page: 1 · 2  |
 joshpo
join:2002-09-24
Philadelphia, PA | Give me a break Reminds me of Ms. Lovejoy on the Simpsons...
"WON'T SOMEONE PLEEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!" | |
|  | 
cao1964
join:2000-08-09
Danville, PA | Re: Give me a break HAHA good one.
Reminds me of Carl's mom in South Park | |
| | | Angrychair
join:2000-09-20
Jacksonville, FL
 ·AT&T Southeast
| Re: Give me a break said by cao1964  :HAHA good one. Reminds me of Carl's mom in South Park There is a Carl on southpark? Can you show me a link, I don't remember that character. | |
| | | | 
LSUTiger Vet
join:2005-06-20
Baton Rouge, LA
| Re: Give me a break said by Angrychair :said by cao1964 :HAHA good one. Reminds me of Carl's mom in South Park There is a Carl on southpark? Can you show me a link, I don't remember that character. I think he means Kyle's Mom | |
| | | | | 
kapil
The Kapil
join:2000-04-26
Chicago, IL | Re: Give me a break LOL. Nothing like a wannabe. ..probably has never seen SouthPark but knows that's what the cool kids are watching.
--
Stand Up For Free Speech! - »www.eff.org | |
| | | | | | 
clorets
join:2001-12-12
Oklahoma City, OK | Re: Give me a break cool kids stopped watching southpark after the 2nd season | |
| | | | | | | | | 
N3OGH
Will it all be Obama's fault now?
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
·Verizon Online DSL
| said by joshpo :Reminds me of Ms. Lovejoy on the Simpsons... "WON'T SOMEONE PLEEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!" Beat me to the punch...
Oh well, there's always next time! | |
| | RichNice
join:2003-01-09
Columbia, MD | Reminds me of an old saying by George Carlin, "F*ck the Children!!!!!" | |
| | | 
nixen
Rockin' the Boxen
Premium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA
 ·Cox HSI
·Speakeasy
| Re: Give me a break said by RichNice :Reminds me of an old saying by George Carlin, "F*ck the Children!!!!!" Sure that wasn't Michael Jackson?
-tom
--
"Some people have morals, standards and ideals about quality, but I'm an American: I couldn't care less." --Tony Pierce (paraphrased) | |
| | | | 
guitarzan
Premium
join:2004-05-04
Skytop, PA
·epix
| Re: Give me a break said by nixen :said by RichNice :Reminds me of an old saying by George Carlin, "F*ck the Children!!!!!" Sure that wasn't Michael Jackson? -tom I believe your correct Tom ! that was to easy for you
maybe a jeopardy style answer next time?
--
Honk if you've never seen an uzi fired from a car window | |
| | 
BIGMIKE
"I do not know with what weapons World W
Premium
join:2002-06-07
Westminster, CA | Barbara Boxer. Oh my god, make her shut her stupid face. | |
| | 
rachelsfx
join:2004-09-27
Pensacola, FL | Well, I never knew morality existed in Washington. Must be a visitor. It's like Madonna promoting Pop Kaballah, which is the same as a Hooker promoting Christianity.
LOL!:D | |
| | | 
Xizer
join:2004-02-05
New York, NY | Re: Right about bad effects of P2P companies Because as we all know, it's worth paying $20 for a CD that has one good song on it. | |
| | | 
TK Junk Mail
Go ahead, make my day
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Margate City, NJ
clubs:
·Comcast
| Re: Right about bad effects of P2P companies said by Xizer :Because as we all know, it's worth paying $20 for a CD that has one good song on it. Then don't buy it. But don't steal it either or you are a lowly thief.
--
My Web Page
Join Red Room Forum | |
| | | | 
SRFireside
join:2001-01-19
Houston, TX
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: Right about bad effects of P2P companies said by TK Junk Mail :said by Xizer :Because as we all know, it's worth paying $20 for a CD that has one good song on it. Then don't buy it. But don't steal it either or you are a lowly thief. Or download a few tracks. See if you like it. If you do buy the album. If not delete the files and move on. P2P is more than just script kiddies bragging about not buying anything. | |
| | | | |
TK Junk Mail
Go ahead, make my day
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Margate City, NJ
clubs:
·Comcast
| Re: Right about bad effects of P2P companies said by SRFireside :Or download a few tracks. See if you like it. If you do buy the album. If not delete the files and move on. P2P is more than just script kiddies bragging about not buying anything. You can download individual tracks legally from many online LEGAL music sources for nominal fees(99cents and less). There is no excuse to steal them, except by those with no morals(about 75% of young adults it seems).
--
My Web Page
Join Red Room Forum | |
| | | | | |
SRFireside
join:2001-01-19
Houston, TX
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: Right about bad effects of P2P companies Speaking as a musician and song writer myself I see no moral dilemma in sharing music as long as you don't sell it. Especially is such sharing equated to more sales. Which if you look at album sales across the board it has. Independent labels have been getting a major push in sales thanks to P2P. There has also been a steady increase with the major labels as well.
The whole point of "try before you buy" is that you aren't spending any money while reviewing. You can download game demos for free. Why not a few songs on an album? I see nothing wrong with pay download services whatsoever. At the same time casual sharing on P2P isn't bad either in my book. Is P2P abused? Yep, but that's not the norm. If it were album sales would go DOWN instead of up. | |
| | | | | | | 
91439306
15,000 Watts of Bass Power
join:2002-10-16
New Milford, CT
| Re: Right about bad effects of P2P companies said by SRFireside :Independent labels have been getting a major push in sales thanks to P2P. There has also been a steady increase with the major labels as well. That's an interesting point. This whole thing could largely be motivated by the record companies' desire to suppress competition from indie labels.
But other than that, I think IP rights need to be protected, otherwise, where is the incentive to produce product?
--
Take care,
Mark & Mary Ann Weiss
Hear my Kurzweil Creations at: »www.dv-clips.com/theater.htm
'»www.mwcomms.com/auctions.htm
'»www.mwcomms.com
'»www.adventuresinanimemusic.com
| |
| | | | | | | |
SRFireside
join:2001-01-19
Houston, TX
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: Right about bad effects of P2P companies said by 91439306 :This whole thing could largely be motivated by the record companies' desire to suppress competition from indie labels. I actually believe that's a major point to the strong opposition against file sharing. Have you noticed the battles they have made on that front are massive compared to their attentions on real bootleggers who sell copies of CD's on the streets? I think it's about control over what you listen to. The major record labels essentially control almost all of the radio stations. MTV is also their mouthpiece. Stores that sell albums are also swayed by the big 5. There is essentially no major outlet for independent labels to showcase talent.
In walks file trading. Now the guy who loves that band in Boston can share the music. Someone grabs some songs and starts loving the band too and jumps all over Amazon or some other outlet to buy the albums. What happens to be giants? Their cookie-cutter formula bands start getting pushed by the wayside for true artists. They lose control. The P2P is more about control than anything else.
I have no problem with IP rights being protected. The thing is P2P isn't hurting those rights. Copyright law is supposed to be about compensating the artist and giving them credit for their work. Sharing music isn't selling it, and nobody is taking credit for the music either. What's the incentive to make music? The same incentive they have now. To make money off of records sold, concerts performed, and merchandise related to them. These avenues have not been stifled by file sharing.
If you look at the sales figures and factor in all the variables you will find that the losses the labels lament over are either false or can easily and logically be related to other factors. In fact the major labels actually sabotaged their own sales numbers (back in 2001 I think) and put the blame squarely on file trading. I don't think IP owners need fear their works being shared. They should focus more on the ones trying to profit from their work without paying due compensation. | |
| | | | | | | | 
weeksben1
Premium
join:2004-02-26
Clarkston, MI
·AT&T Midwest
| I agree with you that file sharing itself is not wrong. Its not file sharing or the software thats causing the problem, but rather people who decide to misuse it.
--
Ben WeeksNetwork AdminNovell CNA NW3.2/4.x/5.xNetwork + Certified | |
| | | | | | | | 
P2P is not theft
@verizon.net
| said by "mweiss":
This whole thing could largely be motivated by the record companies' desire to suppress competition from indie labels.
Gee... ya' think? Of course it is!
The whole "piracy" thing is mostly a red-herring. It's all about the *control* over the distribution of music / movies (which translates to bigger $$$). P2P networks allow for a method of inexpensive electronic distribution, that is not under any sort of centralized control. The record labels are scared stiff that such technology, could make their prime position as a "chokepoint" of distribution, irrelevent, in the long term.
It's not about the production side, nor the quality, it's all about the monopolistic control over the entire industry that brings these companies their profits. If they were forced to fairly compete in a free market, I think that most of them really wouldn't know how to do that, because they haven't had to actually compete in a long time.
The RIAA is like OPEC, a price-fixing cartel. P2P networks, are like a discovery that oil exists everywhere under the surface of the earth, and that there is a new low-cost laser drilling method that can make it available to anyone. | |
| | | | | | Sancus
join:2002-10-17 | It's a good thing that copyright infringement isn't theft then, isn't it? | |
| | | | | | |
TK Junk Mail
Go ahead, make my day
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Margate City, NJ
clubs:
·Comcast
edit:
August 5th, @10:29AM
| Re: Right about bad effects of P2P companies said by Sancus :It's a good thing that copyright infringement isn't theft then, isn't it? It is theft. Copyright infringement is a euphemism for theft and is used by people who don't like to admit they are thieves.
--
My Web Page
Join Red Room Forum | |
| | | | | | | | 
Ken Sohryu
Darkest Days
join:2001-01-07
Chicago, IL | Re: Right about bad effects of P2P companies Unfortunately, it seems that reality disagrees with you. | |
| | | | | | | | |
P2P is not theft
@verizon.net
| Re: Right about bad effects of P2P companies said by "Ken Sohryu":
Unfortunately, it seems that reality disagrees with you.
Happens to a lot of Republicans, I've noticed. They don't seem to care much though - big money "fixes" everything. "Trickle-down reality theory", I think they call it.
Don't like the laws of nature? Change them, through concerted political lobbying! There isn't any law that cannot be bought, for the right price! *That* my friends, is the true essence of American politics today. | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
TK Junk Mail
Go ahead, make my day
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Margate City, NJ
clubs:
·Comcast
| Re: Right about bad effects of P2P companies Libraries, cable companies and other lenders of books, music, videos, etc signed agreements with the copyright holders(or their trade organizations like MPAA and RIAA) allowing them to lend out copies. It is completely legal.
An example is Comcast's financial deal with Rhapsody to allow Comcast users to listen to and save limited numbers of music tracks. And Rhapsody pays the copyright holders for those rights.
P2P users never came to financial agreements with anyone.
--
My Web Page
Join Red Room Forum | |
| | | | | | | | 
tapeloop
Long live Ollie.
Premium
join:2004-06-27
Airstrip One
edit:
August 5th, @10:56AM
| said by TK Junk Mail :said by Sancus :It's a good thing that copyright infringement isn't theft then, isn't it? It is theft. Copyright infringement is a euphemism for theft and is used by people who don't like to admit they are thieves. Why, because you say so, or is there a legal writ defining copyright infringement as synonymous to theft per se? If so I'd like to see it.
Is a "moving violation" a euphemism for "reckless driving"?
Is "manslaughter" a euphemism for "3rd degree murder"? | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
SRFireside
join:2001-01-19
Houston, TX
·RoadRunner Cable
| said by TK Junk Mail :It is theft. Copyright infringement is a euphemism for theft and is used by people who don't like to admit they are thieves. Copyright infringement is not theft. Check U.S. vs. Dowling on that one.
said by TK Junk Mail :Libraries, cable companies and other lenders of books, music, videos, etc signed agreements with the copyright holders(or their trade organizations like MPAA and RIAA) allowing them to lend out copies. There are no agreements made with copyright holders and libraries. Fair Use exemptions in copyright law is what allows them lend books, music and whatnot. Cable companies, being businesses that profit from their content, do have to make licensing agreements. This is the whole point of copyright law. Anytime you profit from someone else's work you have to either get permission do to so or share the money you made, or both. That and making sure artists get credit for their work. Everything else is merely detracting from what copyright law is all about. | |
| | | | | | | | TrueAudio2
join:2005-08-06
| "And they don't have any reason to be upset that I refuse to pay for anything they are in any way associated with, and to
make snide comments about them and their supporters.
Personally, I don't think things like this hurt the MPAA/RIAA, which is why I don't consider people who make/use the
cracking programs public heros. I would think more charitably about people who assassinated them. Do I seem extreme? These
are people who have corrupted our government (even more than it already was). It is hard to think of something bad happening
to them that I would not applaud, unless it adversely affected innocent bystanders. (Unfortunately, all too likely.)
And I have yet to hear any justification for their behavior that holds any water at all. They show neither signs of remorse,
nor even any sign that they realize that they are enemies of humanity.
Calling them enemies of humanity requires a bit of justification, because they're up against some stiff competition, but
basically:
1) they bribe (legally, usually) the legislators
2) they are endeavoring to steal the entire history of human culture, and seal it away under lock and key so that it will
never again be retrievable by anyone without their permission.
3) when they lose interest in any particular piece of culture, they abandon it WITHOUT taking the necessary steps to allow
others to preserve it. And it's all recorded on quickly degradeable media.
4) in addition, they are attempting to crowd out all content that they don't own, so that noone can even discover that it
exists.
They haven't been totally successful, but these are what they are attempting, and for just attempting it I feel that they
are deserving of death. These are crimes against the very essence of what it is to be human. How many folk songs do you know
in a non-proprietary form/b? Generally they make some small change, which entitles them to claim the copyright on that form
of the words. But they don't tell you which pieces they are claiming as proprietary, they claim the whole thing, and unless
you can PROVE that the form you know is public domain, any court will presume that their copyright is valid.
Try to copyright a tune, just try, and you'll get some small flavor of what I mean. Every folk tune around has been
copyrighted, and the copyright doesn't say what part is original, so courts will presume that the entire tune is copyright
by the copyright holder, even though their original contribution may only be a change of three notes in the fourth measure.
(This is second hand, but I believe it to be true. I know that Joan Baez & Vanguard copyrighted minor variations of a
multitude of folk songs...and they don't tell you what they changed from the original.)
I wouldn't regard suing the people who made the tool as wrong if the entire system wasn't so unjust. As it is, I reguard
everything the RIAA/MPAA member companies do as irredeemably wrong."
"...you just can't stop watching their filmsand want everyone else to be able to watch them all, too. You want them so bad
you'll risk being sued or jailed in order to get them. It just gives the industry more publicity when they catch you.
Another example of those evil pirates...As for the DVD Ripper. I suppose it might be useful if you were foolish to waste
money on a product from an industry you profess to hate.
It seems like complaining to the crack dealer about pricing. You want it, you need it, you just don't want to pay for it."
Feel free to send emails to the millions of Americans then that made the wrong decision to go see Star Wars III and plead
with them to not buy the DVD when its released, see how much success you have.
I would go so far as to say that the effort to convince people to boycott that don't even have the wherewithal to start
using the internet for news instead of just Fox or CNN, would be like trying to convert their religion.
My perspective on it stems from an innovation standpoint. From what you have said, the U.S. Supreme Court might as well
never have ruled the way they did in Betamax, because really if you think about it--Fair Use ONLY APPLIES TO DIGITAL/ANALOG
WORKS OF HOLLYWOOD, because Indie artists don't DRM anything for the most part (you still NEED a decryption program for
Independent DVD films however, because CSS is a standard whether anyone likes it or not.
We would not have to boycott the RIAA and MPAA if they stopped monopolizing their industry and commiting real theft through
contracts of indentured servitude to their imprisoned "artists", and played on a level playing field, and gave the consumer
what we want, and stop suing customers.
But in reality, (and this goes for the software industry) many people feel strongly that they have already been robbed, and
thus, thats why there are crackers of software, people tearing apart DRM, because they can, and because its our way of
fighting back. It may not seem like a valid motive to you, but nonetheless millions of people worldwide don't share your
viewpoint.
IMO people SHOULD be able to get modern day entertainment at a reasonable price--if ALL the so-called infringing mechanisms
were eliminated you would still be left with $9.50 movie tickets and so on. And you forget that these organizations are
trying to eliminate independent competition.
The MPAA wants to put a lockdown on all video equipment that could be used to make films, they want to make the equipment
that can be effectively used for this to cost tens of thousands of dollars, and/or require special licensing. Do you really
think they would ever want to see the success of someone like Mel Gibson, come from the next independent filmmaker that only
makes a $50,000 a year salary? Hell no, you have to be a huge movie studio to make films in thier eyes, and approved by
them. This stuff DOES matter because eventually the battle is going to end up at Freedom of Speech--Freedom of Speech
PROTECTS Open Source software, it PROTECTS Encryption--both things that can allow massive illegal activities (for example,
highly sophisticated network tools capable of penetrating DoD computers, Banks, etc, and the latter could protect all
conversation between terrorist groups in the world, using Serpent or TwoFish, would make it impossible for the NSA or CIA to
decrypt messages for over 100 years, BUT thats to damn bad, Freedom of Speech trumps everything else, if it doesn't, we
might as well not even be alive.
In conclusion I will post a message from another site:
"Another shovelful of dirt in the face of liberty's corpse.
The Durants once wrote: "Democracies are but hectic interludes [before dictatorship]."
As we hurtle, head-long, towards dictatorship few seem to even notice.
Woody Allen once said, "Nothing works and nobody cares."
The slow death of freedom, before our passive, apathetic eyes is a fact.
A fact only confirmed by tyranny such as this.
The saddest thing is, we're actually smiling as they fit us for the fetters.
That which a million Americans have died for is slowly evaporating in the strangulation of the bureaucrats and an
out-of-control, despotic judiciary.
Our children will not even know the truncated, facade of liberty that we did. The last people to truly know freedom we in
the US call "the Greatest Generation." They are in their late 70s and 80s now. 18,000 WWII vets a day die. At least they'll
be spared the site of the Dictator whenever he or she actually emerges from the shadows and proclaims his or her right to
rule." | |
| | | | | | | | |
SRFireside
join:2001-01-19
Houston, TX | Re: To: OLD_REPUB wake up call 2.0 Dude. It's just music. Killing record execs isn't the answer. Also proof read before posting. That cut and paste job is not easy to read. | |
| | | | | | Primis1
join:2005-06-13
Coldwater, MI
| quote:
You can download individual tracks legally from many online LEGAL music sources for nominal fees(99cents and less).
Sorry, but this is where that argument falls completely apart.
If I can't hear or listen to the tracks before I buy them... no, it's *not* a fair or reasonable option.
I don't care what the price is. I can try anything else before I buy it, yet I'm not allowed to try music out before I buy it and am supposed to buy it blind and hope for the best? NO!
Let me hear ALL the tracks first in some fashion. Not 15 sec. snippets that may or may not represent what each track is. No excuses of "well then listen to the radio" because that's unreasonable and you may only get 2 tracks off an album that ever get airtime. The whole track, every track, in some fashion.
If you want to let me hear ALL of the all the tracks in some fashion before I can buy them individually... then you're on to something.
If the industry in general would ever clue in to this one obvious thing, I don't think the problem would be anywhere near as great as it is. It's staring them in the face though and they're oblivious, and that's when I start to feel less sorry for them... | |
| | | | | | |
See 7 replies to this post | |
| | | | | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| Old-Repub.. I agree alot with what you say, however, I think you are too blinded by your own makes sometimes.
The ONLY reason 99 cent tracks were introduced, and successfull, was because the people went through a modern day protest and forced them to.
If it weren't for the original napster, we'd still be with $20.00+ sucky CD's out there.
I agree, stealing is wrong. But after many many many years of the cash paying public trying to tell the music industry they were tired of being robbed, and this message being received on deaf ears, the people make no mistakes in their message.
Also, the music industry, if they had their way, would define stealing by "anyone that listens to the song with out paying for the right to do so" including if Lucy bought the song and played it loud enough for her friends in the car to hear too.
Many people in one voice told the music industry it was time for a change or die. Who won again? This statement comes from someone who owns over 800 CDs too, so I think I have certainly demonstrated that I purchase my music.
Another point we disagree with.. 75% of young adults are not without morals... maybe without YOUR morals, but it's pretty shallow for you to say they are without morals.
It's good to know what our government officials think of us today. | |
| | | | 
not quite right
I'D Tell You,But Your Head Would Explode
join:2001-06-23
Puyallup, WA
| said by TK Junk Mail :said by Xizer :Because as we all know, it's worth paying $20 for a CD that has one good song on it. Then don't buy it. But don't steal it either or you are a lowly thief. I'd rather be a thief....Than a TROLL! 
--
Hey...look another dead horse...let's beat it to death. | |
| | | | | | | |
cao1964
join:2000-08-09
Danville, PA | Yes it is;) of course it is, now don't forget you also need to enlist in the Marines and be a good little soldier. | |
| | | 
Speedy8
Premium
join:2002-08-22
Alliance, OH
clubs: | Listen to better bands. Honestly I like 95% of the songs of the bands I listen to. | |
| | 
Minister
join:2002-01-02
Fleeting
| quote:
She is right about bad effects of P2P companies and their policies.
Cite evidence.
quote:
They push their products with the idea that it can be used for stealing music.
Cite examples. | |
| | 
vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Jamaica Plain, MA | Yes, and this is corrupting society's morals as a whole.  | |
| | 
HotRodFoto
Premium
join:2003-04-19
Denver, CO
| said by TK Junk Mail :She is right about bad effects of P2P companies and their policies. P2P software is inherently neutral, but how the main P2P providers advertise their products is hardly neutral. They push their products with the idea that it can be used for stealing music. And that is why the SC ruled against Grokster. So you really won't be successful legislating against the software. But you can legislate how the products are advertised and punish companies that push the illegal uses of the P2P software. My Web PageJoin Red Room Forum Yeah it's about as much stealing as you walking into yer library and checking out a DVD or a CD. Rationale has gone down the shitter in this country
--
All Things Arthttp://kkart.deviantart.com | |
| | | jazzy112
join:2003-12-05
Fargo, ND
| Re: Right about bad effects of P2P companies at least at the library you don't get to keep the product, and it cost you gas or public transportation to get there and back, unless you're a new yorker who likes to walk for miles or live really close.
And yes P2P does advertise itself as free coppyrighted content or others do on their behalf, I found quite a few instances while researching Bit Torrent clients. If you want to try before you buy, download the clips or get off your lazy ass and go to a music store with listening stations, most Wal Marts have them. Yes, now independents and lesser known artist's should still be allowed to flourish on P2P, but mainstream crap that everybody already knows about you can find in any music store.
Think about it people, back before the original napster days while it was still a quality product before the media gave it a whole crapload of free advertising. People had to work to earn sales, now they can put something on the internet and can make money off of it without very much effort. I am not saying the industry is perfect, but you got to realize that most successful artists are millionaires and don't really have a right to whine about not making enough. These days it's all about PR, and just being a talented artist alone doesn't mean you are worth all of that money the record company is getting from your sales. Take a look at all of the American Idol contests, the people with actual talent didn't win, because they'd be harder to promote due to personality or ugliness reasons. | |
| | | | AquaBlaze
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA
| Re: Right about bad effects of P2P companies said by jazzy112 :If you want to try before you buy, download the clips or get off your lazy ass and go to a music store with listening stations, most Wal Marts have them. Oh yeah. 15-30 seconds of a 3 minute track really give me a whole picture to the album.
They need to make the entire CD album avaliable for listening, rather than edited segments. | |
| | | |
guitarzan
Premium
join:2004-05-04
Skytop, PA
·epix
| said by jazzy112 :but you got to realize that most successful artists are millionaires and don't really have a right to whine about not making enough. I don;t think it;s the "millionaire" artists that are complaining and whining.Its the top exec's over at that shithole called the **AA
IMO most artists do not mind P2P except for selloutica err metallica.Any that do, are not going public with it.
Because they know for sure they just bit the hand that feeds them and their musical career will be shit canned in a heartbeat,because that would show they lost touch with their fans.
Proving absolutely without a doubt it was never the music or the message,BUT a bunch of fake phonies,whose intrest was only money not art.In my opinion though I disliked the drug use Jim Morrison& the Doors were the only true artists who lived for music and wanted to really be a poet.Read the book about Morrision:Five to one.Jimi Hendrix i add to this short list as well.
--
Honk if you've never seen an uzi fired from a car window | |
| | | | Drex_CS
join:2005-05-11
canada
| said by jazzy112 :at least at the library you don't get to keep the product, and it cost you gas or public transportation to get there and back, unless you're a new yorker who likes to walk for miles or live really close. Plenty of people keep products from Libraries.. ever not returned a book on time?
It costs gas or public transportation? PLEASE tell me where you get this magical FREE INTERNET and bandwidth from! I want to live in your fairy land! | |
| |
Orwell1984
@fdn.com | P2P services advertise? All of them I have used in the past have been found by word of mouth or news articles(a lot of them here). Gnucleus,Azureus,Ares are my current ones. | |
|
|
|
Senators: P2P Impacts a Child's Morality
Right about bad effects of P2P companies
·
)