2004-11-24, 17:23 | Link #21 |
Team the box!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Badside
|
In America, at least, if someone breaks into your house and tries to steal your property, you can kill them stone dead right there.
When a company tries anything to protect it's property, all of a sudden it's this big evil "monopoly" and how dare they do that. An the other hand, one cannot defend their home with an automatic lethal force system. Such as the classic shotgun with the trigger tied to the door knob. It assumes guilt right off the bat. The RIAA often attemps to pass laws that can result in noncriminals being treated as such. I don't stand for that. |
2004-11-25, 06:44 | Link #22 | ||
Generic Human
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: here
|
Quote:
Yes but when some one breaks into my house and steals my TV for example. I no longer have it. I cannot watch my DVD's, or even cable, because my TV is gone. When I download somthing off the internet, I did not take it, I made a copy of it. Honestly, if some one breaks into my house, looks at my TV, goes home and makes a new one. As long as they did not damage my house breaking into it, I do not care. Huge differance. Never once through downloading music off the internet have I deprived the music industries of somthing they had before. Quote:
Bands make most thier money of touring currently. The record sales are still a percentage, but not the main source. considering the price of mass production and shipping, that means most of what you pay for, is the company. You are giving more $ to the company that signs bands into often restritive contracts that stifle creativity. Worse yet, you have no choice but to do so or become a dreaded pirate. I myself currently am banning the RIAA, and shall start doing so for the MPAA as well. If they want to try and beat me with a stick that says law, I will beat back with a stick that says freedom. Odd when thier right to pursue happiness via taking my money is met with an alternitive that I have in pursute of happiness via music. Also, they honestly cannot prove that the people they are busting for downloading music are doing so illegaly. For example, if I buy 15 CD's. Then my 5 year old gets a hold of them, and uses them as shoes scratching them to a point beyond repair. I am within my leagle right to make and use a backup copy of them. If I need to download that backup copy for a network, who is to stop me? what law have I violated? I downloaded music that I have a leagle copywright to. . . only it was in another form. Thus, I am restricted from copying my property to another media? Not if it is my proporty. that is one of the reasons I purchase somthing. So I can do with it as I please. And yes, a large portion of what I download is replacement of music I have perviously owned. if and when the RIAA and MPAA give me an unristricted method to replace any lost or damaged goods I will end my boycott, but not till then. |
||
2004-11-25, 09:21 | Link #23 |
Uber Coffee for da win!
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Middle of insanity
|
The funny part about what you just said is that the RIAA and MPAA are slowly but surely making it easier and easier to boycott them. In just this year alone I've only seen 3 movies that I actually liked. "I, Robot", Spiderman 2, and The Incredibles. Aside from that everything else has been a steaming pile of fecal matter. If the movie industry keeps this up and the Indy films keep getting better then ignoring or boycotting the MPAA will be a sinch. Heck, last year in 2003 the only two good films all year was Return of the King and Triplets of Belleville, which was a french indy film, but an excellent one none the less.
And I'm not even going to go into all the garbase spewing out of the halls of Riaa last year. Eww. That stuff was utterly horrible. Recycled, talentless gutter noise in my book. There was better stuff that came out of Europe, Asia, and other countries overseas plus the local indy bands. I'm not a huge fan of indy music, but there's a lot more good indy groups than good riaa sponsored groups. And someone please sew britney's mouth shut. Gah. She's annoying. |
2004-11-26, 19:50 | Link #25 | |
Hmm...
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Looking for his book...
|
Quote:
My curiousity over the bill is because Paul Martin, being the balless bastard he's always been, has this stupid habit of trying to follow the American lead. |
|
2004-11-26, 21:24 | Link #26 | |
Banned
|
My advice to everyone on this forum DO IT AND DONT TELL
Quote:
|
|
2004-11-26, 23:33 | Link #29 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by tanuki; 2004-11-27 at 03:51. |
|||
2004-11-27, 00:04 | Link #30 | |
Uber Coffee for da win!
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Middle of insanity
|
Quote:
|
|
2004-11-27, 02:46 | Link #31 | |
Hmm...
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Looking for his book...
|
Quote:
|
|
2004-11-27, 09:36 | Link #32 |
Uber Coffee for da win!
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Middle of insanity
|
There's a tax on all recordable media here and yet they STILL ban us from downloading music and movies. GO figure. It's like saying "we know you're guilty of stealing, so we'll still make you pay for our music/movies/etc one cd at a time even if you aren't.
Oh well. I guess I don't mind too much because the tax isn't all that big. But if they're going to tax our recordable media, at least let us leach something in return. |
2004-11-27, 14:44 | Link #33 |
Homicidal Kitty.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: In Arcueid's arms, getting my blood drained by the neck. Or at least I wish.
|
Except that each mp3 can be analyzed for a particular "signature" and traced. Forensics can reveal if the mp3 you have is a copy of an illegally shared one.
I doubt if people'd go to that much trouble, of using forensics on your computer to prove your guilt, for most music downloaders, so you probably shouldn't worry. Unless you live in the US. |
Thread Tools | |
|
|