Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

Hilary Rosen Defeated at Oxford Union

timothy posted more than 11 years ago | from the choose-your-door-carefully dept.

Music 377

yogi writes "Oxford University Students' Union had a debate last Thursday, titled This House believes that 'the free music mentality is a threat to the future of music.'. Ordinarily, not too exciting, but since it is the Oxford Union, they get Hilary Rosen to speak. She lost the debate, and had to have pictures like this taken. Read the writeup at NTK, or a more detailed one here. I especially like the bit where she asked all the file downloaders whether it made them buy more music."

cancel ×

377 comments

she even voted against her self (0)

mattbland (260913) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538775)

by walking out of the wrong door!

Re:she even voted against her self (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4538800)

She "almost" did...can't you learn to read?

but she looks sad! (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4538816)

Just look at that binder she's holding - full of arguments and facts about why the evil music pirates are devastating the economy, yet she still gets beaten by a couple of punk college kids.

She deserves a pat on the back, for at least trying to defend the glorious RIAA's noble quest against piracy (also known as "fair use")

Re:she even voted against her self (2)

Wonko42 (29194) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538837)

She almost voted against herself by walking out the wrong door. Pay attention.

Re:she even voted against her self (2)

mattbland (260913) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538855)

i'm sorry, my mistake.
would have been funny.
i must stop speed reading ;-)

Re:she even voted against her self (-1, Flamebait)

MisterFancypants (615129) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538939)

Feel stupid by rushing and saying the wrong thing? I guess Hilary is smarter than you, at least she didn't walk through the door, whereas you DID hit the Submit button.

Assclown!

Re:she even voted against her self (1, Informative)

Anonvmous Coward (589068) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538996)

"Feel stupid by rushing and saying the wrong thing? I guess Hilary is smarter than you, at least she didn't walk through the door, whereas you DID hit the Submit button."

Grow up dude. He missed a word while he was reading the article. Some people do that when they have more important things to dedicate their time to. You got hostile over an innocent mistake. Some people do that when they have a serious inferiority complex.

Who's the assclown?

Re:she even voted against her self (0, Offtopic)

dabootsie (590376) | more than 11 years ago | (#4539061)

I am the assclown! Witness the hilarity that is my garishly painted butt!

where can I get one of those T-shirts? (3, Interesting)

e40 (448424) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538785)

subject sez it all.

Re:where can I get one of those T-shirts? (5, Informative)

jaaron (551839) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538813)

http://www.geekstyle.co.uk/ntkmart.cgi#Corrupt [geekstyle.co.uk]
It's linked from one of the articles

Re:where can I get one of those T-shirts? (1)

CoolVibe (11466) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538822)

I would have too, if it weren't slashdotted into submission :)

Thanks for the URL though, guess what my credit card bought me today? :)

Re:where can I get one of those T-shirts? (1)

CoolVibe (11466) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538842)

(yeah yeah, reply to myself. so what. I got karma to burn.)

(duh, the NTK link works fine... that's where you got it from, right?)

thanks anyway though :)

Re:where can I get one of those T-shirts? (2)

Frank of Earth (126705) | more than 11 years ago | (#4539034)

On the back it sez:

"I went to Oxford and all I got out of it was the stupid t-shirt"

Misleading title (5, Funny)

tunah (530328) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538788)

Gee, from the title it looked like it was a military defeat, but I guess this will do ;-)

Re:Misleading title (3, Insightful)

dattaway (3088) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538841)

I wouldn't throw the party just yet. This was just her round of boot camp training before she goes in front of the lawmakers with her big guns.

Re:Misleading title (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4538863)

Uh, aren't the lawmakers the ones on her side? Or is it just Hollings? :)

Re:Misleading title (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4538989)

ugh. i'd rather not think about her "Big guns," thanks. *shudder*

Re:Misleading title (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4539054)

you mean her "big GUN" .. heh heh heh, let's just call it "Hilary's secret weapon".

Re:Misleading title (5, Funny)

sporty (27564) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538931)

Too bad it wasn't done mortal kombat style.

"Fatality"

Debate is getting old (4, Insightful)

traskjd (580657) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538789)

Does anyone else start getting sick of this? The debate is getting so old and the only people saying free music is damaging is some of the artists and the RIAA. I guess it will end up being like open source vs. closed source - and I bet the artists who embrace allowing online downloads will be more sucessful in the end (of course when I make that comparison I also mean that the artist is signed up with a label because they need some form of money - but yet some artists still support downloading their music for free because they have read the research). Hope that all makes sense. What do you think?

Re:Debate is getting old (5, Interesting)

e40 (448424) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538803)

I agree. It's getting to the point that EVERYONE has chosen sides and the resulting debate has a decidedly religious flavor (ie, no one will ever switch sides from this point on).

Re:Debate is getting old (5, Interesting)

mikedaisey (413058) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538868)


Maybe to us, but to normal folks, especially those who are from 40-70 (and who control most of our culture, even if we'd rather not remember that) it is not at all an open and shut case--I've had to explain and discuss these issues numerous times with parents, uncles, coworkers, etc.

We may know how we feel, but mainstream culture still can be swayed, and the RIAA knows that.

Re:Debate is getting old (4, Interesting)

Jace of Fuse! (72042) | more than 11 years ago | (#4539060)

I've had to explain and discuss these issues numerous times with parents, uncles, coworkers, etc.

I wonder if your experience with this was anything like mine. Everyone I've had to explain it to didn't really see why it was illegal in the first place.

"It's not like they've stolen the CD out of a record shop."

Seems that "Intellectual Property" is a vague concept some people seem to have a hard time grasping... ...

Just to clear things up -- I'm a firm believer in copyrights. I'm also a firm believer in free sharing of information. Somewhere in the middle between one side and the other is a realistic ground where things will sometimes be illegal and sometimes be legal and sometimes be hard to define. I both buy and download music, though... so...

Absence of hard, verified data (5, Insightful)

GuyMannDude (574364) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538886)

I agree. It's getting to the point that EVERYONE has chosen sides and the resulting debate has a decidedly religious flavor (ie, no one will ever switch sides from this point on).

Interesting analogy. I have to agree with you: there is so much conflicting data that everyone seems to have made up their minds on the basis of their gut feeling. I imagine there isn't any way of resolving this.

However, I would think that we (the pro-filesharing crowd) could use this ambiguity to our advantage. The **AA wants to limit a powerful technology and impose some dubious laws. And they don't have any iron-clad statistics to back them up. It seems that the burden of proof should be on the **AA to show that filesharing definitely hurts sales. If they cannot show this -- and I don't think they can -- then all their technology-limiting plans should be rejected by the lawmakers. I'm not so naive that I believe this is going to happen, I'm just stating that in a perfect world this non-provable postulate that filesharing hurts sales should be a victory to us. There will always be people who have a "gut feeling" that this is responsible for the financial woes of the music and movie industries, but that shouldn't be enough to enact laws!

GMD

Re:Debate is getting old (5, Insightful)

Pike65 (454932) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538892)

When you say "everyone" you mean the online community. My grandparents wouldn't have a clue what the hell peer-to-peer was, but they still buy and listen to music and that makes their opinion as valid as anyone elses, as far as I'm concerned.

Re:Debate is getting old (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4538823)

I think you're a karma whore. Some semi-intellectual trash post like this, came to thought in your mind because you figured that some moderator has some strange urge to waste moderation points on you.

Re:Debate is getting old (3, Insightful)

cposs (545553) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538845)

Yeah, I'm sick of the debate, and maybe it is getting a bit old. However, until the naysayers realize that they are wrong, articles like this one will continue to be newsworthy and will continue to aggitate the majority of the audience here at /. The fact that people do things because of a misinformed view will always get people riled up, espeically when the actors are integral parts in an industry.

Re:Debate is getting old (3, Interesting)

pezpunk (205653) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538893)

my band and i firmly believe in free music. when hilary rosen says it threwatens the future of music, she means it threatens the future of the music industry as she and the major labels know it. and i can't imagine anything more worthy of fighting for.

i wanna kill this antiquated centralized distribution model
i don't wanna get fucked anymore by this status quo some coddle
don't let fear keep us bound here.
look across this threshold before it closes up forever
see the hate and rage of chaos see the swarming hell hell hell
fear is natural before the refining fires of change,
you must be afraid but do it anyway
i already fell fell fell
don't let fear keep us bound here.
own yourself, remember where the message comes from
think again, once you have it figured out
ask not, what this world owes you -- it owes you shit.
what will you make of it?
status quo's the real foe, this hell we call these tiny lives
giving up our tiny souls to dead unliving corporations
zombies defend rights of them to won us make us wear their name tags
providing the machinery to keep us working intheir gulags
don't let fear keep us bound here.
time is split and this short fit of choice will quickly pass pass pass
now's our only chance ot make a change that will last
tectonic forces are already moving to intercept you
if we make no move to fuck them, only we will lose lose lose
i ask again: if not now, then when?


-Power Shift by my band The Overprivileged [theoverprivileged.com]

Re:Debate is getting old (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4538966)

thank god you believe in free music because no rational person would spend money to hear that tripe.

here's a hint: you're not zach de la rocha.

Re:Debate is getting old (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4539066)

It may be a troll, but come on people, it's the truth.

Re:Debate is getting old (5, Informative)

Jason Earl (1894) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538997)

It was somewhat amusing to see that you not only offer your own music for free download, but also music from several other bands. Something tells me, however, that the Dead Milkmen haven't given you permission to do this.

Now, I can understand wanting to share your own music, but I don't understand why you feel you should be free to share someone else's copyrighted material.

Re:Debate is getting old (1)

marauder (30027) | more than 11 years ago | (#4539058)

A pity about your Flash-only site. According to the poster below you have music available for download, which I quite wanted to listen to.

Re:Debate is getting old (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4538925)

Yeah, all you people debating something important, please stop so I can get back to Baywatch. Why do you bother talking amongst yourselves when it is so obvious that I don't care? Aren't you ashamed that you are spending all this effort on something I don't care about? Hey, why is no one answering me? Isn't anyone listening to me?

Re:Debate is getting old (1)

IanBevan (213109) | more than 11 years ago | (#4539012)

and the only people saying free music is damaging is some of the artists and the RIAA.

Err, well they are the people theoretically losing out after all. Who else would you expect to be complaining exactly ?

Jack Valenti (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4538790)

When is this freak going to suffer similar humiliation and defeat?

Re:Jack Valenti (5, Interesting)

squiggleslash (241428) | more than 11 years ago | (#4539067)

Probably never. Valenti is a better politician than Rosen and, if the truth be told, rather more evil. Valenti has the legislation he wants passed through, in the shape of the DMCA. The RIAA, and Hilary Rosen as its figurehead, aren't in that position. They actually have, for them, a hostile law from their point of view (the Home Recordings Act) in place, and will have to get legislation reversed 180 degrees to get the same kind of protection the movie industry currently enjoys.

For all of these reasons, Valenti isn't going to need to make a case for the movie industry at any time in the near future. Rosen does. Rosen has to sway public opinion if the RIAA is to reduce what it sees as piracy and stolen sales. For the MPAA, there's already legal protections that can be easily invoked against any pirate, and whereas, for example, an author of audio ripping software can point to fair use defenses, DVD "ripping" software authors can, and have been, prosecuted under US criminal law.

You know, while I think she's misguided on the subject of whether MP3 sales have the negative impact she seems to believe, I can't bring myself to think of her to the same degree of hatred as what appears to be the average Slashdotter's attitude. She, for example, has been a major force for protecting musicians against Congressional attempts at censorship or creating censorship systems, whereas Valenti himself oversees the major censorship body for the movie industry, and generally relies on the individual studios and directors and actors to make the case against mandated restrictions. On a surface level, the argument "Why would you buy something if you already have the MP3?" is a hard one to give a definite answer to - you can only, in the end, argue that the side effects - exposure to more music, a desire for higher quality, etc - are (probably) positive.

To that extent, Rosen can't be criticised for not being wholly convinced.

Cool T-shirt on the pic (2)

CoolVibe (11466) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538795)

"corrupt compact disc, inferiour audio"

So where can I get that?! I want it!

Re:Cool T-shirt on the pic (4, Informative)

Monoman (8745) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538809)

I read the article :-)

http://www.geekstyle.co.uk/ntkmart.cgi#Corrupt

Re:Cool T-shirt on the pic (2, Informative)

doomy (7461) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538825)

You can get one of those t-shirts from here [geekstyle.co.uk]

Re:Cool T-shirt on the pic (2)

zdzichu (100333) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538871)

oh, we have new discovery - slashdot-shopping-effect.
geekstyle sales will be higher than ever :)

what was the "different and confusing" set? (5, Interesting)

wadetemp (217315) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538796)

Hilary Rosen asks "Put up your hand if you download and burn music" (most hands go up). She then asks "Keep you hand up if you buy more music because of it" (many stay up). She gets worried and immediately asks some different and confusing set of people to put their hands up, causing everyone to look miffed, and everyone putting their hand down)

I call BS on this. What was the "different and confusing" set she asked for? I have a feeling it was the interesting part of this exchange... pop culture already tells us we should raise our hands for these first two questions.

Re:what was the "different and confusing" set? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4538890)

So, will the real Shady please stand up?
And put one of those fingers on each hand up?
And be proud to be outta your mind and outta control
and one more time, loud as you can, how does it go?

Re:what was the "different and confusing" set? (1, Offtopic)

wadetemp (217315) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538922)

So, will the real Shady please stand up?
And put one of those fingers on each hand up?
And be proud to be outta your mind and outta control
and one more time, loud as you can, how does it go?


Indeed. I would have looked miffed too, and probably would have sat down, but not before singing "I'M SORRY MAMA <offkey> I DIDNT MEAN TO HURT YOO<offkey>OOOUUUU<offkey>. I DIDNT MEAN TO MAKE YOU CRY BUT TONIGHT, IM CLEANING OUT MY CL<offkey>O<offkey>SET." Then again, that is what I have been programmed to say by my radio.

Re:what was the "different and confusing" set? (5, Insightful)

GuyMannDude (574364) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538898)

I call BS on this. What was the "different and confusing" set she asked for? I have a feeling it was the interesting part of this exchange...

Yeah, I agree. I, too, would be very interested in seeing what Rosen's follow-up questions were. Can anyone point us to an unbiased, accurate record of what happened? Maybe even a transcript? It's clear that the articles that were submitted to slashdot aren't trying to evenly present what happened that night.

GMD

Re:what was the "different and confusing" set? (5, Insightful)

zaffir (546764) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538899)

I'd also say that this was a stacked audience. Let's see, you have a bunch of college students that use p2p on a regular basis, many of whom were spreading anti-RIAA propaganda (not that that is bad). And you have the head of the RIAA that is trying to keep them from doing the things they want... come on. The proposition has NO CHANCE when polling an audience like that. I'm actually surprised Rosen asked that question.

Re:what was the "different and confusing" set? (2, Insightful)

Danse (1026) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538911)

Well, since these are the people that Rosen and the RIAA are concerned with persuading, it makes sense that these are the people that she would want to be speaking to. Do you think they should have had some soccer moms and middle managers thrown in for good measure or something?

Re:what was the "different and confusing" set? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4538929)

What was the "different and confusing" set she asked for?

Probably "Now keep your hand up if you were really telling the truth and you do buy more music because of sharing"

Re:what was the "different and confusing" set? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4538971)

And of course the audience count not possibly have been lying.

Look, I'm no fan of the industry, but I now know about 40 people who download and trade music. Not one of them buys CDs anymore. None. And they report similar results with the circuit of acquaintenances they know beyond what I can see.

The bigger question (4, Insightful)

KFury (19522) | more than 11 years ago | (#4539026)

Considering how online-centric we are now, how valid is it to ask about dirtworld CD sales without finding out what kind of behavior consumers would have, if it were easy to buy the music they like online, for digital download, with price-parity with CDs, adjusted for savings in fabrication and delivery costs.

They're asking us to pay for a distribution system we don't need, and that's what offends me as I'm struggling to tear off the stupid sticker holding my new CD's jewelcase together before I put the disc into the reader to be encoded to the only format I use anyhow.

Re:what was the "different and confusing" set? (0, Offtopic)

Subcarrier (262294) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538981)

She probably asked them what they think about Slashdot and Your Tights on Line [bigsmithband.com] . ;-)

Did she learn something? (5, Interesting)

AndersM (32304) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538807)

Now this is great. I wish I could've been there and seen it for myself!

Now let's just hope Mrs. Rosen learned a bit from this, and, even better, passes it on to others. Chances are they'll just steam on as they go, and not mind their customers. They're just a source of money, and not of real importance, after all.

I think she did. (2, Funny)

g.zero (610058) | more than 11 years ago | (#4539064)

Be careful which door you walk out through.

A good quote (5, Interesting)

ekrout (139379) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538818)

I really feel that the music industry has, quite simply, realized that they're on the out-and-out, so to speak. With the advent of faster networking technologies over the past few years, and the number of kids attending 4-year colleges (all of whom have broadband connections), the industry truly feels that they lose $0.20 with every *.mp3, *.ogg, and *.wma file that's exchanged via TCP/IP.

Here's some sage advice (from here [slashdot.org] originally): "If you really want a change, don't vote for either party -- vote Libertarian if you're on the right, Green Party if you're on the left, and independant otherwise. Both parties are in the pockets of big business, and that's bad both for those who advocate freedom from the government as well as those who despise deregulation.

The more we have third party, the closer we get to fairer, European-style representation."

Re:A good quote (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4538856)

Actually, it has been proven that there is no "fair" way to represent the will of the people in an election with more than two choices [Ken Arrow, 1951]. Of course, you can argue that giving people more choices results in a better government, but is also results in unfair elections (fair meaning the result represents the true will of the people, every person considered to have the same weight in the decision).

Re:A good quote (4, Insightful)

Stalyn (662) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538869)

The more we have third party, the closer we get to fairer, European-style representation.

Do we really want that and is it indeed fairer?

Re:A good quote (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4538877)

Do we really want that and is it indeed fairer?

Put simply: "Yes".

Re:A good quote (0, Flamebait)

Stalyn (662) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538895)

Seig Heil!

Re:A good quote-Networking limits. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4538913)

" I really feel that the music industry has, quite simply, realized that they're on the out-and-out, so to speak. With the advent of faster networking technologies over the past few years, and the number of kids attending 4-year colleges (all of whom have broadband connections), the industry truly feels that they lose $0.20 with every *.mp3, *.ogg, and *.wma file that's exchanged via TCP/IP."

Would that happen to be the residential broadband that has limits and quotas, or the corporate and educational networks slammed with ceist and desist letters? Those networks? Or did you have some others in mind?

Now only if... (5, Insightful)

sterno (16320) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538820)

It'd be nice if we could have this sort of debate and result happen someplace it really matters like Congress :)

Courage or stupidity ? (5, Interesting)

liberteus (566864) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538830)

to go to a university only to face a crowd of filesharing student can either be pictured as stupidity or courage, so let's at least give her that: she was coureagous. She ran into the wolves house!

About the filesharing issue? Depends on wether you recognize intellectual property as a valid concept or not...

Re:Courage or stupidity ? (2, Insightful)

traskjd (580657) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538850)

I would say good on her. Not often the corporates even turn up to things like this even when they say they will. Doesn't mean I like what they are doing but I have a little more respect.

Perhaps a calculated move (5, Insightful)

GuyMannDude (574364) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538960)

to go to a university only to face a crowd of filesharing student can either be pictured as stupidity or courage, so let's at least give her that: she was coureagous. She ran into the wolves house!

Disclaimer: because of the poor write-ups posted, I don't have a good idea of what actually happened at this debate and how fair it was. With that in mind, consider the following theory: Hillary figures she can 'win' no matter how the debate turns out. She has a chance to talk to the crowd that are the biggest filesharers. This is her chance to hopefully convince them that what they're doing is wrong. With a little luck, she'll be able to convince someone in the audience who happens to be in a position of power regarding the computer facilities of the school. She figures if the debate is 'fair' that she's got a reasonable chance to getting her message across. She won't be able to convince those whose minds are already made up, but perhaps she can bring a few students back from the Dark Side.

Now consider the case of an 'unfair' debate. If the debate is 'not fair', perhaps some students will realize that and sympathize with her. But even if she isn't able to convince anyone in the crowd that her position is right and the whole debate ends up being a crazy show, she can then take a videotape or transcript of the 'unfair' debate with her to other people (like politicians) and use that to convince swing-voters that the pro-filesharing crowd is just a bunch of hooligans. She willingly goes into the lions' den to gain sympathy from others when she shows them her 'scars'. "I tried to explain my position and look how they treated me? They're animals!"

This is just a theory. But to characterize her action as either courage or stupidity leaves out another very real possibility: calculating.

GMD

Re:Courage or stupidity ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4539070)

I don't think you have to believe or disbelieve in intellectual property as a whole. I certainly believe in intellectual property, but not necessary all of the protections which might exist for it.

I still don't get it... (5, Insightful)

MacAndrew (463832) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538832)

...why the debate is framed as free music v. the music industry. We can decide to dislike both sides, and still get free music -- by encouraging musicians to self-publish either samples or entire albums as freeware or shareware. For those without internet connections and CD burners, music stores could offer a write-your-own-CD services (and I think I've seen this in prototype?).

Up to now the recording studios have been like the cartoon syndicates -- a necessary evil because they control the production, distribution, and promotion of music, with staggering overhead. Why does a 25 CD cost $18, anyway, about what it cost when invented 20 years ago? How many non-geek consumers know about this profit margin, and how loudly would they complain if they did?

Re:I still don't get it... (4, Insightful)

Anonvmous Coward (589068) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538924)

"...why the debate is framed as free music v. the music industry."

I never really thought it was about music being 'free' anyway. My MP3 searches were about finding new music, not about getting it for free. I saw it as a way of finding stuff I thought I'd like. Paying for it is not an issue. I mean think about it: Buy a CD, open it, and it's yours. You can't take it back if it's not satisfactory.

So yeah, I'm gonna download songs from the album first before I buy the CD because I'm not paying $15 for 1 (one) song I liked from the radio. How many of you have been burned by that?

Re:I still don't get it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4538985)

I'm not paying $15 for 1 (one) song I liked from the radio. How many of you have been burned by that?

Never. I guess I listen to better artists than you. ;-) Seriously, the answer to "I only liked one song on the CD" complaint is, "Find someone else to listen to , or expand your musical horizons." You need to have that one song that badly? it's that important?

Oxford Union != Oxford University Student Union (3, Informative)

hsenag (56002) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538844)

It should be pointed out that the Oxford Union [oxford-union.org]
(which is where the debate was) isn't the same thing as the Oxford University Student Union [ousu.org] . Probably only really of importance to people in Oxford, who know this anyway, though :-)

Re:Oxford Union != Oxford University Student Union (4, Informative)

Zeinfeld (263942) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538944)

It should be pointed out that the Oxford Union [oxford-union.org] (which is where the debate was) isn't the same thing as the Oxford University Student Union [ousu.org]. Probably only really of importance to people in Oxford, who know this anyway, though :-)

Err why, most Oxford students have zero contact with OUSU. There is not much point to a student union with no facilities to administer.

Hitler credited the Oxford Union with starting World War II.

Incidentally, King and Country has only been passed once since the original debate. Anyone care to guess what the subject matter was?

Finally the great question is answered... (4, Funny)

slipgun (316092) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538848)

Hilary Rosen is a woman.

Re:Finally the great question is answered... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4538875)

Indeed she is a woman... and I am a very lonely man... *fap* *fap* *fap*

Re:Finally the great question is answered... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4538881)

Re:Finally the great question is answered... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4538887)

I'm not too sure. I still think it's Jack Valenti's transvestite son.

Mod parent funny (1, Redundant)

Joey7F (307495) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538903)

Come on, take a friggin joke. That was hilarious (or should it be hilaryous?)!

--Joey

Re:Finally the great question is answered... (5, Interesting)

seen2much (576446) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538917)

You so sure about that?

The real question about the recording industry is do they have calculators?

A tape or lp at the time of the cd switch was far cheaper than an CD. But now that CD production is more efficient the cost should have come down some. But it hasn't. Cds are still in the 16-20 dollar range where as tapes at the same time were in 10-12.you think that cd's would have dropped?

Why don't we buy CDs? Because the price is prohibitive. On top of that the RIAA has made no friends with fans with the crackdowns and wacky copyright protection schemes.

Now the MPAA is doing the same thing with DVDs. And you know that the DVD won't drop either.

Re:Finally the great question is answered... (5, Interesting)

Joey7F (307495) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538963)

I am not sure if it is quite the same with the MPAA. It seems that the RIAA price CDs equally. DVDs have different prices, frequently depending on the studio that releases them, which I think the end will be more beneficial to the consumer.

It is too bad that the artists that already have made a fair amount of money (and that are fairly famous) don't start there own label that sells music online by the song (yes I know about rhapsody, but they require a monthly fee) or that sell the discs for $12 bucks instead of 20.

In fact, wouldn't it be COOL if you could listen to the songs online at a low bitrate, then buy the cd, and while it is shipping to you, it lets you download the album in your format of choice.

--Joey

Re:Finally the great question is answered... (3, Insightful)

seen2much (576446) | more than 11 years ago | (#4539035)

Look at the price of a videotape versus DVD. I can understand that right now DVD do cost more to produce but in 5-10 years the opposite will be true. But do you think DVDs will drop in price to the same level as videotape. I seriously doubt that. And the extra features added do not add that much to a DVD experience, much as I like them. I forsee the greed of the MPAA by keeping the price as high as it is.

Opposition Quote (4, Interesting)

Flamerule (467257) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538873)

From http://tirian.magd.ox.ac.uk/~nick/UnionDebat/
Jay Berman probably being the best proposition speaker, and coming out with the insigtful "Each generation has had their own music. For your generation it's filesharing. And I think thats a pretty terrible thing"
Hum... don't think that's so insightful.

One, anyone knows what the fuck he means by calling filesharing a style of music? Two, what's so terrible about filesharing... that's more terrible than, say, swapping bootlegs? Seems like p2p has created a whole lot more interest in music since the late 90s... whatever.

Re:Opposition Quote (4, Insightful)

Methuseus (468642) | more than 11 years ago | (#4539024)

His point is that there's no one specific type of music. The reason for this (in his eyes and I think he's right) is the p2p filesharing programs let you listen to more different music without the price being prohibitive. He's not actually saying filesharing is a style of music.

Also, on the subject of bootlegs, it's a hell of a lot harder to find someone that bought such and such a tape, then copy it at *full quality* and then share it again (since each copy of a tape is worse than the last) than to just fire up Napster and download the latest songs. Now you could use the special tapes that the people who share live recordings do (DAT tapes I think?) but those are quite expensive and are almost as much as buying the tape itself. Granted this scheme changes a little with CDs, but you still have to have someone willing to let you copy your CD. Not that many people are willing.

Berman still thinks that p2p sharing is hurting his industry. There's nothing wrong with him being disillusioned, but it's pretty insightful for him to notice what the current trend truly is, that it's all types of music. I don't agree with his "And I think it's a pretty terrible thing" quote, but he's entitled to his opinion. He makes a better argument in one sentence than any other proponent of the music industry has in whole debates.

OFFTOPIC -but funny (-1, Offtopic)

hopbine (618442) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538879)

Following the link to NTK now I liked the follow on section. FULL SHIRTS BAD! T-SHIRTS GOOD!>> well done to long-term reader (but first-time winner!) LLOYD WOOD who, after many years of sending in bizarre t-shirt slogans - we particularly remember his Slashdot-baiting "stuff the nerds - news that matters" -

Never forget: Hilary Rosen is a J - E - W jew (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4538897)

Have you ever noticed how the Jews are at the forefront of those trying to restrict our rights?

Know your enemy. Study this list of Jews trying to destroy your freedom:

  • Rosen
  • Coble
  • Berman
  • Eisner
  • Redstone
The Jews never create anything. They are the parasites who wedge themselves between the producer and the consumer. The Jew takes a slice of every pie that passes by. What the Jew hates is that the Internet is cutting him off from his host. The artists can now distribute directly to their fans.

The Internet has made the Jew irrelevant. So the Jew tries to buy the politician to do his bidding. The Jew tries to get bought politicians to pass bogus regulations in order to maintain Jew hegemony over the consumer.

Listen and learn about the Jew in this mp3 [natvan.com] .

Learn the Truth about the Jew [natvan.com]

The real problem... (Link Free!) (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4538930)

...is politics in general. As many people,so tritely, observe... people who want power are usually very self-centered and have no concern for the betterment of their fellow man. This is, sadly, completely out of alignment with what politics were originally intended to be. Let's take a look at the official definition of politics and break it down:

The science of government; that part of ethics which has to do with the regulation and government of a nation or state, the preservation of its safety, peace, and prosperity, the defense of its existence and rights against foreign control or conquest, the augmentation of its strength and resources, and the protection of its citizens in their rights, with the preservation and improvement of their morals.

First, let's start with the fact the politics is considered a science, where "science" is taken to mean:

Any branch or department of systematized knowledge considered as a distinct field of investigation or object of study.

By this definition, a politician should have a great body of knowledge regarding ethics, citizens and their rights and proper morals. If you apply that branch of logic to the politicians of the last few decades, we find that there is something that has slowly gone seriously wrong. Our politicians tend to be anything but knowledgable, ethical, moral or have any concern for citizen's rights!

We will start with our current administration. While the polls say that G.W. Bush has had anywhere from a 49% approval rating at lowest and as high as his post Sept. 11th rating of 93%. While this speaks well of him, it completely obscures many well known facts regarding his knowledge (quite lacking), ethics, morality and feelings on citizen's rights. If we delve deeper, we find that he, in fact, has very little knowledge about the system. Further evidenced by the fact that he is a poor speaker and his father's former cabinet appears to be running the entire show. He is just a mouthpiece.

Regarding ethics, I would question any politician's ethics who would have other men in thir cabinet involved in scandal. Especially in a position so close to the power seat as vice-president Cheney. Mr. Cheney's desire to conceal the connections between Enron and the current administration are very disheartening. Even the staunchest conservative must admit that this was not one of the finer moments in conservative history. (The liberal-controlled media argument doesn't wash here either as the news sources that reported negatively on this story tend to be just as far right as you can get.)

While Mr. Bush professes to being a good christian. He hasn't always been that way. His morals are not exactly what one would call "good". It's very well known the George W. Bush, was quite the party down, rich kid. As he grew away from his "youthful errors", he became quite the shady businessman. I would have to say that his morals are questionable at best.

Civil rights and the current administration are at odds with each other. This has been an ever increasing problem since Sept. 11th. As most Americans blindly wave their flags, their ability to do much of anything else to affect their own well being is being erroded by things like "The Patriot Act". In the name of security, the man in the white house and his staff are trying to convince us that it's good to lose your freedoms sometimes. This is quite damning evidence that he does not understand or care about the citizen's of this country's rights.

Seeing that all of this is true, it appears that George W. Bush fails to live up to the definition of what a politician should be, as do many of his cabinet.

The last administration has it's blemishes on many counts as well. Analyzing Mr. Clinton in the same way, we find that his knowledge of the governmental system was stronger than Mr. Bush's. (If anyone can provide links to examples please do so, I couldn't find any.)

Where ethics are concerned, Bill Clinton had his share of gaffes. Not to mention the more serious allegations regarding his time as Governor of Arkansas. No... Sadly, we can't say that Mr. Clinton has shiny repution either.

Everyone knows about his moral problems since they've been beaten to death. Like him or not, Bill Clinton was not a man of morals by strict definition.

As geeks, we all know that it was his administration that passed the DMCA which has potential to seriously impinge on citizen's rights. Not just your ability to "swap songs", but you ability to write code freely!

So, by the same analysis, Bill Clinton fails the test of what a good politician is. As do most other politicians. Why is this? Because we are humans. We have imperfections that prevent us from being able to truly hold to the ideals of what how politics should work. Some do better than others, but in general the lot of them are corrupt.

Most politicians are only interested in politics due to their hunger for power. Just that alone is damning as it points to a deep seated greed and selfishness that is almost required to be a politician. So how is it that our system even works? In reality, it doesn't.

Most of what the operations of the government and the way they affect us are almost 100% happily incidental. Ocassionally one person somewhere deep in the system does one thing right. Another one somewhere else in the system does something else right. And so on... There are the few people here or there who intentionally or unintentionally (They're human, remember?) do something wrong. But the aggregate result is something that more or les resembles a system that works. This illusion trickles upward toward the leaders (Senators, congressmen, governors, and ultimately the president) and makes them look good. (It works this way in any large organization) So... for now we are stuck with a system that appears to work, but is solely based on chance. Or looking at it another way, real politics (as opposed to the ideal defined above) is just another form of gambling.

In closing, I'll offer you this joke about politics:

Son: Dad, I have a special report for school. Can I ask you a question?

Dad: Sure son, what's the question?

Son: What is politics?

Dad: Well son, let's take our home for example. I am the wage earner, so let's call me the management. Your mother is the administrator of the money, so let's call her the government. We take care of you and your needs, so let's call you the people. We'll call the maid the working class and your baby brother the future. Understand?

Son: I'm not really sure dad, I'll have to think about it.

That night, the boy is awakened by his baby brother's crying, so he went to see what was wrong. Discovering that the baby had a heavily soiled nappy, the boy went to his parent's room and found his mother fast asleep. He than went to the maid's room, where, peeking through the keyhole, he saw his father in bed with the maid. The boy's knocking went totally unheard. The boy went back to his room and went to sleep.

The next morning...

Son: Dad, I think I understand politics.

Dad: That's great son, explain it to me in your own words.

Son: While the management is screwing the working class, the government is fast asleep, the people are being completely ignored and the future is full of shit.

---Whew! All that work just to post this---

-I am a Windows user
-I am also a f4g0rt
-All Windows users are f4g0rtz
-Bill Gates loves men
-Linux is the sux0rz
-BSD is dying
-Stephen King loved goatse.cx before he died
-75% of people in the US make up 3/4 of the US population
-Adolph Hitroll is my bitch
-RecipeTroll loves the cock too
-Natalie Portman is naked and petrified
-I poured hot gritz down my pants and all I got was this lousy T-shirt
-R.M.S. is a commie
-Linus Torvalds is keeping his brotha down. Free him!
-Looser = Loser and vice-versa. Stop complaining and learn New English
-Imagine a Beowulf cluster of trolls
-The CowboyNeal jokes are old
-X is unstable, let's get rid of it
-KDE is the sux0rz, GNOME rules
-Real men use TWM
-vi is better then emacs (no it's not, emacs is better than vi)=Tastes great/Less Filling
-Ford sucks
-Chevy sucks
-Capitalism is dying
-Linux on the desktop is dead
-IE won the browser war, give it up Mozilla. (No. The war's not over yet M$)
-MySQL is robust and scalable
-PostgreSQL is better than MySQL. Nyah!
-So you like your pages W I D E N E D?
-I 4m 1337. giv3 m3 w4r3z d00dz.
-w00t!
-In other news...
-1. Steal concept from open sores 2. ??? 3. Profit!!!
-RMS is a dirty hippie
-Moderation sucks
-UNIX will never be as secure as VMS
-GayPee is not a hacker, he's a dork
-General strike!! Now!!!!!!
-ESR is a homo
-Grok THIS you GIMP!
-Corporations are evil
-Corporations are good
-Quake is the sux0rz, give me Unreal Tourney! (You Canadian f4g0rt, UT sucks, Quake 0wnz j00)
-Canadians are gay
-Americans are stupid
-Brits are assholes
-For hot gulrz see: http://www.bakla.net

-~the fux0rz has spoken~-

Trolls: please post this in all discussions vaguely related to politics.

To see the original post, go here:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=43344&c id=4536 155

Pirates united shall never be beknighted (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4538935)

<tt><b><strong>
Hello!

"Qcsbs-rrrr " $1,500+/Wk
Millionaire Cash System

Quick Cash Secret Banking System,
The Royal Road To Riches...

A proven money making system, that will wipe out
all your debts!

Open "special bank account" on the internet,
at a "secret website", we'll reveal, click your mouse once, enter a "special code #", then click your mouse a second time, and generate $1,500+/wk, in easy fast cash!
There is:
<ol>
No special training!
No hard work or large investment!
Not a loan program, Credit card scheme, Bank fraud!
Not Mlm, Network, stocks, bonds, Commodity trading
(such as soybeans, oil, gas,) CD, or offshore account!
Not a Business! No staff or office needed!
No Marketing, No meetings, No conference calls!
100% legal in all countries of the world!
</ol>
<ol>
Only 3 Steps:
(1) Click your mouse once,
(2) Then enter "certain secret code #" we'll reveal,
(3) Then click your mouse again, and rake in fast cash!
</ol>
More than $1,500+/wk possible!

Nbc, Cbs, Abc, Cnn, Cnbc, Financial Times, New
York Times, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Investors' Business Daily, and all Financial communities in New York, London, Tokyo, and Switzerland agree that Qcsbs-rrr is the Fastest and Greatest way to make money on earth!

Why? Because it generates 1.2 trillion dollars daily worldwide, so you can generate piles of cash $300-500 daily, just by clicking
your mouse! Unlike in regular business, stocks, bonds, with Qcsbs-rrr you make money every day!

Qcsbs-rrr is like an Atm machine, that will crank out piles of cash ($300-500) for you 5 days, every week, all year! $1,500+/wk legal easy fast cash, possible!

Wipe off your debt in just a couple of weeks!

You should not believe us! We may be lying!

But what if what we're saying is true?

"Seeing is believing," right?

So, don't believe us yet!
You can't lose by finding out!

Just order your Qcsbs package today, try it for free (using Free "$10,000", demo account) and convince yourself it is valid, legal and fast, before you invest even 1 penny!

If you do well in the free trial, you'll be awarded $1000 free cash!

Can you click your mouse twice a day??? If yes, you can do Qcsbs-rrr, and rake in $1,500+/wk, easy, fast legal cash!!!

Satisfy your Curiosity!!!
Get free No obligation details now and decide for yourself!

(1) Send a blank e-mail to:
www.cashbelt@Yahoo.com
Please put the words below in the Subject space:
" Code10,000,001#3" In about 1 hr, check all your folders: Inbox & Bulk Mail for our fast reply!

Thank you!
<blockquote>
This offer will be sent to you once, only and it is valid for 1 week only. Void where prohibited by law.
Not available to Connecticut residents. Our remove address is: jjayny2@excite.com
</blockquote>
</tt></b></stro ng>

Should read Rosen defeated in popularity contest (4, Insightful)

tyrann98 (161653) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538943)

Reassuringly, the motion that "This House believes that the free music mentality is a threat to the future of music" was resoundingly defeated by a hefty 256 "Noes" to 72 "Ayes"

This is more of a popularity contest than a true debate. The RIAA's position is never going to be popular with an illegal file-swapping crowd filled with university students.

Regardless, The RIAA has every right to pursue its goals (i.e., profit) using legitimate business practices.

The RIAA is perfectly allowed to sell music using any method they want. It does not matter if downloaders purchase more CDs due to free advertising. If you believe that start a new record company with free music from your site. Nobody has a right to force a new distribution method on someone else. I prefer the BSD license, but I don't go out and illegally change GPL software to BSD. People have the right to use any license they choose. Similiarly, artists have the right to release free music if they want. They are not forced to sign a contract with anyone. Plus, the distribution method of choice - the Internet - is perfected suited for free music.

Re:Should read Rosen defeated in popularity contes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4539027)

Yes, asking people to vote on the extent of arbitrary government-granted power is always a bad idea. Better leave that sort of thing to the expert central planners!

Re:Should read Rosen defeated in popularity contes (2, Insightful)

Methuseus (468642) | more than 11 years ago | (#4539057)

I have one problem with your comments. It sounds like you are saying that we don't have the right to try to convince the RIAA that they are harming the industry rather than helping it. And saying "illegal file-swapping crowd filled with university students" is wrong because pretty much everyone that was there said they buy more music because of the file sharing. Talk to some RIAA execs for a bit about the subject. Not one of the ones that has been coached; a real one that is deeply entrenched in the Association and shares their values. You'll get the impression that they don't care about the artists unless they make mega-billions. And even then they only care about the money from the artist. I've gone a bit long on this. I'm not sure exactly what you meant by your comments, but implying that someone can't tell a draconic, corrupt corporation to kiss their ass will really piss lots of people off.

there are defeats and defeats (3)

daniel2000 (247766) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538946)

If you go into a competition and everyone expects you to loose, but you don't loose as badly as expected then people will notice that and take more notice of you the next time.

Hilary may well have thought that they wouldn't out and out win a debate in such an environment but thought that it was still worth the effort. A strategic defeat perhaps.

Or...

Off topic but... (5, Interesting)

BigBir3d (454486) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538947)

This all reminds me of my old boss; 70+ yr old Jewish man from NYC who used Napster to download old speeches (Winston Churchill was his favorite) and such other things that were hard to find anywhere locally (library etc). He never once used it for music.

Re:Off topic but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4539017)

that guy was teh l4m3r everyone knows napster is for downloading Britney!!!1!!@!LOOOOOOL!

Re:Off topic but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4539052)

hehe

yeah!

Britney needs my grits!

hehe...

yeah definitly...

196...

yeah, definitly 196...

yeah.

Got Wide? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4538948)

Stealing music is wrong!
    • WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWWW



      Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted!
      Reason: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.

Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted! Reason: That's an awful long string of letters there.

another good quote (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4538958)

"You did very well considering your indefensible position"

har har

Who voted to determine the outcome? (2, Insightful)

geekee (591277) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538962)

Asking whether she won or lost is like sending a republican to debate at a democratic convention and having the democrats vote on who won. Give me a break. Although she's bringing up the practical aspects of what p2p does to their business, this isn't even the issue. The issue is whether it is legal for people to share copyrighted without the permission of the copyright holder. The answer is no. It's very simple. Even Janis Ian agrees that you need the permission of the copyright holder. The RIAA has the right to do business anyway they choose. Your only right is to refuse to do business with them if you don't like what they offer. You do NOT have the right to violate copyright just because you don't like the way they do business. It's as unethical as stealing cable, photocopying books, etc.

Meaningless (-1)

chemstar (457943) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538965)

less she lose in court.

Oxford Union Debates (I "officiated" once) (5, Informative)

Elias Israel (182882) | more than 11 years ago | (#4538974)


This summer, I had the opportunity to help officate at a debate held at the Oxford University Student Union. This was for an XML course that was developed by a consulting firm that was presented at the University. During the summer, Oxford hosts a significant number of for-profit and non-profit organizations holding conferences, seminars, and the like.

The city of Oxford and the University are stunning. If you've never seen them, you're missing out.

The debating hall is laid out similarly to the House of Commons, which us 'mericans sometimes get a glimpse of on TV.

At the head of the room is the debate chairman, who presides over the debate and makes sure that the rules are followed. To his left and right are the Union treasurer and librarian. Since this wasn't an "official" Oxford Union debate, all three of those roles were held by participants in the XML summer course. I sat to the left of the chairman, and helped decide matters of debate procedure and scope. (Don't laugh; there actually was one matter to review. :)

On the main floor of the debate chamber is the Secretary's desk. The Secretary likewise assures debate procedure is followed and assists the chairman in doing so.

On either side of the Secretary's table are the proposer of the motion, and the opposer. Each of them leads a particular side of the debate.

Around all of them are the seats for the participants, arranged on both the main floor and a balcony surrounding everything.

Perhaps the most interesting feature of the debate hall are the doors. On the way in, they look like simple double doors. Only when you are inside can you see that over the right door reads a sign saying "Yeses", and over the left door "Noes." At the end of the debate all participants file out through those doors, their numbers counted by the Secretary as they pass. Then everyone files back in to hear the results read.

The Oxford Union is one of the oldest free speech organizations in the world, and certainly deserving of respect on that basis. The debating hall is a monument to civil society and free speech. The Union is also a completely private institution: a true union of, by, and for Oxford students.

Now, having said all of that, the fact remains that a debate at the Oxford Union is just a debate. It's not a UN Security Council resolution or a Supreme Court judgment. It's just the opinion of a bunch of people who happened to be in the hall at the time as to whether the proposer or the opposer made a better case for their side.

It's all good fun, and much needed at that. But let's not get all worked up about it.

commercialism (5, Insightful)

g4dget (579145) | more than 11 years ago | (#4539007)

This House believes that 'the free music mentality is a threat to the future of music

Well, "this house" believes that it is rampant commercialism that is actually a threat to the future of music.

of course she lost (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4539011)

She was in a room full of people who buy and listen to music.

This is definitely NOT the place for an RIAA exec to be. They should be with other executives and the occasional politician. That way they can avoid the whole issue of customers and business models, and focus on what's really important: new legislation.

rosen (1)

nsda's_deviant (602648) | more than 11 years ago | (#4539075)

don't you think that rosen actually believed she could win by going to oxford? ithink she truly believes that she'll be able to win the greater fight, what is troubeling is she won't be stopped until someone stops her completelly. how do you do that though???
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...