7 ms·
Google threatens to cut ties with Chamber of Commerce over Protect-IP lobbying
- AdamN 15y agoThis is fantastic news - now if only they would just cut the cord. The US Chamber of Commerce is straight out of the 50s and they need to wake up to the fact that innovative businesses want an open market, not to be coddled by the government.
- incomethax 15y agoExcuse my skepticism, but would Google pulling out ACTUALLY do anything? I can understand the argument that innovative businesses don't want anything to do with them, but again the Chamber of commerce is an organization aimed at protecting old businesses anyway. They could care less about what innovative businesses think.
- nextparadigms 15y agoIt could jumpstart a movement and other companies could join them.
- absentbird 15y agoI am not sure what Google pays in dues but I am willing to bet it is in excess of $100,000 and probably closer to somewhere in 10 digit range. That is a financial blow that would put pressure on them to stop alienating progressive businesses.
- jhamburger 15y agoI don't think they pay billions of dollars in dues
- Anechoic 15y agoIt didn't seem to work when Apple dropped out back in 2009.
- mcritz 15y agoI think the chamber of commerce could care less. They're a force of evil against consumers. If they had it their way there'd still be lead paint on your walls, seatbelts would be optional, and the ingredients of your food would be a mystery.
- davidhollander 15y ago>incomethax: They could care less about what innovative businesses think >mcritz: I think the chamber of commerce could care less. I think both of you meant they could "not" care less.
- ajscherer 15y agoIt's a common idiomatic expression and I'd be willing to wager that everyone who read it understood what it meant. I'd also wager that most people could really give a shit if it offended a few language prudes.
- ellyagg 15y agoI would usually agree, although not all idiomatic constructions are created equal. I find the "could care less" construction to be as nonsensical and dumb sounding as "irregardless". Moreover, I found your response to be gratuitously offensive as it paired vulgarity with an implied insult to your parent commenter.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- codyrobbins 15y agoIt’s not nonsensical, and neither is irregardless. People use them for a reason and they’re both incredibly heavily attested usages. But this argument has already been had before in a million places, including on HN: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=853100 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=853100. Specifically, see my comment about why it’s hard to say that could care less is incorrect: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=854042 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=854042.
- adestefan 15y agoIt could be a PR nightmare depending on any of the news outlets actually picking up the story.
- jonnathanson 15y agoAs large and powerful as Google is, it's a drop in the bucket compared to the combined punching weight of everyone else involved in the Chamber. A lot of the companies may be old-school, and some of their industries may be dying, but in terms of collective political influence, they're a serious 800-pound gorilla.
- shareme 15y agoread the article..Google was not the only company listed of pulling out..
- HistoryInAction 15y agoArticle also reports Yahoo quietly cut ties by failing to renew their membership due to this issue.
- chrismiller 15y agoOP's link goes to the 2nd page of the article. The first page is here http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/67603.html http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/67603.html
- babarock 15y agoThank you. I was confused for a while.
- HistoryInAction 15y agoNot sure if it's proper HN form to apologize and take up space with a comment, but I'm sorry for not noticing that.
- egor83 15y agoWhy not just edit the post? I believe it's available for editing during the first two hours after posting.
- HistoryInAction 15y agoTitle, yes; link, no. I assume that's to avoid posting something, attracting high upvotes, and then swapping over to a spam link while attracting the HN hordes.
- mcritz 15y agoIn particular, CEA members are up in arms over so-called private right of action provisions in the bills that would allow trademark and copyrights holders to seek court orders requiring ad networks and payment processors to cut off business with an allegedly infringing site. Tricky territory. It's a fight between content providers versus Google.
- billswift 15y agoNo, it's a fight between content providers and everybody else. Or some content providers. I have heard the Chamber of Commerce's position referred to as "Rotarian Socialism - Free Enterprise, and Keep those subsidies coming." In this particular case they want to expand some members legal privileges which is even worse, long-term, than financial subsidies.
- nmcfarl 15y agoChambers of Commerce are apparently only very loosely associated, and the politics of various international Chambers of Commerce diverge a lot. Perhaps there is room for another national level Chamber of Commerce for the US - one with a more progressive outlook, with a look towards building new businesses and industries, not protecting dying ones. I wonder if the dues from Google, Yahoo, the CEA, and Apple (all mentioned in the article for having or thinking about dropping out over politics), would be enough to bootstrap such an organization…...
- joe_the_user 15y agoI believe we're seeing, or at least I hope we're seeing, a collision between the rent-seeking faction of American corporations and the productive, profit-making factions of American corporations. It would be very nice to see a coalition of companies who stood together on the principle of protecting the profits that come from creating more opportunities instead of the rent that comes from a variety of state-supported monopolies (Patents, "intellectual property" (Hollywood, patent trolls), monopoly on the use of telephone poles(AT&T).
- yuhong 15y agoYea, I know. In fact, I believe the culture of greed of legacy MBAs is closely related to rent-seeking.
- redthrowaway 15y ago"I wonder if the dues from Google, Yahoo, the CEA, and Apple (all mentioned in the article for having or thinking about dropping out over politics), would be enough to bootstrap such an organization…" None of those companies would be particularly interested in such an organization, as they are all monolithic "old" organizations in their own right. Apple, Yahoo, and Google don't want to push through legislation that would make it easier to compete with them. Apple, certainly, is uninterested in patent reform and Google's criticisms of patent law in the US are likely to subside as they build a big enough portfolio to successfully defend themselves from the Apples and Microsofts of the world.
- r00fus 15y agoApple left long ago. Google should have quit a long time ago when the CoC was revealed as nothing more than a corporate-welfare front group.
- thedangler 15y agoIn protest to the Protect-IP act can google in protest not do work for people that support the act? Really no idea how they would do it. But it would be funny if they did a virtual strike and not allow services for people in support for the bill. Just a silly thought that came to mind.
- zaknanny 15y agoDoes this mean that google would have to stop linking to some of the pages on its own website if the litigation goes through? ie: their 'secret books project' where they scanned thousands of books into their google reader database without first getting permission from the authors?