So would it be okay if the government says that everybody gets implanted with an RFID chip and they are allowed to track you. The argument about being tailed would apply to this scenario the same.
It is not surprising that "Classic albums" have decreased. Albums are dieing because people are buying music different. People seem to want to buy only the songs they want, not albums. How music is packaged has nothing to do with the quality of music being released.
We should start a movement to take pictures of actual LV bags and merchandise in the hands of as many people and situations LV would find objectionable and post them on the web.
It Shouldn't matter if he thought the material he was linking to was infringing. Someone can write a book about how to be a pedophile and the constitution protects that persons right to do so. Pedophilia is clearly illegal. It is unfortunate that there isn't a way to stop someone from writing something like this but to do so would erode our fundamental rights. The solution is to arrest the people posting the infringing material and the pedophiles. Then the other problems just kind of take care of themselves.
You seem to confuse what may be an objectionable consequence of a law with breaking the law. The pastor who protests at military funerals would almost universally be denounced and most people would like to put a stop to what he does. Doing so unfortunately takes us down a slippery slope. This is exactly the same thing. Even if we all agree that his motives in linking to the material was not pure, that does not mean he broke the law.
Nice anecdote, but in your scenario it still kills almost as many people and we hope the plane can land. If one out of 20 doesn't land it is still a much bigger problem.
I have never heard anybody claiming that going through a metal detector to get on a plane is contrary to the constitution so why are body scanners? Is x-ray scanning of your suitcases put on a plane contrary to the constitution. What is the difference between looking through your suitcase and looking through your clothes?
BTW @Big Al - If Achmed walks into a screening line with an underwear bomb he would be lucky to kill 20 people. The people around him shield those standing further away. If he takes down a plane by blowing a hole in the side of the plane 300 to 400 people could easily be killed.
I used AllofMp3 when they were up and spent more on music with them in 6 months, than I spent in the previous 5 years plus the years since they were shut down. I love music and I will buy it but I can't bring myself to pay the ridiculous itunes type prices. I believe if the price is right (10 to 15 cents per song max), the market for selling music would be many times what it is today.
I am sorry but it shouldn't be possible to have a $49,000 judgement against you for a 14 song karaoke night. I don't care how much the restaurant owner screwed up. The problem is that this is possible in the first place. If the possible penalty was something reasonable like $2 per song then it would prevent companies from bringing suit unless it was worth the time and effort. It would be nice if I could take someone to court who bounced a check to me for $14.00 and get a judgement for $49k but there is not. I have to decide whether it is worth going to small claims to recover my loss. If it is not I just write it off. Why should it be any different for the music industry?
Those sounds are still present despite the fact they may be altered through the "psycho-acoustic simulation" process.
It seems to me that changing a song using "psycho-acoustic simulation" and recording a song as a cover artist and making it sound exactly the same are no different. Just because the average listener can't tell the difference between the original recording and the cover or psycho-acoustic copy if the recording is different then why would the psycho-acoustic copy and the cover be treated differently?
Seems to me like that problem would be solved by writers and customers not the government creating an artificial market. Maybe writers in the future will be motivated by something other than profit. Maybe writers will figure out how to get rich with unlimited free copies of content on the internet. Let them figure it out. What is the worst thing that could happen finding out?
So by this rationale there should be no problem making files available. Additionally if you put a bag of potatoes on my front lawn then they are not your potatoes or at least it seems reasonable for me to pick them up and do what I want with them.
The title being " Correcting A Few 'Fact' From The RIAA" doesn't mean that he is going to provide facts. It seems to me that he was refuting whether the RIAA's 'Facts' were truly facts. The fact that these are opinions and Mike's opinions are different clearly demonstrates that the RIAA is trying to put forth opinions or falshoods as facts. To me that seems to be the point.
They probably blur those things out so they can justify charging people that they do not blur out in a product placement. I doubt anyone that knows anything about the university of Utah thinks they endorse Big Love. Although I don't know why they would not be proud of their heritage.
Re: Help me understand this better
So would it be okay if the government says that everybody gets implanted with an RFID chip and they are allowed to track you. The argument about being tailed would apply to this scenario the same.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: bleh
It is not surprising that "Classic albums" have decreased. Albums are dieing because people are buying music different. People seem to want to buy only the songs they want, not albums. How music is packaged has nothing to do with the quality of music being released.
Take actual pictures LV merchandise
We should start a movement to take pictures of actual LV bags and merchandise in the hands of as many people and situations LV would find objectionable and post them on the web.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It Shouldn't matter if he thought the material he was linking to was infringing. Someone can write a book about how to be a pedophile and the constitution protects that persons right to do so. Pedophilia is clearly illegal. It is unfortunate that there isn't a way to stop someone from writing something like this but to do so would erode our fundamental rights. The solution is to arrest the people posting the infringing material and the pedophiles. Then the other problems just kind of take care of themselves.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Just trying to help.
You seem to confuse what may be an objectionable consequence of a law with breaking the law. The pastor who protests at military funerals would almost universally be denounced and most people would like to put a stop to what he does. Doing so unfortunately takes us down a slippery slope. This is exactly the same thing. Even if we all agree that his motives in linking to the material was not pure, that does not mean he broke the law.
Re: Re: Logic problem
Nice anecdote, but in your scenario it still kills almost as many people and we hope the plane can land. If one out of 20 doesn't land it is still a much bigger problem.
Logic problem
I have never heard anybody claiming that going through a metal detector to get on a plane is contrary to the constitution so why are body scanners? Is x-ray scanning of your suitcases put on a plane contrary to the constitution. What is the difference between looking through your suitcase and looking through your clothes?
BTW @Big Al - If Achmed walks into a screening line with an underwear bomb he would be lucky to kill 20 people. The people around him shield those standing further away. If he takes down a plane by blowing a hole in the side of the plane 300 to 400 people could easily be killed.
AllofMp3 example
I used AllofMp3 when they were up and spent more on music with them in 6 months, than I spent in the previous 5 years plus the years since they were shut down. I love music and I will buy it but I can't bring myself to pay the ridiculous itunes type prices. I believe if the price is right (10 to 15 cents per song max), the market for selling music would be many times what it is today.
Re: Re: Re: Another story blown out of proportion
I am sorry but it shouldn't be possible to have a $49,000 judgement against you for a 14 song karaoke night. I don't care how much the restaurant owner screwed up. The problem is that this is possible in the first place. If the possible penalty was something reasonable like $2 per song then it would prevent companies from bringing suit unless it was worth the time and effort. It would be nice if I could take someone to court who bounced a check to me for $14.00 and get a judgement for $49k but there is not. I have to decide whether it is worth going to small claims to recover my loss. If it is not I just write it off. Why should it be any different for the music industry?
Re: Re: Re: 114(b) pertains to cover songs
Those sounds are still present despite the fact they may be altered through the "psycho-acoustic simulation" process.
It seems to me that changing a song using "psycho-acoustic simulation" and recording a song as a cover artist and making it sound exactly the same are no different. Just because the average listener can't tell the difference between the original recording and the cover or psycho-acoustic copy if the recording is different then why would the psycho-acoustic copy and the cover be treated differently?
Re: Re: Re:
Seems to me like that problem would be solved by writers and customers not the government creating an artificial market. Maybe writers in the future will be motivated by something other than profit. Maybe writers will figure out how to get rich with unlimited free copies of content on the internet. Let them figure it out. What is the worst thing that could happen finding out?
Re: Re: Re: yeah yeah, but...
So by this rationale there should be no problem making files available. Additionally if you put a bag of potatoes on my front lawn then they are not your potatoes or at least it seems reasonable for me to pick them up and do what I want with them.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The title being " Correcting A Few 'Fact' From The RIAA" doesn't mean that he is going to provide facts. It seems to me that he was refuting whether the RIAA's 'Facts' were truly facts. The fact that these are opinions and Mike's opinions are different clearly demonstrates that the RIAA is trying to put forth opinions or falshoods as facts. To me that seems to be the point.
Re: Re: Flawed Logic
They probably blur those things out so they can justify charging people that they do not blur out in a product placement. I doubt anyone that knows anything about the university of Utah thinks they endorse Big Love. Although I don't know why they would not be proud of their heritage.
Re:
Or.. it wasn't stealing when I downloaded hundreds of records so why would I consider it stealing if someone downloads mine.