With news of “Republican” Sen. Orrin Hatch (a.k.a. “Open Hatch” or “Down-the-Hatch”) turning on music consumers, and lining up foursquare behind the so-called Recording Industry Association of “America’s” piling-on of people who listen to music on computers and their efforts to subvert and destroy new technology and drag us like lemmings down the cliff to the level of a primitive Third World banana republic (in standard of living, in technological progress, in status – you take your pick), joining up with lawmakers on both sides of Congress who are of predominantly “Democratic” position and who have sided foursquare with Goliath against David (i.e. such fascistic measures as “ACCOPS”), it only underscores a point long known to people on the street, that it doesn’t matter whether one is Republican or Democrat (or, as one noted radio talk-show host would call them, “Republicrat” or “Democan”), liberal or conservative, both sides are all but bought and paid for by special interests (of all stripes, not just Big Media but Big Oil, Big Money, Big This, Big That – you get the idea).

Speaking of so-called “Democrats,”; it’s interesting to see how many are of what is usually referred to as “the Left.” The two New York Senators, Chuck Schumer and Hillary Rodham Clinton (as in “Universal Health Care” a.k.a. socialized medicine), are both in the pockets of the multinational entertainment-media complex (in Hillary’s case, no surprise there; her husband, former President Bill Clinton, was also bought and paid for by the Hollywood elites, and after all, it was under his watch that the NET Act, the Sonny Bono Act, and of course the Orwellian-Stalinist DMCA all became law). Mr. Schumer, as you remember, was in on the filibustering of Miguel Estrada whom President George W. Bush sought to nominate to the U.S. Court of Appeals. (The question we may never know: Whose side would Estrada have been on in the RIAA’s vengeful vendetta against consumers?) Then there are the two California Senators, Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, who are also very left-wing. They, like Schumer and Clinton, are also bought and paid for by the MEMC. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. John Conyers makes an exception to his “End Racial Profiling” motto with respect to peer-to-peer (P2P) users on this issue, courtesy of contributions from guess whom? John McCain, the so-called “maverick,” likewise had his pockets lined by the entertainment-media complex, as had the man who would be President, John Kerry. I could go on and on, but I won’t.

But it figures. One of the key essences of socialism is Big Government (or in this case, governmental/corporate) control over every aspect of people’s lives – and in that sense, the RIAA/MPAA/IFPI/BSA etc. agenda is very much socialist. Conservatives who are of the limited-government / personal freedom philosophy (i.e. Phyllis Schlafly) have reacted with alarm at this Stalinistic power grab and tacticology, but such voices in that arena have rarely been heard (unfortunately, another “conservative” commentator, Michelle Malkin, wrote an anti-Napster article some years back; however, as she has also supported such measures as the Patriot Act and TIPS, this is not exactly a surprise).

And President Bush (a.k.a. Bush #43) also supports this RIAA pile-on against consumers – no surprise there, as both he and the members of his Administration (including Vice President Dick Cheney) all come from the corporate world, with some of them in particular having worked in the oil industry (another industry which has become more and more monopolized, with less choice for the Pee-Pull). You would think that, based on this, those useful-idiot recording “artists”-cum RIAA puppets (i.e. Liz Phair, Peter Gabriel) would pat Bush on the back. However, as “Dubyah” has an ‘R’ next to his name, most of these same people hate his guts.

Take the Dixie Chicks, for example. They have lined up in support of this anti-consumer witch hunt. This, some months after lead singer Natalie Maines told an audience in London during a Dixie Chicks concert, “Just so you know, we’re ashamed the President of the United States is from Texas.” Recently, Bruce Springsteen, at a concert, advocated impeaching Bush. “W.T.F.” Madonna has also bashed Bush in the past. And so on.

Indeed, quite a few of these “artists” are of that group that this same talk-radio host would call “Hollywood idiots.” They, like such actors as Ed Asner, Susan Sarandon, Robert Redford, Jessica Lange and Martin Sheen, live way apart from those who would buy their CD’s (one of the most extreme examples being Shania Twain, who lives with her hubby “Mutt” Lange and child in Switzerland; another is Madonna who calls England her home), and are thus insulated from those who really do struggle day and night to feed their family and keep the roof over their head without it totally caving on them, what with 3 million (and counting) job losses in the last two years alone, the decimation of the middle class, and of course the RIAA’s latest campaign of extortion. The recording wing of this community usually take part in concerts for such causes favored by liberals as “End Gun Violence” (pro-gun-control), “End The Embargo” (against Cuban dictator Fidel Castro), “Fight for Choice” (pro-abortion) and “Stop the Death Penalty” (except, presumably, for file-sharers). To say nothing of “No Nukes” (remember that one?). Peter Gabriel, for example, has done benefit concerts in the past for Amnesty International, which has been accused in some corners of having an anti-American bias.

And there’s also what some would call the obscenity of rap mogul Russell Simmons on one hand being pro-RIAA, and on the other lobbying New York State to do away with the so-called “Rockefeller” drug laws. (His position on drugs, and those of some of the rap/hip-hop figures out there, seems quite prevalent among the Hollywood idiots, as witness former “Cheers” co-star Woody Harrelson’s long-standing campaign to legalize marijuana, thus this criticism is by no means racially motivated or a reflection on the rap/hip-hop sector in particular.) The message he seems to be sending out with this duality, has had the potential to stir even further resentment among certain sections of the U.S. population.

And one final observation: It appears that musicunited.org (as in united against the consumer), which has all the makings of being an RIAA front group, was not only founded to counter the influence of groups like the Recording Artists Coalition, but also to enable the industry to drive a wedge between the “artists” and their fans in this cataclysmic, apocalyptic battle we are now witnessing. Judging from the statements made by those in that chicken outfit, this scenario may well be the case.

Politics, at its most basic, is about control. The more one group gains control of ANYTHING from the teamsters to music, there is an increase in money available to ply legislators with green persuasion, in order to either gain favorable legislation, or to gain even more power by law.

The trade of power and access to power, for money, is as old as the earliest government, and neither the Democrats nor the Republicans have the monopoly on corruption.

Perhaps the only solution is to run a true "populist" party of the people, by the people, and for the people.

Power corrupts, Absolute Power corrupts absolutely.

It has quit being a question of
"Right" v. "Left"...now it's clearly
Right v. Wrong.

Register, Read, and get Ready to Vote.
~code

Most of the artists listed at MusicUnited.org are member of the Recording Artists Coalition.

There is no difference in position.

"One of the key essences of socialism is Big Government (or in this case, governmental/corporate) control over every aspect of people’s lives "

I'm not serious very often .. I'm sure there's a perfectly logical psycological reason for this .. but to date, I haven't found it. ;p

But, this IS a very serious issue as far as I'm concerned. And I got a chill when I read what I quoted above. Because its so true .. and that's scary.

Ever since the 9/11 thing people have been throwing their rights out the window with gleeful abandon. I point to the SO CALLED "Patriot Act". Which in reality couldn't have been any less patriotic if they added the clause that, "from now on the government will be monitoring our bedrooms with hidden cameras" (in case theres a terrorist hiding under the bed, I guess).

On a lighter note .. it looks like the media is starting to come around .. and yes, even a few artists, take a look:

http://msnbc.com/news/966393.asp?0dm=s12Ak

Which proves my point . . . no matter what side of the fence the "elites" are on (or in), we all get stabbed in the back in the end.

Which, in turn, underscores why we all have to be vigilant at all times for such attacks on our freedoms.

“(The question we may never know: Whose side would Estrada have been on in the RIAA’s vengeful vendetta against consumers?)”

“And President Bush (a.k.a. Bush #43) also supports this RIAA pile-on against consumers”


I would take a guess that if Bush selected Estrada, he was not on our side. Just an educated guess there. While I think this article clearly illustrates the difficulties in choosing who to vote for, frankly, what the hell are we supposed to do? I’ll tell you what I’m going to do. I’m going to research the issues, try and find out where the politicians stand on those issues, make sure that they don’t support Bush, and then make my final dicision. I’ve tried researching the money trail for all the candidates that I’m going to be voting for in the future, and all of them have received money from all kinds of businesses. So researching the money trail got me nowhere in helping me make my decision. All I can do, is hope that I end up voting for someone who at the least can be worked with. I was watching “Meet The Press” this weekend. Tim (don’t know his last name) grilled Dick Cheney for an hour. Dick Cheney has got to be the slickest liar I’ve ever seen in politics. In some instances, he just flat out lied. But mostly he sidestepped issues, and gave a bunch of bs lengthy answers that made him look good. All in all, I don’t trust the media to give me the truths, and that includes talk radio. All I can do is start becoming more active within my government, and use my best judgment to vote.


~goingnova

People categorize themselves as belonging to a political party et. al as an excuse to not have to think for themselves. I don't know anyone that loves FoxNews AND CNN. One is right and one is left. And depending on their arbitrary preference, they let one spoon feed them biased information, and develop contempt for the other side.

Thank god for the Dixie Chicks who spoke out against Bush (R), but support his feelings on the piracy issue.. Nice to see someone stray away from their political party. Except it had nothing to do with actual intelligence; it's all about selfishness when it comes to something that personally affects them. The reason affilation doesn't matter is because 90% of people are stupid and will always be wrong. Political party affilation only applies when greed isn't a more present and driving force.

Thank Bill Clinton for the DMCA
Thank George Bush for the Patriot Act.

Who's your favorite now?

Abosolutely, w-b. But the problem is that most people wont stand up for their rights. Most of them live in a little bubble of a fantasy world, where its all about the "now". Never mind that your children have to grow up in the "controlled" world that their parents leave behind due to their own negligence.

I think back on what it must have been like when government was first established. Just after the constitution went into action. These were men that believed that took office because they honestly believed that they could create a better world "for the people".

For instance they gave us the right to "bare arms against a corrupt government."

that's the kind of government I want .. the kind we once had in this country. A government that says "hey, if we start to get corrupt and powermad, then by all means .. shoot us!"

You mean I have to pick just one, Sherminator. I guess I'll have to go with Clinton then, DCMA is going to be a lot easier to dismantle than the Patriot Act.

elections coming up people vote them out!!!!!!

oops .. typo. DMCA, there are just too many of these stupid little acronyms.

Here are a couple of interesting and appropriate quotes.

"The only difference between Bush and Gore is the velocity with which their knees hit the floor when corporations knock at the door."
-- Ralph Nader, 2000 election.


"Fascism should more properly be called Corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power."
... Benito Mussolini

StoneWall, you're right on. People love tossing away from their rights so that they can do anything to save their Freedom (oh the irony).

Our Government (Reality): Ok everybody, September 11 was really scary. We're just going to set some of your rights aside for awhile and make sure you are safe. You might feel like you're in the wrong country for awhile, but when the threat is elminated, we'll repeal the Patriot Act, we promise. See, we have to be able to spy on *everyone* and do what *we* think is right because *anyone* can be a terrorist and terrorists can *anywhere*. If you don't like it, then you want 3,000 more Americans to die! Under the Patriot Act that makes you a terrorist. For those of you that support us, you all get a little prize.. how do all of you like your brand new shiny American Flags? True Americans love freedom, and will protect it at any cost. Even if it means investing 100% trust in their government.

I'm scared to live in my country now.

hiker, here are some quotes for you.

"An evil exists that threatens every man, woman and child of this great nation. We must take steps to insure our domestic security and protect our homeland. "
- Adolph Hitler, 1922, Creating the Gestapo

"Our first priority must always be the security of our nation… We will win this war; we'll protect our homeland"
- George Bush, 1/29/2002


"Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to greater danger. It works the same in any country."

-Hermann Goering (1893 - 1946)
Second in Command of the Third Reich

As my dad has always said: "THEY ARE THE SAME HORE IS DIFFERENT CLOTHING!"

As my dad has always said: "THEY ARE THE SAME HORE IN DIFFERENT CLOTHING!"

note: Quotes taken from www.theboywhocriediraq.com

I'll be voting, but even that process is rigged. What the hell do the American people need with an Electoral college anyway?

Since I'm thinking of it .. did anyone happen to check out that link:

http://www.msnbc.com/news/966393.asp?0cb=-314178650

Is it just my imagination .. or does David Johnson from Warner look like the devil?

Of course I know he's not really the devil .. It's a toss up between Cary Sherman, and George W. at the moment .. as to who that coveted title goes to.

But Johnson's ears are definately pointed .. hmm .. maybe he's a lower-level imp or something.

It doesn't matter what political party you see yourself as. We as the people have to get educated and stand together or else the people in power will continue to use division to control us and keep us from standing together against their tyranny.

We are the Consumers.We are the Voters.We are the people.

TheSherminator - Dosen't look like a lot of difference between what Hitler said and what Bush said 80 yrs later, does it. Lets hope history will not repeat itself!

I couldn't agree more, Sherminator. I sat there shaking my head the first time I heard of the Patriot act. I thought my god people, don't you see that if you give them this much power, you'll never get it back?!

But, yeah that's it .. if the government wants some bill that will more effectively rape our rights all they have to do is cry Terrorist!

Never mind the fact that we really only spent a few months combating terrorism before Bush launched into a war on forein "oil". Oh, but what was I thinking? That WAS terrorist related .. we were looking for "weapons of mass destruction". Where ARE those by the way?

Everybody, I never hear anybody mention MTV/VH1. I suggest that we all boycott these two music industry fronts.

hmmm maybe 12yr old file swappers have them, I wouldnt put it past bush to try it.

http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle/

Novato man sues RIAA check it out
if the link does not work go to
www.sfgate.com.......technology section

I'm with you on that one tasadar24. I'm also boycotting some popular local radio stations, and other tyrannical businesses. But that's been going on for me for a while now.

It is scary to know that we have a Hitler running the US huh? But there's no question in my mind who's behind the decisions made in this current administration. That's Dick. He's a truly evil man that cares only about profits.

~goingnova

I'm not as fast to claim this war is necessarily about oil, although it may very well be and in the end, it doesn't matter because our political system is severely messed up.

I have a different perspective that I realized when watching a 9/11 documentary a few days before the 2nd anniversary. I thought to myself "We should just take over the whole f'ing middle east." After all, that's where these lunatics come from. Well, there's no Iraqi Freedom and there's no WMD's. What we do have is control of a country right in the center of the middle east. Remember the axis of evil? Iran will succomb. The UN is already all over their ass for their nuclear program. I say what we're doing is simple: taking over the whole f'ing middle east and saying screw the world, this is BS and yes, we get the oil too. But who knows.

We will rebuild Iraq. It is a HUGE investment with HUGE dividends. Oil? Yes, definitely. Also - the United States' little baby will be flourishing right in the middle of an area we desperately want to control, influence, and put people to work. The middle east will look like the western world in 100 years.


Way off topic. How'd we get here? It's probably my own fault. Apologies.

I was waiting for this to happen!

lol .. Leadnotfollow. Maybe, it'll be a joint effort between the RIAA and the Gov.

I WISH WE COULD ALL JUMP IN AND SUPPORT THIS BRAVE FELLOW!!!!!!!YES GO FOR IT!

As I have stated before, I shall once again state....The "Special Interests" groups of this country are a plague that may well have our foefathers rolling over in thier graves! These organizations need to be removed from our government at any cost (including the proposition of a law that would IMPEACH ANY PUBLIC OFFICIAL [I.E. Senators...And EVEN THE PRESIDENT] found to be dealing with any "special interest" group)! This is the ONLY WAY that our country will recover from the plague of laws that has riddled the U.S. Constitution FULL OF HOLES! It is time my friends to send a strict message to the "Special Interests", YOU ARE NOT WANTED IN OUR GOVERNMENT!

"We're not asking anybody to tell us what songs they downloaded, we're not threatening to break people's legs," Oppenheim said. "But if you would like some comfort that you can sleep at night after you engaged in illegal behavior, here's a way to get that comfort."
- Matthew Oppenheim, RIAA senior vice president for legal affairs.

It makes music sharing sound so dirty, I love it! Id love five min with this bitch, oh and by the way, is there ANYONE who has lost any sleep over this? Id love to know so would old Matty O.

StillNotBlac..., I totally agree with you there. We need to get business out of politics. Not until then will we start to have a democracy that works again.

~goingnova

no power....no problem


vote for: George Clinton or Bill Bush

That Warner guy in the MSNBC story DOES look like Satan ... hmmm, better check him for "666" tatoos!

Okay ... now that I've left that lovely visual image in people's heads, I'll beat it.

Leadnotfollow, great link.
Here is a more direct link (to the same thing) that won't work until you delete the tags: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/09/11/BU281246.DTL&type=tech

This is great!
Speaking of the Amnesty program, have all of you seen the amount of signatures compiled at EFF? Almost 37,000.

I hope this guy has some money behind him! and also I hope there is a group out there that will stand with him!

I'm going to state again that while voting is vitally important, it is not the true catalyst for change, there is no guarantee that the person we vote in is going to take our side on this issue unless we stay in CONSTANT contact with them, letting them know how we feel. The only way this government is ever going to work is if we involve ourselves beyond the act of voting, which does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING if we don't stay involved after the elections.

So vote, then write. and write, and write.

The reason why we are all so cynical about politics is because in the past, people cast their vote and then sat back and did nothing, expecting the person they voted for to read their minds and know what they wanted. But there has been a huge shift in the last year. If you look at the antiwar protests and the current spunk in the democratic party, you'll see that it's due entirely to the efforts of sites like moveon.org and their massive petitioning, letter writing and fundraising efforts. This is true power of the masses and the government is taking heed. Huge campaign donations pale when faced with the power of the voters. When the constituents in a state write letters of overwhelming disapproval of the RIAA's tactics, the polititian will side with us. They want our vote, and if no views from voters with an opposite viewpoint come in, they go with the majority, which we clearly are.

We're at a crossroads, folks, the nation is finally doing their job and becoming involved with government. For the first time in years the system is starting to work.

Have some faith in yourselves.

Vote, then stay involved, write your reps, sign those petitions. Never let your leaders forget your point of view. In that, we will prevail. Vote alone with no follow up, and we will fail.

I've lost sleep over it StillNotBlack .. I feel terrible that the RIAA is losing money. Uh, the artists .. I meant the artists.

I dont want to get into the whole middle east argument, but.... does anyone know anything about 9/11, Osama, Sadam etc, that didnt come from local/gov media hounds, really? of course im not saying that the american spin machine would pop out a couple of lies here and there, perish the thought, but these are the same swine who happen to think that the poor widdle BIG 5 are hard done by!

"I'd love five min with this bitch.."
Haha. We all would.

We need his email....to make contact!!! so he knows how united we are on this fight.......and hes not alone!

Also, write a letter to Entertainment Weekly and protest their pro-RIAA fluff piece "Going for a Song"

Write them at ew_letters@ew.com

Here's mine:


I'd like to express how disappointed I am in your RIAA fluff piece "Going for a Song".

I think you're making an incorrect assumption that the average consumer cares a whit about the troubles of the recording industry, a problem that they created for themselves by not embracing file-sharing when they had a chance.

File sharing is here, it has 60 million users, it will stay that way.

File sharing is also the single best thing to happen for music lovers everywhere around the world, it allows people to find rare and out of print recordings as well as the ability to sample artists that they are considering making a purchase on. And it can easily be made profitable to copyright holders, so easily, in fact, it might be called a no-brainer.

The Electric Frontier Foundation (www.eff.org) and Boycott-RIAA (www.boycott-riaa.com) have both offered solutions that will get artists paid without changing the free nature of p2p.

One idea is compulsory licensing, back in the 1920s the recording industry tried to shut down radio in fear that people would no longer buy music, they settled for compulsory licensing and eventually adapted to the medium.

Another idea, such as tacking on .50 cents to isp bills as a copyright fee would net the recording industry at least $45 million a month.

The RIAA, however, has rejected these ideas in favor of draconian lawsuits against the consumer in hopes that it will frighten people back to an outdated mode of music distribution.

The limited selection and high prices of pay music sites is not incentive enough to draw people away from the obvious benefits of peer-to-peer file sharing. These benefits, apart from the obvious, include the availability of a wide variety of lost music. Currently only 20% of all recorded music is available to purchase, the other 80% is locked in vaults by the industry, never to be heard again. A good percentage of the unavailable 80% is available on p2p.

So the RIAA has only two options:

Embrace file sharing through cumpulsory licensing or a fee on isp bills and reap hundreds of millions of dollars.

or

Continue their present course of suing and alienating the consumers and face certain obliteration. The more people know about what the RIAA is doing, the less patience they will have. The RIAA is fighting an endless game of whack-a-mole that they can only lose.

The growing boycott of RIAA music will expand exponentially. People have no sympathy for corporations. They, in fact, love to see monopolies crumble. And crumble the RIAA's affiliated big 5 must. It's literally us against them, the citizen against the monopoly. Who do you think the public will side with? Thousands are already, at this minute signing petitions on eff.org and boycott-riaa.com to call for a stop to the lawsuits and call for hearings on p2p that involve all spectrums of the issue. I guarantee the audience will be filled with angry consumers.

As far as the artists are concerned, they've been mistreated by the labels for 85 years, it's about time they broke away from the system and went independent, then they can recieve the lion's share of that $15 cd price instead of pennies.

Thank you for your consideration.

p.s. if you edit, please keep in the information about www.eff.org and www.boycott-riaa.com, it is vital to this issue that all sides get fair representation.

As a person who works in politics, from the middle to the extreme left depending on the issue, I see more help coming from the Democrats and liberitarians than from the right. The concerns of the 20 or so politicians I work with, and work for, is that, their main concern is how to balance the issue in everyone's interest. None have taken, or agree with the stance than Oral Hatchet has taken, and all I have talked to on the issue are in complete disagreement with their own who have sided with the RIAA and it's allies, prematurely.
In the 5 western states that I cover, our political allies and some foes, are trying to hammer out a program, of sorts, that will benefit both sides and, most importantly, deal with the issue of rampant lawsuits. Most agree the lawsuits are wrong, for varying reasons.

Now, if I could get a few of them to comment publically....but it is election year and that is the part that pisses me off. Backbones seem to get awful soft this close to elections. But....that is politics.

I'll keep the issue fresh in their minds, though....this I promise.

We are the Consumers. How long are we the Voters. How long will we be able to vote. Better find out now who to vote for. Think about it

paulruss, is there a link to the lyrics of "Going for a Song"? I've never even heard of it .. and I thought maybe we could post them here so we can make fun.

LeadNotFollow...

I have formulated an educated guess on what exactly happened on 9/11. I don't think anybody will agree with me on it though. But as far as hearing any popular person's views on the subject, I personally have not heard any. I know that there are 4 ladies in NY who's husbands died, and they are working really hard to find the truth, allthewhile the presidential administration and the FBI are working equally hard to the keep the truth from them.

~goingnova

fuck it! im gonna copy and paste this sites addy and spam the world. nuff said. the more people that read this site the better. Maybe this is the first "good spam" the world has ever seen... [oh and blow torches down people, no need for flames here, I hate spam as much as the next guy, but lets call this one my funny little experiment] Educate people.

Lets here your theory Goingnova, if people dont like it... "AND?" everone has a right to a theory/opinion no room for censorship here [or anywhere really]

lol .. "good spam" would be a first.

I'm still thinking of this RIAA fluff song .. if they can do it why can't we? And, I even have a title .."The RIAA Took My Money Away, And Now I Live In A Shoebox ... (which is really uncomfortable)". It's a work in progress .

Facts as I see them:

1. The wealthy, who consider themselves the “privileged few”, are running our country. They don’t care about people. The care about profits. Their profits. They wish only to keep themselves “the privileged few”.

2. The wealthy are using our politicians to keep themselves as “the privileged few”.

3. There were 2 hours between the time that the planes went totally off course and the time that they crashed into the towers.

4. The FBI knew ahead of time exactly what was going to happen.

5. Shortly after the incident, the FBI came in and took all of the documents and related information away from the air traffic controllers.


Speculations:

Here’s what I think what happened. And this is horrible to think this for some, but this is what I really believe.

I think in order for the wealthy in the US to make even more money, they needed to establish more control over the Middle East, since that’s where most of the oil is. Dick Cheney knew that he and his other wealthy comrades could stand to make a lot of money off the War with Iraq, but at the same time, was not sure how to sell the American people on that idea.

As soon as George Bush took office, he started making some shady back door deals with the Saudi Arabian Government to establish more control in the Middle East. This started to anger Osama Bin Laden’s Alqueda, due to the fact that they have been warring with the leadership in the Middle East as well as the wealthy in the US.

I think that the Presidential administration, as well as the FBI, and maybe even the CIA all knew what was coming and did nothing to stop it. I don’t think they planned it that way, but I’ll almost bet you that they didn’t shed tears over the 3,000 that died in the mass murder of 9/11. I think they padded each other on the back, because now they had more of a chance to sell the American people on taking out Sadam, which would give them even more power and control over the Middle East.



That’s what I think that happened.


~goingnova

StoneWall, it's an article in their print magazine, sorry, should've clarified. In the article they described p2p as "ruinous technology" and the tone of the two and a half page article is that of the RIAA is an old pal who "gulped hard and got back in the fight" "it's the music industry's most aggressive strike back against ruinous technology".

They also state that "Thwarted in its attempts to shut down faceless software programs, the music industry reluctantly muscled into the homes of its consumers last week"

Reluctantly, my ass.

"But confess now and walk free"

The article's tone is way too soft on the RIAA, they report the news, but do not report the backlash, which is a vital part of the story.

The letters section is the most read section of the magazine, if they get enough letters they will devote space to the issue, the kind of space we need to reach the magazine's millions of readers.

ew_letters@ew.com

Seriously, this is a chance for us to take our issue to the masses.

we will never know....

Let's not forget all those meek and quiet librarians who shredded their records in protest of the Patriot Act to protect our privacy amd thus showing that they are true patriots.

God bless real Americans who won't be intimidated by bad laws and evil empires.

Almost forgot: F*** the RIAA and MPAA

paulruss, I think your right. I think the only way we are going to be able to start making a difference is if we write, write, write.


~goingnova

The issue of invading Iraq was first brought up in '89 by Paul Wolfowitz and rejected by every president until Dubya as "extremist"

Here's the org that Wolfowitz built (read and shudder):
http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm

Read the list of names at the bottom of the page, these people are tied to the white house, bechtel and halliburton. Read the rest of the site, it's chilling.

This whole movement of Wolfowitz' started back in '89 and now every one of they guys who helped write his plan back then is in Dubya's staff, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, they're all there, unchecked.

Organizations like moveon.org are chipping away at this team, though, and the dems are on the offensive because of the efforts of the people of this country.

oh, and as always, copy and paste the link, for some reason gets placed at the end of all the links you click on here.

wow, paulruss, thanks for those links.

~goingnova

goingnova, I think you're very close to hitting the nail on the head with your conspiracy post. but I'll bet while they were expecting an attack, they had no idea how bad it would be. I'll wager, though, that the severity of their attack was a boon to them. I'd go so far as to say that one of them said, "well, Iraq should be a cakewalk, now!"

You're very welcome. Do spread the word. Thanks.

I'm going to back-peddle here a little bit since I missed out on some of this, and say thanks for the info Paulruss.

I think that the major media might be starting to sway a bit, but you're right .. the majority of them are extremely soft on the RIAA. I've yet to see a story on television (with the exception of TechTv, that is) that does not give only the RIAA's lopsided view of things. The only way to know what's really going on is to be online .. and that really sucks. Especially since the people online are most likely fileswappers and already know both sides of the issue.

I'm not saying there's some media conspiracy to keep this information out of the public eye (I'm not saying there isn't, for that matter) .. but I can't explain how a twelve year old girl can get sued by a major Corp. like the RIAA, never to have the story appear on the 6 o'clock news.

The democrats want to give more control to the government. The republicans want to give more control to corporations. Either way we lose.

Brianna LaHara was mentioned in the EW article, but only as a warning. The effect I got reading the paragraph about her was that they believed that no one should feel they are above the law, that it doesn't matter if you're a twelve year old girl in a housing project or a 50 year old bus driver, if you share, you're as good as toast. "Consider yourself warned..." writes the author.

Again, EW is about as mainstream as media gets, it's got huge, huge circulation. I strongly encourage everyone here to write them.

ew_letters@ew.com

IFeelFree, I think you may be oversimplifying, though. Democrats want the government to look out for the well being of Americans, they want everyone in this country to have good education, and heathcare, that means, however that the rich must pay more taxes and everyone else must pay a little less (or more).

Taxes are the boogeyman. People don't want to pay them, but if they knew that the money was going to services that benefit them, I think they'd sing a different tune.

The current problem with Bush's tax cuts is that they come at a time when he's also asking for $89billion for the war effort, money that could eliminate all state debts, put every kid through school, eliminate hunger, hell, it could do a lot of good here at home.

Anyway, those $89billion are not coming from our taxes, they're going to come from the treasury, who will have to print up more money to pay it, money that doesn't exist. It's predicted that we'll be facing a budget deficit of $3trillion in a few years time.

Now, the Dems may tax more, but the money goes to the people in the form of services like healthcare and education reform instead of unwinnable wars. So, under the dems would there be more government control over social services? Yes. But it works for the middle and lower classes of the country and limits the freedoms of monopolies.

Clinton made multibillion dollar corporations pay all their back taxes, Bush gave it all back, that's when our budget surplus turned into a deficit again. Bush could've put it to good use. The corporations don't need to be rewarded for not paying taxes, they need to do their duty and pay taxes for the good of the country. And republican deregulation allowed them to have all their assets overseas, where they do not have to pay taxes.

The WTO has allowed major corporations to set up sweatshops across the border to lower their costs and close more factories at home, at the loss of millions of jobs.

Those who have should do their bit for those who have not. That is what the democratic party stands for, if they falter on that, it's our job as citizens to whip them back into shape, luckily for us, they love that.

Bush thinks that allowing corporations to get away with murder will stimulate the economy. Instead, we have 3million lost jobs and a growing budget deficit worse than any recorded in US history.

For the first time since the depression, more jobs being lost than regained. All because of the Republicans.

So would I prefer a little government controlled healthcare? You bet! Do I think that the government should regulate big business and the media? You bet! Do I think that the people should have more power to change the way the goverment works by more than just voting and taking the power away from big business? You bet!

With that said, even though until recently the dems have been toothless whipping boys for the republicans, I can say, that when the dems are progressive and pro people, I am proud to side with the dems overwhelmingly over the fat bastard republicans.

So there is a difference and when big government works for the people and the people work for it, the democrats are the clearly superior party.

I'll write to EW, but the things to remember are:

1. The majority of articles written in EW are fluff pieces for the entertainment industries. In fact, it's very hard to find an article that speaks out against any medium in their pages.

2. They're owned by our good friends at AOL-Time-Warner. Once again, propaganda bought and paid for...

Wow, I couldn't agree more with what you wrote there paulruss. I think there arn't enough people that understand that either. They think that "government control" is a bad thing, when really it makes it so that big corportations are in control of our public services, the government is, and whith "we the people" taking part in the government, that means we have control over our public services. Anyway, I went through the "Going For a Song" slime article. I did my best to pick it apart and wrote EW my email. Hope it helps. I mentioned the boycott several times and the boycott-riaa site as well.

~goingnova

Paulruss
I will have to strongly diagree with you on dem vs rep. If I am going to give up something I would rather give in favor of the big corporations. It is a lot easier to boycott corporations as we are doing now with the recording industry then it is with government. If you don't believe me, come April 15, don't pay your taxes...you WILL end up in prison. If I don't by a music cd from the RIAA monopoly for the rest of my life I won't wind up in prison. As to your comments about 3 million jobs dissapearing, check and see how many things that you have that are made in China thanks to Bill "need a blowjob from Monica" Clinton's illegal Chinese campaign contributers. Remember Mr. Huang? Finally, do you actually believe the dems are there to help to little guy out...their in it for the money and power too. Also, where was Clinton when Enron, Worldcom, Global Crossing, Tyco, et al. started to cook the books in the mid 1990's? The dems are just as crooked and callus as the rest of them are.
Wait till they try to run a health care MONOPOLY!! Why do you want to limit YOUR choice in health care to one provider...Think about that...If they screw up ( such as remove the wrong organ, etc), what recourse do you have? The marketplace is the best form of regulating abusive business and we will demonstrate that by seriously clipping the RIAA and their members

So... when someone knocks on your door and tells you "Hi, I am from the government, I am here to help you" go get the guns and start shooting. The last time a nation worshipped it's goverment it fell hard (Nazi Germany)
When someone begs me to buy a CD from big music, too bad, because I will not buy.

As for my votes, they will go to either the Constitution or the Libertarian Parties. As for my money, well....it talks!

I am a voter,and I registered as a Independent back some years now . I must say I just don't trust the Democrats or the Republicans . These elected officals are getting payed under the table to screw us all the time , to tell you the truth I'm sick of it..I just hope we can take back our country some day so the next generation will have a future. Long Live the USA!

f-the-riaa. I see where you're coming from on the issue, however it is much more difficult to push for regulation on industry than it is to push for legislation on issues. The thing that most people don't take into account about democrats, (I think, in the worst of cases the dems themselves) is that the reason why most dems belong to the party is because at one time, the dems stood for allowing the people to govern for themselves. What's been happening, I think, is that the people, for a long time, have been silent, except in voting, and when left to their own devices, dems and republicans will legislate in a vacuum, without public involvement they tend to address the concerns of business more favorably. The difference lately has been that people who are democrats have been acting more lately than ever to voice their disapproval of the way the party has handled things, and the party has responded to that favorably. So a very new and public minded democratic party is emerging.

I agree with everything you said about Bill Clinton, he was a deeply flawed president, he, so often, said one thing to his supporters but did another. WTO was mostly his doing and he spoke pro-choice, but passed more pro-life legislation than any president in history. He was an intelligent, passionate (wink) president, but on the whole, a very slippery one.

Also, I never would advocate one healthcare system, but I do think that a program that makes sure that every American can get coverage with whatever provider they like at little or no cost to them (whether that means a healthcare tax or not, I don't know) is a good one.

It's not just the Chinese contributors that have cost American jobs, but unemployment was on the decline during the last administration.

The dems do not want worship, they want people to tell them what to do, that's a core tenet to their party, they don't want to rule alone, that's a rediculous assumption, they legislate the way their constituents want them to, and that takes involvement from the people.

And I would never ever endorse give anything in favor of the big corporations, they have zero motivation to give people what they want, they can't and won't take requests from people and unless they're legislated and regulated, they will rule like the democratic image you so fear. At least with the dems in office, they will feel obliged to listen, as long as you speak.

But the democratic party that's taking shape yet harkens back to it's namesake, democracy, a party that is by the people for the people, and if the people want a national healthcare system, then that's what the dems will push for, if they don't then the dems will not push for it. They listen. The evidence of that is abundant now more than it has been in the past 30 years of the party. People are writing their reps more than ever now and the tone of the party reflects the passions of their constituents.

Just a year ago I would've agreed with you completely, hell, I would've said exactly what you said. But lately the democratic party has a new fire under it's butt, and that party is us, and when we say jump, they jump. I like that, and it gives me more faith and hope every day.

At the end of the day, we all vote our concience, I think the Constitution and Libertarian parties are great, I have nothing negative to say about them, I like the fact that we have a broad range of parties to choose from in this two party system (wink). I do not begrudge you your opinion at all, I think we all want what's best for the country and will put our faith in the party we think will serve us best, but we also must place faith in ourselves to do our part post election day.

Respect to you, f-the-riaa.

paulruss:

Hey, I'm a democrat. I've never voted republican in my entire life. Nevertheless, I think it's just the lesser of two evils. I have to admit, though, the strong support the democrats have recently given the entertainment industry is making me think about voting for some republicans in the next election. In particular, I refuse to vote for anyone who supports the actions of the music industry.

paulruss:

Where is that Entertainment Weekly article? I did a Google search and came up with nothing.

IFeelFree, I think we need to look on this as something more than a few rotten apples spoiling the bunch, in general terms, I think the dems have been doing better now then they have in 30 years, more specifically, there are still representatives that support the industry, this is not a reflection on the party as a whole but tells us who we need to put pressure on, and let them know if they do not legislate our way we will not vote for them in the next election. It's that kind of pressure they respond to. If they don't, we vote 'em out for someone better.

There are more issues than the RIAA on their plate, so you have to consider where they stand on everything and decide whether or not they're going to match your views on the majority of issues.

It's a tough choice.

I know I demonized the republicans a lot in my previous post, but there are those who I believe are doing the right thing right now by criticizing the current administration on the cost of the war and what it will mean to us at home.

Like I said, it all boils down to individuals in the end, not just the party as a whole, if the party seems to be in the majority a shady affair to you than vote with a party you think is mostly on the up and up.

I've been pretty harsh on both parties until recently and felt that the dems were the lesser of two evils, but lately they have the fire and the spunk that many progressives have been crying out for lately, and that to me shows that they're beginning to remember what being a democrat is about. I'm going to keep reminding them.

It's not the democrats that have been giving strong support to the music industry, just a few individuals. Let them know how you feel.

Do some homework and find out how many fall on what side of the issue in all the parties, then pick the party you want to support.

I could be wrong, I'll have to do more homework too. But demonizing an entire party makes little sense to me.

Just something to think about, what do you think?

IFeelFree, it's a print article in the current issue on the newstands, so it most likely won't be online until next week when the new issue goes on sale.

If you go to your local supermarket, browse through to the news section and read the article, put the magazine back on the rack and then you can decide whether or not you want to write your letter.

Paulruss,
Good points there. My main point here is that it is a whole hell of a lot easier to tell a business to F*** off then the government because government can imprison us, thus let's not give them any more power then what is needed. Internal Revenue service, NSA, Total Information Awareness, Post Office, Patriot act, you get the picture.
The true meaning of independence is not being dependent upon others, especially entities that have become too large. Example, Wal*Mart, open 24 hours with very competive prices reasonable selection, etc. But if Wal*Mart becomes way too big and drives out all competition (we have a super Wal*Mart in my hometown of 30,000) then all the desirable qualities WILL dissappear. Prices will go up, they won't need to be open 24 hours etc. On the other hand, when they get too large they could very likely collapse under their own weight and internal bureaucracy. Case in point, it was argued in the late 1960s that General Motors had gotten too big (55% market share) and should be split up. In 1973/74 we had America's first gas crisis and Toyota, Datsun and other Japanese carmakers saw a market in fuel efficient cars and stepped in. In 1979, we had our second crisis, cementing in the Japanese makes into the American market permanently. GM's market share is now around 30%.
Our best way to secure personal independence is to think that way. I generate my own electicity, grow my food, supply my water...and thanks to junk mail.. my heat, and most important, teach others the same.
--... ...-- 's

I'd like to know exactly how Bush supports the RIAA.

Any links would be appreciated.

And if anything, we have Bill Clinton to thank for this whole mess.

He takes donations from Spielberg, Sheen, Streisand, etc... and signed the DMCA into law.

paulruss:

Unfortunately, both of my senators (Senators Boxer and Feinstein, both democrats) are pro-RIAA and voted for the DMCA. I just can't bring myself to vote for them next election (assuming they run for re-election). If the republican or independant opponents look good, I may have to jump ship.

Fortunately, my representative, democrat Lois Capps did vote against the DMCA, so she'll get my vote.

Feinstein and Boxer's days are numbered.

Almost no guy (or girl) I know likes them, but there has been no one with enough charisma and name recognition to take them on.

Here's hoping for the next election...

Great article! We actually put together a spreadsheet to see who had accepted the most "dirty" money from the media people. This was gathered from data from the Center for Responsive Politics and opensecrets.org. Of the people still in office, it looks like the big takers were George W. Bush, Hillary Clinton(big suprise since her hubby gave them the ammo for this mess), John Kerry, Barbara Boxer, Richard Gephardt, Charles E. Shumer, John McCain, and Howard Vermin(aka. Berman). There were many others including Feinstein, Daschle, Burns, Hollings, Kennedy and even Howard Dean. It would probably be good to keep a list to let people know where "their" representatives stand and who they really work for.

IFeelFree, you did the right thing in choosing not to vote for them, you looked at their stance and decided that they are not acting in your best interests, despite your attempts to ask them to consider your point of view.

In the end, it all boils down to who's running, any party is going to have grey area, if nothing about one party appeals to you then you must pick one that does, but even then there are going to be candidates who may not jibe with what you want. It takes a lot of work to exercise citizenship. It took me a long long time to realize that.

For years I believed that I would do whatever I needed to do to survive even the worst administrations, that no matter what happened, I would find a way to fend for myself, so I stayed out of it.

The events of a couple of years ago changed all that for all of us, I think. First, I started watching the news, I found out that I didn't like what I was seeing, I had thought Dubya was a lame duck, then I started seeing the connections to haliburton and the obvious direction that the war on terror was going, I started paying attention to the emails I was getting from moveon.org.

I saw bowling for columbine and went to Michael Moore's site, and while I always take everything he says with a grain of salt, his site linked to the guardian and bbc, the view of the world I got from those sites was very different from those I saw on the big three (cnn, msnbc and fox) and realized that journalistic integrity existed everywhere outside of the us. I then went back to moveon and tompaine.com and started reading the editorials there, I started cross-referencing to other news sites to make sure they weren't blowing a lot of hot air. Besides the invective, there was a lot of truth there, disturbing facts.

I started letter writing and signing the petitions at moveon.org and have since been involved with this an many other organizations trying to make positive change not only for the US, but worldwide.

I haven't gone to that wierd place where they hold up banners (I don't take that kind of thing too seriously) but I try to do what I can in a small way. I've also looked at my life and tried to improve it in slow sure steps.

The world is a screwy place, nothing is ever as clear as it seems, and everything needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

In the end, hopefully, we all do our homework and make informed choices and try to respect the choices others make.

I think in some way, we've all done that in the last couple of years. Activism seems to be everyone's favorite pasttime these days. Frankly, I hope it's a fad that stays with us.

Bless you all,

Sorry about the verbosity, I'm just feeling chatty today.

Note to the folks, remember when it's time to vote that Michigan's John Conyers supports these scum, apparently in return for an all expenses paid vacation in Thailand... gee, wonder what he wanted there...

There was a reason for the Don't-Buy-Thai boycott, and while no evidence of misconduct (beyond supporting the terrorist org known as the RIAA) exists on the part of Mr Conyers - his actions hardly give any good reason to re-elect him... so don't.

Just my two pennysworth.

-user

dumby, great work. I'd like to put them on the spot and see what they have to say.

Actually, although Conyers is an asshole, it was James Sensenbrenner who went to Thailand on RIAAirlines.

I and others have mentioned this before. We boycott-riaa "members" need to (1) list ALL the candidates in the upcomming elections and (2) find out the views of said candidates then (3) debate and deliberate among ourselves right here in these boards and (4) create some sort of poll among ourselves as to whom to endorse. The "poll among ourselves" should be irrespective of whom we each can vote for/against because of our state/region (just cause I am from Tn don't mean I can't endorse/not endorse "Joe Blow" from Alaska.)

Bill, can we get ya to put together some sort of thing here along these lines? A vote on whom to encorage/discorage others to vote for?

A pre-endorsement poll?

Shmoo, of Electric Gypsy

Great Idea, Shmoo!

Also, we NEED an official "membership" of some sort. Maybe list 100 statements that each of us can agree or not agree with (sample-"I think that record companies are evil and that they cooporate in a monopolistic way." --check yes or no) --The "yes" answer always tending to be "pro" boycott-riaa, the "no" answer always tending to be "pro" music industry-- then each member gets a score from 1 to 100 which they have attatched to thier username or something.

Na, screw all that...

but it WOULD be a good idea to have some sort of "official membership"

and we need secret decoder rings!

Shmoo, of Electric Gypsy
(100/100 score)

YEA! Secret decoder rings!!! ; - )

Hey, I said it before, I'll say it again Shmoo, your band's cover of "one way or another" rocks! You've got just the right vocalist to pull that off too. Keep rock'n Shmoo!

I'm voting for Howard Dean. I think he's got the best chance to not only beat George W., but to actually get things done when he gets into the White House. I tried fallowing the money trail for each candidate, and it lead me nowhere. I found out just about every politician there is has been given money by one or more shady businesses. That's my take.

~goingnova

Ah, secret decoder rings !!
But wait a minute , What does B7 mean?
DOH !!!

I think it is obvious that it does not matter if you are liberal, or Conservative, Democrat or Republican. I think we are well represented from both sides against the RIAA.

You can find out the voting record of your senators and congresspersons at:

www.congress.org

DMCA was voted on in 1998. With a little hunting around you can find how your leaders voted on this.

I have been voting Libertarian for over 10 years.

No, I do not feel I am "wasting my vote".

Keep voting "Republocrat" and wonder why nothing changes. They are the same party with a differnt name.

Screw Democrats and Republicans. Vote Libertarian. They believe in very limited government and personal liberties. What amazes me is I hear all the time, "well I would vote Libertarian, but I would be throwing my vote away!" If everyone who said that actually voted Libertarian, they would stand a chance of being a strong 3rd party. VOTE LIBERTARIAN SCREW THE RIAA!

dumby is totally right. i independently researched it today and found the same names!

This is hilarious: http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2003/09/16/arts/20030916_POPLIFE_IMAGE.html?8hpib

Read it- it's great.

Anti-RIAA: Right on the money ... thank-you

http://sensenbrenner-is-nuts.blogspot.com

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/06/15/1345223

TESTIMONY IN DOWNING STREET HEARINGS...