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
 ·Comcast
 ·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
Bear patrol must be working like a charm
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
 ·Verizon FIOS
·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
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. | |
| | | 
GOLFnSUN
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·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
| Re: Right about bad effects of P2P companies said by GOLFnSUN :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. | |
| | | | |
GOLFnSUN
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·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
| 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
| 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? | |
| | | | | | |
GOLFnSUN
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
1 edit | 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. | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
GOLFnSUN
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·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
1959. I try to kick the ball. I miss.
Premium
join:2004-06-27
Airstrip One
1 edit | said by GOLFnSUN :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
| said by GOLFnSUN :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 GOLFnSUN :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'm not cool enough to be a Mac person
join:2001-06-23
Puyallup, WA
| said by GOLFnSUN :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 GOLFnSUN :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. | |
| | | | Thaler
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. | |
| |
vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Jamaica Plain, MA
| 1. Libraries do NOT sign agreements with publishers nor do they have to pay for compulsury copyright. They are protected by fair use.
2. Those who say copyright is stealing... I say intellectual property (music, ideas) are not real property. They're legally defined as such, but to equate legal theft with moral theft is misleading. There are many illegal things (marijuana use) which many don't consider immoral. So while infringement may legally constitute theft, I say becaue nothing is being taken from someone else (only copied) it isn't theft. You say po-tay-to, I say po-tah-to, but people can continue doing it because nobody has convinced them it's wrong (because maybe it just isn't) and laws are laws, but bad laws are made to be broken. | |
| |
vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Jamaica Plain, MA | I would say people downloading music are patriots fighting the government's attempt to subvert people's rights in favor of the music industry. | |
| | |
See 7 replies to this post | |
| Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
| question how is downloading really theft when nothing is stolen.
to use my poor example, if you had a Startrek replicator and had it make you a brand new BMW. did you just steal a car? because file sharing is just like that replicator, the orignal is not destroyed or transfered to you but an exact copy is made.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
| | |
vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Jamaica Plain, MA
| Re: Right about bad effects of P2P companies said by Kearnstd :question how is downloading really theft when nothing is stolen. to use my poor example, if you had a Startrek replicator and had it make you a brand new BMW. did you just steal a car? because file sharing is just like that replicator, the orignal is not destroyed or transfered to you but an exact copy is made. And isn't it a scary thought that if someone invented the replicator, it would become illegal (despite it's ability to solve world hunger) because food manufacturers would complain that it's unfrair competition and theft of intellectual property. | |
| | | rgillis70
Premium
join:2002-12-30
Herndon, VA
| said by Kearnstd :question how is downloading really theft when nothing is stolen. to use my poor example, if you had a Startrek replicator and had it make you a brand new BMW. did you just steal a car? because file sharing is just like that replicator, the orignal is not destroyed or transfered to you but an exact copy is made. Not a good comparision:
Ok. So lets say they invent such a thing. The first time the BMW is mass coped BMW will go out of business, as will every other car manufacture.
Bottom line - you can't make perfect copies for free and have people continue to make originals. Business does not work that way. | |
| | | |
TiTeddy
@cable.rogers
| Re: Right about bad effects of P2P companies Bottom line - you can't make perfect copies for free and have people continue to make originals. Business does not work that way. Then perhaps art can go back to being art and not a commercial product to be hyped and sold en mass. Music and movies are not comparable to cars. People wouldn't make cars if there was no money involved. People WILL still make music if there were no money involved, just the same as they would still paint, sculpt and create films.
There would of course, be less of them around, but at least they would be made/performed by people who truly cared about their work. | |
| | 
BobLeBlau
join:2001-11-01
La Crescenta, CA
| Rodin Hood and his Merry men were on a certain level wrong to steal, but they did so because the whole system was was even more wrong.
Downloading copyrighted music is wrong, but not as wrong as politicians like Boxer corrupting copyright law to the point where it is nothing close to its original intention.
Our system is such that corporations can buy laws that favor them, and then we are supposed to think that people that violate these bought laws are morally corrupt? | |
| | | Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA
| Re: Wrong Vs. Wrong said by BobLeBlau :Rodin Hood and his Merry men were on a certain level wrong to steal, but they did so because the whole system was was even more wrong. Downloading copyrighted music is wrong, but not as wrong as politicians like Boxer corrupting copyright law to the point where it is nothing close to its original intention. Our system is such that corporations can buy laws that favor them, and then we are supposed to think that people that violate these bought laws are morally corrupt? "Two wrongs don't make a right...but three rights make a left!"
There is a difference today from the fabled "Robin Hood" era, in that we have a legal and moral way to oppose the industry's methods. Buying used CDs/DVDs net the corrupt industries no gain, yet you have a nice legal copy to call your own.
Again, this is an entertainment industry, not something life-critical like food, water, or shelter. If you don't like the industry's practices and/or prices, then simply don't buy them until they come to you. Exercise your financial muscle. | |
| | Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
| the only effect P2P had on the music industry was to steal away their illegal monopoly on music distrobution and production to the masses. no longer was the small guy anchored to the big record companies unless they wanted air play they could sneak their way up via P2P and the fact the internet can spread news of a good band pretty fast. i predict in about 5-10 years the system as we know it will implode due to "Garage Studios" powered by high end dual core PCs and software packages able to do what once took a multi-million dollar big city studio, and services similar to Itunes that allow artists to directly upload to the system totally bypassing the need for a big record company.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
| |
P2P is not theft
@verizon.net
| said by "Old_Repub":
She is right about bad effects of P2P companies and their policies.
Tow the line... "family values"... tow the line... (repeat chorus)
said by "Old_Repub":
P2P software is inherently neutral, but how the main P2P providers advertise their products is hardly neutral.
The same could be said for big-business tobacco companies. Now *those* are some harmful companies, that *should* be given the major smackdown. Not inherently-neutral technology companies. There are no known "good" uses for cigarettes, especially for still-developing minors.
said by "Old_Repub":
They push their products with the idea that it can be used for stealing music. And that is why the SC ruled against Grokster.
My g** are you ignorant. The S.C. did NOT "rule AGAINST" Grokster, so much as they ruled that Grokster is not IMMUNE to being ruled against. They then remanded the case back down to a lower court, to decide if any actual infringement occurred. But don't let the facts get in the way of presenting a colorful sound byte.
said by "Old_Repub":
But you can legislate how the products are advertised and punish companies that push the illegal uses of the P2P software.
Well, that much I agree with. Certainly, commercial speech (advertisements), are not unrestricted (with respect to the 1st Amendment) - advertisements cannot be decietful, and it stands to reason that one should not be allowed to present advertisements that advocate illegal acts. That would be akin to advertising hunting knifes as effective murder tools. (Analogy to advertising P2P file-sharing software, as an effective copyright-infringement tool.)
Interestingly, I think that a lot of broadband provider / ISP advertisements, as well as retail home-networking gear advertisements, may need to be re-written in light of the 'Grokster' decision. As they more than likely should be. | |
|
cao1964
join:2000-08-09
Danville, PA | Been a politician affets kids morality also We need to make laws that get rid of stupid politicians like this one. | |
| |
See 10 replies to this post | |
wildcards2000
| Parents This goes back to parent involvement and responsibility. | |
| | Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA | Re: Parents said by wildcards2000:
This goes back to parent involvement and responsibility.
This is the United States wildcards2000, we did away with that a while ago. | |
| 
ArchAngel21x
MacFan Pro
Premium
join:2001-10-28
Lincoln, NE | Surprised I am surprised that the RIAA hasn't been screaming about P2P as some lame excuse for Columbia House Music closing up shop. | |
| | Megladon13
join:2003-09-05
Minneapolis, MN | Re: Surprised i just checked, and they're still alive and what seems like well at www.columbiahouse.com | |
| | 
Krytor
Reminiscing The Future
Premium
join:2001-07-07
Indianapolis, IN | They didn't close down. They merged with their competition - BMG Music Club. | |
| | |
ArchAngel21x
MacFan Pro
Premium
join:2001-10-28
Lincoln, NE
·Internet Nebraska
| Re: Surprised said by Krytor :They didn't close down. They merged with their competition - BMG Music Club. Merged? If you go to their Web site, it reads more like they are closing and handing their customers to BMG.
»www.columbiahouse.com/sa/ch/temp···51136334
--
"I quit running 20 years ago. A voice inside my head said, what are you running from dummy? Besides, the only time a man over 50 needs to be huffing and puffing is during sex." - Michael Savage | |
|
getacluefool
thumbs down from:
mrchris
| It's the law, fool !!! Despite the ignorant lead in opine to this story suggesting that lobbied elected officials are wrong for prosecuting illegal P2P activities and video game mfgs., the fact is the activities of scumbag P2P operators who facilitate illegal distribution of copyright protected materials and pornographic games intended for sale to minors, IS A VIOLATION OF LAW.
Denial doesn't change that, so those in DENIAL can expect to find themselves in a prison cell.
And those who bash the legislative and judicial branches of government for making appropriate laws and enforcing them are in serious DENIAL.
Time to get a grip on REALITY folks. | |
| |
See 15 replies to this post | |
brandon
Some truth included in this post.
Premium
join:2003-03-31
Hurley, MS | Well this article isn't even slightly biased. Slant much? | |
| GhostDoggy
join:2005-05-11
Duluth, GA
| And Cigar-Sex is ok Please, let's look deep  into each politician's life, their entire family, etc., and take from it their best examples on morality, ethics, and social philosophy. Should make for some good comedy (hint for a TV reality show). | |
| | the niTz
Premium
join:2004-07-05
Sahuarita, AZ | Re: And Cigar-Sex is ok ROFL i can just imagine it now,
welcome to my hood, these are my pimp cars...:p | |
| | Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA
| Hell, take a look at the video game "scandal" that's going on now with the Hot Coffee GTA mod. An adults-only game that had a hidden porn scene in it is somehow going to rot the minds of children? Whatever.
Apparantly in this country, it must be OK for children to blow a hooker's head off, but not OK to have sex with her. | |
| 
richk_1957
If ..Then..Else
Premium
join:2001-04-11
Minas Tirith
| I expected this.. I just took a little longer than I though to have them think of it & bring it out out.
*sigh*
We've got a few hot items :
• children
Now, we all want what's best for our children, everyone does. That's a standard, natural reaction.
• morality and well-being
Morality is a term that, I believe, should not be even in a politicians vocabulary. It is such an indivudualistic concept. By that I mean is something may be right, according to your morals, but to the person next door, in the next city or state, it can be against their morals. Well-being is a concept that can, but does not have to, mean the same as moral. Well-being can mean physical health, and that can't really change from place to place, morality values can.
• pornography
Now we all don't want our children viewing pornography. I think we can agree on that. When they become adults *that* is a different story. But let's let our children retain their childish inocence as long as they can.
• theft of music
By itself, I think that this phrase has been used so much, it's almost ignored.
By themselves, the words don't really have much impact, but taken together [especially 'children' and 'pornogrphy'], people are going to shout 'something, anything must be done'.
Now, realisticly, how many kids use P2P to search for porn? Probably not many [there is always a few of anything]. I won't go into the other terms... | |
| | WirelessMajr
Premium
join:2005-08-03
College Place, WA | Re: I expected this.. Besides music, porn is probably the second most downloaded thing from p2p. | |
| | nerdboy789
join:2004-06-07
Rigby, ID
| I expected this.. pornography
Now we all don't want our children viewing pornography. I think we can agree on that. When they become adults *that* is a different story. But let's let our children retain their childish inocence as long as they can.
Umm I hate to burst your bubble, but "childish innocence" has not existed for ohh a couple of decades.
Now, while I agree that we all wouldn't want our younger children seeing pornographic material, I think by the time they hit about age 14-15 they probably have already viewed some, whether accidental or intended. Also, by the time they hit that age, I beleive they're mature enough to see a litle skin if they choose to do so. I wouldn't take them to a porn flick, but Lord knows they've already dreamed up some pretty pornographic fantasies of their own by that age.
I'm not advocating that you let them loose totally, but by the time they hit that age I think it's time to start loosening up a bit and letting them make their own decisions.
Openness and acknowledgement of stuff like this is *always* better than sweeping it under the rug or trying to control it IMO.
Oh and just so I stay sort of on topic p2p ROCKS. Especially for those of us that either A)don't have cable or B) are tired of standard SDTV quality broadcasts and want a bit higher resolution Divx encoding  .
Just my $.02 | |
| | |
richk_1957
If ..Then..Else
Premium
join:2001-04-11
Minas Tirith | Re: I expected this.. You've got a point. | |
| voyager6868
join:2003-01-29
Lynnwood, WA
·Bell Sympatico
| Parenting The solution is called "Parenting".
1. No computer or TV in kids' bedrooms.
2. Put the computer in an open area of the house
3. Monitor what your kids do when they're online. Only allow them to use the computer when you're around, or if that's impossible that install some commonly-available software that will monitor what sites the visit (and tell your kids that you're doing this)
4. Don't let them install p2p software.
5. Check their IM lists to make sure only close friends are on.
Why does the US government feel they need to be the parent in this case? Parents need to get with it and start taking care of their kids. | |
| |
See 9 replies to this post | |
clucas001
join:2003-11-11
Mechanicsville, MD
·Metrocast Communic..
| government is doing too much The government can't control all aspects of American life. It's up to the parents to make sure their children are not doing immoral or illegal activities. The problem in today's society is that parents DON'T watch over their kids for various reasons, so the government feels that it must intervene in an issue that it CANNOT CONTROL. Even if ALL p2p networks were shut down, users could still share music with their friends. Example: friend buys CD. Friend lets another friend borrow CD and put music on his pc. That CD then gets distributed to more friends. Or another example: Friend downloads his cd to his hard drive. Then he uploads to other friends on-line. Piracy is not something the government can control. So should it try to control it in order to save its image to the American people and to the world? Or should it convert spending on copyright infringement to programs that do help Americans, like Education or science? | |
|
WesinATL
@turner.com | Just because it's the law doesn't make it right As soon as I start making more money than the artists and record companies I "steal" from, or musicians stop creating music because it's not profitable, I will buy my first CD. | |
| | 
Transmaster
Don't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY
·Qwest.net
| what a bunch of crap So Senator Boxer thinks P2P is destroying the morals of our children. But purchasing this same crap over the counter isn't. In other words the recording industry want us to pay to corrupt our children. As for porno, as long as it isn't scumbag paedophile crap who cares.
--
Low voltage Tech's are wimps, Real tech's use 45 pound filament transformers, plate voltages no less then 2400 volts with at least 10 amp's lighting 8877 triodes...BPL I'm coming to get you. | |
| | gateguy
Premium
join:2001-02-12
Reisterstown, MD | Re: Just because it's the law doesn't make it righ Enjoy your free ride. | |
|
fiction101
@sonic.net |  waste of money and time
| |
| | DONKEYKONG01
join:2003-03-21
Metairie, LA
| Re: waste of money and time said by fiction101:
Have they actually showed any examples of how p2p is affecting childrens morality and well being?
porn existed before p2p and it was spamming all over the net cause everyone is so horny!!!
| |
| PawnProject
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA
| What about the artists? Every time this comes up, it's the same arguments from both sides. But what about the artists? The people that MAKE the music, not the ones who sell it?
Last time I checked (about 6 months ago), 66% of major label recording artists said that p2p does not bother them or hinder their sales. It's not 100%, but it is still the majority. If they don't care that people are sharing their music, then what is the problem? I wish I could think of an example to show how inherently stupid both sides are being, but, alas, this is a relatively unique situation we have here. Oh well, it'll all change in 2009, when the dead walk the earth. And we all know zombies don't care about p2p.... OR DO THEY?!?!?! | |
| | 
IT Guy
Ow, My Balls
Premium
join:2004-07-29
Las Cruces, NM
clubs:
·Comcast
| Re: What about the artists? And they shouldn't care. Most artists make their income off of tour venues, not record sales. For example, Dave Matthews doesn't believe file sharing is hurting him, that's because he tours almost exclusively. And those tickets aren't cheap. labels are just like sea barnacles on the hull of the artists' ship. major labels live off the record sales, but what gives them the right to control that? They didn't create the music, the artist does. I would feel guilty about file trading if I was actually hurting the artist, but I'm just hurting some cocky, repugnant "agent" for the artist. | |
|
guitarzan
Premium
join:2004-05-04
Skytop, PA
·epix
1 edit | Atta Boy Old_Repub: Go get 'em' I think the real issue is being overlooked here.
Senators: P2P Impacts a Child's Morality
Well lobbied senators know what's right
That IMO is the core issue concerning P2P.Not every file down to the last byte is illegal on P2P, as the power brokers hidden behind the scenes, pulling the strings are labelling P2P.Look at the power structure and where the money is changing hands, the backdoor deals,through greed and influence of money.
That is redefining morality of America for their own personnal agenda.The people with the most money will always be able to define morals,whether the morals get moved to the right or in this case severly to the left of left.
"Peer-to-peer file sharing is affecting children's morality
Where the hell is the morality of these cheap politicians,That forgot their oath of office who willingly and proactively allowed themselves to be bought and paid for ?
well-being by giving them access to pornography and encouraging the everyday theft of music,"
Silly me I thought a credit card was needed to access porn sites.F music already,that's just a ploy to disguise the underlying theme.
I guess this extremist left wing nut whacko,bleeding heart liberal,Democratic commie pinko really has no clue,except to follow the herd in excepting bribe money.Talk is cheap,but when money whispers people listen-that goes for all of society.
suggests Senator Barbara Boxer, who last year hauled in $720,410 in campaign contributions from the TV and film industry.
WOW almost 3 quarter of a million dollars.!I wonder how much more was taken under the table.Now that,that cat is out of the bag.I want to see how many democratic party supporters,complain about that.
Ayup looks as if she slept with Orrin Hatch in the same bed.I remember the flames shot out at him.Lets see what happens now.I bet not one peep is heard about a dirty democrat now. It's funny when the shoe is on the other foot meaning a crat.
Looks as if the beloved democrats just took a sh*t on their most vocal supporters.I wonder how hard or how many she blew for that amount of $$$$.Did any go to charity? seems it was all hush hush, where was her morals then or now? That brib err PAC money should have been donated to a worthy cause, the media networks, could have "portrayed her as a champion of the people".
The leftists and media are cozy bed buddies after all.I say that will never happen, because these grandstanding politicians don't grandstand with their own money. I approve this post
P.S. I think the democratic village is missing one of its idiots.
--
Honk if you've never seen an uzi fired from a car window | |
|
aparent
@cwo.com
| Parents be Aware As a parent to a 15yo boy who was caught downloading massive offensive, violent, and age inappropriate materials via P2P, I stand behind Barbara Boxer on this one. There's VERY little that I agree with Boxer on, but she has this one right! BTW, free P2P blockers are available online, I suggest ALL parents install them NOW.
Try »www.blockster.net or »www.akidthaine.com/ before YOUR kid sees WAY too much or, gets into trouble with the law. | |
| |
fiction101
@sonic.net | Re: Parents be Aware How about becoming a better parent first? | |
| | |
guitarzan
Premium
join:2004-05-04
Skytop, PA
·epix
| Re: Parents be Aware said by fiction101:
How about becoming a better parent first?
Duh I didn't think of that.I was to busy admiring barbara boxer for donating her time to such a noble cause.It's 11 o' clock do you know where your children are?
--
Honk if you've never seen an uzi fired from a car window | |
| | | |
Juareze
@202.185.x.x
| Re: Parents be Aware Yep, my 15-yr old is discussing with his college bro back on holiday about the stuff they get to learn about and do in college. They're in the living room btw just finished some quality family time together watching a dvd.
What about your kids? | |
| | | | |
guitarzan
Premium
join:2004-05-04
Skytop, PA
·epix
| Re: Parents be Aware said by Juareze:
What about your kids?
They are learning the Constitution,Bill of Rights,word for word, the difference between democrats and Republicians and politics,including the ENTIRE history of the birth of our nation up to present day events.And in their spare time.
I take them out to the gun range to teach them firearms safety,safe gun handling and also how to improve their marksmanship.They are both starting to race motocross and have other outdoor activites such as fishing camping,hiking.
I weed out any trouble making friends, they may not understand why--one day they will.I take them into work when it's less than 4 hours to finish a job.So they can watch and learn a trade to see how experience is gained.
Schools may teach a variety of things,yet it doesn't teach kids how to face a dog eat dog world facing them after all schooling is over.Ignorance is no excuse,to allow revisionist history be taught by the schools.That would be allowing a big injustice to happen on my part.
I say the hell to goofy video games anymore,no dvd's to watch, only the discovery or the learning channel.Plus the show "cops" so they can see for themselves the intentional dumbing down of America and where hoodlum friend end up.
When permitted to use the net it's for school projects only.Because I watch them like white on rice.I do not leave my kids unattended or unaccounted for ever.
--
Honk if you've never seen an uzi fired from a car window | |
| knifermcstab
join:2004-03-29
Cleveland, OH | filters Some P2P programs have filters, like limewire. | |
| |
Aussiefitz
@net.au
 from:
guitarzan
| Consumer revolution Legality and morality is irrelevant to the argument.
In the capitalist system the consumer and consumerism are crucial. In the recent past large corporations have dictated to consumers what they want, and how, when, and where they are going to get it and how much its worth. And government has backed the corporations. In short, they have sought to control the consumption of music.
Now the internet and specifically P2P has ushered in a consumer revolution, where consumers have been empowered and are beginning to assert control over consumerism. There is no going back, screaming "its the law stupid" and calling hundreds of millions of good people around the world 'thieves' is not going to make a difference.
I don't understand why people do not question the laws they live under, and if you think that democracy somehow makes laws more legitimate then you need to have a hard look at your political system and the role money and lobbyists play in it. I'm not an anarchist, society must have laws to function, but if laws are not regularly reviewed and questioned to keep pace with society, then they lose legitimacy and are worth no more than the paper they are written on. | |
| TrueAudio2
join:2005-08-06
|  TO: Old_Repub "Unnamed Gov't Official"
I quote most of your comments on this topic to set the stage for what I will say subsequent to your quotes: "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."
"Then don't buy it. But don't steal it either or you are a lowly thief."
"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)."
"It is theft. Copyright infringement is a euphemism for theft and is used by people who don't like to admit they are thieves."
"All the legal music services allow you to listen to at least a portion if not all of a track before paying for it and downloading. Have you ever gone to a LEGAL music site?"
--Time for you to WAKE THE HELL UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE OLD_REPUB
SO-CALLED LEGAL MUSIC IS CRIPPLED, DESTROYED GARBAGE POISONED WITH DRM ***CRAP*** THAT INFRINGES UPON ***MY DIGITAL RIGHTS***, I dont listen to ANYTHING
excpet PURE UNADULTERATED 1440 KBPS 16 Bit, 44.1Khz .WAV Files, or FLAC compressed files from pure .wav which is ZERO degradation. I CHALLENGE you to read
the following, and I hope indeed that you are a "Government Official" because then maybe there will be another voice fighting for consumer's digital rights (as per U.S. Supreme Court Sony Betamax of 1984 and the American Home Recording Act.)
This is an older post I made at audioasylum.com, I felt like posting it here today to give you all a technical perspective of the problem with DRM'd CD's, being that everything seems to be going so downhill, this relieves me a bit.
DISCLAIMER, PLEASE READ 1ST: THIS MESSAGE IS TARGETED AGAINST ANY AND ALL COPY CONTROL/COPY PROTECTION COMPANIES WHO SPECIFICALLY CORRUPT MUSIC CD'S. THIS POST IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES TO HELP PRESERVE FAIR USE RIGHTS AND FREEDOM OF CHOICE IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. WHEN I USE THE WORD "YOU", "YOUR" OR "YOUR COMPANY" REMEMBER I AM **NOT** ADDRESSING YOU THE READER, *NOR ADDRESSING OR DIRECTING MY SPEECH AT AUDIOASYLUM.COM*, I AM TALKING TO THESE CD CORRUPTING COMPANIES, AS THIS IS THE LETTER THEY WILL SOON ALL RECEIVE.
The preservation of true audio fidelity and the problem with anti-ripping measures.
As an audiophile for over 10 years, a man who has an immensely deep appreciation for music, a highly technical understanding of the technologies available which bring music reproduction closer to the original event. I am absolutely appalled by the existence of companies such as you, desecrating the pristine unadulterated masterpiece that is the Glass Master. You people *claim* that there is no loss in sound quality. Who are you to think that your subjective opinion is to be believed by me or any free-thinking human beings in the free world? Here’s how simple the principle is: IF THE LASER PASSES OVER YOUR ANTI COPY/ANTI RIPPING MEASURES WHEN READING A CD THEN IT AFFECTS THE SOUND QUALITY WHETHER **YOU** CAN HEAR IT OR NOT. Any foreign information that is picked up by the laser even if “ignored” WILL modulate its power supply, affecting the voltage rails, inducing jitter [Time domain distortion] into the digital signal.
Any digital data read by the laser must be decoded, processed, and interpolated (where applicable-as in CIRC error correction). All of this activity demands that all of the logic chip circuitry assigned to their specific tasks handle the incoming information as they were designed, this requires consistent power. Any irregular or non-standard data read by the laser [Copy Protection algorithms, encryption/decryption etc.] within the incoming digital data stream will stress the CD player’s logic chips to demand irregular, over and under voltage/currents within the power supply to compensate for these extra bits in the DataStream.
Ringing and power supply modulation induced JITTER results—the worst type of distortion that Redbook CD is already plagued with inherently! This can be scientifically proven with sophisticated laboratory equipment, but far more important it is AUDIBLE to anyone who has any degree of hearing acuity, and a high resolution stereo playback system such as me.
Should your “Copy Protection” fail to meet any of the following characteristics, your technology would be violating Philips Redbook CD standard, and will be utterly rejected by many should they ever come across the media, not to mention me informing and educating as many people as possible of your insidious intentions.
1] If your process alters the discs Table of Contents [TOC] in ANY way, you are violating Redbook specification.
2] If your encoding process alters, replaces, damages (causes BIT/BYTE loss or removal/modification to) the C1 or C2 error correction pits and lands used by the CD player/ROM CIRC chip you are violating Redbook CD specification.
3] If C1/C2/CU Analysis of your encoded media by a Plextor Premium Drive using Q-check shows the presence of C2 errors (there should be ZERO, NONE) OR if it shows even ONE CU error [Uncorrectable C2 error] you violating Redbook specification, and the disc itself is a reject, an outright throwaway piece of polycarbonate trash. This analysis is applicable because it represents how the pressed media will be seen by any CD player.
Violating the Redbook CD standard in ANY way would mean: Per Philips Electronics, it is unlawful for this pseudo compact disc to display the Philips logo “COMPACT DISC DIGITAL AUDIO” on any portion of corrupted media or the case. It would also be in your best interest to clearly and visibly denote that your encoded media is copy controlled with said technology.
Should there be a piece of music protected by your technology that I happen upon and already have an unadulterated version of the same album, and I successfully extract tracks of the same songs and compare via wave comparator [i.e. Adobe Audition] and sample by sample comparison [SoundForge 7.0] and find even ONE sample difference that I can conclude through exhaustive tests is the result of your encoding, your process will have FAILED to achieve perfect transparency to the original audio data.
Mind you, the following MAY NOT entirely apply to your company; however pay attention to the principle behind this as that is what matters. You stop the loss of sales not buy engineering super advanced copy controlled music and smashing everyone over the head with LAW and the “DMCA” you do it by CREATING VALUE AND A TRUE INCENTIVE TO BUY A PRODUCT. It’s called: DROP THE PRICE OF CD’S down to $5-$7 per disc AND DROP THE PRICE OF LEGAL INTERNET MUSIC DOWNLOADS TO $0.29 PER SONG INSTEAD OF $0.99 and give the Musician who created the music half. This will sufficiently suppress the number of pirates and will eliminate the need for programming software that violates ANY aspect of consumer fair use rights. This may never happen however, You have all jumped on this new lucrative market, nice fat-cat cushy jobs which you probably tell yourself you’d be damned to give up a $80,000+ a year job for the sake of standing up for and defending these things called “Fair Use” and “Freedom of Choice” In the United States of America. The RIAA is infinite in its gluttonous unmitigated pursuit and lust of obscene profit, power, monopolistic control and unchallengeable, sovereign communist-like reign worldwide. You have along rough road ahead especially with those like me, exercising their First Amendment Freedom of Speech Right, who are not deaf, dumb and blind to technology and CD mastering like you want your consumers to be throughout the world.
If CD’s were an economical value sales would massively increase, because at that price we consumers (customers) would be getting value for our hard earned money, and many would also have more appreciation for the printed lyrics, the band photos, etc. People would say “Hey if I download music, I’m not getting the CD inlet with the lyrics, AND a CD will only cost me 5-7$--would turn a lot of people from STEALING TO BUYING THE MUSIC THE RIAA SO DESPERATELY WANTS TO SELL, NOT TO MENTION SUPERIOR QUALITY TO ANY COMPRESSED DOWNLOAD IN EXISTANCE, such as the laughably ridiculous 48Kbps .wma files the RIAA tries to pass of assuming music aficionado's would gleefully embrace included on Radiohead, Hail to The Thief. (ANY compression is laughable compared to uncompressed PCM 44.1Khz .wav files or CDDA)
It is monumentally saddening and abhorred that the very reason why we have ANY copy protection for audio CD’s has been directly caused by the inflated, asinine prices of CD’s. People at large have been sick of being ass-raped by their prices. In my view widespread peer-to-peer downloading exists partially as revenge on the RIAA to offset the fact millions of us have been ripped off severely over the last two decades. Instead of SOLVING the problem by permanently slashing prices and adding more value—such as throwing in a DVD with every cd package, with music videos (for example). Instead they have created a market for companies like you.
I will outline for you the horrendous effects that Massive Anti-ripping/copy measures will have and are having presently:
1) No new music would be playable (extractable without errors) on the most superior playback format (as far as I am concerned)—the hard drive, giving hardcore audiophiles like me the most unwelcome and unwarranted kick in the ass. I DON’T WASTE TIME WITH COMPRESSED DIGITAL GARBAGE-UPLOADING OR DOWNLOADING FROM THE INTERNET IN THE 1ST PLACE.
2) MILLIONS of Americans and others around the world would be FORCED [STEALING OUR FREEDOM IN A FREE COUNTRY] to use LIMITED brands of hardware [RIAA controlled, distributed, manufactured] for portable digital playback, FORCING people to possibly support companies like Sony (RIAA), First 4 Internet, Macrovision, Sonopress, Verance [directly or indirectly] whom they may have no desire to support—oh wait that’s just too bad for us isn’t it—too bad for you American-looks like you don’t have the FREEDOM of choice. Setting everything up to line your pockets again, in the most conniving, manipulative ways, hoping once again music listeners abroad are all just like a herd of, ignorant, oblivious and pacifistic sheep.
3) Attempting to appease consumers [not solving the real problem] who enjoy digital playback on PC’s MAC’s by developing proprietary media players (i.e. for CDS200) is AGAIN robbing the consumer of their freedom to use their own media player of personal preference. YOU DON’T PRE-DESTINE FOR ME THAT TO PLAY A DISC ON MY PC WHAT SOFTWARE I “MUST” INSTALL, RUN, OR OTHERWISE LOAD ON MY OPERATING SYSTEM TO LISTEN TO THE MUSIC DISC.
4) Corroborating with Microsoft Corporation misinforming the public abroad either out of sheer ignorance, indifference, and/or outright lying that Windows Media Audio files are “High Quality” or in the case of 128Kpbs per Microsoft deemed as “Audiophile quality”. This is akin to proclaiming Analog Cable TV reception is as good as the original master film. This is pathetically ignorant, disingenuous and shameful beyond measure and is without excuse in the 21st century. The RIAA is trying to stupefy the masses into accepting compressed digital as the norm so it will be easier to put a stranglehold on music availability and crippling usage rights in the name of their Golden Calf Idol dubbed “US Copyright Law”. Redbook CD is your Arch enemy, because you are confined to the format (for anti-copy R&D) due to the requirement of playability in all Redbook devices, subtly, however you are trying to intoxicate the public with lies, distractions and appeasement while trying to eradicate Redbook CD from the face of the earth, only to be replaced by horridly sub standard, super-encrypted 128Kbps quality compressed digital JUNK. All with the help of your unethical and bought friends in the US Senate and Congress.
5) Incorporating DISINGENOUS “VALUE-ADDS” within formats such as “Enhanced CD”, deceiving to the customer, thinking we’re getting something better than a Redbook CD, but wait, this type of disc isn’t often capable of undergoing digital audio extraction readily, and if so at the expense of tremendous errors. This so called value being: adding “backstage passes, so-called bonus online content, songs” WHO CARES when the corrupted media itself is a pock-marked battlefield of MASSIVE C1 errors, C2 and CU errors.
For example, Metallica St. Anger, this epitome of sonic degradation contains 25,000 CU errors (uncorrectable data errors) 25,000 C2 errors (severe data errors) and 250,000 C1 errors on the disc, along with up to 55ns of Jitter. The Redbook standard for MAXIMUM allowable jitter present is 35ns. Take a quality Redbook CD by contrast: 0 C2 errors, 0 CU errors and only 6500 C1 errors.
I will do everything in my power to fight to preserve the true fidelity of virgin Redbook CD, to petition honorable and constitutional upholding, freedom fighting United States Senators, encourage US consumers to take your retailers to court when buying pressed media infused with *YOUR* damaging software to demand full refund for a DEFECTIVE PRODUCT. On the other hand I do support artists and companies who use outstanding and significantly more advanced mastering processes than the standard 16bit such as 20 Bit K2 Super Coding [XRCD] by JVC www.xrcd.net. Now here is a Private record label that caters to audiophiles, a record label that CREATES VALUE, A REAL INCENTIVE to buy a CD.
Why do you ask? Because the sophisticated Ultra High End mastering process is so superior to the majority of mastering, and has such negligible jitter (if any). That any copy that could ever be made on a PC would inevitably be of lesser sound quality than the original because of the limitations of even the best cdrw’s electronics in the world (jitter induced during recording), and outright inferior recording mechanism compared against the original JVC XRCD mastering. This is geared toward audiophiles no doubt, and I highly doubt anyone would bother to steal it as they would want the best sound possible and thus would gladly buy the original, I know I have and am more than happy to do so, despite the fact that these CD's with this superior mastering technology are $30.00 USD.
“It’s like slashing the masterpiece paintings, the Van Gogh’s and the Picasso’s, so people won’t steal them.” MUSIC is an art of extremely high degree, one of the greatest expressions of the human soul, the pinnacle of creativity, innovation, love, passion, caring, and devotion. It is part of what has made the world a better place. MUSIC has helped everyone grow, laugh, cry, live, feel full of life, and countless other magnificent positive effects on mankind. To taint the work of the original musician, to forever lose their pure emotional intent of the recording to “protect profit”, is to me the same as the artist not even existing in the 1st place.
Be true to the original mastered recording, corrupting art is destroying the true expression of the musician and forfeiting their painstaking efforts in the studio. If a single “illegal” download is stealing from the artist, YOU are also stealing from BOTH the artist AND the consumer by adding or taking away (corrupting, altering) a single sample or a single bit of audio or error correction data on the original recording.
To end any debates about audio quality before they even begin—It doesn’t matter if no one can hear a difference (there is an audible difference however) with your copy control measures, if the audio information is reproduced generating one trillionth of a second of jitter more, or causing the drive to interpolate one extra sample, or a superimposed proprietary reflective layer or watermark that makes the laser work harder and end up applying just a little bit more error concealment---your technology be damned, you have still failed in terms of absolute fidelity. ABSOLUTE FIDELITY MUST BE THE REFERENCE.
How would you like it if I scratched your $2,000,000 Picasso while you were watching, with a utility knife? A heinous disregard for fine art—but WHAT WOULD YOU CARE IF YOU COULDN’T SEE THE SCRATCH?—the very thought of you KNOWING it was no longer the perfect original would weigh heavily upon you. You would feel shattering disappointment, utterly powerless, that majestic painting, its exquisite rendering of legend, brilliant colors and physical manifestations of masterwork skill, forever scarred, no longer representative of the true original…it was the original, [The artist never intended that scratch to be there] just like the corrupted CD that will never be available to be heard as the artist (whom you *claim* to protect) intended in its true original Philips approved Redbook format EVER AGAIN because of YOU and/or the RIAA.
An extremely concerned American in the free and great United States of America, Audiophile, lover of music
-Arnie
…”it is not true to the original, and thus cannot be considered a high-fidelity reproduction.” –Sam Tellig, Stereophile
“Give me Liberty or Give me Death” -Patrick Henry
»db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=dig ital&n=79255&highlight=Plextor+Premium&r=&ses sion=
Support INDEPENDENT Musicians at Dmusic.com who ENCOURAGE AND ALLOW you to FREELY download their music.
Boycott the RIAA for LIFE, REFUSE TO ACCEPT Compressed digital DRM'd JUNK that wastes your money because it is a HORRIBLE VALUE, the Customer is IN CHARGE, NEVER FORGET THAT.
"You have to remember that most of the people this type of protection is pitched to don't actually know a lot about technology. Business is their game.
If an analyst with a shiny PhD shows you some positive looking statistics and tells you how effective this new protection is at reducing piracy, you're probably going to agree to it unless it's obscenely expensive to implement. If you went into a major record label and proposed an internet distributed format with no protection you'd get shot down the minute you walked into the boardroom.
What they don't seem to realise is the vast majority of people who download music aren't concerned with fidelity. No matter what protection you put on a disc it will be able to be reproduced somehow, even if only by analogue recording. Yes, you will lose quality but as I said to most downloaders this isn't an issue. The end result is the majority of protection schemes do little to reduce piracy but inconvenience those of us who actually pay for our music.
"
»www.boycottriaa.com/article/17700 | |
| | | |
|
|
Senators: P2P Impacts a Child's Morality
Right about bad effects of P2P companies
·
