Chris Dodd Rewrites Hollywood's History To Pretend That It Came About Because Of IP Laws

from the well,-sort-of dept

Ah, Chris Dodd. Can you open your mouth without saying something ridiculously misleading? Sometimes, it doesn't seem possible. The latest is that he's claiming that strong IP laws were the reason Hollywood was created:
The truth is that neither the content nor the technology industries could survive without strong protections for intellectual property.

Many of you are familiar with how the name Hollywood became synonymous with the birth of the American film industry. It was in Jacob Stern’s horse barn, at the corner of Hollywood and Vine, the story goes, that Cecil B. DeMille screened the first full length feature film 100 years ago.

Well, when it comes to the tech sector, replace “Jacob Stern’s horse barn” with “Mark Zuckerberg’s dorm room” at Harvard, and you have almost the same story with the birth of Facebook.

In these and countless other examples throughout our history, the ability to give birth to an idea and convert it into economic success, whether it is the content of a film or the technology of the internet, depends on copyright and patent protection
Of course, that's all hogwash. Well, in a very twisted way, he's right. Hollywood did come about because of strong patent protection, but not the way Dodd seems to be suggesting. Instead, the reason that filmmakers moved out to Hollywood was because it was about as far away as they could get from Thomas Edison, who held the patents on basic filmmaking technology, and demanded exorbitant licensing fees. So the main reason that Hollywood is in Hollywood is because they were seeking a place to hide from patents.

It's a bit ridiculous for Dodd to try to rewrite this well-known history, and pretend that Hollywood developed because of strong IP protections when the exact opposite is what happened. I realize that Chris Dodd spent most of his adult life as a politician, so perhaps it's a bit naive to expect him to actually tell the truth, but at some point someone who works for him (I'm sure there's someone on staff who has accessed the internet once or twice) might want to explain to him that people can fact check him these days with relative ease online. Perhaps the next version of SOPA can be used to block people mocking Chris Dodd's inane statements as well...


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  •  
    icon
    Skeptical Cynic (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 9:38am

    Chris Dodd...

    I feel corrupted by dirty money just reading his name.

    I even checked out the option of getting a Colon Cleansing when I finished reading another article about how Chris Dodd has achieved the illegal action of becoming a lobbyist before it was legal for his to do so.

    I think the internet should create a campaign against Chris Dodd. Blast him with the full power of the information we can find on the internet.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Gwiz (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 9:50am

      Re: Chris Dodd...

      think the internet should create a campaign against Chris Dodd. Blast him with the full power of the information we can find on the internet.

      I like it. Instead of a #TellVicEverything campaign, we can do an #ExposeChrisDodd campaign.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        :Lobo Santo (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 9:52am

        Re: Re: Chris Dodd...

        That could horribly wrong on short notice... just saying.

        I, for one, definitely DO NOT WANT Chris Dodd exposing himself.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          ltlw0lf (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 9:57am

          Re: Re: Re: Chris Dodd...

          I, for one, definitely DO NOT WANT Chris Dodd exposing himself.

          Well, it could be interesting in a Chris Lee sort of way. I wonder if he'd have to resign? There are quite a few Senators and Representatives who've had to resign lately for exposing themselves...a retroactive resignation might work (and at least it would get people to stop referring to him as Senator, even though we all know he is still the esteemed senator from MPAA.)

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Gwiz (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 9:57am

          Re: Re: Re: Chris Dodd...

          Yeah. you're probably right. Not a good name choice. lol

          What I really meant was pouring over his public records and exposing every time he changed his tune based on who was funding him and that type of thing.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            :Lobo Santo (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 10:09am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Chris Dodd...

            Seriously, the "anthem of tune changes" should be a treatment which every career politician gets at every turn.

            "And here you are, doing a complete reversal on your stance on [x] after having received $[y] campaign contributions from [z]"

            Or something to that effect... (affect? damn.)

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              identicon
              Cowardly Anonymous, May 3rd, 2012 @ 11:03am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Chris Dodd...

              "to that effect" is correct.

              Effect is specific to a certain result.

              Affect is only stating that a result was caused.

              They had an affect. (noun)

              They had this effect. (noun)

              They affected the change. (verb)

              They effected change. (verb)

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            Pjerky (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 11:10am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Chris Dodd...

            Maybe we could call it the "Game of Tunes" or the "Game of Lies and Deceit".

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Gwiz (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 10:00am

          Re: Re: Re: Chris Dodd...

          And a side note:

          Probably just me, but using the terms "short notice" and "Chris Dodd exposing himself" in the same comment made me chuckle.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Skeptical Cynic (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 10:38am

        Re: Re: Chris Dodd...

        I started a hash tag on twitter with your idea. Everybody find a way to post to Twitter with the hash tag.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Nigel (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 10:03am

      Re: Chris Dodd...

      I think jaildodd.com is likely available and I would be all over posting a range of things.

      Dodd's corruption and lies is by no stretch limited to MPAA related matters.

      Nigel

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      gorehound (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 10:43am

      Re: Chris Dodd...

      +1
      I personally wish the Worst Luck possible to fall on this schmuck.I hope someone hacks his computer and network and releases all the dirty laundry they find.
      You are less than an insect.
      Bad Luck To You Chris Dodd !!!

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, May 3rd, 2012 @ 12:46pm

      Re: Chris Dodd...

      Why isn't he in jail yet for admitting he bribed the president on national news?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, May 3rd, 2012 @ 1:17pm

        Re: Re: Chris Dodd...

        Why isn't he in jail yet for admitting he bribed the president on national news?

        Because he bribed a current president?

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 3rd, 2012 @ 9:46am

    "Instead, the reason that filmmakers moved out to Hollywood was because it was about as far away as they could get from Thomas Edison, who held the patents on basic filmmaking technology, and demanded exorbitant licensing fees."

    So, Hollywood was created by pirates?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      :Lobo Santo (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 9:50am

      Re: Revisionist History is NohBohdey's Beetch.

      YES! Hollywood was created by people who were all like: "we'll move to California and pretend we never received the letters demanding licensing fees, now let's make some movies!"

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      tuna, May 3rd, 2012 @ 10:29am

      Re:

      Assuming you're not kidding; Yes, Hollywood was created by pirates.

      Edison had his own goon squad that physically protected his patents so the rouge film makers (read indies) moved from New York to California where they revolutionized the film industry with a series of technical breakthroughs.

      If they hadn't have, we might still be watching 8mm silent black and white movies.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        RD, May 3rd, 2012 @ 10:56am

        Re: Re:

        "Edison had his own goon squad that physically protected his patents so the rouge film makers (read indies) moved from New York to California where they revolutionized the film industry with a series of technical breakthroughs."

        Lets update this, shall we?

        Hollywood had it's copyrights to protect it's ability to be the sole creator and distributor of entertainment, so the rouge film makers (read indies and younger generation growing up in an always-connected world where sharing is common) moved from 19th century technology to 21st century technology via the internet, where they revolutionized the distribution of film with a series of technological breakthroughs that enabled many more people (beyond just those in Hollywood) to be able to create, distribute and profit from their work.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Pjerky (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 11:17am

        Re: Re:

        It is ironic how the tables have turned. Hollywood was created by those that wanted to create entertainment and content but needed to avoid prohibitive license fees and contracts. Doing so allowed them to do what they loved and create great movies without the restrictions that Edison tried to put on them.

        Fast forward to today. Now in the Internet age we have people that want to create new content that are running to the Internet and its underground to avoid the repressive, restrictive controls and contracts of Hollywood so that they can do what they love and create great movies, music, books, and other content.

        Its history repeating itself, just in a slightly different way. Why can't people learn from history? Especially their own?

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Rich, May 3rd, 2012 @ 12:44pm

        Re: Re:

        Which is funny, too, because Edison "pirated" European movies and played them here.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    John Doe, May 3rd, 2012 @ 9:51am

    What about the twins?

    He also conveniently left out the fact that Zuckerberg got the idea for Facebook through his work with the Winklevoss twins. But then that would be like giving Thomas Edison credit too so maybe that slight was on purpose?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Pjerky (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 11:19am

      Re: What about the twins?

      You can't own and idea, only the expression of an idea. He got inspiration from the twins, but the end product of Facebook (in its original form) was not the idea the twins introduced to him at all. They just wanted a site to meet girls with. He made a full on social network.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        blaktron (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 1:37pm

        Re: Re: What about the twins?

        Zuckerberg was a psychology / comp sci student, specializing in social technology. The very notion that a couple of sports majors (sorry, law) came up with the idea for facebook is retarded. The only idea that was even theirs was exclusivity, which has been gone since late '06. Friendster and Hi5 were doing the Winklevoss idea back in '03 (minus the Harvard connection *wink wink*)

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      techflaws.org (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 10:30pm

      Re: What about the twins?

      Really? He did not get it from previous attempts like say, MySpace?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 3rd, 2012 @ 9:54am

    Sadly the exact opposite is almost always true.

    Hollywood founded on avoiding patents. Apple founded by stealing phone calls from Ma Bell (Blue Box). Microsoft from stealing MS-DOS from Seattle Computers. It seems quite apparent that Chris Dodd doesn't know the history of his own industry or that of the technology sector.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      AzureSky (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 10:12am

      Re: Sadly the exact opposite is almost always true.

      1. MS didnt steal MS-DOS, they paid for it, granted they paid very little, but still at lest they paid.

      2. MS was orignally founded as a software firm that just made office software, only expanding into the OS market due to a need for an option other then apple.

      I dont like MS but the facts are the facts, MS didnt steal dos, and they didnt start out with dos, their first software was for apple.

      on the other hand, your correct about apple being founded on theft, steve jobs admitted he and apple where thieves in a video interview.
      "good artists copy, great artists steal" yet, the funny part to me is, years later he said he would "Destroy android because its a stolen product" ROFL.....

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, May 3rd, 2012 @ 11:12am

        Re: Re: Sadly the exact opposite is almost always true.

        I used "steal" as more of a farse on Chris Dodd deal. Microsoft started back in the day developing Basic for the Altair. Old flip switch computer, which helped him later when he joined with Paul Allen to create Microsoft. When IBM came to him for an O/S for the PC, he told them to go to Tim Patterson creator of C/PM, but Tim's wife supposedly kick'd them out because they were having friends over for dinner. They went back to Bill, and he quickly wrote DOS, basically just C/PM but the A drive became the C drive. Later he struck a licensing deal with Tim, and later Tim Patterson joined MS and his big claim to fame was actually VisualBasic, rather ironic imho.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          John Fenderson (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 11:32am

          Re: Re: Re: Sadly the exact opposite is almost always true.

          They went back to Bill, and he quickly wrote DOS


          Actually, Gates did not write DOS. He licensed it from a company called Seattle Computer Products. Their OS was called 86-DOS (aka Q-DOS, it was a CP/M clone) and Gates essentially just renamed it.

          However, SCP maintained that Gates violated the terms of the licensing agreement and sued. While the jury was deciding the case, Microsoft settled out of court, paying SCP $925,000 in exchange for complete rights to the operating system.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            Anonymous Coward, May 3rd, 2012 @ 12:28pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Sadly the exact opposite is almost always true.

            Now that's piracy... look what Microsoft Stole from Seattle Computer Products in **AA terms of 'lost revenue'...

            Sure they paid almost a Million for it, but look how much SCP would have earned if their product had not been stolen...

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          techflaws.org (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 10:39pm

          Re: Re: Re: Sadly the exact opposite is almost always true.

          His wife did not sign for him while he was away. There was no dinner, read this.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        harbingerofdoom (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 11:30am

        Re: Re: Sadly the exact opposite is almost always true.

        if you are going to try to correct someone on a forum, or other public venue, you may want to be sure that you're 100% correct.

        they were not founded as a software firm for office.... the office software didnt start until way later, they were founded as a software company that produced software interpreters, then they bought dos. office products didnt come until much later (word was released in 1983 and it was available for DOS only.... at the time apple had lisa write...so no, it was not created 'for apple'.

        as for stealing, apple stole the concept of the gui from xerox, microsoft lifted the idea from apple and yes, jobs said that but he even stole that comment from picaso who said it long before jobs did... (and i belive that bob dylan also said the same thing but worded slightly differently).

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Rikuo (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 11:59am

          Re: Re: Re: Sadly the exact opposite is almost always true.

          "apple stole the concept of the gui from xerox,"

          How does one go about 'stealing' a concept?

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            harbingerofdoom (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 12:03pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Sadly the exact opposite is almost always true.

            okay... they liberated the idea... that work better for you? lol

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            The eejit (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 1:18pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Sadly the exact opposite is almost always true.

            It's easy: just get into the Dodge concept car, go to the Countrywide concept building, and steal the concept from the concept hall.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          blaktron (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 1:40pm

          Re: Re: Re: Sadly the exact opposite is almost always true.

          Ugh, even your interpretation of history is wrong. Both Jobs and Gates got the idea for a GUI from Xerox at similar times, but Jobs actually got the inner workings of the mouse for free, which Gates had to steal from Jobs. Also, MS started writing code for the Altair, and they didnt even start working with Apple until Jobs needed to license BASIC.

          History, its awesome.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        spenoza, May 3rd, 2012 @ 6:47pm

        Re: Re: Sadly the exact opposite is almost always true.

        That quote, out of context, appears to be a reversal, but what I've read elsewhere is that Jobs called Android a stolen project because Google was heavily involved with Apple, including having a seat on Apple's board, while they were in early planning and development of Android. It wasn't as much about copying Apple's ideas as it was doing it as an insider and a partner, thus betrayal of trust and whatnot.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        spenoza, May 3rd, 2012 @ 6:47pm

        Re: Re: Sadly the exact opposite is almost always true.

        That quote, out of context, appears to be a reversal, but what I've read elsewhere is that Jobs called Android a stolen project because Google was heavily involved with Apple, including having a seat on Apple's board, while they were in early planning and development of Android. It wasn't as much about copying Apple's ideas as it was doing it as an insider and a partner, thus betrayal of trust and whatnot.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Pjerky (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 11:28am

      Re: Sadly the exact opposite is almost always true.

      You are partially right on the Apple end of things. They were renowned for stealing ideas from others and making them their own. BUT Apple was actually founded on the original Mac that Steve Wozniak created as a hobby. The blue box was a small business that the Steves ran before starting Apple from the hobbyist computer.

      Most of what Apple made after that came from ideas stolen from others (Xerox and many others). Jobs couldn't have an original idea to save his life.

      But he could take others original ideas and make them a whole lot better and his skills with design, esthetics, and user-friendly-ness were uncanny. That is where his creativity and originality comes from. Even then most of that was inspired by other ideas and concepts that he learned. He just applied them in very creative ways.

      Ironically there is really nothing wrong with being inspired by others original ideas and then improving upon them. That is part of innovation. Apple and Jobs just had a problem with others that innovated off of inspiration from Apple products. That is where the rub is.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Shane C (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 9:56am

    Next version of SOPA

    Perhaps the next version of SOPA can be used to block people mocking Chris Dodd's inane statements as well


    No, the next version of SOPA will simply make it illegal to contradict the official government version of history.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four#Censorship

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 3rd, 2012 @ 10:01am

    so, why hasn't anyone called Dodd out, in public and the media, over this total load of hogwash? while he gets away with spouting this crap unchallenged, not only will he (and his cronies) continue to do so, no other opposing views or statements are ever going to be believed!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      John Doe, May 3rd, 2012 @ 10:06am

      Re:

      Because the media is all owned by a handful of people who think they will benefit from draconian IP laws.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      :Lobo Santo (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 10:11am

      Re: "Fair and Balanced" Load of Sh*t

      Please refer to the "sign of fascism" comment from an article or two ago for why this isn't be correctly addressed by the media.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Leigh Beadon (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 10:23am

      Re:

      so, why hasn't anyone called Dodd out, in public and the media, over this total load of hogwash? while he gets away with spouting this crap unchallenged, not only will he (and his cronies) continue to do so, no other opposing views or statements are ever going to be believed!

      The best you'd get out of mainstream news is Dodd's statement followed by "...critics say that Dodd's version of history is incorrect." Because balance is more important than research, apparently.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Rekrul, May 3rd, 2012 @ 10:07am

    We have always been at war with Eurasia...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Josef Anvil (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 10:12am

    Technically he''s right

    "In these and countless other examples throughout our history, the ability to give birth to an idea and convert it into economic success, whether it is the content of a film or the technology of the internet, depends on copyright and patent protection."

    Without those strong copyright and patent protections, innovators would not be forced to work so hard and so fast to build economically successful things that grow strong enough fast enough to resist the legal forces that seek to crush them.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Nigel (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 10:17am

    Insert Dodd's pic. in website header with this posted next to it

    "Those who count on 'Hollywood' for support need to understand that this industry is watching very carefully who's going to stand up for them when their job is at stake. Don't ask me to write a check for you when you think your job is at risk and then don't pay any attention to me when my job is at stake,"

    Nuff said.
    N.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    kryptonianjorel (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 10:30am

    Ah, Chris Dodd. Can you open your mouth without saying something that's complete bullshit? Sometimes, it doesn't seem possible.


    Hey Mike, Fixed it for you

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    MRK, May 3rd, 2012 @ 10:30am

    Its worth pointing out that Hollywood was established as we know it mostly because early lighting equipment was unable to provide enough illumination for the early film cameras. Dodging Edison was a side bonus.

    Southern California's climate (Bright and sunny every day) was perfect for filming outdoors.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, May 3rd, 2012 @ 10:41am

      Re:

      I'm pretty sure its the other way around. Dodging Edison's patents was priority. Cali being sunny was a bonus. There are lots of sunny places between NY on Cali.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    aikiwolfie, May 3rd, 2012 @ 10:52am

    "In these and countless other examples throughout our history, the ability to give birth to an idea and convert it into economic success, whether it is the content of a film or the technology of the internet, depends on copyright and patent protection "

    Well that's interesting. Yahoo and others claim Facebook is in violation of their patents which is why Facebook buys other companies. To get their IP. However Facebook was a success long before it had the capital clout to go around buying up other companies or even before Facebook it's self was a company.

    So in spite of the fact Facebook is supposedly in breach of Yahoo's IP. Facebook succeeds where Yahoo is increasingly failing. I don't think it's IP law that's driving success here.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    jonny, May 3rd, 2012 @ 10:56am

    His political career was good training for learning to lie with a straight face.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    IPLawyer, May 3rd, 2012 @ 10:57am

    Prof. Lessig's Reivew of the Social Network

    http://www.tnr.com/article/books-and-arts/78081/sorkin-zuckerberg-the-social-network

    It is worth pointing out that Prof. Lessig (who's opinion should be infinitely weightier than Chris Dodd's) point out in his review of The Social Network that it came about largely BECAUSE he didn't have to go about asking permission from a bunch of people, i.e., it is precisely the lack of regulatory hurdles that made Facebook an overnight success.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    TDR, May 3rd, 2012 @ 10:58am

    Raiden Techdirt: Your world is but one of many realms. One of them is a forsaken land called America. It is ruled by self-serving corporations who have made themselves overlords.

    Johnny Cage 4Chan: Now, wait a minute. If this guy's so powerful, why doesn't he just invade us?

    Raiden Techdirt: To enter the realm of the Internet, Chris Dodd and his demon senator Lamar Smith must pass ten straight bills to destroy our rights. They have passed nine. This will be the tenth bill.

    ---------------------------------

    *after Lamar Smith's and the last bill's defeat*

    Raiden Techdirt: I gotta tell ya, you guys did great!

    ????: BOW TO ME!!!

    Liu Kang Reddit: What is it?

    Raiden Techdirt: Chris Dodd.

    Chris Dodd: YOU WEAK, PATHETIC FOOLS!! I'VE COME FOR YOUR RIGHTS!!

    Raiden Techdirt: I don't think so.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 10:58am

    Alternatively....

    but at some point someone who works for him (I'm sure there's someone on staff who has accessed the internet once or twice) might want to explain to him that people can fact check him these days with relative ease online.
    The cynic in me says that "people" fact checking him is not who it was aimed at.... the "people" are largely irrelevant in his world except as obedient cash cows.

    If one assumes it was aimed at politicians who;
    a/ Probably can't fact-check him on the internet and
    b/ Become even less willing to try with the application of an envelope full of dead presidents
    then it makes a whole lot more sense.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    ASTROBOI, May 3rd, 2012 @ 11:01am

    Edison the pirate.

    Americans think Edison and his Anti-Semitic buddy Ford were just the greatest people ever and their pictures are on postage stamps and their sanitized lives are classic movies. But in reality Edison was more like Bill Gates, a guy who knew how to monitise somebody elses ideas. Take a trip through the Museum of Science and Industry in London and you will see artifacts of early movie and phonographic developement but you will not see the name Edison anywhere. Movies and audio recording were being developed before Edison got into the game. He was the first to make lots of money with the systems, and he wasn't above ripping off others to do so. He cheated Tesla, then lied about the dangers of his AC power distribution system. He was still touting cylinder recording when European inventers were making discs. Crude color films and 3-D movies were being made in Europe while Edison was still selling shutterless peep-show machines. Yeah, he was a pirate and a for-profit one too. This was a guy who didn't share anything. He got things done but was not much as a role model. Possible sociopath too. Just check out what he did to his wife, employees, backers and customers. He was not a guy you would want to be in business with. Beating up independent film makers was one of his lesser shortcomings.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      The eejit (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 1:20pm

      Re: Edison the pirate.

      No, Edison was a bully, a hypocrite and a blackguard.

      So, Chris Dodd but with better ideas.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      blaktron (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 1:43pm

      Re: Edison the pirate.

      Read the Trusted Computing memo from 2002 and realize that we owe the modern workings of the world to Gates. Without that memo (and MS changing total direction on the head of a dime) for the fact that ecommerce works, that email is relatively secure, and that intellectual property can exist at all on a computer.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 3rd, 2012 @ 11:17am

    Wrong Target.

    Folks, the real enemy is their command and its (lost) cause to stop progress, not "insert name of latest 'will-lick-any-genitals-for-money' spineless mouthpiece (the non-entity called chris dodd is it this week)".

    As long as they have money, there will always be another sellout lowlife for them to throw up there and there's no point wasting your energy on sellout lowlifes.

    Ignore the mouthpiece du jour, focus on the real enemy, (their command) and starve them to death.

    That's right, Boycott. They are dead without your money.

    They are going to die anyway. Starving them will just make it happen sooner AND save you time and money.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      AC Cobra, May 3rd, 2012 @ 3:09pm

      Re: Wrong Target.

      Okay. I will boycott Hollywood. But after "Prometheus" comes out. I really want to see that. Oh and my daughter wants to see "Brave" as well. Then I'll boycott Hollywood. We will watch only "indie" videos on YouTube...

      /s

      sigh...

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        RadialSkid (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 8:11pm

        Re: Re: Wrong Target.

        Actually, the gradual step-down is the right method. The fewer movies you watch, the less you'll miss them. I haven't completely sworn off movies yet, but it has been about three weeks since I've watched one at all (and seven years since I saw one in a theater).

        My indie consumption? Way, way up. Vodo is pretty damn cool.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    DUMBASS POLITICIANS, May 3rd, 2012 @ 12:25pm

    My example of this exact thing.

    OK folks think the year 1977 well something was made and the authors are both dead for a few years now....

    The current rights holder has stated i may do as i wish as long as i make no money and to get a commercial liscense for something i have tested to see would be popular using "torrents" of a half finished browser game ...well it means it wont get done and other stuff i had ideas for wont either like a animated sci fi tv series due to costs of software legally speaking....

    I am not going to sell my rights to these greedy types so YOU THE PEOPLE LOSE....not me , i entertain myself. TOO bad i can't share.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, May 3rd, 2012 @ 1:49pm

      Re: My example of this exact thing.

      If you have a good idea for a game, maybe it can stand on its own, and doesn't need the glow of association of some old 70's movie/TV show/whatever. If you're already in development, maybe you can find a way to make money off of what you currently have...

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    apauld (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 1:15pm

    Chris Dodd

    Chris Dodd makes me wish I had the laser from the movie Real Genius, you know, the one that could vaporize a human target from space. Of course, if I built one I would be sued by the MPAA.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    AC Cobra, May 3rd, 2012 @ 3:14pm

    There's a saying...

    In the business:

    "If their lips are moving their lying"

    It's usually applied to producers and UPMs, but I have to say often unfairly. Really I know some producers and UPMs who are paragons of ethics and goodwill (I am serious). But then there are some others who seem to have the moral development of jackals. I would group Dodd into this latter category.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 3rd, 2012 @ 3:49pm

    Uh, no...Bill Gates complained about piracy since he wrote a version of BASIC for the Altair computer and other enthusiasts copied his paper tapes. Of course,.he didn't pay for it or license it, but he was a rich kid whose daddy was a lawyer.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      techflaws.org (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 11:24pm

      Re:

      Especially funny seen in this context:

      From: 'Programmers at work', Microsoft Press, Redmond, WA [1986]:
      Interviewer: "Is studying computer science the best way to prepare to be a programmer?"
      Gates: "No, the best way to prepare is to write programs, and to study great programs that other people have written. In my case, I went to the garbage cans at the Computer Science Center and I fished out listings of their operating system."

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    sgt_doom (profile), May 3rd, 2012 @ 4:32pm

    Knowledge can be valuable....

    ....and not realizing who Dodd is, who his father was, who is grandfather and great-grandfather was, etc., is akin to not realizing what the National Association of Manufacturers is (historically the most anti-worker, anti-labor and anti-union lobbying group in America) and that its first president was George W. Bush's great-grandfather.

    At least three separate pieces of congressional legislation were passed to curb the corruption of Dodd's daddy when he was a senator (see details on the FARA legislation, etc.), and Dodd's ancestor was the same attorney Dodd who worked for John D. Rockefeller on financial fraud constructs of holding companies, trusts and tax-exempt foundations, etc.

    Dodd is just being Dodd, as each generation has been......

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 3rd, 2012 @ 10:22pm

    It is a bit dispiriting to read an article that focuses solely on one matter to the exclusion of everything else that was said, much of which reflects a recognition that the movie industry must (and will) change to meet the challenges and opportunities afforded by new technological developments.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, May 4th, 2012 @ 12:09am

      Re:

      I think it's far more dispiriting that you're willing to overlook blatant idiocy and attempt to rewrite facts. The music industry has constantly resisted change and campaigned against it until they realised they could make killings off of it. To mask that initial resistance and present oneself as open-minding is sheer dishonesty. You seem to be keen on worshipping the ground that Dodd walks on but have no qualms calling Mike a liar.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 4th, 2012 @ 1:26pm

    1. Edison's Motion Picture Patents Company used violent and illegal tactics to seize and suppress equipment and shut down filming of studios not belonging to the Trust. He used privately-hired detectives/thugs as well as mob connections. These practices were found illegal by the US government and the Company was shut down and its assets sold.

    2. The first films shot out in Hollywood were made by Biograph, one of the MPPC members. Obviously, they would not need to escape the MPPC's tactics.

    3. Most studios moved out there for its nearly constant sunlight and its variety of landscapes within short travel distances. Escaping the MPPC's illegal activity was a side bonus. They were not "rogue filmmakers" or "pirates" anymore than Garry Newman is a pirate because he was sued by Righthaven.

    4. The movies they made were protected by copyright, which has nothing to do with Edison's patents. Without strong copyright protection, theatres could show their films without paying them, or make their own copies without reimbursement.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    George Purdy, May 4th, 2012 @ 1:46pm

    Hollywood and Edison's Royalties

    Just because they moved to LA to avoid paying Edison's royalties doesn't mean that IP rights weren't important to the movie industry. Politicians often get things slightly wrong, but the basic idea that IP is important is certainly true. Remember the FBI warning that starts each DVD.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      George Purdy, May 9th, 2012 @ 7:56am

      Hollywood and IP

      This touches on a deeper subject of importance. A "mash up artist" takes existing creations and alters them or combines them in original ways, and they play a useful role in our culture. Unfortunately big media use powerful IP laws to stifle this activity, and "fair use", based on freedom of speech protection, is the main defense against them. In a recent development, big media are using software to protect their creations from mashing. To overcome this protection mash up artists would have to hack into the software, and this in turn has been made illegal, so the fight goes on.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    John Reilly, May 6th, 2012 @ 12:38pm

    ANDY:
    RIGHT ON TARGET. CHRIS NEVER WORKED A DAY IN HIS LIFE, HE'S ALWAYS BEE A POLITICIAN, SOMETHING HANDED DOWN FROM HIS FATHER, WHO WAS DISGRACED AND LEFT THE SENATE IN SHAME.

    DAD

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This