[fur] Update on Furry Bit Torrent
Alaska T Malamute
site. Unfortunately our dns for the last sites went down, I guess
thats what you get for using cheap , free dns hosting. Well we have
our own domain now, and we are putting the bit torrent site back up.
Lots of great stuff for anyfur who would like to download.
Genus 65 : http://bt.f-x-c.net/download.php?id=5&name=%5Bfxc%5D%20Genus%2065.rar.torrent
Rangarigs Raptorlab DVD Rip :
http://bt.f-x-c.net/download.php?id=4&name=%5Bfxc%5D%20raplab%204.avi.torrent
Brian O'Connels Quick and dirty art CD :
http://bt.f-x-c.net/download.php?id=3&name=%5Bfxc%5DBrian_O%27connell_Quick_n_Dirty.rar.torrent
FoxxFire's 3rd addendum CD:
http://bt.f-x-c.net/download.php?id=2&name=%5Bfxc%5DFoxxfire_3rd_Addendum_CD.rar.torrent
Best Of Furry Art cd:
http://bt.f-x-c.net/download.php?id=1&name=%5Bfxc%5DBest_of_Furry_Art_CD.rar.torrent
Furry artists partnership retail cd M/m pron :
http://bt.f-x-c.net/download.php?id=6&name=%5Bfxc%5DFurry_Artists_Partnership_Retail_CD.rar.torrent
Karabiners 2004 cd:
http://bt.f-x-c.net/download.php?id=7&name=%5Bfxc%5DKarabiner2004CD.rar.torrent
Enjoy!
We are also still running xdcc file sharing at
irc://irc.rizon.net/furryxdcc :)
Want to help out? Well if you got a scanner, furry art, a fast box
with good uptime and would like to join us, just join
irc://irc.rizon.net/fxc-chat and ask about joining up :D We always
need good furs to help out.
LaterZ!
Swipecat
<snip>
A Bittorrent index is a bit of a grey area, to put it mildly, but I
think that it can be argued fairly convincingly that the whole purpose
of the site is the unauthorized distribution of copyrighted material,
and is therefore illegal. The content of the home page (at the time of
writing) http://bt.f-x-c.net/ should be clear evidence of that to any
reasonable person.
I'd recommend that any owner or agent for the copyrighted material
contact the webhost for bt.f-x-c.net which is "The Planet" and their
"Procedure for Making Claims of Copyright Infringement" is here:
http://www.theplanet.com/legal/index.html
Also, it'd be worthwhile trying to get their domain registration
revoked. The registrar was "aplus.net", and I see that on the page
http://domains.aplus.net/anonindex.php , there is the text:
"We maintain a separate database that contains the real owners of every
domain registered through our service that can not be accessed by the
public. The benefit of anonymity will only be revoked if you violate our
usage policy, break the law or use it to send out spam."
So it should be possible to get information about the registrant from
aplus, although they might require that the information be obtained by a
lawyer or the police. Their contact page is:
http://www.aplus.net/contacts.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Tech stuff follows:
$whois f-x-c.net
Domain Name: F-X-C.NET
Registrar: ABACUS AMERICA, INC. DBA NAMES4EVER
Whois Server: whois.names4ever.com
Referral URL: http://www.names4ever.com
Name Server: NS1.07005.NET
Name Server: NS2.07005.NET
Status: ACTIVE
Updated Date: 17-jul-2004
Creation Date: 17-jul-2004
Expiration Date: 17-jul-2005
Registrant:
Domain Listing Agent (NRPDB) f-x-...@domainlistingagent.com
PO Box 927010
San Diego, CA 92192-7010
United States
Phone: (858) 731-1701
Registration Service Provider: AplusNet(APRO)
apro-n...@abac.com
http://www.aplus.net
Registrar: NAMES4EVER, http://www.names4ever.com
$nslookup bt.f-x-c.net
Name: bt.f-x-c.net
Address: 69.41.244.34
$whois 69.41.244.34
OrgName: ThePlanet.com Internet Services, Inc.
OrgID: TPCM
Address: 1333 North Stemmons Freeway
Address: Suite 110
City: Dallas
StateProv: TX
PostalCode: 75207
Country: US
ReferralServer: rwhois://rwhois.theplanet.com:4321
NetRange: 69.41.224.0 - 69.41.255.255
CIDR: 69.41.224.0/19
NetName: NETBLK-THEPLANET-BLK-6
NetHandle: NET-69-41-224-0-1
Parent: NET-69-0-0-0-0
NetType: Direct Allocation
NameServer: NS1.THEPLANET.COM
NameServer: NS2.THEPLANET.COM
Comment:
RegDate: 2003-04-24
Updated: 2003-11-19
TechHandle: PP46-ARIN
TechName: Pathos, Peter
TechPhone: +1-214-782-7800
TechEmail: ab...@theplanet.com
OrgAbuseHandle: ABUSE271-ARIN
OrgAbuseName: Abuse
OrgAbusePhone: +1-214-782-7802
OrgAbuseEmail: ab...@theplanet.com
OrgNOCHandle: TECHN33-ARIN
OrgNOCName: Technical Support
OrgNOCPhone: +1-214-782-7800
OrgNOCEmail: adm...@theplanet.com
OrgTechHandle: TECHN33-ARIN
OrgTechName: Technical Support
OrgTechPhone: +1-214-782-7800
OrgTechEmail: adm...@theplanet.com
Nil
Archer Wolff
who have the items scan or whatnot the art. Which is totally legal. After a piece is
purchased that artt becomes the person that bougt it's property. He is not making a
profiet off it so it violates no Copyright. I thiink he gets donations for money. I
mean I addmit haveing copied a Wookiee 2003 CD and sending it to a friend who will
remain nameless. (He was Minor, but I talked with his parents and they oked it. As
long as it contained no RL pronography.) for a fee of $50 dollars, $30 for the CD and
$20 to send it overnight.
"Swipecat" <d.far...@OMiTTHiSfurriesANDTHiS.info> wrote in message
news:kqnkf05h8hmiaed0p...@4ax.com...
Qnir Fnhaqref
great Birnam wood to high alt.fan.furry. hill shall come against him.
>Uhm, no. What Sibe does is Legal, he doesn't give those files himself, other people
>who have the items scan or whatnot the art. Which is totally legal. After a piece is
>purchased that artt becomes the person that bougt it's property. He is not making a
>profiet off it so it violates no Copyright. I thiink he gets donations for money. I
>mean I addmit haveing copied a Wookiee 2003 CD and sending it to a friend who will
>remain nameless. (He was Minor, but I talked with his parents and they oked it. As
>long as it contained no RL pronography.) for a fee of $50 dollars, $30 for the CD and
>$20 to send it overnight.
<Cue long and tedious debate about intellectual property rights and
copyright.>
--
Khofaeghorz gvegh gvegh gnaedh faeng vargr rrirrg!
Qnir Fnhaqref
vanquished be until great Birnam wood to high alt.fan.furry. hill
shall come against him.
>Looks like we have had a huge response from our Furry Bit Torrent
>site. Unfortunately our dns for the last sites went down, I guess
>thats what you get for using cheap , free dns hosting. Well we have
>our own domain now, and we are putting the bit torrent site back up.
>Lots of great stuff for anyfur who would like to download.
Isn't Baked Alaska some kind of food?
FuzzWolf
"Archer Wolff" <aj5...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:cdds8c$2oh6$1...@velox.critter.net...
> Uhm, no. What Sibe does is Legal, he doesn't give those files himself,
other people
> who have the items scan or whatnot the art. Which is totally legal. After
a piece is
> purchased that artt becomes the person that bougt it's property. He is not
making a
> profiet off it so it violates no Copyright. I thiink he gets donations for
money. I
> mean I addmit haveing copied a Wookiee 2003 CD and sending it to a friend
who will
> remain nameless. (He was Minor, but I talked with his parents and they
oked it. As
> long as it contained no RL pronography.) for a fee of $50 dollars, $30 for
the CD and
> $20 to send it overnight.
>
And I'm sure you sent Wookiee that $30, right? Otherwise, you just made a
$30 profit off someone else's work. IMO that's worse than what Sibe is
doing.
Fuzzy
BR
> <Cue long and tedious debate about intellectual property rights and
> copyright.>
<Cue the law getting involved. So we don't have to rehash a thing>
--
-- James Fenimore Cooper
The tendency of democracies is, in all things, to mediocrity, since the tastes,
knowledge, and principles of the majority form the tribunal of appeal.
Archer Wolff
P.S. I DID write every word of your Trick of Light story in Furnation Mag for
persona use and I may have given it to friiends but I made no money from it.
"FuzzWolf" <fuzzwolfn...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:cde1b3$2ss7$1...@velox.critter.net...
lord...@yahoo.com
<aj5...@comcast.net> wrote:
>Uhm, no. What Sibe does is Legal, he doesn't give those files himself, other people
>who have the items scan or whatnot the art. Which is totally legal. After a piece is
>purchased that artt becomes the person that bougt it's property. He is not making a
>profiet off it so it violates no Copyright. I thiink he gets donations for money. I
>mean I addmit haveing copied a Wookiee 2003 CD and sending it to a friend who will
>remain nameless. (He was Minor, but I talked with his parents and they oked it. As
>long as it contained no RL pronography.) for a fee of $50 dollars, $30 for the CD and
>$20 to send it overnight.
I could send you to my site and have you use the links, instead I will
post them here.
US GOVERNMENT COPYRIGHT; OFFICIAL SITE
COPYRIGHT FAQ by Mr. Glenn Woten and Mrs. Mel. White
http://www.rexx.com/%7Ejaguar/copyright.html
In short, unless you buy the publishing copyright from an artist, in
its entirety, or the work was contracted as a WORK FOR HIRE, you do
NOT own any rights to that work other than to own a (1) copy and a (1)
backup copy. Buying a limited use right from the artist (as I did
with Mrs. Ryan for my book) allows only a very limited, very specific
use of the work.
Copying a CD and sending it to a friend, even for free, violates U.S.
Copyright law and severial international treaties.
If you cannot understand what these two links are telling you, I most
strongly suggest that you employ a GOOD lawyer and have her/him
explain it in plain English.
As for the entity known as Sibe, his fate I leave in the gentle hands
of Hadies himself.
Mr. David Reese Dorrycott
San Antonio, Texas
www.naorhy.com
FoxxFire
--
+===================/FoxxFire\===================+
| fo...@foxxfire.com |
| http://www.foxxfire.com |
+------------------------------------------------+
|"I'm like a taxidermist: I'll mount anything!" |
+================================================+
Furry Code
FCF3a A++++$ C++$ D++ H+ M+ P++ R++ T+ W+ Z++ Sm++
RLA a cn++ d+ e++ f++ h iwf+ j+ p-- sm++
Windreader
conference, actually talk to some of the artists and find out how hard
it is for them to make a steady income to pay off their rent and other
bills......
Windreader
Chuck Melville
Archer Wolff wrote:
> Uhm, no. What Sibe does is Legal, he doesn't give those files himself, other people
> who have the items scan or whatnot the art. Which is totally legal. After a piece is
> purchased that artt becomes the person that bougt it's property.
Incorrect. All a person buys is a copy of the art, unless he's buying
the actual original artwork itself. And in either case, all he
purchases is the image. Unless he -also- buys the assorted rights that
are associated with that image -- and there are many -- the image is ALL
he owns. He has no right to reproduce or copy it, beyond for his own
personal use. And that personal use does -not- extend to making copies
for friends. And reposting it to the web is legally considered to be an
act of publication, so if done so without permission, it's also a violation.
> He is not making a
> profiet off it so it violates no Copyright.
Also incorrect. Making money has no direct bearing on whether or not a
Copyright has been violated. If you've made a copy for whatever purpose
without obtaining the permission of the artist, then that is a
violation. Regardless of whether or not there was any exchange of money.
--
-Chuck Melville-
Comic book fanatic and sometimes-creator-type-person
***************
Books, posters and merchandise, check out
http://www.cafeshops.com/feliciakatara
Tage Imhoff
illegally published images.
In Canada, from what I understand, the online music downloading debate has
so far concluded that it is neither legal nor illegal to upload music, but
it's perfectly legal to download the music. I wonder if this extends to
other works of art, such as literature and pictures.
"Chuck Melville" <cp...@zipcon.com> wrote in message
news:cdepn8$i6v$1...@velox.critter.net...
James Rau
"Tage Imhoff" <chi...@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:XlCKc.107$nW...@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
> What I want to know is if its also illegal for a person to download said
> illegally published images.
I am of the opinion that it is. It's no different than receiving stolen
property. Doesn't matter whether you know the property is stolen--you have
still committed a crime.
> In Canada, from what I understand, the online music downloading debate has
> so far concluded that it is neither legal nor illegal to upload music, but
> it's perfectly legal to download the music. I wonder if this extends to
> other works of art, such as literature and pictures.
Legal technicalities aside, what about plain and simple ethics? It's wrong
to steal, period. Intellectual property has real value to the author or
artist. Copyright ensures that the author/artist recieves recompense
(usually in the form of royalties) for their talent.
As an author, I would not like it if someone violated my Copyright and
started to post my stories to the public domain. Sorry, but I live in the
real world. I have bills to pay and my wife and kids need a roof over their
heads.
James Rau
Tage Imhoff
standings are. I personally don't think that it's right to mass distribute
an artists paid-for work.
However, I think its impracticle to try to live off of any furry stories or
art commissioned by private individuals, let alone stories or art of the
yiffy variety.
"James Rau" <jame...@skylinktv.net> wrote in message
news:cdevmg$q79$1...@velox.critter.net...
Rick Pikul
>
> "Tage Imhoff" <chi...@rogers.com> wrote in message
{Foomph...}
>> In Canada, from what I understand, the online music downloading debate
>> has so far concluded that it is neither legal nor illegal to upload
>> music, but it's perfectly legal to download the music. I wonder if this
>> extends to other works of art, such as literature and pictures.
>
> Legal technicalities aside, what about plain and simple ethics? It's
> wrong to steal, period. Intellectual property has real value to the
> author or artist. Copyright ensures that the author/artist recieves
> recompense (usually in the form of royalties) for their talent.
In Canada, downloading music is covered by the SOCAN levies on blank
media. You do pay for it, when you buy the blank CDs you're going to burn
it on.
--
Phoenix
BR
> However, I think its impracticle to try to live off of any furry stories
> or art commissioned by private individuals, let alone stories or art of
> the yiffy variety.
That's true of any job that depends on the whims of others.
Tage Imhoff
intention of burning it to CD?
"Rick Pikul" <rwp...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:pan.2004.07.19....@sympatico.ca...
Mike and Carole
> > Uhm, no. What Sibe does is Legal, he doesn't give those files himself,
other people
> > who have the items scan or whatnot the art. Which is totally legal.
After a piece is
> > purchased that artt becomes the person that bougt it's property.
>
> Incorrect. All a person buys is a copy of the art, unless he's buying
> the actual original artwork itself. And in either case, all he
> purchases is the image. Unless he -also- buys the assorted rights that
> are associated with that image -- and there are many -- the image is ALL
> he owns. He has no right to reproduce or copy it, beyond for his own
> personal use.
> -Chuck Melville-
>
Let me add another legal story.
Roger Broughton.
Also known as "Roger the Dodger" because he's so hard to locate. When he was
publishing, all Diamond ever had was the phone number of his brother in law.
He CLAIMS he owns everything Charlton every published, and has reprinted a
lot of it and other work by smaller defunct comic companies of the 40's and
50's.
We encountered him over two of our comics, LAST KISS and ATOMIC MOUSE. In
KISS, John Lustig contacted the legal representataive of Charlton and BOUGHT
the rights to FIRST KISS, a romance comic they published. He then began
reprinting it with new dialogue as LAST KISS.
Broughton threatened legal action over our comic books of KISS and ATOMIC.
We had done out homework and basically said "Bring it on!"
Of course, it never happened.
This made up an interesting article (some 7 pages) in COMIC BOOK ARTIST,
about who owned Charlton. In this case, they contacted the legal rep of
Charlton and he stated that all Broughton bought were proofs of several
comics. Basically, high quality photocopies. He stated he had sold NO
rights to Broughton.
Roger's disappeared again, even Diamond can't find him, and he hasn't
published in years. It does make me wonder if he ever bought HERBIE, as
that was his first comic.
We do know that he reprinted HOPALONG CASSIDY illegally, as they protect
their copyrights vigorously.
So, what Broughton did was akin to buying a copy of X MEN and since he could
produce a sales receipt, reprinting it and pocketing the money.
Kind of like what Sibe and company are doing.
Mike
Mike and Carole
"Windreader" <burn...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cdemm6$f65$1...@velox.critter.net...
> I would add the suggestion that the next time anyone attends a furry
> conference, actually talk to some of the artists and find out how hard
> it is for them to make a steady income to pay off their rent and other
> bills......
>
>
> Windreader
Tell him to talk to a furry publisher too.
Mike
Glen Wooten
>
> Looks like we have had a huge response from our Furry Bit Torrent
> site. Unfortunately our dns for the last sites went down, I guess
> thats what you get for using cheap , free dns hosting. Well we have
> our own domain now, and we are putting the bit torrent site back up.
> Lots of great stuff for anyfur who would like to download.
Such a shame that it was in stunning violation of their server's TOS, and
was quickly taken offline by the server administrators upon request.
Till the next time we sink another pirate...
Glen Wooten
_______________________________________________________________
| primary: jag...@rexx.com | secondary: kar...@sbcglobal.net |
_______________________________________________________________
| Terrie & Glen's web page: http://www.rexx.com/~jaguar |
_______________________________________________________________
Eric Adler
Rick Pikul wrote:
> In Canada, downloading music is covered by the SOCAN levies on blank
> media. You do pay for it, when you buy the blank CDs you're going to burn
> it on.
>
I see three problems with charging a "royalty fee" on blank CD-R's
1) It does not recoup "royalties" from music downloaded but not coppied
to CD.
2) It means a greater loss for the purchaser when the CD fails to purm
propperly. (which can happen for many reasons, and is therefore not a
rare occourancs)
3) It levies a "royalty fee" on the user for backing up HIS OWN DATA to
CD, (I persoanlly prefer to keep the files I generate while restoring
old board games on CD once the main "repair" is done, so I'll have them
in case anything happens to my HD.) as well as increasing costs for
artists making CD's of THEIR OWN WORKS.
To they also charge a "royalty fee" on reams of computer paper to cover
the costs of printing out copies of pictures downloaded off the WEB, or
a fee on notebooks, in case you want to transcribe a book?
I don't mean to sound anti-Canadian, I'm just using the Bob Newhart test
for sanity.
(For the unaware, the test is based on an old skit, with Newhart
recieving a phone call from Sir Walter Raleigh about this new discovery
called tobacco and what you could do with it. I won't butcher the skit
by trying to reproduce it here, it needs Bob's deadpan delivery to
really work, but ask around, I'm sure you have a friend of a friend
who's seen the skit or knows of it.)
Rick Pikul
> What about instances of downloading music to your hard drive without any
> intention of burning it to CD?
THat's why SOCAN has tried, and failed, to have the levy extended to hard
drives.
--
Phoenix
lord...@yahoo.com
wrote:
Wait until they discover thumbdrives......
Neko2
to be. Selling someones work w/o permission is actually able to be
prosecuted with $$ damages.
Hell go to kinkos or copy max and ask for the copyright brochure. It
should have about 1000% more info about copyright than you currently are
aware of.
N2
Neko2
Sorry to hear that cuz you guys rock :)
N2
M. Mitchell Marmel
Eric Adler <adre...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I don't mean to sound anti-Canadian, I'm just using the Bob Newhart test
> for sanity.
>
> (For the unaware, the test is based on an old skit, with Newhart
> recieving a phone call from Sir Walter Raleigh about this new discovery
> called tobacco and what you could do with it. I won't butcher the skit
> by trying to reproduce it here, it needs Bob's deadpan delivery to
> really work, but ask around, I'm sure you have a friend of a friend
> who's seen the skit or knows of it.)
If you really wanna read it:
http://www.monologues.co.uk/Tobacco.htm
I agree, though, it's best heard. :)
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000059Z84/202-1543362-4596615
-MMM-
--
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TaliVisions
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sawyercatunleashed
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/furry_city/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/losgatosafterdark/
M. Mitchell Marmel
> I see three problems with charging a "royalty fee" on blank CD-R's
I see a fourth. How do you disburse the fees collected, and to whom?
Marc
encourage re-distribution, you can wind up in jail for 5 years.
Not that Americans would care, but your laws are not that different from
ours.
Copyright laws are international by the way; that is why there is an
INTERPOL warning on movies. Want to take them on? Think they are dumb?
They have just not got to you yet. Key word here is 'yet'.
5 years in a cage with Bubba should be enough of a clue, unless you
enjoy that sort of thing.
And yeah, tracking an IP when you have the proper tools and are law
enforcement is extremely easy. Takes about 5 to 15 minutes. A crime is
still a crime, even when no guns are involved. This becomes theft; at
say $30/copy, times 1000 copies, that makes $30,000 of theft. Steal from
10 artists, at $30/copy, and you wind up stealing $300,000. That's a
major number, and equals major jail time.
And they think they hurt nobody or are safe behind their little computer
in their basement. Twits.
lord...@yahoo.com
<artem...@REMOVETHIStwmi.rr.com> wrote:
>Hell go to kinkos or copy max and ask for the copyright brochure. It
>should have about 1000% more info about copyright than you currently are
>aware of.
>
>N2
Agreed. When I tried to get the first issue of CASTLEHOME printed
they (Kinko's) called me at oh-dark-thirty demanding a written, hand
signed release from each and every member before they would print
anything. Considering members were in England, Scotland and Sweden,
that was an impossible demand (within a timely manner.) And they
wanted a release for every following issue!
Prices since then have gone through the roof. It is actually cheaper
to BUY a used copymachine than to run a large APA at Kinko's. Maybe I
ought to drag out a memographic machine and go old tech.
In short though. If YOU didn't create it or don't have a signed
release granting you all rights to the material. YOU don't own it,
you only own a copy.
And if you only own a copy, you don't own the rights to reproduce it
in ANY medium. Thus... COPY-RIGHT.
lord...@yahoo.com
<marm...@vrx.net> wrote:
>> I see three problems with charging a "royalty fee" on blank CD-R's
>
>I see a fourth. How do you disburse the fees collected, and to whom?
>
>-MMM-
Who says they do? It probably goes to a 'General Fund' which then is
used for such things as paintingt the leaves blue in Winter to show
how cold it is.
Silver Seams
news:marmelmm-B09EEE...@velox.critter.net:
> I see a fourth. How do you disburse the fees collected, and to whom?
You join one of the music union thingies (though I think you can join
independently).
Of course, the disbursement is based on radio airplay, so...
--
http://www.silverseams.com/ - Fursuits, plushies, and other stuff
Mike and Carole
"Neko2" <artem...@REMOVETHIStwmi.rr.com> wrote in message
news:cdi8hv$o67$2...@velox.critter.net...
Thanks muchly!
Mike
Doodles
news:Xns952C821F31...@130.133.1.4...
> begin "M. Mitchell Marmel" <marm...@vrx.net> quotation from
> news:marmelmm-B09EEE...@velox.critter.net:
>
> > I see a fourth. How do you disburse the fees collected, and to whom?
>
> You join one of the music union thingies (though I think you can join
> independently).
>
> Of course, the disbursement is based on radio airplay, so...
So if you're a popular download but you don't suck Clear Channel's dick,
you're fucked harder than a $5 hooker when the fleet's in...
Rick Pikul
> Silver Seams" <silve...@silverseams.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns952C821F31...@130.133.1.4...
>> begin "M. Mitchell Marmel" <marm...@vrx.net> quotation from
>> news:marmelmm-B09EEE...@velox.critter.net:
>>
>> > I see a fourth. How do you disburse the fees collected, and to whom?
>>
>> You join one of the music union thingies (though I think you can join
>> independently).
Yes, you join SOCAN.
>> Of course, the disbursement is based on radio airplay, so...
>
> So if you're a popular download but you don't suck Clear Channel's dick,
> you're fucked harder than a $5 hooker when the fleet's in...
Some good news then: It's Canadian airplay that really matters, and the
CRTC isn't exactly going to let Clear Channel in. Plus, it's easy to get
at least some play: Send some CDs to the right parts of the CBC, they'll
play something if it is at all good, (or makes the host laugh).
--
Phoenix
Silver Seams
news:pan.2004.07.21....@sympatico.ca:
> Yes, you join SOCAN.
The impression I get is that SOCAN would like you to believe that's the
only way, but there are others, or you can do it independently.
But I'm neither Canadian nor a musician, so I haven't looked it up
firsthand.
> Some good news then: It's Canadian airplay that really matters, and the
> CRTC isn't exactly going to let Clear Channel in. Plus, it's easy to
> get at least some play: Send some CDs to the right parts of the CBC,
> they'll play something if it is at all good, (or makes the host
> laugh).
Irrelevent Clear Channel bashing: CC recently bought up two (more) local
stations, and made a big show of taking them off the air for a weekend,
changing their call letters, and announcing a Sooper-Sekrit "radical
format change" for them. When they came back online... they'd swapped
formats.
I mean, why not just put up a billboard (they own enough) saying "We've
analyzed this market, and concluded that it's stupid."
(I suppose it's always possible that they're right.)
ObFurry: Neither one of them have furry mascots. In fact, I think all
the stations in town, CC or no, have gone to entirely abstract logos.
mouse
> Irrelevent Clear Channel bashing: CC recently bought up two (more)
> local stations, and made a big show of taking them off the air for a
> weekend, changing their call letters, and announcing a Sooper-Sekrit
> "radical format change" for them. When they came back online...
> they'd swapped formats.
>
> I mean, why not just put up a billboard (they own enough) saying
> "We've analyzed this market, and concluded that it's stupid."
>
> (I suppose it's always possible that they're right.)
>
> ObFurry: Neither one of them have furry mascots. In fact, I think
> all the stations in town, CC or no, have gone to entirely abstract
> logos.
I don;t know how relevant it is , but Canadian Radio laws state that
canadian radio stations that play music MUST play at least (I think) 25%
canadian/local music or specifically canadian content. Thats one reason why
I like the canadian EDGE station (102.1 Toronto) even here in buffalo. The
have punk music nights - just playing straight up punk/hardcore, which, to
me, is unheard of but completely awesome. Plus, on other days I get to hear
other canadian groups that I would never have heard on the radio.
I've known a few local bands also that were considering relocating
themselves to Ft. Erie, Ontario because of these laws, it would be easier
for them to get radio play.
Snapcase, a very good hardcore band from buffalo (big for a local group,
and big for hardcore music) they only played on the US EDGE 103.3 (Buffalo,
NY) when they are playing in town...and the station still sometimes uses
clips for background music for station IDs and whatnot ...because edge
103.3 (citadel radio) are a bunch of corporate fuckers anyway.
Far as Im concerned, the whole music and record industry can go fuck
themselves..seriously
Brock Ulfsen
> In article <cdhe50$2rft$1...@velox.critter.net>,
> Eric Adler <adre...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>>I see three problems with charging a "royalty fee" on blank CD-R's
>
>
> I see a fourth. How do you disburse the fees collected, and to whom?
Big Multinational Record Companies, of course... Who else deserves even
more of your money.
...Brock.
Rick Pikul
> I don;t know how relevant it is , but Canadian Radio laws state that
> canadian radio stations that play music MUST play at least (I think) 25%
> canadian/local music or specifically canadian content.
It's more like 30%[1], but it is easy to qualify as CanCon, you just need
to have two of the following be Canadian:
The writer of the music.
The writer of the lyrics.
The performer(s).
The production company.
So, not only does anything from the Barenaked Ladies qualify, but so does
a Backstreet Boys song fully written by a Torontonian, or the cover of
"Crazy Train" done by Jughead.
[1] Except for the CBC, which has as one of its special rules that it
must play 50% CanCon.
--
Phoenix
iBuck
>art commissioned by private individuals, let alone stories or art of the
>yiffy variety.
Possibly, but who says you have to live -only- off that? Not like every bit
doesn't help making ends meet..
"You can have it Quickly,Correct, Complex - Pick 2"
iBuck
>CD, (I persoanlly prefer to keep the files I generate while restoring
>old board games on CD once the main "repair" is done, so I'll have them
>in case anything happens to my HD.) as well as increasing costs for
>artists making CD's of THEIR OWN WORKS.
This is why, if they impose any such fee, sign up to get your cut of the
levy...