Sancus
join:2002-10-17 | reply to TKJunkMail
People who call music pirate stealing amuse me so much. |
|
Magnet2
join:2001-10-25
San Francisco, CA
| reply to TKJunkMail
First things first, artists do not have investors, they have producers. Occasionally, producers are the label (which do have investors) or a production company. Mostly produced by individuals, however.
On the outside chance that what you really mean by 'investors' are the people who buy into a record (i.e. the public). As such, and I think you're outnumbered here, I would like listen to a damn album on my iPod (well, it's an iriver)!
Secondly, Ol_boy, your trolling indicates, that by BBR not actively dissuading piracy, they must be all for it. Any news outfit should only be unbiased in a story. However, as any good republican can attest, unbiased simply means no criticism of the ruling party.
DRM in its current form does not work. RIAA and MPAA believe that the PC is not a trusted environment. This is the main reason for Vista being what it is, and what it requires. |
|
djrobx
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
 ·PHONE POWER
 ·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T CallVantage
·Time Warner VOIP
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to TKJunkMail
I don't see how they're trying to justify anything. They are pointing out that DRM is hurting legitimate buyers and doing nothing to stop piracy.
When I buy a CD, I want to be able to insert it in my computer for addition to my collection without fear that it's going to install something nefarious. I want to be able to copy my legally purchased music to my car's Phatnoise car audio system. It does not support DRM. I have two other players - an iPod and a Sony solid state player. Guuess what? The only thing that works on all my players is ... *drumrolll* unrestricted MP3!
Frankly, I have no use for a DRM audio file. I generally listen to streaming music either from the net or my cable company at home. I primarily listen to purchased music in my car or on the go.
--
\\ROB - a part of the SCB local network |
|
New_Repub
@verizon.ne
| reply to TKJunkMail
I agree that piracy of music is morally wrong, but I think the recording industry association is tilting at windmills with their legal and public relations campaigns.
Once upon a time, it actually cost a non-trivial amount of money to copy and distribute music (and other content) to the masses, but that's simply not true any more. In fact, it's because someone can make a copy of a song and send it to a thousand other people at practically zero expense that we're having this conversation.
The RIAA is trying to assert its role as middleman between the musician and the consumer, and there's nothing wrong with being a middleman. However, the RIAA adds plenty of cost to the equation without adding much value. People recognize this (either conciously or intuitively), which is why so many otherwise law-abiding are willing to pirate music. Most folks understand that a reasonable profit is necessary for a business to survive, but they're going to resent any company that increases their costs just because it can. |
|
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20 | reply to gheezer
I didn't know that BBR had room for one political party. (thought it appears to be an ultra liberal site)
And don't take that wrong, becuase you and I come from the same polital threads... liberatarian. |
|
MeanPeepsSuk
Premium
join:2004-11-21
Muddy Field
clubs: | reply to mph300
Mom said I could ride in the front seat this time.
Who cares if Retire_Rich is first??? (Besides you two?).
When I agree with him or not.. At least they are on-topic (Ahem) and they are sure a lot better thread starters than most. |
|
thender2
Glamour Profession
Premium
join:2004-05-16
Staten Island, NY
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Another BBR attempt to justify music pirating
quote:
Retired Gov't Official
Explains a lot.
My method of finding music is by listening to it how I want.. buying CDs at a store is inconveinent and far too pricy(companies who charge record pressing prices for CDs should be driven out of business), and legal online downloads are all low quality, overcompressed trash.
Until they get a system that works, I'll continue downloading.
--
The Problem With Music.
Our Rationale
Time to rewrite the DMCA. |
|
unigamer
join:2005-06-01
Henderson, NV
| reply to fiberguy
The following is an observation, not meant to offend. So please let's skip the trolling and flames.
I'm sure that if you were to take a survey of BBR users, you'd find a multitude of views.
As for me, myself, I'm real close to moderate. On some things I fall one way, on some the other. I tend to follow reasoning and basic logic (and sometimes a little emotion) to decide on a case-by-case basis... I'm not the kind to subscribe to one side of the spectrum. |
|
unigamer
join:2005-06-01
Henderson, NV
| reply to mph300
The simple fact is, if it can be played or accessed publicly, beyond a small group of people, it cannot be secured, electronically or not. The keys, method to play it, etc. have to be somewhere, either in software or hardware, and they can be reverse engineered.
It really doesn't matter if you think piracy is right or not. I personally think that it is against the law, even if it's just civil liability. But just because something isn't a crime, doesn't mean someone won't do it... People jaywalk all the time, after all. (On both, I plead the 5th...  )
The reason good cryptosytems (PGP, GnuPG, etc... something beyond garden variety WinZip! LOL) can keep data secure (assuming they're used right) is because the key can be kept secure - it's often in the heads of only one or a few people. But to protect a public work that way - that key has to be available to the player somehow, not in someone's head. Hence my point. |
|
unigamer
join:2005-06-01
Henderson, NV | reply to TKJunkMail
Both of the passages you quoted are simply observations, and journalistic publishing. It takes a warped brain to see them as justifying piracy... but then again, considering how some people see the world, nothing would surprise me, would it? |
|
unigamer
join:2005-06-01
Henderson, NV
| reply to gheezer
1.) And who the heck are you to tell someone to keep their hands off of DSLR, or any other public website or forum for that matter? I don't see any evidence of you being a sysop, etc... they're the only ones that can do that.
2.) Last time I checked, there were three forbidden subjects in polite conversation - if you bring them up, you're bound to cause trouble. The two I remember for sure are politics and religion - you sure opened that can of worms, didn't you? LOL I think the third is sex... I could be wrong, if I am, someone please enlighten me.
I think they said that about the first two for a good reason, though... |
|
unigamer
join:2005-06-01
Henderson, NV | reply to TKJunkMail
So what if someone drifts a little bit off topic? Just so it ain't way out in left field, it makes life more interesting.
In this particular case though, I do note it was a jab. |
|
unigamer
join:2005-06-01
Henderson, NV | reply to MeanPeepsSuk
Re: Mom said I could ride in the front seat this t
On topic? See above reply. |
|
mph300
Two Thirds The Way There
join:2000-11-09
| reply to MeanPeepsSuk
Re: Mom said I could ride in the front seat this time.
said by MeanPeepsSuk  :Who cares if Retire_Rich is first??? (Besides you two?). When I agree with him or not.. At least they are on-topic (Ahem) and they are sure a lot better thread starters than most. I agree with you.....I've just noticed that to some posters, being first is more important than making a comment that would be useful to the discussion. That's All!
Just like the poster that you sited in your post link!
Mike:)
--
It's all about the G's |
|
Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Another BBR attempt to justify music pirating
Bypassing DRM for personal use is not Piracy and is Not illegal.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports |
|
RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs:
 ·XMission
| reply to G_Poobah
said by G_Poobah :Copyright infringement? Where? If you purchased the album legally, please explain where copyright infringement happens? I bought it, they took away my right to play a legally purchased CD on my ipod, so I downloaded a LEGAL COPY from a P2P network. There's no infringement there. nothing to see. Did you not know? That is the infringement! You are suppose to buy a new copy each time you wish to use a new media just for that media.
That is the new wave that people like Retire_Rich and his Hollywood (just a guess, not a known fact) friends would like to get into place.
And I will leave out the politics since it looks like it is no longer just one party, but all parties and groups that are being bought out. (Isn't it amazing how certain people spout off about the "dems did this", or "the repubs did that", but ignore the fact that the other party usually had the same view previously but not the wherewithal to implement it?)
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| reply to thender2
said by thender2 : quote:
Retired Gov't Official
Explains a lot. Actually it doesn't. I make up posting sigs and change on a regular basis. Remember, this is the internet and nothing may be as it seems.
--
My Web Page
Join Red Room Forum |
|
DRM is legalized the
@verizon.net
1 edit | reply to G_Poobah
said by "G_Poobah":
Copyright infringement? Where?
If you purchased the album legally, please explain where copyright infringement happens? I bought it, they took away my right to play a legally purchased CD on my ipod, so I downloaded a LEGAL COPY from a P2P network.
Well, there is some slightly grey area about whether or not downloading the "same group of bits" as you would obtain through ripping a lawfully-owned copy of a work into a digital data file is legal or not.
But in general, these new DRM schemes are more-or-less CONSUMER FRAUD upon the people. I think that needs to be clearly pointed out to people.
A copy-protected "CD" is in fact, not really a CD, since it doesn't meet the proper specifications, and usage of the trademarked logos is trademark infringement, and likely a violation of the licensing agreements that the large publishers have to sign to use the logo(s).
But of course he doesn't bring up that aspect, of how big business is 'raping' the consumer, oh no... |
|
unigamer
join:2005-06-01
Henderson, NV
| reply to Sancus
Well, it is stealing... but, as with many laws, there's a big gap between the law, and the enforcement of the law. LOL
If every stupid little law on the books were enforced everywhere, they'd have to build a zillion new jails... and get aliens to be the jailors. Because I'm sure that almost all of us were guilty of something at some time. |
|
