Slashdot Log In
Hilary Rosen Defeated at Oxford Union
Posted by
timothy
on Sat Oct 26, 2002 06:12 PM
from the choose-your-door-carefully dept.
from the choose-your-door-carefully dept.
yogi writes "Oxford University Students' Union had a debate last Thursday, titled This House believes that 'the free music mentality is a threat to the future of music.'. Ordinarily, not too exciting, but since it is the Oxford Union, they get Hilary Rosen to speak. She lost the debate, and had to have pictures like this taken. Read the writeup at NTK, or a more detailed one here. I especially like the bit where she asked all the file downloaders whether it made them buy more music."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Hilary Rosen Defeated at Oxford Union
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 377 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
where can I get one of those T-shirts? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:where can I get one of those T-shirts? (Score:5, Informative)
It's linked from one of the articles
Misleading title (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Misleading title (Score:5, Funny)
"Fatality"
Debate is getting old (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Debate is getting old (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Debate is getting old (Score:5, Interesting)
Maybe to us, but to normal folks, especially those who are from 40-70 (and who control most of our culture, even if we'd rather not remember that) it is not at all an open and shut case--I've had to explain and discuss these issues numerous times with parents, uncles, coworkers, etc.
We may know how we feel, but mainstream culture still can be swayed, and the RIAA knows that.
Re:Debate is getting old (Score:4, Interesting)
I wonder if your experience with this was anything like mine. Everyone I've had to explain it to didn't really see why it was illegal in the first place.
"It's not like they've stolen the CD out of a record shop."
Seems that "Intellectual Property" is a vague concept some people seem to have a hard time grasping...
Just to clear things up -- I'm a firm believer in copyrights. I'm also a firm believer in free sharing of information. Somewhere in the middle between one side and the other is a realistic ground where things will sometimes be illegal and sometimes be legal and sometimes be hard to define. I both buy and download music, though... so...
Re:Debate is getting old (Score:5, Interesting)
What I find strange is that she accepted this debate in the first place. Surely she must have known what she was getting into?
Absence of hard, verified data (Score:5, Insightful)
I agree. It's getting to the point that EVERYONE has chosen sides and the resulting debate has a decidedly religious flavor (ie, no one will ever switch sides from this point on).
Interesting analogy. I have to agree with you: there is so much conflicting data that everyone seems to have made up their minds on the basis of their gut feeling. I imagine there isn't any way of resolving this.
However, I would think that we (the pro-filesharing crowd) could use this ambiguity to our advantage. The **AA wants to limit a powerful technology and impose some dubious laws. And they don't have any iron-clad statistics to back them up. It seems that the burden of proof should be on the **AA to show that filesharing definitely hurts sales. If they cannot show this -- and I don't think they can -- then all their technology-limiting plans should be rejected by the lawmakers. I'm not so naive that I believe this is going to happen, I'm just stating that in a perfect world this non-provable postulate that filesharing hurts sales should be a victory to us. There will always be people who have a "gut feeling" that this is responsible for the financial woes of the music and movie industries, but that shouldn't be enough to enact laws!
GMD
Re:Debate is getting old (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Debate is getting old (Score:5, Informative)
It was somewhat amusing to see that you not only offer your own music for free download, but also music from several other bands. Something tells me, however, that the Dead Milkmen haven't given you permission to do this.
Now, I can understand wanting to share your own music, but I don't understand why you feel you should be free to share someone else's copyrighted material.
Jack Valenti (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Jack Valenti (Score:5, Interesting)
For all of these reasons, Valenti isn't going to need to make a case for the movie industry at any time in the near future. Rosen does. Rosen has to sway public opinion if the RIAA is to reduce what it sees as piracy and stolen sales. For the MPAA, there's already legal protections that can be easily invoked against any pirate, and whereas, for example, an author of audio ripping software can point to fair use defenses, DVD "ripping" software authors can, and have been, prosecuted under US criminal law.
You know, while I think she's misguided on the subject of whether MP3 sales have the negative impact she seems to believe, I can't bring myself to think of her to the same degree of hatred as what appears to be the average Slashdotter's attitude. She, for example, has been a major force for protecting musicians against Congressional attempts at censorship or creating censorship systems, whereas Valenti himself oversees the major censorship body for the movie industry, and generally relies on the individual studios and directors and actors to make the case against mandated restrictions. On a surface level, the argument "Why would you buy something if you already have the MP3?" is a hard one to give a definite answer to - you can only, in the end, argue that the side effects - exposure to more music, a desire for higher quality, etc - are (probably) positive.
To that extent, Rosen can't be criticised for not being wholly convinced.
Cool T-shirt on the pic (Score:2)
So where can I get that?! I want it!
Re:Cool T-shirt on the pic (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.geekstyle.co.uk/ntkmart.cgi#Corrupt
what was the "different and confusing" set? (Score:5, Interesting)
I call BS on this. What was the "different and confusing" set she asked for? I have a feeling it was the interesting part of this exchange... pop culture already tells us we should raise our hands for these first two questions.
Re:what was the "different and confusing" set? (Score:5, Insightful)
I call BS on this. What was the "different and confusing" set she asked for? I have a feeling it was the interesting part of this exchange...
Yeah, I agree. I, too, would be very interested in seeing what Rosen's follow-up questions were. Can anyone point us to an unbiased, accurate record of what happened? Maybe even a transcript? It's clear that the articles that were submitted to slashdot aren't trying to evenly present what happened that night.
GMD
Re:what was the "different and confusing" set? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why did she go? / Background info. (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd also say that this was a stacked audience. Let's see, you have a bunch of college students that use p2p on a regular basis, many of whom were spreading anti-RIAA propaganda
I followed the discussions and preparations in the CDR [eurorights.org], although I didn't go myself. I have to say that we were not at all sure that the debate could be won. Oxford is a very strange place, and Oxford Union is stranger -- a private members-only debating society which perhaps could be described as a little bit elitist.
As to why Hilary Rosen chose to go to an debate with students -- it is because of the prestige of debating in one of the oldest debating societies in the world. You have to dress up (black tie for men), you go to a special dinner with weird and ancient customs (if you've never been to an Oxford college, you have no idea!), and so on and so on. Take a look around the Oxford Union site.
Also, with a place like Oxford Union, this isn't some shallow debate. Rather it prides itself on getting to the bottom of the issue, with lots of intelligent minds on the job. If the RIAA's case stood on logical grounds, she would likely have won the debate. That is why this is a significant result! The truth of the matter is that even with all the conservatism of Oxford, Hilary and friends couldn't make their arguments stick.
Why is it so hard to understand? (Score:5, Insightful)
Hmmm... heard Funker Vogt on shoutcast [digitalgunfire.com] a few weeks ago.
Enjoyed it. Downloaded a few tracks via gnutella. Yup, this definitely is a group I like.
Went to Best Buy. WTF? No Funker Vogt. Went to CD Warehouse. Nope. Never even heard of them, let alone my fav Apoptygma Bezerk, VNV Nation, Front Line Assembly, etc. "Sure we have industrial..." as the salescritter points at the rap section (ugh... where do they hire these people from?).
So Ms. Rosen, how am I supposed to be a complying RIAA citizen when you won't even sell me the music?
As usual, it was off to cdnow.com, buy one of everything Funker Vogt, and wait for the UPS guy.
Conclusion:
1. I'm waiving money in your face but you won't sell product to me.
2. You can't seem to figure out how to distribute music worth a damn.
3. You keep signing a few worthless artists and pumping their music (while we still don't buy it), rather than understanding the market changed on you.
4. You and the radio broadcasters sign deals trying to limit airplay to the same crap you signed, but now the radio broadcasters can't find listeners and had to destroy Internet broadcasting before it destroyed them.
So, maybe there's another problem [qconline.com] that explains why your sales numbers suck?
*scoove*
The bigger question (Score:4, Insightful)
They're asking us to pay for a distribution system we don't need, and that's what offends me as I'm struggling to tear off the stupid sticker holding my new CD's jewelcase together before I put the disc into the reader to be encoded to the only format I use anyhow.
Did she learn something? (Score:5, Interesting)
Now let's just hope Mrs. Rosen learned a bit from this, and, even better, passes it on to others. Chances are they'll just steam on as they go, and not mind their customers. They're just a source of money, and not of real importance, after all.
A good quote (Score:5, Interesting)
Here's some sage advice (from here [slashdot.org] originally): "If you really want a change, don't vote for either party -- vote Libertarian if you're on the right, Green Party if you're on the left, and independant otherwise. Both parties are in the pockets of big business, and that's bad both for those who advocate freedom from the government as well as those who despise deregulation.
The more we have third party, the closer we get to fairer, European-style representation."
Re:A good quote (Score:4, Insightful)
Do we really want that and is it indeed fairer?
Now only if... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Now only if... (Score:5, Funny)
Oh yeah, can you imagine how that debate would go? I can.. let's listen in..
Rosen: (to herself: heh, this one works every time.. well except at Oxford Union.) So, who here downloads and burns music?
Congress: (silence. they look at each other and shrug.)
R: (to herself: oh yeah, they don't know the hip lingo like I do) Uh, who here uses their computer to get digital music from the internet and then to put the music on recordable CDs, you know, like homemade CDs?
C: (silence. one congressman checks his watch.)
R: (getting frustrated) Okay, does anyone here use a computer?
C: (shaking of heads. one congressman quietly hides a piece of paper with pending legislation on regulation of the personal computer industry.)
R: (gets an idea) Hey never mind about that. Here's another one: who here likes money?
C: (faces light up.. the room becomes animated) ME!! ME!! ME!! ME!!! OVER HERE!! MONEY!!
R: (to herself: looks like my side won this debate after all)
Courage or stupidity ? (Score:5, Interesting)
About the filesharing issue? Depends on wether you recognize intellectual property as a valid concept or not...
Perhaps a calculated move (Score:5, Insightful)
to go to a university only to face a crowd of filesharing student can either be pictured as stupidity or courage, so let's at least give her that: she was coureagous. She ran into the wolves house!
Disclaimer: because of the poor write-ups posted, I don't have a good idea of what actually happened at this debate and how fair it was. With that in mind, consider the following theory: Hillary figures she can 'win' no matter how the debate turns out. She has a chance to talk to the crowd that are the biggest filesharers. This is her chance to hopefully convince them that what they're doing is wrong. With a little luck, she'll be able to convince someone in the audience who happens to be in a position of power regarding the computer facilities of the school. She figures if the debate is 'fair' that she's got a reasonable chance to getting her message across. She won't be able to convince those whose minds are already made up, but perhaps she can bring a few students back from the Dark Side.
Now consider the case of an 'unfair' debate. If the debate is 'not fair', perhaps some students will realize that and sympathize with her. But even if she isn't able to convince anyone in the crowd that her position is right and the whole debate ends up being a crazy show, she can then take a videotape or transcript of the 'unfair' debate with her to other people (like politicians) and use that to convince swing-voters that the pro-filesharing crowd is just a bunch of hooligans. She willingly goes into the lions' den to gain sympathy from others when she shows them her 'scars'. "I tried to explain my position and look how they treated me? They're animals!"
This is just a theory. But to characterize her action as either courage or stupidity leaves out another very real possibility: calculating.
GMD
Re:Courage or stupidity ? (Score:4, Funny)
Hey, at least Hilary gets health benefits.
I still don't get it... (Score:5, Insightful)
Up to now the recording studios have been like the cartoon syndicates -- a necessary evil because they control the production, distribution, and promotion of music, with staggering overhead. Why does a 25 CD cost $18, anyway, about what it cost when invented 20 years ago? How many non-geek consumers know about this profit margin, and how loudly would they complain if they did?
Re:I still don't get it... (Score:4, Insightful)
I never really thought it was about music being 'free' anyway. My MP3 searches were about finding new music, not about getting it for free. I saw it as a way of finding stuff I thought I'd like. Paying for it is not an issue. I mean think about it: Buy a CD, open it, and it's yours. You can't take it back if it's not satisfactory.
So yeah, I'm gonna download songs from the album first before I buy the CD because I'm not paying $15 for 1 (one) song I liked from the radio. How many of you have been burned by that?
Oxford Union != Oxford University Student Union (Score:3, Informative)
(which is where the debate was) isn't the same thing as the Oxford University Student Union [ousu.org]. Probably only really of importance to people in Oxford, who know this anyway, though
Re:Oxford Union != Oxford University Student Union (Score:4, Informative)
Err why, most Oxford students have zero contact with OUSU. There is not much point to a student union with no facilities to administer.
Hitler credited the Oxford Union with starting World War II.
Incidentally, King and Country has only been passed once since the original debate. Anyone care to guess what the subject matter was?
Finally the great question is answered... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Finally the great question is answered... (Score:5, Interesting)
The real question about the recording industry is do they have calculators?
A tape or lp at the time of the cd switch was far cheaper than an CD. But now that CD production is more efficient the cost should have come down some. But it hasn't. Cds are still in the 16-20 dollar range where as tapes at the same time were in 10-12.you think that cd's would have dropped?
Why don't we buy CDs? Because the price is prohibitive. On top of that the RIAA has made no friends with fans with the crackdowns and wacky copyright protection schemes.
Now the MPAA is doing the same thing with DVDs. And you know that the DVD won't drop either.
Re:Finally the great question is answered... (Score:5, Interesting)
It is too bad that the artists that already have made a fair amount of money (and that are fairly famous) don't start there own label that sells music online by the song (yes I know about rhapsody, but they require a monthly fee) or that sell the discs for $12 bucks instead of 20.
In fact, wouldn't it be COOL if you could listen to the songs online at a low bitrate, then buy the cd, and while it is shipping to you, it lets you download the album in your format of choice.
--Joey
Opposition Quote (Score:4, Interesting)
One, anyone knows what the fuck he means by calling filesharing a style of music? Two, what's so terrible about filesharing... that's more terrible than, say, swapping bootlegs? Seems like p2p has created a whole lot more interest in music since the late 90s... whatever.
Re:Opposition Quote (Score:4, Insightful)
Also, on the subject of bootlegs, it's a hell of a lot harder to find someone that bought such and such a tape, then copy it at *full quality* and then share it again (since each copy of a tape is worse than the last) than to just fire up Napster and download the latest songs. Now you could use the special tapes that the people who share live recordings do (DAT tapes I think?) but those are quite expensive and are almost as much as buying the tape itself. Granted this scheme changes a little with CDs, but you still have to have someone willing to let you copy your CD. Not that many people are willing.
Berman still thinks that p2p sharing is hurting his industry. There's nothing wrong with him being disillusioned, but it's pretty insightful for him to notice what the current trend truly is, that it's all types of music. I don't agree with his "And I think it's a pretty terrible thing" quote, but he's entitled to his opinion. He makes a better argument in one sentence than any other proponent of the music industry has in whole debates.
My two favorite links on the subject. (Score:5, Informative)
Should read Rosen defeated in popularity contest (Score:4, Insightful)
This is more of a popularity contest than a true debate. The RIAA's position is never going to be popular with an illegal file-swapping crowd filled with university students.
Regardless, The RIAA has every right to pursue its goals (i.e., profit) using legitimate business practices.
The RIAA is perfectly allowed to sell music using any method they want. It does not matter if downloaders purchase more CDs due to free advertising. If you believe that start a new record company with free music from your site. Nobody has a right to force a new distribution method on someone else. I prefer the BSD license, but I don't go out and illegally change GPL software to BSD. People have the right to use any license they choose. Similiarly, artists have the right to release free music if they want. They are not forced to sign a contract with anyone. Plus, the distribution method of choice - the Internet - is perfected suited for free music.
Re:Should read Rosen defeated in popularity contes (Score:5, Insightful)
Bribing Congressmen to pass a rampantly unpopular law that criminalizes fair use copying rights does not fall under the heading of "legitimate business practices". Neither does deploying technological measures to make it impossible to exercise said rights.
I'm disgusted by how many so-called libertarians are so quick to jump to the defense of the RIAA when it's obvious they have no interest whatsoever in playing by the rules of the fair market. The market has sent a pretty unequivocal message that they want the middle man out of the loop, so the middle man tries alternately to make it either illegal or impossible not to play by their rules. Bleh.
Re:Should read Rosen defeated in popularity contes (Score:4, Insightful)
In fact, I often find myself at odds with other Libertarian-leaning individuals on the whole copyright/piracy debate.
Certainly, Thomas Jefferson himself was not a fan of the ideas of patenting ideas or extending terms of copyright out to great lengths of time.
"It has been pretended by some, (and in England especially,) that inventors have a natural and exclusive right to their inventions, and not merely for their own lives, but inheritable to their heirs. But while it is a moot question whether the origin of any kind of property is derived from nature at all, it would be singular to admit a natural and even an hereditary right to inventors." - Jefferson
"He who receives an idea from me, receives instructions himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me." - Jefferson on Copyright
Re:Should read Rosen defeated in popularity contes (Score:5, Insightful)
We all know that this is literally true. No one is forcing these people to sign contracts. I wish some of them would have been forced not to sign contracts, in fact. I'd have held the gun on Don Henley. If I'd have been alive then.
I'd have held two guns on Rod Stewart.
But on the other hand, if you want to be a music superstar, you have to sign a contract with a major label. Otherwise you don't get put on MTV/VH1, you don't get put on Clearchannel, you don't get put in the major record chains across the country who are penalized (by withholding of ad material and certain albums, or pushed-back release dates) for stocking music which doesn't come from a member of the RIAA.
So sure, no one is forced to, but you cannot "win" the game (assuming you are measuring success monetarily... at least it's a numeric metric) without signing with a major label.
there are defeats and defeats (Score:3)
Hilary may well have thought that they wouldn't out and out win a debate in such an environment but thought that it was still worth the effort. A strategic defeat perhaps.
Or...
Off topic but... (Score:5, Interesting)
another good quote (Score:1, Funny)
har har
Who voted to determine the outcome? (Score:2, Insightful)
Oxford Union Debates (I "officiated" once) (Score:5, Informative)
This summer, I had the opportunity to help officate at a debate held at the Oxford University Student Union. This was for an XML course that was developed by a consulting firm that was presented at the University. During the summer, Oxford hosts a significant number of for-profit and non-profit organizations holding conferences, seminars, and the like.
The city of Oxford and the University are stunning. If you've never seen them, you're missing out.
The debating hall is laid out similarly to the House of Commons, which us 'mericans sometimes get a glimpse of on TV.
At the head of the room is the debate chairman, who presides over the debate and makes sure that the rules are followed. To his left and right are the Union treasurer and librarian. Since this wasn't an "official" Oxford Union debate, all three of those roles were held by participants in the XML summer course. I sat to the left of the chairman, and helped decide matters of debate procedure and scope. (Don't laugh; there actually was one matter to review.On the main floor of the debate chamber is the Secretary's desk. The Secretary likewise assures debate procedure is followed and assists the chairman in doing so.
On either side of the Secretary's table are the proposer of the motion, and the opposer. Each of them leads a particular side of the debate.
Around all of them are the seats for the participants, arranged on both the main floor and a balcony surrounding everything.
Perhaps the most interesting feature of the debate hall are the doors. On the way in, they look like simple double doors. Only when you are inside can you see that over the right door reads a sign saying "Yeses", and over the left door "Noes." At the end of the debate all participants file out through those doors, their numbers counted by the Secretary as they pass. Then everyone files back in to hear the results read.
The Oxford Union is one of the oldest free speech organizations in the world, and certainly deserving of respect on that basis. The debating hall is a monument to civil society and free speech. The Union is also a completely private institution: a true union of, by, and for Oxford students.
Now, having said all of that, the fact remains that a debate at the Oxford Union is just a debate. It's not a UN Security Council resolution or a Supreme Court judgment. It's just the opinion of a bunch of people who happened to be in the hall at the time as to whether the proposer or the opposer made a better case for their side.
It's all good fun, and much needed at that. But let's not get all worked up about it.
commercialism (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, "this house" believes that it is rampant commercialism that is actually a threat to the future of music.
of course she lost (Score:5, Insightful)
This is definitely NOT the place for an RIAA exec to be. They should be with other executives and the occasional politician. That way they can avoid the whole issue of customers and business models, and focus on what's really important: new legislation.
rosen (Score:1)
1 company, 2 camps (Score:3, Interesting)
Chris : Doug, you know, the board has been thinking about your future here with the company...
Doug : Yes, really?
Chris : Well, with the beliefs that you have espoused, and your stance on some matters, we've been thinking that it might be time for you to move on to other projects...
Doug : Remember those pictures of Hilary, you, and an inflatable sheep? Well, I still have the negatives...
Chris :
on a side note, is anyone really surprised by their defeat? they are wrong on most of these issues, and really have very little evidence other than FUD to back anything they say. no big surprise there.
Why don't they start arresting people? (Score:4, Interesting)
I told the FBI about someone that is linked to credit card identity theft and presented the evidence. This person also told me he downloads mp3's of popular music, burns cd's, and sells them to friends, which I related to the FBI as well. Why has there not been an investigation?
Popular music is a joke and its thieves are even more of one. If it is such a horrible crime, why doesn't the FBI and RIAA start making some arrests?
Sounds like her fault (Score:5, Interesting)
And the big "raise your hand" thing doesn't prove anything. It is like "proving" someone has no business talking about African economics if they have never been there. It is all opinion and subjective, like those CNN polls.
In the end I just see this as broadening the rift. She now can be assured that most students out there are "pirating" music and thus beyond communication. Likewise everyone else here is treating this like it means anything. The RIAA will probably just go and get more federal signatures while we sit around feeling all good about this "victory". And its that sort of thinking that will probably mean we will never get the compromise we ask for.
Demanding total victory is asking for total defeat.
Great Job Oxford (Score:1)
Irrelevancy (Score:5, Insightful)
No one is going to change their position. On top of that, this nice little debate is more or less useless. None of those students are congress people, and Berman is has shown his resolve. Nothing has changed in that exchange; we are still hurtling towards an unknown conclusion which this debate does nothing to address or even pretends to address. In the end, the students went and drank some beers and the 'big-wigs' went back home to their legal documents. This is an intellectual excersize and shows zero results other than some transcriptions and a couple webpages. We would be better off sending mailings to our representatives than listening to some nice, feel-good debate that made Rosen look foolish for a couple minutes.
Excuse me sir. (Score:4, Funny)
I'm an RIAA detective and my partner and I noticed that you were singing. May I please scan your universal id card. Enter your secret password, please and I remind you that refusing to supply your passcode is an offence.
It says that you are not licensed for singing. You haven't submitted the proper fees. Your cable bill is also overdue. I suggest that you take this summons and pay the fine and get these matters in order.
(There was music before the music industry and there will be music after.)
I don't and probably won't listen to music (Score:1)
Lessig v. Valenti debate at EFF (Score:4, Interesting)
Has downloading music made you buy more music? (Score:1, Redundant)
So far I bought a bunch of Orbital and Orb, and a Dire Straits album (good old stuff) because of that, and avoided needlessly contributing and funds to the pockets of Fleetwood Mac
simon
This is good... (Score:2, Insightful)
Interesting tidbit on piracy... (Score:3, Interesting)
Good afternoon, Ms. Rosen... (Score:1, Troll)
Take Hilary to lunch (Score:3, Insightful)
What the Music Industry Needs... (Score:3, Insightful)
Jay Benson was the interesting one (Score:1, Interesting)
Anyway, daydreams of celebrity deathmatch aside Rosen wasn't that interesting. Jay Berman was interesting, he's President of the Federation of Phonographic Industries who among other things lobby for new copyright laws. He was the one who came out with
"Each generation has had their own music. For your generation it's filesharing. And I think thats a pretty terrible thing"
Now if its the case that the record industry suddenly doesn't like its audience anymore thats interesting. Its damn difficult to sell things to people who you don't like. It may also mean that even the industry don't think they're being strictly 'rational' about this anymore, if folks like Berman and Rosen belive that they have some kind of moral obligation to kill filesharing for the good of mankind this one could run and run
Oxford Union = elitist twits (Score:1, Troll)
Seriously, the fact that the elitist twits of the Oxford Union vote this way or that matters not a jot. Sadly, it is only the credulity of some Americans and a few wannabe Brits that keep this institutionn going.
The other reason for its existence - to provide the next generation of our "natural" rulers (ie the Tory party) has been well and truly destroyed by Tony Blair. A man who went to Oxford but demonstrated his innate good sense by having nothing to do with the Oxford Union.
Actually, I think our legacy will be... (Score:2)
Once we get to the point of being able to disseminate music to the masses in a cost effective manner (read: recording studios in a garage in Omaha that are better than the super high priced ones in LA), and can get the information into well known online music stores with preview, then the era of the 15 billion dollars that goes to 5 companies is OVER.
This is a late post, but (Score:2)
(This is the first time I saw her picture - even the "try-to-be-flattering" ones, and I am still trying to overcome the shock)
It's (I guess that's supposed to be "she's," eh?) like a cross between that octopus woman (from Disney's Little Mermaid (Ursula or something?) and a mutated Phillsbury Doe-boy.
yuck. *shudders*. If I ever wanted to delay ejaculation during intercourse - I'm prepared. In fact, I think I might be mentally scarred.
The RI-Double-A Isn't as Clueless as You Think (Score:1)
For the record, I do buy my CD's, but only ones that are consistently good, and there isn't a mainstream song in my entire collection.
I don't have a problem supporting artists(true artists, that is. And no, Britney Spear's belley button doesn't fall into that category). But I do have a problem with the Recording Industry making more from an artist's album that the artist themself.
but she looks sad! (Score:3, Insightful)
She deserves a pat on the back, for at least trying to defend the glorious RIAA's noble quest against piracy (also known as "fair use")
Re:she even voted against her self (Score:2)
Re:she even voted against her self (Score:2)
would have been funny.
i must stop speed reading
Re:she even voted against her self (Score:1, Informative)
Grow up dude. He missed a word while he was reading the article. Some people do that when they have more important things to dedicate their time to. You got hostile over an innocent mistake. Some people do that when they have a serious inferiority complex.
Who's the assclown?
Re:Married? (Score:4, Interesting)
Even if she was your type, I don't think she'd be interested in you. Look here. [lesbiannews.com] The person that she is married to, if she is in fact married, is missing something that most of us Slashdot readers have. (I won't go any further than that. I'm assuming most here are males and have not had some kind of freakish accidents).
Re:Married? (Score:2)
You mean you're not into the authoritarian-psycho-nutcase type? I'm shocked.