The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Why Does TechDirt Hate Musicians? Effects Pedals, Units & Accessories
Old 14th April 2012
  #61
Gear addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
No I actually don't agree with that.
Even at it's worst, the bickering here is more petty. It's negative. I hold my hand up to misdemeanors with regards to negative bickering. I see out and out bullying from masnick and some of his supporters quite regularly on Techdirt. If you think people are bullied here (which I know you do) I think you are probably too thin skinned for robust debate.
Yes, of course, it's me that is too thin-skinned for a Rush Limbaugh style robust debate with people who have fragile egos.

Quote:
But why are we continually diverted from the subject matter to discussing individual members of this forum?
For one thing, the subject is forum behavior and the way people treat one another. The way people behave. For another, ask yourself, Rack Gear, John Eppstein and whoever else that engages in your style of "robust debate".

Ask the moderators what they think of how many of you act on this forum. I have.
Old 14th April 2012
  #62
Gear Guru
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by frednurk View Post
Why are you making this about me (again)?
I'm asking you on topic questions. It's called debate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by frednurk View Post
So you are a grown-up full-time professional in the music industry and you are hanging out with rock stars today? Correct?
yup. not just rock stars, but highly respected and influential musicians who literally changed the face music. pretty cool.

Quote:
Originally Posted by frednurk View Post
You didn't answer my questions about your being banned, btw.
I sure did (go back and read it), but what does that have to do with the topic of this thread or the subject being discussed?

If you want to ask me a question about the topic at hand I'd be glad to offer a response.

back on topic, supporting artists rights:

what legislative solution do you support?

did you support sopa? are you in favor of six strikes (not legislative, but it is a commerce policy between companies).

if not these, what kind of legislative solutions would you support?
Old 14th April 2012
  #63
Gear addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post


Next!
Please explain how Rack Gear's grilling of me is on topic? You get what you give.
Old 14th April 2012
  #64
Quote:
Originally Posted by frednurk View Post
Yes, of course, it's me that is too thin-skinned for a Rush Limbaugh style robust debate with people who have fragile egos.
Fine.
If you think the atmosphere at Gearslutz is the same as at Techdirt you are welcome to that view.
I disagree.
But there you go, time to move on........
Old 14th April 2012
  #65
Gear addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
I'm asking you on topic questions. It's called debate.
The topic is about the people commenting on TechDirt. Make up your mind.

Quote:
yup. not just rock stars, but highly respected and influential musicians who literally changed the face music. pretty cool.
I believe you.

Quote:
I sure did (go back and read it), but what does that have to do with the topic of this thread or the subject being discussed?
The topic seems to be people's behavior on forums.

You didn't answer. Were you ever banned here, and why do you have multiple names?
Old 14th April 2012
  #66
Quote:
Originally Posted by frednurk View Post
Please explain how Rack Gear's grilling of me is on topic? You get what you give.
Not sure about grilling, but.......
Techdirt is for copyright reform.
The vast majority of musicians are NOT for copyright reform (sure, there are a few exceptions).
So it's on topic to explore the comments section at Techdirt, the attitude of the posters at Techdirt to the musician blogging (Erin) and the widely held views of most musicians.
I don't speak for Rack Gear, but I guess he just wanted you to go on record as to your views on musician's rights and copyright legislation/reform.
You have.
End of........
Old 14th April 2012
  #67
Quote:
Originally Posted by frednurk View Post
The topic seems to be people's behavior on forums.
Nope, not even close....
The topic is the commentary at Techdirt with regards to musicians who believe they have been plagarised. The commentary speaks for itself. I didn't write it.
It would be lovely if it was insightful as 'J-UK' suggested "what constitues inspiration as oppose to mere copying".
But instead you get comments like 'get a real job', or supposedly serious comparisons between writing a song and making a pizza.
Old 14th April 2012
  #68
Gear Guru
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by frednurk View Post
The topic is about the people commenting on TechDirt. Make up your mind.
Why Does TechDirt Hate Musicians?

Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
A Perspective On The Complexities Of Copyright And Creativity From A Victim Of Infringement | Techdirt

Wow, Just Wow... how incredibly insulting.

The Tech Dirt “Case Study” on artist Erin McKeown’s bout with copyright infringement of one of her songs results in an internet bully pile on that defies any rationality.

These comments are so offensive I don’t even know what to say. This is what Tech Dirt and it’s followers think of artists. If there was any previous doubt about what the true agenda of these people is, this pretty much spells it out.
OP refresher above.

Quote:
Originally Posted by frednurk View Post
I believe you.
ok, can't imagine why you'd care one way or the other how I spend my lunches... that's about as off topic as I can imagine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by frednurk View Post
The topic seems to be people's behavior on forums.
The topic is asking why an entire site would be so dedicated to the destruction of artists rights and copyright, and with such hate for the artist themselves. There appears to be a clear agenda to disempower artists that I personally find disturbing. That's what this thread is about.

Quote:
Originally Posted by frednurk View Post
You didn't answer. Were you ever banned here, and why do you have multiple names?
I actually did (go back and read it).
Old 14th April 2012
  #69
Gear addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Nope....
The topic is the commentary at Techdirt with regards to musicians who believe they have been plagarised. The commentary speaks for itself. I didn't write it.
It would be lovely if it was insightful as 'J-UK' suggested "what constitues inspiration as oppose to mere copying".
But instead you get comments like 'get a real job', or supposedly serious comparisons between writing a song and making a pizza.
And aroundtheworld was pointing out that any forum has people who comment in such a fashion, including this one. If you can't handle some person saying that writing a song is like making a pizza maybe it's you that is too thin-skinned.
Old 14th April 2012
  #70
Gear Guru
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by frednurk View Post
And aroundtheworld was pointing out that any forum has people who comment in such a fashion, including this one. If you can't handle some person saying that writing a song is like making a pizza maybe it's you that is too thin-skinned.
perhaps, but techdirt appears specifically focused on taking artists to task who exercise any vocal support of their own rights... these are the same people who attacked lilly allen in a cyber bullying campaign...

Lily Allen drops fight against filesharing after Techdirt spat - Telegraph
Quote:
"I've shut down the blog, the abuse was getting too much."
Old 14th April 2012
  #71
Quote:
Originally Posted by frednurk View Post
I don't know anything about TechDirt. I saw a link about a copyright case, and I browsed through and saw varying opinions. If there are unpleasant people there, it's no different than the unpleasant people here, in my opinion.

aroundtheworld also said "Don't tell me that when certain oft-suspended people enter threads ablaze with a self-righteous surety that the tenor here doesn't rival the worst of any other moderated community."

Do you agree with that?
That's because when Aroundtheworld and tvsky can't win a debate on the merits of their arguments they find it necessary to indulge in personal attacks and personality assassination.
Old 14th April 2012
  #72
Gear addict
 

Old 14th April 2012
  #73
Gear Guru
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by frednurk View Post
I don't care about TechDirt (or robust debates with loonies here or there).

On the topic of copyright and pizza:

Can you copyright a dish? | Life and style | The Guardian

Goodbye
see ya...

are you trolling then?

if you are not interested in discussing the topic of the thread, or the discussion in it, what are you doing here?

start a copyright and pizza thread if you like...
Old 14th April 2012
  #74
Quote:
Originally Posted by frednurk View Post
And aroundtheworld was pointing out that any forum has people who comment in such a fashion
That doesn't contradict what I was saying. But as you ask, I find the atmosphere at Techdirt to be quite different to Gearslutz.

Quote:
If you can't handle some person saying that writing a song is like making a pizza maybe it's you that is too thin-skinned.
LOL

Of course I never implied or said anything of the sort.
I can 'handle it', it just doesn't equal insightful debate in any way, shape or form. And that's worth noting as the site sets itself up as concerned with copyright reform.
Old 14th April 2012
  #75
Quote:
Originally Posted by frednurk View Post
I don't care about TechDirt (or robust debates with loonies here or there).
Why all the contrarian posts then?
Mystifying.
Old 14th April 2012
  #76
Old 14th April 2012
  #77
Quote:
Originally Posted by frednurk View Post
I don't care about TechDirt (or robust debates with loonies here or there).

On the topic of copyright and pizza:

Can you copyright a dish? | Life and style | The Guardian

Goodbye.
Concerning copyright and pizza:

You can't copyright a pizza. That's not the applicable law.

However

You CAN patent a food dish if it is substantially different and involves new techniques that have not been used before, in other words if it is a unique invention.

A pizza isn't patentable - it's not a new kind of food - BUT the food cited in the article - which was NOT a pizza - would in fact probably have been patentable, had the inventor thought to apply for a patent before releasing the recipe to the public.

But he didn't do that, so he loses out. Unlike copyright, patent does not automatically exist from the moment of creation. You have to apply for it for it to be valid.
Old 14th April 2012
  #78
Gear addict
 

Here's the ironic thing about this story:

First, I want to say I respect McKeown as an artist, and I genuinely enjoy her music, just so this isn't taken the wrong way.

Erin McKeown is a board member of the Future of Music Coalition and a Berkman Fellow. From a very general standpoint, that means she is in a camp diametrically opposed to what is referred to as, for lack of a better term (and I hate this term) "copyright maximalism" -- most recently, for example, she explicitly came out against SOPA.

TechDirt is most closely aligned this side of the debate. It regularly favors Berkman-aligned speakers, and its "Step2" community is sponsored by the Future of Music Coalition.

So it's obvious that McKeown's guest post came about because she and Mike run in the same circles. To see her attacked so visciously by TechDirt readers is therefore shocking.

This is someone who by and large agrees with Mike Masnick. Yet he has cultivated such a hatred for artists -- through years of encouragement on his blog -- that she is basically told to "shut up and sing."

The comments illustrate a position that, to me, has no moral or equitable standing. McKeown should be ashamed that she has the audacity to be upset that some beer company in the Czech Republic has made "a hit" out of her song. That she should have absolutely no say over the product of her creative labor because once it leaves her lips it belongs to the public, a public that stood idley by while she devoted her life to the craft of songwriting.

Why should this public have a superior claim to something that didn't even exist before she wrote and sang it?

It's a sick, twisted ideology that ultimately leads to less Erin McKeowns. We can debate over the scope of copyright, or the methods of enforcement, but the comments on this TechDirt post illustrate that there are plenty of people who believe the very idea of copyright is incorrect, and that idea should be held up as a grave mistake for any enlightened society.
Old 14th April 2012
  #79
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
...
I also wish people who were 'permanently' banned from the forum stayed banned.
But I don't run the place, or moderate it. ...
It's fine the way it is. It's too easy to socially engineer a banning.
Old 14th April 2012
  #80
Lives for gear
 
freetard's Avatar
 

Hey guys,

Freetard ambassador here. Regular and longtime reader and commentard of Techdirt, Reddit, Slashdot and various "technology" sites. I just feel the need to clear the air here.

Let me elaborate on the freetard "hive mind" platform. We are not against the philosophy of copyright. We are not anti-music or anti-artist. We are anti-censorship and anti-surveillance.

Generally speaking, copyright and the above stances are not compatible. There is no real way to enforce copyright without monitoring what everyone does with their computers and technology. The pro-copyright groups know this, and they don't care. They want to reverse hundreds of years of civil liberties to prop up their broken business model. So we try to stop their attempts to constantly ram bad legalization through the legal systems (see: CISPA/SOPA/PIPA).

Fundamentally we are pro-Internet, and pro-freedom. If it makes us anti-copyright, that's just a side effect of copyright enforcement.

Also as nerds, we generally lack social skills and the pretend empathy that most of the human population seems to have. This is a desirable trait to have as a technologist, because our field is based on science and science doesn't care about your feelings. So we are more likely to tell things as we see it, instead of how the receiver wants to hear it.

I hope this helps. Feel free to post on Techdirt or any of the above sites, we don't moderate our sites or restrict what opinions you can have as a commentard.

- Mr. Freetard
Old 14th April 2012
  #81
Gear Guru
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by freetard View Post
Let me elaborate on the freetard "hive mind" platform. We are not against the philosophy of copyright. We are not anti-music or anti-artist.
I wish this were true.

Quote:
Originally Posted by freetard View Post
We are anti-censorship and anti-surveillance.
so are we.

Quote:
Originally Posted by freetard View Post
Generally speaking, copyright and the above stances are not compatible. There is no real way to enforce copyright without monitoring what everyone does with their computers and technology.
this is absolutely false, and promoting that it is true is a large part of the problem. even assuming this statement is correct (which it's not), please contemplate the following.

criminally prosecuting illegally operating corporations and businesses like the pirate bay, megaupload, limewire, kazaa, grokster, etc does not require monitoring anyone. the majority of pirate activity is financed and monetized via googles adwords. no one needs to be monitored to stop google from facilitating illegal activity.

http://popuppirates.com/

all this requires shutting down illegally operating businesses whose sole purpose is to illegally exploit artist rights for profit. so your argument here is moot.

further more, the techdirt responses in the OP are reacting to no such monitoring or surveillance of anyone... period.

it's a case of a multiple commercial corporations illegally appropriating the work of an artists to profit a beer company by not having to pay for the music used in a tv commercial. again, this issue has nothing to do with monitoring anyone, and yet the backlash against this artists was so extreme simply because she wanted to protect her rights.

and finally, if you really are worried about monitoring and surveillance your fears are deeply displaced as the the ship has sailed. there's no one living even a remotely consumer lifestyle that has anything like privacy for over a decade at least, add to that, most people are giving up their privacy voluntarily to google, facebook and the like...

not to mention the copyright alert system going into effect in July...

so if you are really worried about monitoring, you should be focused on the guy in the video below, not Erin McKeown...

Old 14th April 2012
  #82
Gear addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by freetard View Post
Hey guys,

Freetard ambassador here. Regular and longtime reader and commentard of Techdirt, Reddit, Slashdot and various "technology" sites. I just feel the need to clear the air here.

Let me elaborate on the freetard "hive mind" platform. We are not against the philosophy of copyright. We are not anti-music or anti-artist. We are anti-censorship and anti-surveillance.
That's great, except you define every assertion of rights as "censorship" and every assertion of due process as "surveillance." Until you recognize that the world doesn't revolve around you and other people have rights, we can't have a serious discussion.
Old 14th April 2012
  #83
Lives for gear
 
freetard's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
criminally prosecuting illegally operating corporations and businesses like the pirate bay, megaupload, limewire, kazaa, grokster, etc does not require monitoring anyone. the majority of pirate activity is financed and monetized via googles adwords. no one needs to be monitored to stop google from facilitating illegal activity
Sir, but we are not in agreement and if my experience with this sort of thing is accurate, probably will never be. All the sites you have posted have both illegitimate and legitimate uses. If you try to stop the illegitimate uses, you will also harm the legitimate uses. That is simply unacceptable to us.

The thing that makes copyright so hard to enforce on the Internet is the Internet is a platform that ANYONE can use to distribute information at a crazy large scale. So suddenly copyright has to be enforced on everyone.

In the land of mass media, only a few people has this power (media companies). Copyright was much easier to enforce, and casual piracy wasn't really as a big of a deal. So the Internet changed everything, much to the determent of those who still rely on artificial scarcity to earn a living. Like you, I guess.

There is no acceptable solution at all because the Internet and copyright are simply fundamentally at odds with each other. We've been saying this for 20 years now. It's not a new idea.

Personally, I feel the solution to your problems is finding a different occupation. We have such a problem filling positions in the technology industry that we have to constantly import foreign workers to meet demand. Salaries in excess of six figures are fairly standard. So don't fight us, join us.

-Mr. Freetard
Old 14th April 2012
  #84
Gear addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by freetard View Post
Sir, but we are not in agreement and if my experience with this sort of thing is accurate, probably will never be. All the sites you have posted have both illegitimate and legitimate uses. If you try to stop the illegitimate uses, you will also harm the legitimate uses. That is simply unacceptable to us.

The thing that makes copyright so hard to enforce on the Internet is the Internet is a platform that ANYONE can use to distribute information at a crazy large scale. So suddenly copyright has to be enforced on everyone.

In the land of mass media, only a few people has this power (media companies). Copyright was much easier to enforce, and casual piracy wasn't really as a big of a deal. So the Internet changed everything, much to the determent of those who still rely on artificial scarcity to earn a living. Like you, I guess.

There is no acceptable solution at all because the Internet and copyright are simply fundamentally at odds with each other. We've been saying this for 20 years now. It's not a new idea.

Personally, I feel the solution to your problems is finding a different occupation. We have such a problem filling positions in the technology industry that we have to constantly import foreign workers to meet demand. Salaries in excess of six figures are fairly standard. So don't fight us, join us.

-Mr. Freetard
If you had a single shred of empirical evidence to back up any of your points, you might have a point.

But the fact remains: multi-national companies aren't entitled to step on individual creator rights just because it got slightly easier to do so.
Old 14th April 2012
  #85
Lives for gear
 
freetard's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by terryhart View Post
If you had a single shred of empirical evidence to back up any of your points, you might have a point.

But the fact remains: multi-national companies aren't entitled to step on individual creator rights just because it got slightly easier to do so.
Sir, you underestimate the issue when you say "slightly easier".

It has nothing to do with multi-national companies and everything to do with the Internet itself. The Internet's nature favors some business models over others, and these "multi-national companies" are no exception. The technological foundation of the Internet is fundamentally indifferent to copyright, and Web 2.0 and other emergent phenomena of this copyright-hostile platform encourages a society that is increasingly at odds with copyright instead of enabled by it.

If you want to understand the Internet better ("empirical evidence") you should try to get a certification or some other credential. Cisco Certified Network Associate is a good start. I'm not being sarcastic here, learning more about how the Internet works at the low level is important to understanding the issues. It's no surprise that that Internet engineers have a lot of hate for copyright enforcement.
Old 14th April 2012
  #86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Hills View Post
It's fine the way it is. It's too easy to socially engineer a banning.
Thanks, Don!
Old 14th April 2012
  #87
Gear addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by terryhart View Post
If you had a single shred of empirical evidence to back up any of your points, you might have a point.

But the fact remains: multi-national companies aren't entitled to step on individual creator rights just because it got slightly easier to do so.
Not to dog you, terryhart, but on the subject of empirical evidence -- I'm curious if had any more to say as relates to this thread from last week (if you do, the conversation should probably continue over there). Specifically, if you had any real evidence for the claim that two groups whose founders/directors sit on the board of the CCI are "not exactly in favor of" copyright.
Old 14th April 2012
  #88
Quote:
Originally Posted by freetard View Post
Hey guys,

Freetard ambassador here. Regular and longtime reader and commentard of Techdirt, Reddit, Slashdot and various "technology" sites. I just feel the need to clear the air here.
Hello, Mr. Freetard, and welcome. It's nice to have somebody from your camp who is honest about what he is and doesn't try to waffle.

As you're probably aware, I disagree strongly with most of your position, but I just got back from dinner and I'm sure we'll have plenty of opportunities to lock horns in the future. I just wanted you to know that your forthrightness is appreciated.
Old 14th April 2012
  #89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Hills View Post
It's fine the way it is. It's too easy to socially engineer a banning.
I don't understand your comment.
When forum members are permanently banned, they shouldn't be allowed to resign under a different name.
That's just my position.
Old 14th April 2012
  #90
Gear Guru
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by freetard View Post
There is no acceptable solution at all
no, that's not true. there is no acceptable solution to YOU.

and now you are moving the goal posts. at first you were talking about monitoring and surveillance, when I pointed out that no monitoring and surveillance is required you moved the goal posts to assert that the businesses operating illegally could have legitimate uses. well, no kidding.

but if you break the law you face the consequences. if you run someone over with a car, you are held responsible for YOUR illegal use of the auto. if the business are run legally and legitimately fine, but if they are breaking they law they face the consequences like everyone else. again, no monitoring of individuals required.

the internet is not a lawless fantasy land where ethics and law are abandoned, again, you might want to read up on the ISP copyright alert system coming to you this summer... it's happening, you can't stop it.

oh, and quiet frankly I'd prefer you started working in the entertainment business before I became I cubical jockey grinding out code, it's a lot more fun on our side (well, at least it is for those of us who are still doing it).

I'm not that interested in money, my life choices haven't really been focused upon it... but I believe that artists and creators should get paid if their work is being consumed and exploited, as opposed to corporations making millions or billions and paying the artist nothing.

there is no reason why the internet must be lawless to exist, that is simply a fallacy. an ethical internet benefits all people, not just the corporate ruling class.
Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+  Submit Thread to Reddit Reddit 
 
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
mahler007 / So much gear, so little time!
39
Deleted User / So much gear, so little time!
2
Chad Sterling / The Moan Zone
107
AlexLakis / Music Business
306
camitchell / The Moan Zone
0

Forum Jump