What Has The Free Speech Coalition Been Up To Lately

[MAK6]

WOW! If this is what you consider to be “an impeccable source,” I can’t even imagine how wrong your speculative stories must be. Virtually every “fact” in this article is incorrect and can be very easily proven false. So, let’s correct the record, point by point.
• In terms of the cost of the annual report, you claim that “industry professionals estimate it to be between $12,000 and $18,000.” “Industry professionals” can “estimate” all they want, but the actual cost of the report was $1,132.50
• You claim that the Raben Group was paid $100,000. Again, you are WRONG, by about 40%--not a good margin of error.
• You also claim that the Raben Group “has yet to do one God Damned thing except for take Executive Director Diane Duke around to some offices to make introductions.” Those introductions to organizations like the MPAA, Universal Music Group, NBC Universal, the Sony Entertainment Group, Warner Brothers Entertainment, EMI Music North America, Sound Exchange, etc. enabled FSC to host a piracy summit to develop strategies for protecting intellectual property rights. Those introductions to organizations like the Gambling Association, the Gaming Association, and representatives of the alcohol industry have enabled her to collaborate with other industries fighting federal and state legislation and regulation, e.g. sharing the financial burden of fighting the Child Protection Registry.
• You write, “it has lost the contract for its California lobbying firm and the FSC is ineligible for reconsideration.” Again, wrong. In an attempt to ensure that it is receiving services commensurate with the fees it is paying, FSC terminated its relationship with its California lobbyist and instead has contracted with someone who has a proven track record of successful advocacy. While the old lobbyist was busy insulting law makers (on this very site), the new lobbyist was establishing constructive working relationships with legislators. The new lobbyist actually understands that you can’t insult someone and then expect them to do you a favor.
• You assert that $160,000 was spent on “pampering the jetsetting FSC crew and putting them up at luxury hotels every time they had to visit D.C., Sacramento, or San Francisco.” In the past year, Executive Director, Diane Duke made five trips to San Francisco. During four of those five trips, Diane slept on her son’s couch in his small Japantown apartment in order to save the organization money. The only FSC funds spent on a hotel room in San Francisco were at the Holliday Inn for the Cybernet Conference—hardly the lap of luxury. Moreover, while in San Francisco on FSC business, Diane has never even rented a car—SHE TAKES THE BUS—certainly not for her own comfort or convenience, but to save the organization money! Diane has made two trips to DC. Once, out of frugality, she stayed at a dormitory-like facility at Gallaudet University. On the second trip, she stayed at the Doubletree. For this year’s AEE, Diane decided that the room rates at the Venetian are too expensive and has reservations at the Gold Coast Hotel (Anyone ever heard of it? I doubt it.).
• FSC’s other expenses include significant investments in the success of the industry: e.g. the Georgetown Economic Services Report that was used for the 2257 comments, the services of Kelly Drye (a DC firm that specializes in Federal Rules and Regulations), lobby day, testimony in front of ICANN concerning .xxx, a new database, etc.).
• You assert, “No wonder the FSC membership numbers are in the toilet as people peel off and jump ship.” Again, you are wrong. This year’s FSC membership numbers are stable—and, given the state of the economy, one might argue that “stable” is success. Clearly you wish that people were jumping ship, but wishing it does not make it so. The numbers tell the real story.
• FSC is a membership organization—a 501 C6. It is accountable to its members only. If you were a member, I’m sure they would be happy to answer your questions.