This night Megaupload is killed by the FBI!
Allmost all recent downloadlinks are worthless now.
Let's hope it will be breathe new life into shortly.
Otherwise back to snailmail again?
I hope not, but when you're desperate you may send me your list.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-20 11:51 by stonesmuziekfan.

"Otherwise back to snailmail again?"

Torrent sites work fine...

Quote
dcba
"Otherwise back to snailmail again?"

Torrent sites work fine...

ofcourse, but only untill they are killed too.

Quote
stonesmuziekfan

Quote
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
falo01

Quote
stonesmuziekfan

Quote
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

Quote
falo01

Quote
stonesmuziekfan

Quote
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
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!!!

of course you are right. but at least chances are much better on torrent sites to stay online.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-20 21:24 by falo01.

Back to the 70's

HMN

For all who wants to know what's up: the 72 side indictment

[www.scribd.com]

Quote
Erik_Snow

Quote
Munichhilton

Quote
falo01

Quote
stonesmuziekfan

Quote
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 is 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 they wants!

Bo



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-20 23:58 by hedegaard.

Quote
hedegaard

Quote
Erik_Snow

Quote
Munichhilton

Quote
falo01

Quote
stonesmuziekfan

Quote
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_Snow

Quote
hedegaard

Quote
Erik_Snow

Quote
Munichhilton

Quote
falo01

Quote
stonesmuziekfan

Quote
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.

Bo Erik makes perfect sense. He wasn't saying their not a dangerous place to be as they probably are displaying IP addresses and all, the truth is the Govt will eventually want to shut down the 'bad ones' like Demon and Pirate, but also the 'good ones' that concentrate very effectively on ROIOs.

Erik I have read your post again. The fact is, that they DID (do) check out every single torrentsite, and Im sorry to tell you, that they cant tell the differents between an off. release and an alternate version (as you say). They shot first and ask later.
I,m VERY afraid that this is just the beginning of a big crusade, and in time forums like Hott Stuff will take fire!
Sorry; you were right!

cheers Bo



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-20 23:57 by hedegaard.

Quote
Erik_Snow

Quote
hedegaard

Quote
Erik_Snow

Quote
Munichhilton

Quote
falo01

Quote
stonesmuziekfan

Quote
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.

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.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-21 00:52 by werther2003.

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.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-21 00:23 by stonesmuziekfan.

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.

That's correct but as soon as the links are in public on the web you trespass against law.

Fact is:
It doesn't matter if a song is offcial or inofficial - uploading these songs is illegeal. 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 because.
Every uploader do it at one's own risk.[/quote]

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
hedegaard

Quote
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

I'm careful just the same as uploader or up-& downloader on torrent sites.



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-21 01:28 by werther2003.

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............



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-21 01:04 by EddieByword.

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............

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.

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............

Their point is that the music and words played at Akron 72 are copyrighted. You share the recording but it's of illegal material. If you are not making money then it is a much lesser offense, but an offense nonetheless....


Hey I just typed nonetheless!!

Quote
werther2003

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............

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.............



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-21 01:51 by EddieByword.

Quote
EddieByword

Quote
werther2003

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............

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......

You don't determine if it's no offence! This choice rest only by artists, record companies or radio/tv stations.
As I've said: Every uploader do it at one's own risk.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-21 01:59 by werther2003.

Quote
EddieByword

Quote
werther2003

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............

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
werther2003

Quote
EddieByword

Quote
werther2003

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............

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......

You don't determine if it's no offence! This choice rest only by artists, record companies or radio/tv stations.
As I've said: Every uploader do it at one's own risk.

Of course I completely agree with that..(I was about to add it to my last post) Of course I understand that it's not 'me' that determines whether it's an offence or not...that's the point I was making, it's entirely the choice of the copyright holder....and that to upload something like Akron'72 is not automatically an offence. My understanding is that the laws involve people and except in cases of violence against the person where the police can take action where they have evidence without the consent even of a victim - in Britain at least - most laws need 2 parties to empower them. (perpertrator & victim/complainant). All I was trying to say is that I believe copyright is one of those laws.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-21 02:44 by EddieByword.

Quote
hedegaard

Quote
EddieByword

Quote
werther2003

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............

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

Well yes ...if Mick & Keith have sold their copyrights...but have they ?.. - but yes that would be a problem even for Stones fans. But if that's right why haven't ABKO / Virgin / Sony & Universal been after Megaupload about Stones boots for these last years ? Hmmm..Is it illegal for bv to allow links to file sharing sites...I'm not sure it is yet..isn't this what Google & Wikipedia are preotesting about...The U.S. is trying to make it illegal to even allow links to File sharing sites ? (I don't know if I've understood that right......) Hmmmm.

What is music and how should it be valued? Isn't music not some thing "more" than money? I like to think so and as long as the artists think so as well, you can ask your self "who's stealing from who?"

BTW: besides GigaSize, MediaFire is a good alternative as well (perhaps even better!).

'...I said we...we are heaven bound...'

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.

www.rsundercover.eu

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.

....and stop going to see their stupid films with their grossly overpaid actors/actresses..........not that I go anyway........(except to see the Stones with their grossly overpaid actors/actresses.....)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-21 16:36 by EddieByword.

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.

Count me in.

Remember in the 70's
"home taping is killing the music industry"

Never happened