Ex-RIAA Boss Ignores All Criticisim Of SOPA/PIPA, Claims Any Complaints Are Trying To Justify Stealing

from the this-is-how-you-got-into-such-a-mess dept

Over the long weekend, Jay Rosen was kind enough to tweet out a link to my recent "definitive" post highlighting all the problems with SOPA and PIPA. Lots of folks picked up on it, but the one that struck me as the most interesting was from Hilary Rosen, who tweeted back:
The Definitive Post?? Think analog. If a store doesn't sell u what u want, u are justified stealing it?
Hilary Rosen, of course, spent many years as the CEO of the RIAA. And while she hasn't been in that job since 2003, she presided over the Napster lawsuit and the beginnings of the Grokster lawsuit. I believe she left just before the RIAA started suing individuals for file sharing. She also appeared to have second thoughts about the strategy she led while in charge of the RIAA. However, this comment suggests otherwise.

Thinking analog has been the major problem that the RIAA (and MPAA, among others) have had for a long, long time. Rosen's big mistake when she was in charge of the RIAA was that she kept thinking analog. Isn't it time, perhaps, that she started thinking digitally?

But, even more to the point, it's getting ridiculous how many people defending SOPA/PIPA are doing so using this logic. They brush off all of the specific concerns, the highlights of problematic language, and they conclude "why are you justifying theft?" Of course, that's ridiculous. Beyond the fact that "theft" and "infringement" are very different (don't get me started), nothing in anyone's complaints about SOPA or PIPA have anything to do with "justifying" infringement. In fact, in the post that was being discussed, we clearly noted that infringement is a problem. We just disagree that PIPA and SOPA are reasonably, or even effective, solutions.

It's really quite ridiculous to lay out in such great detail all of the problems of the bill, only to have someone -- and someone who is partially responsible for the mess the record labels are in today -- brush off the entire thing by falsely stating that we're "justifying stealing." Unfortunately, this kind of "debate" is all too common. It seems that almost no one is interested in actually discussing the problems of the bill. They just insist that if you highlight problems in the bill you're trying to justify something.

Filed Under: copyright, hilary rosen, pipa, protect ip, sopa
Companies: riaa


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 28 Nov 2011 @ 1:10pm

    Re: At least a decade after widespread broadband, YET NO SOLUTION!

    "That cuts both ways, guys. IF you had a practical solution for the INDUSTRY, it'd have been adopted by now. You just keep asserting that the dinosaurs don't even /want/ to make /more/ money with new methods."

    No Blue, they wouldn't have been adopted by now. It took them practically 10 years to adopt mp3s. Ten years after the digital format was in use and pined for by the customers. And now streaming is becoming the "in" thing and how people want their products, and the content industry's are still trying to place "physical goods" costs/values on "digital goods". They're making changes but still doing so with an "analog" mindset. Mike routinely offers ideas and suggestions and presents articles on people who try new business methods. People like you come in here and denounce Mike, the artists he presents or make demands like "I WANT A GUARANTEE THAT I MAKE BACK MY $100 MILLION MASNICK!!!" You can't only repeat yourself and state so many new ideas for so long before you say "f*ck it, you don't want to know so I'm not going to bother telling you anymore".

    "You continue to decry copyright, while giving no other means for /artists/ to protect their works from Big Media (another point that cuts both ways)..."

    Actually, he continues to denounce ABUSE of copyright. Also ABUSE of laws to sustain old business models and industries that are failing to adapt. We see plenty of articles about artists who benefit from Creative Commons license or more traditional copyright and whose works are protected by said things. And please don't say "Big Media", you sound like bob. Big Media if anything are the ones screwing over artists with copyright as it currently is. That needs to change. Copyright was originally intended to be a limited time thing (as in under a decade). Now it's Life + 70 years (and very few if any artists benefit from that, it's various studios and labels who do). A drastic and ridiculous change when compared to copyright as it was originally envisioned.

    "You continue to dance around the problem of piracy -- of course nearly everyone here denies that they do it, so the whole area shouldn't even matter to you -- while saying that if you can't get what you want, then you WILL pirate it..."

    Mike has done no dancing around the problem of copyright. He acknowledges it, has stated it's wrong but he understands why it happens and has suggested that people just deal with it. It's going to happen. Focusing on only piracy and people who pirate instead of the customers you do have is going to hurt you in the long run. Your customers are out there, find out what they want. They'll gladly tell you. Then meet that demand. Ignoring it for whatever reason will also hurt you monetarily in the long run and push your customers to others who'll gladly provide them with what they want.

    "You continue to say that large numbers of artists (at least, rappers and mixers with cheap products, none who sink, say, $100M into a movie) are already using the power of the Internet to get around the gatekeepers, while pointing out that industry profits are up..."

    You and your fixation on $100M into a movie. Sigh. [shakes head in bafflement] Your fixed cost sunk into anything are not MY (as a customer's) problem. I don't give a f*ck if you spent $10 grand creating a movie or $100M. That's not my concern. I am willing to pay what is a reasonable price/value to me as a customer to have your product. If you don't like it, fine. That's your prerogative, I'll take my money elsewhere. But you don't dictate to me what you want. That's not how the market works. We, the customers, tell you what we think your product is worth. If you place the value too high and refuse to negotiate, we'll get what we want elsewhere and it's your loss. Great example, the HP Touchpad. At $400 it was not selling. Like at all. At $99, it literally flew off the shelves to the point that it was sold out (online and in-stores) within 2 days. People DID NOT think it was worth $400, despite what HP sunk into the product (which was $100s of millions, with the whole R&D and WebOS purchase). They, the customers, DID think it was worth $99 though. This is what we're trying to get into that thick skull of yours, Blue. Your sunk costs matter not to us. If you want guarantees, you're out of luck. If however, you want to make a buck, price accordingly in what customer's feel is an appropriate value for your product.

    "You continue to insist that piracy is actually good for the industry by "promoting" its products, while of course unable to answer how an instance of consumption without paying in any way results in more income for the content owner."

    Mike and plenty on here have pointed out how if you "pirate" a song or an album you might enjoy the music and the artists so much that you'll pay to go see them in concert or buy their merchandise or what have you. That is of course an example and an answer to how an instance of consumption without paying in any way resulting in more income for the content owner. Unless by "content owner" you mean the studio/label, in which case it isn't. But then again, they aren't content creators now are they? I hate seeing the "think of the artists" thing one moment and essentially "f*ck the artists" the next. Which is what you're doing. You're focusing on the studios/labels and to heck with the artists side of things. Then of course there are examples of people pirating games like Minecraft (and a few others) and becoming so engaged and amazed by the product that they then go on to purchase the actual product. Which to me is a "gained sale". I was unaware of your product, I pirated it, I loved it, I've bought it and the derivatives since. My gosh! A great example. I won't continue with others, you'll ignore them anyway.

    "Your positions are self-contradictory."

    Your positions are asinine. Your point being? We can go back and forth all day with you, if you're unwilling to be even remotely reasonable or listen to what we have to say why are we going to keep talking? In fact, if Mike is so self-contradictory and unwilling to give answers to you and your kind, why come here at all? You've made a threat to leave, so be gone already. People propose ideas and business models to you, specifically you Blue, all the time. You ignore them. Stop covering your eyes and ears and actually pay attention to what people are showing/telling you. If you're unwilling to learn, that's not our problem. That's yours.

    "Face it: your newfangled "digital" notions are a ZERO, not a one."

    Face it: your oldfangled "analog" notions are DYING, as in O-B-S-O-L-E-T-E. Adapt or don't. But don't b*tch when others are moving forward and you're stuck in the same place. Don't complain that there are no answers to your questions when you covers your ears and go "la la la I can't hear you". Don't come here if there's nothing worth coming here for (according to your own words).

    I'm done replying to you. AC out!

Add Your Comment

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



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

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.