Precisely what need is there to carry a weapon concealed. Personally, I'd like to see a law that requires people carrying lethal weapons to have to wear a Bright orange sign that says "Fuck with me at your own risk, cuz if you do, I'll kill your ass dead." In Virginia, you can even conceal a weapon in your car (perfect for those drive by shootings/road rage attacks). The idea is thus: Guns do kill people. Granted they are being used as designed by other people. I'm more afraid of a criminal with a knife than one with a gun, to be quite honest. Most people who get shot, die.
If, as has been stated in previous postings here, you consider the entire post as true, the man in the story never stated an intention to incite riot. He stated an intent to get arrested as a demonstrator.
Isn't that the same thing? That would be like me going into downtown DC and saying "I want to be arrested" in a mob of angry people thinking the same thing. When in fact I *DO* get arrested, as per my request, but without charge, the people riot, then are not my actions incitement of riot? Could the author's interpretation of request for identification (perfectly legal request BTW) have been incitement? Sure. I agree with your second and third paragraphs, but NOT with your first. If you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear.
How is asking for proof of identity living in a police state? He could always have answered "I don't have one, I don't drive/work, etc." We're not living in a police state, we're living a state that is controlled by hippie-freak protestors who think it's okay not just to defy authority but to disrespect it as well. THAT's the problem.
Okay, so a lot of the bands you mentioned DO need a lot of the post-production work, but I take exception to the use of Blink 182 and Smashmouth who both put on good live shows (NOT sung to DAT) and are solid artists. Britney Spears, BS Boys, NSync those guys just suck without their studio gear.
Oh that's right, so many of us 19-30 year olds vote so very often that we, alone, could unseat a judge. SUUUUUREE. Just like we could vote in a president. The fallacy that if "everyone voted, we'd win" goes back to the Simpsons (everything in this life does) episode where Bart runs for class president. Sure he's gonna win, he's got all the polls...but then only Martin and his buddy vote and guess who's president? As an age-group we don't vote enough. I've voted every time I've had the option since I turned eighteen, but how many of my compatriots in college did? Maybe 20%. 1 in 5. IF I'm lucky. Pathetic, isn't it? The judges aren't changing the rules "ostentatiously" they're just enforcing the ones we already have. I don't think Dubya is gonna get up on the stand and say "I wanna Free Napster" neither is Gore, for that matter. It's all sans-point if you ask me.
Have you heard of summer term and year round school? Both of those happen at large universities. So, I suppose most of your point is moot. Besides, why buy when you can steal and not get caught? Answer me that? Are these users so altruistic? Not really. Get a clue and stop trying to find the high moral ground for an activity that has none.
Another victory for the bad guys in this fight. Actually, I take that back. There are no winners in this deal. We ALL lose this battle.
If the RIAA wins, there will be no digital music trading. PERIOD. They'll send their watchdogs out like a swarm of locusts searching for crops to eat. So people will go to Gnapster and Freenet. And with that will go the musicians profits, and the labels' as well. If there are no labels, there is no production scheme for modern music that ISNT Digital. And as we all well know we can't trust people to pay for things if they can take them for free.
If Napster wins this suit, then commence the online trading revolution on a more permanent and prevalent basis. Enter the dragon. No longer will artists be able to make a living doing what they are doing.
Sure the current touring bands and the ultrapop bubble gum acts will survive, coasting on a wave of teen sensationalism and washed up nostalgia, but the new artists will make their living scraping by as the starving artists of the 1600s. And yet, we crave that media, that sweet song that soothes our savage soul. No longer will it be possible for a band to take a year off from life and record a thought productive and creative album. Am I bitter? YES. You betcha.
And here's why. I love music. In nearly every form (industrial and country excepted) I enjoy it. And the industry will suffer. We'll get some nice stars, but those people who KNOW that their talent will never be seen will give up. Those bands who might make it now won't make it in the future. It's a sad day for the industry. We've caused the unemployment of thousands of promoters. We've caused the unemployment of thousands of recording studios who won't have clients.
So now you say, "Napster sells more records" Nope. Napsters COSTS records. Why pay when you can have it for free? I like the idea myself sometimes, especially when I see a CD priced at $15. So some altruistic souls go buy more, but I doubt that's what most of the users do.
Here's my deal. I think this whole thing sucks. I hate Napster, I hate the RIAA. I love the artists. Hell, I love the promotions folks more. They work in an industry we all love, but also love to hate. So Let's work on this. Let's get Congress to regulate a digital media transfer source. Let's let our government do their job, represent the interests OF the people FOR the people. So write your congressman, I just wrote mine. It's all doable. But it sucks in the meantime
We are long-overdue for copyright reform. Step one would be to roll back copyright so it expires within 10-20 years of the death of the author. Another good reform would be to expand "fair use" to include everything short of SELLING (or marketing for profit, like Napster hoped to) a nearly-exact duplication of the work. If groups like the RIAA continue to act like dicks over "IP", they may force the rest of us into pushing for such reforms. (People who have been following know that Sen. Orin Hatch of Utah made some thinly veiled threats to act along such lines, and his stock with me went way up for what he had to say.),
Why stop their? Why not say this: you have ten years to make as much money as you want off of your idea and then it belongs to all of us. I like that idea. Personally, I like the idea of Copyright as civil right. We should have a right to what we create and produce instead of it just belonging to someone. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for the proliferation of IP, but not at the hands of some faceless corporation.
Just for the record, the 12 bar blues is pretty well standard, don't get me wrong, I love it, but hey man, how hard is I (6bars) IV (2bars) I (2bars) IV (2bars) V (2bars) I (2bars) to exhaust in terms of possibilties, right?
You've neglected to mention the very hard working promotions staff who often peddle utter drivel to radio stations waiting for that killer album to come around. How about the label people who decide who's good and who's not? How about the secretary who answers phones at the label? Is he supposed to work for free? All of these are legit costs. Honest expenses come with size of corporation. If you don't like it take your record to an indie label with four people. They'll charge more for your CD because they can't get the discounts or the attention that a major label can provide. It's a double edged sword and it sucks hardcore, but that's the way it is. If you don't like it, you're free to try it yourself. And if you succeed, more power to you.
And how many times do we have to tell you that intellectual property and cash flow is NOT a zero sum game. Just because someone copies something DOES NOT MAKE IT FREE. It's NOT like physical property where you either have it or you don't. Intellectual Property is the idea that a notion or expressable feeling is unique and worthy of value, in this case Music being worth something. If you take this IP without properly crediting the author/performer, etc, then you are in effect taking something without asking/paying. This is illegal. Jesu Christo, if I have to explain it one more fscking time, I'm gonna start shooting people (and yes, I will start at the RIAA, that lawyer bitch goes first.)
The whole point here is: 1) Music is not a free thing, never has been (hey, Mozart and Haydn had patrons too), never will be, get used to it. 2) Piracy is a bad word, let's try improper use instead. It's more accurate. 3) Just because someone else still has their copy and you now have one DOES NOT MAKE IT ANYTHING BUT THEFT.
Look, calling the radio stations is pointless since they don't actually BUY the cds 99% of the time, they are "gifts" of the label. They are not in collusion with the RIAA, that's bullshit. The radio stations DO pay for their music through ASCAP/BMI and that's what we want. The labels may suck, but boycott them, not the industry that actually does good things for artists (the best recipe for success includes lots of good appearances on local stations, even if they are commercial). This isn't an anti-radio movement, this is an anti-RIAA movement. The RIAA doesn't own the radio stations. So don't punish people because they are indirectly related.
On the radio, the artist does get paid back for their work. All commercial stations buy a BMI/ASCAP license and the proceeds of this license (often incredibly expensive) go toward the BMI/ASCAP royalty pool and if an artist like Britney/Aguilera/Backdoor Boyz gets a lot of airplay they get cash from that fund. It's not just a freebie. But if you grab it off Napster, they don't get shit. Plus, with radio, you have to put up with commercials, which often suck.
Wasn't Pismo the PBook they released that has firewire? I'm pretty sure the Pismo codename had to do with the newer black Pbooks. But, then again, I could be wrong.
They replaced the iMac style small keyboards with full size larger still iMac style keyboards. Plus they got rid of those fscking hockey pucks they were using as mice. I like Jobs, he's creative. Yes he's fussy like a 12 year old girl, but sometimes, that makes things happen.
That may be the case, I'm not a Java expert, but their report on Wireless networking (posted today) was right on the money. And generally, so is their update information. They hardly belong in the world of MOSR and AI, two groups that spout so much bullsh*t you'd think they were fertilizer companies. Between the two of them, they have debated on a cobranded Palm and other such vaporware products not even on the drawing boards. Macintouch doesn't do much of that.
Begging your pardon, but I'd say Macintouch has a pretty good reputation. They have been right on the spot with their reports regarding various Mac issues and software upgrades. To put them in the same sentence as MOSR and AppleInsider is ludicrous. MOSR and AI are sights that are based on crap, while Macintouch prints legitimate news instead of 98% rumor.
Katz, C'mon, at least pretend you saw the movie. We know you actually saw Rocky Horror Picture Show and you're just talking about Magenta. C'mon, fess up. And Post-Columbine? Couldn't you have left your catchphrase out just once?
I know the name of the game, and I will not budge from my point of view. You conveniently neglected to mention how much radio stations pay to BMI and ASCAP to pay the royalties on the music that they receive for free. I spent a year as a music director for a radio station, so don't tell me I know nothing, alright? Just because you choose not to like the industry structure does not mean it is okay to steal from it. That's what I mean. See Courtney Love's speech on salon.com. She does get it. So buy the CDs artist-direct if you can, but if you can't, don't go and steal it: that guarantees they get nothing.
The Web already provides a way to "ban" or restrict access to users. It's called password protection. It seems that eBay has tried this, but they can't always enforce their own license agreements, what with people holding multiple accounts. So eBay has gone to the courts to help them enforce the agreement made between the two interested parties and obviously neglected by one. This is a license agreement issue. You certainly could, I suppose, restrict your website to beautiful babes, but would that serve your interests? I doubt it. Does eBay's action serve the interests of their community? You betcha.
And what do those middle men do? Sell the records to radio stations. Throw kickass parties so somebody buys the record. They do the recording. They do the engineering. These people have made their living creating music as well, do they not deserve a paycheck too? The label has lots of costs that you don't see, costs that are just as real. They also spend millions on the bands that don't make it, but still got a big label contract and yes, it comes down to the all mighty dollar. Surprised? Not I. People need to make money to live, sad but fscking true. So don't be afraid to support these people who you've never met, will never meet, but do the engineering on track 8 of that CD you like. Or the people that gave it to the radio station so you could hear it for the first time. Or the people that threw the party so the Rolling Stone guy would review it and you read about it. Regardless, the only way you knew about the artists you like (aside from napster/theft) is through the people the industry created. Should those people go homeless because you don't want to pay for music you could steal for free? No. Get your own clue.
While I never suspected it might be Orrin Hatch saying this, more power to him! Regardless, the end of article gave me an interesting thought: The Labels and the RIAA do NOT want Legislation concerning digital media. Instead they want to "let the market work it out" Personally, while I am generally a laissez-faire kinda guy, I think that the only way we may get a fair price for those MP3s is if we let the congress legislate. We can influence them, but we can't influence the record stores and RIAA. Legislate for Cheap MP3s!
The reason we pay so much for CDs is that there are engineers, production staff, graphic artists, promotions staff etcetera that need to get paid for their work. The collected works of Metallica would need only graphic work and promotions people. Piece of cake. Cheap as hell. They'd probably charge $30 for it...but that's a lot of albums.
I watched Lars speak on CNN this morning in front of the Judiciary Committee and I found his ending remarks rather poignant. I'm paraphrasing, but he read from the Napster terms of service, specifically the part where they discuss the copyright of their site, which is theirs and cannot be redistributed without their express written permission. I thought that was a very good point to make. If they're alright with doing it to others, why don't they let everyone else take their software?
The biggest deal about Marathon is the fan community that it spawned, want more, check out the Aleph One movement to work on the Source Code that Bungie released. The plotline in the Marathon series is so deep that people are still exploring it, check out Hamish Sinclair's Marathon Story Page I personally think you're lacking when you compare it to doom, a mindless shoot-em-up with no brain power required.
Slashdot Mirror
Precisely what need is there to carry a weapon concealed. Personally, I'd like to see a law that requires people carrying lethal weapons to have to wear a Bright orange sign that says "Fuck with me at your own risk, cuz if you do, I'll kill your ass dead." In Virginia, you can even conceal a weapon in your car (perfect for those drive by shootings/road rage attacks). The idea is thus: Guns do kill people. Granted they are being used as designed by other people. I'm more afraid of a criminal with a knife than one with a gun, to be quite honest. Most people who get shot, die.
If, as has been stated in previous postings here, you consider the entire post as true, the man in the story never stated an intention to incite riot. He stated an intent to get arrested as a demonstrator.
Isn't that the same thing? That would be like me going into downtown DC and saying "I want to be arrested" in a mob of angry people thinking the same thing. When in fact I *DO* get arrested, as per my request, but without charge, the people riot, then are not my actions incitement of riot? Could the author's interpretation of request for identification (perfectly legal request BTW) have been incitement? Sure. I agree with your second and third paragraphs, but NOT with your first. If you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear.
How is asking for proof of identity living in a police state? He could always have answered "I don't have one, I don't drive/work, etc." We're not living in a police state, we're living a state that is controlled by hippie-freak protestors who think it's okay not just to defy authority but to disrespect it as well. THAT's the problem.
Okay, so a lot of the bands you mentioned DO need a lot of the post-production work, but I take exception to the use of Blink 182 and Smashmouth who both put on good live shows (NOT sung to DAT) and are solid artists. Britney Spears, BS Boys, NSync those guys just suck without their studio gear.
Oh that's right, so many of us 19-30 year olds vote so very often that we, alone, could unseat a judge. SUUUUUREE. Just like we could vote in a president. The fallacy that if "everyone voted, we'd win" goes back to the Simpsons (everything in this life does) episode where Bart runs for class president. Sure he's gonna win, he's got all the polls...but then only Martin and his buddy vote and guess who's president? As an age-group we don't vote enough. I've voted every time I've had the option since I turned eighteen, but how many of my compatriots in college did? Maybe 20%. 1 in 5. IF I'm lucky. Pathetic, isn't it? The judges aren't changing the rules "ostentatiously" they're just enforcing the ones we already have. I don't think Dubya is gonna get up on the stand and say "I wanna Free Napster" neither is Gore, for that matter. It's all sans-point if you ask me.
Have you heard of summer term and year round school? Both of those happen at large universities. So, I suppose most of your point is moot. Besides, why buy when you can steal and not get caught? Answer me that? Are these users so altruistic? Not really. Get a clue and stop trying to find the high moral ground for an activity that has none.
If the RIAA wins, there will be no digital music trading. PERIOD. They'll send their watchdogs out like a swarm of locusts searching for crops to eat. So people will go to Gnapster and Freenet. And with that will go the musicians profits, and the labels' as well. If there are no labels, there is no production scheme for modern music that ISNT Digital. And as we all well know we can't trust people to pay for things if they can take them for free.
If Napster wins this suit, then commence the online trading revolution on a more permanent and prevalent basis. Enter the dragon. No longer will artists be able to make a living doing what they are doing.
Sure the current touring bands and the ultrapop bubble gum acts will survive, coasting on a wave of teen sensationalism and washed up nostalgia, but the new artists will make their living scraping by as the starving artists of the 1600s. And yet, we crave that media, that sweet song that soothes our savage soul. No longer will it be possible for a band to take a year off from life and record a thought productive and creative album. Am I bitter? YES. You betcha.
And here's why. I love music. In nearly every form (industrial and country excepted) I enjoy it. And the industry will suffer. We'll get some nice stars, but those people who KNOW that their talent will never be seen will give up. Those bands who might make it now won't make it in the future. It's a sad day for the industry. We've caused the unemployment of thousands of promoters. We've caused the unemployment of thousands of recording studios who won't have clients.
So now you say, "Napster sells more records" Nope. Napsters COSTS records. Why pay when you can have it for free? I like the idea myself sometimes, especially when I see a CD priced at $15. So some altruistic souls go buy more, but I doubt that's what most of the users do.
Here's my deal. I think this whole thing sucks. I hate Napster, I hate the RIAA. I love the artists. Hell, I love the promotions folks more. They work in an industry we all love, but also love to hate. So Let's work on this. Let's get Congress to regulate a digital media transfer source. Let's let our government do their job, represent the interests OF the people FOR the people. So write your congressman, I just wrote mine. It's all doable.
But it sucks in the meantime
We are long-overdue for copyright reform. Step one would be to roll back copyright so it expires within 10-20 years of the death of the author. Another good reform would be to expand "fair use" to include everything short of SELLING (or marketing for profit, like Napster hoped to) a nearly-exact duplication of the work. If groups like the RIAA continue to act like dicks over "IP", they may force the rest of us into pushing for such reforms. (People who have been following know that Sen. Orin Hatch of Utah made some thinly veiled threats to act along such lines, and his stock with me went way up for what he had to say.),
Why stop their? Why not say this: you have ten years to make as much money as you want off of your idea and then it belongs to all of us. I like that idea. Personally, I like the idea of Copyright as civil right. We should have a right to what we create and produce instead of it just belonging to someone. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for the proliferation of IP, but not at the hands of some faceless corporation.
Just for the record, the 12 bar blues is pretty well standard, don't get me wrong, I love it, but hey man, how hard is I (6bars) IV (2bars) I (2bars) IV (2bars) V (2bars) I (2bars) to exhaust in terms of possibilties, right?
You've neglected to mention the very hard working promotions staff who often peddle utter drivel to radio stations waiting for that killer album to come around. How about the label people who decide who's good and who's not? How about the secretary who answers phones at the label? Is he supposed to work for free? All of these are legit costs. Honest expenses come with size of corporation. If you don't like it take your record to an indie label with four people. They'll charge more for your CD because they can't get the discounts or the attention that a major label can provide. It's a double edged sword and it sucks hardcore, but that's the way it is. If you don't like it, you're free to try it yourself.
And if you succeed, more power to you.
The whole point here is:
1) Music is not a free thing, never has been (hey, Mozart and Haydn had patrons too), never will be, get used to it.
2) Piracy is a bad word, let's try improper use instead. It's more accurate.
3) Just because someone else still has their copy and you now have one DOES NOT MAKE IT ANYTHING BUT THEFT.
IS THAT PERFECTLY CLEAR????!!!
Look, calling the radio stations is pointless since they don't actually BUY the cds 99% of the time, they are "gifts" of the label. They are not in collusion with the RIAA, that's bullshit. The radio stations DO pay for their music through ASCAP/BMI and that's what we want. The labels may suck, but boycott them, not the industry that actually does good things for artists (the best recipe for success includes lots of good appearances on local stations, even if they are commercial). This isn't an anti-radio movement, this is an anti-RIAA movement. The RIAA doesn't own the radio stations. So don't punish people because they are indirectly related.
On the radio, the artist does get paid back for their work. All commercial stations buy a BMI/ASCAP license and the proceeds of this license (often incredibly expensive) go toward the BMI/ASCAP royalty pool and if an artist like Britney/Aguilera/Backdoor Boyz gets a lot of airplay they get cash from that fund. It's not just a freebie. But if you grab it off Napster, they don't get shit. Plus, with radio, you have to put up with commercials, which often suck.
Wasn't Pismo the PBook they released that has firewire? I'm pretty sure the Pismo codename had to do with the newer black Pbooks. But, then again, I could be wrong.
They replaced the iMac style small keyboards with full size larger still iMac style keyboards. Plus they got rid of those fscking hockey pucks they were using as mice. I like Jobs, he's creative. Yes he's fussy like a 12 year old girl, but sometimes, that makes things happen.
That may be the case, I'm not a Java expert, but their report on Wireless networking (posted today) was right on the money. And generally, so is their update information. They hardly belong in the world of MOSR and AI, two groups that spout so much bullsh*t you'd think they were fertilizer companies. Between the two of them, they have debated on a cobranded Palm and other such vaporware products not even on the drawing boards. Macintouch doesn't do much of that.
Begging your pardon, but I'd say Macintouch has a pretty good reputation. They have been right on the spot with their reports regarding various Mac issues and software upgrades. To put them in the same sentence as MOSR and AppleInsider is ludicrous. MOSR and AI are sights that are based on crap, while Macintouch prints legitimate news instead of 98% rumor.
Katz, C'mon, at least pretend you saw the movie. We know you actually saw Rocky Horror Picture Show and you're just talking about Magenta. C'mon, fess up. And Post-Columbine? Couldn't you have left your catchphrase out just once?
I know the name of the game, and I will not budge from my point of view. You conveniently neglected to mention how much radio stations pay to BMI and ASCAP to pay the royalties on the music that they receive for free. I spent a year as a music director for a radio station, so don't tell me I know nothing, alright? Just because you choose not to like the industry structure does not mean it is okay to steal from it. That's what I mean. See Courtney Love's speech on salon.com. She does get it. So buy the CDs artist-direct if you can, but if you can't, don't go and steal it: that guarantees they get nothing.
The Web already provides a way to "ban" or restrict access to users. It's called password protection.
It seems that eBay has tried this, but they can't always enforce their own license agreements, what with people holding multiple accounts. So eBay has gone to the courts to help them enforce the agreement made between the two interested parties and obviously neglected by one. This is a license agreement issue. You certainly could, I suppose, restrict your website to beautiful babes, but would that serve your interests? I doubt it. Does eBay's action serve the interests of their community? You betcha.
And what do those middle men do? Sell the records to radio stations. Throw kickass parties so somebody buys the record. They do the recording. They do the engineering. These people have made their living creating music as well, do they not deserve a paycheck too? The label has lots of costs that you don't see, costs that are just as real. They also spend millions on the bands that don't make it, but still got a big label contract and yes, it comes down to the all mighty dollar. Surprised? Not I. People need to make money to live, sad but fscking true. So don't be afraid to support these people who you've never met, will never meet, but do the engineering on track 8 of that CD you like. Or the people that gave it to the radio station so you could hear it for the first time. Or the people that threw the party so the Rolling Stone guy would review it and you read about it. Regardless, the only way you knew about the artists you like (aside from napster/theft) is through the people the industry created. Should those people go homeless because you don't want to pay for music you could steal for free? No. Get your own clue.
Imagine a Beowulf cluster of....wait a minute...it practically NEEDS a Beowulf cluster to RUN it.
While I never suspected it might be Orrin Hatch saying this, more power to him! Regardless, the end of article gave me an interesting thought: The Labels and the RIAA do NOT want Legislation concerning digital media. Instead they want to "let the market work it out" Personally, while I am generally a laissez-faire kinda guy, I think that the only way we may get a fair price for those MP3s is if we let the congress legislate. We can influence them, but we can't influence the record stores and RIAA. Legislate for Cheap MP3s!
The reason we pay so much for CDs is that there are engineers, production staff, graphic artists, promotions staff etcetera that need to get paid for their work. The collected works of Metallica would need only graphic work and promotions people. Piece of cake. Cheap as hell. They'd probably charge $30 for it...but that's a lot of albums.
I watched Lars speak on CNN this morning in front of the Judiciary Committee and I found his ending remarks rather poignant. I'm paraphrasing, but he read from the Napster terms of service, specifically the part where they discuss the copyright of their site, which is theirs and cannot be redistributed without their express written permission. I thought that was a very good point to make. If they're alright with doing it to others, why don't they let everyone else take their software?
The biggest deal about Marathon is the fan community that it spawned, want more, check out the Aleph One movement to work on the Source Code that Bungie released. The plotline in the Marathon series is so deep that people are still exploring it, check out Hamish Sinclair's Marathon Story Page I personally think you're lacking when you compare it to doom, a mindless shoot-em-up with no brain power required.