The Orren Boyle RIAA award
p2pnet news view Freedom | P2P:- Henry Emrich says »»»
http://www.networkworld.com/slideshows/2008/091808-wall-street-fat-cats.html?ts#slide1
ALL HAIL THE GLORIOUS CAPITALIST OVERMEN!
Ayn Rand WAS right — looking at the tottering wreckage of the global economy, they haven’t exactly “stopped the motor of the world”, but they’ve done an admirable job of ’stripping the gears.’
Yeah, baby — corporate capitalism rawks!
surfer says »»»
hahahahah
I am starting to like your angle of thinking Henry, all kidding aside. You have a point, these CEOs are actually running their respective corporations into the ground, kudos to them. It looks like Brainwol is doing more for the ‘pirates’ of the world than any of us could alone. a one-man-wrecking-crew !
thanks Mitch ‘Orren Boyle’ Brainwol, kinda has a ring to it.
Both comments come in our story entitled RIAA boss Bainwol not fired after all, which points out RIAA boss Rich Brainboil isn’t going to receive the Order of the Goonah as Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony BMG cut back on unnecessary expenses in the face of the economic downturn that’s ravaging the world, including Hollywood.
The url cited by Henry leads to a NetworkWorld item slugged ‘Wall Street is burning, but these fat cats will be just fine,’ and which in turn has 15 portraits of, well, fat cats.
I’d suggested the fact Manhole pulled down closes to $1.5 million in 2008 meant he was doing OK but, says resident p2pnet agent provocateur Sam I Am, I was wrong.
“A decent two-bedroom with a tiny bath and 7 foot galley kitchen, a small terrace and a modest view can easily rent for $100,000 a year in this town,” he said, “this town” being Noo Yawk, I believe.
“A parking space in the basement of a very average apartment building can cost the same $100,000 to purchase and still require another $1000 a month in maintenance,” and »»»
A 27 year old middlemanagement MBA with four of five years on Wall Street get’s a million five these days or he leaves for another firm. A lot of people want to live here and the pressures drive prices up.
“Princely” is hardly accurate. Bainwols salary is pocketchange in a world where 30, 50, 200 million dollar paydays are day-to-day common. Hell, four years at NYU will set you back $250 now, and Bainwol loses probably close to half of his mill five to Fed, State Local and Social Security. I’m not saying it’s right or wrong. I’m just saying it is. Context also counts if comprehension is to have value. For his degree of responsibility and public profile, Bainwol gets paid (contexual) peanuts. Many would suggest that’s all he deserves.
Oh. And here was me thinking he was rich.
But, “Bainwol gets (contextually) peanuts: Agreed,” said Henry, “especially when CEO’s of failing companies fairly-routinely end up with multi-million dollar bonuses, I figure Bainwol deserves significantly more pay for his downright admirable job running the company into the ground.”
The company is, of course, Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony BMG’s RIAA.
Henry even had a suggestion, to wit »»»
Somebody needs to put together a charitable foundation whose sole purpose will be to “out-bid” the RIAA, MPAA, IFPI, and all other such corporate vermin-pits, by giving awards, recognition, and bonuses of our own to corporate weasels who do best at running these companies into the ground. (It worked well for banking and the auto industry!)
Let’s show ‘em that p2p advocates DO have a heart!
Hell, we can even name the award after a character from “Atlas Shrugged”: “the Orren Boyle award for improving the world-at-large by destroying corporate megaliths!”
(Presumably, as an arch-advocate for our glorious Capitalist Utopia, you’ve read Ayn Rand, right “Sam”?)
Stay tuned.
March, 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.
March 5th, 2009 at 1:25 pm
“..and which in turn has 15 portraits of, well, fat cats.”
As an animal lover I think its disgraceful comparing these parasites to something as sweet as a cat (and i have never owned a cat.. just dogs),
P2Pnet, please refer to these lowlifes as fat-cockroaches or fat-scum or such… on second though dont use the cockroaches reference either, I’m sure they too would tell us they are offended if they could speak.
@Sam,
“…and Bainwol loses probably close to half of his mill five to Fed, State Local and Social Security.”
Damn! Poor guy with just $~60k a month, gotta cry me a river.
Now i know why his pals at RIAA HQ go after people earning $20k a year or less/homeless/ single parents/ children/the sick and the dead…. the **AA need the money more, after all a parking space (which is MUCH more important) costs a $100k!
March 5th, 2009 at 9:13 pm
Sam:
I’m not surprised that you’d be whimpering about Bainwol’s so-called “losses” to various forms of taxation (gee, and here I was, thinking that at least a portion of taxes went to maintaining the infrastructure that makes business possible — such as roads, etc.)
No, not that surprising at all.
(Of course, whimpering about how much taxes “take” from Bainwol is at least somewhat more coherent than your earlier claim that copyright-expiration will “take” from your daughter.
Taxation == theft
Expiration-of-monopoly == theft
Corporation lobbyists buying themselves twenty more years of copyright ‘protection == “the sacred right of property”
Limited liability/veil between “personal” and “corporate” assets == “it’s called Capitalism, and even socialists lights such as Sweden” blah blah blah.
(Remember Sam, I actually remember previous discussions.
Bye, now — go on back to your high powered lifestyle.
Jon — thanks for bumping this to the front page.
March 6th, 2009 at 12:20 am
Most regulars here know that as of last Fall I began to post less and actually do something about preserving IP rights and extending their protections and lobbying for greater punishments when they are infringed. Unlike Henry, who sits behind a keyboard in rural Pennsylvania, I make the effort to get out to the seminars, the meetings, the legal circles. When I attended the Future of Music Coalition’s excellent seminar last Fall, I listened to 14 hours of testimony from small indie labels and musicians of all sorts who were losing their recording studios, their health insurance, their continuing ed and their classes. Their “buggy whip” is every bit as viable and just as widely enjoyed as ever, they’re just not being paid by their so-called “fans” anymore. Broadway musicians dependent upon royalty are finally losing their theatre district apartments and their nightly pit jobs as a result. Music schools built and funded by royalty are closing. The degree of destruction to the talented, hardworking indies who have built careers and raised families in this once-monetized industry is as astounding as it is disgusting. Henry, on the other hand, doesn’t actually make the effort to participate in anything like this. He needs to believe that piracy is good for the digital arts. He has an internet connection and so this makes him an expert.
Two weeks back I was in London meeting with a union and some label executives and in correspondence with a rep from Lammy’s IP office, (although regrettably, not Lammy himself). Same thing there. P2Pnet regulars love to point to the fat cats but the reality remains that the fat cats give musicians a better deal than any of you ever did. Signing with a label is still the dream come true for virtually every professional musician out there, and you should do some homework and ask them why. Even today, the deal and financial support a band gets from a label remains head and shoulders above the “Fuck you, I’m taking it, go sell T-shirts if you don’t like it” attitude of online piracy. Henry doesn’t actually meet with musicians or labor leaders or workers in the industries or government officials about this issue, though. He likes to lecture them online about how they should run their businesses instead.
Last Thursday the 26th I took in the Larry Lessig/Shepard Fairey presentation at our New York Public Library, and spoke with Fairey and Lessig for awhile afterwards during the meet and greet. Lessig remains convinced his CCommons is on the right path but happily confides he has no idea how to actually enforce it or to gather income for artists who choose to use it. He’s moving on to government corruption now, so most of his work remains academic. I took a working musician friend of mine, a woman with half a dozen You Tube performances to her credit. Henry wasn’t actually there, though. Henry was working on his treatise about how the recording industry should be made to work 10 cents at a time.
Henry, I have little respect for anyone who pontificates without the slightest clue WTF they are talking about. You’ve already acknowledged you are poorly educated and totally inexperienced in professional music, or copyright contracts, or licensing deals, or ISP business models, or legal circles, or really ANYthing that has to do with the discussions here. You’ve also admitted you’ve never created anything valuable enough to be licensed in the first place.
Your meandering history lessons– often cut and pastes from the online work of others– (as last Summer when I called you out for plagiarizing Fogel word for word without attribution) have no bearing, no MEANING in the current realm of this discussion. You whine about the course of copyright business history but don’t actually do–or know–the business.
The fact is Henry, you don’t have the courage necessary to dive into a creative career and actually find out how good–or not–you really are. You’ve never once revealed how you invest your weekly 40 or 50 or 60 hours, concealing what your area of expertise really is. You read the web as we all do, but you don’t do any real-world homework and still expect to carry the authority of someone who does. It’s as if you read a few article’s on heart surgery and now you post on cardiologist blogs. It’s laughable.
You are a backwoods amateur lecturing professionals, Henry, a pissy dilettante with broadband, a coward who’d rather criticize the achievements of others than achieve something notable for himself. A small mind in a smaller town with a big impression of himself and a bigger mouth, the living definition of a self-important, high-school tool-with-a-keyboard.
Like online pirates everywhere, you threaten our privacy laws by hiding behind them but never once go face to face in a boardroom with anyone. But the best evidence of your cowardice was this:
“Say you’re selling mp3 files for 10 cents each, but some nasty, evil “pirate” makes your stuff available for free without your permission.
Now, if you’re smart, you’ll maybe think of offering him some kind of “fra[n]chise” deal — pay you a percentage from the downloads, and you don’t sue his ass for the 500 bucks.”
So hypothetically Henry, by your reasoning if your wife in Pennsylvania also works for a living and some asshole finds a technical way to get in between her and the paycheck she earns each week, you don’t confront him and set things right. No, you try to get a piece of his action and you think this passes for “smart.” I don’t. I think this makes you a pussy.
You have some intelligence Henry, but you don’t apply it intelligently and you’ve never sounded smart. Angry? Sure. Inexperienced? Constantly. Plain stupid? Practically everytime you open your unsophisticated mouth.
Remaining on this path you’ll wind up like all the other unaccomplished stereotypes, sitting at the end of the bar, bitterly bitching into your beer about how you could have been a contender were it not for all the other talented and hardworking people, the stacked deck, the unfair laws, the insurmountable obstacles, the folks more powerful than you who stood in your way. While guys like me, (who went to high school and college a short drive from where you are tonight), and millions of hopeful kids from all over the world actually find the balls to grow out of your small town mediocrity and flock to the centers to actually try to do something. And really learn it. And make a fine living while doing it. And develop an opinion that deserves respect instead of you just mouthing off. But that takes courage, doesn’t it Henry, while you do whatever you get paid to do.
Digital IP–product, service, private data– may yet have a future, but professional IP creators will never stop pushing for extended protections and criminal convictions because working in IP will be regarded no differently than working materially in this new digital age. Our IP is the house we build in our careers, Henry, and people like you can leave their houses to their heirs. We will never stop until we can do exactly the same— never— and it’s a fact that you don’t have their ears Henry, and we do. Invest your time here preaching to the fanboy choir if it makes you feel important. My weight is in the real world, and it’s behind my agenda now.
You may get out from behind your keyboard and go to where this work gets done everyday and meet with the pro’s and their reps and the legislators who are struggling with your thieving while trying not to cripple our network in the process. You may even learn something that matters, too, but I doubt it. You don’t want to. Because if you did, Henry, you’d have no more excuses for why you could have been, but never will be, a real contender.
March 6th, 2009 at 2:25 am
Sam:
1. Yet again you’ve resorted to your usual pissy little attacks against me, instead of actually responding to anything I (or anyone else here) actually said. As to whether anything I post here is “cut and paste”? Not particularly relevant IF the information “pasted” is valid — which you’ve never actually had the intellectual honesty to debate.
2. It’s not my business to tell you who the hell I am, “Sam”. You’re the one making grandiose claims about yourself, your business, your wonderful intern (what was her name, Amber? I’d bother to look it up, but quite frankly, if I did, you’d just accuse me of “cut and paste”, so I won’t bother.) Now you’ve started blathering about your attendance at various conferences, and hanging out with Lessig, etc.
Care to put up or shut up, “Sam?” Surely a high-powered bidness-tycoon such as yourself snapped a few photos — I’m sure we’d all be very interested in seeing them.
3. Lemme see if I can summarize your “posts”, and feel free to tell me if I’m close:
A. Grandiose claims about yourself/your business/your “qualifications”, etc.
B. pissy little personalistic jibes at your opponents presumed lack of same.
C. Whiny sermon involving RIAA/MPAA boilerplate.
D. More pissy personalistic cracks at your opponent.
E. Name-dropping of “anti-piracy” activist du jour.
Am I close here?
Nobody who reads this blog *KNOWS* anything except what you claim about yourself.
So show us the photos, “Sam”. Provide us a link to your business’ website. (You DO have a website, don’t you?)
Frankly, I kinda feel good that I’ve sparked yet another of your colorful little tantrums: it means that — yet again — some guy from a small town you’ve probably never heard of, managed to make you look stupid. I’m just glad I get to be the one.
It makes me feel all warm and tingly.
How many times have I reduced you to this level now, “Sam”? Ten?
Either refute the arguments I — and others here — make (whether they’re “cut and pasted”, or not), or just toddle off to the next conference, and continue “doing something” to preserve your “rights” to perpetual monopoly. If your efforts THERE are anything like what we see here, we have nothing to worry about.
Cheers!
March 6th, 2009 at 2:44 am
Jon:
Correct me if I’m wrong, but did “Sam’s” latest little tantrum actually address anything I said (other than, of course, my strictly hypothetical “ten cents a song” thing.) I don’t think it did. Now, I know I’m just a “backwoods amateur” and all, but even a slope-browed, inbred, banjo-pickin’, tobacky-chewin’ yokel such as myself would’ve noticed if he HAD addressed any of my points.
Nice talking to you again, “Sam”: see ya over on torrentfreak.
Glad I could provoke yet another one of your oh-so-entertaining screeds.
(Damn, I’m good!)
March 6th, 2009 at 3:53 am
Sam:
I think I figured it out.
It must be really annoying to find yourself unable to actually formulate a counter-argument against a “backwoods amateur” such as myself.
I mean, hey — being as your posts are so often dripping with contempt for anyone who lacks a college degree (presumably from a “suitable” institution at that), it’s pretty obvious you don’t hold me — or any of the others who post here — in very much esteem.
So what scalded your ass THIS time, SammyPoo?
Was it the fact that a “backwoods amateur” was able to “cut and paste” together something you couldn’t contradict?
I mean, hey, I know a slope-browed, banjo-pickin’, tobacky-chewin’ yahoo such as myself can’t POSSIBLY compare to a high-powered, suit-and-tie, IP-monopoly-defendin’ Cityfied Business tycoon like you, but you could at least humor me by responding with something besides snotty nonsense about where I live, Yknow?
(Oh wait, you’re the guy who compared filesharing to rape on the grounds that “they’re both illegal”. We had SUCH fun over on Torrentfreak, no?)
So anyway, back to what I was saying:
The reason I piss you off, is that I refuse to kiss your ass, and keep making you look stupid every time you come back.
You probably think that your repeated attempts at character-assassination qualify as “answering the question”.
Y’know what? They don’t, Sam — and every time you do this shit, it just strengthens my views all the more.
(Then again, if dishonest sermonizing actually WORKED on me, I’d probably be handing out tracts door-to-door or something, instead of repeatedly making you look stupid.)
So in future, save us all some time: skip the RIAA boilerplate, personal attacks, snotty nonsense about where I live, and ego-tripping, and just answer the question, M’kay?
If ya need me, I’ll be out in the woodshed, whittlin’ me a viny switch to take to yeh backside, ya varmint! (smirk)
(”Backwoods Amateur” — one thing I’ll give you: you sure do know how to turn a phrase!)
Ciao, y’all
March 6th, 2009 at 4:45 am
“I took a working musician friend of mine, a woman with half a dozen You Tube performances to her credit”
Name, Sam? I’m sure we’d all be interested to see her. Feel free to generate some free publicity for your “musician friend.”
“Your meandering history lessons– often cut and pastes from the online work of others– (as last Summer when I called you out for plagiarizing Fogel word for word without attribution) have no bearing, no MEANING in the current realm of this discussion. You whine about the course of copyright business history but don’t actually do–or know–the business.”
Are you referring to the Thomas Jefferson quote?
Or maybe the fact that the first thing I mentioned was “Statute of Anne?”
(Odd how you assume that qualifies as “plagiarizing Fogel without attribution” And anyway, didn’t you spell his name VOGEL in your other sad little screed? I guess if HE mentioned it, then I must have gotten it from HIM, right? It’s not as if it’s annotated anywhere else, of course.
As far as whether I “do — or know — the business”, it’s pretty obvious that — unlike you — I don’t have a vested interest in twisting a monopoly expressly granted for a “limited time”, into a fundamental right — much less a “sacred” one. (YOUR word for it, not mine.)
I’m pretty sure pharmaceutical companies get a bit testy when their patents expire, and they’re finally open to that “market competition” you capitalist types are always jabbering about. Honestly, “Sam” — IF you’re as intelligent and well-educated as you claim, how is it that you can’t tell the difference between a limited-term MONOPOLY, and a “sacred” right?
“most regulars here know that as of last Fall I began to post less and actually do something about preserving IP rights and extending their protections and lobbying for greater punishments when they are infringed.”
No, actually “most regulars” know you as a pissy little troll who stops by periodically to take pot-shots at me/Jon, boast about how much of a high-powered business tycoon you are, and generally be a complete pain in the ass. Did I mention that you never actually answer questions put to you?
“Digital IP–product, service, private data– may yet have a future, but professional IP creators will never stop pushing for extended protections and criminal convictions because working in IP will be regarded no differently than working materially in this new digital age.”
Uh, no. “Working materially” has ALWAYS been regarded “differently” from “working in IP”. That’s why IP monopolies are explicitly granted ONLY FOR A LIMITED TIME, and why the goddamn things expire — if, of course, whiny little shits like YOU and your RIAA idols don’t stop that from happening.
Last time I checked, bagging groceries didn’t involve being able to coercively prevent OTHERS from doing so for seventy years after you’re own death. But hey, I’m just a “backwoods amateur”, what the fuck do I know?
“Our IP is the house we build in our careers, Henry, and people like you can leave their houses to their heirs. We will never stop until we can do exactly the same— never— and it’s a fact that you don’t have their ears Henry, and we do. Invest your time here preaching to the fanboy choir if it makes you feel important. My weight is in the real world, and it’s behind my agenda now.”
So NOW we get to the real crux of your “argument”.
Inquiry into the history and purpose of IP law is evil because it’s tantamount to “taking away your house”.
That’s fascinating.
So every patent-holder is therefore, expropriated when the patent expires. NOW your whining idiocy about how expiration will “take” from your daughter makes sense!
And the next thing? The pompous idiocy about how your “weight is in the world?” Suuuure, Sammykins. That’s why an uber-capitalist business giant such as yourself feels the gnawing, gut-wrenching need to continue posting on blog after blog, alternately barking threats, sermonizing, and insulting anybody who calls “bullshit” on you for it.
Sam, you’re pathetic. You’re the equivalent of the “popular” kid in high school who just can’t get over the fact that the nerdy weirdo is smarter, hence your need to attack me, instead of actually answering the questions put to you.
Y’know what? I’m genuinely flattered, Sam. You can’t possibly imagine how gratifying it is for a “backwoods amateur with a big mouth” like myself, to be able to reduce the real-life equivalent of John Galt to quivering, spittle-spraying rage.
Now let’s get a few things straight:
1. A monopoly granted for a limited time is neither a fundamental, NOR “sacred” right (no matter what your RIAA idols may think.)
The expiration of such a monopoly does not “take” anything from you, OR your heirs.
“Buying” yourself OUT of such expiration is NOT acceptable, and will not be tolerated — NO MATTER HOW MUCH REPRESSION YOUR PUPPETMASTERS MAY ATTEMPT TO UNLEASH.
2. Claiming to hang out with Lawrence Lessig is not a substitute for answering questions put to you.
3. Yeah, I know I’m a “backwoods amateur” “high-school tool” from a small town in Pennsylvania who “cuts and pastes” “meandering history lessons”. You still haven’t actually managed to EVER refute any of the points I made (or, “cut and pasted”, as you’d have it.)
Now, I’ve made you look stupid (yet again), and we get treated to yet another of your wonderful screeds.
I, for one, genuinely LOVE it when you go all “Sunset Boulevard” on us. To quote Martha Stewart (another high-poewred Capitalist “designer” type person): “it’s a good thing!”
Ah well, back to pickin’ the ol’ banjo out in the woodshed back of the house
(Maybe I’ll just whittles me a corncob pipe while I’m at it.)
March 6th, 2009 at 4:54 am
“So hypothetically Henry, by your reasoning if your wife in Pennsylvania also works for a living and some asshole finds a technical way to get in between her and the paycheck she earns each week, you don’t confront him and set things right. No, you try to get a piece of his action and you think this passes for “smart.” I don’t. I think this makes you a pussy.”
That’s exactly what copyfighting is ABOUT, you fuckin’ weasel:
The various monopolies subsumed under the misnomer of “intellectual property” (In particular, Patents and copyright) are granted SPECIFICALLY on condition that they be allowed to expire. However, the fuckin’ RIAA weasels keep increasing the term, and have done so for years. Moreover, they’ve successfully mindfucked stupid little weasels like YOU into viewing those monopolies as a “sacred right”.
Y’know what I think is “pussy?”
Whining to the government to get the VCR banned, and then twenty years later claiming that the video-rental market ENABLED by the device in question constitutes a “vital income stream”, in order to get OTHER TECHNOLOGIES banned.
So pull your head out of Valenti’s ass, stop making yourself out to be some kind of martyr.
“IP is the house we build in our careers”
I just thought of another thing: the DEED to PHYSICAL houses isn’t specifically designed to EXPIRE in a “limited time”.
Goddamn, but you’re stupid.
March 6th, 2009 at 7:36 am
“A woman with half a dozen You Tube Performances to her credit”
Uhhh….Youtube “performances?”
Gimme a fuckin’ break, Sam — any halfway decent “backwoods amateur” Video-blogger can rack up half a dozen (as in SIX!!!) youtube “performances”. Y’see, this is why nobody takes you seriously — in among what LOOKS, at first glance, like an impassioned defense of “the rights of creators”, we get priceless gems of genius like that! “Half a dozen You Tube Performances?” Wow.
If you’re into “You Tube” (sic) “performances”, I’d advise you to check out “Margerie Brubaker” and/or “the man from Boston”.
Both of them periodically upload “performances” consisting almost exclusively of the kind of idiotic temper-tantrums in which YOU specialize.
“I listened to 14 hours of testimony from small indie labels and musicians of all sorts who were losing their recording studios, their health insurance, their continuing ed and their classes.”
Gee, you mean the folks working for “small indie labels” are being effected by the same type of shit as EVERYBODY ELSE?
Leaving aside the fact that NO member-label of the RIAA deserves to be called “indie”, it’s exceedingly unlikely that “online piracy” is doing anything but HELPING “small indie labels” — if you can even find their stuff, that is.
I want you to try something for me, “Sam”:
Go to Isohunt, Mininova, TPB, any of the bittorent search portals, and plug in the following names:
“Rob Crow”
“Optiganally yours”
“Pinback”
“Smokin’ with Superman”
“Thingy”
“Goblin Cock”
After doing so, please let me know what sort of results you come up with.
As for the “health insurance” situation, I COULD suggest that supporting some form of health-care reform might be in order?
(Oh, wait — my bad. According to Caribou Barbie, that would be “socialism”.)
“Broadway musicians dependent upon royalty are finally losing their theatre district apartments and their nightly pit jobs as a result.”
Gee, and here I thought it was because of stuff like this:
http://www.dmamusic.org/news/000198.php
(Sorry, “Sam”, I realize I just “cut and pasted” something — oooooooh, I’m just soooooo evil.)
“You’ve also admitted you’ve never created anything valuable enough to be licensed in the first place.”
When did I say anything about that, Sam?
I know you’re insufferably arrogant, elitist, stupid to the point of being barely-verbal, and arrogant to boot, but please, oh please tell me how simply having admitted that a monopoly EXPRESSLY granted for a limited time isn’t a “sacred right” merits this shit you spew at me?
“st Thursday the 26th I took in the Larry Lessig/Shepard Fairey presentation at our New York Public Library, and spoke with Fairey and Lessig for awhile afterwards during the meet and greet. Lessig remains convinced his CCommons is on the right path but happily confides he has no idea how to actually enforce it or to gather income for artists who choose to use it. He’s moving on to government corruption now, so most of his work remains academic.”
Okay, leaving aside the fact that jumping up and down repeatedly, waving your hands over your head like a three year old probably doesn’t, strictly speaking, fit the definition of having “talked with Lessig and Fairey”, what the hell does it matter whether Lessig is unsure of how to “monetize” creative commons licenses have to do with anything?
Newsflash, dude: the copyright office doesn’t really have that much to do with helping those it’s monopoly “protects” figure out how to “monetize” their stuff, either. I’m glad Lessig is moving on to government corruption — he can start by check-mating (or at least voting against) any further extension of copyright terms.
Sam, you’re pitiful. I mean, here you are, obviously wealthy enough that jet-setting all over (London, munich, etc.) isn’t that big of a deal, and yet you expend vast amounts of time, energy and rage attempting to disparage me, rather than trying to refute the stuff I post.
Y’know why you can’t do that, “Sam?” Because despite all your posturing and protestations that you’ve “never been in the RIAA’s camp”, you’re nothing but a pitiful little weasel who can’t even manage to successfully refute a “Backwoods amateur”.
Don’t take this the wrong way, “Sam”, but fuck you, AND the RIAA trojan horse you rode in on.
Are we clear now?
March 6th, 2009 at 7:50 am
Oh, and about Fairey, you neglected to tell us about THIS:
“Fairey has come under criticism for appropriating others’ artwork into his own while failing to provide attribution for the work used.[35] However, he has threatened to sue artists for the same technique. Austin, Texas graphic designer Baxter Orr did his own take on Fairey’s work in a piece called Protect, with the iconic Obey Giant face covered by a SARS respiratory mask.[36] He started selling prints through his website marketed as his own work. On April 23, 2008 Orr received a signed cease-and-desist order from Fairey’s attorneys, telling him to pull Protect from sale because they alleged it violated Fairey’s trademark. Fairey threatened to sue, calling the designer a “parasite”.[37]
In 2009 it was revealed that the HOPE poster was based on a copyrighted photograph taken in April 2006 by Mannie Garcia while on assignment for the Associated Press (AP), which wants credit and compensation for the work.[38] However, Garcia believes that he personally owns the copyright for the photo, and has said, “If you put all the legal stuff away, I’m so proud of the photograph and that Fairey did what he did artistically with it, and the effect it’s had.”[39] Fairey feels his use of it falls within the legal definition of fair use.[40] Lawyers for both sides were discussing an amicable agreement.[41] Fairey, however, ultimately filed a federal lawsuit against the Associated Press, seeking a declaratory judgment that his use of the AP photograph was protected by the fair use doctrine and so did not infringe their copyright.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shepard_Fairey#Legal_issues_with_appropriation_and_fair_use
My GOD but you’re stupid, Sam. We’re not just talking Sonny Bono “Copyright is forever minus a day” stupidity. We’re not even talking “Valenti’s Boston Strangler speech” stupidity. We’re talking dumb-as-a-bag-of-wet-dogshit levels of stupid.
Sorry if I offended you because I “cut and pasted” something. (Gee, and here all this time I thought I was simply providing off-site references for the stuff I mentioned.) Wow, it’s so difficult being a “backwoods amateur”, how can you EVER expect me to do better?
I mean, Sam, trust me: my fondest wish in the whole wide world is to get to be “a real contender” like you, someday.
March 6th, 2009 at 9:55 am
@Henry Emrich,
Forget it… you’ve kind of failed in your response.
1. You made valid arguments and asked valid intelligent questions
2. You have shot down nearly/all points Sam made
3. You brought up references to back up your arguements
4. You want Sam to actually prove that he was not just talking ’smack’
Even one of the above usually sends Sam running for the hills, and asking direct questions is a big no-no. Look at the RIAA/MPAA… being vague is their strength, put them in the corner and they really have nothing.
Copyright has been distorted far beyond its original 14year plan and turning into something to rape the public with instead. When something has been disfigured due to corporate interests soooo badly, it deserves no respect _at all_.
Unfair laws and bought laws will never be respected, especially when they are largely unenforceable.
March 6th, 2009 at 10:06 am
thanks Jon for allowing threads like this one to live, and not be filtered.
I love the banter between Sam and Henry, and yet again, Henry has slapped Sam (and his RIAA sycophantic ideology) around for all to read and judge for themselves.
@Sam: in the IT world we call this being ‘pwned’.
stw
March 6th, 2009 at 10:39 am
@ surfer
99.9% of comment posts stay up. The .1% which bit the dust contributed absolutely nothing.
Cheers!
March 6th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
Ezee:
1. Oh, I never actually expect “Sam” to give a straight answer, because he can’t. I’m usually pretty tolerant with people even when I disagree with them, but he’s a different story. When he goes for the “Talented hardworking businessman vs. ignorant, backwoods amateur” thing, I’m not gonna let it stand. He thinks he can intimidate his opponent into silence by means of repeatedly dodging every question with “you’re just a small-town redneck, what do YOU know???”
Somehow, I always get this image in my head of the owner of a slave-ship defending the “Middle passage” by saying “what do you abolitionists know about it? Quit hiding behind all that ‘all men are created equal’ bullshit! This is about the ’sacred right’ to property. You’ve never bought slaves!”
Oh, wait, Sam will probably take offense to THAT, too. GOOD.
From now on, everybody be warned: the second he attempts to bring any of his RIAA bootlicking idiocy around, I’m on his ass like a bear-trap. The stupid bastard has called me everything from a “backwoods amateur” to a “shoplifting potty-mouth” (Yes, sam, I even remember THAT!), razzed me over where I live (we can’t all be the real-life equivalent of telephone sanitizers, now can we?), and just generally taken great pains to fuck with me at every turn.
You want “backwoods amateur?” I’ll show you “backwoods amateur”.
I guess I should’ve seen his idiotic tantrum coming when he commented about how Bainwol gets “peanuts”, and “loses” some of it via taxation. (Gee, it’s not like the government doesn’t give corporate pukes like Bainwol a tremendous boost by keeping “corporate” and “personal” assets separate, now is it?)
March 6th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
The “problem” with the net is people are far more educated than they were before on a variety of subjects and when someone tries to drop a sentence and pass it off as the gospel truth… it just does not get far.
Face to face this works wonders depending on who you talk to because you can almost convince some people black is white, but posting on a discussion forum is like talking to a crowd… only here, the crowd talks back in the same volume.
Sam used to post the same stuff he posts on all sites on eZee.se as well, trying to ‘discourage’ our visitors from the most unholy and disgusting (in his eyes) habit of file sharing— after all, everyone should _respect_ IP right? No matter if its unfair or distorted or corrupted way beyond its actual intended use.
For the most part me (as an admin) and two others treated him as just another visitor/commentator but just like you he realllly hit a raw nerve with some visitors, one of whom became a guest writer on eZee (you kind of remind me of him), he regarded Sam as nothing mroe than a troll/shill for the industry and told us he would write for us just as a “troll killer”, you might find this interesting:
http://ezee.se/articles-blog/2008/06/26/introducing-our-troll-killer/
There are other posts as well before Shaz started writing for us where direct questions would go unanswered and instead be replied to with more FUD.
Looks like P2PNet has its own troll killer now
March 6th, 2009 at 2:38 pm
Ezee:
Oh yeah, I’d read that link already (you posted it here in another thread where “Sam” was, also, being a whiny little bitch.)
I always knew he was stupid, but until I realized this, I didn’t know he was a clone of George W. Bush:
Sam: “Maybe you’d agree it’s slimy to use the law and its implementation to defend an unethical act that has harmed artists for years and that you know perfectly well has always been illegal. Do you have any problem with that?”
Now, I know I’m just a “backwoods amateur” and all that shit, but out here in “Possum Gulch” failing to live up to YOUR end of a bargain constitutes “breach of contract”. Guess what, shitboy? IP monopolies are at least implicitly a form of contract, in that (now follow me closely here) the State grants the PRIVILEGE of such monopolies “for a limited time”, and for a VERY SPECIFIC REASON (”science and the useful arts”), on the condition that such monopolies be allowed to EXPIRE.
That’s right, puke: every extension of copy’right’ term represents nothing less than a big ol’ “fuck you” to the very people who granted the monopolies in the first place.
“Time’s up, Content-guy. It’s the public-domain’s turn, now.”
“But we don’t WANNNA! WAAAAAH! WAAAH! IT’S MINE! MINE MINE MINE!”
(RIAA representative stamps foot petulantly, lip quivvering with righteous indignation).
Sam, would you — or would you not — agree (being the modern Prometheus you are), that “breach of contract” is a bad thing?
Oh, wait, that’s right — your RIAA pals scored a decision saying retroactive extensions of copyright law are peachy, provided the term is “limited” at each step (read, anything other than “infinity.”)
Y’know, that’s not actually that unusual, actually.
John Yoo came up with this same type of idea, getting around prohibitions against torture by cleverly re-defining it so as to allow waterboarding.:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Yoo#Regarding_torture_of_detainees
Let me put this as bluntly as only a “backwoods Amateur” can:
FUCK YOO, and fuck YOU!
(Goddamn, but he’s stupid.)
Yeee-haw!
March 6th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
More “wisdom” from Sam’s (richly-deserved) beatdown over at Ezee:
“We could have protested back before the advent of Napster if we all, in fact, loathed the recording industry so much and their pricing structure. We could have organized and stopped buying and brought them to their knees–we had the internet then, too– and had the courts and legislators on OUR side as well. But No. we had to loot the industry and turn the tide against us.”
Wouldn’t it be refreshing to hear an RIAA-type, just once, say something like:
“We could have been content with a reasonable monopoly term, if we actually gave a shit about “advancing science and the useful arts” and thought the ability to learn from/build upon the past was a good thing. We could have run our studios ethically, not cheated the artists at every turn, and graciously fulfilled OUR part of the bargain when it came time for our monopoly privileges to expire. We could have refrained from lobbying Congress to ban the VCR. We didn’t HAVE to be greedy, short-sighted, money-hungry assholes. We could even have come out looking like defenders of free speech when we protested the “Tipper Sticker.” But no, we had to loot the public domain, screw our own artists out of the royalties we promised them, and turn the tide against us.”
Wouldn’t THAT be refreshing?
“Is it slimy to take entertainment product over and over and over when you know perfectly well the artist’s lives depend on being paid for it?”
Gee, you mean like all those royalties that mysteriously never got paid by Soundexchange?
Or maybe you mean buying themselves perpetual monopoly on the installment plan?
Or maybe you’re referring to lawsuits over “copyright infringement” because the riff kinda, sorta almost slightly sounds somewhat like something somebody else did. (I know big words are hard for you, Sam, but repeat after me: cryptomnesia).
“Is it slimy to do this under the cowardly cover of the “privacy” on the network, thereby presenting to the courts with the Hobson’s choice of removing our precious privacy or allowing rampant infringement to continue unabated?”
Gee, like the Confederate states and their “Hobson’s choice” to preserve chattel slavery?
Or maybe you’re referring to the “hobson’s choice” of “Federal tyranny” (desegregation) vs. apartheid-in-all-but-name (Missisippi 1963, etc.)
But THIS has to take the cake:
“But you know what’s REALLY slimy? How about Ray Beckerman styling himself the “NewYorkCountryLawyer” (laughing) while pretending in the media that he is some latter day Robin Hood with a touch for the common man? Yeah, right. His offices reside at 110 East 42nd Street , one of Manhattan’s legendary old bank buildings. “
Y’know, me and my kinfolks here in Possum Gulch may just be “backwoods Amateurs” and sech (”shuck-a-muck!”), but the above quote almost looks as if “Sam’s” trying to play the “Uppity New Yorker” card here. Gee, how fuckin’ fascinating, especially coming from somebody who busts on me because I’m actually still IN Pennsylvania. Wow, Sam — amazing: a real life suit-and-tie Business tycoon type of guy like yourself, castigating Beckerman because he’s (gasp!) A NEW-YORK LAWYER.
There’s just no pleasing you, is there SammyPoo?
Either we’re just a bunch of “thieving, potty-mouthed, backwoods amateurs” who “don’t know the business”, or we’re like Ray — “Trying to be robin-hood with a touch for the common man.”
(”scuse me, I gotta go check the box-traps. I think me and the Missus done gots us a squirrel! Thems is some all-fired tasty vittles!)
“The slimy RIAA lawyers say what they say and spin their case because they are lawyers with a job to do, precisely what Beckerman is and what Beckerman does.”
Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. There you have it, friends — arch-advocate of the “Sacred right” to perpetual monopoly — defender of his daughter against the “taking” represented by the public domain — modern prometheus, jet-setting Uber-capitalist “Man of Ability” wannabe Dr. Seuss-character troll piece of shit “Sam” FINALLY admits that the RIAA lawyers are ’slimy’, but that’s okay, cuz they done gots a ‘job to do.”
Just like Blackwater Int.?
(In a way, I kind hope this DOES turn out to be “Great Depression II”: kinda looking forward to “Sam” jumping out of a 30th-floor window or something, and leaving a nice, juicy SPLAT on the street (since he’s been so thoroughly crushed everywhere else!)
Possum Gulch, over and out
March 6th, 2009 at 4:13 pm
The actually was a pretty good and long discussion on eZee with Sam and someone else that i cant really find right now (been some time away from the site), things got pretty heated, i think it was with p2plover (used to be one of our regulars) but if you want a little more as to what Sam thinks is going to happen:
http://ezee.se/articles-blog/2008/05/31/oink-uk-police-corrupted/
I’ll post that other link when i find it, it was an amusing read when I was moderating the comments.
)
If you dont want to read the whole thing, here’s the gist… basically, ‘we’ are all f**ked because the internet is going to be policed and we really dont stand a chance and are fighting a losing battle against content owners. They are going to prevail. (Yes, you’re welcome for the laugh
Cheers!
March 6th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
Oops, sorry to double post but just had to say this…
with all the RIAA and corrupt govts + excessive lobbying the content industries have been seeing results (cue in NZ’s guilty till proven innocent, Frances bending over to 3 strikes, Beatrice Ask (Sweden) bending over and spreading for big content from April first with IPRED etc) but just head over to Ars and check the top news for today:
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darknet_(file_sharing) )
1. Darknets spreading/opening up all over the place (old school style)
2. Limewire which already has millions of users has released a new version with an ever easier way to start your own darknet (new school)
What does this mean? Simple:
The net has again started to evolve, instead of trying to move the huge obstacle in its way, its simply taken a turn and curved around the obstacle, defeating the obstacle and making it +1 in the favor of the ‘pirates’.
Worth nothing, by the time most of these laws get even slightly effective, technology will have made them almost obsolete… and its always going to be this way because laws are made by old fuddy duddy dinosaurs while technology is advancing by the new go getter generations.
March 6th, 2009 at 5:05 pm
Ezee:
“Laws are made by fuddy-duddy dinosaurs”
Not quite. Actually, “laws” are usually bought by lobbyists — except in those very rare exceptions where our (s)elected leaders HAVE to change “the law” because to do otherwise risks destroying the system itself:
Examples:
1770s: A bunch of rabble-rouser types begin distributing pamphlets protesting various laws the Brits passed (”Stamp act”, etc.)
Eventually, a bunch of guys decide to dress up like indians and dump a bunch of tea over the side of a ship.
If I recall correctly (and keep in mind that the one-room log cabin school here in Possum Gulch wasn’t exactly the greatest), the “unlawful insurrection” we know today as the “American Revolution” didn’t exactly have an easy time of it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loyalist_(American_Revolution)
1860s: Abraham Lincoln runs for president. Previously, he’d been a rather fiery supporter of the abolitionist cause, but during his campaign, he explicitly stated that if “leaving some alone” (enslaved) would save the Union, he’d do so.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln%27s_First_Inaugural
Interestingly enough, when events had “moved on”, he felt compelled to issue the “emancipation proclamation”, ostensibly “freeing” the slaves within the territory held by the CSA. (I say “ostensibly, since the CSA was at that point, depending on your loyalties, either a seperate nation in fact, or at any rate, in open rebellion against the United States government.)
1960s: The “Freedom Riders” finally got the United States to understand that a racial caste system was incompatible with the principles upon which the United States was founded.
Now notice something: in all three cases I mentioned, there is always a minority of the populace OPENLY FLOUTING law which they find to be unjust. It’s only LATER, that such “scofflaws” are recognized to have been on the side of right.
“Sam” isn’t merely a mindless RIAA shill: he’s actually something far worse: a DELIBERATELY mindless RIAA shill.
What exactly is so wrong with recognizing a privilege for what it IS?
Copyright, patent, and the “limited liability” afforded by corporate charter are ALL examples of privileges which are commonly misunderstood to be “rights”. They are also — not coincidentally — three of the most blatantly, dangerously missapplied aspects of “law” at this point.
But somehow, merely recognizing that fact opens one to the lowest kind of dishonest hate-spew imaginable (as we’ve seen from our old buddy “Sam”.) The “laws” relating to copyright, patent, and corporate liability are in serious need of reform — or, if need be — outright repeal. Even a “Backwoods Amateur” like me can see that (and I don’t even have “half a dozen You Tube Performances”)
(I gotta say, that was probably the funniest line in his whole screed.)
“Half a dozen” sounds kind of impressive, until you realize that it’s really just “six”.
Likewise, “performances” sounds really impressive, until you recognize that what his “working musician friend” did was to upload files to Youtube. Here in Possum Gulch we tend to be a bit cynical, but I call bullshit on the whole thing — mostly because I can’t actually imagine something like “sam” having “friends” of any kind.
Good luck defending your daughter from the public domain, Sam.
Possum Gulch, Over and out
March 6th, 2009 at 5:12 pm
hahahahhah, Sam, u gotta stop posting, your getting pwned everywhere you go. the bitch-slapping you are enduring has GOT to hurt at some point.
kudos to Henry for the eloquent smackdown using Sam’s own quotes.
im starting to really like u Henry, in a macho kinda way… pass the vittles…
LMFAO !!!!!!!
stw
March 6th, 2009 at 5:14 pm
I’d like to know what artist he’s talking about.
Telling us would bring a lot of traffic and attention to
his ‘artist’ friend .. wouldn’t it ?
We might even think his ‘artist’ friend is actually good, right ?
Tell us Sam so we can see for ourselves the quality you promote.
Don’t you want people to see your ‘artist’ ?
March 6th, 2009 at 5:16 pm
Cute, Surfer. Henry, whether you type here complaining about the course of copyright or the course of the American civil war, it’s all about the same to me and brings about as much meaning to the discussion. I meet with the creative pro’s everywhere I travel and learn what they can teach me, then I call my legislators offices, book the dates, make the meetings and tell them/show them what I know and what I believe. You sit in Possum Gulch bitching for the readers. Fine, then. But don’t come crying to me when terms are extended again and isp’s and internet surveillance laws tighten in support. We’ve barely begun.
I sent a piece to Jon this morning trying to answer some of your questions about why piracy is growing in consideration for criminal status along side crimes like rape or burglary or murder. I also listed the “big three” items on this side of the agenda, a common strategy discussed in every meeting I’ve attended since last Fall; in Munich, in Los Angeles, here in New York and last week in London.
Early this morning I also sent three photos I personally took at the Lessig Seminar since you wanted photographic proof. We don’t know what you actually do for a living, Henry, nor what your true area of expertise really is, but it takes time and real effort to be genuinely involved in something like this. It takes a commitment to get out of the house and meet the players, to advance the dialogue, to influence the outcome. Maybe you’re pissed off that laws evolve to reflect a wide variety of ever-changing conditions. They do, and they always have. Maybe you’re just a pointlessly angry high school grad in a dead-end job, jealous of anyone also from Pennsylvania who actually has a paying creative career. That has more than a ring of truth to it.
But either way Henry, by everything you offer here you remain little more than an ineffective hayseed with a crap attitude and a network hook-up. We’ll see in the months ahead if you actually put your time and effort where your mouth is, as the working professionals do. Like I said, I doubt it.
March 6th, 2009 at 5:30 pm
Henry, while I just “liked” your comment, I _loved_ this line:
mostly because I can’t actually imagine something like “sam” having “friends” of any kind.
HEH! That was a resounding bitchslap and i could hear the yelp all the way here in Sweden!
>Good luck defending your daughter from the public domain,
it is just me or does that like the public all want to ‘jump’ his daughter?
I myself uploaded a couple of songs on youtube of me playing the guitar… beginner stuff and not my songs, mostly showing people how far i have advanced and asking for advise etc wonder if that makes me an ‘artist’ in Sams eyes, or have i forever already been labeled ‘pirate’?
I also freely gave out the musical tabs to anyone who asked for it… guess i’m in line to be sued!
youTube half dozen artist… lol! That IS funny!
March 6th, 2009 at 5:33 pm
oops, my reference to old “fuddy duddy dinosaurs ” was with regards to Sweden and Europe in general… they might be paid for by younger industry execs but its sl*ts like this one http://gfx.aftonbladet.se/multimedia/archive/00488/Beatrice_Ask_488265w.jpg that fight to get it passed and actually do the passing (no pun intended)
March 6th, 2009 at 5:34 pm
Wow — the more I read, the dumber he looks:
The internet is the greatest invention yet for the dissembling of information, the certainty of free speech, the promise of online commerce.”
Umm, okay. Pardon me if I “cut and paste” something, kids:
1. (transitive) To disguise or conceal something; to feign.
2. (transitive) To deliberately ignore something; to pretend not to notice.
3. (intransitive) To falsely hide one’s opinions or feelings.
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/dissemble
Sam, I know a high-powered “bidnessman” such as yourself has a hell of a lot going on — what with all the frenzied jet-setting and conferences and waiting around to lick “Lammy’s” nutsack and such, but even a “backwoods amateur” like me knows how to look up words in an online dictionary. Dissembling, that’s goddamn right:
You sure do a lot of “dissembling”, my friend:
You’re “dissembling” via definition 1, when you act to “disguise, conceal or feign” your real intentions for posting here. To be more specific, you lie to us about wanting to “discuss” the issue, but when we DO, we only get the same RIAA talking-point claptrap bullshit interspersed with class-baiting, and bluster.
You are “dissembling” via definition 2, when you (and your RIAA puppetmasters) “deliberately ignore” the historical roots/actual stated purpose of IP law. You’re also “dissembling” when you “pretend not to notice” our counter-arguments, and resort to insulting me for where I live, in hopes that i’ll be confused or intimidated into silence.
And you’re “dissembling” via definition 3, when you don’t admit how much the mere notion that your pwecious, pwecious IP monopolies might EVER be allowed to EXPIRE, scares the fuck out of you. You “fail to notice” the difference between “intellectual” property (which remains yours/your heir’s/corporate proxy’s) FOR A LIMITED TIME, and PHYSICAL property (like, for example, a physical house) — the title of which might gleefully be passed down generation to generation for centuries.
Oh, wait, I get it! You’ve decided that fellating “Big Media” and their cronies in government is a good way to make that “limited time” go away, so the big, bad public domain never “takes” anything from your “heirs” ever again.
Come on, Sam — even a half-literate “cryin’-in-his-beer” Backwoods Amateur “shoplifting potty-mouth” like ME can see the difference. Why the FUCK can’t you?
What the hell is wrong with you, man?
March 6th, 2009 at 5:39 pm
“Good minds are needed here, not the boorish attitude of some drunken fratboy high on his own self-importance and believing he is beyond containment.”
Agreed 100 percent. Thus, Valenti wasn’t necessary.
Bainwol isn’t necessary.
“Containment” is exactly what copyfighting is ABOUT: “containing” the “boorish attitude” that confuses privileges like IP with RIGHTS (like privacy), and then goes on to believe that such RIGHTS must be sacrificed — not even for some grandiose notion of “national security” vis. a vis the Bush administration — but just to prop up a fuckin’ “business model?”
Don’t even TRY to respond, “Sam” — you’ll just fuck things up even worse than you already have. Fly on over to London: maybe you’ll get your chance at “lammy” yet.
Possum Gulch, over and out.
March 6th, 2009 at 5:45 pm
“P2p is a brilliant technology with a huge legal future, but it’s being used in large measure to break the law at the moment. Even if you feel morally entitled to taking, copying and freely distributing copyrighted entertainment—thereby fucking the artist a lot worse than any industry ever did—you should at least recognize that no just legal system can or will turn a blind eye to rampant civil infraction.”
This presumes a few things:
1. Like we said before, the vast majority of the stuff wouldn’t BE “copyrighted” amymore, barring the actions of your buddies in the RIAA etc.
2. “Just” legal system? Don’t fuckin’ make me laugh. Would a “just” legal system have had that mewlypuke Valenti sitting in Congress grying to get the VCR banned? I don’t fuckin’ think so.
3. As to it’s “brilliant legal future”: proposal after proposal after proposal for how to monetize it. (Go read the EFF stuff about it — don’t wanna risk pissing you off by “cutting and pasting” again!)
Need I continue? Don’t bother attempting to “dissemble” any more information with us — you blew it bad, this time.
March 6th, 2009 at 5:50 pm
“This mess represents an unprecedented ransacking of 50 years of the best work by our best music artists and it is not being done, frankly, with the courage of your convictions.”
Why yes, life-plus-75 years IS an atrocity, thank you for noticing
“In fact it’s being done in the most cowardly way, hiding behind a temporary shroud of (almost) privacy that is rapidly being removed by legislation, bringing permanently damaging changes to this once free and unencumbered network.”
ha. ha. ha. ha. ha
So, filesharing/copyfight is being in a “cowardly” way, by “hiding behind a temporary shroud”?
What the fuck is IP law ITSELF, Sam? Need I rehash the thing about the “limited time”, or the stuff about “science and the useful arts?” OH wait, sorry, I forgot — failure to blindly bend over and take it up the ass from corporate scumbags is “cowardice”.
Suuuuuuuuuure, Sam.
(I’m genuinely enjoyin’ this — the stupid fuck doesn’t even have to show up, and I can keep beatin’ his ass.)
It’s all right over there.
March 6th, 2009 at 5:58 pm
Where’s the link to your friend’s “You Tube Performances?”
March 6th, 2009 at 6:04 pm
It’ll never happen Henry.
There will be excuses like …
‘You’ll just steal their stuff’ … while, oddly enough, accessing YouTube is still free.
or ..
‘You’ll just go and attack my friend because of their association with me’ .. But
most of us won’t do that, I for one am genuinely curious and will definitely be more
fair than Sam has been to us here.
There are probably many more excuses he will come up with, but I guarantee no
YouTube link will be coming.
Cowardice is obviously not limited to us thieves and rubes.
March 6th, 2009 at 6:09 pm
Ok, its been bugging me to find that long discussion with Sam and others on eZee… couldnt find that but did find another one that has lots of juicy titbits (heck, wish i had something better to do today, but honestly today i have nothing to do but supply you guys with “sam fodder”
)
http://ezee.se/articles-blog/2008/09/26/quick-p2pmafiaa-review-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly/
March 6th, 2009 at 6:19 pm
“Maybe you’re pissed off that laws evolve to reflect a wide variety of ever-changing conditions. They do, and they always have. Maybe you’re just a pointlessly angry high school grad in a dead-end job, jealous of anyone also from Pennsylvania who actually” — blah blah blah.
Yet again — and how many times do we get to see this repeated — we’ve come full-circle:
1. Sam shows up, blathering the same old blather.
2. I — or somebody else — takes him to task for it.
3. He responds by completely ignoring what any of us said, repeating the blather, and then insulting me — yet again.
4. I take his stupid ass to task — again
5. He comes back with a “seemingly” reasonable response which, nevertheless, ends up tacitly defending his RIAA pals/insulting me/etc. (see step 1)
Yes, Sam, laws “evolve” in response to a variety of conditions. One prominent “condition” as regards the current state of IP law, is the relentless lobbying of your RIAA buddies. Another is technological innovation — PROVIDED the aforementioned lobbyists don’t manage to get the technologies banned (Valenti’s VCR thing, etc.)
You don’t NEED to know anything more than I ALLOW you to know about me, Sammypie — unlike you, I’m not a grandiose blowhard prattling on about his fast-paced Manhattan career/newfound hobby of RIAA fanboy apologist.
I never claimed to be anything other than “just some guy”.
YOU are the one who has never actually answered my questions.
You’re also the first to start slinging the mud. We don’t cotton to that here in Possum Gulch.
Now I’ll ask you again — really nice and sweet and gentle-like, so as to not look hostile:
Given your repeated assertions that you have the ear of powerful people, and have become something of a mover-and-shaker in the areas of IP policy — why in the hell do you even bother posting here at all? I mean, come on, Sam: you don’t respect any of us. You won’t actually answer any of our questions. You won’t even give your lady-friend some free publicity by supplying a link to her “half dozen You Tube Performances”. Face it, Sam — you idolize Valenti and the RIAA folks, and just can’t resist attacking me because I didn’t “make it out of Pennsylvania.”
Now go toddle off to your next “conference”, Sammypoo. I’m quite frankly bored with you now.
March 6th, 2009 at 6:21 pm
Ah found it,
http://ezee.se/articles-blog/2008/07/10/flawed-foundations-lead-to-solid-statements/
Henry, a bit of a warning though, its a lonnnng read with a few comments from your namsis , wish I could give you the gist of it but that would be a lot of text as well.
Not that I hold anything against Sam, even tho’ he so kindly opened his heart to us, giving us a friendly kick when we were down: http://ezee.se/articles-blog/2009/02/10/an-ezee-pause/
Cheers,
CJ
March 6th, 2009 at 6:56 pm
Well, now at least I know what “Sam” does:
“Today my firm licenses design support and touring consultation to entertainment, exhibit and special theatrical events the world over, but we are just as likely to do a fashion show or museum exhibit as we are something to do with theatre or music. If illegal downloading succeeds in destroying the value of IP and copyright in general, my employees are done and this business is over.”
So he used to basically be a roadie, doing lighting for shows. But, wait — I thought his “area of expertise” was in copyright law. But no, alas — he’s a lighting designer, who just happens to be able to “leverage” the current IP regs in his favor. Leaving aside the fact that most of the “licensing” is probably hashed out by his lawyers, if he’s involved in the day-to-day of the business, but we’ll let that pass.
I gather from the above that he figures the “value of IP and copyright in general” derives from it’s status as a monopoly (hence his not shying away from the phrase “and the payments they compel”. It makes sense that he’d actively support the lobbying efforts of the RIAA nd their ilk. The above-quoted passage also confirms that — despite all his bloviating to the contrary — he is not an IP attorney, historian, legal expert, professional lobbyist, or anything else. He’s a hopped-up roadie (oh wait, I mean “design consultant”) for theaters and fashion-shows and such.
So much for his bullshit about my being a “backwoods amateur”. (What can I say — I’ll cut the guy a break, maybe the ‘ludes had just kicked in or something.)
“It’s hard to imagine the worlds governments will allow the destruction of the internet as a secure business platform just because of a few potty-mouthed, digital shoplifters”
Well, there goes another of my cherished illusions — namely, that he’s even actively participating in our “discussions” here.
What’d he say about the evil of “cutting and pasting?” Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t he use the exact same “potty-mouthed shoplifter” line when I — rather gently — corrected him in regard to the “Statute of Anne?” Oh wait, my bad — THAT time he said “shop-lifting potty-mouth”.
“This was never going to go well for “taking without paying” in the long run, CJ. Pirates just got out ahead of law and its enforcement for awhile, and took stuff without paying while they could. It was never very honorable. Hiding on the internet says a lot about their courage, too.”
Yet another recycled phrase from what seems to be his stock repertoire (wonder if he “licenses” that out to other RIAA shills as well)
“Taking without paying”, Sam? Like, what’ll happen when expiration “takes” from your daughter? (smirk)
Does anybody know how to make one of those Java-based “mad-lib” things? You know — like, the “automatic movie plot generator” or “automatic star trek episode generator”? It’d be pretty simple to sift through all of his jabbering RIAA boilerplate and insults, and create a program that could automatically generate “Sam-I-Am” style commentary on p2p/copyfight-related blogs.
Hell, we’d be doing the guy a favor — instead of badgering us, he could spend more time designing light-shows, and cozying up to his RIAA pals.
“And a question, CJ. If you want to be taken seriously and establish a productive dialog here, why do you publish crap like “Now fuck you and your mother you riaa shill.” We attend seminars, meet with our legislators, create new valuable content for license and support legislated higher penalties so we can get on with the businesses we’ve built. You guys are like shoplifters to us. But you don’t help your cause publishing remarks like that, CJ. All that shows is how outclassed pirates really are in this debate.”
Outclassed? I mean, Sam, like — seriously?
ME == history of IP law/it’s abuses, stuff about how propaganda fails bigtime, links to “stupid Valenti tricks”, Thomas Jefferson quotes, etc.
YOU == “You’re just a shoplifting, potty-mouthed, Backwoods Amateur pussy who never managed to escape from Pennsylvania!”
ME == “You didn’t actually answer the question, Sam”
YOU == “Aww, yer just cutting and pasting!!!!!!!! Fogel, Fogel Fogel Nyah Nyah Nyah!”
I mean, seriously???? For real???? “Outclassed?
Pardon me while I —– hahahahahaha, oh damn, that’s rich, it really is!
I can’t actually even give you the “benefit of the doubt” after that, Sam.
I can’t even bring myself to detest you anymore: after all the piss-whimpering, RIAA fanboy boilerplate, and paens to the wonders of our glorious capitalist system, you turn out to be a hopped-up ROADIE with PTSD flashbacks about Pennsylvania, who uses phrases like “shop-lifting pottymouth” and “backwoods amateur”, and can’t even tell the difference between “disseminating” and “dissembling?”
Jesus weasels — I’ve been sparring with a hopped-up roadie
(and Here I thought when you said you designed “creative IP” it was something like novelty sex-toys!)
“immy says:
September 27, 2008 at 11:49 am
@Sam, the reason most people reply to you in a manner such as mrl here and on other forums is because we see you for the RIAA shill and liar that you are.
I knew i read some other posts from you on this issue and i finally found it, you wanted jammie to lose from the beginning and pay that huge unjust fine so dont pretent otherwise, here are some of the comments you posted:
*********
if Jammie loses the “making available” argument, she loses big. But if she wins? We ALL LOSE BIG
*********
and 2
*********
So we’d all better hope that Jammie loses this “making available” argument, and begins to pay her fine. Because if she “wins”—
*********
This is from your rant here:
http://ezee.se/articles-blog/2…..ger-a-gun/
@CJ, personally, i dont think you shoud have edited the comment at all, leave it as is, but hey, this is your site
”
Whoa! Whoever that “Jimmy” guy is, he has my respect! To think, somebody else who gives enough of a shit about your pitiful little roadie ass to bother chasing down all your varous lines of bullshit — it does my “Backwoodds Amateur” heart good.
March 6th, 2009 at 7:03 pm
“My IP is in lighting shows, fashion show catwalk design, showcase ventilation and certain proprietary effects, I have no music IP at all and I have no affiliation with the recording industry, either.”
Uh, so tell us all exactly how your daughter will be able to “leverage” that IP “as she sees fit, until expiration takes it from her”.
How in the HELL does one go about “leveraging” IP related to “lighting shows, fashion show catwalk design, showcase ventilation(!!!!) and certain proprietary effects?” What, do you have a patent on a special type of dry-ice machine or something?
I mean, come on, seriously — “showcase ventilation????” And somehow, you figured you could intimidate me — and everybody else you ever “debate” on blogs etc. — like that? Damn.
Did you used to make/sell “special” brownies at Dead shows, by any chance?
(Methinks you did, Sambo, ‘cuz the only way you could be THIS dumb THIS often is if you’re stoned out of your mind.
March 6th, 2009 at 7:08 pm
“Make no mistake, it is PIRACY that is compelling the legislatures to dismantle privacy laws and NObody really wants that. Certainly not me. It’s YOU guys who are doing this. Supermarkets, auto dealerships, pharmaceuticals YOU NAME IT all work with far higher profit margins than music, but we don’t see “pirates” in those material industries because THAT takes real courage and conviction, something that’s never been present in a group who hides while pilfering online and then squeals like a piggie with every new law that reveals them further.”
Suure, Sam — “NObody” wants privacy laws gutted, but it just sorta kinda “has to” happen. (Just like nobody really “wanted” waterboarding, but it just sorta kinda needed to happen for reasons of “national security”. Just like “nobody” really wanted to destroy the public domain, but Disney really, really really really NEEDED that extra twenty years, etc. etc. at nauseum boo hoo hoo, you poor little shill.
Yet again, you insist on claiming that Intellectual “property” and physical objects are equivalent — despite having it explained to you over and over and over that they’re not. I challenge you right now, Sam: name me ONE instance where the title to PHYSICAL porperty is set up to expire. Oh wait, you can’t, because there ISN’T any.
(But then again, what should I expect from a hopped-up lightshow-designer with delusions of grandeur?)
Honestly, Sam — pitiful.
March 6th, 2009 at 7:14 pm
“If you read what I post anywhere you’ll find my arguments are consistent and meticulously legal, which is how any imbecile could see this is going to play out. If pirates were half as organized and focused upon finding their way to their goals legally, they could be a significant force for good. Instead, you shoplift digitally while harming our network, and you represent yourself here as a bunch of shortsighted takers which is why the courts don’t respect you. What do YOU DO FOR A LIVING Jimmy? Tell us. Do YOU get paid for your work?”
Oh goody goody gumdrops, mercy mercy me — he even used the fucked-up nonsense about “so what do YOU do for a living” on other boards, too? Holy christ, this guy’s a piece of work. How in the fuck do you answer a question like that “correctly”, I ask you?
1. If you’re not a lawyer or lobbyist, he claims it’s “not your area of expertise”.
2. If you ARE a lawyer (like Ray, for example), he dismisses that out of hand and classes you as an ambulance chaser.
3. If you happen to live in Pennsylvania, you’re royally fucked, because he’ll try to use that against you.
Wow, this stuff is fuckin’ classic, thanks Ezee!
I was BEGINNING to take this personally, but now I see that him for what he is: a hopped-up lighting guy who figures kissing RIAA ass is a great way to ensure that expiration doesn’t “take” anything from his daughter.
Damn.
March 6th, 2009 at 7:20 pm
“Certainly, I’m no fan of the RIAA who routinely tries to extort me for the use of their music in our shows. But I have my own IP to protect and Jimmy, you just appear to have the same third grade mentality that Mrl exhibits. You probably have NOTHING to protect but your Mom’s computer. LOL.”
Well now, this last little bit IS exciting:
1. “They try to extort me for use of their music in my shows”: well fuck you, you whiny little bitch. If you don’t like the terms-of-use, then shut the fuck up. That’s your mentality towards copyfight/p2p advocates, isn’t it, Sam? Now I’ll never be able to take this stupid, short-sighted fuckwit seriously again, under any circumstances.
You’d THINK (given this last little bitch-fest here, that he’d be in favor of scaled-back copyright terms and a more robust public domain (so as to not HAVE to get “extorted” by the RIAA on a routine basis) — but no, the stupid, sanctimonious jackass doesn’t even seem to be able to connect the dots in a case where the RIAA is FUCKING HIM OVER, too!
Oh, and lets not ignore his nice little jab about Jimmy’s “Mom’s computer (LOL)!”
Holy shit, Sam — are you really that goddamn stupid?
And the saddest part of the whole thing is that the people “debating” him aren’t giving him half the bitch-slapping he gets from me on a routine basis, and he STILL gets all pissy about it.
I repeat: wow.
March 6th, 2009 at 7:25 pm
Next, “P2plover” attempts (as I have) to supply “Sam” with some information:
” P2P Lover says:
September 27, 2008 at 1:36 pm
Sammy Read These!
Study Says Intellectual Property System Should Die:
http://torrentfreak.com/study-…..ie-080911/
http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/papers/pci23.pdf
http://www.law.ed.ac.uk/ahrc/S…../ghosh.asp
http://www.iprcommission.org/p….._study.pdf
This is how ridiculous the RIAA is being. I mean come on WTF! Suing a blogger???:
http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9…..r+Blogging”
Does it work?
Does it EVER work with this stupid bastard?
March 6th, 2009 at 7:28 pm
The fun exchange ends thusly:
“At the end of the day, doing well within the law is smart and we get paid, believe me, over and over and over. Pirates are just stupid and Jammie is the poster girl for you all. Go to jail, then, and see if we care. That’s how this will work out over time, because your squinty-eyed stupidity is the most telling attribute of this whole sad affair. See ya.”
Jon: seriously — I’ve deconstructed this stupid bastard over and over again — taken him to task for his bullshit — reduced him to the level of sputtering incoherence and personal attacks, and he still comes back.
Please, somebody else debate Roadie-boy next time — It’s pretty fuckin’ boring at this point.
(Back to the woodshed I go — my corncob pipe went out while I was typing this, my banjo needs a-tunin’, and the Missus says the squirrel’s done gettin’ cold)
March 6th, 2009 at 7:46 pm
Ezee:
I’m not gonna bother to “deconstruct” yet another whine-fest from “Sam-Spam-The-Rodie-Man”, simply because after you’ve done it as many times as I have, it’s no fun anymore. I mean, after that stuff where he’s complaining about how the RIAA “try to extort” him for the use of “their” music — BUT HE STILL KISSES THEIR ASS — what more is there to say, really?
Sometimes you just gotta admit defeat, and, quite frankly, I’m defeated: there’s absolutely no possibility of EVER reasoning with him, or even getting him to understand the issues at all. When we try, we just get insults and bullshit.
Wow. I’m deeply, deeply dissapointed. Up until this last thing, I still tried to hold out some kind of grudging respect for Sam, but no more. Between all the bitch-slapping he gets from me, and watching his antics over on Ezee.se, it’s stunningly clear there’s no point.
As I said — wow.
March 6th, 2009 at 8:22 pm
For some reason the links you posted a getting distorted… just posting it here for convenience:
ezee.se/articles-blog/2008/07/03/buy-your-mugger-a-gun/
March 6th, 2009 at 8:25 pm
“The fun exchange ends …
That it does. That’s it for a while. A LONG while.
Sam He Was.
Cheers!
March 6th, 2009 at 8:45 pm
and all I got was a ‘cute, surfer’.
when in fact, you never addressed any of the numerous factual incongruities in your philosophy that were posed to you by Henry. Not even the miniscule attempt by posting your ‘lady’ friends youtube extravaganza. if ‘cute, surfer’ is any indication, you must be either a mentally stunted sycophant, or a spineless RIAA mouthpiece.. im guessing either/or…
I would have stepped in, but Henry is just absolutely wearing your shill ass out with fact after fact. its more enjoyable watching you get outclassed with your own rhetoric to jump in and help in any fashion.
this thread in itself contains every retort to your narrowminded view of IP to even bother to respond. well done Henry, my count is Henry 12, Sammy 0. outclassed by a vermit eating ‘vanian, hahahahahahha
don’t go away mad SammyPoo, just go away.
March 6th, 2009 at 9:07 pm
(Blushes modestly, bows, and exits stage left)
March 6th, 2009 at 10:43 pm
@Henry, please contact me, Id like to invite you to our underground. You have an intellect that would accent [us].
March 6th, 2009 at 11:11 pm
there is an organized underground,, something the MAFIAA cannot grasp, and it has been organized for decades prior to the RIAA sue em all campaign, that distinguishes a community beyond the reach of stupid mortals such as yourself Sam, that every increasingly devotes their time to circumventing the ‘roadblocks’ that your puppetmasters fail to understand. While you continuwesly fail to ‘understand’ the current pirate climate and devise circumvention tactics, we are ‘fluid’ in nature, and compensate for your lack of forward thinking along the lines of what you consider ‘piracy’. You are an idiot Sam, something to be laughed at by the masses of concerted efforts hell bent on ‘overcoming’ your narrowmindedness, your political ‘agenda’, your all encompassing fight against the ‘pirates’ of the world.
this may be a drunk rant, but its better than anything you have posted to date…..
we are, and we are not going anywhere.
stw
March 6th, 2009 at 11:26 pm
Surfer:
Thanks, man — cant tell you what that means (even though we’ve never met in person, I really “get” where you are, if that makes any sense).
Chug one for me. I’d say for Jon as well, but what with his history and all that might come off sounding wrong somehow, but you get what I mean.
Anyhow, I want you and Dredsnik to do me a favor here:
Anytime you happen to see “Sam” attempting to weasel his way into a conversation here, or on another blog, polluting it with his jabbering, just paste in the link to this thread. DO NOT bother to “debate” the guy in any form. Do NOT attempt to give him the benefit of the doubt. Don’t even try, because it won’t work.
As to the invite to your underground?
Hmm….Dunno what to say to that, really. How would I go about contacting you?
March 6th, 2009 at 11:28 pm
http://www.p2pnet.net/story/18703#comment-969168
March 6th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
Surfer:
I’ve thought about it more (yeah, ten minutes whooooo!)
1. Despite my ability to (occasionally) put together a halfway-coherent presentation of ideas, and my increasing disdain for the thuggish bullshit of the RIAA and their fans, I’ll be the first one to tell you that I am neither “Techie” enough or clever enough to possibly be any kind of “underground” asset. Honest, dude — making Sam look stupid and incoherent really isn’t all that hard.
To be honest, don’t take this the wrong way, but I’ve got my own projects to do. There’s at least as much needs doing “above ground” as “underground.” In fact, after some discussion with Jon recently, I’ve decided to begin formulating some ideas, and stuff.
Thanks for the invite, Surfer. I don’t wanna sound paranoid, but the more I think about it, a public invitation to join an “underground” doesn’t seem particularly secure. I can honestly do more for “the cause” here.
Thanks, tho. I really mean it.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:45 am
and totally honored, you are actually doing more good in your decisiveness than any pirate ‘put to words’.
its kewl to say no, that is an option. but the exercise was only an extended hand, nothing more, no disrespect implied from debate.i understand your ideology now, and actually apologize for previous preconceptions and jump-to-conclustions on my part. you are a proven intellect that i will further respect.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:54 am
Right back at ya, man.