In defence of Indiana Gregg
p2pnet news view Music | P2P:- Until fairly recently, if you’d heard of singer Indiana Gregg, it may well have been because you read The Pirate Bay, TorrentFreak or p2pnet.
She went up against Sweden’s TPB, continued with a slanging match with the site’s Peter Sunde, and finally produced a long rant slugged The Pirate Bay: The Sinking Ship – My Response.
Among other things, “Since the birth of the Internet, people have been hacking software, stealing music, books, films, television shows, credit card numbers, eBay accounts, IP addresses you name it, if it’s out there and can be downloaded, it’s being virtually stolen from under your nose,” Gregg, aka Morrow, stated.
“”Why would someone steal an ip address?” – wondered p2pnet reader BigRob. “Is that even possible?”
Said Art in a comment post response, “Yes, you can steal an IP address. You can not only steal it, you can use it and basically download porn, use it to hack into https websites without being detected. It is a serious problem.”
He goes on >>>
The problem here is that a torrent site “The Pirate Bay” makes over $3 million in profit by pointing us to URL’s where we can download. The argument isn’t whether or not someone would’ve bought all those albums/ software/ films/ TV shows or not.
The argument is that sites like the Pirate Bay exploit the material and earn advertising revenues by allowing users to infringe copyright.
So, the argument is that these sites should share with all these copyright creators. Everyone else is getting something out of it except for the creative people. Those creative people need to be able to continue creating.
There are bands like NIN, Radiohead, that you have mentioned who have profited from a huge marketing machine. The amount of PR and marketing that fueled those downloads was enormous. Likewise, these bands were already well-known beforehand. (known world-wide).
They will be able to fill big stadiums (and already did before they gave their music away)
Some sites like Youtube pay a royalty to musicians. So, it’s free music/film for the users and the musician’s get paid and also the participating songwriters. One problem is that everyone is trying to put all musician’s inside the same box. All musician’s are not part of the major label debate. There are millions of musicians in the world who work on music of all genres. Songwriters are hurt most by this downloading because they can only be paid if there is a royalty structure.
I think in this case the bully is The pirate Bay. If The Pirate Bay is beginning to bully independent musicians who want to be able to chose where they will share their music, then, they are going after the wrong people. Myspace is also in negotiations about paying a royalty to musicians. Last FM is paying a royalty to musicians for their streams. The Pirate Bay claim to be some sort of “Titantic”. They are flagrant about a lack of respect to the artistic community.
As an independent film maker, I see a real crunch going on. It is getting much harder now than ever for independents to find funding. This is because investors will want a return on their investment and if films are being given away for free the day after release, who is going to pay?
Creativity at the level that people have come to enjoy is being destroyed unless these sites make a decision to help fund creativity by sharing in revenues. I don’t see how we will be able to survive. Everyone is tired of seeing the same films without any new great story’s. Same with TV. But, how do we independents get to break through now? I think it is great to have our work popularised by internet. But, I don’t see how we will be able to continue making these interesting films without still selling our automobiles and going into debt because nobody will invest at that big risk.
I think Indiana has produced a solid argument. I think she has been rhetorical and provocative. I think if I was being attacked by The Pirate Bay and if they started to publish my emails and begin to bully me, I would do the same and respond. I respect that a lot. I hope many more independent creators do the same.
Thank you,
Art
Continue to stay tuned.
Jon Newton – p2pnet
.
.Stumble It!
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details. Download here.
July 11th, 2008 at 8:00 am
“Until fairly recently, if youâd heard of singer Indiana Gregg, it may well have been because you read The Pirate Bay, TorrentFreak or p2pnet.”
Exactly!
An unknown bitch uses the noble name of The Pirate Bay, which constitutes an unathorised use of the Trademark, not endorsed by The Pirate Bay.
July 11th, 2008 at 8:08 am
Since when does TPB make $3 Million? Did you get that number from the IFPI?
July 11th, 2008 at 8:13 am
Copyright itself is a broken concept, it was necessary in the past because distribution and production were too expensive. this is no longer the case. people will always create things, they did so long before copyright came along and will do so after it is gone. the question is, is it worth it to our society to give a monopoly to certain people to encourage them to create things that will never belong to the public? keeping in mind that by giving them that monopoly you strip every human being of the rights to do what they wish with their own tangible property. i don’t believe so. we may no longer see multi-million dollar movies but i think it will be worth it to be able to have true ownership of our own property. artists can choose to find a way to adapt or they can take up regular jobs and do art on the side. same for software. open source software is a great example of how people will still create without a monopoly or even a monetary incentive.
July 11th, 2008 at 8:14 am
> The problem here is that a torrent site âThe Pirate Bayâ makes over $3 million in profit by pointing us to URLâs where we can download. The argument isnât whether or not someone wouldâve bought all those albums/ software/ films/ TV shows or not.
Perhaps those torrent sites would be more amenible to the idea if it had been approached with sincere efforts to reach an agreement rather than with lawyers and threats. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.
> There are bands like NIN, Radiohead, that you have mentioned who have profited from a huge marketing machine. The amount of PR and marketing that fueled those downloads was enormous. Likewise, these bands were already well-known beforehand. (known world-wide).
How do you explain Jonathan Coulton, to give just one example?
> Creativity at the level that people have come to enjoy is being destroyed unless these sites make a decision to help fund creativity by sharing in revenues. I donât see how we will be able to survive. Everyone is tired of seeing the same films without any new great storyâs. Same with TV. But, how do we independents get to break through now? I think it is great to have our work popularized by internet. But, I donât see how we will be able to continue making these interesting films without still selling our automobiles and going into debt because nobody will invest at that big risk.
The Pirate Bay and others do not have a monopoly on torrent sites. Just because they are the biggest doesn’t stop you from getting together with some of your INDI buddies and setting up a torrent site of your own. If a piece of the ad revenue is what you want, go out and get it. I can easily see such a site becoming very popular, especially since you, as the creators, would be able to release first! I’m sure you could even reach agreements with many torrent sites that would be to your mutual benifit. Just don’t make Indiana your ambassador, and you’ll do fine.
July 11th, 2008 at 8:27 am
Exactly! Copyright is broken. I don’t know if it needs to be eliminated or not, but you have the MPAA and RIAA to thank for the total disregard for copyright we are now seeing, at least in the US. Society will not tolorate such unreasonably harsh laws such as the DMCA and the Mickey Mouse extension which made copyright a rediculous 95 years! You can’t restrict a basic human instinct to such a great extent, and expect that society will just take it. What instinct? The instinct to interact, to create, to share, and to borrow from others creations. All of the elements which cause societies to evolve. A little restriction on such freedoms will probably be tolorated, too much and people ignore them completely.
July 11th, 2008 at 9:32 am
True. IP addresses can be stolen, and used. After all, we know MediaSentry stole 5 million of them just to upload corrupted files onto filesharing networks.
July 11th, 2008 at 10:43 am
please don’t overlook that “downwardspiralchick”-indiana wrote her rant already in OCTOBER last year and not in connection wiht her take down demand against TPB lately!
(that specific blogpost with the rant is now no longer there).
http://indianagregg.blogspot.com/2007/10/save-musicsave-worldpiracy-is-just-too.html/
She is just an *** and nobody gives a shit about her. (Beside maybe those scottish parliament guys mentioned in the CC-field of the TPB mails her husband has allegedly greased with the label money)
Just ignore her and all the sockpuppets/delusional groupies that pop up the last few weeks on TF, p2pnet and other places.
Ignorance is the severest punishment this spamming/trolling nonentity can recieve. (Not even poverty burdended UK teens with knives can punish her more adequately then we with just ignoring her!)
Like the people do with her album on TPB: Ignoring it!
July 11th, 2008 at 11:14 am
It’s still there. You just have to remove the / at the end. Wow! What a read. My favorite part has to be the quote:
“Please.. spare us this kind of rhetoric guys. With the likes of Microsoft, Prince, and the IFPI going after you, any outsider might begin to wonder when YOU plan to adapt to ‘change’.”
She compares Prince to Microsoft. Oh no!!! Prince is after me!!! I’ll do anything, as long as he doesn’t release another album. Please nooooooooo!!!
July 11th, 2008 at 11:22 am
yeah, we need the Internet police to keep thoze evyl hAcK0r dUdeZ from pikkin on innucent peoples, and yeah, gotta stop thoze pirAtz from cloggin up da pipez to0.
July 11th, 2008 at 11:43 am
I think that Reader’s Write is a stalker of Indiana Gregg.
July 11th, 2008 at 12:34 pm
Yeah that Reader’s Write guy/gal sure is an active poster eh? Who knew one person could make so much noise.
July 11th, 2008 at 1:20 pm
Indiana “I’m a millionaire, I own a record label” Gregg is someone in her 40s competing with artists half her age trying to break into the music business as a new act. And then becoming bitter and blaming her failure on the internet. She’s married to a former RIAA record company manager, so her and her husband Ian’s offensive money-grubbing attitude should not surprise anyone.
Some quotes from her blog http://indianagregg.blogspot.com/2008/06/pirate-bay-sinking-shipmy-response.html
“How easy would it be to simply find all these people who are illegally ’sharing’ and slap a lawsuit on them.
“I’ll bet that when all their users get slapped a fine for ’sharing’ in their respective countries.. ”
“Last year, in an article on Sky News, I read that a woman was fined a massive fine for file sharing on the Kazaa network. I thought, great!”
So this is a person who would take great pleasure in suing her fans into the ground. Any fans of such a vile and vindictive person need to have their heads examined.
July 11th, 2008 at 1:32 pm
she has no fans that’s the problem and the reason why she demanded the take down of the “no one wants the shit”-torrents on TPB!
(at least non that are either able to operate a torrent client or that think her music is so great that they have the urge to make it possible for others to check the music out fo free via the TPB torrent so they can taste if they want to become “fans” too)
July 11th, 2008 at 1:58 pm
Reader Write is like a stalker. The intenet police should come an take him away. lol
Seriously, there needs to be something done about this because nobody wants to start getting fined or banned and if the torrent
community made a real plan then we users wouldn’t be in this position. I started file-sharing when I didn’t know if was illegal.
I don’t think that Indiana was being vendictive at all, i think that she just knows that the torrent sites aren’t going to do anything
to keep their users from getting hurt by using a site which is ‘legal’, but, that the actual sharing is ‘illegal’.
I think she actually makes the point well, but, she is also reacting to The Pirate Bay because they started publishing her email address
and making a big stink about them. This post from Art is sensible. I haven’t read anywhere that Indiana Gregg has ever sued
any of her fans and on her original post, she also mentions that she believes music should be free.
You can make comments and take anything that anyone writes either in context or out of context. Look at how many times Islam is
misquoted for example. So, anything that anyone will write that is controversial is subject to interpretation.
I also read the wikipedia page discussion after Reader’s Write posted her wikipedia page. In the discussion area, there is debate about
the entries being made. I am a freelance writer. So, this is simply topical for me. From observation, it looks to me as though many of
the contributors making comment entries on these various postings seem to be the same people who are often using the same language.
So, I can only assume that perhaps many of you are potentially members of The Pirate Bay?
I am playing devils advocate here.
July 11th, 2008 at 2:44 pm
TPB has “2.858.512 registered users (aka members) . Last updated 23:32:03.”
so given the laws of probability there might be a few here too
–
“I think she actually makes the point well, but, she is also reacting to The Pirate Bay because they started publishing her email address and making a big stink about them.”
1) it is public knowledge that TPB will publish your demands for takedowns in there legal section. So no ground for her based on that to “make the point well and react to The Pirate Bay” Beside that, as pointed out, she would like to sue everybody and the last fan of her and said so already LAST year!
2) where does Peter make a big stink about them? He redicules (not bullies!) her for her lack of judical knowledge!
3) and if she and her new man is stupid enough (or thought to be smart because those 2 non lawyers thought that would impress/freighten Peter) to deliberately had all the politicos email addresses in the CC field instead the BCC field those 2 “morowns” should not complain either!
July 11th, 2008 at 3:21 pm
I am confused yet again Mr. Fritz. I do not see anywhere that she planned to sue anyone last year.
I can only see that The Pirate Bay chose to openly make statement in a TF column which was digged more than a few times.
I see that Gregg was probably in a position to retaliate and made her debate open on her myspace blog (which is not subject to RSS or Digg).
Therefore, TF must have chosen to publish her response.
As someone objective from an outside point of view, I only see an independent musician responding rather than simply taking it on the chin.
In many ways, her arguments could be seen as helpful because in effect, she is not actually arguing or complaining; she is, however, making
suggestive interrogation to the situation. The way I read this is that she is ‘playing the game’ of negotiation on behalf of the users. She clearly
explains (and again, this is only subject to my independent interpretation), that torrent sites are not taking note of the situation that they put
their users in. She explains indirectly that the only way they will be able to somehow survive is by “sharing the revenue” as she puts it.
This is a somewhat clever attempt. She points out an obvious weakness in the ‘business model’ as she puts it.
The deeper I dig, the more I can see that she is probably more of an asset to the torrent model than a vice. Since the TF post opens up with Gregg stating
that she is not opposed to file sharing, it stands to reason that her objective might be considered more friendly than it’s interpretation here.
What is astonishing is that within days of the posts made by TF, so many actions have been made. The announcement made by the G8. The Viacom/Youtube decision. The letters sent via the BPI and Virgen Media(ISP), the media has been swarmed with this P2P debate. From the looks of it, there is absolutely no way
that Gregg could have forseen this reaction. However, for some reason her debate has hit very close to home at an extremely contentious time.
This is of particular interest to me, it would seem that perhaps Gregg is working on a PR stunt with The Pirate Bay (from my point of view).
Again, devils advocate.
July 11th, 2008 at 5:15 pm
I agree that there should be some type of royalty system. That way everyone wins.
For example- TPB makes its money through advertising- which they would get more of if they became “legit”- and pays some type of royalty fee on a download basis DIRECTLY to the ARTIST
That way, the artists make money, the users get there content for free and torrent sites make more money (they become “legit” and attract more advertisers)
July 11th, 2008 at 6:03 pm
why is it that some guys always want some “royalty system” instated?
those systems just make the useless parasitic middleman fat!
See the sound exchange debacle for example.
So instead of concieving some “system” with aditional money taking middleman for those players (TPB, mininova ect) that are now on the market already, let the artist(s) themself -and only them(!) not some royalty collecting society that takes 90+ percent of the money- set up trackers to make money from the advertising cake. And since they have the right to, they can even sell with those trackers then high quality perfect digital copies of their work for money.
I guess that pay pal (yes they are evil, but what alternative micromoney payment system is in function out there?) will not close the accounts in their case when they have the rights to sell high quality FLAC files of their stuff!
July 11th, 2008 at 10:50 pm
For our independent film maker perhaps you should take a look at the film “iron sky” ’s business model. They gave there first film away for free online and people payed for the dvd, merchandise, donated bandwidth etc..
The real problem is people wish to support bands, movie studios, authors etc.. directly. The internet is the new distributed(free) middle man making RIAA MPAA etc.. redundant.
any body can make it big on the internet they just need to provide a quality product and to get my money will have to be not in any financial arrangement with company who may sue me for something i have not done or withhold payment to the artist im trying to support.
July 12th, 2008 at 4:18 am
The problem is that no one will invest in the making of a proper film if the risk is so high because the income stream
for the film is cut off. DVDs are becoming obsolete just as much as DVDs. People are migrating towards the ‘free’ model.
however, film making is not free. It costs a lot of money to rent the cameras, have good camera men, lighting costs a fortune,
good films need budgets. Then you have online and offline editing. Editing suites are very expensive because the equipment
is extremely expensive. Without budgets, us small independents can’t survive. I used to be able to get investment and return
for my films. Now investors are very skeptical regardless how great the script. So, if there is not some form of structure where
films are compensated through a royalty system (which doesn’t necessarily mean having a middle man. It just means a royalty).
Then we will die off. The unions are not the fat middle men. I don’t agree with that.
July 12th, 2008 at 4:20 am
(I meant to say that DVD’s are becoming just as obsolete as CDs, so why would anybody buy them anymore?)
July 12th, 2008 at 11:44 am
Art makes an inconvenient but very valid point about the funding needed to make a motion picture. Music and other forms of applied commercial art arenât actually all that different. It’s one thing for technology to change the distribution model but quite another to pull the plug on funding and require commercial art to somehow survive. I donât mean the industry that supports them, I mean the artists themselves. Piracy is literally putting them out of work now.
Like the motion picture industry, the recording industry has built an infrastructure of facilities and touring equipment, producers, A&R men, musicians, arrangers, conductors, orchestraâs, public relations and marketing folks, sound engineers, graphics folks……. all who contribute to finding and promoting great artists and all who deserve to be paid. Can anyone here build a sound and reasonable argument why none of these folks deserves to earn a living in support of commercial music?
The burden is never upon an industry to âadaptâ to the illegal use of digital technology to freeload. No one in business believes that; thatâs the responsibility of law and enforcement. But the industry can be forced to change if online pirates would set forth a well reasoned argument why talented effort and digital product does not deserve proper compensation. Perhaps then, the world would listen. Or, instead, if the freeloaders would actually flood an alternative model with similar money that attracts artists worldwide because it genuinely gives them a better deal than their industry does, then piracy would really be onto something, and perhaps change the industry truly for the better. But thatâs not what we see happening. Pirates refuse to pay.
So as it is, illegal downloading is doomed to remain a cowardly, blackmarket, illegal activity based within hiding behind ever-diminishing privacy laws. And make no mistake, the growing police state will be the legacy of YOUR doing, not mine. I pay for what I take, everytime, as a real fan always will. History will not blame the growing online police state on industry as you wish but instead, it will remember a more decent, honest and open network that was fast and fun and truly flourished……. âbefore piracy.â
July 12th, 2008 at 11:55 am
DVDs will become obsolete. The next phase will be on-demand video. Pay $20 a month and watch any movie or TV show ever made, whenever you want. If the industry fails to provide this kind of service, piracy will.
The music industry only started to embrace digital downloads years after they’d already lost a large chunk of their market to piracy. Will the movie industry make the same mistake?
July 13th, 2008 at 12:13 am
One way for movie producers to make money on their flicks is to embed advertising directly into the movie itself. This is not hard to do at all. For example, if there is a cafeteria or a break area scene in the movie, this would be a great place to put in a vending machine with the logo and website of a small soft drink company. If the scene involves city driving, why not have a billboard in the scenery display an ad paid for by a business which is trying to sell their product. Remember the movie, “Antitrust?” There was a website advertised called skullbox.com . The movie had a great chance of selling that name to some software company. I generally get curious when I watch a movie and see a previous unknown (to me) website anywhere within the scenery. I tend to remember and visit that particular website. In another movie, “Untraceable” referred to a website I believe was called, “killmenow.com .” If that website featured “Gothic” type outfits or Halloween costumes, it would probably generate a mint of money.
In each of these cases, it would be very difficult to take out the embedded advertising within the scenery without affecting the overall quality of the movie. This is the chance for movie outfits to make a killing by allowing advertisers to put their vending machine or their product within the scenery. If done correctly, IT WILL WORK!!!
July 13th, 2008 at 8:39 am
” One way for movie producers to make money on their flicks is to embed advertising directly into the movie itself. This is not hard to do at all. For example, ”
ummm, have you been away at your vacation home on Uranus for a decade ?
July 13th, 2008 at 9:32 am
indiana’s new blog:
http://indianagregg.blogspot.com/2008/07/pirates-call-me-money-grabbing-whore-i.html
July 13th, 2008 at 11:12 am
cs/h: urr, different take; wouldn’t you prefer the movie [industrie] to be clean? [that is, no subconcious crap [irrelevant to the movie] getting put into the back of your head?]
’cause it does seem like a revenue stream, sub-ads, but to me it is certainly unwanted. advertising [on radio/tv/billboards] in general actually. but then the question stays; how can art earn someone cash..
r/w: ahem, it’s a blog-POST, not a new blog.
but thanks for the post.
oh, and back to cyberscan; i agree on your point of websites used/mentioned in films; they always draw my curiosity [not often do i give in to that, but occasionally...]
SIA: i disagree with you there; i feel definitely not all people you mention are worth getting paid, in fact, i feel loads of ‘em deserve to get the shit kicked out of them. people ‘finding’ artists, people buying airtime for those ‘artists’.. .if it’s good, it will be heard ANYHOW.
and i have to agree, without cash coming into a sector people won’t be able to make any cash in that sector; and i do think it is goood that there’s gonna be less money coming into the multimedia sector [hopefully] making sure the obsolete parts get killed [parts that have to do with feeding mainstream instead of creating]; there’s probably millions of films that were better off not being made in the first place, definitely so with albums. otoh, good artists do need a little compensation.
“Can anyone here build a sound and reasonable argument why none of these folks deserves to earn a living in support of commercial music?”
well, i find commercial music generally unworthy of existing in the first place. so ‘no’ in answer to that question, but i wouldn’t mind music/movies dying as a business. ’cause the great stuff never comes from people in it for the money, and that’s what “commercial music/movies” implies to me.
and great closing statement though; hit.
July 13th, 2008 at 12:49 pm
Reader’s Write Says:
July 13th, 2008 at 9:32 am
as i said: just ignore that non entity!
who gives a shot that he wrote again a piece?
It’s not that she uses her “homepage” (which by the way last time i visit it is still touting the last year (!) october single release as a “pre order thingy”! or the blogspot page to have some real interaction.
Probaby her imo ugly looking husband told her “you must have such stuff to be “in”.
She is just a false character swine and just should be ignored!
July 13th, 2008 at 2:39 pm
hi there all. On the film issue, I don’t think it’s great to make proper films that have advert breaks in them. But, I’m probably too artsy for that. I believe a good film needs to have a great plot and a brilliant storyboard. Films take a lot of time. Breaking them up with adverts insults the film. I might just not be commercial enough to cope in this business.
As for kdsde, sounds strange what you wrote. What is your connection with her and October? You seem to know so much about her.
’she is just a false character swine and just should be ignored’. The kdsde, is the ‘de’ german? I read on the other page about an IP address on a wiki page that was from germany.
I can always smell a rat.
July 13th, 2008 at 2:51 pm
that “de” is indeed for the tld .de, smart ART!
But i’m definetly not the guy that fucked her in highschool! I had rather shoot myself!
but what is “strange” about my observation that her homepage is lying dead for over 11 month now?
what has my observation that she used her homepage only as an (allegedly not successfull) vehicle to promote her album that noone seems to want to do with your ability to “smell a rat”?
Me does not understand!
July 14th, 2008 at 3:29 am
I have a homepage for my films. I use it rarely and it points to my myspace. I haven’t made a new showreel for a few months.
I think a lot of people who are between albums don’t use their homepage. But, I just went to look at her homepage and I see that it was updated in March of this year. There are many entries there. kdsde is the ex everyone is talking about
July 14th, 2008 at 3:31 am
I know about these things because my ex-wife tries this kind of stunts with me on my youtube site. You smell like the ex
and people like you have emotional problems.
July 14th, 2008 at 3:35 am
I see this from you ksde:
“who gives a shot that he wrote again a piece?
Itâs not that she uses her âhomepageâ (which by the way last time i visit it is still touting the last year (!) october single release as a âpre order thingyâ! or the blogspot page to have some real interaction.
Probaby her imo ugly looking husband told her âyou must have such stuff to be âinâ.
She is just a false character swine and just should be ignored!”
That sounds like ex or stalker. That doesn’t sound like random comment. Are you the ex that left three children, I just read it in the biography in the homepage you were talking about?
sick
July 14th, 2008 at 3:45 am
Maybe Miss Millionaire is still sleeping her beauty sleep (hint: you must look those plastic surgeon customers at their hands. Those reveal the true age of the person better then the face. Some frieghtening examples were shown lately in the american tabloid press) and that’s why there are no comments so far under the piece that “Reader’s Write” above advertised.
Or is it that she just isn’t for “democracy” publishing of different opinions and such stuff since she likes “internet police” ruining fans and such?
What ever the reason that so few comments are showing up on the blogspot are, here is what me send to be published there:
–
Anonymous not sharing her album guy said…
so “Indi” you changed your mind again?
Is it now better suited to say you are with filesharers?
Last time you opend your mouth you claimed you find it great that a mid 30ty mother of two teenage boys was hit with an idiotic $222k judgement!
What sparked your change in attitude?
some british fucked up filesharing youth with knives already showing up at your home?
your labelboss and husband ian told you that it was a bad idea to say that fileharers (who happends to be most times die hard fans!) should be punished hard?
Or just another incident of your character swineness lurking thru that you would do/say what ever seems to be the most oportunistic at a given situation?
If you weren’t already such a nonentity that nobody cares and/or want her music anyway, then at least after this latest rant of yours that shows how false you are you should deserve to be forgotten and ignored!
July 13, 2008 4:15 PM
–
July 14th, 2008 at 3:48 am
Hi ART
I already told that me isn’t her ex.
Are you able to react in answering my question instead of repeating/reposting what already was posted?
July 14th, 2008 at 5:21 am
I found this on the wiki discussion page (about the stalker guy)
:The IP address: 62.226.53.35 (recent entries) based in Germany. There were previous attempts at slandering Gregg’s wiki page between the 11th and 27th November 2006, where someone, strongly suspected and presumed to be Indiana’s ex-husband, made alterations to various entries concerning Ms Gregg and her professional activities and history here on Wikipedia, These alterations to the article texts were deemed false, highly defamatory and extremely damaging and therefore the wiki page was removed. The IP addresses originating these amendments were traced as 88.64.10.236 and 88.64.24.172, both codes which relate to the Automotive Research division of Accenture GmbH.
July 14th, 2008 at 5:57 am
interesting infos T.Duffy
you have any additional prove to back up your infos about this 2 88.nnn IP adresses.
And do I understand you correctly that the entries you are refering to are no longer in the history visible and that the entries around this IANMOROW only confusingly seem now to be related to the “normal” entries that show up between his blankings and text exchanges like “visit our official artist page”?
Can you back up your claims in any way with scans of paper proofs of that info?
Would be interesting since that at least would show that ART is a moron when he claims that IANMOROW who changed the page to “visit our official page” is a disgruntled ex.
July 14th, 2008 at 6:05 am
There were previous attempts at slandering Greggâs wiki page between the 11th and 27th November 2006,
sorry, noticed your date mentioning only after rereading. What is the significance of that timespan while the IANMOROW “visit our official page”-vandalism took place already a half year before that?
18 May 2007 for example
So please elaborate if you don’t want to have your post looking like smoke and mirrors set up/initiated/payed by Mellissa and Ian to distract from their wrongdoings.
July 15th, 2008 at 2:20 am
@kdsde
deary deary… 18 May 2007 is only 6 months AFTER November 2006… (get your time line together). I don’t understand your question about ian morrow vandalism. Guess you may know? Sounds like the ex…. The ex. The ex… lol or crazy stalker psychopath. and Who is Melissa and Ian? I think we will all have a laugh if your posts were to be looked up kraut!
I guess what Iâve written isnât very convenient for you and obviously what Indiana wrote must have really pissed you guys off. I guess you donât like it if your users find out that you make money through advertising and tell everyone that the site is legal (without telling them that file-sharing of copyright is ILLEGAL). A few days ago I was wondering whether I should use file-sharing for my films. Now, I think itâs a waste of time because you TPB people are just fat cats sucking away at young indepedent film makerâs chance at a livelihood because no nobody wants to invest in independent films.
sorry, Iâm not a complete wank who sits in front of my computer all day waiting for you to ask me a question you idiot. As for you, I think you have some more personal issues mr. kdsde and it is clear that unless you are a complete psychopath (or Sunde, because he probably likes reading about himself, since he seems to be constantly making PR for himself), or you are an ex. It all rings like one : âugly exâ, âI know Indianaâs real name (which, I donât even know, maybe it is her real name. Researched it, didnât find it), âhistory of wikipedia (which apparently the ex was vandalising last year), combined with a lot of emotional language (nearing hatred) of someone you claim not to know? I donât think that even someone from TPB would be
that bitter. I mean, since sheâs so âstupidâ and things like they claim.
Sorry mate, youâre definitely the ex.
classic
July 15th, 2008 at 10:07 am
@ART
I don’t want to interfere in your very constructive and ad hominem free discussion with ksdde of course
but don’t you think he just misspoke when he said “after” since there even seems to be some inconsistency when the article was created?
At least from what it is publicly viewable for everyone it seems that the article indead was only created at:
14:53, 6 April 2007
and not already “6 month earlier” (thats where ksdde seems to had a slip in his selfpromoting reading compehension since it seems he confused the mentioned 06 date with november 2007) in November 2006.
Of course it could be that there was indeed an article about her already present before the 6th of April 2007 and that that one was subject to a non public revisionable page deletion!
But if that is the case then it simply makes no sense that some commenters here, at TF and elsewhere beside the WP are refering to that non publicly viewable alleged incident in contrast to all those other commenters that are refering to the “vandalism”-incident with respect to what the alleged label boss did to the artist page because he allegedly wanted people to visit only the official pages of indiana gregg for infos about her instead of the wikipedia!
THESE vandalism by user IANMORROW were done roughly a month after the publicly viewable creation date at 18 May 2007!
So it seems a few people (including the wikipedian “littleredm&m”!) are refering to alleged vandalisms prior to the date of the “official” creation time and using that when they argue with public users like Alter_Fritz, those readers writes that followed them or ksdde who seems to refere in his argumentative construct to the May 18 vandalism!
Then it must be that those few peoples are obviously insiders in the form of the artist at issue, her husband and labelboss, wikipedia administrative personal or those “journalist” that claims to have gotten info from indiana about the incident.
I doubt that wikipedia admin personal takes the time to engage in damagecontrol revisionistic commenting at the mentioned palces. So the only logical consequences that are left are it must be persons that are extremely closely related to Indiana Gregg and Ian Morrow. Probably they themself are doing this sockpuppeteering under so many different commenters names.
I think it is telling about the state of mind of those 2 persons!
Anyway Art, as I said I don’t want to interfere your “constructive” discussion with ksdde. So just ignore my observations and lets us all wait if he will show up here later and reacts to your eloquent answers!
You spoke like a true souvereign brit!
July 15th, 2008 at 11:22 am
@ART
http://tinyurl.com/5ebd43
and thanks for proving testemony to the world how stupid some allegedly british independent filmmakers are!
*EOD*
July 17th, 2008 at 1:21 am
hi wikieditor2008, is this where those famous questions were? When I read your message, it doesn’t make sense. I can see nothing mentioned
about any of the wiki things you are talking about. It is also pretty clear that you are mumbling about nothing except for some previous vandalism on a wikipedia page. When you speak of “constructive”, it doesn’t take very long to read through these messages and work out who is being constructive versus who is being ‘destructive’ , now, does it?
July 17th, 2008 at 7:57 am
pardon?
I don’t understand what do you mean here with “is this where those famous questions were?”!
I can further not comprehend why you are trying to engage into a discussion about “constructiveness”.
In case you haven’t grasp it, I better explicitely state it then I guess.
What I did with my before standing piece with you is called “jdn. verarschen” in german. Some also call something like i did Sarcasm!
Everybody with an IQ above toastbread would see that my classification of your discussion cababilities as “constructive” can not be ment as to be taken 100% verbatim
July 17th, 2008 at 4:58 pm
ha ha. Well, I guess that wikieditor2008 doesn’t have a very good command of English. I’m sorry for that, you would have understood that had
you been able to upgrade your reading comprehension via a P2p network maybe; however, you can’t. (laughs).
The ‘questions’ that you kept asking me to answer? remember? Those were the questions I was referring to my dear Pirate.
July 17th, 2008 at 8:26 pm
sorry again Art, but what are you talking about?
What questions?
I see no questions I had asked you?
Are you implying you are not only DNSCyberguy like you had confessed too elsewhere when accused of that, but that you have also other sockpuppets here under even more Posternames?
because I had asked a few persons a few questions, but I’m quite sure recalling my mind that I have not asked you any so far.
Should I have asked you questions non the less, then take my apology for forgetting about it and be so nice to post a link to the questions please.
July 18th, 2008 at 10:40 am
what is this sockpuppet craze you go on about constantly?
I guess you don’t remember that you kept asking “ART” questions and then there was a long message from
you explaining to me that those are the things with “?” behind them, etc.
July 18th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
why can’t you stay on topic ART? Do you have ATD?
I might repeat my question why you were talking to me since I was not asking you anything that was expecting an answer;
“Should I have asked you questions non the less, then take my apology for forgetting about it and be so nice to post a link to the questions please.”
Given that you have not done that in your latest comment I guess the other poster(s) were right, you are indeed just a sockpuppet employing troll.
So I guess I call it now too EOD with a stupid person like you.
Have a nice weekend and happy editing on monday when the sockpuppet protection on the article is lifted. I guess you and your idiot collegue sockpuppet article vandalisers will have fun then again, wont you?
*EOD*
July 18th, 2008 at 3:53 pm
eh? Are you for real? What article are you speaking about? I didn’t realise that the article (my post) that Jon moved to a new spot here was protected. Now I’m completely confused. I’m employed? I have my own film company thanks. What’s this about? Nice weekend to you too.
cheers mate
July 18th, 2008 at 4:31 pm
Oh my god can you really be SO stupid?
Nobody is talking about your article. Everybody is talking about a chick called “indiana”! So it should be obvious that I am talking about her article!
But I must admit, you are good in being stupid!
You managed to drive me to break my own rule to not react further once I consider a discussion EOD.
Sincere congratulation for that.