The UK is a part of Western civilization and Yogi invoked the RIAA to bless the other agency. He wasn't implying that the RIAA was the other agency. You know, just like when someone says 'God bless you.', they're not implying that you're God.
Radio waves specifically sent by someone are not 'public goods', they are copyrighted intellectual property, just like physical or digital recordings.
Okay, first, this is hilarious. Second, radio broadcasts aren't sent to anyone specifically. They're sent over public area into public and private property.
So these agencies are absolutely attempting to charge people to use their own physical property to access public property on their own real property.
It seems like the artists are doing way more infringing than the property owners...
I absolutely have the moral right to listen to ANYTHING that travels onto my property, including radio waves. You don't want me and anyone on my property to listen to it? Don't send it over my property. (Even airplanes have to have an easement...)
Umm.... You are a complete idiot. Most of those acts of civil disobedience were completely illegal. MLK, Jr. and his supporters shut down an entire city for days and, by your way of thinking, Rosa Parks should have walked or stayed in her own seat.
That's not what I said, but nice strawman. :) Let me repeat what I said: I do believe that waitresses deserve to earn a living wage. I do not believe that I should have to pay it directly.
If you can explain why an agreement between party A and party B should involve money legally being extorted from party C, please do so. This custom is unfair to the customer.
In addition, people choose their tip based on many factors, only a few of which the waiter or waitress has any control over. This custom is unfair to the waitress.
I don't choose to utilize restaurants that pay a living wage because it wouldn't make a difference. IHOP isn't go to suddenly start paying their employees more because I tell them I'd prefer that. What would be the point of that useless gesture? (That's a rhetorical question.)
You seem to think that a boycott is a cure-all for all principles. You are wrong. Have a nice day. :)
Re: Re: Re: Re: Savage gotta be a joy at the office
So all of that time I spent growing up and working at refreshment stands at events that gave away free refreshments for the purpose of keeping people hydrated and not, you know, dying of a heat stroke, was stupid and taught me bad things, huh? Wow. Good to know.
I grew up in a historical reenactment group, where the point of the lemonade stand (which also had fresh fruit) was to keep people hydrated in the heat. It had zip to do with an economics lesson.
Actually, trolls wouldn't be allowed, because they didn't actually exist pre-1599. :P
I'm interested in the arts and sciences, not the clothing, so I generally just throw on a chiton for comfort.
This weekend I'm attending an event held by the local chapter of the Society For Creative Anachronism. This weekend, as I do on many weekends, I will show my membership card, that I paid for, and pay my entry fee to attend.
I'll spend part of my time there taking the foodstuffs that I purchased, without reimbursement, and my labor, which I am not charging for, to the waterbearing stations, which are responsible for offering refreshments to event-goers, in the interest of keeping them from getting heat stroke. (In a nutshell)
What do I get out of this? The pleasure of service. But I guess that's not worth anything, because I'm not getting a section of green paper for it. Really, that's a decidedly odd way to think.
I do believe that waitresses deserve to earn a living wage. I do not believe that I should have to pay it directly. So I tip, and support legislature that gives waitresses the same minimum wage as everyone else.
You see, my refusal to tip wouldn't have an impact on the situation, except to adversely harm the waitress even more than they're already harmed by the practice. Refusing to tip wouldn't support my principle, just as refusing to pay wouldn't support his principal (if he has any principals about this issue, which is in doubt).
So paying wouldn't be against his principles (if he has any about this issue) and more than my actions negate my principles.
There are people who don't agree with the principle of income tax. They refuse to pay and attempt to leave the country, and the US seizes their property, anyway. Principle has nothing to do with it.
On the post: UK Hairdresser Fined For Playing Music Even Though He Tried To Be Legal
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
That's funny. I guess that my local mall isn't open to the public, so they can play music all they like.
Of course, the UK agencies have sued companies for playing music for their employees as well, but you can ignore that if you'd like.
On the post: UK Hairdresser Fined For Playing Music Even Though He Tried To Be Legal
Re: Re: Happy
Man, you're dumb.
On the post: UK Hairdresser Fined For Playing Music Even Though He Tried To Be Legal
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: (@Dave Nattriss) Really?
Okay, first, this is hilarious. Second, radio broadcasts aren't sent to anyone specifically. They're sent over public area into public and private property.
So these agencies are absolutely attempting to charge people to use their own physical property to access public property on their own real property.
It seems like the artists are doing way more infringing than the property owners...
On the post: UK Hairdresser Fined For Playing Music Even Though He Tried To Be Legal
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: UK Hairdresser Fined For Playing Music Even Though He Tried To Be Legal
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: UK Hairdresser Fined For Playing Music Even Though He Tried To Be Legal
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Boycotting isn't the answer to everything. It's not even the answer to most things. Deal with it.
On the post: UK Hairdresser Fined For Playing Music Even Though He Tried To Be Legal
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Stupid troll is stupid.
On the post: UK Hairdresser Fined For Playing Music Even Though He Tried To Be Legal
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: UK Hairdresser Fined For Playing Music Even Though He Tried To Be Legal
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
If you can explain why an agreement between party A and party B should involve money legally being extorted from party C, please do so. This custom is unfair to the customer.
In addition, people choose their tip based on many factors, only a few of which the waiter or waitress has any control over. This custom is unfair to the waitress.
I don't choose to utilize restaurants that pay a living wage because it wouldn't make a difference. IHOP isn't go to suddenly start paying their employees more because I tell them I'd prefer that. What would be the point of that useless gesture? (That's a rhetorical question.)
You seem to think that a boycott is a cure-all for all principles. You are wrong. Have a nice day. :)
On the post: UK Hairdresser Fined For Playing Music Even Though He Tried To Be Legal
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Financial Columnist Lectures Little Kids Who Want To Give Away Lemonade That They're Destroying America
Re: Re: Re: Re: Savage gotta be a joy at the office
On the post: Financial Columnist Lectures Little Kids Who Want To Give Away Lemonade That They're Destroying America
Re: Re: Re: Savage gotta be a joy at the office
On the post: Financial Columnist Lectures Little Kids Who Want To Give Away Lemonade That They're Destroying America
Re:
On the post: Financial Columnist Lectures Little Kids Who Want To Give Away Lemonade That They're Destroying America
Re: Re: Some people just don't get it.
On the post: Financial Columnist Lectures Little Kids Who Want To Give Away Lemonade That They're Destroying America
Re: Re:
On the post: Financial Columnist Lectures Little Kids Who Want To Give Away Lemonade That They're Destroying America
Re: Re:
On the post: Financial Columnist Lectures Little Kids Who Want To Give Away Lemonade That They're Destroying America
I'll spend part of my time there taking the foodstuffs that I purchased, without reimbursement, and my labor, which I am not charging for, to the waterbearing stations, which are responsible for offering refreshments to event-goers, in the interest of keeping them from getting heat stroke. (In a nutshell)
What do I get out of this? The pleasure of service. But I guess that's not worth anything, because I'm not getting a section of green paper for it. Really, that's a decidedly odd way to think.
On the post: UK Hairdresser Fined For Playing Music Even Though He Tried To Be Legal
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You see, my refusal to tip wouldn't have an impact on the situation, except to adversely harm the waitress even more than they're already harmed by the practice. Refusing to tip wouldn't support my principle, just as refusing to pay wouldn't support his principal (if he has any principals about this issue, which is in doubt).
So paying wouldn't be against his principles (if he has any about this issue) and more than my actions negate my principles.
On the post: UK Hairdresser Fined For Playing Music Even Though He Tried To Be Legal
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: UK Hairdresser Fined For Playing Music Even Though He Tried To Be Legal
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Next >>