Step One: Get a key position at a think tank.
Step Two: Adjust the focus of the think tank.
Step Three: Support Dubious Viewpoints.
Step Four: Have Paid “Fellows” Write Op-Eds.
Step Five: Profit!
Step One: Get a key position at a think tank.
Step Two: Adjust the focus of the think tank.
Step Three: Support Dubious Viewpoints.
Step Four: Have Paid “Fellows” Write Op-Eds.
Step Five: Profit!
Hey! What happened to the “?” Not to mention the underpants…
Posted by Faza (TCM) | November 16, 2011, 11:44 pmHmm, so you’re saying that a Google executive participates in like-minded organisations that lobby Washington? Isn’t that what every major company in the US is doing?
Thanx for the link to Cory’s speech; I hadn’t seen that one yet.
I’ll come back with comments after I’ve viewed it.
I agree with Faza on this one though: it’s missing the famous “?” step.
Posted by Pieter | November 17, 2011, 8:41 amI thought that was a pretty interesting speech by Cory. Can you point to any specific parts of the video that you object to, Robert?
Posted by Pieter | November 17, 2011, 10:56 pmIt does not hold together logically, Cory does not seem to know anything about copyright law, and he does not point to an example of a country where freedom of speech flourishes without copyright law. Basically, he’s a mediocre science fiction writer posing as an intellectual, doing lobbying work for a major corporation without realizing it. Other than that, it was fine.
Posted by roblevine1 | November 17, 2011, 11:37 pmHe does seem to know enough about (c) to get angry when a photo of his wife’s was lifted, as I recall. What goes around, comes around?
Posted by Faza (TCM) | November 18, 2011, 6:49 amI know you and Cory don’t seem eye to eye on some issues, but doing lobbying work for a major corporation without realizing it? You mean his views happen to coincide with that of some major corporation perhaps or that some of the organisations he works for are also supported by some major corporation, because the views of that organisation match that of that corporation?
I’m not quite sure what you mean by “does not hold together logically” either. Can you point to specific parts of his video that don’t add up in your mind?
Personally I don’t think he’s oblivious to copyright law. He just states that certain problems cannot be solved by technology, and he’s most often right in that regard. Still, I’d love to debate some specific issues with his statements if you have any.
Posted by Pieter | November 18, 2011, 6:59 am@Faza,
I don’t recall ever hearing Cory say that it was ok to infringe on copyright to be honest. His focus is mostly on preventing huge collateral damages in a failing attempt to enforce copyright, and quite frankly I support him in that. Even if a new law would help prevent copyright infringement (which most of the proposals of the last decades did not), it’s still important to weigh the pros and cons of such a law to see if the benefits outweigh the cost.
Posted by Pieter | November 18, 2011, 9:02 am