LOL

R.I.P. Lilly Allen’s Career.

Even after this drama, apparently she is in the lineup for the Big day Out 2010 festival here in Aus lol > http://bigdayout.com & http://tinyurl.com/y9rc2jq

I have absolutely no control over what gets used as “headline” for the stuff I submit. That’s Jon Newton (the guy who actually runs the site.)
I’m just a (fairly) frequent contributor. To be honest, I used to be on the “other side” of this stuff. A lot of my earliest interaction with p2pnet was to basically come around, post inflamatory “troll” type of stuff accusing p2p users of just not wanting to pay for stuff, etc. Typical,grade-A, RIAA-style bullshit.

But then somebody (I forget exactly who) dared me to read Lawrence Lessig’s book “Free culture”. Well, one thing led to another, and now here I am. For some reason I still haven’t quite figured out, Jon hasn’t quite figured out how much of a complete prick I actually am, so he keeps publishing the stuff I submit.

I’ve been in a music group for twenty years now, but I don’t bring the other guys into *my* p2p advocacy or copyright reform advocacy or whatever, because I can’t speak for anybody else. It takes time for people to “come around”, and they have to do it on their own.

I’ve been working on some solo projects for year — lost three albums worth of stuff when mp3.com got destroyed, and turned into the piece of crap it is now. I guess I should have realized what was up back then, but it took up until sometime in 2006 for me to really start changing my viewpoint on this stuff.

Sorry to ramble — I tend to do that too, as you can see.

Thats what I was trying to describe, but for some reason went on a bit… For some reason your article didn’t seem to come across as clear as that to me either! Maybe write another article with that line as a headline?

The trouble is that the mainstream press has fallen for it, and the public at large are being horribly mislead as a result.

“I think this is wrong”.

Of course it’s wrong, which is why I wrote the article. People need to understand that the FAC is nothing but another corporate front-group, and it’s whole purpose is to get a “watered-down” put through. If they REALLY ‘got it’ in regard to p2p/copyright etc, they’d be lobbying for drastically shorter copyright terms, or protection of noncommercial file-sharing or etc., but they’re not.
What they ARE doing is throwing their support behind the corporate music industry’s latest anti-p2p spokesdrone, and advocating the slightly ‘better’ option of throtting as opposed to full-out disconnection.

What’s sad, is that people are actually taking them seriously. Over on Torrentfreak I remember seeing how people were “encouraged’ by their supposedly pro-p2p rhetoric (about how it’s a promotion tool etc.) My immediate question was how folks who think it’s a valuable promotion tool would want to penalize people for using it.

Somebody needs to call bullshit on that.

Doug:
Agreed 100%