Join 3,556 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Pot meets kettle - none more black.
January 19, 2012 1:06 AM   Subscribe

Chris Dodd responds to the SOPA/PIPA protest and blackout on the official MPAA blog calling it an "abuse of power".
posted by loquacious (198 comments total) 19 users marked this as a favorite

 
LOL
posted by BitterOldPunk at 1:11 AM on January 19, 2012 [18 favorites]


Seriously?

pony request: can I flag TFA for trolling?
posted by Vetinari at 1:12 AM on January 19, 2012 [2 favorites]


You would think a career politician would at least know when to play diplomat and live to fight another day. Totally tone deaf.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 1:12 AM on January 19, 2012 [10 favorites]


Salon on Dodd's paid "I'm not going to lobby" lobbying for PIPA and SOPA.
posted by loquacious at 1:12 AM on January 19, 2012 [7 favorites]


Also, Markos on how the Democrats in general have sucked the big one on this SOPA bullshit.
posted by bardic at 1:13 AM on January 19, 2012 [22 favorites]


I think I rolled my eyes so hard it caused a gravitational disturbance. They're still rolling. It's actually quite painful.
posted by loquacious at 1:14 AM on January 19, 2012 [44 favorites]


I am a corporate pawn of Wikipedia, also the number of African elephants has tripled in the last six months.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 1:15 AM on January 19, 2012 [14 favorites]


Seriously, though, one takeaway from the blackout is that the public interest may not be best served by things which are or have become de facto "semi-critical infrastructure" in the control of a small coterie of potentially irresponsible people and completely inscrutable people who may or may not have the public interest at heart.

(I refer of course to the increasingly unacceptable risk to service and application providers of subjecting themselves to the jurisdiction of the United States. But other people might get the wrong idea and think that Jimmy Wales is the bad guy here. Especially 'cause, let's face it, he's kinda creepy.)
posted by Vetinari at 1:16 AM on January 19, 2012 [5 favorites]


(Woah. Dodd is a regular blogger on MPAA.org? What the... I... I mean... ah... breathtakingly corrupt, much?)
posted by Vetinari at 1:18 AM on January 19, 2012 [6 favorites]


"A so-called “blackout” is yet another gimmick, albeit a dangerous one, designed to punish elected and administration officials who are working diligently to protect American jobs from foreign criminals."

AAAAAAH-HAHAHAHAHA!

That man funny!
posted by flapjax at midnite at 1:20 AM on January 19, 2012 [5 favorites]


"Foreign criminals" clanks in my ear the same way Dubya's "terrorist killers" did.

Now, watch this drive…
posted by StrangeTikiGod at 1:22 AM on January 19, 2012 [13 favorites]


He thinks the protest is an abuse of power? Man, and they say Americans don't do irony!
posted by Decani at 1:24 AM on January 19, 2012 [30 favorites]


(Woah. Dodd is a regular blogger on MPAA.org? What the... I... I mean... ah... breathtakingly corrupt, much?)

Dodd is now Chairman and CEO of the MPAA.

Breathtakingly corrupt is quite the subtle understatement.
posted by loquacious at 1:26 AM on January 19, 2012 [79 favorites]


We got to them. I can't fucking believe it. Awesome.
posted by spitbull at 1:27 AM on January 19, 2012 [17 favorites]


Wikipedia blackout, general internet protest - abuse of power.

Flagrant disregard for the First Amendment, kowtowing to wealthy corporations, treating everyone as if they are guilty until proven innocent, China's censorship laws, hearings closed to anyone who might oppose - "working diligently to protect American jobs from foreign criminals."

GOT IT
posted by louche mustachio at 1:33 AM on January 19, 2012 [32 favorites]


Yes, it may have slipped your notice, but he retired from the Senate and last held office a year ago. He was Senator for thirty years (no, nowhere near the record), so essentially the entirety of my adult life, and probably many of yours as well.
posted by dhartung at 1:34 AM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


Internet luminary Wil Wheaton's response to this blog post.
posted by sleeping bear at 1:35 AM on January 19, 2012 [16 favorites]


Nice that the MPAA are so open to discussion.
posted by iotic at 1:42 AM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


Dodd is now Chairman and CEO of the MPAA.

OOf. I'd obviously missed that part. Okay. He's allowed to blog there, but can we get a law to strip former senators of their title (cite Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution if you need to) so we know we can ignore them once they become professional asshats? I mean, professional asshats off the public dole. Er, I mean. You know what I mean.
posted by Vetinari at 1:58 AM on January 19, 2012 [4 favorites]


Wikipedia takes a day of from giving real knowledge away for free and they're abusing power? But legislating a five year prison sentence for downloading the live action Scoobie Doo movie is just quality legislation that will protect us all from the forces of darkness?

The ironic part is that an organization with the word "artists" in their name would have a blog with that standard of graphic design.
posted by Kid Charlemagne at 2:15 AM on January 19, 2012 [26 favorites]


Abuses of power include causing people to lose homes and jobs and life savings or going to war on false pretenses or locking people up without due process. I don't think this really falls into the "abuse of power" category.
posted by loosemouth at 2:31 AM on January 19, 2012 [7 favorites]


Man, I'm just ashamed I ever even defended this cocksucker.

This SOPA blackout has been an incredible eye-opener and a watershed moment. I used to think the Dems would ultimately do right, but I think the country is truly on it's own now. We're right properly royally plutocratically fucked all around.

Let's face it: 80% of Congress is so Web illiterate as to be laughable.

GAH.....

...

posted by Skygazer at 2:33 AM on January 19, 2012 [11 favorites]


A so-called “blackout” is yet another gimmick, albeit a dangerous one, designed to punish elected and administration officials who are working diligently to protect American jobs from foreign criminals.

"Pot!", cried the kettle, "thou art black an obvious shameless corporate shill".

This motherfucker should be hung up by his thumbs.
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 2:42 AM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


In related news, Sauron accuses hobbits of terrorism.
posted by Pyrogenesis at 2:44 AM on January 19, 2012 [110 favorites]


[The blackout] is an irresponsible response and a disservice to people who rely on them for information and use their services. It is also an abuse of power given the freedoms these companies enjoy in the marketplace today.

Whoah, don't tear that veil as you drape it over that threat.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 2:54 AM on January 19, 2012 [38 favorites]


I piss on you, but I'll tell you it's raining!
It's an entirely legit choice, but I'll tell you it's abuse!
I'll get the profit, but I'll tell you it's in your best interest!
posted by elpapacito at 2:56 AM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


Elected official shilling for the MPAA, posting on the MPAA blog as a Senator - that is an abuse of power.
posted by Dysk at 3:18 AM on January 19, 2012 [3 favorites]


Does the MPAA blog always use that style sheet? It looks like it has been blacked out, which is hilarious.
posted by twoleftfeet at 3:20 AM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


Maybe the MPAA should write better legislation next time it is writing legislation WHICH IS TOTALLY IT'S JOB AN NOT AN ABUSE OF POWER OH WAIT.
posted by Artw at 3:21 AM on January 19, 2012 [4 favorites]


What's that word for when you accuse someone who disagrees with you of something they aren't doing much and you are doing in spades? Hypocrisy just doesn't cover it.
posted by plinth at 3:26 AM on January 19, 2012 [2 favorites]


In other news I am really, really hoping Rupert Murdoch's head does physically explode as he has given every indication it might.
posted by Artw at 3:30 AM on January 19, 2012 [2 favorites]


What's that word for when you accuse someone who disagrees with you of something they aren't doing much and you are doing in spades?

Politics.
posted by eriko at 3:31 AM on January 19, 2012 [14 favorites]


PIPA and SOPA Co-Sponsors Abandon Bills
posted by flapjax at midnite at 3:43 AM on January 19, 2012 [3 favorites]


Hahaha, saw that earlier. Insane.

Of course this is the same organization that claimed that VCR owners were the equivalent of serial killers

I think I heard the number $94 million thrown around on how much the industries are spending to lobby on this. That's about 10x the Wikmedia foundation's annual budget, I think.

So you can see why they're outraged. They've spent ten times Wikipedia's entire budget and yet Wikipedia can have as much of an effect on D.C. as they can? Of from their course it's an abuse of power for them to have as much "free speech" (per citizens united) as them when they don't pay nearly as much money to do it!

---

The other thing is how incredibly disingenuous these people are. It's like they just don't give a fuck what the truth is. Like some VP of NBC was on MSNBCs' Chris Hayes how the other day, debating one of the founders of reddit. It was just one lie after another, about how it would only affect foreign sites It's completely false. The bill targets foreign sites, but it does so by seriously affecting local sites.

The thing is 'domestic' (meaning .us, but also com/net/org/etc) domains have already been getting seized, sometimes by mistake. Completely legitimate domains have been pulled by the Obama administration. So you could make the argument that the stuff targeting domestic sites is already being done. But it is in the bill, IIRC.

---

Also, Red State is taking the opportunity to brag about how much better republicans are on this then democrats. And, Hollywood moguls are going to stop donating to Obama, apparently.
posted by delmoi at 3:45 AM on January 19, 2012 [19 favorites]


Senators (even former ones) don't know how to deal with actual people anymore, and look at everything as the corporate entity that might be behind it. It couldn't possibly be the people, who are content to vote once in a while and can't rally behind anything on a large scale. It has to be some kind of corporate move, moving and manipulating people as pawns.

This is telling, given the way that the political environment works. Perhaps the issue is that this kind of thing is not the norm. Maybe our elected officials need to be reminded more often that they're accountable for their actions. SOPA and PIPA aren't dead yet, so it's not time to step off the gas pedal. It's time to follow through.
posted by Rodrigo Lamaitre at 3:55 AM on January 19, 2012 [10 favorites]


Markos on how the Democrats in general have sucked the big one on this SOPA bullshit.

And healthcare reform. And Iraq and Afghanistan. And the FCC. And so forth and so on.

It continually puzzles me why people think the Democrats are any less in the corporate pocket than Republicans. Both parties represent corporations, the Republicans just also represent rich people personally, anti-science nutjobs and bigots.
posted by DU at 4:20 AM on January 19, 2012 [23 favorites]


Senators (even former ones) don't know how to deal with actual people anymore,

Extend that to include almost all elected officials and you have it. They exist in a very insular world that does not include people who only vote, no matter how many people only vote.
posted by fuq at 4:22 AM on January 19, 2012


Former Senator Dodd has lost the last little shred of respect I had for his service.

And you know what, the republicans *do* look better than the dems on this. Shocking, and I mentioned it above, because it is damn stupid electoral politics by the dems -- tone deaf on every level unless you grant that losing a few big donors matters more than losing a few million votes and some even bigger donors.

Sad. The president got out in front of this right in the nick of time. So it will cost him some Hollywood donors . . . what, are they going to support republicans who spun around on this as soon as they smelled the blood in the water?
posted by spitbull at 4:26 AM on January 19, 2012 [4 favorites]


I was thinking Dodd was the one they used to call the 'Senator from Disney,' but, nope, looks like that was Fritz Hollings.
posted by box at 4:33 AM on January 19, 2012


I think everyone is missing the real point here:
...working diligently to protect American jobs from foreign criminals.
The American criminal industry would be getting some much-needed protection from all the outsourcing that has been going on in recent years.

I'm disappointed at everyone's shortsightedness on this matter and the way Mr Dodd's smart ideas are being ripped to shreds by people who don't seem to appreciate what he is doing for America.

Typical Metafilter.
posted by i_cola at 4:34 AM on January 19, 2012 [22 favorites]


Also, Red State is taking the opportunity to brag about how much better republicans are on this then democrats. And, Hollywood moguls are going to stop donating to Obama, apparently.

Eh, it's equal opportunity dickishness on this one. And the only "Hollywood mogul" in Finke's breathless article is Rupert Murdoch. So, yeah.
posted by zombieflanders at 4:40 AM on January 19, 2012 [3 favorites]


i_cola: "I think everyone is missing the real point here:
...working diligently to protect American jobs from foreign criminals.
The American criminal industry would be getting some much-needed protection from all the outsourcing that has been going on in recent years.

I'm disappointed at everyone's shortsightedness on this matter and the way Mr Dodd's smart ideas are being ripped to shreds by people who don't seem to appreciate what he is doing for America.

Typical Metafilter
"

Bwa ha ha, awful ballsy to leave off the "HAMBURGER" disclaimer
posted by DoctorFedora at 4:43 AM on January 19, 2012 [3 favorites]


And healthcare reform

They Democrats came within 3-4 votes of getting fantastic reform. The Republicans voted in lock step against pretty much anything, except 2-3 of them.

I'm not sure why people keep insisting the parties are the same.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 4:47 AM on January 19, 2012 [13 favorites]


They Democrats came within 3-4 votes of getting fantastic reform.

Think what they could have done if they'd negotiated like they meant it.
posted by DU at 4:57 AM on January 19, 2012 [3 favorites]


Think what they could have done if they'd negotiated like they meant it.

3 or 4 of the Democratic Senators didn't mean it, at all, so...what?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 4:59 AM on January 19, 2012 [2 favorites]


Pretty rich. This is why pressuring congress works like a charm. Wish we did it more.
posted by Ironmouth at 5:02 AM on January 19, 2012 [3 favorites]


Christ, what an ass-shill.
posted by delfin at 5:06 AM on January 19, 2012


So robo-suing IP addresses and making web sites disappear without any due process aren't abuses of power, but protesting for a day is?

What an asshole.
posted by Benny Andajetz at 5:07 AM on January 19, 2012 [13 favorites]


Maddoxx pretty much sums up the SOPA-protest bullshit in his typical manner.
posted by Old'n'Busted at 5:08 AM on January 19, 2012 [12 favorites]


"Job stealers" is going to be this decade's "terrorists". We must sacrifice our liberties to protect ourselves from the job stealers!

I'm imagining a sort of soul eater-like wraith that slips in to your bedroom through the crack under the window and sucks the jobforce (that would be like lifeforce, except sometimes it provides health insurance) out of your sleeping body.
posted by backseatpilot at 5:17 AM on January 19, 2012 [13 favorites]


Wow, didn't know Dodd was so versatile as to be able to turn on a dime from whoring for the financial industry to whoring for the movie business. You'd think the 2008 financial crisis would have been enough to force him to climb under a rock and never return for fear of derision from anyone and everyone he met but I'm sure there isn't a commoner alive that he comes in contact with on a daily basis that has the attention span to connect him to the crisis and those that do have memory consider him a hero for bailing out their asses.

You know, "we the people" could show some real force here by refusing to go to the movies for a week...oh what am I saying, just the idea of being alone with their own thoughts for a week would drive most Americans certifiably insane.
posted by any major dude at 5:20 AM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


Markos on how the Democrats in general have sucked the big one on this SOPA bullshit.

Gold.
Those goddam Democrats would rather keep collecting their Hollywood checks, than heed the will of millions of Americans who have lent their online voice in an unprecedented manner.

Are they really this stupid? Can they really be this idiotic?
This from the same man who wrote:

If Democrats can’t deliver on good policy with strong popular support and dominant congressional majorities, then they’re too incompetent to be in power.

And yet who is he going to tell people to vote for in November?

"Party hack" doesn't begin to describe how craven an order-taker Markos Moulitsas is.
posted by Trurl at 5:33 AM on January 19, 2012


"Job stealers" is going to be this decade's "terrorists". We must sacrifice our liberties to protect ourselves from the job stealers!

And it's just going to get worse. Movies will start to glamorize the job stealing lifestyle. Impressionable youth will, like, go out and steal jobs. Old ladies won't be able to trim their hedges without a half dozen punks in overalls muscling in and doing it for her.

"What are you work'n for?" we'll ask these rebels without a job.
"Whatchu got?" they'll reply before putting up the drywall you were meaning to do this weekend and cleaning your basement. You'll try to call the cops on them, but whoops, someone stole the cops' jobs too! Stole them right away and took them down to the local job fence or employment chopshop.

It'll be a dark time for America. Luckily, without any health insurance, the job stealer population will eventually dwindle and real patriots will be able to emerge from their bunkers and get back to the daily business at hand - sitting in front of a computer for seven hours moving a set of numbers from one spreadsheet to another in between looking at funny pictures of cats.
posted by robocop is bleeding at 5:34 AM on January 19, 2012 [49 favorites]


I hope you're fucking proud of yourself, Chris Dodd. You just unseated Joe Lieberman as "shittiest living senator (past or present) from Connecticut." JOE LIEBERMAN.

On the bright side, Blumenthal comes out of this smelling like roses. And I'm pretty sure that's the first time that sentence has ever been written
posted by Mayor West at 5:34 AM on January 19, 2012 [6 favorites]


I'm not terribly shocked at Dodd's stance, ever since I watched Pat Schroeder go from being one of the more progressive voices in Congress to being a shill for the Association of American Publishers and going after libraries.

The one that I'm really disappointed in? Al Franken, for supporting this mess. I know that he knows a lot of people in show biz, but come on, Al.
posted by Halloween Jack at 5:36 AM on January 19, 2012 [16 favorites]


Dodd is easy to mock but he's not far from being alone. Pat Leahy, who for years has postured and preened about what a stalwart defender of the First Amendment he is ("Leahy is a leader in enacting laws to protect privacy rights, copyright protections and freedom of speech on the Internet," bleats his bio), is one of the principal sponsors of PIPA, and his top three campaign contributors for the past 20 years are Time Warner, Disney, and Wilshire Boulvard trial lawyer firm Girardi & Keese (whose portfolio includes contingency-basis intellectual property lawsuits).

And yeah, when Pat Schroeder took her cushy American Association of Publishers job and started ominously intoning about how publishers "have a very serious issue with librarians," I wanted to vomit.
posted by blucevalo at 5:42 AM on January 19, 2012 [5 favorites]


"A so-called “blackout” is yet another gimmick, albeit a dangerous one, designed to punish elected and administration officials who are working diligently to protect American jobs from foreign criminals."

This line alone should be reason enough to bar this person from ever serving elected office again.
posted by odinsdream at 5:43 AM on January 19, 2012 [3 favorites]


Apparently well informed summary of public attitudes regarding issues surrounding SOPA and PIPA. Reported by Bloomberg News and conducted by independent research arm of Columbia University, funded by a grant from Google and with appropriate disclaimers
posted by rmhsinc at 5:43 AM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


You know, "we the people" could show some real force here by refusing to go to the movies for a week...oh what am I saying, just the idea of being alone with their own thoughts for a week would drive most Americans certifiably insane.

alone with my thoughts for a week?
i'm afraid it would drive me insane!
to go a whole week without movies?
i'm sure it would damage my brain!
my thrillers and dramas and comedies,
i need them so badly, you see!
but wait, after all, it won't be so bad,
as long as I've still got TV!
posted by flapjax at midnite at 5:46 AM on January 19, 2012


The #wikipediablackout feed on twitter is interesting. A lot of the tweets are along the lines of "WTF Wikipedia is down?? How am I supposed to do my homework? WTF?" and fewer are along the lines of "WTF? Wikipedia is down because of SOPA? WTF is SOPA? I have no way to know because I can't look it up on Wikipedia now."
posted by twoleftfeet at 5:54 AM on January 19, 2012


I am a corporate pawn of Wikipedia, also the number of African elephants has tripled in the last six months.

I read this as "prawn". If anything it only improves your comment.
posted by Fizz at 6:00 AM on January 19, 2012 [2 favorites]


Seriously, though, one takeaway from the blackout is that the public interest may not be best served by things which are or have become de facto "semi-critical infrastructure" in the control of a small coterie of potentially irresponsible people and completely inscrutable people who may or may not have the public interest at heart.


That COULD be a take away.

Another is - it is their own PRIVATE property. They can do with it what they wish.

If you opt to rely on the infrastructure of others - you are relying on their goodwill.
posted by rough ashlar at 6:05 AM on January 19, 2012 [2 favorites]


Blumenthal comes out of this smelling like roses.

I'm guessing with new genetic engineering methods you could get a rose to smell anyway you want.

(Note to self: Buy/rent DNA gun. Combine Corpse flower and rose)
posted by rough ashlar at 6:07 AM on January 19, 2012


In related news, Sauron accuses hobbits of terrorism.

Smuggling a powerful weapon into a foreign country for the purpose of causing a huge explosion - that's about the textbook definition I guess.
posted by Dr Dracator at 6:08 AM on January 19, 2012 [4 favorites]


[The blackout] is an irresponsible response and a disservice to people who rely on them for information and use their services. It is also an abuse of power given the freedoms these companies enjoy in the marketplace today.

Jesus Christ on a pogo stick. I hereby call on all netizens to boycott all major motion pictures for the next 12 months. Spread the word.
posted by ZenMasterThis at 6:24 AM on January 19, 2012 [2 favorites]


rough ashlar: "That COULD be a take away. Another is - it is their own PRIVATE property. They can do with it what they wish."

Wait - in what sense exactly is the Internet the private property of the US government? I think maybe you misread the comment you're responding to.
posted by koeselitz at 6:24 AM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


Congress literally did not read this bill. It's becoming quite obvious that SOPA/PIPA is a ridiculous mess that effectively scribbled on a napkin that whoever can afford lawyers can get whatever they want. Likewise, because of how awful the bill is it's quite obvious that the MPAA/RIAA wanted this bill passed quickly and without anyone giving a shit. I can't laugh at or mock Chris Dodd when he's just being more effective at being paid and totally in the pocket of the Hollywood owners than all the other ones still in office. Of course he's going to say ludicrous bullshit about SOPA. That is literally what his job is. He is actually doing his job that he is paid to do, as opposed to Harry Reid, who is not.

The Daily Show's mocked this very often but one of the things worth noting here is that the majority of Congress truly, utterly does not know how the internet works. It's far more than just old man Ted Stevens and his series of tubes. As last night's clip pointed out, here is the member of Congress who is the ranking member of the Intellectual Subcommittee pretty much stating that he does not have a fucking clue what the bill does.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 6:31 AM on January 19, 2012 [4 favorites]


I mean, I totally understand how standing up there and saying things like that is now a core part of Dodd's job, and that not doing it would mean not having a job. But still, how could one possibly say those things and not just feel totally vile?
posted by Forktine at 6:31 AM on January 19, 2012


But still, how could one possibly say those things and not just feel totally vile?

I'm pretty sure that he feels much better on the 15th and 30th of each month.
posted by octothorpe at 6:45 AM on January 19, 2012 [6 favorites]


These bills are the screams of redundant men with obsolete business models. Far from being ridiculous messes, they are engineered to get the slaves back on the plantation, by sabotaging open access to the means of production and distribution.

Piracy is a red herring. What really has them shitting their bucket seats is the ability for anyone to set up a record label or movie studio as a weekend project - the ability to create and sell media with a barrier to entry as low as the price of a computer and a cable internet account.

The Internet needs to respond not just by protesting, but by organizing and funding its own lobby groups and by drafting its own legislation.
posted by fleetmouse at 7:04 AM on January 19, 2012 [19 favorites]


Brings home the point that we really don't have a "two" party system. We have one large party that are divided on some issues depending on the money they are being fed.
posted by incandissonance at 7:06 AM on January 19, 2012 [8 favorites]


what the fuck is the internet?
posted by 12bits at 7:19 AM on January 19, 2012 [7 favorites]


The Internet needs to respond not just by protesting, but by organizing and funding its own lobby groups and by drafting its own legislation.

Well, you can lobby and organize and draft all the legislation you want, but the only sound they hear is the sound of cash, preferably in large denominations, dropping into their re-election and super PAC accounts.
posted by blucevalo at 7:24 AM on January 19, 2012


The Internet needs to respond not just by protesting, but by organizing and funding its own lobby groups and by drafting its own legislation.

I keep seeing this argument in SOPA discussions, but I don't see what legislation you want us geeks to propose. Perhaps something along the lines of "Congress shall make no law restricting the free transfer of information over computer networks?" Fine sentiment, but that's completely toothless, since any future legislation would supersede it. What we want is to restrict the growth of US-government power over the Internet, but that's more Constitutional-amendment territory, a much harder battle.

Best case scenario: SOPA or something like it passes, but is quickly struck down by the Supreme Court on First Amendment grounds. More realistic: complete inaction. If we lobby, we should lobby for maintaining the status quo.
posted by skymt at 7:27 AM on January 19, 2012 [2 favorites]


The Internet needs to respond not just by protesting, but by organizing and funding its own lobby groups and by drafting its own legislation.

I don't know if you've actually read The Internet, but I'd be afraid of the kind of shit they'd try and get passed.
posted by empath at 7:28 AM on January 19, 2012 [11 favorites]


"Job stealers" is going to be this decade's "terrorists". We must sacrifice our liberties to protect ourselves from the job stealers!

I'm imagining a sort of soul eater-like wraith that slips in to your bedroom through the crack under the window and sucks the jobforce (that would be like lifeforce, except sometimes it provides health insurance) out of your sleeping body.


Apparently the Lethifold should also be worried about its own job security.
posted by malusmoriendumest at 7:28 AM on January 19, 2012


The Internet needs to respond not just by protesting, but by organizing and funding its own lobby groups and by drafting its own legislation.

Isn't that what this is?
posted by dinty_moore at 7:29 AM on January 19, 2012


Re: the Daily Show clip, the weird thing to me is that the SOPA penalties aren't without parallel in the real world. You're talking about measures roughly analogous to cutting a store's phone lines, forbidding it to advertise anywhere and pulling its listing from the Yellow Pages because it sold a plagiarized book. Or some furniture that used illegally imported wood. The foundational insanity of these bills isn't that complicated.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 7:32 AM on January 19, 2012 [14 favorites]


Amazing how the cowards don't have the courage to enable comments on their blog post. Truly amazing.
posted by spitefulcrow at 7:38 AM on January 19, 2012 [2 favorites]


If you guys think piracy is a problem (I don't), then what do you propose to do about sites like filestube and the pirate bay? Or do you think the status quo is fine?
posted by empath at 7:45 AM on January 19, 2012


Does anybody else just feel like turning off "culture" for a good long while? I know this makes for a pretty neutered version of Walden Pond but the cumulative force of this crap is really turning me off of watching any movies or listening to any popular music for a while. I'm probably way late to the game on this, but I can't imagine I'm the only one who just feels like going off the pop culture grid. I'm not going to be treated like a felon for interacting with this stuff. It's not even remotely worth the hassle. I'm thinking I can live just fine with my books and a small collection of music produced by people that aren't participating in this whole mess.

I know things have been heading this way for a while but this is the first time I've actually felt strongly about it. Some inarticulable line is being crossed.
posted by dosterm at 7:45 AM on January 19, 2012 [12 favorites]


Senators (even former ones) don't know how to deal with actual people anymore, and look at everything as the corporate entity that might be behind it. It couldn't possibly be the people, who are content to vote once in a while and can't rally behind anything on a large scale. It has to be some kind of corporate move, moving and manipulating people as pawns.

I think you're misreading the politics here. Dodd isn't looking for the entity that might be behind it. He doesn't actually believe that this is some kind of corporate conspiracy. He's using the conspiracy, populist language because it's popular at the moment. Since OWS, every political figure in America now uses this kind of language to convey their American-ness. Hence, the use of "Big Green" to describe the people behind the failure of the Keystone Pipeline. Hence, the attacks on Romney - from Republicans - that accuse him of being a corporate whore. It's not that these politicians actually believe what they're saying. Their PR people know that right now, the language of politics is populism, so they write the scripts to fit. Five years ago, Dodd would have framed this around state defense and a need for national security.
posted by outlandishmarxist at 7:49 AM on January 19, 2012 [15 favorites]


Generally, the most long-term effective way of dealing with piracy is to focus on your customer service. If you're selling data, pirates can duplicate your product exactly, but they can't duplicate the experience of getting it. The experience of pirating a song varies depending on how many other people know or care about it at the moment, what trackers they're using, and how much sleep the compressionist had that night. Paying 99¢ to not worry about that bullshit is quite a reasonable proposition for most consumers.
posted by LogicalDash at 7:50 AM on January 19, 2012 [2 favorites]


Basically, Sen. Dodd and his rich corporatist cronies are of the opinion that failure to smile when eating your shit sandwich is anti-American. I agree - come on guys, we all owe so much to these job creators! They built this country from the ground up using nothing but inherited wealth, graft, and a willingness to screw everyone who's not in their club!
posted by Mister_A at 7:52 AM on January 19, 2012 [6 favorites]


outlandishmarxist: Agreed. It's jarring (and weirdly, almost robotically tone-deaf) how Dodd tries to use the rhetoric of populism in that MPAA blog response.
posted by saulgoodman at 7:54 AM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


plinth: What's that word for when you accuse someone who disagrees with you of something they aren't doing much and you are doing in spades? Hypocrisy just doesn't cover it.

It's projection.
posted by localroger at 8:03 AM on January 19, 2012 [5 favorites]


Hey Mr Dodd -

Remind me again just how it came to be that all those movie studios ended up way out in Hollywood, California anyway. Seems like it had something to do with patents and copyright and getting as far away from Menlo Park, New Jersey as possible.

It's almost like people wanted to use and reuse cool new tools and ideas to make new stuff and remix old stuff without having to kowtow to an onerous patent troll.

Hey! That'd make a great movie!
posted by BitterOldPunk at 8:10 AM on January 19, 2012 [32 favorites]


The Internet needs to respond not just by protesting, but by organizing and funding its own lobby groups and by drafting its own legislation.

The internet isn't a group; it's infrastructure. That's like suggesting all drivers should get together to lobby for road construction. There's no central tenet of belief that internet users have...hell, the content should show that. Westboro is The Internet. 4Chan is The Internet.

Also, there is a representative group for the viewpoint, and it's the EFF. You should donate.
posted by Rodrigo Lamaitre at 8:22 AM on January 19, 2012 [2 favorites]


Also, Markos on how the Democrats in general have sucked the big one on this SOPA bullshit.

How's that saying go again? Never doubt the Democrat's ability to snap defeat from the jaws of victory.
posted by Talez at 8:28 AM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


Foreign criminals, China, American jobs! Oh my!
posted by Oh OK HA HA at 8:30 AM on January 19, 2012 [2 favorites]


I'm proud to say my Dem. Rep (Tammy Baldwin) replied to my mail (from last month) letting me know she opposed it... though funny I got it on the same day as the blackout, even though I wrote last month... Funny that.

Either way, she listens. Mostly. More than most.
posted by symbioid at 8:32 AM on January 19, 2012


I know what you mean symbioid. My district is basically Silicon Valley (CA #15 represent!) so Mike Honda opposes it as a matter of course. So does Anna Eshoo over in greater Santa Clara county next door.

I sent Mike's office an email in support assuring him he'd have my vote in 2014 once I become a citizen. I'd make room in the budget for campaign money but even after California's redistricting he's in one of the bluest seats in the country running in CA #17.
posted by Talez at 8:39 AM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


WTF is SOPA? I have no way to know because I can't look it up on Wikipedia now.

This is annoying, because all of wikipedia was blacked out yesterday EXCEPT for the SOPA page. It was up the entire time.
posted by nushustu at 8:40 AM on January 19, 2012 [5 favorites]


So Blackout Day was a cheap, "corporate stunt," but having a senator write about said stunt on the MPAA blog isn't?

BTW: If ever there was a time to pull out the ol' "pot meet kettle" bit, this is it; excellent post title.
posted by asnider at 8:41 AM on January 19, 2012


So Blackout Day was a cheap, "corporate stunt," but having a senator write about said stunt on the MPAA blog isn't?

Just in case this point has still gone unprocessed by some latecomers to the thread, Dodd isn't just a former senator. He's the CEO of the MPAA now.
posted by saulgoodman at 8:45 AM on January 19, 2012


Holy shit. Let's review: Politicians and corporate powers consider a populist protest against corporate and government attempts to restrict civil liberties an abuse of power. Its official. We live in Whacky-fucking-crazy-land.

Here's an idea Entertainment industry: Punish us. Punish us real good. Stage your own blackout. Go a full year without giving us NCIS or another Avatar movie. Make us feel the pain of you depriving us of an entire season of Toddlers And Tiaras or Jack And Jill 2: Jack Harder. Make us hurt. We'll be begging for mercy before you can say "Cake Boss Season 4".

I promise.
posted by sourwookie at 8:48 AM on January 19, 2012 [30 favorites]


Rodrigo Lamaitre:
The internet isn't a group; it's infrastructure. That's like suggesting all drivers should get together to lobby for road construction. There's no central tenet of belief that internet users have...hell, the content should show that. Westboro is The Internet. 4Chan is The Internet.

I'm the Internet, and you can too!
posted by no relation at 8:49 AM on January 19, 2012 [5 favorites]


This is annoying, because all of wikipedia was blacked out yesterday EXCEPT for the SOPA page. It was up the entire time.

Yeah even The Daily Show screwed that up :(
posted by kingbenny at 8:51 AM on January 19, 2012


Jack And Jill 2: Jack Harder

I have never seen an Adam Sandler movie, and have no plans to, but that's kind of an awesome title.
posted by Halloween Jack at 8:51 AM on January 19, 2012 [2 favorites]


First of all, fuck Chris Dodd. Typical politician turned lobbyist.
then what do you propose to do about sites like filestube and the pirate bay? Or do you think the status quo is fine?

the status quo is fine. I will pirate until the following happens.
1.) I own and control the media I purchase with the ability to use it on whatever device I want, not tied to some fucking stupid "appstore"
2.) I can get the content easily, with little to no delay
3.) Costs are reasonable
4.) I can get the media I want from other countries now, not a year after its been released elsewhere.


Looks like I am going to be pirating for a long ass time.

posted by handbanana at 8:53 AM on January 19, 2012 [6 favorites]


Well, you can lobby and organize and draft all the legislation you want, but the only sound they hear is the sound of cash

Which Google, among others, have a rather large amount of, except that -- at least until now -- they've not seen fit to bother spending much of it in Washington. Perhaps believing, naively, that they will simply be allowed to go about changing the world unmolested by those who prefer the status quo, or perhaps they just watched too many School House Rock videos and still think that's how the Beltway world actually functions.

Either way, I hope that the SOPA/PIPA thing is a wake-up call to them, and to other tech companies. There's no reason why the tech sector can't outspend Hollywood, and the dirty truth is that buying politicians is absurdly cheap. The only reason why the content companies have such a voice is because they spend liberally, and spend via a trade organization (the MPAA) that ensures they're represented coherently (if evilly). Internet companies don't have an equivalent organization, and it's hurting them.

Protests and direct action are nice, but something like the SOPA Blackout will only work once, or at most a few times. And there's no way that the content companies and the MPAA are just going to give up and go home. They're going to keep the pressure and the money flowing, and eventually -- unless the companies who are going to be ruined by legislation like SOPA stop playing defense and go on the offensive -- it's going to get through.

What I'd love to see is some sort of MPAA-equivalent lobbying organization for tech companies, with a clear set of legislative priorities and the backing of some deep-pocketed organizations. Ideally, those priorities would take the fight directly to the content companies. It's been a long time since Viacom and Disney have been on the defensive; something (just e.g.) that expanded online safe harbor provisions, or better yet an attack on copyright terms, would have them shitting their pants.

But it can't be left up to individual users to protect the entire technology sector; the companies who stand to lose billions from SOPA/PIPA-type laws need to ante up and start playing the game. The fact that they may not be interested in Washington doesn't mean that Washington isn't interested in them.
posted by Kadin2048 at 8:53 AM on January 19, 2012 [4 favorites]


I think this MPAA message may be effective. For the herpderpedia crowd of ordinary folks who don't give a shit about politics or freedom or the health of the Internet, the blackouts yesterday were an abuse of power. I mean, how dare Wikipedia go offline, I need it to write my school paper. And dammit I want my stoner comics on Reddit what is this bullshit?

You and I don't think that way, because we're Internet culture people on Metafilter and are educated on issues like SOPA. But I think for a large portion of Americans, Dodd's blog post speaks to them. Never underestimate the power of playing to the ignorant.
posted by Nelson at 8:53 AM on January 19, 2012


...working diligently to protect American jobs from foreign criminals.

Cool! Finally going after Rupert Murdoch!

What?
posted by Celsius1414 at 8:59 AM on January 19, 2012 [4 favorites]


Hmm. I think if you go looking for people with a particular point of view on Twitter you will find them, becuase there are a lot of people on Twitter.
posted by Artw at 8:59 AM on January 19, 2012 [3 favorites]


The Internet needs to respond not just by protesting, but by organizing and funding its own lobby groups and by drafting its own legislation.

Rather than admitting that money drives legislation to the benefit of monied interests, why not move to a political system that benefits the citizens 1st and foremost?
posted by rough ashlar at 8:59 AM on January 19, 2012 [3 favorites]


This is all going to end in Libertarian space enclaves...
posted by Artw at 9:00 AM on January 19, 2012 [3 favorites]


So as head of the MPAA, is Chris Dodd the guy I should complain to about Season 1 of Boardwalk Empire not being available on DVD until after Season 2 had ended?

Because I wanted to buy it, I really did.

posted by Capt. Renault at 9:00 AM on January 19, 2012 [3 favorites]


I used Wikipedia yesterday. I looked at the Google cached version of the page I wanted to read. It's not like the information went away.
My takeaway is that the vast majority of internet users are even less informed than a minimally informed person like me.

Chris Dodds is a hack. I expect this from him. It doesn't mean anything to me, except if he ever tries to get back into politics or lobbies for something worthwhile or meaningful, I will be extra circumspect.
posted by Seamus at 9:01 AM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


Oh, I guess it does mean something to me. I got a good chuckle out of it this morning.
posted by Seamus at 9:03 AM on January 19, 2012


Another note, is the American education in such poor shape that students/teachers rely on wikipedia?

Don't get me wrong, it is an awesome resource but is not "research" material nor always complete/accurate nor static for the use of referencing.
posted by handbanana at 9:04 AM on January 19, 2012


The wikipedia block was JavaScript based, and would have been pathetically easy to avoid in any number of ways (including turning off JavaScript). Which may have been a metaphor, or something.
posted by Artw at 9:04 AM on January 19, 2012


You mad bro?!
posted by varion at 9:04 AM on January 19, 2012 [2 favorites]


This is all going to end in Libertarian space enclaves...

If supporting SOPA/PIPA is the price I have to pay to snort space cocaine off a space hooker's tits, then so be it.

SSSSSPPPPPPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACCCCCCCEEEEEEEE
posted by BitterOldPunk at 9:08 AM on January 19, 2012 [2 favorites]


Hmmmm. Interesting to see such a robust defense of corporate political speech on Metafilter.
posted by yoink at 9:08 AM on January 19, 2012


Kadin2048 you're not entirely correct. I agree that these companies should step up, but they aren't doing nothing. You can see (tell it to sort by tech industry $) that the tech sector has donated a lot to candidates, and will likely continue to do so more and more. Sure the MPAA has Dodd's address book, but Google (probably) has Sen. Wyden's, and Rep Issa's.
posted by Wretch729 at 9:08 AM on January 19, 2012


So as head of the MPAA, is Chris Dodd the guy I should complain to about Season 1 of Boardwalk Empire not being available on DVD until after Season 2 had ended?

Because I wanted to buy it, I really did.


Not even DVD. Why the fuck do I have to have a cable sub to even buy/receive access to Showtime and HBO's on demand libraries? Why can't I just pay Showtime and HBO their $10/month to have access to their library? Do I have to give those Comcast vultures $30/month (at least I think that's how much it costs) as well for basic cable that I just get over the air anyway?

I mean if you don't want to sell me the content what am I supposed to do? Force you at gunpoint to take my money? File an anti-trust suit against Comcast because they're a monopoly at my location and they force me to engage their services to receive HBO/Showtime?

Media in this country is even more fucking retarded than Australia. And that's a pretty high bar to beat for stupidity in media companies.
posted by Talez at 9:13 AM on January 19, 2012 [2 favorites]


Dodd isn't just a former senator.

Why do former senators get to keep the "Senator" title? Why is he still being referred to as "Senator Todd" if he's not longer a senator. As someone living outside of the US, this confuses me.
posted by asnider at 9:15 AM on January 19, 2012 [2 favorites]


snort space cocaine off a space hooker's tits

All three?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:19 AM on January 19, 2012 [5 favorites]


Chris Dodd rejects Martian sepratist's use of "aliens" (foreign) air creation technology as abuse of power.
posted by Artw at 9:22 AM on January 19, 2012


Apologies if this is linked above, but did anyone see this response by the Boston Herald editorial staff? I've never seen such a lack of professionalism.

They were probably all upset that they couldn't get to Wikipedia to write their articles.
posted by King Bee at 9:23 AM on January 19, 2012 [3 favorites]


I mean if you don't want to sell me the content what am I supposed to do?

Exactly. I'm no businessman, but I always thought the number one rule of business was to make it as easy as possible for people to buy your product. Apparently, it's to set up the rules to protect you from the discipline of a free market, so you can sit back and do whatever, if you want, maybe.

posted by Capt. Renault at 9:23 AM on January 19, 2012


Drivers do lobby for road construction, or at least fire off a ton of letters to the editor if the city isn't keeping up with the potholes.

I dare say a huge swath of the people using the internet would agree on some pretty basic things. You want to shut down people committing actual piracy? Fine. Craft a law that does that. But right now fair use is rapidly being EULAed out of existence and off target (or deliberately targeted but inappropriate DMCA take-down notices) are a dime a dozen (consider Mathowie's examples).

It's like the MPAA looked at what Valve has going and was frightened by the idea of making that much money. So instead they're busy trying to out RIAA the RIAA.
posted by Kid Charlemagne at 9:24 AM on January 19, 2012


It's strange to me that both Amazon and Microsoft stepped out against SOPA.

Microsoft feels more like a content company than a web company to me, since their bread and butter is shipping massive blobs of carefully arranged bits that are trivially duplicated

And Amazon is evolving into a content company, or at least has a content wing. I wonder if they benefit from the downward pressure that piracy exerts on content prices? More pressure on content companies to lower prices = cheaper stuff on Amazon = more Amazon penetration of the market.

I agree that these companies should step up, but they aren't doing nothing.

They'll step up or they'll be dead, because the other two legs of the internet tripod, content and telecom, both have it out for the web industry. We're lucky that content and telecom are terrible at writing software.
posted by Sauce Trough at 9:29 AM on January 19, 2012


Old'n'Busted: "Maddoxx pretty much sums up the SOPA-protest bullshit in his typical manner."

I'll be perfectly honest, I had no idea Maddox was still on the web.
posted by Gordafarin at 9:31 AM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


It's strange to me that both Amazon and Microsoft stepped out against SOPA.

Amazon needs a secure internet, and people who don't know what they are doing monkeying around with DNS is bad news. I don't think the piracy angle per se has anything to do with it.
posted by ambrosia at 9:34 AM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


Chris Dodd has worked very hard to make me regret supporting him in the 2008 Iowa caucuses. I'm so let down by the guy.

Am I the only one who's reminded of a beardless George Lucas? "Hey check this out, it's called Star Wars/my fight against retroactive immunity for warrantless wiretapping. By the way here's Jar-Jar/SOPA."
posted by compartment at 9:34 AM on January 19, 2012


Microsoft feels more like a content company than a web company to me, since their bread and butter is shipping massive blobs of carefully arranged bits that are trivially duplicated

Yeah, it's been a concern of theirs for a while.

"As the majority of hobbyists must be aware, most of you steal your software."
posted by empath at 9:35 AM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


Wow, SOMEONE is a grumpy gus.
posted by Artw at 9:35 AM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


Microsoft feels more like a content company than a web company to me, since their bread and butter is shipping massive blobs of carefully arranged bits that are trivially duplicated

Most of those bits are locked down by copyright protection that's annoyingly difficult to defeat and well outside the realm of the average casual user pirating their friend's copy of a game.

You don't need John Q. Law to protect your shit when you have your own standing army doing it better.
posted by Talez at 9:36 AM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


I wonder if they benefit from the downward pressure that piracy exerts on content prices?

You seem to be assuming that opposition to SOPA implies being pro-piracy, but I think that misses the point. The problem is that this is awful legislation that's guaranteed to have all sorts of unintended, negative consequences for anyone running a website, whether they have anything to do with online piracy or not.

Or on preview, what ambrosia said...
posted by saulgoodman at 9:36 AM on January 19, 2012


Not even DVD. Why the fuck do I have to have a cable sub to even buy/receive access to Showtime and HBO's on demand libraries? Why can't I just pay Showtime and HBO their $10/month to have access to their library?

Why on earth do you think you have a "right" to purchase this content whenever and in whatever format it happens to suit you? It may well be that they're making a bad business decision in not releasing it across more platforms but why isn't that their decision to make? I might want to buy your TV set from you, and it might actually be a good business decision for you to sell it to me, but I don't have a right to just waltz into your house and take it if you happen to make a bad decision and not sell it.

I happen to agree that copyright laws are pretty effed up in the US--they certainly extend the protection for far too long. But I can't imagine any fair and reasonable set of copyright laws under which it would be legal to pirate copies of Boardwalk Empire simply because you're not willing to wait a couple of years for the DVD to become available.
posted by yoink at 9:39 AM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


But that's not the argument, yoink. The argument is that people WHO WOULD OTHERWISE PAY will pirate if media companies don't start adapting their behavior to consumer demands instead of trying to pump life into an antiquated distribution model propped up by shitty legislation.

It's not my "right" to have it now. But it IS my option. And that's because media distributors are still getting dragged kicking and screaming into a brave new world where their ridiculous mark-ups and outlandish accounting practices simply won't work.

The market has moved on. They don't have to like it. But they do have to adapt or die.

Or, you know, throw ninety-plus million at Congress and try to legislate away market forces.
posted by BitterOldPunk at 9:49 AM on January 19, 2012 [12 favorites]


I might want to buy your TV set from you, and it might actually be a good business decision for you to sell it to me, but I don't have a right to just waltz into your house and take it if you happen to make a bad decision and not sell it.

Adverse possession? If you don't care about property enough to sell it to me and I can take it without armed invasion, hold it, improve it and pay the land taxes I can claim title on it eventually.

But I can't imagine any fair and reasonable set of copyright laws under which it would be legal to pirate copies of Boardwalk Empire simply because you're not willing to wait a couple of years for the DVD to become available.

Not directly pirate it if there's not something NOW NOW NOW but there are ways to start *ahem* encouraging copyright owners to not sit on their content. Straight up use-it-or-lose-it? Escalating copyright payments every year to encourage all but the highest revenue producing intellectual properties to be released into the public domain rather than the hoarding we currently condone?

Copyrights are supposed to be of "limited Times to Authors and Inventors" for the "Progress of Science and useful Arts" not a perpetual rent seeking device.

Hell, even once it's in the public domain it's not safe thanks to Golan v. Holder where it was just decided that works can be pulled out of the public domain by Congress and recopyrighted.
posted by Talez at 9:58 AM on January 19, 2012 [10 favorites]


But that's not the argument, yoink.

But it is, in fact, one of the most commonly made arguments in any piracy discussion on the net. It's not "oh, what a pity that media company made a bad business decision which has lead to its work being pirated"--it's "well, if those bastards would just release it in the format I want and at the low low price I'm willing to pay then I would have bought it--but seeing as they didn't I'm perfectly justified in taking it." The comment to which you're replying doesn't simply complain about having to wait so long for Boardwalk Empire to come out on DVD, it suggests that because the release was delayed so long it was impossible for the poster not to pirate the series.
posted by yoink at 10:01 AM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


Copyrights are supposed to be of "limited Times to Authors and Inventors" for the "Progress of Science and useful Arts" not a perpetual rent seeking device.

Absolutely. But I'm struggling to see "two years" as effectively indistinguishable from "perpetual."
posted by yoink at 10:02 AM on January 19, 2012


If companies only had three to eight years before their copyright payments became uneconomical you can bet your ass they wouldn't take two years to release a DVD set.
posted by Talez at 10:09 AM on January 19, 2012 [4 favorites]


Adverse possession?

Adverse possession is actually rather analogous to copyright laws in that there is typically a fixed time period (akin to a statute of limitations) short of which the original possessor can assert his/her rights and kick the usurper off the land and beyond which those ownership rights can be held to have lapsed. One can see all kinds of good reasons for the concept of adverse possession (one doesn't want to have the court inundated with claims over property issuing from 100-year-old cases of unsound title, for example)--but, again, one cannot imagine anyone thinking that the "fixed time period" should be as short as two years or that the appropriate length of the time period should be left up to the personal feelings of the new claimant to the land.
posted by yoink at 10:10 AM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


Why on earth do you think you have a "right" to purchase this content whenever and in whatever format it happens to suit you? It may well be that they're making a bad business decision in not releasing it across more platforms but why isn't that their decision to make?e

I don't have a "right", it is a want. I will get it with or without the media conglamorates help. If they'd like to make some money rather than none, they should take note and change their business model. Because honestly, they, the media companies have been fucking us for years, and to be honest, I am going to do what I damn well please at this point. I am tired of being locked in, tired of buying media multi times over, tired of low quality, tired of no ownership, tired of middle men fucking over the true content creators, tired of that entire industry.

So the media companies can adapt or die, either way they can go fuck themselves.
posted by handbanana at 10:11 AM on January 19, 2012 [9 favorites]


tired of middle men fucking over the true content creators

But no one, apparently, tires of end users fucking over the "true content creators."
posted by yoink at 10:12 AM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


Hardly yoink, instead of pirating Louie CKs new special, I ponied up money. I go to concerts and support bands with donations for high quality downloads. That is the direction that content creators should take note.
posted by handbanana at 10:14 AM on January 19, 2012 [5 favorites]


"well, if those bastards would just release it in the format I want and at the low low price I'm willing to pay then I would have bought it--but seeing as they didn't I'm perfectly justified in taking it."

I don't feel justified in taking it. I haven't seen it because I don't have it. Just like I haven't seen It's Always Sunny or Curb Your Enthusiasm because FX are HBO are utter retards about getting the content out in a usable format. I recently was able to get into Parks and Rec (after watching the first two episodes and not feeling it) simply because I had the entire series available to me between Netflix and Hulu Plus and I was able to plow through it.

And it's not like we're asking for anything at a low low price and a different format. Showtime and HBO have EVERYTHING there ready to go. They already offer it to people who subscribe to the channels gratis. I want to pay what they ask for the channels for the same access to the same content but I can't because I don't have a cable TV subscription.

That's it. That's the gatekeeper between me and paying for content. Not wanting to pay $30/month for somebody else's useless crap.
posted by Talez at 10:15 AM on January 19, 2012 [2 favorites]


If companies only had three to eight years before their copyright payments became uneconomical you can bet your ass they wouldn't take two years to release a DVD set.

Under such a model--which I think is absurd on its face--I cannot imagine any media company choosing to produce long-run series television--where the copyright would run out on season one while you were still producing the series. Goodbye "The Wire," goodbye "The Sopranos," goodbye "Boardwalk Empire" etc. etc. etc.
posted by yoink at 10:15 AM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


"...that because the release was delayed so long it was impossible for the poster not to pirate the series."

To be clear -- I did not pirate. I simply lost all interest in the product. I wanted to buy it, and before the second series came out, so I could be on board with all the media coverage and promotion going on. This did not happen -- I couldn't even find an intended release date. As such, there were now TWO seasons of spoilers I had to avoid, and -- fuck it.

posted by Capt. Renault at 10:16 AM on January 19, 2012 [5 favorites]


The argument isn't that piracy is ethical because companies don't sell their content under reasonable terms. The argument is that it's human nature and there's nothing you can do about it, even if it isn't ethical, and it's very stupid for the companies to throw money away by not adapting to this fact of life.

Back in the 1970's I had a friend who was a core member of the rabid US Dr. Who fan organization. In those days their method of seeing Dr. Who episodes as soon as possible was to have a UK cohort mount a PAL TV on one end of a plank and a NTSC video camera on the other, and email the resulting VHS tape to America. They did this because the BBC couldn't be arsed to arrange for prompt worldwide distribution, and everyone kind of looked the other way because the resulting copies (and their n-generation subcopies) were so inferior to regular broadcast.

Nowadays they rip the PAL stream to .AVI and hit SEND, and the copies are perfect. They're going to do that no matter what laws you pass. They're even going to do it if you shut down half the internet by accident trying to stop them, except that then instead of making money off those people you've shut down half the internet.

It's a global economy for information. It's extremely stupid to think people will put up with releasing your content at different times in different countries, or for ten times the price in one country as in another, or for the same price you were charging for physical media when all you're delivering is a stream of bits. The people who you are shafting no longer have to spend six dollars to make an international phone call or wait for airmail turnaround to find out how they're being shafted from the people you aren't.
posted by localroger at 10:16 AM on January 19, 2012 [12 favorites]


Remember when media companies illegally colluded for decades to artificially keep prices high?
posted by absalom at 10:19 AM on January 19, 2012 [11 favorites]


Under such a model--which I think is absurd on its face--I cannot imagine any media company choosing to produce long-run series television--where the copyright would run out on season one while you were still producing the series. Goodbye "The Wire," goodbye "The Sopranos," goodbye "Boardwalk Empire" etc. etc. etc.

The copyright wouldn't run out. It would become uneconomical. The numbers can also be tweaked. And if a series is popular enough to make a series that runs for nine years it's popular enough to sustain large payments to keep copyrights on the series. If it becomes uneconomical for whatever reason the content provider doesn't get to keep it locked in a vault because producing a run of DVDs or whatever is too much hassle.
posted by Talez at 10:20 AM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


Yoink, you are completely oblivious. Releasing a dvd != copyright expiring. Well oblivious or dishonest in your argument. Asking media companies to, you know, respect their consumers and kinda give what the market fucking WANTS instead of fighting against the market in order to monopolistically extract rent while continuing to refuse evolution of a business model, until they are dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century. As pointed out numerous times upthread and online, this is an old battle that's been going on for decades.

Many of us WANT to support content creators. I buy from bleep.com (warprecords' online mp3 shop) precisely because they had the foresight to provide their music in MP3 (non-DRM'd formats) for their users/fans, because they knew what the people wanted and they trusted them. They didn't fight their customers, they relished them, and we are happy... Steam is another way to support users, offer mad deals and continually pumping out content and cheaply that people throw their money at them.

We aren't asking to murder content creators, we're asking to give them money in an easy way that lets us have access to content that isn't locked down, dribbled slowly our way (well, ok, maybe a BoC album or Episode 3 of Half-Life 2 or whatever is slow as tar, but you know...) and made torturous to us, just because they want to retain their monopoly on distribution.

When you have laws that force copyright +70 years after the fucking DEATH of the creator, there's a problem. It violates the principles on what the whole point of copyright in the US Constitution is about... Not rent extraction or profit motive, but useful innovation in science and arts.
posted by symbioid at 10:25 AM on January 19, 2012 [2 favorites]


absalom: "Remember when media companies illegally colluded for decades to artificially keep prices high?"

Hey! I do! I think I got like 4 bucks outta that!
posted by symbioid at 10:25 AM on January 19, 2012


Remember when media companies illegally colluded for decades to artificially keep prices high?

And what a settlement they got!

Not only that but they were allowed to write off these unwanted CDs that they dumped on non-profits.

Fucking criminal.
posted by Talez at 10:27 AM on January 19, 2012 [2 favorites]


Escalating copyright payments every year to encourage all but the highest revenue producing intellectual properties to be released into the public domain rather than the hoarding we currently condone?

That is the most elegant solution to the length-of-copyright issue that I've ever heard, Talez.
posted by mstokes650 at 10:32 AM on January 19, 2012 [4 favorites]


I say all copyrights should remain with the original creator for life + 5 years (so the family at least has a little left over to bury them with). But there has to be a sole creator for every copyrighted work, and ownership of copyrights cannot be transferred. Thereafter, the copyrighted content goes permanently into the public domain.
posted by saulgoodman at 10:34 AM on January 19, 2012 [4 favorites]


Just in case this point has still gone unprocessed by some latecomers to the thread, Dodd isn't just a former senator. He's the CEO of the MPAA now.

asnider: Why do former senators get to keep the "Senator" title? Why is he still being referred to as "Senator Todd" if he's not longer a senator. As someone living outside of the US, this confuses me.


Start here:
A style of office, or honorific, is a legal, official, or recognized title. A style, by tradition or law, precedes a reference to a person who holds a post or political office . . .

[In the US:] Continued use of a title depends on the office: Offices of which there is only one at a time (e.g., President, Speaker, Governor, or Mayor) are only officially used by the current office holder. . .

Titles for offices of which there are many concurrent office holders (e.g., Ambassador, Senator, Judge, Professor or military ranks, especially Colonel and above) are retained for life: A retired US Army general is addressed as "General (Name)" officially and socially for the rest of his or her life.
posted by Herodios at 10:48 AM on January 19, 2012


One can see all kinds of good reasons for the concept of adverse possession (one doesn't want to have the court inundated with claims over property issuing from 100-year-old cases of unsound title, for example)--but, again, one cannot imagine anyone thinking that the "fixed time period" should be as short as two years...

Indeed. It is literally impossible to imagine a legal regime where a person who has title to a property has only two years to file an unlawful detainer against someone who is openly and notoriously occupying that propery, while maintaining it and paying the property taxes before they lose the title to this property that is obviously so dear to them.
posted by [citation needed] at 10:50 AM on January 19, 2012


Gee, Senator Dodd*, maybe they did this because they'd like to have "the freedoms these companies enjoy in the marketplace today" tomorrow?

*I will refrain from comment on former Senators using their former title in their current professions.
posted by JaredSeth at 10:50 AM on January 19, 2012


Goodbye "The Wire," goodbye "The Sopranos," goodbye "Boardwalk Empire" etc. etc. etc.

HUZZAH!!
 
posted by Herodios at 10:50 AM on January 19, 2012 [3 favorites]


If Democrats can’t deliver on good policy with strong popular support and dominant congressional majorities, then they’re too incompetent to be in power.


Y'know, I'd love to vote against PIPA co-sponser Sherrod Brown when he's up for re-election... but I also believe that if Republican's can't realize that evolution, is scientifically speaking, rock solid, that gay people aren't the boogeyman, and that public health insurance is no more socialist than our public police force or public parcel service, then they're too incompetent to be in power...

wow, I am depressed at how quickly bottom of the barrel expectations can be disappointed...
posted by midmarch snowman at 10:52 AM on January 19, 2012


Chris Dodd always was one of the more brazenly corrupt Democrats in the Senate. That the MPAA now has him at the head should tell us that they're not going down this time. The internet may have won this little battle, but they're coming back with SOPA or son-of-SOPA as soon as Kim Kardashian dies in a freak botox accident and the entire nation is distracted by the state funeral.

This bill is already bought and paid for, and a little thing like the will of the people is not going to stop it for long.
posted by T.D. Strange at 10:54 AM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


I still worry despite the distortions that there could be some effectiveness in this "abuse of power" meme in the court of public opinion... like we need the government to protect us against too powerful and open a media. yikes.
posted by spbmp at 11:10 AM on January 19, 2012


Escalating copyright payments every year to encourage all but the highest revenue producing intellectual properties to be released into the public domain rather than the hoarding we currently condone?
posted by Talez at 11:58 AM on January 19


I agree that copyright as it currently works in the US is crazy. 70 years after death is just way too long. But escalating copyright payments every year would probably price me out of the market to copyright my own poetry at... year one. If I do gonzo bazillionaire well at selling a poem to a magazine, I make $20 (and the current copyright fee is $35; thank goodness you don't need to copyright each individual piece, because copyright is inherent - currently, which it couldn't be under your plan afaict). And it takes several years just to get published. Maybe you'd start the clock ticking at publication, in which case, my poems would be in the public domain before I'd written enough to make up a book, because the magazine who can barely afford to pay me $20 can't afford to pay the copyright fees, so it would fall on me, and so the only writers who could afford to retain their copyright would be the ones who already have comfortable middle class or better lifestyles. Many, many novelists would also have to give up their copyright before they even earned back their advance from the publishing house - which would be lower because the publishing house would know their horizon for sales just got tighter - and publishing houses would take even fewer chances on marginally-selling work than they do now, and small presses would go out of business like woah.

I don't think our current problems are related very much to length-of-copyright (although that's a problem) though; what SOPA/PIPA ostensibly seeks to do wouldn't be changed if length-of-copyright was drastically shorter.

But there has to be a sole creator for every copyrighted work, and ownership of copyrights cannot be transferred.
posted by saulgoodman at 12:34 PM on January 19


The business model for academic writing (where the academic journals always own the copyright) would be wildly changed if they couldn't do that anymore. I don't have an opinion on whether this is a good or bad thing, but I note it as an unintended side effect.

I'd be very much against any copyright act that told me I wasn't allowed to collaborate with another writer - or that if I did, one of us would have to give up our IP. Would it be enough for your purposes to say that copyright owners have to be flesh-and-blood humans (not corporations)?
posted by joannemerriam at 11:35 AM on January 19, 2012 [2 favorites]


designed to punish elected and administration officials who are working diligently to protect American jobs from foreign criminals

Not accessing their astrologer's blog for half a day was punishment I suppose?
posted by infini at 11:38 AM on January 19, 2012


Dodd isn't just a former senator.

Why do former senators get to keep the "Senator" title? Why is he still being referred to as "Senator Todd" if he's not longer a senator. As someone living outside of the US, this confuses me.


It makes it easier to keep track of the trouble they are getting into.

Maybe public service should come with a 5 year ban on being employed or accepting cash for anything, once service ends.
posted by psycho-alchemy at 11:53 AM on January 19, 2012


Would it be enough for your purposes to say that copyright owners have to be flesh-and-blood humans (not corporations)?

Sure--but any shared ownership would have to be strictly contingent on the owner/creators all having actually contributed to the creation of the copyrighted work in proportion to their share of ownership, however that sorts out (one of my worries here is the possibility of creators being exploited into bargaining away some or all of their creator rights to non-creators). The precise split of ownership would be left up to the creators to sort out.
posted by saulgoodman at 12:13 PM on January 19, 2012


Today: Feds Shutter Megaupload, Arrest Executives.
posted by nobody at 12:31 PM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


"Megaupload, the popular file-sharing site, was shuttered Thursday and its executives indicted by the Justice Department in what the authorities said was “among the largest criminal copyright cases ever brought by the United States.”

Seven individuals connected to the Hong Kong-based site were indicted on a variety of charges, including criminal copyright infringement and conspiracy to commit money laundering. Four of the members of what the authorities called a “racketeering conspiracy” were arrested Thursday in Aucklund, New Zealand, the authorities said.

More information to come as the story unfolds."

Megaupload shuttered/execs arrested...
posted by symbioid at 12:33 PM on January 19, 2012


Looks like I am going to be pirating for a long ass time.

There is another option. Stop consuming their media products. Don't use 'em at all. You'll find other things to do with your time.

(and saying "I'll post more on MetaFilter" isn't gonna work out once SOPA/PIPA shutsdown places like here. You'll need to find a different thing to do. )
posted by rough ashlar at 12:33 PM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


woops!
posted by symbioid at 12:34 PM on January 19, 2012


So is Megaupload like Dropbox/Skydrive/assorted cloud things from Apple and Amazon, or is it more like Pirate Bay?
posted by Artw at 12:37 PM on January 19, 2012


Megaupload shuttered

Awww man. I was hoping for a big splash page. Instead - nothing. :-(
posted by rough ashlar at 12:39 PM on January 19, 2012


(and saying "I'll post more on MetaFilter" isn't gonna work out once SOPA/PIPA shutsdown places like here. You'll need to find a different thing to do. )

How long until ASCAP is demanding microphones in every house to make sure music isn't being performed by families without a license.
posted by Talez at 12:39 PM on January 19, 2012


How long until ASCAP is demanding microphones in every house

With all the cell phones and the move to SIP based phones - all they need to do is have the service providers from a "new partnership". And if you complain, you'll be told to look with your microscope to the fine print in the middle of the contract where you agreed to such.

All nice and legal.
posted by rough ashlar at 12:43 PM on January 19, 2012


Looks like I am going to be pirating for a long ass time.

And the "FREE STUFF NOW!!!!" brigade puts in a long anticipated appearance!
posted by Justinian at 12:51 PM on January 19, 2012


Yeah, TBH I'm opposed to PIPA and more particularly SOPA because they are harful to the way the internet, not to help the pirate bays of the world operate (not that it would really actually harm them even). In fact you could even say we have them to blame for this crap being foisted on us.
posted by Artw at 1:04 PM on January 19, 2012


If you guys think piracy is a problem (I don't), then what do you propose to do about sites like filestube and the pirate bay?

Amputating your arm to treat a hangnail is always a great idea.

We really need to turn this "job killing" meme around. When I wrote to my congress-critters I said:

"This bill would likely kill Idaho jobs in the tech industry and small business jobs in a vain attempt to send a few more dollars to Hollywood."

A bit sloppy with the facts, maybe, but more likely true than anything Dodds is saying.
posted by straight at 1:11 PM on January 19, 2012


And the "FREE STUFF NOW!!!!" brigade puts in a long anticipated appearance!

I didn't read that as the FSN brigade so much as a Godfather moment. I.E. You gonna fuck around in my life? Eh? Ehhhh? Alright, then I'm gonna fuck around a bit myself. See how we all like dem apples at the end of the day.
posted by Slackermagee at 1:15 PM on January 19, 2012 [2 favorites]


I didn't read that as the FSN brigade so much as a Godfather moment.

It was ridiculous post-hoc self justification.
posted by Justinian at 1:16 PM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


Perhaps for him, we live in the land of 'get your own back', so I could see that actually taking off as a form of revenge against the people who royally fucked the internet.
posted by Slackermagee at 2:02 PM on January 19, 2012


Damn, that Boston Herald piece is poor. Just poorly written, ill-conceived, everything.

I'm curious what it would take to get them all wrapped up and flummoxed with frivolous DMCA takedown actions.
posted by Navelgazer at 2:05 PM on January 19, 2012


Markos on how the Democrats in general have sucked the big one on this SOPA bullshit.

More from Markos: Hollywood bought its politicians, and it expects them to stay bought
posted by homunculus at 2:23 PM on January 19, 2012


one takeaway from the blackout is that the public interest may not be best served by things which are or have become de facto "semi-critical infrastructure"

The public interest is certainly not being well-served by the idiot savants we've elected to leadership positions. That intellectual blackout in the service of only "those who count" isn't serving all of the rest of us.

Give it a rest.
posted by Twang at 2:57 PM on January 19, 2012


Did you actually read the comment you're responding to, Twang?
posted by koeselitz at 3:04 PM on January 19, 2012


Wow, you think maybe Markos is realizing how corrupt the democrats actually are? I stopped going to the site years ago because it seemed more like shilling for party hacks. Even before Obama got elected it seemed that way. I have no idea what it's like now.

--
They Democrats came within 3-4 votes of getting fantastic reform. The Republicans voted in lock step against pretty much anything, except 2-3 of them.

I'm not sure why people keep insisting the parties are the same.
You mean zero republicans. And the thing is, these three or 4 dems could have had their arms twisted a little harder, but also the democrats could have pushed through the public option via reconciliation. They actually did use reconciliation to make some changes to the bill after Scott Brown's election. It wouldn't have been impossible.

People keep saying "The democrats couldn't have done the public option", but the problem is they actually could have, they just chose not too.

Just to clarify, here's the order of events:

1) The senate passes HCR, with 60 votes.
2) Scott Brown gets elected.
3) the house passes the senate version of HCR
4) The house passes a second bill, 'the patch' to fix some of the things in the senate bill
5) The senate passes the 'patch' using reconciliation. They don't need 60 votes to do this.

That's hat happened. The public option could have been in the patch, but it wasn't.
Maddoxx pretty much sums up the SOPA-protest bullshit in his typical manner.
I think Maddoxx is overly optimistic about what will happen if something like SOPA passes (he thinks it will make people 'rise up' or some bullshit. Likely, they'll just continue getting fucked by the same corrupt lobbyists and crony politicians they always do)
This line alone should be reason enough to bar this person from ever serving elected office again.
That's the plan. He's been taking bribes from millionaire lobbyists for years, now it's his turn to be the millionaire lobbyists.
Does anybody else just feel like turning off "culture" for a good long while? I know this makes for a pretty neutered version of Walden Pond but the cumulative force of this crap is really turning me off of watching any movies or listening to any popular music for a while.
Or you can just pirate it.
Generally, the most long-term effective way of dealing with piracy is to focus on your customer service. If you're selling data, pirates can duplicate your product exactly, but they can't duplicate the experience of getting it. The experience of pirating a song varies depending on how many other people know or care about it at the moment, what trackers they're using, and how much sleep the compressionist had that night. Paying 99¢ to not worry about that bullshit is quite a reasonable proposition for most consumers. -- LogicalDash
But see, they don't want to do that they want to be able force ads down your throat, or restrict access to older works so they can continue to charge a high price for new stuff. They want to go back to the days of charging $25 for a VHS tape – under limited release to boost artificial scarcity - instead of $7/mo for all the movies you can watch. Because they make more money
I used Wikipedia yesterday. I looked at the Google cached version of the page I wanted to read. It's not like the information went away.
My takeaway is that the vast majority of internet users are even less informed than a minimally informed person like me.
All you had to do was press "stop" before the blackout screen loaded. If you did that, it worked fine.
posted by delmoi at 4:10 PM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


Seems like the real deal--there's an IamA thread on reddit right now with Chris Dodd.
posted by zardoz at 4:48 PM on January 19, 2012


Actually, it might not be the real deal at all. Time will tell.
posted by zardoz at 5:02 PM on January 19, 2012


"IAM former senator and chairmain of the MPAA Chris Dodd. I want to begin an open dialog with you, why don't you ask me some questions and I'll ask some back."

Sounds 100% fake to me. From the "IAM" at the start to the comma splice in the middle.
posted by nobody at 5:19 PM on January 19, 2012


Every Republican on stage at debate tonight opposes SOPA.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 6:16 PM on January 19, 2012


NYT article on dodd and the legislation. He calls for "Hollywood and Silicon Valley to Meet", because apparently this is just a disagreement between huge corporations, and what the average person thinks is totally irrelevant.
posted by delmoi at 8:19 PM on January 19, 2012 [1 favorite]


Wow, the incredibly weak anti-corruption laws might actually have helped due to some weird circumstances (from the NYT article):
Christopher J. Dodd now fills Mr. Valenti’s shoes. But he stays out of those halls, thanks to restrictions on his ability to lobby Congress until 2013.
...
That shift was exposed this week partly because Mr. Dodd found himself in a political knife fight while being forced to sheathe his most powerful weapon: 36 years of personal relationships with a Congress in which he had served as a representative and then senator since 1975, before joining the motion picture association last March.
That's the official story, anyway. Seems highly unlikely that he never reached out to his close personal friends or never mentioned any of this to them. But who knows, I suppose he could be following the rules, it's not like he wouldn't have a ton of lobbyists working for him. The Idea that you can't be a lobbyists but you can manage lobbyists seems kind of ridiculous.

It's probably just some bullshit line he's feeding to the reporter to excuse his failure, though.
posted by delmoi at 8:29 PM on January 19, 2012


SOPA KING WE TODD DID.
posted by XhaustedProphet at 9:22 PM on January 19, 2012 [3 favorites]


Wow, you think maybe Markos is realizing how corrupt the democrats actually are? I stopped going to the site years ago because it seemed more like shilling for party hacks.

Markos has always had contempt for establishment democrats -- remember he lead the Dean Revolution. He led the charge on Lieberman, also, and has always pushed primary challenges against incumbents.
posted by empath at 1:23 AM on January 20, 2012 [2 favorites]


Here's an interesting bit by Cenk Uygur on the media coverage of SOPA (before the blackout)
posted by delmoi at 1:55 AM on January 20, 2012


Update: Next week's scheduled PIPA vote in the Senate has been delayed indefinitely.
posted by nobody at 7:24 AM on January 20, 2012 [1 favorite]


Such a shame that Dodd was constrained by those pesky ethics rules. How are you supposed to get anything done with all those rules and regulations to follow?
posted by octothorpe at 7:24 AM on January 20, 2012 [1 favorite]


See? That right there illustrates one important difference between how Dems (even those who don't always come out looking lily-white in practice) govern differently than Repubs.

When there was massive popular opposition in Wisconsin against Walker's assault on public worker collective bargaining rights, the Republicans in that state legislature responded by digging in and being more determined than ever to push their agenda through, becoming even more aggressive, to the point they even held an illegal, midnight meeting with inadequate public notice to ram the legislation through.

On the Dem side, even a cynical old, bought-and-sold, double-dealing corporate stooge like Reid will back down in the face of public opposition.

Whether they're less or more corrupt, Dems generally aren't as belligerent and top-down authoritarian. That quality alone makes them a better quality raw political material to work with, even if they are still just as susceptible to human weakness as their opponents.

If this had happened under Bush, congress would be rushing to pass SOPA/PIPA even more quickly. The fact that Dems are more willing to compromise than Republicans when they encounter opposition is sometimes a positive.
posted by saulgoodman at 8:09 AM on January 20, 2012


That goes both ways though, sometimes you don't want your politicians to cave.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 8:18 AM on January 20, 2012


Last I checked, most of the SOPA/PIPA support crumbled on the Republican side, because the Dems are tighter with the entertainment industry. Here in Louisiana Democratic senator Landrieu is for PIPA, and Republican senator Vitter (with whom I disagree about just about everything else) is against it.
posted by localroger at 8:44 AM on January 20, 2012


Well, support's crumbled on both sides for now, apparently. And Obama actually came out opposing SOPA (and pissing off Hollywood in the process) three days before the blackout and this whole kerfuffle started.

No one except the lone former Senator/industry stooge referenced in this FPP seems to be sticking to their guns over this crap legislation anymore. Hopefully, it stays that way, but don't count on it.
posted by saulgoodman at 10:50 AM on January 20, 2012


Here's Chris Dodd telling Obama "Don't ask me to write a check for you when you think your job is at risk and then don't pay any attention to me when my job is at stake." (fox news link; sorry. it says exclusive.)

A whitehouse response in that article has the press secretary "stress[ing] the administration did not take sides last Saturday and is simply trying to find the right balance to come up with reform that both sides can live with."

A couple things of note:

1. If nothing else, Dodd is probably inadvertently correct in saying that *his* job is at stake. If he can't successfully exploit his Washington contacts to get legislation passed, then what else is the point of him being chairman of the MPAA?

2. I had read Obama's statement last weekend as the whitehouse coming out narrowly against the already-all-but-dropped DNS provisions, but remaining implicitly supportive of the rest of the bill(s). It's interesting that by opportunistically interpreting Obama's statement as being against SOPA/PIPA completely, Dodd is going to help solidify that inaccurate (in my opinion) view among voters, thus probably raising Obama's favorability ratings a touch.
posted by nobody at 10:18 AM on January 21, 2012


TBH I think interpreting that statement as "OBAMA + SOPA/PIPA 4-EVER! I LOVE YOU, MPAA!" is pretty unique to Metafilter.
posted by Artw at 10:24 AM on January 21, 2012


« Older Chances are that sometime, somewhere, out of the c...  |  "The '70s, man. Martin Luther ... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments