[Time Warrior]

Originally Posted by valis

way I see it, why should someone go into somebody else's house and tell them how to rearrange their furniture? This is Mike's site, and if he want's to put documents detailing the mating habits of the Peruvian Dancing Llama, that's his prerogative.

Our goal is not to tell anyone how to do anything. I posted the original article that I did because both Tech Guy and the mindsets over at BRIAA not only mostly (but not completely) agree, but even when they did not agree -- it impressed me as to the level of tact and intelligence that he used to address the issues from his point of view -- and I desired to know more of his views. So we are not telling him now to rearrange his furnature -- we are simply inquiring to receive more information about said arrangement.

Dave aka Twarrior
Boycott RIAA

[Time Warrior]

Originally Posted by iltos

agreed, v. i don't understand the all of it, but my sense of it is that the thread starter feels unjustly condemned by mike's other site, and is presenting a defense....

one that mike acknowledges without animosity.

The glass being half full or half empty is up to you. We simply wish to know more of Mike's thoughts on the mater. Aside from Dreddsnik's reasons for posting it in this forum -- and all RIAA propaganda and political concerns aside -- the whole reason the issue even exists, is technology. Computers are being used. Software is being used. This is just as much of a technical issue as it is a political one. Most (but not all) of us over at BRIAA are also, to one level or another, computer technicans. You're not dealing with a bunch of 14 year old AOLers.

Dave aka Twarrior
Boycott RIAA

[Time Warrior]

Originally Posted by valis

I saw that Mike acknowledged without animosity, and that's something I've always admried in him. Very equananimous, Mr. Cermak. I cannot say that I would have responded the same, but I would hope so.

Bottom line, stealing IS illegal, and whether or not it's copyright infringement or intellectual theft, it's still stealing in the eyes of the law.

Whether you concider stealing to be an act that requires physical involvement, or an act that does not require any sort of physical intervention -- Mike's ability to be civil and tactful is the reason I wrote an article about his other site and his views in the first place. If he was just another ranter talking for the sake of talking, I wouldn't have bothered.

Both BRIAA and Tech Guy.org have the same priority goal in common -- the civil exchange and discussion of information for the bennefit of the users on the site. Being from the heyday BBS Scene -- in my experiences heated flame wars have been fought over far less important issues -- including but not limited to what BBS Software is or is not better than another, what computer and / or operating system is superior to the rest, etc..

It is our hope that both the users and Administration here are well beyond that sort of pointlessness and are capable of participating in a productive threat about this topic.

Dave aka Twarrior
Boycott RIAA

[Time Warrior]

Originally Posted by wacor

Well I do have a comment that might be appropriate should this get testy. I comes from the now fired coach of the Michigan State football team.






http://www.statenews.com/print.phtml?pk=27439

Well then I hope that most here do not see a person or people merely holding one opinion or another and having posted that opinion in an open and public forum as having crapped on anyones floor. That would certianly give me doubts as to how this site conducts itself and as to whether or not it truly is a valued or valid resource for the aquisition and exchange of information if something so simple could incite a comunity into a fit of fury.

That would be about as stupid as a MAC User going into a Tech Forum largely made up of PC Users and getting flamed for making a statement about MAC Hardware or Software, when this hypothetical forum in this example had nothing posted about it being a "PC Hardware and Software Only" Forum. Even if it had been posted in this non-existent and hypothetical environment -- the MAC User having missed the memo also would certainly not be an offense deserving of such harsh retaliation.

Dave aka Twarrior
Boycott RIAA

[Time Warrior]

Originally Posted by gbrumb

Problem is that you are mixing two different sets of terminology. Stealing isn't found in the criminal code; there is larceny or theft or such similar legal definitions. Stealing is a layman's method of defining theft and too loose to conform to defined criminal behavior. Copyright infringement can be the legal equivalent to theft but, again, there is a use of differing terminologies. Larceny and theft come from old English common law and are centuries old. There meaning evolved into the present day criminal definitions. Not so with copyright infringement, which a statutorily created concept in the law. As such it wasn't bound by the precedent of old English law which didn't fit the concept of copyright to begin with. For simple illustration, theft takes place against the tangible whereas copyright infringement takes place against the intangible.

Both, however, can be morally wrong.

Debating semantics is counter productive to any thread, regardless of topic. The best course of action would be to enveavor to steer clear of personal opinion and bias as much as is humanly possible, proceeding with only facts and cited sources for those facts -- such is the policy of BRIAA when articles are posted. Now, I'm not telling anyone how to run their backyards -- it's simply a bit of friendly advice that encourages a benneficial exchange of data.

Dave aka Twarrior
Boycott RIAA

[Time Warrior]

Originally Posted by bassetman

I believe the term you (or they) were looking for is "Medieval".

"Damnit, Jim! This is a message forum, not a Spelling B!" -Something Dr. McCoy likely would have said

:-)

Dave aka Twarrior
Boycott RIAA

[Time Warrior]

Originally Posted by Time Warrior

Whether you concider stealing to be an act that requires physical involvement, or an act that does not require any sort of physical intervention -- Mike's ability to be civil and tactful is the reason I wrote an article about his other site and his views in the first place. If he was just another ranter talking for the sake of talking, I wouldn't have bothered.

Both BRIAA and Tech Guy.org have the same priority goal in common -- the civil exchange and discussion of information for the bennefit of the users on the site. Being from the heyday BBS Scene -- in my experiences heated flame wars have been fought over far less important issues -- including but not limited to what BBS Software is or is not better than another, what computer and / or operating system is superior to the rest, etc..

It is our hope that both the users and Administration here are well beyond that sort of pointlessness and are capable of participating in a productive threat about this topic.

Dave aka Twarrior
Boycott RIAA

THREAD about this topic. Typos are apparently a biznatch -- especially the ones that end up spelled right but vastly change the context!

Dave aka Twarrior
Boycott RIAA

PS -- instead of ****** for what the Admin thinks are innapropriate words, perhaps a replacement system (i.e - the F-ing Word gets changed to "fracking" or "freakin", etc..

[Dreddnik]

I made that links page a few years ago (2002 maybe?)... since then, I've tried to remove the dead links, but I didn't reevaluate the existing ones. When I first went to the anti-RIAA page, they were only bashing the RIAA for (in my opinion) rightfully suing people who stole copyrighted material. If that's not still the case, I'll certainly remove the link.

Yes, they should rightfully sue those who Infringed on someones copyright.
They should also be required to prove those allegations though.

Could you ... prove .. your innocence ?

All they have is an IP and a printed list of files. If they have more, they have defied
court order after court order to avoid producing it.

The IP .....
So far there have been at least 4 contested cases ( which the RIAA dropped their suit )
in which the holder of that IP could NOT have been the correct party ( the named party
was deceased .. never owned a PC etc .. ).

The IP addy is NOT a solid identifier.

But how do you PROVE that you are innocent ??

Well obviously .. you go to court.

Will you represent me for free GBrumb, against a Multi-Million dollar corporate cartel ?
I personally could not afford the legal costs to prove my innocence.
The RIAA legal team is using a marvellous strategy of stalling, to drive the opposition
into the financial ground, so they simply don't have the resources to continue to fight.

Looking at this strategy, which option is prettier ?
Settling for 5,000, even though you commited NO infringement ?
Fighting to prove your innocence on a $ 13.00 an hour salary ??

Here you will find out about the cases that ARE being contested ...

http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/

In one of these cases, the RIAA hired HDD 'expert' ADMITTED to the court that
he looked at the personal e-mail and other private information, completely unrelated
to the case.

It's not as cut and dry, black and white , as you would like to believe.


Now, those who are reading this think about something ....

1. How many reading this have Copyrighted media files on their machine, AND
have them .. completely legally ?
2. We DON'T know exaclty what criterion the RIAA uses to choose victims, they have
YET to produce any of that info in the discovery process.
3. If you recieved one of their supoenas ( extortion letters ) could YOU afford to
prove your innocence ?

THAT is the trouble with the suits.

[Dreddnik]

1. How many reading this have Copyrighted media files on their machine, AND
have them .. completely legally ?

I need to correct this mistake.

The ONLY POSSIBLE WAY to have music or move files legally on your PC ...

Downloaded from an INDUSTRY SANCTIONED service.
Downloaded from an Independent ( NON RIAA ) artist that allows it, as in
Emusic or Dmusic. ( sMANY of these same artists are available for download
from P2P services like kazaa etc .. as well )

If you have music on tour HDD ripped from a CD you own, due to a technicality,
you still can be sued.
Fair use allows you to rip purchased music, however ...
the only way to do this is to circumvent the DRM on the CD, a practice made illegal
by the DMCA.

You have still committed an actionale offense.
You will still have to go up against a multi-million dollar cartel to prove you innocence.

hmmm.

Now,
the REAL reason the RIAA want to kill P2P 9 in my opinion ) ...
Competition.

The industry has made ALL of the same death cries .. many times before.

I'll go back to Radio.
This was also supposed to be the death of music.
Back then the industry was denied, what happened then ?
Payola was born.
The industry realized what marvellous potential radio had as a marketing tool,
so once they realized they could not eliminated, they put all of their resources into
CONTROLLING it .
Now, if you are not affiliated in some way with an RIAA member ( including a simple
distribution deal ) you WILL NOT be heard on the radio. If they don't own it, they won't
allow you to hear it.
P2P changed that, the way radio did.
Comepletely unaffiliated artists could be heard, right next to RIAA' product' , and in
many cases be PREFERRED. EMI is CLAIMED to be number 3 in sales, but that's false ..
Independet artist sales are actually number 3, beating EMI. But the industry refuses
to acknowledge this. If you're not theirs, you're not 'legitimate'.
So, look at what they are doing, suing the major P2P outlets, BUYING them out, and
reawakening them, with ONLY their own little club, once again locking out those who
DO NOT want to associate with them.

Since the Major Labels are NOT going broke, the only REAL reason for criminalizing
P2P is, in fact ... Control.
They are losing it , again.
They will do ANYTHING to get it back.

[iltos]

Originally Posted by Dreddnik

Since the Major Labels are NOT going broke, the only REAL reason for criminalizing
P2P is, in fact ... Control.
They are losing it , again.
They will do ANYTHING to get it back.

i'm not as well versed in the legal end of this arguement as many here, and i do find the rules as they apply to tsg to be both appropriate for this place in time and constructive to the purpose and professionalism of this site.

but i also believe that the web is probably the greatest tool in history for giving voice and opprotunity to the "masses"...a lot of folks here call me an idealist: it's a label i wear with some pride, even tho it exposes my ignorance continuously

in general, tho, i find myself against almost every effort of big business and it's sidekick, big governement, to control the voice and opprotunity that technology affords us.

the arguement that companies deserve compensation -because, without it, innovation is stifled- cuts both ways.....much of what we see on the web today was developed by "small time" entrepenuers seeing a way to further the proliferation of the individual's voice and opprotunity here....certainly many of them did it with a view towards financial gain, but some where simply idealists....same as me, but some techincal expertise

the idea that the web should be managed to suit the current standards of business, or with an eye to whatever fears that business or government sees down the road, is, too me, the dull roar of the status quo....

[GoneForNow]

Originally Posted by Time Warrior

Debating semantics is counter productive to any thread, regardless of topic. The best course of action would be to enveavor to steer clear of personal opinion and bias as much as is humanly possible, proceeding with only facts and cited sources for those facts -- such is the policy of BRIAA when articles are posted. Now, I'm not telling anyone how to run their backyards -- it's simply a bit of friendly advice that encourages a benneficial exchange of data.

Dave aka Twarrior
Boycott RIAA

If you believe my post was about semantics then you missed the boat. You can't have an intelligent discussion/debate/discourse if one or more of the parties involved are misusing legal terminology. The law is precise in the meanings place upon legal terms as well as the affect these terms have when discussing their ramifications. The point of my post was and is to point out that you must (let me repeat) must have a common point of reference when batting about legal terminology. Otherwise your discussion devolves into valley talk for sure, like totally.

[GoneForNow]

Originally Posted by Dreddnik

Will you represent me for free GBrumb, against a Multi-Million dollar corporate cartel ?

You mean would I do it again, having done so several times in the past.

[Dreddnik]

You mean would I do it again, having done so several times in the past.

Excellent.
So,
After visiting ..
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/

and looking over some of these cases,

do you feel, as I do, that in the cases of the RIAA lawsuits, that the playing field is
FAR from level ?

Perhaps you will be inspired to seek out some victims in your area ?

All it would take is one case to actually go to completion, to settle things one way
or another.

[GoneForNow]

Originally Posted by Dreddnik

Excellent.
So,
After visiting ..
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/

and looking over some of these cases,

do you feel, as I do, that in the cases of the RIAA lawsuits, that the playing field is
FAR from level ?

Perhaps you will be inspired to seek out some victims in your area ?

All it would take is one case to actually go to completion, to settle things one way
or another.

The playing field has never been level, nothing new in that revelation.

[Dreddnik]

The playing field has never been level, nothing new in that revelation.