..someone building a platform in international waters and running a bunch of high-speed i-net lines to it from several different countries and then offering free, anonymous access and web site hosting and having the policy of not cooperating with any goverments. ^_^ Of course, that would be far to expensive, like they said, and someone would probably get ticked off enough eventually to go blow it up. But it is an idea. Oh well. As for your question, who knows. Everyone seems to be trying to censor everyone else these days. It's like a giant game of tattle-tale, with the goverment being the 'parent'. "MOMMY! Little Timmy said a no-no word!" Etc. People should just lighten up. The Internet is here for many reasons, one of them being free speech. If you don't like what a web site is saying, don't go to it. If you don't like what someone is saying, leave the chat room/message board/etc. or, if the place has it, use their ignore feature. People have rights, (Last time I checked they did, at least. But the goverment's been working on that, so I don't know!) That's my $0.02
Personally, I've never felt that this price is fair, especially since it's usually only one or two songs that you buy a CD for (At least, that's how it always seemed to be with me) I know that if I tried to buy every CD to equal the songs I had in my collection of (Varied artists and bands) I would have WAY to many CD's, not to mention songs I never really listened to. Usually I only download a few songs from any one band/artist, which is the reason that my music collection is so ecclectic. I can see why Metallica would get mad over people that would go and download entire CD's of music worth of their stuff instead of paying for it (Even though the prices are steep, IMHO). But for the people who simply download one or two or three songs, I think it's completely unfair to ban them. (Not that this will stop them from just creating a completely new account. Rinse, lather, repeat?)
Slashdot Mirror
..someone building a platform in international waters and running a bunch of high-speed i-net lines to it from several different countries and then offering free, anonymous access and web site hosting and having the policy of not cooperating with any goverments. ^_^ Of course, that would be far to expensive, like they said, and someone would probably get ticked off enough eventually to go blow it up. But it is an idea. Oh well.
As for your question, who knows. Everyone seems to be trying to censor everyone else these days. It's like a giant game of tattle-tale, with the goverment being the 'parent'. "MOMMY! Little Timmy said a no-no word!" Etc. People should just lighten up. The Internet is here for many reasons, one of them being free speech. If you don't like what a web site is saying, don't go to it. If you don't like what someone is saying, leave the chat room/message board/etc. or, if the place has it, use their ignore feature. People have rights, (Last time I checked they did, at least. But the goverment's been working on that, so I don't know!) That's my $0.02
Personally, I've never felt that this price is fair, especially since it's usually only one or two songs that you buy a CD for (At least, that's how it always seemed to be with me) I know that if I tried to buy every CD to equal the songs I had in my collection of (Varied artists and bands) I would have WAY to many CD's, not to mention songs I never really listened to. Usually I only download a few songs from any one band/artist, which is the reason that my music collection is so ecclectic. I can see why Metallica would get mad over people that would go and download entire CD's of music worth of their stuff instead of paying for it (Even though the prices are steep, IMHO). But for the people who simply download one or two or three songs, I think it's completely unfair to ban them. (Not that this will stop them from just creating a completely new account. Rinse, lather, repeat?)