For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
dcba
"Otherwise back to snailmail again?"
Torrent sites work fine...
Quote
stonesmuziekfanQuote
dcba
"Otherwise back to snailmail again?"
Torrent sites work fine...
ofcourse, but only untill they are killed too.
Quote
falo01Quote
stonesmuziekfanQuote
dcba
"Otherwise back to snailmail again?"
Torrent sites work fine...
ofcourse, but only untill they are killed too.
why should they be killed if they do not contain officially released stuff ?
megaupload and all the other shit is relly criminla with all their content,
so it shouldnt surprise us. it`s ridiculous to compare it with torrent sites.
at least thats good news ;-)
Quote
MunichhiltonQuote
falo01Quote
stonesmuziekfanQuote
dcba
"Otherwise back to snailmail again?"
Torrent sites work fine...
ofcourse, but only untill they are killed too.
why should they be killed if they do not contain officially released stuff ?
megaupload and all the other shit is relly criminla with all their content,
so it shouldnt surprise us. it`s ridiculous to compare it with torrent sites.
at least thats good news ;-)
falo, you give the Justic Dept too much credit if you think they will differentiate between sites...
Think of them as a 'judicial' bulldozer...get outta the way!!!
Quote
Munichhilton
falo, you give the Justic Dept too much credit if you think they will differentiate between sites...
Think of them as a 'judicial' bulldozer...get outta the way!!!
Quote
Erik_SnowQuote
MunichhiltonQuote
falo01Quote
stonesmuziekfanQuote
dcba
"Otherwise back to snailmail again?"
Torrent sites work fine...
ofcourse, but only untill they are killed too.
why should they be killed if they do not contain officially released stuff ?
megaupload and all the other shit is relly criminla with all their content,
so it shouldnt surprise us. it`s ridiculous to compare it with torrent sites.
at least thats good news ;-)
falo, you give the Justic Dept too much credit if you think they will differentiate between sites...
Think of them as a 'judicial' bulldozer...get outta the way!!!
Exactly. They would never bother to check out every single torrent or every single torrentsite, or bother to for instance seperate between "alternate studio version of Brown Sugar" or "official version"....very often these things aren't even mentioned on torrent-sites. Just the song titles.
THere's 1000s of bands out there. Much easier for them to just close down each and everyone of them.
Quote
hedegaardQuote
Erik_SnowQuote
MunichhiltonQuote
falo01Quote
stonesmuziekfanQuote
dcba
"Otherwise back to snailmail again?"
Torrent sites work fine...
ofcourse, but only untill they are killed too.
why should they be killed if they do not contain officially released stuff ?
megaupload and all the other shit is relly criminla with all their content,
so it shouldnt surprise us. it`s ridiculous to compare it with torrent sites.
at least thats good news ;-)
falo, you give the Justic Dept too much credit if you think they will differentiate between sites...
Think of them as a 'judicial' bulldozer...get outta the way!!!
Exactly. They would never bother to check out every single torrent or every single torrentsite, or bother to for instance seperate between "alternate studio version of Brown Sugar" or "official version"....very often these things aren't even mentioned on torrent-sites. Just the song titles.
THere's 1000s of bands out there. Much easier for them to just close down each and everyone of them.
Erik are SOOO wrong! Torrents is the most risci place at all. Thats where you all the find legal stuff. In "their" campaing last year FBI busted every torrent, with great succes - and thats a fact. Yes Uncle Sam , just close the whole shit down, and we are all under complet control - as you wants!
Bo
Quote
Erik_SnowQuote
hedegaardQuote
Erik_SnowQuote
MunichhiltonQuote
falo01Quote
stonesmuziekfanQuote
dcba
"Otherwise back to snailmail again?"
Torrent sites work fine...
ofcourse, but only untill they are killed too.
why should they be killed if they do not contain officially released stuff ?
megaupload and all the other shit is relly criminla with all their content,
so it shouldnt surprise us. it`s ridiculous to compare it with torrent sites.
at least thats good news ;-)
falo, you give the Justic Dept too much credit if you think they will differentiate between sites...
Think of them as a 'judicial' bulldozer...get outta the way!!!
Exactly. They would never bother to check out every single torrent or every single torrentsite, or bother to for instance seperate between "alternate studio version of Brown Sugar" or "official version"....very often these things aren't even mentioned on torrent-sites. Just the song titles.
THere's 1000s of bands out there. Much easier for them to just close down each and everyone of them.
Erik are SOOO wrong! Torrents is the most risci place at all. Thats where you all the find legal stuff. In "their" campaing last year FBI busted every torrent, with great succes - and thats a fact. Yes Uncle Sam , just close the whole shit down, and we are all under complet control - as you wants!
Bo
Read my post again, Bo
I'm saying that they don't care about if there's for example "unreleased studio versions" being torrented, they wouldn't seperate between that and the offcial songs. They just close the whole damn place down.
Quote
Erik_SnowQuote
hedegaardQuote
Erik_SnowQuote
MunichhiltonQuote
falo01Quote
stonesmuziekfanQuote
dcba
"Otherwise back to snailmail again?"
Torrent sites work fine...
ofcourse, but only untill they are killed too.
why should they be killed if they do not contain officially released stuff ?
megaupload and all the other shit is relly criminla with all their content,
so it shouldnt surprise us. it`s ridiculous to compare it with torrent sites.
at least thats good news ;-)
falo, you give the Justic Dept too much credit if you think they will differentiate between sites...
Think of them as a 'judicial' bulldozer...get outta the way!!!
Exactly. They would never bother to check out every single torrent or every single torrentsite, or bother to for instance seperate between "alternate studio version of Brown Sugar" or "official version"....very often these things aren't even mentioned on torrent-sites. Just the song titles.
THere's 1000s of bands out there. Much easier for them to just close down each and everyone of them.
Erik are SOOO wrong! Torrents is the most risci place at all. Thats where you all the find legal stuff. In "their" campaing last year FBI busted every torrent, with great succes - and thats a fact. Yes Uncle Sam , just close the whole shit down, and we are all under complet control - as you wants!
Bo
Read my post again, Bo
I'm saying that they don't care about if there's for example "unreleased studio versions" being torrented, they wouldn't seperate between that and the offcial songs. They just close the whole damn place down.
Quote
stonesmuziekfan
I only have been uploading to MU for save storage
and when I had a disk crask I could get my own file back again.
Quote
hedegaardQuote
werther2003
Fact is:
It doesn't matter if a song is offcial or inofficial - uploading these songs is illegal. The uploader isn't the owner of the song, the film or what ever.
It won't make a difference if it's an upload on a torrent site or megaupload.
Everyone who uploaded such songs, films, clips, radio/tv broadcasts trespass against law.
Every uploader do it at one's own risk.
you,re so right werther! But be carefull - the last time I said this, on this very board I got stoned and allmost killed!!
cheers Bo
Quote
EddieByword
Don't 'you' have to have a complainant ? I mean if Mick and Keith Richards don't mind Akron '72 (for example) being up and downloaded - which they obviously don't or the lawyers would have been to see bv long ago for allowing links on this board - then who is being sinned against ? where is the crime ?......and ABKO don't seem bothered by IORR allowing links either............
Quote
EddieByword
Don't 'you' have to have a complainant ? I mean if Mick and Keith Richards don't mind Akron '72 (for example) being up and downloaded - which they obviously don't or the lawyers would have been to see bv long ago for allowing links on this board - then who is being sinned against ? where is the crime ?......and ABKO don't seem bothered by IORR allowing links either............
Quote
werther2003Quote
EddieByword
Don't 'you' have to have a complainant ? I mean if Mick and Keith Richards don't mind Akron '72 (for example) being up and downloaded - which they obviously don't or the lawyers would have been to see bv long ago for allowing links on this board - then who is being sinned against ? where is the crime ?......and ABKO don't seem bothered by IORR allowing links either............
Mick & Keith and all other artists could become at any moment complainant just as
record companies or radio/tv stations. They don't have to justify.
You don't determine if it's no offence! This choice rest only by artists, record companies or radio/tv stations.Quote
EddieBywordQuote
werther2003Quote
EddieByword
Don't 'you' have to have a complainant ? I mean if Mick and Keith Richards don't mind Akron '72 (for example) being up and downloaded - which they obviously don't or the lawyers would have been to see bv long ago for allowing links on this board - then who is being sinned against ? where is the crime ?......and ABKO don't seem bothered by IORR allowing links either............
Mick & Keith and all other artists could become at any moment complainant just as
record companies or radio/tv stations. They don't have to justify.
That's the point...they don't (on this site at least) unless it's official albums or DVDs it seems.........and so surely there is no offence......
Quote
EddieBywordQuote
werther2003Quote
EddieByword
Don't 'you' have to have a complainant ? I mean if Mick and Keith Richards don't mind Akron '72 (for example) being up and downloaded - which they obviously don't or the lawyers would have been to see bv long ago for allowing links on this board - then who is being sinned against ? where is the crime ?......and ABKO don't seem bothered by IORR allowing links either............
Mick & Keith and all other artists could become at any moment complainant just as
record companies or radio/tv stations. They don't have to justify.
That's the point...they don't (on this site at least) unless it's official albums or DVDs it seems.........and so surely there is no offence......
If I take a photo and someone re-produces it without my permission but I say "I don't mind"....ie If I forgo my copyright then nobody has the right to step in and act as a proxy protector of as I say MY copyright and harrass the people I have tacitly or overtly surrendered it to.......which is what's happened on this site...........if anyone thinks Mick and Keith don't know what goes on here and doesn't understand that they have tacitly said "we don't mind" then patently they must be a bit slow...............
The point I'm making is that there is imo only a breach of copyright if the copyright holder objects.............
Quote
werther2003You don't determine if it's no offence! This choice rest only by artists, record companies or radio/tv stations.Quote
EddieBywordQuote
werther2003Quote
EddieByword
Don't 'you' have to have a complainant ? I mean if Mick and Keith Richards don't mind Akron '72 (for example) being up and downloaded - which they obviously don't or the lawyers would have been to see bv long ago for allowing links on this board - then who is being sinned against ? where is the crime ?......and ABKO don't seem bothered by IORR allowing links either............
Mick & Keith and all other artists could become at any moment complainant just as
record companies or radio/tv stations. They don't have to justify.
That's the point...they don't (on this site at least) unless it's official albums or DVDs it seems.........and so surely there is no offence......
As I've said: Every uploader do it at one's own risk.
Quote
hedegaardQuote
EddieBywordQuote
werther2003Quote
EddieByword
Don't 'you' have to have a complainant ? I mean if Mick and Keith Richards don't mind Akron '72 (for example) being up and downloaded - which they obviously don't or the lawyers would have been to see bv long ago for allowing links on this board - then who is being sinned against ? where is the crime ?......and ABKO don't seem bothered by IORR allowing links either............
Mick & Keith and all other artists could become at any moment complainant just as
record companies or radio/tv stations. They don't have to justify.
That's the point...they don't (on this site at least) unless it's official albums or DVDs it seems.........and so surely there is no offence......
If I take a photo and someone re-produces it without my permission but I say "I don't mind"....ie If I forgo my copyright then nobody has the right to step in and act as a proxy protector of as I say MY copyright and harrass the people I have tacitly or overtly surrendered it to.......which is what's happened on this site...........if anyone thinks Mick and Keith don't know what goes on here and doesn't understand that they have tacitly said "we don't mind" then patently they must be a bit slow...............
The point I'm making is that there is imo only a breach of copyright if the copyright holder objects.............
Eddie - if I understand you correct; the problem is that allmost all artist has SOLD their copyright to the recordcompagny. Jagger/Keith dont care but the greedy recordcomp. do!
cheers Bo
Quote
Britney
This is not about justice. It's about plain greed & money. Again...
Let's all stop buying legit releases for a while to show our appreciation.
Quote
Britney
This is not about justice. It's about plain greed & money. Again...
Let's all stop buying legit releases for a while to show our appreciation.