The RIAA Was For Freedom Of Speech Before It Was Against It
from the say-what-now? dept
Reader Noah was surfing the RIAA’s web site recently, when he found something odd. Under the “About” section, between “services” and “licensing”, there’s what appears to be a totally out of place section defending free speech rights, in which it claims that the RIAA “takes an uncompromising stand against censorship and for the First Amendment rights of all artists to create freely. From the nation’s capital to state capitals across the country, RIAA works to stop unconstitutional action against the people who make the music of our times–and those who enjoy it.” It also quotes the First Amendment.
Filed Under: censorship, free speech, sopa
Companies: riaa
Comments on “The RIAA Was For Freedom Of Speech Before It Was Against It”
“it appears that what the RIAA means as “free speech rights,” is the rights of minors to buy their music.”
That’s nothing new, they’ve been claiming this for years.
Re: Re:
Fucking Assholes who want to take our freedom away and control the Internet.
C**ts.
That is all
Only for artists
The double-standard here is that they only want free speech for artists.
Re: Only for artists
The double-standard here is that they only want free speech for label executives.
FTFY
As always
RIAA definition of Free Speech: our right to express ourselves and our right to make you shut the hell up while we express ourselves in any manner we see fit.
Re: As always
Too long.
RIAA definition of Free Speech: Shut up! Buy CDs!
Re: Re: As always
Well said, Well said indeed.
RIAA: We stand up for free speech… until we change our minds that is.
This piece isn't just lame, it's legless.
Kind of wormy. Read your own ‘About’ page and get back on track.
Re: This piece isn't just lame, it's legless.
Please cite exactly where in the About page that Mike has stated something that he has since gone in the exact opposite direction regarding.
It’s not a valid comparison to say, “this is a tech blog, but we talk about copyright a lot” is the same as, “we are for freedom of speech except when we’re for censorship.”
Re: This piece isn't just lame, it's legless.
About Techdirt:
the Techdirt blog uses a proven economic framework to analyze and offer insight into news stories about changes in government policy, technology and legal issues that affect companies ability to innovate and grow.
Where’s the problem exactly?
Re: This piece isn't just lame, it's legless.
Your comment to attack Mike is so rushed that again, you’ve only made yourself look the fool.
Re: This piece isn't just lame, it's legless.
Kind of wormy.
maybe kind of techwormy rolling about in techdirt?
Re: Re: This piece isn't just lame, it's legless.
what are you a techsmurf?
Re: This piece isn't just lame, it's legless.
The about page specifically states “analyze and offer insight into news stories about changes in government policy, technology and legal issues that affect companies ability to innovate and grow.”
Guess what, every article ever posted on Techdirt is about exactly those things.
Simply because it doesn’t deal with whatever it is *you* think this blog is only about, doesn’t mean the OWNER of the blog can’t put whatever he wants on the blog.
The above being said, government policy, technology AND legal issues are whats discussed here. Hate to break it to you, but calling someone wormy and asking them to read their own page shows just how much you fail at reading comprehension. And on top of that, you don’t even make a case. You just state your opinion as if it were fact and leave it at that.
All you need to remember for the future is government policy, technology and legal issues. If you don’t have the comprehension to understand what those three things mean, remedial education may be in order.
And again, no one is forcing you to read the articles here. The problem is between your ears, not sitting at the CEO’s desk of Floor 64.
Re: This piece isn't just lame, it's legless.
By ‘wormy’ I take it you mean Mike managed to worm his way into the heart of the RIAA/MPAA and their employees in congress (pretty much most of them) and wriggle around until he uncovers what they’re REALLY up to with our elected officials?
Nothing wrong with worms my friend, they help to aerate the dark places that some people would prefer remain in darkness.
Re: This piece isn't just lame, it's legless.
Try not being such a twat, will you? just once? You hopeless, vapid twat!
Sure you can have free speech in a dictatorship that censors the opposition.
The dictator gives you the right to say whatever speech the dictator wants you to say! And if you say something the dictator doesn’t want you to say the dictator has you thrown in handcuffs and put in jail for the next few decades without trial as a political dissident/traitor.
Isn’t that what free speech is all about, the right to say what those in power want you to say?
Re: Re:
The dictator gives you the right to say whatever speech the dictator wants you to say!
Exactly. Any other speech is illegal, and therefore it’s OK to censor it.
I’m all for stopping SOPA and covering this issue but Techdirt you’ve begun boring me to tears on this subject. It’s become almost comical in its repetition. It’s all you talk about anymore and you are on the endangered list on my RSS feed.
Re: Re:
The way things are going you may not be able to have an RSS feed anymore.
Re: Re: Re:
I hear SOPA requires all puppies and cats to be sacrificed too.
Re: Re:
It’s all you talk about anymore and you are on the endangered list on my RSS feed.
Ohhhh nooooossss an AC might go away.
Re: Re: Re:
Let’s be nice. If the ac is not satisfied with the stories of hypocrisy, censorship, unneeded barriers to entry, copyright abuse, patent abuse, trademark fraud, impediments to the First and Fourth Amendment, plutocracy of US democracy, and the occasional story about food
Re: Re: Re: Re:
… Then he should do what needs to be done. (Damn entry button on phone…)
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
Where does one find the “Entry” button?
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
ooooooooooo, is that why phones vibrate?
Re: Re:
SOPA would actually outlaw RSS feeds because technically there are parts of a “copyrighted” site that may be pushed to you, such as the site’s URL or title…..
Re: Re:
You know you don’t have to read them, right? You can just mark it as read and move on.
Notification Memo
In case you weren’t aware, America had a slogan change from “Land of the Free” to “Land of Hypocrisy”. Please adjust your expectations accordingly.
They just want to protect THEIR freedom of speech and to create. Its makes them money when Rhianna’s new song about being a sex slave does not get censored for depravity. (I don’t think it is Im just creating a scene here). But when that same freedom that they and their artists have suddenly I am a pirate who is stealing from them when all I have really done is disagree with their position.
The RIAA is a strong proponent of the freedom of speech, and has taken this stance for decades. However, it is possible to be for freedom of speech while being against the unlawful dissemination of speech as to which copyright pertains. These are not inconsistent positions, but it takes more than broad generalizations to appreciate why this is the case.
Re: Response to: Anonymous Coward on Nov 22nd, 2011 @ 10:48am
The people here generally aren’t opposed to companies protecting their copyrights. The problem is that these new bills have huge potential to be abused to the point of censoring those who are not actively engaged in infringement.
That said, it makes it look like the riaa is for the first amendment until they decide its hurting their bottom line.
Re: Re:
It takes blindness, deafness and mutness to understand that position.
Oh Hai Hypocrites!
I sure like how you’re so spineless. You say you’re all for freedom when you even considered suing boy scouts for using Happy Birthday.
You people make me sick.
Just a typo
In the last paragraph, just take out the “un” in “uncompromising” and their position becomes perfectly consistent.
well
RIAA stands for free speech, but you have to pay $12.99 for the dvd its recorded on!
In other news, RIAA execs have not been found guilty........
of fondling young boys and girls in recording studios………yet. Now that the seeds of doubt have been planted, they will feel compelled to deny it furiously until just one case surfaces, and then go into spin control. Just like always.