Comments on: No ’3 Strikes’ Disconnection for UK Pirates

By: Oli

Oli — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 01:31:19 +0000

I do own a multitude of products and treat myself to a multitude of services I don't really need but I am grateful for what I have, unlike moaning Actors/Movie people, which was my point…

By: fr33tard

fr33tard — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 01:22:11 +0000

if you're a communist, yeah, there's a huge difference.

chances are you yourself own a multitude of products and treat yourself to a multitude of services you don't really need and the money you used to procure them could just as easily have gone to someone without food, a home, clean water, or medical care.

double edged swords are sharp aren't they?

By: Oli

Oli — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 00:25:51 +0000

There is a difference between money they need and money they want.

By: freetard

freetard — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 17:55:46 +0000

"Artists & Film makers have no excuse for not getting money, they can do live gigs/cinema."
———————————————–

theater box office accounts for less than 18% of the film industry revenue. so your plan is for them to just willingly give away the vast majority of their business?

By: Oliver Tester

Oliver Tester — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 13:55:18 +0000

Record Industry = Not needed and dying.

Artists & Film makers have no excuse for not getting money, they can do live gigs/cinema.

Stop trying to get an easy buck.

By: Fr33tard

Fr33tard — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 06:42:52 +0000

"It certainly does offer something better. It offers free distribution and audience."
—————————————–

which amounts to exactly "jack" and "shit" if it doesn't keep a roof over my head and food on my table.

"The Pirate Bay does not earn profits for themselves."
——————————————-

you don't have any proof of this. the reason you have no proof of this is because the pirate bay refuse to make their finances transparent. and the only reason anyone has for not making their finances transparent is because they have something to hide.

…none of which matters since the reality, whichever end of the spectrum it may reside, will soon be revealed during the trial.

"A right is a right only when it does not interfere with other rights, "
———————————————

therein lies the dilemma. your supposed "right" to distribute my hard work on a massive, unlimited scale with complete strangers and without the smallest trifle of compensation for your greedy consumption most definitely infringes upon my rights as a creator. bit of an impasse there.

By: freetard

freetard — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 06:22:02 +0000

you want me to prove if copyright has ever benefited a content creator?

lolololololol

By: rhf

rhf — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 02:01:05 +0000

Well, all I can say is that I'm glad that this hasn't been followed up, although, the British Government does like to lie on a regular basis. For example, if you've been watching the UK news recently about the new airport terminal expansion at Heathrow, the controversy of them not sure whether to do the runway or not. It's all a visage, a deception, a friend of mine is currently getting his final security checks done to go and work on this new runway/terminal project. I'll reiterate this, The British government lies on a regular basis, so don't be so sure the storm is over yet.

This to be created subsidiary of OfCom is a joke, it'll be a new amalgamation of the IFPI/MPAA/RIAA/FAST, where the good ol' government will squeeze more money out of us to fund feck knows what.

By: Roze

Roze — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 21:20:23 +0000

A right is a right only when it does not interfere with other rights, which is why there is no right to take away other people's rights. Thus, there is no "creator rights to take away the citizen's rights to share their own property." The only "right" that file-sharing usurps is the "right" to take away the citizen's rights to share their own property, which, of course, is not a right at all.

By: Roze

Roze — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 21:18:05 +0000

It certainly does offer something better. It offers free distribution and audience. Those two are most important. The Pirate Bay certainly has done much good – unlike the industry, which steals from the artists all the time, The Pirate Bay does not earn profits for themselves.

By: UK Backs Away from Over-Reaching Anti-Piracy Legislation « MyMediaMusings

UK Backs Away from Over-Reaching Anti-Piracy Legislation « MyMediaMusings — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 13:20:20 +0000

[...] No ‘3 Strikes’ Disconnection for UK Pirates (torrentfreak.com) [...]

By: UK Backs Away from Over-Reaching Anti-Piracy Legislation | BigBook.eu

UK Backs Away from Over-Reaching Anti-Piracy Legislation | BigBook.eu — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 13:18:50 +0000

[...] No ‘3 Strikes’ Disconnection for UK Pirates (torrentfreak.com) [...]

By: Widget

Widget — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 12:32:59 +0000

I have a solution: all you just just register for these stupid IntenseDebate accounts and stop pretending you aren't impersonating each other =)

By: fr33tard

fr33tard — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 10:43:55 +0000

When you say "content creator's work" you're ignoring that they don't get much at all. The worst case scenario is that the artist becomes more popular and they can charge more for bigger live shows. I haven't heard of a single case where the money from a lawsuit against someone who shared music was given to the original author(s).
————————————————————————

these are good points, succinctly put and i thank you for making them. you immediately stand out from the rest of the hormonal teens around here…

while i agree that the record and film industries shortchange their respective content creators, my point is i don't see the pirate community offering anything better. 7-14 cents an album does add up after a while. i know better than anyone here how the studios (in particular) do not care about their content creators. my particular profession though integral to the creation of a movie is grossly underpaid in relation to other above the line talent such as actors, producers and directors. however, again, i do not see the pirate community offering anything better. at least the studios (or labels) pay SOMETHING, meager though it may be, it is better than nothing.

By: Widget

Widget — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 07:43:35 +0000

The creator doesn't have any rights though, they all belong to the industry. If I made a copy of a Slipknot album, I wouldn't be hurting the band themselves, they're hardly losing any money (I could download 10 CDs and mail them the money for 1 directly and they'd be getting around the same amount).

The "problem" these days is that record labels are simply becoming unneeded.. Quite a few artists are more than capable of recording their own music, and if they can't it's not all that expensive to rent out a recording studio (though some big labels might have you think otherwise).

By: BenJones

BenJones — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 06:10:04 +0000

Just to point out, the people doing those jobs don't expect to be paid for their work the next pay period, let alone 50 years or more later. If I want to have any income in any particular year, I expect to have to work during that year. I don't expect to be paid for today, for the work I did in 2000 and 2001 (which was for a TV company). If I owned the copyright of that work though, I suddenly should? Think about your answer carefully.

btw, as I said to roze, I've changed the name on all your comments to match each other, under your usual nick of 'freetard' – it makes it easier to track who says what.

By: FLB (aka freetard)

FLB (aka freetard) — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 05:15:23 +0000

roze, this comment is particularly ironic and hilarious given the rest of your spam in this thread…

By: Roze

Roze — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 03:56:54 +0000

Care to cite any law that actually uses the word "intellectual property"?

By: Roze

Roze — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 03:53:42 +0000

and not a single one of them successful without a long lineage of label backing (radiohead/NIN).
Then you must be living in a cave, because there are plenty of them.

By: BenJones

BenJones — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 23:43:12 +0000

Psst, Roze – you know we can tell when you use blank accounts to agree with yourself. It flags it up for us. Spamming the comments will just get you banned.

I'll edit in your name to all your comments, just so we know who they're from.

By: freetard

freetard — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 23:17:49 +0000

that’s because i’m not trying to hide the fact, whereas you ARE trying to hide the fact that you use multiple nicknames to agree with yourself, flandre, lunasa, nobody, merlin, tei, mystia, mystia lorelei, dollop etc…

rather pathetic. in my opinion only someone of the aforementioned stereotype would go to such feeble lengths as to fabricate other people to agree with their own drivel.

By: freetard

freetard — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 23:06:08 +0000

you know what else makes you look bad? using a bunch of stupid nicknames to agree with yourself.

Yes, thats why I’ve cleaned them all up, attributing your comments and roze’s appropriately – Ben

By: freetard

freetard — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 23:04:11 +0000

says the guy that didn’t substantiate his…please list some of these bands in question.

By: freetard

freetard — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 22:55:58 +0000

And massive illegal distribution of content creator’s work is an usurpation of creator rights.

By: chu dat

chu dat — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 22:10:29 +0000

What, the MAFIAA has nothing good to say anymore, so they resort to random insults and impersonation?

Site edit – posted by Roze

By: chrysanthemum

chrysanthemum — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 22:09:24 +0000

Fuck off and die you record label defender.

Site edit – posted by Roze

By: Roze

Roze — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 22:08:48 +0000

Fuck off and die, you MAFIAA defender.

Site edit – posted by Roze

By: Tei

Tei — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 22:06:19 +0000

Why don’t you just go kill yourself instead of coming up with these pathetic retarded arguments in favor of the vile MAFIAA?

Site edit – posted by Roze

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 22:05:35 +0000

Yes, it does obsfucate. Also, there is no difference in scale. Sharing is sharing.

Site edit – posted by Roze

By: Roze

Roze — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 22:04:31 +0000

@”free lunch brigade”
The fact that you are “free lunch brigade” impersonating someone else is obvious; you are not very good at impersonating someone else because people are easily able to see that it is actually the retard who posts as “free lunch brigade.”

Also, lol at “vampire complexioned” – you are very funny. It doesn’t really help your case to try to use random stereotypes which are untrue, than to actually argue the issue.

Site edit – posted by Roze

By: Alice

Alice — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 22:00:49 +0000

Why don’t you try proving that it has ever benefited any artist? Of course, you can’t, since it is false. You can’t prove something that’s false.

Site edit – posted by Roze

By: nobody

nobody — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 21:59:31 +0000

I guess you better delete all of you comments now, since you impersonation attempts and the content of your comments make you look stupid.

Site edit – posted by Roze

By: cal reflector

cal reflector — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 21:56:02 +0000

That’s just the most retarded thing ever. By the way, impersonating someone else, you industry plant, only makes you look bad. This officially proves that you have nothing positive to contribute to humanity, so just fuck off and die.

Site edit – posted by Roze

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 21:54:15 +0000

If you have read TorrentFreak, then you would know that there are some.

Site edit – posted by Roze

By: falling stars

falling stars — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 21:52:12 +0000

That’s only something that the industry scum like you (who, by the way, is impersonating someone else) would say.

Site edit – posted by Roze

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 21:51:12 +0000

WRONG. There are plenty of indie artists that are successful through distribution through file-sharing networks. Why don’t you try to substantiate your point that there are none next time, instead of throwing out these unsubstantiated ideas?

Site edit – posted by Roze

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 21:49:57 +0000

The law begs to differ. There is no “intellectual property” in the law.

Site edit – posted by Roze

By: Alice

Alice — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 20:03:11 +0000

This argument has already been discredited so many times. Why do you insist on repeating an invalid argument?

By: Roze

Roze — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 20:02:36 +0000

No, it doesn't.

By: Nitori

Nitori — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 20:01:12 +0000

Has it not occurred to you that BitTorrent occurs through computers, not "human effort"?

"You seem to be something of an idiot."
Look who's talking. Now, I think that it may be best to go to elementary school.

By: no

no — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 20:00:23 +0000

Im all for someway to let us carry on and artists still get paid, but bumping up my bb price isnt the way, i already pay quite alot as it is. Im testing that spotify thing and so far so good i just hope they get more types of music, dnb and some less commen stuff and im happy to play my music via that, but apart from not having everything it doesnt seem much different that browseing h\d to play music… its fast! the search and everything

By:

Tue, 27 Jan 2009 19:59:43 +0000

Okay, I thought that the industry was stupid, but I never thought that they could come up with such a stupid analogy as this one. Just shows you how much they hire retarded people for their spokespeople.

By:

Tue, 27 Jan 2009 19:58:43 +0000

"I am astonished by the number of comments seeking to justify non-compliance with IP laws solely on the ground that intellectual property is an intangible item."
Representation FAIL

"Perhaps not a perfect analogy, but one has to wonder how the persons espousing such beliefs would feel if their employers only paid them for the portion of their workday in which they were engaged in physical labor and not the intellectual portion of their jobs."
Analogy FAIL

You fail.

By:

Tue, 27 Jan 2009 19:58:09 +0000

"You seem to be something of an idiot."
Of course, the most obvious example of idiocy is you. I mean, your analogy doesn't even make the slightest bit of sense.

Now fuck off.

By: Roze

Roze — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 19:46:16 +0000

You seem to be something of an idiot. You are speaking to a mirror. You act like that means anything or has any credible distinction from intellectual property Intellectual property does not exist. Period. Scientists are paid to do scientific research, and then the findings are not kept secret, unless it were a military secret.

By: Roze

Roze — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 19:46:05 +0000

You seem to be something of an idiot.
You are speaking to a mirror.

You act like that means anything or has any credible distinction from intellectual property
Intellectual property does not exist. Period. Scientists are paid to do scientific research, and then the findings are not kept secret, accessible only to those who pay.

By: Roze

Roze — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 19:45:52 +0000

You seem to be something of an idiot.
You are speaking to a mirror.

By: Roze

Roze — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 19:45:33 +0000

You seem to be something of an idiot.
You are speaking to a mirror.

You act like that means anything or has any credible distinction from intellectual property
Intellectual property does not exist. Period.

By: freetard

freetard — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 16:27:24 +0000

no it hasn’t alice but i implore you to try.

By: freetard

freetard — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 16:26:38 +0000

Choke on your Doritos and Mountain Dew you basement dwelling, vampire complexioned loser.