Slashdot Mirror
Eminem Sues Apple for Sampling his Samples
EvanKai writes "To celebrate Grey Tuesday, Eminem sues Apple to show his support for hiphop and sampling. CBS MarketWatch is reporting
that 'Rapper Eminem's music publisher is suing Apple Computer Inc., claiming the company used one of the hip-hop superstar's songs in a television advertisement without permission. Eight Mile Style filed the copyright infringement suit late last week against Apple, Viacom Inc., its MTV subsidiary and the TBWA/Chiat/Day advertising agency.' While the ad in question no longer appears, several similar ads can be found here. I can't believe Chiat Day failed to clear the use of these songs with Pink, Mariah Carey, and The Who... or whatever major label actually owns the rights."
All your samples are belong to Slim Shady.
I LIKE POOPY.
This is long, but you'll see how I tie it in with Eminem...
It may be too early in this election year to determine which will be the biggest of the Big Lies in this political campaign. However, my feeling is that it may be "the working poor." While there are working people who are poor, most poor people are not working full time, not working very long, or not working at all.
These are not matters of opinion. Census data make it unmistakably clear. When it comes to full-time year-around workers, there are more heads of
households who fall into that category in the top 5 percent of income earners than in the bottom 20 percent - in absolute numbers.
There was a time when you could legitimately contrast the idle rich and the working poor. But that time is long gone. Nevertheless, the image is still politically useful, so you are likely to see that image invoked again and again by candidates practicing divide and conquer politics, sometimes known as class warfare or by its more fashionable name, "social justice."
There is even a book by a New York Times reporter titled "The Working Poor." It was previewed by a long article in the New York Times and then given a huge and favorable review in - you guessed it - the New York Times. Journalistic incest lives.
The thesis of both media liberals and political liberals is that there are vast millions of people who work hard all their lives and still remain poor. The next chorus of this song is that only the government can save the day for such people. The grand finale is that politicians need to take more money out of your paycheck to buy the votes of those to whom they give it.
They don't express it like that, of course, but that is what it amounts to. Are there genuinely poor people who stay poor? Yes. However grossly
exaggerated the numbers, there are such people. But studies that follow the same individuals over time find that most of those in the bottom 20 percent of income earners are also in the top 20 percent at some other time in their
careers.
Only a fraction of the people who are in the bottom 20 percent in income at any given time will be there for more than a few years. Of those whose pay is at or near the minimum wage, for example, most are young people or part-time workers, or both.
How much political traction can you get by wringing your hands over some high-school or college kid who is picking up a few bucks flipping
hamburgers, while living with mom and dad?
The solution to this problem, in both the liberal media and among liberal politicians, is to ignore the typical person who is simply passing through
the lower income brackets on his way up and talk exclusively about the atypical person who stays at the bottom for life.
By focusing on those who work hard all their lives and still remain poor - no more than 3 percent of the population - and telling their personal
stories endlessly, liberals can present the Big Lie with a human face. There is an even bigger lie behind all this. That lie is the implication that the purpose of all this hand-wringing is to help the poor. But the poor are just the bait in a political bait-and-switch game.
The fraud becomes apparent the moment anyone suggests that there be means tests, so that the taxpayers' money will be spent only on the poor. Those who pose as the biggest champions of the poor are almost invariably the biggest opponents of means tests. They want bigger government and the poor are just a means to that end.
Whether the issue is housing, medical care or innumerable other things, the argument will be made that the poor are unable to get some benefit that the government ought to provide for them. But the minute you accept that, the switch takes place and suddenly we are no longer talking about some benefit confined to the poor but about "universal health care" or "affordable housing" as a "right" for everyone.
Bait and switch advertising is illegal when unscrupulous businesses engage in it. But it is standard operating procedure in politics. especially during election years.
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell.ht
Oh dear! Somone is going to get roasted over this one. How could somone have overlooked something as simple as clearing the music rights? Then again, Apple has been known to be a little silly when it comes to things like this, look at the previous names for dev versions of the Mac OS, Copland, Gershwin, and Mozart. I'm pretty darn sure the Mozart foundation (or whatever it's called) actually did sue Apple for use of the name without approval.
What a moron too... "Eminem"? I mean geeze come on, can't you come up with something better? Couldn't he try to invent some name that didn't sound like a candy name? (M&M's, obviously)
Jack Valenti, head of the Motion Picture Association of America, has suggested that consumers have no legitimate need for such software, telling The Associated Press in November, "If you buy a DVD you have a copy. If you want a backup copy you buy another one." How about, "No", Jack Valenti? While many people like myself do copy DVDs because they don't feel like paying for them, many others want to create backup copies because they have kids and because DVDs are quite expensive. How do you like someone telling you what you can and cannot do with your own stuff? You have every right to create backup copies.
Everyone, purchase a DVD burner for $100-150, get a Netflix account for $21 a month, and download DVD X Copy from any P2P network.
You can get 3 movies out at a time with Netflix. Simply take the 3 movies the day you get them, rip & copy them, send them back. If you can do all 3 in the same day before the last mail pickup, you can get about 9-12 DVDs copied a week.
I have saved over $1000 by doing this. Instead of purchasing DVDs to fund lawsuits like those against 321 Studios, you can spend the money on more important things, like your children.
Subtle?
"Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
In my state (Michigan) homosexual couples are afforded all the rights and priviliges of a married couple, from changing your name to sharing health care benefits as a Same Sex Domestic Partner. This begs the question, what is the big deal about being able to get a marriage license? You're not gaining anything under the eyes of the law. I'm not a homosexual, so perhaps that's not something I can understand.
What I can understand is the heterosexual viewpoint, which is if homosexual unions are "recognized" as legal marriages, then what is marriage? Rather than a sacrament and a union of two people in order to rear children, what is it? Why not let polygamists get married, then?
I can see homosexuals wanting to legitimize what is in FACT an alternative lifestyle, but if that's what you're going for, call it that. Don't seek approval from the majority in your choice of lifestyle.
This is all just my opinion, and wildly offtopic.
El riesgo vive siempre!
3 percent of people not being able to marry each other since marriage is between dissimilar genders isn't exactly abuse.
Some want to say this is the same as the Civil Rights movement. To do that is to be quite disrespectful of people who WERE treated as property, denied the right to vote, etc. If I was a black person, I'd pop a knot on the next person who said gays being unable to marry each other is as bad as being treated as property.
I'm abandoning this thread, before it degenerates into more off-topic discussion that it already is.
I don't love iTunes or the iPod
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
If there is no difference, then WHY is a distinction made? Marriage in the legal sense is a civil contract, no one is going to force a church to perform unions that it doesn't want to.
"Alternative" is a clever term often used by folks who don't want to sound critical, when in fact they are. Homosexuality appears to be biological. Discrimination on biological grounds is held to be illegal. Pretend that it is a choice (Many folks make this argument). Faith is also a choice, and also an illegal ground for discrimination.
What then is the valid argument? That it offends christian morals? Fine, let the church condem gays, but the State is not allowed to discriminate.
It comes down to a question of being treated as second class citizens. Of course gay folks don't want this. They don't particularly want approval, just acceptance of the right to LIVE AS THEY WILL.
For the record, I'm neither gay nor married. However, I am sick of gay people being bashed for their audacity to love who they will...
And yeah, wildly off topic. Hopefully the country does the right thing on this one, and grow up a bit.
"Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
Aye, a reference to Guybrush Threepwood? Arrrr, matey!
Ha, you've already posted a comment, so try moderating me now! Oh, so it was a Jedi mind trick, huh? Silly! :-)
LeChuckWhat would an EWOULDBLOCK block, if an EWOULDBLOCK could block would? -- me
Why not let polygamists get married, then?
What a great idea! We could call the enabling legislation the "Divorce Lawyers' Lifetime Employment Act'!
Did she feed, clothe and raise you? If so then some respect is due you ungrateful prick.
If she sold you into slavery and disavowed all knowledge of your existence, then you might have a case.
While your description of her political views does indicate that she has some maturing to do as far as acceptance of other heritages, sexual orientations and people different from her; you haven't named any reason for you to be such a goon.
There's a wide difference between having a disagreement with a person's political views and having no respect for them. There are tons of folks whom I can't see eye to eye with politically (many of them are relatives); but I respect them.
</rant>
Paul Lenhart writes words!
And your point is?