Has recording industry stopped lawsuits? [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Has recording industry stopped lawsuits?


Romadoc
06-14-2009, 07:23
If I understand this correctly, the recording industry will no longer prosecute persons using file sharing. As stated, however, all lawsuits already filed will proceed.

The lawsuit is among the last vestiges of an anti-piracy campaign that the recording industry ultimately dropped amid widespread criticism. The Recording Industry Association of America said in December it had stopped filing lawsuits like these and would work instead with Internet service providers to cut access to those it deems illegal file-sharers. But the recording industry plans to proceed with cases that are already filed.

This excerpt was taken from an article about a woman challenging the verdict in a lawsuit involving the downloading of music.

IndyGunFreak
06-14-2009, 08:04
If I understand this correctly, the recording industry will no longer prosecute persons using file sharing. As stated, however, all lawsuits already filed will proceed.

The lawsuit is among the last vestiges of an anti-piracy campaign that the recording industry ultimately dropped amid widespread criticism. The Recording Industry Association of America said in December it had stopped filing lawsuits like these and would work instead with Internet service providers to cut access to those it deems illegal file-sharers. But the recording industry plans to proceed with cases that are already filed.

This excerpt was taken from an article about a woman challenging the verdict in a lawsuit involving the downloading of music.

Link?

IGF

Romadoc
06-14-2009, 09:37
Entire article:

Woman Who Lost File-Sharing Suit Gets Replay

Sunday, June 14, 2009

* Print
* ShareThis

AP

Jammie Thomas-Rasset is shown with her former lawyer.

MINNEAPOLIS — The Minnesota woman who became the nation's only music file-sharing defendant so far to go to trial is getting a replay two years after losing the case.

Jammie Thomas-Rasset, a 32-year-old mother of four and self-described "huge music fan," will be armed with aggressive new lawyers when her retrial begins in federal court here Monday.

The lawsuit is among the last vestiges of an anti-piracy campaign that the recording industry ultimately dropped amid widespread criticism. The Recording Industry Association of America said in December it had stopped filing lawsuits like these and would work instead with Internet service providers to cut access to those it deems illegal file-sharers. But the recording industry plans to proceed with cases that are already filed.

Thomas-Rasset is the rare defendant who has fought back.

• Click here to visit FOXNews.com's Personal Technology Center.

Music companies have filed more than 30,000 similar copyright lawsuits in recent years against people they accused of illegally swapping songs through Internet file-sharing services such as Kazaa. None of the others has made it to trial yet.

Faced with huge legal bills, most settled for an average of about $3,500, even if they insisted they had done nothing wrong. Thomas-Rasset's new lawyer, K.A.D. Camara, notes the settlements add up to more than $100 million; the RIAA contends its legal costs exceeded the settlement money it brought in.

The lawsuits have turned into a public relations nightmare for the recording industry, putting music companies in the position of going after their most ardent fans. Blogs and media reports have highlighted heavy-handed tactics against several improbable targets.

In 2006, for example, the industry dropped a lawsuit against Tanya Andersen, a disabled single mother in Oregon. Andersen said she had been misidentified and never downloaded the music she was accused of stealing. Industry representatives allegedly threatened to question her 10-year-old daughter if she didn't pay up.
Related Stories

* Convicted Music File-Sharer Granted New Trial
* Huge Music-Sharing Award May Be Overturned
* Woman Accuses Record Industry of Illegal Spying
* Lawyer: Ripping MP3s Illegal, Grounds for Lawsuit
* Judge Throws Out LimeWire's 'Antitrust' Lawsuit Against Record Companies
* Music Industry Wins $220,000 in File-Sharing Trial

And in 2007, the companies backed off their attempt to sue an elderly Texas grandmother, Rhonda Crain, who had been displaced by Hurricane Rita in 2005 and said she never downloaded music. They settled for no money, just her agreement not to download any music illegally.

Camara said he hoped to turn Thomas-Rasset's retrial into a trial against the RIAA, both before the jury and in the court of public opinion. A win by the defense, he said, could undermine the other music-sharing cases.

"What you'll see in Minneapolis will be the first battle in what we think will be a successful campaign against the recording industry," Camara said.

RIAA spokeswoman Cara Duckworth insisted the music companies will again prevail, just as they had in 2007 when a federal jury in Duluth found Thomas-Rasset violated copyrights by offering 24 songs on the Kazaa file-sharing network. She was ordered to pay $222,000 in damages, or $9,250 per song.

"The facts in evidence have not changed in this case," Duckworth said. "We're confident that a new jury will see it no differently from the first time around."

Duckworth said the group doesn't have figures on cases still pending, but the industry will press ahead with them, saying it had to pursue those "who have regularly illegally downloaded music and thumbed their nose at the law and the legal process."

Nor did Duckworth have figures on how many defendants decided to settle after Thomas-Rasset lost.

"Suffice to say, the first trial generated a fair amount of attention and certainly caused a number of people to think twice about downloading music illegally," she said.

Thomas-Rasset, who still denies any illegal song swapping, is getting a retrial after U.S. District Judge Michael Davis decided last September he erred in telling jurors the companies didn't have to prove anyone downloaded the copyright-protected songs she allegedly made available. Davis later concluded the law requires that actual distribution be shown.

The companies suing are subsidiaries of all four major recording companies, Warner Music Group Corp., Vivendi SA's Universal Music Group, EMI Group PLC and Sony Corp.'s Sony Music Entertainment.

The defense is now being handled by Camara and his partner, who agreed to take the case for free after the court last month relieved her previous attorney, Brian Toder, who had put in nearly $130,000 worth of unpaid time.

Camara, who's about to turn 25, was just 19 when he became the youngest person ever to graduate from Harvard Law School, and he graduated with high honors. He and his partner at their Houston law firm, Joe Sibley, 34, a classmate, were already involved in a couple of similar cases. He said they agreed to defend Thomas-Rasset for free in hopes of setting precedents for other cases.

On orders from Sibley, Thomas-Rasset declined to say why she's kept up the fight for so long when she could have settled for a few thousand dollars at the start.

Thomas-Rasset, who pronounces her first name as JAY'-mee, lives in the central Minnesota city of Brainerd. She said her musical tastes are "very eclectic" ranging from rock to country to classical. "It all depends on my mood and what I'm doing and who I'm with," she said. She also said she doesn't buy many CDs anymore because she spends what little discretionary income she has on concerts instead.

In the short time since they took over the case, Camara and Sibley have tried some new legal tricks, with mixed success.

On Thursday, Davis shot down their request to suppress evidence gathered by the MediaSentry anti-piracy service. The judge didn't buy Camara's claim that MediaSentry violated a federal wiretapping law and a state law regulating private detectives when it tracked down his client. Had Camara won on that point, however, the recording companies could have been left without much of a case against her or other defendants.

But the defense did manage to create at least a headache for the music labels by demanding that they produce certified copies from the U.S. Copyright Office of the copyrights on the 24 tracks in question, to prove they really do own the songs.

The industry's lawyers were caught by surprise, having gotten by with uncertified copies during the first trial. Although music companies told Davis this past Monday they weren't sure they could get certified copies in time for the new trial, Davis reminded them that they had the burden of proving they owned the copyrights. Camara said he'll seek dismissal of the case if the plaintiffs fail that test.

Corryne McSherry, a staff attorney with the digital-rights group Electronic Frontier Foundation, said the new defense team is taking a creative approach. She said it would have been interesting to see how all the cases that settled might have turned out if those defendants had free lawyers who were willing to push as hard.

"This case could end up being the tail end of a frankly shameful and certainly failed campaign to go after users," McSherry said. "Maybe this will be the coda to that long campaign."

Green_Manelishi
06-14-2009, 13:02
Faced with huge legal bills, most settled for an average of about $3,500, even if they insisted they had done nothing wrong. Thomas-Rasset's new lawyer, K.A.D. Camara, notes the settlements add up to more than $100 million; the RIAA contends its legal costs exceeded the settlement money it brought in.

"This case could end up being the tail end of a frankly shameful and certainly failed campaign to go after users," McSherry said. "Maybe this will be the coda to that long campaign."

Clinton, Bush, Frank, etc. insist they too have done nothing wrong.

So I guess "it aint be stealin if everybody be doin it."?

MavsX
06-15-2009, 16:07
i read in article this month in playboy that said the same thing. the people being sued will still be sued...they just aren't suing anybody new.

and we are talking about p2p here, not BT's or usenet

dotsun
06-15-2009, 16:59
Playboy has articles? Oh um, yeah I mean that's why I buy PB...:whistling:

minderasr
06-15-2009, 17:02
What I read was the MPAA/RIAA claim they're not pursuing any new law suits. However their actions say different.

havensal
06-15-2009, 17:50
Pandora's jar (http://hak5.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=6014) is safer anyway. :wavey:

justinsn95
06-15-2009, 18:53
Oh boo-hoo they dont make as much money as they used to. Sorry if i feel zero pity for a bunch of super rich people. It's just like that south park episode: "Stan, due to all the illegal downloading, the drummer for metallica will have to wait until next week to put in his guitar shaped swimming pool. Now do you see why downloading music is bad?"

MavsX
06-15-2009, 19:14
Oh boo-hoo they dont make as much money as they used to. Sorry if i feel zero pity for a bunch of super rich people. It's just like that south park episode: "Stan, due to all the illegal downloading, the drummer for metallica will have to wait until next week to put in his guitar shaped swimming pool. Now do you see why downloading music is bad?"

exactly right. Maybe they should not have flaunted their riches on MTV Cribs back in the day!

SKeefe
06-16-2009, 06:56
Oh boo-hoo they dont make as much money as they used to. Sorry if i feel zero pity for a bunch of super rich people.
I agree, that's why I think it shouldn't be illegal to burglarize or rob people who make over X amount of dollars.

Rise up workers of the world! :upeyes:

Green_Manelishi
06-16-2009, 15:30
Oh boo-hoo they dont make as much money as they used to. Sorry if i feel zero pity for a bunch of super rich people. It's just like that south park episode: "Stan, due to all the illegal downloading, the drummer for metallica will have to wait until next week to put in his guitar shaped swimming pool. Now do you see why downloading music is bad?"

So it's OK to steal provided the person from whom you are stealing has what you want?
I'll bet you are not-quite sure of the defininition of plagiarism, either, are you.

justinsn95
06-17-2009, 17:58
I agree, that's why I think it shouldn't be illegal to burglarize or rob people who make over X amount of dollars.

Rise up workers of the world! :upeyes:

So it's OK to steal provided the person from whom you are stealing has what you want?
I'll bet you are not-quite sure of the defininition of plagiarism, either, are you.

So neither of you have ever downloaded a song off limewire or napster or imesh or something? You're full of it. If you want to start bringing the law into this, i can do that. Here in the great state of Texas, it is not illegal (you can't be prosecuted) for driving off with less than $4.00 of gasoline. Did i pay for that gas? No. Was it mine? No. Did i steal? Not according to the law. So lets see, how much can you buy songs for? 99 cents? Hmm....:upeyes:

And i never said anything about them "having what i want". I said that regardless of what happens, they will remain superich. So yeah, hard to feel sorry for em.

Patrick Graham
06-17-2009, 19:49
When it comes to the movie and music industry I sometimes wonder who is stealing from whom.

Some of the crap they have both been putting out and calling good seems to amount to nothing less than stealing from the audience under the guise of entertainment.

kc8ykd
06-18-2009, 00:01
So neither of you have ever downloaded a song off limewire or napster or imesh or something? You're full of it. If you want to start bringing the law into this, i can do that. Here in the great state of Texas, it is not illegal (you can't be prosecuted) for driving off with less than $4.00 of gasoline. Did i pay for that gas? No. Was it mine? No. Did i steal? Not according to the law. So lets see, how much can you buy songs for? 99 cents? Hmm....:upeyes:

And i never said anything about them "having what i want". I said that regardless of what happens, they will remain superich. So yeah, hard to feel sorry for em.

You have two separate points here.

One, you consider taking something from someone else to be not stealing since it's apparently not illegal if you don't take over a certain amount? :upeyes:

Two, you believe that download songs, that you should pay to get, is ok because you believe all recording artists are rich? :upeyes:

You should know that very few are super rich, or even rich. You should know that you're also depriving the recording, mixing and mastering engineers of money. You're also depriving the promotion people and distribution people of money. Money that they use to support themselves and their families with. You are, quite literally, taking bread off someone's table with your actions.

In the end, you're not only ripping off the artists, but a lot of other people that produce and promote and distribute that music.

There's lots of options for legal downloads, more than just amazon and itunes.
You don't have any excuses to not use them, unless you just don't have any morals and are a criminal (since stealing music is well...stealing).

And no, I don't download off those places, I go to Amazon myself and have also ripped my collection of 300+ cd's to mp3 format for exclusive use in my own mp3 players. Being a Sound Engineer for a Blues band, I understand the business side of the industry and am amazed by conceptions like yours.

aspartz
06-18-2009, 00:28
My ISP called me a few weeks back saying they got a complaint from the publisher that I was BTing something from Harry Potter. Perhaps that's the next target -- the ISP's or getting them to deny you service.

ARS

ETA: I was not getting anything Harry Potter, but it was in the torrent I was getting pieces of.

justinsn95
06-18-2009, 02:16
You have two separate points here.

One, you consider taking something from someone else to be not stealing since it's apparently not illegal if you don't take over a certain amount? :upeyes:

Two, you believe that download songs, that you should pay to get, is ok because you believe all recording artists are rich? :upeyes:

You should know that very few are super rich, or even rich. You should know that you're also depriving the recording, mixing and mastering engineers of money. You're also depriving the promotion people and distribution people of money. Money that they use to support themselves and their families with. You are, quite literally, taking bread off someone's table with your actions.

In the end, you're not only ripping off the artists, but a lot of other people that produce and promote and distribute that music.

There's lots of options for legal downloads, more than just amazon and itunes.
You don't have any excuses to not use them, unless you just don't have any morals and are a criminal (since stealing music is well...stealing).

And no, I don't download off those places, I go to Amazon myself and have also ripped my collection of 300+ cd's to mp3 format for exclusive use in my own mp3 players. Being a Sound Engineer for a Blues band, I understand the business side of the industry and am amazed by conceptions like yours.

Well if you want to get technical about it then no, actually i am not stealing. According to the law, a peer to peer filesharing program is completely legal. This would be limewire and the like. When the bands of the world united and shut down napster, they were forced to define the theft, or else it couldn't be theft, now could it? So they defined what napster was doing, and it was server to client. So that's against the law. Peer to peer, is not. Yet. When it is, you will have a valid point. But at this time, the government does not define peer to peer as theft. And i know you will say something like "Well, it's still immoral and you know it". So why not make everything that's questionable illegal? We wouldn't have radar detectors, and we wouldn't have guns either. I swear there is always some pansy sticking up for corporate fatcats, even though the fatcats may be taking a dump on their heads as they speak.

kc8ykd
06-18-2009, 02:46
Well if you want to get technical about it then no, actually i am not stealing. According to the law, a peer to peer filesharing program is completely legal. This would be limewire and the like. When the bands of the world united and shut down napster, they were forced to define the theft, or else it couldn't be theft, now could it? So they defined what napster was doing, and it was server to client. So that's against the law. Peer to peer, is not. Yet. When it is, you will have a valid point. But at this time, the government does not define peer to peer as theft. And i know you will say something like "Well, it's still immoral and you know it". So why not make everything that's questionable illegal? We wouldn't have radar detectors, and we wouldn't have guns either.

I do want to get technical about it, yes, you are stealing when it comes to your example of gasoline and copyrighted material.

Taking something that isn't yours without the owner's consent is stealing.

steal
  /stil/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [steel] Show IPA ,verb, stole, sto⋅len, steal⋅ing, noun
–verb (used with object)
1. to take (the property of another or others) without permission or right, esp. secretly or by force: A pickpocket stole his watch.
2. to appropriate (ideas, credit, words, etc.) without right or acknowledgment.

You can try and justify that a million different ways in your own mind, but the fact is, it's theft, plain and simple. And since you brought up morals, I'll also bring up ethics. If this is your prime example of your morality and sense of ethics, I've got to say I'm less than impressed.

To try and stretch it to guns and radar detectors doesn't even make sense. Why do you think guns are questionable? Are you a felon or an otherwise disqualified person in possession of a gun? If not, then your legal to own one and there isn't anything 'questionable' about it. Same with a radar detector, if it's legal for you to own and use, then there isn't anything questionable about it since you are within the boundaries of the law. You should stop trying to bring other non-similar arguments into this discussion, it looks silly and looks like you are trying to distract from the topic being discussed.



A program for accessing p2p networks is, in and of itself, not bad or illegal. It's what you do with it that's wrong. There are plenty of files and torrents that are GPL'd or given away freely by their owners.

However, when you use a p2p program to facilitate your STEALING of copyrighted material, then your use of that program still isn't illegal, your actions of stealing the material are. If you want to get really technical, you could consider it wirefraud as well as theft since most likely you're using interstate communications facilities to commit theft.

Also, napster was p2p software. The really big difference between that and most networks today is the way the files available are indexed, and with torrents, how many sources the files come from.

In the case of napster, limewire and similar software clients (along with the gnutella network itself), files are still pulled from individual computers. Being that the gnutella network and protocol are opensource, anybody can write clients for it and that makes it very difficult to try and shut down (unlike with naptster which as a business contained the central indexing service as well as published the client). Either way, files are still pulled from individual computers across the network just the same.

With torrents, it's the same general idea, except your pulling parts of the file from lots of computers at the same time and there is a plethora of indexing services.

Also, the government never defined 'napster' as illegal. Napster was found to be liable for facilitating it's users committing copyright violations on a massive scale. They basically got sued out of existence. With opensource software and networks, that's a little more dificult to do, however, we're seeing attempts at it with cases like the pirate bay.

Basically, bro, your showing the world here you've got very low morals and a very questionable sense of ethics.

Again, you'll try and spin this a million different ways in your own head to try and justify it as not stealing copyrighted material, but when you remove all the excuses, your doing just that.

When you download copyrighted material and didn't pay or provide some other negotiated typed of compensation for it, then you've stolen said copyrighted material, plain and simple.


And ya, that whole argument about 'them' being super rich so they can afford to be stolen from sounds a whole lot like retribution of wealth...

South Fla
06-18-2009, 02:57
I don't download songs off the internet without paying for them, but I liken the whole P2P lawsuits to this:

Is it illegal to let someone else read your newspaper, magazine or a book after you have bought it? Same principal.

kc8ykd
06-18-2009, 03:04
I don't download songs off the internet without paying for them, but I liken the whole P2P lawsuits to this:

Is it illegal to let someone else read your newspaper, magazine or a book after you have bought it? Same principal.

In those instances though, your giving up the physical media and not retaining a copy of it yourself. You are transferring any licenses with the physical media to another singular person, and thus is why book and CD/DVD/record/tape resellers are all perfectly legal and good.

A closer example would be making exact copies of a news paper or book and distributing them to anybody who wants them.

South Fla
06-18-2009, 03:08
In those instances though, your giving up the physical media and not retaining a copy of it yourself. You are transferring any licenses with the physical media to another singular person, and thus is why book and CD/DVD/record/tape resellers are all perfectly legal and good.

A closer example would be making exact copies of a news paper or book and distributing them to anybody who wants them.

OK, I see your point. I do. But what if I get the book, newspaper or magazine back?

kc8ykd
06-18-2009, 03:11
OK, I see your point. I do. But what if I get the book, newspaper or magazine back?

As long as you give it away and don't retain a copy, it's cool. If you get the book/media back and the other party doesn't retain a copy, it's cool too. If you trade/sell/lend, whatever, it's all good as long as the party parting with the media doesn't retain a copy.

justinsn95
06-20-2009, 02:26
I do want to get technical about it, yes, you are stealing when it comes to your example of gasoline and copyrighted material.

Taking something that isn't yours without the owner's consent is stealing.



You can try and justify that a million different ways in your own mind, but the fact is, it's theft, plain and simple. And since you brought up morals, I'll also bring up ethics. If this is your prime example of your morality and sense of ethics, I've got to say I'm less than impressed.

Not really here to impress you or anyone else, this is the flippin' internet, guy. Your can preach all you like, it will never stop the millions that do this every second of every day. Point is, if it was so wrong, as you say, then good 'ol uncle sam would have put a stop to it a long time ago. Period. And you can go ahead and say "Oh yeah well what about all the other stuff uncle sam lets go on?" But we both know if it mattered, it would be stopped. Simple as that.


To try and stretch it to guns and radar detectors doesn't even make sense. Why do you think guns are questionable? Are you a felon or an otherwise disqualified person in possession of a gun? If not, then your legal to own one and there isn't anything 'questionable' about it. Same with a radar detector, if it's legal for you to own and use, then there isn't anything questionable about it since you are within the boundaries of the law. You should stop trying to bring other non-similar arguments into this discussion, it looks silly and looks like you are trying to distract from the topic being discussed.


rofl! Are you serious? You are one of those people who really doesn't believe in free speech, aren't you? Cause if you did, you would easily realize that there quite literally billions of people who believe that guns are in fact very questionable. And whether or not you think so, their opinion matters. So yes, as per those people, guns are questionable. Sorry, but you're wrong again.


A program for accessing p2p networks is, in and of itself, not bad or illegal. It's what you do with it that's wrong. There are plenty of files and torrents that are GPL'd or given away freely by their owners.

However, when you use a p2p program to facilitate your STEALING of copyrighted material, then your use of that program still isn't illegal, your actions of stealing the material are. If you want to get really technical, you could consider it wirefraud as well as theft since most likely you're using interstate communications facilities to commit theft.

Also, napster was p2p software. The really big difference between that and most networks today is the way the files available are indexed, and with torrents, how many sources the files come from.

In the case of napster, limewire and similar software clients (along with the gnutella network itself), files are still pulled from individual computers. Being that the gnutella network and protocol are opensource, anybody can write clients for it and that makes it very difficult to try and shut down (unlike with naptster which as a business contained the central indexing service as well as published the client). Either way, files are still pulled from individual computers across the network just the same.

With torrents, it's the same general idea, except your pulling parts of the file from lots of computers at the same time and there is a plethora of indexing services.

Also, the government never defined 'napster' as illegal. Napster was found to be liable for facilitating it's users committing copyright violations on a massive scale. They basically got sued out of existence. With opensource software and networks, that's a little more dificult to do, however, we're seeing attempts at it with cases like the pirate bay.

Once again, are you serious? You really think that everyone and their dam dog doesn't know what millions if not billions of people use those programs for? Including all your lawmakers and judges that you bring up? So er, while you may say that, they know. And so does everyone else. It may not be "official" but it's the reality of the situation. So you really don't have much of an argument here, im afraid.


Basically, bro, your showing the world here you've got very low morals and a very questionable sense of ethics.

Again, you'll try and spin this a million different ways in your own head to try and justify it as not stealing copyrighted material, but when you remove all the excuses, your doing just that.

I don't have to spin it a million different ways in my head to try and justify it or whatever, i just laid out for you how-it-is. You came to the wrong website to be saying that the world is (or should be) all perfect and purty.


When you download copyrighted material and didn't pay or provide some other negotiated typed of compensation for it, then you've stolen said copyrighted material, plain and simple.


And ya, that whole argument about 'them' being super rich so they can afford to be stolen from sounds a whole lot like retribution of wealth...

Something as meaningless and pointless as that shouldn't concern a flea, much less a human being. We are not talking about something that could actually have a measurable effect. But rather, something that just doesn't matter. And your argument about giving away a newspaper is just as flawed. You left out the part where the guy had already read it. He had used it's services, and paid to do so. Is the information he learned now taken out of his brain, once he has passed the newspaper on to someone else? I didn't think so. So basically, he gets to keep what he had, since he does in fact have a memory, and someone else gets to benefit without paying. Sound familiar?

kc8ykd
06-20-2009, 16:31
Not really here to impress you or anyone else, this is the flippin' internet, guy. Your can preach all you like, it will never stop the millions that do this every second of every day. Point is, if it was so wrong, as you say, then good 'ol uncle sam would have put a stop to it a long time ago. Period. And you can go ahead and say "Oh yeah well what about all the other stuff uncle sam lets go on?" But we both know if it mattered, it would be stopped. Simple as that.


So, now I'm preaching because I'm informing you that your concept of copyright infringement is totally wrong? heh.

Being in college, I'd have thought you'd understand better the benefits of p2p networking and that it's not all bad. You'd realize there are lots of great and legal uses for it. And, you'd realize how asinine it would be to 'stop it'. Or, do you want the feds 'controlling' the internet? (again, an asinine concept, considering the nature of the internet, unless you want to go live in China) Surely they teach some rudimentary class on the basics of the ineternets these days.

You're starting to sound like a big government / big brother / spread the wealth around kinda guy...


rofl! Are you serious? You are one of those people who really doesn't believe in free speech, aren't you? Cause if you did, you would easily realize that there quite literally billions of people who believe that guns are in fact very questionable. And whether or not you think so, their opinion matters. So yes, as per those people, guns are questionable. Sorry, but you're wrong again.

So, how exactly don't I believe in free speech? And how does free speech and guns relate to you thinking it's ok to steal other people's work? Again, another distraction from you believing in theft.


Once again, are you serious? You really think that everyone and their dam dog doesn't know what millions if not billions of people use those programs for? Including all your lawmakers and judges that you bring up? So er, while you may say that, they know. And so does everyone else. It may not be "official" but it's the reality of the situation. So you really don't have much of an argument here, im afraid.

Lots of people use p2p software and networks for completely legal purposes. I use them for grabbing linux distros. It's very efficient. I have yet to see an 'argument' from you that's actually relevant when it comes to thinking stealing other people's work is ok. So, if the judges and lawyers working the cases related to this matter, wouldn't it be expected they know that people use that kind of software and networks to steal stuff? I haven't seen any action against someone downloading legal material, I wonder why that is...


I don't have to spin it a million different ways in my head to try and justify it or whatever, i just laid out for you how-it-is. You came to the wrong website to be saying that the world is (or should be) all perfect and purty.

Heh, you amuse me. You've justified it in your head, that's all that counts. You contribute to the problem and steal from others. You're just demonstrating to others via this thread your low morals and ethical standards. That's cool. I don't get your "saying that the world is (or should be) all perfect and purty." statement. We both know that people steal stuff, but you are the one saying it's fine to do. I don't think Eric really is interested in people promoting illegal activities on his site, so, who's at the wrong site now?.

Something as meaningless and pointless as that shouldn't concern a flea, much less a human being. We are not talking about something that could actually have a measurable effect. But rather, something that just doesn't matter. And your argument about giving away a newspaper is just as flawed. You left out the part where the guy had already read it. He had used it's services, and paid to do so. Is the information he learned now taken out of his brain, once he has passed the newspaper on to someone else? I didn't think so. So basically, he gets to keep what he had, since he does in fact have a memory, and someone else gets to benefit without paying. Sound familiar?

Hm, I'd consider loss of CD and Digital sales to be measurable. For every person that downloads a CD illegally, that's a lost sale.

Your thought process regarding the paper is the one that's flawed. By buying a paper, you aren't purchasing a service, thus invalidating your entire argument about 'memory' and related bs. You should learn the difference between a product that is a service based vs. one that is goods based. (internet service vs. buying a car, in case you can't figure that one out)

So, I have yet to see anything other than distractions (guns and free speech) and flawed logic to advance your 'argument' that stealing and copyright theft is ok.

Feel free to bring up anything that actually relevant next time,

gh0st614
06-21-2009, 14:56
Hm, I'd consider loss of CD and Digital sales to be measurable. For every person that downloads a CD illegally, that's a lost sale.


I remember when there was a big class action lawsuit that came down the line when every cd was $19.99+ I also remember getting myself a nice $7 dollar check at the end of it because they were illegally fixing the price because the listener had to pay their fair share.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,115443,00.html

Thanks for $7 over the hundred cds I had probably purchased. CDs cost pennys to make and its worth $20 because they burned some mp3s on it for me?

My sincerest apologies to the people trying to pay their familys in the music industry. Its really a poor place to make money since everybody will be able to listen to your music for me and with the economy I dont see the music industry booming. If your a musician its because you love music not because you want to get rich. If you want to make money hustle knock off basketball shoes at a flea market.

kc8ykd
06-21-2009, 15:52
I remember when there was a big class action lawsuit that came down the line when every cd was $19.99+ I also remember getting myself a nice $7 dollar check at the end of it because they were illegally fixing the price because the listener had to pay their fair share.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,115443,00.html

Thanks for $7 over the hundred cds I had probably purchased. CDs cost pennys to make and its worth $20 because they burned some mp3s on it for me?

My sincerest apologies to the people trying to pay their familys in the music industry. Its really a poor place to make money since everybody will be able to listen to your music for me and with the economy I dont see the music industry booming. If your a musician its because you love music not because you want to get rich. If you want to make money hustle knock off basketball shoes at a flea market.

Ya, I remember the price fixing thing, the publishing houses really put a dent in it for everybody. But, that also demonstrated how little the actual artists and engineers make from each sale.

The actual cd's cost more than pennies to make, for a small run (few hundred) you're looking at +2$ each for reproduction. Add on to that promo and distribution, paying the performers, paying the recording engineers, mastering engineers and mixing engineers, paying for instruments and equipment.

Also, cd's aren't pressed from mp3's. Just an example, the masters for the cd I'm currently working on total about 60gb for 28 tracks so far.

The big lables typically front all the cash for all that and throw an advance to the artists (since they don't actually make anything till the cd's are actually sold). The artists have to repay that money over time or those fees are taken out of their checks and they don't make anything from the sales till the fees are repaid.

We saw artists like Nine Inch Nails and a couple others (Radiohead also iirc) try and bypass the big publishing lables by releasing under their own label and distro system. NIN even put out an album where you pay what you think it was worth. (could have been Radiohead)

The system isn't perfect, far from it, but things like digital distribution (amazon/itunes) have really helped. I mean, why buy an entire album if you're only interested in a couples songs from it?

People stealing music just makes slim margins even slimmer and things tougher for everybody involved in the industry in this economy.

gh0st614
06-21-2009, 16:36
Thats the main problem everybody is getting paid too much money all the way up the chain before the artists even see a dime. I never really implied it the artists fault but it is the consequences of the empires these industrys built.

kc8ykd
06-21-2009, 18:50
Thats the main problem everybody is getting paid too much money all the way up the chain before the artists even see a dime. I never really implied it the artists fault but it is the consequences of the empires these industrys built.

ya, those big recording labels have really taken a lot of fun and ethics out of the industry for sure.

They were great in the beginning because it cost so much to get all the promo and vinyl pressed, but now with digital distribution and the internet it's a lot more economical to go it alone, but it's still pretty hard to go without a big name label.


It's a lot like what we see with ticketmaster and live shows. Although with TM, you see them selling 1/2 the tickets to scalpers when they initially go on sale, so they're contributing an even larger amount to the problem, rather than being part of the solution. (along with charging another %50 in just 'fees', lame) Another side to the live shows with TM is that without them, it's pretty hard to sell tickets efficiently since they have the biggest infrastructure.

Personally, I think TM itself is pretty ripe for an antitrust suit to bring live show prices back down to earth.

gh0st614
06-21-2009, 19:18
Somebody just needs to want to compete. TM has been the only real name in the game. Some venues down here on campus will book big shows and sell tickets at the door. Probably works out better for all involved.

Ticketmaster is just like PayPal except there are now other names in the game in eBay due to Paypal getting sued..its all just a matter or time.

Alot of local rap artists put in work selling their own pressed cds. These things have printed inserts and printed discs half the time and Im sure there costs are closer to a dollar a piece...sell them for $5-$10 maybe get rid of 10,000 copies in a couple months. Thats $50,000 and they did it themselves. I have yet to be approached by any other genre trying to sell a cd unless its some festival.

Hustling and making that dollar should be taught to all children. Give a man a fish feed him for a day, teach a man to fish feed him for a lifetime.

Our education system is built to give us a little bit of everything a broad and very basic intelligence. We are learning the same stuff our grandparents did but the world isnt the same place our grandparents lived in. Too bad education reform is normally seen as something sinister with ill intentions.

Man my ass got off topic.

This is the way I see it in the music business, you want to support a artist goto their concert and buy a t shirt and a cd there. You want to support Recording labels you buy a cd at best buy

kc8ykd
06-21-2009, 20:07
Somebody just needs to want to compete. TM has been the only real name in the game. Some venues down here on campus will book big shows and sell tickets at the door. Probably works out better for all involved.

Ticketmaster is just like PayPal except there are now other names in the game in eBay due to Paypal getting sued..its all just a matter or time.

Alot of local rap artists put in work selling their own pressed cds. These things have printed inserts and printed discs half the time and Im sure there costs are closer to a dollar a piece...sell them for $5-$10 maybe get rid of 10,000 copies in a couple months. Thats $50,000 and they did it themselves. I have yet to be approached by any other genre trying to sell a cd unless its some festival.

Hustling and making that dollar should be taught to all children. Give a man a fish feed him for a day, teach a man to fish feed him for a lifetime.

Our education system is built to give us a little bit of everything a broad and very basic intelligence. We are learning the same stuff our grandparents did but the world isnt the same place our grandparents lived in. Too bad education reform is normally seen as something sinister with ill intentions.

Man my ass got off topic.

This is the way I see it in the music business, you want to support a artist goto their concert and buy a t shirt and a cd there. You want to support Recording labels you buy a cd at best buy

Your last paragraph is the absolute truth about artists and labels.

One problem with TM, is that they have exclusive agreements with lots of venues which makes it impossible to sell tickets without them :(

Booking agents try and do the same for venues too. We had a venue that exclusively booked through one guy. But, when you went through that guy, you had to sign an exclusive agreement for 2 years that you couldn't book through anyone else and he wanted a %20 cut / gig. All just to play one night at a place.

That 50k has to cover recording studio time, engineering and mixing, along with mastering time. And, if you're not doing it in a regular studio you've got a pretty hefty investment in pc and interface gear along with all the stuff would be in a regular studio, snakes, cables, monitors, headphones, headphone amps, stands, software, plugins, recording location and lots of other stuff.

The industry isn't cheap for recording or playing live. I could go to www.zzounds.com with $5 million and still not get the gear I want to put together a good (not great) pa and small studio. And that's without instruments or people to play them.

justinsn95
06-22-2009, 15:37
So, now I'm preaching because I'm informing you that your concept of copyright infringement is totally wrong? heh.

Being in college, I'd have thought you'd understand better the benefits of p2p networking and that it's not all bad. You'd realize there are lots of great and legal uses for it. And, you'd realize how asinine it would be to 'stop it'. Or, do you want the feds 'controlling' the internet? (again, an asinine concept, considering the nature of the internet, unless you want to go live in China) Surely they teach some rudimentary class on the basics of the ineternets these days.

You're starting to sound like a big government / big brother / spread the wealth around kinda guy...

OBVIOUSLY i know about P2P and all it's uses. Are you really going to sit here and try to convince me that it's main bulk usage by americans is not just downloading MP3's? Please.




So, how exactly don't I believe in free speech? And how does free speech and guns relate to you thinking it's ok to steal other people's work? Again, another distraction from you believing in theft.

Sorry, "i thought you had been to college" and garnered some basic reading comprehension. You know what i was talking about. I was using that to outline my point...




Lots of people use p2p software and networks for completely legal purposes. I use them for grabbing linux distros. It's very efficient. I have yet to see an 'argument' from you that's actually relevant when it comes to thinking stealing other people's work is ok. So, if the judges and lawyers working the cases related to this matter, wouldn't it be expected they know that people use that kind of software and networks to steal stuff? I haven't seen any action against someone downloading legal material, I wonder why that is...


Yeah i know. I'm one of em. I dual boot with linux all the time. you do realize that we "computer guys" are less than 1% of this deal, don't you? Cause you talk like we make up a significant portion. We don't. And obviously i do not think that "stealing other people's work" is ok. If i go into a store, and eat a candybar, and walk out without paying, that was wrong. Cause the poor owner had to take a loss out of his own pocket. BUT, what you are saying it more like this: I go to my fence. I poke my head through my neighbor's gate. I breath in some of his air, which is technically his cause it's on his property line. Then i cross back over to my side, and exhale. That's how much of a difference it makes. So go ahead, talk about all the "little guys" that lose money when an MP3 is downloaded. You know what, they really do have my pity. Im sorry they had to lose. But for someone who would seem to dislike something he deemed immoral, you certainly stick up for all those immoral, unethical corporate record label fatcats that you two were just discussing. Kinda makes me wonder how you can defend immorality, and also preach against it at the same time. Cause that's what you are doing, cause they (the fatcats) are the ones who lost so much. Not the "poor starving artist who was just trying to feed his family. And little jimmy had a broken leg and got no christmas presents this year. /sob" rofl!

What a joke.



Heh, you amuse me. You've justified it in your head, that's all that counts. You contribute to the problem and steal from others. You're just demonstrating to others via this thread your low morals and ethical standards. That's cool. I don't get your "saying that the world is (or should be) all perfect and purty." statement. We both know that people steal stuff, but you are the one saying it's fine to do. I don't think Eric really is interested in people promoting illegal activities on his site, so, who's at the wrong site now?.

I say again, i dont have to justify anything. It's the way it is, it ain't going anywhere, you may as well get used to it. Millions of people do this every second of every day. You must be one of those people who hates change, huh. Even when it's for the better. And your argument fails here, yet again when the other member talked about his $7 check. Well, that was what we call a ruling. And it proves my point. They were ripping people off (essentially) and they got caught. But no, we should give that money back right? They earned that fair and square! It's ok if the little guy get's F@#$!%, as long as the greedy immoral unethical fatcats get to keep their 5th home, right?

Again, im sorry about the engineers who had to take a pay cut. But guess what, that's life. And, that's business. You advocate capitolism so much, (so do i) well then you should know that it's OK when something new comes out, that put's something old out of business. That's the way of the world, dude. It was bound to happen eventually and if you don't think so, then i really have no business arguing with you.



Hm, I'd consider loss of CD and Digital sales to be measurable. For every person that downloads a CD illegally, that's a lost sale.

First of all, let's clarify something. I have never in my life "downloaded a CD". I don't think i know anyone who has. What i have done, is downloaded a song. So you see, there is a difference. What i did was, i broke up their little way that they wanted to sell it. They wanted, to give me 1 song that i liked, and make me pay for $20 for the other 18 songs that i didn't like. Hmm, i think not, when there is another option. Sorry for not wanting to be locked in to their way, or no way.


Your thought process regarding the paper is the one that's flawed. By buying a paper, you aren't purchasing a service, thus invalidating your entire argument about 'memory' and related bs. You should learn the difference between a product that is a service based vs. one that is goods based. (internet service vs. buying a car, in case you can't figure that one out)


Oh yeah. Try to call up any newspaper and tell them that they don't offer a service, and watch yourself get laughed into oblivion. Better yet, by your logic, that newspaper need only sell one copy! I mean, one guy can buy it, then let's all just pass it around the whole town! They don't need to make any money! Big cities would have to sell like 20 copies, but i think we can manage that. ...You defeat your own argument with this...


I have yet to see anything other than distractions (guns and free speech) and flawed logic to advance your 'argument' that stealing and copyright theft is ok.


Feel free to bring up anything that actually relevant next time,



Feel free to use basic reading comprehension next time.

kc8ykd
06-22-2009, 21:34
OBVIOUSLY i know about P2P and all it's uses. Are you really going to sit here and try to convince me that it's main bulk usage by americans is not just downloading MP3's? Please.

Reading comprehension? Where did I try and convince you that the main bulk of usage of p2p is for any particular purpose at all? Oh wait, I didn't. Perhaps you should leave your words in your mouth and out of mine.



Sorry, "i thought you had been to college" and garnered some basic reading comprehension. You know what i was talking about. I was using that to outline my point...

Oh, I got what you were talking about, it was a dodge and distraction from the discussion.




Yeah i know. I'm one of em. I dual boot with linux all the time. you do realize that we "computer guys" are less than 1% of this deal, don't you? Cause you talk like we make up a significant portion. We don't. And obviously i do not think that "stealing other people's work" is ok. If i go into a store, and eat a candybar, and walk out without paying, that was wrong. Cause the poor owner had to take a loss out of his own pocket. BUT, what you are saying it more like this: I go to my fence. I poke my head through my neighbor's gate. I breath in some of his air, which is technically his cause it's on his property line. Then i cross back over to my side, and exhale. That's how much of a difference it makes. So go ahead, talk about all the "little guys" that lose money when an MP3 is downloaded. You know what, they really do have my pity. Im sorry they had to lose. But for someone who would seem to dislike something he deemed immoral, you certainly stick up for all those immoral, unethical corporate record label fatcats that you two were just discussing. Kinda makes me wonder how you can defend immorality, and also preach against it at the same time. Cause that's what you are doing, cause they (the fatcats) are the ones who lost so much. Not the "poor starving artist who was just trying to feed his family. And little jimmy had a broken leg and got no christmas presents this year. /sob" rofl!

What a joke.

More dissimilar analogies (seriously, breathing your neighbor's air and exhaling on your own property? dude, come on). Really, bring something relevant next time.

Oh, and last I checked, you're the one defending 'immorality' by condoning the theft of copyrighted material and gasoline.



I say again, i dont have to justify anything. It's the way it is, it ain't going anywhere, you may as well get used to it. Millions of people do this every second of every day. You must be one of those people who hates change, huh. Even when it's for the better. And your argument fails here, yet again when the other member talked about his $7 check. Well, that was what we call a ruling. And it proves my point. They were ripping people off (essentially) and they got caught. But no, we should give that money back right? They earned that fair and square! It's ok if the little guy get's F@#$!%, as long as the greedy immoral unethical fatcats get to keep their 5th home, right?

Is 'hate change' code for 'condemning theft'? Then I guess I'm guilty. You on the other hand.. I fail to see how stealing copyrighted material is 'for the better'.

Hm you mention a ruling...I wonder if I can find any of those...

Oh wait, here we go:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9792252-38.html?tag=txt
The Bush administration said on Friday that the recording industry's $222,000 courtroom victory shows that the legal system is working against peer-to-peer pirates.

"Cases such as this remind us strong enforcement is a significant part of the effort to eliminate piracy, and that we have an effective legal system in the U.S. that enables rights holders to protect their intellectual property," said Chris Israel, the U.S. Coordinator for International Intellectual Property Enforcement, to CNET News.com.

Chris Israel, U.S. Coordinator for International Intellectual Property Enforcement, in a file photograph

President Bush named Israel, formerly a senior Commerce Department official, to the key copyright post in July 2005. He has an MBA from George Washington University and, before joining the Bush administration, worked for Time Warner's public policy arm.

Israel's comments come a day after the Recording Industry Association of America won a landmark jury verdict in a Minnesota federal court against a woman accused of sharing copyrighted songs on the Kazaa file-trading network.

The Bush administration has adopted a generally expansive view of copyright law, including writing trade deals that include anti-circumvention restrictions. In 2005, the president signed into law the Family Entertainment and Copyright Act, which slaps some file-sharers with additional penalties.

Israel also said: "Piracy impacts many of our most innovative industries, costs American jobs and is a huge threat to our economic competitiveness."




Again, im sorry about the engineers who had to take a pay cut. But guess what, that's life. And, that's business. You advocate capitolism so much, (so do i) well then you should know that it's OK when something new comes out, that put's something old out of business. That's the way of the world, dude. It was bound to happen eventually and if you don't think so, then i really have no business arguing with you.

So, the engineers should just expect their material to be stolen and be fine with it? Dude, seriously? Imagine if you were in their shoes and someone was ripping off your work and products. I'd really be interested to learn some more about your work experiences (seriously, not making fun or joking or anything, just for some perspective of where you're coming from with all this)


First of all, let's clarify something. I have never in my life "downloaded a CD". I don't think i know anyone who has. What i have done, is downloaded a song. So you see, there is a difference. What i did was, i broke up their little way that they wanted to sell it. They wanted, to give me 1 song that i liked, and make me pay for $20 for the other 18 songs that i didn't like. Hmm, i think not, when there is another option. Sorry for not wanting to be locked in to their way, or no way.

So, it's not *so bad* that you steal copyrighted materials since you do it one song at a time? Is this like that stealing gasoline $4 at a time 'argument'? You know, you can d/l one song at a time via lots of different places, like Amazon and iTunes (iTunes has been around since '01, so that kind of kills distribution methodology as an excuse for you if you've stolen material since then)

Oh yeah. Try to call up any newspaper and tell them that they don't offer a service, and watch yourself get laughed into oblivion. Better yet, by your logic, that newspaper need only sell one copy! I mean, one guy can buy it, then let's all just pass it around the whole town! They don't need to make any money! Big cities would have to sell like 20 copies, but i think we can manage that. ...You defeat your own argument with this...

Stay in school, it will pay off in the end. :wavey:


Feel free to use basic reading comprehension next time.

:rofl:

Seriously, any valid points? None? dude, come on... I'm still waiting to hear a good reason to condone copyright theft like you do... You've got to have something better than what you've posted so far. :wavey:

gh0st614
06-22-2009, 23:26
Well there was never actually a ruling, it settled out of court.

justinsn95
06-22-2009, 23:44
Reading comprehension? Where did I try and convince you that the main bulk of usage of p2p is for any particular purpose at all? Oh wait, I didn't. Perhaps you should leave your words in your mouth and out of mine.





Oh, I got what you were talking about, it was a dodge and distraction from the discussion.






More dissimilar analogies (seriously, breathing your neighbor's air and exhaling on your own property? dude, come on). Really, bring something relevant next time.

Oh, and last I checked, you're the one defending 'immorality' by condoning the theft of copyrighted material and gasoline.





Is 'hate change' code for 'condemning theft'? Then I guess I'm guilty. You on the other hand.. I fail to see how stealing copyrighted material is 'for the better'.

Hm you mention a ruling...I wonder if I can find any of those...

Oh wait, here we go:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9792252-38.html?tag=txt






So, the engineers should just expect their material to be stolen and be fine with it? Dude, seriously? Imagine if you were in their shoes and someone was ripping off your work and products. I'd really be interested to learn some more about your work experiences (seriously, not making fun or joking or anything, just for some perspective of where you're coming from with all this)




So, it's not *so bad* that you steal copyrighted materials since you do it one song at a time? Is this like that stealing gasoline $4 at a time 'argument'? You know, you can d/l one song at a time via lots of different places, like Amazon and iTunes (iTunes has been around since '01, so that kind of kills distribution methodology as an excuse for you if you've stolen material since then)



Stay in school, it will pay off in the end. :wavey:




:rofl:

Seriously, any valid points? None? dude, come on... I'm still waiting to hear a good reason to condone copyright theft like you do... You've got to have something better than what you've posted so far. :wavey:

Ugh... Sigh... /facepalm. I guess you are just missing the whole point? My point is, it's so damn irrelevant, that it really shouldn't even be considered true theft. Anyone can call something theft. But when it's as pointless as this, well, what's the point? Like i said. I agree that theft is completely immoral. It's just that i dont really define this as theft. And as we both know, even the law is having trouble putting it's finger down on it. So you can call me names or whatever you want, but you know i have a point. It's back to the whole - little jimmy had a broke leg and got no christmas presents or medical care, cause daddy the engineer made $34.50 an hour instead of his old rate, which was $36.75. I don't know who cares.

kc8ykd
06-23-2009, 00:12
Ugh... Sigh... /facepalm. I guess you are just missing the whole point? My point is, it's so damn irrelevant, that it really shouldn't even be considered true theft. Anyone can call something theft. But when it's as pointless as this, well, what's the point? Like i said. I agree that theft is completely immoral. It's just that i dont really define this as theft. And as we both know, even the law is having trouble putting it's finger down on it. So you can call me names or whatever you want, but you know i have a point. It's back to the whole - little jimmy had a broke leg and got no christmas presents or medical care, cause daddy the engineer made $34.50 an hour instead of his old rate, which was $36.75. I don't know who cares.

Wow, just ... wow.

Btw, never called you any names bro, you're the one condoning copyright theft and admitting to it. It's your words from your mouth, not mine.

And, on top of all that, now you want to belittle sound engineers?
(still waiting to hear about your work experiences..)

Stay classy,

justinsn95
06-23-2009, 00:18
What could my personal work experiences possibly have to do with any of this? Perhaps it is you, who is trying to distract from the point of the conversation.

kc8ykd
06-23-2009, 00:21
Well there was never actually a ruling, it settled out of court.

I couldn't find anything to that effect,

I found this from 10/4/07:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9791383-7.html
UPDATE at 8:46 p.m. PDT: A Minnesota woman must pay $220,000 to six of the top music labels after a federal jury found on Thursday that she violated their copyright.

and then this from 6/18/09:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10268199-93.html?tag=mncol;mlt_related
Jammie Thomas-Rasset was found guilty of willful copyright infringement on Thursday in a Minneapolis federal court and must pay the recording industry $1.92 million

I believe that last one was posted in GNG the other day too.

kc8ykd
06-23-2009, 00:32
What could my personal work experiences possibly have to do with any of this? Perhaps it is you, who is trying to distract from the point of the conversation.

Like I said man, so I could gain some perspective on where you're coming from.

Here, I'll list you mine:

From age 16 to 18, I worked for a computer/network consulting company and worked with mostly realtors and lawyers.

From 18-20 I did consulting in the same field

From 20 to 28 I was a network engineer for a tier 2 internet service provider. I was also the facilities manager for a data center that had about 400 servers and 600mb of transit. I worked with mostly OSPF, IGRP, ATM, ISIS, BGP routing as well as standard lan issues such as vlanning, cabling, site planning and maintenance (cooling, generator, battery plant, inside power, etc...)

From 28 to 31 (now) I've been a live sound engineer, as well as a recording engineer and mixing engineer for a Blues band.


So, you see my experiences, how about yours?

pkn.glock23
06-23-2009, 00:41
It is wrong , But so is charging $15 for a Plastic Disk that costs .01 Why is that price Justified ? Manufacturing? Shipping and handling? True True , but what about the Old $9 Cassette Tape that Cost’s about $9 to make. The record companies have robbed people from day one.

justinsn95
06-23-2009, 00:49
Like I said man, so I could gain some perspective on where you're coming from.

Here, I'll list you mine:

From age 16 to 18, I worked for a computer/network consulting company and worked with mostly realators and lawyers.

From 18-20 I did consulting in the same field

From 20 to 28 I was a network engineer for a tier 2 internet service provider. I was also the facilities manager for a data center that had about 400 servers and 600mb of transit. I worked with mostly OSPF, IGRP, ATM, ISIS, BGP routing as well as standard lan issues such as vlanning cableing, site planning and maintenance.

From 28 to 31 (now) I've been a live sound engineer, as well as a recording engineer and mixing engineer for a Blues band.


So, you see my experiences, how about yours?

So that's why you care so much about this, when no one else does. And i wasn't demeaning sound engineers. I was just saying that they probly get paid a lot already, and i highly doubt they took some kind of massive lifestyle change over it. But, you can answer that, can't you? Have you gone from making $500/hr to $4.25/hr?


Just for you, my work history is as follows:

Aril 2 1998 (first day i was legally able to work due to age) - Sept 5 2004

Flowers MFG co. Started as Laborer, did shift lead, supervisor, security, and human resources before the place burned to the ground on sept 5 2004. Laid off.

Unemployed for about 4 months before i found a job managing a local weightlifting Gym. So something like... feb 06- feb 07 i worked at Titan fitness before that place went out of business and closed.

Unemployed for 3 months before the GF's dad offerend a job roughnecking on his rig. Did that till April of 08, when suddenly it got real old when a guy died on the opposite shift. So i decide the only way to find a decent job again was to go to school. have been there full time ever since. GF is a nurse so she gets good pay and we can make it by, till i grad.

Now i can see why you have your point of view, but i don't see how my point of view has been skewed. Unless, maybe the periods of unfortunate (and unavoidable) unemployment drive me to seek cheap or free stuff. I guess that could be it...

kc8ykd
06-23-2009, 00:53
It is wrong , But so is charging $15 for a Plastic Disk that costs .01 Why is that price Justified ? Manufacturing? Shipping and handling? True True , but what about the Old $9 Cassette Tape that Cost’s about $9 to make. The record companies have robbed people from day one.

You forget to include,
Studio time+engineer
post recording engineering
mastering
cover art
duplication
distribution
promotion
management
any studio talent used
pay the band/artist

I could see the rub, if you could spit out blank cd's and have them magically appear on a store shelf with music on them, but that's not how it works. Although, with some of the quality of music available these days, it wouldn't surprise me if that actually happened sometimes (read: anything with autotune :ack:).

kc8ykd
06-23-2009, 01:18
So that's why you care so much about this, when no one else does. And i wasn't demeaning sound engineers. I was just saying that they probly get paid a lot already, and i highly doubt they took some kind of massive lifestyle change over it. But, you can answer that, can't you? Have you gone from making $500/hr to $4.25/hr?


Just for you, my work history is as follows:

Aril 2 1998 (first day i was legally able to work due to age) - Sept 5 2004

Flowers MFG co. Started as Laborer, did shift lead, supervisor, security, and human resources before the place burned to the ground on sept 5 2004. Laid off.

Unemployed for about 4 months before i found a job managing a local weightlifting Gym. So something like... feb 06- feb 07 i worked at Titan fitness before that place went out of business and closed.

Unemployed for 3 months before the GF's dad offerend a job roughnecking on his rig. Did that till April of 08, when suddenly it got real old when a guy died on the opposite shift. So i decide the only way to find a decent job again was to go to school. have been there full time ever since. GF is a nurse so she gets good pay and we can make it by, till i grad.

Now i can see why you have your point of view, but i don't see how my point of view has been skewed. Unless, maybe the periods of unfortunate (and unavoidable) unemployment drive me to seek cheap or free stuff. I guess that could be it...

Ya, see, you were demeaning the engineers with your snide comments and you don't know how much nor how they get paid.

Unfortunately, I can't discuss my pay due to agreements with my current employer. Now that I think about it, I've had to sign an NDA (and usually a non-compete) with just about every employer I've ever had except for when I was consulting on my own, heh.

Put it this way, to produce and sell a CD without the help of a big label means margins are slim all the way around. Promo and management are expensive, and gear is expensive, crazy expensive. And you have to have decent gear to get decent sound (I mean, who wants to buy a CD of a band that sounds like it was made in a garage with one mic?) Everything is self financed, everything.

Need that drum mic kit? It's $400 for 4 mics (I prefer at least 6 to 12) and guess who pays for it? Not the label. Cables and stands so you can actually use them? There's another 2-300$ (audio interfaces/ recorders/etc, all extra too, and not cheap)

On top of that, time investment, all around. For the engineers and the artists, doing take after take to get it perfect. People don't work for free.

When do we see a return on that investment? CD sales. Digital downloads.

A normal studio is in the same boat, everything they buy is self financed, but they get a set rate per hour, but, they have to have the gear to accommodate the setup, which means a pretty hefty initial investment. Then, engineering, location, maintenance, stuff breaks and needs to be replaced.


The upside,

I'm guessing the last sentence in your post is the key to your view. Times are tough man, there's no getting around it. But that still doesn't make it right to steal other people's work. I mean, I wouldn't walk into a grocery store and steal someone's merch, just cause I was hurting for cash same as I wouldn't go to TPB and torrent, say, Visio or Office because I couldn't afford them. There's great alternatives available.

Just because times are tough doesn't mean you have to lower your morals and stoop to doing things that others without morals are doing. It's the herd mentality. And, just because others are doing it, doesn't make it right, and doesn't mean you have to follow along with them.

I bet you didn't go out looting after the hurricanes down in TX. You probably saw others doing it, knew it was wrong, and choose not to follow them down that path putting your morals and standards first....


Be different, stay legal, support the music you like, use services like Pandora radio to check out things you might be interested in so you know your investment in music won't be wasted on a bunch of stuff you don't like or want, and do the right thing.

BTW, speaking of frugal, there's a woot off going on now :)
www.wooters.us / www.wootalyzer.com (don't tell anyone)

justinsn95
06-23-2009, 15:56
Well, you can at least say if you, (or any other engineers who you may know) have taken a major lifestyle change since the advent of napster and the like. Or p2p or anything that involves downloading without paying. I get the feeling that it's all just the fatcats crying cause now instead of having 10 billion in the corporate bank account, now they have 6. If that's the case, then boo-hoo, cry me a river. Sorry but i think you will find that society as a whole has no pity or sympathy for the super rich, who take a hit, cry about it, yet still have enough to remain super rich.

Now, as i said, all the "little guys" like you and your help will always have my sympathy as you cant stand to lose near as much.

gh0st614
06-23-2009, 16:11
I couldn't find anything to that effect,

I found this from 10/4/07:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9791383-7.html


and then this from 6/18/09:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10268199-93.html?tag=mncol;mlt_related


I believe that last one was posted in GNG the other day too.


I was talkin regards to my $7 refund check. shoulda clarified better.

kc8ykd
06-23-2009, 18:19
I was talkin regards to my $7 refund check. shoulda clarified better.


Ah, no biggie :)

I think the same thing may have happened regarding DVD's as well, I can't remember specifically tho..

kc8ykd
06-23-2009, 18:28
Well, you can at least say if you, (or any other engineers who you may know) have taken a major lifestyle change since the advent of napster and the like. Or p2p or anything that involves downloading without paying. I get the feeling that it's all just the fatcats crying cause now instead of having 10 billion in the corporate bank account, now they have 6. If that's the case, then boo-hoo, cry me a river. Sorry but i think you will find that society as a whole has no pity or sympathy for the super rich, who take a hit, cry about it, yet still have enough to remain super rich.

Now, as i said, all the "little guys" like you and your help will always have my sympathy as you cant stand to lose near as much.

One big problem is having the resources to fight illegal downloads. The RIAA represents the industry and their funding is provided by judgements as well as coming from major labels.

The little guy, the regular artist, even the big artist, or even a single label or two simply don't have the resources to fight the fight.

I don't agree with their methods, but they're the only ones trying to get the message out. I wish they'd focus more on digital distribution options rather than suing people.

Personally, I always hated buying an entire import cd ($20+) for just the one or two songs I wanted. But now, I can spend just the one or two bucks to get what I want.

And, artists don't make near as much as you think. For every one who's 'rich' there are hundreds of thousands who live gig to gig (paycheck to paycheck, if you will) trying to make ends meet.

justinsn95
06-28-2009, 01:34
I understand that. And you're right it's sad if they don't get to get paid. Anyone who does not get to get paid or get's significantly less then they should have has my sympathies cause i have been there, done that. Separate industry but the feeling is the same anywhere you go. But that still does not answer my question. You can talk about this without violating your contract, as it could not possibly give me any idea as to what your pay could be. Cause there are varying lifestyles.

So, did you, or did any other engineer that you know, have to make a lifestyle change since the advent of napster and the like? Surely you must know someone who was an engineer in the mid '90s. It wasn't that awful long ago. So, did that person have to take a significant enough pay cut, to be called a "Lifestyle change"? A small example would be if i made $20/hr, but my company was bought out by another and the new company thinks that my job is only worth $10/hr so that's what i make now. I know that's against the law without good reason but you get the idea.

kc8ykd
06-28-2009, 05:18
I understand that. And you're right it's sad if they don't get to get paid. Anyone who does not get to get paid or get's significantly less then they should have has my sympathies cause i have been there, done that. Separate industry but the feeling is the same anywhere you go. But that still does not answer my question. You can talk about this without violating your contract, as it could not possibly give me any idea as to what your pay could be. Cause there are varying lifestyles.

So, did you, or did any other engineer that you know, have to make a lifestyle change since the advent of napster and the like? Surely you must know someone who was an engineer in the mid '90s. It wasn't that awful long ago. So, did that person have to take a significant enough pay cut, to be called a "Lifestyle change"? A small example would be if i made $20/hr, but my company was bought out by another and the new company thinks that my job is only worth $10/hr so that's what i make now. I know that's against the law without good reason but you get the idea.


A quick couple of things since I'm tired from the gig last night.

1. You don't know the terms of my agreement and all I'm going to say is that I'm compensated for my work.

and

2. I don't discuss the income/lifestyles of those that I know, it's just bad form. Just as they wouldn't discuss my income/lifestyle either, whether 'anonymously' or not.



This whole discussion boils down to this, do you believe that stealing the copyrighted works of others is wrong.

Personally, I'm not a big fan of stealing other people's stuff, whether tangible or intangible, just not cool move in my book, morally and ethically. And, just because others do it doesn't mean I have to sacrifice my own principals to follow their bad examples.

justinsn95
06-29-2009, 08:53
A quick couple of things since I'm tired from the gig last night.

1. You don't know the terms of my agreement and all I'm going to say is that I'm compensated for my work.

and

2. I don't discuss the income/lifestyles of those that I know, it's just bad form. Just as they wouldn't discuss my income/lifestyle either, whether 'anonymously' or not.



This whole discussion boils down to this, do you believe that stealing the copyrighted works of others is wrong.

Personally, I'm not a big fan of stealing other people's stuff, whether tangible or intangible, just not cool move in my book, morally and ethically. And, just because others do it doesn't mean I have to sacrifice my own principals to follow their bad examples.

Bang. I finally hit the right question. That's what i thought. :cool:

kc8ykd
06-29-2009, 14:39
Bang. I finally hit the right question. That's what i thought. :cool:

Lol wut?

justinsn95
06-30-2009, 00:04
I think you know. I think we both know. Your reluctance to talk about it just helps to reinforce what i always suspected. That no lifestyle change did in fact happen, and that you're actually complaining about nothing. Thin air. You see, i don't have to hear it from your mouth to learn what "sound engineers" make. Every industry has standards and i found out the one for yours with ease. Now obviously i can never figure out what you yourself bring home. But frankly, i couldn't care any less. After some research, i found out that "sound engineers" took no major lifestyle change since the advent of the internet. In fact, they have seen steady rises in pay, much like any other industry out there needing semi-skilled labor. So your floundering like a politician only helped me understand that much more. Plus, I know some darn fine people. I don't know a single on that thinks talking about industry pay standards is "bad form" rofl! I can tell you that a man that i know, somewhere in the world, make $31 an hour. Can you ever, ever, ever know who he was or what he does? Or anything at all? No. So this was just a pi$$ poor excuse to weasel out of the argument.

Now, even having said that, i still agree that theft is wrong. Of course it is. You are correct in assuming that i would never have looted homes in New Orleans. However, don't you think that allowing limewire and the like to exist is exactly like saying, "Here, you may own this marajuana. Don't smoke it, cause it would be wrong to get high. But own it all you like." Well if they said that, what the hell do you think people are going to do with it? They are going to smoke the damn weed. (im not a pothead, just an example) So the same thing is happening with P2P, is it not? The lawmakers are saying "Ok. Here is this very powerful tool that you can use from the comfort of your own home. BUT! Do not use it to break the law by infringing on copyrights." PFFFFT!! What are the odds? They are not serious. They can't be. It's insulting to act like they are. So relying on the lawmakers and their ilk is completely pointless, they will not help you, and they don't care about you. And thus using laws, or court cases, or anything like that to aid in your argument is fruitless.

kc8ykd
06-30-2009, 00:54
I think you know. I think we both know.

I hate to be blunt, but I'll tell you what I know. You think you know a lot more than you actually do.

In addition to the limits of my agreements, I don't discuss those personal aspects of my life on the ineternets, never have, never will. Others feel comfortable doing it, and more power to them, but that's them and not me. Just like how you believe that stealing from others is OK. (have fun when an employer finds your screen name and finds this thread, it's great use when interpreting a perspective employee's sense moral character)


Your reluctance to talk about it just helps to reinforce what i always suspected. That no lifestyle change did in fact happen, and that you're actually complaining about nothing. Thin air. You see, i don't have to hear it from your mouth to learn what "sound engineers" make. Every industry has standards and i found out the one for yours with ease. Now obviously i can never figure out what you yourself bring home. But frankly, i couldn't care any less. After some research, i found out that "sound engineers" took no major lifestyle change since the advent of the internet. In fact, they have seen steady rises in pay, much like any other industry out there needing semi-skilled labor.

blah, see above, oh, and you're comment about semi-skilled labor is added fun too !

So your floundering like a politician only helped me understand that much more.

Floundering? lol, dude, you're the one condoning (borderline promoting) illegal activities here, not me. (stealing gas and copyrighted material, what?) Again I ask, who's on the wrong board?

Plus, I know some darn fine people. I don't know a single on that thinks talking about industry pay standards is "bad form" rofl!

Your words can stay in your mouth and out of mine, thanks! I don't follow industry standards and I don't care to discuss those people that I know in it, sorry if my principals are too high for you, but, I suspect yours are a lot lower than I think.


I can tell you that a man that i know, somewhere in the world, make $31 an hour. Can you ever, ever, ever know who he was or what he does? Or anything at all? No. So this was just a pi$$ poor excuse to weasel out of the argument.

Don't really care, but thanks for sharing! (and for the annoying distractions from the real discussion here, you know, the one where you're trying to argue that stealing gas and copyrighted materials, the works of others, is ok)

Now, even having said that, i still agree that theft is wrong. Of course it is. You are correct in assuming that i would never have looted homes in New Orleans.

ORLY? I'm really kinda wishing I would take back my statement about that because now I'm not so sure.

However, don't you think that allowing limewire and the like to exist is exactly like saying, "Here, you may own this marajuana. Don't smoke it, cause it would be wrong to get high. But own it all you like."

Have fun 'not allowing' things on the internet, especially p2p protocols. Seriously, take that interets 101 class again, it might help for you to understand a bit about how the internet actually works.


Well if they said that, what the hell do you think people are going to do with it? They are going to smoke the damn weed. (im not a pothead, just an example) So the same thing is happening with P2P, is it not?

Another terrible attempt at a parallel, and another failure (and another attempted distraction).

The lawmakers are saying "Ok. Here is this very powerful tool that you can use from the comfort of your own home. BUT! Do not use it to break the law by infringing on copyrights." PFFFFT!! What are the odds? They are not serious. They can't be. It's insulting to act like they are. So relying on the lawmakers and their ilk is completely pointless, they will not help you, and they don't care about you. And thus using laws, or court cases, or anything like that to aid in your argument is fruitless.

Hm... well, so, are you implying that the internet was created with the intent to allow people to steal copyrighted material? Or that, that was something they should have thought about during it's infancy back in '74 when the RFC for TCP/IP was published? I'm a little unclear about what you're trying to say here.

The industry isn't relying on lawmakers, that's why they've got the RIAA. The lawmakers have done their job, he laws are already in place, but, as you know (and probably contribute to, considering you're attitude here and the things you've posted), the laws are being broken broken.

I'm still waiting for some sort of real argument from you, but so far, it's all been distraction and thinly veiled insults.




Oh, and it seems you did answer my question (which I don't believe your answer), to which, I pose another. If you agree that theft is wrong, then why do it? And why condone theft, which you're trying so desperately to do. Do you believe that theft is OK under certain conditions? Is that how you make it right in your head?

If you're going to steal music, why not steal someone's identity? Why not steal someone's child? WHERE DOES IT END?!?!

See what you're 'arguments' look like? :rofl:



Just for a minute, I'll delve into the absurd as you continually do, and ask the question:

Why do you support terrorism? Why do you hate America? (http://www.interpol.int/Public/ICPO/speeches/SG20030716.asp)

justinsn95
06-30-2009, 01:51
Wow, looks like i hit a nerve with that one. :wow: And no, i am not insulting you with the words semi skilled labor. Look it up. My instructor defines the I.T job that i will be going into as semi skilled labor. See I don't have a problem with the truth, looks like you do though. Sorry you took offense at what you and i both are. :upeyes:

And you have "moral character." Great. Im happy for you. Although trying to dismiss all of my arguments with what some would call intelligent bull$hit is not really helping your case. The fact that you define theft differently than i do does not make me some kind of hitler, regardless of what you may say. But, you have already told me everything i need to know. You are a sound engineer. That is why you care, when no one else gives a rip lol. I bet you anything that 90% of the people on this site have, or regularly do download songs that they like. Argue all you want, but it's the nature of the beast. Even in the hypothetical scenario that they went ahead and legalized it (not saying they ever will) you, I'm sure, would still be crying about it.

And i love the joke about one of my future employers (who statistically would likely be a song downloader) finding this thread. And giving a damn. Cause that's all it is, a joke. Go ahead and act like they will. You're hilarious. :rofl: First of all, Justinsn95 is not my real name. Neither is Justin. Neither is n95. I guess we are somewhat similar in one way. I don't really want everyone and their dog knowing my real full name and identity either. Even if they can look me up if they really tried. If you actually knew anything about the internet, you would know that as well. So slinging your little insults about how i should "stay in school and learn more" only serves to make you look bad. You know as well as i do that a person with the proper know how can look people like you and me up, and garner much information that we would rather them not. It's easy.

Don't have to put words in your mouth, not when you say them first. You specifically said the words bad form. Did you not? Regardless of the subject matter you said it, no i was not putting words in your mouth. Plus you got it all wrong about "gas theft" i was merely using that as an example of how something that is tangible, worth a lot of money (especially these days) and needed is legal to take in the event that you are basically... stranded and desperate. Maybe it's just me having sympathy for someone who was in need, but if i was a gas station owner i would not try to prosecute someone who needed a very small amount of gas. Technically i couldn't in texas, but still i wouldn't. Im just not that big of a... well you get the idea. And no, it is not something that would happen to me non-stop, all day, every day till my gas station was in the poor house. Im sure that's what you were about to say, isn't it. That the people downloading songs are just killing you. That's why you're so reluctant to talk about your job like it's some big secret lol.

kc8ykd
06-30-2009, 02:25
Wow, looks like i hit a nerve with that one. :wow: And no, i am not insulting you with the words semi skilled labor. Look it up. My instructor defines the I.T job that i will be going into as semi skilled labor. See I don't have a problem with the truth, looks like you do though. Sorry you took offense at what you and i both are. :upeyes:

And you have "moral character." Great. Im happy for you. Although trying to dismiss all of my arguments with what some would call intelligent bull$hit is not really helping your case. The fact that you define theft differently than i do does not make me some kind of hitler, regardless of what you may say. But, you have already told me everything i need to know. You are a sound engineer. That is why you care, when no one else gives a rip lol. I bet you anything that 90% of the people on this site have, or regularly do download songs that they like. Argue all you want, but it's the nature of the beast. Even in the hypothetical scenario that they went ahead and legalized it (not saying they ever will) you, I'm sure, would still be crying about it.

And i love the joke about one of my future employers (who statistically would likely be a song downloader) finding this thread. And giving a damn. Cause that's all it is, a joke. Go ahead and act like they will. You're hilarious. :rofl: First of all, Justinsn95 is not my real name. Neither is Justin. Neither is n95. I guess we are somewhat similar in one way. I don't really want everyone and their dog knowing my real full name and identity either. Even if they can look me up if they really tried. If you actually knew anything about the internet, you would know that as well. So slinging your little insults about how i should "stay in school and learn more" only serves to make you look bad. You know as well as i do that a person with the proper know how can look people like you and me up, and garner much information that we would rather them not. It's easy.

Don't have to put words in your mouth, not when you say them first. You specifically said the words bad form. Did you not? Regardless of the subject matter you said it, no i was not putting words in your mouth. Plus you got it all wrong about "gas theft" i was merely using that as an example of how something that is tangible, worth a lot of money (especially these days) and needed is legal to take in the event that you are basically... stranded and desperate. Maybe it's just me having sympathy for someone who was in need, but if i was a gas station owner i would not try to prosecute someone who needed a very small amount of gas. Technically i couldn't in texas, but still i wouldn't. Im just not that big of a... well you get the idea. And no, it is not something that would happen to me non-stop, all day, every day till my gas station was in the poor house. Im sure that's what you were about to say, isn't it. That the people downloading songs are just killing you. That's why you're so reluctant to talk about your job like it's some big secret lol.


Sorry, bro, no nerve hit, just calling out your remarks for what they are, plain and simple.

All the stuff in the middle is more spaff, except the part where you try and re-define the meaning of theft, that's quite amusing to see..

It's also amusing to see you think you have any idea what my job, or the job of any other recording, mixing, producing, mastering, or live sound engineer entails considering you've never done them. I'm not going to tell you what it's like to be a student, oh, well, maybe I could since I've been one, hm...

And, you added all that stuff regarding my thoughts about me talking about people that I know. I consider it bad form to talk about others lifestyles and pay, but, that's just me. You can continue to do it all you want and I still won't hold it against you.

And then you justify stealing gas some more....booring...

It's not killing me that people d/l songs, you're just projecting, you've been doing it all through this discussion. It happens, that's life bro.

I'm more than happy to talk about my job, but there are certain aspects I don't discuss, mainly, compensation. And, I don't discuss my 'lifestyle' in general on the internets.

Ask me about compressors, software, hardware, boards, mics, cables, whatever you want, that's more than fun.


Well, this conversation has become quite circular with you still trying to justify theft, and now, with the added benefit of your trying to move the goal posts as well as injecting as much emotion into the subject as you can.

If you'd like to really discuss this, as adults, some time shoot me a PM, but this round and round with terrible tangents is just wasting my time now.


Have fun,




oh, and here's some upeyes cause they're fun !

:upeyes::upeyes:

(look, I used two, that means I'm twice as cool)

justinsn95
06-30-2009, 03:03
Yeah, this is what im used to from you. Calling my arguments pointless as you fail to address them. And i don't have to have done your job to be able to gain a basic idea of what it's like. There you go thinking it's some big secret again lol. For example, i mentioned before that i was in Human Resources. As well as security. Have you ever been? I take it that you havn't as you did not list them under what jobs you have had. But you know, i bet you can pretty well imagine what's involved, can't you? I probly hired some people, i probly managed an employee database. I probly helped out with payroll and raises. When i was in security i probly watched out for crooks. I probly helped install and maintain security systems as well as monitor suspected "problem employees", don't you think? Maybe i checked people's pockets that set off the metal detector? Perhaps escorted people out sometimes or notified the police? I mean, isn't that something that you can imagine someone in security doing? You can, can't you. So while I obviously couldn't possibly know your daily routine, I get the idea.

But, since in this post i am addressing that particular point, i am sure you will say i am somehow dodging the argument or something like that. Say that all you want, as you avoid them. Plus you still don't get it do you. I am not talking about stealing the gas. Wow, maybe your definition of theft is actually thinking that i stole if i breathe air on my neighbors land with out him knowing. And when the law says it's acceptable. I already told you, several times, that it is not theft according to the state of texas if the amount is less than what the state has set forth. This is to help PEOPLE IN NEED. IT IS NOT TO HELP THEM STEAL. But you like to flip flop this, don't you? See according to you, when the law rules in your favor, by god you better believe it's theft. But when the law rules the other way, (as in the gasoline example) somehow it's different for you, isn't it? Thats a mightly big double standard you got there.

I may have been wrong on the amount, i will admit that much. I believe now that it is whatever amounts to 1 gallon. So currently, no more than $2.50. But go ahead, say that im avoiding the real issue when you wont even admit that i am right about the question that i asked you. You have not, and will not be, taking a major lifestyle change due to people downloading music. Thus your pity card falls to the floor in failure. Give me a reason not to think so. But you can't can you? You just try to fall back on some idea that your job is somehow some kind of secret (it's not, i know a sound engineer, granted i have not talked to him in 8 years)and that you do not want to talk about your pay, that im not even asking about. I can respect that you do not talk about your situation. Typically, i do not talk about mine either. Unless it couldn't possibly matter, under any circumstance. Like this.

kc8ykd
06-30-2009, 03:06
I take back the part about me being done with this.

I do have one last question, Why do you hate Glocktalk?

(please excuse my lame attempt at using mspaint to censor out the "bad" words)
http://i40.tinypic.com/2saxkjq.jpg


And, in case you think this is a hoax, joke, photoshop or whatever, I've got more screen shots of that thread as well as an unedited pdf of it.
Here is the link to the thread http://www.dfwstangs.net/forums/showthread.php?p=5775129
with a couple of your gems quoted by other members in case you try and go back and edit them.

If you don't like this place so much, why do you stick around?
(and, what do you have against vets?)

justinsn95
06-30-2009, 03:13
Thanks again for proving my point, and that i did indeed hit a nerve. :rofl: See if i hadn't, you would never have posted that. You would have just blew me off as someone who you didn't care about the opinion of. So go ahead, cry me a river and tattle tale like a little kid and post up all the rest that you want. I knew from the beginning that you can find my screen name anywhere. I have used this name countless times. I also knew that the members there sent me here! :rofl: So yeah, more pointlessness. Actually i would watch what you post around here, i just came off a ban for something like that.

Sigh... not war vets... i thought you said you knew internets? Vets of the site, OBVIOUSLY... /facepalm

See what im saying about google? It's a good tool huh?

kc8ykd
06-30-2009, 03:18
Thanks again for proving my point, and that i did indeed hit a nerve. :rofl: See if i hadn't, you would never have posted that. You would have just blew me off as someone who you didn't care about the opinion of. So go ahead, cry me a river and tattle tale like a little kid and post up all the rest that you want. I knew from the beginning that you can find my screen name anywhere. I have used this name countless times. I also knew that the members there sent me here! :rofl: So yeah, more pointlessness. Actually i would watch what you post around here, i just came off a ban for something like that.

Sigh... not war vets... i thought you said you knew internets? Vets of the site, OBVIOUSLY... /facepalm

Again bro, no nerves to hit. You're really projecting on that. You didn't PM me before that last post about random stuff, so you obviously aren't interested in carrying out a meaningful discussion.

I found your other posts amusing and since you were bringing up so many unrelated things to the discussion, I thought I'd insert one myself, to add.. 'perspective'.

Have fun,



Oh, and I really am not interested in reading posts by you after reading what you wrote about GT in that other forum, so I just clicked that handy 'ignore' button.

justinsn95
06-30-2009, 03:22
Hey go read the rest of what i said, and see if you like that. :embarassed:


Took you this long to put me on ignore? Man a new record! And boo hoo, did someone have an opinion that you didn't share? Im so sorry. Oh and have fun on your wii forums, and your XD forums. Also have fun living in... well i'll leave that part out. You seem like a private person. I do have some class, after all.

Hey i even made a new thread over there, about this thread! Lets see if they like it. But man, in regards to that pic that you posted, just look at the sheer amount of people who had been to jail, over there! That's a lot more than the people here admitted to...hehe