"I'm going to steal a vacuum. If I like it, I'll go buy another one
because I feel like supporting the people that made it."-- said no one ever
Just because music, books, movies are digital, and easily stolen, shouldn't
make it a justifiable crime.
And, as a way of life, I've never been one who thinks much of the idea that:
I know it's probably not right. But I can't help to change it. So I'll
just go with the rest of the sheep. I'll just push that guilt so deep down
that not only does it become non-existent, it'll also become a source of
pride for my ignorance.
If this is considered being on a "high horse", giddyup bitches.
On Oct 22, 2014 1:38 PM, "Laurent Knauth" <laurent.knauth@gmail.com> wrote:
quoted 78 lines As Sham said, <<*people think of themselves as good and moral*>>. This is
> As Sham said, <<*people think of themselves as good and moral*>>. This is
> how i might see myself for eating veggy, but definitely not as being
> <<urban>> -- i eat organic but have a unecological way of life, having a
> cellphone (even though it's a cheap one that i almost never use) and a
> computer assembled by poor people for the antipodes ; on top of that, i'm
> French and as such, taking advantage of <<Françafrique>>, even though i'm not
> responsible for it and find it more than regrettable.
>
> Now, sorry if my contribution seemed a little provocative, but then piracy
> concerns appear subjective and insoluble to me -- until some legal package
> ultimately gets the afterword, like it happened with sampling.
>
> Yet, even though it finally has a legal framework, the legitimacy of
> sampling remains hard to define to me so far. In one case, i'm tempted to
> think that sampling a whole bar is going too far, but then of course it
> depends on who does it and how. On the other end, some people think that
> even sampling a snaredrum <<only>> is already stealing, because recording
> this snaredrum required a whole life of abnegation.
>
> Like many people here, i'm hoping to make some music that deserves some
> <<commercial>> release one day.
> And like many people here, i'm listening to illegal music a lot, which i
> generally don't like so i have no problem about it.
> Sure, there are Youtube, Spotify and other <<legal>>-likes which i also use
> an awful lot, but many <<serious>> people see them as the fatal blow dragging
> down the music industry.
>
> Until Universal Music trully deserves its name -- i.e. they'd stream about
> each and every existing music catalog on earth --, maybe only lossless audio
> should be forbidden ?
>
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 3:58 PM, Esa Juhani Ruoho <esaruoho@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> This is like a can of worms type discussion that just doesn't stop.
>>
>> What, we've moved from Torrent piracy to sampling, is it illegal, should
>> it be allowed, what if it shouldn't be. when is sampling a sample piracy,
>> when is it theft,
>> ....
>> and
>> ....
>> when is it arson?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>> http://lackluster.bandcamp.com
>> http://lackluster.org
>> http://esaruoho.tumblr.com
>> iPhone: +358403703659
>>
>> On 22 Oct 2014, at 16:55, Laurent Knauth <laurent.knauth@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Correct me if i'm wrong, but Luke Vibert took over other people's music
>> before he ever got a chance to get pirated.
>> Now of course, that's a different story - or not ?
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 7:59 AM, Esa J. Ruoho <esaruoho@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Sham, I remember Luke Vibert saying to The effect that that is exactly
>>> what People mention to him at The drop of a hat.
>>> Luke Vibert.
>>>
>>> Sent from some iDevice. Written by Esa.
>>>
>>> > On 22 Oct 2014, at 02:45, Sham Beam <sham.beam@gmail.com> wrote:.
>>> >
>>> > If you met your favorite muso in a bar would you mention you
>>> downloaded their entire discography?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>