The same fraudulant activity obviously takes place when formats are changed and once more you are paying for the same content in a new media, you cant have it both ways Reasoned, either its licenced and the recording industry are fraudsters or its purchased and they are then liars.

Feel free to make a response although I dont think theres anything you can say to refute the obvious.

You do know that copyrights were never invented with the purpose of lasting for eternity as corporate cash-cows.

Copyrights were originally meant to last 10 years to compensate the creator after which the intellectual property falls to the public domain.

Greedy shit heads have managed to extend it well beyond 100 years after the original creator and most of their kids have passed. And these copyrights are held by the corporations and not the individuals responsible for it.

“Another bit of sophistry is that you “own” the music, and we all know you don’t. You don’t own the story in a book nor the motion picture either, they are all licensed, in effect an allowance is granted. The only thing you own is the cd itself, the hardcover, the dvd itself. But you never own the content. Never did. Another Dingo lie.”

_____________

Well, obviously the only person here who are blatantly lying is you, Reasoned Nazi.

The CD is only a medium, and any person who buys a CD are buying the content, not the medium. Dingo is right when he says that you are a thief for thinking that you could limit the legitimate rights of ownership from the consumers after that you sold (transferred) the content to them.

This goes against the basic right of ownership. You basically are saying that the consumers don’t have any rights for their new acquired property, this is obviously a gross violation to the universal right of ownership, which permits to the new owner to enjoy their acquired property in an exclusive way.

I assume that today the lawyers are in extreme incompetents, for not seeing this as an argument impossible of refuting in a court. The right of ownership is universal, and this is above of any copyright law.

BTW, Reasoned Nazi; are you (and the others in the record music business) communists? I say this because the communists are the only individuals on the world who don’t recognize the ownership of the citizens and also the communists think that are entitled to dispose of the goods of the persons.

(i’m absolutely not against piracy)

If this is true then this exec would in fact represent the copy holders and thus make whatever files he provided Authorized, yes?

This little tid bit seems to have escaped moste here.

dont feed the troll let him starve. all he does is say the same stupid things over and over even though he is wrong and he knows it.

Strictly speaking from a scientific point of view there is no such thing as “fact” as you keep saying. We can never be 100% certain of anything 100% of the time. “Fact” implies that we do. People who use the word “fact” to somehow strengthen their arguments are horrendously misinformed. If you don’t believe me go and do some reading on any scientific methodology. gg

I’m sorry but you really got no arguments. Or let’s say your arguments are clearly biased. It’s obvious that you work for the music companies, somehow. Try to “reason” with me about what I’m going to tell you.

Back in the 80s, tapes were shared and copied and duplicated the same way .torrents are now. Of course when tapes were copied, they lost their original quality, and it’s the same thing that happens today when we download an MP3 or a movie. They never get the original quality. Not for the same reason that tapes didn’t, but still they don’t. They are just “downgraded copies”, or how I like to call them, “try before to buy” copies.

The same thing happened with VHS. People copied them and shared them. There were double decks audio and video recorders to copy everything.

When the first copy protection appeared, for VHS (Macrovision) it’s when people start to “piracy”, or to copy, things more aggressively. They wanted a copy of what was theirs.

By the way, somebody always have to somehow “own” a original purchased audio, or video, or game, to make a copy of it. Have you read? A music executive has been arrested because he was involved in sharing pre-releases. This proves the point I made on a comment in a previous article. Most of the times it’s the music companies that release “leaked” .torrents, more or less legally. In this case it was certainly not legal, in some case it is, like when Microsoft “leaks” Windows 7 just to get more beta testers to test their product for free.

The same goes for books. We don’t own the content but we DO own the tangible good itself! A CD, a DVD, is OURS when we buy it. I said many times that if the companies do add their DRM crap and don’t allow us to legitimally copy what’s ours (the tangible good, not the content itself), we have to find a way to do it anyway. This goes for buyers wanting to make just a backup copy, or for “pirates”. Unfortunately, the software and anti-protection techniques are the same for both, that’s why I insist that the more the MAFIAA add protections to make our life harder to copy and backup what’s legitimally ours, the more they give incentives to “pirates” to make software to elude their protections.

They just have to face it, for there’s nothing they can do to stop this.

Unless they change their behiavour, “piracy”, legal (to make backup copies) or illegal (to sell pirated DVDs in the streets for money) will remain rampant, and this is it, like it or not.

Once again your idiocy astounds me. Barter means to trade. File bartering is trading one or more specific files for one or more different files. File sharing does not require or even enable the ability (in case of torrents) to offer specific files in exchange for other files. If you trade dental work for chickens it’s commercial. If you give dental work away it is not.

BTW, it would be nice if you could provide actual links to your claims. I’m highly inclined not to believe your lies.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/copyright/cases/239_F3d_1004.htm

“And laws exist in almost every country all over the world that limit an ability to make copies and give them away”

Really? I know many countries where ‘USA copyright law’ doesn’t apply, in fact, I live in one of these
countries… Cool. Sharing copyrighted material is allowed in my country always that this is for
personal use and not for profit. Whether you like it or not, I simply don’t care; you know, USA is not the centre of the world anymore, and my country and many other countries don’t care at all about your stupid and fascist copyright laws.

And YES, I own my CDs; I paid for them… Why do you believe that you are entitled to my possessions?
Are you crazy? Are you a THIEF?

I share my possessions with who I want and as I want, this is my private property; Fu.ck YOU, THIEF.

“The file-sharing in the 70’s and 80’s was tape based and analog, each copy was poorer for the
duplication”

False. The cassette tapes were considered the perfect medium for sharing music in the 70′s and 80′s, you know, the cassette tapes offered a convenient size for portable use, and also in many cases high fidelity audio quality.

In fact, in 70′s and 80′s era the cassette tape was able to deliver high fidelity audio quality, and
many tape cassette recorders were designed with that in mind, or maybe, you forgot the famous and
legendary ‘TDK Super Avilyn’ cassette tape, which was the norm in that days. Your insinuation about that cassette tapes were a poor medium for audio is FALSE, and all the people in that days regularly used cassette tapes as a medium of very acceptable quality and perfect for sharing a LOT of music between LOTS of people in all the countries. Denying this is the same as denying that the planet earth is round.

“And you also had to have all the originals to make the duplication.”

That was not a problem in that days. I was a teenager in 1982 and I remember that in the school the
album ‘AC/DC – Back In Black’ was shared and copied in cassette tapes infinity of times, LOL, from an
unique LP album. Even I remember that this LP arrived to my hands after of having passed by around 5
other classrooms full of kids, and believe me, this happened with MANY other popular albums in that
time, not only ‘AC/DC – Back In Black’, and this type of filesharing culture was the norm in that days; and you see, the record labels did BIG FORTUNES in that days, despite of the fact that all the people SHARED lots of copyrighted music via cassette tapes in a big commercial scale, in all countries.

Also, you LIE again when you said that was necessary to have the originals for making copies. In that days, the people did a lot of copies from cassette tapes to other cassette tapes, and even existed
duplicate cassette tapes machines for this task; although the quality obviously never was the same when
compared with a cassette tape made from an original LP. But my point is to demonstrate that you LIED
again when you said that is not possible making cassette tapes copies without having the originals LPs.

The rest of my arguments are very clear in my previous post, I won’t repeat them again, and for your
disgrace you can’t refute them because you totally lack of arguments for that. You simply are a liar and a fascist, that’s all. Have a bad day with this.

http://www.prsformusic.com/creators/news/research/Documents/Will%20Page%20and%20Chris%20Carey%20(2009)%20Adding%20Up%20The%20Music%20Industry%20for%202008.pdf

WTF?

Where are the loses from piracy?

if these kopyright kartels really want to make a statement then perp walk this guy for the whole world to see.
its funny how these groups act like pirated material just appears from nowhere and gets uploaded, when right here we have proof that its people from inside the labels who are hugely responsible for making this stuff,movies,music,games,ect…
available for copying.
its time they looked in their own backyard instead of the usual guys and girls who cant defend themselves.

Of course people are going to download a pirated copy of a CD if there’s no legal copies available at that time. You solve that problem The fact is that if pirated copies exist, it means there’s nothing stopping legal copies from existing too (except companies’ refusal to sell them).

Sites like TF that set the truth out each day for all to see with legal reference and caselaw and precedent (whether the poorly informed Dingo’s appreciate it or not) are doing the best work for piracy today.

The piracy in the 70′s and 80′s was tape based and analog, each copy was poorer for the duplication and it all happened in real time, not “three clicks and all of the Beatles is mine.” Pirate can pretend it’s the same but it’s not and every intelligence knows this; not in scale, not in ease, not in time, not in quality. And you also had to have all the originals to make the duplication. Everyone knows all this is the real truth but the Dingo’s of the world prefer to keep their head in the ground and remain informed. That’s another reason why the pirate BS gets nowhere influential. Because it’s mostly BS. Back then the occasional hardearned mixtape really WAS a kind of free advertising and exposure.

Another bit of sophistry is that you “own” the music, and we all know you don’t. You don’t own the story in a book nor the motion picture either, they are all licensed, in effect an allowance is granted. The only thing you own is the cd itself, the hardcover, the dvd itself. But you never own the content. Never did. Another Dingo lie.

And laws exist in almost every country all over the world that limit an ability to make copies and give them away, to “share them” in the Dingo lie talk. Dingo knows that, too. But hey, he’d never let a little thing like the facts get in his way of posting here on TF.

Keep up the truthful work, TF. If piracy is to gain an evenhanded hearing, SOMEONE has to counter the foolish Dingo’s of the world.

2 of the worst thiefs around and a lot worse than some filesharers

in other words he grassed them up!

Of course, NOT.

This is exactly the LIES that the USA entertainment industry has been spreading by years.

In the 70′s and 80′s decades a lot of copyrighted music in a commercial scale was SHARED by millions and millions of persons around the world, and the record labels lived with that reality doing millions of dollars, without complains; and the practice was accepted and NEVER was this called piracy. This was called SHARING.

Now, when the persons do EXACTLY that via internet then this is called automatically piracy, Why?

Because the internet proves that the actual record labels as distribution medium are redundant and obsolete in this digital age.

This is simply a conspiracy of lies from the record labels for taking away fundamental civil rights from the people and convert it in a monetary business; that’s all.

In essence, saying that filesharing of copyrighted material is piracy is the same as saying that all the persons on the world (without exception) are criminals; because all the people has shared copyrighted material with others in some time, independently if they are aware of that or not.

And there doesn’t exist any law on the world which prohibits TO SHARE my possessions (private property) with others, and also, there doesn’t exist any reason for giving to music or movies a different treatment, that’s THE TRUTH.

And I repeat, this is shameful that pro-filesharing sites as TF are spreading subliminal misinformation. Instead, you could use the power of information of these forums for spreading useful knowledge for that the persons can defend themselves.

:-)

you probably have a better chance of dying in an airplane crash then getting caught pirating stuff. dont believe all this court bullshit…arghh PIRACY 4 EVER!!!!

Here in the United States the Napster case acknowledged the hypocrisy about “non commercial piracy” that traffics in commercial (for sale) files. Anytime money or the “saving of expense” is involved, it’s not a “non-commercial action” here in the USA.

As it should be everywhere, and will be under the ACTA.

From the case in 2001:

“To save the expense” Illegal file bartering has been held to be a commercial use, cutting off the defense of fair use in the U.S.: “…[C]ommercial use is demonstrated by a showing that repeated and exploitative unauhorized copies of copyrighted works were made to save the expense of purchasing authorized copies.” A&M Records, Inc. et al v. Napster, Inc., 239 F.3d 1004 (9th Cir. 2001), at 1014.

It cost me nothing and the person who gave it me made no money. They didn’t call it ‘tape sharing’ back then, they called it piracy.

To me, if it’s an unauthorized copy, it is a pirate copy, no matter what the media.

File-sharing of copyright material is a type of piracy – non-commercial if no money changes hands.

Selling files or tapes for money is commercial piracy.

wouldn’t it be better to call it a “music sharing group”?
————-

Exactly; for introducing the word “piracy” the element of monetary gain must be present in the equation, which is not the case here.

This is incredible (and shameful) as “supposed” pro-filesharing sites as TF commit this failure all the time; of equaling (in a subliminal way) filesharing (which is a non-commercial action) with piracy (which directly involves monetary gain).

Reviewing your concepts TF staff, filesharing is not piracy, and you are spreading subliminal misinformation which is totally harmful.

It keeps getting better…..

“Conspiracy to Defraud (the music industry)”

Don’t you mean help promote albums and the music industry? I’m just wondering how much profit the industry MAFIAA made from the extra promotion caused by this group.

90% of the people using computers right now would be infected.

Or maybe someone would be kind enough to make a player named BTM(Boycott The MAFIAA) and that player would not play copyrighted material and would point you to alternatives like jamendo and only play CC commons licensed media, you wanna bet that revenue would go even further the rabbit hole?

Besides everyone could make a digital picket fence(it is technically called DDOS) at some digital distributor.

ps: if you use firefox is easy to do it just download the plugin called ReloadEvery 3.5.1 by Jaap Haitsma and plan with your friends a picket. The plugin reloads pages at a determined interval that you choose, but first send and email to the place and tell them why they are being hit.

How about plugins for browser that identify copyright media and point you to alternatives of the same genre? after it tells you what the industry is really about(control and greed)

Have people searched for free digital music and tv internet recently? There is hundreds of places where one can get free legal music and TV shows and even some very good films that were produced by crowd-sourcing.

C’mom people be creative there is tons of things we can do to piss the other side off like they do to us.

For it to be fraud, they’d have to be selling the tracks for profit whilst claiming to be an official legitimate distributor and they would fall foul of anti-counterfeiting laws too.

Also strange is the fact that groups like the BPI/IFPI can carry out their own private investigations and then hand information to the police which the police then act on. When the same kind of private investigation was carried out by human rights lawyers into the criminal activities of Tony Blair and his cabinet members (a war crimes investigation) and the evidence and information gathered was handed to the police, the police seem to have decided not to act on it. Which is a more important matter to investigate really – music piracy or war crimes? Hmm…

it’s all non profit, isn’t it?…

label executive bringing home PRE’s on friday evening, drinkin lots of red and later at night upping an image to a topsite – cool, love this stuff!

DV8, Heros, Rule :)

Unfortunately in RIAA’s book a scene releaser, a drug dealer or an arms dealer are all in the same category with some dude who is sharing his collection or downloading some mp3 files from another guy far outside from his geographical location !!!

The recording industry, global but largely British and American, has created the broadest and deepest collective of music so cherished and widely regarded as excellent, it is and remains the world-wide standard for excellence and the cultural envy of every other country on the planet. Artists come and artists go but it’s not inexpensive to find and develop them, and no one likes everything they hear. We’ll see how well an indie can be noticed and paid on YouTube in the future.

But to call the recording industry’s catalog “overpriced crap” is so fundamentally untrue on so many different levels, it makes anyone who thinks that way sound very Phishy.

Instead, the overwhelming odds are that your favorite band or artist was found, nurtured, recorded and promoted by a record label, and the wide majority of new artists still strive for label contracts. It’s just a fact.

wouldn’t it be better to call it a “music sharing group”?

When it comes to music it’s simple. We want DRM free digital copies. We don’t want archaic plastic discs that degrade.

we don’t want digital copies infested with DRM that opens security holes in your pc, and stops you from actually using the media in the way you choose.

And we don’t want over priced crap.

The music industry is failing because they are holding steady onto a dead distribution medium, and with that, they produce more crap and decent work, we know it, they know it.

This is why pre-release material is so hated. It puts the ball back in our court.

We don’t have to pay to find out it’s garbage, we have a choice, and the labels simply can’t deal with that.

This is also the reason you see all major labels sueing us, while the artists they sue on behalf of come out against the lawsuits and crack downs.

Music, games, movies… everything is always delivered to the scene by someone from inside the industry itself before store dates.

If the industry wants to fight with PREs, they’d better start looking who is rolling all the eggs out from their own nests.
Oh, let’s hope that never happens, LOL :D