File Sharing Not Dead - Page 2 - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

roachboy · 02-27-2005, 05:23 PM

sob:

the slavery analogy was just an analogy--if you actually read the post carefully, its point is pretty both really limited and quite clear.

as for your claim that i and others who are at least offended by the riaa and its practices of late "feel entitled to other peoples' money"--it was not worth the time it took to read through.... it means nothing.

as a musician myself, i feel like i can speak about this from a viewpoint not simply defined by consumer practices and riaa justifications for trying to limit them. for example, i oppose much existing copyright law both in principle and because as it is currently set up, people who work in the kind of music i do get and can get no protection from it for their own work because 19th century notation does is not sufficient to describe the sound we work with.
so we could not retain composer rights in any real way if something were to require litigation--such was the outcome of the james newton vs. the beastie boys case of a couple years ago. so in addition to other problems i have with the riaa, i see them as trying to prolong the life of a system that from its inception is based on antiquated notions of what music is, one that operates to the exclusion of many many players who work in more experimental fields. so as a musician, i see nothing good or politically justifiable in the riaa's actions.

but i am sure that such ways of seeing do not and would not cross your mind--not is you manage to twist the hell out of a relatively straight forward post that you even copy into your response. no matter, however. i simply understand your position as myopic.

FoolThemAll · 02-27-2005, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sob

This is GREAT. Now if you oppose fiilesharing, you're like those who approved of slavery.

Although after seeing how you and so many others feel entitled to the money of others, it's not surprising that you think you're entitled to the work of musicians and programmers as well.

You misunderstood his slavery comparison, I think. He was comparing a pro-slavery mindset to a "everything that's illegal is unethical" mindset. (I would certainly agree that not all filesharing opponents have this mindset. I think it's a gross oversimplification on roachboy's part, unless he's referring to particular posts appearing to exhibit this mindset.)

roachboy, I'm wondering if you might elaborate on your opposition to current copyright law.

edit: whoops, you just did. Thanks.

raveneye · 02-28-2005, 05:06 AM

I'm also a composing musician who sees no problem whatsoever with filesharing. The money I make is almost entirely from performing and selling CDs during breaks, and filesharing for me is free advertising.

The RIAA's actions are not helping me in any way whatsoever. In fact they are hindering me from reaching potential audiences who have yet to hear my work.

trache · 02-28-2005, 06:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chickentribs

Kid Rock is interviewed in this month's Playboy and was bitching about the fact that as an artist he could not focus on an album again because nobody would want to pay for all the songs on one. I thought "even you know that half the stuff on your albums is crap, and you want us to feel sorry for you? Make a good album without filler on it then you schmuck!"

Kid Rock was on MuchMusic a few years ago (If I recall Joe C was still alive) on an Intimate and Interactive, and I remember the host asked him what he thought of all the filesharing going on. In short (and not verbatim) he basically said that "I don't care because I am now rich and it doesn't matter because the more people listen to me, the richer I'll get"

Well, a few short weeks later I saw an interview on CNN and he completely reversed his position... 180 degrees. I couldn't believe it.

It just goes to show you what a little discussion and threat (As I'm sure there are clauses in his contract that will allow his record label to bow out if he did anything to undermine them!) can do. It makes me sick.

raveneye · 02-28-2005, 06:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

the riaa and the major labels that created it are working to defend an entire system of production and distribution that the net is making obsolete.

As if to prove roachboy correct, we have the following news item today:

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05058/463051.stm

Quote:

"If Hollywood gets its way, they'll be granted de facto control over, frankly, the vast majority of communications and technology today," said Will Rodger, director of public policy for the Computer & Communications Industry Association, which represents Sun Microsystems Inc., Verizon Communications Inc. and 28 other companies.

The companies fear a ruling against the file-sharing services would leave them susceptible to lawsuits if they develop devices or technologies not approved by the entertainment industry.

They point to a long history of copyright holders trying to quash new distribution models or products, going back to the player piano and including the VCR, MP3 player and digital video recording pioneer ReplayTV.

"This is the Hail Mary pass on the part of the content industry to try to put the entire technology sector under their thumb," said Fred von Lohmann, an attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which is representing StreamCast. "That's something they could never get Congress to do, but that's precisely what they would like the Supreme Court to do for them."

So in other words, the RIAA is not just against file sharing. They want to hold the companies liable for what the file sharers do with their software.

What this shows pretty clearly is that the RIAA is against not just file sharing, but any technology used to share files.

This is a big leap. Apparently RIAA is less about creativity and innovation than simply protecting its business model, its "entire system of distribution and production."

02-27-2005, 05:23 PM	#41 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	sob: the slavery analogy was just an analogy--if you actually read the post carefully, its point is pretty both really limited and quite clear. as for your claim that i and others who are at least offended by the riaa and its practices of late "feel entitled to other peoples' money"--it was not worth the time it took to read through.... it means nothing. as a musician myself, i feel like i can speak about this from a viewpoint not simply defined by consumer practices and riaa justifications for trying to limit them. for example, i oppose much existing copyright law both in principle and because as it is currently set up, people who work in the kind of music i do get and can get no protection from it for their own work because 19th century notation does is not sufficient to describe the sound we work with. so we could not retain composer rights in any real way if something were to require litigation--such was the outcome of the james newton vs. the beastie boys case of a couple years ago. so in addition to other problems i have with the riaa, i see them as trying to prolong the life of a system that from its inception is based on antiquated notions of what music is, one that operates to the exclusion of many many players who work in more experimental fields. so as a musician, i see nothing good or politically justifiable in the riaa's actions. but i am sure that such ways of seeing do not and would not cross your mind--not is you manage to twist the hell out of a relatively straight forward post that you even copy into your response. no matter, however. i simply understand your position as myopic. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite Last edited by roachboy; 02-27-2005 at 05:28 PM..

02-28-2005, 05:06 AM	#43 (permalink)
raveneye Born Against	I'm also a composing musician who sees no problem whatsoever with filesharing. The money I make is almost entirely from performing and selling CDs during breaks, and filesharing for me is free advertising. The RIAA's actions are not helping me in any way whatsoever. In fact they are hindering me from reaching potential audiences who have yet to hear my work.