Broadcastthis’s Weblog

This post is really just a “shout out” to the naysayers of my previous posting on this topic. I knew that it wouldn’t receive as warm a welcome as the posts on trying to speak “truth” to a union on Copyright Law. Thank you for the e-mails. I appreciate hearing your feedback even when you’re saying, “you’re nuts, man!”.

I may be nuts, but I do read articles top to bottom…

Maybe I’m nuts because I actually do read the news. But I’m not so sure that it makes me a conspiracy theorist. All the same, for the record… the implications of Steven Page’s arrest, and the subsequent media coverage does shine a light on a couple of topics that are *not* being covered.

Do I think that the cops in NY “had it in” for Page?

No. More precisely, I don’t know. From the information that we have, the police were investigating a car in a driveway that had its driver’s side door open. That is the pretext that they have used for approaching the house.

Now, not to go off on a tangent here, but while I say that the actual cops may not have had anything personal against Page, I’ll be sure to close the door to my car next time I go back into the house. Not that the Patriot Act and a general sense of Homeland Insecurity wouldn’t stop any U.S. official from entering your house *whenever* they wanted…

Remember… he’s pleading NOT GUILTY to the charge of possession. Page and his friend Stephanie Ford “invited” the officers in when they knocked on the door. I have a hard time believing that the BNL frontman said, “Yeah, come on in…. we’re snorting cocaine.”

A note on “conspiracy theories”…

I’m certainly no stranger to the pejorative term “conspiracy theorist”, but since I have hinted at the possibility of “conspiracy” behind the negative coverage of one of the leading voices in Canada against major label monopoly and the the industry cartel that drives support for Bill C-61, I’ll indulge in a quick look at “conspiracy”.

“Conspiracy” is a cornerstone of our legal ability to charge someone for a crime. “Conspiracy to commit…” is a fairly common bit of language heard in legal cases all over the world. (Note: I’m not a lawyer, but I have played one in summer stock theatre….I’m lying…that’s a bad joke….I’ve never even played a lawyer…)

I’m sure that Steven Page (and no doubt, his lawyers) will not be entering my blog into the record as evidence. I doubt that they’ll fight this on the grounds of conspiracy (I’ll even take a wild guess that even Page himself doesn’t agree with me…).

BUT – to think that “conspiracies” to take out opposition, or to “take down” opposition in the corporate world do *not* exist, is just foolishness. If I had the time, I’d post a list of current Wall St. Execs that are currently under investigation or being prosecuted for “conspiracy” crimes. Think Enron….

Do I think that Page is a “big enough” target for the Copyright Cartel to focus on?

Yes.

In fact, I think that he’s just about as big a target as one can be in Canada. He’s not just a vocal opponent…he’s a *very* vocal opponent.

I realize that this is supposition on my part, and I’m only putting it out there as an “alternate take” on what’s happening. I doubt very much that even Page himself would condone my point of view, but then again…. he’ll probably let his lawyers do all of the talking.

It’s a “hot” time for Canadian Copyright law and considering that Michael Geist has just announced the C-61 in 61 Seconds Competition (for which Page is listed as a judge), it’s just *brilliant* timing to have Steven Page’s credibility called into question.

Now, before you jump to the conclusion that Industry Canada is f****** with Fair Copyright For Canada’s Youtube Competition (that’s not *at all* what I’m saying), I’ll just gently remind you that when you look at the “story” of Steven Page’s arrest on the news, or on-line….just check to see if Page’s words (in “quotes”) match up with the claims that are being made by the news-wires or news-readers.

I’m no expert on Occam’s Razor…

…but I for one find it easier to believe that the media runs stories that they’re *told* to, as opposed to believing that Steven Page is an “out of control” coke-fiend who’s charges are equitable to alleged “sex crimes”.

Call me crazy, but I just see more evidence for the former as opposed to the latter.