#76
|
|||||
|
|||||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
As I have already said, my purpose is not to argue with you, or to convince you that I am right and you are wrong. I am just expressing my opinions, based on my reading of legal documents and direct quotes from the legal representatives of companies and organizations that are involved in bringing the music industry in general, and copyright enforcement in particular, to what I consider new depths. I appreciate your comments, but I must remain inclined to formulate my understanding of the specific words that I find in print, rather than your generous interpretation. Finally, I will add a couple of quotes from one of hundreds of great articles I have read: S T R A N G L I N G C U L T U R E W I T H A C O P Y R I G H T L A W Steve Zeitlin Op-Ed in The New York Times April 25, 1998 Copyright © 1998 The New York Times. "Legislation now in Congress (which, of course, passed) to extend the copyright law threatens to make it more difficult for this nation's creativity to become part of our cultural landscape, part of a common heritage of folklore circulating freely in the public domain." "under the new law our roly-poly Santa Claus, originally created by the 19th-century cartoonist Thomas Nast, would not have gone into the public domain until 1973. Even the United States Government would have had to pay royalties to use Nast's Uncle Sam in all of his century's wars." "If corporations thought they could get away with it, they might charge a few cents every time we copied a cartoon to distribute in the office or hummed a song in the shower." "The interests of songwriters and screenwriters and the corporations they work for have to be balanced against the importance of our collective folk culture. As Mr. [Pete] Seeger put it from his home in Beacon, N.Y., "The grandchildren should be able to find some other way to make a living, even if their grandfather did write 'How Much Is That Doggie in the Window.'" |
#77
|
|||
|
|||
a bit of satire...
Some levity to these weighty issues
RIAA Declares Using Brain to Remember Songs is Criminal Copyright Infringement On the heels of the RIAA's recent decision to criminalize consumers who rip songs from albums they've purchased to their computers (or iPods), the association has now gone one step further and declared that "remembering songs" using your brain is criminal copyright infringement. "The brain is a recording device," explained RIAA president Cary Sherman. "The act of listening is an unauthorized act of copying music to that recording device, and the act of recalling or remembering a song is unauthorized playback."
__________________
A Maverick Radar Guides Fate |
#78
|
||||
|
||||
Hi guys...
To resurrect a point from the original thought of buying one's last CD, I will have purchased my last CD when anything I want is available for online purchase and download. I no longer use CDs as my main method of listening...have not for several years. The only ones I tend to use are other people's music they want to learn for lessons or content not available for download. The CDs I purchase are immediately transferred to my computer and the CDs are either put away or gifted. |
#79
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
"With this decision, the RIAA now considers approximately 72% of the adult U.S. population to be criminals. Putting them all in prison for copyright infringement would cost U.S. taxpayers an estimated $683 billion per year -- an amount that would have to be shouldered by the remaining 28% who are not imprisoned. The RIAA believes it could cover the $683 billion tab through royalties on music sales. The problem with that? The 28% remaining adults not in prison don't buy music albums.' |
#80
|
|||
|
|||
more to chew on ....
Radiohead's 'In Rainbows' tops charts Wed Jan 9, 6:49 PM ET"Optional pricing" meant you paid what you want... you could download it for free, or you could pay what amount you wished. A recent Spin article said that a survey was conducted of some 3,000 people who downloaded In Rainbows, and that those people paid an average of $8.00. Interesting, eh?
__________________
A Maverick Radar Guides Fate |