You answered yourself;)Quote:
Originally posted by Isezumi
Him wanting to use file sharing to get popular but still cash in on his talent maybe hypocritical, but whats your point?
Printable View
You answered yourself;)Quote:
Originally posted by Isezumi
Him wanting to use file sharing to get popular but still cash in on his talent maybe hypocritical, but whats your point?
Ya know 1ct, its really easy to be narrow minded, thick headed with subjective hearing...and have everything work out the way you want.Quote:
Originally posted by 1ctabor
You answered yourself;)
The plain and simple of it is that there is no justification for violating copyrights no matter how you paint it. Nor is your point of Hypocracy any more valid because you choose to broaden all the constructs to the point where anything and everything placed under its scrutiny appears wrong.
I mean crap 1ct under your own arguement, how hypocritical can you be? you want someone else to work there a$$ of for years and years and spend thousands of dollars in production so that you can DL it for free. When was the last time you went up to your boss and said "Ya know what, How about I put in an extra 20 hours a week and you dont pay me for it."
Yeah you may see the artists whining on TV, but I guarantee you that the studio engineers/techs/owners think your an a$$, same thing as the guy that spend days taking Photos doing cover layouts and typography for those "uselss little paper inserts" . Its just as much their hardwork as it is anyone elses. You are all so freakin pissed off about how like $2 of the $15 that you pay for a CD goes into the RIAAs pocket, that you forget about the dozens of normal blue color works that wake up each morning to get a share of the $13 inbetween.
Frankly isezumi regardless what you are anyone else says i'll keep getting my free music so get over it. You just showed me your true colors. I thought differently of you and thought we were having a decent discussion on the topic up until the time you posted this garbage. Now I know you are no different then any other of the little brats on this forum when it comes to someone arguing with you. You sink to name calling, thats just funny. And I thought you were trying to work your way to being a mod. Well let me tell you something, you better at least step out of puberty before you should even consider monitoring everyone elses posts on here. You asked a very simple question, "what is my point" and answered it in the same line. Being hypocritical was my point, case proven. Apparently you can't handle my response. When you can take this argument back to a decent level then i'll continue on with you. Until then don't bother wasting my time. No reason to get all pissy there Isez, do you need some cool down time??????????Quote:
Originally posted by Isezumi
Ya know 1ct, its really easy to be narrow minded, thick headed with subjective hearing...and have everything work out the way you want.
The plain and simple of it is that there is no justification for violating copyrights no matter how you paint it. Nor is your point of Hypocracy any more valid because you choose to broaden all the constructs to the point where anything and everything placed under its scrutiny appears wrong.
I mean crap 1ct under your own arguement, how hypocritical can you be? you want someone else to work there a$$ of for years and years and spend thousands of dollars in production so that you can DL it for free. When was the last time you went up to your boss and said "Ya know what, How about I put in an extra 20 hours a week and you dont pay me for it."
Yeah you may see the artists whining on TV, but I guarantee you that the studio engineers/techs/owners think your an a$$, same thing as the guy that spend days taking Photos doing cover layouts and typography for those "uselss little paper inserts" . Its just as much their hardwork as it is anyone elses. You are all so freakin pissed off about how like $2 of the $15 that you pay for a CD goes into the RIAAs pocket, that you forget about the dozens of normal blue color works that wake up each morning to get a share of the $13 inbetween.
Oh yeah, you said i'm so freakin pissed off, where do I appear in my posts to be pissed off. Look in the mirror if you want to see who's having the pissing fit.
I dont know where people draw the impression that I am trying to be a Mod, but thanks for even giving me the intial consideration.Quote:
Originally posted by 1ctabor
Frankly isezumi regardless what you are anyone else says i'll keep getting my free music so get over it. You just showed me your true colors. I thought differently of you and thought we were having a decent discussion on the topic up until the time you posted this garbage. Now I know you are no different then any other of the little brats on this forum when it comes to someone arguing with you. You sink to name calling, thats just funny. And I thought you were trying to work your way to being a mod. Well let me tell you something, you better at least step out of puberty before you should even consider monitoring everyone elses posts on here. You asked a very simple question, "what is my point" and answered it in the same line. Being hypocritical was my point, case proven. Apparently you can't handle my response. When you can take this argument back to a decent level then i'll continue on with you. Until then don't bother wasting my time. No reason to get all pissy there Isez, do you need some cool down time??????????
Oh yeah, you said i'm so freakin pissed off, where do I appear in my posts to be pissed off. Look in the mirror if you want to see who's having the pissing fit.
I dont think it is a question of my not being able to handle your responces 1ct. I am pretty sure it has more to do with not really seeing your responce the same way that you do. There is an inherent danger with leaving short responces like that, there is a fairly large potential for misinterpetation. I mean just because you see it, doesnt guarantee that someone else will.
As for who is pissed off: I was under the impression that "You are all so pissed off..." more easily communicated a general YOU, where "You are so pissed off..." is more indiciative of YOU 1ct.
As for the general tone of the overall post, youll have to pardon me from about the end of the second paragraph I was being nagged at by a rent.
I didn't want this to go this route and would love to be able to keep it on a decent sort of tone. Now if you would like to continue on please, give me a response I can respond to in a not so hateful way.Quote:
Originally posted by Isezumi
I dont know where people draw the impression that I am trying to be a Mod, but thanks for even giving me the intial consideration.
I dont think it is a question of my not being able to handle your responces 1ct. I am pretty sure it has more to do with not really seeing your responce the same way that you do. There is an inherent danger with leaving short responces like that, there is a fairly large potential for misinterpetation. I mean just because you see it, doesnt guarantee that someone else will.
As for who is pissed off: I was under the impression that "You are all so pissed off..." more easily communicated a general YOU, where "You are so pissed off..." is more indiciative of YOU 1ct.
As for the general tone of the overall post, youll have to pardon me from about the end of the second paragraph I was being nagged at by a rent.
Really , i can say i'm not pissed off in the slightest. If the ruling stated that no more downloading can exist then so be it, I won't download anymore. I have a total of about twenty songs on my cmoputer just so you know. Give me a break here I just got home from a party so if my words sound stupid, Its all the alcohal's fault.:) Anyway, I see both sides if the story and accept both sides. I just happen to be on the side that you disagree with, thats all. Now, can we continue on in an adult sort of manner and have a "real" disussion that lasts for once?
Hypocracy or resiprocation for it, is no reason.
I have said it before several times, prolly not here because of the language constraints.
The file sharing community has spend the better part of 3 years breaking the law. Your time is up, you've illicted a scortched earth response.
Right now, as we speak the RIAA is working on trojan infected files that they are going to release onto every p2p network they can find. Expect the infection rate to be in the high 90%, and unless you contract and never go onlin again, that trojan allows them access to ID everything that resides in your "Shared Folder". And NO Norton wont catch it, niether will McAfee or PcCillin or practically every other antivirus program. It can also subvert all but the most Hardcore Firewalls (which means that Black Ice, Zone Alarm, simple NAT on your SOHO router wont save you).
You all (in general) have spent so long stickin it too big money, that now they are fed up and are going to stick it right back at ya and they can BUY alot of votes.
Honestly its really fun to sit here and postulate this crap with you. But right now, what you all arent willing to spend (money) is whats working to take away your freedom.
Its like I said in another forum. Your fighting a war and a vast majority of your troops are going to turn tail and run at the first sign of real conflict.
If the RIAA is about to release a trojan file that would affect my computer, I am going to hope on the P2P bandwagon then. I want to be part of that classaction suit against them. Since they have no right to enforce the law to that extent.
It doesnt matter what the RIAA can do to stop the pirates, it will never work. They would have to attack all the major routers and pipes, such as the transatlantic to cause a major problem for internet activity. As long as there is some form of Internet connection there will ALWAYS be pirates. Its as simple as that. There will always be the will and there will be a way to get around even the extreme attempts to hinder one from obtaining illegal software/music.
I do have a major MP3 collection (over 130GB and growing) and I do own most of the music. *whistle* However if there is a song I like and its the ONLY one on the album then I might find a copy of it, but not with P2P software or anyother similiar forms :) I dont feel it is worth me going out and spending $15+tax etc for a single song. However if the album has atleast 3 songs I like I would buy it to support the artist I like.
For example, I own all Metallica albums and Eminem, I also have each album ripped at 256-bit rate.
For another example, I have Alien Ant Farm but I only liked one song from there album. Do I own the album? No. Would I ever buy it? No
This post has nothing to do with stealing, mind you. It has to do with privacy.
If they do indeed usher in this new Trojan, they are going to create an even bigger mindset of anarchy. People fight the fiercest when their backs are againts the wall and they feel they have nothing left to lose. I'm fearful of the socialogical impact this move would make. People are paranoid enough about their lack of privacy and being striped of rights. The price of freedom is blood. If we lose our freedoms again, it will once again take the spilling of blood to gain it back if at all. This does not forebode well...
Eventually the RIAA and all involved are gonna piss off enough hackers with the technological savvy and will to join forces and wreak havoc...
I can see it now...the matrix is our destiny...our doom. I got dibs on Trinity. :P
Well piracy, as it stands is nothing more than someone steeling...it can be spun, and re spun all day long by people who do it. But the bottom line is, your ripping off someones hard work. Weather they are making millions or not, isn't the point...and the majority are not.
MTV does not represent every artist in the world, not even close...
Where do you think the joke, whats the difference between and pizza, and a musican? Pizza feeds a family of four...comes from...musicians, most at least are not rich, the ones that are worked there *** off to get rich, and the ones who aren't can't cut a break...and all piracy does, is effect the record companies judgment on how many people, and how many artist they will contract this year...in fear of lost revenue.
How can anyone say, that piracy is not effecting sales? Hello, if you could not pirate something, then you would have to buy a copy to own it. So, if you wanted a song, software, anything...you would have to earn the money to buy it. This isn't a communist state, we aren't giving hand outs here...you want something you have to work for it, just as artist, record companies, people who work in the factory that prints the CD's all have to work to get what they deserve.
Also, this argument about not likeing the artist, but still downloading the songs, and having a copy of them is childish. Thats like saying you only like Ford trucks (Metallica), so you will only by a Ford truck, but you sort of like the new Chevy's (another band you don't really like) so you will go steel one, till you decide to dump it (recycle bin), no point in wasting money on it, if you wont like it?
And what you will say to that, is music is a little different than trucks... because, because you cannot touch it, or see it...well no, because you know they both cost lots of money to produce, and they both take time and effort and people hours to make. So next time you start *****ing about CD prices, realize that the average cost of marketing, producing, and distrubuting an album worldwide and in America, takes 100's of people from the artist, to the truck driver delivering the CD's, to the person that pushes the button in the factory that prints the books, and cover art...so it's well over $100,000 for a small realese, imagine a Metallica or nSynch worldwide realease...I know, because I've already spent over $5,000 (over 100 hours) and we aren't even done with recording, much less mix down, and CD printing. Thats at a local level...and we are going to be giving these CD's out, for publicity....so yeah, Im a hypocrite...and yeah, I sure as hell want to get paid, and for those people who I gave my CD to, hopefully they will buy one.
Just to play devils advocate...
If you are a musician because you love and not to get rich, then you wouldn't be making as huge of a deal out of it. You are showing much more passion about making money than making music. ;)
I believe the general directive in your life as a workers, is to get payed to do what you enjoy.Quote:
Originally posted by Fig
Just to play devils advocate...
If you are a musician because you love and not to get rich, then you wouldn't be making as huge of a deal out of it. You are showing much more passion about making money than making music. ;)
I also believe that NO ONE works pro-bono.
I love playing music, and rather I make a lot of money or not isn't going to stop me from making music. But if I can make money doing it, and know that I may be able to make lots of money then of course I want to make money!Quote:
Originally posted by Fig
Just to play devils advocate...
If you are a musician because you love and not to get rich, then you wouldn't be making as huge of a deal out of it. You are showing much more passion about making money than making music. ;)
I didn't get into playing music, because I wanted to make money. I got into it because it is a true passion...and music right now is much more important than money right now in my life...but If I have to spend thousands of hours in the studio...and then, noting comes from that except a good CD...and no ones buys it, well then I can always say I made a good CD...and then go back into the studio and try again. But yes I want to make money, because I realized I can with my talent...but it is not what I got into it for.
Please stop patronizing me with your one-sided analogies and insinuations that I am a horrible or simple-minded person. Music and cars are different, and that's because stealing a car is grand theft, not petty theft. You made the comparison to writing. Imagine that there was a collection of short stories that was just published. You've never heard of the author, but the book is highly recommended. So, you go to the bookstore and browse through the book, and find that there are only two stories, out of twenty, that you actually want to read. Since it's newly released, the book is horribly overpriced, and you decide that you'd rather not spend $25 on a 300+ page book when you are only interested in 50 of the pages. You have a couple of options. You can borrow your friend's copy of the book, and just return it later, or, since he's a nice enough guy to let you, you can photocopy the chapters that you want and give the book back. A bad analogy? No. The photocopies are going to be of a lower quality (just like mp3's), and you're likely to read them a few times, then throw them away. Or, if you grow to like the author's writing style and decide that you'd like to read the whole book, you can always just go buy a copy. Is this stealing? Yes. Is the publisher of the book going to come and dig through your house until they find these copied pages and then light them on fire with a propane torch, thereby destroying every piece of literature, legitimate or not, that you own (similar to what the RIAA would like to do to mp3 collections)? I sure hope not.Quote:
Originally posted by Idiot356
Also, this argument about not likeing the artist, but still downloading the songs, and having a copy of them is childish. Thats like saying you only like Ford trucks (Metallica), so you will only by a Ford truck, but you sort of like the new Chevy's (another band you don't really like) so you will go steel one, till you decide to dump it (recycle bin), no point in wasting money on it, if you wont like it?
I am not trying to change your mind; I'm just trying to get you to see both sides of the issue.
If you read the stipulations for the "Fair Use Agreement" that was approved by the RIAA/MPAA many moons ago. It pretty much agreed to analog reproductions of Publicly broadcast media. MP3s can be of lesser quality then the original track, but the discrepancy is that they are essentially Binary dumps with compression algorithums. Which is not an analog reproduction. I mean if everyone on Kazaa was trading Digitizied versions of songs that they copied off the radio with a tape deck, we wouldnt be having to deal with this branch of the arguement.Quote:
Originally posted by zeppelinfr34k
Please stop patronizing me with your one-sided analogies and insinuations that I am a horrible or simple-minded person. Music and cars are different, and that's because stealing a car is grand theft, not petty theft. You made the comparison to writing. Imagine that there was a collection of short stories that was just published. You've never heard of the author, but the book is highly recommended. So, you go to the bookstore and browse through the book, and find that there are only two stories, out of twenty, that you actually want to read. Since it's newly released, the book is horribly overpriced, and you decide that you'd rather not spend $25 on a 300+ page book when you are only interested in 50 of the pages. You have a couple of options. You can borrow your friend's copy of the book, and just return it later, or, since he's a nice enough guy to let you, you can photocopy the chapters that you want and give the book back. A bad analogy? No. The photocopies are going to be of a lower quality (just like mp3's), and you're likely to read them a few times, then throw them away. Or, if you grow to like the author's writing style and decide that you'd like to read the whole book, you can always just go buy a copy. Is this stealing? Yes. Is the publisher of the book going to come and dig through your house until they find these copied pages and then light them on fire with a propane torch, thereby destroying every piece of literature, legitimate or not, that you own (similar to what the RIAA would like to do to mp3 collections)? I sure hope not.
I am not trying to change your mind; I'm just trying to get you to see both sides of the issue.
Hell I remember having Tools album Lateralus like 3 days before it debuted, because our local radio station played the album in its entirity in mono at like midnight, and man I stayed up till 1:30 patiently waiting by the radio to make sure that i had everything on tape. Then I dubbed it onto my computer and ran down to Frys and bought some audio clean up software (for $40) and camped for the next day with my cans on, editing tracks and eliminating noise. And when I was done I burned that on to a CD and played that as loud as I could for the next 2 days (when the actual CD came out). And what I did was totally legit, cause What I had on CD was an analog reproduction of a public radio broadcast.
Now Can the copyright holder destroy all unauthorizied reproductions of his work, Yes he can, almost with out impunity.
The same way that the police can enter your house with a warrant to sieze your Marijuanna plants. And destroy your Meth lab and confinscate all your unprocessed Heroine, even if those werent specifically on the warrant.
All illegal activities you willingly perform, you perform at the risk of being caught and subsequently being prosecuted. To people who care enough, not even the internet is vague enough to save you.