Grokster lost

Go ahead, get it off your chest.
Post Reply
User avatar
roymond
Beat It
Posts: 5188
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 3:42 pm
Instruments: Guitars, Bass, Vocals, Logic
Recording Method: Logic X, MacBookPro, Focusrite Scarlett 2i2
Submitting as: roymond, Dangerous Croutons, Intentionally Left Bank, Moody Vermin
Pronouns: he/him
Location: brooklyn
Contact:

Grokster lost

Post by roymond »

Even more reason to establish independent content networks, and wean ourselves from the RIAA, etc...
roymond.com | songfights | covers
"Any more chromaticism and you'll have to change your last name to Wagner!" - Frankie Big Face
User avatar
Future Boy
Push Comes to Shove
Posts: 412
Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2004 7:55 am
Instruments: Keyboard, Vocals
Recording Method: Apollo Twin, Reaper, Rhodes, Casios
Submitting as: Future Boy
Pronouns: he/him
Location: Seattle, WA
Contact:

Post by Future Boy »

New Album: Comes Apart | Missed Connections | With Johnny Cashpoint: A Maze of Death | modular synths on Youtube
deshead
Panama
Posts: 875
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 2:44 am
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Post by deshead »

Cory Doctorow's opinion echoes the generally held sentiment on this decision: it won't kill P2P but it might stifle innovation.
roymond wrote:Even more reason to establish independent content networks, and wean ourselves from the RIAA, etc...
The scary thing is, this (cop-out of a) Supreme Court decision will probably have ramifications far beyond anything the RIAA cares about, and possibly even affect things not traditionally thought of as "content". From an article in Salon today: "Souter struggled to construct a decision that would not impede the inventor in her garage who is tinkering away at the next great thing. The problem is, she will definitely have to hire a lawyer now."

As a Canadian and Bittorrent user, I laugh at the notion of killing P2P. But as a programmer, that hire-a-lawyer shit makes me anxious ...
User avatar
roymond
Beat It
Posts: 5188
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 3:42 pm
Instruments: Guitars, Bass, Vocals, Logic
Recording Method: Logic X, MacBookPro, Focusrite Scarlett 2i2
Submitting as: roymond, Dangerous Croutons, Intentionally Left Bank, Moody Vermin
Pronouns: he/him
Location: brooklyn
Contact:

Post by roymond »

Yes, that is the danger. These rulings set certain precedence that reach far beyond the obvious.
roymond.com | songfights | covers
"Any more chromaticism and you'll have to change your last name to Wagner!" - Frankie Big Face
User avatar
erik
Jump
Posts: 2341
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 11:06 am
Submitting as: 15-16 puzzle
Location: Austin
Contact:

Post by erik »

People in the blogosphere are fricking idiots who can't rub two brain cells together to form a thought, solely because they want to be allowed to infringe on copyrights that they don't agree with. It's stupid. I'm not saying that I don't like P2Ps, or that I don't download stuff that I never intend on paying for. I do, and will probably do so in the future. But I'm not going to stand on my high horse and say that I should be *allowed* to do so because someone, somewhere might be trading files legally, or that it might possibly, maybe stifle someone's future creativity when they create something else with an illegal function, because that's just fucking retarded.
deshead
Panama
Posts: 875
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 2:44 am
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Post by deshead »

erikb wrote:I'm not going to stand on my high horse and say that I should be *allowed* to do so because someone, somewhere might be trading files legally, or that it might possibly, maybe stifle someone's future creativity when they create something else with an illegal function, because that's just fucking retarded.
But in some respects, isn't "standing on your high horse" your duty, at least in a democratic society, when you sense an injust law?

By most accounts, the Supreme Court copped out on this one, passing the buck back to the lower courts and setting a potentially chilling precedent in the process. Vaidhyanathan's suggested future (from the Salon article I linked) in which Google becomes the target of lawsuits because of this decision is not so far-fetched that the justices can have been expected to overlook it.

The Grokster decision is bad law, and those who oppose it, whatever their methods, serve just as important a role as those who defined the law in the first place.
User avatar
jb
Hot for Teacher
Posts: 4159
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 10:12 am
Instruments: Guitar, Cello, Keys, Uke, Vox, Perc
Recording Method: Logic X
Submitting as: The John Benjamin Band
Pronouns: he/him
Location: WASHINGTON, DC
Contact:

Post by jb »

The problem is that frequently people DO get on their high-horse and claim that they have every right to just download whatever they want, whenever they want, without regard or respect shown to the author of the things they're downloading.

They claim that "information wants to be free" but really they just want to keep downloading gigs and gigs of free songs made by people who would really like to earn a living from that music.

So then they trot out the old "I'm not screwing the artist, I'm screwing the record label" argument, which is bullshit, because they're screwing them BOTH. They're certainly not HELPING the artist. What good is one more listener who doesn't provide revenue, to somebody like The Decembrists or Aimee Mann?

I'm with erik. I won't claim not to steal music, but I'm just gonna say I do it and not claim it's right. I'm being an asshole and a thief when I download music for free. Maybe there are mitigating circumstances, but often there aren't. It's just greed. I want all these songs and if there were a decent way to get them all I'd pay it. In fact, I have- I subscribed to Real Rhapsody for several months and now I subscribe to Yahoo Music. Now I can listen to a lot of what I want, and my bank account isn't precariously empty, and the stuff they don't have in my stream I can go buy in the store like normal.

But anybody who tries to justify stealing music as a "right" or a "protest" against an unjust law is immediately suspect in my eyes, and I'd like to know the last album they stole and the last time they paid for a t-shirt from that artist or went to their concert. All artists are not interconnected, so going to "some" concerts doesn't support everybody you're stealing from.

*shrug* Go ahead and steal music, just don't try to make me think you're being noble in your theft.
blippity blop ya don’t stop heyyyyyyyyy
User avatar
roymond
Beat It
Posts: 5188
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 3:42 pm
Instruments: Guitars, Bass, Vocals, Logic
Recording Method: Logic X, MacBookPro, Focusrite Scarlett 2i2
Submitting as: roymond, Dangerous Croutons, Intentionally Left Bank, Moody Vermin
Pronouns: he/him
Location: brooklyn
Contact:

Post by roymond »

jb wrote:I won't claim not to steal music, but I'm just gonna say I do it and not claim it's right.
Dude, you should log on as yourself when posting stuff like that :)

I still say support indie artists by buying what you enjoy and donating what you can, download free indie music provided by artists themselves, and rely less and less on the record industry. Buy what you will, but make pains to broaden the impact and success of the indie universe, and the mechanisms that deliver indie music.
roymond.com | songfights | covers
"Any more chromaticism and you'll have to change your last name to Wagner!" - Frankie Big Face
Southwest_Statistic
Push Comes to Shove
Posts: 314
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 2:48 pm
Instruments: Guitar, Lead Vocals
Recording Method: Renoise, Melodyne
Submitting as: Southwest Statistic
Location: Cleveland, OH
Contact:

Post by Southwest_Statistic »

I honestly don't care about P2P. It doesn't affect my habits in the least. The last 7 albums I have purchased have come from indie labels or directly from the unsigned artists.

I have turned on the radio from time to time, but have not heard anything that sounds half as good as the local gigs I go to.

Now, time for some sarcasm:

Oh my freakin' god, I can't copy "Coldplay" or "Backstreet Boys" anymore? What about all my favorite Pimpin' JamZ Yo, like the "Three 6 Mafia" or "Crime Mob" shizzle? How could they take my special ultra-meaningful Hood-Hoppin Muzicks? Popular Detroit radio just speaks to my freakin Heart Fo' Shilzzle:
Three 6 Mafia wrote:"Now step the fuck back nigga 'fore I hurt cha
Y'all niggaz comedy, funny to me like Geico commercials
I'm a G nigga, don't let this rap shit trick ya
Cause I'll introduce your mouth to this motherfuckin pistol"
- Who I Is
But seriously guys...

This ruling is great for independent musicians: The only music available to legally download from the internet for free is gonna be stuff from PureVolume, Garageband, and (of course) SongFight!

I also think it's going to hurt corporate music: I would never have gotten most of the corporate albums I own if I hadn't downloaded the bands to check them out and see what they sounded like.

This ruling gets no complaints from me.

Rock on!

Edit[0]: Fixed spelling error.
I'm back.
Hoblit
Hot for Teacher
Posts: 3669
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 12:48 pm
Pronouns: Dude or GURRRLLLL!
Location: Charlotte, NC ... A big city on its first day at the new job.
Contact:

Post by Hoblit »

I steal music. Right now it's the only way I can afford music outside of songfight/somesongs.

This ruling isn't necessarily about that though. It's about hindering technology and forcing P2P software developers into extra man hours and labor to make THEM responsible for what should be end users personal responsibility. Thats US not the developers.

It goes back to video tape. Except this time, the video tape makers would have to develop a tape that had filters that would have to not allow certain content to be video taped. And require every video tape maker to constantly keep up with each and every new corner in 'the ways around' their filters. Not to mention affording lawyers for every little item hollywood whines about.

This isn't just music thats being discussed. This is the whole entertainment industry. Their lack of enthusiasm to adapt to a new age of technology and utilizing the supreme court to keep thier profit margin grossly skewed in their favor is appalling. Thank god there are some companies realizing this (LIKE Rhapsody and online streaming video rentals) and adapting to a new world.

None of what I'm saying has anything to do with high horses or defending piracy. Carry on.
Me$$iah
Push Comes to Shove
Posts: 479
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2004 8:34 pm
Instruments: I just bought a 12 string and a stratocaster with a whammy bar
Recording Method: Sonic-Core
Submitting as: infrequently as ever
Location: Son of God - Im like EVERYWHERE

Post by Me$$iah »

Im not sure if I steal music or not. I mean i do use BitTorrent from time to time, Usually tho just to get a 'computer' copy of somthing ive already got on record(yeh i know ... but I just love the old colored vinyl anOMG shaped pic disks) or sumthing Ive got no intention of buying.
But also I pay for my internet, I pay top dollar for a topdraw service, with no limits on my downloads etc. and I use all the content provided to me...it seems to me that the ISP companies are the one who actually break the copyright laws by offering the files to download on their networks. As a consumer Ive paid for a full service, why should I deny myself certain areas of a service I pay for. The ISP companies should surley pay a fee to the record and film industries, maybe as some form of license, like bars do for juke-boxes DJs and cover bands

maybe Im wromg, but I do feel as tho I pay for my internet and all its goods

Id like to add tho that I do regularly buy CDs. I often buy direct from the artist if possible, failing that its a local independant record store. And Im always buying second hand vinyl{tho technically thats illegal too}

I buy way too many old records
Ive got thousands and they're everywhere
User avatar
Caravan Ray
bono
bono
Posts: 8647
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 1:51 pm
Instruments: Penis
Recording Method: Garageband
Submitting as: Caravan Ray,G.O.R.T.E.C,Lyricburglar,The Thugs from the Scallop Industry
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Contact:

Post by Caravan Ray »

I don't download music - but only because I'm not internet-savvy enough to know where to find it (except for when people post links to stuff on these boards, like for the Xmas GOM thing - is that P2P? I don't understand - I'm old...)

Anyway, I don't have an iPod or that stuff - but I buy a lot of CD's and I like to make copies so I can carry the copy or mixed CD's in my car. Nothing pisses me off more than paying $30 for a CD and then find out it's copy-protected so that I can't do something that's completely legal. That makes me want to not buy CD's and look for free downloads instead.

...Acually, I tell a lie. I did download some stuff once - that I paid for. the Telstra shop in Australia was selling songs for about 50c each - so, just to see how it worked, I ordered a dozen or so things that I like but didn't want to have to buy a whole CD to get. The songs came in a format that could only be played on one computer - I couldn't burn to CD or anything. Now I don't have that computer anymore - so I no longer have those songs. After that - I'm very disinclined to ever pay for downloads again.
User avatar
erik
Jump
Posts: 2341
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 11:06 am
Submitting as: 15-16 puzzle
Location: Austin
Contact:

Post by erik »

Hoblit wrote:It goes back to video tape.
Except with the video tape, and with photocopier, and with every other piece of technology which has the potential to be used to infringe on a copyright, a substantial percentage of the people using the product use it legally. You can't make that claim with P2P. That is exactly what makes it different from all other analogous technologies which have come before it: that the amount of legal transfers is so low that it might as well be nothing.
Post Reply