Re: Music: Rent Vs Own


Travelinman wrote:
> In article <1125161967.368730.263400@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> steve.travis@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> > Travelinman wrote:
> > > In article <1125152509.453251.125350@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> > > steve.travis@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > >
> > > > Travelinman wrote:
> > > > > In article <znu-6EE62A.00192527082005@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> > > > > ZnU <znu@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > In article <nowhere-0D470C.23104226082005@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> > > > > > Travelinman <nowhere@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > In article <znu-7920C6.00083127082005@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> > > > > > > ZnU <znu@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In article <nowhere-21C9FC.22582526082005@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> > > > > > > > Travelinman <nowhere@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > First, you've never demonstrated that it creates monopoly
> > > > > > > > > markets.
> > > > > > > > > In
> > > > > > > > > fact, this is demonstrably false.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Second, you've never demonstrated that the music market is any
> > > > > > > > > different
> > > > > > > > > than a wide range of other markets.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Finally, you've never demonstrated that it would be immoral
> > > > > > > > > even if
> > > > > > > > > your
> > > > > > > > > contentions were true.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I see you're resorting to the old meta-debate. If you can't win
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > actual debate, go find another sub-threat and start the same
> > > > > > > > arguments
> > > > > > > > there by claiming you have won it. Repeat as necessary.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > OK, Edwin.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think you're a bit confused. Meta-debating is one of Edwin's
> > > > > > classic
> > > > > > tactics.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This particular meta-debate ends here; I'm done responding to this
> > > > > > sub-thread.
> > > > >
> > > > > You're the one who can't stick to a topic. Let me summarize the
> > > > > discussion:
> > > > >
> > > > > Me: Stealing music is both illegal and morally wrong.
> > > > >
> > > > > You (and others): You can't treat music like physical property. Music
> > > > > is
> > > > > very different.
> > > > >
> > > > > Me: Please explain why music is inherently different than physical
> > > > > property in a way that affects the morality of stealing it.
> > > >
> > > > All this interesting debate aside, here's a few interesting questions.
> > > >
> > > > Before the advent of the internet/file sharing, most teenagers would
> > > > make what they call Mix tapes. Some of the songs would be dubbed off
> > > > other tapes, and some would be recorded right off the radio. They
> > > > would then put these tapes in the Walkmans (TM) and enjoy their tunes.
> > > >
> > > > We ALL did that (and if anyone says they didn't they are either liars
> > > > or they couldn't afford the dual tape deck to do it, or couldn't figure
> > > > out how to do it), and it wasn't such a big deal. Recording companies
> > > > didn't piss and moan about lost sales to this (at least not as loudly
> > > > as they are today) and the sales of LPs and Tapes didn't suffer much.
> > >
> > > Actually, it was always known that this was illegal - at least by people
> > > honest enough to care about it. For example, I used to be a DJ in a
> > > youth center. Some of the kids asked for copies of all the music - and I
> > > refused.
> >
> > You failed to address the issue. BTW, you were a DJ? (I bet you just
>
> Of course I addressed the issue. You claimed that theft of music wasn't
> an issue back in the days of cassettes. You were wrong.

So, since theft of music was such a big deal back then, what (if
anything) was done to curb it?

> > played the coolest music) LOL... Is there anything you haven't done
> > in your pathetic life? BTW, I noticed that you were very specific
> > about the requests.
> > You said:
> > "Some kids asked for copies of ALL the music", which you refused.
> > Does that mean that you made copies of SOME of the music? And if not,
> > why specify it? Why not just say:
> > "Some kids asked for copies of the music". Sounds to me like you were
> > being deliberate for a reason. Either that, or you're a jackass
> > without a good grasp of the english language.
>
> I didn't give them any. Your lack of an intelligent argument is making
> you grasp at straws.

Actually, your wording makes you look guilty. It's unfortunate for you
that I pick up those subtleties.


> > > Even back in the days of tapes, SOME people were honest. The fact that
> > > you can't comprehend that says a lot more about you than about reality.
> >
> > *Yawn*.. You're so full of crap it's simply pathetic. You launch on a
> > personal attack, yet fail to address the post in question. What a
> > total jackass you are.
>
> I didn't launch any personal attack. I simply pointed out that SOME
> people are honest.

Implying that others (perhaps me) were dishonest. That's a personal
attack.

> > > > So what has changed? Or are we considering that the mix tape practice
> > >
> > > What has changed is that it has become so prevalent that it's more than
> > > a minor nuisance. The morality hasn't changed.
> >
> > You're still a jackass. You've already agreed that the price on a CD
> > is set on what the market will bear and that alone. It has nothing to
> > do with Johnny making copies, yet now you're saying that the prevalance
> > makes it a nuissance, indicating that your initial position (free
> > market economy) isn't something you totally believe in? Or are you
> > naive enough to think that if piracy were to somehow be totally
> > eliminated the price of a CD would drop?
>
> Where did I claim anything like that?

In this very thread you agreed with me that music prices were set on
what the market will bear. Read back... if you still can't find it let
me know and I'll give you the link.

> If even ONE of the people who stole the music would have bought it if it
> weren't on Napster, than harm has been done. Are you going to pretend
> that not a single sale was ever lost?

But then you have to prove that people who download music would have
bought it if there was no other way to get it. Good luck with that.
The internet, High Speed connections and CDs have simply facilitated
the 'illegal' copying of music, but even before them people would copy
tapes->tapes, LPs->tapes and radio->tapes.

Even today, I can record a song of the radio and there's nothing really
YOU or ANYONE can do about it, because I have NEVER entered into any
agreement with the Radio station (public FM radio) that I will not
record any of their broadcasts and replay them for my own amusement at
will.

> More importantly, even if you were to make such a silly claim, stealing
> is still wrong.

A lot of things are wrong, but yet people still do them. A lot of
things are significantly more wrong than Johnny making a copy of the
latest Brittney Spears CD, but it seems that Johnny gets the most
attention. Wonder why that is?


> > > > was also immoral and that recording a song of the radi\o is also
> > > > immoral? If that's the case what happens with something like XM?
> > > > Right now they have the equivalent of a PVR so technically you can
> > > > record a song and listen to it as often as you like (even if you cancel
> > > > your subscription after the two years). What if you transfer that song
> > > > to CD?
> > >
> > > I don't know. Is the concept of reading the license you signed when you
> > > joined the service too difficult for you?
> >
> > Too wordy and the font is too small. Do you real all the EULAs when
> > you install new software? If so, congratulations, but you're one of
> > the few. The licenses are written specifically in such a way that 99%
> > of the population will NOT read them. Just like the disclaimers at the
> > end of a commercial are said quickly enough, that the company covers
> > their ass, but yet 99.9999% of the population has no idea what is said.
>
> IOW, you're not bright enough to realize that the relevant information
> is already in your hands and you refuse to read it.

No jackass. I said it's too wordy, not that I don't understand the
words. Again your reading comprehension problems are showing
themselves. I see you did not refute any of my other claims in that
paragraph, nor did you admit to reading all the EULAs of all the
softare you install. Noted.

> > > The copyright owner is providing you a service. You agreed to their
> > > terms. Morally, whatever terms they offered are what you need to do.
> >
> > IOW, you don't want to answer the question, so you're providing canned
> > bullshit. Noted.
>
> No, you asked a question. I told you where to find the answer. It's not
> my fault you're not bright enough to be able to read a license.

Licenses are for tools like you and dogs. Any monkey that sits and
reads a 6pt font document (that spans multiple pages) has more time
than brains.

I looked at one of my CDs, and found the following written in several
locations:
"Unauthorized duplication is a violation of applicable laws"
That's pretty freaking vague. Does me ripping the CD to an MP3 of
lesser quality constitute duplication? Does the warning pertain to the
CD or the label it's affixed to (the one with the pretty pictures).

On another (game) CD, the following license is written:
<garbled text>,public performance or broadcast of this game is a
violation of applicable laws.
What the hell is the <garbled text> part and how can I comply with it
if I can't read it?

BTW, here's a little more FYI about legal documents written in that 6pt
(or smaller) font. It didn't keep Merck pharamaceuticals from having a
250M judgement passed against them. Granted they'll appeal, but their
ass is still grass.


> > > > I don't think things are quite cut and dry as some would like have them
> > > > appear to be.
> > >
> > > Only for dishonest people.
> >
> > IOW, no response. Noted.
>
> I did respond - unless you're admitting that you're dishonest.

Your attempts at insulting me are pathetic.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT - Software license key generator
    ... cracker can still jump around and modify the IL and the app is again ... So you can keep the honest out, ... purchasing a license then spending hours hacking it. ... hack you just dont want to give them a golden opportunity. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)
  • Re: Will Dell OEM Vista install on another Dell PC?
    ... Me either;);) But I also upgrade software to my old computer from ... To be honest I thought Steve W. and PeterD ... and tries to justify violating his original license ... with dell provided microsoft oem software. ...
    (alt.sys.pc-clone.dell)
  • Re: Security makes .Net a JOKE.....
    ... > There may be some great solutions but finding them is like searching for ... really just for the honest person, anyone who wants to steal your software ... will, be it in C++ or .NET, your license canstill be broken. ... Best way to distribute depends heavily on the app. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.security)
  • Re: Security makes .Net a JOKE.....
    ... > There may be some great solutions but finding them is like searching for ... really just for the honest person, anyone who wants to steal your software ... will, be it in C++ or .NET, your license canstill be broken. ... Best way to distribute depends heavily on the app. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)
  • Re: Med MJ now legal in Rhode Island
    ... jackass said, if you've REALLY done all the things you SAY you've done ... Marie Rainwater, Connie Sunday, Robert Hokura, Elle Mathews, Robert ... Be authentic and honest and good things will come. ... trolls/mentally ill, such as her. ...
    (alt.support.mult-sclerosis)