P2P filesharing isn’t piracy
p2pnet news view Freedom | P2P:- catflap has been posting to p2pnet for many moons. Usually, his contribution come in the form of articles but this time around, it’s in a Reader’s Write to Delete your file share apps RIGHT NOW !
“I see so many people here, for and against p2p, who still equate it with so-called piracy,” he says, going on »»»
Piracy is stealing an object for profit.
p2p is stealing nothing and no profit is made – except perhaps by the lokis and other scum who charge admission to their so-called private websites.
Many people here are still referring to something called illegal filesharing. what’s that? there’s no such animal. there’s no such law anywhere afaik which mentions it. there might be some obscure trial judgment that gives it (p2p) a similar label (and might be in the process of a successful appeal), but no law has been sanctioned against so-called illegal filesharing.
Because it isn’t illegal and one has the right to copy and/or share what they’ve legally purchased. trading 1’s and 0’s is not illegal.
Someone above – probably sam – said Jon (and others here) have never talked to the performers or others in the entertainment industry.
That’s a lie.
a couple of years ago (i think) Jon attended some kind of seminar in the UK and met with a BBC programmer. Jon can remind us all of what took place.
I’ve also met with world famous musicians (and no-so-famous ones). Yhey all agree with what I’ve said above and encourage it.
The Commitments (one of the most famous, recognizable, and approachable bands on the globe) who I interviewed in person for p2pnet are absolutely not against p2p, and encourage their fans to share their stuff. In fact, they even let us post a song of theirs here for anyone to have. They know that the record companies get the lion’s share of any profits and the performers are the last to see a dime – if anything.
They also do not receive a cent from sales or rentals of their movie – which has been seen by over a billion people, named the best Irish film of all time, and has secured a slot in the UK’s 100 best films of all time.
The Commitment, like all right-thinking people, know that p2p cannot be stopped. and that any endeavor to stop it creates hatred for the industry’s unions, besides being a waste of time, effort and money.
Peter Jackson has still to receive his full share of royalties for King Kong.
Also, as I’ve written here before, Monty Python is giving their stuff away for free on gootube. in just a few months, sales of their works have skyrocketed to a whopping 23,000% increase.
Sharing – or downloading absolutely does not equal a lost sale. It can, and does, increase sales, as has been proved time and again. it increases awareness of a film, tv show, record, which translates into sales of tickets and merchandise.
Joss Whedon created Dr Horrible and shared it with the world. Although he knew it would be recorded and shared, he also knew that his gesture would increase merchandise sales, iTunes sales, and DVD sales. Which it did.
I’ve personally bought many films and tv shows I’d downloaded. many others can’t be found on dvd anywhere anymore. But even many many more I’d never pay for because they aren’t worth it (to me)
Many films and shows where I live are not shown in English. Although the technology exists to air it in dual audio, the so-called rights are sometimes too expensive for the stations.
Still more don’t reach my country on TV or DVD for sometimes months or years – if ever. one recent film was WALL-E. it was available on US DVD in 2008, but in my country I wasn’t allowed to buy it until the end of January 2009. I wasn’t even allowed to buy the NTSC version until then, either. i didn’t want to wait, and indeed i won’t be forced to wait. so i downloaded a copy in 2008.
But I did eventually buy my own WALL-E DVD in january.
These are situations created by the studios and movie houses who lobbied for this law.
Yes it’s a law, and a ridiculous one at that. The law states that while a film is still in theatres here, or a show is still (or yet to be aired) on tv, no version of it can be sold until it’s been on TV, or in the case of a film, until the official foreign language version is released here.
So once again, proof that a downloaded file doesn’t equal a lost sale. it increased the sale because i wouldn’t have bought it without first sampling it through p2p.
I didn’t steal anything. Someone gave me their 1’s and 0’s and put together, they made a movie.
We know who the real pirates are.
Stay tuned.
February , 2009
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.
February 16th, 2009 at 9:00 am
ya, they frequent the waters off Somalia.
February 16th, 2009 at 9:20 am
…and vanuatu, both in the water and inland.
February 16th, 2009 at 10:12 am
“I didnât steal anything. Someone gave me their 1âs and 0âs and put together, they made a movie.”
Okay, catflap, Good morning. So you want to suggest here that the movie made by the “one’s and zero’s” is all simply incidental, no harm has been done and no sale was lost. Okay. So try this.
Go to a little Mom and Pop DVD shop in your town, you know the kind, the convenient little shops that depend on sales to feed their kids, to keep their mortgage current, to pay their health insurance.
Purchase a new copy of The Commitments, Alan Parkers very entertaining movie from 1991.
Now go home and while hiding behind privacy laws, use technology to rip it and burn a couple dozen illegal copies of the movie. While you are distributing these incidental “one’s and zero’s” to your friends, and while keeping an illegal copy for yourself, remember not to complain when privacy laws are eroded by this.
Now take the DVD and its original packaging and your receipt back to the Mom and Pop shop. Inform them that the laws regarding this sort of unethical behavior are “ridiculous”. Perhaps they will agree. Now demand a full refund of your money for the return of the DVD, since no product will have gone missing from their shelves. They may even agree with you that they’ve lost no sale as they refund your cash to you, since you would not have legally payed for this movie anyway.
February 16th, 2009 at 10:32 am
And then with the money that you’ve saved why donn’t you place it into a chest and bury in the garden, oh wait thats silly, you’ll go and spend it on something else. There is only so much money in the world, if you don’t spend it on one thing then you will simply spend on something else, one business model suffers and another on thrives. Thats life I’m afraid.
February 16th, 2009 at 10:34 am
haha, sam is a dummy. sam is a troll.
the âargumentâ makes no sense, and has no basis in reality. read my interview with The Commitments. i own the movie and all of their cds (they signed them all for me) and the entire world has their permission to share their stuff – their words, not mine.
sam is stuck in 1987. there are no âmom and popâ video stores where i live. perhaps there are a couple spread throughout the country – in the sticks. their time has gone. one such store – in business for 20 years in a major city here, closed a year ago and sold its stock to another privately-owned store – at a loss. the owner then turned to selling something that will make him a profit for decades.
the video stores i buy from absolutely do not agree with the law. they had the NTSC WALL-E in stock for months, but were prohibited from selling it. they were not allowed to earn money.
sam picks on one section of my statements and doesnât understand or accept the truth, meanwhile ignoring to concede that everything i stated is the truth and can be backed up with more facts.
sam, i wonât respond to you on this again. so no need for yet another trollish rebuttal. youâve had your chance and blew it on nonsense. thatâs all you get.
February 16th, 2009 at 10:59 am
When the Commitments signed their music/movie deal in 1990 with MCA Records, Universal City California, they took the money in exchange for distribution rights. They took the money catflap. They have no more ability to give “permission to share their stuff” than you or I do. Honestly folks, when the facts start meaning something for you, the discourse on this website improves a great deal.
In the meantime, who amongst us actually believes that cd or dvd will remain as a distribution medium? The medium has changed every few years as technology improves, but never before has a technical invention been offered as just cause for a complete review of global business principle. In a few years these tangible formats will seem as quaint as 78 rpm recordings, but the fundamental principles will not change. Oh, and the quote “the video stores i buy from absolutely do not agree with the law.” is just an outright fabrication. HMV, Virgin, Tower, the lot of them would (have) moved into digital distribution in a heartbeat were it not for piracy. They are near desperate for protective law regardless of medium to reestablish the principle of “one sale one possession.” like Amazon, iTUNES, a host of legal alternatives. So since facts don’t help him much, catflap calls me names. Frankly catflap, I expected better of you.
Well. No I didn’t.
February 16th, 2009 at 11:12 am
not a response to sam, but i just would like to clear one thing upâ¦when i said the stores i buy from had the film in stock and were prohibited from selling it – this is not a lie. i speak to them often about release dates and availability and price. they gave me a url for official release dates and the dates when they are allowed to start selling something – and the dates are arbitrary and can change from day to day.
why should i lie? I donât work for the RIAA or MPAA.
sam can try and prove i lied, but he/she/it will fail, of course.
âYou big dummy.â (Fred Sanford)
âYou stupid woman.â (Rene Artois)
âYou stupid boy.â (Captain Mainwaring)
âStupid dog.â (Eustace, in Courage, the Cowardly Dog)
oh, are those expressions âcopyrightedâ? tough shit.
February 16th, 2009 at 11:25 am
hehehe, Sam I Am is copy/pasting excerpts from riaa.org. dude, wake up !
February 16th, 2009 at 12:28 pm
I think it’s time Sam was introduced to Dave Null.
That’s really the one who should be addressing his posts at this point.
: )
February 16th, 2009 at 1:14 pm
I live in the US, so DVD region codes often seem distant to me; I barely notice them. But the idea that they exist at all bugs me — what if, just what *if*, I took an interest in African films (my Father’s caregivers are almost all Kenyan, and they enjoy sharing their culture). I would not likely be able to view them here, without spending extra money to get a regionless DVD player — if not for “illegal” programs like libdvdCSS on my Debian-based computer, or the win32codecs package for more “proprietary” formats. What if I move out of the US? If congress doesn’t improve, that is not an impossibility. Then my DVD collection would be totally useless. Ouch.
But more importantly, however. Region codes bring p2p in a whole new light. When dealing with crossing borders, region codes mean that p2p can be the *only* way to get something. You can’t donate to the artist, unfortunately, since the record labels haven’t heard of the idea, apparently. But you can, at least, see what they’ve created, even if you live somewhere where it’s not allowed yet.
Good job, keep it up!
By the way, what does everyone think of Freenet?
February 16th, 2009 at 2:50 pm
Uh, Sam:
1. Quit jacking off over the DMCA, M’kay? I know the idea of perpetual monopoly power backed up by the threat of waterboarding makes you weak in the knees, but we’re not all like that.
2. The only part of your blather that I bothered to read was the thing about “Mom and Pop Video stores”.
Hmm….you mean that “business model” that sprang up to serve the needs of that ubiquitous “equivalent of the Boston Strangler”, the VCR?
The mere fact that an RIAA-worshiper such as yourself would use as an example, a class of business that Valenti wanted his cronies in congress to BAN? If the “content industry” had won THAT one, there wouldn’t have BEEN any such thing as video rentals (”Mom and Pop” OR corporate chain outfits.) Or did you miss that memo, too.
I guess I’m “patient zero” in regard to a hell of a lot of “lost sales” for the publishing houses:
I’ve been “hiding behind” the first-sale doctrine, and frequenting those heinous dens of iniquity known as used bookstores, swap-meets, and yard-sales as far back as I can remember.
Oh yeah — while I’m “confessing” here, I also quite enjoy listening to old-time radio programs from the 1940s — large amounts of which are freely available, having — inadvertently — “fallen” into the public domain. (Side question: why is the end of a coercive monopoly termed a “fall?” just curious.)
Did I mention that the vast majority of the musical “content” I’ve ever bought was from used record stores and swap-meets as well?
If anything, I’d be more likely to consider the copy of “Catcher in the Rye” I just bought at my local library’s book sale to be a “lost sale”.
(Oh heaven forfend and forbear! — a used book, bought from a LIBRARY!!!!! Just think — with no libraries to “hide behind”, people wouldn’t be permitted to “take without paying” like they are.
Go work on something more your speed, Sammykins: get your local library banned.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
Oh wait, Troll-I-Am said “DVD” shop.
My mistake — except for the fact that it’s not.
For the record:
The last book I purchased: “Catcher in the Rye” for TEN CENTS.
The last VIDEO I purchased: Madame Souzatska (Damn good movie starring Shirley McClaime): bought from either goodwill/local library (Don’t remember which). Paid? Maybe a buck (of which NOTHING went to the MPAA, for which I’m extremely glad.)
The tide has turned, you feculent little shit:
We all know you’re trolling (else why your typical blustering “predictions” and complete inability to actually answer questions put to you? Why the snotty nonsense about “The Honorable Reginald Tosspottington” or whoever it was? You’re really, really reaching, “Sam”, and the mere fact that you’d DARE paint yourself as savior of the beleaguered “mom and Pop Video Store” is low, even for you.
Besides, according to your hero Valenti, those “Moms and Pops” were (and are) nothing but more “lost sales” for the theater chains.
Which are “lost sales” for the book publishers (oh somebody please tell me how the poor publishers stay in business, what with libraries and used bookstores and such! Oh heaven protect the poor beleaguered souls and their precious, precious Bidness model!)
(Jesus Wept!)
Sam == Fail (yet again)
February 16th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
The thing of it is, we’re sick of being lied to.
We’re all sick of watching lobbyists score extension after extension after extension on something that was never a “right” in the first place.
We’re sick of lobbyists trying to get government to ban technologies (like the “consumer” VCR), and then claiming that revenue-streams based around those technologies are “vital” — all in order to scare up yet another (retroactive) extension on the term of their monopolies.
We’re tired of having lobbyists stipulate what technical advances will be “permitted” (the VCR, yet again.)
When we hear corporate wonks comparing technologies to serial killers, it makes us laugh — AND it makes us lose whatever respect we may have once had for the “business models” those lobbyists represent.
Our “leaders” and their corporate cronies tell us, in oh so many ways, that they’ll never let anything “Fall” into the public domain if they can help it, but somehow, we’re not supposed to start QUESTIONING the “laws” which permit those monopolies?
You’ve got a perpetual hard-on for the “Sacred Right of Property”, Right, Sam?
Well study up on your John Locke, buddy, cuz here it comes:
Think of the emergence of p2p technology and “copyfight” in general as a form of “adverse possession”.
Your side (the IP lobbyists) will NEVER GET “enough”. All your mealy-mouthed bullshit about how you’re just “trying to strike a sensible balance” flies in the face of reality when we SEE copyright monopolists crusading for ANOTHER twenty years. (What, fifty years past your OWN DEATH isn’t enough for you people?)
So people act. They make tapes of their LP’s (whether it’s strictly “legal” or not.)
They invite people over to listen to music TOGETHER (Remember “Sam” — the Brits you were jabbering about are trying to criminalize THAT too).
They buy “used” books and used tapes and figure out ways to monkeywrench region coding on DVDs because above all else, they know full well that the “laws” are stacked against them. And above all else, they speak out.
So go talk to the Honorable Reginald Tosspottington, “Sam” — it won’t work.
People — everywhere, all over the globe — are tired of being scammed.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:48 pm
heeheeâ¦henry, dear oh dearâ¦
take a breather friend, lol. why, weâll never convince sam heâs wrong. itâs the same with all trolls.
i thought we agreed to ignore the trolls. let it slide. trolls arenât worth it. the best thing you can do with a troll is shove a pencil up its ass.
that’s old-skool.
February 16th, 2009 at 4:10 pm
Sam, mom and pop shops were killed by Blockbuster video! Get your facts straight! They undercut in pricing and overkill with “selection” which isn’t true because mom and pop shops STILL exist! The selection of Blockbuster is to have 20 of the same DVD! Meanwhile to find older or lesser known flicks you have to go to a mom and pop shop.
Oh, and you have to love how Blockbuster EDITS the movies for me, you know since I can’t seem to handle certain scenes. iTunes does this as well and since I discovered it, I refuse to rent from them.
This is Wal-Mart of the video rentals! That’s who killed mom and pop shops! Even though they STILL exist because people have become wise to corporations controlling the media for the “deals” you think you are getting. What deals? Is it a deal to have some exec decide what I can and cannot see? I don’t think so!
And while it may be true that The Commitments have signed away their rights for money (again, I call upon you to PROVE IT – Post their contract!!!), how many musicians have been shafted by the people you “stand up for” only to have their dreams crushed. Of course they’ll blame it on filesharing and not the truth, the Industry destroyed them because they were not carbon copies of what sells.
The big stores like HMV/Tower sold albums they were told to sell. Try finding indie artists there, if the indie label is lucky they will get a small section but that will be hidden when Universal Reps step in the door. People ARE turning away from corporate crap. How many times can you reproduce Pearl Jam? Seriously? The late 90’s and early 2000’s were full of bands trying to sound like them.
Do you know how bad it is Sam? Nickelback had to pirate their OWN song, that’s how bad it is right now. Yes, take a listen to How You Remind Me and Someday! SAME song! Different lyrics and slightly different strumming is the only difference.
And you blame filesharing on poor CD sales!
Sam, produce REAL proof. List REAL bands and mom and pop shops that packed it in due to filesharing. I bet any band you list or any studio you list you know we’ll find proof it was the result of greed from labels. But seriously, put some proof behind your claims, otherwise take your hot air elsewhere!
Go talk to Cary Sherman, I’m sure he’d love to sit there and chat with you about this.
February 16th, 2009 at 4:24 pm
shove a pencil up the trollâs ass!
February 16th, 2009 at 4:27 pm
@catflap:
Please find us a LEAD pencil, not graphite. Then you have a deal.
February 16th, 2009 at 4:47 pm
He’s not a troll .. exactly.
He’s a golden opportunity to rebut the ridiculous notions the AA’s parrot.
Sam say’s exactly what the corporations want everyone to believe.
The rebuttals outline what is wrong with the corporate ‘needs’, and it
serves everyone to show them for the fallacies that they are.
Sam’s a ‘Tool’
An invaluable Tool, but a Tool, nothing more.
February 16th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
make a voodoo doll of a troll. then stab it, burn it. kill it!
February 16th, 2009 at 5:05 pm
(”shove a pencil up the trollâs ass!”)
EEWWWWWW!!
Troll poo!
And it eating my pencil!!
8 O
February 16th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
no RIAA or MPAA rep has ever proved that a shared file equals a lost sale. not a one has ever provided verifiable evidence of this claim.
on the other hand, i and innumerable others have provided concrete, indisputable evidence of the opposite. filesharing can, and does, increase sales.
another false claim – that a homemade digital copy or dvd copy is an exact replica in quality as the original. but even the n00biest of p2p n00bs can attest that this claim is a fabrication (lie).
i usually borrow 3-4 dvds each week from my library. i copy them and return them in better condition than i received them. i clean off everyone elseâs fingerprints and muck. i sometimes make copies for friends – for free. i buy the blank dvds. i buy the sleeves. i buy the labels and print them out.
nothing is stolen. the dvd is returned in better condition. no profit is made by myself or my friends. but the library does have to pay royalties. who lost? no one. the studio makes money. the dvd media manufacturer makes money. the dvd sleeve manufacturer makes money. the label manufacturer makes money. the printer ink cartridge company makes money. even the company i buy all my supplies from, and the company which delivers it to me made money.
buy i made no money and stole nothing.
i recently bought a legal device which circumvents the macrovision protection of VHS tapes so i can legally digitize my legally purchased VHS tapes. i won’t shell out money for dvds to replace them. why should i?
February 16th, 2009 at 6:38 pm
Although I agree with various points in your post, to suggest that it’s not illegal to share/upload copyright works is wrong. There are plenty of laws which outlaw such behavior. You do not have the right to share online anything you have bought purely because you paid for it, unless the copyright holder gives you permission to do so.
Since you mentioned the UK – the OiNK uploaders narrowly missed being sent to jail for uploading ONE album each. P2P isn’t mentioned specifically under the law in the UK, but they call it unauthorized distribution of copyright works. Trust me, it IS illegal. A civil offense if done for no profit, a criminal one if done for profit or part of a conspiracy/fraud.
You can call it ones and noughts all you like, judges don’t see it that way
February 16th, 2009 at 6:48 pm
” You do not have the right to share online anything you have bought purely because you paid for it, unless the copyright holder gives you permission to do so. ”
That’s ok.
I’ll just pass my 170gb portable drive around, the
way we used to pass our copied cassette tapes around,
then burned CD’s etc ..
The industry continued to flourish then, and continues to break sales records.
Thats because file sharing does not effect sales of worthwhile content.
Never will.
The law is based on a lie and therefore the law is wrong.
Laws can be wrong.
Wrong laws will be fought .. one way or another.
They can pass as many ‘laws’ as they like.
It will change nothing.
February 16th, 2009 at 6:50 pm
” You can call it ones and noughts all you like, judges donât see it that way ”
Thats funny, a lot of OUR judges are finally starting to see reality.
It’s taken a while, but it’s slowly going against the cartels.
Besides, only ONE CASE was actually tried before a judge, and it’s been overturned.
What cases are YOU talking about ?
February 16th, 2009 at 7:51 pm
Hi Dreddnik, I think you may have misjudged my post, i’m not anti-p2p whatsoever,
i’m a writer from TorrentFreak
All i’m saying are the facts. Sharing/uploading of copyright works is illegal in many
countries – I don’t say I agree with it, but that’s how it is i’m afraid.
I can talk about any cases you like, I report on most of them and read about every
one of them and have done for 10 years…..I think we might be on the same side so
I won’t get into a squabble with you
February 16th, 2009 at 8:19 pm
@ Dreddsnik:
enigmax is correct and I should have caught that line before I did the post. My fault.
Although in countries such as Canada, itâs OK to download as long as itâs for personal use, in most places uploading is against laws the music and movie industries paid millions of dollars to have put in place.
That doesnât make it morally or philosophically right, but thatâs the way it is, for the time being, anyway.
And it still ain’t piracy.
Cheers!
February 16th, 2009 at 9:22 pm
Ahem:
I go off and do stuff for a few hours, and when I come back, You’re all ready to pillory the poor guy.
I’m downright embarrassed to say this, but I figure we should cut the guy a break.
1. I’ve been thinking: if somebody teaches their pet parrot to scream racial slurs or suchlike, do you blame the parrot, or the guy who trained it? “Sam” — poor chowderhead that he is — is the victim (and beneficiary) of decades of propaganda and misinformation, every bit as much as, say, those guys who beat Matthew Shepard to death because he was gay. Does that make hate criminals (or corporate weasels) less dangerous? No, but it does put things in perspective.
“Sam” fancies himself to be part of the “privileged” class: his snotty little cracks at me because I’m “Still in Pennsylvania” are ample evidence of that fact. Beneath all of his bravado, sermonizing, condescention and bullshit, on some level he’s still that raggedy li’l Pennsylvania boy who tried to “make good”.
Strange as it is for me to say, I don’t think “Sam” is a deliberate weasel OR that he understands that he’s an RIAA shill. It’s not HIS fault that he see’s perpetual, coercive corporate monopolies as “the Sacred Right of Property”. To put it bluntly, I really think he’s too stupid to really know the difference.
I mean, despite all of our best efforts, the guy’s incapable of answering questions, or even putting forward a coherent argument. He’s explicitly stated that copyright expiration would “take” something from his daughter, but is — most likely — incapable of relating that claim to how Patents work. (Remember kiddies: Captain Capitalism sez “Failure to grant perpetual monopoly is a form of theft!”)
So let’s all cut the poor dumb animal some slack: I wouldn’t be suprised if the guys who delivered big blocks of ice for people’s “iceboxes” were upset that the government “permitted” indoor electric refrigerators. (Oh heaven protect their pwecious, pwecious “bidness model”)
Sorry, “Sam”: I’ve finally realized that thinking you had the intelligence to understand anything but RIAA/MPAA-sanctioned talking points was expecting too much. Expecting the “free enterprise” system to be either enterprising OR free is, likewise, too much to hope for.
February 17th, 2009 at 3:05 am
enigmax, jon, etc…
if you’re referring to my statements, then i’ll amend them to mean “in many countries – and certainly in mine.”
copying for personal use is not illegal in my country.
and sharing it (including via p2p) is not illegal in my country.
copying and selling for profit is illegal in my country because that’s piracy.
but i still don’t know of any laws which refer to something called “illegal filesharing” – which is the term most used by the cartels and lamescream media, and the one they try and brainwash children with. it’s a non-crime because afaik, there’s no law on the books anywhere against “illegal filesharing”.
if there ever is a law against “illegal filesharing”, Dickens would crawl out of his grave to denounce it with his most memorable line, “The law is a ass.”
âIf the law supposes that,â said Mr. Bumble,⦠âthe law is a assâa idiot. If thatâs the eye of the law, the law is a bachelor; and the worst I wish the law is that his eye may be opened by experienceâby experience.â (from Oliver Twist)
February 17th, 2009 at 8:05 am
Hey Catflap.
Correct.There is no such thing as “illegal filesharing”.
Cheers!
February 17th, 2009 at 8:59 am
catflap Says:
February 17th, 2009 at 3:05 am
but i still donât know of any laws which refer to something called âillegal filesharingâ – which is the term most used by the cartels and lamescream media,
As someone who has worked in broadcasting for 30 years I must say that the media is some of the biggest hipocrites out there when it comes to P2P.
I see it used everyday by the same people that go on the air and spew the cartels propaganda about “Stealing Music” It just cracks me up.
I try to point out to them that the RIAA is not their friend but it always falls on “Deaf Ears” I think that is about to change though.
I have to laugh at Sam he is so miguided