Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

MPAA Chief Dodd Hints At Talks To Revive SOPA

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the they're-back dept.

The Internet 279

suraj.sun writes "Christopher Dodd, the former Connecticut senator who now leads the MPAA, hasn't given up on his dream of censoring the Internet. In an interview with Hollywood Reporter, he said that Hollywood and the technology industry 'need to come to an understanding' about new copyright legislation. Dodd said that there were 'conversations going on now,' about SOPA-style legislation, but that he was 'not going to go into more detail because obviously if I do, it becomes counterproductive.' Asked whether the White House's decision to oppose SOPA had created tensions with Hollywood, Dodd insisted that he was 'not going to revisit the events of last winter,' but said he hoped the president would use his 'good relationships' with both Hollywood and the technology industry to broker a deal."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

LOL! American Freedom! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39592801)

LOL! American Freedom!

Re:LOL! American Freedom! (1)

PrescriptionWarning (932687) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593567)

The freedom to pirate their stuff despite their lame attempts to control it all is the priceless part.

Re:LOL! American Freedom! (5, Insightful)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593575)

There's a reason out of thousands of innate natural rights, the Founding Fathers decided to include guns as one of the top 10. No not for hunting. For self-defense. Both of yourself and your fellow compatriots.

We haven't hit that stage yet, but we're getting very very close. If they start rounding-up Americans and throwing them in jail without trial (NDAA), I'm running for office. I'm fed up. And if they start executing americans.....

Let's just say the 2nd amendment is the only right left that I have not exercised. But that will change. Time to follow the example of our fellow human beings in Egypt. Libya. Eastern Europe. And the original 14 states (including Vermont).

My goodness (5, Interesting)

Sigvatr (1207234) | more than 2 years ago | (#39592811)

What motivates this man to be so evil?

Re:My goodness (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39592987)

He's liberal.

Re:My goodness (5, Insightful)

andydread (758754) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593117)

Yes but the person that introduced SOPA is a staunch conservative....Lamar Smith (R-Tx) Yeah Texas no less. So we have a liberal from Ct and a Conservative from Tx What exactly is your point?

Re:My goodness (5, Insightful)

an unsound mind (1419599) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593231)

The common factor is that they are both filthy rich and consider themselves far too poor.

Re:My goodness (5, Insightful)

e9th (652576) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593309)

The word you're looking for is greed.

Speaking of Lamar Smith... (5, Interesting)

Freddybear (1805256) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593569)

http://www.tomsguide.com/us/REddit-TestPAC-SOPA-PIPA-Lamar-Smith,news-14720.html [tomsguide.com]

"What better way to kill the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) bill for good than to nuke its author right out of Congress? That's what a group of Reddit users are trying to do after forming a Political Action Committee, or PAC. They want Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX.) booted out of office, and will do everything they can to see it happen."

If they succeed in booting Smith in the primary, that should put some fear into others who might otherwise support SOPA/PIPA style legislation.

Re:My goodness (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39593247)

He's gay. Also he's a nigger.

Really? (2)

Benfea (1365845) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593289)

What is it about liberal ideology that makes us want to align with a group of large corporations to screw over large numbers of individuals just to line the pockets of said corporations? I thought liberals were bad people for doing precisely the opposite. Make up your minds!

Re:Really? (0, Flamebait)

Attila Dimedici (1036002) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593437)

What is it about liberal ideology that makes us want to align with a group of large corporations to screw over large numbers of individuals just to line the pockets of said corporations? I thought liberals were bad people for doing precisely the opposite. Make up your minds!

Then you obviously have not been listening. Of course the problem is that once upon a time the term liberal applied to people who were in favor of liberty, whereas now the term liberal is applied to people who favor "progressive" policies. Progressive policies are those which seek to establish control over all aspects of people's lives by experts who know better what those people really want and need than those people do themselves.

Re:Really? (4, Interesting)

paiute (550198) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593451)

Progressive policies are those which seek to establish control over all aspects of people's lives by experts who know better what those people really want and need than those people do themselves.

In stark contrast to that are the Conservative policies, which seek to establish control over all aspects of people's lives by nonexperts who know better what those people really want and need than those people do themselves.

Re:My goodness (4, Insightful)

ohnocitizen (1951674) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593547)

Actually, he's conservative. Most modern Democrats are conservative, or centrist. If you want a liberal Democrat, look at Elizabeth Warren, Al Franken, or Russ Feingold.

Re:My goodness (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39592993)

Really?

Money and a sense of 'he is right and we are wrong'. Thats it nothing more.

Re:My goodness (5, Insightful)

hondo77 (324058) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593035)

The usual suspects: money and power.

Re:My goodness (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39593055)

RIAA sluts.

Re:My goodness (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39593119)

RIAA sluts.

He was part of the "Waitress Sandwich."

Re:My goodness (1)

Bahamut_Omega (811064) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593141)

Must we call in the Digital Yakuza again to deal with the MAFIAA? SOPA round 2 will go like the first, down in flames from the tech sector.

Re:My goodness (4, Insightful)

Fast Thick Pants (1081517) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593333)

Very true, it will probably be round 4 in 2014 before the outrage fatigue sets in and the MPAA gets about 60% of what it's asking for. By round 6 it'll be up to 135%. By 2025 your children will be required to name their children after an Oscar winner, and pay monthly license fees accordingly.

Re:My goodness (2)

fustakrakich (1673220) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593371)

Not sluts, whores...

Sluts do it for free. Whores get paid

Re:My goodness (3, Funny)

philip.paradis (2580427) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593425)

Sluts do it for free.

There's always a price, man. There's always a price.

Re:My goodness (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593443)

Oh come on... How much is a shot of penicillin at the free clinic?

Re:My goodness (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39593565)

Oh come on... How much is a shot of penicillin at the free clinic?

You'll need something better than that, there are penicillin resistant strains of both Chlamydia and Syphilis.

Re:My goodness (2)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593283)

My guess is that he has a thing for green pieces of paper with pictures of dead men and numbers printed on them.

Genes perhaps? (5, Informative)

danwiz (538108) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593475)

Senator Thomas J. Dodd Memorial Stadium is a minor league baseball stadium in Connecticut. It was named after a Senator who was censured in 1967 for converting campaign funds to his personal accounts and spending the money.

That's Christopher Dodd's father. [wikipedia.org] And the memorial stadium was built in 1995 during Chris Dodd's tenure as a Senator. Senator Chris Dodd has had his share of scandals [wikipedia.org] too.

Something about apples not falling too far from the tree comes to mind.

Re:My goodness (1)

quizzicus (891184) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593485)

Money.

Re:My goodness (2)

c0lo (1497653) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593589)

What motivates this man to be so evil?

This is not half that evil as others... watch out [digitaltrends.com] CIPSA [eff.org]

Connecticut (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39592817)

What a fucked up state. Please Connecticutions stop breeding NOW.

Re:Connecticut (5, Funny)

CelticWhisper (601755) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593357)

Perhaps we should call in a Connecticutioner?

If that language doesn't (5, Insightful)

kungfuj35u5 (1331351) | more than 2 years ago | (#39592835)

Spit out plain and simple bribed legislation I don't know what does.

Re:If that language doesn't (1)

Kenja (541830) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593473)

Money is now speech, so bribes are just a way to tell someone what you think. Why are you against the 1st amendment?

Yawn... (4, Insightful)

Black Parrot (19622) | more than 2 years ago | (#39592843)

The *AA will keep sponsoring legislation until they get what they want. Then they'll decide they want more.

News, indeed.

Re:Yawn... (5, Insightful)

iter8 (742854) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593181)

I like how he said "that Hollywood and the technology industry 'need to come to an understanding' about new copyright legislation." Hollywood and industry? We peasants don't get a say I guess.

Re:Yawn... (4, Insightful)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593387)

It's hard for them to see us as stakeholders in the society whose rules they are trying to manipulate
As opposed to consumers that they are trying to sell a product to.

CISPA (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39592857)

I believe the current bill trying to snake its way into US law is CISPA:
http://kat.ph/blog/GreenPirate/post/1774/ [kat.ph]

Obviously (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39592885)

If I tell the people about the legislation I am crafting there will be outrage. So don't tell anyone. Obviously.

Re:Obviously (4, Insightful)

Riceballsan (816702) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593039)

Sounds about right, They felt the system failed them last time, because major webpages actually told the public what was being planned. The goal the next round is going to be to figure out how to slip it in without anyone who actually understands it getting a voice. It still cracks me up how with SOPA, the most common statement from the congressmen making the decision was "I'm not a computer nerd, so I don't understand how this works at all", that part was what the **AA's considered, the process as intended. The companies and people who were effected by it speaking up and making sure that the ramifications of it were understood, that was an "abuse of power".

Re:Obviously (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39593193)

With the resistance that met SOPA, I imaging its next incarnation will be attached as an amendment to a budget or national defence bill. This will give cover to those who vote "yay" with them saying something along the lines of, "well, we couldn't NOT vote for the budget. We had to vote 'yay'."

Re:Obviously (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39593249)

The companies and people who were effected by it ...

So now they will attack the middlemen, not their competition. IE. The ISPs and telecommunications backbone providers. They're have already been several legal attacks on these industries. Ideally, they will gain revenue by forcing licenses for 'data carriage' on such middlemen.

Re:Obviously (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39593467)

"We have to pass the bill to find out what's in it." -- Nancy Pelosi

In MPAA-speak... (4, Informative)

sconeu (64226) | more than 2 years ago | (#39592919)

"Broker a deal" means "Bend over and take whatever we give you"

Come to an understanding? (3, Funny)

russotto (537200) | more than 2 years ago | (#39592935)

You'd think the guy could at least try to resist the temptation to sound like he's in a mob movie. Unless that's part of the draw of the whole being evil thing.

Re:Come to an understanding? (1)

cervesaebraciator (2352888) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593085)

He had to say "come to an understanding." He was unwilling to pay the licensing costs 'to make them an offer they can't refuse.'

Jack Valenti is dead (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | more than 2 years ago | (#39592941)

Long live Jack Valenti!

It's ironic, but... (5, Insightful)

FridayBob (619244) | more than 2 years ago | (#39592957)

... the fact that we can't resist buying his shit is what gives him the money to keep trying to censor our Internet.

Re:It's ironic, but... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39592979)

Speak for yourself. I have much better things to do with my time, and it's been that way for a long time in my household.

Re:It's ironic, but... (2)

Bucky24 (1943328) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593023)

Speak for yourself. I have much better things to do with my time, and it's been that way for a long time in my household.

The problem is, you and people like you are the minority. FridayBob doesn't speak for you, clearly, but does speak for the majority of American citizens.

Why we fail (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39592991)

Copyright is the problem, it needs to be limited to 20 years. Only people should be allowed to own copyright. Businesses should only be allowed to lease copyright.

Re:Why we fail (2, Insightful)

Shavano (2541114) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593179)

Corporations are people my friend.

Re:Why we fail (1)

visualight (468005) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593211)

Hollywood stepped off the moral high ground in 1998:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act [wikipedia.org]

Until we're back to where we were in 1997 the copyright lobby won't get a dime from me. I hope they all go bankrupt and I'll do anything I can to help that happen.

Re:Why we fail (1)

chrismcb (983081) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593429)

20 years is a good start but what stop issues like this.
As for corporations not holding copyright, I don't understand why you think this is an issue or helps. Some things cost a lost of money to create. If we corporations can't hold copyright, then those things won't get created.

An "Understanding," You Say? (5, Informative)

ewhac (5844) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593005)

In an interview with Hollywood Reporter, [Dodd] said that Hollywood and the technology industry 'need to come to an understanding' about new copyright legislation.

Here's the understanding, Chris: Computers copy data. Period. End of novel; no sequel coming. It is a fact of the landscape that is not going to change.

And that, as far as any clear-thinking technologist is concerned, is the end of the discussion. Business models must be constructed around this reality. (And if your business model is not based on reality, but instead on a la-la fairy land where every computer is under MPAA/RIAA/SPAA control, unsanctioned copies never happen, every view is metered, and directors and actors work for naught but "exposure"... Well, they have anti-psychotics that can help with that now.)

BTW, anyone hoping to debate the merits of copyright policy is REQUIRED to read this speech by Thomas Babington Macaulay [kuro5hin.org] -- it will easily be among the most enlightening forty-odd minutes of your life.

Schwab

Re:An "Understanding," You Say? (1)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593159)

Here's the understanding, Chris: Computers copy data. Period. End of novel; no sequel coming. It is a fact of the landscape that is not going to change.

It's also a fact of the landscape that to get online and function once you're there, most Americans go through very few gatekeepers/ways.
Whether we're talking about ISPs, search engines, payment processors, file hosts, etc... there aren't actually that many.
By attacking these gateways, the **AA can focus its power much more efficiently than if they were going after every American online.

/And the money they spend on advocating this crap gets written off on their taxes, so it isn't a big loss to them.

Re:An "Understanding," You Say? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39593411)

Encrypted-tunnel based P2P makes the ISPs a non-starter, the search engine side is as hopeless as maintaining a blacklist of pornsites for censorware, payment processors are almost moot beyond the outrageous types of shenanigans that were used on wikileaks.

That leaves file hosts which is like trying to kill a hydra, DNS, and the most important one which you didn't even mention which is aggregators.

DNS shares the same issue as file hosts, and aggregators just become layered like onions or russian nesting dolls. If you can't aggregate torrents then you aggregate Blogger pages which aggregate torrents. If you can't aggregate Blogger pages then you aggregate Blogger page agreggators.

So long as content takes less time to find and download for free than it would take to buy it legitimately and earn the money necessary to buy it working a minimum wage job, then there will be an advertising market which exists to support piracy. This is particularly the case with the unemployed and the unemployable who have more time than money.

The can battle this economically by providing higher quality of service for a lower time & money cost, or they can approach it thuggishly by trying to bury the competition until they accomplish the first without lowering prices or improving service.

As demonstrated by the War on Drugs, and nearly a decade of their own actions: I suspect human nature will guide them towards the second choice until they run out of money.

As much as anything this is about a trade lobbying association composed of lawyers trying to demonstrate value to their member organizations to justify their existence. The easiest way to remove this lobbying association(to be replaced by the evil we don't know) is to gather support and then one at a time sand bag individual members with boycotts(buy their shit with cash, damage the contents/packaging, return to retailer for full refund).

This is a 4chan-raid waiting to happen. Live action DDoS. A surge in sales met with immediate cash-flow volatility and product support liability which can only be combated by self inflicted gunshot wound in the form of refusal to accept product returns(or understaffed customer service desks ; P ). They cannibalize their customer loyalty in order to amputate a cash-flow cancer.

You start with the smaller labels and members who can least readily absorb the damage and let them start the exodus from the MAFIAA.

Re:An "Understanding," You Say? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39593197)

The thing is, if the *AAs actually acknowledged the new reality, and worked with it, rather than against it, they probably would be able stop almost all piracy. They won't ever make as much money as they used to, because the Internet allows us all to do our own distribution. Why should we pay extra for a separate media distribution service when we've got a perfectly effective one in the Inteternet?

What we're seeing is the *AAs trying to cripple the Internet as a distribution medium because it encroaches on the job they (used to) do. Part of your movie ticket or CD purchase pays for the production of that movie or CD, and part of it pays for the whole distribution channel. Cut out the distribution channel from that price and a whole lot of profit dissapears (that would never have gone to the original artists).

Perhaps there should be some "consumer information" printed on the movie ticket / DVD / CD that tells us how much of it actually goes to the actors / artists and production crews, and how much goes into "studio" coffers.

Re:An "Understanding," You Say? (2)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593209)

Well, I read the Macaulay speech. And found that it had nothing to do with this particular discussion. In fact it could be construed to support the idea of copyright, in so far as that it recognized granting a monopoly to authors as the solution to seeing they are paid.

"It is good that authors should be remunerated; and the least exceptionable way of remunerating them is by a monopoly. Yet monopoly is an evil. For the sake of the good we must submit to the evil; but the evil ought not to last a day longer than is necessary for the purpose of securing the good."

Clearly legislation that controls the content of the internet, or tries to is evil. I was among the many who was active in opposing SOPA and PIPA. However that does not solve the issue - making sure authors get paid. And sometimes the cost of authoring is great, especially in the realm of film.

So SOPA-like legislation is not acceptable. But what happens when there are exceptions to monopolies?

Re:An "Understanding," You Say? (1, Insightful)

Rich0 (548339) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593479)

I think the obvious solution is a better compromise. I think most people are fine with the idea of making money off of creating things, whether they be movies, drugs, or whatever. The issue is that there is no end to the greed of the companies that control these things. It isn't like the average musician is making loads of money - it all goes to line executive pockets, and shareholders.

Copyrights and patents need to be reigned in and given durations appropriate to their nature. Go ahead and let Apple have a year or two lead if they come up with multitouch or whatever, but after that anybody can use it. If a new song comes out, give the artist a year or two to make a load of money on it, and then it goes in the bargain bin. Perhaps books last a little longer (not sure what the profits vs costs look like there). Let movies have a month of theater protection, and two years of DVD/streaming protection. Maybe for drugs set a cap on profits - you get 10 years from market approval (and another 10 years to get it to market as long as you actively pursue it), or a few billion dollars, whichever comes first.

There is nothing wrong with rewarding people who create things that are useful to society, even if only for entertainment. The issue is that these rights get used to stifle all kinds of potential innovation, and are far in excess of what is required to create an incentive.

Of course (4, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593009)

Ok, in case you didn't know this, of course they're going to revive it. They're going to keep pushing it and keep pushing it until it goes through. You thought we beat it because it didn't pass that one time? What, did you think the entertainment industry ran out of money and stopped paying congressmen?

They'll wait a little while, they'll rename it, they'll alter it to hide the more controversial aspects, and they'll wage a propaganda war. They will not stop trying to consolidate their power until they're ousted from power.

Re:Of course (3, Insightful)

martin-boundary (547041) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593415)

Which is why we have to keep following and mentioning it on slashdot, even if we already know this. We (the public) can outlast them, if a relatively small number of us are dedicated to bringing the attempts to light, again and again, for as long as it takes.

Re:Of course (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39593523)

It's called CISPA.

Moron (5, Insightful)

WML MUNSON (895262) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593021)

Chris Dodd said that there were

conversations going on now

but that he was

not going to go into more detail because obviously if I do, it becomes counterproductive.

It becomes counterproductive because nobody fucking wants this, and the people you're "having discussions" with are probably corrupt.

Re:Moron (1)

Shavano (2541114) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593199)

Or he's trying like hell to corrupt them or bamboozle them into thinking MPAA's vision is a good idea and not a scheme that puts the utility of the internet at risk.

Chris Dodd petition (1)

WhyNotAskMe (2571885) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593399)

Why don't we have more signatures on this petition [whitehouse.gov] to have him investigated for bribery?

Re:Chris Dodd petition (1)

Martin Blank (154261) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593505)

Because such petitions are pointless.

I only added my name to an anti-SOPA petition because the list stood a chance of being read on the Senate floor as part of a filibuster. Senators are allowed threaten a filibuster to slow consideration, but I prefer it when they actually get up there and speak until 61 others tell them to shut it and this seemed like a worthy example. Other than that, I pretty much never add my name to such things.

The New Deal (3, Insightful)

MrKaos (858439) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593025)

The technology industry wipes out the existing business model introducing a more efficient one, retaining only the creative elements that produces movies and music. That's what IT does.

I mean evolving business models was the whole idea of capitalism in the first place, from memory.

Well, OK then (3)

inode_buddha (576844) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593049)

Lets everybody keep a sharp eye out for whatever the fuck they may be trying, and shout it down when it comes out again... just like SOPA.. again

Ashamed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39593065)

Chris Dodd makes me ashamed to be a life-long Connecticut Resident.

I found this guy's theme song... (2)

Cazekiel (1417893) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593069)

Voltaire says it best in 'When You're Evil' [youtube.com] ...

I'm the fly in your soup, I'm the pebble in your shoe
I'm the pea beneath your bed, I'm a bump on every head
...

Senator *AND* he leads the MPAA??? (1)

sl4shd0rk (755837) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593079)

I guess corporate dollars and political motivation can't get spelled out much clearer than that. Anyway, there have been plenty of alternatives proposed to SOPA/PIPA. If he can't work with what's been proposed then he should be fired.

Re:Senator *AND* he leads the MPAA??? (2)

R3d M3rcury (871886) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593351)

In this case, the title is honorary. Much like George Bush is still referred to as "President Bush" even though he isn't in the White House anymore, Senator Dodd is no longer a senator.

This is why center-left .\ needs Conservatives (4, Informative)

windcask (1795642) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593087)

We may disagree with you about social issues and government assistance, but you'd better believe we're your brothers in fucking arms when it comes to the overreach of Hollywood and big government censorship.
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/kevinglass/2012/01/18/republicans_backing_off_internet_piracy_acts [townhall.com]
http://www.buzzfeed.com/jpmoore/15-republicans-you-can-thank-for-bailing-on-sopap [buzzfeed.com]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_US_Congresspersons_who_support_or_oppose_SOPA/PIPA [wikipedia.org]

Re:This is why center-left .\ needs Conservatives (1)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593313)

We may disagree with you about social issues and government assistance, but you'd better believe we're your brothers in fucking arms when it comes to the overreach of Hollywood and big government censorship.

Don't confuse being the "party of no" with being anti-MAFIAA.

Take, for example Orrin Hatch [wikipedia.org] former republican senator from Utah and RIAA bitch.

Re:This is why center-left .\ needs Conservatives (1)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593327)

Make that current senator from Utah and still a RIAA bitch.

Re:This is why center-left .\ needs Conservatives (2)

windcask (1795642) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593349)

And don't confuse being a remember of the Republican party with being Conservative. Hatch is the quintessential old guard Republican, having been in office longer than half of the people reading this thread have been alive. He has massive lobbying interests in pharmaceuticals and other areas as well, not just the RIAA.

Re:This is why center-left .\ needs Conservatives (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39593563)

Take, for counterexample, Senator Rand Paul or Congressman Justin Amash, both opposed to internet censorship.

Re:This is why center-left .\ needs Conservatives (1)

Microlith (54737) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593413)

No worries, we'll just wait for "conservatives" in Congress to back big oil, big coal, and other large industries.

Let's do something about it. (2)

Pinkfud (781828) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593097)

It's time to organize a general boycott of the productions of their member companies. Can't you find some entertainment other than seeing the latest movie? I haven't bought a theater ticket in 10 years, and I do just fine. Most of their stuff these days is garbage anyway. The only way we are EVER going to be free of this tyranny is to deprive the members of the money they need to keep supporting it.

Re:Let's do something about it. (1)

Shavano (2541114) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593259)

Also no rentals or Netflix subscriptions.

Re:Let's do something about it. (1)

R3d M3rcury (871886) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593385)

The only way we are EVER going to be free of this tyranny is to deprive the members of the money they need to keep supporting it.

But, then I'll miss Battleship [battleshipmovie.com] !

I don't understand this. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39593121)

The reason this is happening is because the *AA is pumping so much money into members of Congress. The tech giants, however, have far more money than the *AA.

Why aren't the tech giants protecting their interests by spending more than the *AA are on lobbying?

Chris Dodd (1, Redundant)

cosm (1072588) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593175)

Fuck that guy.

It's just like home... (3, Interesting)

mark-t (151149) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593177)

As a Canadian, I'm torn between taking some sort of sadistic delight in seeing that the characteristic of elected representatives making decisions contrary to the electorate's desires is not a uniquely Canadian trait, and feeling genuine empathy for the USA in this situation.

After careful consideration, I'll go with the latter. It's a more PC.

I am Canadian, after all.

Fuck you Dodd!!! (0, Redundant)

modmans2ndcoming (929661) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593187)

Go fuck your self with a wiffle ball bat.

No. (1)

atari2600a (1892574) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593195)

Just no.

An understanding? (1)

Freddybear (1805256) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593275)

Maybe Chris Dodd needs to come to an understanding with a bucket of tar and a pile of feathers.

Re:An understanding? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39593537)

A couple ounces of lead would get the point across both quicker and with a more lasting impact.

Re:An understanding? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39593577)

ounces

You gringos and your damn Fred Flintstone units...

Re:An understanding? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39593605)

ounces

You gringos and your damn Fred Flintstone units...

Would you prefer it in grains?

How about THIS Mr. Dodd (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39593305)

You, me a couple of my friends meet at the back alley behind the bar, with my favorite "mr happy stick" and we'll reach "an understanding"

fucking trash.

How much more openly? (3, Interesting)

blind biker (1066130) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593373)

How much more explicitly should he say that he doesn't give a rat's ass about the general interest? Should he say "I poop on all you little folks!"

I swear, Americans seem to just *love* these self-interested politicians.

I wish (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39593375)

Someone would kill dodd.

No really, im serious. The world is a worse place because he exists. We KNOW what a corrupt scumbag he is... It's an estabalished fact.

And i wish someone would just shoot him dead.

It would improve the world by a non zero percent. I'm sure of it. And hey, won't know till we try.

Re:I wish (1)

Elbereth (58257) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593459)

You're advocating fascism.

Re:I wish (1)

geminidomino (614729) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593535)

Actually, he's advocating vigilantism. Dodd is (one of many) advocating fascism.

Quoted as saying (1)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593439)

"We &@$%ing own the executive branch! And we've already bribed Congress. Only nine more people to buy; five if we're not interested in a unanimous decision."

Electronic Frontier Foundation needs to step up (1)

Karmashock (2415832) | more than 2 years ago | (#39593449)

All the people that complained about special interest groups... well, this is what they're good for... EFF has been pretty good about fighting this stuff off in the past. And as time goes on this will be a bigger struggle.

You can't ban special interests. You can only counter special interests with special interests. The abortion people fight each other. The gun people fight each other. And now we're going to have a war between the MPAA etc and the EFF etc.

Bring it.

Sigh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39593507)

I can't believe I voted for this jerk.

OK, let's see the other angle (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39593553)

Get SOPA on, and then hunt the GPL violators with it. I'm sure some of them are in the MPAA-related companies and groups. They'll be so very happy about the better way of enforcing copyright then. That's what they want, right?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?