Collaboration

What SOPA/PIPA would mean for IT consultants

Chip Camden explores how SOPA/PIPA could impact tech consultants' business for the bad and possibly the good -- as long as you don't mind losing some sleep.

If you haven't heard the recent controversy over the proposed U.S. legislation known as the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) or its Senate equivalent, the Protect IP Act, you haven't been listening. Even though this legislation proposes to modify U.S. laws, it has a potentially broad impact on websites around the world, thanks to the highly interconnected network we appropriately call the Internet.

In an attempt to subvert illegal copying of copyrighted material, these bills go further than the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 (DMCA). For instance, they require ISPs to block access to sites that subvert U.S. copyright (or whose purpose is to enable copyright subversion). Search engines would also be required to suppress results for those sites. Payment processors like PayPal would be required to block its transactions. Advertising services like Google AdSense would have to suppress ads for these sites. Perhaps most alarming of all, each of these services would be required to accept "good faith" complaints and take action before the issuance of any court order. That action could cost a web-based organization significant losses in revenue and legal fees before it manages to reverse such a blackout.

Fortunately, it appears that SOPA in its present form will not even come to a vote. The White House published a response to two online anti-SOPA petitions which acknowledges the dangers to freedom and Internet security inherent in that legislation. However, that same response also states, "the Administration calls on all sides to work together to pass sound legislation this year that provides prosecutors and rights holders new legal tools to combat online piracy originating beyond U.S. borders," and Congress is working to modify the legislation to make it a pill just small enough for the American people to be willing to swallow. SOPA/PIPA isn't dead, it only sleeps.

How does all this affect consultants? If you or your clients publish or host Internet content of any kind, you could get scrubbed with SOPA.

First and perhaps most serious of all, if you provide any content that your clients publish on the web, a SOPA takedown could cause big trouble for your relationship with your client. Most consulting contracts include language that either guarantees that all work produced is original, or that it is free of license and copyright restrictions. If someone fingers your content as a violation of copyright, your client's entire site could go dark. If the takedown sticks, then your client could consider you in violation of those contract provisions. Even if they manage to fight it and get back online, they're not going to look favorably on the trouble you've caused them. Even if they acknowledge that it wasn't your fault at all, they'll have to wonder whether you couldn't have erred on the side of safety and avoided anything even remotely questionable.

Let's suppose that your client gets taken down, but it has nothing to do with your work for them. They could still go out of business, or at least run into deep financial trouble, as a result. This could spell the end of your engagement, through no fault of your own.

Finally, the website for your own business could also face a takedown. Now, you might say, "my website doesn't drive much business. It's just an Internet business card." Remember, though, that in SOPA's current provisions, lookups for your domain would go dark. That means no email if you receive it through your own domain, nor any other Internet transactions that rely on your domain.

Another objection you might raise: "I don't post much content on my site, and it's all clear of violations." Are you sure that nothing you posted is similar enough to anything out there that a copyright holder wouldn't issue a pre-emptive strike? Images and videos are hard enough to clear, but how about the written word that just happens to be similar to something someone else wrote? Have you ever linked to a site that might be an offender, even for other unrelated content? Do you allow comments? Have you checked all of their content and every thing they link to, as well?

In the Always Look on the Bright Side of Life department, these new rules could also bring consulting opportunities to prey upon your clients' misfortunes. Reviewing content and policies to ensure or restore compliance with copyright restrictions would become more urgent. For sites that must block content, the technical chops to do that effectively could make some big bucks. The question is: would it pay for your loss of sleep?

As an author of online content, I don't like it when sites copy what I've written without attribution. It feels like a violation. When it occurs with content I've written for TechRepublic, I notify my editor. But I don't think that this piracy has ever cost me a dime, and I'd be really surprised to learn that it cost TechRepublic any significant loss either. When copiers provide attribution, it probably even helps. However readers find content online originally, some of them will start to notice when the same source provides consistently reliable content, and they'll go to that source. The rip-offs aren't generally smart enough to separate the good from the bad. Often they're just automated web scrapers. They're not going to build a loyal readership.

Even if copyright violators do sometimes cost revenue to content providers, additional laws will not improve the situation. Provisions like those in SOPA/PIPA would probably end up costing content publishers more to defend their own content than they could possibly save in enabling the prosecution of true offenders. The only people who win are the lawyers on both sides.

Also read:

TechRepublic, ZDNet, and CBS News are CBS Interactive brands.

About

Chip Camden has been programming since 1978, and he's still not done. An independent consultant since 1991, Chip specializes in software development tools, languages, and migration to new technology. Besides writing for TechRepublic's IT Consultant b...

130 comments
osenberremmi
osenberremmi

monster beats by drecheap beats by drebeats by dreby dre headphonesby dre tourdiscount Beats Studio Kobe BryantCheap Dr Dre StudioMonster Beats Studio SaleMonster Beats Dr Dre SoloMonster Beats by Dr. Dre Sale. Wireless blog Bluetooth About ibeatsbydre.org blog

aflynnhpg
aflynnhpg

The issues at hand clearly are ALREADY ILLEAGAL. More legistlation can't make them any more illegal then they are. What we are talking about here is making someone else responsible for illegal activity. The people breaking the law will continue to break the law, and legitimate businesses will wind up mired in legal battles. How does that make sense? If your neighbor is a theif, but has evaded capture and prosecution, should we make you responsible for reporting his illegal activities? If you don't stop him, we can then go after you for our loss? Find a way to enforce the laws already on the books before you go adding more.

mikegonzalez2k
mikegonzalez2k

A lot of people are aware and are in strong opposition to SOPA and PIPA. However in Oct 2011 our beloved government secretly signed off on ACTA, the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, without even alerting its citizens. This agreement could effectively give a governing body the power to seize information by an Internet Service Provide and prosecute individuals directly. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting_Trade_Agreement

Charles Bundy
Charles Bundy

Governor Tarkin: Princess Leia, before your execution, I'd like you to join me for a ceremony that will make this battle station operational. No star system will dare oppose the Emperor now. Princess Leia: The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers. Star Wars episode IV

verd
verd

Kurt Nimmo and Alex Jones http://www.infowars.com/the-great-internet-wars-have-begun/ Infowars.com January 20, 2012 In the video below, we note that the massive protest this week against SOPA and PIPA should not merely be about government and corporate curtailment of freedom of expression on the internet. You Tube Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=u2HpxRQ-HYo It also crucial that it be about resistance against an all-out effort by the elite and their technocrats to turn the internet into an all-encompassing panopticon surveillance and control grid. Contrary to common belief, the internet was not built to be a networked computer system designed to withstand a nuclear war, but as a surveillance and control grid. It was not happenstance that the platform found its way into public use. In addition to a master networked surveillance tool, the internet is now a weaponized system that will be used to take out enemies of the state, as the Pentagon made abundantly clear following a concerted propaganda campaign hyping the dubious threat of cyber attacks on the power grid and national infrastructure. The system is not designed to attack remote cave dwelling terrorists, as the government would have us believe, but those of us designated as domestic terrorists. Following the introduction of the internet and more specifically the world wide web in the early 1990s, the technocrats began engineering aspects of the surveillance and control grid that are now increasingly embedded in much of our everyday technology ??? from ???smart phones??? that use GPS to track and trace our every move to home appliances networked across the internet and televisions with onboard cameras and microphones in TiVo DVRs and other devices that surreptitiously record our conversations and movement. GPS is also now a standard ???feature??? in our cars. So-called black boxes??? recording our driving habits will soon be mandatory under the pretense of gathering information for car accident investigations. Other surveillance tools include so-called smart meters on our homes that monitor electrical usage and provide this data not only to the government but that will be given or sold to a vast array of third parties for commercial purposes. As previously noted, Google has repeatedly deleted videos unacceptable to the government from its YouTube service and has methodically de-listed alternative news sites from Google News. As a further example of how new technologies facilitate an Orwellian memory hole process where information may disappear without warning, consider Amazon???s arbitrary deletion of purchased books on the Kindle devices of customers. (Significantly, the book in question was Orwell???s classic Nineteen Eighty Four.) From license plate reading technology to RFID tags embedded in clothes to proposals to have fusion centers track and trace our email (the NSA has done the latter now for years), the surveillance state is already here and growing at an alarming rate. We are quickly entering the world portrayed in Minority Report where an array of devices monitor and surveil our every move. In March of 2011, Mike Adams described a plan by the Department of Homeland Security ???to roll out a new wave of mobile surveillance technologies at train stations, stadiums and streets. These new technologies will track your eye movements, capture and record your facial dimensions for face-recognition processing, bathe you in X-rays to look under your clothes, and even image your naked body using whole-body infrared images.??? All of the efforts of government and corporations to turn the world into a high-tech panopticon ??? a prison where the inmates are continuously surveilled without their knowledge or consent ??? is now rolling along at a brisk clip. The internet is at the forefront of that insidious effort. We are not attempting to dismiss commendable efforts to prevent SOPA and PIPA from becoming law. However, we must realize that the battle to maintain and restore our liberty is like playing a game of Spock???s three-dimensional chess. It is active and in motion on multiple levels. We must ensure that the technology we consent to use is not weaponized or employed to track and trace our every move. At the same time, it is critical that we work to restore liberties the government has robbed from us under the pretense of saving us from not only phantom terrorists but also from the banker imported scourge of drugs and other invented dangers like man-made global warming. The great internet wars have begun. It is our responsibility to confront each one decisively and not allow the controllers to divert us down a single path. We must realize that the battle to defeat SOPA and PIPA is part of a larger, more comprehensive fight to resist tyranny in all forms, not simply in Congress where the most obvious efforts appear with theatrical media fanfare.

progan01
progan01

So, Chip... you agree, then, that in a world of dirty politics and the strong-arm tactics of privilege, the best thing to do is to play as dirty as the big boys, step on as many faces as your smaller feet allow, and generally just keep passing on the message that power of any kind is superior to morality of any kind. Do I have that right? You don't mind my hand being on my weapon right now, do you?

Anthony Rice
Anthony Rice

Protecting copyright is like trying to protect a gate to a compound with no surrounding walls. But then SOPA/PIPA has very little to do with copyright and everything to do with controlling the dissemination of information. Essentially, this is digital McCarthyism.

Dusterman
Dusterman

I just found this guy .. .. by accident .. .. at the time he had a mere 300+ views .. .. I did do a little exposing on Facebook [ now he has several thousand hits ] .. .. but thought that maybe .. .. just maybe .. .. there are those on here .. .. like myself that did not know or realize this info that he shares with us .. .. All that I could say was WOW .. .. he hits the nail on the head as far as I am concerned .. .. ! . You can disagree .. .. but please .. .. do not just flame this just because he hits on your favorite program or website .. .. take in what he says with an open mind .. .. research what he says .. .. then come back an make an intelligent comment .. .. . http://youtu.be/7ZhSVGe6ILQ . Mike

Zorched
Zorched

I will bet you huge amounts of money the industry will pay to have the exact verbage of SOPA bootstrapped to the upcoming anti-child-pornography legislation, and no one will have the spine to fight "anti-child pornography" even if it comes with a pro-terrorist rider clause. That's why our only recourse is to not consume their products, no matter how much they whine and cry and lie to get you to stop, until they get back in line. No new movies, no new music, and no video games from the companies that support this. And no pirating them either or they just have ammo for their cause. Let them starve under their own bloated greedy weight.

RealGem
RealGem

"How does all this affect consultants?" Well, you have to make sure you're not providing information that isn't yours, without attribution. Everyone seems to be forgetting about the sites that give away pirated music. I know people who have never bought a CD but their iPods are full of music. Are you telling me that if they couldn't get free music, they *wouldn't* buys any CDs at all? The brilliant people who work hard to come up with new content have to be protected somehow from the leeches who just want to get it all for free and somehow feel that just because the Internet connects computers together, this somehow gives them the right to steal from others. The internet isn't another worlds or another legal system. No matter how often people say "it's a new age" or "it's a new world", we're still talking about people doing things to other people. That's the only point of view that matters. Everybody loves anarchy until someone takes something of theirs ... then the hypocrites are demanding to be protected.

Sterling chip Camden
Sterling chip Camden

I'm sure the powers that be just love hiding this sort of police-state transformation under the guise of an international treaty.

verd
verd

"So this is how liberty dies with thunderous applause" Star Wars Episode III

apotheon
apotheon

. . . by his order, Alderaan was annihilated. The key is to not be among the people (like MegaUpload) who got blasted by a laser big enough to destroy an entire world before the rebels took out the Empire once and for all.

ultimitloozer
ultimitloozer

It appears that we have found another victim of the American education system.

Sterling chip Camden
Sterling chip Camden

How did you make the jump from resisting badly-framed legislation to the raw exercise of amoral power?

apotheon
apotheon

Where did Sterling say anything even remotely like what you claim he's saying?

Sterling chip Camden
Sterling chip Camden

The ability to criminalize anyone who puts anything on the Internet, if you look hard enough.

Sterling chip Camden
Sterling chip Camden

CBS didn't acquire CNET until 2008. By the way, TechRepublic is part of CBS Interactive.

AnsuGisalas
AnsuGisalas

And it's not like their output is worth consuming, anyway. That's the thing, they're not just bloated and obsolete in how they operate... they're bloated and obsolete in everything they do, including their product. Coup de grace, sil vous plais!

Sterling chip Camden
Sterling chip Camden

I'd like to see artists publish their content independently and boycott MPAA/RIAA, too.

nwallette
nwallette

It *IS* a new world now. Take this example: Let's say you're getting married, today, in 2012. You hire a photographer for a couple thousand bucks to take pictures of the ceremony. In all likelihood, s/he is going to use a digital camera, but sell you a certain number of prints, as if this was 1985 and the film had to be taken in and developed. I completely understand that a professional photographer has to make a living, and while $2500 may seem expensive for spending a few hours behind a viewfinder, that person (or people) may only have a couple appointments a week to live off of. The equipment is expensive, and they still have to pay their rent and buy health insurance, I get that. At the end of the day, though, are you going to buy 50 copies of super expensive glossies when all you really wanted to do was email the friends and family that couldn't be there in person? No, you'll probably scan one of the pieces included in your package, or ask a friend with a $75 Canon to send you a couple JPEGs from their memory card. It's not a polished professional portrait, but it's all you really needed anyway. I don't have the solution to problems like this, but then, I'm not an esteemed photojournalist either. Still, if you cling to an old-fashioned business model, you'll get buried by those who don't. There is another way.

apotheon
apotheon

Quote: Well, you have to make sure you're not providing information that isn't yours, without attribution. Actually, if you attribute someone, you're more likely to be found and legally attacked. Attribution helps you not at all. Quote: Are you telling me that if they couldn't get free music, they *wouldn't* buys any CDs at all? Depends on the person. Question: What does that have to do with how horrible SOPA and PIPA are, anyway? Answer: nothing at all. SOPA and PIPA wouldn't even target the infringers themselves. Quote: The brilliant people who work hard to come up with new content have to be protected somehow That much is true -- but they need to be protected from the Big Media corporations who want to maintain a stranglehold on content industries via obsolete business models, preventing artists and other creators from generating revenue for themselves independently, cutting out the predatory middle-men. Quote: steal from others. It's not "stealing". It's copyright infringement. Learn the difference. These are separate bodies of law. In stealing, you take something from someone, and that person no longer has it. In copyright infringement, you copy something you have and give it to someone who did not previously have it without getting permission from a third party. *Totally* *different* *circumstances*. Quote: No matter how often people say "it's a new age" or "it's a new world", we're still talking about people doing things to other people. Yeah -- except you're talking about things you imagine people are doing ("stealing") when they aren't, and the rest of us are talking about things people really are doing (censoring).

tkejlboom
tkejlboom

You also have to make sure you're not linking to anyone that links to anyone that's been accused of infringement. You also have to make sure that no users on comment threads like this post infringing content, links to infringing content, links to hosts of infringing content, etc. Your entire job will become policing content for infringement. You WILL eventually miss something, and then you're toast. It's MASSIVE liability. It's deliberately intended to be soooo much liability that sites like YouTube, TechRebublic, and Forbes.com SHUT DOWN. The cost and liability of making sure a commenter on a blog from a contributor doesn't bring down the entire enterprise is so great that no one will pay for a web presence AT ALL. Your own premise defies your conclusion. The Internet isn't a special legal system. It should not be constrained by brutal draconian laws that would be completely unacceptable in other legal systems. Yes, that's exactly what we're saying, you idiot. Just like all throughout the 90s, millions of people listened to music in their car without purchasing an in-dash music player. It's bad enough they passed the abomination which is the DMCA, using the law to create monopolies by strangling all other distribution channels is NOT capitalism. It's NOT right. It's NOT ethical. It does NOT promote order. It's just a BAD LAW.

Sterling chip Camden
Sterling chip Camden

It's the violation of a state-supported monopoly on copying, nothing more. It's illegal, but it's not the same thing as theft. Theft means I take something from you that you no longer have.

nwallette
nwallette

There's a distinction between having a process to protect intellectual property and allowing legislation that could lead to an online Red Scare. Not everyone that opposes SOPA/PIPA is a pirate, or sides with piracy. Neither does being against piracy equate to supporting SOPA.

Sterling chip Camden
Sterling chip Camden

... it's the Alderaans, MegaUploads, Nathan Hales, and Mohamed Bouazizis who inspire resistance that might otherwise have faltered.

HAL 9000
HAL 9000

You honestly do not expect Rupert Bare to respond to that do you? He has a history of firing people that disagree with his ideas where he can and ignoring those he can not fire. The best we could hope to achieve here is to drive the idiot away from Tweeber where he has free reign to say what he likes and to stir people up. I honestly wouldn't be holding my breath expecting any form or recognition let alone a reply. ;) Col

progan01
progan01

I understand IP. I've had mine sold from under my feet by a former publisher who lost their license from the original studio and decided they thus owned my work, ignoring its reversion to me. I understand making a living as a consultant, even making a living advising consultants. But you can't oppose SOPA/PIPA and then tell people how to cope with their clients who have to comply, Chip. No, sorry, you're arguing the ESA way, out of both sides of your mouth. No client of any consultant should be told anything other than to resist to their utmost any attempt by any company to shut them down for suspicion of having questionable content. To let in the nose of THIS camel means your tent is forfeit, and as much as you as can be seized by privately-hired thugs acting under the shield of the law. Illegality of the sort proposed by SOPA/PIPA -- and make no mistake, this is a direct assault on personal property by the privileged, subverting your 4th Amendment rights to freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures -- needs to be utterly opposed. There is no compromise. There is no 'helping' people to 'comply' with the 'law.' You either resist this or you cave. You've advised caving. I find that unacceptable, immoral, un-American and anti-liberty. I repudiate such advice absolutely, and I tell everyone to refuse to assist. Instead, you must help your clients resist. Clients who don't want to resist aren't going to be around much longer anyway. They'll be seized as Megaupload was seized, and likely for less cause. You weaklings who don't see what's happening are going to be crushed as you kneel before your new Masters, who don't give a hoot in hell about your property, your supposed 'rights' or your business. Your right to have a nose ends where they can swing their fists. Believe me, they're going to be swinging. You want to let them? Then follow Chip's advice and prepare to die on your knees. In ignominy, dishonor and failure. Like a crippled slave. You want to live on your feet? Then fight back. Help your clients fight back. Or you, and they, are going to lose a lot more than your noses. Trust me on this.

apotheon
apotheon

regex that b**ch that is all

AnsuGisalas
AnsuGisalas

it's from where the sun don't shine.

Dusterman
Dusterman

Good attempt at the spin here [ conspiracy theory ] . . I'll let you buy me a cup of coffee when I get to your neck o' the woods .. .. with that CBS monay .. that you get paid to present these articles ......... :-) . I do thank CBS .. .. for thier participation in the tech area [ here] .. .. we all share and learn from each other .. .. no stealing of info going on here .. .. . In my opinion .. ..

apotheon
apotheon

. . . and we can see how well that's going.

Sterling chip Camden
Sterling chip Camden

They know that some (certainly not all) of the intentionally free stuff out there competes well on quality with what they spend millions producing and marketing. Their whole business model is based on being a gigantic money sink, from which they can pull a hefty share. Lean, low-cost, quality production is their worst nightmare.

apotheon
apotheon

I've been boycotting the RIAA for about a decade now. I've been boycotting the MPAA for a few months; I fully expect that to last at least a decade, too. I'm pondering a boycott of the major publishing houses, too, and next time I move I may be looking for a way to opt out of cable Internet service. It's getting "real". The time has come to cut ties to these jackasses. When you have to buy such things, buy them used or from publishers and distributors who "get it" like O'Reilly.

AnsuGisalas
AnsuGisalas

they retain all rights to the image, and so refuse to hand over a digital copy. Christ on a cracker, that gets my goat.

Sterling chip Camden
Sterling chip Camden

Just because we don't know what model will work under new circumstances doesn't mean that we should criminalize the evolutionary processes that are making the old model obsolete. The dinosaurs are trying to legislate in favor of cold-blooded gigantism. The meteors are incoming, time to get small and grow feathers.

apotheon
apotheon

I still don't want to be on Alderaan when it blows up, though.

HAL 9000
HAL 9000

That those who do not agree with Rupert are just plain wrong. He controls the media or at least a very big chunk of it and way too many people follow his lead like the Lemmings that they are. Those that don't are the ones he pushes over the cliff as he could never make a mistake. ;) Of course his Mummy pulls him into line when he returns home but that doesn't happen often. :0 Col

Sterling chip Camden
Sterling chip Camden

I just hope some other folks will see how he twisted the term "terrorism" to apply to the exercise of free speech in the pursuit of representative democracy. That's the sort of doublespeak that will end all our freedoms if it isn't challenged.

AnsuGisalas
AnsuGisalas

He might mail ya a box of his finest poo. ;)

apotheon
apotheon

I think you went quite far enough, with statements that specifically point out that any SOPA/PIPA privateers must lose sleep over the work (or, by implication, be a sociopath). If someone misses that, it's probably because on some level (s)he wants to miss it. When I read the article, my only real worry was that someone might leap to the conclusion you are running a copyright infringement business online somewhere, or something asinine like that. It sure never occurred to me that someone would (reasonably) read from what you said that you somehow support profiting off SOPA or the PROTECT IP Act.

apotheon
apotheon

This is the quote that makes me think progan01@ falls short of your own opposition: "I understand IP. I've had mine sold from under my feet by . . ." Anyone who feels the need to open with something that reads vaguely like a disclaimer of radicalism is someone who has at least some sympathies for the motives of the people on the other side of the divide. When the very foundation of those motives are wrong, and someone (like you) recognizes that fact, the other person -- who uses something so disclaimerish -- seems quite obviously to fall short in depth of opposition. edit: I guess I'm talking about "opposition" in terms of principle, and not in terms of specific actions taken in a narrow context.

Sterling chip Camden
Sterling chip Camden

... but I don't presume to know the depth of progan01@'s passion. I called my senators, wrote my representative, posted about this several times on the web, signed the petitions, and blacked out my own sites on January 18. But who knows, maybe progan01 did even more.

Sterling chip Camden
Sterling chip Camden

... and lashing out at anyone who seems suspect of favoring SOPA/PIPA in any way. Not too surprising, since those who would eliminate our freedoms couch their arguments in all sorts of pretended good intentions. I probably should have been more explicit in the article that I would view consulting for SOPA/PIPA compliance as equivalent to assimilation in the Borg.

apotheon
apotheon

Knowing you as I do, I suspect you probably oppose SOPA and PIPA even more than progan01@.

apotheon
apotheon

I don't know whether to give you an upvote for such a strong, principled message, or a downvote for completely missing Sterling's point (which agrees with you). I think I'll just leave this comment here instead.

Sterling chip Camden
Sterling chip Camden

... the sarcasm in that bit of advice on how to capitalize on this. I'm as against SOPA/PIPA as you are.

Sterling chip Camden
Sterling chip Camden

Regardless of how it got started or what its motives are, it's bad legislation.

Dusterman
Dusterman

Clarifying your position ! We do tho .. .. stand united in opposing this issue

Sterling chip Camden
Sterling chip Camden

I'm not trying to spin anything. I don't support SOPA/PIPA, no matter whether CBS does or not. Like apotheon, I think TechRepublic was better off without them -- but I still find the arrangement workable, mostly because they don't seem to interfere with content. Regarding "conspiracy theory" -- the video you linked does claim that there's a conspiracy here. All I'm saying is that the part of it that links CNET's past activities to any intention of CBS is stretching it, because CBS didn't even own CNET at that time.

apotheon
apotheon

Why thank CBS? In my opinion, things were better here before TR's parent company was acquired.

Sterling chip Camden
Sterling chip Camden

It's the middle-of-the-road, top-40 tastes that gobble up the slop they're shoveling.

apotheon
apotheon

Unfortunately, the people we really need to boycott them are the people already consuming their products.

Sterling chip Camden
Sterling chip Camden

The only way to break their stranglehold on both artists and consumers is to quit handing them money. I don't buy music or movies anyway, but if I ever do I'll make sure it's not passing through the hands of these mobsters.

apotheon
apotheon

Are you aware that "wheel" is a user group for accounts with certain types of administrative access on Unix-like systems?

AnsuGisalas
AnsuGisalas

Coming from you, Chad, that gave some interesting associations... Jesus of the black hat :D

apotheon
apotheon

Christ wasn't on a cracker -- he was on a stick. Christ *is* a cracker, but he was *on* a stick.

Sterling chip Camden
Sterling chip Camden

That got my funny-bone. It sounds like a new marketing slogan for the Eucharist. Maybe you could sell it to the Roman Church, along with "acolyte on a stick" (maybe not).