Entertainment Industry Get Their Own 'Piracy Police' In The Justice Department

from the thank-you,-joe-biden dept

Remember back in December when Vice President Joe Biden hosted a one-sided "piracy summit", ridiculously declaring that "all of the stakeholders" were present (despite there not being a single representative from the technology industry, nor anyone representing consumer interests or ISPs). The "stakeholders" were entirely the entertainment industry. And, even better, despite promises of openness and transparency, the press was kicked out so top execs from most of the major entertainment industry companies could collude talk directly with many of the top administration officials, including Joe Biden, Attorney General Eric Holder, Commerce Secretary Gary Locke and others. You knew that this wasn't just a random meet and greet and that something would come out of it.

And, indeed, less than two months later, we have Eric Holder announcing a special "IP task force" within the Justice Department designed to take on "the rise in intellectual property crime." Given how many former RIAA/MPAA lawyers ended up at the Justice Department, perhaps this is no surprise. But given that it now appears that the entertainment industry was able to create their own private enforcement division within the Justice Department without a single ounce of public discussion or transparency, and no input from those concerned about consumer rights or technology innovation, shouldn't someone be asking why the Justice Department is now functioning as a private police force to prop up the business models of a group of companies who refuse to adapt, even as plenty of upstarts have figured out how to make new business models work?

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. icon
    The Anti-Mike (profile), 13 Feb 2010 @ 5:25am

    Re: Re: TAM FAIL again

    Just before I head out, I figure I should address this. RealDense, careful what you wish for, it will make you look like an asshole:

    Show me ONE FUCKING POST anywhere on the site where Mike says "dont pay for anything."

    Actually, my words are "didn't have to pay for the products I resold".

    http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091217/0334237405.shtml

    http://www.techdirt.com/ar ticles/20091215/0941527364.shtml

    http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090519/1127454934.shtml

    "T o be honest, I'm still not sure why it makes sense that Google has to pay anything for this"

    http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090707/1657295475.shtml

    "The idea that webcasters/broadcasters should need to pay artists for the right to promote them to fans just seems bizarre and borderline incomprehensible in the first place. "

    I could go on. But I think that shows very conclusively that Mike thinks that many of the web2.0 and other "new business models" should be based on not paying for the material you use.

    So in the end, the only garbage being spewed here is coming from you, a guy who is attached to Mike's ass like stink on shit, and yet you don't seem to remember his very basic words.

    Now, you can be a man and apologize for being wrong, or you can continue to be an asshole, call me all sorts of names, and continue to lie about my point of view. Which one will it be? Man or mouse? It's up to you.

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: Techdirt Logo Gear
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.