Doonesbury

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <U_ydnbJQ3NgH-7XfRVn-sQ@rcn.net> rnorman@starpower.net writes:

> I have 4, but the youngest is an 18 pounder and too ebullient for the rest
> of the oldies. He even lulls me into petting him and then he attacks.
> Can't blame him, he's only 4 and the rest range from 10 to 16. So with
> them, 3 birds (budgie and two cockatiels), an American Eskimo, and
> Australian Cattle Dog and now a stupid red-earred slider, I've got way too
> many animals (ok, so the turtle is a reptile)

Uh . . . why don't you bring your Crest mixer over here if you want
to compare it to the Onyx? Be sure to leave plenty of food for the
animals. <g>



--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <-eydnVf4EZEw-7XfRVn-qw@golden.net> trashtrash@christian-horizons.org writes:

> And note that photocopiers have no crippling technologies implemented to
> prevent them from copying copyrighted materials.

There was a period when all copiers in government offices marked
copies near the border with "This document copied at Government
expense." While it didn't prevent copying copyrighted material, it did
deter people from using the office copier for personal copies that
would be send somewhere.

> Any small business
> with a copier could easily "steal" copyrighted magazine articles and
> even books, if they cared to go through the trouble. Now you can even
> copy magazine articles and photographs in colour.

I used to copy articles from magazines that I got in the office,
pasting (with real paste) pieces together to make a readable copy on a
couple of pages that was split into single columns scattered
thorughout the magazine after the first page or two. Then I'd throw
away the magazine. It made for better "clippings" than trying to file
a bunch of 2" wide strips of paper. But of course those were magazines
related to work that I received in the office. And it was the
Government so it was OK if they broke any of their own laws.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

dOn Fri, 04 Mar 2005 08:22:03 GMT, "David Morgan \(MAMS\)"
<mams@NOSPAm-a-m-s.com> wrote:

>
>"play on" <playonAT@comcast.net> wrote in message news:1p5g21hcbeih3hld6jpqd44f75m99fe071@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 06:11:16 GMT, "David Morgan \(MAMS\)"
>> <mams@NOSPAm-a-m-s.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"play on" <playonAT@comcast.net> wrote in message news:veqf21d7ummqrdjkm2evs71toscrpnk0e5@4ax.com...
>> >> On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 03:47:09 GMT, walkinay@thegrid.net (hank alrich)
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >play on <playonAT@comcast.net> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> I think the point he was making was that in some ways the modern music
>> >> >> industry has been based on theft from the beginning. It may have been
>> >> >> legal theft, but it was still theft, and that history doesn't earn the
>> >> >> record companies a lot of cred or sympathy for their current moral
>> >> >> stance.
>> >> >
>> >> >So let's rip off the artists now to show them damn rekurd companies just
>> >> >what we think of 'em!
>> >>
>> >> It's interesting that the companies seem to be complaining a lot more
>> >> than the artists are.
>> >>
>> >> Al
>> >
>> >Ask any artist... the company is paid damned well to represent them.
>>
>> No. The artists' lawyers do that. Do you really think the companies
>> are reacting this way because they care about the artists?
>>
>> Al
>
>The artist's attorney generally does not handle promotion & distribution.
>
>We're picking nits here.... I'll move on if you will.
>
>

Works for me =:^0

Al

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 20:32:01 GMT, "Paul Stamler"
<pstamlerhell@pobox.com> wrote:

>Because A cat goes bonkers by itself and starts doing terrible things to the
>house. Two is the optimum number. Fourteen seems a bit overboard.

I had three for a time. Pissing and scratching everywhere. I guess
they were competing for territory.

Now I'm down to one, he's good as gold. Nothing to prove, I suppose.

CubaseFAQ www.laurencepayne.co.uk/CubaseFAQ.htm
"Possibly the world's least impressive web site": George Perfect

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>>You outrightly admitted stealing music using p2p. Remember that?
>
>
>
> Yes. I am one of millions that enjoy music off of the internet.

what about the artists enjoying the rewards of their own hard work?



> I am also the person that owns over 300 purchased CD's,


well i guess if you bought 300 cd's then the rest should be free?

has a concert list
> that includes most modern rock acts, has worked for a record store for 3
> years, and has gone to school for audio engineering.

I never knew anyone who worked in a record store that did not fill out
thier music collection with cd's marked
FOR PROMOTIONAL USE ONLY < NOT FOR RESALE

> You just have to realize that the industry did not adapt in time to a new
> technology.

just because you can is not a moral reason to steal from people

I want artists to get paid using this new technology.

so fight against unauthorized file shareing
buy ALL the music you enjoy
shame those that don't
refuse to be part of the problem
George
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"George Gleason" <g.p.gleason@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:Td%Vd.323976$w62.149145@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
>>>You outrightly admitted stealing music using p2p. Remember that?
>>
>>
>>
>> Yes. I am one of millions that enjoy music off of the internet.
>
> what about the artists enjoying the rewards of their own hard work?


I don't think artists, on the whole, are against file sharing.


>> I am also the person that owns over 300 purchased CD's,
>
>
> well i guess if you bought 300 cd's then the rest should be free?


No. I purchased those CD's when bandwidth and p2p technology wasn't readily
available. And I still buy CD's when I love the album/artist.


> has a concert list
>> that includes most modern rock acts, has worked for a record store for 3
>> years, and has gone to school for audio engineering.
>
> I never knew anyone who worked in a record store that did not fill out
> thier music collection with cd's marked
> FOR PROMOTIONAL USE ONLY < NOT FOR RESALE


Managers got first dibs on those. One guy was nice enough to give me a promo
copy of my favorite band's new release one time though (thanks jay). I
literally have maybe 3 promo's max.


>> You just have to realize that the industry did not adapt in time to a new
>> technology.
>
> just because you can is not a moral reason to steal from people
>
> I want artists to get paid using this new technology.
>
> so fight against unauthorized file shareing
> buy ALL the music you enjoy
> shame those that don't
> refuse to be part of the problem


I am. By using P2P to bypass the labels that have screwed over their artists
and customers.


--
-hev
remove "your opinion" to find me:
www.michaelYOURspringerOPINION.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

hev wrote:

> I don't think artists, on the whole, are against file sharing.

Hold that thought.

> I am. By using P2P to bypass the labels that have screwed over their artists
> and customers.

You are a thief rationalizing your theft by opinion. Things
that require rationalization and justification are rarely
rational or just.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

ust because you can is not a moral reason to steal from people
>>
>> I want artists to get paid using this new technology.
>>
>>so fight against unauthorized file shareing
>>buy ALL the music you enjoy
>>shame those that don't
>>refuse to be part of the problem
>
>
>
> I am. By using P2P to bypass the labels that have screwed over their artists
> and customers.
>
>

I bet your screwing over the artists that owe their very careers to the
labels that brought them to the public eye as well
when you cut out the people that put up the money to bring a artist to
prominence your screwing over every artist who is working for that same
chance with their career

of course a artist might be happy being heard by a few dozen p2p devotees
but I bet most would rather be selling records and enjoying national and
world wide marketing, something p2p can not provide
george

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"George Gleason" <g.p.gleason@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:UI%Vd.100626$Th1.32763@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> ust because you can is not a moral reason to steal from people
>>>
>>> I want artists to get paid using this new technology.
>>>
>>>so fight against unauthorized file shareing
>>>buy ALL the music you enjoy
>>>shame those that don't
>>>refuse to be part of the problem
>>
>>
>>
>> I am. By using P2P to bypass the labels that have screwed over their
>> artists and customers.
>>
>>
>
> I bet your screwing over the artists that owe their very careers to the
> labels that brought them to the public eye as well
> when you cut out the people that put up the money to bring a artist to
> prominence your screwing over every artist who is working for that same
> chance with their career


I understand that it is a big problem... one I want to see solved as well.
But the industry had about a decades forewarning and still did nothing but
bitch and moan. They should have welcomed this new technology with open arms
and we might have been closer to a solution or even profiting from p2p at
this point.


--
-hev
remove "your opinion" to find me:
www.michaelYOURspringerOPINION.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

hev wrote:

> But the industry had about a decades forewarning and still did nothing but
> bitch and moan. They should have welcomed this new technology with open arms
> and we might have been closer to a solution or even profiting from p2p at
> this point.

And because they didn't, you should steal from them and
those who supply them the material to sell. Right.

Your logic is so feeble that you've got to be just trolling.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Bob Cain" <arcane@arcanemethods.com> wrote in message
news:d0ae8n0ncp@enews2.newsguy.com...
>
>
> hev wrote:
>
>> But the industry had about a decades forewarning and still did nothing
>> but bitch and moan. They should have welcomed this new technology with
>> open arms and we might have been closer to a solution or even profiting
>> from p2p at this point.
>
> And because they didn't, you should steal from them and those who supply
> them the material to sell. Right.
>
> Your logic is so feeble that you've got to be just trolling.


I'm not trolling. Just letting you know how the computer generation feels
about it. Kill the messenger if you wish.

--
-hev
remove "your opinion" to find me:
www.michaelYOURspringerOPINION.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

play on wrote:

> And if what "all other businesses do" is a yardstick for ethics, spare
> me. I can certainly be argued that the music business in general is
> an ethically-challenged environment when compared to others.

C'mon, Al. _All_ business, top to bottom, big to small
operates on the principle of paying as little as possible
for something it will, in turn, sell for as much as it can
get consistent with people buying it. Always has, always will.

The music business is _no_ different except for the fact
that high bandwidth personal interconnect is destroying its
ability to do business by enabling rampant theft. The only
reason that the publishing business isn't in similar trouble
is that people who still read tend to have better ethics.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Bob Cain" <arcane@arcanemethods.com> wrote in message
news:d0ae2a0n45@enews2.newsguy.com...

>> I am. By using P2P to bypass the labels that have screwed over their
>> artists and customers.
>
> You are a thief rationalizing your theft by opinion. Things that require
> rationalization and justification are rarely rational or just.


I'm telling you what got us to this point and how our generation doesn't
view it as theft. We could just as easily be singing praise about an
industry that adapted to the new technology and is showing bigger profits
than ever. They had their whole target market sitting right in front of
them, collected... like shooting ducks in a barrel.

--
-hev
remove "your opinion" to find me:
www.michaelYOURspringerOPINION.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

hev wrote:

> I'm not trolling. Just letting you know how the computer generation feels
> about it. Kill the messenger if you wish.

While yo whine about the lawless use of firearms. You are part of the
lawlessness, yet you want to make a distinction. You're getting what you
ask for, "whether you know it or not".

Enjoy.

--
ha

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"hank alrich" <walkinay@thegrid.net> wrote in message
news:1gswi9g.y1bl8a1hmr6zkN%walkinay@thegrid.net...
> hev wrote:
>
>> I'm not trolling. Just letting you know how the computer generation feels
>> about it. Kill the messenger if you wish.
>
> While yo whine about the lawless use of firearms. You are part of the
> lawlessness, yet you want to make a distinction. You're getting what you
> ask for, "whether you know it or not".
>
> Enjoy.


Next time I kill someone via downloading I'll let you know.

--

-Hev
remove your opinion to find me here:
www.michaelYOURspringerOPINION.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Bob Cain" <arcane@arcanemethods.com> wrote in message
news:d0bcda01bl3@enews1.newsguy.com...
>
>
> play on wrote:
>
>> And if what "all other businesses do" is a yardstick for ethics, spare
>> me. I can certainly be argued that the music business in general is
>> an ethically-challenged environment when compared to others.
>
> C'mon, Al. _All_ business, top to bottom, big to small operates on the
> principle of paying as little as possible for something it will, in turn,
> sell for as much as it can get consistent with people buying it. Always
> has, always will.
>
> The music business is _no_ different except for the fact that high
> bandwidth personal interconnect is destroying its ability to do business
> by enabling rampant theft. The only reason that the publishing business
> isn't in similar trouble is that people who still read tend to have better
> ethics.


I have to say I couldn't agree less. Think of a business that locked its
vendors into contracts where making money was an uphill battle. Does that
seem just to you?



--

-Hev
remove your opinion to find me here:
www.michaelYOURspringerOPINION.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hev wrote:
>
> Think of a business that locked its vendors into contracts where
> making money was an uphill battle. Does that seem just to you?

Seems to me a lot like selling to Trader Joe's or Costco.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hev wrote:

> I have to say I couldn't agree less. Think of a business that locked its
> vendors into contracts where making money was an uphill battle. Does that
> seem just to you?

Damn straight, unless arms were broken in the signing. Do
you know anyone in business who willingly pays more than
they have to for anything? Let me know if you do; there's
an opportunity there.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hev wrote:

> I think
> everyone has the right to free music.

And food, and shelter, and medical help... how wee the musicians going
to get those from your theft? Oh, nevermind, they won't.

--

ha

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Dave Martin wrote:

> And HERE'S the crux of the problem, folks. This boy wants something for
> nothing.

How about free brains? Maybe get one that isn't deeply into
rationalizing inapropriate behavior.

> I must say, though, on one level you're right. You have the right to MAKE
> music for free. You just don't have the right to steal other people's music.
> Why don't you buy a guitar and sing some songs? There's your free music. Of
> course, you'll have to spend a little time and energy learning how to play
> the guitar, and that means that it's no longer 'free'...

And then there are strings, picks, capos, fret recrowning jobs (4 of
those since I got the McCollum, less than three years ago - Lance
must've used cheap frets or something), beer, ganga (my guitar teacher),
and most of all, literally, the instrument. But it's worth every
penny...


....because of the free pussy.


I want to download free Brauners and Lawsons and Josephsons, free Great
Rivers (the electronical kind, not the squirters), free Cranesongs
(heard 'em flying over last week but they wouldn't let me dial 'em in),
free Lavry's, and more, much more, but those won't fit through my modem.

--
ha