Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

You guys do know Victoria Espinel right? Her position as "Copyright Czar" was created by Obama's government.

From Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victoria_Espinel:

Espinel received eleven letters of in support of the nomination from related organizations including the MPAA, the Copyright Alliance, and the United States Chamber of Commerce.[7] As the IPEC, Espinel has stated she has a singular objective: develop and implement a comprehensive, unified approach to IP enforcement for the U.S. government.[1]

So if the response reads a little suspicious, it's because she (and presumably the administration) has a side on the issue.



Why is it "suspicious?" Yes, the administration has a stance on this issue, one that is not popular amongst the readers of this site. But I don't think they are denying that stance or pretending to believe anything else.


Suspicious was the wrong word. It reads to me like a lot of agreeing with SOPA opposition: "We must avoid creating new cybersecurity risks or disrupting the underlying architecture of the Internet."

But then tries to jam in:

"That is why 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"

No! The internet has no borders. American laws and "rights" don't apply outside of the United States. That's why the United States tortures people outside of the US. You can't say that US law applies to copying MP3s, but not torture.

That's why if you read between the lines, the response is not saying "We agree with you.", it's saying "I'll get you next time, Gadget, next time."




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: