Comments on: Partial list of corporate lickspittles who are allowed to know what's in the secret copyright treaty the Obama administration claims is a matter of "national security" http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html Brain candy for Happy Mutants Sun, 19 May 2013 04:09:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1 By: jere7my http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-439553 jere7my Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-439553 The EFF's response has been more sensible and measured:<blockquote>Obama gave Holder the task of laying out the ground rules related to the president's Jan. 21 FOIA memo, which instructed agencies to presume that information requested by the public should be released, unless there are compelling reasons not to.</blockquote><blockquote>EFF is unsure when Holder will issue his guidelines, said David Sobel, a senior attorney there. "I don't think the new FOIA policy and the commitment to openness has really percolated through the agencies," he said. "I'd like to believe the new administration is going to use that time to rethink its position."</blockquote>http://www.pcworld.com/article/161234/obama_administration_says_treaty_text_is_state_secret.html That reflects my feeling — this is awkward, but it's an awkward oversight, not a reflection of some new draconian policy. Change takes time. Obama probably hasn't even heard about the FOIA request — he's got a lot in his schedule, and this story broke less than 24 hours ago. But that doesn't really feed the internet drama monster, does it? You know, the <a href="http://www.boingboing.net/2008/11/10/changegov-is-going-t.html" rel="nofollow">"change.gov is no longer asking for citizen input" post</a> a few months ago generated a lot of drama, too. Then the new version of the site went live, and all those features were put back in, and nobody noticed. But I only mention that so I can make this point: just once, just <i>once</i>, I'd like to see a discussion of an Obama decision that didn't include the quote from <i>Won't Get Fooled Again</i>. C'mon, people — I was carving that on school desks in 1983. I saw it four times, in four different fora, while researching this FOIA request. In his first two months, Obama has overturned the stem cell ban, moved to close Gitmo, enacted the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, set forth new FOIA guidelines, and done a bunch more things Bush & Co. fought tooth-and-nail against, all while dealing with a global financial crisis and two ongoing wars. But every time he (or someone who works for him) makes a minor misstep (and this is a minor misstep), it's "Meet the new boss! Same as the old boss! Snicker-snee!" It's like the twister came, ripping up the house and flinging it from Kansas to Oz, and all Dorothy can say when she steps out into Technicolor is, "Pff. We have midgets at home, too." The EFF’s response has been more sensible and measured:
Obama gave Holder the task of laying out the ground rules related to the president’s Jan. 21 FOIA memo, which instructed agencies to presume that information requested by the public should be released, unless there are compelling reasons not to.

EFF is unsure when Holder will issue his guidelines, said David Sobel, a senior attorney there. “I don’t think the new FOIA policy and the commitment to openness has really percolated through the agencies,” he said. “I’d like to believe the new administration is going to use that time to rethink its position.”

http://www.pcworld.com/article/161234/obama_administration_says_treaty_text_is_state_secret.html

That reflects my feeling — this is awkward, but it’s an awkward oversight, not a reflection of some new draconian policy. Change takes time. Obama probably hasn’t even heard about the FOIA request — he’s got a lot in his schedule, and this story broke less than 24 hours ago. But that doesn’t really feed the internet drama monster, does it?

You know, the “change.gov is no longer asking for citizen input” post a few months ago generated a lot of drama, too. Then the new version of the site went live, and all those features were put back in, and nobody noticed. But I only mention that so I can make this point: just once, just once, I’d like to see a discussion of an Obama decision that didn’t include the quote from Won’t Get Fooled Again. C’mon, people — I was carving that on school desks in 1983. I saw it four times, in four different fora, while researching this FOIA request.

In his first two months, Obama has overturned the stem cell ban, moved to close Gitmo, enacted the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, set forth new FOIA guidelines, and done a bunch more things Bush & Co. fought tooth-and-nail against, all while dealing with a global financial crisis and two ongoing wars. But every time he (or someone who works for him) makes a minor misstep (and this is a minor misstep), it’s “Meet the new boss! Same as the old boss! Snicker-snee!”

It’s like the twister came, ripping up the house and flinging it from Kansas to Oz, and all Dorothy can say when she steps out into Technicolor is, “Pff. We have midgets at home, too.”

]]> By: Ernunnos http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-439556 Ernunnos Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-439556 After voting for a Chicago politician, the American public is shocked to discover the office filled by a Chicago politician. After voting for a Chicago politician, the American public is shocked to discover the office filled by a Chicago politician.

]]> By: High On Markers http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-439557 High On Markers Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-439557 great reporting - this article really cuts through the crap great reporting – this article really cuts through the crap

]]> By: yakta http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-439569 yakta Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-439569 There is no good democratic reason to not keep procedings of this nature completely transparent. If that is not the case then any decision reached in the end lacks democratic authority and we will not be compelled to follow it. On the contrary, any decision reached via undemocratic proceedings creates a moral carte blanche for piracy. There is no good democratic reason to not keep procedings of this nature completely transparent. If that is not the case then any decision reached in the end lacks democratic authority and we will not be compelled to follow it. On the contrary, any decision reached via undemocratic proceedings creates a moral carte blanche for piracy.

]]> By: owenblacker http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-440083 owenblacker Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-440083 @Joe in Australia (#5). IBM's not odd in that list at all. They have the largest patent portfolio in the world. That said, they make much more money out of FLOSS-related consultancy than from their patent portfolio these days. (These facts brought to you courtesy of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Boyle_(academic)" rel="nofollow">Prof James Boyle</a> and his lecture <em><a href="http://www.thepublicdomain.org/download" rel="nofollow">Public Domain: Enclosing the Commons of the Mind</a></em> <a href="http://www.thersa.org/events/audio-and-past-events/the-public-domain-enclosing-the-commons-of-the-mind" rel="nofollow">at the RSA last week</a>; full audio available for download on that link.) @Joe in Australia (#5). IBM’s not odd in that list at all. They have the largest patent portfolio in the world.

That said, they make much more money out of FLOSS-related consultancy than from their patent portfolio these days.

(These facts brought to you courtesy of Prof James Boyle and his lecture Public Domain: Enclosing the Commons of the Mind at the RSA last week; full audio available for download on that link.)

]]> By: Baldhead http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-439572 Baldhead Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-439572 Anheiser Busch makes Budweiser. This is an internatinal copyright issue since Budwieser, in traditional beer terms merely means "from Budvar"- a city in Poland far away from any anheiser- busch breweries. Anheiser Busch makes Budweiser. This is an internatinal copyright issue since Budwieser, in traditional beer terms merely means “from Budvar”- a city in Poland far away from any anheiser- busch breweries.

]]> By: Ugly Canuck http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-439579 Ugly Canuck Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-439579 I for one remember how little criticism of any kind whatsoever was directed at Bush in his first year in office - it was a marked contrast to the media's attitude to clinton, it was as if someone had thrown a switch - and now hey! Another president they go after from before the get-go.... The anti-O stuff stinks. And it's orchestrated. I for one remember how little criticism of any kind whatsoever was directed at Bush in his first year in office – it was a marked contrast to the media’s attitude to clinton, it was as if someone had thrown a switch – and now hey!
Another president they go after from before the get-go….
The anti-O stuff stinks. And it’s orchestrated.

]]> By: Signal30 http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-439330 Signal30 Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-439330 Is this really a big shocker? Business as usual (and yes... I did vote for Obama. But did it without thinking that change is a'comin' though). Is this really a big shocker? Business as usual (and yes… I did vote for Obama. But did it without thinking that change is a’comin’ though).

]]> By: Michael Leung http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-439331 Michael Leung Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-439331 Um, can somebody tell me why I'm not allowed to know what's in the treaty, but the senior associate in a freaking BREWERY company (Anheuser-Busch) is? This really annoys me. Um, can somebody tell me why I’m not allowed to know what’s in the treaty, but the senior associate in a freaking BREWERY company (Anheuser-Busch) is? This really annoys me.

]]> By: Axx http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-439338 Axx Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-439338 National security, huh? Well, if the treaty goes through in full, then I guess I can't share my favorite open source .txt document via PvP. <br /> It says: "Don't tread on me" National security, huh? Well, if the treaty goes through in full, then I guess I can’t share my favorite open source .txt document via PvP.

It says: “Don’t tread on me”

]]> By: Anonymous http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-439339 Anonymous Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-439339 Is anyone still unaware that "national security" means whatever they want it to mean? It means "SHUT UP!!!!!1!!11!! BECAUSE SCARY CANNIBALISTIC ZOMBIE FOREIGNER RAPE SQUADS ARE COMING FOR YOUR CHILDRENS AND YOUR DOG!!!1! ... OR NOT, JUST SHUT UP THOUGH KTHXBYE" Is anyone still unaware that “national security” means whatever they want it to mean? It means “SHUT UP!!!!!1!!11!! BECAUSE SCARY CANNIBALISTIC ZOMBIE FOREIGNER RAPE SQUADS ARE COMING FOR YOUR CHILDRENS AND YOUR DOG!!!1! … OR NOT, JUST SHUT UP THOUGH KTHXBYE”

]]> By: GuruOfReason http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-439595 GuruOfReason Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-439595 Obama needs to choose where his loyalty is. Is he loyal to those corporations, or is he loyal to the people? At some point, like the French peasants in 1789, people will have enough. I hope Obama is on the correct side when that time comes. Obama needs to choose where his loyalty is. Is he loyal to those corporations, or is he loyal to the people? At some point, like the French peasants in 1789, people will have enough. I hope Obama is on the correct side when that time comes.

]]> By: Joe in Australia http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-439345 Joe in Australia Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-439345 The second on the list, "The Gorlin group" is interesting. I'd never heard of it, but a quick Google found its website. It looks like a lobbying corporation - but get a look at its clients! <i><b>A Partial List of Past and Current Clients</b></i> [First the ones who are worried about their own intellectual property, mostly pharmaceuticals but also Microsoft and ... IBM? Didn't they use to be in computers? Also Time Warner, which is a magazine publisher.] <i>Bristol-Myers Squibb DuPont FMC Corporation General Electric Gilead GlaxoSmithKline Hewlett-Packard IBM Johnson & Johnson Lilly Merck Microsoft Monsanto Novartis Pfizer Pharmacia Procter & Gamble Rockwell International Schering Plough Texas Instruments Time Warner Westinghouse</i> [Now comes the industry groups] <i>American BioIndustry Alliance (ABIA) Business Roundtable Intellectual Property Committee (IPC) International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers & Associations (IFPMA) INTERPAT Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association of South Africa Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers Association (PhRMA) RDPAC (R&D-based Pharmaceutical Association in China)</i> You can see that the big money amongst their clients is in medicine. I'd be surprised if Microsoft, IBM and TI are current clients. Then looking past the Gorlin group you find many of the same names, including Merck and Lilly. But you also get some WTF? moments. Anheuser-Busch sells beer. Yes, I guess they're interested in trademark infringement, but no more than any other manufacturer. GM? Are they scared that people will drive them into bankruptcy by imittaing their cars? And most of all - Thomas G. Faria Corporation. As far as I can make out, they sell speedometers. Unless there's something I'm missing out on, their corporate counsel just got a chance to take a holiday in Washington DC. The second on the list, “The Gorlin group” is interesting. I’d never heard of it, but a quick Google found its website. It looks like a lobbying corporation – but get a look at its clients!

A Partial List of Past and Current Clients

[First the ones who are worried about their own intellectual property, mostly pharmaceuticals but also Microsoft and ... IBM? Didn't they use to be in computers? Also Time Warner, which is a magazine publisher.]

Bristol-Myers Squibb
DuPont
FMC Corporation
General Electric
Gilead
GlaxoSmithKline
Hewlett-Packard
IBM
Johnson & Johnson
Lilly
Merck
Microsoft
Monsanto
Novartis
Pfizer
Pharmacia
Procter & Gamble
Rockwell International
Schering Plough
Texas Instruments
Time Warner
Westinghouse

[Now comes the industry groups]

American BioIndustry Alliance (ABIA)
Business Roundtable
Intellectual Property Committee (IPC)
International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers & Associations (IFPMA)
INTERPAT
Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association of South Africa
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers Association (PhRMA)
RDPAC (R&D-based Pharmaceutical Association in China)

You can see that the big money amongst their clients is in medicine. I’d be surprised if Microsoft, IBM and TI are current clients. Then looking past the Gorlin group you find many of the same names, including Merck and Lilly. But you also get some WTF? moments. Anheuser-Busch sells beer. Yes, I guess they’re interested in trademark infringement, but no more than any other manufacturer. GM? Are they scared that people will drive them into bankruptcy by imittaing their cars? And most of all – Thomas G. Faria Corporation. As far as I can make out, they sell speedometers. Unless there’s something I’m missing out on, their corporate counsel just got a chance to take a holiday in Washington DC.

]]> By: surreal http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-439602 surreal Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-439602 What folks should be concerned with is how the bio tech companies are jumping on the drm train with their genetic rights management (grm) lawsuits against food producers who use non licensed seed stock. These companies control what you eat and who can grow it at the most fundamental level. For those concerned and unaware check this out for a full list http://www.keionline.org/blogs/2009/03/13/who-are-cleared-advisors/ The companies lobbying for the passage of ACTA are counting on the populace to be like the tv users of old 'watch-what-we-provide-bitch-and-moan-and-go-to-sleep' Is there someone who can harness the power of reddit, digg, twitter et al. and show the axis of evil ACTA the power of internet users, that is crusaders? Anyone up for the task? I am a newbi or I would try. For everyone who is bitching, I hear ya.....but what are you personally going to do about it? It would be neat to see the net community stop this in it's track. Might even make the news. What folks should be concerned with is how the bio tech companies are jumping on the drm train with their genetic rights management (grm) lawsuits against food producers who use non licensed seed stock. These companies control what you eat and who can grow it at the most fundamental level.
For those concerned and unaware check this out for a full list http://www.keionline.org/blogs/2009/03/13/who-are-cleared-advisors/

The companies lobbying for the passage of ACTA are counting on the populace to be like the tv users of old ‘watch-what-we-provide-bitch-and-moan-and-go-to-sleep’
Is there someone who can harness the power of reddit, digg, twitter et al. and show the axis of evil ACTA the power of internet users, that is crusaders?
Anyone up for the task? I am a newbi or I would try.
For everyone who is bitching, I hear ya…..but what are you personally going to do about it?
It would be neat to see the net community stop this in it’s track. Might even make the news.

]]> By: lakelady http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-439606 lakelady Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-439606 JERE7MY - thank you for a reasoned response to the issue. I'm getting sick and tired of hearing on one side about how Obama is taking us to hell because he's a communist and from the other that he's pulling the wool over our eyes and that we're all being duped and that is same song different singer. None of this squabbling and bickering and looking for the worst in everything serves us and does nothing more than shut down real conversation and real solutions to real problems. JERE7MY – thank you for a reasoned response to the issue. I’m getting sick and tired of hearing on one side about how Obama is taking us to hell because he’s a communist and from the other that he’s pulling the wool over our eyes and that we’re all being duped and that is same song different singer. None of this squabbling and bickering and looking for the worst in everything serves us and does nothing more than shut down real conversation and real solutions to real problems.

]]> By: Anonymous http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-440127 Anonymous Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-440127 I see no evidence that Obama's copyright policies are orchestrated by a right-wing spin machine. In fact, I see every indication that when it comes to copyright Obama is pretty much wrong across the board. Just look at his running mate, for crying out-- and appointing a bushel of ex-RIAA lawyers, etc. Obama + copyright = bad. I see no evidence that Obama’s copyright policies are orchestrated by a right-wing spin machine. In fact, I see every indication that when it comes to copyright Obama is pretty much wrong across the board. Just look at his running mate, for crying out– and appointing a bushel of ex-RIAA lawyers, etc. Obama + copyright = bad.

]]> By: Big Ed Dunkel http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-439361 Big Ed Dunkel Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-439361 What worse is that these jokers also get access to Gerald Ford's hefty collection of "Hustler" back issues, too. What worse is that these jokers also get access to Gerald Ford’s hefty collection of “Hustler” back issues, too.

]]> By: Ugly Canuck http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-439370 Ugly Canuck Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-439370 Workers revolt! Nature sets the example: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/wildlife/4970905/Monkey-kills-cruel-owner-with-coconut-thrown-from-tree.html Workers revolt! Nature sets the example:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/wildlife/4970905/Monkey-kills-cruel-owner-with-coconut-thrown-from-tree.html

]]> By: Anonymous http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-439373 Anonymous Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-439373 Yes, we can, up to a point. Yes, we can, up to a point.

]]> By: Ugly Canuck http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-439375 Ugly Canuck Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-439375 Joe in australia: brewer's yeast is subject to genetic manipulation: any industry which incorporates bio-elements in the production change will be more interested in patents; this is true for big pharma, too: but what have they to say about copyright? If we were in a slightly different world, would big marijuana producers be on the list of invitees too, and what for? Perhaps the Treaty is more like a patent+copyright thingy. OTOH as big advertisers the beer cos have an interest in big mass media, and they in turn have a very great interest in copyrights, indeed. But if so why not have the ginsu knife people (and all big ad firms)there too? (Then again, maybe they are, via their corp masters) Joe in australia: brewer’s yeast is subject to genetic manipulation: any industry which incorporates bio-elements in the production change will be more interested in patents; this is true for big pharma, too: but what have they to say about copyright?
If we were in a slightly different world, would big marijuana producers be on the list of invitees too, and what for?
Perhaps the Treaty is more like a patent+copyright thingy.
OTOH as big advertisers the beer cos have an interest in big mass media, and they in turn have a very great interest in copyrights, indeed. But if so why not have the ginsu knife people (and all big ad firms)there too? (Then again, maybe they are, via their corp masters)

]]> By: Thebes http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-439635 Thebes Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-439635 Ok, we've got the list. So, where do we pick up the tar and feathers? Ok, we’ve got the list.
So, where do we pick up the tar and feathers?

]]> By: fltndboat http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-439894 fltndboat Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-439894 Gag. It is the Federal Reserve. Get rid of it. They puke ugly. Self serving all. They put the lie into Democracy and kill people. Secret societies. Family power. Self serving cowards bred for generations, no problem welcome to America. Melt down into your self serving ignorance and become a leader. That is the American Way. Don't make a rats ass quiver when the top changes. Unless it looks at who is printing the Money. Gag. It is the Federal Reserve. Get rid of it. They puke ugly. Self serving all. They put the lie into Democracy and kill people. Secret societies. Family power. Self serving cowards bred for generations, no problem welcome to America. Melt down into your self serving ignorance and become a leader. That is the American Way. Don’t make a rats ass quiver when the top changes. Unless it looks at who is printing the Money.

]]> By: zuzu http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-439385 zuzu Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-439385 <blockquote>Also <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Warner" rel="nofollow">Time Warner</a>, which is a magazine publisher.</blockquote>You mean AOL Time Warner, the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_Runner_(ISP)" rel="nofollow">telecommunications</a> and media company? <blockquote>major operations in film, television, publishing, Internet service and telecommunications. Among its subsidiaries are AOL, New Line Cinema, Time Inc., Time Warner Cable, HBO, Turner Broadcasting System, The CW Television Network, TheWB.com, UBU Productions, Warner Bros. Entertainment, Kids' WB, The CW4Kids, Cartoon Network, CNN, DC Comics, and Mohawk Productions.</blockquote>

Also Time Warner, which is a magazine publisher.

You mean AOL Time Warner, the telecommunications and media company?

major operations in film, television, publishing, Internet service and telecommunications. Among its subsidiaries are AOL, New Line Cinema, Time Inc., Time Warner Cable, HBO, Turner Broadcasting System, The CW Television Network, TheWB.com, UBU Productions, Warner Bros. Entertainment, Kids’ WB, The CW4Kids, Cartoon Network, CNN, DC Comics, and Mohawk Productions.

]]> By: zuzu http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-439386 zuzu Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-439386 <blockquote>Perhaps the Treaty is more like a patent+copyright thingy.</blockquote>You mean <i><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonization" rel="nofollow">harmonisation</a></i>? Like how the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_Act" rel="nofollow">DMCA</a> got exported as the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Directive" rel="nofollow">EUCD</a>? The worst part is that this elimination of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage" rel="nofollow">comparative advantage</a> will likely be spun as some kind of "free trade" agreement. ...like calling Guantanamo Bay a "freedom camp".

Perhaps the Treaty is more like a patent+copyright thingy.

You mean harmonisation? Like how the DMCA got exported as the EUCD?

The worst part is that this elimination of comparative advantage will likely be spun as some kind of “free trade” agreement. …like calling Guantanamo Bay a “freedom camp”.

]]> By: zuzu http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-439390 zuzu Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-439390 <blockquote>The second on the list, "The Gorlin group" is interesting.</blockquote>Followed by the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlyle_Group" rel="nofollow">Carlyle Group</a> and the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilderberg_Group" rel="nofollow">Bilderberg Group</a>, no doubt.

The second on the list, “The Gorlin group” is interesting.

Followed by the Carlyle Group and the Bilderberg Group, no doubt.

]]> By: Ugly Canuck http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-439392 Ugly Canuck Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-439392 Well you know I hold it as a principle, that property owners are best qualified to set the rules as to property: they know it best. This looks like a working session amongst those who hold a the majority of income-producing monopoly rights arising under patent and copyright legislation. To the extent that it is a gathering of rentiers enabled to be such by public legislation and public grants of monopoly privilege, it should be open to the public. To the extent that it is a gathering of property owners calibrating their relations amongst themselves and their relations as a group to others, it ought to be private. In corporatist 21st C. America, it is weirdly difficult to say as to where to draw the line. My instinct says that the line bounding what can be rightfully treated as property has been drawn wrongly: some things are being treated as "property" which ought not to be, and that this in turn has led to the blurring of public/private interests. In practical terms that means some are getting more, while others are getting less, than they ought: that imbalance makes it a public concern, if the entire edifice is based (as it is) on public legislation. Well you know I hold it as a principle, that property owners are best qualified to set the rules as to property: they know it best.
This looks like a working session amongst those who hold a the majority of income-producing monopoly rights arising under patent and copyright legislation.
To the extent that it is a gathering of rentiers enabled to be such by public legislation and public grants of monopoly privilege, it should be open to the public.
To the extent that it is a gathering of property owners calibrating their relations amongst themselves and their relations as a group to others, it ought to be private.
In corporatist 21st C. America, it is weirdly difficult to say as to where to draw the line.
My instinct says that the line bounding what can be rightfully treated as property has been drawn wrongly: some things are being treated as “property” which ought not to be, and that this in turn has led to the blurring of public/private interests.
In practical terms that means some are getting more, while others are getting less, than they ought: that imbalance makes it a public concern, if the entire edifice is based (as it is) on public legislation.

]]> By: mdh http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-439648 mdh Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-439648 <i>How is it BoingBoing justifies petty name-calling in its own headlines, while simultaneously disemvowelling any comments that commit the identical crime?</i> It's been explained. See the moderation thread and learn why it's not the same thing. The Mod thread is linked at the top of this and every page. Happy reading. <i>Has BoingBoing lost (or did it originally have) integrity?</i> That is for each of us to decide. Now let me ask you, do you find time complaining about the free ice cream to be time well spent? How is it BoingBoing justifies petty name-calling in its own headlines, while simultaneously disemvowelling any comments that commit the identical crime?

It’s been explained. See the moderation thread and learn why it’s not the same thing. The Mod thread is linked at the top of this and every page. Happy reading.

Has BoingBoing lost (or did it originally have) integrity?

That is for each of us to decide. Now let me ask you, do you find time complaining about the free ice cream to be time well spent?

]]> By: Boomer http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-439912 Boomer Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-439912 Re: Esq. Members of the working press (i.e., reporters, editors on recognized newsgathering agencies) are also permitted to use Esq. after their names. I was never able to bring myself to use it during my days as an ink-stained wretch. Re: Esq.

Members of the working press (i.e., reporters, editors on recognized newsgathering agencies) are also permitted to use Esq. after their names.

I was never able to bring myself to use it during my days as an ink-stained wretch.

]]> By: Anonymous http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-440168 Anonymous Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-440168 National Security = Corporate Profits National Security = Corporate Profits

]]> By: bwcbwc http://boingboing.net/2009/03/14/partial-list-of-corp.html#comment-440169 bwcbwc Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-440169 I'm not going to attribute this to malice on the part of the Obama administration just yet. This treaty and secrecy got its start under the previous administration, and there's enough other shit going on that there's at least a chance they just haven't gotten around to cleaning up their act in this area yet. On the other hand, he IS a Chicago pol, and I've always suspected his donor list was a bit more extensive than all those grassroots donors that got so much airplay during and after the election. There will be time. It would be a great chance for the Republicans to stage a filibuster in the senate over this treaty ratification, if it comes out of the negotiation process still under wraps. I wouldn't classify Obama as cheap or two-bit, though. Blagoyevich was cheap, two-bit. Obama has already shown he's high-priced by raising so much money, and not two-bit by beating the Clintons and the Republicans in a long, tough, campaign. I’m not going to attribute this to malice on the part of the Obama administration just yet. This treaty and secrecy got its start under the previous administration, and there’s enough other shit going on that there’s at least a chance they just haven’t gotten around to cleaning up their act in this area yet.

On the other hand, he IS a Chicago pol, and I’ve always suspected his donor list was a bit more extensive than all those grassroots donors that got so much airplay during and after the election. There will be time. It would be a great chance for the Republicans to stage a filibuster in the senate over this treaty ratification, if it comes out of the negotiation process still under wraps.

I wouldn’t classify Obama as cheap or two-bit, though. Blagoyevich was cheap, two-bit. Obama has already shown he’s high-priced by raising so much money, and not two-bit by beating the Clintons and the Republicans in a long, tough, campaign.

]]>