Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Commerce Department Pushing For New "Copyright Czar"

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 6 years ago | from the bogus-stats dept.

Government 294

TechDirt is reporting that those all-too-familiar "stats" surrounding the cost of piracy are being trotted out in an attempt to push through a new "Copyright Czar" position. "In urging President Bush to sign into law the ProIP bill, which would give him a copyright czar (something the Justice Department had said it doesn't want), the US Chamber of Commerce is claiming that 750,000 American jobs have been lost to piracy. Yet, it doesn't cite where that number comes from."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

fp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25275053)

Like recession? Then you'll love Obama!

Re:fp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25275065)

If that isn't off-topic, I don't know what is.

Easy (5, Funny)

Eponymous Crowbar (974055) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275059)

If we just hire 750,000 copyright czars, well there ya go. That would be mavericky, you betcha.

Re:Easy (5, Funny)

Jimmyisikura (1274808) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275219)

Yes but then we have created a problem by removing 10,000,000,000 pirates from the market. Pirates need to eat too. Studies also show that 12/15 of those 750,000 are part-time ax-murderers. I think the statistics show the real victims here.

Re:Easy (5, Insightful)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275691)

Average Americans used to be restricted to a very small subset of the information and culture that exists. The average person just couldn't afford any more than that.

Now, thanks to piracy, they have access to most of it.

In addition to having access to more, percentage-wise, it is a fact that despite current conditions, there are more creative works being made than ever before in recorded history. And they get access to most of that too.

Therefore, rampant piracy has improved the average persons quality of life.

If it came to pass that there was an end to piracy, and an extra 250 billion a year was divided amongst all Americans, that amount of money wouldn't be anywhere close to enough to pay for what the average person currently has access to because of piracy.

Therefore, the average Americans quality of life would be significantly diminished should effective copyright enforcement become available and common.

In conclusion, the victims of the American War on Piracy are... the American people.

Re:Easy (5, Insightful)

OVDoobie (887621) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275785)

Oddly enough, the same goes for the American War on Drugs. 80% of arrests are for simple possession. Before you mod me off topic think about this: if they pass this, and are equally efficient with enforcement how may millions, if not billions, will this cost average Americans (assuming there is no jail time, just fines).

Re:Easy (1)

calmofthestorm (1344385) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275911)

Yeah these wars make the war on terra look positively intelligent, if you examine them closely.

Re:Easy (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25275927)

It is truly awe-inspiring to see the creativity used by the ethically challenged to justify their behavior.

Re:Easy (2, Funny)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275517)

Yet, it doesn't cite where that number comes from

Cue the goatse trolls in 3...2...

Re:Easy (2, Funny)

Ortega-Starfire (930563) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275705)

It is odd. Whenever goatse would actually be on topic, the goatse guy is never around. Psychological reverse trolling, perhaps?

Re:Easy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25275723)

Makes sense to call the **AAs goatse trolls.

I like it! (1)

Valdrax (32670) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275541)

I support this plan. After all, seeing how well "czars" have done on other problems like terrorism and drugs, I imagine that 750,000 copyright czars would be the single swiftest path to restoring pro-consumer balance to copyright.

"I'm helping!"

Re:Easy (0, Flamebait)

ScentCone (795499) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275765)

If we just hire 750,000 copyright czars, well there ya go. That would be mavericky, you betcha

No, no, no. It's Change. You know, Change We Can Believe In. Well, no, actually. That's FAR too specific. I keep forgetting that Change We Can Believe In only works when you avoid ever saying what it actually is supposed to do, to whom, and at what cost. If you just change the "750,000 copyright czars" to some sort of class-baiting equivalent, you'll get some traction. Let's see... "We need to take back America's Copyright Czar jobs from the Eeevil Corporations that have hired Eeevil Overseas People to do that work (um, please don't listen to this part you overseas workers, OK, since I want to maintain my status as World Candidate and I know I can't have it both ways), and put those Czar jobs back here, where we can raise taxes on them, especially when they die, which is patriotic. Middle class!"

Re:Easy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25275941)

You're trying too hard.

As President, he will create 750,000 new jobs for the middle class. That's change you can believe in.

Piracy (5, Funny)

arizwebfoot (1228544) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275067)

We know where those lost jobs went, India and Pakistan all pirated our IT jobs.

--
Oh Well, Bad Karma and all . . .

Re:Piracy (2, Funny)

TinFoilMan (1371973) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275257)

I think you have a valid point, maybe the new czar can pirate them all back.

Re:Piracy (1)

david.emery (127135) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275491)

So we can thank Microsoft for creating the -need- for 750k IT jobs that are now outsourced?!?

dave

Commerce Department????? (5, Insightful)

lecithin (745575) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275075)

The Commerce Department is not the US Chamber of Commerce.

Chamber of Commerce = non-for-profit business federation.

Commerce Department = Federal Government Entity.

As a matter of fact, the Commerce Department OBJECTS to a "Copyright Czar"

Henry Paulson (5, Funny)

whisper_jeff (680366) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275107)

They got that number from Henry Paulson - he's so good at pulling out random large numbers that sound plausible while being founded on nothing of substance, after all.

Re:Henry Paulson (4, Funny)

n0dna (939092) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275263)

Dammit.

I was going to say exactly the same thing, only I would have probably guessed where I think he pulled them out of.

Good show.

Re:Henry Paulson (5, Interesting)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275647)

Thanks for not linking his wikipedia entry. Unfortunately for me, I looked him [wikipedia.org] up. Do not click that link! Jesus Christ but that's one freaky looking fuckweed! In order to save you the horror of seeing that man's face (makes goatse look like it came from a children's book) I'll quote wikipedia's entry on who he is:

Henry Merritt "Hank" Paulson Jr. (born March 28, 1946) is the United States Treasury Secretary and member of the International Monetary Fund Board of Governors. He previously served as the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Goldman Sachs.

Born in Palm Beach, Florida, to Marianna Gallaeur and Henry Merritt Paulson, a wholesale jeweler,[1] he was raised in Barrington Hills, Illinois. He was raised as a Christian Scientist.[2] Paulson attained the rank of Eagle Scout in the Boy Scouts of America.[3][4]

A star athlete at Barrington High School, Paulson was a champion wrestler and stand out football player, graduating in 1964. Paulson received his Bachelor of Arts in English from Dartmouth College in 1968;[5] at Dartmouth he was a member of Phi Beta Kappa and was an All Ivy, All East, and honorable mention All American as an offensive lineman.

He met his wife Wendy during his senior year. The couple have two adult children, Henry Merritt III and Amanda Clark, and became grandparents in June 2007. They maintain homes in Washington, DC and Barrington Hills, Illinois.

In 1970 Paulson received a Master of Business Administration degree from Harvard Business School.[6]

He is, in short, an anti-nerd. He is the complete and polar opposite of you and me.

I think it's obvious now why the banking industry crashed and the stock market is crashing. It's because of people like Henry Merritt "Hank" Paulson Jr. who will not lose their jobs and homes and who will NOT go hungry as a direct result of their actions, as you and I may. Not as a result of our actions, but as a result of HIS and the actions of people (and I use that term loosely) just like him.

If you fear people like Osama Bin Laden more than you fear people like Henry Merritt "Hank" Paulson Jr., IMO you're brain dead stupid.

Re:Henry Paulson (2, Insightful)

maxume (22995) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275965)

This is ridiculously reactionary. Up until this point, the vast majority of people who have lost their homes in this crisis have lost their homes because they took on loans that they could not afford (there are people in Detroit who lost their homes because Michigan is imploding, and so forth). Sure, they were offered teaser rates and things probably weren't always made real clear, but it seems pretty reasonable to hold each and every buyer of a home somewhere around 50% responsible for the loan that they agreed to.

Irresponsible behavior on Wall Street has exacerbated the mess, but to Paulson's credit, Goldman Sachs is having among the least of the troubles (I guess this could be taken as a sign that they are the true bastards, but they weren't the ones originating hilarious securities, they were the ones selling the hilarious securities short).

750,000?? (5, Interesting)

jgtg32a (1173373) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275119)

Are there even that many people working in the music and movies/tv industry in this country?

Re:750,000?? (4, Funny)

Eponymous Crowbar (974055) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275147)

Including porn, or not?

Re:750,000?? (4, Funny)

theM_xl (760570) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275171)

Well, not anymore, obviously ;)

Re:750,000?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25275217)

There WOULD be, if it weren't for those filthy pirates!

Re:750,000?? (1)

marcosdumay (620877) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275287)

<sarcasm>That is the problem, piracy has reduced the industry to a small fraction of its potential<\sarcasm>

Re:750,000?? (4, Funny)

sesshomaru (173381) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275421)

I think most of that number was clerks at Blockbuster video.

It looks like we need more bailouts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25275125)

With the current decline in creativity in Hollywood it has become clear to me that the US government should give money to any firm that has lost money due to piracy in an effort to get their creative drives going again.

This will create new jobs and help remedy the loss of 750,000 jobs to such barbaric acts.

Reliable source for numbers of all kinds (4, Funny)

ivandavidoff (969036) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275173)

The numbers came from The U.S. Department of the Posterior.

Re:Reliable source for numbers of all kinds (1)

ari_j (90255) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275607)

Only after extensive prodding by the U.S. Department of the Anterior.

Uh huh (5, Interesting)

Xeth (614132) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275189)

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there were 383,000 people employed [bls.gov] in the Motion picture and sound recording industries in September 2008.

My money is on the idea that they took the amount the industries estimate they lose from piracy and then divided that by some moderate wage.

Re:Uh huh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25275241)

in other words, they used whatever figure that the MPAA & RIAA pulled out of their collective asses.

Re:Uh huh (5, Interesting)

halcyon1234 (834388) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275441)

Heck, think about it this way:

There are about 300 million (thousand thousand) people in the States

According to All Knowledge Ever [wikipedia.org] , 24.6% are minors, and 12.7% are of retired age. That means there are only 188 million "employable" citizens.

The same BLS says the unemployment rate is 6%. That means there are 11.3 million unemployed citizens

If every single one of those lost jobs resulted in a currently unemployed person, then 6.65% of all unemployed persons were from the entertainment industry.

Now, assuming that their number isn't complete and utter bullshatistics-- nah, I think I'll just call BS and be done with this one.

Re:Uh huh (2, Insightful)

LordNimon (85072) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275531)

The same BLS says the unemployment rate is 6%. That means there are 11.3 million unemployed citizens

Bzzz.... wrong. Thanks for playing.

The 6% unemployment rate refers to people who are actively seeking work but haven't found it. That is a small percentage of the total number of adults.

Re:Uh huh (1)

ByOhTek (1181381) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275663)

> The 6% unemployment rate refers to people who are actively seeking work but haven't found it. That is a small percentage of the total number of adults.

I thought it was the number of people who lost their jobs within the last [timeframe]? I think [timeframe] is two or six months?

Regardless, in which case, they could be looking for a job and still not be counted (or not looking for a job, and be counted).

Re:Uh huh (1)

ari_j (90255) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275655)

Actually, your properly-cited statistic shows that the most likely math isn't dividing estimated losses by any wage figures, but rather as follows:
  1. Give a survey to the motion picture and sound recording industry employees, or a sufficient sample thereof
  2. Ask one question: How many people do you know who lost their job within your industry?
  3. The average response is "two"
  4. Multiply 2 x 383,000 = 766,000
  5. Publicly claim the rounded-to-media-friendly-terms figure of 750,000 jobs lost

Re:Uh huh (1)

Ares (5306) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275769)

6. Profit!

Re:Uh huh (1)

Znork (31774) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275697)

... and then they forget to deduct the jobs that wouldn't exist in other industries because money is spent on MAFIAA monopoly rights.

Too bad (3, Funny)

Corpuscavernosa (996139) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275199)

It's too bad that one of the jobs lost wasn't Uwe Boll's. I'm just sayin'. [petitiononline.com]

Quickly! (4, Funny)

tgd (2822) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275207)

We need a content producer bailout!!!

The real costs (0)

CHRONOSS2008 (1226498) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275215)

heres your cost
after rent i have 160 to live on.
I have to have a phone thats 40$ a month
I get internet cause im stuck in the house ...thats another 40$
so i have 80$ for groceries
what would i buy?
And i go and download a music tune and you think normally id buy it?

no loss to economy

It is the people WITH jobs , WITH money that are the problem here.
IF you dont like the price then dont buy it.
YOU at least have a choice.

Re:The real costs (3, Insightful)

n0dna (939092) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275341)

YOU could turn on a radio or stream a station.

YOU also have a choice, but please, continue to justify it for us.

Steal it if you want to, don't steal it if you don't want to, but please don't expect us to believe that you're being forced to download music at gunpoint.

Re:The real costs (3, Interesting)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275843)

YOU could turn on a radio

And sample it. [kuro5hin.org] Three or four hours of top-40 radio will have all the hits on your hard drive. Piracy? It's label-sanctioned piracy! [kuro5hin.org]

Steal it if you want to, don't steal it if you don't want to

Stealing: You walk into Best Buy or Walmart, stick a CD under your coat, and walk out.

Copyright infringement: Uploading your CD collection as MP3s on Kazaa. Or downloading with Morpheus and letting the downloads go into your "share" folder.

Stealing: misdemeanor retail theift, small fine.

Copyright infringement: Civil suit with a huge payment.

Downloading without sharing; sampling the radio, downloading or buying indie music: PRICELESS as it helps drive the copyright cartel out of business. I, for one, wish to see Sony and the other three evil mainstream labels GO UNDER. They are hindering the creation of art, hampering the independant artists who aren't in it for the dough.

They are, in my opinion, EVIL and should die horribly.

YMMV. HAND.

Re:The real costs (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25275845)

Steal it if you want to,

Copyright infringement is *NOT STEALING*!!!!!!!

How many times do we have to repeat it to you people?

And why does the government need to spend *OUR* taxes into protecting the music industry?

If they spend MY taxes into protecting them, well, that makes ONE MORE incentive to pirate: To take back my fucking money.

Re:The real costs (1)

CHRONOSS2008 (1226498) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275913)

it is not theft
the real teft is when the last time in 2005 i goto a store and i see a 30$ CDR
thats theft
25Cent stomp
maybe 50cents to the artist
maybe 25cents mroe to cover the cost of the label

29.00 of greed
and how exactly is copying theft when the original is still there?

AND BCE throttles (1)

CHRONOSS2008 (1226498) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275975)

YA and then there are caps and throttles to deal with if that makes you want to puke even further

japan gets 1000megabit for 56USD/month
for the same price i get 25Kbytes /sec so called 5 megabit
when i ain't throtlled that would be 200 Times the cost
when throtlled that equals 4000 times more cost for what i get then the japanese guy/gal gets.

SO stuff you i am not going to p2p , i have too, radio wont work and you cant stream at your cottage, you cant stream on your car ( throttled during any time you would want ot use it)
and cant use at home ( throtlled at any time your awake)

and ill add , you cannot justify the cost being what hollywood wants when i can show you using a simple p2p system how the costs are so low that ANYONE can make a buck charging as little as 5 cents a track.
100MB server to initially seed and host a tracker site....200$ /month unmetered
out all the known tracks of one big label and pay 1-1.5 per album.
let users pay the distribution by there own bandwidth. AND there p2p is required cause i cant stream and htus this throttling means i have to leave it on longer and dont even think about streaming video during a throttle.

Re:The real costs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25275971)

I avoid hearing radio specifically because it's most probably tainted with copyrighted music.

I do not tolerate copyrighted music.

Re:The real costs (2, Insightful)

YrWrstNtmr (564987) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275449)

I have to have a phone thats 40$ a month

No you don't. My cell costs less than 1/2 that.

I get internet cause im stuck in the house ...thats another 40$

Instead of being 'stuck in the house', a second job, or school to get a better job, might be in order. And NetZero is only $9.95/month..:)
Don't use your apparent insolvency to justify why you think you are entitled to music for free.

YOU at least have a choice.

So do you.

Re:The real costs (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25275567)

OP is a grotesque shut-in

Re:The real costs (2, Insightful)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275725)

He might be stuck in the house because of some disability y'know.

Note: "Too fat to walk" although it appears to be enough to get yourself a "free" scooter at the expense of the SSA, is not a particularly sympathy inducing 'disability'.

Re:The real costs (1, Interesting)

cliffski (65094) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275805)

if you take what you want anyway, where is your incentive to get a better job, earn more money and grow the economy?

Signed, someone who works hard, pays for everything he buys, and is sick of subsidizing leeches who expect the world to pay for their lifestyle.

It's a 1,000,000 lost. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25275221)

They didn't break down the number. Here it is:

250,000 lost because of less international trade. Less piracy of cargo ships.

250,000 lost because of less yachts on the seas. Rich people are starting to take a hit too.

150,000 lost to pirate ships and fuel becoming more expensive.

100,000 lost due to increased law enforcement activity in the straights off of Malaysia and Indonesia.

As far as media piracy goes, there has been a negative 250,000 job losses due to the RIAA and MPAA hiring folks to find alleged "thieves".

So there ya go. One million jobs have been lost!

Progress (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25275273)

Hey, don't manufacture anything, litigate instead. Sure, that will get you out of a recession!

"...it doesn't cite where that number comes from." (5, Funny)

Snarfangel (203258) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275285)

Easy. It comes from the set of real numbers.

Re:"...it doesn't cite where that number comes fro (5, Funny)

Qzukk (229616) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275461)

It comes from the set of real numbers.

Funny, I could have sworn it looked imaginary.

Re:"...it doesn't cite where that number comes fro (1)

Wildclaw (15718) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275715)

Well, all real numbers are imaginary. I leave it up to you to figure out what that says about reality.

Re:"...it doesn't cite where that number comes fro (1)

compro01 (777531) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275921)

All real numbers are complex, not imaginary.

Re:"...it doesn't cite where that number comes fro (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275909)

No, its real, just like my 2.3 children and my 1.2 pets.

Re:"...it doesn't cite where that number comes fro (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25275513)

Are we sure it's not (750000)(i)?

Re:"...it doesn't cite where that number comes fro (1)

sohp (22984) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275553)

More like the set of imaginary numbers. The square root of the value of DRM to ordinary people who listen to music and watch movies.

Re:"...it doesn't cite where that number comes fro (2, Funny)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275747)

Good point. Now, the question is, is it rational?

Oh I know! (1)

mfh (56) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275299)

750,000 jobs lost is the next logical step from 700,000 bailout required.

Source of the number (4, Funny)

192939495969798999 (58312) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275379)

That 750,000 jobs number comes a very reliable source, the bird. Haven't you heard, about the bird?

Re:Source of the number (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25275751)

... Haven't you heard, about the bird?

Well, the bird is the word.

Re:Source of the number (1)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275835)

... Haven't you heard, about the bird?

Well, the bird is the word.

Everybody's talkin' about the bird.

'Jobs' lost? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25275385)

Sorry to post as AC, but I have to say it-

If we had a copyright czar, more people would be sued an incredibly large amount of money and go into debt, requiring them to get a second job to pay it off. Therefore the US has lost that many jobs.

Scary, but it makes sense, especially since they used the word 'jobs' instead of the more rhetorically effective phrase 'went into unemployment'.

Obama (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25275401)

That number will come up when Obama is in office and they start pushing real copyright legislation. Obama and friends will fuck you thieves in the ass.

I have a question: (1)

TinFoilMan (1371973) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275407)

Is it Czar or Tzar?

Re:I have a question: (1)

Hawke666 (260367) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275477)

Or Tsar or csar.

Re:I have a question: (1)

ari_j (90255) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275695)

Or Kaiser or Caesar. But Czar is the commonly accepted spelling in the context of American government officials who have supreme oversight over things that do not necessarily need or in fact should not have supreme oversight vested in one man with no other job.

Re:I have a question: (1)

arizwebfoot (1228544) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275509)

From Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] Tsar or czar[1] (Russian: ÑÐÑÑOE (helpÂinfo), Bulgarian, Serbian: ÑÐÑ, in scientific transliteration respectively car' and car), occasionally spelled csar or tzar in English, is a Slavonic term designating certain monarchs.
Originally, the title tsar (derived from Caesar) meant Emperor in the European medieval sense of the term, that is, a ruler who has the same rank as a Roman or Byzantine emperor (or, according to Byzantine ideology, the most elevated position adjacent to the one held by the Byzantine monarch) due to recognition by another emperor or a supreme ecclesiastical official (the Pope or the Ecumenical Patriarch).
Occasionally, the word could be used to designate other, non-Christian, supreme rulers. In Russia and Bulgaria the imperial connotations of the term were blurred with time and, by the 19th century, it had come to be viewed as an equivalent of King.[2][3]
The modern languages of these countries use it as a general term for a monarch.[4][5] For example, the title of the Bulgarian monarchs in the 20th century was not generally interpreted as imperial.
"Tsar" was the official title of the supreme ruler in the following states:
* Bulgaria in 913â"1018, in 1185â"1422 and in 1908â"1946
* Serbia in 1346â"1371
* Russia from about 1547 until 1721 (after 1721 and until 1917, the title was used officially only in reference to the Russian emperor's sovereignty over certain formerly independent states such as Poland and Georgia).

--
Oh Well, Bad Karma and all . . .

Re:I have a question: (4, Informative)

wcrowe (94389) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275577)

Not sure if you're being serious or not, but the Russian "Tsar" has historically been tranliterated into English as Czar or Tsar. For a long time one might have found it spelled either way, but since "Czar" started being used to describe a high government official, e.g., "Drug Czar" the CZ spelling has tended to be applied to that use, while the TS spelling has now nearly always come to be applied to the rulers of the Russian Empire. The OED comments thusly: The spelling with cz- is against the usage of all Slavonic languages; the word was so spelt by Herberstein, Rerum Moscovit. Commentarii 1549, the chief early source of knowledge as to Russia in Western Europe, whence it passed into the Western Languages generally; in some of these it is now old-fashioned; the usual Ger. form is now zar; French adopted tsar during the 19th c. This also became frequent in English towards the end of that century, having been adopted by the Times newspaper as the most suitable English spelling.

Re:I have a question: (1)

TinFoilMan (1371973) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275651)

Thanks I really didn't know that there was a difference.

Re:I have a question: (1)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275821)

He can call himself anything he likes.

Most folks will call him "asshole."

22nd! (0, Offtopic)

Grendel_Prime (178874) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275409)

TWENTY-SECOND POST BEEEEYOTCHES!!!!

Why doesn't that have quite the same ring to it?

P.S. I copyright that 22nd post thing!

Inefficency (5, Interesting)

Wildclaw (15718) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275457)

claiming that 750,000 American jobs have been lost to piracy

Overexaggerated number for sure, but jobs may very well have been lost because of piracy. But, so what? Let me formulate the matters in another light.

750,000 American jobs would have been wasted if piracy hadn't existed to combat the inherent inefficencies in the copyright and IP systems.

Jobs are good if they actually produce something useful to society. Otherwise they are just a big waste, and do little more than shuffle resources around because the current system don't have a better way to allocate it.

Even if more actual intellectual property were produced with stronger IP laws, it still isn't sure that it would be a better idea. The real value of IP isn't how much is produced, but how much is produced times how well spread it is among the population. Also, that total value has to be balanced against the cost of producing it.

Say that 700,000 more jobs would be created. That is a multi billion cost. And what would be the gain. More tv? More music? More movies? It isn't like there is a lack of choice right now.

Re:Inefficency (1, Insightful)

cliffski (65094) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275817)

if the content those people produced was not useful to society, why was demand for it so high amongst pirates that they risked breaking the law to get it?

This is the same old complaint that you pirate because mainstream content sucks. If it sucks, why pirate it?

Re:Inefficency (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25275933)

It is not the same old complaint. He is just making a case that piracy may be good for the economy, by allowing consumers to spend their money on more beneficial markets.

It makes perfect sense, and the only argument against it is the sense of entitlement for your own creative works. Make no mistake, that sense of entitlement is unnatural, and is only tenuously supported by copyright as granted by the constitution.

It certainly isn't outlined as an unalienable right. And more to the point, the right for profit isn't either.

Re:Inefficency (1)

compro01 (777531) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275957)

You presume that the jobs "lost" actually create content, which the GP disputes.

Yes, great (2, Insightful)

Nimey (114278) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275483)

because America needs another powerful, unaccountable functionary in the government.

Suppose, instead, that Congress does its job and shits out a decent copyright law.

Re:Yes, great (2, Insightful)

oldhack (1037484) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275871)

Hey, our economy is hollowing out, and Hollywood is one of the few things left now that still "produce" things others would buy. But then, our copyright laws can't do squat to piracy in other countries. Genius.

Incitement Czar (5, Insightful)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275489)

Has any of these "czars" the US government has been fond of appointing the past decade or so actually accomplished anything except creating more serfs?

Why does the US government have people modeled on the most hated monarchs, who drove Russians so nuts that they went "Communist" on us for 3/4 of a century, and nearly helped us blast the world back to microscopic life?

How about Congress just returns copyright to its Constitutional basis: at most 17 years (a human "generation") of private monopoly on any content, but only when that monopoly will "promote progress in science and the useful arts". That regime doesn't need a czar, it needs a searchable content registry archive and an antitrust watchdog.

Re:Incitement Czar (1)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275897)

I'm with you.

I still can't figure out why people are not pissed off about the very idea of declaring royalty in the US government.

Re:Incitement Czar (0)

compro01 (777531) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275973)

Why does the US government have people modeled on the most hated monarchs, who drove Russians so nuts that they went "Communist" on us for 3/4 of a century, and nearly helped us blast the world back to microscopic life?

Hm? Czars were the Russian royal family, and they got kicked out by the Bolsheviks (The communists) just before the end of WW1. They had nothing at all do to with the cold war.

Japanese Anime Translation (5, Interesting)

Khisanth Magus (1090101) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275557)

Although it is more in the thousands, possibly as high as ten thousand, it is true that there has been a significant amount of job loss due to piracy in the companies that bring japanese anime over to the US. I've talked with voice actors as well as people who run those companies, and piracy really has hurt them. Some companies are closing up shop, others are just having to severely cut back to make ends meet. This was never a large profit business in the first place, and with people downloading it so much as opposed to buying the DVDs they can't manage to squeak by.

The irony of this is that the "copyright czar" would probably just ignore this as the MPAA and RIAA aren't involved. Not that I'm advocating law suits against people who do pirate it, as I think that is way over the top, just pointing out that people HAVE lost their jobs due to piracy.

Re:Japanese Anime Translation (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25275673)

The anime industry in the US might not exist at all were it not for people who were violating copyright and giving away fan subtitled work -- when I first saw anime ('93) it was all fansubs.

More recently -- I've purchased anime and manga which I wouldn't have know about were it not for people violating copyright laws: specifically because the friends who introduced me showed me fansubs. I'll grant that absent pirating, some of them might have purchased the shows ... but most wouldn't, the initial price tag is too high. (Once you know you like a series, it's easier to justify spending $15-30/disk.)

Ah well. Time to write my congresscritters.

Re:Japanese Anime Translation (2, Insightful)

Wildclaw (15718) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275779)

Well, when you have people who are willing to translate (a.k.a. fansub) for free, and most people (atleast those who watch lots of anime) seems to prefer original japanese voice, then it isn't that strange that it is a tough market.

Of course, at the same time you have people selling bottled water that basically is no different than the water you can get directly from the tap. So it isn't that easy to predict where there is a market.

Stop calling them "czars" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25275613)

"Czar" means "emperor". To keep calling people in minor or moderate positions of power "czars" makes the speaker look ignorant or like a fool.

Not even George Bush is anywhere near to being a "czar".

When the government says it (0)

iminplaya (723125) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275641)

It must be true. No citation needed.

why does a free market economy need commie czars? (4, Insightful)

Russ Nelson (33911) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275657)

Why does a free market economy need czars? Aren't they an invention of the same country that adopted communist central planning to such poor effect?

Actually... (5, Insightful)

SerfsUp (839507) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275661)

Great idea. I nominate Lawrence Lessig!

Re:Actually... (1)

TehZorroness (1104427) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275907)

+1 insightful, not +1 funny.

in related news (1)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275709)

there's 750,000 jobs in my ass

and if you ask me where i got that number, i'll tell you honestly i just pulled it out of my ass

Re:in related news (1)

jeremiahstanley (473105) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275949)

You slut...

Why the intermediate blog? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#25275759)

The story's link leads to a blog that does little more than summarize the original story [wired.com] . Why don't we just link to that instead?.

Too bad (1)

clint999 (1277046) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275801)

He might be stuck in the house because of some disability y'know.Note: "Too fat to walk" although it appears to be enough to get yourself a "free" scooter at the expense of the SSA, is not a particularly sympathy inducing 'disability'.

one decision I might trust Bush more with? (1)

cashman73 (855518) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275841)

Don't get me wrong; I'm still all for replacing Bush & Co. with Obama/Biden,... but this copyright czar thing is one area I might not want Biden's advice on, with his anti-consumer track record in this area,... Then again, McSame/Pain might screw things up even worse,...

Simple (1)

supermanwashere (1376171) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275873)

We all know where the number came from the 750,000 terrorists that are taking jobs away for those honest, god-fearing, and hard working individuals in Hollywood that are losing there jobs as a result of piracy.

Maybe if would stop making movies and music for pure money (who green-lite Doom, the Arachnotron?) we would actually buy some their stuff. The only stuff I buy is stuff that has long term entertainment value, go Iron-Man but no Indiana Jones (seems to have an odd number curse)

"I'm not dumb. I just have a command of throughly useless information."

- Calvin, of Calvin and Hobbes

Reduce Copyright terms (1)

Jason Levine (196982) | more than 6 years ago | (#25275937)

We should reduce copyright terms instead as long copyright terms have resulted in 7 trillion jobs lost, fifty million babies being carried off by wolves, and terrorists dancing in the streets*. If you love America, hate terrorists, and care about poor, defenseless children, you *must* support shorter copyright terms!

* All statistics have been obtained from the Institute of Extraction of Random Numbers from Collective Posteriors. Coincidentally, this is the same place that the Commerce Department got their figures.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?