The whole idea of “region codes” and “regional distribution limitations” is BS and only promotes more piracy. Why should the UK, Egypt, etc have to wait for something that is already out in Japan or the US? It makes no sense!

What? That’s not how music works or why artists make music, malgre.

“This argument at least sounded like it made sense ten years ago but it’s just not real anymore.”

I thought I told you to either elaborate or shut up with the stupid speculations.

Should read

“over-simplified”

Should read

“Now that you …”

On the contrary: the governments are encouraged to utilize new technologies more effectively.

Who knows where you get all of your delusions from?

“And if you think government’s all over the world are going to sell out artists and the entertainment industries who support them (and not incidentally PAY them, too) and the essential tax base they provide, go ahead, think that too.”

You are way out of touch.

“And if you think “you can’t stop us” is a valid justification and market force for why rules of commerce and social behavior offline will not be inevitably applied online as well when this finally gets sorted out, you’ll enjoy Tenenbaum’s trial in a few weeks.”

Rules of social behavior? Do you think that people follow a strict set of rules to interact with others in the society? Do you think that behaviors are static and that the same physical rules apply online? You are an imbecile.

“I couldn’t care less how much legal purchasing a sometimes thief also does, and neither will right minded societies and their justice systems the world over.”

You have ridiculous ideals. You are not the ideal human and it is selfish of you to want others to live the way that you do in the way that you see it.

“There’s still never been a single valid reason why digital theft should be given even the slightest credibility and your suggestions are old, discredited and long abandoned by anyone genuinely inside this issue.”

Blatant lies and misuse of words.

By ‘valid’ you obviously intended to write ‘legal’. Well, if you always called it theft in the first place, then of course you would always consider it illegal.

False intimidation does not work here and you have not established any credibility. In fact, every one of your points are old and fallacious; that’s the weakness of your so called ‘consistency’.

As for “long abandoned by anyone genuinely inside this issue”, you obviously mean you and those that oppose downloading. Your use of ‘genuine’ is an affront: people are “genuinely inside this issue” when they analyze the issue and observe the phenomenon, unlike many that just blindly continue idiotic speculations and applying their interests, morals, and personal experiences while having no knowledge of the main foundations of the problem.

“Governments protect and allow privacy and freedom to their citizens in direct proportion to the respect the citizens offer in return.”

Iran.

“Expect nothing but greater surveillance, a profound loss of privacy, a near ruined internet and a growing police state to make Orwell blush if you keep this shit up.”

Applications of science and mathematics are outside the wills of governments. Privacy is a fundamental right of a human and by principle it cannot be taken without just cause to remove the human’s innocence.

“And don’t take my word for it. Take a history class sometime.”

History classes are meant to teach people to allow them to prevent past mistakes from transpiring. They also allow one to ridicule past follies.

“And finally Reznor would still be washing cars back at the dealership where he began were it not for a decade and millions of dollars of support and promotion directly from the industries that created his platform and made him a household name in the first place. You know it and I know it.”

The conditions have changed since then, so your point no longer applies now. Get with it.

“Fans can buy or pass. Consumers in EVERY market of every product can buy, or pass, but they cannot steal it and call it market evolution whether you would like that or not, and the legal trends are clearing.”

Just to mention this now in case you haven’t been paying attention: merely downloading is not stealing. That essentially negates most of your arguments. By principle, you cannot just assume every downloader to automatically be a thief.

As well, you have just compared digital markets to non-digital markets, some of which would have great influences to the global economy. Just some more evidence that you equate digital theft to physical theft.

As for “the legal trends are clearing”, you clearly have no idea what you mean by that.

“Get caught pirating our content and make my day, Soulxtc. There’s a lot more going on than you even know.”

You assume ignorance on him? How pathetic.

“And finally, if you really think that pitchforks and torches to the capital building for your “right” to free entertainment on our hardworking backs is what’s next, then organize the revolution or move along.”

Perhaps some demand “free entertainment”; however you cannot assume every single consumer to share the same perspectives. Perhaps you have ingrained into your worthless brain too many deluded ideas of what a consumer is.

“Otherwise, you are a waste of time and electrons.”

You are a waste time and space, imbecilic fool.

The same “shit life” many others had, idiot.

“It was only in the 29th century …”

This is the 21st century, dumbass.

“… with the ability to *sell* copies of their music the way publihsers sold books or sheet music that they could ever even approach the level of ‘artist’ or own a home or have a stable family.”

You speculate that all musicians in the past lived in poverty?

“Your non-scheme sets the art and artists back hundreds of years.”

Blatantly erroneous. Do you know what happened back hundreds of years? Global development and advancing technologies, but don’t start speculating on that now.

Should read

“The rest of your post is utterly pointless babble.”

Your misuse of the term ‘genuine thought’ is an affront. If you have not realized yet, it always has been the industries’ resistance to advancing technologies.

“It’s a clear and illegal misuse of tech.”

Unintended, but not illegal. Declaring it as illegal misuse implies that the law has been properly updated to fit new technologies, which is false.

“Any just society uses its resources to combat the illegal misuse of anything.”

That’s an over-simplified ideal you have there.

“Tools, cars, video. You name it. Misuse it? Government will always try to stop you.”

Can you be more specific on what you mean by “misuse”? Or is that the typical style that you use to write for your job?

“Pirates have long claimed superior numbers. Change the laws if you think you have so much influence and we have no problem, right?”

What the hell are you babbling about?

“To say that all file-sharers are thieves ignores the reality that many cannot afford access to the same pool of cultural works as others.” is actually quite funny. Why not also “To say that all car thieves are thieves ignores the reality that many cannot afford access to the same pool of transportation as others.”? lol That’s just poor quality reasoning.

That’s an affront to logic. Prove that file-sharers are thieves and then say that they are thieves, but you just called them thieves to say that they are thieves. Imbecile. Whatever you would consider ‘quality reasoning’ can never withstand against logical reasoning. I’m quite certain that you never use the latter.

“And Rubin’s famous licensing canard, [...] nurture and develop it in a dozen different very expensive ways before an artist begins selling recordings and creating the revenue stream (in) that justifies the risk (and investment revenue) out.”

That’s one of dumbest things I have read today.

“If you have a problem with this basic model your argument is with capitalism, not any particular industry, and you are whining on the wrong board.”

So you are assuming that any argument against this “basic model” is with capitalism? You are a very poor debater.

“But if Rubin’s [...]”

The rest of this post is utterly pointless babble.

“… even though your theft is in no way their fault.”

Now that is naive.

“Auto theft isn’t the fault of the world’s automakers, either, no matter how high the price, how limited the models or paint colors or how inflexible the option packages.”

You cannot compare digital products to cars.

“I just don’t buy it. Stealing is wrong, …”

But you need to confirm what is stolen.

“… and digital industry isn’t “stealing” from you when you purchase with no gun to your head.”

Con artists.

“If you think our work is such crap, why do you take unpaid copies of it?”

Because it’s been “such crap”, the human mind will tend to think the quality of the next work to be the same “such crap” as well.

“But as legitimate sales figures fall since the advent of piracy, what is drying up is royalty and residual to the artists themselves due to the drop in sales.”

You should be reminded that ‘real’ piracy existed long before your birth. What you have stated is a false causation unless you have proved it to be real.

“They have to sell units or they don’t get paid so it’s the little working musician you have fucked far worse than anything the industry has ever done, and BOY do they know it.”

The ‘artists are suffering because of piracy’ fallacy again?

“Also R&D of new artists has been almost eliminated and signing bonuses are now tiny because the labels know that the recordings will not make a return on their pirated investment, hence, small bands have smaller investments and far less chance in this market. And no small band willingly handles PR, marketing, touring, graphics work, promotion and recording and still try to write tunes and lyrics as well. One of the biggest lies in the debate is that the labels don’t do anything. In point of fact the labels do an enormous amount of work and support and they pay bigtime, too, they have enriched countless artists and working musicians well beyond their dreams in the past 50 years. But piracy doesn’t pay and we all know it.”

Speculations, not facts. As well, beliefs do not belong in any debate.

“My firm … ”

That’s what I thought.

” … writes lighting shows and touring support, industrial shows and product showcase all over the world for music and a hundred different brand names you’d know.”

It would help you to actual mention any random one, you know?

“Since going digital in the mid 90’s our licensed shows have been blatantly ripped off, copied illegally and used again and again unpaid, all over the planet. Our legal staff can’t even keep up with it. Even my own staffers know piracy limits our growth and our hiring and is the problem and not a solution, EVERY established content creator sees what’s happened to their income and it’s no coincidence it corresponds to Fanning’s Napster in 1999. Piracy is about hypocrisy and TPB are now the poster boys.”

You talk about credible arguments, but I suppose that never meant anything about you being credible.

“No-to-Mafia’s comment seeks to compare international contractual energy agreements between governments upon which the safety and security of the world’s people and the entire world’s economy arguably is based… with um… stealing a copy of IronMan online.”

The world is gradually become less reliant on oil for energy, if you haven’t realized.

“On our side of the debate/divide, it’s this kind of uneducated thought that gathers credibility for us in the courts and legislatures, and increasingly in the court of public opinion, too.”

If you haven’t noticed yet, that “credibility” continues to decrease.

“People know piracy is wrong.”

But what is real piracy in this matter? It is ridiculously obvious that you are merely thinking that downloading is piracy; as a consequence, you are only regarding the ‘creators’ and non-end-users as the ‘people’.

“I’m no hypocrite No-To-Mafia, …”

Oh really?

“I’ve been consistent for a long time on this issue of digital theft.”

Then that just simplifies my derivation of your apparent perspectives from your postings.

“What a deep thinker you must be.”

He posted a single comment of 57 words excluding your name, which is hardly enough information. One could say you are just making things up. Perhaps you are thinking too deeply on over simplified fallacies.

“Thanks for commenting. lol”

lolfail