Do you really BELIEVE that the music industry bought out some in congress?

[meyou123]

In answer to a poll that was posted about believing if sharing music files is legal....I decided to make my own poll.

So the question is...

Do you believe that some members of congress were basically "bought out" by the music industry which allowed them to have a say in legislation presented when it came to sharing music and other files?

[mwalimu]

There is certainly a subset of Congress who has bought into the arguments given to them by the RIAA/MPAA lobbyists hook, line and sinker, a group which would include Howard Berman and Diane Feinstein. In addition, there are many in Congress who don't use the internet much personally and are very much out of touch with the culture of the online world.

[DwarfBaby]

Without a doubt. Bought paid and shipped.

[Signa]

my guess is that its every decision is a transaction. i doubt that anyone is permanently on the payroll of the RIAA

[Mels_Smileys45]

Not really. I think they understand that markets need money. If you give all the goods away the market, well there is no market.

IIMO people are foolish and greedy. If you like something be ready to pay for it or do without. It wont kill you. Sure I download tons but I also know I just ripped someone off. OOps! No use lying to myself by thinking im doing the world some great service by downloading free swag. I wanted to buy drugs with my money instead of supporting people who make the music I love. Whats wrong with that?

[thepuzzler]

Do as I say, not as I do?

[meyou123]

Not really. I think they understand that markets need money. If you give all the goods away the market, well there is no market.

IIMO people are foolish and greedy. If you like something be ready to pay for it or do without. It wont kill you. Sure I download tons but I also know I just ripped someone off. OOps! No use lying to myself by thinking im doing the world some great service by downloading free swag. I wanted to buy drugs with my money instead of supporting people who make the music I love. Whats wrong with that?



Yeah, but you have to also look at it from the other side Mel! If we did not have so many politicians being BOUGHT...we might not have the STUPID LAWS on the books that say you cannot even own a backup to a CD or DVD you bought in some cases.

To me that is being unfair and because you have money does not make it right to be able to buy off congress men and women. This country was founded on the people....not on corporations. Where do THEY get off telling congress what laws should and should not be passed?

And if you think people are "foolish and greedy" exactly WHAT do you think corporations are?? You sound as though you trust the corporations to do the right thing....if you do that, I feel sorry for you. Because all they are about is the bottom line.

And as far as studios and supporting those who "make" the songs you love...isn't it those same studios that RIP OFF ARTISTS?? I think so.

I don't mind paying for stuff , But I am going to get my moneys worth and OWN what I have...not some DRM crap that you have to "rent"!

And if the media giants don't trust me as a consumer, then why should I trust them with my money??

[N Fiddledog]

I'm not sure I understand why this is even a question. I was under the impression it was a documented fact corporate lobby groups have legislation pushed through to make themselves fatter.

There's the Mickey Mouse Protection Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonny_Bono_Copyright_Term_Extension_Act) pushed through by Disney and others.

Then there was the Work-for-Hire (http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/2000/08/38129) thing snuck into law by the RIAA, although wasn't that later rescinded as a result of pressure from the artists once they realized what was happening. It basically stole their rights to copyright.

[meyou123]

I'm not sure I understand why this is even a question. I was under the impression it was a documented fact corporate lobby groups have legislation pushed through to make themselves fatter.

There's the Mickey Mouse Protection Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonny_Bono_Copyright_Term_Extension_Act) pushed through by Disney and others.

Then there was the Work-for-Hire (http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/2000/08/38129) thing snuck into law by the RIAA, although wasn't that later rescinded as a result of pressure from the artists once they realized what was happening. It basically stole their rights to copyright.



I basically made this a question in response to another poll that asked if you believe file sharing is legal.

If it was not for people in congress being bought off, fair use might have a chance.That was my point.

[Mels_Smileys45]

Hey, I wish I could make a back up copy for the 20 dollar bill in my pocket, in case I lose it or it gets stolen, but then again some people may spend the back up 20 and the main 20 too. Hmmm.... A few bad apples spoil things for everyone. Thats why laws are needed to punish the bad apples.

Just because you can make a copy of something doesnt mean you should. If you mess up a product you should buy another one. Sorry, I just aint feeling it


I can actually look at it from both sides, not just the left

[N Fiddledog]

Except there's no real proof anybody's losing any money from filesharing. For every study saying they are, there's another one saying they're not.

In fact those who have embraced the new technologies created out of the filesharing revolution have discovered new sources of income can be created. For example you can draw a line from filesharing to Itunes and Ipods. Then there's the independents. Independent music has been thriving since the birth of filesharing.

In fact here's a question for you. If Ashlee and Jessica Simpson get poorer, but OK Go (the guys the new technology made famous) get richer, have you stolen from the Simpson girls?

You don't have to think of yourself as a thief. You can pat yourself on the back, and say "Good job. I'm creating a new economy."

I don't think it's the money the industry is whining about anyway. They just don't want to give up control of how the bucks are parceled out.

And yes they are lobbying, bribing, and pressuring, if not outright extorting governments to make sure they don't lose that control. It's not about money. It's about control.

[A TRUE PATRIOT]

What a stupid idea. If our elected representatives were being bought out by RIAA money the American people would kick them the hell out of office faster than you could say "conflict of interest".

Thats not the way things are done in this nation and thats why we have openness and trasparancy at every level of goverment.

[tackdaddy]

Sure kick them out of office to bring in another crappy politician. There is no such thing as a honest politician thatreally does much good. Every senator or representive is rich, you have to have money to hold a office in this country. They are not the common man who do things in our best intrest. All of them are rich and do whatever will help make them richer. The political party system is flawed so badley, you really don't have a true choice. You have to vote for the parties canidate which means limited choice at best.

[StormNinja]

Yes!

Now let me qualify it a bit....

I think some of them have little or no understanding or interest in the subject and/or may see it in black and white; that file sharers are thieves and file sharing is illegal, immoral and just plain shady and because of this they will take the path of least resistance take a position against it(not to mention it's the "politically" correct stance in the eyes of certain voters). If the RIAA/MPAA can give them legitmate sounding statics to support their position...most of those politicians will not take the time to properly investigate it's validity and in turn will accept and parrot it.

Others don't care one way or the other but if it looks like taking a anti P2P position puts them in the most favorable light then they too will become anti P2P crusaders.

Finally, the rats! I have no proof, so this is strictly my personal opinion, but I think a good number of them are RATS and suck ups to any number of coporations, organization and special interest groups. If those aforementioned groups are willing to find creative ways to pay them off...certain congressmen/senators will toil night and day to give them what they want...So I repeat;
YES!

[Signa]

another way they can also make the bux for helping the **AA's is campiegn funding. if a congressman wants votes, he can sell his soul to the **AA for cash. this of course leads to future favors.

[meyou123]

Hey, I wish I could make a back up copy for the 20 dollar bill in my pocket, in case I lose it or it gets stolen, but then again some people may spend the back up 20 and the main 20 too. Hmmm.... A few bad apples spoil things for everyone. Thats why laws are needed to punish the bad apples.

Just because you can make a copy of something doesnt mean you should. If you mess up a product you should buy another one. Sorry, I just aint feeling it


I can actually look at it from both sides, not just the left


Well I am thankful it is not you who decides what should be a LEGAL COPY. And what does a 20 dollar bill have to do with software you legally purchased and want to make a backup of?

Are you saying that people should have to buy legally purchased software all over again,even if it is something as expensive as CAD, because it got scratched?

If that is what you are saying, I am glad you are not making the decisions.

Sorry, but I am not "buying" what you are saying either. It goes both ways.

What a stupid idea. If our elected representatives were being bought out by RIAA money the American people would kick them the hell out of office faster than you could say "conflict of interest".

Thats not the way things are done in this nation and thats why we have openness and trasparancy at every level of goverment.

LOL! You are really something! If you believe that, I guess you believe the moon is made of green cheese or that current prseident Bush is a great president.

[meyou123]

double post. Sorry.