / 0-)

            Someone like Engebretsen, who is not an elected politician, would find it impossible to not move between public and private. There is no guarantee that she can always be employed by government or politicians. So if she wants to serve the public sector with her talents must can do so only when asked. When that gig is up and there is not other public offer she must go where she can make a living with her talents.

            As for the RIAA it always amazes me that people get pissed at them for doing what may be illegal things - but never mention that if people were not STEALING music ILLIEGALLY then what the RIAA does would not have to be done.

            It is the thieves who turns the RIAA into what they have had to become. But yet not a peep about that here on this blog.

            "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

            by talex on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 06:49:19 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  re: stealing (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              alizard, BOBAUBIN com

              we'll just have to agree to disagree on the revolving door.

              But as far as downloading goes....the five dollar word of the day is rivalry.

              The problem is that stealing an mp3 is not preventing anyone else from listening to that song. The artist is still able to play the song; a physical copy hasn't been removed from a shelf, causing a loss to a retailer; the person who encoded the mp3 retains a copy, etc. People have gotten so used to music living on pieces of plastic or coming out of boxes that they are convinced that music is something they can "own." You can't. Music is vibrating air molecules, man, it can't be owned, not by anybody. It has no physical form of any sort. It is made of patterns and ephemera.

              Think about it like a photograph of a painting the same thing as the painting itself? If art lovers suddenly stopped paying to get into museums and contented themselves with looking at pictures of pictures, would they be stealing?

              I agree that the economics of the music industry are dire, and I agree wholeheartedly that musicians (and software engineers, for example) need to be paid for their work. The crux of the problem is that digital music is not a rivalrous good, and no one--no one!--has yet devised a business model that can be applied industry-wide that takes this into account. And no, iTunes doesn't cut it. I'll be surprised if iTunes is around in five years.

              By the way, this is the second coming of this argument....we had this fight once before when blank cassette tapes were introduced. The people that own the technological formats are trying to dictate to everybody else what they can and cannot do with something once it has been sold. If I buy a car from Ford, Ford can't tell me what to do with it once it's been sold. If I buy a CD, it's nobody's business but mine what I do with that later. I can resell it, I can give it away, or I can stuff it in a box in the attic. I can dub it to a blank tape and give the tape to a friend--people freaked out when that became possible, but it didn't cause the end of the world. Now any fool with a computer can make a more-or-less perfect copy of anything in minutes, and this (along with the internet, P2P technology, and other factors) is causing the collapse of the entire structure of the industry.

              Some people say save what can't be saved. I say roll with the punches and figure out something that's a bit more equitable than the old system was.

              One last thing....I hope that I'm misreading your last paragraph....the RIAA are thieves because everybody else is? Do you really think that?

              Dreams of empire die hard; empire, that goes away quickly.--Juan Cole

              by nota bene on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 07:13:22 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  OK... (0+ / 0-)

                so you don't think people should be able to work in the private sector and then apply their talents in government when the opportunity presents itself. So what does that leave us with - career politicians and civil servants who must stay in government and if they ever leave they cannot come back?

                But oh wait - you probably think career politicians are bad also - so you are in a hell of a quandary aren't you? Thank goodness everyone doesn't think as illogically as you seem to.

                As for digital music - yeah I get you point. You are saying that you think you should be able to download an artists work for free. Even though it is creative work that is copyrighted - fuck them, just fuck them. Oh yeah - you don't say fuck them - you say "equitable". Equitable? What did you do to create and record the music - not a damned thing.

                And you probably bitch that you don't make enough money for what you do for a living. You deserve more money for yourself and artists deserve less.

                Good luck pal - you are one hell of a Democrat.

                "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

                by talex on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 11:02:14 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Digital Music.... (6+ / 0-)

                  Copyrights and IP were put into place so that I couldn't make money off of your work. NOT to Create a Business Model and structure that allows you to make money. It is only through years of corporate friendly  legislation and court findings that the current system is in place. Think about how illogic music distribution is....If I buy a CD I have the right to listen to the music from the CD. But I don't have the right to copy that music to an MP3 on my computer. If I would have bought the album on iTunes but decided it was easier to rip from CD to mp3, it could be said that I have circumvented the content protection and I am guilty of violating the DCMA. Radio Stations can broadcast music for everybody to hear, after paying a hefty sum to the "owners". So, I have to right to listen the radio and hear Britney Spears for free, but I don't have the right to listen to that music whenever I want unless I've paid for a physical or digital copy. And If it's a digital copy, that I've paid for, I can't listen to it on my music streamer or PDA, because neither supports Apple's DRM. If I make digital copies from a CD I bought, I'm breaking the law.

                  I'm still pondering whether I'm allowed to borrow someone else's CD and listen to it. Or whether I'm allowed to play my CD when someone else is within listening range, or If I'm allowed to after verifying that they have paid for it.

                  Also, I've purchased many CDs over the years which have been destroyed, either by accident, purposefully, or by apathy, or lost, or lended out and never returned. Since I've paid for these, shouldn't I be able to download another copy for free?

                  Is the value in the plastic of the CD? the bits contained on the CD? The amount of labor it took to get the bits on the CD? the amount of heartache and emotion that the artist put into the song?

                  Why is it that all songs are currently worth 99 cents?

                  There is no inherent monetary value in music. The only value is that in which people are willing to pay, and without IP law and doctrine, there is no music business.

                  And also, I'm about tired of this "the artists need to get paid." Your work isn't art. Artists are poor.

                  If you were so dedicated to your art, you wouldn't be concerning yourself with such things as payment. Your art would be judged by it's creativity and the feelings it inspired in people.

                  It's a product. You are a producer. You judge your work by how much money it makes you. And for your product (sorry...your "Art") to have a viable business model, you need to control the manufactoring, distribution, and legal framework within which you operate. The music companies and RIAA could have embraced the changing technology infrastructure and provided consumers with better or additional services and technology, but they didn't. In their greed and comfortably monopoly of $14.00 per CD, they did nothing, and now they have lost control of the manufactoring and distribution channels and their only hope is restrict the advance of technology. Their only hope is through the legislative process. Eff the RIAA and Music companies. Eff DRM. They can't stop piracy. And in their attempts they alienate paying customers like me. I'm not gonna pay for music that I can't utilize however I feel fit. Protected AAC from Apple..yeah right..MP3 from a million other sources.

                  •  a 1,000 4s (3+ / 0-)

                    you get it, man....thanks.

                    I'm still pondering whether I'm allowed to borrow someone else's CD and listen to it. Or whether I'm allowed to play my CD when someone else is within listening range, or If I'm allowed to after verifying that they have paid for it.

                    No kidding....if a lawyer thought he could figure out how to call that a "performance" and demand fees per additional listener, nothing would stop him....

                    I do have to quibble with this though....

                    And also, I'm about tired of this "the artists need to get paid." Your work isn't art. Artists are poor.

                    If you were so dedicated to your art, you wouldn't be concerning yourself with such things as payment. Your art would be judged by it's creativity and the feelings it inspired in people.

                    Look, I don't mind not being filthy rich, but I still have bills, and playing music comes with a substantial overhead (gear, parts for the gear, gas money, hotels, etc)....I don't need big bucks, but I'd like a smidgen of financial stability....

                    In their greed and comfortably monopoly of $14.00 per CD, they did nothing, and now they have lost control of the manufactoring and distribution channels and their only hope is restrict the advance of technology.

                    Absolutely. And if history shows anything, it shows that getting in the way of technology typically doesn't work out very well....

                    Dreams of empire die hard; empire, that goes away quickly.--Juan Cole

                    by nota bene on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 08:22:01 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Too Funny (0+ / 0-)

                    "If you were so dedicated to your art, you wouldn't be concerning yourself with such things as payment. Your art would be judged by it's creativity and the feelings it inspired in people."

                    So according to you artist should be starving artists who should be happy with being recognized. TFF. You guys think up the lamest excuses to be able to not pay for things.

                    I can only hope that you reap what you sow and that your boss thinks that underpaying you is fine and that you should be happy that he appreciates that you work for so little and that you have a job at all. Accept that scenario and you will be congruent with how you feel artists should be treated.

                    Copying a CD to your MP3 player or making copies for a few friends is a lot different than distributing it across the internet where your computer on a P2P networks could literally distribute it to thousands if not millions of people. If you toiled hard to create something to sell so you could make a living from it and someone demanded to get it for free via the internet you probably would not like that anymore than a music artist.

                    The internet is a convenience tool to communicate with and was never intended to be a vehicle to steal someones creativity and work. Just because something is on the internet does not mean it should be free. This blog is not even free if you look at the ads that it takes to make it keep running. Your access to the internet itself is not free. It costs time and money to build and maintain the infrastructure and keep up with the technology and that is what you pay for. it is no difference with a musician - it takes them time and money to create what they do and they need to be paid also.

                    "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

                    by talex on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 09:02:59 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  and how much is astroturfing worth (0+ / 0-)

                      as a "creative art"? You seem to be the guy to ask about that sort of thing. Do you have ANY opinions that aren't part of some major corporation's Party Line?

                      Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

                      by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 01:35:05 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  How is making a few copies for a few friends (0+ / 0-)

                      any different? Because you know them? Because, they are your friends and since you paid for it, they shouldn't have to? Making one copy is as illegal as making a million. How about you get a coherent position on the matter?

                      The internet is a convienence tool (?) and was never intended to be a vehicle for theft? I can as easily state that copyright law was never intended to create a monopolistic economic and technological infrastructure to support your "art".

                •  fuck you (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  alizard, BOBAUBIN com

                  I am a professional musician. I write, perform, and record music for a living, and I will admit to being pissed off that I don't make more money.

                  I don't appreciate how you're putting words in my mouth.

                  I think that my observations about digital music are merely that--observations--and that I'd love to be able to pay my fucking bills via a recording contract with a giant record label. But the technological landscape has changed and music will change with it, just as it has throughout history. I am a student of music history and I know that the modern record business is a new thing in music years. Before 1920 or so in order to hear music you had to either be in the same room with musicians or play it yourself. Now we're on our third generation since the thing got started and it's become entrenched, but the system is falling apart. I believe the record industry as we know it is to be a recent phenomenon, and one that should not dictate the economics of the entire music world, since the business model is so obviously fucked. (Pop quiz--what's it cost more to manufacture, a cassette or a CD?)

                  The RIAA is trying to put the genie back in the bottle and it's not going to happen. I don't think it's necessarily a good thing, but I think it's inevitable and we may as well get started on the new model already.

                  Re: copyright: copyright law in America has been written by Disney. Copyright is important but the laws have gone too far, and they are being exploited in order to turn profits for those who are not responsible for the creation of work.

                  Since you seem to have me so well figured out about the revolving door, I guess I'll let you argue for me. You don't appear to be interested in having a worthwhile discussion, so go ahead and knock yourself out without me.

                  Good luck pal - you are one hell of a Democrat.

                  Who the fuck do you think you are? You got a lot of nerve to say something like that.

                  Dreams of empire die hard; empire, that goes away quickly.--Juan Cole

                  by nota bene on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 08:12:41 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  fuck me? (1+ / 1-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Bill W
                    Hidden by:

                    What an ass!

                    No one is putting words in your mouth - I am just making "observations" and they are merely that --observations.

                    Yeah you can go on talking about the changing landscape if you want. Keep talking like that and you will never make the money you'd like to make because you talk against your own best interest and the interests of all artists. But then it is understandable because no one ever said that most musicians were great business people. Plenty have been short changed and ripped off because they didn't take care of their own business. You sound destined for the same.

                    "and they are being exploited in order to turn profits for those who are not responsible for the creation of work."

                    Distribution is part of any business. Without distribution all products, including music would not make a cent. Even radio stations are part of the distribution system and they make money off the music. Got a problem with that?

                    Good luck to you pal - you haven't got a clue to how commerce works. You live in some idealistic world where others create and you get it for free.

                    I suggest you live by that motto. You're a musician so sit down and spend weeks of your time writing some music.

                    Then go pay for some studio time to record it professionally.

                    Then pay for a website and bandwidth to upload it to.

                    Then spend some more time calling radio stations to play your music for free and have them mention your website so people can go there...

                    And download it for free.

                    Repeat that for the rest of your life and die broke.

                    "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

                    by talex on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 09:21:09 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  what part of Clear Channel (0+ / 0-)

                      monopoly don't you understand?

                      Of course, you probably cheered Clear Channel when they stopped playing Dixie Chicks tracks on their FM network because the Dixie Chicks didn't toe the GOP Party Line on Iraq.

                      I TR'd you for contributing pure noise to the signal-to-noise ratio of this discussion. You obviously know nothing of entertainment economics, only that the record industry is a corporate institution and that you must support them.

                      I look forward to your support of the banking industry when repeal of the bankruptcy bill comes up to discussion.

                      Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

                      by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 01:19:26 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  a question of morality (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Progressive Moderate

                      and yes, I agree that it isn't fair to ask you questions that are way outside your field of competence.

                      Why is it legal to record to analog tape off the radio and illegal to record to digital formats?

                      BTW, two bands became major bands because people heard their stuff through the (analog) tape trading scene.

                      One is the Grateful Dead.

                      Who's the other one?

                      Hint: their name starts with "M".

                      This are questions for the RIAA fanboys, informed people already know the answers.

                      Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

                      by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 05:24:36 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                •  since you obviously don't understand (0+ / 0-)

                  digital copyright issues, STFU while people who do discuss them, you might learn something. Even if only how to be a better corporate shill.

                  Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

                  by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 01:13:48 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

        •  you've got an example closer to home (0+ / 0-)

          as to why information posted on blogs should not be believed without checking.

          You are the example. Anyone who'd call himself a "progressive" and spend his online time shilling for FoxNews and the RIAA is a waste of oxygen.

          Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

          by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 01:11:56 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Right, and then she was the Mouth of the RIAA (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Jake Nelson, jmcgrew
        So let's hear her say "Sorry, those guys are total dicks," and we can move on.


        The President is not my master. He is Chief among my servants.

        by DemCurious on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 05:38:21 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Oh! (0+ / 0-)

          Then you don't listen to music any more? Because if you do then the artists you listen to are represented by the RIAA.

          If you don't listen to recorded music then fine. But if you do you are practicing hypocrisy.

          So do you listen to recorded music?

          "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

          by talex on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 06:16:13 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  that's a stretch (4+ / 0-)

            the RIAA are a bunch of flaming shitheads. None of those fucking assholes are actually playing any music, so I don't see what the connection is.

            The RIAA does not have artists' best interest in mind. In the modern record industry the artists (and the customers, for that matter) are at the bottom of the fucking pyramid. The record industry is a bunch of non-musical fucking barnacles that have grafted themselves into what was a very simple relationship (musicians --> audience) and made it far more complex than it ever needed to be.

            They're a mob of lawyers, bean-counters, salesmen, philistines, and empty suits. They have nothing to do with music.

            Dreams of empire die hard; empire, that goes away quickly.--Juan Cole

            by nota bene on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 06:28:24 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Stretch? (0+ / 0-)

              By virtue of recording for one of the 90% of the labels out there artists endorse the RIAA to protect their right to be paid for their music which 'is in the artists best interest' - unless of course you think you should get their music free of charge.

              If you listen to anything other than non-RIAA indies then you actually SUPPORT that which you bitch about. That's fact.

              "You Have The Power!" - Howard Dean

              by talex on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 06:38:07 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  no (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                rogun, alizard

                I think the modern record industry (barely eighty years old or so) as a business model has reached its utter limit, and as you would expect, the individuals and entities who are invested in the old order are fighting tooth and nail to preserve what can't be preserved.

                I think that music existed long before there was a record industry to exploit it, and I think that music will exist just fine without the fucking RIAA. By the way, I think you're confusing the RIAA with performing rights societies like ASCAP. Despite their claims to the contrary, the Recording Industry Association of America does not represent artists, it represents labels, which, if you haven't been living under a rock, are notorious for ripping off both artists and consumers.

                Boycotting any music made for a Big Four label is like the fundies trying to boycott's awfully hard to be that pure. It's everywhere in modern culture and that's exactly what's fucked up about it. Through very effective (if ethically questionable) business practices, the RIAA and the labels it represents have come to totally dominate what you hear, just like ClearChannel owns as much of the broadcast market as they're legally allowed to. Just like Microsoft is on nearly every computer. Ad naus.

                The thing is, music is a basic human impulse and people get pretty touchy when you start fucking with it for profit. So you tell me, I'm eating mac and cheese every other night but Mr. Record Executive is paid nicely, and I'm supposed to be happy about that? Fuck that shit. I want to go back to 1900, when I played for you in person and I got paid for that instead of being forced to turn myself into a salesman of little pieces of plastic in order to make a living.

                Dreams of empire die hard; empire, that goes away quickly.--Juan Cole

                by nota bene on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 06:54:20 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  talex's citing of the RIAA (0+ / 0-)

                  as an organization that collects money for artists demonstrates that he knows nothing about the music industry and has no right to expect anyone to respect his opinion on the subject. His only intention here is to disrupt a discussion he's uncomfortable with.

                  Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

                  by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 01:21:19 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

  •  So will the DNC (11+ / 0-)

    now be suing computer-illiterate grandmothers for downloading music?

  •  That is flat freakin' disgusting. n/t (2+ / 0-)
  •  BIG OLD, WTF? (7+ / 0-)

    C'mon Dean, what are you doing?

    by aaraujo on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 03:13:37 PM PDT

  •  Maybe ... (24+ / 0-)

    ... is this her idea of restitution and penance?

    Actually, some quick Googling suggests that the RIAA job was the exception, not the rule, as Engebretsen served as press secretary for John Edwards' 2004 campaign in Wisconsin and South Carolina; Washington press secretary to U.S. Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL); deputy communications director to U.S. Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY); and special assistant to the press secretary during the Clinton Administration.  

  •  Yeah, where was the cluestick (0+ / 0-)

    when they chose her?


    Let the great world spin for ever down the ringing grooves of change. - Tennyson

    by bumblebums on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 03:14:04 PM PDT

  •  "Deputy CEO" is part of the problem (12+ / 0-)

    Wow, what an asinine, corporatist, top-down, management-heavy approach to organization. "Deputy CEO of Public Affairs" shows there's a deep rottenness to the way the DNC is structured if they have titles and positions like this. I wouldn't expect less than a shill from one of the worst-run "companies" in this country to fill such a position.

    Are you shaking or biting the invisible hand?

    by puppethead on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 03:14:32 PM PDT

  •  Howard Dean is allowed to screw up (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DemDachshund, rabel, Ninepatch

    every now and then

    after everything he's accomplished, I'm willing to cut him some slack

    this is a questionable choice but, whatever

    I'm more worried about what this 50 state strategery thingie he has can accomplish come next year's election...

    I'm kind of stalling for time here...They told me what to say. George W Bush, 03-21-2006 10:00 EST Press Conference

    by Tamifah on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 03:14:37 PM PDT

    •  what I like about Dean is (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Progressive Moderate

      that when he makes a mistake, he fixes it rather than making excuses.

      While there may be more anti-consumer organizations than the RIAA/MPAA in existence in America, I can't think of one offhand, unless al Queda has US sleeper cells. Hiring out of an anti-consumer organization is the kind of mistake the GOP can use on us.

      Hiring an RIAA shill is a mistake, and we all know that the fix is.

      Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

      by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 01:56:22 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Well, he compensated for it today (0+ / 0-)

      with his statement about voting rights:

      "The Bush administration's campaign to undermine and politicize essential federal voter protections while downplaying voter suppression tactics is one of the most chilling and cynical examples of the Bush administration's consistent use of our government to put partisan politics ahead of the American people. In our Democracy, every eligible voter deserves the right to cast his or her vote and have that vote counted. But for Republicans, nothing is more important than their narrow partisan interests.

      "The list of tools that Republicans have used to enhance their electoral prospects at the expense of our right to vote reads like a shameful litany from past eras: restricting access to voter registration, improper attempts to purge voter lists, the use of voting machines that
      leave no verifiable audit trails, criminal phone jamming schemes, discriminatory voter ID laws, and inconsistently administered elections. Now, we see the very institutions of our government that are intended to protect the right to vote used by Republican political operatives to undermine that right. This brand of politics is undemocratic and
      un-American. The time has come for Republicans to stop playing politics with our fundamental right to vote."

      Let the great world spin for ever down the ringing grooves of change. - Tennyson

      by bumblebums on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 03:49:45 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  What the hell? (7+ / 0-)

    What's up with Dean, drunk on the beltway Kool-Aide already?  Is the Democratic leadership going to sell out before we even make it to the White House?  

    These trends bode ill.

    •  yes, the next thing you know (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      he'll be elected president and get us involved in an elective war of aggression, lose an american city, tap all our wires, blah blah....

      oh wait...

      I'm kind of stalling for time here...They told me what to say. George W Bush, 03-21-2006 10:00 EST Press Conference

      by Tamifah on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 03:16:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Hey kos, I think your book just got banned in Aus (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    alizard, CenterLeft


    BOOKS and DVDs which glorify terrorism will be banned in Australia under new laws to be unveiled tomorrow by Attorney-General Philip Ruddock.

    Mr Ruddock has declared a "zero-tolerance approach" to material that "advocates" terrorism, which would be pulled from shelves and prevented from entering the country under the new laws, News Ltd newspapers report.

    The title Crashing the Gate sounds a bit terrorist, and the barbed wire on the cover and semi-commie orange color scheme surely puts it over the threshold.

  •  Howie planning on cutting a record? Title:... (0+ / 0-)


    The November 2008 Tsudemi Approacheth!

    by Public Servant on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 03:17:58 PM PDT

  •  Why screw up now though? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Tamifah, Autarkh, KansasLiberal

    If Dean is supposedly allowed a screw up -- why divert attention away from all of the right wing Illegal screw ups that are going on now?

    Can he not see where the "bread and butter" of his party comes from?

    I swear -- it's been all downhill since 11/07/06.  Or maybe I'm just having a bad day.

  •  Hillary Rosen (11+ / 0-)

    The former E.D. of the RIAA has always been knee-deep in Democratic Party politics.  RIAA and the DLC wing of the party are very close.

  •  What a stupid move. Let's boycot DNC. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Suggest we write to DNC and Dean to protest this and also refuse to give one dime to DNC as long as Jenni Engebretsen is on the DNC payroll.

    If they want her, fine, but my money is not going to pay her salary.

    •  Oh, come on. (8+ / 0-)

      That's purity trollism to an ugly degree because of one line on an otherwise solidly Democratic resume.

      •  RIAA (4+ / 0-)

        Well, this may just be one line on her resume...but it proves that she's willing to sell her soul to the devil.

        My dream ticket in 2008? John Edwards-Kathleen Sebelius

        by KansasLiberal on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 03:30:46 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  agree (6+ / 0-)

        but it's the effing RIAA! they'll have their very own rung of hell. it's a bad hire....imho, not enough to warrant abandoning the whole Democratic Party (c'mon now), but enough that whoever made the decision (even if it's HD himself) deserves a little kick in the ass so they get a clue that the grassroots don't appreciate people who rep for people who sue little girls.

      •  The RIAA (5+ / 0-)

        Is quite possibly the single most hated entity amongst internet users - and this crosses political and international lines. An internet based boycott of an event based on evidence of possible ties with the RIAA is not purity trollism - it's actually pretty predictable.

      •  The LAST line (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        This isn't some youthful folly; the venomous lies are still glistening on her lips.


        The President is not my master. He is Chief among my servants.

        by DemCurious on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 05:44:24 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I agree with you (0+ / 0-)

        it's killing me to stick up for somebody with that one line, but this is just a PR flack we're talking's a bit much to jump ship on the party over something like this....

        Dreams of empire die hard; empire, that goes away quickly.--Juan Cole

        by nota bene on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 06:37:53 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  that's (0+ / 0-)

        horseshit and you know it.

        The DNC is a convenience from our point of view. When it comes right down to it, we don't need them to support Democratic candidates.

        AFAIK, the RIAA hasn't made it illegal for private individuals to donate directly to candidates, or to local and state party organizations.

        Unless they've bought a new law from their DLC friends in Congress.

        It isn't just the content industry that has suffered from the influence of laws purchased by the Hollywood content cartel. The consumer technology industry, on which far more jobs depend on than on Hollywood has been hampered as well... and that's where I make my own bread and butter.

        If you think my decision not to donate to an organization that uses its hiring decisions to say "screw you" to the American consumer and to high-tech industry in general is "purity trollism"... than your good opinion is not something that should matter to me or to anyone else.

        Though I'm willing to wait at this time for Dean to fix his mistake, I agree with the other Kossacks willing to cut him slack based on previous good decisions.

        Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

        by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 02:14:57 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Yes... (0+ / 0-)

      let's boycott Great Satan Dean! /snark

      Really, you guys are unbelievable. Dean does one thing you don't like and all of a sudden he's the enemy. Kos said so!

      •  Not the enemy (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        I'm happy that Dean's mostly on our side, but why should that exempt him from criticism?

        Democrats -- Progress for the Working Class

        by rogun on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 11:25:19 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  OK, that's fair (0+ / 0-)

          but some aKossacks re talking about not donating to the DNC at all and have practically morphed Dean into McAuliffe. WTF?

          •  hiring Ms Engebretton (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Progressive Moderate

            as a former flack for the most anti-consumer and anti-technology organization in America (with the possible exception of the Bush White House) is EXACTLY the sort of thing McAuliffe would have done.

            Shouldn't we expect better from Howard Dean?

            Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

            by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 02:19:23 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Sorry for the late response (0+ / 0-)

            But I had to let you know that I agree with you that not donating to the DNC is the wrong response. I wish everything were so simple that we could make such hasty decisions, but they're not and by refusing to donate to the DNC we'd basically be giving BushCo and the RNC a big, undeserved gift.

            There are better ways to show our disapproval then refusing to play the game -- and therefore, refusing to help advance the many worthy plans that a DNC-led government has to offer -- and I can only hope that those who are making such threats are not so simple-minded that they'd be willing to jeopardize everything we've worked for because of a single issue they have with Howard Dean. Hiring a RIAA shill upsets me also, but like you, I'm not willing to go that far.

            Democrats -- Progress for the Working Class

            by rogun on Sun Apr 15, 2007 at 12:16:06 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Is this really that surprising? (9+ / 0-)

    The Dems haven't been falling all over themselves to repeal the DMCA or anything.  The RIAA is to the Democratic Party us what Exxon-Mobil is to the GOP, a really embarassing but financially important supporter.  The liberal blogosphere may be against them, but (other than Net Neutrality, which was an existential issue for the blogosphere) I never thought DNC or any of the campaign committees were avoiding them.

    Read James Loewen's "Sundown Towns"!

    by ChicagoDem on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 03:22:24 PM PDT

  •  Her performance is the only thing that matters (4+ / 0-)

    If she can do the job Dean and the DNC hire her, great!

    I don't judge lawyers on the basis of the people they represent. Same goes for other professions where people are in the business of representing interests other than their own. Obviously, there's a limit to giving people the people the benefit of the doubt, I just don't think Jeni has crossed that limit.

    "Party like a rock star, hammer like a porn star, rake like an all-star!"

    by crazymoloch on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 03:24:56 PM PDT

    •  Given My Propensity (5+ / 0-)

      to give Howard Dean the benefit of the doubt, I hope this is a case of "keep your friends close, and your enemies closer"--at least in terms of Net Neutrality.

      If the corporate thugs succeed in smashing Net Neutrality, the nascent progressive movement in this country that led to the victories last Fall will be set back 20 years.

      The right has succeeded in getting Republicans and corporate Democrats elected to office for the past 26 years because they've been able to control public opinion through control of the media.  They don't control the Net yet, but they're assembling their lobbyists for the assualt.

      Progressive cannot allow the Democratic Party to cave in on Net Neutrality.

      "Throughout the nation...private enterprise, indeed, became too private. It became privileged enterprise, not free enterprise."--FDR

      by FDR Statue In Every County on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 03:51:16 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Seriously..... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Given my propensity to give Howard Dean the benefit of the doubt, I hope this is a case of "keep your friends close, and your enemies closer"--at least in terms of Net Neutrality.

        How is "keep your friends close, and your enemies closer" even a plausible rationale for hiring DNC staff? Should Dean hire the netire VRWC? You hire someone because they can get the job done.

        The right has succeeded in getting Republicans and corporate Democrats elected to office for the past 26 years because they've been able to control public opinion through control of the media.  They don't control the Net yet, but they're assembling their lobbyists for the assualt.

        Not ready to buy they, yet. People bear responsibility for their stupid voting choice.

        "Party like a rock star, hammer like a porn star, rake like an all-star!"

        by crazymoloch on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 04:21:22 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  so if the DNC (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Progressive Moderate

      hires Karl Rove to run the national Democratic campaign next year, you're OK with that?

      Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

      by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 05:27:30 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  kos is on point with this post (13+ / 0-)

    everyone at my school (occidental) got served up with a "warning" email sent from the dean of students that, apparently, was sent to colleges nationwide. The letter says that the RIAA is committed to scanning private college networks and finding people who share copyrighted material, then filing lawsuits against said individuals.

    That's how you get everyone on your take them to court.

    -8.63, -3.18 someone give Shrub a blowjob so we can impeach him already.

    by feingoldforVP on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 03:25:12 PM PDT

  •  Thank you for bringing this to our attention. (4+ / 0-)

    You seem to be the last person we can really trust.  I'm really disappointed in Howard Dean on this one.  Maybe we need to tell him.  In my opinion, our judicial system is broken, especially in Connecticut, but that's a long story for another day.

  •  ... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KansasLiberal, IamLorax

    ...of ALLLLL the people they could have hired!

  •  I was under the impression (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    turnover, maralenenok

    that Saint Dean was infallible.  Interesting.

  •  Unethical and ineffective! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    What a combo, how could you pass that up!

    Imagine if the government took David's sling away and gave it to Goliath. Now you understand tort reform.

    by bosdcla14 on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 03:31:16 PM PDT

  •  This decision stinks. (4+ / 0-)

    Tell Dean you're disappointed.

    Well, disappointed is a bit weak, but probably pissed wouldn't make it through the filter.

    In 1492 Native Americans discovered Columbus lost at sea.

    by Bugsby on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 03:32:13 PM PDT

  •  Whenever I think of the RIAA... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Abou Ben Adhem, drag0n, JML9999

    ...I think of one of my favorite bands, Rocket From the Crypt (RIP). They had a great t-shirt back in the day that had a drawing of a cassette on it, with the phrase "Home recording is killing the record industry."

    Underneath the above? RFTC's own prerogative: "Killin' ain't wrong."

    "Like a baby down a well / like a prisoner in his cell / I can wait all day / I can wait as long as it takes." - C. Lopez

    by turnover on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 03:32:38 PM PDT

  •  Wow. I Feel So Alone. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AlanF, Back in the Cave

    I'm almost always agreeing with the stuff I see here, but I get frustrated when people get up in arms about the RIAA going after people for downloading music. Anyone who doesn't understand that it's wrong (and illegal) to download music is, at best, rationalizing their beliefs.

    I'm not a fan of the DMCA either, but I'm also not opposed to the RIAA aggressively going after the people who get for free the stuff that I pay for simply because I'm too stupid to be a thief.

    And on their desire to "commit wire fraud," well, again, to me this appears to be frustration that they may succeed in reducing theft. And they're not asking to avoid the law, they're asking for a clarification that simply posing as a criminal while looking for criminals (but not committing any crimes, themselves) is legal.

    As to hiring a lawyer who has been successful in representing her clients, why would that be bad?

    •  It's beyond agressive enforcement (12+ / 0-)

      Here's the RIAA's basic MO:

      Send a letter to a student offering a "deal" of only giving the RIAA approximately $3000. This student may or may not have committed copyright infringement. Threaten that if the student does not comply he/she will be sued at enormous legal cost to the student. Take the money and run, or drop the case if the student fails to comply.

      The RIAA has never won a court case and almost always drops the effort before discovery because in the few cases in which they did reach this stage their "evidence" was shown to be laughably poor.

      And if I laugh at any mortal thing, 'T is that I may not weep;

      by splinterbrain on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 03:58:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm sure Lloydian knows this (0+ / 0-)

        and approves completely of "copyright" enforcement via extortion applied by "lawbot".

        There are only two viewpoints that make it reasonable to support the RIAA against the American public.

        Either complete ignorance or complicity.

        Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

        by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 02:24:14 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Only Two? (0+ / 0-)

          Just one possibility or the other?

          What you call copyright enforcement via extortion, I call simply copyright enforcement. To label the threat of a lawsuit as "extortion" reduces our system of laws to less than I believe true.

          Am I complicit? No. I'm a law abiding citizen, not even remotely connected to the music industry, who wishes that people would obey laws because it's the right thing to do, not because of fear of lawsuit.

          For a number of years now, we have had iTunes, Rhapsody, Connect and others allowing us to purchase songs for less than my parents paid in the '50s for a 45 RPM single. But that has not reduced the amount of stealing done by people who, upon learning how easy it is to steal, do so without remorse. Even worse, many see their theft as acts of civil disobedience.

          When people point out cases that seem baseless, closer inspection reveals better information (the woman who never owned a computer did, curiously, own a wireless router and maintained an unsecured Internet connection for it: why?; recording industry says copying to iPods is illegal: nope, and they specifically said that they weren't saying that in legal documents).

          I have little pity for people who rail against authority figures simply because they want to get away with whatever they're doing. Not stealing music and still don't like what the RIAA is doing? Fine. I disagree, and it isn't because I'm ignorant or complicit. Try again.

          •  pure RIAA party-line bullshit (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Progressive Moderate

            Here's an example of what you are supporting:

            Runaround Suits
            By Mike Godwin (mnemonic) - Godwin's Law

            I've always said that the Recording Industry Association of America and its member companies are perfectly within their rights to sue those they think are infringing on music copyrights through peer-to-peer file-trading of songs. At the same time, it seems obvious that the RIAA should pick the lawsuits prudently, based on solid evidence, so that when the cases are publicized it will be clear that the defendants deserved what they got.

            That doesn't seem to be what's happening, however. Instead, the RIAA notifies potential defendants that they are subject to a lawsuit that may result in hundreds of thousands of dollars of liability, and then gives them the option of settling the claim for only a few thousand dollars. It ought to be needless to say this, but sometimes an innocent defendant might still opt to take the settlement, because the risk of going to court and losing is so great.

            Would you care to explain to us how a legalized extortion model can be considered "progressive"?

            BTW, the RIAA labels filing this action got stomped so badly that they tried to withdraw their complaint "without prejudice".

            So are you complicit or just ignorant?

            Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

            by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 03:24:31 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  A simple analogy (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Progressive Moderate

            The RIAA is protecting its copyrights like Guantanamo is protecting the US from terrorists.

            Both are likely doing some true enforcement but there are so many false positives, and the rule of law is so abused that the net results to society and all parties involved are almost certainly negative.

            And if I laugh at any mortal thing, 'T is that I may not weep;

            by splinterbrain on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 05:27:10 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  If it weren't for free downloaded music (6+ / 0-)

      We would not have a way to download music legally at a reasonable price (iTunes is the best known example).

      I remember a few years ago some RIAA-loving members of Congress were pushing a bill to make it a felony with mandatory prison to download copyrighted material.

      What the RIAA really wants is to completely get rid of the "piracy," so that they can get rid of iTunes and similar places and force people to buy full CD's at $15 even if there's only one song they like on them.

      The responsibility of defending a copyright should fall entirely on the copyright holder.  They have the right to sue, but just as if I were suing a doctor for malpractice, the government doesn't have to help them (nor hinder them; it should simply stay out of it).

      More importantly, the recording companies must always have to worry about illegal downloads.  The second they don't, the legal and more fairly priced sites like iTunes will be dead.

      Economic -3.50/Social -2.41 "Please don't eat the moderates." (Yes, someone else used that before me, but it's perfect.)

      by CenterLeft on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 04:10:10 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The RIAA (4+ / 0-)

      is the bullet that the record industry shot itself in the head with.

    •  It's tough to defend piracy (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jmcgrew, DemCurious

      But the RIAA brought it upon themselves.

      They made it impossible to get anything new and fresh outside of the realm of online music.  They insisted on killing the single because they'd rather you pay 18 bucks for a full CD (and ironically, the truly worthy 'album', artistically speaking, has pretty much gone extinct).  

      I used Napster.  I also began using iTunes when it became available.  I own more than 700 CDs - not to mention hundreds of cassettes and even a smattering of 8tracks and records.  I have been the RIAA's bitch for long enough.  

      I don't 'pirate' music anymore.  But you know what?  I don't buy all that much music anymore, either.  I still try to make it out to dive bars to see local bands- but I am so utterly turned off by the RIAA and music industy in general that I honestly 'go without' music.  Music generally will be better off once the rotting infrastructure that gives us shitty products at shitty prices via shitty delivery methods dies off.  Via Atrios last week -- see this - this sums me up perfectly.

      Now... That said -

      Forget whether you agree with me or not concerning the downloading of music and the RIAA (but do remember, I've purchased what probably equates to $10K+ in my lifetime of CDs, cassettes, albums, concert tix, posters, Ts - and I am by no means a rich man)...  

      Do you really want the Director of Communications for the group that turned me from ardent music snob to what I am today to be in charge of anything of the same sort for your political party?

      Forget the RIAA and how you feel about downloading - the music industry is dying, the RIAA is near universally hated... she's a bad hire because that's a frickin motherload of incompetence.

      I guess everyone's got their own blog now.

      by zonk on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 04:44:35 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I'm not attacking you personally (4+ / 0-)

      Please don't be offended.

      I also don't want to get us off thread, so I'm not going to rebut the statement "Anyone who doesn't understand that it's wrong (and illegal) to download music is, at best, rationalizing their beliefs" here except to analogize thus:

      The "debate" over the moral equivalence between sharing entertainment-related files and stealing actual property is much like the "debate" over climate change.

      Excepting those representing affected industries, the overwhelming majority of participants (60 million as of 2003) seem to fall on one side of the controversy, thus rendering even the description "controversy" somewhat absurd.

      Obviously we're describing an argument about morality and not science, but unless the entertainment industry manages to implant a chip into everybody's heads that automatically substitutes the word "stealing" for "sharing", it still seems like you're going to be lonely and frustrated for a very long time...

    •  you should feel lonely... unappreciated, and (0+ / 0-)


      What part of DailyKos is a progressive community do you not understand?

      Perhaps you should find a community whose opinions on property rights are closer to yours, like RedState or FreeRepublic.

      Just kidding, I don't think you're pro-Hollywood content monopoly position would go down even well even among wingnuts. NOBODY likes the RIAA except the truly stupid (the people not smart enough to be in Bush's die-hard 25%) and people on their payroll, directly or indirectly.

      Your only hope of finding a forum where your uninformed (or perhaps - well informed and totally disingenous) opinions are appreciated is to get the RIAA or MPAA to pay you to make one, and let your shillblog posts come only from astroturfers in the pay of *AA companies or their PR firms.

      Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

      by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 05:34:57 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The RIAA: "We'll Sue You're Ass" (21+ / 0-)

    The RIAA has......

    In one of their latest moves, the RIAA has filed suit against, a Russian online music store. AllOfMP3 sells their music based on volume of data downloaded, and not price per song. A song that costs 99 cents on iTunes is 12 cents at AllOfMP3. The record companies are asking for $1.65 Trillion in damages. That is more than the GDP of the Russian Federation itself....

  •  yay kos! (4+ / 0-)

    Glad to see you on this so fast. I'm writing my letter to Schumer after I post this.

  •  There was a job open at the DNC? (6+ / 0-)

    For an organization that is supposed to be in support of equal opportunity, I've been curious about why they don't post their job openings on-line?

    So I would be interested in knowing, how many people applied for this job and where it was advertised.

    Besides her professional relationships, it might also be neat to know if she is related to anyone that would give the appearance of cronyism to this hire.

    Formerly of Los Angeles, now in the FL Panhandle(Lower Alabama) I blog at

    by Thom K in LA on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 03:46:18 PM PDT

  •  Hyperbole? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Progressive Moderate

    There might not be any bigger scumbags in the corporate world today than the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA).

    I beg to differ. There are plenty of corporations whose actions have caused death or physical injury or other misery. Does the RIAA manufacture disembowling swimming pool drains? Do its actions drive wars?

    •  given that the Hollywood content cartel (0+ / 0-)

      is doing to limit American competitiveness in high technology through restrictive legislation, I'd say that they're at least as dangerous to America as Big Oil is.

      And a bigger danger to the American economy than al Queda ever hoped to be.

      Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

      by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 05:38:19 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  here's what I wrote to Schumer (7+ / 0-)

    Spur of the moment, not edited:

    When I read that the DNC had hired your former staffer who now works as a lobbyist ("Director of Communications") for the recording industry association

    the association that makes a hobby of suing students, the elderly, children, and innocent people who don't have a computer

    the recording industry lobbyists who sue innovation to death

    When I read that the DNC had hired a lobbyist to govern its interaction with the media consisted of avoiding the media and issuing "no comment" statements

    I felt sure you could correct this mistake.

    We're supposed to be running against the culture of corruption, not contributing to it. The last thing the Convention needs is to have a lobbyist in charge. That sends the message that rather than fighting the culture of corruption, we're going to cash in ourselves.

    I know you cannot stop Steny Hoyer from cashing in

    But I believe that you can correct the DNC and prevent your former staffer from embarrassing the party.

  •  Bummer, Man (0+ / 0-)

    People have this idea that if you work for someone that you automatically agree with everything they do.

    Bloggers might be united on that fundamental misunderstanding about people as well.

    Now if you'd have said this Jenni person was crappy at her last job, then I'd be all depressed about it.

    For now.  In Dean I trust.

    More time is being spent trying to create agreement in the Dem Party than is being spent trying to exploit disagreement in the Republican Party.

    by Edgar08 on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 03:59:23 PM PDT

    •  Along those lines (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      alizard, DemCurious, CenterLeft, IamLorax

      People have this idea that if you work for someone that you automatically agree with everything they do.

      So Rove doesn't agree with the current administration, he's just doing his job?

      We need to hold people accountable for their actions - working for an evil company means you're complicit in their actions. It's not like she was trying to change the company from the inside.

      •  Along what lines? (0+ / 0-)

        Surely, you can see the difference between an RIAA lawyer and Karl Rove. If Ms. Engebretsen was pulling the kind of stuff that Rove has demonstrated, then sure she would be a bad choice. But I've seen no evidence that compares to the Rove example.

        •  so that's the standard? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          So everyone's OK if they aren't quite as bad as Karl Rove?

        •  in defense of Karl Rove (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Progressive Moderate

          I've NEVER heard of Rove using bots combing through filenames on people's hard drive file shares to locate people he thinks might be political enemies of his.

          While Rove has misused the law on people, at least he knew who and why he was misusing the law against, and he has never sent tens of thousands of demand letters against e-mail addresses gathered by automated software spying systems saying "give us several thousand dollars or we'll sue you in Federal court!"

          IOW, Rove has an organization he can feel morally superior to.

          Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

          by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 09:11:22 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  And Albert Pujols (0+ / 0-)

        can't play for the Orioles cause the owner of the Cardinals gives to Republicans and the owner of the Orioles gives to Democrats.

        I know I know.

        Sometimes people do believe in what they do and agree with the people they work for (Rove), sometimes they're just there to do a job.

        Who really knows about this Jenni person.

        At least we know she's not Karl Rove.

        More time is being spent trying to create agreement in the Dem Party than is being spent trying to exploit disagreement in the Republican Party.

        by Edgar08 on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 04:50:54 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  C'mon Kos... (0+ / 0-)

    why do you pretend to dis Howard, when everyone knows you're on his payroll?


  •  Not every liberal hates the RIAA... (0+ / 0-)

    Most musicians (and artists in general) seem to love the various artistic cartels (like ASCAP, who love to shake down small businesses for the horrible crime of playing the radio in their shops), even thought the RIAA, et. al. screws musicians and artists every chance they can.

    I guess when you are a starving artist, you're willing to prostitute even your very soul for crumbs on your plate.



    •  I'm not so sure about that... (7+ / 0-)

      I run with something of a musician crowd - local band guys who haven't "made it" (yet).  

      One guy summed it up perfectly:

      He didn't really care about mp3 downloads (legal or illegal -- hell, free downloads were the best possible way to gain exposure for his band, so he loved the medium) -- in the end, we get to the point of a different set of corporate scumbags screwing over young untested artists and all but ignoring bands that don't fit the flavor of the year.  In the 50s and 60s - it was the concert promoters, then it was the record industry execs... it'll probably revert back to concert promoters as the 'industry' goes the way of the dinosaur.   The upside, as he put it, is that music should get better because good live music (as opposed to lavish, expensive spectacles) will become the sole currency of bands and artists to appeal to afficionados in a way where the band can still get paid.  Also a Firefly fan - 'You can't stop the signal', he said.

      I guess everyone's got their own blog now.

      by zonk on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 04:57:27 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  musicians like ASCAP/BMI/etc (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      alizard, Progressive Moderate

      because those entities actually pay musicians (not always reliably, but it's there)....the RIAA and the businesses (ie labels) it represents are generally taking money from musicians....

      And PS some of us prefer to starve vs turn into whores, although I'd rather just get paid for playing live music instead of selling merchandise....

      Dreams of empire die hard; empire, that goes away quickly.--Juan Cole

      by nota bene on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 08:44:13 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Other choices than the RIAA or starvation. . . (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        nota bene

        go to this comment for a quick review of how to sell your music either as CDs (with SOMEBODY ELSE collecting from the credit card companies for you) or as digital tracks.

        What isn't in the post is through companies like Cafepress, you can not only sell band CDs and tracks, but you can have a band merchandise selection available for online ordering comparable to that of a major label band. Posters, T-shirts, coffee mugs, etc.

        Instead of hauling CDs and merchandise on top of your equipment between gigs, haul your equipment and flyers with your band website printed on them.

        Basically, the RIAA labels give a musician a lottery ticket... if you win, you've got megabucks. If you lose like 99+% of musicians who sign on to them do, you'll never earn out your first album advance and your future creative output will be owned... but not marketed.

        Personally, I see little reason to bother with the middleman.

        Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

        by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 02:37:51 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Jenni Engebretsen the Bob Shrum of RIAA (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Progressive Moderate

    At least she's only running PR for the convention and not the party/general election.........Yet.

    Be carefull what you shoot at, most things in here don't react well to bullets-Sean Connery .... Captain Marko Ramius -Hunt For Red October

    by JML9999 on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 04:26:30 PM PDT

  •  RIAA have always been scum... (7+ / 0-)

    ...and a coalition with these dirtbags is one of the DNC biggest blindspots.

    Here in Oregon-beyond already shutting down our library systems, we are looking a summarily terminating our Public broadcast systems as well.

    This due to a bill sponsored by Al Gore which mandates an automatic switching to a digital broadcast format which on average costs each independent station 18 million dollars.

    Most independents will simply shut down in 2009.

    How does apply to the RIAA-these are the record industry hacks who are trying to perpetuate the same studio/distribution system that ripped off creators rights as far back as the 1950s.

    Think Elvis and Col whats-his-face, among sooo many others.

    Well, by suing college students and at-home mothers, the RIAA is trying to weasel it's way into the new millenium.

    The RIAA is utilizing morally bankrupt legal practices which steal artists's creative properties without giving them a dime.

    They also champion ripping off their artists by forcing them to sign over rights to publicly-traded corporations, whose stockholders are only too happy to sell to whatever advertising campaign ponies up the big bucks.

    Finally, the RIAA are the foremost champions of the DRMA act (spelled wrong-think digital rights millenium act)...

    Which is an act which essentially mandates digital watermarks, an inability to copy things you've legally purchased, and a fundamental assualt to the freedom of information, which is one of the cornerstones that made this country great!

    I despise these idiots, and the DNC has compromised itself once again.


    •  It's the DMCA... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ScienceMom, Progressive Moderate

      The Digital Millennium Copyright Act, and about 95% of it is completely unobjectionable.  The main thing it does it makes it a separate illegal act to, if a copyrighted item (typically software, music, or a film) is protected by encryption, to break that encryption.  IMHO, copyright infringement is wrong, and so is "breaking in" even if just to look at something.  It has been overzealously used, but it's the right principle.

      •  I agree with you in principle... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Progressive Moderate

        ...but the practice has been ugly and wrong.

        And the record industry has always been a collection of scum and villiany just like Mos Eisley in Star Wars.

        I think all college students oughta sue them right back, and we all go back to cassette tape duplication like in the 1980s.

        You make very good points, sir.

        Great post!


      •  It is not the right principle. (4+ / 0-)

        By "breaking in", you mean accessing and using the audio (or whatever other) data that you paid for. The same audio data that in different formats appears on CDs, records, and the analog line-out that you can easily record (although they've tried to stop that, too).

        Society decided that breaking and entering was bad because of its threat to privacy and sanctity of physical property, and the ease of things getting stolen. Only the latter applies here (if you believe "piracy" is "theft", which is already questionable), and even so the original doesn't cease to exist because a copy is made. They are claiming a moral right to a type of legal protection that was not invented for their benefit. Only lobbying and bad politics can justify that connection.

        •  Yes... (0+ / 0-)

          there are certain uses that are problematic from an ethical standpoint.  However, what the aim is to do is to prevent massive piracy and copyright infringement, which is a bad thing, not just for the "evil corporate overlords" but for the artists/writers who created the copyrighted materials, and whose compensation rests largely (if not entirely) on sales.

          •  The law was made (5+ / 0-)

            pretty much by lawyers and industry representatives, along with a handful of technology companies who had a vested interest in selling DRM software they were developing. It creates an entirely new class of crime without any substantive public input. The chances are high that if the public knew this and understood what exactly the law represented they would oppose it just as the smaller community which has been more aware of it has generally been active against it.

          •  The bad thing is the business model (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            It's foolish to do a bunch of work for free and then hope to get paid for it later, especially when the only means to get paid for it later is to sell copies - when you know everyone can make and distribute their own copies for free, going right around you, and you can't do anything to stop it.

            The DMCA and all these lawsuits are just temporary life support for a business model that should've died years ago. It's fundamentally flawed: no amount of legislation or lawsuits can change the fact that information is inherently copyable.

      •  I don't agree with you in principle (7+ / 0-)

        95% of the DMCA is quite objectionable:

        DMCA Title I: WIPO Copyright and Performances and Phonograms Treaties Implementation Act

        "...implemented a broad ban on the circumvention of copy prevention systems and required that all analog video recorders have support for a specific form of copy prevention commonly known as Macrovision built in. (From Wikipedia)"

        DMCA Title II: Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act

        "...OCILLA also provides for subpoenas to OSPs to provide their users' identity. (From Wikipedia)"

        DMCA Title III: Computer Maintenance Competition Assurance Act

        " ...Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of Copy.— Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer program provided:
        (1) that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no other manner, or
        (2) that such new copy or adaptation is for archival purposes only and that all archival copies are destroyed in the event that continued possession of the computer program should cease to be rightful. (Cornell Law)"

        ...I could go on, I suppose, but the the only parts left are:

        DMCA Title IV: Miscellaneous Provisions

        and of course

        DMCA Title V: Vessel Hull Design Protection Act

        (yes, that's right...a provision for boat hull designs)

        Because of time constraints (yours and mine), I won't go into why copyright infringement is, IMHO not morally wrong (except in certain specific and egregious cases).

        But please think about this:

        Since copyright infringement isn't actually occurring when I choose to use my purchased property consistent with Fair Use copyright exceptions (excerpting, backing up, other non-commercial use, etc.), if I somehow am ingenious or diligent enough override "that encryption", then I am still breaking the law to do something that is perfectly legal.

        To address the pejorative phrase "breaking in", I guess that I would use the term "exercising my rights", since the "locks" we're talking about don't recognize whether I have a right to open them or not.
        It's not illegal or immoral to "break in" to "my own car"...perhaps a better analogy is needed.

  •  Howard Dean will hear from me! (11+ / 0-)

    I am a copyright holder, former songwriter and Columbia Records recording artist.  I am now a software designer and engineer, owning copyrights to what I (and my company) produce and sell.  As such, I am someone on behalf of whom representatives of the entertainment industry claim to be speaking.

    As a member of the EFF () however, I am also doing everything in my power to thwart the perverted agenda of the RIAA, first and foremost by demanding of my Democratic Party congressional representatives the repeal of the malignant DMCA statutes.

    For those unfamiliar, the DMCA law passed in 1998 primarily acts as a sort-of statutory work-around to the legal copying, excerpting and non-commercial sharing by you of stuff that you bought and own.  Because the DMCA specifically

    "makes it illegal to:

       * (1) 'circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work' (From Wikipedia)"

    , that means that you can't make a single copy of a CD that is (however faultily and by whatever record company scheme) copy-protected by bypassing that mechanism without breaking the law.

    That's right: if some music industry lawyers decide that you may have ripped that CD for commercial gain, you can be criminally prosecuted:

    "The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is a United States copyright law which implements two 1996 WIPO treaties. It criminalizes production and dissemination of technology, devices, or services that are used to circumvent measures that control access to copyrighted works (commonly known as DRM) and criminalizes the act of circumventing an access control, even when there is no infringement of copyright itself. (From Wikipedia)"

    This grotesque, insane loophole in our rights as creators and consumers has spawned such legal lunacy as:

    "Princeton student J. Alex Halderman[1] was threatened by SunnComm under this law for explaining how Mediamax CD-3 CD copy protection worked. Halderman explained that the copy protection could be defeated by holding down the shift key when inserting the CD into Windows (this prevented autorun, which installed the Mediamax protection software). After press attention SunnComm withdrew their threat. (From Wikipedia again))"

    In my experience, real artists, real writers and real copyright holders (not the imaginary ones held up as the purported beneficiaries of RIAA lawsuits) are overwhelmingly opposed to everything the "content" industry corporate elites stand for (see this short essay by the excellent recording engineer Steve Albini)

    By definition "people-powered politics" excludes the kind of corporate-brothel legislation that the DCMA embodies.  Kos has been (IMHO) extraordinarily effective in making the case against the threat of consolidated corporate power:

    "...much of what’s known as "corporate welfare" is not designed to protect personal liberties. Rather it rewards inefficiencies in the market and the politically connected. Intellectual property law protections, constantly extended at the behest of Walt Disney in service to its perpetual Mickey copyright, have created a corporate stranglehold over information in an era where information is currency. Patent law allows companies like Amazon to patent simple and obvious "business processes" like "one-click shopping," which they protect with armies of lawyers and deep pockets. In the non-virtual sphere, cities use eminent domain to strip property owners of their rights on behalf of private developers. (From his article here)".

    Once again I applaud his commitment to and expression of our values.

    Let's not let the Democratic Party be sullied by its association with the entertainment industry lawsuit lobby the way that the Republican Party has been tainted by its bedfellows in big energy.

    We deserve much, much better than this; I am going to express to Howard Dean tonight ( my revulsion at having the Democratic Convention's publicity managed by ex-RIAA mercenaries.

    A big thank you to Kos for his continued vigilance on this issue...

    •  Yeah, well (0+ / 0-)

      I PM for a couple artists on two of the five evil labels who are still musicians who haven't retired to IT, and to all your Boing Boingist garbage, I say copy copy copy, but if you don't want to get sued, don't sell your copies.  One makes you an archivist, the other a bootlegger.  

      And, don't steal.  

      I don't buy for a second you are or were a Columbia Records recording artist.  I call BS.  You sound like an EFF communist shill to me.

      "Life is a dream for the wise, a game for the fool, a comedy for the rich, a tragedy for the poor." --Sholem Yakov Rabinowitz

      by Back in the Cave on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 07:59:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Are Proud of Your Job Assclown? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        alizard, CenterLeft


        Where to begin...

        I have never, ever known a product manager at a major label that wasn't the worst kind of starfucker.

        I mean, A&R guys aren't even the kind of worthless, gutless, amoeba-spined bloodclots that PMs are.  Ever notice how few people actually want to talk to you at any sort of release event?  That's because they have better things to do...and I mean everyone.  I think that (label-side) tour management people are are a more creative, more fun bunch.  No wonder so many product managers turn out to be alcoholics...nobody gives a fuck if you even exist!

        It doesn't surprise me that at all that you wouldn't recognize a recording artist when you met're about the farthest thing from a recording artist possible, aren't you?  You're really, really down there on the food chain, aren't you?  You're like a quarter-step above the interns, right?

        I wonder what experiences led you to your current job...did you get all moist when a drum tech yelled at you to get out of the way when you were backstage somewhere with your little pass that some radio asshole lent you?  Is that the feeling that helped you decide to get into the music industry someday?
        Do you ever wonder when you're at the big rock show why it isn't you up there, why you don't have the talent or the guts to do what you're so obviously jealous of?  

        I mean you must really know that you're nothing without us.  It has to be back there somewhere in that ferret brain of yours, that you live in a fantasy world that's disintigrating around you like an East German cop trying to direct traffic around the Berlin wall.  I love you you morons try to turn reality on its head by impotently sobbing out bogus justifications for your collective existence.  Artists really need you?  Please, don't make me laugh any harder...I'll forget that great melody that I just came up with. Oh, wait, that's right, you have no experience with that sort of thing.  It's like describing a rainbow to a congenitally blind person. Please forgive me for my insensitivity to your disability...lack of musical ability, that is.

        Face the facts:  you and your kind are parasites--luckless, talentless eunuchs good for nothing except the dog-pack ass-sniffing rituals that pass in your world for business.
        Without the federal government to enforce your state-granted monopoly on duplication, you add no fucking value whatsoever to the process of making and selling good music.  You are the ultimate stereotypical welfare recipients.  It must be so stressful for you, knowing that at any time there might be an end-to-welfare-as-we-know-it moment where the government stops supporting your business model. It must be so exhausting for you, blindly sucking on the flesh that keeps you propelled forward, like the pilotfish that you obviously are.

        It's really sad that you fill your meaningless workdays never knowing what its like to, say, play in front of tens of thousands of people at the Reading festival in England...or sit with, say, Jeff Buckley discussing how you play a certain way to evoke a certain atmosphere.  But at least, I suppose, you do still get paid a salary...for now.

        If you were in any way familiar with the creative process--if you had actually done it for a living ever--you might have the credentials to describe copying music (that sound that you do not make) as stealing or not stealing.
        It is painfully (for your dignity) clear, however, that you have no fucking idea whatsoever what stealing is, what the EFF is, what a communist is, what a recording artist is, and what you yourself are.

        I'm not going to name-drop because of your weak "BS call".
        I don't have the time to fill you in on the differences between real property and intellectual property, because I'm actually pretty busy--I have work to do actually creating copyrightable material.

        I can let you in on how recording artists really talk about you label people when you're not around.  I remember one musician I used to know describing label people as "the only invertebrate mammals".  We think that labels are useless cartels filled with vacuous, ass-tonguing wastes of vodka like yourself.  

        •  you both make a pretty good case (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          nota bene

          for artists to bypass the RIAA monopoly and market tracks and CDs direct to the public via the Internet... from an artist viewpoint, much can be said for the ability to make $5+/CD instead of 20 cents/CD after infamous Hollywood style accounting is used to recoup real and imaginary expenses from label artists... with the real component largely used to subsidize parasites like "Back to the Cave".  

          Sell a few thousand CDs a year without RIAA label help plus touring and one makes an OK living... sell a few thousand CDs a year for an RIAA label and one is screwed...

          While I'm sure you know this, for everyone else (even "Back to the Cave" if he ever masters a musical instrument) the cost of entry for the ability to sell physical CDs and digital tracks via iTunes is under $100 at CDbaby... that gives one a back end to one's music website at which one can take orders for either and have somebody else handle the credit card risk and the rest of the fulfillment stuff.

          Fill out the online paperwork, send 5 CDs and the setup charges. One gets a bar code, one's tracks available for at iTunes, and a place where people can buy the CDs.

          The tradeoff - making the CDs is your problem... you know the economics of mass CD duplication - if one is testing the waters, though... printing on printable / burned CDs is NOT rocket science, even in Linux... so one can make 5 copies of a professional-looking package for a few bucks.

          And of course, marketing is also your problem.

          Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

          by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 12:49:51 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Oh god (0+ / 0-)

            You've been reading Everything You Need to Know About the Music Industry.  That doesn't make you a  Berklee grad and doesn't make your understanding of this industry any less criminally stupid than the comic insults that you don't even understand, you fuckhead.  Parasite?  I represent artists.  I am like their fucking priest and attorney all wrapped up into a fist that will fuck you up if you raise a hand to my clients.  

            I'm the one who makes sure my clients contracts are negotiated by a couple of the best attorneys in the  business.  

            You're fucked up all over the place in your withered little comment.  If you're only selling a grand, you would be getting some people very fired, because it's hard to sign someone, promote them, and not sell at least as much as they sold prior to signing.  If I brought an artist to any of my friends who was to be so repulsive as to sell only one thousand units with that kind of help, I would be thereafter screened out of ever again hearing live voices on their end of our calls.

            We call those hobbyist bands.  Good folk, but not the ones that are ever going to be loaned the mint that the process of promoting a release costs.  You have so much to learn, kid.  Start with the very basic understanding that labels are buying your album in return for a negotiated advance and a percentage of net sales.  You make the vast majority of your dime from touring and merch sales, and you wouldn't be able to afford to set up any of those tours without that loan.  Nor would you be able to draw a single little myspace buddy to were it not for all the radio promotion and publicity that the label is doing to promote what is now THEIR product.  If you don't believe you can sell more than a thousand albums given those guns, you are a fool, and wouldn't be in that position to begin with.

            This is not hard to understand.  Pull your head out of your ass and get it. And,you won't get it from those books.  Other than that, I don't know what to tell you.  

            Apply to Berklee.

            "Life is a dream for the wise, a game for the fool, a comedy for the rich, a tragedy for the poor." --Sholem Yakov Rabinowitz

            by Back in the Cave on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 02:21:50 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  yeah, sure you represent "artists" (0+ / 0-)

              Maybe someday you'll get to represent a real artist, like. . . Britney Spears. . . in your dreams.

              I am like their fucking priest and attorney all wrapped up into a fist that will fuck you up if you raise a hand to my clients.

              Face it, in the real world, you'll never be more than an anonymous PR hack with delusions of grandeur, drinking away your dreams in yet another bar. So have another few drinks and dream about a world where you might have been a someone instead of a nuisance.

              The most important fact that's going to bring the people who actually live the lifestyle you claim down around the ears of the people who actually do that is . . . a musician who sells 10K CDs is making $50K ... plus income off digital tracks and touring... and is doing OK without a record label.

              A musician who does this with the help of a label owes them money. Actually, one can sell quite a bit more than that without actually getting paid by a label. Ask Janis Ian. She said that she never collected a single dime of actual royalty payments in 20 years with a record label. Or is she not an "artist" by your definition? Even Courtney Love has written an analysis of record industry economics far more coherent than anything you've managed today, and she thinks your buddies are garbage. too.

              The mass market for music is breaking up. Even MTV is more about youth lifestyle than it is about music. Listenership at all the major FM radio chains is down as a long-term trend. Satellite FM is in trouble. The Internet is fast becoming the only viable channel to either promote music or to sell it. Assuming your buddies don't buy enough politicians to pull the plug, of course.

              But the labels and studios don't have the cash to buy all the politicians in the world, so the Internet Radio stations that your buddies close in America will reopen in Canada or Russia.

              Within a decade, what you call hobbyist bands are going to be the only new bands around and the labels that exist are going to be the ones who can get a bunch of them together and make money off them.

              And the people you aspire to be will be out on the sidewalk with a sign "Will Make GREAT!!! Records for Food!!!"

              And for you and those like you, 'music will come to an end'. And good riddance. For the rest of us, it'll keep right on going, with lower cost and higher quality than ever.

              Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

              by alizard on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 04:07:52 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  *sigh* (0+ / 0-)

                You win.  Your secondhand information and do it yourself music industry guides trump reality.  You've got it all figured our so you'll survive just fine without a clue.  

                Dig your bitter pill.  It's no substitute for success and it isn't going to help me drive home even the most basic tenets of this business.   Some of what you regurgitated from your definitive online source may be part of the future of music, but music isn't going to die and there will always be organization around it and all those scum sucking leaches that *gasp* make comfortable livings from the process will continue to do so, because people depend on us to usher in the next.  

                Every communist experiment fails, because the product is always shit.  Do you understand that?  You are a sad fringe hack of a writer angry that you haven't had success and praying that a big revolution will somehow level the playing field and suddenly people will start buying your services.

                There's always going to be an industry, lizard, and there will always be people like you angry at the it because you still don't get everything for free and you still still suck.  Should have gone back to school and gone into nursing or something.

                Fool yourself, but I start my morning off with a chuckle knowing that even the utterly uninitiated can tell you don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about.   You're a living fuck the RIAA blog review done without the firsthand knowledge to even understand how to apply any of the false information to the real world.

                Sad sack.  

                "Life is a dream for the wise, a game for the fool, a comedy for the rich, a tragedy for the poor." --Sholem Yakov Rabinowitz

                by Back in the Cave on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 10:14:11 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  who the fuck needs a mint to make music? (0+ / 0-)

              It's cause our business model dictates that for every person actually playing music, there have to be 100 other motherfuckers who need to get paid....

              Robert Fripp is full of interesting aphorisms, some of which I agree with and some of which I don' of the ones I do agree with is "discard the superfluous."

              At some point there will be a market correction, not unlike the one that happened in the dotcom business not too long ago, and everyone who isn't contributing anything of significant value to the musicians==>audience relationship is going to get squeezed....

              Dreams of empire die hard; empire, that goes away quickly.--Juan Cole

              by nota bene on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 09:00:01 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I hear you. (0+ / 0-)

                . . . But, you hear me in that the mint is not to make the music, nota bene (although you know how that can be expensive).  The Mint is in the cost of product launch.  Same with any product in any industry . . . no getting around it.

                Market correction  . . .  yeah.  But, not someday.  Try now.  There is flux in every business model, but what is going on now in music is epic.  Everything is changing, down to the basic cost of touring.  You know how that goes.    

                Marketing at labels may be top heavy, but agencies and management firms like the one in which I am contracted with, along with publicists and those 32nd floor attorney armies are pretty lean on the battle front as is.  You can lay off half the hospital wing, but ain't no one gonna call it a "correction" because there won't be much correct.  

                Have a good one.  Off to convention alley to lob a few live ones in the trenches.

                "Life is a dream for the wise, a game for the fool, a comedy for the rich, a tragedy for the poor." --Sholem Yakov Rabinowitz

                by Back in the Cave on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 10:26:19 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  well (0+ / 0-)

                  Yes, the market correction is ongoing, I agree....and yes I agree about everybody being "lean on the battlefront"....I don't pretend to know what the industry is going to look like in ten years but I feel pretty confident that it's going to based around some sort of wildly different model and nobody but nobody knows what the hell it will be like....

                  I do know a guy who spent about a quarter million dollars just to produce an album....really good studios and really good engineers & producers are expensive, but your point stands....the promo/marketing/distro/merch start-up/ad naus (and all the lawyers & accountants etc it entails) is phenomenally expensive, but the economics of the marketplace are not supporting all of that anymore....if I'd only forced myself to take Econ 101 I think I could put this better, but the market clearing price for music is dropping rapidly and more people are going to be forced to do something else....the only constant is still the engine that drives the whole thing, which is [musicians==>audience]....

                  I can't point to the exact moment in time when everything became so fucking expensive, but it had to have been after Elvis and the Beatles....the industry is set up to create home runs and everyone needs to remember how to play small ball again....

                  I'm not happy about any of it, but the more musicians know about this sooner, the better IMHO....good luck in Vegas (which coincidentally is where my ex-singer is now)....

                  Dreams of empire die hard; empire, that goes away quickly.--Juan Cole

                  by nota bene on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 04:49:55 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

        •  That was fun (0+ / 0-)

          But off-base.  I'm a personal manager, not project manager (which means I represent the artist to the project manager, who is, like Stewart pointed out, usually hung like a ken doll), so a long, eloquent insult and some valuable time wasted :)    

          Yeah.  I don't have much of a problem keeping my table full at release events :)  I think you must know that I don't even have to wipe to get my ass kissed, were I to welcome that shit - which I'm not, so no kindlin' for your fire, Stewie.

          You didn't hate your manager and attorney too, did you?  Everyone out to get you?

          Kidding, kidding.

          Seriously, though.  I know you were kicking a different dog, but lemme say that although the artists to which we pit bulls defend and support to the death are the ones to which all the eyes focus, we are not living in want of that ball and chain.  I admire the guts to sacrifice that which I most value - my privacy.  I am honored to be able to pay my employees with the money I help my clients make, all to bring light back in the cave to shine on the walls to free the chained.

          But, fucking great slam.  Definitely wrong about you not being an artist :)

          God, today has been fun on here.  I hate Vegas and I hate conferences even more.  This crap is better than craps.  I think your insistence that it's ok to steal another person's product is utterly baseless and undefendable horseshit, but you have all made this shit fun.

          "Life is a dream for the wise, a game for the fool, a comedy for the rich, a tragedy for the poor." --Sholem Yakov Rabinowitz

          by Back in the Cave on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 01:38:50 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  do these artists have names? (0+ / 0-)

        Or is it that you know that they would be EXTREMELY embarrassed to have their names dragged through the mud through public association with your opinions?

        Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

        by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 06:14:49 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Hahahahahaha. (0+ / 0-)

          My artists know my opinions and wouldn't be professional artists if they had a problem with my philosophy.  

          As far as dragging their names through mud?  You're kidding, right?  I am against my clients' and anyone else's product being stolen, and I'm going to be embarrassed?  I'm not public here primarily because artists are not my only consulting clients.  But, I can assure you I am vociferously supportive of the RIAA, ASCAP, the EPA, and the goddamn EPA in public and in print.  

          You, definitely wouldn't have to worry about your artists being pissed to find out your opinions were so radical, because with your anti-capitalist philosophy glowing red from your eyes, no artist would work with you in a million years.  

          See, you are anti-artist.  Pro-artist PM's make their clients proud with their pro-art stances.  See the other thread if you need a primer.

          "Life is a dream for the wise, a game for the fool, a comedy for the rich, a tragedy for the poor." --Sholem Yakov Rabinowitz

          by Back in the Cave on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 01:11:26 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  you aren't a capitalist (0+ / 0-)

            You're just another freeper cheerleader for capitalism.

            Probably just as well, because you appear to have the "MBA business acumen" of George W Bush. I can't imagine you even running a hot dog stand profitably. You might last 5 minutes at a high-tech startup.

            You don't cite artists names because the artists you claim to support exist only in your imagination.

            Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

            by alizard on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 01:26:29 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Hahahahahaha. (0+ / 0-)

              You'd type faster if you'd take off that gas mask. Dig into my archived comments, you little anarchist.  

              I don't just consult entertainment clients and as mentioned before, you don't get to know me, kiddo.  But who I represent is utterly immaterial to the basic facts I presented.  You know dick about music.  You are an intellectual property thief and a supporter of this philosophy.  You know Linux and are a programmer script kiddie with a UID out near Pluto - a noob to an old stomping ground of mine.  And you're questioning my intents?

              Transparent crap, lizard.

              If you can dispute my arguments, do it, son.  You can't because you don't even know enough about my industry to understand why what you are doing is wrong.  

              All you can do is whine that you deserve everyone's music for free and that I'm a doody head.

              You make me sleepy and I'm typing from a casino bar.

              "Life is a dream for the wise, a game for the fool, a comedy for the rich, a tragedy for the poor." --Sholem Yakov Rabinowitz

              by Back in the Cave on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 01:52:37 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  if you ever bother to make any arguments (0+ / 0-)

                I may bother to try to refute them. So far, all you've come up with is an incoherent collection of RIAA talking points, some perhaps in forms that might surprise the original author because they made even less sense than the originals did.

                I recommend you buy another 10 drinks or so and drink them quickly. While they won't improve your coherence, perhaps they'll shake loose something that'll pass for an argument.

                Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

                by alizard on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 03:39:20 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  :) (0+ / 0-)

                  Not a drinker, but the flame is duly noted.

                  You're no longer even amusing and your insults are as lifted from the works of others as the music you steal.  Your wit is is the only thing remotely drunk here.

                  It's been amusing, but you'll pardon me.  I have to go leach off the good of the land or something :)

                  "Life is a dream for the wise, a game for the fool, a comedy for the rich, a tragedy for the poor." --Sholem Yakov Rabinowitz

                  by Back in the Cave on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 10:41:11 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  I hate to interrupt a really good flame war (0+ / 0-)

                but the problem with your understanding of the business comes in when certain artists (like yrstruly), obviously not making big bucks, decide that their music is theirs and doesn't belong to anyone else, can't belong to anyone else, doesn't even really belong to me at all in the first place because music is not a thing, it is intangible and can't be owned any more than land can, and this causes me to say enough of all these people who don't perform with me on stage making it hard for me to pay my bills.....when a critical mass of artists reach these conclusions the record industry as we know it will have collapsed and the music industry will go on, just fine, as it did before the record industry hierarchy grafted itself onto the process of making, playing, and enjoying music....

                I didn't go to Berklee, but my music timeline doesn't start with Edison, Marconi, or Col. Tom Parker....and as great as those individuals and their accomplishments were, none of them motherfuckers played a fact this discussion (how does one play music and eat at the same time?) has been going on since at least the time of Mozart, and as usual, external social and technological changes have upset the existing business model (and those who profit from it).

                But, hell, I'm just a drummer in a rock n roll band, so obviously I don't know shit....and if the foregoing is any guide, I must be a communist too.

                Dreams of empire die hard; empire, that goes away quickly.--Juan Cole

                by nota bene on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 09:23:28 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  That's fine (0+ / 0-)

                  We're not remotely in argument.  Like I mentioned many times before, you don't have to make your music a product.  You don't have to accept an offer to sell it to an investor.  You can keep it and give it away and keep your play local.  This isn't the point.  The point is that some people want to make a career out of being a musician and realize that their stuff is significant such that someone would see the wisdom in helping you brighten the far reaches of the globe with it.  A prospect that no musician or even medium sized label can afford to do.  It is a very involved process and involves a lot of people helping you.  

                  Not involving yourself in the process isn't communist.  That picture was painted on a canvass of whiny motherfuckers complaining that they can't nick the product of those who do choose to build their family's nest egg with it.

                  Good luck with your band.

                  "Life is a dream for the wise, a game for the fool, a comedy for the rich, a tragedy for the poor." --Sholem Yakov Rabinowitz

                  by Back in the Cave on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 10:34:41 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  OK, glad we got that cleared up (0+ / 0-)

                    It's hard to see the huge structural changes happening all around you in an industry when you're right in the middle of it, but I think more people in your position are beginning to understand how deep the fissures in the market, which is a good thing....I've said it before--the record business was a bit more figure-out-able just ten years ago, and now the wheels are coming off....

                    As for me, thanks for the good wishes....honestly all I want is to find a reasonable middle ground between starving artist and global superstar....I mean, yeah, I'd love to have people listening to me from Anchorage to Zimbabwe, but realistically I'd appreciate it if I could tour on my own from Austin to Wisconsin, sell several dozen $5 CDs, and keep everything I make.

                    What I keep coming back to is that CDs (not music, CDs) have become severely devalued, and that (coupled with the advent of broadband and P2P technologies) is what is driving consumers away from purchasing CDs (or mp3s etc). The corporate structure that distributes music from musicians to retail stores is what has been endangered....I believe the era of the superstar is over and we're going to see a return to when music was predominantly local/regional as opposed to national/international....and the Internet, in its own way, makes everybody sort-of international automatically....and then this is all in the context of the drastically weakened American economy during the Bush years. People just don't have the disposable income laying around like in the Roaring Nineties....

                    Dreams of empire die hard; empire, that goes away quickly.--Juan Cole

                    by nota bene on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 04:28:26 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  you want the middle ground? (0+ / 0-)

                      , but realistically I'd appreciate it if I could tour on my own from Austin to Wisconsin, sell several dozen $5 CDs, and keep everything I make.

                      CDbaby where you can sell CDs and tracks via iMusic and Cafepress is there for you. You want to promote, find some Internet Radio stations... at least until Back in the Cave's RIAA homies manage to get independent Internet Radio stations off the air. And find some college radio stations if you can find some that match your kind of music. They aren't at risk as far as I know.

                      BTW, what is your kind of music? Got a band website you can point me at?

                      You can make and sell your own CDs and digital tracks and have people order band mechandise without going to the trouble of having to have it made up and packing it to take to gigs.

                      While DIY is still a hassle, it's at least a lot easier to do than it used to be and a hell of a lot cheaper. If you want to test out CDbaby without doing a run of x-hundred CDs, catch me in e-mail and I'll point you at some ink-jet printers that do CDs, paper CD labels are A REALLY BAD IDEA.

                      You have to persuade people that they like you well enough to do buy your music and stuff, but ultimately, even if you accepted a deal from an RIAA label, that's still your problem in the end.

                      I agree with your conclusions with respect to long-term structural changes in the music market, though I'll add that a large part of the reason why CDs aren't as valued as they were is that music itself isn't as valued as it was.

                      It isn't just the quality of the crap flung at us by the modern version of Tin Pan Alley, it's that music has become the background to a lifestyle rather than the center of a lifestyle. And there are a lot of other things one can spend one's entertainment dollar and time on now.

                      The reason why the CD still survives is simply that it sounds better.

                      There's a big and audible difference between 128K MP3 and CD audio... the 128K MP3 format is not adequate for full-fidelity audio reproduction, and uses various acoustic matching techniques to fool the ear into believing that the sound is "good enough".

                      The reason is that a 5 meg 128K MP3 track turns into a 50 meg CD audio track... which you don't want to either download via first-generation broadband or store on a conventional MP3 player.

                      Those differences are readily apparent if a person is consciously listening to music, and if a person listens to a particular song a lot... the person is going to be impelled to buy the CD even or especially if she's got the MP3 or even the whole album of MP3s.

                      That's why one of Emimem's CDs got uploaded to P2P a few weeks before it hit the stores, and people were lined up at the stores to buy it (and of course, it went straight to #1) People liked it enough that they wanted to hear every single acoustic nuance.

                      Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

                      by alizard on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 11:10:32 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  the thread is 3 days old now (0+ / 0-)

                        which is an eternity in blog time, but here goes....

                        I do have a MySpace page but I would like to keep my psuedonymity here....I'll send you an email with the link.

                        CDbaby is great. As soon as I have a stable band I'm going to go that route (and I'll go ahead and fork over the bucks to get them duplicated, it's worth it--doing that yourself is an enormous hassle).

                        My problem recently hasn't been an understanding of the biz, it's just keeping a fucking band herding cats. Can't stand it sometimes, especially since I'm a drummer and I just kind of have to put up with things from the frontline band means no touring, which means no money. It sucks. I'm teaching lessons and doing odd jobs on the side, but I refuse to go back and work in a restaurant or in retail again, fuck it. The aggravation is too much and I end up focusing on that instead of on music....

                        It isn't just the quality of the crap flung at us by the modern version of Tin Pan Alley, it's that music has become the background to a lifestyle rather than the center of a lifestyle.

                        Agreed on both counts. The Tin Pan Alley reference is apt.

                        I think the CD will eventually go the way of the dinosaur, probably as soon as broadband gets even broader, broad enough to handle uncompressed .wav files....a full CD is roughly 3/4 of a GB, and we're almost to the point where high-end connections can deal with that. MP3 is really not an adequate substitute for CD audio (44/16), although I listen to MP3s all the time....

                        Dreams of empire die hard; empire, that goes away quickly.--Juan Cole

                        by nota bene on Sun Apr 15, 2007 at 10:10:14 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

    •  the DMCA has also been used (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Progressive Moderate

      to interfere with computer security research, vendors often decide to go after the person who brings the bad news instead of fixing the vulnerability itself.

      Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

      by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 12:51:48 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The right is going to have a field day with this (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    alizard, adrianrf

    "First they're trying to take our guns, now they're going to sue us!"


  •  Reprehensible. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I guess Ed "RIAA" Schultz has some new friends in our party.

    Bad for the party.

    Bad for the country.

    "Stay close to the candles....the staircase can be treacherous" (-8.38,-8.51)

    by JNEREBEL on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 04:51:38 PM PDT

  •  No money for DNC until she is gone (3+ / 0-)

     Thats it - are you listening, Howard? I know its an innocent mistake but you've hired someone we can easily picture sitting on Karl Rove's lap ...

    "Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise" - U.S. Constitution author and fourth President James Madison

    by Iowa Boy on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 06:31:07 PM PDT

  •  Contact them (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I give a monthly cash deposit and I told them if they keep this idiot, they can kiss my little donation goodbye...

  •  I couldn't agree more. (0+ / 0-)

    As a good progressive, I hate all those thousands and thousands of people an their damned demon wives and children who are employed by those major labels who bust their asses to elevate good music to the world.

    Screw them all.

    I hate the goddamn RIAA for attempting to stop me from stealing music. I'm American.  I can steal whatever I want.  I want everything free, and we as good Goddamn progressives must show our best communist fronts and get together and kill every one of those East Asian dogs that sniff out bootleg CD's.

    We must rise up as a freeloading peoples and take what is rightfully ours, and bankrupt every one of these labels that the RIAA "protects."

    Pitchforks all!  

    Give me a goddamn break.  Markos and the rest of these bandwagon apologists are a bunch of whining children angry that mommy won't give them an allowance for sitting on their asses and playing video games.

    Boing Boing is a socialist shill and everyone who subscribes to an ideology defending the right of people to steal from artists has jumped on the wrong bandwagon.  

    This is totally outside the mainstream, and only sun-less bloggers and script kiddie hackers take pleasure in holding this organization up as worse than Haliburton.  

    Fuck you Markos, Boing Boing, and anti-American way socialist mob rule scum.  The rest of you are on the wrong bandwagon if you are buying into this crap.  You want to keep your artists shackled in the slave quarters begging for dimes as their teeth rot and they have no resource to get their kids' cancer worked on?  

    Just as long as you can get your free shit?  

    Then you suck and you splinter the progressives into the ultra communist and the american way camps and you are not welcome in my house any more than Rove.  

    And, don't give me the "but, the labels are making the money" because that is utter shit.  I represent these artists, brothers and sisters, and without these labels (which are basically banks stupid enough to invest in such a prospective product) the artists would not be able to tour profitably which is where they make their money.

    Markos lost me totally today.  Fucking socialist shill.  And that's not my opinion . . . blah blah blah lookie at my angry mob link justifying my bullshit insult . . . blah blah.

    Before you get itchy with the troll finger, best see my history.  No troll here.  My attitude is just a mirror of Markos' inflammatory and juvenile rant.

    Awwww.  This probably means I don't get an invite to your next shin dig, Kos?  I'll just have to hang out with my broke-ass musician friends who don't fit into your grand scheme.  You're an ex-grunt and don't know shit one about music or the industry that supports it.  You have lost every ounce of respect I ever had for you.


    Rant complete.

    "Life is a dream for the wise, a game for the fool, a comedy for the rich, a tragedy for the poor." --Sholem Yakov Rabinowitz

    by Back in the Cave on Thu Apr 12, 2007 at 07:47:10 PM PDT

    •  This is great comedy (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      rogun, alizard, CenterLeft

      Please, stop.

      It's uncomfortable to laugh this hard...oh man.

      Socialist shill?

      From the industry kept alive by direct government intervetion in the market (DMCA laws)?

      I've got to wipe my eyes...too funny...

      •  Stewart can explain to everyone (0+ / 0-)

        How 9 out of 10 artists whose albums are sold to Labels for a nice profit get dropped because even with all that help, it's just that no one really liked their stuff.

        He can also tell you how those artists are all bitter because they spent all their money and still have to pay it back . . . because it was a loan against sales their product couldn't muster.

        They are failures who are angry that they can't get their music back to offer up because they haven't paid back their debt.  

        He'll tell you how at every turn, he takes a smoke break from his new day job to log in and perpetuate a myth of the evil industry that did him wrong and how it should be taken down with bulldozers, right, Stewart?

        What he won't tell you is that it's his tears he's wiping from his eyes.  Right, Stewart?  Lie about it if you want to, but we both know.

        "Life is a dream for the wise, a game for the fool, a comedy for the rich, a tragedy for the poor." --Sholem Yakov Rabinowitz

        by Back in the Cave on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 12:36:26 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  How does it feel... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      alizard, CenterLeft have your head up your ass and your foot in your mouth at the same time? It must be awkward and embarrassing, huh?

      Go back to your cave, troll. Indeed. Progressive is a vague political label. You seem to be very fascist if you ask me.
      Peer-to-peer file sharing isn't stealing. There's a big world of difference between file sharing and piracy. The people have the right to enjoy any damn work of art they please and not have to waste their money just to make a corporate monopoly like the RIAA happy.
      All a piece of shit like you cares about is money and privilege. Please leave DailyKos! We don't need a hypocrite like you wasting our space.

      •  Yawn (0+ / 1-)
        Recommended by:
        Hidden by:

        This is not your space, either, dickweed.  Community space, and not everyone has to agree with your free shit for all at the expense of the artists attitude.  Foot up my mouth indeed.  I've been here as a TU twice as long as you, so if anyone needs take a hike, it will be you.

        And, it's not to make the RIAA happy.  Like ASCAP and other performing rights organizations, the RIAA protects the rights of artists and the industry that pours money into the support of thousands and thousands of jobs that maintain it all.  I don't care about privilege.  I care about paying my bills, just as I care for those thousands and thousands of people who work in the biz who need to pay for theirs.  What you say is pure shit, selfish, communist, and pathetic.

        Troll, my ass.  Try again, you insulting piece of garbage.  Calling me a fascist because I won't sit for the communist ideal you preach just shows what a bunch of unrealistic children you are.  

        And to link an EFF shill site whose audience is full of shit enough to insinuate the the RIAA is even in the same class as Haliburton . . . Pull your foot out of your mouth and tell me how the shit you've been wading through tastes.

        "Life is a dream for the wise, a game for the fool, a comedy for the rich, a tragedy for the poor." --Sholem Yakov Rabinowitz

        by Back in the Cave on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 05:03:28 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  So you say? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          So much spite, and you're supposed to be liberal? You love to use the word "shill" a lot, too. I'm sorry to hear that all of your beloved artists can only survive with the huge royalties they get from a monopoly like the RIAA. Protecting artists? That's fucking hilarious!
          The RIAA takes advantage of artists more than anything else and, with government intervention, forces people to buy CDs. You know what? Fuck your beloved celebrities and big corporations. They can find other ways to pay the bills.
          To be fair, I find genuine piracy wrong. When it involves taking credit for another person's work or making personal profits off of a company's products, then that's wrong. I agree.
          However, friends sharing with friends and/or making their own CDs for their private use with songs they downloaded isn't wrong. I'm pretty sure people are still buying CDs so Lars Ulrich won't starve to death... yeah fucking right! XD
          Anyway, I checked out your account and see that you're not a troll or a fascist. So for those remarks I'll admit that I was out of line and I'm sorry.
          On the other hand, you are indeed a limo liberal and still an asshole and a hypocrite.
          Here's a nice way to make my point in an enjoyable, less belligerent way:

          As you can see, the link is from Youtube and the artist is Weird Al. I just provided the link! :)

          You're right, by the way, about DailyKos being OUR space! Isn't it nice to share? Well, maybe not for you.

          •  I use shill (0+ / 0-)

            liberally to poke at Markos' BS use of it.

            And, what I think of myself has nothing to do with this basic issue of right and wrong.  If liberal to you means left socialist, then I am not liberal.  I am American and I have been very active in Dem politics for a long time.  

            To your claim that this is an issue concerning backing up your collection, BS.  

            I don't care if you copy your own collection, and neither do attorneys at the RIAA.  But, if you distribute what you copy, for profit or not, you're hurting someone by passing along a product that is not yours to give.  Yes, it is that simple.

            If you just want someone to share a song you found, shit, everything streams nowadays.  Send a link.  Thought of that?  Think of streaming like the watermark on software you're too criminal to It's what you do with the copies.  Distribution of cocaine can be passing it out to everyone at a party.  You don't have to sell it to graduate to felony.  

            And, the angry little pissant that told me to get off "our" site was childish.  You speak gibberish in response to my wordage.  

            And the TU abuse, again, YAWN.  

            Bottom line, we disagree.  I respect what the RIAA has done and lament at how the issues that surround the introduction of this new format have played out parallel to anti-GOP anti-bush fervor.  It is unfortunate.  You'll be hard pressed to find more than a hand full of people in music in either NY or LA who are anything but energetically liberal.

            I'm bored with this. You're greedy and wrong, and the liberal of which you speak is far left of the real progressive movement, which is about utilizing our gifts and hard work to achieve our dreams living for the betterment of society.

            Dispute that.

            "Life is a dream for the wise, a game for the fool, a comedy for the rich, a tragedy for the poor." --Sholem Yakov Rabinowitz

            by Back in the Cave on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 10:54:30 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Awww, did I bore you? (0+ / 0-)

              Too bad! I'm calling out your hypocrisy. Greedy? I already told you I don't profit off of anything companies or artists make. That sounds more like you: profitting off of information so a privileged few can live large. What the fuck is liberal about that?
              If your beloved celebrities want to make money, which they have plenty of, they can do concerts and tours.
              Utilizing our gifts? It's more like giving corporations dominion over our culture. Ever heard of the "culture industry"? It's sad that our dreams have to be connected with Corporate America, which has commoditized our lives so much.
              Don't give me your shallow, spineless garbage about how much you care about the betterment of society when you don't mean it. Madison Avenue and Hollywood have you ringed around their diamond studded fingers. You're just as bad as the Republicans. Have you ever watched MTV's Cribs? Those multi-millionaire recording artists sure are suffering because people want to share their mass produced music for free. The same goes for other media.
              People will pay for the initial products, of course. If these products are hard to find, then collectors will surely scramble over them.
              My point: it's too bad that people like you can only appreciate creative works based on their money-value and that you care more about how much money the corporations make than anything else.
              Yes, there's a few people that genuinely pirate the hard work of artists. Those jerks that engage in piracy are just like you: profit above people.
              You still haven't addressed the fact that the RIAA is a monopoly that strong arms musicians into selling their music under their name. The RIAA dominates the American music industry. It doens't appreciate creativity or music at all!
              Once again, it's seems like you only care if the RIAA is collecting royalties, not if our society has freedom of information and love for creativity for its own sake divorced of the market.

              •  Four things: (0+ / 0-)

                One: You pompus little shit, you have absolutely no right to assume anything about my intentions for doing what I do.  I have endured great hardship and have undertaken GREAT risk to champion art - to champion artists.  Motherfucker calling me a hypocrite?  You aren't worthy of wiping my ass.

                Two:  You don't have even an idiot's understanding of  what the RIAA even does.  Go back and sample through the posts. Jesus.  Pretty much every label is a member of this organization - an organization that enforces existing laws to protect the rights of its members.  RIAA Label is about as accurate as Liberal Media.  

                Three: Who lives fat?  There is a lot of money, but you are disillusioned and misinformed if you think it is consolidated around a few.  I pull 20 points.  But, you know what?  That's my artists funding the lean fighting team I have to offer him my service.  (And, my service, regardless of your comprehension, is a vital and difficult to obtain).  And, the musicians?  You think they are getting fat?  Comfortable, but that's not a crime, Robbin Hood. Who do you think pays their band?  Their road crew?  Jesus, you are warped and angry, which brings me to point two:

                Finally: Dems aren't anti-capitalist wingers.  You have so described yourself as such.  Not a Dem, you are a 100K+ UID green freeping anarchist troll.  

                Madison Avenue and Hollywood have you ringed around their diamond studded fingers. You're just as bad as the Republicans.

                Yeah.  Rich. The same kind of anarchist as the rest of the anti-Capitalist, anti-American, anti-Democrat scum who insist on stealing intellectual property even knowing it is a crime because there are victims.  


                "Life is a dream for the wise, a game for the fool, a comedy for the rich, a tragedy for the poor." --Sholem Yakov Rabinowitz

                by Back in the Cave on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 12:21:13 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  You've got to be kidding me. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Progressive Moderate

                  1)Pompus? Ha! Look at your own responses! You ride the backs of people who actually have talent and all you care about is a fucking paycheck! And yet you act as though you speak for the art world in general and you produce none of your own! Get over yourself.

                  2)The RIAA is a trade group. 90% of recorded music is made and distributed by the member companies of the RIAA. They also collect royalties and administer licenses. They represent the recording industry. I know that.
                  Did I mention that P2P file-sharing is what you would call a disruptive technology? Of course the RIAA hates it because it deprives its member corporations of sales. In particular, the "Big Four" (EMI, Sony-BMG, Universal Music and Warner) pretty much dominate the sales of music CDs and are all RIAA members. The musicians can make money without these CD sales or these companies if they wanted to.
                  Basically, the RIAA has a monopoly on music distribution. It's not so much about protecting the musicians, who it takes advantage of, but making money off of CDs. It doesn't appreciate creative works, but lives to make money. It doesn't want the cash cows to run dry.

                  3)The musicians that win the heart of the RIAA live fat, indeed. Any struggling musicians that are lapped up by they companies will more or less live large too. Modern music in general is so mass produced and centalized nowadays. Here in Olympia, a lot of musicians make money by holding concerts or shows. Nothing to it!
                  I'm sure you work hard to make money off of someone else's talent. It's fun to exploit people, huh? No wonder you love the RIAA.

                  4)Have you ever heard of a Creative Commons? Perhaps not. Or the free culture movement? Probably not that either. I'm sure you find public education and universal health appalling since, you know, companies aren't making money. God forbid people get free education and health care! Likewise, it's the end of the world if information is free! Yes, music is information.
                  I already explained to you that I know the differece between piracy and filesharing. They're two different things. Piracy means you make a profit off of another person's work or take credit for their work. Most of us who use P2P filesharing aren't doing either of those things.
                  Yes, my sharing the song "Yellow Submarine" with my friends deprives Ringo and Paul of royalties. But inversely, my friends and I aren't making any money either. Isn't it nice that we can share a song we like and no one gets hurt? At least we can appreciate the artistic value of "Yellow Submarine" rather than getting anal over who makes or loses money. Ringo and Paul can rest assured that people still love their music! Sure, the RIAA loses money but that's all they care about.

                  No, I'm not a Dem. I haven't been a Dem for years. I'm disgusted with how they've become Republican-Lite and have been cowardly and incompetent in the face of Republican opposition. They fold like a card table every time the conservative movement attempts to paint them as traitors or otherwise. People like you have shown me how shallow and morally bankrupt the Democratic Party has become.

                  Have you ever heard the quote "Property is theft."? Think about it.

                  I already told you that I'm sorry for calling you a troll. I can promise you I'm no troll. I'm here to discuss politics with like minded, genuinely progressive people. You're not one of them.

                  Anti-American? It's hard not to be when you see how backwards and fucked-up this nation has become. I used to believe in this country, but with all the lies, corruption, war and our ever-so tainted history it's hard to love this country at all.

                  I am indeed anti-capitalist and I have no qualms about it. It's too bad that you believe property rights are more important than human rights. Why the fuck do you even claim to be progressive? You're more center-right than anything else. You must be one of those DLC hacks.

                  Unlike you, I respect the right artists have to produce whatever they want without fear of censorship. Likewise, I support their right to be creative without interference by the market. I support their right not to be taken advantage of by creeps like you.

                  My political sentiments are very close to anarchism. I'm a member of the Green Party of South Puget Sound, Olympia Movement for Justice and Peace, and Olympia Fellowship of Reconciliation. Unlike you, I do believe in freedom from both the government and market.

                  I'll pass your offer to eat shit because I've had my fill with you.

        •  EFF shill site? (0+ / 0-)

          I'd say that's something to be proud of.

          They protect online freedom of speech, even for wannabe scumbags like you.

          Troll rating because your only purpose here is to disrupt.

          If you want "freedom of speech" unrestricted by decency, common sense, or contradiction, why don't you get your employers to buy you a blog of your very own where you can lie to your heart's content.

          Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

          by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 05:54:00 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Good man! (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            I'm with you alizard. Perhaps "Back in the Cave" hasn't heard of the free culture movement or the free software movement, huh? Of course he hasn't!
            It's funny that "Back in the Cave" hates the EFF so much. Looks like money is more important to him than freedom.

            •  no need to insult "Back to the Cave" (0+ / 0-)

              unnecessarily. I'm sure he knows of the Open Source movement, and considers it a "Communist plot" against the major Bush campaign contributor we know as Microsoft Corporation.

              And I suspect strongly that part of his level of anger and aggression is based on an honest and sincere attempt to use Vista on his home workstation because he feels it's his obligation to "The American Way" to do so.

              I don't feel that kind of anger and aggression over computing, probably because my computer maintenance needs take about 15 minutes a week. I use Debian (stable), using Windows in a VM for legacy software. Whether or not Linux is a "communist conspiracy", it's certainly made my computing life a lot easier.

              Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

              by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 07:51:13 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Good Point. (0+ / 0-)

                It's nothing personal with "Back to the Cave", I just find his opinion on this matter vastly ignorant. For a Kossack, I expected him to be more enlightened than that. So naturally I was pissed with his responses. If only he realized that his support for the RIAA is tantamount to voting Bush or worse. It's just hypocritical. He probably just doesn't know any better. :/
                I've never heard of Debian, though. I'll check it out!

                •  if you're new to Linux... (0+ / 0-)

                  you may be better off with the Debian-derived Ubuntu than with Debian, Ubuntu is designed for user-friendliness . The main advantage of Debian and its derivatives is a superior installation packaging technology (apt) over rpm based distros (openSUSE, RHEL/Fedora).

                  I used Fedora Core for a couple of years and switched because the nvidia driver would NOT work with my motherboard... the Debian installer is simply a lot less flaky.

                  The easiest way to find out if your existing hardware setup is workable with Linux is get a LiveCD for the distro, insert, and tell the BIOS to boot from it. If it boots and everything comes up, it's installation time.

                  As for our resident cave troll, when's the last time you heard an actual progressive screaming "Communist" accusations and expecting them to be taken seriously?

                  My guess is that there are probably more entrepreneurs here and certainly more technology entrepreneurs (writing tech articles for money is my day job) here than there are on the RedState and FreeRepublic blogs combined... and not a single person who's ever been a member of CPUSA among us.

                  Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

                  by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 08:42:19 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  You are far off (0+ / 0-)

                And fuck you for the insults.  It's Back in the Cave,   but I won't confuse you with the Plato reference.  But, your play on words to infer me a troll, are so original.  Such a witster you are.

                Open source?  Don't pat yourself on the back for being a linux geek.  You're not the only one who came up self learning to program on the AppleII your friend's principle pop was able to take home for the summer when you were eleven.  Oh, that was me.  Calling me a noob regarding any of this is pointless because of my choice to be anonymous here, so with a grain of salt, accept my claim that you are way off.

                I have no problem with OS software, but respect non-participating coders to keep their code proprietary. Regardless, software isn't music and isn't my fight.  Same corner different ring. If you can make open source albums, put a bunch of heads together and make music that charts on its own, great.  Then we can compare the two.  What I do have a problem with is what I suppose you think is your right - to steal the commercial stuff.  And your other crap hobby, distributing pirate copies of people's wares online.  That, you can compare.

                I've pretty much made my point.  You're going to whine like an entitled child and I'm going to tell you the RIAA is not the damn pigs busting the party, they're the protectors of an entire American industry.  

                And, the communist reference?  Demanding that product that is legitimately owned by another be distributed equally to everyone at no cost with no regard to how much was invested in it or how many people make their living from it is not democratic.  Call it anarchist if you want, but you aren't going to socialize music.  If I am wrong, welcome mob rule, goodbye art.  

                So whine the last word if you want.  You're still a greedy, naive, insulting fool.

                "Life is a dream for the wise, a game for the fool, a comedy for the rich, a tragedy for the poor." --Sholem Yakov Rabinowitz

                by Back in the Cave on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 11:34:16 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  actually, I'm just bashing you for the hell of it (0+ / 0-)

                  You have no clue, no comprehension, no understanding of what Communism means, you're semi-literate, you're as ignorant as a Bush Republican even about the industry you claim to work in.

                  More to the point, all you accomplished is to persuade people that RIAA fanboys are really, really, stupid, and really, really pathetic.  

                  "Welcome mob rule, goodbye art."

                  The only persuasion you've done around here has been anti-RIAA. You claim to be the face of the music industry?

                  You got your wish.

                  You've made the music industry look even uglier to people with your endless whining about how EVIL COMMUNISTS!!! endanger the salaries and bonuses of the RIAA label suits, and I think there's exactly one person around here who's credulous enough to think that you or anyone else connected with any RIAA label actually cares about artists getting paid.

                  Since the *AA companies are indeed the most hated organizations on the Internet, your managing to incite this hatred further is something of an accomplishment.

                  I'm going to stop, because I really feel sorry for you.

                  You're the guy who's going to have to show somebody working for a label or a PR agency just how effectively you've advocated for the "cause".

                  Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

                  by alizard on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 12:38:05 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  That was rich (0+ / 0-)

                    If you had any idea about ANYTHING you were talking about, I'd be touched.  But, I'm arguing with a hack script kiddie tech writer who's trying to press buttons.  

                    Keep it flowing.  You amuse yourself.

                    "Life is a dream for the wise, a game for the fool, a comedy for the rich, a tragedy for the poor." --Sholem Yakov Rabinowitz

                    by Back in the Cave on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 11:12:46 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

    •  Copyright law is messed up (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      alizard, Progressive Moderate

      That's another part of the issue that isn't talked about a lot.

      Copyrights last, if I remember right, for 75 or 100 years or something.  That's frigging ridiculous.

      Of course there should be copyrights as an incentive to produce the material that gets copyrighted.  But the vast majority of movie or music or software sales are within the first few years after the release of the material.

      If you want strict copyright enforcement, you should first except major reform, such as that copyrights last six years.  After six years, it is public domain.

      No, people wouldn't just wait six years to watch the movie or get the music.  Many don't even wait six months to get a movie cheaper via DVD rental, but instead watch it in the theatre.

      Current copyright law is ridiculous, in a lot of realms.  

      Abandonware sites have been shut down over it.  Abandonware is (generally old) software no longer being sold that was being downloaded for free.  But companies have the right under the law to say, "We won't sell it, but you can't share it, either."  (In other words, you cannot legally obtain it, paid OR free).  A six year rule is one way to prevent most travesties like that.

      I get music through iTunes.  I used file sharing before iTunes was available.  To me it's extremely important, however, that illegal file sharing not be stamped out, because the music industry would rather not have to allow iTunes to sell their music at reasonable prices.  They'd rather gouge-- and if they ever shut down file sharing entirely, you can bet they will gouge again.

      So, the government shouldn't help them, in any way.  File sharing that violates fair use is copyright infringement, a civil matter that the RIAA has a right to sue over.  

      But it should never be a criminal matter, and the government should remain as neutral regarding such lawsuits as if I were suing a doctor for malpractice or a fellow motorist for a parking lot accident they caused.

      Economic -3.50/Social -2.41 "Please don't eat the moderates." (Yes, someone else used that before me, but it's perfect.)

      by CenterLeft on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 06:27:53 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not realistic. (0+ / 0-)

        That puts a limit on the amount of time you can profit from your own creation.  Those who would invest in the furtherance of artists in general would no longer be able to justify investing the money.  

        I understand where you are coming from, but you are only looking at it from your perspective.  There are thousands and thousands and thousands of people in a giant web of employers and employees whose families all depend on the stability of the ART SUPPORT NETWORK.  Kill the roots and you kill the tree.  You don't want that.  The very notion is un-American.  Our descendants came to this land to escape the kind of atmosphere that prevented the common man from achieving success in life.  We all work very hard to balance between the  ideal of philosophic aestheticism that drives us all, and the desire to provide for our families.  What we do under the framework of the law of this land is no different than what any doctor or auto worker or farmer's market vendor does.  Each works hard to make and market product to sell and support their wives and children.  Music may not be something you can hold in your hand, but it is a product.  

        This rebel alliance is not pregnant with the Force.  More like Sith Kiddies.  You don't want to be that.

        "Life is a dream for the wise, a game for the fool, a comedy for the rich, a tragedy for the poor." --Sholem Yakov Rabinowitz

        by Back in the Cave on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 05:17:17 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  so what? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Progressive Moderate, CenterLeft

          Patents have a limited lifespan, too. I expect to be applying for some in the next couple of years.

          As you know, the point behind letting copyright expire is to let the protected material get into the public domain, so the rest of us can use it as building blocks for creative works of the future.

          As Disney used the public domain literary works as a basis to create derivative works to start their empire.

          Very few creative works spring full-grown out of absolutely nothing, they're generally bits and pieces from half-remembered ideas out of the past.

          Not that you would know anything about creative work from experience.

          Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

          by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 06:13:08 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  God, I can't tell if you're more (0+ / 0-)

            an asshole or idiot.  

            I work for artists.  I represent artists.  I am a personal manager. Rarely a day goes by when most of my time isn't spent around creation, music, video, photographic.  It is completely apparent to the casual reader that I am the one talking ex cathedra and you are busy whining about how entitled you are to works of the artists you steal from.  

            And, apparently, you are so devoid of originality (which there are concrete legal ways to determine, BTW) that you have to try to change copyright laws so you can steal even the damn ideas.  

            You, are the one who would have a hard time coming up with a creative work were it to relieve the splinter from your eye.

            I bold you and raise your pointless arguments and playground insults a royal italic bird.

            "Life is a dream for the wise, a game for the fool, a comedy for the rich, a tragedy for the poor." --Sholem Yakov Rabinowitz

            by Back in the Cave on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 11:50:37 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  odd. . . (0+ / 0-)

              I've been making a living off professional writing for 20 years.

              Isn't it odd that everybody around here who creates and sells intellectual property for a living (starting with Kos) thinks you're completely full of shit?

              For the sake of argument, I'll accept that you work for a RIAA label.

              "A people hire A people, B people hire C people. . ."

              What you are telling us is that they've got "F" people doing the hiring.

              The "mystery" of how record label profits seem to diminish over time is solved, and has nothing to do with file-sharing or "exotic" technologies like MP3 players.

              Putting "F" people into management is a great way to kill a business. You've got a few lobbyists with plenty of money to spend trying to protect the industry from the consequences of its mistakes. . . and that's all that stands between you and the rest of the parasites in the record industry and a future flipping burgers.

              I don't think even legislators on the RIAA payroll can put the inevitable off for much longer.

              I look forward to seeing your company and the other major players sold at firesale prices based on the record catalogues and tangible assets like CD pressing facilities and real estate, and their being purchased by entrepreneurs who have a clue as to how to make money with them.

              And someday, I'll be able to log onto a record label website and buy either full CD-quality downloads or for print-on-demand albums that aren't even available on collectible record sites.

              There's no reason why a book or a record should ever go out of print. The fact that records go out of print is a pretty exact measure of the kind of "thinking" that goes on at upper management levels of the kind of company you unconvincingly claim to work for.

              Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

              by alizard on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 01:08:06 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  I think StuartZ pegged you correctly (0+ / 0-)

              As for me, I write technology articles for money. I doubt any of them will ever be turned into an MTV lifestyle story, so you'll never see what I do, which is just as well since you wouldn't understand it anyway.

              I don't consider myself "an artist" or "An Author", but it's creative work and unlike you or any project anyone would let you into, actually serves a useful purpose.

              You claim to "work for" and "represent" artists because you have no discernible talent and nobody would believe that you yourself are one. As for your understanding the "creative process". . . getting that across to you would be as possible as explaining color to a man born blind.

              Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

              by alizard on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 02:00:08 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Were I a Project Manager, perhaps (0+ / 0-)

                But if your reading comprehension were even up to Texas primary school standards, you'd have picked up on the fact that I am a personal manager.  

                Twat.  Nobody left behind, my butt.  You're a field trip orphan.  Nobody came looking and you just decided to miseducate yourself.

                Cheaper that way, but as you've let on it wasn't too successful an endeavor.

                Bottom line through all this flame is that you are an outsider; you're bitter at your failure as a writer; you're eager to steal the works of others like a dirty buzzard on a freshly murdered body; and your wit is as slow as a fly at 15K feet.

                I love it.  A tech writer who proposes to know shit about the music industry, but who fucks up even the secondhand info, willing to demonize it anyway because his little realm found a way to cannibalize and support itself with our product.

                Get the hell out of this conversation, you hack.  Nothing you have written here has any worth whatsoever in furthering the argument because you don't have a clue.  You have wasted my time and everyone else's who thought they were enjoying a real flame war.  

                You in your utter lack of understanding, brought nothing but old, secondhand, bullshit to this conversation.  

                Not, that it wasn't patently obvious to everyone reading.

                "Life is a dream for the wise, a game for the fool, a comedy for the rich, a tragedy for the poor." --Sholem Yakov Rabinowitz

                by Back in the Cave on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 11:09:00 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

        •  As Elizard said... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          alizard, Progressive Moderate

          ...and I want to emphasize, patents also have a limited lifespan.  That does not stop people from seeking them and inventing, as inventors make plenty of money in the limited lifespan as would artists within the six years (and the industry itself would, too, although I'd love it if the industry were killed off and the money went directly to the artists).

          You go against the principles of liberalism, progressivism, or even centrism if you seek unlimited property rights.  Unlimited property rights would, after all, mean no taxation.

          That would make you an extreme libertarian, although extreme libertarians don't want the government to criminally enforce civil law.

          So that leaves you on the far right wing on this issue, which is not where the Democrats ought to be.

          Economic -3.50/Social -2.41 "Please don't eat the moderates." (Yes, someone else used that before me, but it's perfect.)

          by CenterLeft on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 10:05:28 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Ugggggh. (0+ / 0-)

            You're proud of that one, regardless of it's rediculous accusation.  I have a long history here, which you are welcome to search the archives for before spitting up that kind of pflegm.  

            To those who are fed the garbage about the labels making all the money and the artists getting screwed:

            Music as a career is speculative as is investing in their careers.  No one who signs a recording contract is forced to.  They are asking what is basically a bank dipped into distributing sauce and covered with marketing to buy their art and sell it for them, paying them a percentage.  

            And, depending on how much they think people will buy the artist's album, they will give them an advance on future earnings so they don't have to wait around forever for royalties to kick in.  It's a loan.  Not bling bling money, but to use to tour their band.  You know?  That $700K+ it costs to tour a ten piece band and their crew for a couple months?  An expensive goddamn thing to do, but where the artists make the majority of their money.  The labels make sure everyone knows your name, and you go pay them all visits, give them your love and sweat, and sell them shirts to remember you by.  This is where the artists make their money.

            However, you don't make much money touring unless you are getting played on the airwaves - and without going into details, it takes a lot of man hours to get the music to all the Stations and develop the trust to consider the submissions.  It is an industry in itself, and it costs.  Another place the money is needed if the artists are going to be able to profit.

            Oh god, the publicity.  It doesn't grow on trees.  You pay for your publicist's staff, who get you on Late Night talk shows and featured in Variety.  Don't think they just call you.

            These labels don't roll around naked in cash.  They  spend a lot of their own money paying a lot of hard working employees and contractors - all artists themselves in some way - to do all the things necessary to get CDs in the hands of people all over the globe.  They are counting on the album making money (not stealing it in whatever form) to pay those employees and turn a profit, like every business.

            If with all the help in the world, people just choose not to buy your stuff (or if people just steal it instead) you are in trouble, just as anyone else who might have borrowed money in a failing venture:  you still owe the bank for the loan.

            It's risky believing that destiny demands your music and your lead singer's sweat reach every corner in the world.  It's expensive missionary work.

            Are labels suppose to . . . what?  Give their money and productive work force to everyone for free?  Brilliant.  Way to see the big picture.  These venture capitalist recording labels go, and so does touring.  Sorry.

            Like I said up top, no one forces a band to sell their album to a recording label.  They can be waiters and keep their music local, working outside the art world, playing as a hobbiest.  They can keep all the money from their album sales.  It'll buy them a nice new box to store their instruments in as they lose their fire and master TIVO.

            This is the norm for hobbiests.  But, do you want your entitlement and greed to prevent something that everyone deserves to hear from touching everyone?  They don't ever sell their album, the label doesn't ever do all the marketing and placement and don't put your new artist on tour with John Mayer, and you don't sell shit.  100% of nothing more than you can fit into your navel.

            This is what you desire?  You have no freaking clue how this business works and no idea what your theft, were it not regulated and prosecuted, would do to art in general.  One-track minded, uninformed, simple, young, and greedy.

            You related to Bush?  Operation Just Desserts?  

            "Life is a dream for the wise, a game for the fool, a comedy for the rich, a tragedy for the poor." --Sholem Yakov Rabinowitz

            by Back in the Cave on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 12:42:32 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  and with all this effort and labor. . . (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              and all the payola, the best the record industry can do is Britney Spears and the latest boy-toy bands.



              Business models that are unsustainable fall apart, and no amount of government regulation can protect them forever against market forces.

              Or demographic forces, like the splintering of the mass market into fractions too small for anyone to sell platinum into. You've got a business model that can't make money with somebody who can sell 10K SKUs reliably every year, and that's where the action is going to be in a decade.

              I don't know what's going to replace the "record label as VC" (like Silicon Valley VCs, just not as greedy, intelligent,  competent, or honest) ... but hopefully, the mediocrities turned into "stars" will fade into oblivion just like your career is going to.

              Personally, I'd like to see "cream" rising to the top for a change, not crap. And the end of your industry will probably be the start of this happening.

              Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

              by alizard on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 01:19:15 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  You're like a chatty cathy doll. (0+ / 0-)

                You spit out day old news while the three dimensional amongst us are analyzing the colors as they run together an are busy painting the next masterpiece with the remains.  

                You know nothing more than what you read, and your diarrhea here is no more original than music you make violating others' copyrights.

                Be the resident wannabe health care expert next.  I'd like to see you hand the good doctor his uninformed ass.


                "Life is a dream for the wise, a game for the fool, a comedy for the rich, a tragedy for the poor." --Sholem Yakov Rabinowitz

                by Back in the Cave on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 10:54:04 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  That one really got to you (0+ / 0-)

              Note I said you were right wing on this issue, not that you were a right winger.  Your history can show that you're overall a liberal, but it doesn't make your position on this particular issue any less right wing.

              So...all those people are needed to get a band going.  Why?  I'd guess it's because other bands have them.

              If the RIAA companies go belly up, and no bands have them, radio stations aren't going to stop playing music.

              Exactly what would happen?  I don't know for sure, but my guess is that bands looking to become big would get agents the way aspiring actors do (who with aspiring bands, as actors' agents with aspiring actors, would represent a whole bunch of bands).

              Much less overhead and infrastructure to be paid there, and the agents market their artists' songs to radio stations to get air time, etc..  

              That wouldn't work now, as their agent with 20 artists would be competing with the infrastructure you mentioned.

              But get rid of that infrastructure for everyone, and the playing field is level, and then the agent is probably all an artist needs.

              And you just accused me of stealing, when I've never stolen.  I've violated copyright law, which is what you call stealing; but I haven't even done that since iTunes became available.  I'm perfectly content to pay $1/song.  That's fair.  And in fact, once cumulative inflation reaches 50% higher than today, the price can go up to $1.50/song and I'll accept it.

              But...I'm not as young as you might assume, and I did buy music in pre-Napster days.  And I still feel ripped off, remembering the skyrocketing price of cassette and CD singles, and then fewer and fewer songs being released as singles at all, so that people would have to buy the whole album.

              And then there's of course the absurdity that copyrights aren't very time limited as patents are, and a lot of songs just plain weren't available in any form.

              And yes, it made sense that, as with out of print books, record labels stopped publishing albums once the demand for them was too small.  But when it reaches that point, it needs to be public domain-- because I do demand a copy for free if you won't sell it to me.

              And right now, all I demand is reasonable prices as well as reform to bring things into the public domain much, much faster.  iTunes offers reasonable prices, so it's what I use.  But I know that iTunes only exists because people are using BitTorrent and getting the content for free.  

              So, I know that it's essential for "piracy" to continue to happen, or we'd be back to the old ripoff days.  The Democrats-- the party of the people rather than the powerful-- should commit themselves to making sure those days never return.

              Economic -3.50/Social -2.41 "Please don't eat the moderates." (Yes, someone else used that before me, but it's perfect.)

              by CenterLeft on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 10:57:40 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  You're only off (0+ / 0-)

                In your description of an "RIAA company."  There is no such thing.  RIAA is an enforcement agency that protects the rights of its members from theft of intellectual property.  Their MEMBERS are many.  Browse their site.  Most labels are members.

                It's all a bit more complicated than the euphoric possible future you describe.  I'd love to get into it more, but I'm doing all this from the floor of a conference in Vegas . . .  eh, screw it.  No one important around.

                OK.  It doesn't take a mint to make a band.  You can even tour on the cheap.  In the 90's I used to be an agent.  Sent some pretty damn good bands around the country.  

                Thing is, I was still young.  The tours were inefficient and lacked real promotion.  No radio.  No real publicity.  Too many people who deserved to be touched couldn't be.

                Not every band needs to have their album promoted and not every band is asked to spend that kind of money.  But, sometimes an investor (label) will offer to put the dime into a product.  They offer to purchase the album in order they can market it and sell it for you.  

                It's a tough call.  You're going to owe money if you do and you have to determine if you believe in your music enough to take that loan against yourself.

                You don't have to, and you don't have to.  It's just so much different now that recording equipment and the access to rudimentary promotional outlets is so widespread.  Everyone has an EPK whereas a few years ago, you couldn't find but a handful of venue buyers or promoters who were tech savvy enough to freaking open your MP3's. Nowadays, there are infinitely more bands with arguably the same amount of net talent.  Unfortunately, with the increase of people who choose to throw on a guitar strap and rock, there was no coresponding increase in disposable income people had to support it.  So times are lean.  There are no extra positions open, and there are a staggering number of disillusioned who since they cannot sell it, give it, and the product that some sell is somehow now the target of a revolt.  

                Am I remotely off here?  I've been swimming in this pond for a long time and this is  pretty much how it's seen everywhere I've been.  Here, Europe, and especially in Japan.  

                So you know, I'm not a fan of the prices of discs now.  Not at all.  So you know, all of my clients have written into their contracts the maximum retail price of the product, and it's never been over $15.99.  Ever.  And, my clients have all been influenced into providing content in their album packaging just a bit better than could have been fit into a vinyl LP.  Although, you can deliver value and keep costs down, it's coming from somewhere.  It might mean less people are introduced because the marketing is the victim, but you make do because at the end of the day, despite what the tech writer lizard thinks he understands, we all live to bring good into the world.

                Also, you know that your band will always make the lions share of your money from touring and you understand the costs . . . and you understand where it comes from . . . if it comes at all.  So I know you understand.  It's all connected and each aspect compliments the other.  Our web of life.

                It takes a tech geek to know that these tech geeks don't have any idea of the way our biosphere runs, and their hostile takeover attempt is an affront to music and music lovers alike.  One that directly affects the lives of thousands and thousands of hard working people.

                Things may change, no matter what, we are going to continue to be able to feed our children, and people will still pay for good art.

                "Life is a dream for the wise, a game for the fool, a comedy for the rich, a tragedy for the poor." --Sholem Yakov Rabinowitz

                by Back in the Cave on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 11:50:19 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Okay, some fair points.... (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Progressive Moderate

                  Let me ask you a few questions, with the intent to lay off the vitriol and just ask your view of these issues:

                  1. Do you think that iTunes (and similar sites) would be allowed to continue to sell a legal download with unlimited plays of nearly any song one wants for $1/song (eventually adjusted for inflation) if "piracy" were successfully eliminated?
                  1. Regardless of whether you think the answer to #1 is no but nevertheless think "piracy" ideally would be eliminated entirely, would you prefer to see iTunes and sites like them able to continue to operate as they are, if you could choose?
                  1. Since you are left of center and as such accept that there are some limits to property rights (taxation being okay, time limits on patents being okay), what is the rationale behind your support for nearly unlimited copyright protection terms?

                  I'll write a bit more about my view on copyright protection limitations:

                  I think that the goals of most economic policy, including this one, should be:

                  1. To make sure that products get produced, and
                  1. To make such items as affordable and as widely available as possible, within the constraint of part 1.

                  Pure socialists (who are very few) reject part 1 as a consideration, as if people would be as productive no matter what.  Pure capitalists (radical libertarians) reject Part 2 as a consideration.  Many of today's Repugs seem to think Part 2 is actually a bad thing.

                  Mainstream ideology balances Part 1 with Part 2.  Current copyright law does basically nothing for Part 2.  My view is that copyrights should last long enough so as not to overly discourage the making of such materials, but only that long.

                  Few songs (or movies, etc.) make much money more than six years after they're released, although there are exceptions (but those exceptions almost always made lots of money in the first six years).

                  Therefore, I feel that a six year limit won't mean much less production (Part 1) and would be fantastic for Part 2.

                  If you think I've gone wrong, please tell me where.  If it's just property rights, then on this specific issue you're right-wing, even if on other issues you aren't.  That isn't awful.  I have right of center views on a few issues, while I'm overall left of center.  But can you tell me why a left of center individual, one who cares about Part 2, should want nearly unlimited copyright terms?

                  Economic -3.50/Social -2.41 "Please don't eat the moderates." (Yes, someone else used that before me, but it's perfect.)

                  by CenterLeft on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 01:54:03 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

    •  you are NOT a good progressive (0+ / 0-)

      What you are is a waste of perfectly good oxygen.

      Go to your natural home in the GOP. And take Jenni Engebretsen with you.

      Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

      by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 02:42:57 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  A lizard. Heh. (0+ / 0-)

        First of all, you little shit, if you're going to insult, you're a big doodie head approach only primes your reader to be able to gauge your argument's basic worth.

        Second of all, you only show your idiocy telling me that since I am not down with a mob-driven greedy communist vampire call to arms to steal music that I must now be GOP.  

        Lizard, go through the archives.  I am a pretty storied vet of campaigning for Democratic candidates for going on two decades.  I have lived three to a bed in housing too shitty for the college students I was organizing there to make sure a GOP incumbent was defeated.

        Don't you dare tell me I am without progressive ideals because I subscribe to the American dream.  You are delusional.  Think about re-evaluating your philosophy and examining yourself to discover from where your wayward greedy communist ravings originate.  

        Waste of oxygen.  Lizard, where were you back in '90 when we were fighting our asses off to standardize air pollution standards between states?  Think back . . . It was before you were wasting your time insulting people on blog comment boards . . . Think about the shit you say before you say it.  Your oxygen would suck if honest, hard-working, real Democrats weren't busting our asses putting in the real time.  

        And as fucked up as I think your communist philosophy is, I wouldn't insult you by telling you you don't deserve the clean Oxygen that my kind has ensured you.  Contrary, I respect your right to say it and then eventually grow the hell up and mature into the system that makes our country great.  Good Dems participate in the American Way.


        "Life is a dream for the wise, a game for the fool, a comedy for the rich, a tragedy for the poor." --Sholem Yakov Rabinowitz

        by Back in the Cave on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 05:37:31 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  hi, troll... (0+ / 0-)

          Your kind has ensured us absolutely nothing.

          The environmental legislation of the past was passed in the face of the industry greed sanctified by people like you.

          "The American Dream" you talk about has been turned into shit by the corporations YOU shill for, and your employers are part of the corporatist crowd we're trying to take it back from.

          So it's "Communist" to oppose your industry's case study in advanced rent-seeking? It's "Communist" not to support every extension of the Copyright Act every time Disney/ABC's copyrights on Mickey Mouse are in danger of running out? You know no more about "Communism" than you know about being progressive.

          You think it's part of the duty of the blogosphere to help the "American Way" by looking the other way when your bosses buy politicians to pass anti-consumer and anti-technology legislation?

          You're wrong.

          It's our public duty to stop people like your bosses.

          p.s. I don't believe ANY of your claims about suffering for the cause of progressivism... they read too much liks something dreamed up by a PR hack. Which I suspect is the only connection you've really got with the Hollywood content cartel. I think you're just another astroturfer whose background gets reinvented every time you want to influence the public in a direction your "sponsors" want. Netvocates?

          Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

          by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 06:05:03 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  You don't have a clue what a troll is (0+ / 0-)

            Do you, UID 100K+

            Not buying into your grab the neighbor's shit and run philosophy isn't troll.  And, my bosses?

            Stop my bosses?

            General partner.  Am a boss.  

            Stop me?  I represent artists, you twat.  Stop me?  I bleed labels for my clients.

            Stop me?  You don't have even the most basic knowledge of what I do or how general business is run.  You are a hack and YOU ARE THE TROLL.  Just because I'm the only one with the balls enough to walk into this sure as hell doesn't make me a troll.  

            Eat my comment history, you anarchist no-show.  I've been here and helping elect Dems while campaigning artists you aren't fit to breathe near since you were learning to spell B-L-O-G.

            Call me a troll.  Cute.

            "Life is a dream for the wise, a game for the fool, a comedy for the rich, a tragedy for the poor." --Sholem Yakov Rabinowitz

            by Back in the Cave on Sat Apr 14, 2007 at 10:49:29 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Hey there Republicrat! (0+ / 0-)

              We know you're just a talentless phony that profits off of real artists. The only reason you're putting up a fight is because alizard and I are telling it like it is. The truth hurts, doesn't it?
              You could care less about culture, art or the "American Way". You're a selfish, craven hypocrite that thrives off of the corruption of big business. As alizard put it, you are anti-consumer and anti-technology.
              Go back to being Lars Ulrich's lap dog. It's very obvious by now that you only care about business interests and nothing else. The "liberal" celebrities you claim to campaign with and so on are just limo liberal scumbags that vote Democratic but think and live like Republicans. It's all just a sham PR effort on your part. You're a Democrat in name only. People like you are the reason the Democrats have ceased to be a decent political opposition anymore.
              Go ahead and have your lame, repetitive rants about how we're all communists and how you're right because you have the legal backing of the RIAA. You're too much of a gutless coward to admit your true colors! Amazing!
              You're one of those "concern trolls" that Kos and others on this board mention from time to time.

  •  no money for dnc until she is gone (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    of course howard dean is going to make mistakes,and this is one of them (possibly becoming DNC chair was another mistake as well--we really don't know how someone else might have done).
    the netroots need to pressure him to correct this disaster...and ending the "7 dwarfs" approach called a democratic primary...and refusing to accept hostile questions from pbs/cnn/abc during "debates"--all of this!

  •  Dear Howard Dean (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    alizard, VoteHarder

    Your bread is buttered on the blog side. Hire someone from the blogosphere. I'm sure there are plenty of candidates.

  •  And this actually surprises you? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Progressive Moderate

    This is one of the many reasons I'm now a registered Independent. So far the Democratic party hasn't lived up to their promises of representing my views, therefore why should I continue to support them with donations? And while I don't regret my early donations to several progressive campaigns, they probably won't happen in the future.

    "You must be the change you wish to see in the world" Mohandas Gandhi

    by baracon on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 12:26:53 AM PDT

  •  You are missing the point. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    alizard, Progressive Moderate

    The RIAA is a lobbying firm. It takes its marching order from the major labels.
    IGNORE the RIAA . Part of their job is to act like a lightning rod to deflect the attention away from the real culprits, the major labels. Part of their income goes to fund the RIAA on a percentage of their sales.

    Don't like the RIAA actions? Then bitch to Sony Music,  BMG, Warner Bros, and EMI. Look up the complete list of labels under the umbrella of the RIAA. Complain to them, don't buy the music, don't download their music. Let the artists know why you refuse to buy their music.

    Does it work? You bet yer bippy. How do I know? I am the original founder of Boycott-RIAA back in July 2000. I was paying for it on my own and had to sell it to keep it afloat in Feb 2001.  I continued to run it for the next 2 years, when I finally parted ways with them over a philosophical difference.

    Some interesting facts. DMCA is based on a paper written by Bruce Lehman

    Mitch Glazier was a Lawyer to the Senate Judiciary during the Clinton Impeachment hearings and the person that wrote those "four little words" into a 1400 page satellite bill that changed all music to "Works for Hire" it took a bill and a new law to remove them. Less than five months later Glazier went from making $86,000 as a staff lawyer to making 350,000K plus as the RIAA chief lobbyist. (side note he was supposed to have been on the plane that crashed into the Pentagon on Sept. 11th, but missed the flight.)

    Amy Weiss who was the PR director for the RIAA for a while was member of the press office in the Clinton White House. She was there during the whole Monica Lewinsky thing and the Impeachment (which interestingly enough, the DMCA was passed  during the impeachment hearings.)

    Mitch Bainwol began his career as a budget analyst in President Ronald Reagan's Office of Management and Budget (OMB). He went on to become chief of staff for U.S. Senator Connie Mack (R-Fla.), U.S. Senate leadership staff director from 1993-97, chief of staff of the Republican National Committee in 1998.

    Bob Goodlatte is the Republican Congressman (VA-6th) who wrote the "No Electronic Theft " (NET) Act. He has run unopposed for a long time, and Also wrote an OP-ED that almost quoted the RIAA word for word. That same election he ran unopposed, but received over $33k in campaign donations from the RIAA and RIAA members. Not a lot right? It was about $5,000 more than the average income in his district.

    I moved out of his district into the VA 9th to be in Rick Boucher's district. John Perry Barlow once said that Boucher was the only person who gets it.

    Learn the history and take action. Stop buying the major labels music.
    Focus on The labels not the RIAA.
    Tell the labels what you are doing and why. They are already hurting and if Kosacks would go after this with the same passion that got Ned Lamont the Democrat  nod in CT, the RIAA is history.

    BTW the length of copyright is life +70years. Seems like age discrimination to me, a 20 year old gets the benefit much longer than an older artist.

    It is about the issues, not the party.

    by BBGBILL on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 05:52:54 PM PDT

    •  and if you want to buy current music (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Progressive Moderate

      without giving more money to whoever "Back to the Cave" is working for, buy used CDs while you still can. (there are perennial rumors that the RIAA wants to make used record sales illegal)

      If you think an artist deserves money, track down an address and send her/him/them a check.

      Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

      by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 06:18:40 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  slashdot's picked up the story (0+ / 0-)

    Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

    by alizard on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 08:55:36 PM PDT

  •  Concur, not a good person (0+ / 0-)

    The recording industry has been practicing price fixing for decades, they are even enacting lawsuits as a monopoly, and are lobbying to ensure they can continue ripping off consumers at large.

    This cannot be a good person for the DNC to hire.

  •  It's on Digg too (0+ / 0-)

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site