Downloading Music should equal Prison
Douglas Lang
not the least bit shocked. Personally I thought it would be more than that.
Most people I know have tons of downloaded music burnt on to cd's in their
vehicles or homes.
People think it is just innocent downloading because it is easy to do and
not a hassle to anyone. The fact is that if it wernt available it would push
people to go out and buy not all that they have downloaded but a few of the
cds they have downloaded.
I don't think people recognize that these are industries where many
Americans and Foreigners are working. They don't recognize that these
companies will lay off to protect their profit which is the obvious reason
for running a company that employs people.
How many people in here illegally download music? If you do and you do not
stop, you should not only be sued, but locked up for whatever the worth of
music you have downloaded you stole.
--
_____________________________
"It takes a big man to cry, and an even bigger man to laugh at that
man -Jack Handey-"
"I would not use the three-letter word, lie. I would use the five-letter
word: deceit." Bob Graham on George Bush at NAACP confrence.
Bill Walker
"Douglas Lang" <dougl...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:xlGSa.95433$wk6....@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net...
> Just read that over 1/3rd of downloaded music makes up the industry and I
am
> not the least bit shocked. Personally I thought it would be more than
that.
> Most people I know have tons of downloaded music burnt on to cd's in their
> vehicles or homes.
>
> People think it is just innocent downloading because it is easy to do and
> not a hassle to anyone. The fact is that if it wernt available it would
push
> people to go out and buy not all that they have downloaded but a few of
the
> cds they have downloaded.
>
> I don't think people recognize that these are industries where many
> Americans and Foreigners are working. They don't recognize that these
> companies will lay off to protect their profit which is the obvious reason
> for running a company that employs people.
>
> How many people in here illegally download music? If you do and you do not
> stop, you should not only be sued, but locked up for whatever the worth of
> music you have downloaded you stole.
Now you found your niche.. Stick with it little guy.. You Go boy..
Captain Compassion
<dougl...@comcast.net> wrote:
>Just read that over 1/3rd of downloaded music makes up the industry and I am
>not the least bit shocked. Personally I thought it would be more than that.
>Most people I know have tons of downloaded music burnt on to cd's in their
>vehicles or homes.
>
>People think it is just innocent downloading because it is easy to do and
>not a hassle to anyone. The fact is that if it wernt available it would push
>people to go out and buy not all that they have downloaded but a few of the
>cds they have downloaded.
>
>I don't think people recognize that these are industries where many
>Americans and Foreigners are working. They don't recognize that these
>companies will lay off to protect their profit which is the obvious reason
>for running a company that employs people.
>
>How many people in here illegally download music? If you do and you do not
>stop, you should not only be sued, but locked up for whatever the worth of
>music you have downloaded you stole.
>
Are you allowed to tape music off your Radio for personal use?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Giving society cheap abundant energy . . . would be the equivalent of
giving an idiot child a machine gun." -- Dr. Paul Ehrlich
"There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other
is wrong, but the middle is always evil." -- Ayn Rand
"...observe that in all the propaganda of the ecologists amidst all
their appeals to nature and pleas for 'harmony with nature' there is
no discussion of man's needs and the requirements of his survival.
Man is treated as if he were an unnatural phenomenon. Man cannot
survive in the kind of state of nature that the ecologists envision
i.e., on the level of sea urchins or polar bears..." - AYN RAND
"The Anti-Industrial Revolution," The New Left, 136.
"In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us,
'Make us your slaves, but feed us.'" -- Dosteovsky
Joseph R. Darancette
res0...@NOSPAMverizon.net
Lawson English
From Web White & Blue (http://www.webwhiteblue.org)
Question:
In light of the recent Napster case, what are your views on Internet
file-sharing and the protection of intellectual property online? Where would
your administration draw the line regarding freedom to access content versus
copyright infringement?
Submitted from Mary from Front Royal, Virginia, via Yahoo!
Answer:
Whenever new technologies emerge, such as the tape recorder or the
videocassette recorder, the owners of existing intellectual properties
demand draconian protection, insisting that without it their industries will
collapse.
Each of these technological advances, however, has in fact resulted in new
ways for the movie, television, and music industries to make money.
Similarly, the Internet and digital distribution of music have stimulated
interest in the purchase of new CDs. (In fact, CD sales have continued to
rise even with Napster, and it is probable that free sampling of music leads
to increased CD sales.)
However, it is also true that intellectual property is a key motivator in
the creation of new material and therefore must be given protection.
That is why we believe that the entertainment industry should make an
all-out effort to find new ways to utilize Napster and similar services on a
"pay per view" basis. This approach will serve all concerned and turn what
appears now--at least to many in the entertainment industry--to be a
disaster into a boon for both the industry and the consumer.
--
New definition of irony:
'Today's liberal Democrats are like the supporters of the Third Reich of the
'30's and '40's
- they absolutely trusted the government to "make things right". '
-Comment made on the internet by an ardent GW Bush supporter.
"Douglas Lang" <dougl...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:xlGSa.95433$wk6....@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net...
Douglas Lang
"Captain Compassion" <res0...@NOSPAMverizon.net> wrote in message
news:3f1b381a...@news.verizon.net...
I am not sure of the law. Most radio music is shortened and I am not sure
what is required of it. However, blatantly sharing files on the internet for
the sole purpouse of not having to purchase the cd but to burn it onto your
own disc is and should be. I hope they pass the law soon.
Douglas Lang
"Lawson English" <engl...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:bffer4$ns3$1...@slb4.atl.mindspring.net...
> Rolling Cyber Debate Question for John Hagelin from October 17, 2000
> From Web White & Blue (http://www.webwhiteblue.org)
>
> Question:
> In light of the recent Napster case, what are your views on Internet
> file-sharing and the protection of intellectual property online? Where
would
> your administration draw the line regarding freedom to access content
versus
> copyright infringement?
> Submitted from Mary from Front Royal, Virginia, via Yahoo!
> Answer:
> Whenever new technologies emerge, such as the tape recorder or the
> videocassette recorder, the owners of existing intellectual properties
> demand draconian protection, insisting that without it their industries
will
> collapse.
> Each of these technological advances, however, has in fact resulted in new
> ways for the movie, television, and music industries to make money.
> Similarly, the Internet and digital distribution of music have stimulated
> interest in the purchase of new CDs. (In fact, CD sales have continued to
> rise even with Napster, and it is probable that free sampling of music
leads
> to increased CD sales.)
This person may be talking about the cdwr, but not music cd's. Sales of
music cd's have declined 16% in 2002, and who knows how much this year.
Sales in cdrw went up 40% in 2002.
> However, it is also true that intellectual property is a key motivator in
> the creation of new material and therefore must be given protection.
> That is why we believe that the entertainment industry should make an
> all-out effort to find new ways to utilize Napster and similar services on
a
> "pay per view" basis. This approach will serve all concerned and turn what
> appears now--at least to many in the entertainment industry--to be a
> disaster into a boon for both the industry and the consumer.
I have no problem with pay to download it and burn it. Infact if the music
industry did that, then they could also count on better quality music,
especially if they started selling the cdre writable disc. Because people
wouldnt download an entire cd. they would take mostly the hits and dispose
of the rest of the crap. I too am sick of an artist coming out with some
good songs and then filling the rest of the cd with crap.
Randy Cox
prosecution of music downloaders. He should be the first to go to jail for
pirating software....or he should keep his mouth shut and learn the lesson
of truth.
I am an artist and artists live by copyright. I understand intellectual
rights but to carry this artificial right to the extreme is absurd! I knew
of a world famous photographer that took a photo of an old barn and a
wagon. He sold prints and made a nice tidy sum. It was a nice picture.
He noticed a small local artist had reversed his image and painted an
original oil painting of his "original" photo. He sued her and won, but she
declared bankruptcy. He was angry that she had cheated him once again.
So with these facts alone one might empathize....but upon close scrutiny it
would be revealed that the photographer has stolen his image from the
carpenter that built the barn and the wagonwright that built the wagon.
I am also an electrician. I will support putting these thieves in jail just
as soon as Doug and Orrin and others are jailed for not sending me royalties
each time they turn on the lights. I worked on the South Texas Nuclear
plant that produces some of the electricity that Doug may use. He has never
sent me a check for the use of the equipment I installed which made his
lights possible. Why can these music companies claim residuals when I can
not. If you think electricity comes without the practice of art and
invention, you really don't understand the generation of electricity or the
construction of nuclear power plants. Installing these systems requires
exactly the same creative energy that one of my bronze sculptures, one of
wife's paintings, one of my daughter's gospel songs, or one of my son's
chart rated MP3 CD's require. There is no difference. Intellectual rights
are good but too strict a view ignores reality.
Every great artist has copied the masters. This is the way a novice becomes
a master. Any who deny this are not speaking the truth. This be true
whether the art be music...painting...or electrical engineering. It is an
undeniable truth. 100% enforcement would put every artist in jail or
debtor's prison before they develop into an artist worthy in their own
right.
Here is the truth as I have said before in other mediums. All art and
invention connects to the past and expands into the future. If art doesn't
connect to the art that came before...it will pass over the heads of those
who use or view it. If it expands too far into the future it will not be
recognized at all during the creator's lifetime.
So laws can be passed to protect an artist's claim, but if it was truly
enforced art would STOP! This would not serve the public good. It has been
tried in antiquity and resulted in dark ages. Moderation is required here.
If we started today restricting all violation of the copyright laws,
tomorrow would begin the decline of all art. Only those recognized as
masters would remain entitled to produce art. All others would be estopped
from the process. Art and invention would end. It is foolishness to carry
out these plans. Already the monster uses the lever of fear to stop the
music from flowing. They do err out of ignorance and misunderstanding.
Orrin Hatch writes songs, but he would be very surprised to know how many of
those note and word combinations that he thinks are his own....are simply
repetitions that he has unconsciously gleaned from songs that come before
him. It is not to belittle his writing that I say this, but to properly
credit the continuity of art history as it flows from one generation to
another, one individual to another. He would have been equally surprised to
find that he had pirated software...but that is exactly what he has done.
It is just the way of things as we connect to each other. It is a pity to
criminalize the process of art to satisfy the greed of some for monetary
exclusivity.
Randy R. Cox
"Douglas Lang" <dougl...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:xlGSa.95433$wk6....@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net...
Captain Compassion
<dougl...@comcast.net> wrote:
Is it ok if the author is some dead white guy such as Mozart?
See TITLE 17 > CHAPTER 1 > Sec. 107. There is fair use.
Lawson English
"Captain Compassion" <res0...@NOSPAMverizon.net> wrote in message
news:3f1b381a...@news.verizon.net...
Radio stations pay licensing fees to broadcast their music. Napster-style
servers do not. There ARE licensed internet radio stations, but they don't
have peer-to-peer file sharing of music and other entertainment files like
napster did.
Lawson English
"Captain Compassion" <res0...@NOSPAMverizon.net> wrote in message
> On Mon, 21 Jul 2003 02:27:23 GMT, "Douglas Lang"
> >> Are you allowed to tape music off your Radio for personal use?
> >
> >I am not sure of the law. Most radio music is shortened and I am not sure
> >what is required of it. However, blatantly sharing files on the internet
for
> >the sole purpouse of not having to purchase the cd but to burn it onto
your
> >own disc is and should be. I hope they pass the law soon.
> >
> Is it ok if the author is some dead white guy such as Mozart?
>
> See TITLE 17 > CHAPTER 1 > Sec. 107. There is fair use.
>
>
Mozart would be compensated for the use of his music, as would the
*performer*. The fact that Mozart is dead doesn't mean that the performer
or his heirs don't have certain rights.
Lawson English
> > "pay per view" basis. This approach will serve all concerned and turn
what
> > appears now--at least to many in the entertainment industry--to be a
> > disaster into a boon for both the industry and the consumer.
>
> I have no problem with pay to download it and burn it. Infact if the music
> industry did that, then they could also count on better quality music,
> especially if they started selling the cdre writable disc. Because people
> wouldnt download an entire cd. they would take mostly the hits and dispose
> of the rest of the crap. I too am sick of an artist coming out with some
> good songs and then filling the rest of the cd with crap.
>
Check out iTunes at Apple. Currently Mac only, but thats changing next year.
99 cents per download, legally licensed, 30 sec preview of any song, etc.
Gives you the right to burn the music on CD, store it on your computer, or
on your iPod music player.
http://www.apple.com/music/store/
Captain Compassion
<engl...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>"Captain Compassion" <res0...@NOSPAMverizon.net> wrote in message
>news:3f1b5b93...@news.verizon.net...
>> On Mon, 21 Jul 2003 02:27:23 GMT, "Douglas Lang"
>[...]
>> >> Are you allowed to tape music off your Radio for personal use?
>> >
>> >I am not sure of the law. Most radio music is shortened and I am not sure
>> >what is required of it. However, blatantly sharing files on the internet
>for
>> >the sole purpouse of not having to purchase the cd but to burn it onto
>your
>> >own disc is and should be. I hope they pass the law soon.
>> >
>> Is it ok if the author is some dead white guy such as Mozart?
>>
>> See TITLE 17 > CHAPTER 1 > Sec. 107. There is fair use.
>>
>>
>
>
>Mozart would be compensated for the use of his music, as would the
>*performer*. The fact that Mozart is dead doesn't mean that the performer
>or his heirs don't have certain rights.
>
Sorry Mozart and his Heirs are out of luck after December 31, 2002.
See USC TITLE 17 > CHAPTER 3 > Sec. 303.
Captain Compassion
You don't need Peer to Peer You can capture directly from internet
raido stations to MP3. The biggist abuse of coyprights is not Napster
or KaZaa but Usenet. Wanna see Pirates? Got to the binaries groups.
Lawson English
"Captain Compassion" <res0...@NOSPAMverizon.net> wrote in message
> On Sun, 20 Jul 2003 21:13:33 -0700, "Lawson English"
> <engl...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Captain Compassion" <res0...@NOSPAMverizon.net> wrote in message
> >news:3f1b5b93...@news.verizon.net...
> >> On Mon, 21 Jul 2003 02:27:23 GMT, "Douglas Lang"
> >[...]
> >> >> Are you allowed to tape music off your Radio for personal use?
> >> >
> >> >I am not sure of the law. Most radio music is shortened and I am not
sure
> >> >what is required of it. However, blatantly sharing files on the
internet
> >for
> >> >the sole purpouse of not having to purchase the cd but to burn it onto
> >your
> >> >own disc is and should be. I hope they pass the law soon.
> >> >
> >> Is it ok if the author is some dead white guy such as Mozart?
> >>
> >> See TITLE 17 > CHAPTER 1 > Sec. 107. There is fair use.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >Mozart would be compensated for the use of his music, as would the
> >*performer*. The fact that Mozart is dead doesn't mean that the
performer
> >or his heirs don't have certain rights.
> >
> Sorry Mozart and his Heirs are out of luck after December 31, 2002.
>
> See USC TITLE 17 > CHAPTER 3 > Sec. 303.
>
OK, so the author's heirs are SOL 70 years after he dies.
chilly
all doubt:
>
>
> I am not sure of the law.
then why did you start this idiotic thread? here's my advice: go
long on apple stock.
chilly
GotOuttaIdaho
> Just read that over 1/3rd of downloaded music makes up the industry and I am
> not the least bit shocked. Personally I thought it would be more than that.
> Most people I know have tons of downloaded music burnt on to cd's in their
> vehicles or homes.
>
> People think it is just innocent downloading because it is easy to do and
> not a hassle to anyone. The fact is that if it wernt available it would push
> people to go out and buy not all that they have downloaded but a few of the
> cds they have downloaded.
>
> I don't think people recognize that these are industries where many
> Americans and Foreigners are working. They don't recognize that these
> companies will lay off to protect their profit which is the obvious reason
> for running a company that employs people.
>
> How many people in here illegally download music? If you do and you do not
> stop, you should not only be sued, but locked up for whatever the worth of
> music you have downloaded you stole.
And for every "bootlegger" locked up we'll have to release a burglar
or a rapist or a murderer. Do you support raising taxes to house all
these nonviolent "criminals" you want to create? Our jails are already
full of scary thugs like potsmokers; shall we add bootleggers,
jaywalkers, overtime parkers, litterers, loiterers, ad infinitum?
MLW
Captain Compassion
wrote:
The vast majority of those that download music from the net do only
for personal use not for resale or to make a profit. That being said
it is theft. But so are taxes.
Mark Lewis
The only one really gripin' 'bout low CD sales is the RIAA. THEIR CD sales
have dropped, but overall CD sales have risen, they're just buyin' CDs from
independent distributors.
beber
<engl...@mindspring.com> wrote:
Music industry supplies vast piles of really, really bad crap, which
it sells with sex and hype. A buck a song is fair enough, but if it
ever catches on, every singer in the world is on a equal footing.
-= Ц§вmв Янс KлсoЯн =-
-------------------------------------------
Rebel Alliance Galactic Usenet News Service
-------------------------------------------
DTJ
<dougl...@comcast.net> wrote:
>How many people in here illegally download music? If you do and you do not
>stop, you should not only be sued, but locked up for whatever the worth of
>music you have downloaded you stole.
You should stop trying to think, as you are incapable.
People who download music buy more than people who do not download.
People who download music do so to see if they like it and then they
either buy it or delete it.
People who don't buy CDs do this because CDs are over priced. The
cost of a CD is less than an album, but CDs were introduced at far
higher prices. They have gone up in price, never came down. The
overwhelming percentage of the CD cost goes to profit for the music
company - NOT THE ARTIST.
Bill
profits for the entertainment artists and producers.
It cost less than $.50 per CD to produce a music or movie CD yet the typical
price runs from $15 to $50 per CD. If the industry would deliver their
product at a more reasonable price the incentive for violating the copy
right would decline substantially.
Lot's of outstanding music was created before the passing of monopoly
copyright laws which now protect the authors product for his life plus 50
years. Hell, patent protection only runs for 20 years.
--
Bill Mech
wm...@att.net
"Douglas Lang" <dougl...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:xlGSa.95433$wk6....@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net...
Bill Walker
"Bill" <wm...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:G7dTa.67594$0v4.4...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> One of the main reasons there is so much piracy is the huge mark ups and
> profits for the entertainment artists and producers.
>
> It cost less than $.50 per CD to produce a music or movie CD yet the
typical
> price runs from $15 to $50 per CD. If the industry would deliver their
> product at a more reasonable price the incentive for violating the copy
> right would decline substantially.
>
> Lot's of outstanding music was created before the passing of monopoly
> copyright laws which now protect the authors product for his life plus 50
> years. Hell, patent protection only runs for 20 years.
Hey .. I got an idea.. everybody just boycott the hell out of all the
overpriced, overpaid "artists" and entertainment industry for about 3
months.. Stay away from them and don't buy their products and productions..
Don't spend your hard earned money .. Save it.. You'd see the prices fall so
fast, they'd look like meteors dropping out of the sky..
Bill Walker
Irving, Tx..