February 11, 2009
At Reason Goes Hollywood, our 40th anniversary bash held November 14-15, 2008 in Los Angeles, Reason.tv's Nick Gillespie led a lively debate over freedom of expression, the First Amendment, intellectual property rights, and the history of obscenity law.
Participants included Michael Robertson, founder of MP3.com and a leading advocate for innovation in copyright laws; Martin Torgoff, author Can't Find My Way Home, a history of drugs in popular culture and a writer for the VH-1 series The Drug Years and Sex: The Revolution; and Allan Gelbard, well-known First Amendment lawyer currently representing pornographer John Stagliano (who makes a cameo appearance!) in federal court.
Approximately one hour.
Go here for embed code, related materials, and more Reason Goes Hollywood videos.
Go here for an audio podcast version.
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
Sure you can. If you yell "fire" in a crowded theatre, and there
is no fire, and you proximately cause harm to people, there is a
legal mechanism in place for you to be punished and others to be
compensated for damages. It has nothing to do with the word "fire"
or the environment in which you yell it. Neither this nor any other
justification stands as a rationalization of censorship. The
criminal and civil charges stand as a large enough disincentive to
commit such an act if general virtue is not enough.
If the New York Times published blueprints for an atomic bomb
tomorrow, I guarantee you nobody would build one. The bar to
creating nuclear weapons is not access to information, it's access
to materials, facilities, equipment, and the people qualified to
interpret and apply that information safely and successfully.
If a person incites a riot, is the result of the act a
justification to legislate against certain types of speech? Put
another way, is an individual who's goal is to incite a riot, or
who is negligent and irresponsible enough to give a speech that
will incite violence around a group of people who are likely to
respond violently, going to be phased by an obscenity citation?
This is ridiculous to argue.
Taken to the extreme, there are laws against sexual abuse of minors
and non-consenting adults; making it additionally illegal to
produce and distribute videos portraying such acts is not going to
give pause to individuals who want to commit these horrible crimes.
Others who distribute these videos are already likely to be guilty
of conspiracy, accessory to the crime, or aiding and abetting. If
the goal is to put these sick assholes in prison longer, simply
increase the sentences on the existing crimes. This is a poor
excuse to undermine the rights of law-abiding citizens.
Speech legislation is useless in preventing the straw-man
situations which are used to justify it. There are already laws
against, and systems in place for dealing with, violent,
antisocial, or harmful negligent action. Making it illegal to talk
about it, or to express oneself in ways and situations arbitrarily
defined by the government as obscene or dangerous.
Regarding copyright infringement, there's no substantial proof that
record companies are 'dying' due to p2p or any other kind of file
sharing. Study after study has shown that the largest infringers
are typically also the largest legal consumers. The problem is the
market for media is completely saturated. I spend every dime I can
afford for it on media already; if I want more media beyond that,
well, maybe I'll download it for free and maybe I won't. I
certainly wouldn't spend a dollar I don't have for something I
want; if I buy it next month, I will be buying it instead of
something else. Whether they're 'dying' or just failing to grow as
fast as they would like is also a matter of debate, but it's not
the government's job to step in and protect businesses it likes
when they're failing. Especially not by giving those companies
means to charge people money (via lawsuits) for things they don't
own and arguably would never have bought.
Thanks to Michael Robertson for his work on mp3.com, by the way. I
discovered some great artists I would have never heard of if not
for him in mp3.com's early days, and at around $6 an album I have 3
times as many great albums as I would have if I bought albums from
the record labels.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245