<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Archers Daniel Midland abuses copyright law to censor criticism &#8212; corporations have the right to free speech, but not the people who criticize them?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.geniocity.com/friedman/2010/02/archers-daniel-midland-abuses-copyright-law-to-censor-criticism/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.geniocity.com/friedman/2010/02/archers-daniel-midland-abuses-copyright-law-to-censor-criticism/</link>
	<description>The ways law rules creative endeavors and the ways law itself is a creative endeavor</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 13:08:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sean</title>
		<link>http://blogs.geniocity.com/friedman/2010/02/archers-daniel-midland-abuses-copyright-law-to-censor-criticism/comment-page-1/#comment-3356</link>
		<dc:creator>Sean</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 10:28:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.geniocity.com/friedman/2010/02/archers-daniel-midland-abuses-copyright-law-to-censor-criticism/#comment-3356</guid>
		<description>This post is that first brought me to your blog.

The careful way the parody removed from your facebook was done makes it so very entertaining- when one watches the original you can see the care the voiceover artist uses to try and get her tone down, the pauses, etc- It&#039;s unflinchingly leftist, sure, but the unapologetic approach is also what makes it so powerful and hilarious.

Ms. Woertz apparently feels slandered but elites need to lose the ego. Criticism is part of democratic participation and ADM is fair game since economic interests carry huge potential social and governance influencing power, as ADM has actively engaged the pursuit of that power, and since ADM propoganda seems to misrepresent itself as a world service. I can&#039;t fully weigh the company&#039;s good against its bad (though joint liberal and conservative watchdog condemnation seems telling)- I don&#039;t know enough to make solid arguments; but hypocrisy boils me, especially in governance and the pubic good; and again ADM- like many other powerful commercial companies- is embedded in international institutions (such as the WEF) that given the lack of power in international governing institutions, functions as that governance de facto. (I welcome criticism in this statement or its logic, I seek growth and value the input).

Elite egoism aggravates me as well; again, especially in this context. I know this is an idealistic stance, it expresses something that is nowhere near the way things actually operate, but anyone who can&#039;t figure out the value of (and the truth behind) humility is not someone I want making decisions that affect me, more/less the world. I also think that those who fake this humility should be called out.

&quot;WEF spokesperson Adrian Monck says &#039;the only defense to satire is common sense!&#039;&quot; (http://www.businessinsider.com/world-economic-forum-website-gets-spoofed-2010-1)
I completely disagree when that &#039;common sense&#039; is specific to and defined by a particular political paradigm. It&#039;s a cop out response. If a decision affects the world, those involved should be engaging the world&#039;s concerns. Woertz, I would note, was ranked by Forbes in 2007 as the 8th most powerful woman in the world.(http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20516848/)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This post is that first brought me to your blog.</p>
<p>The careful way the parody removed from your facebook was done makes it so very entertaining- when one watches the original you can see the care the voiceover artist uses to try and get her tone down, the pauses, etc- It&#8217;s unflinchingly leftist, sure, but the unapologetic approach is also what makes it so powerful and hilarious.</p>
<p>Ms. Woertz apparently feels slandered but elites need to lose the ego. Criticism is part of democratic participation and ADM is fair game since economic interests carry huge potential social and governance influencing power, as ADM has actively engaged the pursuit of that power, and since ADM propoganda seems to misrepresent itself as a world service. I can&#8217;t fully weigh the company&#8217;s good against its bad (though joint liberal and conservative watchdog condemnation seems telling)- I don&#8217;t know enough to make solid arguments; but hypocrisy boils me, especially in governance and the pubic good; and again ADM- like many other powerful commercial companies- is embedded in international institutions (such as the WEF) that given the lack of power in international governing institutions, functions as that governance de facto. (I welcome criticism in this statement or its logic, I seek growth and value the input).</p>
<p>Elite egoism aggravates me as well; again, especially in this context. I know this is an idealistic stance, it expresses something that is nowhere near the way things actually operate, but anyone who can&#8217;t figure out the value of (and the truth behind) humility is not someone I want making decisions that affect me, more/less the world. I also think that those who fake this humility should be called out.</p>
<p>&#8220;WEF spokesperson Adrian Monck says &#8216;the only defense to satire is common sense!&#8217;&#8221; (<a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/world-economic-forum-website-gets-spoofed-2010-1" rel="nofollow">http://www.businessinsider.com/world-economic-forum-website-gets-spoofed-2010-1</a>)<br />
I completely disagree when that &#8216;common sense&#8217; is specific to and defined by a particular political paradigm. It&#8217;s a cop out response. If a decision affects the world, those involved should be engaging the world&#8217;s concerns. Woertz, I would note, was ranked by Forbes in 2007 as the 8th most powerful woman in the world.(<a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20516848/" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20516848/</a>)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Links 6/2/2010: GNOME Journal Released, ARM CEO Sees Bright Future &#124; Boycott Novell</title>
		<link>http://blogs.geniocity.com/friedman/2010/02/archers-daniel-midland-abuses-copyright-law-to-censor-criticism/comment-page-1/#comment-3194</link>
		<dc:creator>Links 6/2/2010: GNOME Journal Released, ARM CEO Sees Bright Future &#124; Boycott Novell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Feb 2010 00:48:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.geniocity.com/friedman/2010/02/archers-daniel-midland-abuses-copyright-law-to-censor-criticism/#comment-3194</guid>
		<description>[...] Archers Daniel Midland abuses copyright law to censor criticism — corporations have the right to f... ADM has, top it mildly, been the subject of considerable ire, criticism, and even criminal prosecution for price fixing (the subject of Matt Damon’s recent film The Informant and Fair Fight in the Marketplace, an excerpt of which appears below’s Woertz’s blathering), political corruption, destruction of the rainforests, and the forced labor of children. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Archers Daniel Midland abuses copyright law to censor criticism — corporations have the right to f&#8230; ADM has, top it mildly, been the subject of considerable ire, criticism, and even criminal prosecution for price fixing (the subject of Matt Damon’s recent film The Informant and Fair Fight in the Marketplace, an excerpt of which appears below’s Woertz’s blathering), political corruption, destruction of the rainforests, and the forced labor of children. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Free speech &#38; fair use in recent news &#171; So anyway&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://blogs.geniocity.com/friedman/2010/02/archers-daniel-midland-abuses-copyright-law-to-censor-criticism/comment-page-1/#comment-3193</link>
		<dc:creator>Free speech &#38; fair use in recent news &#171; So anyway&#8230;</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 18:17:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.geniocity.com/friedman/2010/02/archers-daniel-midland-abuses-copyright-law-to-censor-criticism/#comment-3193</guid>
		<description>[...] &#8220;[T]o use the copyright laws to silence that critique has nothing to do with protecting intellectual property and the rights of a creator to profit from his, her, or its creation: it’s unconstitutional censorship!&#8221; -Source [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] &#8220;[T]o use the copyright laws to silence that critique has nothing to do with protecting intellectual property and the rights of a creator to profit from his, her, or its creation: it’s unconstitutional censorship!&#8221; -Source [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: You Get The . Info &#187; ADM Says Video Mocking Them Is Copyright Infringement; Abuses Copyright Law To Stifle Free Speech &#8211; 2985th Edition</title>
		<link>http://blogs.geniocity.com/friedman/2010/02/archers-daniel-midland-abuses-copyright-law-to-censor-criticism/comment-page-1/#comment-3189</link>
		<dc:creator>You Get The . Info &#187; ADM Says Video Mocking Them Is Copyright Infringement; Abuses Copyright Law To Stifle Free Speech &#8211; 2985th Edition</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 20:37:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.geniocity.com/friedman/2010/02/archers-daniel-midland-abuses-copyright-law-to-censor-criticism/#comment-3189</guid>
		<description>[...] joke, there were important free speech implications to it. Law professor Peter Friedman quickly points us to a more serious case of a giant company stifling criticism through DMCA takedown. Apparently, food conglomerate, Archers [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] joke, there were important free speech implications to it. Law professor Peter Friedman quickly points us to a more serious case of a giant company stifling criticism through DMCA takedown. Apparently, food conglomerate, Archers [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

