Yeah it is, but that's okay once in a while, as long as it's interesting. People here tend to be more intelligent than people not here, so this is a good place to come for a good discussion.
Well, if the RIAA wants money for it, aren't they then condoning it, meaning you can pay your 4.95 and download all you want without getting in trouble? If they want money, then that obviously would be for copyrighted material, not for the indie stuff which the have no rights to, right? That's how I would take it.
And once you pick a file to download, it's a point-to-point transaction. The only people involved in violating copyright law are individual people, and they might or might not be doing this on a case-by-case basis.
Well, except one thing, the databases of everything on Napster are stored on Napster's servers, and if Napster did any query on any popular band of their own databases, they would come up with hundreds, probably thousands of hits. The databases are theirs, that is their service. So if the databases are theirs then they could arguably be knowingly violating copyright law.
One could also easily argue that they are not responsible for the content of their databases because they did not put the content there (at least the content that violates copyright law). This way, they are like an ISP in that they are not responsible for content of the web pages of their customers. Even though Napster knows their databases contain material in violation of copyright law, as long as they don't look and don't try to police it, then they are not responsible. But if they police any of it, then they are responsible for all of it.
Yes, all that would be very nifty, but it how much memory and CPU time would it take up? I mean to have to keep all those icons in memory and to have to figure out what files get what icons (combinations of like 5 different categories) every time any folder is opened, well I don't know... And if they are generated on the fly by just reading the file info and creating the icon right there that would kill CPU time and just take forever.
I pretty much agree with Lars. While I haven't read the whole interview yet, I feel compelled to reply now anyway.
Their main quarrel with Napster is the volume and quality of the material available. This is valid. When they were taping vinyl it was low quality, so they wanted to go get the records or tapes or whatever. With Napster, it's nearly cd quality and with cd recorders and all, where's the incentive to go support the bands by buying the cds? Aside from liner notes and just doing the right thing, there's none. I download stuff from Napster. Most of the mp3s I have (from Napster or otherwise) are legal. I own the cd or the tape or bought them on the net or whatever. My point is, I use Napster the way it should be used, and I do the same thing with it that they (Metallica) esentially did when they were trading tapes, I do go buy cds that are worth buying, which turns out to be not very many. I support the bands worth supporting, and the rest of them (that suck) can burn.
And let's not forget that nobody on the internet is there to lose money. Napster has some way of making money down the road, and without anybody who deserves it (like artists) ever seeing any.
I know people who have said they will never buy another cd again. I'm sure there are lots of people out there like this. While I can understand them not wanting to support the evil empire (record industry) they are also not supporting the artists. How do they think the artists get the money to continue making records? I mean Metallica is certainly not running out of money anytime soon but some other bands could. The Goo Goo Dolls, early in their career had a multi platinum album and were broke. They were playing shows FOR THE MONEY. What if everybody had downloaded their stuff instead of buying it? There may have been no more Goo Goo Dolls. Maybe there are other bands like them who were not so lucky that we have lost forever because of services like Napster. (Maybe not?)
See, it's stuff like this that makes me understand why artists are pissed at Napster. Like I have said at length, I use Napster (and others) the way it should be used. Lots of people don't.
All just fuel for thought. Gimmie fuel gimmie fire...
I didn't realize that I had to format the damn thing myself, I thought it would format it as typed. Gosh, I hope THIS one gets moderated up, the last one has no chance...
First off I want to say that I own all the Metallica albums except Re-Load (which I will) and Kill 'Em All (late comer to Metallica, can't find an original copy). Yes, I bought Load the day it came out (first new Metallica album after I started listening.) Yes it kicks ass. It took me a little while to warm up to it, but I did, and it's just as edgy as anything they've ever done. I love all Metallica old and new.
Now for the question: (And don't anybody jump on me, I seriously doubt that they'd manage to 'not notice' Scour.) What do you all think about people trading your (or anybody's) videos? Back to the old argument, this is how I found out that there even was a video for S&M (I figured there was, but this clinched it) and I bought it the same day. And I will buy the DVD. And I will eventually buy all Metallica videos. (Is there anything more exciting than watching Lars kick ass?) Now, anybody that knows me knows how much I hate MTV (GODDAMM TRENDY MOTHER-#$&@$*) and VH1 just doesn't play much Metallica, so I get my videos from Scour. Isn't this another way of getting the artists out there to be seen and heard?
I use Napster and Scour the way everyone should, I download tons of stuff, throw out most of it, and buy what's worth buying. I have bought literally dozens of albums that I probably would not have bought, as a direct result of being able to download and hear new stuff. I think you need to trust people a little more, most will do the right thing, and those who won't, well, you're not going to stop them anyway. They're assholes, and will find a way to pirate no matter what (and probably never even thought about buying anything they're pirating). All you do by killing Napster is slowing it down some and depriving the rest of us valuable, um, let's call it research. That's basically what it is.
I don't mean to offend you or anything, but you guys all traded tapes and stuff and look at where you are today. How many up and coming (and poor) musicians are being inspired by your stuff? What if the Misfits came after you back in '83 for copying their stuff?
Now, that said, a note to everyone else: Before you get all pissed at Metallica, think about their side. You're a musician and you find that people are stealing from you (yes that's what it is) so you go find a list of 330,000 of them, which is probably a WAY low estimate. Assuming that all of these people get tracks from two different albums, that's about 6 million bucks! Of course not every one of these people are going to actually BUY those albums if they had no other way to get them, but what if half did? Or a quarter? That's still millions of dollars. My first reaction was to be really pissed, but I actually stopped and THOUGHT about it, and they're right. Nobody wants to admit it, but under the law, they are right. Don't f.cking try to tell me you wouldn't be pissed.
Well, that's about it, but I know as soon as I hit submit, I'll remember what else I wanted to say...
First off I want to say that I own all the Metallica albums except Re-Load (which I will) and Kill 'Em All (late comer to Metallica, can't find an original copy). Yes, I bought Load the day it came out (first new Metallica album after I started listening.) Yes it kicks ass. It took me a little while to warm up to it, but I did, and it's just as edgy as anything they've ever done. I love all Metallica old and new. Now for the question: (And don't anybody jump on me, I seriously doubt that they'd manage to 'not notice' Scour.) What do you all think about people trading your (or anybody's) videos? Back to the old argument, this is how I found out that there even was a video for S&M (I figured there was, but this clinched it) and I bought it the same day. And I will buy the DVD. And I will eventually buy all Metallica videos. (Is there anything more exciting than watching Lars kick ass?) Now, anybody that knows me knows how much I hate MTV (GODDAMM TRENDY MOTHER-#$&@$*) and VH1 just doesn't play much Metallica, so I get my videos from Scour. Isn't this another way of getting the artists out there to be seen and heard? I use Napster and Scour the way everyone should, I download tons of stuff, throw out most of it, and buy what's worth buying. I have bought literally dozens of albums that I probably would not have bought, as a direct result of being able to download and hear new stuff. I think you need to trust people a little more, most will do the right thing, and those who won't, well, you're not going to stop them anyway. They're assholes, and will find a way to pirate no matter what (and probably never even thought about buying anything they're pirating). All you do by killing Napster is slowing it down some and depriving the rest of us valuable, um, let's call it research. That's basically what it is. I don't mean to offend you or anything, but you guys all traded tapes and stuff and look at where you are today. How many up and coming (and poor) musicians are being inspired by your stuff? What if the Misfits came after you back in '83 for copying their stuff? Now, that said, a note to everyone else: Before you get all pissed at Metallica, think about their side. You're a musician and you find that people are stealing from you (yes that's what it is) so you go find a list of 330,000 of them, which is probably a WAY low estimate. Assuming that all of these people get tracks from two different albums, that's about 6 million bucks! Of course not every one of these people are going to actually BUY those albums if they had no other way to get them, but what if half did? Or a quarter? That's still millions of dollars. My first reaction was to be really pissed, but I actually stopped and THOUGHT about it, and they're right. Nobody wants to admit it, but under the law, they are right. Don't f.cking try to tell me you wouldn't be pissed. Well, that's about it, but I know as soon as I hit submit, I'll remember what else I wanted to say...
Actually, I don't think they do use cookies, I think it's an IP type thing or something like that. I had a Netscape browser and an IE browser open, both on buy.com (it had to do with $20 coupons & swapping accounts). Anyway, stuff I put in the basket in one browser would show up in the basket in the other (coupons too). I'm not sure how they do it and I'm too lazy to go look right now, but it's NOT cookies, unless Netscape now looks at IE's cookies.
As for public terminals, I never buy anything on a public terminal. The computers at my school are the least secure machines on the planet. But if I suddenly lost my senses and did buy something, I would be sure to myself off, clear the cache and delete the history and cookies, but I'm paranoid, so...
Yes, I do believe in creation and no, I do not believe in all that evolution crap. But no matter what you believe in, let's not forget that no matter what anyone says, evolution is -- listen carefully now -- STILL A THEORY. THEORY. Just like creation is a theory, since there's nobody here that was around then (except maybe Bob Dole). The Bible says that creation happenned, but if you don't believe in the Bible, then I guess there's just no proof. I guess it just takes a bit of faith, just like evolution does. You still haven't found your "missing link."
Slashdot Mirror
Billy Big Mouth Bass! Yes, that God-awful singing fish, somebody hack THAT to play something else. THAT would be cool.
Yeah it is, but that's okay once in a while, as long as it's interesting. People here tend to be more intelligent than people not here, so this is a good place to come for a good discussion.
Well, if the RIAA wants money for it, aren't they then condoning it, meaning you can pay your 4.95 and download all you want without getting in trouble? If they want money, then that obviously would be for copyrighted material, not for the indie stuff which the have no rights to, right? That's how I would take it.
Well, except one thing, the databases of everything on Napster are stored on Napster's servers, and if Napster did any query on any popular band of their own databases, they would come up with hundreds, probably thousands of hits. The databases are theirs, that is their service. So if the databases are theirs then they could arguably be knowingly violating copyright law.
One could also easily argue that they are not responsible for the content of their databases because they did not put the content there (at least the content that violates copyright law). This way, they are like an ISP in that they are not responsible for content of the web pages of their customers. Even though Napster knows their databases contain material in violation of copyright law, as long as they don't look and don't try to police it, then they are not responsible. But if they police any of it, then they are responsible for all of it.
Yes, all that would be very nifty, but it how much memory and CPU time would it take up? I mean to have to keep all those icons in memory and to have to figure out what files get what icons (combinations of like 5 different categories) every time any folder is opened, well I don't know... And if they are generated on the fly by just reading the file info and creating the icon right there that would kill CPU time and just take forever.
Their main quarrel with Napster is the volume and quality of the material available. This is valid. When they were taping vinyl it was low quality, so they wanted to go get the records or tapes or whatever. With Napster, it's nearly cd quality and with cd recorders and all, where's the incentive to go support the bands by buying the cds? Aside from liner notes and just doing the right thing, there's none. I download stuff from Napster. Most of the mp3s I have (from Napster or otherwise) are legal. I own the cd or the tape or bought them on the net or whatever. My point is, I use Napster the way it should be used, and I do the same thing with it that they (Metallica) esentially did when they were trading tapes, I do go buy cds that are worth buying, which turns out to be not very many. I support the bands worth supporting, and the rest of them (that suck) can burn.
And let's not forget that nobody on the internet is there to lose money. Napster has some way of making money down the road, and without anybody who deserves it (like artists) ever seeing any.
I know people who have said they will never buy another cd again. I'm sure there are lots of people out there like this. While I can understand them not wanting to support the evil empire (record industry) they are also not supporting the artists. How do they think the artists get the money to continue making records? I mean Metallica is certainly not running out of money anytime soon but some other bands could. The Goo Goo Dolls, early in their career had a multi platinum album and were broke. They were playing shows FOR THE MONEY. What if everybody had downloaded their stuff instead of buying it? There may have been no more Goo Goo Dolls. Maybe there are other bands like them who were not so lucky that we have lost forever because of services like Napster. (Maybe not?)
See, it's stuff like this that makes me understand why artists are pissed at Napster. Like I have said at length, I use Napster (and others) the way it should be used. Lots of people don't.
All just fuel for thought. Gimmie fuel gimmie fire...
First off I want to say that I own all the Metallica albums except Re-Load (which I will) and Kill 'Em All (late comer to Metallica, can't find an original copy). Yes, I bought Load the day it came out (first new Metallica album after I started listening.) Yes it kicks ass. It took me a little while to warm up to it, but I did, and it's just as edgy as anything they've ever done. I love all Metallica old and new.
Now for the question: (And don't anybody jump on me, I seriously doubt that they'd manage to 'not notice' Scour.) What do you all think about people trading your (or anybody's) videos? Back to the old argument, this is how I found out that there even was a video for S&M (I figured there was, but this clinched it) and I bought it the same day. And I will buy the DVD. And I will eventually buy all Metallica videos. (Is there anything more exciting than watching Lars kick ass?) Now, anybody that knows me knows how much I hate MTV (GODDAMM TRENDY MOTHER-#$&@$*) and VH1 just doesn't play much Metallica, so I get my videos from Scour. Isn't this another way of getting the artists out there to be seen and heard?
I use Napster and Scour the way everyone should, I download tons of stuff, throw out most of it, and buy what's worth buying. I have bought literally dozens of albums that I probably would not have bought, as a direct result of being able to download and hear new stuff. I think you need to trust people a little more, most will do the right thing, and those who won't, well, you're not going to stop them anyway. They're assholes, and will find a way to pirate no matter what (and probably never even thought about buying anything they're pirating). All you do by killing Napster is slowing it down some and depriving the rest of us valuable, um, let's call it research. That's basically what it is.
I don't mean to offend you or anything, but you guys all traded tapes and stuff and look at where you are today. How many up and coming (and poor) musicians are being inspired by your stuff? What if the Misfits came after you back in '83 for copying their stuff?
Now, that said, a note to everyone else: Before you get all pissed at Metallica, think about their side. You're a musician and you find that people are stealing from you (yes that's what it is) so you go find a list of 330,000 of them, which is probably a WAY low estimate. Assuming that all of these people get tracks from two different albums, that's about 6 million bucks! Of course not every one of these people are going to actually BUY those albums if they had no other way to get them, but what if half did? Or a quarter? That's still millions of dollars. My first reaction was to be really pissed, but I actually stopped and THOUGHT about it, and they're right. Nobody wants to admit it, but under the law, they are right. Don't f.cking try to tell me you wouldn't be pissed.
Well, that's about it, but I know as soon as I hit submit, I'll remember what else I wanted to say...
First off I want to say that I own all the Metallica albums except Re-Load (which I will) and Kill 'Em All (late comer to Metallica, can't find an original copy). Yes, I bought Load the day it came out (first new Metallica album after I started listening.) Yes it kicks ass. It took me a little while to warm up to it, but I did, and it's just as edgy as anything they've ever done. I love all Metallica old and new. Now for the question: (And don't anybody jump on me, I seriously doubt that they'd manage to 'not notice' Scour.) What do you all think about people trading your (or anybody's) videos? Back to the old argument, this is how I found out that there even was a video for S&M (I figured there was, but this clinched it) and I bought it the same day. And I will buy the DVD. And I will eventually buy all Metallica videos. (Is there anything more exciting than watching Lars kick ass?) Now, anybody that knows me knows how much I hate MTV (GODDAMM TRENDY MOTHER-#$&@$*) and VH1 just doesn't play much Metallica, so I get my videos from Scour. Isn't this another way of getting the artists out there to be seen and heard? I use Napster and Scour the way everyone should, I download tons of stuff, throw out most of it, and buy what's worth buying. I have bought literally dozens of albums that I probably would not have bought, as a direct result of being able to download and hear new stuff. I think you need to trust people a little more, most will do the right thing, and those who won't, well, you're not going to stop them anyway. They're assholes, and will find a way to pirate no matter what (and probably never even thought about buying anything they're pirating). All you do by killing Napster is slowing it down some and depriving the rest of us valuable, um, let's call it research. That's basically what it is. I don't mean to offend you or anything, but you guys all traded tapes and stuff and look at where you are today. How many up and coming (and poor) musicians are being inspired by your stuff? What if the Misfits came after you back in '83 for copying their stuff? Now, that said, a note to everyone else: Before you get all pissed at Metallica, think about their side. You're a musician and you find that people are stealing from you (yes that's what it is) so you go find a list of 330,000 of them, which is probably a WAY low estimate. Assuming that all of these people get tracks from two different albums, that's about 6 million bucks! Of course not every one of these people are going to actually BUY those albums if they had no other way to get them, but what if half did? Or a quarter? That's still millions of dollars. My first reaction was to be really pissed, but I actually stopped and THOUGHT about it, and they're right. Nobody wants to admit it, but under the law, they are right. Don't f.cking try to tell me you wouldn't be pissed. Well, that's about it, but I know as soon as I hit submit, I'll remember what else I wanted to say...
Actually, I don't think they do use cookies, I think it's an IP type thing or something like that. I had a Netscape browser and an IE browser open, both on buy.com (it had to do with $20 coupons & swapping accounts). Anyway, stuff I put in the basket in one browser would show up in the basket in the other (coupons too). I'm not sure how they do it and I'm too lazy to go look right now, but it's NOT cookies, unless Netscape now looks at IE's cookies.
As for public terminals, I never buy anything on a public terminal. The computers at my school are the least secure machines on the planet. But if I suddenly lost my senses and did buy something, I would be sure to myself off, clear the cache and delete the history and cookies, but I'm paranoid, so...
Check out my web page. You just may find the missing link after all...
Yes, I do believe in creation and no, I do not believe in all that evolution crap. But no matter what you believe in, let's not forget that no matter what anyone says, evolution is -- listen carefully now -- STILL A THEORY. THEORY. Just like creation is a theory, since there's nobody here that was around then (except maybe Bob Dole). The Bible says that creation happenned, but if you don't believe in the Bible, then I guess there's just no proof. I guess it just takes a bit of faith, just like evolution does. You still haven't found your "missing link."