Time to start using some dodgy Russian sites?

[ChezGiven 0]

Because films aren't distributed to cinemas on DVD's that can be ripped and find there way online the day it's released. The film industry is able to time a dvd release to maximise profit from both the cinema run before the DVD release is rolled out.

 

Right, so why is it ok for them to do that and not the music companies? Why should the music company or the artist not be afforded the same opportunity.

 

You say that the musician tours but thats another thing entirely, thats a performance, which the artist quite rightly should expect to be paid for in addition to any media output.

 

The film industry gets to release the DVD and make money again, the artist gets to tour to make money again. Your view is that this is ok for one industry but not the other?

 

It's not a case of being ok for one and not the other. It's just a fact that the formats are different and the opportunities afforded to one aren't afforded to another purely on the mode of delivery.

 

We're in agreement on that but the music industry could change the way it distributes its products (not sure how and neither are they) in which case they would be afforded the opportunity to make money on the file output. If people go up in arms about it, then you could just say well look at the film industry and it would be justified. You're not making a legal or moral argument for the film industry retaining that power, nor one against the music industry having it. You're just pointing to the practicalities of the situation.

 

This is about producing something and having copyright on it, which is a moral/legal issue.

 

That moral/legal issue hasn't changed in the decades from the cassette tape through minidisc and on to digital downloads. Of course stealing from the artists wasn't an issue back in the day because the record companies always had the next superior sounding format to push. Now they can see the gravy train slowing they're all worried about the welfare of their artists?

 

Bullshit.

 

Who has been lobbying for the changes apart from the BPI? British Music Rights and their artist Chief Executive.

 

What persuaded me this was a fair issue? My professional musician friends.

 

Both the companies and the artists are losing out.

[NJS 4446]

As I might have said before - until they explain who is stealing the extra 25p (79p Vs 99c) from UK customers they can fuck right off.

[Park Life 71]

As I might have said before - until they explain who is stealing the extra 25p (79p Vs 99c) from UK customers they can fuck right off.

 

[Happy Face 29]

Because films aren't distributed to cinemas on DVD's that can be ripped and find there way online the day it's released. The film industry is able to time a dvd release to maximise profit from both the cinema run before the DVD release is rolled out.

 

Right, so why is it ok for them to do that and not the music companies? Why should the music company or the artist not be afforded the same opportunity.

 

You say that the musician tours but thats another thing entirely, thats a performance, which the artist quite rightly should expect to be paid for in addition to any media output.

 

The film industry gets to release the DVD and make money again, the artist gets to tour to make money again. Your view is that this is ok for one industry but not the other?

 

It's not a case of being ok for one and not the other. It's just a fact that the formats are different and the opportunities afforded to one aren't afforded to another purely on the mode of delivery.

 

We're in agreement on that but the music industry could change the way it distributes its products (not sure how and neither are they) in which case they would be afforded the opportunity to make money on the file output. If people go up in arms about it, then you could just say well look at the film industry and it would be justified. You're not making a legal or moral argument for the film industry retaining that power, nor one against the music industry having it. You're just pointing to the practicalities of the situation.

 

This is about producing something and having copyright on it, which is a moral/legal issue.

 

That moral/legal issue hasn't changed in the decades from the cassette tape through minidisc and on to digital downloads. Of course stealing from the artists wasn't an issue back in the day because the record companies always had the next superior sounding format to push. Now they can see the gravy train slowing they're all worried about the welfare of their artists?

 

Bullshit.

 

Who has been lobbying for the changes apart from the BPI? British Music Rights and their artist Chief Executive.

 

What persuaded me this was a fair issue? My professional musician friends.

 

Both the companies and the artists are losing out.

 

They want to count their blessings they work in an industry where they continue to get a cut of what they create. If I design a new spoon that Ikea buy those fuckers pay a flat fee for my inspiration and they rake in all future profits.

[ChezGiven 0]

As I might have said before - until they explain who is stealing the extra 25p (79p Vs 99c) from UK customers they can fuck right off.

 

Do you complain about the differences in the price of big macs too?

[ChezGiven 0]

Because films aren't distributed to cinemas on DVD's that can be ripped and find there way online the day it's released. The film industry is able to time a dvd release to maximise profit from both the cinema run before the DVD release is rolled out.

 

Right, so why is it ok for them to do that and not the music companies? Why should the music company or the artist not be afforded the same opportunity.

 

You say that the musician tours but thats another thing entirely, thats a performance, which the artist quite rightly should expect to be paid for in addition to any media output.

 

The film industry gets to release the DVD and make money again, the artist gets to tour to make money again. Your view is that this is ok for one industry but not the other?

 

It's not a case of being ok for one and not the other. It's just a fact that the formats are different and the opportunities afforded to one aren't afforded to another purely on the mode of delivery.

 

We're in agreement on that but the music industry could change the way it distributes its products (not sure how and neither are they) in which case they would be afforded the opportunity to make money on the file output. If people go up in arms about it, then you could just say well look at the film industry and it would be justified. You're not making a legal or moral argument for the film industry retaining that power, nor one against the music industry having it. You're just pointing to the practicalities of the situation.

 

This is about producing something and having copyright on it, which is a moral/legal issue.

 

That moral/legal issue hasn't changed in the decades from the cassette tape through minidisc and on to digital downloads. Of course stealing from the artists wasn't an issue back in the day because the record companies always had the next superior sounding format to push. Now they can see the gravy train slowing they're all worried about the welfare of their artists?

 

Bullshit.

 

Who has been lobbying for the changes apart from the BPI? British Music Rights and their artist Chief Executive.

 

What persuaded me this was a fair issue? My professional musician friends.

 

Both the companies and the artists are losing out.

 

They want to count their blessings they work in an industry where they continue to get a cut of what they create. If I design a new spoon that Ikea buy those fuckers pay a flat fee for my inspiration and they rake in all future profits.

 

If the Spoon was that good, whats to stop you producing it yourself. In fact if the design was 'creative' it would have to revolutionise the world of Spoons, in which you'd be stupid to license out the Spoon instead of looking for a development partner.

 

Spoons

[Holden McGroin 6938]

Just get broadband with an alternative provider. The smaller ones (and/or business orientated) will not have anything in place for years.

[NJS 4446]

As I might have said before - until they explain who is stealing the extra 25p (79p Vs 99c) from UK customers they can fuck right off.

 

Do you complain about the differences in the price of big macs too?

 

I don't know - if the burger sellers all get together and impose pricing models on geographical areas based on what they can get away with and against anti-cartel laws which governments completely bottle out of taking them to task over like the bastards in the music industry do then yes I would object.

 

 

Remember the CD-Wow case - CDs sourced from countries with all royalties and taxes paid (therefore no bleating moral issues) still could not be imported into the UK because the record companies insisted that they set the price - not the free market.

 

Fuck them all.

[Happy Face 29]

If the Spoon was that good, whats to stop you producing it yourself. In fact if the design was 'creative' it would have to revolutionise the world of Spoons, in which you'd be stupid to license out the Spoon instead of looking for a development partner.

 

Spoons

 

Nothing.

 

I invite all musicians to do exactly that.

[ChezGiven 0]

As I might have said before - until they explain who is stealing the extra 25p (79p Vs 99c) from UK customers they can fuck right off.

 

Do you complain about the differences in the price of big macs too?

 

I don't know - if the burger sellers all get together and impose pricing models on geographical areas based on what they can get away with and against anti-cartel laws which governments completely bottle out of taking them to task over like the bastards in the music industry do then yes I would object.

 

 

Remember the CD-Wow case - CDs sourced from countries with all royalties and taxes paid (therefore no bleating moral issues) still could not be imported into the UK because the record companies insisted that they set the price - not the free market.

 

Fuck them all.

 

 

If the Burger sellers get together....? I'm pretty sure Big Mac sellers all fall under one umbrella organisation

 

Interesting perspective, markets good, copyrights bad. Hmmm.

[Happy Face 29]

As I might have said before - until they explain who is stealing the extra 25p (79p Vs 99c) from UK customers they can fuck right off.

 

Do you complain about the differences in the price of big macs too?

 

I don't know - if the burger sellers all get together and impose pricing models on geographical areas based on what they can get away with and against anti-cartel laws which governments completely bottle out of taking them to task over like the bastards in the music industry do then yes I would object.

 

 

You make the burgers, I'll supply the spoons for people to eat them with.

 

Kerching!

[NJS 4446]

As I might have said before - until they explain who is stealing the extra 25p (79p Vs 99c) from UK customers they can fuck right off.

 

Do you complain about the differences in the price of big macs too?

 

I don't know - if the burger sellers all get together and impose pricing models on geographical areas based on what they can get away with and against anti-cartel laws which governments completely bottle out of taking them to task over like the bastards in the music industry do then yes I would object.

 

 

Remember the CD-Wow case - CDs sourced from countries with all royalties and taxes paid (therefore no bleating moral issues) still could not be imported into the UK because the record companies insisted that they set the price - not the free market.

 

Fuck them all.

 

 

If the Burger sellers get together....? I'm pretty sure Big Mac sellers all fall under one umbrella organisation

 

Interesting perspective, markets good, copyrights bad. Hmmm.

 

That's the thing though - with orgs like the BPI and the RIAA it's like Burger King, MacDonalds and KFC all getting together - that was my point - maybe they do but they aren't as blatant as the music industry.

 

I'm not against copyright protection per se and would like to see more Radiohead type ventures but spare me the tears for the actual companies and their lobbying businesses.

[ChezGiven 0]

As I might have said before - until they explain who is stealing the extra 25p (79p Vs 99c) from UK customers they can fuck right off.

 

Do you complain about the differences in the price of big macs too?

 

I don't know - if the burger sellers all get together and impose pricing models on geographical areas based on what they can get away with and against anti-cartel laws which governments completely bottle out of taking them to task over like the bastards in the music industry do then yes I would object.

 

 

You make the burgers, I'll supply the spoons for people to eat them with.

 

Kerching!

 

Call it Pirate Burger.

[Fop 1]

Both the companies and the artists are losing out.

 

And even if that is the case (which is it patently not) that justifies violating the rights of the rest of society does it?

 

 

As I might have said before - until they explain who is stealing the extra 25p (79p Vs 99c) from UK customers they can fuck right off.

 

Do you complain about the differences in the price of big macs too?

Are you legally stopped from selling a Big Mac you legally bought in China in the UK for less than the UK retail price? Again again.

 

 

If the Spoon was that good, whats to stop you producing it yourself. In fact if the design was 'creative' it would have to revolutionise the world of Spoons, in which you'd be stupid to license out the Spoon instead of looking for a development partner.

Not so much in the new internet age, but quite a lot in the age they are trying to hang on to by fair means or foul. So again.

[Park Life 71]

Of course the hidden secret is that people don't really like buying from corporations. They imagine when they caress a cd sleave that the bond between themselves and the artist is complete.

[Fop 1]

Just get broadband with an alternative provider. The smaller ones (and/or business orientated) will not have anything in place for years.

Except once they've threaten the big companies to get on message, they threaten the rest, you can't run from bullies.

 

 

 

 

That's the thing though - with orgs like the BPI and the RIAA it's like Burger King, MacDonalds and KFC all getting together - that was my point - maybe they do but they aren't as blatant as the music industry.

 

I'm not against copyright protection per se and would like to see more Radiohead type ventures but spare me the tears for the actual companies and their lobbying businesses.

 

There's nothing like the world wide price rigging in the burger market, it's just not possible.

 

What you have to remember is that the generic drugs issue is very similar to this argument (treatment of AIDs or maximum profit = profit every single time), so you're never going to convince ChezGiven as he'd be in some way convincing himself out of a job.

 

 

In the end money talks and everyone rights and freedoms walk..... that's just how it is, until enough people stand up to them (which will and is happening).

[ChezGiven 0]

Of course the hidden secret is that people don't really like buying from corporations. They imagine when they caress a cd sleave that the bond between themselves and the artist is complete.

 

I know the amount of people on here who eschew branded clothing, new media devices and going on holiday is astounding.

[Happy Face 29]

Both the companies and the artists are losing out.

 

And even if that is the case (which is it patently not) that justifies violating the rights of the rest of society does it?

 

 

5 pages you've been fly fishing with rights violation argument and you still haven't had a single bite. I think it's time to pack up the bait box and go home for a nip of whisky in front of the fire.

 

[Park Life 71]

Of course the hidden secret is that people don't really like buying from corporations. They imagine when they caress a cd sleave that the bond between themselves and the artist is complete.

 

I know the amount of people on here who eschew branded clothing, new media devices and going on holiday is astounding.

 

You know the rules.

[Fop 1]

Both the companies and the artists are losing out.

 

And even if that is the case (which is it patently not) that justifies violating the rights of the rest of society does it?

 

 

5 pages you've been fly fishing with rights violation argument and you still haven't had a single bite. I think it's time to pack up the bait box and go home for a nip of whisky in front of the fire.

 

It's not a hook it is a cold hard fact, simple as that.

 

Which is why old Chez is ignoring me, he knows I'm completely right.

[Park Life 71]

Both the companies and the artists are losing out.

 

And even if that is the case (which is it patently not) that justifies violating the rights of the rest of society does it?

 

 

5 pages you've been fly fishing with rights violation argument and you still haven't had a single bite. I think it's time to pack up the bait box and go home for a nip of whisky in front of the fire.

 

 

You've just sharpened his next presentation for him.

[ChezGiven 0]

Of course the hidden secret is that people don't really like buying from corporations. They imagine when they caress a cd sleave that the bond between themselves and the artist is complete.

 

I know the amount of people on here who eschew branded clothing, new media devices and going on holiday is astounding.

 

You know the rules.

 

[Fop 1]

*witters*

 

Actually I wonder if your selling of your DvD technically breaches their "law"?

[Happy Face 29]

*witters*

 

Actually I wonder if your selling of your DvD technically breaches their "law"?

 

No, it doesn't.

[Fop 1]

Both the companies and the artists are losing out.

 

And even if that is the case (which is it patently not) that justifies violating the rights of the rest of society does it?

 

 

5 pages you've been fly fishing with rights violation argument and you still haven't had a single bite. I think it's time to pack up the bait box and go home for a nip of whisky in front of the fire.

 

 

You've just sharpened his next presentation for him.

 

He's good at ignoring, but not so good at addressing awkward questions, be they about Singapore relative economic size, the need to produce new drugs, the legal and moral issues of root-kits and privacy invasion, or indeed generic drugs.

 

But he's a good suit, I'll give him that.