Off topic, please don't close.

Knight

Knight

Spaceman
This is kinda off topic, well, actually way off, and I know that stuff's restricted, but I want to take a kinda-sorta poll.

Who here thinks that Napster should keep getting sued by these greedy @$$holes who are already filthy rich with more money than some of us will ever see? Who here actually thinks a judge will go against something that's not going to stop? And my final question is: Do these idiots have a chance in Hell to stop it? I mean, MP3s have already made their stand, and I don't think a few million (10 to be exact, but that number's supposed to go up) will stop'em.

I know this is outta line Quarto, Kris, LOAF, but it's kinda WC related. Cobalt 60 MP3s are traded all the time, namely the WCP soundtracks. I don't want a fight, just opinions.

------------------
HTML Assistant: WC Space Command
Administrator: UBW 5th Fleet
Member of the LMG and hating it (Disgruntled Man)
I might be right, I might be wrong, but then again, I just might not care either. Got a problem with that?--Me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You're right Knight (Whoa cool that rhymes). Napster is just a harmless friendly community. And these big stars with money (Too much money) come in and start trying to take away songs that we took the time to download. Now I think Napster rocks. But I don't think the Judge will go against Napster.

------------------
And I was stupid enough to think that us brotha's had to stick togetha. :p
 
I think he'll be inbetween, he'll make'em pay, but Metallica won't get what they want out of it. After some of the comments made by Lars Ulrich, I really don't think they'll have too much fan appeal from those who spent 200-300 bucks on a portable MP3 player and are finding out that they might have a big hit taken in their collection.

BTW, for some references, though biased, head to:
http://www.parlars.com
 
Altough the bands that are sueing are right (legally they are), I believe they are fighting evolution , and therefore will lose to Napster.

------------------
Meson

Wing Commander is more than just a game. It is a lifestyle.

[This message has been edited by Meson (edited June 04, 2000).]
 
to be honest, i can see both sides of it. I mean, sure they already have money, and cd's are expensive, but after all, it is their music. they created it, they sell it. its their career. they have the right to that money, and no matter how much you have, you dont like people stealing it from you.
 
Yeah, but if you read some of the stuff Lars Ulrich put in their press release, it's stupid. They consider themselves artists. That's bullshit. Real artists, no matter how good, never do it for the money, they do it because they are good at it, and people enjoy what they do. Sure, if you can make a buck off of it, that's great. I can build computers, sell'em, and make a few hundred off each one. Big whoop. But you don't bite the hand(s) that feeds you by sueing them when they find a more conveient way to store/listen to your work. That's being greedy. Legally they don't mean shit, because their record labels released the songs originally, but they'll never admit that. Then it would be their fault. Plus, the fact that CD sales are up (at 16-17 bucks a pop, I don't know why) is irrealvent for some reason. And instead of trying to make CDs more appealing, like lowering to cost of them and making all of them "PC Enhanced" (which only costs a few thousand I am told), the RIAA is sueing them too!

------------------
HTML Assistant: WC Space Command
Administrator: UBW 5th Fleet
Member of the LMG and hating it (Disgruntled Man)
I might be right, I might be wrong, but then again, I just might not care either. Got a problem with that?--Me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Frankly, Knight, I think you're being exceedingly one-sided here.

And what's this about real artists not doing it for the money? What the hell? Does bread fall from the sky when you're an artist? Do real estate agents say, "No, let that house be our gift to you..."?!?

It's a screwed-up, money-oriented, individual-repressing society you live in. Better get used to it.
 
I think the bands are right and have every right to have a problem with Napster. I mean, a method for upcoming artists to promote their work? As if
smile.gif


Regardless of what happens to Napster, the music industry as we know it got DooMed when the MP3 format was developed. SDMI or whatever they're working on is not going to change that. Enjoy Napster while it lasts, and if it goes down, move on to an alternative (they already exist). But keep buying WC soundtracks
smile.gif


[This message has been edited by KrisV (edited June 04, 2000).]
 
Last edited:
I personally think Napster is harmless -- it's had no affect on music sales at large -- but I don't think the online society has any right to bitch and moan that it's being repressed
smile.gif
Should I be able to steal cake because 'real bakers' don't want to make money? And so on and so forth.

That said, if this online music thing actually starts to affect the recording industry, I'm absolutely certain that they'll be able to roll with the punches... expect there to be a completely new dynamic for music distribution... something more along the lines of TV. Millions of dollars are spent producing TV shows, and they're available for 'free' on the air. Musicians will find a new way to make money.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've not really been following the whole Napster/Metallica thing. But whether Metallica is legally right or not, they are IMO morally wrong. They are getting a little too big for their boots these days (Cliff would be spinning in his grave if he knew what was happening).
I think at some point they suddenly went from artists to a show me the money band. Considering how rich they actually are, what they are loosing in money to Napster is tiny.
Less well known bands such as Korn, which has always been more underground, are not concerned about MP3's and are actually encouraging them because it will get their music out to a wider audience.

------------------
'What goes around usually gets dizzy and falls over.'

Wing Commander - Secret Ops Missions
The Fanfiction Archives
 
I don't know how many of you know about V.O.D.(Vision Of Disorder) but all I can say is that they kick ass. Napster is doing them a favor.

------------------
And I was stupid enough to think that us brotha's had to stick togetha.
tongue.gif


[This message has been edited by Craze (edited June 04, 2000).]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
... they are IMO morally wrong ...
Click to expand...

How can they be morally wrong? It's their music.

Real artists, no matter how good, never do it for the money ...
Click to expand...

I almost agree. You may not do it for the money, but you never want some one else profitting from your work. The creator should have full control. Not some punk kid who decided to make copies and distribute them freely.
 
Napster does no more damage to the music industry than radios do. In the times before Napster, when people wanted music without buying it, they just recorded it straight off the radio.

Napster is just a more high-tech way of doing things.
smile.gif


------------------
Barrie "Cpl Hades" Almond
balmond@wcnews.com
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's like Steampunk said, their copies....Exactly just copies... I know that paintings and songs are different but when you distribute copies there's really no problem

------------------
And I was stupid enough to think that us brotha's had to stick togetha. :p
 
Look, you must remember to look at all three sides of any issue (including this one).

1. Metallica has every legal right to do so. BUT REMEMEMBER, METALLICA ISN'T SUEING NAPSTER. They received a friendly letter, with a few thousand users who were caught downloading illegal MP3's off Napster. Metallica isn't sueing them...
If you read the Press Release, 'to avoid any legal actions from Metaillic', they agreed to ban those such users from the Napster Servers.

2. Now, Napster is not getting the flame on this, (and if you think they are, you're wrong, because here is why).
Here's a question, an only a hypothetical one, imagine 'GetWeb.Com' is a server provider, providing server space for people who rent out server space for their own 'YourName.com' (remember, server space for lots of places, is mostly rented). If this new 'Hello.com' is an illegal warez site, pornography, etc, and a certain company is 'maybe attempting' to sue because of the contents, who will they sue?
They will sue the renters of the site, NOT the Service Provider. The Service Provider is not legally obligated to control content on a .com site, (even if they say that they are, they have no legal obligation, and if they fail to do what they say, they get no flame). So the renter's get 'sued', and the Service Provider comes out clean, because, hey! Don't shoot the Messenger!

3. Now, finally, the third side, the user's side. Legally, what they did was wrong, and should have been aware of what they were doing (if they were not already so). For example, if you make an MP3 off a music CD on a program (let's say like RealJukebox, there's one), in the Options menu of this program (and remember, RuleJukebox legally can make MP3s of CDs), there is a Security Protection Program (or whatever that program will call it, but its all the same). The Program will add Copyright information to the MP3. If you use an MP3 player (let's say WinAmp, that's a common one), under the File Info section, it will say (Copyright: Yes). If you were listening to that exact song and MP3, but it was made as (Copyright: No [this can be done in RealJukebox, our example, by turning OFF the Copyright program, where you will receive a terms of agreement message that tells you of this), then what you are listening to is Illegal. And therefore, can legally be prosecuted for such.

But remember, those users got off very light. Napster, as the mediator of the two, decided with Metallica, to not press charges against the users. Napster had to do something, because as the mediator, they had to punish somehow, banned the users.

There you go, that's how it works, and don't forget it.

-Master Chief J. Graison, BLS Krakatoa

------------------
Member of BlackLance HQ

"To take one step forward, you must look back three steps... and walk forward while looking back... "

[This message has been edited by Metras (edited June 04, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by Metras (edited June 04, 2000).]
 
steampunk said:
I almost agree. You may not do it for the money, but you never want some one else profitting from your work. The creator should have full control. Not some punk kid who decided to make copies and distribute them freely.
Click to expand...

Who's profitting? Hell, last time I checked, Napster's all sponsored by it's parent company, and they sure ain't makin' too damn much from it. Yes, and in most cases the creators have full control, like now, try to download a Metallica song, that's a good example. And how, preytell, do you copy and distribute and MP3? It's not like dubbing a CD or a tape and giving it to someone, then they can actually use it. Unless you have a labtop, or a 100-300 portable player, the songs are pretty much stuck on your PC, with no other alternatives except the ones listed above.
And what's this about real artists not doing it for the money? What the hell? Does bread fall from the sky when you're an artist? Do real estate agents say, "No, let that house be our gift to you..."?!?
Click to expand...
Quarto, think about who's sueing here. They could put their profits together and only be a few notches below Mr. Gates. I mean, why in the hell are they complaining? Like LOAF and myself stated, CD sales are up some 10% or something like that, so that leaves those who are informed thinking WTF? and those who're not, thinking the same as steampunk, thinking that they need more money.

Regardless of what happens to Napster, the music industry as we know it got DooMed when the MP3 format was developed. SDMI or whatever they're working on is not going to change that. Enjoy Napster while it lasts,
and if it goes down, move on to an alternative (they already exist). But keep buying WC soundtracks
Click to expand...
Good point. What if they started using MP3 as the format for CDs? Think about it. They players are out there now. What is it? Like 8 hours of music instead of 74 mins?

Musicians will find a new way to make money.
Click to expand...
Those who aren't lazy fools. To those few, lawsuits will solve mostly anything, basically because they don't have to do anything.

Napster does no more damage to the music industry than radios do. In the times before Napster, when people wanted music without buying it, they just recorded it straight off the radio.
Click to expand...

People still do that. (Myself included)

Metallica isn't sueing them...
Click to expand...
That's BS. They are sueing them for 10 mil. $100,000 for every song traded.

They will sue the renters of the site, NOT the Service Provider.
Click to expand...
Ok, think of that statement from the Artists position. Do you really want to feel the effects of sueing 300,000 fans, figuring each of those fans have at least 6-10 friends who also like Metallica? Figure 1,800,000-3,000,000 people who don't like you, who will tell their friends...need I say more?

Plus, they banned those who traded those MP3s. Not everyone knows a lot about Napster, Mp3s, etc work. Go to a high school and look at some of the stuff downloaded, you'll see what I mean. They'll download stuff from people on a 33.6 when they're on a T1. Not everyone's going to go looking at the file properties of those MP3s and go:
"OH MY GOD! I HAVE AN ILLEGAL MP3!" Ask some people if they have illegal MP3s on their computer. Alot of the average uses will go:
"There's such a thing?"
Not everyone knows as much as the majority of us here to, nor do those people care. They just want to listen to music. The day Napster made Metallica songs unavailable, I had at least 30 of my friends call me, because they couldn't get it to search for them. This is really, really long, but I had alot to say, so if you're with me this far, thanks
smile.gif


------------------
HTML Assistant: WC Space Command
Administrator: UBW 5th Fleet
Member of the LMG and hating it (Disgruntled Man)
I might be right, I might be wrong, but then again, I just might not care either. Got a problem with that?--Me.

[This message has been edited by Knight (edited June 04, 2000).]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Here's an excerpt from: http://www.maximumpc.com/content/2000/05/04/11331

Drummer Lars Ulrich suggests Napster users are cowards stating, "If they want to
steal Metallica's music, instead of hiding behind their computers in their bedrooms and dorm rooms, then just go down to Tower Records and grab them off the shelves."

Ulrich continues, "What we're doing is giving Napster the information they thought we couldn't get them, which is basically real people downloading Metallica master songs." Napster founder, Shawn Fanning, made the statement, "I'm a huge Metallica fan and therefore really sorry that they're going in this direction. If we got the opportunity to explain to the band why Napster exists and why fans enjoy Napster, perhaps we could bring all of this to a peaceful conclusion."
Click to expand...

------------------
HTML Assistant: WC Space Command
Administrator: UBW 5th Fleet
Member of the LMG and hating it (Disgruntled Man)
I might be right, I might be wrong, but then again, I just might not care either. Got a problem with that?--Me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Quarto, think about who's sueing here. They could put their profits together and only be a few notches below Mr. Gates. I mean, why in the hell are they complaining? Like LOAF and myself stated, CD sales are up some 10% or something like that, so that leaves those who are informed thinking WTF? and those who're not, thinking the same as steampunk, thinking that they need more money.
Click to expand...
I don't give a damn if they're rich. I wouldn't give a damn if they were richer than Mr. Gates. You know what law is about? Law is about precendents. So, if Metallica has no right to sue people from stealing their work - that's a very dangerous precedent you're setting. You're putting thieves above the law, and sooner or later, someone who *doesn't* have all that money will suffer for it.

Personally, I agree that MP3s are here to stay and so on, but it would do you a world of good to look at *both* sides of the story before you go and condemn anyone. Because let's face it. You're not complaining about them attacking an innocent little site/person/organisation. Lots of innocent people/organisations all over the world get attacked every day, and I don't see you out there protesting. Hell no - you support it, since you insist that the American military is so great that they should run the US. So what is the problem? Why in hell are you complaining? I think if you answer that question *truthfully* you'll feel somewhat different about all this.
 
Gentlemen, before this drift turns into a contravercy where WE will be sueing Napster because they have Wing Commander Song that originally came from CIC.
Look, what you read is propoganda...propoganda, and MORE propoganda!!!
Instead of releasing frustrations on the board, which you didn't even know you had; let's wrap it up.

Fact: Metallica requests Napster to ban several thousand users given by a friendlly, non-hostile letter, to Napster
Fiction: Metallica sues tens of millions of dollars to Napster (Exerpt from Knight).

Wrong there. Metallica, and every other band group which someone has at least heard of, is NOT sueing Napster. Sure, they are sueing others, but they are not doing it to Napster.

Head over to Napster, and read the Press Release on it.

Oh, and by the way, when you're done, don't post your disagreements with it, because, ya know... CIC is a user-friendly place, and that's what I like about it!

biggrin.gif


------------------
Assistant Game Master
Chief of Public Relations
BlackLance HQ

"..there are always three sides to any given truth..."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top