3 ms·
During an election, it may not always be clear which candidate voters will choose, but it is absolutely certain that those candidates need a lot of money just t
by beloch 15y ago
During an election, it may not always be clear which candidate voters will choose, but it is absolutely certain that those candidates need a lot of money just to get on the ballot. As a result, the U.S. government's course has been charted by lobbyists and their money for a very long time now, and that isn't likely to change unless the U.S. starts capping campaign contributions per donor like other nations do. (This is actually a very good idea!) So how important is public opinion really? Not very important at all, in the long run. Yes, PIPA/SOPA met heavy opposition, but will the same bill with a different name get the same response next year? How about the year after? What about a dozen different bills that incorporate all the bits and pieces of SOPA/PIPA separately? Paid lobbyists will always win in the long run.
Internet companies like google are being threatened with crushing government regulations just as Hollywood was in the 1920's. Hollywood's response was a combination of heavy lobbying and just barely enough self-regulation, in the form of the production code, to escape government regulation. The code was abandoned in the 60's, but Hollywood hasn't let up lobbying since. It's arguable that they have actually achieved a form of regulatory capture when it comes to copyright laws. e.g. The funny coincidence between how long copyrights last and the age of Mickey Mouse.
The real wake-up call that SOPA/PIPA has provided is not to the public, the government, or to the MPAA/RIAA. It's to companies that rely on the internet for their revenue. That revenue dwarfs Hollywood. Literally. Regardless of what the public wants or what lobbyists say, legislation like SOPA/PIPA would have a far larger negative impact on the U.S. economy than burning Hollywood to the ground. So why aren't there lobby groups sticking up for internet freedom? Why was PIPA/SOPA only stopped by a grass-roots movement? The money is there. Far more than the MPAA or RIAA could ever muster in fact.
My prediction is this: ISP's, google, etc. now know that Hollywood is gunning for them. They're going to fight back with their own lobbyists, and they have a lot more money. The next decade is going to be dark indeed for the MPAA/RIAA. They have awoken a juggernaut.
- nextparadigms 15y agoThe problem is those lobbying money keep rising up, too. From what I hear Obama plans on raising $1 billion for his re-election campaign. That means in the future other candidates will try to raise a lot more, too, and so on. This is bad. I think we need to limit how much any single individual or entity can pay for a campaign. Elections shouldn't be decided by who raises the most money, and according to a statistic 98% of those who won elections also had the most money. I really believe that needs to end somehow. Unlimited donations from single individuals/companies just means that much more power will held by those single individuals and companies, and you can bet that the first thing the politicians will do when they get in office is to pay back thoe money.
- khafra 15y agoBut that would abridge our first amendment rights, because money is speech. Although for some reason, the police didn't see it that way when I tried $100 worth of talking a lady on the street corner into going on a date with me.