White House Holding Piracy Summit 268
DesScorp writes in to let us know about a White House piracy summit, which is going on this afternoon. Judging by the press accounts, the sort of intellectual property criminals they are interested in are large-scale DVD bootleggers, not individual downloaders. "Hollywood once again demonstrates its close ties to Washington DC, regardless of who is in power, with a White House summit on piracy to be attended by the top executives in Hollywood, as well as the music industry. Vice President Joe Biden will be leading the summit to discuss organized cooperation between the federal government and the entertainment industry on all matters of piracy. Also at the summit will be the Obama Administration's new Copyright Czar, Victoria Espinal. The summit comes after Congress has earmarked $30 million dollars of taxpayer funds for anti-piracy efforts." According to one attendee's tweet, the press was kicked out of the meeting around 20:45 GMT.
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Al Gore Senior was one of the MafiAA's pet stooges who wrote/pushed the 1987 predecessor to the DMCA that tried to criminalize DAT tape unless it had a "copy protection flag" built in.
Amazing how some things never change, indeed!
Re: (Score:2)
Have you read the Constitution? Copyright and patents are Congress's domain. Having a Libertarian administration wouldn't fix the problem.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Let's just say that Ron Paul had been elected to office. Other than the fact that the US now had a completely nutty and out to lunch fanatic in office, unless a whole bunch of Libertarians got into Congress, I'd suggest that regardless of the Constitution of Congress, the Dems and Republicans would join hands to make Paul's four years in office so miserable and utterly wasted that he might as well have never run. At the end of the day, Congress holds the purse strings and the bulk of the legislative power
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't pay much attention to all the hand waving of both parties, but I'm always amazed at how many people think we simply have to maintain the status qu
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Ron Paul is a Republican only slightly more than Joe Lieberman is a Democrat. Paul seems to be regarded with bemusement by fellow Republicans, sort of like Borat's village rapist.
My point is that all the swirly eyed Paulites ran around insisting how different things would be if a Real Libertarian got the nod, with little appreciation that his more radical notions (like going back to the Gold Standard) would more than likely be blocked by Congress anyways. They seemed to consistently ignore the fact there
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
He could have done a lot of my favorite things on the first day, without the approval of anyone:
1) End the wars and bring home the troops
2) Fire everyone in the Department of Education, or any other Executive Department
3) End the NSA domestic spying programs and the CIA espionage
4) Close Gitmo
5) Pardon everyone in a Federal Prison for drug possession
There are many, many more. In fact most of what Bush did was done via abuse of Executive power. It is entirely possible to wield it in a good way as well as a
Republican? (Score:4, Interesting)
When Texas Democratic President Lyndon Johnson signed the voting rights act in 1964, he remarked that it was going to deliver the deep South to the Republican Party for a generation. He underestimated.
The deep South segregationists that now control the Republican Party are only Socially Conservative. They are Politically Liberal (intruding into people's personal decisions) and Fiscally Spendthrifts or corrupt. Newt Gingrich and his fellow 'Movement Republicans' are not actually conservative at all. And I would hold that they are hardly Republican.
Ron Paul is truly Politically Conservative, Fiscally Conservative and Socially Conservative. There are few others like him, but they exist. Joel Hefley of Colorado, perhaps Chuck Hegel of Nebraska. Governor 'Butch' Otter of Idaho. The vast majority of the Republican party are simply pro-business (or more accurately, pro-corporation) proto-fascists. Opportunists. Thieves. Corrupt.
The Democratic Party has evolved into an aimless, populist mob. They currently have no guiding principles. They seem to exist only in reaction to big business and the corrupting influence of money.
Getting back to the article; it seems that piracy has a lot to do with intellectual property similar to software programs. If a person creates a work, it would be better if that person could maintain control over its provenance. This encourages continued production of similar work. China, India and other Wild West type newly minted capitalistic systems care little for hypothetical rights such as intellectual property. With good reason, it's unenforceable.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Lincoln was no saint and greatly exceeded his power. The war was not actually a true civil war, since the south had no intention of taking over Washington DC and gaining control of the country. (just like Washington had no intention of taking over England during the American revolution)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Now hang on. I know you have dozens on replies to this already, but... how come you can safely divide up the Republican party into different factions, and then give examples you like and presumably approve of (eg. Ron Paul) but the Democrats can get lumped together into one bucket of crap?
The Democratic Party is even more divided than the Republican. They range from the practically Republican Joe Lieberman, the very left-wing Dennis Kucinich, and everyone in between.
It's one of many reasons the Dems can't g
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Vote Cthulhu! (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh yeah, "lessor of two evils" and all that. Who was it around here who first said "The lessor of two evils is still evil"?
The lesser of two evils is still evil, but it is also lesser. What's the alternative, voting for Cthulu? As long as we're going to elect evil, we may as well elect the greatest evil of all, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Ah yes, a governor who did a lot for her state versus... a habitually non-present senator whose only prior experience was as a community adviser.
Hm yes, unqualified running mates.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Maybe she can drink him under the table.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Citation please.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh good grief. The only thing that did "it" for Alaska was obscenely high energy prices. You could have replaced Palin with Mr. Hanky and got the same effect.
Re: (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Obama's main qualification seems to be the fact that he can put together a good speech.
Obama's main qualification seems to be the fact that his speech writers can put together a good speech and he can read from a teleprompter.
There, fixed that for ya!
Re: (Score:2)
Biden's a twit, but on the scale of qualification, he still dwarfs Palin. The choice of Palin had everything to do with McCain trying to shed his maverick image to the social conservative and Evangelical wings of the GOP, who were pretty much threatening to stay home on Election Day if he won the nomination. I actually feel sorry for McCain, because he was fucked either way. Either he went with a running mate who shared his views, and a key core constituency of the Republicans walked away, or he picked s
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I've never met a Palin lover that wasn't either pondering what getting inside her pants would be like, or just simply liked the idea of a fellow religious zealot being one bullet away from the Oval Office.
Huckabee would certainly have been the more logical choice if you were looking for a VP with at least some skills, but I don't think he was sufficiently uber-religious to get past the hump McCain needed to. McCain was deeply unpopular with the various brands of social conservatives in the GOP. He largely
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, he is smart enough to handle katie couric. Also he probably knows that Russia is not visible from Palin's front porch.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes, of course he was.
Yep, he's qualified. Oh, and:
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, but I fail to see how being Governor made Sarah Palin unqualified to be Vice President, yet being Governor made Bill Clinton qualified to be President.
Like her or dislike her, that's fine - but Palin was much more qualified than Obama who'd never held a real leadership position before -- and Palin wasn't even running for President.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The partisan
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that the U.S. falls asleep and becomes complacent. Think of this country back in the 1920s and 30s. Once there is enough political will things will change rather rapidly. There is a long slope for those of us that see what both sides are doing as wrong. I do see more and more people getting fed up with both sides. The republican party has completely fallen apart and look like children. The democratic party can't stop arguing amongst itself. Look at the shamble that is the health care legislat
Re: (Score:2)
!change nor the first time... (Score:5, Informative)
This isn't surprising in the least. Less than two weeks ago they had a workshop for Federal employees on openness in government and it was closed to the public. [yahoo.com]
Don't forget that Obama promised to have debates on healthcare on C-Span. [74.125.155.132] (google cache)
I’m going to have all the negotiations around a big table,” Obama said. “We’ll have doctors and nurses and hospital administrators. Insurance companies, drug companies — they’ll get a seat at the table, they just won’t be able to buy every chair. But what we’ll do is we’ll have the negotiations televised on C-SPAN, so that people can see who is making arguments on behalf of their constituents and who are making arguments on behalf of drug companies or the insurance companies.
Then he goes on to have closed door meetings with drug companies and insurance companies. Not to mention that he promised to not support any health care bill that forced people to get healthcare.
You'll find very few people here who ever worshiped the Obamassiah. It's no secret that the Dems are just as much in the pocket of the media companies as the Republicans.
As a person who was continually modded down for saying there was (and will be) no difference between Obama and McCain before and during the election I find your statement very funny.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course there is a difference.
Dem: Less war, Less regulating morality, more bending over backwards for Big Media.
Repub: More war, More regulating morality, less bending over backwards for Big Media.
Not that Republicans are really war hungry, but they are in the pocket of arms manufacturers.
Re: (Score:2)
Can you give any evidence of the last part of that claim?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
More personal choice and liberty?
Please.
Perhaps if you are church going conservative businessman.
Or if you mean the freedom to be crushed by the wealthy.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not about the candidates, for they are like puppets. It's about the monied interests who finance their campaigns and put them into office. That's where the real power is, and it's not up for a vote. It's more of a plutocracy. Whether it's Obama or McCain who won the election, either of them has a career in politics onl
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I can't wait to hear all of the partisans who rightfully complained about Dick Cheney's energy task force come out of the woodwork to tell us why this is "different".
Reasons why this is different:
1. Dick Cheney never put out a press release announcing there was a meeting
2. Dick Cheney never released any of the names of the people he or his Task Force met with
3. Most of the activities of the Task Force have never been/will never be disclosed by the government
Here's most of what we know [washingtonpost.com] about the Energy Task Force [washingtonpost.com] (two articles)
I find it distasteful that the press is getting kicked out, but none of this is happening in Cheney-esqe secrecy.
I'm going to save my outrage for
No need to wait, read story summary! (Score:3, Interesting)
I can't wait to hear all of the partisans who rightfully complained about Dick Cheney's energy task force come out of the woodwork to tell us why this is "different".
Your wish, it is granted:
Judging by the press accounts, the sort of intellectual property criminals they are interested in are large-scale DVD bootleggers, not individual downloaders.
Well thanks for clearing that up! This copyright summit would never harm you, citizen! It's utterly different than any that have come before because it only goes
Re: (Score:2)
Well (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Why would they want the public to be there? They just get in the way.
And I thought... (Score:2, Flamebait)
...they were going to discuss about the problem with "real" piracy.
If anything, this should encourage the pirates operating in the Arabian sea near Somalia: unless they start bootlegging songs and movies, they should be relatively save and Uncle Sam will not go after them.
At least not in a big, coordinated way.
In essence, they, the ship-wrecking, people-killing pirates are a mere nuisance, while copyright-violating pirates mean the end of civilization is near.
Or maybe it's just another episode of "Politicia
Re: (Score:2)
Not to mention that the US government has a much wider range of jurisdiction and tools to work with when it comes down to bootlegged goods that sell on our lands.
Plus, who says we only have to deal with one problem at a time? The issues off the African coast will not be solved by one nation. Was
wtf?!? (Score:2)
Hollywood has considered redirecting any significant effort towards people who actually press pirate DVD instead of their own fans? Seriously?
Oh! I see, they want congress to pay for it, they'll keep using their own lawyers on their fans.
It's obviously good if these sorts of large scale industrial pirates are sued for copyright infringement. I'd strongly support a fund that aided small publishers when going up against pirate publishers, especially the largest pirates that are members of the RIAA and MPAA
Makes nominal strategic sense... (Score:5, Interesting)
As much as I hate the idea that the Federal Government is in the interest of helping the RIAA, it seems that "intellectual property" is just about the only thing left that our country exports. I can understand thinking that it should be a national economic priority if you think in those terms. That doesn't address the reality of the "value" of said property, or its constitutional justification, however.
Ummmm (Score:2)
Except for the fact that Hollywood is a very minor part of the US economy compared to other areas. Intel alone has more revenue than everything Hollywood does. I'd buy this argument if the US economy was relying on Hollywood, but that just isn't the case. The biggest sector of the US economy is still manufacturing (and in fact the US still has the biggest manufacturing sector in the world). When you look at it, the movie and music industry just aren't that big a deal.
So this really isn't based off of need,
Re:Ummmm (Score:4, Insightful)
if i remember the random story yesterday they are slated to break 30bn this year which puts them at 0.2% of the US GDP or better phrased 1/500th of the US GDP.
0.2 doesn't sound like much but 1 in 500 is.. think if they where to disappear 1 in 500 people wouldn't have a livelihood.
i'm not advocating for them - nor do i think the taxpayers should give them anything or pay for their troubles. BUT i think 1 in 500 is enough to justify a meeting at the white house.
while there are bigger companies and sectors - Hollywood isn't small
Re: (Score:2)
What it doesn't justify is special laws to protect them, especially when some special laws hurt other sectors, like electronics which is way larger.
intellectual property.. (Score:2)
Id gladly trade that 'resource' for a plant that made cars, or food... IP wont mean much when we cant actually make anything.
Information just wants to be free (Score:5, Insightful)
As we said early on, and have continually been proven right, Information just wants to be free.
And no amount of trying to stop that will end up working in the end.
Restore copyright to 17 years renewable only by the author of the work, remove patent protection for software, and let's get back to creating and away from lining CEO's pockets.
Re: (Score:2)
Restore copyright to 17 years renewable only by the author of the work, remove patent protection for software, and let's get back to creating and away from lining CEO's pockets.
Copyright was never 17 years.
It started out as 14 years + a 14 year renewal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_copyright_law#History [wikipedia.org]
Anyways, the USA can't make any meaningful changes to copyright law without going through the World Trade Organization.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually they can, my understanding is that a constitutional amendment (and only an amendment) would supersede the treaty without renegotiating. Like that will ever happen.
Re: (Score:2)
Restore copyright to 17 years renewable only by the author of the work, remove patent protection for software, and let's get back to creating and away from lining CEO's pockets.
So when we do all this, it stops wanting to be free and this amount of trying will work in the end? Or does it still want to be free? That part isn't clear.
Wrong way round (Score:5, Insightful)
"Hollywood once again demonstrates its close ties to Washington DC"
should be
"Washington DC once again demonstrates its close ties to Hollywood"
It's your political system that's broken - not Hollywood.
Re:Wrong way round (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
"Hollywood once again demonstrates its close ties to Washington DC"
"Washington DC once again demonstrates its close ties to Hollywood"
Ha, sounds like the Republican vs. Democratic versions of the relationship. Kind of a lame "In Soviet Russia..." style joke.
Re: (Score:2)
Full text (Score:5, Insightful)
"are interested in are large-scale DVD bootleggers, not individual downloaders [for now]. "
Re:Full text (Score:4, Insightful)
"are interested in are large-scale DVD bootleggers, not individual downloaders [for now]. "
You can scratch the "for now" even. Any laws that start in meetings like this aren't going to be "If you bootleg DVDs, you get punishment X per bootleg disk." they're going to be "If you infringe copyright, you get punishment X per infringement." where "infringe" can be taken to mean "bootleg, copy for a friend, download, upload, format shift for yourself, write an unfavorable online review of" and so on, however much the lawyers can twist the word and destroy the spirit in a court of law.
See also: Laws against pedophiles and child pornographers that somehow apply to pairs of consenting teenagers and individual teenagers photographing themselves, laws against racketeers that apply to people not running a racket, laws against drug dealers that apply to people with a lot of cash, etc. etc. etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
With the numbers on the table, the only thing that 30 million could be effectively used for is ramping up police departments and the FBI for cracking down on large scale bootleg operations.
Assume it is. How does Congress' budget change the summit at all? It's not a summit to discuss the money Congress earmarked, it's a summit to discuss piracy, so is probably only marginally related.
Besides, Variety reported that representatives of Warner Music Group and the RIAA are there. If it's all about DVD copying, why is the music industry there? Protecting their tour video DVDs?
Meddling with the Fourth isn't going to be something that can be done at a whim.
And I don't expect anything a tenth as big as that directly out of this summit. I don't expect oak trees from acorns becaus
And as usual...... (Score:2)
Reference: http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap12.html#1201 [copyright.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
The same people who are representing our interests on ACTA.
Unfortunately... (Score:5, Insightful)
" the sort of intellectual property criminals they are interested in are large-scale DVD bootleggers, not individual downloaders"
The law won't discriminate. Neither will the lawyers.
If they write it, someone will sue.
Fair and Balanced (Score:3, Insightful)
Hollywood once again demonstrates its close ties to Washington DC, regardless of who is in power
Industries that generate significant export dollars are guaranteed a hearing in Washington.
Bonus points for cultural exports.
If you are a Brit, ask yourself what the return has been on Sherlock Holmes, The Beatles, James Bond, Harry Potter.
Bonus points for clean industries. Bonus points for tech. Bonus points for skilled labor and labor-intensive industries.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
True.
Bonus points also for an industry that has the power to sway public opinion at home. MPAA and RIAA can easily make and destroy politicians.
Not so many anymore. In the 70-ies and 80-ies, a LOT more US films and series were available in third world countries. Due to insane licensing costs nowadays, US cultural exports have dropped significantly there.
Joe Biden? (Score:3, Funny)
Vice President Joe Biden will be leading the summit to discuss organized cooperation between the federal government and the entertainment industry on all matters of piracy.
You mean this Joe Biden: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=joe+biden+plagiarism&aq=0&oq=joe+biden+pl&aqi=g10 [google.com]
Maybe someone will ask Joe the difference between bits in a track and the letters in a book.
Enjoy,
Now we know (Score:3, Insightful)
where to drop a bomb to rid us of all of the MPAA Assholes in one shot. It gets the RIAA as well. Sweet.
Should start with huge commercial organizations (Score:3, Insightful)
CRIA is a huge violator. I suspect the RIAA is a similar violator. These organizations should be made to pay in full.
http://www.zeropaid.com/news/87347/can-cria-recover-from-the-largest-copyright-infringment-case-in-canadian-history/
---
Canadian Recording Industry Association (CRIA) was sued for $6 billion (not $60 billion as initially reported) for commercial copyright infringement. The case was only filed and already, it is seemingly beyond the point of damage control for CRIA. The question is, can CRIA recover from what may be the biggest blunder in its history?
--
Rightful ownership of information (Score:2)
!Piracy (Score:5, Informative)
For the 88th Time:
Piracy is ship to ship armed robbery. Calling copyright infringement piracy makes light of murderous thugs, and makes infringement sound worse than it is. It doesn't even work as a metaphor. When we use their misnomer, they win. Then one of two things will happen. Either infringers will be demonized people sharing 1s and 0s or the word piracy will lose its gravity.
Cue the "langwijiz morf, get/it" crowd.
And yeah, get off my lawn, or whatever other dismissiveness you want to conjure. Disagree all you want, but try to do it without dismissing me as pedantic or a grammar nazi. Try some substance.
Language matters; word choice matters. All actions start as thoughts, thoughts happen in words. By calling a government a regime, we can make overthrowing it more palatable. By calling a person a kike, nigger, rag head, witch etc, we can make them not human, so killing them won't be murder. Hacker was a positive term. The "man" (media, law, etc) has corrupted the word hacker to refer to criminals. It's like calling Nazis German over and over until the word German means Nazi. When we blur the distinction between words we lose expressiveness and have to invent awkward ways to regain specificity that we threw away out of laziness and ignorance. Yeah languages change over time, but there is evolution and there is devolution and corruption. Change is not inherently good.
And stand up for yourselves.
Last time you guys modded this "redundant", let's see if you do better this time!
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:oh joy. (Score:4, Interesting)
yeah that organized crime commited by pirates is really bad for your nation.
It is if your nation makes billions of dollars developing movies and music. Anyone find it interesting that we routinely run massive trade deficits with China but stand mute while their Government tacitly condones piracy on an industrialized scale? As much as I despise the mafia there are real people working in these industries. It's a safe assumption they don't want to work for free. Can't we find some balance on this issue somewhere between "some teenagers downloaded Britney Spears, lock 'em up!" and "information wants to be free"?
We will have that balance the moment our social and governmental attitude towards the media companies consists of: "adapt your business model to the 21st century and create an online product that people want to buy, or go bankrupt. Your choice." Until then we're trying to make sure that buggy whip manufacturers still have jobs after the advent of the automobile.
Re: (Score:2)
I bet if the cost went down that would change.
The reality is the general public seems to not value music at $0.99 cents a song. For me it would have to either be cheaper or not be lossy. I will continue to buy cds and rip them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that people don't want to go to a thousand different places for content but they want to be able to go to a few different places. A user going to the Pirate Bay will find anything in digital format whether it be a movie, a book, or music, or games, or anything. Only Amazon is positioned to provide this service and even then, the catalog is limited. Start-ups will fail because they don't have a large initial catalog and 99 cents per song adds up real quick making for a $16 cd which is the stan
Re: (Score:2)
There's already online versions of music. You can buy tracks for $0.99 from Amazon with no DRM whatsoever. They come in a nearly universal (mp3) format that is easily converted to other formats and which can run on just about anything. For slightly more you can purchase the same product from the Apple Store. Yet people continue to pirate music in fairly significant numbers. Could it just be that free > pay?
Movies are trickier. Not aware of any online movie distribution systems that aren't laced with DRM or locked into a specific vendors product. But if the music example is telling it wouldn't matter if there were -- people would keep right on pirating them.
The industry did miss the boat with online distribution but I can't be the only one that thinks that excuse is wearing thin as a justification for piracy.
The industry also earned itself a great deal of ill will, which definitely has a non-zero contribution towards piracy. Lots of people who would not pirate from a more respectable organization have no qualms about doing it to a cartel that was willing to subject minor children to interrogation and various other legal proceedings as part of an intimidation campaign. Right or wrong.
Also note, I said an online product that people want to buy. That may or may not mean buying songs and albums. It may also
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone find it interesting that we routinely run massive trade deficits with China but stand mute while their Government tacitly condones piracy on an industrialized scale?
I would, if it were true. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE50P5XZ20090126 [reuters.com]
Except most piracy is by their contractors (Score:2)
Except most piracy is by their own manufacturing contractors in other countries running a so-called "Third Shift", also known as a "Midnight Shift" or a "Ghost Shift" on the same production lines with the same equipment and workers who were used for the legitimate production of authorized copies. If they kept their manufacturing in their own political jurisdiction, they could expect some enforcement by the politicians they've bought; they don't, and so they have to go to the politicians they own and plead
Re: (Score:2)
The differenciation lies between for-profit, and not-for-profit infringement. Limiting the former limits commercial rights. Limiting the latter limits personal rights. The "balance" to copyright legislation you desire lies smack in between these two.
Unfortunately, the media distribution industry wants to make money from both. They're not interested in personal versus commercial, they want money either way.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hmm. May be that's their plan. USA will get rid of the national debt by suing Chinese people over copyright violations and slapping them with statutory penalties. Let's see, with $150000 per infringement, they only need to sue for 80 million violations to get back 12 trillion or so. They just need stronger copyright treaties.
Re: (Score:2)
Good point.
It's their custom crafted laws that make my use of the 1000 or so DVDs I have bought from them something that can be construed as a crime.
You would think that they would want it to be easier to buy than it is to "steal". Yet they soldier on with their self-destructive artistic megalomania. Most consumers are too lazy to use BitTorrent. If you lead them by the nose to a payware option they will use it. iTunes should be ample demonstration of this.
The longer the "void" remains unfilled, the more li
Re: (Score:2)
Actually I take this in a completely different context. For Congress and the White House to talk about the ails of piracy is a situation so loaded with irony it's almost painful. It's like Congress holding a summit on the ails of substance abuse and extramarital affairs.
If anything, Congress and the White House would school the MPAA and RIAA on how to best extract money from future generations (of course unfounded taxation to support a huge freaking bureaucracy isn't piracy - why that's just your gov't at
Re: (Score:2)