Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Politico)   RIAA on SOPA outrage: "It sure seems like the deck is stacked to ensure no meaningful or balanced debate occurs on an issue that is very important to American jobs and our economy"   (politico.com ) divider line
    More: Asinine, American Jobs, RIAA, Ces, FedRamp, Americans, Fred Upton, Commerce Committee, John Shimkus  
•       •       •

16160 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Jan 2012 at 9:36 AM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



336 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2012-01-15 08:58:54 AM  
Those corporations' cocks aren't going to suck themselves.
 
2012-01-15 09:23:21 AM  
No Ironic tag for this one?
 
2012-01-15 09:29:23 AM  
See? This is where I need the cartoon of the laughing guy saying "Ha-ha, Oh wow!"
 
2012-01-15 09:34:49 AM  
Someone ask the RIAA about all the money record labels owe to artists and how much of the money from RIAA lawsuits actually goes to the people who hold the copyrights.
 
2012-01-15 09:36:48 AM  
Ye$, it'$ too bad the poor RIAA ha$n't any other $ort of recour$e they can (and do) u$e to balance out the oppo$ition.
 
2012-01-15 09:37:51 AM  

SmackLT: No Ironic tag for this one?


Came here to say this.

Hey RIAA, television studios, etc. FIND A NEW BUSINESS MODEL.

If you make everything available online and make it reasonable to buy without insane restrictions, it will be bought legally by 99% of people. We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.
 
2012-01-15 09:39:58 AM  
Google is pouring gigabucks into lobbying against SOPA - and Google makes more in a quarter than the entire movie industry does in a year.
 
2012-01-15 09:45:30 AM  

Vodka Zombie: See? This is where I need the cartoon of the laughing guy saying "Ha-ha, Oh wow!"


i1125.photobucket.com
You're welcome.

/Die RIAA DIE!
//In a fire please, kthxbai.
 
2012-01-15 09:48:26 AM  

Summer Glau's Love Slave: Vodka Zombie: See? This is where I need the cartoon of the laughing guy saying "Ha-ha, Oh wow!"

[i1125.photobucket.com image 348x228]
You're welcome.

/Die RIAA DIE!
//In a fire please, kthxbai.


You're awesome.
 
2012-01-15 09:48:36 AM  
OH YOU MEAN LIKE HOW YOU STACKED THE CONGRESSIONAL DEBATES 5-1 IN FAVOR OF SOPA???????

God do these people have anything left that even resembles a soul?
 
2012-01-15 09:49:56 AM  
The Stop Online Piracy Act only targets foreign websites that are primarily dedicated to illegal and infringing activity. It does not grant the Justice Department the authority to seek a court order to shut down any website operated in the U.S." He added SOPA only "extends enforcement of property rights protections that apply to domestic websites to those that operate abroad" and would not "censor the Internet."

Just the tip, baby. Honest injun!
 
2012-01-15 09:53:16 AM  

zipperlip: The Stop Online Piracy Act only targets foreign websites that are primarily dedicated to illegal and infringing activity. It does not grant the Justice Department the authority to seek a court order to shut down any website operated in the U.S." He added SOPA only "extends enforcement of property rights protections that apply to domestic websites to those that operate abroad" and would not "censor the Internet."

Just the tip, baby. Honest injun!


":First they came for the X, and I did not complain for I was not an X" process in effect.
 
2012-01-15 09:53:55 AM  

WhyteRaven74: Someone ask the RIAA about all the money record labels owe to artists and how much of the money from RIAA lawsuits actually goes to the people who hold the copyrights.


they'll just call you socialist then mark you down for later extermination.
 
2012-01-15 09:58:55 AM  

Gonz: No, he's usually a troll. And his act is rather played out. He's not a bad troll, per se, just predictable. You know what you're going to get from him, which takes a lot of the sheen off his posts.


If you think his comments are anything other than an absurd comedic extension of what some actual trolls actually say on this site, then you are taking Fark entirely too seriously.

My god, the man spent a month last year talking about how awesome Mario Chalmers is.
 
2012-01-15 09:59:43 AM  

Berz: +1


corridor: Speak for yourself. I say good riddance.


You two must be a blast at parties.
 
2012-01-15 10:00:59 AM  

zipperlip: The Stop Online Piracy Act only targets foreign websites that are primarily dedicated to illegal and infringing activity. It does not grant the Justice Department the authority to seek a court order to shut down any website operated in the U.S." He added SOPA only "extends enforcement of property rights protections that apply to domestic websites to those that operate abroad" and would not "censor the Internet."

Just the tip, baby. Honest injun!


SOPA is the Guantanomo Bay of copyrights.
 
2012-01-15 10:01:13 AM  
Fark the RIAA, fark the MPAA, fark the ESA, and fark everyone else who supports SOPA.

They all represent dying business models, and people are getting sick of being controlled by them. You guys already have plenty of legal tools to go after the real pirates. Getting more will only continue to assrape the average citizen in the process, and the idea of it is pissing people off.

I stopped buying new CD's made by RIAA-represented labels back when Napster was shut down the first time. Their music starting to suck was just one of the reasons why I stopped caring about these assholes. Then Lars came out biatching that he supposedly was getting less money because of 12-year olds on Napster swapping Metallica songs (who probably weren't going to buy their CD's anyway), yet it didn't occur to him that his abilities could be easily replaced with a $100 drum machine.

I also think Nickelback was annoying, and then hearing about the lead singer biatching like Lars made me hate that piece of shiat band even more.
 
2012-01-15 10:02:48 AM  
Free Mike, Free Mike, Free Mike!
 
2012-01-15 10:03:40 AM  
Yeah, if the entire world is against a piece of legislation which hijacks society and the world's culture to benefit a hand full of corporations then yeah, it may appear to be more people to attack it instead of defending it.
 
2012-01-15 10:07:40 AM  

GAT_00: It wasn't anything out of the ordinary. I don't like the double standard to only delete some trolls though.


Yeah I don't get it...

Smart guy who makes troll/satire posts and gets some fish on his hook: BALEETED.
Idiot who expresses the same opinions and genuinely believes them: A-OK
 
2012-01-15 10:08:23 AM  
This sounds like the complaint from some christians that they are being oppressed.
 
2012-01-15 10:08:26 AM  
Anyone think CS Obama isn't going to sign this?
 
2012-01-15 10:08:33 AM  

GreatBunzinni: Yeah, if the entire world is against a piece of legislation which hijacks society and the world's culture to benefit a hand full of corporations then yeah, it may appear to be more people to attack it instead of defending it.


People are funny sometimes. *sigh*

Marcus Aurelius: Those corporations' cocks aren't going to suck

punch themselves.

FTFM.

/Dear RIAA, STFU and GBTW.
//Oh wait, your job consists solely of cashing checks and calling lawyers.
///Never mind.
////Resume your DIAF posture.
 
2012-01-15 10:08:45 AM  
What's the point?

This piece of shiat will be passed. We'll find a way around it, but it won't be the same.

And not a single fark will be had that day.
 
2012-01-15 10:09:26 AM  
Wait, didn't the RIAA (or one of their cronies) institute a media blackout regarding SOPA? How is there supposed to be any debate if nobody is allowed to talk about it? My head asplode.
 
2012-01-15 10:09:26 AM  

bulldg4life: Berz: +1

corridor: Speak for yourself. I say good riddance.

You two must be a blast at parties.


No he's right. Trolling is farking retarded.
 
2012-01-15 10:13:05 AM  

Fluorescent Testicle: Wait, didn't the RIAA (or one of their cronies) institute a media blackout regarding SOPA? How is there supposed to be any debate if nobody is allowed to talk about it? My head asplode.


I think they are realizing that there are companies with gobs of money (like Google) that are against SOPA, as well as a reasonably pissed off portion of the population that also happens to have internet connections. If fewer people were online, the bill wouldn't have gotten the attention it did.
 
2012-01-15 10:13:43 AM  

Mugato: No he's right. Trolling is farking retarded.


He's not being funny the right way! Get rid of him!
 
2012-01-15 10:15:25 AM  

bulldg4life: Mugato: No he's right. Trolling is farking retarded.

He's not being funny the right way! Get rid of him!


actually, if you're talking about who I think you're talking about, I put it on ignore a while back. constantly repeating the same things over and over and over again just fill up space and contribute nothing to the discussion.
 
2012-01-15 10:16:25 AM  
horrornews.net
 
2012-01-15 10:16:53 AM  
"It sure seems like the deck is stacked to ensure no meaningful or balanced debate occurs on an issue that is very important to American jobs and our economy"

profile.ak.fbcdn.net
 
2012-01-15 10:19:35 AM  
WhyteRaven74: Someone ask the RIAA about all the money record labels owe to artists and how much of the money from RIAA lawsuits actually goes to the people who hold the copyrights.

Weaver95: they'll just call you socialist then mark you down for later extermination.


Darn... was gonna say it but Weaver95 beat me to it...

/getting old is a biatch

//been marked already thanks... just awaiting the 'producer police' to arrive and finish the job...

///beware the 'producer police'... their slogan is 'MINE MINE MINE MINE MINE!'
 
2012-01-15 10:20:35 AM  
Whenever I hear things like this, I ask myself a question: Is this guy that much of a lying shiathead, or is the cognitive dissonance so strong that he truly believes what he is saying?

Then I weep because I realize it doesn't matter. He's still going to win. One of the most wildly unpopular bills to ever go to the floor is going to pass, despite the screams of every one of us. Why? Because Congress is filled with geriatric assholes who think every American citizen is a criminal anyway and should be caged.

I don't even know why they bother to keep working when they hate their country so much.
 
2012-01-15 10:20:47 AM  

oroku_saki: Fark the RIAA, fark the MPAA, fark the ESA, and fark everyone else who supports SOPA.


The European Space Agency supports SOPA?
 
2012-01-15 10:23:31 AM  

vwarb:

I don't even know why they bother to keep working when they hate their country so much.


fc00.deviantart.net

Because they're making better worlds. all of them...better worlds.
 
2012-01-15 10:26:16 AM  

zipperlip: The Stop Online Piracy Act only targets foreign websites that are primarily dedicated to illegal and infringing activity. It does not grant the Justice Department the authority to seek a court order to shut down any website operated in the U.S." He added SOPA only "extends enforcement of property rights protections that apply to domestic websites to those that operate abroad" and would not "censor the Internet."

Just the tip, baby. Honest injun!


This reminds me of how my friend from Austrailia honestly believes that their government will censor child porn and nothing else on the Internet, even though they've already been caught blocking sites that merely oppose the blocking policy.

/Fortunately, that whole thing appears to be dead in the water now
 
2012-01-15 10:32:34 AM  

heypete: oroku_saki: Fark the RIAA, fark the MPAA, fark the ESA, and fark everyone else who supports SOPA.

The European Space Agency supports SOPA?


I don't think so, but the Entertainment Software Association does. Anyone who has purchased stuff from Nintendo, Sony, Capcom, EA, or Square-Enix has at least some of that money go to the ESA. Here's a full list of their members (new window).

What is so ironic about the ESA is that they created a group called the Video Game Voter's Network that supposedly champions free speech. However, recent news makes it seem that they only care about free speech that supports the ESA and their member's bottom lines.
 
2012-01-15 10:36:58 AM  

adamgreeney: We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.


No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.
 
2012-01-15 10:37:59 AM  

vwarb: Whenever I hear things like this, I ask myself a question: Is this guy that much of a lying shiathead, or is the cognitive dissonance so strong that he truly believes what he is saying?

Then I weep because I realize it doesn't matter. He's still going to win. One of the most wildly unpopular bills to ever go to the floor is going to pass, despite the screams of every one of us. Why? Because Congress is filled with geriatric assholes who think every American citizen is a criminal anyway and should be caged.

I don't even know why they bother to keep working when they hate their country so much.


This is why I abstain from voting. The US political system is systemically flawed and I refuse to participate in it. When I tell people this I usually get a response along the lines of, "If you don't vote, the system will never change!" Or, "Voting is your only way to voice your opinion!"

My opinion doesn't matter. Neither does my vote. There's really no substantial difference between political parties. We're supposed to be a republic. Our politicians are supposed to be elected to represent our interests. But they don't. They mostly serve their own interests. Any action that actually benefits the common man was just posturing or pandering for votes. Period.

SOPA is just the latest example of this mindset. It's wildly unpopular. The constituency DOES NOT want this legislation. But our representatives are gearing up to shove it down our throats anyway. Because shut up, that's why.
 
2012-01-15 10:38:49 AM  
PATRIOT ACT,NDAA,SOPA,Citizens United,PIPA...


All in all they are all just Bricks in the Wall

Feel the fascist boot on your neck yet?
 
2012-01-15 10:39:31 AM  

Big_Fat_Liar: Anyone think CS Obama isn't going to sign this?


White House "will not support" SOPA as it stands
 
2012-01-15 10:40:11 AM  
If every industry acted like the RIAA. . .

They would have banned the automobile because it was putting the horse industry out of work, think of all the blacksmiths that wouldn't be able to shoe horses.

They would have banned the television because it was cutting into radio profits.

They would have banned the airliner because it endangered the railroad industry.

The RIAA is based on an obsolete business model: the idea that music artists require distributors and labels to ensure that their works are distributed to the public at large. The internet makes that obsolete, because now an artist could just sell their works directly to the people.

Of course, spending the 90's charging $15 for a CD with maybe 1 or 2 songs people wanted to hear and a bunch of filler material made people get used to the idea they were being overcharged for music (when people knew it costs only cents to produce the actual physical CD, and seeing rock stars living like, well, rock stars made people think that musicians certainly weren't hurting). Feeling like you've been ripped off by people who are already rich made the public feel no remorse at copyright infringement by the time peer to peer file sharing came around.

The RIAA (and through them the major labels) built it's entire business model on being the monopolistic provider of music entertainment in the USA, charging as much as they could get away with for as little product as they had to. It worked well for decades. Then technology came around which made their business model obsolete.

So, they've got a shiat-ton of money, and they want to change the law to ban all technology that could threaten their business model. It doesn't matter how much collateral damage the law could do, and as it has been shown, SOPA could pretty much crash the whole farking internet, they just want to make sure they keep getting money.

"Meaningful debate"? Sounds like there is a helluva lot of meaningful debate going on, and the fact that SOPA is receiving actual disagreement and people speaking out against it (i.e. debate) instead of blind agreement (what they were trying to get away with) is their whole problem.

Jobs? They are honestly trying to say that SOPA will save jobs? What, maybe a few positions at record labels, maybe? As opposed to the damage to dot.coms if it passes? The damage to the whole farking internet just to try to preserve the music industry? How important do they think they are?
 
2012-01-15 10:40:41 AM  
"It sure seems like the deck is stacked to ensure no meaningful or balanced debate occurs on an issue that is very important to American our jobs and our my family's economy"
 
2012-01-15 10:41:35 AM  
"It sure seems like the deck is stacked to ensure no meaningful or balanced debate occurs on an issue that is very important to American jobs and our economy"

It sure does. But enough about the war on drugs, we're talking about a massively draconian internet law that won't even accomplish its stated objective.
 
2012-01-15 10:42:36 AM  

Honest Bender: This is why I abstain from voting.


Then STFU. You've got no reason to complain; you got the government you deserve.
 
2012-01-15 10:44:02 AM  

KrispyKritter: that bears repeating. lame is lame. the troll / snark content is the reason for coming here. this harshed my buzz and gave me teh mild sad.


I enjoy snark. I dislike trolling. Intelligent snark, back handed compliments, etc can be fun. Obvious trolls just make reading the posts a chore. I'm grateful that there's a means on Fark to help streamline the comments.

/I'll ignore a troll one or twice
//But the repeat offenders disappear.
 
2012-01-15 10:45:19 AM  

Snarfangel: Anyone notice that liberals claim the country has been going downhill since the eighties? What took off in the eighties?


what took off on the eighties was the rise of the "me generation" and the entitlement and participation trophy generation.

They all believe that they are entitled to benefit from something someone else created without paying for it.

They are greedy farks who believe that the world owes them something.
 
2012-01-15 10:45:38 AM  

jayhawk88: OH YOU MEAN LIKE HOW YOU STACKED THE CONGRESSIONAL DEBATES 5-1 IN FAVOR OF SOPA???????

God do these people have anything left that even resembles a soul?


They have pulsing black things where their hearts should be. That's a kind of soul.
 
2012-01-15 10:46:16 AM  

Snarfangel: Mike_LowELL: I have to agree with the RIAA on this. The only balance in this debate is the number of people seeding versus the number leeching. Anyone notice that liberals claim the country has been going downhill since the eighties? What took off in the eighties? Software piracy. Enough said. Look in the mirror, Obama. Maybe if you would stop pirating copies of "Raising Taxes for Dummies", the country wouldn't be in the shape it's in.

Your post contains several words that are protected by international copyright. I can't tell you which ones, because then I would be in non-compliance.

/Which reminds me, I need to renew my license fee to Webster'sTM.


Your post is a good example of how copy protection will never work, as soon as information (in this case a post which was removed) is in the public domain then people will find ways to spread it in spite of attempts to remove it from the public domain.
 
2012-01-15 10:47:14 AM  

RobSeace:
White House "will not support" SOPA as it stands


Obama said the same thing about the NDAA. We learned last time that the key is that little "as it stands" bit. They'll change some superfluous wording so he can say he did something. Then he'll sign the thing anyway.

/I voted for Obama
//Gary Johnson 2012
 
2012-01-15 10:48:56 AM  

WhyteRaven74: Someone ask the RIAA about all the money record labels owe to artists and how much of the money from RIAA lawsuits actually goes to the people who hold the copyrights.


I wondered this "Hey guys, these people are costing revenue to these other people, lets sue the first lot and take the money instead of giving it to the second lot!"
 
2012-01-15 10:48:56 AM  

tenpoundsofcheese: They all believe that they are entitled to benefit from something someone else created without paying for it.

They are greedy farks who believe that the world owes them something.


Now you're describing the RIAA/MPAA/ESA.
 
2012-01-15 10:48:57 AM  

Honest Bender: This is why I abstain from voting. The US political system is systemically flawed and I refuse to participate in it. When I tell people this I usually get a response along the lines of, "If you don't vote, the system will never change!" Or, "Voting is your only way to voice your opinion!"

My opinion doesn't matter. Neither does my vote. There's really no substantial difference between political parties. We're supposed to be a republic. Our politicians are supposed to be elected to represent our interests. But they don't. They mostly serve their own interests. Any action that actually benefits the common man was just posturing or pandering for votes. Period.

SOPA is just the latest example of this mindset. It's wildly unpopular. The constituency DOES NOT want this legislation. But our representatives are gearing up to shove it down our throats anyway. Because shut up, that's why.


Serious question: how do you propose we fix it, then?
 
2012-01-15 10:49:07 AM  
"It sure seems like the deck is stacked to ensure no meaningful or balanced debate occurs on an issue that is very important to American jobs and our economy"

Indeed. Now if you f*ckers would like to change that, maybe stop stacking the deck to ensure no meaningful or balanced debate occurs on an issue, you entitled little anti-technology cunny-wafts. Piracy is a problem, obviously, but the way around that is not to piss everyone off and make yourselves the bad guys. And that is all you are accomplishing whenever you open your fat stupid mouths. For a company that's entirely about selling an image of your products (i.e. musicians), you have no f*cking PR department for yourself, so you keep coming across as goddamn rigid old people who can't stand that the world is changing around them. Adapt or die, motherf*ckers, that's all you can do. Adapt or die. And you've consistently chosen the path that leads to your own downfall. At THAT point, you have no one left to blame but yourselves; the pirates just got the ball rolling.
 
2012-01-15 10:49:15 AM  

Silverstaff: The RIAA is based on an obsolete business model: the idea that music artists require distributors and labels to ensure that their works are distributed to the public at large. The internet makes that obsolete, because now an artist could just sell their works directly to the people.


exactly. things can go viral now if they are good enough. without the millions in promotional advertising. this is simply entitlement legislation. these moguls think they should be entitled to a majority percentage of an artists' work. sorry but those days are gone. an artist can record in a home studio using a laptop and a couple hundred dollars in microphones and produce stuff just as good as the big studios can. they can self promote on the web and use word of mouth. and they can sell their stuff to the masses without the industry. the days of owning the airwaves and the product is over. and this is their last desperate effort to keep their grip on it.
 
2012-01-15 10:49:48 AM  
tenpoundsofcheese: No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.

So every album ever released and every movie ever released on VHS is available for purchase?

They are greedy farks who believe that the world owes them something.

No, that would be the RIAA and MPAA.
 
2012-01-15 10:50:02 AM  
If the RIAA thinks it can hold the cards in this battle, it has another thing coming. If they fark up the Internet for the sake of covering their lack of foresight and inability to adapt their business model to modern technology, I personally would not have a problem with never buying music, again, ever. Hell, I've got decades worth of great music I love that I can listen to exclusively for the rest of my life and be content.

RIAA, the bands don't even need you anymore. So how about instead of you bullying us back into buying your overpriced product and giving our money to the people who deserve it the least, how about we just start buying the music directly from the bands, and cut you out of the process altogether?

More so.
 
2012-01-15 10:50:25 AM  

tenpoundsofcheese: adamgreeney: We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.

No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.


Genie, bottle
 
2012-01-15 10:51:56 AM  
What it comes down to is this: There are rich and influential entities on both sides of the issue, but...

The side opposing SOPA also has the majority of public opinion on its side, to say nothing of the 'most' money.

SOPA supporters have the weight of tradition and 'some' money, but that won't win the day.

At the end of the day, this 'will' be passed, but in a weak, neutered form that lacks any ability to do what it wants to do.
 
2012-01-15 10:53:22 AM  
dready zim: I wondered this "Hey guys, these people are costing revenue to these other people, lets sue the first lot and take the money instead of giving it to the second lot!"

The funny it is, that the RIAA represents, explicitly, only record labels, not the actual people who record music and write it. And you can't go around suing people on behalf of copyright holders without their permission beforehand.
 
2012-01-15 10:54:07 AM  

tenpoundsofcheese: adamgreeney: We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.

No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.


tenpoundsofcheese: adamgreeney: We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.

No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.


yeah, some people do. Personally, i have never pirated anything since Napster. I WANT to give people my money! But the pricing and DRM tells me they dont want to take it. giving me 24 hours to watc h a film? sorry, but human lives arent always constructed so that i have 2 contiguous hours. So obviously they want to make movie renting a pain in the ass. iTunes allows you to buy music, but only for your apple device, so you dont actually own the music. How does any of that make piracy less attractive?
 
2012-01-15 10:54:24 AM  

Honest Bender: This is why I abstain from voting. The US political system is systemically flawed and I refuse to participate in it. When I tell people this I usually get a response along the lines of, "If you don't vote, the system will never change!" Or, "Voting is your only way to voice your opinion!"

My opinion doesn't matter. Neither does my vote. There's really no substantial difference between political parties. We're supposed to be a republic. Our politicians are supposed to be elected to represent our interests. But they don't. They mostly serve their own interests. Any action that actually benefits the common man was just posturing or pandering for votes. Period.

SOPA is just the latest example of this mindset. It's wildly unpopular. The constituency DOES NOT want this legislation. But our representatives are gearing up to shove it down our throats anyway. Because shut up, that's why.


Every single sentiment you've expressed is why this country is becoming so f*cked up. The more people who believe the kind of nonsense you just posted, the more the power ends up in the hands of lobbyists, corporations, and special interest groups. Your opinion DOES matter. Your vote DOES count. There IS a difference between political parties and if you doubt that, well then you're a shallow thinker and it's probably better that you don't vote, allowing my vote to count for that much more.

There's more to political activism than voting. Spend an hour to draft a letter to your mayor, governor, senator, congressional representative, or whomever whenever there is legislation proposed that you disagree with. Maybe once or twice a year go to a meeting and voice your dissatisfaction. Come up with better ideas and propose them. Convince your friends and peers and colleagues to do the same thing. Run for office, even a dinky one. Voting is just the bare minimum. But whatever you do, be informed. Spend a little time each day learning more about what's going on. It's depressing as all hell, but the more people who give up, the more they win.
 
2012-01-15 10:54:56 AM  
adamgreeney: but only for your apple device,

you can play stuff iTunes on anything.
 
2012-01-15 10:56:18 AM  

RobSeace: Big_Fat_Liar: Anyone think CS Obama isn't going to sign this?

White House "will not support" SOPA as it stands


Is this the same White House that was going to close Guantanamo and signed a bill allowing detention of US Citizens but swears they won't actually do it?
 
2012-01-15 10:56:28 AM  

HeartBurnKid: Honest Bender: This is why I abstain from voting.

Then STFU. You've got no reason to complain; you got the government you deserve.


Your inability to process basic concepts and arrive at a logical conclusion precludes you from any further discussion on the matter.

snake_beater: Serious question: how do you propose we fix it, then?


Revolution? I don't really know. If I honestly thought the answer involved passing laws/regulations or voting the "right" people in, I wouldn't be abstaining. Got any ideas?
 
2012-01-15 10:56:57 AM  

adamgreeney: tenpoundsofcheese: adamgreeney: We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.

No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.

tenpoundsofcheese: adamgreeney: We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.

No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.

yeah, some people do. Personally, i have never pirated anything since Napster. I WANT to give people my money! But the pricing and DRM tells me they dont want to take it. giving me 24 hours to watc h a film? sorry, but human lives arent always constructed so that i have 2 contiguous hours. So obviously they want to make movie renting a pain in the ass. iTunes allows you to buy music, but only for your apple device, so you dont actually own the music. How does any of that make piracy less attractive?


art.penny-arcade.com
 
2012-01-15 10:57:16 AM  

corridor: PanicMan: Hey mods, Mike_LowELL isn't a troll. He's a comedy genius. People like him are why readers come to Fark. And actions like you are why they leave.

Speak for yourself. I say good riddance.


Look everyone, this is what a wild retard looks like!
 
2012-01-15 10:59:08 AM  

adamgreeney: iTunes allows you to buy music, but only for your apple device, so you dont actually own the music. How does any of that make piracy less attractive?


The best thing to do is this: buy your music on iTunes. Then pirate it and keep the pirated copies on an external somewhere. Now you've done your part for supporting the artists and you actually have the files
 
2012-01-15 11:00:06 AM  

Kome: Every single sentiment you've expressed is why this country is becoming so f*cked up.


You're putting the horse before the cart. I gave up because I believe the system to be irreversibly broken.

It's depressing as all hell, but the more people who give up, the more they win.

They've already won, dude. Your optimism is quaint, but misguided.
 
2012-01-15 11:01:11 AM  

Kome: Honest Bender: This is why I abstain from voting. The US political system is systemically flawed and I refuse to participate in it. When I tell people this I usually get a response along the lines of, "If you don't vote, the system will never change!" Or, "Voting is your only way to voice your opinion!"

My opinion doesn't matter. Neither does my vote. There's really no substantial difference between political parties. We're supposed to be a republic. Our politicians are supposed to be elected to represent our interests. But they don't. They mostly serve their own interests. Any action that actually benefits the common man was just posturing or pandering for votes. Period.

SOPA is just the latest example of this mindset. It's wildly unpopular. The constituency DOES NOT want this legislation. But our representatives are gearing up to shove it down our throats anyway. Because shut up, that's why.

Every single sentiment you've expressed is why this country is becoming so f*cked up. The more people who believe the kind of nonsense you just posted, the more the power ends up in the hands of lobbyists, corporations, and special interest groups. Your opinion DOES matter. Your vote DOES count. There IS a difference between political parties and if you doubt that, well then you're a shallow thinker and it's probably better that you don't vote, allowing my vote to count for that much more.

There's more to political activism than voting. Spend an hour to draft a letter to your mayor, governor, senator, congressional representative, or whomever whenever there is legislation proposed that you disagree with. Maybe once or twice a year go to a meeting and voice your dissatisfaction. Come up with better ideas and propose them. Convince your friends and peers and colleagues to do the same thing. Run for office, even a dinky one. Voting is just the bare minimum. But whatever you do, be informed. Spend a little time each day learning more about what's going on. It's depressing as a ...


Bullshiat, The only voice in our government we have as Americans are our pocket books. Public opinion means shiat.
 
2012-01-15 11:03:47 AM  

tenpoundsofcheese: adamgreeney: We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.

No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.


Nope, actually it's the prior. The last game I bought forced me to immediately connect to an online server to prove I was a lawful user when I first installed it and continues trying to connect every time I play the game so it can scan to see if I've made any unallowed changes. When I've paid for an item, I don't need some company then telling me how and when I can use it.
 
2012-01-15 11:04:10 AM  

snake_beater: Honest Bender: This is why I abstain from voting. The US political system is systemically flawed and I refuse to participate in it. When I tell people this I usually get a response along the lines of, "If you don't vote, the system will never change!" Or, "Voting is your only way to voice your opinion!"

My opinion doesn't matter. Neither does my vote. There's really no substantial difference between political parties. We're supposed to be a republic. Our politicians are supposed to be elected to represent our interests. But they don't. They mostly serve their own interests. Any action that actually benefits the common man was just posturing or pandering for votes. Period.

SOPA is just the latest example of this mindset. It's wildly unpopular. The constituency DOES NOT want this legislation. But our representatives are gearing up to shove it down our throats anyway. Because shut up, that's why.

Serious question: how do you propose we fix it, then?


Torches and pitchforks are the historic way.
 
2012-01-15 11:04:14 AM  

Honest Bender: HeartBurnKid: Honest Bender: This is why I abstain from voting.

Then STFU. You've got no reason to complain; you got the government you deserve.

Your inability to process basic concepts and arrive at a logical conclusion precludes you from any further discussion on the matter.


NO U.

I get that you think the government sucks, but how does abdicating the one small measure of power you have to make them suck less do anything but make them suck more?
 
2012-01-15 11:04:36 AM  
SharkTrager: that was going to close Guantanamo

There are two executive orders ordering it shut down. You put the blame at the feet of Congress for never following through with the funding to make it happen.
 
rpm
2012-01-15 11:05:31 AM  
Kome:
[art.penny-arcade.com image 640x326]


"They have to protect it somehow" is the bad assumption.

iTunes(music) - unprotected
GoG - unprotected
Amazon (music) - unprotected
Baen (books) - unprotected

Yeah, iTunes is losing so much money on music, there's not a chance in hell Apple will stay in business.
 
2012-01-15 11:05:40 AM  

adamgreeney: tenpoundsofcheese: adamgreeney: We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.

No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.

tenpoundsofcheese: adamgreeney: We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.

No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.

yeah, some people do. Personally, i have never pirated anything since Napster. I WANT to give people my money! But the pricing and DRM tells me they dont want to take it. giving me 24 hours to watc h a film? sorry, but human lives arent always constructed so that i have 2 contiguous hours. So obviously they want to make movie renting a pain in the ass. iTunes allows you to buy music, but only for your apple device, so you dont actually own the music. How does any of that make piracy less attractive?


I have no problem with the iTunes model, in fact I love the iTunes model. As for "owning" the music or not, when it's on my devices it feels like I own it. Of course, if my intent was to make copies for all my friends then it doesn't work...
 
2012-01-15 11:07:07 AM  

Kome: iTunes allows you to buy music, but only for your apple device, so you dont actually own the music. How does any of that make piracy less attractive?


That's why all the legal downloads I buy are from Amazon.com. mp3's with no DRM. I keep a copy on my laptop, keep copies on my iPod and iPad, and a copy burned on DVD-ROM as a backup sitting on a shelf.
 
2012-01-15 11:07:11 AM  

Kome: adamgreeney: tenpoundsofcheese: adamgreeney: We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.

No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.

tenpoundsofcheese: adamgreeney: We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.

No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.

yeah, some people do. Personally, i have never pirated anything since Napster. I WANT to give people my money! But the pricing and DRM tells me they dont want to take it. giving me 24 hours to watc h a film? sorry, but human lives arent always constructed so that i have 2 contiguous hours. So obviously they want to make movie renting a pain in the ass. iTunes allows you to buy music, but only for your apple device, so you dont actually own the music. How does any of that make piracy less attractive?

[art.penny-arcade.com image 640x326]


I'm not talking about video games here.

Know what works great? Hulu. Netflix. Zune Pass. Go that route. It would be great if studios would put ENTIRE SEASONS on Hulu so that people could catch up and start watching their show though. I would love to watch Modern Family, but the first season isn't available except on DVD, and I'm not paying for DVD's if I don't know whether I'd like the show or not. They need to start giving people more options instead of trying to force us into using their old models that don't work for most people.

Put things out there to buy or watch online at a reasonable rate. The people that will still pirate are going to pirate anyway, not matter what you do, and things like SOPA won't stop that, just like putting cameras and alarms at the door of a store won't stop 100% of shoplifting. Hell, people were recording shows on their VCR's and sharing them and I don't remember anyone trying to ban VCR's from being plugged into TV's.
 
2012-01-15 11:07:58 AM  

vwarb: adamgreeney: iTunes allows you to buy music, but only for your apple device, so you dont actually own the music. How does any of that make piracy less attractive?

The best thing to do is this: buy your music on iTunes. Then pirate it and keep the pirated copies on an external somewhere. Now you've done your part for supporting the artists and you actually have the files


I was told, somewhere, that itunes was stepping down on the whole DRM thing.

Of course I don't know because I don't buy from itunes, in fact the last album I got I had to pirate simply because it did not exist in a form that could be purchased. *hipster glasses* you've probably never heard of them.
 
2012-01-15 11:08:27 AM  

moof: tenpoundsofcheese: They all believe that they are entitled to benefit from something someone else created without paying for it.

They are greedy farks who believe that the world owes them something.

Now you're describing the RIAA/MPAA/ESA.


are they getting something for free? what is that?
 
2012-01-15 11:09:45 AM  

Honest Bender: snake_beater: Serious question: how do you propose we fix it, then?

Revolution? I don't really know. If I honestly thought the answer involved passing laws/regulations or voting the "right" people in, I wouldn't be abstaining. Got any ideas?


To be honest, I'm stumped myself. In my mind, the only way to truly fix this is to just blow everything up and start over, but too many people have too much invested in the current system to do that.
 
2012-01-15 11:10:22 AM  

tenpoundsofcheese: No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.


I'm an American living in Switzerland. Netflix isn't available here, nor is any similar service (i.e. streaming video on-demand). Before I moved here, I happily paid for Netflix service as it offered the content I wanted at a price I thought was reasonable.

Since I've moved here, my options are:

1. Don't watch movies. (Unless I want to watch them in German, which I don't.)
2. Continue to pay for Netflix, but connect to a US-based VPN service to get around their geographical restrictions. (That is, they don't offer the service here and actively restrict paying customers from using it.)
3. Pirate content.

I choose #2 even though it is technically against the Netflix terms of service (nonetheless, I am paying for the service and thus for the content). I know a few other expats here who also do the same, but occasionally pirate a particular movie as it's not available on Netflix for streaming (that is, they would happily pay for it, but it is not available legitimately where they are).

You're welcome to keep white knighting for the RIAA, but they don't really care.
 
rpm
2012-01-15 11:10:57 AM  

tenpoundsofcheese: moof: tenpoundsofcheese: They all believe that they are entitled to benefit from something someone else created without paying for it.

They are greedy farks who believe that the world owes them something.

Now you're describing the RIAA/MPAA/ESA.

are they getting something for free? what is that?


I don't think they're paying for the SWAT teams.
 
2012-01-15 11:11:14 AM  

HeartBurnKid: I get that you think the government sucks, but how does abdicating the one small measure of power you have to make them suck less do anything but make them suck more?


The only difference between you and me is that I don't buy into the illusion that we have that power.
 
2012-01-15 11:11:14 AM  
Remember when well things went when republicans campaigned in 2010 on jobs and economy?
 
2012-01-15 11:11:58 AM  
tenpoundsofcheese: are they getting something for free? what is that?

Money they claim should be going to artists.
 
2012-01-15 11:12:29 AM  

capt.hollister: adamgreeney: tenpoundsofcheese: adamgreeney: We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.

No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.

tenpoundsofcheese: adamgreeney: We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.

No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.

yeah, some people do. Personally, i have never pirated anything since Napster. I WANT to give people my money! But the pricing and DRM tells me they dont want to take it. giving me 24 hours to watc h a film? sorry, but human lives arent always constructed so that i have 2 contiguous hours. So obviously they want to make movie renting a pain in the ass. iTunes allows you to buy music, but only for your apple device, so you dont actually own the music. How does any of that make piracy less attractive?

I have no problem with the iTunes model, in fact I love the iTunes model. As for "owning" the music or not, when it's on my devices it feels like I own it. Of course, if my intent was to make copies for all my friends then it doesn't work...


What happens when your computer or iPod dies? Maybe Apple has gotten better with that, but I remember when you would just lose your music. That's insane. Also, I like to be able to listen to my music in any form I want. we don't OWN it, because we have to use the terms they dictate. When i bought a CD i could listen to it in any player anywhere I go. I like the Zune Pass model because I can download and listen to anything I want, but get to keep 10 songs a month and can burn them, move them, anything I want. Thats worth the money every month.
 
2012-01-15 11:13:21 AM  

adamgreeney: tenpoundsofcheese: adamgreeney: We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.

No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.

tenpoundsofcheese: adamgreeney: We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.

No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.

yeah, some people do. Personally, i have never pirated anything since Napster. I WANT to give people my money! But the pricing and DRM tells me they dont want to take it. giving me 24 hours to watc h a film? sorry, but human lives arent always constructed so that i have 2 contiguous hours. So obviously they want to make movie renting a pain in the ass. iTunes allows you to buy music, but only for your apple device, so you dont actually own the music. How does any of that make piracy less attractive?


Piracy is getting something for nothing, so for people have ethics, it should never be an attractive option.

well, except maybe if somehow an orphans life depends on it or something like that.

Different business models are emerging. You can get redbox for $1.3 a day and don't need to worry about watching it in two days. Others will emerge too.
 
2012-01-15 11:13:40 AM  
Back in the mid 80s record labels said everything released on vinyl would eventually be released on CD and that CDs would eventually cost as much as records. They never came close to making good on either. Perhaps they should make good on that first, then get to worrying about what some people are doing.
 
2012-01-15 11:14:02 AM  

adamgreeney: Hell, people were recording shows on their VCR's and sharing them and I don't remember anyone trying to ban VCR's from being plugged into TV's.


Perhaps not, but in Canada we pay a special copyright tax on blank media for just this reason
 
2012-01-15 11:14:19 AM  

Kome: art.penny-arcade.com


If DRM or huge, overreaching regulations worked, that strip would not exist. Just saying.
 
rpm
2012-01-15 11:14:45 AM  

adamgreeney: What happens when your computer or iPod dies? Maybe Apple has gotten better with that, but I remember when you would just lose your music.


TTBOMK, it's still the possibility you could lose it, but it's in the same manner you would lose your 10 songs - the backup goes.

Music at least. Video, I think you're screwed
 
2012-01-15 11:15:10 AM  

adamgreeney: iTunes allows you to buy music, but only for your apple device, so you dont actually own the music. How does any of that make piracy less attractive?

?
Maybe that was true four years ago (DRM-free iTunes purchases began in 2007), but now they're just unprotected AAC files that work on pretty much any player released in the last 5 years.
 
2012-01-15 11:15:38 AM  
adamgreeney: What happens when your computer or iPod dies?

you can keep a copy on your iPod and your computer, you can burn the stuff to a CD if you want. Can copy it to a second hard drive.

tenpoundsofcheese: You can get redbox for $1.3 a day and don't need to worry about watching it in two days.

And you get a very limited choice of movies. How about the film studios putting everything online and charging $5 a month for watching all the movies you want at your leisure? They'd make money hand over fist doing that.
 
2012-01-15 11:16:22 AM  

adamgreeney: Hell, people were recording shows on their VCR's and sharing them and I don't remember anyone trying to ban VCR's from being plugged into TV's.


You don't?
 
2012-01-15 11:16:53 AM  
In a capitalistic effort to increase the bottom line, Strandedco has decided to seek information globally to take advantage of the lowest possible price, free, without regard for national laws, morality, the welfare of the people or the long term unsustainability of the model.

people are corporations///
 
2012-01-15 11:16:54 AM  
The old business model is obsolete and in need of change.

That said, there is little to no chance that when the model is changed that folks who have been enjoying free material are going to stop sharing illegally. The old "if they gave us a good model this wouldn't happen" argument is good to get some attention brought to the problem, but it's not an honest statement. We have an entire generation of folks who have grown up with free access to their entertainment media.

Personal greed is as predictable as corporate greed in this case.
 
2012-01-15 11:17:00 AM  

heypete: tenpoundsofcheese: No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.

I'm an American living in Switzerland. Netflix isn't available here, nor is any similar service (i.e. streaming video on-demand). Before I moved here, I happily paid for Netflix service as it offered the content I wanted at a price I thought was reasonable.

Since I've moved here, my options are:

1. Don't watch movies. (Unless I want to watch them in German, which I don't.)
2. Continue to pay for Netflix, but connect to a US-based VPN service to get around their geographical restrictions. (That is, they don't offer the service here and actively restrict paying customers from using it.)
3. Pirate content.

I choose #2 even though it is technically against the Netflix terms of service (nonetheless, I am paying for the service and thus for the content). I know a few other expats here who also do the same, but occasionally pirate a particular movie as it's not available on Netflix for streaming (that is, they would happily pay for it, but it is not available legitimately where they are).



Got it.

You are NOT paying for the service you are using. What you are paying for does not allow access in Switzerland (probably due to whatever licensing fees Netflix would have to pay if they did that).

You an entitled, unethical POS.
 
2012-01-15 11:17:29 AM  

adamgreeney: I don't remember anyone trying to ban VCR's from being plugged into TV's...


I was born in 1976, so I was only 6 years old when the "Video Nasty" debates took place. The whole theory was based on "think of the children" but enough people had home video devices by then, and liked watching porn at home, that it just turned into a labeling system more stringent than the cinema release.

But there were people that believed in banning of home video playback devices, especially those that could record.

Wiki
 
rpm
2012-01-15 11:18:01 AM  

adamgreeney: Hell, people were recording shows on their VCR's and sharing them and I don't remember anyone trying to ban VCR's from being plugged into TV's.


You might want to get checked for senility. They did.

The first VC"R" you couldn't rewind, it was a read once media. This one I didn't know about until I've seen it in SOPA related articles, that should tell you how well it worked.

Plus there was the court cases needed to legalize space shifting. There were suits flying left and right
 
2012-01-15 11:18:04 AM  

Honest Bender: HeartBurnKid: I get that you think the government sucks, but how does abdicating the one small measure of power you have to make them suck less do anything but make them suck more?

The only difference between you and me is that I don't buy into the illusion that we have that power.


We do, and if you and everybody else who says "I'm not voting because everybody sucks" exercised it, it might mean something.
 
2012-01-15 11:18:36 AM  

adamgreeney: SmackLT: No Ironic tag for this one?

Came here to say this.

Hey RIAA, television studios, etc. FIND A NEW BUSINESS MODEL.

If you make everything available online and make it reasonable to buy without insane restrictions, it will be bought legally by 99% of people. We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.


Steam has said that, in effect, they expected to make x amount with thier first huge sales etc they did.

They made something insane like 3000% of x.

People want to buy content. They just need to trust the provider and it needs to be priced reasonably.

Otherwise they say f you and get it free or not at all.

I personally simply stopped trying to watch shows on not-Hulu because they all have some different format, want me to subscribe, don't publish episodes in a timely manner, or flat out don't work.
 
2012-01-15 11:18:52 AM  

adamgreeney:
What happens when your computer or iPod dies? Maybe Apple has gotten better with that, but I remember when you would just lose your music. That's insane.


What's insane is not having multiple backups for things you're not willing to lose.

In any case, Apple will let you re-download all your purchased movies and songs as a one-time courtesy if your computer dies, but you really shouldn't have let it come to that.
 
2012-01-15 11:19:32 AM  

WhyteRaven74: SharkTrager: that was going to close Guantanamo

There are two executive orders ordering it shut down. You put the blame at the feet of Congress for never following through with the funding to make it happen.


It didn't take congressional funding to move the prisoners. The facilities to house them elsewhere exist. The planes fly in and out daily. The ability to release prisoners to their home countries exist. The legal right to facilitate the transfers exist.

The idea that they couldn't have closed the prison because they didn't have funding is absolute bullshiat.
 
2012-01-15 11:20:45 AM  
When it comes to movie piracy, for me getting it *free* isn't the issue at all. It's the simple availability, and ease of use.

If there existed a legal, easy to use means by which I could go to a site, get a list of just about every movie ever made, regardless of studio, and have it on my computer within the hour with no time constraint, for a reasonable fee, I would have no issue with paying for every single movie I download.

The problem of piracy doesn't stem from the desire to steal for most people. The problem stems from the fact that the film and music industry refuse to adapt to the needs of their customers in the face of a technology revolution. And it is their own quibbling and nickle and diming each other over rights agreements that is preventing them from creating online downloading resources which match those provided by the wooden legged parrot aficionados.

Here's the conversation in a nutshell:
Movie Studio A - Hey, would you like to join our conglomerate of movie studios to create an online catalog of downloadable movies, each purchased for a nominal fee?
Movie Studio B - No way! If people want to watch our movies we want them to have to go to our website, so they have to see our advertisements, sign up for an account so we can spam their emails with advertisements, force them to install our weird crappy codec and not notice the toolbar malware they're also installing, etc. Also the other crappy movie service that no one uses doesn't want us to let anyone else show our movies.
Guy Who Wants to Watch a Movie - Well fark you then. There, I've downloaded your movie and watched it anyway. Happy now?
 
2012-01-15 11:20:59 AM  

HeartBurnKid: Honest Bender: This is why I abstain from voting.

Then STFU. You've got no reason to complain; you got the government you deserve.


Whereas all the people that actually voted for the government have the right to complain, even though they were the ones that enabled it to do these things in the first place?

I think you have it backwards.
 
2012-01-15 11:21:03 AM  
tenpoundsofcheese: You an entitled, unethical POS.

He's paying for the service. That the service isn't available worldwide is a fault of the service and the film studios. There's zero reason for them to not allow people to access the material anywhere in the world.
 
rpm
2012-01-15 11:21:32 AM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Got it.

You are NOT paying for the service you are using. What you are paying for does not allow access in Switzerland (probably due to whatever licensing fees Netflix would have to pay if they did that).

You an entitled, unethical POS.


You're assuming the laws are ethical. You want the benefits of globalization? You get the downsides of it too. The regions are unethical.
 
2012-01-15 11:21:44 AM  

Marcus Aurelius: Those corporations' cocks aren't going to suck themselves.


This

WhyteRaven74: Someone ask the RIAA about all the money record labels owe to artists and how much of the money from RIAA lawsuits actually goes to the people who hold the copyrights.


and that...

/thread
 
2012-01-15 11:23:17 AM  
SharkTrager: The idea that they couldn't have closed the prison because they didn't have funding is absolute bullshiat.

The second order called for the prisoners to be moved to a stateside facility and which point the GOP pissed itself. There were plans to buy a closed down prison here in Illinois for the purpose and the GOP rep for the area started whining about having terrorists in their backyards. Only Congress could authorize the funds to acquire and operate the prison.
 
2012-01-15 11:23:39 AM  
I used to record songs on cassette off the radio. they didn't cry about it then. they didn't try to outlaw cassette recorders.
 
2012-01-15 11:24:05 AM  

tenpoundsofcheese: adamgreeney: tenpoundsofcheese: adamgreeney: We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.

No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.

tenpoundsofcheese: adamgreeney: We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.

No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.

yeah, some people do. Personally, i have never pirated anything since Napster. I WANT to give people my money! But the pricing and DRM tells me they dont want to take it. giving me 24 hours to watc h a film? sorry, but human lives arent always constructed so that i have 2 contiguous hours. So obviously they want to make movie renting a pain in the ass. iTunes allows you to buy music, but only for your apple device, so you dont actually own the music. How does any of that make piracy less attractive?

Piracy is getting something for nothing, so for people have ethics, it should never be an attractive option.

well, except maybe if somehow an orphans life depends on it or something like that.

Different business models are emerging. You can get redbox for $1.3 a day and don't need to worry about watching it in two days. Others will emerge too.


Redbox is great, but it doesnt always have a great selection. I prefer digital if I can get it. The problem is that a lot of the great models are being hampered by the idiots trying to push for SOPA's passing. Those people don't want new models. They want people to stop innovating and go back to the old models. That is the biggest issue in my mind. Innovation is a bad word for them, and they are too stupid to figure out how to make money from their products, so they want to hamper free speech and innovation to protect themselves.
 
2012-01-15 11:24:36 AM  
adamgreeney:
What happens when your computer or iPod dies? Maybe Apple has gotten better with that, but I remember when you would just lose your music. That's insane.

iTunes can be backed-up and restored. When I went from a PC to a Mac, I had no problems porting it from one machine to the next...

Also, I like to be able to listen to my music in any form I want. we don't OWN it, because we have to use the terms they dictate. When i bought a CD i could listen to it in any player anywhere I go. I like the Zune Pass model because I can download and listen to anything I want, but get to keep 10 songs a month and can burn them, move them, anything I want. Thats worth the money every month.

Sounds like you already have a solution to your problem...
 
2012-01-15 11:25:02 AM  

WhyteRaven74: adamgreeney: What happens when your computer or iPod dies?

you can keep a copy on your iPod and your computer, you can burn the stuff to a CD if you want. Can copy it to a second hard drive.

tenpoundsofcheese: You can get redbox for $1.3 a day and don't need to worry about watching it in two days.

And you get a very limited choice of movies.

waaa, waaa, waaaa. I am entitled to get more content than people are willing to give me. Waaaa, waaa, waaa.

How about the film studios putting everything online and charging $5 a month for watching all the movies you want at your leisure? They'd make money hand over fist doing that.

Seriously?? Don't you think that they have a bunch of people trying to figure out how to make money hand over fist? Don't you think that they looked at that option? Did you see what happened with Netflix?

 
2012-01-15 11:25:19 AM  

HeartBurnKid: Honest Bender: HeartBurnKid: I get that you think the government sucks, but how does abdicating the one small measure of power you have to make them suck less do anything but make them suck more?

The only difference between you and me is that I don't buy into the illusion that we have that power.

We do, and if you and everybody else who says "I'm not voting because everybody sucks" exercised it, it might mean something.


How? Explain the process to me.
 
rpm
2012-01-15 11:25:26 AM  

Hobodeluxe: I used to record songs on cassette off the radio. they didn't cry about it then. they didn't try to outlaw cassette recorders.


"Home Taping is Killing Music"

Yeah, they did.
 
2012-01-15 11:25:54 AM  
pirating old school

www.billstuff.com
 
2012-01-15 11:26:22 AM  

oroku_saki: heypete: oroku_saki: Fark the RIAA, fark the MPAA, fark the ESA, and fark everyone else who supports SOPA.

The European Space Agency supports SOPA?

I don't think so, but the Entertainment Software Association does. Anyone who has purchased stuff from Nintendo, Sony, Capcom, EA, or Square-Enix has at least some of that money go to the ESA. Here's a full list of their members (new window).

What is so ironic about the ESA is that they created a group called the Video Game Voter's Network that supposedly champions free speech. However, recent news makes it seem that they only care about free speech that supports the ESA and their member's bottom lines.


Speaking as someone who's vaguely in the biz - actually, SOPA harms ESA's members more than helps them in any regard(by killing much of the 'heard from friend' or 'saw Let's Play' clip on youtube -type marketing, as well as the game company's own web2.0 enabled sites to help generate hype).
Video games, like movies, are pirated via P2P, not websites. There is a campaign circulating among ESA members to tell ESA to back the hell off.
 
2012-01-15 11:26:32 AM  
BTW if the copyright laws hadn't been redone in the 70s and then the 90s, there's a fark ton of movies and music that would now be public domain. Oh yeah in the 70s legislation there's a thing with music where after a certain amount of time all rights revert to the songwriter. And guess what? The record labels are trying to fight from having to revert all the rights back.
 
2012-01-15 11:26:41 AM  

Marcus Aurelius: [horrornews.net image 400x333]


Oh, cool. Somebody else has actually seen that movie?
 
2012-01-15 11:26:45 AM  

Rozotorical: Bullshiat, The only voice in our government we have as Americans are our pocket books. Public opinion means shiat.


Jared Lee Loughner had a voice in government, just not a type of voice that we like.
 
2012-01-15 11:28:10 AM  

rpm: Hobodeluxe: I used to record songs on cassette off the radio. they didn't cry about it then. they didn't try to outlaw cassette recorders.

"Home Taping is Killing Music"

Yeah, they did.


well they should have quit putting the songs on the radio then
 
2012-01-15 11:28:35 AM  
The RIAA is mean. They threatened to sue me when I was a poor college student knowingly pirating music.
 
2012-01-15 11:28:35 AM  
www.dreamfoundry.co.za
/been an argument since...forever
 
2012-01-15 11:29:12 AM  
tenpoundsofcheese: Seriously?? Don't you think that they have a bunch of people trying to figure out how to make money hand over fist? Don't you think that they looked at that option? Did you see what happened with Netflix?

Netflix has to pay a ton of money to the studios, if the studios put the movies online themselves, those licensing fees aren't there. And movies no one sees don't make any money for the studio. No studio has even thought about putting their entire catalog online and making it available for streaming. Most still drag their feet on releasing DVDs of old movies.

waaa, waaa, waaaa. I am entitled to get more content than people are willing to give me. Waaaa, waaa, waaa.

I'd gladly pay for it if I could get it. Alas, there's nowhere to go to get it. And me not being able to get it and pay for it just costs the film studios money.
 
2012-01-15 11:29:21 AM  

ox45tallboy: adamgreeney: I don't remember anyone trying to ban VCR's from being plugged into TV's...

I was born in 1976, so I was only 6 years old when the "Video Nasty" debates took place. The whole theory was based on "think of the children" but enough people had home video devices by then, and liked watching porn at home, that it just turned into a labeling system more stringent than the cinema release.

But there were people that believed in banning of home video playback devices, especially those that could record.

Wiki


I'm not quite 30 yet, so I remember VCR's very well, but I didn't exactly pay attention to lawsuits. That's kind of incredible to read about though.

GizmoToy: adamgreeney:
What happens when your computer or iPod dies? Maybe Apple has gotten better with that, but I remember when you would just lose your music. That's insane.

What's insane is not having multiple backups for things you're not willing to lose.

In any case, Apple will let you re-download all your purchased movies and songs as a one-time courtesy if your computer dies, but you really shouldn't have let it come to that.


I like to live dangerously. I'm glad they allow you to redownload now. That makes me more likely to go to Apple once Microsoft actually kills my Zune.

kroonermanblack: adamgreeney: SmackLT: No Ironic tag for this one?

Came here to say this.

Hey RIAA, television studios, etc. FIND A NEW BUSINESS MODEL.

If you make everything available online and make it reasonable to buy without insane restrictions, it will be bought legally by 99% of people. We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.

Steam has said that, in effect, they expected to make x amount with thier first huge sales etc they did.

They made something insane like 3000% of x.

People want to buy content. They just need to trust the provider and it needs to be priced reasonably.

Otherwise they say f you and get it free or not at all.

I personally simply stopped trying to watch shows on not-Hulu because they all have some different format, want me to subscribe, don't publish episodes in a timely manner, or flat out don't work.


Steam is a PERFECT example. Hell, Hulu and Netflix are too. I'd pay 10 or 15 for Hulu gladly if they had more back seasons. I want to watch more shows, but i can't find them legally, so I have to home Hulu or Netflix get them at some point. Everyone should be following Steam's example.
 
2012-01-15 11:29:29 AM  

SharkTrager: WhyteRaven74: SharkTrager: that was going to close Guantanamo

There are two executive orders ordering it shut down. You put the blame at the feet of Congress for never following through with the funding to make it happen.

It didn't take congressional funding to move the prisoners. The facilities to house them elsewhere exist. The planes fly in and out daily. The ability to release prisoners to their home countries exist. The legal right to facilitate the transfers exist.

The idea that they couldn't have closed the prison because they didn't have funding is absolute bullshiat.


Aw, geez, really? Congress does this all the time. Read this, you might get a better of how your government works. Or, in this case, doesn't.

Also, take a good look at the URL.
 
2012-01-15 11:30:07 AM  

tenpoundsofcheese: You are NOT paying for the service you are using. What you are paying for does not allow access in Switzerland (probably due to whatever licensing fees Netflix would have to pay if they did that).

You an entitled, unethical POS.


This is the most retarded thing I've ever read. Netflix has the ability to block vpn ips, and they don't. The guy is paying netflix the same that anyone else does. And you still call him a piece of shiat.

I'm sure you never travel a mile an hour over the speed limit, you moron.
 
rpm
2012-01-15 11:30:08 AM  

Hobodeluxe: rpm: Hobodeluxe: I used to record songs on cassette off the radio. they didn't cry about it then. they didn't try to outlaw cassette recorders.

"Home Taping is Killing Music"

Yeah, they did.

well they should have quit putting the songs on the radio then


Well, they tried. They opposed radio in the beginning too, since it would hurt the artists.

The content industry has been on the wrong side of innovation EVERY SINGLE TIME.
 
2012-01-15 11:30:26 AM  
Hey, RIAA slavery was good for the Southern economy too. Problem is evil is still evil.

/take your greed and cram it with walnuts.
 
2012-01-15 11:31:49 AM  

tenpoundsofcheese: WhyteRaven74: adamgreeney: What happens when your computer or iPod dies?

you can keep a copy on your iPod and your computer, you can burn the stuff to a CD if you want. Can copy it to a second hard drive.

tenpoundsofcheese: You can get redbox for $1.3 a day and don't need to worry about watching it in two days.

And you get a very limited choice of movies.

waaa, waaa, waaaa. I am entitled to get more content than people are willing to give me. Waaaa, waaa, waaa.

How about the film studios putting everything online and charging $5 a month for watching all the movies you want at your leisure? They'd make money hand over fist doing that.

Seriously?? Don't you think that they have a bunch of people trying to figure out how to make money hand over fist? Don't you think that they looked at that option? Did you see what happened with Netflix?


Hold on there. I'm not whining, I'm simply saying that I won't use Redbox very often because they don't offer content that I want. Isn't that how the market is supposed to work? I want content, and if that content isn't there, then why would I use that service? Where is the whining here?
 
2012-01-15 11:32:11 AM  

Hobodeluxe: I used to record songs on cassette off the radio. they didn't cry about it then. they didn't try to outlaw cassette recorders.


upload.wikimedia.org

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_Taping_Is_Killing_Music

/not sure if there was an American equivalent to this UK campaign
 
2012-01-15 11:32:23 AM  

SweetSaws: The RIAA is mean. They threatened to sue me when I was a poor college student knowingly pirating music.


I knew a guy in my freshman dorm who was a target of the RIAA. His could barely afford in-state tuition so I don't know what happened. I do know the school was trying to do its best to block the RIAA from attacking the students.
I was caught once using P2P, but the school just gave me a warning to cut it out, and I did.
 
2012-01-15 11:33:30 AM  

tenpoundsofcheese: You are NOT paying for the service you are using. What you are paying for does not allow access in Switzerland (probably due to whatever licensing fees Netflix would have to pay if they did that).

You an entitled, unethical POS.


I think you're confused. I'm a willing, paying customer. I opt to go through a bit of trouble and extra cost in order to pay for for the content that I'm viewing.

I could just pirate everything (and it's legal to do so here), but I opt to pay money for resources I use. How does that make me entitled?

I would love for Netflix (or some other company) to offer comparable service in Switzerland so I don't have to jump through all these hoops, but nobody has yet. I'd happily pay a bit more money in licensing fees if that's what it took.

Maybe if the RIAA, et al. got their collective heads out of their asses, they might realize that if they actually offer to sell people things, people will buy their things. Instead, they continue to not offer their products in many global markets and complain how nobody is buying their stuff.

Commerce is a two-way street: you need a buyer and a seller to agree upon mutually agreeable terms. There's a lot of people out there who are actively wanting to buy the products being offered, but cannot. It's no surprise that some turn to piracy.
 
2012-01-15 11:34:50 AM  
Incredibly rich and greedy old, old men brains are made of concrete. It's a bit like having the buggy-whip manufacturers in 1908 buying politicians to pass laws prevent Henry Ford from manufacturing cars.

Record Industry ASSHOLES of America. Buying their buddies (like this LAMAR pandering piece of shiat!) to protect their business model the LAZY way.
 
2012-01-15 11:34:56 AM  

tenpoundsofcheese: adamgreeney: tenpoundsofcheese: adamgreeney: We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.

No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.

tenpoundsofcheese: adamgreeney: We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.

No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.

yeah, some people do. Personally, i have never pirated anything since Napster. I WANT to give people my money! But the pricing and DRM tells me they dont want to take it. giving me 24 hours to watc h a film? sorry, but human lives arent always constructed so that i have 2 contiguous hours. So obviously they want to make movie renting a pain in the ass. iTunes allows you to buy music, but only for your apple device, so you dont actually own the music. How does any of that make piracy less attractive?

Piracy is getting something for nothing, so for people have ethics, it should never be an attractive option.

well, except maybe if somehow an orphans life depends on it or something like that.

Different business models are emerging. You can get redbox for $1.3 a day and don't need to worry about watching it in two days. Others will emerge too.


American ethics. lol Paying taxes to fund nonstop war that kills millions every decade for the last 100 years = good. Downloading a publicly available song with out paying for it = bad. So keep your so called ethics. Pay record companies that try to monpolize the market, companies that stiffle new generes of music. Black list artists that don't toe the correct company line, and then offeres bullshiat like nickleback for sale at three times the going market rate.
Something for nothing is what life is all about music should be free. Showing up at a venue shouldn't. Buying a manufactored device to store music shouldn't be free. Free access to music only inspires people to create more music and better music. File sharing is not piracy. Taping the radio is not piracy, Burning a mixed cd is not piracy.
 
2012-01-15 11:38:34 AM  

epoc_tnac: HeartBurnKid: Honest Bender: This is why I abstain from voting.

Then STFU. You've got no reason to complain; you got the government you deserve.

Whereas all the people that actually voted for the government have the right to complain, even though they were the ones that enabled it to do these things in the first place?

I think you have it backwards.


I think you do. Why should anybody listen to you if you're not going to do anything about it?

Nobody said you had to vote for any of the guys in power. Vote for the other guy, vote third-party, write in somebody, whatever. Not voting at all is a tacit endorsement of whatever's going on.

You're not above the system. All you do by abstaining is ensure that you'll be below it.
 
2012-01-15 11:39:21 AM  

rebelyell2006: Rozotorical: Bullshiat, The only voice in our government we have as Americans are our pocket books. Public opinion means shiat.

Jared Lee Loughner had a voice in government, just not a type of voice that we like.


No he didn't He murdered people. No one in the government is listening to Jared Lee Loughner. He influenced no change that he wanted or asked for by insanely murdering a group of people.
 
2012-01-15 11:39:47 AM  
Here's an idea, why don't the RIAA, MPAA and other groups just work out a deal with the internet providers to create some sort of "free-zone" internet service where people who sign up for that service can pirate without punishment, but their monthly bills will be slightly higher with the increased payments going directly to the RIAA, MPAA and other groups with a dog in the fight? That would be cost effective for everybody.
 
2012-01-15 11:40:09 AM  

Honest Bender:

How? Explain the process to me.


Okay.

307,006,550 people live in America. In the 2000 election, 107,390,107 people voted. You could all decide to vote for the Jedi party and it would win.

Source for Turnout Number (new window)
Source for U.S Population (new window)
 
2012-01-15 11:40:37 AM  
Radiohead released an album on a "pay what you want" basis, made a ton of money. More than they'd have made from a record label selling the same number of albums. Trent Reznor released the raw recording tracks to one of his albums and let people mix it themselves, basically letting them play producer. Then he let them upload what they did to his website so everyone else could hear what they were doing, and so he could hear it cause well it was interesting and who knows what sorts of talented people are among his audience. Oh yeah he's also made a ton putting on music however he wants whenever he wants. Something no major label or eve small label would ever let him do these days. When John Coltrane signed to Impulse! records, his contract simply said he must record at least two albums a year. If he wanted to record four or ten and that was just fine. That was a record label doing it right. Oh and what he recorded was entirely up to Coltrane, the label had no say so as to that. They just wanted to Coltrane albums a year at the minimum to release. He ended up recording so much they never released it all while he was alive.
 
2012-01-15 11:41:49 AM  
I just paid $17.00 for my wife and I too see a movie.

This is where George Lucas lives.

www.qualitybath.com

The fact that ANYONE in government is seriously worried about a few people downloading pirated crap makes me very 'stabby'.

Keep raising the damn ticket prices and everyone will be pirating movies.
 
2012-01-15 11:43:06 AM  
RIAA and SOPA should DIAF.

But first, rip their testicles off.
 
2012-01-15 11:43:23 AM  

Honest Bender: HeartBurnKid: Honest Bender: HeartBurnKid: I get that you think the government sucks, but how does abdicating the one small measure of power you have to make them suck less do anything but make them suck more?

The only difference between you and me is that I don't buy into the illusion that we have that power.

We do, and if you and everybody else who says "I'm not voting because everybody sucks" exercised it, it might mean something.

How? Explain the process to me.


You see, in this country, offices are filled by elections. People vote, and the person with the most votes gets the office.

So let's say you have two candidates running: John Jackson and Jack Johnson. Let's say about 53% don't really like either one (look at the voter turnout numbers, that's not a highly unrealistic situation). This scenario can go either of two ways:

53% say "screw this noise, I'm not voting": John Jackson or Jack Johnson wins, business as usual
53% say "screw this noise, I'm voting for Bob Robertson instead": Bob Robertson wins, maybe things change.
 
2012-01-15 11:43:25 AM  

heypete: tenpoundsofcheese: You are NOT paying for the service you are using. What you are paying for does not allow access in Switzerland (probably due to whatever licensing fees Netflix would have to pay if they did that).

You an entitled, unethical POS.

I think you're confused. I'm a willing, paying customer. I opt to go through a bit of trouble and extra cost in order to pay for for the content that I'm viewing.

I could just pirate everything (and it's legal to do so here), but I opt to pay money for resources I use. How does that make me entitled?

I would love for Netflix (or some other company) to offer comparable service in Switzerland so I don't have to jump through all these hoops, but nobody has yet. I'd happily pay a bit more money in licensing fees if that's what it took.

Maybe if the RIAA, et al. got their collective heads out of their asses, they might realize that if they actually offer to sell people things, people will buy their things. Instead, they continue to not offer their products in many global markets and complain how nobody is buying their stuff.

Commerce is a two-way street: you need a buyer and a seller to agree upon mutually agreeable terms. There's a lot of people out there who are actively wanting to buy the products being offered, but cannot. It's no surprise that some turn to piracy.


Exactly. Again, I WANT to give companies my money. I'm frivolous, and I like media. Give me reasonably priced options, and I'm in. Sadly, buying the episodes through Xbox, Sony or Amazon cost as much, if not more, than the DVD's. Pricing tells me they don't want me to do it that way.
 
2012-01-15 11:43:33 AM  

Rozotorical: rebelyell2006: Rozotorical: Bullshiat, The only voice in our government we have as Americans are our pocket books. Public opinion means shiat.

Jared Lee Loughner had a voice in government, just not a type of voice that we like.

No he didn't He murdered people. No one in the government is listening to Jared Lee Loughner. He influenced no change that he wanted or asked for by insanely murdering a group of people.


He got Gabrielle Giffords to stop voting in Congress for a while. He influenced her voting patterns. The end result isn't much different from a lobbyist influencing voting patterns with a check.
 
2012-01-15 11:46:36 AM  
If the recording industry wants to keep relevancy, they need to try offering something other than easily pirated material.

Some smart companies have started offering goodies along with the CD or DVD in question, sometimes exclusive books, clothing, trinkets, coupons for concert tickets. Things you can't get through an internet connection..
 
2012-01-15 11:47:33 AM  

Rozotorical: rebelyell2006: Rozotorical: Bullshiat, The only voice in our government we have as Americans are our pocket books. Public opinion means shiat.

Jared Lee Loughner had a voice in government, just not a type of voice that we like.

No he didn't He murdered people. No one in the government is listening to Jared Lee Loughner. He influenced no change that he wanted or asked for by insanely murdering a group of people.


Fair enough. How about Ruby Ridge, or Waco? Their deaths resulted in change in the way government investigates crimes.

People who die of drug overdoses are gradually changing the way many governments handle drug addiction, as in treatment rather than enforcement.

One can also say Davy Crockett still had a voice in government after leaving Congress, even though he wanted nothing to do with the US government. He met up with a bunch of other Americans in Northern Mexico, formed an illegal army, and helped create a new nation.
 
2012-01-15 11:48:06 AM  

HeartBurnKid: Honest Bender: HeartBurnKid: I get that you think the government sucks, but how does abdicating the one small measure of power you have to make them suck less do anything but make them suck more?

The only difference between you and me is that I don't buy into the illusion that we have that power.

We do, and if you and everybody else who says "I'm not voting because everybody sucks" exercised it, it might mean something.


www.stevenhumour.com
If he really believed what he was saying, then he wouldn't even be here. If resistance is futile, as he claims, then what's the point of the argument?

1. Click ignore.
2. Go on with your life.
3. Profit!

/PSA
 
2012-01-15 11:48:28 AM  

safeinsane: /been an argument since...forever


Yah. Damn those player-piano manufacturers and their fancy gadgets! They're cutting into our sheet-music sales!

/unfortunately, that actually was the argument at the time...
 
2012-01-15 11:49:10 AM  

Big_Fat_Liar: Anyone think CS Obama isn't going to sign this?


Don't worry, it'll be repealed when the Republicans take back the White House and repeal every single piece of legislation that the Sekrit Muslum Usurper ever touched.
 
2012-01-15 11:49:51 AM  

Summer Glau's Love Slave: If he really believed what he was saying, then he wouldn't even be here. If resistance is futile, as he claims, then what's the point of the argument?


I don't think he's trolling, to be honest. I've been in this argument IRL; there are some people who honestly somehow think that not voting is a way to change things.
 
2012-01-15 11:49:51 AM  
I'm disappointed in the people who failed to see the irony in Mike getting censored in a thread about SOPA.
 
2012-01-15 11:52:40 AM  

hitlersbrain: I just paid $17.00 for my wife and I too see a movie.

This is where George Lucas lives.

[www.qualitybath.com image 400x280]

The fact that ANYONE in government is seriously worried about a few people downloading pirated crap makes me very 'stabby'.

Keep raising the damn ticket prices and everyone will be pirating movies.


So as long as one of the most successful, most famous person who earned their fame and money decades ago can survive, that's good enough?

How many of us can say that we've achieved the level of success in our industry that George Lucas has? Should we not be able to afford a living?
 
2012-01-15 11:53:10 AM  

vwarb: Honest Bender:

How? Explain the process to me.

Okay.

307,006,550 people live in America. In the 2000 election, 107,390,107 people voted. You could all decide to vote for the Jedi party and it would win.

Source for Turnout Number (new window)
Source for U.S Population (new window)


You forgot that more than 100,000,000 of those residents can't vote for any party, due to the fact they are too young, too infirm, a convicted felon, or not a citizen.

Link (Warning: PDF that will make you tilt your head to the left)
 
2012-01-15 11:58:43 AM  

vudukungfu: RIAA and SOPA should DIAF.

But first, rip their testicles off.


Don't forget the BSA.
 
2012-01-15 11:59:07 AM  

rebelyell2006: Rozotorical: rebelyell2006: Rozotorical: Bullshiat, The only voice in our government we have as Americans are our pocket books. Public opinion means shiat.

Jared Lee Loughner had a voice in government, just not a type of voice that we like.

No he didn't He murdered people. No one in the government is listening to Jared Lee Loughner. He influenced no change that he wanted or asked for by insanely murdering a group of people.

He got Gabrielle Giffords to stop voting in Congress for a while. He influenced her voting patterns. The end result isn't much different from a lobbyist influencing voting patterns with a check.


She missed only a handfull of votes. She votes more then most congress members. So yes you are right. It takes shooting a room full of people to keep one rep from voting on a few bills. Votes that likely did nothing to influence policy change mind you. Lobbiest are effective because of the scale they work on. No body lobbies to influence one vote on the floor, what would be the point.
 
2012-01-15 11:59:20 AM  

adamgreeney: and they are too stupid to figure out how to make money from their products,


Because you disagree with their business model does not grant you ownership or entitlement to the services that they provide.


WhyteRaven74: John Coltrane signed to Impulse! records, his contract simply said he must record at least two albums a year. If he wanted to record four or ten and that was just fine. That was a record label doing it right.


Thats rare. Most of the jazz musicians got absolutely fleeced by their record companies. I believe Miles Davis was involved in a terribly shiatty deal with one contract and got a better offer to go with another company but there was just one problem - he owed his existing recording company 4 more albums. wanting to break free, Miles went into the studio and laid down the required 4 albums.

In 2 days.
 
2012-01-15 12:01:29 PM  

Fark_Guy_Rob: hitlersbrain: I just paid $17.00 for my wife and I too see a movie.

This is where George Lucas lives.

[www.qualitybath.com image 400x280]

The fact that ANYONE in government is seriously worried about a few people downloading pirated crap makes me very 'stabby'.

Keep raising the damn ticket prices and everyone will be pirating movies.

So as long as one of the most successful, most famous person who earned their fame and money decades ago can survive, that's good enough?

How many of us can say that we've achieved the level of success in our industry that George Lucas has? Should we not be able to afford a living?


I think what he's saying is that the game is already rigged to benefit a few people at the top of the industry while the rest of them are fed crumbs. Pirating only hurts those at the top, seeing how stuntmen and MOST actors and bands don't make much off of the profits of these obscenely profitable businesses.
 
2012-01-15 12:01:52 PM  

Silverstaff: Kome: iTunes allows you to buy music, but only for your apple device, so you dont actually own the music. How does any of that make piracy less attractive?


That's why all the legal downloads I buy are from Amazon.com. mp3's with no DRM. I keep a copy on my laptop, keep copies on my iPod and iPad, and a copy burned on DVD-ROM as a backup sitting on a shelf.


I've had no problem transferring music from iTunes to any folder or any device I want, you just need the right software.And I run Windows.
 
2012-01-15 12:02:20 PM  

starsrift: oroku_saki: heypete: oroku_saki: Fark the RIAA, fark the MPAA, fark the ESA, and fark everyone else who supports SOPA.

The European Space Agency supports SOPA?

I don't think so, but the Entertainment Software Association does. Anyone who has purchased stuff from Nintendo, Sony, Capcom, EA, or Square-Enix has at least some of that money go to the ESA. Here's a full list of their members (new window).

What is so ironic about the ESA is that they created a group called the Video Game Voter's Network that supposedly champions free speech. However, recent news makes it seem that they only care about free speech that supports the ESA and their member's bottom lines.

Speaking as someone who's vaguely in the biz - actually, SOPA harms ESA's members more than helps them in any regard(by killing much of the 'heard from friend' or 'saw Let's Play' clip on youtube -type marketing, as well as the game company's own web2.0 enabled sites to help generate hype).
Video games, like movies, are pirated via P2P, not websites. There is a campaign circulating among ESA members to tell ESA to back the hell off.


That's good news that there are ESA members that aren't backing SOPA. I do recall hearing that Crave came out against it recently. Capcom however had a spokesperson stating that their company was in agreement with the ESA on SOPA. I really hope that companies realize that the legislation is going to do more harm than good, and I even wrote to some of them recently with my concerns. Haven't heard anything back yet though.
 
2012-01-15 12:03:15 PM  
HeartBurnKid:

vwarb:


You seem to be missing the basis of my argument.

You: "If it's broken, then fix it!"
Me: "I don't believe it can be fixed."
You: "Then fix it!"
 
2012-01-15 12:04:05 PM  
My father gave me some advice way back in the day. He was, mind you, a trainer for the Army. HTH, survival, pretty much doing bad things to bad people with only your shoelaces, an entrenching tool, and good, old fashioned American ingenuity. He could take said entrenching tool and to things that are just plain wrong, and then without even stopping, keep the thing flipped over, prize it out of a rib cage, and dig a hole for the night, or the body. His advice to me, when I was all of 12, was "Never hand anyone a weapon unless you know what they're going to do with it." That advice has stuck with me, and covers a lot of ground, beyond pistols or a hunting rifle or a knife.

Never hand anyone a weapon unless you know what they're going to do with it. For all the nice folks who defend this tripe: why do you trust a board of people you don't know, and whose motives are lining their pockets above all else, but scream bloody murder that our own government cannot possibly be trusted?

I understand the desire to protect one's intellectually property. I understand wanting to protect avenues of distribution. I understand wanting to get paid for your work.

This particular piece of drek doesn't actually address those concerns, but instead hands folks who a maul to slip out a Jenga piece. There are better ways, and right now, the distributors and publishers, not the creators are pushing for this.
 
2012-01-15 12:04:39 PM  

ox45tallboy:

You forgot that more than 100,000,000 of those residents can't vote for any party, due to the fact they are too young, too infirm, a convicted felon, or not a citizen.



I thought someone might point that out. You're right of course. The actual number of eligible voters is closer to 200 million that 300 million. Last I checked, voter turnout usually hovers around something like 53%.

That said, if those remaining 100 million all voted for the Jedi party, it would still beat the 100 million that split their vote between 2 parties.

I was trying to keep things simple for the sake of conversation, but it is true that an issue like this can't really be summed up in a sentence or two.
 
2012-01-15 12:05:00 PM  

HeartBurnKid: Summer Glau's Love Slave: If he really believed what he was saying, then he wouldn't even be here. If resistance is futile, as he claims, then what's the point of the argument?

I don't think he's trolling, to be honest. I've been in this argument IRL; there are some people who honestly somehow think that not voting is a way to change things.


I won't claim that not voting 'changes' things; but I will say I advocate 'not voting' to people who are uninformed/unqualified to have an opinion on things. I don't mean that as an insult, I include myself.

I didn't go to medical school. If the American Medical Association had a 'vote' where we decided whether 20mg of Y or 2mg of X should be the new standard treatment of Z - and they allowed everyone to vote....I wouldn't. Because I don't know anything about medicine. I'm not a doctor. I haven't given drugs. I don't know the side effects. I'm just as likely to vote for the worse thing as the better thing.

Politics are no different, IMHO.

What the heck do I know about economics? Hell, top economic-type professor people can't seem to agree on the very basics like 'Will X increase or decrease the number of jobs in our country'. And they've studied economics for decades. What hope do I have, as a guy who studied computer crap in school and has about a junior-high level understanding of economics, of voting for the politician who claims that economic policy X is better than economic policy Y. I'm woefully unqualified for that.

In most cases, everyone agrees on the outcome. Everyone wants lower crime. Everyone wants lower taxes. Everyone wants more social services available to them (but not at the cost of increased taxes). Everyone wants better school systems. Everyone wants higher employment. Almost everyone wants more freedom. Almost everyone wants more protection (nevermind that those two are contradictory).

But those things that everyone seems to want - all the politicians are selling them.

Every politician promises better times for everyone. Most of the time, they only differ in the implementation of getting there. I've heard people argue the merits of various tax systems and I'm sorry, I don't have the faintest idea of what is better. Sure, I can listen and formulate an opinion....but it's an UNSUBSTANTIATED opinion, based on nothing. You could have asked me to speculate on the shape of the Earth as a four year old and formulate an opinion based on whatever, but it would be absolutely unsubstantiated by anything.

For virtually every important issue - I have *no clue* how to reach the desired end goal. So I don't vote.

A lot of people tell me that's a bad way to do things. But I don't know what the alternative is.
 
2012-01-15 12:06:19 PM  

HeartBurnKid: Nobody said you had to vote for any of the guys in power. Vote for the other guy, vote third-party, write in somebody, whatever. Not voting at all is a tacit endorsement of whatever's going on.

You're not above the system. All you do by abstaining is ensure that you'll be below it.


This!

Not voting is not protesting. Not voting is saying "Hi, I'm a doormat."

Voting for Bugs Bunny is better than not voting. At least they'd know people your age have a voice.
 
2012-01-15 12:07:03 PM  

o5iiawah: adamgreeney: and they are too stupid to figure out how to make money from their products,

Because you disagree with their business model does not grant you ownership or entitlement to the services that they provide.


WhyteRaven74: John Coltrane signed to Impulse! records, his contract simply said he must record at least two albums a year. If he wanted to record four or ten and that was just fine. That was a record label doing it right.

Thats rare. Most of the jazz musicians got absolutely fleeced by their record companies. I believe Miles Davis was involved in a terribly shiatty deal with one contract and got a better offer to go with another company but there was just one problem - he owed his existing recording company 4 more albums. wanting to break free, Miles went into the studio and laid down the required 4 albums.

In 2 days.


Please highlight where i said i was entitled to it. If they don't offer it in a way that is convenient for me, they won't get my money, or a lot of other peoples. That's business. Do you disagree? Should I pay them anyway because they are entitled to my money? What are you trying to say?
 
2012-01-15 12:07:10 PM  

HeartBurnKid: Honest Bender: This is why I abstain from voting.

Then STFU. You've got no reason to complain; you got the government you deserve.


Nope. That's not true at all. If someone doesn't find anything in any candidate offered to us then its their right no to vote.

Not voting doesn't make someone hate America. It's as much a right as anything else. When good people start running for government more people will vote. And yes, if you don't vote you still have every right to complain.

So you stfu.
 
2012-01-15 12:07:45 PM  

Fark_Guy_Rob: HeartBurnKid: Summer Glau's Love Slave: If he really believed what he was saying, then he wouldn't even be here. If resistance is futile, as he claims, then what's the point of the argument?

I don't think he's trolling, to be honest. I've been in this argument IRL; there are some people who honestly somehow think that not voting is a way to change things.

I won't claim that not voting 'changes' things; but I will say I advocate 'not voting' to people who are uninformed/unqualified to have an opinion on things. I don't mean that as an insult, I include myself.

I didn't go to medical school. If the American Medical Association had a 'vote' where we decided whether 20mg of Y or 2mg of X should be the new standard treatment of Z - and they allowed everyone to vote....I wouldn't. Because I don't know anything about medicine. I'm not a doctor. I haven't given drugs. I don't know the side effects. I'm just as likely to vote for the worse thing as the better thing.

Politics are no different, IMHO.

What the heck do I know about economics? Hell, top economic-type professor people can't seem to agree on the very basics like 'Will X increase or decrease the number of jobs in our country'. And they've studied economics for decades. What hope do I have, as a guy who studied computer crap in school and has about a junior-high level understanding of economics, of voting for the politician who claims that economic policy X is better than economic policy Y. I'm woefully unqualified for that.

In most cases, everyone agrees on the outcome. Everyone wants lower crime. Everyone wants lower taxes. Everyone wants more social services available to them (but not at the cost of increased taxes). Everyone wants better school systems. Everyone wants higher employment. Almost everyone wants more freedom. Almost everyone wants more protection (nevermind that those two are contradictory).

But those things that everyone seems to want - all the politicians are selling them. ...


Sometimes you have to vote to make sure the wrong people stay out of power, not to ensure that the right people get power.
 
2012-01-15 12:07:51 PM  

o5iiawah: adamgreeney: and they are too stupid to figure out how to make money from their products,

Because you disagree with their business model does not grant you ownership or entitlement to the services that they provide.


Precisely. Which is why lending books to your friends (in lieu of making them buy new copies for themselves) should be illegal.
 
2012-01-15 12:08:41 PM  

Mattyb710: I'm disappointed the city council threw that bum who was peeing in the corner and ranting about chemtrails out of the meeting. I thought this was America!


ftfy
 
2012-01-15 12:09:33 PM  

Biological Ali: o5iiawah: adamgreeney: and they are too stupid to figure out how to make money from their products,

Because you disagree with their business model does not grant you ownership or entitlement to the services that they provide.

Precisely. Which is why lending books to your friends (in lieu of making them buy new copies for themselves) should be illegal.


Ironically, the source of many pirated books is the library. Many books that I've found that were scanned and turned into .pdf files have code labels from various public libraries on the covers.
 
2012-01-15 12:10:20 PM  

Honest Bender: HeartBurnKid:

vwarb:

You seem to be missing the basis of my argument.

You: "If it's broken, then fix it!"
Me: "I don't believe it can be fixed."
You: "Then fix it!"


If you honestly don't believe it can't be fixed, then I hope you're stockpiling ammo and planning a revolution.

Otherwise, you're just looking for an excuse to pout without actually having to do anything about it.
 
2012-01-15 12:11:32 PM  
Let's see. Most people are against SOPA. Congress will pass it anyway. The RIAA says "It sure seems like the deck is stacked to ensure no meaningful or balanced debate occurs on an issue that is very important to American jobs and our economy". STFU RIAA, your bill is going to pass, Obama will sign it even though he's supposedly against it.
 
2012-01-15 12:14:28 PM  

enforcerpsu: HeartBurnKid: Honest Bender: This is why I abstain from voting.

Then STFU. You've got no reason to complain; you got the government you deserve.

Nope. That's not true at all. If someone doesn't find anything in any candidate offered to us then its their right no to vote.

Not voting doesn't make someone hate America. It's as much a right as anything else. When good people start running for government more people will vote. And yes, if you don't vote you still have every right to complain.

So you stfu.


So why should anybody listen to what you have to say?
 
2012-01-15 12:14:32 PM  

vwarb: Honest Bender:

How? Explain the process to me.

Okay.

307,006,550 people live in America. In the 2000 election, 107,390,107 people voted. You could all decide to vote for the Jedi party and it would win.

Source for Turnout Number (new window)
Source for U.S Population (new window)


No, you couldn't the US unlike countries with proportional representation don't really allow for this sort of thing.

In countries with proportional voting systems if 7 percent of the votes go to a party 7 percent of the seats in parliament will go to that party and the ideas the party stands for will influence the political system because everyone needs to compromise and form coalitions and stuff. This is why the Green Party managed to gain a foothold in much of Europe a few decades ago while coming out of nowhere and are now an institution. That is why movements such as the Pirate Party find serious traction in some places.

The way the system is set up it is either Democrats or Republicans and in many places there is very little any small or medium sized movement can do to influence which one. You are free to vote for whichever party you want and if you vote for either the Democrats or the Republicans and have the fortune of living in a place where the gap between the two is close you might actually achieve something.

If you see the two parties as one system than your ability to vote against the system is not unlike that of a an average soviet citizen during the communist rule.
 
rpm
2012-01-15 12:16:04 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: adamgreeney: We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.

No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.


I assume you've paid ASCAP for every single time you've sung "Happy Birthday" in front of people, right? Otherwise you're benefiting from pirating without paying.
 
2012-01-15 12:16:27 PM  

Loki-L: vwarb: Honest Bender:

How? Explain the process to me.

Okay.

307,006,550 people live in America. In the 2000 election, 107,390,107 people voted. You could all decide to vote for the Jedi party and it would win.

Source for Turnout Number (new window)
Source for U.S Population (new window)

No, you couldn't the US unlike countries with proportional representation don't really allow for this sort of thing.

In countries with proportional voting systems if 7 percent of the votes go to a party 7 percent of the seats in parliament will go to that party and the ideas the party stands for will influence the political system because everyone needs to compromise and form coalitions and stuff. This is why the Green Party managed to gain a foothold in much of Europe a few decades ago while coming out of nowhere and are now an institution. That is why movements such as the Pirate Party find serious traction in some places.

The way the system is set up it is either Democrats or Republicans and in many places there is very little any small or medium sized movement can do to influence which one. You are free to vote for whichever party you want and if you vote for either the Democrats or the Republicans and have the fortune of living in a place where the gap between the two is close you might actually achieve something.

If you see the two parties as one system than your ability to vote against the system is not unlike that of a an average soviet citizen during the communist rule.


Pretty much. Vote either way, the end result is the same.
 
2012-01-15 12:16:56 PM  
Hey dumbass backers, piracy is actually on the decline! Thanks to Netflix and Google music, piracy isn't that big of a deal but oh yeah, the big wigs caught up from 2000 and are losing money due to their products quality on the decline as well. But oh yeah, PIRATES MUST BE STOPPED BECAUSE WE WANT OUR MONIES!
 
2012-01-15 12:18:17 PM  
so the new go to reason for passing asinine bills is "it will create more jobs!"
I propose the enact me as emperor of the United States bill, it will create more jobs. also the pestilence and pain bill where I unleash all the diseases unto the United States along with imported predators from Africa and Asia like those hornets and Lions and shiat, it will create more jobs!
 
2012-01-15 12:19:20 PM  

Ehcks: Not voting is not protesting. Not voting is saying "Hi, I'm a doormat."


Voting is saying, "Hi, I'm a doormat but I refuse to acknowledge it."

HeartBurnKid: If you honestly don't believe it can't be fixed, then I hope you're stockpiling ammo and planning a revolution.


I'm trying to earn enough money as fast as I can so that I can retire to a nice, self sufficient plot of land in the middle of no where. I'm currently eyeing Alaska.

In the mean time, I try not to break any major laws and I count on my mild minored, handsome, white appearance to keep the police thugs from farking my world up.
 
2012-01-15 12:20:48 PM  
Well, if they really said that, I think the true problem lies in that the general public doesn't think it's true. It very much is. Online piracy affects jobs, incomes, and lives of everyday people, not just corporate fatheads.

Now, I have to get back to this torrent. Bye!
 
2012-01-15 12:22:45 PM  
www.advrider.com

/Wandered off like a Down's Syndrome kid on a sugar high.
 
2012-01-15 12:28:19 PM  
Of course the deck is stacked. It should be stacked against the RIAA just like other crime syndicates.
 
2012-01-15 12:29:44 PM  

ox45tallboy: Rozotorical: rebelyell2006: Rozotorical: Bullshiat, The only voice in our government we have as Americans are our pocket books. Public opinion means shiat.

Jared Lee Loughner had a voice in government, just not a type of voice that we like.

No he didn't He murdered people. No one in the government is listening to Jared Lee Loughner. He influenced no change that he wanted or asked for by insanely murdering a group of people.

Fair enough. How about Ruby Ridge, or Waco? Their deaths resulted in change in the way government investigates crimes.

People who die of drug overdoses are gradually changing the way many governments handle drug addiction, as in treatment rather than enforcement.

One can also say Davy Crockett still had a voice in government after leaving Congress, even though he wanted nothing to do with the US government. He met up with a bunch of other Americans in Northern Mexico, formed an illegal army, and helped create a new nation.


You mean lobby groups of drug treatment facility have been trying to use the money they have pooled to change how drug addiciton is handled but are constantly blocked on state and federal levels by private prisons and law enforcement groups? Effective drug treament was studied by the Rand Corp think tank for Raygun and Bush I think we can all see how much that changed national policy
. Davy Crockett did a lot of things. The money Texas Ranchers and Midwest Banks fronted to support the forming of that army helped create Texas more then one illiterate soldier who died early in the war. Now Dan Boone that guy almost single handedly created Texas himself. The land not the country amazing person we will never see the like of him again.
That being said I am not aware of what changes in policy you are refering to that came from ruby ridge so I will refrain from spouting off on that.
Of course this argument is about not voting. That is something I don't understand. Vote. No mater what else you may do in your life vote. If you don't like the canidates write someone in. Vote third or fourth or fifth party. Shoot right in fark you for all that maters. But show up and put your Herby Hancock down that you are still there and still have an opinion no mater how little that it might mater to anyone else.
 
2012-01-15 12:30:24 PM  
tenpoundsofcheese

You keep referring to piracy as 'stealing', when in many cases it is not. To clarify, when 'Piracy' is referring to the unauthorized sale of someone else's intellectual property, THAT is stealing.

However, the act of copying something for personal use, is not stealing.
Let's say I go over to your house, and admire an Ikea chair you have. Being somewhat of a handyman, I take pictures and measurements of your chair, go home, and make a replica of it. Or baring my own skills, I 'know a guy' who makes a good chair, and he's willing to do it for free, because he's a chair enthusiast.
The replica is not perfect, lacking in the quality craftmanship of the original, but it is functional.

Now, can you call the cops on me and have me arrested for stealing your chair? Nope. YOU still have your chair. There has been no loss of property. And here's the big question. Can Ikea have me charged for making my own personal copy of their chair and not paying them for it? The only thing they could argue, is that if I didn't have the ability to make my own chair, I would have had to pay them to get it. Yet they still can't charge me for that, because it is utterly impossible for them to know, or prove, that I actually liked the chair enough to pay for it.

Now why does this logic suddenly go out the window when we are discussing digital content? If I download an Xbox game, there is no demonstratable loss of income for the maker or distributer, because it is merely an assumption that I *would* have bought it if I hadn't the means to get it for free.

Despite this assumption of loss of sale being impossible to prove in a court of law, it is also untrue in many cases, and in such cases, there is no moral or ethical issue.

Ever see people who have cleaned out their garage or basement, and left a bunch of junk sitting at the end of their driveway with a sign saying 'free for the taking' or what not. If you come across this pile of junk, you might find a few things to take on a lark. Hmmm, a gaudy, holographic Jesus clock. It's weird, kitchsy, maybe I'll take it for a laugh, hang it in the rec room, or give it to my sister as a jokey, ironic housewarming present. Does this mean the company that made it now has a right to charge me $49.99? Because the notion that I would actually buy this tacky piece of crap is utterly ridiculous, and the fact that I was willing to take it home simply because it was free for the taking is in no way an indication of my willingess to purchase it.

Likewise with digital content. I may download 'Mega Shark Vs Giant Octopus' from a torrent site out of morbid curiousity, but I would never, in a million years, have shelled out $20 for the DVD, and I can take a polygraph to that effect.

The ethical dilema associated with file sharing is nebulous at best. If you've downloaded something you would have otherwise knowingly paid money for, then that is unethical, and you have stolen. If you would not have paid for it either way, then nothing unethical has transpired. No property has been lost, and no revenue has been lost.

Fark Challenge Difficulty: Reply without saying 'entitled'
 
2012-01-15 12:30:32 PM  
Desperation, thy name is RIAA.

Piracy has not hurt the music industry half as much as iTunes have. iTunes, and Amazon et al after them, made the cash cow we know and love as the overpriced album obsolete.

But sure, blame your woes on people whose option to pirating your product is to not use it at all. That's the ticket.

This is not about stopping piracy, It's about cracking down on competition. Independent online content providers that can't afford to lawyer up against frivolous claims of infringment, once SOPA overrides the safe harbor provision of the DMCA.

/Probably been said in this thread already but,
//tl;dr
///and
////bearsbearsbearsbears
 
2012-01-15 12:30:37 PM  

Summer Glau's Love Slave: Vodka Zombie: See? This is where I need the cartoon of the laughing guy saying "Ha-ha, Oh wow!"

[i1125.photobucket.com image 348x228]
You're welcome.

/Die RIAA DIE!
//In a fire please, kthxbai.


I think it's supposed to be Captain Braddock, actually.
 
2012-01-15 12:34:25 PM  

Vodka Zombie: See? This is where I need the cartoon of the laughing guy saying "Ha-ha, Oh wow!"


My mistake Captain Haddock, I think I might have watched the Bardock special abridged too often.

i3.kym-cdn.com
 
2012-01-15 12:34:28 PM  

Nintenfreak: Summer Glau's Love Slave: Vodka Zombie: See? This is where I need the cartoon of the laughing guy saying "Ha-ha, Oh wow!"

[i1125.photobucket.com image 348x228]
You're welcome.

/Die RIAA DIE!
//In a fire please, kthxbai.

I think it's supposed to be Captain Braddock, actually.


www.youknow-forkids.com
 
2012-01-15 12:36:06 PM  

Zmog: Desperation, thy name is RIAA.

Piracy has not hurt the music industry half as much as iTunes have. iTunes, and Amazon et al after them, made the cash cow we know and love as the overpriced album obsolete.

But sure, blame your woes on people whose option to pirating your product is to not use it at all. That's the ticket.

This is not about stopping piracy, It's about cracking down on competition. Independent online content providers that can't afford to lawyer up against frivolous claims of infringment, once SOPA overrides the safe harbor provision of the DMCA.

/Probably been said in this thread already but,
//tl;dr
///and
////bearsbearsbearsbears


This. Bolded for emphasis.
 
2012-01-15 12:38:00 PM  
Any oligarchy like the RIAA or the Vatican seeks to protect its own existence even when it has become thoroughly obsolete.

Their fate is inevitable ... in a decade or so, more new acts will rise from YouTube and its competitors than from traditional studios.
 
2012-01-15 12:38:31 PM  

WhyteRaven74: Someone ask the RIAA about all the money record labels owe to artists and how much of the money from RIAA lawsuits actually goes to the people who hold the copyrights.


Same goes for the MPAA. Most of the people that actually MAKE the movies get squat.

Jobs, sure, but unpaid ones.
 
2012-01-15 12:40:14 PM  
o5iiawah: , Miles went into the studio and laid down the required 4 albums.

Yep, the end of his days at Prestige. Funny thing is, given how much material Miles recorded and how fast, he could've put out 4 albums for two days work on many other occasions.
 
2012-01-15 12:40:25 PM  

rmoody: Mattyb710: I'm disappointed the city council threw that bum who was peeing in the corner and ranting about chemtrails out of the meeting. I thought this was America!

ftfy


I was merely pointing out the irony about someone being censored on the internet in a thread that is about internet censorship (or is supposed to be anyway).
I never said whether I disagreed or agreed with his post being censored.
Equating that to me thinking someone should be allowed to piss on the floor is idiotic.
 
2012-01-15 12:42:08 PM  

WhyteRaven74: Someone ask the RIAA about all the money record labels owe to artists and how much of the money from RIAA lawsuits actually goes to the people who hold the copyrights.


I don't understand what jobs they are referring too? Haven't they stolen money from artists for decades now? And are fighting copyrights being lifted which would take their biggest cash cow away?

F*ck them, they all need to die.
 
2012-01-15 12:44:51 PM  
I just found it interesting that anyone from the RIAA managed to show up at the CES and not get lynched. Did they bring along Paul Christoforo to deflect attention?
 
2012-01-15 12:45:27 PM  
You know, movie studios and record studios have only been around in their modern form for about 100 years. Humanity survived without them for eons. We'll survive just fine without them in the future.

I say burn the assholes to the ground.

Trying to completely block innovation to save your failing business model is in no way shape or form good capitalism. It's bad natured corporatism.
 
2012-01-15 12:46:49 PM  
steamingpile: And are fighting copyrights being lifted which would take their biggest cash cow away?

Well the artists could negotiate licensing deals so the labels would still get money but they would no longer have actual control of the recordings. And they'd make less. Their argument is, and I'm not kidding, is that the works are all works for hire and thus exempt from the law.
 
2012-01-15 12:46:54 PM  
You know, I'm not against the *spirit* of the bill, but they're going about it all wrong. It's gonna f*ck up DNS, and it'll create essentially what could be called "copyright trolls."

They need to rethink this.
 
2012-01-15 12:49:04 PM  

vwarb: Then I weep because I realize it doesn't matter. He's still going to win. One of the most wildly unpopular bills to ever go to the floor is going to pass, despite the screams of every one of us. Why? Because Congress is filled with geriatric assholes who think every American citizen is a criminal anyway and should be caged.


In related news: The Pirate Bay just switched to 100% magnet links meaning that all the technical measures in the SOPA act are useless.
 
2012-01-15 12:50:13 PM  
Fark you America, I can't afford to buy my new gold Porsche because of your pirating antics my inability to produce anything of substance.
 
2012-01-15 12:52:53 PM  

The RIAA and MPAA perform late term abortions

 
2012-01-15 12:53:59 PM  

Joce678: In related news: The Pirate Bay just switched to 100% magnet links meaning that all the technical measures in the SOPA act are useless.


So how, exactly, do you find a magnet link if The Pirate Bay's site is blocked for "facilitating copyright infringement?"
 
2012-01-15 12:54:19 PM  

Joce678: vwarb: Then I weep because I realize it doesn't matter. He's still going to win. One of the most wildly unpopular bills to ever go to the floor is going to pass, despite the screams of every one of us. Why? Because Congress is filled with geriatric assholes who think every American citizen is a criminal anyway and should be caged.


In related news: The Pirate Bay just switched to 100% magnet links meaning that all the technical measures in the SOPA act are useless.


Once SOPA passes, the only way to get anything will be to pirate it
 
2012-01-15 12:54:37 PM  
Artists should be slaves to society! Am I a good little progressive now?
 
2012-01-15 12:54:40 PM  
img689.imageshack.us

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

UP YOURS BIG MEDIA!
 
2012-01-15 12:55:12 PM  
Parasite: par·a·site/ˈparəˌsīt/ Noun.

1. An organism that lives in or on another organism (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the host's expense.
2. derogatory. A person or organization that habitually relies on or exploits others and gives nothing in return.
 
2012-01-15 12:58:35 PM  

glassbottomboatcaptain: tenpoundsofcheese

You keep referring to piracy as 'stealing', when in many cases it is not. To clarify, when 'Piracy' is referring to the unauthorized sale of someone else's intellectual property, THAT is stealing.

However, the act of copying something for personal use, is not stealing.
Let's say I go over to your house, and admire an Ikea chair you have. Being somewhat of a handyman, I take pictures and measurements of your chair, go home, and make a replica of it. Or baring my own skills, I 'know a guy' who makes a good chair, and he's willing to do it for free, because he's a chair enthusiast.
The replica is not perfect, lacking in the quality craftmanship of the original, but it is functional.

Now, can you call the cops on me and have me arrested for stealing your chair? Nope. YOU still have your chair. There has been no loss of property. And here's the big question. Can Ikea have me charged for making my own personal copy of their chair and not paying them for it? The only thing they could argue, is that if I didn't have the ability to make my own chair, I would have had to pay them to get it. Yet they still can't charge me for that, because it is utterly impossible for them to know, or prove, that I actually liked the chair enough to pay for it.

Now why does this logic suddenly go out the window when we are discussing digital content? If I download an Xbox game, there is no demonstratable loss of income for the maker or distributer, because it is merely an assumption that I *would* have bought it if I hadn't the means to get it for free.

Despite this assumption of loss of sale being impossible to prove in a court of law, it is also untrue in many cases, and in such cases, there is no moral or ethical issue.


Ever see people who have cleaned out their garage or basement, and left a bunch of junk sitting at the end of their driveway with a sign saying 'free for the taking' or what not. If you come across this pile of junk, you might find a few ...


Actually the loss of sales is exactly provable in court. But beyond that, you are correct: infringement of intellectual property rights is not the tort of conversion (theft) - the depriving of others of the use and enjoyment of their property. It is its own thing, its own tort. It is really more of a bastard child of the tort of trespass (i.e. entering someone's land) and restitution (someone is unjustly enriched at your expense). We have given a monopoly right to creators as a way of spuring creation of new workd because intellectual property is a public good, making it almost impossible to internalize the external benefits. By copying the work without paying for it you are saying "if you wanted to make a living off of making IP, don't, because you cannot recoup the benefits you have put out into the world."

I know this will lead inevitably to the "George Lucas and Metallica are filthy rich - oh boo hoo" but they became so because of IP. Also its looking at the margins. You can also argue about the PR value of the big labels being constant sperm-turtles, encouraging infringement. You would likely be right - but all i am saying is that it is disingenuous to say that IP infringement isn't a tort because it isn't conversion. That's like saying Intentional infliction of emotional distress isn't a tort because it doesn't fit the elements of battery.
 
2012-01-15 01:05:22 PM  
If farking with the first amendment is what it takes to create jobs in your industry, RIAA and MPAA... then I'd say it's time for your industry to go away.
 
2012-01-15 01:07:20 PM  

Teiritzamna: glassbottomboatcaptain: tenpoundsofcheese

You keep referring to piracy as 'stealing', when in many cases it is not. To clarify, when 'Piracy' is referring to the unauthorized sale of someone else's intellectual property, THAT is stealing.

However, the act of copying something for personal use, is not stealing.
Let's say I go over to your house, and admire an Ikea chair you have. Being somewhat of a handyman, I take pictures and measurements of your chair, go home, and make a replica of it. Or baring my own skills, I 'know a guy' who makes a good chair, and he's willing to do it for free, because he's a chair enthusiast.
The replica is not perfect, lacking in the quality craftmanship of the original, but it is functional.

Now, can you call the cops on me and have me arrested for stealing your chair? Nope. YOU still have your chair. There has been no loss of property. And here's the big question. Can Ikea have me charged for making my own personal copy of their chair and not paying them for it? The only thing they could argue, is that if I didn't have the ability to make my own chair, I would have had to pay them to get it. Yet they still can't charge me for that, because it is utterly impossible for them to know, or prove, that I actually liked the chair enough to pay for it.

Now why does this logic suddenly go out the window when we are discussing digital content? If I download an Xbox game, there is no demonstratable loss of income for the maker or distributer, because it is merely an assumption that I *would* have bought it if I hadn't the means to get it for free.

Despite this assumption of loss of sale being impossible to prove in a court of law, it is also untrue in many cases, and in such cases, there is no moral or ethical issue.

Ever see people who have cleaned out their garage or basement, and left a bunch of junk sitting at the end of their driveway with a sign saying 'free for the taking' or what not. If you come across this pile of ju ...


That's a great argument for the DMCA, but comes nowhere close to PIPA or SOPA... letting the government unilaterally censor the internet is going way farther than enacting IP tort reform.
 
2012-01-15 01:08:04 PM  

TyrantII: You know, movie studios and record studios have only been around in their modern form for about 100 years. Humanity survived without them for eons. We'll survive just fine without them in the future.


Serious question: What would happen if we got rid of copyright on music?

OK... first up, we'd get a lot less new work. But really, so what? I mean, we've got fricking thousands and thousands of great songs and records out there, and very little innovation happening. If no-one wrote another song again, it wouldn't matter.

But... people would still write songs, because they always did in the past. They still do today. You go to English football stadia and people sing chants that they've written, either celebrating players or dissing their opponents. No-one has copyright on "He's fat, he's round, he's sold your f**king ground, Al Fayed, Al Fayed...".
 
2012-01-15 01:08:34 PM  
If (and that's a big if) the bill gets passed then people just need to make a few youtube videos and photoshop posters which enthusiastically support SOPA and RIAA. Those organizations will use them on their websites without asking permission and can then be reported as being in violation of the act.
 
2012-01-15 01:11:35 PM  

ParaHandy: Their fate is inevitable ... in a decade or so, more new acts will rise from YouTube and its competitors than from traditional studios.


Oops - those new acts were accused of copyright violation. They didn't violate any copyright, but they were accused and so their videos were taken off youtube. Luckily the hot new star that Sony is promoting is available to view instead!
 
2012-01-15 01:12:11 PM  

Noah_Tall: If (and that's a big if) the bill gets passed then people just need to make a few youtube videos and photoshop posters which enthusiastically support SOPA and RIAA. Those organizations will use them on their websites without asking permission and can then be reported as being in violation of the act.


Didn't you get the memo? The rules and laws do not apply to those who make or enforce them.
 
2012-01-15 01:15:55 PM  

bulldg4life: Gonz: No, he's usually a troll. And his act is rather played out. He's not a bad troll, per se, just predictable. You know what you're going to get from him, which takes a lot of the sheen off his posts.

If you think his comments are anything other than an absurd comedic extension of what some actual trolls actually say on this site, then you are taking Fark entirely too seriously.

My god, the man spent a month last year talking about how awesome Mario Chalmers is.


He's only an absurd comedian in threads like this. In a gaming thread, if you don't like exactly the sorts of things he likes, or even hint at the possibility that someone might not like the same things he likes, he turns into a huge whiny brat. And it's not entertaining at all.

And, yes, I agree that the RIAA and MPAA should DIAF.
 
2012-01-15 01:16:20 PM  

glassbottomboatcaptain: Now why does this logic suddenly go out the window when we are discussing digital content? If I download an Xbox game, there is no demonstratable loss of income for the maker or distributer, because it is merely an assumption that I *would* have bought it if I hadn't the means to get it for free.


Because piracy isn't theft. In the case you described, you're illegally distributing a copyrighted work. That's what you'd be taken to court for and that's why the judgements against pirates tend to be drastically higher than the MSRP of the content they pirated.

You should probably know a little about this stuff before you write really long posts about it.
 
2012-01-15 01:18:05 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: Those corporations' cocks aren't going to suck themselves.


^

adamgreeney: Hey RIAA, television studios, etc. FIND A NEW BUSINESS MODEL.


^

Hobodeluxe: I used to record songs on cassette off the radio. they didn't cry about it then. they didn't try to outlaw cassette recorders.


^
 
2012-01-15 01:18:47 PM  

firefly212: That's a great argument for the DMCA, but comes nowhere close to PIPA or SOPA... letting the government unilaterally censor the internet is going way farther than enacting IP tort reform.


Oh trust me sir, I am majorly against SOPA. I was just responding to the implied argument that because IP infringement is not the same as the tort of conversion, its not a tort at all (which tends to be one of the 5 great logical fallacies regarding IP law trotted out in every IP thread).
 
2012-01-15 01:19:06 PM  
In the event that these bills pass. How might one theoretically get around all of these things when browsing the interwebs?
 
rpm
2012-01-15 01:19:27 PM  

ox45tallboy: Joce678: In related news: The Pirate Bay just switched to 100% magnet links meaning that all the technical measures in the SOPA act are useless.

So how, exactly, do you find a magnet link if The Pirate Bay's site is blocked for "facilitating copyright infringement?"


Except they can't be blocked. They explicitly exclude .com as "under US control"
 
2012-01-15 01:21:26 PM  
Barack Obama is the Democratic Mitt Romney. He says whatever he thinks people want him to say, and stands for nothing, while, in the end, ignoring what he said to do what we all knew would happen anyway. Like all the other expansions of executive power we've seen so far, Obama will pretend to protest, and sign himself more power anyway.
 
2012-01-15 01:21:47 PM  

Dr J Zoidberg: In the event that these bills pass. How might one theoretically get around all of these things when browsing the interwebs?


DeSopa for Firefox Bypasses SOPA DNS Blocking (new window)
 
2012-01-15 01:23:00 PM  

glassbottomboatcaptain: If the RIAA thinks it can hold the cards in this battle, it has another thing coming. If they fark up the Internet for the sake of covering their lack of foresight and inability to adapt their business model to modern technology, I personally would not have a problem with never buying music, again, ever. Hell, I've got decades worth of great music I love that I can listen to exclusively for the rest of my life and be content.

RIAA, the bands don't even need you anymore. So how about instead of you bullying us back into buying your overpriced product and giving our money to the people who deserve it the least, how about we just start buying the music directly from the bands, and cut you out of the process altogether?

More so.


boo hoo i don't listen to music.
 
2012-01-15 01:23:21 PM  

pxlboy: Dr J Zoidberg: In the event that these bills pass. How might one theoretically get around all of these things when browsing the interwebs?

DeSopa for Firefox Bypasses SOPA DNS Blocking (new window)


Do they have something similar for chrome?
 
2012-01-15 01:24:01 PM  

narkor: Google is pouring gigabucks into lobbying against SOPA - and Google makes more in a quarter than the entire movie industry does in a year.


Citation Needed.
 
2012-01-15 01:25:46 PM  

rpm: ox45tallboy: Joce678: In related news: The Pirate Bay just switched to 100% magnet links meaning that all the technical measures in the SOPA act are useless.

So how, exactly, do you find a magnet link if The Pirate Bay's site is blocked for "facilitating copyright infringement?"

Except they can't be blocked. They explicitly exclude .com as "under US control"


Uhhh.... last time I checked, they were a .org, not a .com

Hang, on, let me check again.... yup, .org
 
2012-01-15 01:27:23 PM  

HeartBurnKid: Kome: art.penny-arcade.com

If DRM or huge, overreaching regulations worked, that strip would not exist. Just saying.


When I started file sharing, it was for music that was too difficult to find: b-sides, rarities, live stuff. Finding music used to require physical effort.

The internet more or less eliminated that. I can get nearly anything on CD. When you say DRM and mean, I can't put this on my ipod, or I can only put this on my ipod, I get that, but realize that music is available for sale in more convenient ways than ever. Online stores can't sell out of hit albums.

Now I'm not innocent of anything, but consider that the goalposts have moved from "buying this is physically impossible for me" to "delivery methods don't meet my criteria."
 
2012-01-15 01:31:01 PM  

Fark_Guy_Rob: For virtually every important issue - I have *no clue* how to reach the desired end goal. So I don't vote.


Which Occupy did you attend?
 
2012-01-15 01:31:48 PM  

ox45tallboy: Joce678: In related news: The Pirate Bay just switched to 100% magnet links meaning that all the technical measures in the SOPA act are useless.

So how, exactly, do you find a magnet link if The Pirate Bay's site is blocked for "facilitating copyright infringement?"


Without the .torrent files the files needed to reproduce The Pirate Bay are reduced to a fraction of their former size size. They can be passed around easily to create clones. You could even grab your own copy.

Where will it end up? I dunno, but you can bet it'll be automated/easy before SOPA gets warmed up.
 
2012-01-15 01:32:46 PM  

apeiron242:
Hobodeluxe: I used to record songs on cassette off the radio. they didn't cry about it then. they didn't try to outlaw cassette recorders.
^


Um, yes they did.
 
2012-01-15 01:34:13 PM  
I wonder if Lamar has to give the money back.
 
2012-01-15 01:34:37 PM  
I've 2700+ movies on my media center, some converted from my dvd collection, most pirated. I've not watched a vast majority of them but I like having the library available when needed, I'm not paying $20 for a dvd I'll likely never watch. If someone would come along and offer Hollwood's complete library available for instant viewing, maybe a buck or two per viewing I'd be all over the thing. This will never happen until someone like Apple drags them kicking and screaming into the 21st century, they're perfectly happy with most consumers paying $20 for a dvd they watch once.

And yes I know about Netflix streaming, I've a subscription. The selections are so hobbled by studio squabbling as to be near-useless.
 
2012-01-15 01:35:21 PM  
I'm a little late to this party, but let me agree with the "Fark you RIAA/et al. asshats. You're the only ones trying to stifle debate about this absolute disaster of a bill. DIAF" crowd. I've written to my Congresscritters to no avail. The form letter I get in return is totally devoid of intelligence, which I can only assume should be telling me something. Bah.

How about we all move to KY, rename it Farkistan, and secede?
 
2012-01-15 01:35:29 PM  
"unfairly stacked" my ass (new window)

if anything, the debate is unfairly stacked in favor of the lobbyists.
 
2012-01-15 01:42:33 PM  
I think it is hilarious that there are so many Total Farkers who actually PAY to be on this site. Wow. What a badge of honor you have next to your name. I mean let me get this straight...you actually PAY $5 a month to post your innane IMO commentary on this shiat site? Is that just some kind of ego validation that ANY OF US really really cares or loses slep over the opinions of each other?

And what is this sh*t ignoring other users? You really think that bragging about how you block another Farker from posting on your screen in a 1st Amendment type of thread issue makes you what...? Better, more enlightened, your opinion and commentary matters more...I mean WTF?

Personally I could not possibly be bothered to take the 0.5 seconds it would take to block anyone off the thread...goes against my philosophy to censor anyone out of discourse troll or not...

Grow up you pretentious a&&holes who realy think you matter. Ignore him? Her? Them? Me? Boggles my mind that someone thinks snubbing on these threads is worth two squirts of piss of their efforts...

My ideal experience on Fark someday would be to perhaps ignore ALL OF YOU and just have the whole thread with just MY wit and wisdom...lol

Fools.
 
2012-01-15 01:48:17 PM  

mayIFark: narkor: Google is pouring gigabucks into lobbying against SOPA - and Google makes more in a quarter than the entire movie industry does in a year.

Citation Needed.


This made me curious. If you look at it as total revenue:

q4 2010 Google: 8.44 Billion
Entire Year 2010 Recording Industry: 15.9 Billion.

It's important to note that the recording industry numbers include all "trade revenue", kind of like how box office receipts include the theater's take, not the money sent to the distributor. Then the distributor takes their cut before passing it on to the studio.

In other words, Google reports all revenue they received. For instance, when they get 1/10 of a cent for a clickthru, they don't count it as the $25 someone spent at the site they clicked on, they count it as how much revenue they received - 1/10 of a cent.

The recording industry, however reports all money spent on music related items worldwide. They report the retail price someone paid at Wal-Mart for the new Justin Beiber CD, even though Wal-Mart is going to keep about 30 % or so of that revenue.

So, in summary, this assertion is not far off, if you only include revenue received by the record companies, and not received by the retailers.

/I just realized that you were talking about movies, not music. I'll do some research there, but I worked hard on this and I'm not deleting it.
 
2012-01-15 01:48:44 PM  

Hugemeister: Personally I could not possibly be bothered to take the 0.5 seconds it would take to block anyone off the thread...


I can't be bothered either... Oh wait, look at that. It seems I can.
 
2012-01-15 01:49:57 PM  

Hugemeister: I think it is hilarious that there are so many Total Farkers who actually PAY to be on this site. Wow. What a badge of honor you have next to your name. I mean let me get this straight...you actually PAY $5 a month to post your innane IMO commentary on this shiat site? Is that just some kind of ego validation that ANY OF US really really cares or loses slep over the opinions of each other?

And what is this sh*t ignoring other users? You really think that bragging about how you block another Farker from posting on your screen in a 1st Amendment type of thread issue makes you what...? Better, more enlightened, your opinion and commentary matters more...I mean WTF?

Personally I could not possibly be bothered to take the 0.5 seconds it would take to block anyone off the thread...goes against my philosophy to censor anyone out of discourse troll or not...

Grow up you pretentious a&&holes who realy think you matter. Ignore him? Her? Them? Me? Boggles my mind that someone thinks snubbing on these threads is worth two squirts of piss of their efforts...

My ideal experience on Fark someday would be to perhaps ignore ALL OF YOU and just have the whole thread with just MY wit and wisdom...lol

Fools.


Settle down, Beavis.
 
2012-01-15 01:52:53 PM  

Kome: art.penny-arcade.com


My solution? I don't buy the damned things. I tend to have violent reactions to pop music (as in, it makes me sick to my stomach). If you enjoy the old Sierra-style adventure games--or heck, anything that's not a clone of Shooter Guy 2025--you're pretty much screwed by the current selection, and the indie games are the only ones worth playing anymore; indie games which tend not to have any DRM.

How did we get from Fallout 2 to The Elder Scrolls 4.5: Vault 13?

/War. War never changes.
//Or does it? The war has changed. Did it? The answer is no. Unless it is yes. No, of course it is. Is war. Yes! No. Yes?
 
2012-01-15 01:53:45 PM  

Hugemeister: I think it is hilarious that there are so many Total Farkers who actually PAY to be on this site. Wow. What a badge of honor you have next to your name. I mean let me get this straight...you actually PAY $5 a month to post your innane IMO commentary on this shiat site? Is that just some kind of ego validation that ANY OF US really really cares or loses slep over the opinions of each other?

And what is this sh*t ignoring other users? You really think that bragging about how you block another Farker from posting on your screen in a 1st Amendment type of thread issue makes you what...? Better, more enlightened, your opinion and commentary matters more...I mean WTF?

Personally I could not possibly be bothered to take the 0.5 seconds it would take to block anyone off the thread...goes against my philosophy to censor anyone out of discourse troll or not...

Grow up you pretentious a&&holes who realy think you matter. Ignore him? Her? Them? Me? Boggles my mind that someone thinks snubbing on these threads is worth two squirts of piss of their efforts...

My ideal experience on Fark someday would be to perhaps ignore ALL OF YOU and just have the whole thread with just MY wit and wisdom...lol

Fools.


You seem a little upset. Why don't you sit down, have a cookie and tell us all about it.

No, really. We're dying to hear about it.
 
2012-01-15 01:54:02 PM  

RobSeace: Big_Fat_Liar: Anyone think CS Obama isn't going to sign this?

White House "will not support" SOPA as it stands


They've seen the writing on the wall - it took them this long to come out and make an opinion. The Administration's council on Intellectual Property is stacked with ex-MPAA and ex-RIAA lawyers and everyone there knows who writes the big checks for campaigns.

In short: they were for it before they were against it. I was in the room for some of those meetings.
 
2012-01-15 01:54:31 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: adamgreeney: tenpoundsofcheese: adamgreeney: We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.

No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.

tenpoundsofcheese: adamgreeney: We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.

No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.

yeah, some people do. Personally, i have never pirated anything since Napster. I WANT to give people my money! But the pricing and DRM tells me they dont want to take it. giving me 24 hours to watc h a film? sorry, but human lives arent always constructed so that i have 2 contiguous hours. So obviously they want to make movie renting a pain in the ass. iTunes allows you to buy music, but only for your apple device, so you dont actually own the music. How does any of that make piracy less attractive?

Piracy is getting something for nothing, so for people have ethics, it should never be an attractive option.

well, except maybe if somehow an orphans life depends on it or something like that.

Different business models are emerging. You can get redbox for $1.3 a day and don't need to worry about watching it in two days. Others will emerge too.


You've really never seen a show\movie\song where no one produces it, but you'll get your ass sued off for posting a totally free copy on Youtube. Or making a fanvid. Or doing anything with it.

If you want to talk about ethics, that's essentially spitting in the face of everyone who put time or money into creating that work, not to mention the fans who enjoy it. And it's not stealing to enjoy a work of art, even if you wouldn't traditionally consider it art.
 
2012-01-15 01:57:24 PM  

HeartBurnKid: Honest Bender: This is why I abstain from voting.

Then STFU. You've got no reason to complain; you got the government you deserve.


Then the voters are getting the government they deserve too. What was your point again?
 
2012-01-15 01:57:33 PM  

syberpud: RobSeace: Big_Fat_Liar: Anyone think CS Obama isn't going to sign this?

White House "will not support" SOPA as it stands

They've seen the writing on the wall - it took them this long to come out and make an opinion. The Administration's council on Intellectual Property is stacked with ex-MPAA and ex-RIAA lawyers and everyone there knows who writes the big checks for campaigns.

In short: they were for it before they were against it. I was in the room for some of those meetings.


I think you underestimate who has the deepest pockets in this.

That would be Google and other internet giants.

It might get passed, but it'll be a neutered, toothless gesture of futility that'll be impossible to enforce or enact in any meaningful way.

The Internet giants have too much to lose in this and they have have far far more money than the weakened music and movie businesses. And then there's the PR that's solidly against SOPA and the like..

As soon as I saw that Google and other major internet-connected corps were against it, I knew it was dead in the water. The rest is just wild gesturing by all parties involved.
 
2012-01-15 01:58:27 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Piracy is getting something for nothing, so for people have ethics, it should never be an attractive option.


I note the distinct lack of a TF next to yer name, there, Mr. Captain Blackcheese, Sir. Arrr, but ye might want to rethink yer definition.
 
2012-01-15 02:05:44 PM  

ox45tallboy: So, in summary, this assertion is not far off, if you only include revenue received by the record companies, and not received by the retailers.


Yep. The MAFIAA is actually pretty small in terms of real $$$.

How they got so much influence in Washington is just another indication of how slimy/spineless they are.
 
2012-01-15 02:07:07 PM  
"American Jobs": RIAA lawyers

"Economy": the ability of Hollywood producers to buy more yachts and Dom Pérignon.

The RIAA is made up reincarnated Nazi death camp guards and serial killers
 
2012-01-15 02:07:10 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: heypete: tenpoundsofcheese: No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.

I'm an American living in Switzerland. Netflix isn't available here, nor is any similar service (i.e. streaming video on-demand). Before I moved here, I happily paid for Netflix service as it offered the content I wanted at a price I thought was reasonable.

Since I've moved here, my options are:

1. Don't watch movies. (Unless I want to watch them in German, which I don't.)
2. Continue to pay for Netflix, but connect to a US-based VPN service to get around their geographical restrictions. (That is, they don't offer the service here and actively restrict paying customers from using it.)
3. Pirate content.

I choose #2 even though it is technically against the Netflix terms of service (nonetheless, I am paying for the service and thus for the content). I know a few other expats here who also do the same, but occasionally pirate a particular movie as it's not available on Netflix for streaming (that is, they would happily pay for it, but it is not available legitimately where they are).

Got it.

You are NOT paying for the service you are using. What you are paying for does not allow access in Switzerland (probably due to whatever licensing fees Netflix would have to pay if they did that).

You an entitled, unethical POS.


I've read some stupid shiat in this thread, but this takes the cake. Welcome to Ignore, population: you.
 
2012-01-15 02:08:39 PM  

Summer Glau's Love Slave: Vodka Zombie: See? This is where I need the cartoon of the laughing guy saying "Ha-ha, Oh wow!"

[i1125.photobucket.com image 348x228]
You're welcome.

/Die RIAA DIE!
//In a fire please, kthxbai.


1.bp.blogspot.com
HE TOOK MY JERB!!!!
 
2012-01-15 02:10:59 PM  

RobSeace: Big_Fat_Liar: Anyone think CS Obama isn't going to sign this?

White House "will not support" SOPA as it stands


Don't start thinking you've "won", but that's only one part of SOPA. The rest of it still stands.

What they're doing is backpedaling on a part of it hoping that the rest will pass amidst all the sighs of relief.

Next year they'll be back with the bit they took out plus something far worse. We'll all be so happy when they backpedal on the "far worse" that SOPA will be implemented in its entirety.

Lather, rinse, repeat until the MAFIAA is running the Internet.
 
2012-01-15 02:13:17 PM  

rebelyell2006: Rozotorical: rebelyell2006: Rozotorical: Bullshiat, The only voice in our government we have as Americans are our pocket books. Public opinion means shiat.

Jared Lee Loughner had a voice in government, just not a type of voice that we like.

No he didn't He murdered people. No one in the government is listening to Jared Lee Loughner. He influenced no change that he wanted or asked for by insanely murdering a group of people.

He got Gabrielle Giffords to stop voting in Congress for a while. He influenced her voting patterns. The end result isn't much different from a lobbyist influencing voting patterns with a check.


Shooting 18 people during what amounts to the attempted assassination of a sitting US Congresswoman isn't "having a voice." It's quite clearly showing that he hears voices.
 
2012-01-15 02:13:59 PM  

Honest Bender: The only difference between you and me is that I don't buy into the illusion that we have that power.


We do so long as there is access to flammable liquids and ammonium nitrate.

images.wikia.com
 
2012-01-15 02:14:48 PM  

ox45tallboy: I just realized that you were talking about movies, not music. I'll do some research there, but I worked hard on this and I'm not deleting it.


Okay, worldwide box office in 2010 (includes theater and distributor cut, not the amount the studio receives): 31.8 Billion

Please note that does not include DVD, Blu-Ray, or VHS sales (yes, some countries still use VHS). I couldn't find numbers for those that I felt were accurate, and I don't feel like adding different countries together. However, if I did, that number would include sales of TV series boxed sets, as well as concert videos, which should not be counted as "movie industry".

I guess Google does make more in a quarter than the music industry, but not the movie industry.

However, if you're talking about "profit" rather than "revenue", Google increased its liquid assets by more than 12 billion, or an average about 3.1 billion per quarter in 2010.
 
2012-01-15 02:17:50 PM  

adamgreeney: SmackLT: No Ironic tag for this one?

Came here to say this.

Hey RIAA, television studios, etc. FIND A NEW BUSINESS MODEL.

If you make everything available online and make it reasonable to buy without insane restrictions, it will be bought legally by 99% of people. We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.


One of my big beefs is that all the music is available only in .mp3 or .aac format. Look, I'm not here to talk about sound quality (the dumbest of all flamewars), but I like to have my music archived in a lossless format so that in the future I can convert on-fly to any format I wish. Lossless is future-proof and can be manipulated infinite times to fit your needs. Say I have a small SSD and I want to convert to a lower bitrate to save space. With .mp3 you can't do it. Well, technically you can but it will mangle an already messed up file.

If I'm paying for the song, give me the whole farking song. Mp3 is fine for listening on most devices and speakers (am listening to it right now), but I'd like the option of having the original file in unmolested form.

Aside from certain sites that are primarily dedicated to jazz and classical, there's no legal way to digitally purchase lossless music. But type in any album you can think of in a torrent or usenet search engine, and a FLAC copy is readily available.

/again, this isn't an audiophile discussion - it's about archiving your collection and having choice


/rant: off
 
2012-01-15 02:22:49 PM  
PS: The RIAA is not terribly important to the American economy. It's entire annual revenue is single digit billions of dollars.
 
2012-01-15 02:28:18 PM  

Joce678: PS: The RIAA is not terribly important to the American economy. It's entire annual revenue is single digit billions of dollars.


The RIAA itself is not even that much. The RIAA is an organization that represents the legal interest of the 4 major labels, the sum gross yearly revenue of which are in the single digit billions.

Since the RIAA is a private company, however, it does not report its own revenue or operating expenses.
 
2012-01-15 02:35:21 PM  

xanadian: You know, I'm not against the *spirit* of the bill, but they're going about it all wrong. It's gonna f*ck up DNS, and it'll create essentially what could be called "copyright trolls."

They need to rethink this.


I am against the *spirit* of the bill (this isn't about protecting musicians, this is about making RIAA more powerful and profitable), but I'll say again this is only going to be a blip on the radar for file sharing as they implement the myriad of ways to get around having to use IPs instead of DNS AS WELL AS be a pain in the ass for legitimate users and traffic.
 
2012-01-15 02:53:57 PM  

Mugato: bulldg4life: Berz: +1

corridor: Speak for yourself. I say good riddance.

You two must be a blast at parties.

No he's right. Trolling is farking retarded.


This
 
2012-01-15 02:59:42 PM  

moothemagiccow: HeartBurnKid: Kome: art.penny-arcade.com

If DRM or huge, overreaching regulations worked, that strip would not exist. Just saying.

When I started file sharing, it was for music that was too difficult to find: b-sides, rarities, live stuff. Finding music used to require physical effort.

The internet more or less eliminated that. I can get nearly anything on CD. When you say DRM and mean, I can't put this on my ipod, or I can only put this on my ipod, I get that, but realize that music is available for sale in more convenient ways than ever. Online stores can't sell out of hit albums.

Now I'm not innocent of anything, but consider that the goalposts have moved from "buying this is physically impossible for me" to "delivery methods don't meet my criteria."


You missed my point.

The fact that someone can say "I don't like the DRM, so I'll just pirate it" is proof that DRM doesn't work.
 
2012-01-15 03:07:08 PM  

HeartBurnKid: 53% say "screw this noise, I'm not voting": John Jackson or Jack Johnson wins, business as usual
53% say "screw this noise, I'm voting for Bob Robertson instead": Bob Robertson wins, maybe things change


t3.gstatic.com

You can't vote in change. It doesn't work.

That's why revolutions happen.
 
2012-01-15 03:08:30 PM  

sendtodave: HeartBurnKid: 53% say "screw this noise, I'm not voting": John Jackson or Jack Johnson wins, business as usual
53% say "screw this noise, I'm voting for Bob Robertson instead": Bob Robertson wins, maybe things change

[t3.gstatic.com image 132x76]

You can't vote in change. It doesn't work.

That's why revolutions happen.


If that's where you think we are as a nation, I hope you're working to make that revolution happen, and not just using it as an excuse to shirk your civic duty.
 
2012-01-15 03:09:29 PM  
This working musician has mixed feelings.
If you pirate my work I'll punch you in the face.
 
2012-01-15 03:16:47 PM  

moothemagiccow: Now I'm not innocent of anything, but consider that the goalposts have moved from "buying this is physically impossible for me" to "delivery methods don't meet my criteria."


I agree, the goalposts of have moved, and some access is easier. But I think it's unfair to evaluate that change in isolation, because there have been a lot of related changes along side it.

Consider that the playback goalposts have moved from "all commercial music plays on 1 of 2 common household devices and can be copied from those formats to others" to "a wide variety of playback devices are available, but DRM prevents moving among them, making it impossible to get the music I want on a playback device I own".

And that's to say nothing of the location issue -- there are lots of places where you cannot buy the content you not because it's out-of-print or anything like that, but simply because the marketing agreements for your locale prevent your access. Now add to those agreements technological enforcement (region codes, IP blocks, etc.) and it's actually harder than ever to legitimately obtain certain kinds of content.
 
2012-01-15 03:17:58 PM  

Trackball: HeartBurnKid: Honest Bender: This is why I abstain from voting.

Then STFU. You've got no reason to complain; you got the government you deserve.

Then the voters are getting the government they deserve too. What was your point again?


The voters can work to change things. If they withhold votes from a leader that doesn't do what they say, and if they can do that in numbers, the leader won't stay a leader for long.

The non-voters just throw their hands in the air and give up. And they think somebody should still listen to them? Why? Why would anybody listen to you? You just said you won't do jack shiat about it.
 
2012-01-15 03:27:06 PM  

Reverend Monkeypants: This working musician has mixed feelings.
If you pirate my work I'll punch you in the face.


So, how many YouTube videos do you have that anyone can freely watch, and how much revenue do you get from that?

A real musician would want everyone possible to listen to his stuff. Believe it or not, Metallica used to encourage people to record their live shows and pass the recordings around to their friends. This is one of the reasons they became popular, and it made Lars' stance on Napster absurd.
 
2012-01-15 03:28:39 PM  

HeartBurnKid: The non-voters just throw their hands in the air and give up. And they think somebody should still listen to them? Why? Why would anybody listen to you? You just said you won't do jack shiat about it.


The people in office are a small part of the problem. The system they populate is the major problem. I'm even willing to admit that it's technically possible for us to change the US political system... if we manage to get the "right" 322 people into office at the same time. Now, can you admit that the probability of that happening is sufficiently low as to be considered 0%?

/322 is a 3/5th super majority + 1 for POTUS
 
2012-01-15 03:34:19 PM  

Honest Bender: HeartBurnKid: The non-voters just throw their hands in the air and give up. And they think somebody should still listen to them? Why? Why would anybody listen to you? You just said you won't do jack shiat about it.

The people in office are a small part of the problem. The system they populate is the major problem. I'm even willing to admit that it's technically possible for us to change the US political system... if we manage to get the "right" 322 people into office at the same time. Now, can you admit that the probability of that happening is sufficiently low as to be considered 0%?

/322 is a 3/5th super majority + 1 for POTUS


I'll admit it's a very low chance. It's still significantly higher than the chance of doing nothing at all working.
 
2012-01-15 03:43:52 PM  

Honest Bender: /322 is a 3/5th super majority + 1 for POTUS


What do you mean, 3/5th's?

www.motifake.com
 
2012-01-15 03:45:46 PM  
I thought the RIAA learned their lesson when the market chose DRM free music and their sales didn't collapse due to piracy. Hell, Katy Perry's last album has been a $5 deal at Amazon multiple times so tons of people have a good quality DRM free version to share and she still is cranking out hit singles. They are the textbook case of customers choosing to pay rather than pirate if the price it is cheap and convienent to get your product nonlinear (see also Louis CK's standup video).

They are the last people who should be supporting SOPA because their industry has already been through all five stages of dealing with piracy.
 
2012-01-15 03:59:25 PM  

HeartBurnKid: You missed my point.


No I just wanted to bring up how old I was
 
2012-01-15 04:06:46 PM  
Support your favorite artists on bandcamp.com! The money goes directly to the artists. The consumer usually gets a great deal and the artist profits.
 
2012-01-15 04:14:53 PM  
I've got my PVR set to record NCIS. Well last week NCIS was preempted by some stupid election junk. Which the PVR recorded. Current episodes are not repeated, only last years shows.

So now I am out one episode which I cannot watch until next year when it is rerun..

So I grabbed a torrent off eztv.

Is this piracy? I fast-forward through the commercials anyways, and the PVR recording is "legal", and I do not see much difference between a torrent and the PVR.
 
2012-01-15 04:23:25 PM  

RobSeace: Big_Fat_Liar: Anyone think CS Obama isn't going to sign this?

White House "will not support" SOPA as it stands


Dream on. Obama will sign it. He'll make a statement against it when he signs it, but he doesn't have the balls to veto it as he should if he really was against it. He owes too many people who want it passed.
 
2012-01-15 04:25:51 PM  
How about shows like Mystery Science Theater 3000, where they can't release a lot of episodes onto DVD because of the owners of the movies in the show not allowing them to be released for one reason or another?

/Keep circulating the tapes
 
2012-01-15 04:26:17 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: adamgreeney: We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.

No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.


To be fair, if you could return opened media if you dislike it, piracy rates could/would decrease.

Stop trying to steal from legitimate customers and they likely won't steal from you.

/does not apply to actual thieves and pirates of course
 
2012-01-15 04:29:26 PM  

adamgreeney: capt.hollister: adamgreeney: tenpoundsofcheese: adamgreeney: We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.

No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.

tenpoundsofcheese: adamgreeney: We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.

No you pirate content because you are an entitled idiot who believes that you should benefit from pirating without paying.

yeah, some people do. Personally, i have never pirated anything since Napster. I WANT to give people my money! But the pricing and DRM tells me they dont want to take it. giving me 24 hours to watc h a film? sorry, but human lives arent always constructed so that i have 2 contiguous hours. So obviously they want to make movie renting a pain in the ass. iTunes allows you to buy music, but only for your apple device, so you dont actually own the music. How does any of that make piracy less attractive?

I have no problem with the iTunes model, in fact I love the iTunes model. As for "owning" the music or not, when it's on my devices it feels like I own it. Of course, if my intent was to make copies for all my friends then it doesn't work...

What happens when your computer or iPod dies? Maybe Apple has gotten better with that, but I remember when you would just lose your music. That's insane. Also, I like to be able to listen to my music in any form I want. we don't OWN it, because we have to use the terms they dictate. When i bought a CD i could listen to it in any player anywhere I go. I like the Zune Pass model because I can download and listen to anything I want, but get to keep 10 songs a month and can burn them, move them, anything I want. Thats worth the money every month.


Apple will let you re-download any of your previous purchases. It's a recent thing. I pulled down a bunch of albums I had bought, lost in a hard drive failure and subsequently pirated. I have the real versions from iTunes again, so I deleted the pirated copies
 
2012-01-15 04:34:15 PM  

LeftCoast_eh: I've got my PVR set to record NCIS. Well last week NCIS was preempted by some stupid election junk. Which the PVR recorded. Current episodes are not repeated, only last years shows.

So now I am out one episode which I cannot watch until next year when it is rerun..

So I grabbed a torrent off eztv.

Is this piracy? I fast-forward through the commercials anyways, and the PVR recording is "legal", and I do not see much difference between a torrent and the PVR.


The only real difference is that you are not following "their rules". I swear shiat like SOPA are just there to remind us masses that the powers to be can fark with us whenever, wherever, however, for whatever reason.
 
2012-01-15 04:37:54 PM  

Honest Bender: Because piracy isn't theft. In the case you described, you're illegally distributing a copyrighted work.


In the case I described, I'm not illegally distributing anything. I'm receiving a copy of something that someone else illegally distributed.

Aside from that, the entire point of my post was to address the *ethical* concerns of downloading movies/games/music, I only touched on the legal aspect as an afterthought.

On a more fundamental level, a digital copy of something is essentially a sequence of numbers, and you cannot claim a sequence of numbers as your intellectual property, so any such laws are inherently flawed. If Sony says my divx copy of Spiderman 2 is their intellectual property, then I'm claiming the number 25 as my intellectual property. If I catch you using the number 25 without my expressed written consent, I'll sue.
 
2012-01-15 04:44:11 PM  

firefly212: If farking with the first amendment is what it takes to create jobs in your industry, RIAA and MPAA... then I'd say it's time for your industry to go away.


Not that I don't agree with you (because I do; the RIAA needs to go away), but how exactly is this a First Amendment case? I assume you mean the "freedom of speech" part, but sharing files hardly seems like a freedom of speech matter.

/If I'm wrong, please clear it up for me!
 
2012-01-15 04:49:43 PM  

glassbottomboatcaptain: Honest Bender: Because piracy isn't theft. In the case you described, you're illegally distributing a copyrighted work.

In the case I described, I'm not illegally distributing anything. I'm receiving a copy of something that someone else illegally distributed.

Aside from that, the entire point of my post was to address the *ethical* concerns of downloading movies/games/music, I only touched on the legal aspect as an afterthought.

On a more fundamental level, a digital copy of something is essentially a sequence of numbers, and you cannot claim a sequence of numbers as your intellectual property, so any such laws are inherently flawed. If Sony says my divx copy of Spiderman 2 is their intellectual property, then I'm claiming the number 25 as my intellectual property. If I catch you using the number 25 without my expressed written consent, I'll sue.


Yes, but that's like saying a book is a collection of letters, or a painting is a collection of colors.
 
2012-01-15 04:49:54 PM  

Fark_Guy_Rob: HeartBurnKid: Summer Glau's Love Slave: If he really believed what he was saying, then he wouldn't even be here. If resistance is futile, as he claims, then what's the point of the argument?

I don't think he's trolling, to be honest. I've been in this argument IRL; there are some people who honestly somehow think that not voting is a way to change things.

I won't claim that not voting 'changes' things; but I will say I advocate 'not voting' to people who are uninformed/unqualified to have an opinion on things. I don't mean that as an insult, I include myself.

I didn't go to medical school. If the American Medical Association had a 'vote' where we decided whether 20mg of Y or 2mg of X should be the new standard treatment of Z - and they allowed everyone to vote....I wouldn't. Because I don't know anything about medicine. I'm not a doctor. I haven't given drugs. I don't know the side effects. I'm just as likely to vote for the worse thing as the better thing.

Politics are no different, IMHO.

What the heck do I know about economics? Hell, top economic-type professor people can't seem to agree on the very basics like 'Will X increase or decrease the number of jobs in our country'. And they've studied economics for decades. What hope do I have, as a guy who studied computer crap in school and has about a junior-high level understanding of economics, of voting for the politician who claims that economic policy X is better than economic policy Y. I'm woefully unqualified for that.

In most cases, everyone agrees on the outcome. Everyone wants lower crime. Everyone wants lower taxes. Everyone wants more social services available to them (but not at the cost of increased taxes). Everyone wants better school systems. Everyone wants higher employment. Almost everyone wants more freedom. Almost everyone wants more protection (nevermind that those two are contradictory).

But those things that everyone seems to want - all the politicians are selling them. ...


Yeah, what he said. When I see a politician who I think deserves my vote, I'll do it. Came close a couple of times, but it always seems to turn out they weren't what they seemed. Very few of them seem to put emphasis on what they will do more than on what a bad person their rival is. Every issue seems like it can go both ways, and I am too busy trying to keep my job and raise my kids to learn the legalese needed to truly understand every issue enough to know what my vote will do. Remember Net Neutrality? The very name of the legislation was backwards from what it was doing...or was it? So, I abstain.
 
2012-01-15 04:52:03 PM  
Worked for a company back in the '80s that was concerned about the internal copying of Lotus123 and other software (See I told you it was in the '80s). They issued a memo to each desk (about 1800 desks) with a newspaper photocopy clipping attached.

I called the newspaper to ask about the price to copy and distribute the article for 1800 internal use copies and the answer was about $300.

I went back to the help desk with the facts and they didn't realize they had just violated their own memo.

Remember: Do as I say. Not as I do.
 
2012-01-15 04:57:07 PM  

Britney Spear's Speculum: Remember when well things went when republicans campaigned in 2010 on jobs and economy?


Such as The Iraq and maps and such?
 
2012-01-15 05:00:55 PM  

ox45tallboy: Yes, but that's like saying a book is a collection of letters, or a painting is a collection of colors.


Numbers are a tad more fundamental. If you legally 'own' 'ABCCADAEFEGAAB' as a sequence of notes it won't have a huge effect on the world. But if you legally 'own' raw numbers that means you own any instance of them being expressed. Going to be a bit hard for people to do accounting if they aren't allowed to write the number 4 down anywhere without owing royalties.

You can't own numbers. And digital media IS numbers. It's pretty weird that whether or not someone gets prosecuted for distributing a sequence of numbers depends on the values those numbers get translated into by software. If you were to dictate that sequence of numbers to someone, and they wrote them down on paper, is that paper illegal content? If they enter those numbers into notepad, is that notepad illegal content? The closer you look at it, the more ambiguous it gets.
 
2012-01-15 05:04:59 PM  

ox45tallboy: A real musician would want everyone possible to listen to his stuff.


Wrong. A real musician plays music for fun and/or for a living, understands music theory enough to hang, can play the appropriate parts where applicable, doesn't take 19 takes to cut a track, acts professionally in tense situations and always performs well. Not, "want everyone possible to listen to his stuff". Go ahead and make that your main focus and you'll just suck. O, you'll be a popular suck but you'll still suck.

You think being a musician is a popularity contest? That's the singer/songwriter attention whore that will be flipping burgers in 2 years' department. You think a orchestral violinist cares about youtube hits? No, more about giving expensive private lessons. You think the commercial bed music guy is looking for youtube hits? NO. O sure, that's a fun game to play too but giving away your music gets you nothing unless you're trying to be a pop star and if that's what you're aiming at you'd better finish school because your chances are pretty slim, regardless of how talented your girlfriend says you are.

I don't want just everybody to listen to my stuff, just the right people, as in, the people who will but it or get commercial licenses happening. Any music on youtube that I've been involved with I've gotten paid for as the studio musician or as a co-producer. This web2.0 line of thinking is awful and half the reason this entire issue exists. So many people thinking they know what the entertainment industry works like, or should, or is going to. Farking music business degrees, you idiots screwed everything up. That's like getting a degree in "Art Gallery". Good luck.

I'm serious. Good luck, especially when the recoup costs part comes around or how that publishing deal is working out for you.

/only job for 17 years
 
2012-01-15 05:25:47 PM  

vwarb: Whenever I hear things like this, I ask myself a question: Is this guy that much of a lying shiathead, or is the cognitive dissonance so strong that he truly believes what he is saying?

Then I weep because I realize it doesn't matter. He's still going to win. One of the most wildly unpopular bills to ever go to the floor is going to pass, despite the screams of every one of us. Why? Because Congress is filled with geriatric assholes who think every American citizen is a criminal anyway and should be caged.

I don't even know why they bother to keep working when they hate their country so much.


$ and power - that is why they keep working.
 
2012-01-15 05:33:27 PM  

StrangeQ: When I've paid for an item, I don't need some company then telling me how and when I can use it.


THIS. What if I wanted to play my bought-and-paid-for game on my laptop at 35,000 feet over Denver? Should the company I bought my shoes from somehow violently wrench my feet away from puddles, snow and slush when I wear them? How about the people who manufacture my car putting a chip in the engine so that I could only drive it when it's connected to one of their satellites? Or a television that only works when it's hooked up to a certain company's cable system?

If I'm RENTING something, the entity I'm renting it from gets to place restrictions on its use. When I've BOUGHT something I have the right to do what I want with it, because it's MINE.
I don't tell the media companies how to spend the money I've paid them, they don't tell me what to do with what I've paid for with that money. Sounds fair to me.
 
2012-01-15 05:44:17 PM  

Reverend Monkeypants: ox45tallboy: A real musician would want everyone possible to listen to his stuff.

Wrong. A real musician plays music for fun and/or for a living, understands music theory enough to hang, can play the appropriate parts where applicable, doesn't take 19 takes to cut a track, acts professionally in tense situations and always performs well. Not, "want everyone possible to listen to his stuff". Go ahead and make that your main focus and you'll just suck. O, you'll be a popular suck but you'll still suck.

You think being a musician is a popularity contest? That's the singer/songwriter attention whore that will be flipping burgers in 2 years' department. You think a orchestral violinist cares about youtube hits? No, more about giving expensive private lessons. You think the commercial bed music guy is looking for youtube hits? NO. O sure, that's a fun game to play too but giving away your music gets you nothing unless you're trying to be a pop star and if that's what you're aiming at you'd better finish school because your chances are pretty slim, regardless of how talented your girlfriend says you are.

I don't want just everybody to listen to my stuff, just the right people, as in, the people who will but it or get commercial licenses happening. Any music on youtube that I've been involved with I've gotten paid for as the studio musician or as a co-producer. This web2.0 line of thinking is awful and half the reason this entire issue exists. So many people thinking they know what the entertainment industry works like, or should, or is going to. Farking music business degrees, you idiots screwed everything up. That's like getting a degree in "Art Gallery". Good luck.

I'm serious. Good luck, especially when the recoup costs part comes around or how that publishing deal is working out for you.

/only job for 17 years



I tried for several years but couldn't make it in the biz. I understand how hard it is (which is why a hate manufactured pop stars and American Idol). If you're doing it because you love it, that's completely different from viewing it as your job. I love IT work, but I hate doing it as my job.

Music is art, which is using technique to express an idea. But anyone who wants people to view their expression of an idea must let them know they have created something.

If I am a painter, I must paint, and then show my paintings to other people, and hope they tell others about it. In this day and age, I can put pictures on the Internet, to make it easier to show my creation, but I still have to get people to look at it.

I've known lifelong road musicians, lifelong studio musicians, burnouts who physically couldn't perform anymore, and several people that make a living doing local gigs in bars and restaurants. What they had in common was that they wanted people to listen to their performance, and that's why they did what they did.

There are reclusive artists, for example Emily Dickinson, whose well-regarded poetry was never found until after her death. But most artists create for the sense of achievement it gives them, and if they want to do it for a living, whether as a pop star, studio musician, painter, poet, writer, whatever, they have to have people appreciating their art.

I paid $220 to see Roger Waters play the Wall Live. I would not have paid this had I not already knew of his creative ability, by listening to his earlier work. I refer to my earlier example of Metallica. Think about when you're starting a band, you hand out demos to everyone you find. I can't go see anyone at a venue like The Tabernacle here in Atlanta without someone passing out free CD-R demos of their band.

The world is slowly returning to pre-recording industry days, when artists had to travel and perform to make their money. I think that is a good thing.

And yes, making a living in music is a popularity contest, just like any other business. If you play bars, you want to be the best bar player around, so you get the best nights with the biggest draw. If you play studio only, you want to be the best session guy, the one the producer always calls. If you play Viola, you want the conductor offering you the solos. If you play arenas, you want to play the biggest arena. If you teach, you want parents to tell other parents about you, so they will bring their children for lessons.
 
2012-01-15 05:48:23 PM  
SOPA supporters own all major media outlets in the US. It sure does look like the deck is stacked against meaningful or balanced debate.

You can quit gloating anytime, RIAA.
 
2012-01-15 05:48:49 PM  

adamgreeney: Please highlight where i said i was entitled to it. If they don't offer it in a way that is convenient for me, they won't get my money, or a lot of other peoples. That's business. Do you disagree? Should I pay them anyway because they are entitled to my money? What are you trying to say?


I might have mis-quoted you by accident but the general sentiment in here is: "I will pirate until the movie/recording industries figure out how to meet my every demand"
 
2012-01-15 05:57:14 PM  

erveek: SOPA supporters own all major media outlets in the US. It sure does look like the deck is stacked against meaningful or balanced debate.

You can quit gloating anytime, RIAA.


Er... they don't own the Internet. Which is why most people don't want anyone farking with the Internet, its the last place you can find (sometimes) rational expression of ideas, and debate them (sort of) in a civil manner.
 
2012-01-15 05:59:40 PM  

rpm: Kome:
[art.penny-arcade.com image 640x326]

"They have to protect it somehow" is the bad assumption.

iTunes(music) - unprotected
GoG - unprotected
Amazon (music) - unprotected
Baen (books) - unprotected

Yeah, iTunes is losing so much money on music, there's not a chance in hell Apple will stay in business.


It's important to note that iTunes used to be hardcore DRM, wasn't it? It went DRM free later (and is still massively successful) so it's an extremely good success story.
 
2012-01-15 06:10:01 PM  
Congress stopped passing laws in the interest of US citizens many years ago. Allegedly.
 
2012-01-15 06:40:14 PM  

apeiron242: Marcus Aurelius: Those corporations' cocks aren't going to suck themselves.

^

adamgreeney: Hey RIAA, television studios, etc. FIND A NEW BUSINESS MODEL.

^

Hobodeluxe: I used to record songs on cassette off the radio. they didn't cry about it then. they didn't try to outlaw cassette recorders.

^


As for point three...while they didn't try to outlaw cassette recorders they sure did cry hard about it...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corp._of_America_v._Universal_City_ S tudios,_Inc.
 
2012-01-15 06:51:18 PM  

ox45tallboy: erveek: SOPA supporters own all major media outlets in the US. It sure does look like the deck is stacked against meaningful or balanced debate.

You can quit gloating anytime, RIAA.

Er... they don't own the Internet. Which is why most people don't want anyone farking with the Internet, its the last place you can find (sometimes) rational expression of ideas, and debate them (sort of) in a civil manner.


I don't want to speak for erveek, but his point appears to be the same as yours. He just made it a little differently.
 
2012-01-15 07:02:09 PM  
fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net
 
2012-01-15 07:21:33 PM  

krackpipe: ox45tallboy: erveek: SOPA supporters own all major media outlets in the US. It sure does look like the deck is stacked against meaningful or balanced debate.

You can quit gloating anytime, RIAA.

Er... they don't own the Internet. Which is why most people don't want anyone farking with the Internet, its the last place you can find (sometimes) rational expression of ideas, and debate them (sort of) in a civil manner.

I don't want to speak for erveek, but his point appears to be the same as yours. He just made it a little differently.


I do want to speak for erveek. They own the tv networks, from which the baby boomers still get their news. Those being the largest and most influential voting bloc, the RIAA has nothing to whine about here.
 
2012-01-15 07:22:00 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: You an entitled, unethical POS.


Right back atcha, babe.
 
2012-01-15 07:25:47 PM  

ciberido: tenpoundsofcheese: You an entitled, unethical POS.

Right back atcha, babe.


He comes RIIIIIIGHT back at'cha!
He comes RIIIIIIGHT back at'cha!
He's more than you think, he's got maximum pink!
Kirby, Kirby, Kirby's the one!
 
2012-01-15 07:43:12 PM  

adamgreeney: SmackLT: No Ironic tag for this one?

Came here to say this.

Hey RIAA, television studios, etc. FIND A NEW BUSINESS MODEL.

If you make everything available online and make it reasonable to buy without insane restrictions, it will be bought legally by 99% of people. We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.


Just had a conversation the other day: all parties would go legit if they offered it online at a fair price or with unobtrusive marketing.
 
2012-01-15 07:47:01 PM  

erveek: krackpipe: ox45tallboy: erveek: SOPA supporters own all major media outlets in the US. It sure does look like the deck is stacked against meaningful or balanced debate.

You can quit gloating anytime, RIAA.

Er... they don't own the Internet. Which is why most people don't want anyone farking with the Internet, its the last place you can find (sometimes) rational expression of ideas, and debate them (sort of) in a civil manner.

I don't want to speak for erveek, but his point appears to be the same as yours. He just made it a little differently.

I do want to speak for erveek. They own the tv networks, from which the baby boomers still get their news. Those being the largest and most influential voting bloc, the RIAA has nothing to whine about here.


Makes sense. That's how I understood you the first time you made your point. Appears you and ox45tallboy share a similar opinion of the RIAA, or at least of the SOPA.
 
2012-01-15 07:48:48 PM  
Issa is as corrupt as they come.
 
2012-01-15 07:49:43 PM  

adamgreeney: SmackLT: No Ironic tag for this one?

Came here to say this.

Hey RIAA, television studios, etc. FIND A NEW BUSINESS MODEL.

If you make everything available online and make it reasonable to buy without insane restrictions, it will be bought legally by 99% of people. We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.



I buy 6-10 BD's a month. If they were sold online via digital distribution buying 4-5 would eat through my monthly bandwidth quota (only broadband company in this area) .

Your proposal is at odds with realistic infrastructure availability for many consumers.
How does this make any sense.?
 
2012-01-15 08:08:18 PM  

Leader O'Cola: adamgreeney: SmackLT: No Ironic tag for this one?

Came here to say this.

Hey RIAA, television studios, etc. FIND A NEW BUSINESS MODEL.

If you make everything available online and make it reasonable to buy without insane restrictions, it will be bought legally by 99% of people. We pirate because you make content unavailable through legal means or make it so restrctive that it isnt worth the price. Maybe look in the mirror a bit here.


I buy 6-10 BD's a month. If they were sold online via digital distribution buying 4-5 would eat through my monthly bandwidth quota (only broadband company in this area) .

Your proposal is at odds with realistic infrastructure availability for many consumers.
How does this make any sense.?


i wasnt aware the RIAA and the networks were in charge of the internet too.

that is a whole seperate issue. and they can still OFFER it to thoae who can take advantage and keep their old model. they don't have to throw anything away. just add.
 
2012-01-15 08:10:27 PM  

Reverend Monkeypants: This working musician has mixed feelings.
If you pirate my work I'll punch you in the face.


If your tracks are available individually then sure I'd buy the ones I like.
Or do you only sell them on CD for $10+ with 1 or two good songs and the rest filler crap
that even the most desperate radio station wouldn't play even if you paid them too.

If it's the latter then you've lost a sale. Let me know if your a member of the real world or not.
 
2012-01-15 08:13:53 PM  

krackpipe: erveek: krackpipe: ox45tallboy: erveek: SOPA supporters own all major media outlets in the US. It sure does look like the deck is stacked against meaningful or balanced debate.

You can quit gloating anytime, RIAA.

Er... they don't own the Internet. Which is why most people don't want anyone farking with the Internet, its the last place you can find (sometimes) rational expression of ideas, and debate them (sort of) in a civil manner.

I don't want to speak for erveek, but his point appears to be the same as yours. He just made it a little differently.

I do want to speak for erveek. They own the tv networks, from which the baby boomers still get their news. Those being the largest and most influential voting bloc, the RIAA has nothing to whine about here.

Makes sense. That's how I understood you the first time you made your point. Appears you and ox45tallboy share a similar opinion of the RIAA, or at least of the SOPA.


Don't forget NewsCorp, NBC/Universal, and Disney/ABC. They are all fighting for ways to control (and charge for) content delivery, and make that delivery system exclusive.
 
2012-01-15 08:47:21 PM  

adamgreeney: If you make everything available online and make it reasonable to buy without insane restrictions, it will be bought legally by 99% of people


Every heard of "Tragedy of the Commons?" I wouldn't be quite so certain about individual ethics.
 
2012-01-15 09:07:02 PM  

WhyteRaven74: adamgreeney: but only for your apple device,

you can play stuff iTunes on anything.


No. Unless iTunes converted DRM to mp3, it won't play on any of my CD players, mp3 players, etc. I typically buy from Amazon, .99 a song, and in an un-DRM mp3 format.
 
2012-01-15 09:07:48 PM  

Reverend Monkeypants: You think being a musician is a popularity contest?


I'm pretty sure every branch of the entertainment industry is a popularity contest.
 
2012-01-15 09:27:08 PM  

People_are_Idiots: WhyteRaven74: adamgreeney: but only for your apple device,

you can play stuff iTunes on anything.

No. Unless iTunes converted DRM to mp3, it won't play on any of my CD players, mp3 players, etc. I typically buy from Amazon, .99 a song, and in an un-DRM mp3 format.


I get all of my new stuff from Amazon, too, since they are so damn cheap with their daily deals and $5 albums.

That said, I would like to point out that new purchases on iTunes are actually un-DRMed M4A files, which can easily be converted over to MP3 in iTunes. For songs purchased prior to iTunes going DRM-free you can convert them to un DRM'd tracks for $0.30 per track (which also doubles the bitrate). If you have a lot of old DRM'd iTunes tracks, you can actually convert them much more cheaply using iTunes Match. You pay $25 for the first year of service (you won't need a second year), match all of your purchased DRM'd tracks, then you delete the original tracks, and redownload them as DRM-free M4A files.

Match is actually a neat loophole. I used it to liberate a few hundred tracks of iTunes music I bought back in their DRM-using days because I had an iPod. As a bonus, I also used it to launder some tracks that fell off the back of the internet on to my computer back in about a decade ago. It converted them from the crappy quality MP3s I originally downloaded from Napster and Kazaa into high bitrate iTunes files. Between Match and the deals at Amazon, I've pretty much made my whole collection legit.
 
2012-01-15 09:33:06 PM  
bandcamp is already mentioned, so that's good.

Leaving this here: MC Lars ft Jaret Reddick - Download this Song

/Someone should give Hugemeister a TF, for the lulz.
//And can we get 10POC a reward or something? Got some amazing bites in this one.
*goes off to pshop a Golden Troll Statue*
 
2012-01-15 09:55:41 PM  

Hugemeister: I think it is hilarious that there are so many Total Farkers who actually PAY to be on this site. Wow. What a badge of honor you have next to your name. I mean let me get this straight...you actually PAY $5 a month to post your innane IMO commentary on this shiat site? Is that just some kind of ego validation that ANY OF US really really cares or loses slep over the opinions of each other?

And what is this sh*t ignoring other users? You really think that bragging about how you block another Farker from posting on your screen in a 1st Amendment type of thread issue makes you what...? Better, more enlightened, your opinion and commentary matters more...I mean WTF?

Personally I could not possibly be bothered to take the 0.5 seconds it would take to block anyone off the thread...goes against my philosophy to censor anyone out of discourse troll or not...

Grow up you pretentious a&&holes who realy think you matter. Ignore him? Her? Them? Me? Boggles my mind that someone thinks snubbing on these threads is worth two squirts of piss of their efforts...

My ideal experience on Fark someday would be to perhaps ignore ALL OF YOU and just have the whole thread with just MY wit and wisdom...lol

Fools.


I've been on this site for 12 years and all I've bought was a T-shirt....back when I was in middle school.
 
2012-01-15 10:08:47 PM  

Mad_Radhu: People_are_Idiots: WhyteRaven74: adamgreeney: but only for your apple device,

you can play stuff iTunes on anything.

No. Unless iTunes converted DRM to mp3, it won't play on any of my CD players, mp3 players, etc. I typically buy from Amazon, .99 a song, and in an un-DRM mp3 format.

I get all of my new stuff from Amazon, too, since they are so damn cheap with their daily deals and $5 albums.

That said, I would like to point out that new purchases on iTunes are actually un-DRMed M4A files, which can easily be converted over to MP3 in iTunes. For songs purchased prior to iTunes going DRM-free you can convert them to un DRM'd tracks for $0.30 per track (which also doubles the bitrate). If you have a lot of old DRM'd iTunes tracks, you can actually convert them much more cheaply using iTunes Match. You pay $25 for the first year of service (you won't need a second year), match all of your purchased DRM'd tracks, then you delete the original tracks, and redownload them as DRM-free M4A files.

Match is actually a neat loophole. I used it to liberate a few hundred tracks of iTunes music I bought back in their DRM-using days because I had an iPod. As a bonus, I also used it to launder some tracks that fell off the back of the internet on to my computer back in about a decade ago. It converted them from the crappy quality MP3s I originally downloaded from Napster and Kazaa into high bitrate iTunes files. Between Match and the deals at Amazon, I've pretty much made my whole collection legit.


hehe, how crappy is mp3, since CDs are -crappier?- I also dislike having to have another piece of software just to download music. I prefer Amazon's "We have a website!" model. Course, I also like Vevo and Youtube (Download the song FTW!)
 
2012-01-15 10:17:09 PM  

moothemagiccow: Reverend Monkeypants: You think being a musician is a popularity contest?

I'm pretty sure every branch of the entertainment industry is a popularity contest.


My point was lost. NO worries.

And THANK GOD the industry is turning back to musicians having to actually have talent and perform well.
 
2012-01-15 10:18:51 PM  

ox45tallboy:
I tried for several years but couldn't make it in the biz. I understand how hard it is (which is why a hate manufac ...


I agree completely.
 
2012-01-15 10:39:54 PM  

ox45tallboy: krackpipe: erveek: krackpipe: ox45tallboy: erveek: SOPA supporters own all major media outlets in the US. It sure does look like the deck is stacked against meaningful or balanced debate.

You can quit gloating anytime, RIAA.

Er... they don't own the Internet. Which is why most people don't want anyone farking with the Internet, its the last place you can find (sometimes) rational expression of ideas, and debate them (sort of) in a civil manner.

I don't want to speak for erveek, but his point appears to be the same as yours. He just made it a little differently.

I do want to speak for erveek. They own the tv networks, from which the baby boomers still get their news. Those being the largest and most influential voting bloc, the RIAA has nothing to whine about here.

Makes sense. That's how I understood you the first time you made your point. Appears you and ox45tallboy share a similar opinion of the RIAA, or at least of the SOPA.

Don't forget NewsCorp, NBC/Universal, and Disney/ABC. They are all fighting for ways to control (and charge for) content delivery, and make that delivery system exclusive.


Sux
 
2012-01-15 10:46:19 PM  
Sounds like a pile of Steam to me.
 
2012-01-15 11:32:58 PM  

d34dr0d3n7: bandcamp is already mentioned, so that's good.

Leaving this here: MC Lars ft Jaret Reddick - Download this Song

/Someone should give Hugemeister a TF, for the lulz.
//And can we get 10POC a reward or something? Got some amazing bites in this one.
*goes off to pshop a Golden Troll Statue*


Alright, so I'll counter with this, hilarious and culturally relevant,
 
2012-01-15 11:53:41 PM  
This thread needs more hyperbole and melodrama.

Or, you know, you could stop stealing and society won't collapse and the internet won't be crippled. (Depriving them of potential which is a valuable business commodity. They would have potentially sold the material. Such potential is eliminated or decreased when you steal it. I know, there are some who will attempt to cover their theft by saying it isn't stealing. I'd not expect much from them morally.)

And, so nobody feels a need to respond... I happily pirate everything AND I can afford it. I just man-up and admit it. I actually have a few applications that I have paid for. I proudly possess, for example, a copy of WinRAR and I've even paid for mIRC and I've paid for WinZip though I haven't used it in years. I figure I got enough use out of 'em, I might as well pay for them. I don't know as I've actually used my own key for more than a single installation on my own equipment (total, like as in forever) or even if I could find said keys if I tried. But, well, I think the thought counted just a little.

I pirate. I steal in other words. I admit it. I don't tend to take much these days BUT, I will if I want. You put it online and I just might steal it.

The difference is honesty. Yes, I deprive them of a potential sale even though I may never buy it and probably wouldn't. I'm comfortable with that. I'd be less comfortable if I lied about it but I suppose we each draw our moral compass lines on our own.
 
2012-01-16 12:16:45 AM  
When can we line these guys against up against the wall and shoot 'em dead?
 
2012-01-16 02:43:57 AM  

WhyteRaven74: adamgreeney: What happens when your computer or iPod dies?

you can keep a copy on your iPod and your computer, you can burn the stuff to a CD if you want. Can copy it to a second hard drive.

tenpoundsofcheese: You can get redbox for $1.3 a day and don't need to worry about watching it in two days.

And you get a very limited choice of movies. How about the film studios putting everything online and charging $5 a month for watching all the movies you want at your leisure? They'd make money hand over fist doing that.


I suggested that in the other SOPA thread. Thousands of hours of tv shows, movies, and other video sit in their vaults, cabinets and wherever else the content people store sh*t. Regular tv programming started way back in 1928 with NTSC broadcasts starting in 1941 and broadcast videotape was introduced in 1956. Couple that with all the movies produced since the invention of film, and you have more media than any one person could ever watch in a dozen lifetimes. And since it's all bought and paid for reshowing it on demand would be pure profit.

A second season episode of "My Mother the Car"? Done.
The entire first season of "Gunsmoke"? Boom.
The entire run of "All In The Family"? Play it.
Every movie starring Betty White? Onscreen.

They media corporations have no idea what they are sitting on and letting go to waste. There are plenty of folks who would be willing to pay good money to see what they want, how they want at the time they want, and it would cost the corporations almost nothing. How many boomers would want an on-demand channel that showed nothing but cartoons from their childhood, Crusader Rabbit and Prince Planet and Wally Gator... or tv shows and movies from when they were teens like the Love Boat or Dance Fever or Automan?

They're not smart enough to do that... all they see is this quarter, this cycle, yesterday's stock price, and grabbing a quick buck by sh*tting out yet another "reality" show... and they wonder why torrenting and UseNet are so popular. I would rather chunk up $5 or $10 a month to sit on my couch and use the remote rather than downloading and unRARing and crap.

Sell us what we want, and we'll buy it. Just that simple.
 
2012-01-16 04:07:18 AM  

HeartBurnKid: Honest Bender: This is why I abstain from voting.

Then STFU. You've got no reason to complain; you got the government you deserve.


You are so wrong because you have (in a 2 party system) only 3 ways to express your opinion

1, vote for guy 1 (who you disagree with)
2, vote for guy 2 (who you ALSO disagree with just as much as guy 1)
3, express dissatisfation with the whole process by refusing to endorse either guy that you disagree with.

You do not abdicate your power in the face of unacceptable alternatives, you transform it instead of creating a false endorsement for a wrong cadidate. Therefore "I didn`t vote" (I didn`t give them power) means you can legitimately complain about government policy MORE than someone who voted as neither guy would make policy you found acceptable and only a new candidate would get your approval.

candidate 1 "I want to kill all newborn boys"
candidate 2 "I want to kill 50% of all newborns"

Personally I wouldn`t vote for either and to suggest that my not voting somehow means I deserve to live in a world of either all newborn boys or just 50% of all newborns killed and have no right to complain about the system and say "this is wrong and I didn`t give my approval for this action by voting for it" is just insulting and you have no idea about decent politics.
 
2012-01-16 06:20:03 AM  

Reverend Monkeypants: This working musician has mixed feelings.
If you pirate my work I'll punch you in the face.



I would think you'd want to take advantage of some word of mouth advertising. Is your music even worth paying for? seems like you would want to get as many people as possible to listen to your art. Some of them might actually pay for the privilege.

here's an idea: distribute low-res copies for free and let people who actually like your music pay for a higher quality version on your website.
 
2012-01-16 08:33:19 AM  

randomarrangement: Reverend Monkeypants: This working musician has mixed feelings.
If you pirate my work I'll punch you in the face.


I would think you'd want to take advantage of some word of mouth advertising. Is your music even worth paying for? seems like you would want to get as many people as possible to listen to your art. Some of them might actually pay for the privilege.

here's an idea: distribute low-res copies for free and let people who actually like your music pay for a higher quality version on your website.


shhh. He's one of those "pirates are evil" folks. Don't think he's going to learn. Just pirate his music deliberately and laugh because he can't exactly punch you in the face over the internet and is roughly the equivalent of a tea party rally-er who defends michelle bachman and uses just as much logic in his thought process (aka zero).
 
2012-01-16 10:51:15 AM  
It is everyone's moral imperative to ignore intellectual property laws and to never vote for those who support them.

There is no room for copyright in the future of human civilization.
 
2012-01-16 11:05:39 AM  

dready zim: You are so wrong because you have (in a 2 party system) only 3 ways to express your opinion

1, vote for guy 1 (who you disagree with)
2, vote for guy 2 (who you ALSO disagree with just as much as guy 1)
3, express dissatisfation with the whole process by refusing to endorse either guy that you disagree with.


While we are a de facto 2 party system, there are a lot of other names on the ballot you can check, or you can write someone in. Chances are, your guy won't win, but it'll still mean something more than putting your thumb up your butt and waiting for something to happen.
 
2012-01-16 12:56:17 PM  

dready zim: HeartBurnKid: Honest Bender: This is why I abstain from voting.

Then STFU. You've got no reason to complain; you got the government you deserve.

You are so wrong because you have (in a 2 party system) only 3 ways to express your opinion

1, vote for guy 1 (who you disagree with)
2, vote for guy 2 (who you ALSO disagree with just as much as guy 1)
3, express dissatisfation with the whole process by refusing to endorse either guy that you disagree with.

You do not abdicate your power in the face of unacceptable alternatives, you transform it instead of creating a false endorsement for a wrong cadidate. Therefore "I didn`t vote" (I didn`t give them power) means you can legitimately complain about government policy MORE than someone who voted as neither guy would make policy you found acceptable and only a new candidate would get your approval.

candidate 1 "I want to kill all newborn boys"
candidate 2 "I want to kill 50% of all newborns"

Personally I wouldn`t vote for either and to suggest that my not voting somehow means I deserve to live in a world of either all newborn boys or just 50% of all newborns killed and have no right to complain about the system and say "this is wrong and I didn`t give my approval for this action by voting for it" is just insulting and you have no idea about decent politics.


HeartBurnKid: While we are a de facto 2 party system, there are a lot of other names on the ballot you can check, or you can write someone in. Chances are, your guy won't win, but it'll still mean something more than putting your thumb up your butt and waiting for something to happen.


I wasn`t saying to put your thumb up your butt and wait, I was refuting "STFU. You've got no reason to complain; you got the government you deserve." by saying the two things are unconnected. My post tried to show that it is valid to be able to complain even if a person did not vote (be honest, a write in has the same effect in the real world)

Alternatively, if you vote for someone who changes policy half way through their term then you can still complain even though you voted them in. Your vote is not connected to the right to complain I think is my point.
 
2012-01-16 01:58:51 PM  
I do everything I can to support indie labels and everything I can to steal from from the major labels. If an artist I like happens to be on a major label, then I catch their shows when they tour the bay or Sac (where I live) or buy their merch (DIRECTLY FROM THEM). It's 2012 - there is absolutely NO REASON to sign with a major label nowadays.
 
2012-01-16 03:17:42 PM  

jayhawk88: OH YOU MEAN LIKE HOW YOU STACKED THE CONGRESSIONAL DEBATES 5-1 IN FAVOR OF SOPA???????

God do these people have anything left that even resembles a soul?


As long as it continues to work, why would they change? It's not like we're ever going to vote in enough non-corporate-whores to make a difference in legislation.
 
2012-01-16 05:03:58 PM  

dready zim: HeartBurnKid: Honest Bender: This is why I abstain from voting.

Then STFU. You've got no reason to complain; you got the government you deserve.

You are so wrong because you have (in a 2 party system) only 3 ways to express your opinion

1, vote for guy 1 (who you disagree with)
2, vote for guy 2 (who you ALSO disagree with just as much as guy 1)
3, express dissatisfation with the whole process by refusing to endorse either guy that you disagree with.

You do not abdicate your power in the face of unacceptable alternatives, you transform it instead of creating a false endorsement for a wrong cadidate. Therefore "I didn`t vote" (I didn`t give them power) means you can legitimately complain about government policy MORE than someone who voted as neither guy would make policy you found acceptable and only a new candidate would get your approval.

candidate 1 "I want to kill all newborn boys"
candidate 2 "I want to kill 50% of all newborns"

Personally I wouldn`t vote for either and to suggest that my not voting somehow means I deserve to live in a world of either all newborn boys or just 50% of all newborns killed and have no right to complain about the system and say "this is wrong and I didn`t give my approval for this action by voting for it" is just insulting and you have no idea about decent politics.


southparkstudios.mtvnimages.com

This.
 
2012-01-16 06:00:06 PM  

Guidette Frankentits: The RIAA and MPAA perform late term abortions


and they are owned by Focus on the Family.
 
2012-01-16 06:11:18 PM  

bulldg4life: Gonz: No, he's usually a troll. And his act is rather played out. He's not a bad troll, per se, just predictable. You know what you're going to get from him, which takes a lot of the sheen off his posts.

If you think his comments are anything other than an absurd comedic extension of what some actual trolls actually say on this site, then you are taking Fark entirely too seriously.

My god, the man spent a month last year talking about how awesome Mario Chalmers is.


This thread is so farkin' meta, I can't stand it. He was suspected of trolling and he was pushed off the Internet. Which of you SOPA loving bastards filed the complaint?

/in after the comment, so I don't even know what it said
//I wouldn't even know who you're talking about if it wasn't for the Mario Chalmers comment :)
 
2012-01-16 06:56:40 PM  

adamgreeney: Put things out there to buy or watch online at a reasonable rate. The people that will still pirate are going to pirate anyway, not matter what you do, and things like SOPA won't stop that, just like putting cameras and alarms at the door of a store won't stop 100% of shoplifting. Hell, people were recording shows on their VCR's and sharing them and I don't remember anyone trying to ban VCR's from being plugged into TV's.


Actually... they did. And Mr. Rogers put a stop to it.

I Agreed with the rest of your post completely though.
 
2012-01-18 07:02:34 PM  

narkor: Google is pouring gigabucks into lobbying against SOPA - and Google makes more in a quarter than the entire movie industry does in a year.


That's the first positive thing I've heard in a long time. . . big money going to lobby AGAINST some draconian bit of legislation? Usually, it's the other way around. I gave up the mainstream media industry a long time ago, and that doesn't mean I pirate. . . I just don't consume, discuss, or give a toss about anything they create. I find it actually frees up a lot of time to look at stuff that matters, and explore some historical public domain stuff that Congress wants to restrict.
 
2012-01-18 07:07:06 PM  

skrame: Guidette Frankentits: The RIAA and MPAA perform late term abortions

and they are owned by Focus on the Family.


If by abortions you mean extracting royalty money from artists before they get it, you are correct.

Let's see the RIAA EVER stand up for artists. I just don't see it. Artists get some of the most horrible deals in any business in this country, and you NEVER see the RIAA come to their defense. Go ask Sly Stone what the RIAA has done for him lately, if you can find his broken down van that he lives in.
 
Displayed 336 of 336 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report