The next 'war on drugs'...

[Blake]

Sure. Even more so back then when you couldn't purchase individual songs.

You are like the supermarket person that samples a grape in the produce section, whether the store is handing out free samples or not.

You are stealing the grape, whether you like the grape or not.

...and just because something is not available for you to purchase, that does not mean you have the right to take it.

That's one of the more ridiculous attempts at justification that an illegal downloader like yourself tries to make.

[Blake]

And they get their money if they produce something I like.

lol but not if you don't like it.

who are you that you think you can dictate such terms?

I reject the idea that I should have to pay for something in order to hear it, without knowing if I'm even going to like it or ever have any interest in listening to it again.

Of course you reject the idea.

Most pirates do.

Most artists think that way too. You mistakenly think you're speaking on behalf of a bunch of upstart musicians. In reality, you're just parroting the tired arguments of label executives, their parent companies and their shareholders.

Music itself has never been in better shape than it is right now. I couldn't give a about the people who make money limiting access to art.

Rofl at you doing the thinking for musicians but telling me I'm mistaken for speaking on their behalf. If someone wants you to have something for free, they wouldn't charge $1 for it. It's pretty simple.

I know you don't give a about stealing people's music. You made that clear in your first post.

[Blake]

I agree. Despite the tangent, it really doesn't matter how you feel about piracy... This legislation far exceeds its stated purpose.

I agree that these bills sucked ass.

That really doesn't excuse your piracy, pirate.

[ElNono]

You are like the supermarket person that samples a grape in the produce section, whether the store is handing out free samples or not.

You are stealing the grape, whether you like the grape or not.

...and just because something is not available for you to purchase, that does not mean you have the right to take it.

That's one of the more ridiculous attempts at justification that an illegal downloader like yourself tries to make.

You're off-topic again.

Did the sampling cause a lost sale? Isn't the fact that I'm sampling (sanctioned by the rights holder or not) evidence that I'm not convinced if I want to purchase or not?

I have no problem with the rights holder enforcing their rights. I made that clear a long time ago.

[ElNono]

lol but not if you don't like it.

who are you that you think you can dictate such terms?

There's two parts to any sale. The seller and the buyer. He's 50% of the transaction. Why wouldn't he be able to dictate such terms?

[Spurminator]

lol but not if you don't like it.

who are you that you think you can dictate such terms?

Someone with a computer and the ability to sample art/music before determining if I want to pay for it.

The recording industry is beginning to see that this is where their business is heading too. That's why they're now streaming new albums prior to release on NPR and other sites, and also signing on with music streaming companies like Spotify.

Rofl at you doing the thinking for musicians but telling me I'm mistaken for speaking on their behalf. If someone wants you to have something for free, they wouldn't charge $1 for it. It's pretty simple.

I know you don't give a about stealing people's music. You made that clear in your first post.

You're not speaking on behalf of musicians. I doubt you know ANY musicians. Most musicians first and foremost want you to hear their music. They would like you to pay for it if you like it. If you knew anyone who makes any kind of art for a living, you'd know that.

You're speaking on behalf of a dying industry that, through proposed regulations like SOPA/PIPA, is seeking to make it more difficult for most musicians' music to be heard.

Thanks to sites and services like Napster, Kazaa, torrenting, etc., people are hearing more varieties of music by more artists than ever before. And they're still paying for music, whether it's live or recorded. This is a good thing.

lol nope.

Of course you reject the idea.

Most pirates do.

That really doesn't excuse your piracy, pirate.

Ooh, sick burns bro! You have yet to present any argument that goes beyond "It's wrong cuz it's wrong, you pirate, lol" and you seem proud of your inability to keep up with an adult conversation.

...Also, lol yep.

[Blake]

You're off-topic again.

It's a sidebar analogy of what I compare downloaders like you to.

Did the sampling cause a lost sale? Isn't the fact that I'm sampling (sanctioned by the rights holder or not) evidence that I'm not convinced if I want to purchase or not?

I have no problem with the rights holder enforcing their rights. I made that clear a long time ago.

it's irrelevant to the fact you took the sample without permission.

[Blake]

There's two parts to any sale. The seller and the buyer. He's 50% of the transaction. Why wouldn't he be able to dictate such terms?

Wow. That's just flat out stupid.

If the buyer doesn't like the price the seller puts it at, the buyer can go himself.......or just take it without permission.

[ElNono]

It's a sidebar analogy of what I compare downloaders like you to.

It's a poor analogy to what we're discussing. Wrong too.

it's irrelevant to the fact you took the sample without permission.

Was a sale lost? It's entirely relevant to what we're discussing. Actually, it's exactly what I'm discussing with you.

[ElNono]

Wow. That's just flat out stupid.

If the buyer doesn't like the price the seller puts it at, the buyer can go himself.......or just take it without permission.

Exactly, people that don't like things don't buy them.

What's "flat out stupid" about that?

[Blake]

It's a poor analogy to what we're discussing. Wrong too.

I think it's analogy that is pretty close to dead center.

Next time you buy grapes, ask the cashier if they can charge you for one grape.

If the scales are the same from when I worked at heb, the answer is no because the grape is too light and doesn't register any weight.

Was a sale lost? It's entirely relevant to what we're discussing. Actually, it's exactly what we're discussing.

Bull .

Did you take something without permission? Yes or no

[Blake]

Exactly, people that don't like things don't buy them.

What's "flat out stupid" about that?

You're sidestepping what you said.

What's stupid about your statement was saying the customer has any ability to dictate terms of a sale.

Flat. Out. Stupid.

[ElNono]

I think it's analogy that is pretty close to dead center.

Next time you buy grapes, ask the cashier if they can charge you for one grape.

If the scales are the same from when I worked at heb, the answer is no because the grape is too light and doesn't register any weight.

It's the wrong analogy because we're discussing if a pirate copy equates to a lost sale.

Starting from the fact I can't copy a grape at the supermarket, the analogy is simply wrong. Then it doesn't address the lost sale argument at all.

Bull .

Did you take something without permission? Yes or no

Was a sale lost?

[ElNono]

You're sidestepping what you said.

What's stupid about your statement was saying the customer has any ability to dictate terms of a sale.

I'm not sidestepping anything. You said the customer doesn't have the ability to dictate any terms on the sale if he doesn't like the product.

That's factually wrong. The customer can dictate not to go ahead with the purchase.

lol but not if you don't like it.

who are you that you think you can dictate such terms?

Flat. Out. Stupid.

[Blake]

Someone with a computer and the ability to sample art/music before determining if I want to pay for it.

Which is exactly how pirates justify their piracy.

You're not speaking on behalf of musicians. I doubt you know ANY musicians. Most musicians first and foremost want you to hear their music. They would like you to pay for it if you like it. If you knew anyone who makes any kind of art for a living, you'd know that.

I linked a Houston Chronicle blog written by a musician, moron.

Who are you that you can speak on behalf of musicians?

Ooh, sick burns bro! You have yet to present any argument that goes beyond "It's wrong cuz it's wrong, you pirate, lol" and you seem proud of your inability to keep up with an adult conversation.

...Also, lol yep.

Everyone knows stealing its wrong.

It's ing hilarious that you have no problems calling it piracy, but cry when someone calls it stealing.

Keep up the good fight, Long John.

[Blake]

I'm not sidestepping anything. You said the customer doesn't have the ability to dictate any terms on the sale if he doesn't like the product.

That's factually wrong. The customer can dictate not to go ahead with the purchase.

Can the customer dictate the price of the item?

[ElNono]

Can the customer dictate the price of the item?

On some sales they can. Bargaining existed long before the internet.

[Useruser666]

I don't believe copying files to be theft, especially not if it's not for financial gain. I am also an IP producer, but the IP I produce has no value in being copied as it is customer specific. Stealing a grape is taking a physical thing, copying an MP3 does not change ownership of a file sitting on an Apple ITunes server, or a CD at Best Buy. Artists can make money by performing a live concert, licensing their works to TV, movies, advertising, selling physical albums (some people buy them even with free MP3s).

The internet doesn't seem to hurt artists as much as it hurts the industry. I think that is the true battle that is being fought by the corporations that have the most to lose if they can't adapt.

[Winehole23]

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/st...own/52678528/1

[Blake]

On some sales they can. Bargaining existed long before the internet.

Only if the seller opens it up for bargaining.

If he doesn't, you can't have it......unless you steal it.

[Winehole23]

Megaupload and similar locker sites, like Rapidshare and Mediafire, are often promoted as being convenient ways to legitimately transfer large files — a recent promotional video had major stars like Will.i.am of the Black Eyed Peas singing Megaupload’s praises. But they have become notorious among media companies, who see them as abetting copyright infringement on a large scale by giving people easy, but unauthorized, access to movies, music and other content.



Megaupload is currently engaged in a lawsuit with Universal over the promotional video and Universal’s efforts to have it removed from YouTube.



As part of the crackdown on Megaupload, 20 search warrants were executed in nine countries, including the United States. About $50 million in assets were also seized, as well as a number of servers and 18 domain names, the authorities said.


Ira P. Rothken, a lawyer for Megaupload, said in a phone interview on Thursday afternoon that he had not yet seen the indictment, but he added: “Clearly we have due process concerns. This was done without a hearing.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/20/te...th-piracy.html

[Blake]

I don't believe copying files to be theft, especially not if it's not for financial gain. I am also an IP producer, but the IP I produce has no value in being copied as it is customer specific. Stealing a grape is taking a physical thing, copying an MP3 does not change ownership of a file sitting on an Apple ITunes server, or a CD at Best Buy. Artists can make money by performing a live concert, licensing their works to TV, movies, advertising, selling physical albums (some people buy them even with free MP3s).

The internet doesn't seem to hurt artists as much as it hurts the industry. I think that is the true battle that is being fought by the corporations that have the most to lose if they can't adapt.

The purpose of copyrights and copyright law is to make intellectual property tangible.

Making an exact duplicate of a song without permission is stealing the intellectual property.

[ElNono]

Only if the seller opens it up for bargaining.

If he doesn't, you can't have it......unless you steal it.

Absolutely. As i said earlier, both the seller and the buyer have equal power to dictate terms.

[ElNono]

The purpose of copyrights and copyright law is to make intellectual property tangible.

Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the United States Cons ution, known as the Copyright Clause, empowers the United States Congress:

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.

Nothing about making "intellectual property tangible" there...

[ElNono]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/20/te...th-piracy.html

Thanks for posting. Had no idea they went after them. Will be interesting to see how this develops because megaupload is certainly on that thin line where safe harbor provisions from the DMCA might apply.