Entries Matching: RIAA
Trying to figure out who's naughty and nice this time of year can be difficult. Many people are both, and figuring it all out by the end of the week will be quite the challenge.
Take for example two days last week in the life of Vice President Joe Biden. On Dec. 15, he hosted a meeting for the crème de la crème of Big Media, which by all accounts, like this one and this one brought top government officials together to focus on combating the scourge of “piracy.”
No one likes “piracy,” but this over-the-top meeting put so much of a focus on the issue, and pandered so much so the assembled multitudes that it lacked any credibility whatsoever.
The following statement is attributed to Gigi B. Sohn, president and
co-founder of Public Knowledge:
“We were extremely disappointed to learn of the White House meeting
to be held later today on the issue of intellectual property and
‘piracy.’ It is unclear why three cabinet officers, several
subcabinet officers, the directors of the Federal Bureau of Investigation
and the U.S. Secret Service are needed to tend to the worries of the big
media companies, particularly the motion picture industry which is
completing a year in which it will set box-office records.
A number of movie studios, record labels, and other copyright-holding companies (and their related trade associations) have also written a pro-ACTA letter to Congress, which I first saw posted on Ben Sheffner's blog. Minus the bizarre "distraction" claim, it follows the same basic pattern—that ACTA will benefit IP businesses and do nothing harmful.
The evidence for this? Still absent. Instead, the letter reiterates that changes in technology require online copyright enforcement, and thus a section of ACTA covering the Internet.
This probably shouldn't require repeating, but I'll say it again. A solution has to be tailored to solve the problem. Is ACTA properly tailored to solve copyright infringement? No one can tell.