Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

1.  

   Unfortunately ...

   

   Newob, Jul 27th, 2005 @ 4:15am

   
   

   Copyright law does not encourage creativity. It was meant to permit the creator of something's original to own every copy of it for a limited time. But now, it is the cornerstone of an intellectual property regime that regards speech and other forms of expression as commodities. The only goal of this regime is to make a profit and anything that cuts into their expected profits is accused of "stealing" from them. But if something was stolen then that would mean that the owner was missing it; and the Constitution does not guarantee expected profits.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

2.  

   Re: Unfortunately ...

   

   Anon, Jul 27th, 2005 @ 6:29am

   
   

   The idea for the artist to make money via copyright was so that they could live off the money while creating more new things. It was simply to keep good artists from being "starving" artists, thus encouraging creativity.
   What is unfortunate is that the only artists that do come out with "second acts", usually make money by rehashing the same crap they did in the first album, while the starving artists actually become creative.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

3.  

   I've always wondered how long it would take...

   

   anonymoose cow-ard, Jul 27th, 2005 @ 9:42am

   
   

   I've always wondered how long it would take for the RIAA to catch on to the fact that people are blantly including copyrighted music in with game videos that they've created.
   
   If the game video creator had used music from the game itself, it wouldn't be such a big deal, but videos like Warthog Jump including copyrighted music is really not much different than sharing the songs directly (all you have to do is close your eyes while the video is playing and it sounds exactly the same).
   

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

4.  

   They lose out on all sorts of promotion opportunit

   

   acousticiris, Jul 27th, 2005 @ 1:57pm

   
   

   I recently purchased the entire series of "Keen Eddie", which was a very short-lived (7 episodes to be exact) somewhat interesting television series that aired in the summer on Fox.
   At the very bottom of the box in fine print was a note saying that music from the series had been changed. I can only assume this was done to avoid paying royalties to various bands who's 2 second clips of their music was used to enhance the show.
   The music they replaced it with was pretty-much terrible and didn't even have the same mood/feel of the original episodes.

   Ironically, I could tell you the scene and the song they replaced because in the fourth episode the soundtrack was so interesting that I hit the web site and purchased the artist's CD.
   Perhaps in some of the episodes I am seeing for the first time on this DVD I would have doled out money to enjoy the music as well had they left it alone. Too bad for them ...

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

5.  

   turns out...

   

   thatguy, Jul 27th, 2005 @ 3:58pm

   
   

   The RIAA is aparently claiming they never sent this site a takedown notice. They are saying someone used an old takedown notice from something else and sent it to the site. Might be BS, but either way it sucks for them.
   
   Why would you puss out like that and immediately shut down your site without first checking to make sure the notice is legitimate?

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment