Gov't wants easier internet wiretapping

[sgreger1]

There needs to be a severe reform of copyright/patent laws. Isn't it funny how copyright periods get extended every time Mickey Mouse gets ready to released to the public domain? Your grandkids will be paying royalties to Disney for watching 150 year old cartoons :^S

The law in place today isn't at all what drafters had in mind with copyright law. It was never intended to be a perpetual investment, and what we have now stifles creativity, which is the antithesis of copyright. The consumer as well as the artists have gotten screwed for years. All the power was concentrated in the record companies. You dealt with them on their terms, or you GTFO. They're scared now. The power's been stripped from their hands, and they're becoming increasingly irrelevant. The process from creation to distribution to promotion can happen without them, and they're wondering what they're gonna do for a job.

Yah this is especially true for pharmaceuticals too. All the big names get to keep the good stuff and it kills competition. It shouldn't be able to last that long. Like devilock76 said, Happy birthday is still under copyright lol.

[devilock76]

Something important to mention, on the converse. Copyright does not prevent you copying something, it prevents you copying it and then "distributing" it. It is designed not to prevent a person from making a mix tape but to prevent a person from making that mix tape and then selling it without permission or paying due union rate to the original artists/writers/performers.

Ken

[sgreger1]

I still think .99 cents is too much for a song. Songs should be .25c or .50c a piece. Music is just too plentifull to charge $1 a song. To get all the songs I WANT to buy would cost me hundreds and hundreds (if not thousands) of dollars. If it were cheaper, I would increase the quantity I purchase, therefore spreading my wealth more evenly amongst all the artists I like. Anything more than 5 years old should be .25 cents.

[lxskllr]

Something important to mention, on the converse. Copyright does not prevent you copying something, it prevents you copying it and then "distributing" it. It is designed not to prevent a person from making a mix tape but to prevent a person from making that mix tape and then selling it without permission or paying due union rate to the original artists/writers/performers.

Ken

But you're not allowed to crack copy protection. The record companies have already said that ripping a CD is the same as piracy. Screw them. They want to charge users 20 different times for the same music. They want money for your car song, your house song, your phone song, and any other way they can extract money from people.

Studies have shown that people who download the most music, also buy the most music. They aren't losing much to piracy, but they go crying the blues to governments, and the people get stiffed for the sake of a few bucks every time. Vote Pirate Party in 2012....

[sgreger1]

But you're not allowed to crack copy protection. The record companies have already said that ripping a CD is the same as piracy. Screw them. They want to charge users 20 different times for the same music. They want money for your car song, your house song, your phone song, and any other way they can extract money from people.

Studies have shown that people who download the most music, also buy the most music. They aren't losing much to piracy, but they go crying the blues to governments, and the people get stiffed for the sake of a few bucks every time. Vote Pirate Party in 2012....

Pirating is probably the oldest pasttime of the internet. They can never stop it, ever. The good thing about technology and the internet is that the civilian hackers seem to always be better than the gov/corporate security guys and therefore anything they try to stop will fial. People will find a way around it. Even apple, the DRM overlord cannot keep people from jailbreaking their phones. They are updating the software so often now to try and make it so the hackers can't keep up. I bought an iphone this weekend and by the time I drove home nad plugged it into my computer there was a new software version it wanted me to update to lol.



I'm just saying people, don't try and play mind tricks or convince yourself you are not stealing when you download photshop for free, and then go on limewire and download all your favorite albums. It is stealing, plain and simple. I know this and do it anyways because that's how I roll, but for those of you who think your "BUT I HAVE AN INFINITE COPY MACHINE!" defense will stand up in court, you are very wrong.

As for actualy copying: Copying shit you already bought is not stealing, though they would like to think it is. Imagine if you bought an apple and they wanted to charge you extra depending on whether you ate it in your house, your car, or your job. They would try it if they could, and make you buy an extra apple for each location. Or what if it were illegal to share the apple with a friend? They would want the friend to buy their own apple. Lol @ them.

[truthwolf1]

Music should be free for all to hear and now it pretty much finally is. I dont know anybody who has a paid for, thousand dollar I-tune download collection. The disgust people felt after having to purchase overpriced CD's all those years, pretty much created the pirate payback. Nobody is going back to save these companies.

Now, if you want to see those musicians play live then I can understand a inflated ticket purchase and this is how a artist can still make a living.

[lxskllr]

[sgreger1]

Music should be free for all to hear

What line of work are you in truthwolf?

[truthwolf1]

What line of work are you in truthwolf?

If you want to use my art/image/design then you legally can as long as you are not profiting from it. Same with music. If you want to use a song for a ad/profit you will have to pay for it.

[devilock76]

Music should be free for all to hear and now it pretty much finally is. I dont know anybody who has a paid for, thousand dollar I-tune download collection. The disgust people felt after having to purchase overpriced CD's all those years, pretty much created the pirate payback. Nobody is going back to save these companies.

Now, if you want to see those musicians play live then I can understand a inflated ticket purchase and this is how a artist can still make a living.

Then why would any artist bother to write new music?

[NonServiam]

I used to buy all my music on Itunes just due to availability since record stores here in Oklahoma rarely carry my music.

But I really missed having a tangible CD in my hand and looking through the inserts with the cool artwork, lyrics, etc...

So from now on I'm buying all my CD's from Amazon. It costs a little more with the shipping, but it's worth it to me now. Not to mention, I feel like I'm giving a little something back (probably only 3cents when it's said and done) to the musicians in exchange for their work which enhances my life on a daily basis. Purchasing a CD will give an artist more royalties than it will from ITunes.

Lxskllr...+1 on your optimistic catastrophe theory. I've been saying that for years, and I know it's inevitable, because nature has proven it's course time and time again.

As far as the gov't progressing more and more into a police state in reference to this new internet wiretapping B.S., I think I'll start shopping for my federally mandated barcode neck tattoo early. I don't want to rush into it and end up with something tacky. lol

[lxskllr]

Then why would any artist bother to write new music?

To create. Your real fans will support you. When NIN released the Ghosts album, Trent gave the first one away, and you were supposed to buy the rest. You didn't have to because it was open source, but that was the plan. I went to bittorrent to look for the first album, but said screw it, and downloaded all 4. I liked it so much, I went to the site and paid my $5(very reasonable) for the 4 albums, and I'm not particularly a fan of NIN. I just happened to like that album, and only heard it because it was free. I'll always support quality music. I have around 100gb on my hd, and that's only about 1/3 of my collection. There's very little I didn't pay for, with most of those from people who have been long dead.

This is how you add value, and get people to buy your stuff. First make your product interesting. Second, package it in a form people want, and third, don't treat your customers like criminals...

http://ghosts.nin.com/main/order_options

[sgreger1]

If you want to use my art/image/design then you legally can as long as you are not profiting from it. Same with music. If you want to use a song for a ad/profit you will have to pay for it.

Please forward a copy of all of your works to me. PM me for me address.

Now imagine this happening 30 million times. If you want to record an artist singing with a tape recorder and listen to it that is fine, but asking them to package it, then distribute it in a consumable and high quality medium takes money and labor. This is not free.

Imagine you are a painter, are you saying that if you set up a little shop at the beach displaying all of your canvases, that anyone can come and take them to put in their homes as long as they don't re-sell them for a profit? That is an awefull lot of labor on your part for 0 return, and may make you decide to get out of the art business.

Then people like snupy will say that you are making too much money and that you could be profiting from your art via different methods, like for example showing it at museums or art shows, though the profit from these is marginal compared to what you would make by selling individual units for personal consumption.

[sgreger1]

To create. Your real fans will support you. When NIN released the Ghosts album, Trent gave the first one away, and you were supposed to buy the rest. You didn't have to because it was open source, but that was the plan. I went to bittorrent to look for the first album, but said screw it, and downloaded all 4. I liked it so much, I went to the site and paid my $5(very reasonable) for the 4 albums, and I'm not particularly a fan of NIN. I just happened to like that album, and only heard it because it was free. I'll always support quality music. I have around 100gb on my hd, and that's only about 1/3 of my collection. There's very little I didn't pay for, with most of those from people who have been long dead.

This is how you add value, and get people to buy your stuff. First make your product interesting. Second, package it in a form people want, and third, don't treat your customers like criminals...

http://ghosts.nin.com/main/order_options

And that is all well and good, but it should be at the discretion of the artist. How they want to market their product is their choice. If they choose to give some away or to charge for each copy, it is their labor that they are selling and therefore their right to decide what to charge and how to conduct marketing and sales.

Saying that anyone can take any album they want for free and decide if they want it later wouldn't work for all artists.

[lxskllr]

Bad analogy. It's more like making digital wallpapers for computers, and allowing anyone to use them for non commercial purposes, and you put a donate button on your site. Your real fans will give you money, and the rest won't. One copy costs the same as 1,000,000 copies. To further encourage people to give you money, you sell signed prints on your site that you'll mail out for $x, and with the purchase of a print, you also get a CD that has prototype wallpapers that will never be shown on your site.