The Press Finally Realizing Jerry Nadler Is In Bed With The RIAA While In Charge Of Copyright Reform

Copyright

from the oh-look-at-that dept

Back in December, we wrote about how Rep. Jerry Nadler, chair of the House Judiciary Committee, which is in charge of any copyright reform proposals, was hosting a party for music industry lobbyists at the Grammy’s this year (along with Chair of the Democratic Caucus, Hakeem Jeffries). To party with Nadler and Jeffries at the Grammys — the recording industry’s biggest event of the year — you “only” had to pay $5,000 per ticket. A bargain.

Whether or not you believe this is outright corruption, it certainly meets Larry Lessig’s definition of “soft corruption.” That is activity that may be perfectly legal, but to the vast majority of the public certainly feels corrupt, and raises questions about who’s influencing our elected officials. Nadler, of course, has long been deeply in the bag for the recording industry. Years back, he pushed a bill that was little more than a bailout for the RIAA, and he’s attacked the idea that if people buy something, they then own it as “an extreme digital view.”

But it appears that the more mainstream media is beginning to notice Nadler’s conflicts. His hometown NY Daily News has a whole article that talks about Nadler’s money grab at the Grammys as well as much, much more.

Jerry Nadler is rockin’ and rollin’ in campaign cash from the music industry and other intellectual property businesses that he oversees as chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, a review of recent federal records reveals.

Nadler, who is one of the point men pounding the drums against President Trump?s various improprieties, banked at least $65,000 from corporate music industry political action committees, industry executives, and their lobbyists and lawyers, a Daily News search of Nadler?s campaign receipts found.

He also spent more than $30,000 to hold his own Grammy Awards party ? at the Grammy Awards in Los Angeles in February.

Yeah. The Daily News doesn’t mention that tickets to the party were advertised to lobbyists at $5k a pop. The Daily News points out that this is all legal, but does certainly suggest it appears pretty freaking sketchy:

A spokeswoman for Nadler?s campaign insisted there was nothing improper in dropping $27,250 for a suite at the Staples Center where the Grammys are awarded, $2,290 for food and drinks, $1,835 at the Beverly Hills Hilton and another $2,650 at the Sheraton Grand, all so industry execs could fill Nadler?s campaign coffers and schmooze with the chairman.

The article notes that “in a perfect world” members of Congress who run committees regulating industries probably wouldn’t be allowed to host parties at those industry events, selling expensive tickets to get in. But, hey, it’s not a perfect world.

?For many Americans, our corrosive fund-raising system calls into question whether members of Congress are acting in the public interest, or for some private financial interest,? Scherb said.

You don’t say.

There are still a number of important copyright issues likely to come before Congress in the near future. Does anyone actually believe that Nadler will take the interests of all sides into account? Or does he have at least 65,000 reasons to focus mainly on the views of the RIAA in determining what copyright bills are even considered?

Filed Under: copyright, copyright reform, grammys, hakeem jeffries, jerry nadler, soft corruption
Companies: riaa