On Jan 5, 2008, at 9:23 AM, Craig White wrote:
> not unlike the article that you gave us early on from cio magazine.
But more to the point in addressing the failings of Fisher
>
>
> While I would agree that I wish Mark Fisher could have articulated the
> issues with greater precision, that seems to be a frequent problem for
> mass media outlets, especially on issues surrounding technology.
I would characterize it this way:
Mark Fisher has done more to advance the cause of the RIAA than any
other individual in the history of that organization. Many
journalists seem to struggle with technology but must will issue a
retractioin when one is clearly required. By continuing to defend
his indefensible conduct continues to be a big asset to the RIAA. He
even allowed them to slip out from under their worst PR blunder, the
"steals only one copy" remark, with a modicum of grace.
> If NPR
> had invited Roy Beckerman to debate the spokesman for the RIAA, the
> outcome would have been different because Beckerman is clearly capable
> of dissecting the legal issues surrounding this controversy. I
> guarantee
> you the RIAA's Sherman would have never have debated with Beckerman.
> Bullies don't enter into a fight that they know going in that they
> won't
> win...that's a rule that bullies understand
Exactly. The RIAA is not stupid (most of the time) and they aren't
going to engage in any debate where they are going to look bad. Fisher
is their perfect foil, a self appointed spokesman for the opposition
who will take indefensible positions and then persist in trying to
defend them.
> The fact is that most of the public is guilty of all of the same
> activities with the exception that most of us don't install KaZaA
> software. We do have legally authorized copies and software that
> automatically makes them shared and the only distinction is the actual
> sharing protocols
Again, this simply flies in the face of my experience if by "shared"
you mean 'shared outside the household'. Most people don't install
KaZaA or limewire or anything like them. You need to be more
selective in the company your keep.
> t's hardly surprising that there are apologists or bloggers or
> publications that also take lots of advertising revenues are
> supporting
> the RIAA position. In the end, attack the messenger...lovely, nice
> hatchet job.
Yet another ad hominem attack. It is the opposite of persuasive.
Anyone reading the Sandoval article will realize that that he goes out
of his way to point out that the RIAA spokesman won't go as far as he
could. To attack Sandoval's journalistic credibility just emphasizes
how solid his facts are and seems desperate and mean spirited. You
have no evidence that Sandoval is less than honorable.
You know what? It's over. A google search demonstrates that nobody
except possibly a handful of fanatics is defending Fisher any more.
The RIAA was given a forum, on NPR no less, to make the case that all
who oppose them are dishonest and they exploited it brilliantly. They
have probably milked the situation for all they can.
--
And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who
could not hear the music.
-Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche, philosopher (1844-1900)
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list -
PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss 
(text/plain)