NAPSTER RULING IGNORES BASIC PRINCIPLES OF COPYRIGHT
Recovered from the Internet Archive. This page comes from a ListenSmart.com capture saved by the Wayback Machine on February 23, 2001. The original text is preserved where it survives; links and layout have been adapted for this restoration. Historical account, search, posting, voting, playback and download features are inactive; their labels remain as plain text. Images that were never archived are marked as such. Audio files were not recovered for this archive.
Source: Wayback Machine capture of ubb.listensmart.com:80/ubb/Forum12/HTML/002570.html.
Removal requests: email seanfenlon@yahoo.com with the page address.
Email This Page to Someone! |
 Artist Only Boards [all categories]
 Artist Area
 NAPSTER RULING IGNORES BASIC PRINCIPLES OF COPYRIGHT (Page 1)
Post New Topic |
| This topic is 3 pages long: 1 2 3 | next newest topic | next oldest topic |
| Author | Topic: NAPSTER RULING IGNORES BASIC PRINCIPLES OF COPYRIGHT |
| #1
KennyLee Guru Posts: 1476 |
posted 02-13-2001 01:19 AM
Click Here to See the Profile for KennyLee  Edit/Delete Message 
The Drudge Report is carrying this release right now. From the Consumer Electronic Association. They lost in the Ninth circuit too. Only to win in the Supreme court. VCR's. Remember?
quote: ------------------ [This message has been edited by KennyLee (edited 02-13-2001).] IP: Logged |
| #2
Davey Boy Crocky Guru Posts: 261 |
posted 02-13-2001 12:49 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for Davey Boy Crocky Edit/Delete Message
How stupid. Guess he's pissed cause he's gonna have to pay for entertainment again. ------------------ Davey Boy Crocky's Solo Project IP: Logged |
| #3
KennyLee Guru Posts: 1476 |
posted 02-13-2001 01:16 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for KennyLee Edit/Delete Message
quote: How? Stupid? I remember our lengthy discourses on important topics fondly. Suddenly it's getting primal. The history of "New Technology IP cases" is what this guy from the CEA is referring to. The Ninth Circuit has done this before. Only to be overturned later. That's why you can now load up your Diamond Rio with great mp3s from Rapigator, Davey Boy Crocky. While you are taping the M-TV video awards at the same time. ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #4
TheBassDude Guru Posts: 364 |
posted 02-13-2001 03:15 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for TheBassDude Edit/Delete Message
Kenny Lee... The performers on the MTV awards sign a contract (with MTV) assigning them the rights to broadcast their performances... Who signed ANYTHING with Napster? Yes, the videos played on MTV are available to record by anyone owning a VCR... But ANYBODY who believes that it is then legal to distribute a videotaped copy of a broadcast is in for a treat if the FCC ever catches them... This is what Napster does... It allows people to reproduce (legally or otherwise) an audio recording (whether they own it or not is not the issue... read on) that they then make available (free of charge) to the world. Just like the video copier who re-distributes his copies, Napsterites should be shut down. Think about it this way, Kenny... If I went around giving away maps to the locations of highly desirable cars, with the knowledge that those who used my maps were going to steals those cars, I would be justly prosecuted for aiding and abetting at the VERY least, if not for the actual theft of those cars. Tell me how Napster is any different. ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #5
KennyLee Guru Posts: 1476 |
posted 02-13-2001 03:28 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for KennyLee Edit/Delete Message
quote: Napster doesn't deal with physical property. Like automobiles. If I take your car? Then you don't have one. Napster deals with sharing and duplicating information for free. Like a library. See the difference? The constitutional principle involved at the Supreme Court level is this: Everyone, regardless of economic status, should be able to access information. Copyright is a limited right under the constitution. And it was intended to protect authorship, not necessarily allow for enrichment. Otherwise, Stephen King could say to the library: "No one gets to read my book unless they pay me for it." Seems we have become so used to fascism we forget the Constitution. And our goal now is to somehow become our own little fascist empire. Is this clear enough or do you want more? ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #6
TheBassDude Guru Posts: 364 |
posted 02-13-2001 03:47 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for TheBassDude Edit/Delete Message
quote: Not at all... Try copying the contents of one of those books and then giving them away... see just how fast the library will have you arrested for copyright violations.
quote: Suppose that is so... Who gave the "right" to access free entertainment? See the difference? Or do you really believe that The Backstreet Boys are providing "information" to the masses? The very bottom line is this... When you purchase a CD, it typically has a boilerplate legalese statement to the effect of: "Unauthorized duplication is a violation of applicable laws." By breaking the seal on that CD, you are agreeing to that copyright statement. Do the record companies consider making a "personal" copy of your CD (austensibly for personal use) a "violation of applicable laws?" No... of course not... But you'd better believe that they (the copyright holders) do NOT approve of the "copy-for-distribution" ethic. It is illegal, and no amount of Napsterite whining is going to change that. Does Napster provide a service to some artists? Yes... but it should be up to those artists or their legal representatives to make the decision to have their product (yes, Virginia, there IS a product) available to the general public for FREE distribution.
C'mon, man... you can do better than that... ------------------ [This message has been edited by TheBassDude (edited 02-13-2001).] IP: Logged |
| #7
dond Guru Posts: 221 |
posted 02-13-2001 04:07 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for dond Edit/Delete Message
Libraries provide free information to you... That information was purchased by the library ,and, your taxes are paying for licensing, royalties, books, multimedia, and, subscriptions to provide you free access to information. It isn't free! It's damn expensive, but, because your local library enjoys support from your community, you get to use that data at no direct cost to you. Your community is fostering your education, hoping it will indirectly benefit your home town. Libraries are the good guys! They play by all the established rules, and, are strong proponents of the existing copyright system for all the right reasons. They spend a fortune, keeping you legal! Your local library is a free service, but, in reality, it's a long way from free information. ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #8
KennyLee Guru Posts: 1476 |
posted 02-13-2001 04:15 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for KennyLee Edit/Delete Message
quote: Well, BassDude, when you fail to see that the Backstreet Boys product is information? That makes it a little tough. Looks like we may have to start from square one on understanding the terms. Agree upon a Glossary or something. Ok, Physical Property. Material Objects of any sort. Information. Thoughts, ideas, words, iin this case a series of numbers like 00110101001. A Backstreet Boys CD is physical property. In a jewel box with a folded placard and shrinkwrapped. If I take yours? You no longer have one. If you play yours for me so I can hear it? You still have one? If I burn my own copy of the Zero's and One's? You still have one. If I download an MP3 of it using Napster? You still have one. If you burn a copy and sell it to me? That is bootlegging. If I check it out from the library? And listen to it? Or make mp3's from it? That is sharing information. The commerce you are concerned about comes from the physical property aspect. People make money packaging information and selling it. The information itself is a "service". The package is a "product". Music has only recently become a product. Before that it was a service. Thomas Edison started it by inventing the wax cylinder recording device. Kinda like a Diamond Rio but more primitive. Now you and the RIAA want to treat information as a product. But technology is making that difficult. Because people have computers and do not need the package anymore. Jim Griffin, genius that he his, says that information as a product has had a short life and will soon be no more. Information is returning to becoming the information service it has always been. The Constitution treats information in a certain way. This has come up many times and has followed the same legal path. Eventually ending up with the new technology for transmitting information approved by the Supreme Court on Constitutional grounds. After it has been rejected in the lower courts on other grounds. One of the earlier cases involved piano rolls. Later cases involve the VCR and the Diamond Rio. All approved only at the Supreme Court level. All lost in the lower levels. Before I go any further. Do you understand what is information and what is Physical Property? ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #9
KennyLee Guru Posts: 1476 |
posted 02-13-2001 04:23 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for KennyLee Edit/Delete Message
quote: © 2001 Kenny Lee The libraries pay for a package of information that many people share for free. The library does not buy a different copy for everyone. They do have copier machines, computers and other duplicating devices though, if you want to make a copy. The government pays for all of this so that poor people have access to the same information that rich people do. For Free! I haven't checked, but there may be a Backstreet Boys CD in a library somewhere. I know they have Sound Of Music. ------------------
[This message has been edited by KennyLee (edited 02-13-2001).] IP: Logged |
| #10
dond Guru Posts: 221 |
posted 02-13-2001 04:26 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for dond Edit/Delete Message
Kenny, You're missing a key point in your library analogy...The library is paying top dollar for your "free" information. The copyright holder is getting paid. The taxpayer is buying that data, and, everyone is happy. The Napster library doesn't pay a penny to the content provider...just steals it for distribution. It's theft, any way you look at it! ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #11
pmarinovich Guru Posts: 402 |
posted 02-13-2001 04:31 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for pmarinovich Edit/Delete Message
Wow, I had to go to a meeting and I got way behind in this debate. Oh well, I'll post it anyway. Hello dond! You're wasting your time, but then again, so am I. _________________________________________ You are a fascist. Wasn't that clear from the start? You can spend your entire life studying music and refining your art. You can spend your life's savings to create a professional studio recording that is as unique and enjoyable as anything else on the planet but if you hope to gain any recompense, you certainly must be a fascist (sounds more like a capitalist to me, I must me missing sumfin). Isn't that clear? Kenny's interpretation of a 200 year old document says the following: 1) Music is the same as literature, both are nothing more than information. Yeah, that's what I was thinking last time I listened to my favorite song: hmmm, interesting information! 2) The Constitution (if and only if his interpretation is correct) should not be amended to compensate for new technologies because the principles are not to be questioned. I'm quite sure John Hancock would have loved Napster. Doncha think? Those guys were no better than us. Surely they would pounce on all those free songs. 3) All the billions of dollars spent to compensate artists for their copyrights up to now was all needless because Kenny says we've got the Constitution all wrong. Well, I hope some of it was put to good use, like maybe the creation of more art. Who knows. Why do we have to point out the obvious? It is illegal to go into a library and copy Stephen King's books. I thought everyone knew that. Kenny, you are a sickeningly selfish individual. Napster works for your personal needs so you think it is okay to impose it on everyone else regardless of their personal philosophy or ability to perform live or other life circumstances. For some people, artist royalties are their only source of income. Oh, but fuck them. They are probably fascists, right? If you want to give your music away, fine. There are a million other alternatives to do that. You have no right to give others music away on a grand scale. Do I sound angry? Maybe you think we are too dumb to know that it is an insult to be called a fascist? Guess again. I have had enough of your bile. You understand perfectly the holes in your schpiel but you choose to inflict damage on fellow artists to further your own agenda. Bass Dude, Kenny will never concede any point you make no matter how valid and if you persist, he will misrepresent your words like he did with mine a while back. ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #12
dond Guru Posts: 221 |
posted 02-13-2001 04:32 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for dond Edit/Delete Message
Kenny, Much of thetechnical information in libraries is paid for as a per use license. Everytime a patron accesses the data, the library picks up the tab. My family is knee deep in librarians, and, my wife is the chairman of our local library. You have no idea how hard these people work to bring you free information at your local library. The taxpayers are paying a fortune to keep you legal, and, continually expand your knowledge base. As i said earlier, Libraries are very different then Napster. Napster steals, while libraries rent! ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #13
KennyLee Guru Posts: 1476 |
posted 02-13-2001 04:33 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for KennyLee Edit/Delete Message
quote: The Napster user buys one copy. Just like a library. And shares it with 57 million people. © 2001 Kenny Lee ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #14
KennyLee Guru Posts: 1476 |
posted 02-13-2001 04:42 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for KennyLee Edit/Delete Message
quote: Well, Pete, you are way deep in "kill the messenger" land here. Hey, Kenny Lee does not make the history of copyright up. What has happened before is known. If you have new historical info, please share it. As far as calling you a fascist? I don't think I did directly. But let's look at that. You, Pete, have created musical works. That you want to publish for public consumption. But you want no one to have access to the information/musical works you have created unless they have paid you, Pete, for it? Furthermore, if someone buys a copy of your creation? You don't want them to share it with anyone unless you, Pete, get paid for it? Am I correct in understanding your position? © 2001 Kenny Lee ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #15
dond Guru Posts: 221 |
posted 02-13-2001 04:43 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for dond Edit/Delete Message
Kenny, Read the notice next to the copy machine in your library. It should give a concise definition of copyright law, and, a thorough explanation of fair use doctrine too. Our library also outlines recent additions to internet copyright law, coupled with the copier notice, at every computer terminal attached to a printer. Librarians trust their patrons to obey the law, once it's explained to them. It's the law, for copy machines, locally, we're ahead of the curve providing current information for computer patrons. That will be law soon too. Pete, welcome back! ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #16
dond Guru Posts: 221 |
posted 02-13-2001 04:50 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for dond Edit/Delete Message
Kenny, Again, much of the information available at your library is paid for on a per use basis...a royalty is paid to the information creator each time a patron accesse the data! Much of your "free" info at the library is paid for with a blanket license...so many thousand users are supposed, and, a discount rate is paid. Napster pays nothing! Napster steals from the creators! ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #17
KennyLee Guru Posts: 1476 |
posted 02-13-2001 04:52 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for KennyLee Edit/Delete Message
quote: Don't go to the library anymore, dond. But I can make a copy for my own personal use, can't I? I know I can't sell the copy. But I can still make a copy? Right? © 2001 Kenny Lee ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #18
TheBassDude Guru Posts: 364 |
posted 02-13-2001 04:54 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for TheBassDude Edit/Delete Message
quote: But you have violated the copyright to which you tacitly agreed by opening the package and are now subject to prosecution.
quote: And you are abetting a criminal act.
quote: So is burning a copy and GIVING it to you... which is no different than giving you that illegal copy via Napster. Pull the gun all the way out of the holster so you don't shoot yourself in the foot...
quote: ditto..
quote: violation.
quote: tell it to the judge...
quote: There is a fundemental flaw in your logic, Kenny. You are making the incorrect assumption that the definitions of performance and information are one and the same... People make money packaging their performances... performances for which they expect to get paid... You have no inherent right to their performance...
quote: Really? Then why did so many people commission works from the great composers of the 17th and 18th Centuries?
quote: Or are you now contending that nobody deserves to be paid for services rendered?
quote: Edison was an inventor... (by the way, he, like most musicians, expected to be paid for his work) as well as a bad business man... why are you bringing up him?
quote: There you go again, making that same erroneous assertion...
quote: Precisely so... But you are still assuming that you have a right to an invention of mine... or anyone elses, just because you think it is information to which you have a right... Please find me the legal precedent for that assertion... As it's clearly the crux of your argument, you should be able to find it quite readily. Bet you can't.
quote: Apples and oranges as described above.
quote: Before I go any further, do you realize that you have agreed to the copyright assertion of the CD maker when you broke the seal? By breaking the seal on the CD, you are giving tacit agreement to the protection of the copyright holder... There's plenty of legal precedent for this... And here's the kicker... If you don't like that basic fact, you don't have to get the CD in the first place. ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #19
KennyLee Guru Posts: 1476 |
posted 02-13-2001 04:57 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for KennyLee Edit/Delete Message
quote: Well, now this is news to me. ASCAP/BMI for libraries or some such. Museums, too? ©2001 KL worldwide ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #20
KennyLee Guru Posts: 1476 |
posted 02-13-2001 05:09 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for KennyLee Edit/Delete Message
quote: Your whole post is based on this one "break the seal" premise. This came up in dialogue between Orrin Hatch and Hilary Rosen at the televised Senate Hearings. "What is Fair Use". Hatch said that sharing copies was legal. He wrote the law. Hilary Rosen of the RIAA said that the RIAA's position was that it was illegal. I'm going with Orrin Hatch on this one. It doesn't matter what the RIAA says "Fair Use" is. What matters is what Congress and the Supreme Court say "Fair Use" is. Once again, also, you say that a performance is not information once converted to 00110101. So we have yet to even agree on the Glossary. What is the Glossary that you prefer, Bass Dude? ©2001 KL universal ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #21
dond Guru Posts: 221 |
posted 02-13-2001 05:14 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for dond Edit/Delete Message
Kenny, The myraid variety of fees libraries pay to provide you with "free" info may be news to you, but, ask any library administator how it impacts their budget. You are legal at the library! They play by the rules! It costs a fortune! Information ain't cheap!!!! In our little town, we're looking at budget increases in 6 figure increments, to provide the latest data legally, and, to provide state of the art web access for everyone. We can either provide a fancy new building, to compete for middle class patrons, with Borders, or provide the latest information, and state of the art computers for every patron, in every category. The cost is the same! What will the taxpayer want the most? Our board went for information,and more sophisticated computers, with enhanced databases, and, our coffee shop isn't nearly as nice as Borders! Our site was modern in 1950. ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #22
pmarinovich Guru Posts: 402 |
posted 02-13-2001 05:15 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for pmarinovich Edit/Delete Message
dond, The library information was very enlightening. I should spend more time in libraries. I'm becoming encouraged by people like you and bass dude and Dave Griffith who help to educate the masses with far more eloquence than I can muster when I get pissed. I just read somewhere that I should drink more water and my mind would be sharper. I dunno. Kenny's alright. He probably convinces himself of most of this stuff. That's what happens when you don't respect your colleagues. It becomes easy to keep feeding off your own ideas with some kind of circular logic that runs off like a waterspout in the bayou. On the other hand, I should be shot for losing my temper. It cheapens any point that I make and actually lends credibility to the other side. I should just be thankful for the way things have turned out so far. It's just that I feel the responsibility to break up these little clogs of anti-artist sewage when I find them. Apparently it wasn't necessary. You guys dismantled him pretty handily. Part of my passion comes from years as a painting student, wondering how the hell was I going to make a living off my paintings. I kind of knew it was my calling to show people how depriving artists of compensation would eventually harm the fabric and quality of life in any society. ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #23
KennyLee Guru Posts: 1476 |
posted 02-13-2001 05:23 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for KennyLee Edit/Delete Message
quote: Actually, my mom is a librarian,, dond. I grew up in libraries. Never heard of this ASCAP/BMI type fee for each user though. Must be a new one they just came up with. Napster is not actually a library, though. Although a library operates under the same Constitutional principles of sharing information as Napster. All the content is held by the users of Napster. Not Napster itself. Napster just connects everybody real conveniently. No users on Napster = No content available using Napster. In other words, it just looks like all the songs are on Napster. the reality is that they are on the computers of 57 million users. MP3.com is like a library though. Because they hold all the content. And it ain't cheap for them either. ©2001 all rights reserved KL ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #24
KennyLee Guru Posts: 1476 |
posted 02-13-2001 05:27 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for KennyLee Edit/Delete Message
quote: Can I quote you in my promo, Pete. © 2001 waterspout productions ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #25
TheBassDude Guru Posts: 364 |
posted 02-13-2001 05:30 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for TheBassDude Edit/Delete Message
quote: No... actually the whole premise of my argument is that your argument is based solely on sound-bites... to wit:
quote: Orrin Hatch? an expert on... what? Lining his own pocket like most congressmen?
quote: And congressmen never write laws on subjects about which they know nothing... Look... Congressmen write laws on the most banal topics... It's up to the Courts to decide the application of those laws.
quote: Funny... the Supreme Court wouldn't lump Congress into that last statement... In reality, the Supreme Court will be the final arbiter... Wanna make a wager? Wanna bet that in 10 years my argument will win out? Oh sure... It'll get really grey for those who want to believe that a free-enterprise society owes them some personal freedom to determine for themselves what they will or will not have to steal, but in the end, copyright laws will be upheld.
quote: Yes... that's exactly what I'm saying... Oh sure, it's data... but so is the analog of that digital data... but information? get real. I'll say this again... Just because it's easier to steal and distribute, doesn't make it legal to do so!
quote: Kenny, I don't mean to sound insulting, but we couldn't agree on a reality, let alone a glossary.
quote: The glossary of common sense... Napsterites just love delving into the minutia of language hoping that there will be some loophole that will justify their violations... Sorry... But that's the truth. Jeeesh... you guys sound like Bill Clinton... "That all depends on what the meaning of 'is' is..."
------------------ IP: Logged |
| #26
pmarinovich Guru Posts: 402 |
posted 02-13-2001 05:31 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for pmarinovich Edit/Delete Message
Go ahead, quote me if you wish. ------------------ [This message has been edited by pmarinovich (edited 02-13-2001).] IP: Logged |
| #27
pmarinovich Guru Posts: 402 |
posted 02-13-2001 05:35 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for pmarinovich Edit/Delete Message
Actually bass dude, if I can beat Kenny to the punch, Orrin Hatch is a life time musician and has at times shown genuine concern for artists rights. Otherwise, your points are well spoken. ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #28
KennyLee Guru Posts: 1476 |
posted 02-13-2001 05:44 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for KennyLee Edit/Delete Message
quote: Well, I too, believe that in the end, copyright laws will be upheld. Just like they were upheld in the Diamond Rio case. Just like they were upheld in the Betamax VCR case. Just like they were upheld in the piano roll case. Now the copyright holders may not be happy with the WAY they are upheld. But they will be upheld. The difference is, you see copyright as a total right. But so far, copyright has been a LIMITED right. It only lasts so long, and only covers certain things. Now, that may change to the TOTAL right you profess. It's all politics in the end. But on Napster's side, there are 57 million registered voters. And only 50 million people voted in the last election. Orrin Hatch for President/2004 [image not archived] ------------------
[This message has been edited by KennyLee (edited 02-13-2001).] IP: Logged |
| #29
dond Guru Posts: 221 |
posted 02-13-2001 06:53 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for dond Edit/Delete Message
Kenny, Libraries aren't protected by the constitution in any way, beyond the first ammendement. Back then, free libraries that we know didn't exist. They are a recent addition to the common good. At the birth of our nation, libraries were a luxury only available to the wealthy. I hate to keep referring to our local library, but, it will illustrate my point. It began in the early 1700's as a subscription service, among wealthy residents of the town. The library, as an institution, predates the incorporation of our town within the state. It's the oldest, continually functioning, organization in town. Even the fire department came later in our history! Books cost a bundle 300 years ago, and, only wealthy people actually owned them. If you were willing to contribute every year, you could borrow books from the library. If you couldn't pay, you couldn't use the library. Back then, there was no such thing as the common good, unless you could personally afford it. That's a new concept. In the late 1800's, the administrators gave their private library to the town, for the benefit of all residents, with an important condition, that exists today. That was, an independent, board of directors, to administer the organization, and, most important, determine library policy forever. At the turn of the last century, when many subscription libraries became community assets, a lot of benefactors, with true foresight, created community libraries with full autonomy. In 2001, their wisdom is treasured! The best current libraries usually, are still managed by autonomous, volunteer, boards of directors. They don't get paid, but, they wield heavy power over their libraries. It's why libraries continue to thrive, and, adapt to modern life. Our government has no real control over the library, only the obligation to pay their bills, as long as it's a free service for town residents. This is a rare freedom today, and, made it possible to easily bring our town library into the digital age, despite kicking and screaming by local government. The board spent a lot of money on computer technology, when town politicians thought a few extra dollars for books was waste! Today, we have a full, digital library, plus a half million books too. Subscription licenses, royalties, pay per use, blanket bulk royalties, and, all the other staggered payment formulas for information use at the library aren't new trends. They've been around for well over 100 years! Ask your mom. Especially for technical, and, rapidly changing statistical data, these are common billing methods to libraries. The internet has added a lot more new categories, but, per use billing is history at your local library too! Your mom knows this! Libraries began as a true capitalist luxury. Napster began the same way. Libraries paid full boat for content, since day #one. Napster hasn't paid a dime for anything on their site. 300 years from today, who'll still exist???? ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #30
deel Guru Posts: 217 |
posted 02-13-2001 07:09 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for deel Edit/Delete Message
quote: music, recorded on any media, tape/digital or wax cylinder has been transformed into material object. ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #31
KennyLee Guru Posts: 1476 |
posted 02-13-2001 07:58 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for KennyLee Edit/Delete Message
quote: Napster??? Or at least the concept of Napster??? Napster buys no book, or CDs. It is not a library, dond. It just conects people that do own CD's. Revolutionary concept, Napster is. Anyhow, informative stuff about libraries, dond. Although most people think of libraries and museums as government facilities, you point out that they can be privately owned too. Even charge for their use. Hey, I wonder if there are any communities of people sharing books on the internet? Hmmm....maybe audio books? I'll have to check it out. Search for Texter or Wordster or Novelster or something like that. ©2001 KL libraries ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #32
KennyLee Guru Posts: 1476 |
posted 02-13-2001 08:01 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for KennyLee Edit/Delete Message
quote: Nope. transferred ONTO a material object. For instance, a CD-RW can contain different information at different times. Just like my hard drive can. Or my brain. [image not archived] ©2001 KL's brain trust ------------------ [This message has been edited by KennyLee (edited 02-13-2001).] IP: Logged |
| #33
Davey Boy Crocky Guru Posts: 261 |
posted 02-13-2001 11:36 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for Davey Boy Crocky Edit/Delete Message
Well, after all the debates, all I have left to say is: How Stupid ------------------ Davey Boy Crocky's Solo Project IP: Logged |
| #34
KennyLee Guru Posts: 1476 |
posted 02-13-2001 11:56 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for KennyLee Edit/Delete Message
Well, when you start with "How Stupid" Davey Boy? You always end up there. In a month it will just be guttural sounds and icons. ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #35
KennyLee Guru Posts: 1476 |
posted 02-13-2001 11:57 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for KennyLee Edit/Delete Message
I almost forgot one step of regression, Davey Boy. TYPING YOUR POSTS IN ALL CAPS!!!! ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #36
Davey Boy Crocky Guru Posts: 261 |
posted 02-14-2001 01:24 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for Davey Boy Crocky Edit/Delete Message
UNNGGGHH NAPSTER FIRE ------------------ Davey Boy Crocky's Solo Project IP: Logged |
| #37
TheBassDude Guru Posts: 364 |
posted 02-14-2001 03:02 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for TheBassDude Edit/Delete Message
BEER!  ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #38
KennyLee Guru Posts: 1476 |
posted 02-14-2001 11:53 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for KennyLee Edit/Delete Message
Nope. You guys aren't there yet. You have links in your sigs and they work. But you're getting there. You're almost there. I give it a month. Maybe less. ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #39
deel Guru Posts: 217 |
posted 02-15-2001 12:27 AM
Click Here to See the Profile for deel Edit/Delete Message
jeez! split a fukin hair KL!
quote: i stand corrected, yes onto , not into, yet the music that you download and listen to is a physical object...data..taking up space on a hardrive.
quote: no duh, but when i make an audio cd i never put data files on it..so i'm not sure where you are steering this .. ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #40
Tundead The One and Only Guru Posts: 175 |
posted 02-15-2001 02:46 AM
Click Here to See the Profile for Tundead The One and Only Edit/Delete Message
Im not sure where it is stearing either deel. I mean im basically lost in this thread. Could someone maybe condence the point here into a couple of sentence structures for me, maybe IP: Logged |
| This topic is 3 pages long: 1 2 3 All times are ET (US) | next newest topic | next oldest topic |
Post New Topic  |
Hop to: Go |
Contact Us | ListenSmart.com
Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.41a
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 1999.