The music business is booming!!! The sky is rising.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by jammybastard

They have shareholders to answer to and that's all they care about.

What about the thousands of small indie labels that are in it for the love of music, don't have any shareholders, and are struggling to even break even thanks to your pirate buddies stealing all their income?

The greedy ones are your crowd who all want something for nothing.

[fritzschreiner]

Originally Posted by terryhart

Doctorow is a shill for the free culture lobby, and a particularly creepy one at that.

The majority of his writings at Boing Boing are links to EFF press releases -- a nonprofit where he is a Fellow -- or links to blog posts by Michael Geist -- who sits on the advisory board of the EFF. Doctorow has no problem deleting comments that disagree with his posts or highlight his hypocrisy and bullshit.

He also sits on the board of the Participatory Culture Foundation, who, when they're not busy sucking up funds from the Ford Foundation, is made up of the same people who led the swiftboat campaign against rogue sites legislation.

At the end of the day, he hates free speech he disagrees with and doesn't want to protect artists' works unless the artist is someone he knows.

Doctorow Vs Doctor-Spin. Wait, I'll get my popcorn.

[fritzschreiner]

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

You're wrong.

No. You're the one who is wrong. You have much too rigid and greedy a point of view. But you speak very loudly, so I guess it's all good. Greed is the old way.

When you say that nobody has proposed any alternatives, I see from recent posts that You didn't see them because they differed from the Greed is Good model you hold dear.

The new way of doing things is growing and springing it's head up all over the place, like little islands of sanity in a sea of people who never noticed their soul take a vacation as they "Learned what it takes" to get by in this world.

And soon those island of sanity will become the continents and people who continue to push the crap you do will simply be cut loose on their rafts where Greed is King.

[rack gear]

Originally Posted by fritzschreiner

No. You're the one who is wrong. You have much too rigid and greedy a point of view. But you speak very loudly, so I guess it's all good. Greed is the old way.

really?

how many artists, albums, films have the pirates (or big tech) financed and produced? what great contribution to the arts have pirates (or big tech) made to society? that would be ZERO.

the pirates take and given NOTHING in return. talk about GREED.

record labels on the other hand have invested in, supported, developed the careers of countless artists from all walks of life and made them into millionaires...

who is really greedy here?

[joelpatterson]

There is SOMETHING a little on the "reductio ad absurdum" side in neatly cleaving the entire world into pirates vs. non-pirates... and assigning motives that EITHER endorse piracy or defy it... and creating analogies that substitute real, tangible goods in place of intangible data and pretending like there's a one-for-one equality.

This is way too simplistic an approach to describing the modern world and the tremendous upheavals that the steady march of technological progress have wrought.

And all the energetic, righteous huffing and puffing-- it ain't gonna blow one house down.

[fritzschreiner]

Originally Posted by rack gear

really?

how many artists, albums, films have the pirates (or big tech) financed and produced? what great contribution to the arts have pirates (or big tech) made to society? that would be ZERO.

the pirates take and given NOTHING in return. talk about GREED.

record labels on the other hand have invested in, supported, developed the careers of countless artists from all walks of life and made them into millionaires...

who is really greedy here?

The piracy definition is invalid, so that's a non component of the debate.

Who's greedy? Anyone who puts the old money grubber hat on over breakfast each morning. Anyone who is so focused on "getting their share, or more" that it consumes an inordinate amount of their time. Your debating team for instance.

Most record labels would probably fall into the category. Most corporations. The vast majority of politicians. All bankers or wall street types. Anyone who has bought into the insane meme that you have to make lots of money to be valuable or valid.

Most Musicians would NOT fit the category, as far as I can tell. They just seem to like to create and share, until some asshole convinces them they'd better chase money, or fight, and impose rule of law on others to protect any gains they have managed to make against the odds.

[fritzschreiner]

Originally Posted by joelpatterson

There is SOMETHING a little on the "reductio ad absurdum" side in neatly cleaving the entire world into pirates vs. non-pirates... and assigning motives that EITHER endorse piracy or defy it... and creating analogies that substitute real, tangible goods in place of intangible data and pretending like there's a one-for-one equality.

This is way too simplistic an approach to describing the modern world and the tremendous upheavals that the steady march of technological progress have wrought.

And all the energetic, righteous huffing and puffing-- it ain't gonna blow one house down.

Excellent observation. It's a lazy and dishonest debating technique to use labelling in place of valid argument. It's designed to introvert the opponent. "you and your pirate friends", tries to derail an argument that is being lost by shifting the superior debaters focus onto defending against the connotations of the label thrown at them, instead of on continuing to kick butt with incisive points and keen observations.

Watch any politician, and you'll see the same technique. If they can't carry their point to save their life, they resort to labelling. "You must be some kind of Climate change Denier". (A curious one, because when Global warming was scientifically debunked, it quickly scrambled to "climate change". Turns out it was always about greed as well. Global warming chained to Carbon emissions means a fantastic new way to tax billions of people). "You must be some kind of bigot". Mention some political body or other shyster type is up to something, and it's "Oh...You're just a comspiracy theorist". Uh, No. I've noticed that Shysters are up to stuff. "You're on the right....You're on the left....You're a liberal....You're a conservative.....You're a terrorist.... You're a pirate....ad nauseum.

That gives me an idea for a label. "You're a labeller!!!!" I like that. Any permutations available? How about "You're a labeller lover!!!!!". Hmmm. A bit unwieldy.

Oh never mind. I don't need labels. I can Think.

[aroundtheworld]

Originally Posted by jammybastard

Doctorow advocates for the the rights of artists to OWN THEIR OWN WORK via copyright and be able to sell it any way they see fit as the copyright holders.
That is definitely "pro-artist", and could only be considered "anti-industry" if you are an industry lobbyist.

The "industry" is not "pro-artist".
The "industry" is pro "revenue".
They have shareholders to answer to and that's all they care about.
Artists have always been a commodity to the "industry", plain and simple.

Doctorow is very much "pro" artist, being an author himself.
(Cory Doctorow - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

Here's a good summation of his philosophy...


Do you understand that?
I know you probably didn't make it past the first paragraph, but you should keep reading.

Doctorow is advocating the same thing that artists like Don Henley, Sheryl Crow, Bruce Springsteen, Madonna, Billy Joel, Elton John, R.E.M., Dave Matthews, Eric Clapton, Sting, Joni Mitchell, Bonnie Raitt, and Tom Petty have been lobbying Congress for since 1999.
That's pretty good company to be in on this issue.

Read this interview with Henley for more background

"Don Henley Urges Artists to Know Their Rights"

Don Henley Urges Artists to Know Their Rights - NYTimes.com

Final thought on the "industry" courtesy of Mr. Henley....

Great post! The character assassination that takes place here is really quite pathetic and reaching.

[AwwDeOhh]

Originally Posted by fritzschreiner

The piracy definition is invalid, so that's a non component of the debate.

Who's greedy? Anyone who puts the old money grubber hat on over breakfast each morning. Anyone who is so focused on "getting their share, or more" that it consumes an inordinate amount of their time. Your debating team for instance.

Most record labels would probably fall into the category. Most corporations. The vast majority of politicians. All bankers or wall street types. Anyone who has bought into the insane meme that you have to make lots of money to be valuable or valid.

Most Musicians would NOT fit the category, as far as I can tell. They just seem to like to create and share, until some asshole convinces them they'd better chase money, or fight, and impose rule of law on others to protect any gains they have managed to make against the odds.

your bias shines like a light in a cave...

Who ever said anything about making "lots" of money? Where was that EVER implied? No, that is just a very revealing meme into the workings of your own brain...

Every working musician i know, would like to make "enough" money TO EAT AND PAY THEIR BILLS. Beyond that they'd like enough to buy a gift for their children on their birthday.. or possibly treat the wife to a night out every once in a while.

Every struggling musician i know would prefer to CHOOSE to give away their time/labor [or not] rather than have it taken from them.

Every musician i know would rather they get --honestly earned money-- than giving it to (or having it stolen) from money grubbing anti-union companies like Google and their friends


When Haiti imploded via natural disaster... it was MUSICIANs and other creatives who helped raise over $65,000,000 (65 million) for the Haitian people for disaster relief.
EQ Magazine April 2010

When the chips were down, it was music that provid-ed the backdrop for people to donate over $65,000,000to the cause of Haitian relief

You're quick to call us all "greedy"... maybe you should do some self-reflection. You may just realize you have an irrational hatred for people whom you don't even know...
Do you hate other 'groups' of people as well? I believe there's a term for that...

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by fritzschreiner

No. You're the one who is wrong. You have much too rigid and greedy a point of view. But you speak very loudly, so I guess it's all good. Greed is the old way.

When you say that nobody has proposed any alternatives, I see from recent posts that You didn't see them because they differed from the Greed is Good model you hold dear.

The new way of doing things is growing and springing it's head up all over the place, like little islands of sanity in a sea of people who never noticed their soul take a vacation as they "Learned what it takes" to get by in this world.

And soon those island of sanity will become the continents and people who continue to push the crap you do will simply be cut loose on their rafts where Greed is King.

Greedy? Dig it, junior - I've invested over $30,000 (probably a lot more, actually) in getting my band together, putting together a decent studio capable of recording an album to professional standards, and recording my album - which is still only about 2/3 done. That's not even considering the over THREE YEARS time invested and the physical labor involved.

And you have the UTTER GALL to tell me that I'm "greedy" for wanting to be able to make my investment back and pay my people?

ARE YOU REALLY TELLING ME THAT????

The greedy one is you, who thinks that he's entitled to take my product and not pay for it.

You know, I don't really care if I make more money than it takes to continue recording and support the band on the road - which takes a shitload of money that you wouldn't know anything about BECAUSE YOU'VE NEVER TOURED, and to be able to pay the guys in my band. My lead guitarist is in a band in the Rock and Roll Hall Of Fame and he's broke - crashing on the floor of my studio and feeding himself on $40 a week he makes teaching guitar. My bass player gets by doing sound one or two nights a week a a small club. I'D LIKE TO BE ABLE TO PAY THESE GUYS!

If you want to see greed, look in a mirror.

When you say that nobody has proposed any alternatives, I see from recent posts that You didn't see them because they differed from the Greed is Good model you hold dear.

And let me tell you something about that - I spent a good part of my life living "alternative models" and hating the "greedy pigs" and you know what it got me?

NOTHING, that's what it got me. I worked my ass off and ended up broke, with health problems and no medical coverage.

Hating people for their success is a self-destructive dead end street. Living as parasite on society will get you nowhere. Maybe it all sounds romantic and cool when you read about it in a Cory Doctorow Sci-Fi novel, but guess what - that's FICTION. It ain't reality.

Expecting something for nothing and the idea that society owes you a living is the ultimate in greed.

It isn't greedy to expect to be paid for your work.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by joelpatterson

There is SOMETHING a little on the "reductio ad absurdum" side in neatly cleaving the entire world into pirates vs. non-pirates... and assigning motives that EITHER endorse piracy or defy it... and creating analogies that substitute real, tangible goods in place of intangible data and pretending like there's a one-for-one equality.

This is way too simplistic an approach to describing the modern world and the tremendous upheavals that the steady march of technological progress have wrought.

Yes we know.

There's pirates and there's creatives - and then there's Joel, who has managed to carve himself a little (but highly specialized) niche that manages to avoid all that.

That's great for YOU, Joel. We all applaud your ingenuity. But not everybody has the opportunity to make a living doing vanity recordings for schools and civic organizations. In fact there's room for about one guy doing that in any given urban area.

So it's all well and good for you to sit there above all the rest of us who have to deal with real conditions in the real world and make your snarky but witty comments. It's mildly amusing except when it become annoying.

But it really doesn't have anything to do with us. It's just not relevant. For the rest of us, down in the trenches, there are pirates, supporters, and apologists on the one hand and creatives and anti-pirates on the other. Glad your conscientious objector status was approved by your draft board. The rest of us weren't that lucky.

(See, I can be snarky but witty, too!)

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by aroundtheworld

Great post! The character assassination that takes place here is really quite pathetic and reaching.

Are you an artist? I am, and I can't agree with Doctorow.
According to your profile you've made 113 posts on Gearslutz. Every single one a post against the industry in piracy discussions.
No questions about a nice mic/pre?

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by fritzschreiner

The piracy definition is invalid, so that's a non component of the debate.

Who's greedy? Anyone who puts the old money grubber hat on over breakfast each morning. Anyone who is so focused on "getting their share, or more" that it consumes an inordinate amount of their time. Your debating team for instance.

Most record labels would probably fall into the category. Most corporations. The vast majority of politicians. All bankers or wall street types. Anyone who has bought into the insane meme that you have to make lots of money to be valuable or valid.

Most Musicians would NOT fit the category, as far as I can tell. They just seem to like to create and share, until some asshole convinces them they'd better chase money, or fight, and impose rule of law on others to protect any gains they have managed to make against the odds.

What do you know about "most record labels? (And, more importantly, where did you get your info?)

Have you dealt with "most record labels"?

Have you dealt with ANY record labels?

I don't believe you have.

Have you ever even known ONE PERSON who works for a record label in any capacity?

Let me clue you in to a little secret - most musicians signed to a label LOVE their label. Their label gives them support that nobody else will. Their label allows them to make music without having to worry about holding down a day job. Their label advances them money for projects so they don't have to pay up front out of their own pocket.

NONE OF THAT MAKES GOOD PR. So they don't talk about it.

NONE OF THAT SELLS MAGAZINES OR ATTRACTS CLICKS TO BLOGS. So pundits and "journalists" don't want to hear about it.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by fritzschreiner

That gives me an idea for a label. "You're a labeller!!!!" I like that. Any permutations available? How about "You're a labeller lover!!!!!". Hmmm. A bit unwieldy.

Oh never mind. I don't need labels. I can Think.

Which is why you're constantly blathering on about how everybody in the industry is "greedy".

Right.

You'd actually be funny it you weren't so pathetic.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by aroundtheworld

Great post! The character assassination that takes place here is really quite pathetic and reaching.

Charcter Assassination - you mean like calling anyone who actually WORKS at music and wants to get paid a fair wage GREEDY?

Yeah, there is a lot of that, isn't there. And from people with nothing better to do than make excuses and justifications for people who want to take others' property without paying for it.

Concerning Cory Doctorow - it's not character assassination. I seriously doubt that he would dispute anything that's been said about him except the ultimate results of the things he advocates. He makes no effort to conceal or disguise his opposition to copyright or his support of Lawrence Lessig. He makes pirates and hackers the heroes of his novels. He's quite out front in his position. He makes no bones about being the enemy. Which is more than I can say about some people around here.

Have I mentioned that I enjoy his novels? They're very entertaining SCIENCE FICTION. Let's try that again - SCIENCE FICTION. Which is great. You only get into trouble when you start confusing fiction with reality.

[aroundtheworld]

Originally Posted by chrisso

According to your profile you've made 113 posts on Gearslutz. Every single one a post against the industry in piracy discussions.

"Every single one a post against the industry." Find me one single post of mine "against" the music industry, or retract that gross and skewed exaggeration of my posting history, as I did for you, when I mistakenly exaggerated your position on an issue.

Since you asked (and I have answered thus before), I do work in the music field as an artist. I don't know if I agree with everything Doctorow says, but when his positions are made into strawmen and attacked on that basis I will rightly call that out, because I do support the EFF, and I do release some works under Creative Commons licenses (of which there was a long and unproductive discussion some time ago), which are two of the frequent popular villains ('round these parts) to conflate Doctorow (and others) with.

[fritzschreiner]

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

Greedy? Dig it, junior - I've invested over $30,000 (probably a lot more, actually) in getting my band together, putting together a decent studio capable of recording an album to professional standards, and recording my album - which is still only about 2/3 done. That's not even considering the over THREE YEARS time invested and the physical labor involved.

And you have the UTTER GALL to tell me that I'm "greedy" for wanting to be able to make my investment back and pay my people?

ARE YOU REALLY TELLING ME THAT????

The greedy one is you, who thinks that he's entitled to take my product and not pay for it.

You know, I don't really care if I make more money than it takes to continue recording and support the band on the road - which takes a shitload of money that you wouldn't know anything about BECAUSE YOU'VE NEVER TOURED, and to be able to pay the guys in my band. My lead guitarist is in a band in the Rock and Roll Hall Of Fame and he's broke - crashing on the floor of my studio and feeding himself on $40 a week he makes teaching guitar. My bass player gets by doing sound one or two nights a week a a small club. I'D LIKE TO BE ABLE TO PAY THESE GUYS!

If you want to see greed, look in a mirror.


And let me tell you something about that - I spent a good part of my life living "alternative models" and hating the "greedy pigs" and you know what it got me?

NOTHING, that's what it got me. I worked my ass off and ended up broke, with health problems and no medical coverage.

Hating people for their success is a self-destructive dead end street. Living as parasite on society will get you nowhere. Maybe it all sounds romantic and cool when you read about it in a Cory Doctorow Sci-Fi novel, but guess what - that's FICTION. It ain't reality.

Expecting something for nothing and the idea that society owes you a living is the ultimate in greed.

It isn't greedy to expect to be paid for your work.

Your inability to think straight and actually read what's written makes discussion difficult.

Show me where I said you were greedy? Maybe if you're failing so badly at your chosen career, you'd be better off trying something you CAN do?

But railing at bloggers, and journalists, and authors, and debaters isn't going to get you better able to make a living.

You need to find out what you've been missing out on while you've been so busy bitching about things you have no control over, and figure out something that will work. Shilling for the pro regulation/legislation gang only leaves you sucking fumes some more.

A little free and friendly advice.

[chrisso]

What about earlier today:

Originally Posted by aroundtheworld

Maybe UMG and Sony, the owners of VEVO, aren't too concerned when it's other people's copyrights being infringed?

It isn't hard to see your motivation, nothing against it, but it bears pointing out.
Every single post at Gearslutz, a post on the subjects of piracy, the music industry and copyright.
You habitually link to Techdirt and Torrentfreak, habitually disagree with every Gearslutz poster working in the industry, and equate the EFF with the ACLU ().
You started threads criticising both Warner Brothers, and the Australian content industry.
You have never posted a single question about a piece of gear, or a recording technique in 115 posts.
I'm just calling a spade a spade. There is no shame in your position, it's just that it's enthusiastically for tech innovations and enthusiastically against the traditional industries and seemingly devoid of any other musical content, favourite albums, favourite music software, favourite mics.

[joelpatterson]

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

Yes we know.

...

John, you keep trying to tie this back around to me, personally-- because I've managed to find a way to make a living with tape recording machinery outside of the "traditional" system, you're implying that my perspective is not valid?

And then what I hear you saying is that you've sunk a significant investment into your own plans, and you're expecting that investment "deserves" some kind of recouping?

How do you expect that to work-- considering that we both know the "traditional" way of going about these things, in 2012, is to say the very least somewhat idealistic?

These "trenches" of which you speak, it's all in your mind... your brothers in arms aren't folding those arms together across their chests and pouting... they're moving on... I'd guess they're realizing that "producing an album" isn't the goal or potential bonanza it once might have been. That's the feverdream of a bygone era.

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by joelpatterson

because I've managed to find a way to make a living with tape recording machinery outside of the "traditional" system, you're implying that my perspective is not valid?

The entire music scene can't operate the same way you do, so the fact you keep dropping into threads about the entire music scene stating that "I've seen the light, I've got it sussed" seems a bit of a waste of time. It's a decent opinion to hold in certain discussions, not every one.
I found it particularly bizarre that in a simple case of a studio owner wrongly posting an artist's song on the web without asking them, you dropped in to advise the girl should have been grateful for the publicity.

[aroundtheworld]

Originally Posted by chrisso

What about earlier today:

The post of mine that you linked, I would hope presents itself as fairly clear parody, given that I linked the posts that it was skewering; it draws a comparison between claims of negligence directed at Youtube against claims of dismissal over the same actions toward VEVO (which, as I later acknowledged were warranted). Now redact your post, because I have never posted "against the music industry," let alone in "every single [post]." I gave you the courtesy of acknowledging my own mistake when describing your position, now do the same for me.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by fritzschreiner

Your inability to think straight and actually read what's written makes discussion difficult.

Show me where I said you were greedy? Maybe if you're failing so badly at your chosen career, you'd be better off trying something you CAN do?

You've said I'm greedy in nearly every post you make.

I think perfectly straight. It's you who has the comprehension problem.

What you refuse to understand is this - I'M FAIRLY TYPICAL OF THE AVERAGE PERSON IN THE MUSIC INDUSTRY. When you insult the industry you insult me. When you say the industry is greedy I take it personally because you're talking about me and my friends.

I'm not failing at my career - I'm a success. Not a BIG success, but I'm still alive (which a lot of my friends and people I've known are not), I've been a part of making a lot of great (and a fair amount of non-so-great) music, I've worked for and played with some legendary people.

That doesn't necessarily translate into money.

The idea that most people in the industry are rich, or even moderately well off, is a myth. Michael Jackson's guitar player David Williams died from complications of high blood pressure - a treatable disease - because he couldn't afford medical coverage.

But railing at bloggers, and journalists, and authors, and debaters isn't going to get you better able to make a living.

Sure it will, if I can do even a little bit to counter the misinformation and outright lies that these scurrilous vermin perpetuate. You expect me to just roll over and play dead while they profit from the destruction of the industry I've spent my life in? Guess again, kiddo!

You need to find out what you've been missing out on while you've been so busy bitching about things you have no control over,

We only have no control if we admit defeat and give in to the enemy.

And I haven't missed out on anything. Have you ever been paid to do a world tour for with some of the biggest acts in the world?

No, you have not.

and figure out something that will work.

I know what will work. Eliminating the scumbags who steal our product will work. Nothing else will.

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by aroundtheworld

Now redact your post, because I have never posted "against the music industry,"

I'm highlighting the platform you bring to Gearslutz. Are you denying it?
You're for Creative Commons and change in current copyright laws.
I have no problem with Creative Commons. I don't think the supporters of new IP concepts need to bring down the alternative that most people want to use, or bring down those many people who use more mainstream copyright.
Why don't you start threads promoting Creative Commons and similar, instead of starting threads criticizing mainstream labels and questioning the damage done by piracy?

[AllAboutTone]

This rating had no help from me, in the past few years I saw Chris Botti twice and Diana Krall once, other than that I cannot remember the last year I saw a concert, simply not gonna dig that deep in the wallet to pay the price.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by joelpatterson

John, you keep trying to tie this back around to me, personally-- because I've managed to find a way to make a living with tape recording machinery outside of the "traditional" system, you're implying that my perspective is not valid?

It's certainly valid for you, and that's great.

It isn't valid for those who don't have the opportunity to work in your very limited, very specialized niche.

Some of us have greater ambitions than recording school orchestras. Some of us want to work in music that reaches thousands or millions of people.

Your model isn't valid for that. And touting it to those of us who want something larger is....... childish? Annoying? Intentionally refusing to acknowledge the real problem?

The problem is that piracy has all but destroyed the business of making music. This has put a lot of people out of work and seriously reduced the quality of available commercial music. It has destroyed the opportunities for new artists. It is responsible for untold amounts to great music that will never be made.

I'm sorry, recording school and municipal orchestras and doing the odd private vanity record is not a viable solution to this problem.

You've found a personal solution that works for what you want to do with your life and that's great.

Please stop standing in the way of those of us who are trying to do something more than that.

[L.S.D.]

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

Please stop standing in the way of those of us who are trying to do something more than that.

*Different* is what you meant to say

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by aroundtheworld

The post of mine that you linked, I would hope presents itself as fairly clear parody, given that I linked the posts that it was skewering; it draws a comparison between claims of negligence directed at Youtube against claims of dismissal over the same actions toward VEVO (which, as I later acknowledged were warranted). Now redact your post, because I have never posted "against the music industry," let alone in "every single [post]." I gave you the courtesy of acknowledging my own mistake when describing your position, now do the same for me.

And you totally refuse to accept reality. Which is that VEVO DID NOT DO WHAT YOU AND THE PROPAGANDIST WHO WROTE THE HIT PIECE ACCUSED THEM OF.

They refused to allow the game to be shown.

When the found that the person had illegally comandeered a pice of their equipment and pu it on anyway they corrected the situation.

HOW THE HELL CAN YOU SAY THEY HAD ANY RESPONSIBILITY? Are they supposed to station an armed guard with an M-16 at every laptop station in the venue to keep buttheads from messing with the gear? (Actually, not a bad idea, but probably too expensive.)

Have you ever worked in a bar?

Have you ever even been in a bar? (Are you old enough?)

Bars are full of drunken patrons who on occasion can do some incredibly obnoxious, assholic things. Unless you've got really tight security (which is not conducive to a good industry party) it is often impossible to prevent some incidents from occurring.

When the venue you're at is a sports bar and you've taken it over and are not giving the local wildlife their usual diet of mindless sporting events then thinks like this often happen.

The only thing the event coordinator from VEVO (NOT the company, which had nothing to do with this whatsoever) did wrong was not post a constant guard on the laptop. Hindsight is 20-20. Would YOU have thought to do it? Would YOU have predicted a problem? I seriously doubt it.

[aroundtheworld]

Originally Posted by chrisso

I'm highlighting the platform you bring to Gearslutz. Are you denying it?
You're for Creative Commons and change in current copyright laws.

Can you even show me one post where I advocated change to current copyright law? I suspect not. You were absolutely dead wrong with your first exaggeration/lie about my posts, and I believe you're wrong with your second. Now I'll thank you to amend your post.

[aroundtheworld]

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

And you totally refuse to accept reality.
[rant snipped]

That's a really great rant and all, John, but even in the post that you're replying to, which you quoted, I linked my acknowledgement that I was too quick to sarcastically respond as I did. Unlike some posters in this thread, I can admit when I am wrong.

[chrisso]

Well this in response to 'JammyBastard's' strong defense of Doctorow:

Originally Posted by aroundtheworld

Great post! The character assassination that takes place here is really quite pathetic and reaching.

Doctorow

....believes that copyright laws should be liberalized to allow for free sharing of all digital media. He has also advocated filesharing.[29] He argues that copyright holders should have a monopoly on selling their own digital media, and copyright laws should only be operative when someone attempts to sell a product currently under someone else's copyright.

So you are very supportive of Doctorow, and see criticisms of him in this thread as character assassination (bold underlined). And now you claim you aren't interested in changing copyright?