Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Monday July 27 2015, @10:29PM   Printer-friendly
from the second-rule-is-don't-write-anything-down dept.

Earlier this month, [TechDirt] noted that the Hollywood studios were all resisting subpoenas from Google concerning their super cozy relationship with Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood, whose highly questionable "investigation" of Google appeared to actually be run by the MPAA and the studios themselves. The entire "investigation" seemed to clearly be an attempt to mislead the public into believing that it was somehow illegal for Google's search engine to find stuff that people didn't like online. A court has already ruled that Hood pretty clearly acted in bad faith to deprive Google of its First Amendment rights. As the case has continued, Google has sought much more detail on just how much of the investigation was run by the MPAA and the studios -- and Hollywood has vigorously resisted, claiming that they really had nothing to do with all of this, which was a laughable assertion.

However, in a filing on Thursday, Google revealed one of the few emails that they have been able to get access to so far, and it's stunning.

To read some of the content of the e-mail (which really is stunning, if only for how openly the MPAA is doing this), read more here: TechDirt article

takyon: Dec. 12: Google Ends MPAA Anti-Piracy Cooperation
Dec. 23: As Hollywood Funds a SOPA Revival Through State Officials, Google (And The Internet) Respond
Jul. 3: Google Scolds MPAA on Cozy Relationship With the Mississippi Attorney General


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Tuesday July 28 2015, @06:52PM

    by Joe Desertrat (2454) on Tuesday July 28 2015, @06:52PM (#214995)

    Not at all. I've paid my fees and therefore get to download all available recorded music.

    From the Wikipedia page for Private Copying Levy:
    "Currently, private copy royalties are generated in the US by the sale of "blank CDs and personal audio devices, media centers, satellite radio devices, and car audio systems that have recording capabilities.".

    Note that is only in the US, many other nations have higher and lower taxes for more or less categories of items. Perhaps they should be providing us with download credits, as you would be hard pressed to find examples of them actually paying artists. In fact, you might realize the artists mentioned in the OP are being charged a tax for the blank media used to record and sell their own music!

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2