Anyway, given that you clearly are not interested in debating this with facts or logic, good luck to you. I will not discuss this with you further. I have made my points and you have ignored the
again I will strife to be better , clearer and more academically honest in my posts.
I hope everyone one here will , as we will all gain by doing that.
Interview With William Patry: Understanding How The Copyright Debate Got Twisted
there is alot to read and digest there. Today , I got some time , and hope to get to it, but there is alot there, and it does deserve very careful and very thoughtful and well referenced rebuttal. So it make take a while,, even weeks.
Basically, lyrics -- which, by themselves, generated absolutely no money for songwriters/publishers for pretty much the entire history of the business
Mike:
"Basically, lyrics -- which, by themselves, generated absolutely no money for songwriters/publishers for pretty much the entire history of the business "
And will you admit Mike , that your sentence above right here , is a completely unfounded , un- sourced , and now proven -- in my humble opinion-- completely false by various posters.
Re Are you an anarchist Mike ? you say: ""I believe that civilized society comes from the society itself, not its laws."
you seem to admit so by saying "I believe that civilized society comes from the society itself, not its laws."
Which is -- as I understand it , in my humble opinion --a core anarchist pillar of belief. If you are an anarchist , and are coming at thinks from that prospective, I think you should state so , when needed for context , as it will save your readers a lot and commentators --like me-- a lot of time.
( Bill Safire often pointed out his libertarian prospective when it was relevant for his readers to know that -- if I remember his writings correctly.
I am always willing to exchange ideas and words, if you thought I "stepped out of the baseline" , "to elude being tagged" on mis-statements, I apologize for my sloppy writing. I will state more clearly in the future when i am stating a supported and referenced fact , and just my meaningless -- though usually correct :) -- opinions.
Re: Re: ASCAP's bill of rights is not the law. ASCAP is not a gov't organizatio
Mike :"Unless you are willing to admit that you were wrong multiple times in your initial post (falsely suggesting ASCAP's one side view was an accurate description of copyright and then falsely claiming"
Actually ,i read the ASCAP rights very carefully ,, and they do reflect how copyright law now does stand in the USA. (-- IN MY HUMBLE OPINION. You have yet to point out which clauses of the ASCAP do not reflect current copyright law.)Which quiet frankly has the strongest and the best copyright laws in the world.
The ASCAP B.O.Rs. extends focus of artist rights onto new areas of the digital age, as well better international protections __ In MY humble OPINION based on my reading of it.
MIKE: "Copyright law was never intended to protect bad business people."
Sorry , mike , I think it it was, thus the clause "to promote the progress"
"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."
It would be nice if we could raise T.J.'s spirit from the next world , to explain this to us. While there are Kabbalistic formulas for raising the spirits of the dead, Jewish law forbids its practice. ( c.f. `First Samuel chapter 28 , and Leviticus 19:31)
Me: Sorry Mike ,, nice wordplay, but again , {copyright} laws protect victims , not criminals." Mike: I have no idea what this means.
Mike , pretty basic tenant of law and history.
As applied here ,, copyright laws protects artist {victim} from Pirate websites { criminal}, that make illegal use of their Art for profit , and fail to pay any of that profit $$ back to the Artist in the manner proscribed by law.
you anarchists types like that quote ,, but it is not mainstream thinking, and goes against fact & history-- in my humble opinion ,,,,as I have pointed out often elsewhere in related threads. ( click my profile, if you really want to read all my posts on the matter)
Re: " It would be curious then, if an idea, the fugitive fermentation of an individual brain, could, of natural right, be claimed in exclusive and stable property.� -- Thomas Jefferson
will you admit mike ,, that you TOTALLY mis-read T.J. , and then based your points on it?
Re: Re: ASCAP's bill of rights is not the law. ASCAP is not a gov't organizatio
I got to got to bed ,, I will reply later ,, but just briefly ,, glad to see you did research for once.
I was wondering if you would catch my off -the -cuff comment on no opposition to copyright laws in the 1700's. I knew is was unsubstantiated -- but not necessarily untrue when I typed it . But there was little opposition, as evidenced by the historical fact that copyright became embedded into the constitution.
(Old yeshiva teacher trick , make a comment or point full holes ,, see if anybody is awake out there and catches it. There is hope for you yet mike.)
But the point again is is : After reasoned discussion by the greatest mind of the day copyright and patent law WAS placed into the constitution, to help the new American economy grow. Seems to have worked well as history bears out ..
And we've already addressed them point by point, in a post written by a songwriter:
I will read it carefully and try to find time to thoughtfully reply ,,
but again , it is really a thread that a copyright law professor should moderate ,, not some anarchist songwriter,, or any songwriter for that matter ,, including me.
you know our President was a law professor ,, maybe you could get him to comment on copyright & Patent law vis a via Songwriters , Prose writers , and folks who patent lifeforms.
-----------------------
So given all this, you mean to tell me that as soon as a collection agency comes around threatening suit because a venue owner invites local bands to play their music......
Because people lie ,, and ASCAP cannot put a full time employee into the bar , to constantly monitor the bands that play there.
As well the original band material , may not be that original , and their original songs may just be ripping off chuck berry et al.
I am a musician , I see guys all the time try to pawn as new and original stuff songs that are just complete riff-offs of other artists ,, either by intend or accident.
Either way , if you rip off lyrics or melody in your "original rip-off song ", you have pay the "original-original artist" through ASCAP or whatever royalty facilitator they choose. It is the Law.
The point is why is it illegal to play any kind of music without paying ASCAP?
Because people lie ,, and ASCAP cannot put a full time employee into the bar , to constantly monitor the bands that play there.
As well the original band material , may not be that original , and their original songs may just be ripping off chuck berry et al.
I am a musician , I see guys all the time try to pawn as new and original stuff songs that are just complete riff-offs of other artists ,, either by intend or accident.
Either way , if you rip off lyrics or melody in your "original rip-off song ", you have pay the "original-original artist" through ASCAP or whatever royalty facilitator they choose. It is the Law.
Re: Re:Dude, Mike isn't a reporter, and this isn't a news site.
but it could be , and should be. It is mike's free-choice. And I for the life of me can't figure out why he does not work to make techdirt a forum for serious policy discussion. He gets the readship, but the high-end academic and profressional readers do not bother posting, as the threads often just turn into useless drival -- even w/o me helping.
There are very few good forums to address the many interesting Mike does raise in his postings. Mike should look to find a way to have more high-end academic and professional readers join the threads , without always being called a Moron -- or worse -, but some high school kid on LSD
On the post: Can Someone Explain Why Circumvention For Non-Infringing Purposes Is Illegal?
, make a comment or point full holes ,, see if anybody is awake out there and catches it.
On the post: Can Someone Explain Why Circumvention For Non-Infringing Purposes Is Illegal?
In response to this, Jefferson sent a letter to Madison,...........................
On the post: Can Someone Explain Why Circumvention For Non-Infringing Purposes Is Illegal?
Anyway, given that you clearly are not interested in debating this with facts or logic, good luck to you. I will not discuss this with you further. I have made my points and you have ignored the
I hope everyone one here will , as we will all gain by doing that.
On the post: Can Someone Explain Why Circumvention For Non-Infringing Purposes Is Illegal?
As for your bizarre claim that I need to discuss this with copyright lawyers, I do so all the time
That is never a way to grow & learn.
On the post: Can Someone Explain Why Circumvention For Non-Infringing Purposes Is Illegal?
Interview With William Patry: Understanding How The Copyright Debate Got Twisted
On the post: Can Someone Explain Why Circumvention For Non-Infringing Purposes Is Illegal?
Basically, lyrics -- which, by themselves, generated absolutely no money for songwriters/publishers for pretty much the entire history of the business
"Basically, lyrics -- which, by themselves, generated absolutely no money for songwriters/publishers for pretty much the entire history of the business "
And will you admit Mike , that your sentence above right here , is a completely unfounded , un- sourced , and now proven -- in my humble opinion-- completely false by various posters.
Mike , you post better , we will all comment better. And then you will make more $$ Mike ,, -- again in my humble opinion
http://techdirt.com/articles/20100510/0404369357.shtml
On the post: Can Someone Explain Why Circumvention For Non-Infringing Purposes Is Illegal?
Re Are you an anarchist Mike ? you say: ""I believe that civilized society comes from the society itself, not its laws."
Which is -- as I understand it , in my humble opinion --a core anarchist pillar of belief. If you are an anarchist , and are coming at thinks from that prospective, I think you should state so , when needed for context , as it will save your readers a lot and commentators --like me-- a lot of time.
( Bill Safire often pointed out his libertarian prospective when it was relevant for his readers to know that -- if I remember his writings correctly.
I am always willing to exchange ideas and words, if you thought I "stepped out of the baseline" , "to elude being tagged" on mis-statements, I apologize for my sloppy writing. I will state more clearly in the future when i am stating a supported and referenced fact , and just my meaningless -- though usually correct :) -- opinions.
{Remember , "my opinion is fact!!". (sic)}
On the post: Can Someone Explain Why Circumvention For Non-Infringing Purposes Is Illegal?
Re: Re: ASCAP's bill of rights is not the law. ASCAP is not a gov't organizatio
Actually ,i read the ASCAP rights very carefully ,, and they do reflect how copyright law now does stand in the USA. (-- IN MY HUMBLE OPINION. You have yet to point out which clauses of the ASCAP do not reflect current copyright law.)Which quiet frankly has the strongest and the best copyright laws in the world.
The ASCAP B.O.Rs. extends focus of artist rights onto new areas of the digital age, as well better international protections __ In MY humble OPINION based on my reading of it.
On the post: Can Someone Explain Why Circumvention For Non-Infringing Purposes Is Illegal?
MIKE: "Copyright law was never intended to protect bad business people."
"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."
It would be nice if we could raise T.J.'s spirit from the next world , to explain this to us. While there are Kabbalistic formulas for raising the spirits of the dead, Jewish law forbids its practice. ( c.f. `First Samuel chapter 28 , and Leviticus 19:31)
However if on of you pagans out there want to give a shot , and raise T.J.'s spirit form the dead, please do ask him about the root reasons for copyright and patent law. And also that blasted comma in the 2nd amendment on gun rights , that till today is causing so much debate.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=opera&hs=re5&pwst=1&rls=en&ei=0GP2S_ SgGYK78gas67ngCg&sa=X&oi=spellfullpage&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=2&ved=0CBcQvwUo AQ&q=2nd+amendment+comma&spell=1
On the post: Can Someone Explain Why Circumvention For Non-Infringing Purposes Is Illegal?
Me: Sorry Mike ,, nice wordplay, but again , {copyright} laws protect victims , not criminals." Mike: I have no idea what this means.
As applied here ,, copyright laws protects artist {victim} from Pirate websites { criminal}, that make illegal use of their Art for profit , and fail to pay any of that profit $$ back to the Artist in the manner proscribed by law.
On the post: Nice Work ASCAP: Convinces Yet Another Coffee Shop To Stop Promoting Local Bands
Re: Re: The point is why is it illegal to play any kind of music without paying ASCAP?
http://www.ascap.com/rights/
On the post: Nice Work ASCAP: Convinces Yet Another Coffee Shop To Stop Promoting Local Bands
Robert A. Heinlein, 1939
On the post: Can Someone Explain Why Circumvention For Non-Infringing Purposes Is Illegal?
Re: Re: willfully clueless or a flat-out liar,
On the post: Can Someone Explain Why Circumvention For Non-Infringing Purposes Is Illegal?
Re: " It would be curious then, if an idea, the fugitive fermentation of an individual brain, could, of natural right, be claimed in exclusive and stable property.� -- Thomas Jefferson
On the post: Can Someone Explain Why Circumvention For Non-Infringing Purposes Is Illegal?
Re: Re: ASCAP's bill of rights is not the law. ASCAP is not a gov't organizatio
I was wondering if you would catch my off -the -cuff comment on no opposition to copyright laws in the 1700's. I knew is was unsubstantiated -- but not necessarily untrue when I typed it . But there was little opposition, as evidenced by the historical fact that copyright became embedded into the constitution.
(Old yeshiva teacher trick , make a comment or point full holes ,, see if anybody is awake out there and catches it. There is hope for you yet mike.)
But the point again is is : After reasoned discussion by the greatest mind of the day copyright and patent law WAS placed into the constitution, to help the new American economy grow. Seems to have worked well as history bears out ..
More in the morning ,
On the post: Can Someone Explain Why Circumvention For Non-Infringing Purposes Is Illegal?
And we've already addressed them point by point, in a post written by a songwriter:
but again , it is really a thread that a copyright law professor should moderate ,, not some anarchist songwriter,, or any songwriter for that matter ,, including me.
you know our President was a law professor ,, maybe you could get him to comment on copyright & Patent law vis a via Songwriters , Prose writers , and folks who patent lifeforms.
-----------------------
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science_and_environment/10132762.s tm
"Scientists in the US have succeeded in developing the first synthetic living cell."
On the post: Nice Work ASCAP: Convinces Yet Another Coffee Shop To Stop Promoting Local Bands
Nice thread
Good conversation !! Nice job posters. This is what a thread should be.
don't you think so Mike ?
On the post: Nice Work ASCAP: Convinces Yet Another Coffee Shop To Stop Promoting Local Bands
So given all this, you mean to tell me that as soon as a collection agency comes around threatening suit because a venue owner invites local bands to play their music......
As well the original band material , may not be that original , and their original songs may just be ripping off chuck berry et al.
I am a musician , I see guys all the time try to pawn as new and original stuff songs that are just complete riff-offs of other artists ,, either by intend or accident.
Either way , if you rip off lyrics or melody in your "original rip-off song ", you have pay the "original-original artist" through ASCAP or whatever royalty facilitator they choose. It is the Law.
On the post: Nice Work ASCAP: Convinces Yet Another Coffee Shop To Stop Promoting Local Bands
The point is why is it illegal to play any kind of music without paying ASCAP?
As well the original band material , may not be that original , and their original songs may just be ripping off chuck berry et al.
I am a musician , I see guys all the time try to pawn as new and original stuff songs that are just complete riff-offs of other artists ,, either by intend or accident.
Either way , if you rip off lyrics or melody in your "original rip-off song ", you have pay the "original-original artist" through ASCAP or whatever royalty facilitator they choose. It is the Law.
On the post: Turns Out People Really Like It When The Press Fact Checks, Rather Than Just Reporting What Everyone Said
Re: Re:Dude, Mike isn't a reporter, and this isn't a news site.
There are very few good forums to address the many interesting Mike does raise in his postings. Mike should look to find a way to have more high-end academic and professional readers join the threads , without always being called a Moron -- or worse -, but some high school kid on LSD
Next >>