MPAA Boss Chris Dodd Denies That Copyright Law Today Has Created Any Free Speech Issues

from the can-someone-please-educate-him? dept

MPAA boss Chris Dodd is apparently continuing his “how far can I stretch the truth” tour in support of SOPA/PIPA. His latest stop was an interview on Bloomberg TV. He talks about a bunch of things, blowing some hot air about how this debate is a “breakthrough.” But the part that interested me is around the 3:30 mark, where he insists that what SOPA allows we already do to American sites, and “no one has suggested freedom of speech has been hampered.”

Oh really? Perhaps Chris Dodd is entirely unfamiliar with the blatant censorship and denial of due process for Dajaz1.com, a site taken down under the laws of today… and denied due process before the government finally admitted it had no case, more than a year later. There also have been tons of complaints about bogus DMCA claims (including many from top MPAA members). This is not an idle concern. We have the evidence of wrongdoing under today’s laws. We have the evidence that it is not narrow, but widespread, and it happens all the time.

That’s our key concern. It’s not some “hypothetical.” We have tons and tons of evidence of today’s laws being widely abused, so we’re quite reasonably freaked out about a law that has much, much broader implications, in that it doesn’t just take down specific content, but entire websites. And, when that happens, speech is definitely restrained, and legitimate companies get killed.

So when I hear Chris Dodd claim that “no one has suggested freedom of speech has been hampered” under today’s laws, I wonder if he’s simply completely ignorant of what’s happening… or if he’s just lying. Either answer looks bad for Dodd. But it does highlight the desperation of SOPA/PIPA supporters today that they’re resorting to such ridiculous claims…

Filed Under: , ,
Companies: dajaz1

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “MPAA Boss Chris Dodd Denies That Copyright Law Today Has Created Any Free Speech Issues”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
50 Comments
xenomancer (profile) says:

Old Habbits Die Hard, Old Morons Die Slow

Its amazing, he mentions the protections written into the constitution, but his comments make it seem like he’s never read the damn thing. Further more, in continuously conflating infringement, counterfeit, and theft, he comes off sounding like an overfilled gas bag rather than an important industry figure. No wonder the MPAA is worried, they can’t get this dinosaur to finally go extinct fast enough.

Jay (profile) says:

Re: Old Habbits Die Hard, Old Morons Die Slow

This is the same man that was involved with the Countrywide scandal so long ago…

He IS an overfilled gas bag.

He might be right about the OPEN Act being more difficult to help resolve copyright issues. But notice how there’s no mention of punishing those that bring false copyright claims. Someone needs to bring that up at the next Chris Dodd tour.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Old Habbits Die Hard, Old Morons Die Slow

He is a gasbag and a liar (didn’t he publicly state he wouldn’t leave congress and become a lobbyist…and then promptly do exactly that?).

He will say anything for 1.5 million dollars, which is what the MPAA is paying him, to get unnecessary and damaging legislation passed that will likely serve to bite all of us, including the MPAA, in the ass.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: Old Habbits Die Hard, Old Morons Die Slow

He’s not an overfilled gas bag, so much as a steaming sack of lying monkey shit, and the MAFIAA he lies for has their arm up the ass of Congress so far that they can actually make them say whatever they want, and if they don’t, they can pull their tongues out. That is how all of this horseshit legislation got off the ground in the first place. I’m sure they took great pains to cover the money trail, but that would not be an insurmountable obstacle to finding it out.

Anonymous Coward says:

“Oh really? Perhaps Chris Dodd is entirely unfamiliar with the blatant censorship and denial of due process for Dajaz1.com, a site taken down under the laws of today”

What laws? There was nothing legal about how Dajaz1 was taken down. ICE just decided to take it down because they could, using flimsy (and later proven false) claims of piracy as the excuse for ICE’s law breaking towards Dajaz1.

If it had been taken down by today’s laws there would have been a trial and conviction first with both sides present.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

Has the DCMA led to unjust censorship?

McCain Campaign Feels DMCA Sting

[O]verreaching copyright claims have resulted in the removal of non-infringing campaign videos from YouTube, thus silencing political speech. Numerous times during the course of the campaign, our advertisements or web videos have been the subject of DMCA takedown notices regarding uses that are clearly privileged under the fair use doctrine. The uses at issue have been the inclusion of fewer than ten seconds of footage from news broadcasts in campaign ads or videos, as a basis for commentary on the issues presented in the news reports, or on the reports themselves. These are paradigmatic examples of fair use…

(Letter from McCain-Palin Campaign dated October 13, 2008)

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

“Sounds like your real problem lies with the civil forfeiture laws. These laws are not exclusive to copyright and it is another one of Masnick’s fanciful lies to suggest otherwise.”

WTF?! They did NOT use civil forfeiture laws, the used the criminal forfeiture claws in the Pro IP Act, notwithstanding that copyright infringement is usually a civil offense ratter then a criminal one.

jupiterkansas (profile) says:

The thing about mass media is anyone can go on there and lie through their teeth and never get called out. Nobody cares to check the facts, and those that do are never heard from. Unfortunately the person with the scariest and loudest doom and gloom story usually ends up with all the attention – and that’s Chris Dodd screaming that thieves are setting up shop outside the U.S. to steal our precious jobs. Even if they acknowledged the free speech issues, thieves taking jobs will always win. And I’ll bet that 99% of the doom and gloom purveyors you see on TV are rich.

It’s a great country where someone like Jon Stewart can go on television and point out the blatant hypocrisy of our government officials. Is a truly sad country where he can keep doing this for years on end.

Bob (profile) says:

Balderdash-- only crooks lost their ability to tell other crooks where to look

I love how you think that shutting down a site offering pointers to unlicensed goods is somehow depriving the ability of that site to express an opinion. Nonsense. Why don’t you complain about mobsters being put in jail for ordering that someone be “whacked?” After all, they’re just expressing an opinion.

The First Amendment has plenty of practical exemptions. It does not cover people helping other people break the law. That’s called being an accessory to a crime.

Now quit insulting the legacy of great First Amendment fighters like Martin Luther King or Peter Zenger. These were people with legit complaints and this is just an insult.

A non-mouse says:

Re: Balderdash-- only crooks lost their ability to tell other crooks where to look

I love how you keep ignoring that whole “due process” nonsense. Having to actually prove something in court? Hogwash! That might require time & effort.

Innocent until proven guilty, it’s supposed to be the cornerstone of our legal system. They are not “criminals” until proven so in a court of law.

Now quit trampling my constitutional rights and fucking die already. The world has changed and will continue to do so, with or without you. Your attempts to get back to the way things used to be is just an insult.

Dark Helmet (profile) says:

Re: Balderdash-- only crooks lost their ability to tell other crooks where to look

“I love how you think that shutting down a site offering pointers to unlicensed goods is somehow depriving the ability of that site to express an opinion. Nonsense.”

Well, you certainly win the “Complete Jackass Of The Day” award. Riddle me this, Bobbo: if what ICE did in taking Dajaz1 down was so warranted….HOW COME THEY GAVE THE FUCKING SITE BACK YOU FREAKING RETARD!!?!!?!?

“Why don’t you complain about mobsters being put in jail for ordering that someone be “whacked?” After all, they’re just expressing an opinion.”

Yes, allowing 3rd party users to make comments that might sometimes include links to other sites that host infringing content, maybe, if anyone can actually figure out if its infringing or not…is EXACTLY the same as a mobster at the top of a hierarchy ordering one of his henchman on a hit. Bob, I fear the best part of you likely ran down the crack of your mothers ass in a cheap motel somewhere….

“The First Amendment has plenty of practical exemptions. It does not cover people helping other people break the law. That’s called being an accessory to a crime.”

What in the sweet hell does that have to do with Dajaz1? The people doing the helping were users, not the site itself. Are you having a stroke? I don’t say that in a wondering tone; I say it in a hopeful tone.

“Now quit insulting the legacy of great First Amendment fighters like Martin Luther King or Peter Zenger. These were people with legit complaints and this is just an insult.”

Aw, look at you. Nevermind that MLK was a champion of free speech. Nevermind that, as an evangelist, he’d have LOVED a free internet. No, you invoke him anyway.

So, in the same spirit, please stop insulting the legacy of Chris Dodd by backing SOPA.

Fucking idiot….

E. Zachary Knight (profile) says:

Re: Balderdash-- only crooks lost their ability to tell other crooks where to look

I love how you think that shutting down a site offering pointers to unlicensed goods is somehow depriving the ability of that site to express an opinion.

Because there is never a valid reason to link to potentially infringing content? There is never a fair use reason to do so? Because a person that links to infringement is jsut as guilty as the person that actually infringed?

Are you serious?

Also, I highly doubt that MLK and Zenger would have supported the censorship of the internet. They were pretty darn supportive of open communication, due process and fair treatment of all people.

TtfnJohn (profile) says:

Re: Balderdash-- only crooks lost their ability to tell other crooks where to look

For example the insistence that search engines stop returning allegedly infringing sites names. I suppose you know that it’s possible to look up local Hell’s Angels clubhouses in the phone book in many towns. Does that make the publishers liable should someone join the HA and later commit a crime just because they were able to call them and find an address? That somehow they’re an accessory to that crime?

It’s not Google, Yahoo or Bing’s fault if I find the name of an offending site when I search for it and then download something infringing. That’s my fault and mine alone. All they do is provide the directory. And it’s their fault somehow that I did that?

Don’t be silly.

And it’s interesting that the Bloomberg headline under Dodd said something about stealing ideas when neither copyright or patent law protect any such thing. They both protect certain expressions of ideas, not the ideas themselves.

Remember that we are talking two groups that have complained bitterly about every technological advance for the past hundred years that just might make copying easier or that might hurt them somehow. (For the latter see the introduction of television and the MPAA’s whines that it would destroy their box office business.)

MLK and Zenger would have opposed bills like SOPA and POPA just because of their chilling affect on free speech. And, were they alive today, would have used the Internet and the web to spread their ideas far and wide. That said no one is abusing their memories or stature.

Both backed causes seen widely, in their day, of not really having legit complaints. It was only after they were active for a while that the public mood moved to supporting them. They stood up honourably and honestly for their causes and beliefs and both triumphed. So, while you may not consider concerns about free speech and the security of the Internet and not legitimate complaints I have to suggest that you are in the minority in that one.

The comparison is also idiotic but I won’t call you that. DH already has and he does a far better job than I do at skewering 🙂

V (profile) says:

V

As a certified hypnotist it comments make perfect sense. One way to wear down our natural resistance to an idea that doesn’t fit into our normal conscious, rational mind is repetition.

The idea need not be true, simply repeated often enough. It’s a stratedgy used by salesmen, politicians and “prophets” all the time.

He hopes that if he says something loud enough and long enough, people will believe it is true. And he’s right. He will convince people it is true.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...