I don't mind buying a .99 cent song from Amazon, I will not however stand to be told I can only have my music on approved devices, burn a CD twice, and have it on three PC's.


I have systems at multiple stores, a laptop, my home PC's and multiple MP3 players for me the wife and in the car. So the RIAA, and anyone else who tries to tell me I need to buy another copy can go fark themselves.


As far as the "artist", paint me a picture. When the floozies like Britney Speers can write her own tunes, play an instrument, and sing I will consider them something, but for now they are a meat popcicle.


All the bands I listen to have been around for awhile, or have made music and gotten famous from getting gigs and playing, on the internet or by friends mentioning them. I have as of yet to really hear a song on a clearchannel owned station that i considered worth buying.


Remove the problem with music, and that problem is a bunch of money grubbing whores deciding what can and cannot be done with legally purchased music, what will and will not make it onto a CD, what will and will not make it to the radio stations, and what will and will not be sung.


I for one am against a company that would like my camcorder to stop recording when I have the TV, radio, CD, comptuer or any other device on that could contain a copyrighted song or media on and within distance, and against a company that forces users to purchase new and different hardware to allow them to use the media they have purchased, against companies who remove internet videos as you could possibly hear a song in the background that they don't want you to hear from a CD that you may or may not own, while the video is about something that may or may not anything to do with the protected media in question.



If they can afford to pay people to go through youtube videos and make sure we aren't able to record a background noise song from a video, they are making too much and need to be takedn down a few .

SteevoI don't mind buying a .99 cent song from Amazon, I will not however stand to be told I can only have my music on approved devices, burn a CD twice, and have it on three PC's.


I have systems at multiple stores, a laptop, my home PC's and multiple MP3 players for me the wife and in the car. So the RIAA, and anyone else who tries to tell me I need to buy another copy can go fark themselves.


As far as the "artist", paint me a picture. When the floozies like Britney Speers can write her own tunes, play an instrument, and sing I will consider them something, but for now they are a meat popcicle.


All the bands I listen to have been around for awhile, or have made music and gotten famous from getting gigs and playing, on the internet or by friends mentioning them. I have as of yet to really hear a song on a clearchannel owned station that i considered worth buying.


Remove the problem with music, and that problem is a bunch of money grubbing whores deciding what can and cannot be done with legally purchased music, what will and will not make it onto a CD, what will and will not make it to the radio stations, and what will and will not be sung.


I for one am against a company that would like my camcorder to stop recording when I have the TV, radio, CD, comptuer or any other device on that could contain a copyrighted song or media on and within distance, and against a company that forces users to purchase new and different hardware to allow them to use the media they have purchased, against companies who remove internet videos as you could possibly hear a song in the background that they don't want you to hear from a CD that you may or may not own, while the video is about something that may or may not anything to do with the protected media in question.



If they can afford to pay people to go through youtube videos and make sure we aren't able to record a background noise song from a video, they are making too much and need to be takedn down a few .

Well then you wont mind having a song you sang being played at a Al-qaeda beheading then would you? I mean we are not questioning right or wrong anymore so why not?

TheMailMan78Why is my analogy not comparable? Because cars are tangible? As for not needing a professional studio to create music fine. But file sharing networks (Pirate Bay) are not the answer. Paid distribution is the only viable answer.

Totally different industries with different rules and different competitions, and yes, different levels of tangibility.

File sharing is here to stay. The sooner the industry accepts it the better. There is no viable way to eliminate them and still keep personal freedom at the level most of us desire to have it. If you are so violated then stop creating. Others will continue to find new ways to do so.

Hellz YEAH! I voted on them! (Swedish citizenship)

farlex85Totally different industries with different rules and different competitions, and yes, different levels of tangibility.

File sharing is here to stay. The sooner the industry accepts it the better. There is no viable way to eliminate them and still keep personal freedom at the level most of us desire to have it.

Well then anything that isnt tangible should be free then huh? How about your credit? Thats not tangible. Property is property. No matter what industry.

Most of the artists that are so defensive with copyrights, at least in Spain, are artists that haven't been able to do a single new song for more than 10 years, and only live from the past records. If I'm forced to work every day, they should also work at least every now and then and do something new. Or I should get paid while evey computer I've made or repaired is still being used a small fee based on their uptime. Until then, I'm happy to see the Pirate Party there, to raise a voice against that so called artists.

TheMailMan78Well then anything that isnt tangible should be free then huh? How about your credit? Thats not tangible. Property is property. No matter what industry.

We have already gone down this path and need not tread the same ground with the same arguments. Credit is not at all the same thing, nor is it your property (your credit score belongs to lending institutions who use it to assess you). Really though, my thoughts on the tangibility of intellectual property are of no consequence, at least not yet. What is now of consequence is better systems of file-sharing and personal privacy to appease all. You have to work with what you have and be flexible, or you will break.

Demon_82Most of the artists that are so defensive with copyrights, at least in Spain, are artists that haven't been able to do a single new song for more than 10 years, and only live from the past records. If I'm forced to work every day, they should also work at least every now and then and do something new. Or I should get paid while evey computer I've made or repaired is still being used a small fee based on their uptime. Until then, I'm happy to see the Pirate Party there, to raise a voice against that so called artists.

Ah yes Socialism we meet again....:shadedshu "if I have to work then they should too! Its not FAIR they did something before me and have a right to the money it brings. We should all be financially equal. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaa"

farlex85We have already gone down this path and need not tread the same ground with the same arguments. Credit is not at all the same thing, nor is it your property (your credit score belongs to lending institutions who use it to assess you). Really though, my thoughts on the tangibility of intellectual property are of no consequence, at least not yet. What is now of consequence is better systems of file-sharing and personal privacy to appease all. You have to work with what you have and be flexible, or you will break.

It is the same thing. Your credit score has a direct effect on your life. Some have it good. Some bad. But it is yours and you must protect it. Whats at consequence is the quality of every artists life. Weather they make a million bucks or .1 cent per song is up to the consumer. You take this away by making whatever they do free you open a door to pandoras box. Services of any kind will come into question.

Hail, hail, HAIL!!!
P.S.
YAARRR!!!!
Mailman, take it easy, they wont make everything for free, dont worry...

EasoHail, hail, HAIL!!!
P.S.
YAARRR!!!!
Mailman, take it easy, they wont make everything for free, dont worry...

If you guys have been ripped off like I have you wouldn't be all for the Pirates. I'm calm man. You guys just do not have a concept what this could open the door too.

The reality of things...

As far as digital content (just mp3s) is concerned, I'm willing to pay any artist I listen to and appreciate, the money it took them to produce their music and the money they need to live a decent life. I'll pay for the bandwidth it takes to get it on my mp3 player (I do already anyways).

I'll buy a CD if I like the music. I'll pay what it took a company to produce/fabricate the CD, transport the CD, etc but I don't like the idea of fattening some CEO wallets who have nothing to do with music. And again, I think the artist should make a decent living on the music. As long as they make good music, they'll have no problems making a good honest living.

I'll go to a concert, and I'll buy a shirt of their concert tour if I appreciate their music enough (just did a Limp Bizkit concert at an open-air festival and bought a shirt).

As far as I'm concerned, if I don't like someone's music, I won't buy their CD - ever. If an artist gave me his/her/their music for free to download, and I didn't like it - I wouldn't keep it on my mp3 player even "they" paid me to keep it. I sure as hell wouldn't recommend it to my friends. However, if I did hear something I liked, I'd seriously consider paying an artist for his music. The chances of me hearing something on the radio, MTV or in a CD shop are almost nil. Downloading music should be used like promotional material.

Let people listen to mp3s (low quality) for free and a limited time (if people don't like it they'll deleted it in a very limited amount of time on their own!) and ask money for higher quality mp3s (which I think most people will want if they like something enough) and other media content. If artists wanna sue pirates for sharing the higher quality mp3 then fine because you're taking away from their livelihood. I definitely don't think people should pirate music to make profits off them with illegal copies etc.

Same thing goes for movies. People will pay a reasonable price for high quality media. I'll buy a DVD of a movie even if I have the same thing as an avi.

Artists need to harness the power of the internet. The truth is that the internet is their best friend, as it's the only medium that will give them an honest chance at making it "big". If you're good, you'll make it and you'll make it big. People will talk about you and people will support you (Susan Boyle anyone?). With a music company, you have a 1% chance of making it IMHO, even if you have great music. Again, why didn't we discover Susan Boyle before? What were record companies doing besides counting their money? Obviously not listening to Susan Boyle.

Well, looks like the pirates are in trouble again.

AnnCore: where the hell have you been hiding? a staff member ive never heard of?


I agree with our ninja staff member, i've downloaded movies in .avi, and gone and bought them on DVD the next day. my housemate does the same with Bluray.

The market is over-saturated with piles and piles of crap, and it can be very difficult to return a product if you dont like, since there is no 'try before you buy' option. what do people do? they find their own trial method, they download it.

AnnCoreArtists need to harness the power of the internet. The truth is that the internet is their best friend, as it's the only medium that will give them an honest chance at making it "big". If you're good, you'll make it and you'll make it big. People will talk about you and people will support you (Susan Boyle anyone?). With a music company, you have a 1% chance of making it IMHO, even if you have great music. Again, why didn't we discover Susan Boyle before? What were record companies doing besides counting their money? Obviously not listening to Susan Boyle.

Yes they do - and artist need someone out there being paid to scream from the roof tops. And boyle was a pathetic excuse, that sorry excuse for an artist did nothing (NOTHING) to even get anywhere. In reality the X Factor was the record company that promoted her.

I agree AnnCore. Mailman, what band do you belong to or where have I heard your music before?

Also Viva La Revolution! (in french)

WhiteLotusYes they do - and artist need someone out there being paid to scream from the roof tops. And boyle was a pathetic excuse, that sorry excuse for an artist did nothing (NOTHING) to even get anywhere. In reality the X Factor was the record company that promoted her.

Admit it WhiteLotus. You'd do Boyle in the pooper. If nothing else but for the fame.

WarEagleAUI agree AnnCore. Mailman, what band do you belong to or where have I heard your music before?

Also Viva La Revolution! (in french)

I'm not a musician.

TheMailMan78Well then you wont mind having a song you sang being played at a Al-qaeda beheading then would you? I mean we are not questioning right or wrong anymore so why not?

They are free to play whatever they like. And if they would like to use a song i have sung and post it o youtube at a starbucks while playing mahjong, go ahead. No different than the psyhco killers we have here in waiting, playing mahjong, surfing youtube, taking guns to class.


Wait, we should force them to ban machete's so there will no beheadings, we will spoil their fun!!!!! Hell to prevent internet downloads, we should abolish the internet. And get rid of tapes and radio while we are at it. What will be right is what we will be served at the community dining hall for food and drink and the community music listening room comrade. :p



How do I question right and wrong again? As i want waht i paid for, shame on me. :p

TheMailMan78Admit it WhiteLotus. You'd do Boyle in the pooper. If nothing else but for the fame.

GOOD GOD MAN HAVE YOU NO SHAME!?!!!!!

WhiteLotusGOOD GOD MAN HAVE YOU NO SHAME!?!!!!!

None. :laugh:

TheMailMan78Admit it WhiteLotus. You'd do Boyle in the pooper. If nothing else but for the fame.

She is more than a double bagger.

SteevoShe is more than a double bagger.

Naaaa thats something you relish in the beauty of. Its not often you get to bareback something that would make a maggot vomit.

TheMailMan78If you guys have been ripped off like I have you wouldn't be all for the Pirates. I'm calm man. You guys just do not have a concept what this could open the door too.

I do! Suing an entire political party for copyright infringement! They have much more money than your basic torrent whore. :D

erockerI do! Suing an entire political party for copyright infringement! They have much more money than your basic torrent whore. :D

Now your talkin! Thats some American thinking right there. Where do I sign up? :rockout: :laugh:

TheMailMan78Naaaa thats something you relish in the beauty of. Its not often you get to bareback something that would make a maggot vomit.

Exactly. No record company would promote "that" but after 60 million something hits on YouTube, record companies know exactly how to do the math.

Btw, if you're not a musician, what are you?

AnnCoreExactly. No record company would promote "that" but after 60 million something hits on YouTube, record companies know exactly how to do the math.

Btw, if you're not a musician, what are you?

"Fine artist" turned pro.