varigb707
Topic Author
Posts: 1236
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:02 am

U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 4:37 am

posted by Thom Holwerda on Sat 27th Nov 2010 10:46 UTC

""The US is really ramping up its war on intellectual property infringement, a war which I'm sure will be just as successful, cheap and supported by the people as the wars on drugs and terrorism. The US has started seizing the domain names of various websites through ICANN - not because owners of these sites were convicted of anything, but merely because complaints have been filed against them. Anyone want to take a guess how long it will be before the US government blocks WikiLeaks? Update: The blocks function outside of the US too. In other words, the US is forcing its views upon the rest of the world once again.""

Read the full report here : http://www.osnews.com/story/24074/US_Government_Censors_70_Websites

""A war is brewing. If you think body scanners, sexual assault patdowns, censorship laws, and the seizure of property without even a notice are the end, you're sadly mistaken.

It's only the beginning.""
http://i56.tinypic.com/xkrms6.jpg

[Edited 2010-11-28 20:39:45]
First, I said 'hey' and then I said 'now'. "Hey Now!" - Hank K.
 
sccutler
Posts: 5555
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2000 12:16 pm

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 4:53 am

Can you cite one or more of the seized URLs?

I'd dearly love to take a gander at the pleadings in the federal courts which ordered the seizures.
...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
 
futurepilot16
Posts: 1756
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 7:20 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 4:56 am

Two things.

1) What's your point
2) Where did wikileaks come from?

First off, we have absolutely no idea what these websites are. It could be anything from illegal downloading websites, to sites that have received numerous complaints for fraud or viruses. There is no implication that the "Evil" US gov't has any intention of shutting down wiki leaks, or taking away any rights and trying to enslave the people. So relax take a deep breath and take a chill pill, a big one.
"The brave don't live forever, but the cautious don't live at all."
 
TheCommodore
Posts: 3458
Joined: Tue Dec 25, 2007 2:14 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 5:13 am

Quoting varigb707 (Thread starter):
not because owners of these sites were convicted of anything, but merely because complaints have been filed against them.

Wow. Scary stuff indeed

Can't imagine Americans putting up with this for terribly long. Not with the way they view Government controlling things, especially censorship, or if it goes anywhere near breaching the sacred "constitution"

I can hear the screaming from the civil libertarians here already. Yikes !!

It has been said before, at many levels, that one day the internet will be censored, seems like the US has started to more on the subject. Shame, but I suppose it had to happen. It will employ a few more public servants, and there will be more government departments formed under all sorts of wonderful names that will inevitability be abbreviated like everything seems to be these days.

As you say, if you think body scanners etc are a worry..... Then just you wait !  
“At first, they'll only dislike what you say, but the more correct you start sounding the more they'll dislike you.”
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 5:16 am

Intellectual property and Copyright crimes are globes most significant economic crime.

Its long overdue that concerted effort is placed to thwart such crimes that rob billions if not trillions from the pockets of everyone from the smallest performer or artist, to multi-national corporation.

You want to listen to that song, or buy that Gucci bag, then do it the legal and right way!
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
varigb707
Topic Author
Posts: 1236
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:02 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 5:28 am

Quoting sccutler (Reply 1):

Can you cite one or more of the seized URLs?


Nope. The only site i could access was www.torrent-finder.com, which was mentioned on the report.
I did search under http://www.icann.org , but nothing there either.
First, I said 'hey' and then I said 'now'. "Hey Now!" - Hank K.
 
varigb707
Topic Author
Posts: 1236
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:02 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 5:30 am

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 4):
You want to listen to that song,
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 4):
then do it the legal and right way!

Yup..... that's why i only download music from Itunes.
First, I said 'hey' and then I said 'now'. "Hey Now!" - Hank K.
 
gosimeon
Posts: 232
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 12:45 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:30 am

Here's a list of the sites affected:

2009jerseys.com
51607.com
amoyhy.com
b2corder.com
bishoe.com
borntrade.com
borntrade.net
boxedtvseries.com
boxset4less.com
boxsetseries.com
burberryoutletshop.com
cartoon77.com
cheapscarfshop.com
coachoutletfactory.com
dajaz1.com
discountscarvesonsale.com
dvdcollectionsale.com
dvdcollects.com
dvdorderonline.com
dvdprostore.com
dvdscollection.com
dvdsetcollection.com
dvdsetsonline.com
dvdsuperdeal.com
eluxury-outlet.com
getdvdset.com
gofactoryoutlet.com
golfstaring.com
golfwholesale18.com
handbag9.com
handbagcom.com
handbagspop.com
icqshoes.com
ipodnanouk.com
jersey-china.com
jerseyclubhouse.com
jordansbox.com
lifetimereplicas.com
louis-vuitton-outlet-store.com
lv-outlets.com
lv-outlets.net
lv-outletstore.com
massnike.com
merrytimberland.com
mycollects.com
mydreamwatches.com
mygolfwholesale.com
newstylerolex.com
nfljerseysupply.com
nibdvd.com
odvdo.com
oebags.com
onsmash.com
overbestmall.com
rapgodfathers.com
realtimberland.com
rmx4u.com
scarfonlineshop.com
scarfviponsale.com
shawls-store.com
silkscarf-shop.com
silkscarfonsale.com
skyergolf.com
sohob2b.com
sohob2c.com
storeofeast.com
stuff-trade.com
sunglasses-mall.com
sunogolf.com
tbl-sports.com
throwbackguy.com
tiesonsale.com
timberlandlike.com
topabuy.com
torrent-finder.com
usaburberryscarf.com
usaoutlets.net

Where are people gonna buy counterfeit goods now?!  Wow!  

I googled a few of them and there seems to be a common trend here. These sites seemed to be using popular brands to create professional looking sites, entice people to "buy" branded goods off them, and never actually send them any goods.

[Edited 2010-11-29 00:33:32]
 
Zentraedi
Posts: 609
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 6:30 pm

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:36 am

Apparently, this was all just a big hoax that a lot of people fell for it.

Another site pulled the same thing, admitted it and these guys just ripped of the same graphic.

http://torrentfreak.com/fansubbing-s...to-protest-media-reporting-100719/
 
FlyKev
Crew
Posts: 1295
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 5:34 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:25 am

Quoting gosimeon (Reply 7):
Here's a list of the sites affected:

I don't think I would use the term "censor" to describe that list; it is more like a crackdown on copyright infringement. A quick google of some of the sites listed brings up a long list of angry reviews about fakes goods and bad service.

Kev.
The white zone is for immediate loading and unloading of passengers only
 
Severnaya
Posts: 646
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 5:03 pm

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 12:24 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 4):
You want to listen to that song, or buy that Gucci bag, then do it the legal and right way!

That would depend on the country you live in. In the Netherlands and Russia it's not illegal to download songs. Uploading is however.
Всяк глядит, да не всяк видит.
 
NoUFO
Posts: 7397
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 7:40 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 12:52 pm

Quoting FlyKev (Reply 9):
I don't think I would use the term "censor" to describe that list; it is more like a crackdown on copyright infringement.

  

This is not censorship but law enforcement.

Quoting varigb707 (Thread starter):
not because owners of these sites were convicted of anything, but merely because complaints have been filed against them

Your screenshot clearly reads "pursuant to a seizure warrant issued by a United States District Court"

Besides, apparent counterfeit goods can be confiscated on the spot until a judge expesses objections.
I support the right to arm bears
 
777way
Posts: 6470
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 1:38 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 3:00 pm

End times philosophy seems to be coming true on step at a time.
 
User avatar
alberchico
Posts: 2937
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 5:52 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 4:31 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 4):
Intellectual property and Copyright crimes are globes most significant economic crime.

Its long overdue that concerted effort is placed to thwart such crimes that rob billions if not trillions from the pockets of everyone from the smallest performer or artist, to multi-national corporation.

You want to listen to that song, or buy that Gucci bag, then do it the legal and right way!

oh come on !!!

illegal music downloads are a victim less crime , nobody gets hurt.........

[Edited 2010-11-29 08:31:57]
short summary of every jewish holiday: they tried to kill us ,we won , lets eat !
 
futurepilot16
Posts: 1756
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 7:20 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 4:55 pm

Quoting alberchico (Reply 13):

oh come on !!!

illegal music downloads are a victim less crime , nobody gets hurt.........

Except the record companies that lose millions of dollars in piracy. I'm no stranger to illegal music downloads myself, I have 800 songs on my ipod and I think I only paid for 3 songs. But you can't deny the amount of money that is lost to piracy.
"The brave don't live forever, but the cautious don't live at all."
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 5:44 pm

Quoting alberchico (Reply 13):
oh come on !!!
illegal music downloads are a victim less crime , nobody gets hurt.........

If you are naive enough to believe that I have a bridge to sell you.

A dollar at a time, money is stolen from the artist and companies involved each time a song is downloaded illegally.

Simply put, when you download songs without permission, you are stealing. Piracy is a very real threat to the livelihoods of not only artists and record label employees but also thousands of behind the scene folks – from sound engineers and technicians to warehouse workers to store clerks. Piracy undermines the creative future of music by depriving dollars to find and develop new talent and drains millions of dollars in tax revenue from local communities and their residents.

According to IPI (Institute for Policy Innovation) 2009 study, music piracy estimated caused $12.5 billion of economic losses a year, 71,060 U.S. jobs lost, a loss of $2.7 billion in workers' earnings, and a loss of $553 million in tax revenues.

So by all means, enjoy music and other copyrighted media, but do so responsibly, respectfully, and within the law.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
FlyKev
Crew
Posts: 1295
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 5:34 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 6:57 pm

An article from the NY times confirms this removal of certain websites:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/27/technology/27torrent.html

Apparently according to the article a similar thing happened to 7 websites back in June.
Overall, I can;t see the harm in blocking sites which are 100% selling fake goods; especially as more and more people buy online - this way people will not face disappointment while these criminals profit.

Kev.
The white zone is for immediate loading and unloading of passengers only
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 8524
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 6:58 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 15):
Simply put, when you download songs without permission, you are stealing. Piracy is a very real threat to the livelihoods of not only artists and record label employees but also thousands of behind the scene folks – from sound engineers and technicians to warehouse workers to store clerks.

As with anything, moderation is the key. I download compilations of indie rock and such to find new artists - if I like them, I buy their stuff from iTunes. The other stuff I download is mostly to fill out my collection with stuff I've not heard in a long time and the artists I am downloading don't need the money. In any case I've been to my fair share of concerts so it balances out.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
slider
Posts: 6805
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:42 pm

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 7:04 pm

Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 3):
Wow. Scary stuff indeed

Can't imagine Americans putting up with this for terribly long.

We are a nation of laws. It's high time we enforce them. The only issue I have is that there are probably far more pressing and immediate needs for some law enforcement agencies to be concerned about, but as a matter of principle, why should anyone have a problem with actually enforcing the law as long as it's done with due process, supported by reasonable cause and executed in a lawful manner?

Quoting alberchico (Reply 13):
oh come on !!!

illegal music downloads are a victim less crime , nobody gets hurt.........

Have you ever gone to China, Vietnam, or other places that excel in the blatant ripping off of American intellectual property? Beyond intellectual property, REAL property (ie: fake Rolexes, clothes, sports equipment, other merchandise)?

It is hardly victimless---it is the very fruits of their labor, their ingenuity, the work of their creativity, minds and hands being stolen shamelessly. Their livelihoods, in fact.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 8524
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 7:16 pm

Quoting Slider (Reply 18):
It is hardly victimless---it is the very fruits of their labor, their ingenuity, the work of their creativity, minds and hands being stolen shamelessly. Their livelihoods, in fact.

Well yes, but people are too up in arms about the music. If I want a couple Eagles, Springsteen, or Stones songs, I'll download them. They all have tens of millions in the bank, and are not struggling. If they are, it's because they haven't managed their money. An up and coming artist - sure, I'll buy their stuff.

Quoting Slider (Reply 18):
Have you ever gone to China, Vietnam, or other places that excel in the blatant ripping off of American intellectual property? Beyond intellectual property, REAL property (ie: fake Rolexes, clothes, sports equipment, other merchandise)?

That's a whole different animal - they are ripping things off wholesale, supporting an entire small/medium-sized business environment that depends on the distribution of those items.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
Mir
Posts: 19092
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 7:22 pm

Quoting FlyKev (Reply 9):
I don't think I would use the term "censor" to describe that list; it is more like a crackdown on copyright infringement. A quick google of some of the sites listed brings up a long list of angry reviews about fakes goods and bad service.

How is bad service copyright infringement?

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 7:25 pm

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 17):
the artists I am downloading don't need the money.

Its not a matter of needing, the fact is they deserve that money.

That artist and all the parties around them created something which you want to own, and should be compensation for it accordingly.
Anyhow, you maybe don't see it, but of that $0.99 iTunes download, only about 10% goes to the artist directly depending on specific royalty agreements, but the rest to support the broader industry infrastructure employing many thousands of people after Apple takes their cut.

What people are doing is an electronic version of shoplifting while sitting in their own living rooms.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 17):
In any case I've been to my fair share of concerts so it balances out.

Great logic. Its OK to rob the bank as I already paid enough in fees in the past  


We all enjoy and benefit from a vibrant entertainment industry and the only way to ensure long term success is to be mindful of copyrights of other peoples intellectual property and act within the law as consumers.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 8524
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 7:59 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 21):
Anyhow, you maybe don't see it, but of that $0.99 iTunes download, only about 10% goes to the artist directly depending on specific royalty agreements, but the rest to support the broader industry infrastructure employing many thousands of people after Apple takes their cut.

What people are doing is an electronic version of shoplifting while sitting in their own living rooms.

Take it up with Apple then  
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 21):
Its not a matter of needing, the fact is they deserve that money.

For a couple of songs here or there, on CDs I once had but no longer own? Give me a break  
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:10 pm

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 22):
Take it up with Apple then

Nothing to do with Apple, or other means of distribution.

At the end of the day, the artist only gets a sliver of the revenue as there is lots of other cost involved in bringing you that form of entertainment. Music, TV show or movie don't appear out of thin air, but are the results of the investment of millions of dollars and hard work of many thousands.

So thinking and artist might not "need" the money, you also end up robbing the thousand of others involved in the industry at the same time.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 22):
Give me a break

Continue as you wish and justify things, but piracy is piracy, no different than shoplifting.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 8524
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:45 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 23):
Continue as you wish and justify things, but piracy is piracy, no different than shoplifting.

Whatever - to me, they are different, and fortunately, the industry is waking up to the fact that all the internet has done is hasten the day when people would refuse to pay $20 for a CD.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 23):
So thinking and artist might not "need" the money, you also end up robbing the thousand of others involved in the industry at the same time.

If you ask a lot of the artists, half those people are just in the way anyhow. That's why a lot of artists have started selling their own wares directly - to cut out all the middle men who shave off their dues.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
PlymSpotter
Posts: 9986
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 7:32 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 9:17 pm

This really isn't news to me, anyone else who regularly uses Watch Movies (plus associated sites) will also know that their main page is often taken over with that logo once or twice a day. But you can bet it'll be back a few minutes later with another address, and the process goes on and on repeating.

The irony here is that most of the movies I watch I either have, or I will then go out and buy to watch properly, as the uploaded content is always always of a shocking quality.


Dan  
...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
 
photopilot
Posts: 3061
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2002 11:16 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 9:23 pm

Quoting futurepilot16 (Reply 14):
Except the record companies that lose millions of dollars in piracy. I'm no stranger to illegal music downloads myself, I have 800 songs on my ipod and I think I only paid for 3 songs. But you can't deny the amount of money that is lost to piracy.
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 15):
A dollar at a time, money is stolen from the artist and companies involved each time a song is downloaded illegally.

Here's my problem with this whole download issue, granted, from my Canadian perspective.

I USED to never download a single thing. But I am a digital photographer and have bought thousands of CD's and DVD's to copy my digital image files onto. Sometime only a single file per disc if I have to send a copy to someone. Then some idiot from the recording industry cried foul because these BLANK Cd's and DVD's could also be used to write downloaded music to. So the Canadian Gov't IMPOSED a tax on blank media and this tax is DIRECTLY TURNED OVER TO THE RECORDING INDUSTRY to pay for alleged downloading. And all of us who used to legitimately use that same blank media, now have our money stolen by the recording industry without regard to the end use of those blank CD's and DVD's. In their eyes, I'm guilty just because I use blank recordable media.

So from that very instant, I now freely download whatever I want from the internet without regard to copyright. Because I've ALREADY PAID for that privledge every time I buy a CD or DVD. If the recording industry is going to make me pay for their product, whether I use it or not, I sure as heck might as well use it.

So a hearty THANK YOU to the Recording Industry who have so generously granted me the right (by payment) of downloading whatever I want from the internet. I'm sure your artists are pleased with this arrangement.
 
Fly2HMO
Posts: 7207
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2004 12:14 pm

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 9:40 pm

I'll just leave this here:

http://youbentmywookie.com/wookie/gallery/0210_wtf/pirated-dvd-real-dvd.jpg
 
slider
Posts: 6805
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:42 pm

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 9:44 pm

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 19):
Well yes, but people are too up in arms about the music. If I want a couple Eagles, Springsteen, or Stones songs, I'll download them. They all have tens of millions in the bank, and are not struggling. If they are, it's because they haven't managed their money. An up and coming artist - sure, I'll buy their stuff.

Oh, I get it. So if the artist is wealthy—in your loose determination—you’ll rip them off, but an “up and coming” artist whose personal financial profile may not be as flush somehow is more “worthy” of your PAID patronage? Karl Marx couldn’t have said that any better. Look, Don Henley is a first class douche and a half. But I’d no sooner steal his property than some garage band that’s scraping by in a bus trying to get weekend gigs and breaking out. Aaron, do you not understand that music is not just a commodity? While we all may have different music tastes, it’s their soulcraft. Not just livelihood but their labor—I firmly believe that if you steal from some musician, it’s no different than stealing the wallet of some other normal shmuck after he cashes his paycheck. I’m glad that you are the self-appointed morality police though….geez.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 19):
That's a whole different animal - they are ripping things off wholesale, supporting an entire small/medium-sized business environment that depends on the distribution of those items.

So you’re trying to rationalize stealing and theft by saying because their theft supports a cottage industry, it’s OK? It’s NO different, man! It’s stealing. If anything, it’s WORSE because it’s an orchestrated, sanctioned and permitted theft ring. Intellectual property laws thankfully are really beefing up and prosecution has grown a great deal.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 8524
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 10:03 pm

Quoting Slider (Reply 28):
you’ll rip them off, but an “up and coming” artist whose personal financial profile may not be as flush somehow is more “worthy” of your PAID patronage?

It's not about that - it's simply that I'd rather spend that money on my kids or in a local restaurant and contribute to the local economy than send it off to the recording industry. There's only so much to go around. When they come to town I'd have no problem saving for a couple months and dropping $200 for a ticket if its someone whose music I really enjoy.

My friends and I used to record all our favorite songs from the radio and make mixes on casette when we were kids - no different.

Don't give me that "the law is the law is the law" crap unless you can prove you've never gone 10 miles over the limit.

Quoting Slider (Reply 28):
Not just livelihood but their labor—I firmly believe that if you steal from some musician, it’s no different than stealing the wallet of some other normal shmuck after he cashes his paycheck. I’m glad that you are the self-appointed morality police though….geez.

It's no different than anything else - everything is a value judgment as a consumer. I choose not to patronize Wal*Mart unless absolutely necessary because I dislike the lowest common denominator business model they embody - but that doesn't mean I wouldn't use something that had previously been sold in their store. I go out of my way to seek products that are made in USA, or otherwise sourced from companies that I like and/or conduct business in a way I find admirable. What this is actually about is what you do or do not choose to spend money on - period.

Quoting Fly2HMO (Reply 27):
I'll just leave this here

That's a big part of it too, for sure.

[Edited 2010-11-29 14:05:49]
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
RottenRay
Posts: 217
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 1:43 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 10:26 pm

Censorship?! Really!?

So one form of freedom of expression is to steal from someone and distribute those stolen goods to the rest of the world?


Boy, that's ripe. Ripe-smelling, an odor like anarchy.




Quoting 777way (Reply 12):
End times philosophy seems to be coming true on step at a time.


Because a government is doing something about protecting copyrighted material?

How would you feel if you created something, and it was stolen... Oh, never mind. Fat chance.




Quoting photopilot (Reply 26):
So the Canadian Gov't IMPOSED a tax on blank media and this tax is DIRECTLY TURNED OVER TO THE RECORDING INDUSTRY to pay for alleged downloading.


I agree, that's bad, but it's sort of not-related to this "censorship" issue.




One of the reasons recorded media has been increasing in price instead of decreasing in price is that the industry has been losing volume - which means they must spread the backend and production costs over fewer units.

They've been losing volume because of "consumers" who simply download from P2P or torrent sites.

It's theft.

It's not like you bought the DVD or CD, copied it, kept that copy, and then sold the original to a used disc store - which is bad enough.

YOU NEVER EVEN BOUGHT IT IN THE FIRST PLACE!





Quoting LAXintl (Reply 23):
So thinking and artist might not "need" the money, you also end up robbing the thousand of others involved in the industry at the same time.


Like the people who own music and video stores, the people who work in those stores, or work for distributorships, and everything else along the path from their mouths to our ears.

Shameful, and selfish.

The people who think this is censorship are clearly those who think life owes them something, and that just by being born they are entitled to free stuff at everyone else's expense.

I've got bad news for you, cupcake.



RR
 
NoUFO
Posts: 7397
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 7:40 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 10:50 pm

Quoting Slider (Reply 28):
Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 19):
Well yes, but people are too up in arms about the music. If I want a couple Eagles, Springsteen, or Stones songs, I'll download them. They all have tens of millions in the bank, and are not struggling. If they are, it's because they haven't managed their money. An up and coming artist - sure, I'll buy their stuff.

Oh, I get it. So if the artist is wealthy—in your loose determination—you’ll rip them off, but an “up and coming” artist whose personal financial profile may not be as flush somehow is more “worthy” of your PAID patronage? Karl Marx couldn’t have said that any better.

Not only that.
If Aaron747 *really* thinks that any up-and-coming artists would get a contract and money from the recording industry if there weren't "blockbusters" like Springsteen or the Stones around, he's pretty damn naive.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 29):
My friends and I used to record all our favorite songs from the radio and make mixes on casette when we were kids - no different.

No, it is not the same.
1) You never shared a song with tens of thousand or millions of friends. Private copies are still allowed.
2) with your blank cassette tapes you paid a fee to the recording industry
3) It is not the same quality

Quoting photopilot (Reply 26):
a and this tax is DIRECTLY TURNED OVER TO THE RECORDING INDUSTRY to pay for alleged downloading.

No, those fees cover potential private copies, not the download from illegal sources. If you need a second book or a second car, you need to buy it, and you won't get a discount. If you want a copy of a song or record, you can go ahead and pay very little to nothing.
I support the right to arm bears
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 8524
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:12 pm

Quoting rottenray (Reply 30):
It's not like you bought the DVD or CD, copied it, kept that copy, and then sold the original to a used disc store - which is bad enough.

Well that's exactly what I did from high school and for years after - and I don't know why that's bad. There is a used market for everything. People shouldn't sell their cars or clothes anymore? Come on.

Quoting rottenray (Reply 30):
Like the people who own music and video stores, the people who work in those stores, or work for distributorships, and everything else along the path from their mouths to our ears.

Don't give me that "it's about the jobs" malarkey - if that's the case, you'd be calling for Wal*Mart and amazon to be out of business as well. Face it, internet commerce is changing everything before our very eyes. We'll be lucky if there but a few physical stores left in 50 years. Businesses need to adapt or they'll be history - that goes for the record industry too.

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 31):
If Aaron747 *really* thinks that any up-and-coming artists would get a contract and money from the recording industry if there weren't "blockbusters" like Springsteen or the Stones around, he's pretty damn naive.

Why should they sign with a recording company, that will eek away at their earnings with small royalties and lawyers, exert controls on their creativity, until they are "big" enough to break free or otherwise buy themselves out? Thanks to the internet, they can now develop a following, and sustain themselves through direct sales and advertising of their shows/events through social media. This will be another model for success going forward. Bands like the Yeah Yeah Yeahs would be nowhere today without the following they developed first on the Internet - that ended up leading them to contract offers from the likes of Interscope.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
Yellowstone
Posts: 2821
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 3:32 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:36 pm

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 31):
No, those fees cover potential private copies, not the download from illegal sources. If you need a second book or a second car, you need to buy it, and you won't get a discount. If you want a copy of a song or record, you can go ahead and pay very little to nothing.

The fees don't cover private copies, unless Canadian copyright law is significantly different from US law. If I buy a CD or a track on iTunes, under US copyright law, I'm legally entitled to make as many copies of that song as I see fit, as long as they're for personal use. I can make copies for my laptop, desktop, car, iPod, and a whole stack of backups, and I cannot be made to pay a single cent more. It's only when someone else wants to use one of those copies that copyright law steps in.

Quoting rottenray (Reply 30):
Like the people who own music and video stores, the people who work in those stores, or work for distributorships, and everything else along the path from their mouths to our ears.

A whole industry that's going to be gone in 15 years with or without illegal downloads. Internet distribution of music is just too cost effective for physical media to survive. No CDs equals no music stores and no distribution chains.

Quoting rottenray (Reply 30):
YOU NEVER EVEN BOUGHT IT IN THE FIRST PLACE!

As Aaron747 pointed out, untrue in many cases. If I've bought a CD in the past, but it got lost or damaged, I still own the rights to a copy of the songs on that CD. Hence I don't feel any moral obligation to buy the song again.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 32):
Why should they sign with a recording company, that will eek away at their earnings with small royalties and lawyers, exert controls on their creativity, until they are "big" enough to break free or otherwise buy themselves out?

Bingo! Sorry, music industry, record labels will be dead in 20 years. Argue about the morality all you want, but the reality of the situation is that the internet gives all the power to the consumer. People will pay what they want for the music they like, and there's very little the music industry can do to stop that. Better for the artists to face facts and make good music that attracts lifelong fans who want the artists to keep making music - and so pay them money, whether for CDs, or merchandise, or live shows, or whatever. All of this can be done independently of a label.

Quoting Slider (Reply 28):
I firmly believe that if you steal from some musician, it’s no different than stealing the wallet of some other normal shmuck after he cashes his paycheck.

Problems with that logic...
- The marginal cost of a digital track is zero. It cost nothing to generate that copy, and I have not permanently taken anything from the artist by making it. That's not the case with stealing a wallet - there's one wallet, and one set of cash, and my having it means the other guy doesn't.
- The vast majority of downloaders, if forced to pay full price for music, would simply stop listening to that music. A million illegally downloaded tracks does not equate to a million lost sales. Not to mention, some considerable fraction of those illegal downloads will result in the downloader going out and buying the CD or going to the show of the group he likes, but wouldn't have heard if not for the download. Many artists (especially the younger, struggling artists whom one would assume would be the first to be pushed out by collapsing music industry revenues) have concluded that they earn more money by letting people share their music than they would otherwise.
Hydrogen is an odorless, colorless gas which, given enough time, turns into people.
 
nwadeicer
Posts: 169
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 3:17 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:57 pm

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 19):
Well yes, but people are too up in arms about the music. If I want a couple Eagles, Springsteen, or Stones songs, I'll download them. They all have tens of millions in the bank, and are not struggling. If they are, it's because they haven't managed their money. An up and coming artist - sure, I'll buy their stuff.

So you are a thief, classic. You try to justify your stealing by saying the above. How do you know how much money these people have and what is it to you how they spend their money. They made the songs, it is their intellectually property and you can't afford 99 pennies to purchase a song? You need to ask your lawyer bosses for a raise.

Speaking of lawyers, so you are a legal secretary with a law firm that specializes in workers comp fraud. People who steal from companies or other people. And you steal from other people and companies.. The irony in this 
I miss the Red Tail
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 8524
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Tue Nov 30, 2010 12:25 am

Quoting NWAdeicer (Reply 34):
How do you know how much money these people have

Easy to look up.

Quoting NWAdeicer (Reply 34):
They made the songs, it is their intellectually property and you can't afford 99 pennies to purchase a song?

If I already owned the CD at one point or another, who cares? My digital collection largely represents replenishing what I once had as a teen and college student.

Quoting NWAdeicer (Reply 34):
You need to ask your lawyer bosses for a raise.

They pay me fine, thanks  
Quoting NWAdeicer (Reply 34):
People who steal from companies or other people. And you steal from other people and companies.. The irony in this

No irony at all. I would never claim I can't work when I very well could, or let an MD without any ethics convince me I was disabled all in the name of getting $350K from government or insurance companies I never earned.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
nwadeicer
Posts: 169
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 3:17 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Tue Nov 30, 2010 12:52 am

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 35):
If I already owned the CD at one point or another, who cares? My digital collection largely represents replenishing what I once had as a teen and college student.

So that gives you carte blanche to steal whatever songs you feel you need from them? That's BS and you know it, quit trying to justify the fact that you are stealing from the artist. So tell me this. You went to college, probably bought a sweatshirt or some article of clothing from your college. Over time that piece of clothing is gone, now you want to relive your glory days at such and such community college. You should have no problem walking into the student store and walking out with a shirt, without paying of course correct? I mean you owned that piece of clothing before and i'm sure such and such community college is raking in some serious cash. So tell me, wheres the difference.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 35):
No irony at all. I would never claim I can't work when I very well could, or let an MD without any ethics convince me I was disabled all in the name of getting $350K from government or insurance companies I never earned.

Where is your defense in this statement. Your bosses go after people who steal, and you steal from people. That is the bottom line. Don't pull this "ethical" crap, it's stealing, plan and simple. You illegally download songs without paying for them makes you no different. The key word is STEALING, you want these songs then pay for them.
I miss the Red Tail
 
RottenRay
Posts: 217
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 1:43 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Tue Nov 30, 2010 1:55 am

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 32):
Well that's exactly what I did from high school and for years after - and I don't know why that's bad. There is a used market for everything. People shouldn't sell their cars or clothes anymore? Come on.


Aaron, you misunderstood... People SHOULD sell cars, clothes, and discs.

The problem is that most folks don't sell discs anymore. That's because a lot of folks DON'T have the discs to sell.

And that's the ailment. NOBODY is buying, they're just downloading.





Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 32):
Don't give me that "it's about the jobs" malarkey - if that's the case, you'd be calling for Wal*Mart and amazon to be out of business as well. Face it, internet commerce is changing everything before our very eyes. We'll be lucky if there but a few physical stores left in 50 years. Businesses need to adapt or they'll be history - that goes for the record industry too.


It IS about the jobs.

There is pressure from mega-merchants like Wal*mart. There is pressure from the internet.

But, at the end of the day, WHO DO YOU THINK ACTUALLY GETS QUALITY PERFORMANCE on permanent media?

It's the rest of the little people - those totally cut out when you stop buying their product and start stealing it.



One of the reasons music stinks as bad as it does today is that we don't have major labels actively promoting, grooming, and helping new artists.

When you look at the amount of $$ various labels have spent on helping acts like the Stones, et al, it doesn't seem worth it - until you look at the fact that the music is still here.

We're moving to a "no investment, no reward" mode. The farther we push against the traditional star-maker system, the fewer stars we'll get.

That's not building a legacy.



Cheers!
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 8524
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Tue Nov 30, 2010 2:05 am

Quoting rottenray (Reply 40):
And that's the ailment. NOBODY is buying, they're just downloading.

The only alternative is to restrict activity on the Internet - and since that won't happen, there is really no alternative.

Quoting rottenray (Reply 40):
It's the rest of the little people - those totally cut out when you stop buying their product and start stealing it.

I don't see why I have to feel sorry for people working in a record store or working admin for an A&R exec. They know the industry is changing and aren't adapting. Part of responsibility for maintaining gainful employment is staying ahead of the tide.

Quoting rottenray (Reply 40):
One of the reasons music stinks as bad as it does today is that we don't have major labels actively promoting, grooming, and helping new artists.

As I said I routinely scour the indie rounds via downloads and am finding fantastic music all the time. Just because there's no commercial label pushing it doesn't mean the music is crap. If anything it's a lot of the big-label stuff that is just junk today.

Quoting rottenray (Reply 40):
When you look at the amount of $$ various labels have spent on helping acts like the Stones, et al, it doesn't seem worth it - until you look at the fact that the music is still here.

They're still here because they've never stopped touring and haven't broken up. Not to mention they bought out their contracts early on and started their own eponymous label. No different than U2 buying a large share of Island, etc. I'd say generally the groups with longevity either a) did something so noteworthy musically that they are still looked to for inspiration or b) saw the writing on the wall and took control of their own destiny early on or c) both.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
RottenRay
Posts: 217
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 1:43 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Tue Nov 30, 2010 3:44 am

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 43):
The only alternative is to restrict activity on the Internet - and since that won't happen, there is really no alternative.


So, you're saying you just can't help yourself from stealing unless the g'vmint steps in and acts like Big Brother.



Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 43):
I don't see why I have to feel sorry for people working in a record store or working admin for an A&R exec.


It's not a case of feeling sorry for them.

If you don't like their product, then don't buy it.

BUT DON'T STEAL IT, EITHER.

That's the point you're missing, either through youth and being naive, or deliberately because you like getting stuff you should pay for for free.




Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 43):
I'd say generally the groups with longevity either a) did something so noteworthy musically


That they were PAID for, once they had created it, which inspired them to continue. The same is true for numerous talents.

Face it, there are few lasting musicians today.



I'm not picking on you personally, but I am picking on your concept of how life works.

You need to pay the muse. If you don't then you're leaving it up to chance.

What kind of classics are the current crop going to produce? Will any "haircut" like Justin Beiber ever go on to become a serious entertainer?

Is this what your generation wants?

A continuous flow of one-hit wonders, with no talent or backing?

You can get that at your local state fair.

I miss the days when musicians had a chance to develop a career, and produce a folio of work.


Raggamuffins simply stealing one's hard work doesn't help, either, and I certainly hope you learn better ethics in the future.


Cheers!
RR
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 8524
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Tue Nov 30, 2010 3:58 am

Quoting rottenray (Reply 50):

Is this what your generation wants?

I wouldn't know - at least 40% of my collection is pre-1980.

Quoting rottenray (Reply 50):
You need to pay the muse. If you don't then you're leaving it up to chance.

Certainly food for thought, but there's not only one way to pay.

Quoting rottenray (Reply 50):
That's the point you're missing, either through youth and being naive, or deliberately because you like getting stuff you should pay for for free.

I just don't see it that way - I've already paid for it in some way or another - and through continuing to vouch for the work of others (i.e. "you've gotta see these guys live"), are contributing to their success.

Case in point: was a big U2 / Pearl Jam / STP / Soundgarden fan as a teenager, bought all their CDs, lots of t-shirts, went to about 2-3 shows on each tour, subscribed to the fan clubs, all that stuff. Lost touch with a lot of it over time and recently went and replenished my collections over the last few years. Will still go to the shows, buy the gear/DVDs, but will not pay for the music again. I already did that once. Just don't see the point.

Quoting rottenray (Reply 50):
So, you're saying you just can't help yourself from stealing unless the g'vmint steps in and acts like Big Brother.

No, I'm making a larger point about an otherwise resourceful industry's glacial response to changing influences on their product.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
Maverick623
Posts: 4632
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 9:13 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Tue Nov 30, 2010 10:12 am

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 21):


What people are doing is an electronic version of shoplifting

While I have misgivings about downloading certain unauthorized material, that argument is complete and utter BS.

When you steal something from a physical store/record shop, that shop loses out on both the sale of that item and in higher insurance costs, plus the artist who doesn't get royalties. Then the shop may have to lay off people or close down completely, which hurts many more people.

When you torrent something, only the artist loses something. I couldn't care less about the RIAA and other trade groups, because they're basically a bunch of thugs themselves.

It's wrong, yes, but nowhere near the level of actual shoplifting.
"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
 
Yellowstone
Posts: 2821
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 3:32 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Tue Nov 30, 2010 10:51 am

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 62):
When you torrent something, only the artist loses something.

And the artist only loses something in a small fraction of cases. You can't say that an illegal download cost you a sale if the downloader wouldn't have bought the track at full price, or if the downloader is inspired to buy your work/attend your concerts by listening to the free track.
Hydrogen is an odorless, colorless gas which, given enough time, turns into people.
 
Maverick623
Posts: 4632
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 9:13 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Tue Nov 30, 2010 11:07 am

Quoting Yellowstone (Reply 63):

And the artist only loses something in a small fraction of cases. You can't say that an illegal download cost you a sale if the downloader wouldn't have bought the track at full price, or if the downloader is inspired to buy your work/attend your concerts by listening to the free track.

True, and we can argue back and forth about the moralism of it all day long. I do it with myself frequently, as I have friends that are in bands.

At the end of the day, to respond to the topic at hand, the laws against piracy are not inherently unconstitutional, so I don't lose any sleep over websites getting shut down under those laws.
"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
 
Starbuk7
Posts: 555
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 7:09 pm

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Tue Nov 30, 2010 2:58 pm

I tend to agree with Aaron747 on this one, when I was younger I owned this music on 8-tracks, those went out of style and we all bought the cassettes, now those are gone and I'll be damned if I am buying them again on CD. They got their money from a lot of us on more than one occasion for the same music so why should we continue to go out and re-purchase the music every time the meduim changes.
 
slider
Posts: 6805
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:42 pm

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Tue Nov 30, 2010 4:05 pm

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 32):
Thanks to the internet, they can now develop a following, and sustain themselves through direct sales and advertising of their shows/events through social media. This will be another model for success going forward. Bands like the Yeah Yeah Yeahs would be nowhere today without the following they developed first on the Internet - that ended up leading them to contract offers from the likes of Interscope.

You just defeated your own argument. The Yeah yeah Yeahs might NOT still be anywhere if people like you STEAL THEIR MUSIC!

And actually, most artists nowadays are making the brunt of their income through touring and live concerts, not record deals. Royalty income varies, and those figures are quite divergent.

I agree with you about the new model, but then you essentially say you're going to download their shit for free anyhow, thus destroying that band's whole income stream and "new economy" work.
 
san747
Posts: 4344
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 10:03 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Tue Nov 30, 2010 5:02 pm

Quoting futurepilot16 (Reply 14):

Except the record companies that lose millions of dollars in piracy.

Boo hoo. Like Aaron747 said, these companies are either completely oblivious or completely unwilling to acknowledge that the market has changed and have done nothing to adapt to it.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 15):

If you are naive enough to believe that I have a bridge to sell you.

A dollar at a time, money is stolen from the artist and companies involved each time a song is downloaded illegally.

I have 12 Lady Gaga tracks on my iTunes, which I did not pay for. "Loss"= ~$12. I went to her concert last December in San Diego at considerable cost, about $85.

Most artists today make the vast majority of their income on live shows, not album/track sales or royalties, and I know this personally as the son of a musician who has been playing and writing for 40 years. My father makes maybe $100 a year on royalties from his songs (mainly used on TV) and hasn't sold more than a few hundred copies of each of his 4 albums, but he makes much more than that doing gigs, mostly in the Northeast.

Quoting Slider (Reply 28):
Aaron, do you not understand that music is not just a commodity? While we all may have different music tastes, it’s their soulcraft. Not just livelihood but their labor—I firmly believe that if you steal from some musician, it’s no different than stealing the wallet of some other normal shmuck after he cashes his paycheck. I’m glad that you are the self-appointed morality police though….geez.

As someone who has firsthand experience with both sides of this issue, I have to tell you that, though I understand where you're coming from, you're just wrong in this case. This obsession with getting paid is exactly what's wrong with music today. A true musician does his/her "soulcraft," as you put it, because of their love for the music. Being paid should not be the top priority for an artist in any media. If that's your top priority, you aren't an artist, you're an entrepreneur. If you as an artist can make a living off of your art, great, but it shouldn't be the reason you create.

Quoting Yellowstone (Reply 33):

- The vast majority of downloaders, if forced to pay full price for music, would simply stop listening to that music. A million illegally downloaded tracks does not equate to a million lost sales. Not to mention, some considerable fraction of those illegal downloads will result in the downloader going out and buying the CD or going to the show of the group he likes, but wouldn't have heard if not for the download. Many artists (especially the younger, struggling artists whom one would assume would be the first to be pushed out by collapsing music industry revenues) have concluded that they earn more money by letting people share their music than they would otherwise.

Bingo. How is an up and coming band supposed to develop a fan base? Many bands do free gigs and give away demos and even their full albums in the beginning, is that stealing? The last sentence is much truer than most people realize. Until you have people listening, your band will be making NOTHING. Once you reach that critical mass of fan base size that many bands don't reach, then meaningful income can start to become a reality. But that fanbase doesn't just magically appear, and most people aren't going to pay for something they know absolutely nothing about.

Would you buy a car that the salesman gave you literally zero information on? Of course not, you'd want to test drive, or at least SEE the car first.

Quoting rottenray (Reply 37):

We're moving to a "no investment, no reward" mode. The farther we push against the traditional star-maker system, the fewer stars we'll get.

Good. We don't need "stars," we need legitimate artists.

Quoting rottenray (Reply 39):

You need to pay the muse. If you don't then you're leaving it up to chance.

Actually the opposite. When the consumer decides who they're willing to pay for their music, you're letting the free market run its course. Or are you saying all artists deserve to be "financially successful," no matter the quality of their music?
Scotty doesn't know...
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 8524
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Tue Nov 30, 2010 6:09 pm

Quoting Slider (Reply 45):

I agree with you about the new model, but then you essentially say you're going to download their shit for free anyhow, thus destroying that band's whole income stream and "new economy" work.

Irrelevant. I found out about the YYY's through the internet and downloading their stuff - yes, for free. I then turned around and bought concert tickets and t-shirts for all three of their shows that came my way while living in Japan. Now they've got a fan for life, and I bought their most recent album on iTunes, regardless of the misgivings I had about their having gone big label. So basically you're 100% inaccurate to say I proved my own argument wrong.

Quoting san747 (Reply 46):
When the consumer decides who they're willing to pay for their music, you're letting the free market run its course. Or are you saying all artists deserve to be "financially successful," no matter the quality of their music?

  
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
slider
Posts: 6805
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:42 pm

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Tue Nov 30, 2010 6:57 pm

Quoting san747 (Reply 46):
A true musician does his/her "soulcraft," as you put it, because of their love for the music. Being paid should not be the top priority for an artist in any media. If that's your top priority, you aren't an artist, you're an entrepreneur. If you as an artist can make a living off of your art, great, but it shouldn't be the reason you create.

Come on, man. I love the airline business too, but I'm also in it to make a living. If, when and under whatever circumstances it doesn't support my $$ living standards, I'd do something else. That artistic saw is so overplayed. Yeah, I know a ton of musicians too and they love it and do toil for their craft, but it is ultimately a BUSINESS. Just like sports.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 47):
So basically you're 100% inaccurate to say I proved my own argument wrong.

So you're saying stealing from them led you to giving them money later, hence justifying your theft? Is that what I'm reading?
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 8524
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

RE: U.S. Government Censors 70 Websites!

Tue Nov 30, 2010 7:13 pm

Quoting Slider (Reply 48):
So you're saying stealing from them led you to giving them money later, hence justifying your theft? Is that what I'm reading?

It wasn't theft. Indie labels leak stuff onto the net constantly. I'm always trolling the indie rock compilations that are released monthly to see what new bands are up to - and no doubt many of the tracks come from those leaks. If a couple good songs get me into them and there is a pattern of interest generated from that, nothing untoward has occurred. I simply don't buy your view of it.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: andz, Baidu [Spider], Google [Bot], jpetekyxmd80, kngkyle and 26 guests