NJ Gubenatorial Candidate Speaks Out Against Six Strikes: ISP Shouldn't Decide What You Can Download
from the a-political-rallying-point dept
Via Slashdot, we learn that a gubernatorial candidate from New Jersey has staked out a clear position against the new “six strikes” Copyright Alert System. Carl Bermanson, a regular in New Jersey politics who entered the race a few weeks ago, made a nice statement about why six strikes is so problematic. Basically: why is it the ISPs’ business at all?
“The
internet has become an essential part of living in the 21st century, it uses public infrastructure and it
is time we treat it as a public utility. The electric company has no say over what you power with their
service, the ISPs have no right to decide what you can and can not download”. He went on to say that
while he believes copyright infringement is unethical, it is not surprising that as the law evolves to
disrespect the public domain, that the public would grow to disrespect copyrights.
While some will just brush this off, it is significant in that, to date, most politicians have been playing down the whole six strikes thing as a “good example of voluntary agreements,” without realizing just how angry it’s making people, and how it’s giving them less reason to respect copyright at all.
Filed Under: carl bermanson, cas, copyright, copyright alert system, governor, new jersey, six strikes
Comments on “NJ Gubenatorial Candidate Speaks Out Against Six Strikes: ISP Shouldn't Decide What You Can Download”
Sadly, I’m so disillusioned with how politicians work that I don’t care at all what any of them say when its election time. Didn’t Obama promise to close Guantanamo?
Just because he says it now, is no guarantee he’ll follow through if he is actually in office.
Re: Re:
That’s a good sign. You’re not that far off from realizing nothing they say is in any way true and should they actually keep a promise it was simply a coincidence that someone paid them to.
Re: Re:
My exact thoughts as I finished reading. However I got pleasantly contradicted with a few pirate parties and some politicians I got to know and see their work closely. There’s light. A tiny little bit of light. But it’s there amidst all the rotten crap in politics.
Re: Re:
politician – noun:
root – politic
politic : compound word –
poly – adj. : many
tic – n. : bloodsucker
Better than nothing
Good to see at least someone speaking out against this egregious pact, even if they really don’t mean it.
Hmm… the author of the article seems to also be the candidate making the statement.
Happy to see the statement being made, but Christie is pretty darn popular right now in New Jersey, so I don’t see this guy making much headway…
Re: Re:
Correct me if I’m wrong but you seem to be saying Mike Masnick is Carl Bermanson. I find that a little hard to swallow as it were.
Re: Re: Re:
Okay, you’re wrong, but it’s my fault for not being clear.
Carl Bergmanson wrote the linked-to article quoting Candidate Bergmanson coming out against six-strikes.
ISP’s have already been ruled to be information services, not public utilities. More meaningless political pandering by an outlier.
Re: Re:
Then that ruling needs to be changed.
Re: Re: Re:
Good luck unringing that bell
Re: Re:
ISP’s have already been ruled to be information services, not public utilities.
Really? Hadn’t heard that one before. Got a link?
“Ruled” as in a court case? If so, that could still be changed with a new law in the future.
Re: Re: Re:
Seriously? Are you so lazy you can’t use Google or Wikipedia yourself?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Cable_%26_Telecommunications_Association_v._Brand_X_Internet_Services
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I’m not going to speak to his motives, but given the default practice of troll on this site to throw out random “facts” I think the call for citation is not unrealistic. The thinking being that if you make a claim you should back it up with a citation, not expect the reader to track it down for you.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Seriously? Are you so lazy you can’t use Google or Wikipedia yourself?
Thanks for the link. No need to be a dick about it though.
That case has never popped up on my personal radar, so I wasn’t even sure where to start looking for it, that’s all.
Re: Re: Re:
Yes. And it’s worse than that. They were ‘sometimes’ considered information services and other times utilities.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
It SHOULD be considered a utility, period. Telephone is a utility, defined by its public necessity; and so has Internet become a necessity.
Re: Re:
A home internet connection is a requirement for my day job and I’m outraged that Comcast is implementing this policy without any notification to me whatsoever. Not to mention AT&T controls my data plan. How can they unilaterally change the conditions of my contract and force me to continue doing business with them if I don’t want to pay to end my contract?
Re: Re: Re:
OK. Don’t infringe. Even if you get throttled, unless your day job requires downloading large video files you’ll be fine.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Not quite that easy given the massive numbers of false positives in the past. No one has to prove a thing for you to get a ‘strike’ on your account.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Simple retort from simple mind, misses the obvious.
Way to go.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
i will just say lol, you really think this system is perfect just lol
Re: Re: Re:
How can they unilaterally change the conditions of my contract and force me to continue doing business with them if I don’t want to pay to end my contract?
While they can unilaterally change the conditions of the contract (because they put a clause in the original contract that you agreed to that lets them), you may not be stuck doing business with them. If they have made a material (significant) change of the contract, you most likely will be able to get out of it without fees if you push back.
Re: Re:
And we all know that once government decisions are made, they can never be changed, so we should never try.
Re: Re:
“ISP’s have already been ruled to be information services, not public utilities.”
ISPs aren’t public in any sense, but they obviously don’t sell information services either. You get the speaker’s point … don’t be anal.
and how it’s giving them less reason to respect copyright at all.
Nobody respects it less than you, Mike.
Re: Re:
That is an outright lie, a great many people respect copyright a hell of a lot less than Masnick does.
Copyright maximalists would do well to heed what moderates like Masnick say before they lose their cherished copyright goose completely.
Re: Re:
and how it’s giving them less reason to respect copyright at all.
Nobody respects it less than you, Mike.
If it’s respect for copyright that you are wanting, why aren’t you advocating changes to copyright to restore the public’s respect for it?
Seriously, you can only whack a dog so many times with a rolled-up newspaper before it turns and bites you. Even our four-legged friends have a basic concept of respect that far exceeds what some of the copyright maximalists around here can muster.
Re: Re: Re:
Agreed!
The best line in the article was the end of the quote: ” it is not surprising that as the law evolves to disrespect the public domain, that the public would grow to disrespect copyrights” Once the maximalists get past this “all your cultures are belong to us” mentality, and some real discussion opens up about bringing some balance back to copyrights, then maybe, just maybe, these cries to respect copyright won’t fall upon deaf ears. Until then, the bilateral contract between rightsholders and rightsgrantors has been rendered null and void due to repeated breach of unilateral changes to a 2 party deal.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Don’t leave out the fact that most of the current copyright laws were the result of industry lobbying in Washington. Hard to respect laws that you know were A) bought and paid for by corporate interests, and B) are mostly designed to regulate/restrict the public.
Re: Re:
Nobody respects it less than you, Mike.
Speaking only for myself, I can say with certainty that this is 100% completely false.
I have nothing but complete and utter contempt for copyright and the corporations who have sought (and succeeded) to expand it over the last several decades and the corrupt governments and politicians who willingly went along with it.
With each passing day that copyright maximalists pander to governments the world over to get new treaties (TPP, ACTA), new laws (SOPA, PIPA), abuse existing laws (DMCA) and try to go around the law (six strikes, guilty until proven innocent, no due process), I respect them even less.
These copyright organizations are parasites. And we’d all be better off if they were gone.
Re: Re: Re:
Wow, a freeloader manifesto. Are you a failed artist or just an embittered, entitled cheapskate? Hopefully you get your first strike soon.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Nope, I don’t infringe copyright. I choose to play by the rules, no matter how much corruption went into obtaining them.
But, copyright maximalists better straighten up and start adapting or they’ll find themselves irrelevant.
I hope for the latter.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
“I don’t infringe copyright. I choose to play by the rules”
This is no guarantee you will not be accused.
Guilty with no recourse, this is brilliant!
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
“This is no guarantee you will not be accused.
Guilty with no recourse, this is brilliant!”
Yeah, until there is enough public outcry to overturn this. Or someone comes up with a new ISP which isn’t beholden to corporate interests. Perhaps we could crowdfund such an effort.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
The fact that you managed to read freeloading into that show all anyone ever need know about you comprehension and objectivity.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
That is the corruption speaking.
Copyright was supposed to be for the benefit of the public first and for limited times.
But, through the corrupting influence of lobbyist money, governments and politicians have altered copyright to the exact opposite of what was intended in our constitution, for the benefit of corporate monopoly special interests at the expense of the public.
Copyright maximalists really don’t want the public to wake up about what is truly happening. That’s why they try and label their fight as a fight against “freeloaders” and “pirates.” Copyright infringement is nothing, it’s been going on for decades and will continue on for decades more. What they’re really attempting to achieve is the ability to retain control and power. They feel they need that control and power in order to prop up corporate profits and shareholder returns. That’s why they want to extend copyrights into perpetuity and invent more draconian methods of enforcement.
This isn’t artists doing this. This is corporations doing it. They have entirely too much power and it is high time they were reigned in. But, they have the government in their hip pocket so its not going to happen often.
The public needs to wake up and put tons of pressure on their elected officials to stop pandering to the copyright lobby. This happened with SOPA, PIPA and ACTA. It needs to continue to happen.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
Excellent post.
“The public needs to wake up and put tons of pressure on their elected officials to stop pandering to the copyright lobby. This happened with SOPA, PIPA and ACTA. It needs to continue to happen.”
I’d go one step further — return copyright to its original status. The way it was always meant to be.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
Also, you can’t expect objectivity from a copyright maximalist. They have dollar signs painted on their rose colored glasses. That’s all they see.
They totally do not care what copyright was intended to be. They only care that they are paid.
For life plus 70. Or, preferably, forever minus one day.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
“Hopefully you get your first strike soon.”
Hopefully YOU get YOUR first strike soon. Maybe then you’ll stop stealing all your ad hominem rhetoric from 2002. This isn’t about “artists” and “cheapskates.”
Re: Re:
I dunno I think the label that sued its insurance company to pay off its settlement for commercial copyright infringement might have less respect for it when its applied to them.
Re: Re:
“Anonymous Coward”? I’d recognise that sarcastic drivel anywhere. Amputation from the neck up would be my cure for this blithering troll.
Re: Re:
Anyone who remotely approves of copy’right’ law, or at least our current iteration of it, or the expansion of these laws (or enforcement thereof), is either completely ignorant about these laws or they have no regard for morality. I hate these laws, I hate them with a passion. and, in all likelihood, I hate IP laws more than Mike. and I see nothing morally wrong with infringement, though generally I try to avoid infringing and breaking the law and I don’t encourage anyone to infringe. and what are you going to do about it? I want these laws abolished. What are you going to do about it? Call me a ‘freetard’. Act like a little crybaby? Do you think this is going to change anyone’s mind or do you think it’s only going to convince people that you’re too short sighted to even discuss the issue beyond calling those who disagree with you names? Your immature behavior is a huge disfavor to your position. You and your laws can get lost and if you think that makes me a ‘freetard’ I can care less. No one is forcing anyone to make content, if they don’t want people ‘infringing’ they can stop. There are many others that will still create content. Whatever content or innovation that is allegedly lost due to IP abolition is a risk I’m more than very willing to take. Abolish IP. Completely. I don’t want it at all. So what’s your response now? That this blog is full of freetards? Get lost loser.
Another politician looking for popularity by taking a position on something he cannot change. Such a position might mean something if he was trying for congress.
Re: Re:
Yeah, no reason to take a position on an issue if you are unable to change it all by yourself. It’s much better to just bend over and take it – amirite?
I suggest a six-strikes proposal for legislators. Sure, they need time to learn. But if they fail to understand the people they represent, at some point, we have to cut them off.
Re: Re:
It was implemented centuries ago. It’s called “voting”.
Re: Re: Re:
“It was implemented centuries ago. It’s called “voting””
It was corrupted decades ago, it’s called gerrymandering.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
It was ignored/forgotten decades ago. It’s called apathy.
Let's hope this gains momentum
It’s good to see politicians finally beginning to realize blatantly obvious stuff like this. I’ve been saying for about 5 years now that Internet access needs to be regarded by law as a public utility. Let’s see if we can’t actually get some momentum behind the concept.
Re: Let's hope this gains momentum
That’d be great. Then the FCC could simply order them to block sites, disconnect repeat infringers, block unlicensed encrypted traffic, etc. Watch out what you wish for. Although the Republicans will never allow government control of the internet.
Re: Re: Let's hope this gains momentum
So, it wouldn’t be so different than it is right now except that corporations wouldn’t be able to trample on us so easily? Then yes, it would be great.
Re: Re: Re: Let's hope this gains momentum
Hahahahaha… you obviously know nothing of the supple spine of the FCC. And forget judicial oversight. The FCC has carte blanche to implement rules on regulated carriers.
It’s a joke anyway, no one wants it.
Re: Re: Let's hope this gains momentum
You mean like they do with phone service?
They block phones, disconnect users, block connections???
This is very interesting, do tell us more.
Well I hope this guy is able to get his voice heard.
The candidate’s statement is somewhat misleading. The ISP is not making any decision about what you download.
The ISP has agreed to be a conduit between an unproven accusation against an IP address — errors in collecting the evidence about that IP address are declared to be impossible — and a paying customer. Errors, which are inevitable, in matching that IP address to a paying customer, are declared to be impossible.
Like the Pope, Six Strikes is declared to be infallible. 🙂
But, the ISPs have no discretion in this system.
Re: Re:
Of course they have discretion in this system. If nothing else, they could certainly have the discretion to decide not to join in this blatantly illegal and abusive scheme in the first place!
Re: Re:
” The ISP is not making any decision about what you download.”
True … but they are making decisions to impact your service based on certain other parties claim you shared, and those parties don’t even need to submit legal proof.
The ISPs never know what you downloaded, if anything. Honestly, MarkMonitor doesn’t even know – they don’t check for that before sending the notice.
Sad, sad ,sad …
This is exactly the kind of stuff that makes me lose sleep at night.
Bandwidth restriction without proof of infringement, no discounts during the restriction, and more importantly NO PROOF.
Can’t we just run our own wires all over the place?
Re: Re:
Can’t we just run our own wires all over the place?
Yes you can. Maybe head over to Kickstarter and have a go.
Re: Re: Re:
Well, unless the ISPs have bribed your local politicians into passing laws against other, competing services.
"The electric company has no say over what you power with their service,"
provided that you PAY proportionally for it! Therefore I propose metering Internet like electricity: per-megabyte charges from ISPs, and TEN TIMES that on the upload side. — That’d fix you bandwidth-hogging, freeloading pirates!
Less seriously, the “Six Strikes”, not yet fully in place making a practical difference is only making a few pirates angry; as usual, Mike mistakes his few fanboy-trolls for general sentiment.
More seriously, ISP interests align with Big Media: MONEY is why they’re implementing this.
Re: "The electric company has no say over what you power with their service,"
Six strikes isn’t making any pirates angry. It doesn’t affect pirates one bit.
Re: Re: "The electric company has no say over what you power with their service,"
Honestly, between how six strikes will influence the national conversation and make the ISPs/media companies look bad (and the sure to follow embarrassing mistakes in identification), the fact that it is trivial to get around the strikes, and the fact that even if you do get strikes the migration measures are quite toothless, this works out more to be a gift for pirates going forward.
Re: Re: "The electric company has no say over what you power with their service,"
This is true. This targets the soft middle- the casual opportunists.
Re: Re: Re: "The electric company has no say over what you power with their service,"
Yes, the RIAA tried that since 2002 and look how that turned out. Absolutely nothing went wrong with it, no sir!
Re: Re: "The electric company has no say over what you power with their service,"
LOL
Re: "The electric company has no say over what you power with their service,"
Collusion is illegal.
Re: "The electric company has no say over what you power with their service,"
ATTENTION WHORE!
Re: Re: "The electric company has no say over what you power with their service,"
You forgot the comma.
ATTENTION, WHORE!
Fixed that for you.
Re: "The electric company has no say over what you power with their service,"
“provided that you PAY proportionally for it! Therefore I propose metering Internet like electricity: per-megabyte charges from ISPs, and TEN TIMES that on the upload side. — That’d fix you bandwidth-hogging, freeloading pirates!”
Uh we already pay proportionally for it. Data caps. Throttling. Etc.
As for bandwidth-hogging, it’s not just pirates downloading/uploading lots.
You’re aware that Netflix and Pandora and Spotify and all that are LEGAL streaming services that use up quite a bit of bandwidth, right?
Ditto video games, which are now being updated through torrent protocols and clients (so as to lessen bandwidth costs on the developers).
I’d go on and on but it’d be pointless to do so with you, seeing as reality and the facts are both things you’re pathologically allergic to.
“Less seriously, the “Six Strikes”, not yet fully in place making a practical difference is only making a few pirates angry; as usual, Mike mistakes his few fanboy-trolls for general sentiment.”
Yes, that’s exactly why non-pirates haven’t complained about the potential privacy issues, connection cuts, etc. /s
You’re seriously getting more retarded by the day Blue.
Re: Re: "The electric company has no say over what you power with their service,"
He forgot to mention how both the RIAA and MPAA have been caught uploading, using file-hosting services and even torrenting.
But as we all know, copyright laws don’t apply to the law-makers.
Re: Re: "The electric company has no say over what you power with their service,"
Correct me if I am wrong, and I may be, but I already do pay for my bandwidth. Firstly, I am on what is supposed to be an UN-limited plan. It consists of 40MB/s-1MB/s. Whether or not I am a pirate is a moot point. I am paying 40-1 for every bit (no pun intended) of traffic coming or going to the house.
Secondly, this article is about six strikes, and the fact it is a bad idea. You all complain because copyright wants too much control, and we can’t have that. You also complain over too much regulation, or govt. intervention, if you will.
The bottom line is that this is about money. You all will also scream corruption, greed, blah blah blah while you are too busy forgetting it’s the capitalist way. You don’t get to choose, it’s not a free country, and the system is broke, and has been for way too long.
NOW kudos to the guy who openly and publicly has likely already killed his political future by standing up and saying six strikes is bad.
Re: "The electric company has no say over what you power with their service,"
“provided that you PAY proportionally for it! Therefore I propose metering Internet like electricity: per-megabyte charges from ISPs, and TEN TIMES that on the upload side.”
Proportionally is exactly how Internet is typically sold you idjit. 56Kbps is a rarely chosen but still existing connection where the customer purchases 56 x 1000 bits (a 0 or 1) of information every second downloaded typically the contracts are for a month, use it or lose it, no discounts or refunds. A more commonly chosen contract is for 10Mbps. 10Mbps is 10 x 1,000,000 bits (a 0 or 1) every second with typical contracts billed monthly, use it or lose it, no discounts or refunds. Purchasing a 56Kbps connection or purchashing a 10 Mbps connection or buying more or buying less, is proportionly.
As far as the upload side it already does cost significantly more for large amounts of upload bandwidth with most ISPs.
Re: Re: "The electric company has no say over what you power with their service,"
I think he was talking about actual consumption, not capacity.
Re: Re: Re: "The electric company has no say over what you power with their service,"
I know what he was saying, my point is that the typical ISP customer purchases full consumption at a proportional rate, whether they choose to use it all, some or none.
Re: "The electric company has no say over what you power with their service,"
“bandwidth-hogging”
So Idjit-Blue, if you utilize your phone service are you “line-hogging”?
Keep up your brain damaged comments, because you help your own opposition by discrediting yourself and others by affiliation.
Regardless of if this particular politician has much to gain, rallying against six strikes will become a useful tool for politicians running before the ISPs buy them. Any politician looking to gain the youth vote can rally against this, since any argument that “this is a threat to the internet, I will work to fix it” does very well with the youth vote. The youth vote today considers the internet to be a very high priority and distrusts anyone having any apparent power over controlling it and I doubt that political strategists have overlooked this.
“it is not surprising that as the law evolves to disrespect the public domain, that the public would grow to disrespect copyrights.”
This is THE crucial point and I am glad that a politician has had the courage to stand up and say it. If the entertainment industries etc have no respect for the law or our rights why should we have any respect for the law or their rights?
Respect should be earned and it should also be a two way street.
Well done, that man.
Bandwidth hogging you say ootb? Dang you really have drunk the koolaid haven’t you? You’re just flappin’ your gums cause you have no idea of what a real factual stance is.
Everyone buys a package of some sort for internet connection. Unless you can hack the account in some way, you can’t exceed your package plan. It’s another red herring the ISPs use to cover their ass for not investing in expansion of the net. They over sell their resources and when people complain they aren’t getting what they bought… it’s bandwidth hogging.
Sure thing. Another addition showing you can’t think and string two sentences together without someone else thinking for you.
Re: Re:
“Sure thing. Another addition showing you can’t think and string two sentences together without someone else thinking for you.”
Well, sure its hard for him to think clearly. You would have difficulty thinking clearly too if you had the hand of a huge organization like the *IAA’s jammed up your ass 24/7 to sock-puppet you into saying what they want.
Bandwidth hogging you say ootb? Dang you really have drunk the koolaid haven’t you? You’re just flappin’ your gums cause you have no idea of what a real factual stance is.
Everyone buys a package of some sort for internet connection. Unless you can hack the account in some way, you can’t exceed your package plan. It’s another red herring the ISPs use to cover their ass for not investing in expansion of the net. They over sell their resources and when people complain they aren’t getting what they bought… it’s bandwidth hogging.
Sure thing. Another addition showing you can’t think and string two sentences together without someone else thinking for you.
Any Politician who Supports the 6 Strikes Bullshit will never be getting my Vote.I refuse to give my Vote to any of those who would side with this.
I hope there is a huge Backlash which affects the Big Content Industries and the large ISP’s who Signed on.
Sick and tired of their corruption and utter contempt they feel towards us Consumers.
Re: Re:
Are you even registered to vote?
Re: Re:
That’s nice, but you seem to be under the impression that your individual vote matters to these people.
The electric company has no say over what you power with their service
I tried to make that observation this afternoon that OOTB is getting more and more delusional by the day, but for some reason my comment never got posted.
Carl Bergmanson
Carl A. Bergmanson is a conservative Democrat and was the mayor of Glen Ridge, New Jersey, a borough 10 miles west of New York City, from 2004 – 2007. Bergmanson is a vocal critic of the Democratic Party establishment in New Jersey. Wikipedia
The only problem with these guys is that after they get into office they too often become kowtowing party toadies.
Private enforcement of copyrights
More importantly, how did we get from ISPs acting like common carriers to ISPs becoming copyright enforcers? We know about the government’s involvement (under Victoria Espinel) in getting the ball rolling, but what exactly motivated ISPs to participate at all? Part of the story is missing, and I’d like to know what it is.
Re: Private enforcement of copyrights
I believe it was due to Biden basically pulling a classic mafia move on them. ‘That’s a nice internet business you got there, be a shame if any regulations were to happen to it. Tell you what, you go along with what my bosses tell you, and maybe I won’t have to send my friends to ‘deal’ with you.’
Overly dramatic, but I believe that’s basically the gist of what happened.
As consumers we are blind
How is it a consumes reponsibility to know that any particular site has a right to publish the content it publishes. A good example is The Huffington Post who re-publishes all kinds of news content. Strike One.
YouTube, you click on a video that happens to have a song. It later gets taken dwon but not until Stike Two. How about Hulu. Well known enough but do we get to read the contract between the content creators and the site to see if they have a right to air it. Strike Three. Jonathan Coltan had a song reproduced by Glee and apparently every episode Glee steals content and deal with copyright issues later. Well you downloaded the song from Itunes, strike 4 then you bought the video on Amazon …strike five. Oh that was just one week and you were done in 30 minutes of web browsing. Is this going to happen (yes). Because if you can imagine any screw ball combination of things going wrong then it probably will.
Speaking only for myself, I can say with certainty that this is 100% completely false.
I have nothing but complete and utter contempt for copyright and the corporations who have sought (and succeeded) to expand it over the last several decades and the corrupt governments and politicians who willingly went along with it.
Hear, hear! As far as I’m concerned, intellectual property has effectively turned what was once billed as the information superhighway and a limitless library into a monster. If I had any say, I would round up the MAFIAA and have them each rot in a small cell.
‘good example of voluntary agreements’
considering this was an enforced agreement between the ISPs and the entertainment industries and happened without any input from the public or any of their representative bodies, how can it for one second be regarded as ‘voluntary’? all this has done id further show the contempt that the entertainment industries and now the various ISPs have for their customers. it also shows, yet again, how little the entertainment industries are prepared to do themselves, at their own expense, to correct the biggest fuck up they have ever made by not listening to or catering for the people. the cost of this ‘voluntary agreement, as usual, is being paid for by anyone and everyone except those very industries that have forced others to comply with their wishes.
‘voluntary agreement’, my fucking arse!! these politicians want a voluntary agreement implemented on to them whereby they cant receive any more campaign funds. let’s see how they like that fucker!!