Alan’s Blog of Monkey Bloginess

If you’ve been paying attention to the claims of the various media lobbying groups, you eventually come to realize that they are liars, have politicians in their back pockets, and are pretty much suing and greasing legislation that is trying to grab money from everybody from soccer moms to cell phone ringtone users. They’ve been twisting and warping interpretations of copyright laws to the point where copyright no longer serves the function for which is was created.

In this process, I’ve come to realize: I’ve never paid for music. I used to have an impressive CD & cassette tape collection thanks to memberships in BMG and Columbia House (10 CDs for a penny!). For all my life, when I’ve given money to music companies, I’ve been buying CDs and tapes, not the music on them. To prove the point, if I were to damage my CD, if I had bought the music then I should get a new CD; but I bought the physical CD, not the music on it, so damaged CD means I lose access to the music on it. Music has been free for consumers, we’ve only ever been purchasing the physical delivery mechanism. And music should be free for consumers.

In a digital world with infinite copying and marginal cost delivery methods, why should the dynamics of paying for music change? If I didn’t pay for music before the Internet, why should I start paying now? Music belongs to The People, and copyright is only supposed to grant a temporary monopoly while the artist creates their next artwork; copyright is not intended to construct concepts of ownership around the non-physical aspects of artwork.

This is just about one of the most moving songs I’ve ever heard. It takes speeches given by Martin Luther King Jr, Malcolm X, John F Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, and Barry Goldwater and puts them to a techno beat to create one of the best liberty-minded songs ever created. Please check out the video and really listen to the chosen words.

If you don’t agree with a law, as a jury member, you can find a person Not Guilty because you believe the law is bad. That is the purpose of a jury trial: to decide not if a person did it, but if the person should be punished for it. It’s the fundamental difference between a judge & and a jury trial. A judge’s job is to rule based on law, a jury’s job is to decide based on the situation. And if the situation is that the law in question is a bad law and people shouldn’t go to prison for it … then the jury has the right to base their judgment on that and let the person go free, even if the person is guilty by the letter of the law.

The problem is that judges around the country aren’t allowing defense lawyers to even mention jury nullification to juries under threat of contempt of court charges. In many cases, lawyers aren’t even allowed to challenge the legality of the law at all (such as in income tax or drug prohibition related charges). While prosecutors are allowed to lie directly to juries and tell them it is their responsibility to judge based on the “letter of the law”, defense attorneys aren’t even allowed to mention the names of the jury’s rights such as “jury nullification”.

So, if you get called for jury duty, feel honored, you may have an opportunity to take a stand against bad government policy. But please, get to know your rights as a juror before you walk into the courtroom, because the lawyers are interested in getting you to side with their arguments … not give you a free law school grad course in juror’s rights. Take it upon yourself to get informed and don’t believe the hogwash.

A Primer for Prospective Jurors:

One form of activism I’ve been thinking about participating in is passing out brochures like the one above to people appearing for jury duty one morning. Since everybody gets there around the same time to report, it’s a quick & easy method of activism that could open some eyes. The jury is the last stand of the average citizen against tyranny of government without taking up arms.

For more information on your rights as a juror, check out the Fully Informed Jury Association.

There’s a really interesting mocumentary available on Hulu concerning the re-legalization of marijuana that is both highly informative and side-splitting funny: Totally Baked. I hadn’t previously left a review on Hulu, but with the amount of people not understanding the style of film, I felt the need to give my take. It’s not your classic documentary or mocumentary or comedy, but takes elements from several styles of film and threads them together. It’s a very entertaining and humorous film, and I felt it needed an adequate explanation for those who don’t understand film.

This is a genre crossing film that starts with a central story thread and then uses stand-up routines from the 4:20 Hour Stand-Up (on Hulu) and combines it with documentary elements, mocumentary elements, skits, and parodies to present information for the re-legalization of marijuana. It’s a bit scattered in presentation and highly satirical in the lineage of Kentucky Fried Movie and Amazon Women on the Moon, but does so with the intention of teaching facts about marijuana and attempting to dispel government propaganda myths. Every bit of information presented in this film I have heard previously from more reputable sources than I have heard information presented by the government and other interest groups, and it’s all presented in a highly entertaining, laugh-out-loud funny way. I was in tears at the end with some of the skits, particularly the Martha Stewart/How Much Does It Take To Overdose skit. I’m going to immediately purchase this on DVD after I hit submit for this review.

Totally Baked

If you liked my review, go to the reviews page for Totally Baked on Hulu and let people know it was helpful. I’m thinking of getting more into reviews on Hulu, and may post those here as well with links to the video like I did here. Are people interested?

Also, I tried to go get the DVD immediately after writing that review … but failed in finding an in-store copy.