From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V9 #209 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Friday, July 28 2000 Volume 09 : Number 209 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: When Robyn Gets To Be Huge... [MARKEEFE@aol.com] Nixon now, more than ever! [The Great Quail ] Re: a whole mess of crumbs [HSatterfld@aol.com] is it me? [BLATZMAN@aol.com] Green Party platform ["Andrew D. Simchik" ] NYC: swamp denizens attack big apple! [dmw ] somebody ring it [Eclipse ] Re: is it me? [John Barrington-Jones ] RE: is it me? ["Brian Huddell" ] RE: is it me? [Stephen Buckalew ] RE: is it me? [John Barrington-Jones ] Re: is it me? [Aaron Mandel ] RE: is it me? ["Brian Huddell" ] Re: the italian job ["Proctology Now" ] eb all over my "hard drive" ["Proctology Now" ] RIAA v. Napster and other reasons to vote for Nader [Capuchin ] what'll really happen with this napster shit (from someone who'd know) [J] RE: Napster Rules ["James Hadfield" ] Geek Question #21 ["brian nupp" ] RE: is it me? ["Brian Huddell" ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 11:27:45 EDT From: MARKEEFE@aol.com Subject: Re: When Robyn Gets To Be Huge... In a message dated 7/26/00 5:20:05 PM, altoflaco@yahoo.com writes: << http://users.tinyonline.co.uk/bigh/bigh/intropage.htm >> I don't know. They just aren't . . . *orange* enough. - -----Michael K., himself a collector of water treatment facilities ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 12:04:44 -0400 From: The Great Quail Subject: Nixon now, more than ever! >BTW, the election of 1876 was the only one where the candidate who got >the most popular votes failed to win the most Electoral votes (although >1960 came close). And Nixon *should* have won it! If it weren't for those sneaky perfidious "machine politics" Democrats fixing the vote in Illinois and Texas, Richard M. Nixon would have been president in 1960! Damn you, Mayor Daley! Curses! - --Henry Kissquailinger - -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The Great Quail, K.S.C. (riverrun Discordian Society, Kibroth-hattaavah Branch) http://www.w-rabbit.com/gerbilstuff/gerbilbabies15a.html "People that are really very weird can get into sensitive positions and have a tremendous impact on history." --Vice President Dan Quayle ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 12:41:02 EDT From: HSatterfld@aol.com Subject: Re: a whole mess of crumbs kenster@MIT.EDU writes: > 'jfk' and 'platoon' are the two generally acknowledged masterworks; but > every one of his films that i've seen has been impressive: 'nbk', 'fourth of > july', 'wallstreet', 'doors', 'talk radio', 'nixon'. And don't forget the masterful Hervé Villechaize performance in Ollie's debut, 'Seizure'. (Oh, OK, forget it if you would like.) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 12:52:27 EDT From: BLATZMAN@aol.com Subject: is it me? I am one of those people who have made purchases BECAUSE OF Napster. Is it just me? Has anyone else on this made a purchase because of Napster? dave ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 10:42:40 -0700 (PDT) From: "Andrew D. Simchik" Subject: Green Party platform > From: Christopher Gross [...] > Secondly: sure, the ideals you listed above sound great. So do the > Republican's professed ideals of "prosperity, freedom and personal > liberty." *Anyone* can have great-sounding ideals, and most political > parties do. But the practical programs they propose to realize those > ideals are another story. I think most Americans, if they read the > Green > Party platform, would consider it "loony," and would henceforward be > more > likely to consider all environmentalists loony. I, personally, also > find > parts of the party platform "loony," or at least impractical. [...] It's not hard to find planks of the Republican and Democratic platforms that sound unappetizing, though, if not loony. Plus I put as much faith in party platforms as I do in campaign promises -- a Ouija board often produces truer prophecies. If by some extraordinary circumstance Nader actually were to take office (I'm thinking Anton Chekhov might have a better chance), how many of those planks do you actually believe would become reality? I would settle for having a president in office who sincerely intended to act to reduce the power of corporations (never happen -- not from the executive branch, anyway), to enact stricter environmental controls, and to close the income gap just a little bit. As a callow youth of 18, I believed Clinton might sincerely intend to act on his stated convictions, and that belief was not well rewarded (on the other hand, he was my least favored candidate in the primaries, so I shouldn't have been too surprised). Drew ===== Andrew D. Simchik: drew at stormgreen dot com http://www.stormgreen.com/ __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites. http://invites.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 13:47:22 -0400 (EDT) From: dmw Subject: NYC: swamp denizens attack big apple! NYC Fegs and Loudfans to our shock and consternation, Feckless Beast's sister band, the estimable Lesbian Boy, are calling it suddenly quits. their final performance will be next saturday, august 5th, at Meow Mix, 269 E. Houston (212 254 0688) the club sez LB at 9, Delores Slim at 10. because the thought of never once more hearing some of the Lesbian Boy classics, like "Satan Stole My Muscle Car" and "Rock'n'Roll Cow," that aren't featured on their album _Like White on Trash_ makes me all oogly inside, i'm trekking up to NYC with a mess of recording gear and intent to preserve whatever debacle ensues. For the virtually 100% of you unfamiliar with the charms of LB, they're sort of like Iggy Pop crossed with the Cramps, drowning in a sea of irony. they're not always good, per se, but they're always entertaining. i suspect playing in actual lesbian bar will drag frontman "Comely" Mike Montana to unplumbed new depths of stage behavior. i'd encourage any or all intrigued by the description to make the scene, of course, but my plan is to take a friday afternoon train up, so if loud and/or fegfolk would be interested in friday evening/saturdayday hanging out not necessarily committing you to attending the evening performance, do drop me a line. (i'll be leaving early sunday to hustle back for rehearsal w/band #2.) - -- d. - - oh no, you've just read mail from doug = dmw@radix.net - get yr pathos - - www.pathetic-caverns.com -- books, flicks, tunes, etc. = reviews - - www.fecklessbeast.com -- angst, guilt, fear, betrayal! = guitar pop ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 11:04:16 -0700 (PDT) From: Eclipse Subject: somebody ring it http://www.astradyne.co.uk/cheese/ - - Eclipse np: Ghost In The Shell soundtrack ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 11:08:52 -0700 (PDT) From: John Barrington-Jones Subject: Re: is it me? - --- BLATZMAN@aol.com wrote: > I am one of those people who have made purchases > BECAUSE OF Napster. Is it > just me? Has anyone else on this made a purchase > because of Napster? i've made many! here are just a few off the top of my head cat power - moon pix xtc - apple venus vol. 1 moby - play skavoovie & the epitones - ripe john linnell - state songs kraftwerk - computer world =jbj= __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites. http://invites.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 13:47:59 -0500 From: "Brian Huddell" Subject: RE: is it me? I know a lot of people who have purchased an album after downloading all or part of it. But I have found, somewhat to my surprise, that I personally have done so only once. My MP3 collection is big (almost 600 albums including boxed sets) and really well indexed, and I only collect albums at 160kbps or higher so the compromise in sound quality is minimal. My DVD player handles CDRs full of MP3s so I'm not tied to my computer. Bottom line is I don't have any practical motivation to replace my MP3s with CDs. That leaves ethical motivations, and I have to admit with some shame that those just aren't very compelling when compared with the cost of replacing hundreds of albums. It's not going to happen. I suspect that the recent studies showing that Napster et al have helped sales reflect the fact that a lot of people aren't entirely comfortable with MP3 yet. As the sub-$100 hardware proliferates and people start to realize that MP3 music can be free AND practical I imagine many of the music industry's fears will be realized. > --- BLATZMAN@aol.com wrote: > > I am one of those people who have made purchases > > BECAUSE OF Napster. Is it > > just me? Has anyone else on this made a purchase > > because of Napster? > > i've made many! here are just a few off the top of my > head > > cat power - moon pix > xtc - apple venus vol. 1 > moby - play > skavoovie & the epitones - ripe > john linnell - state songs > kraftwerk - computer world > > =jbj= > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites. > http://invites.yahoo.com/ > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 15:18:17 -0400 From: Stephen Buckalew Subject: RE: is it me? Just to be *devils advocate*, as I'm pretty much a dullard deviod of pesky opinions: I sure would rather *steal* a lifetimes worth of food, stereos, appliances, etc. than buying them in the store. Can I come to your house and take all your stuff? I didnt think you'd mind, it really is only the money you made from your labor. I have my own philosophies about whether music should even be sold commercially. But the fact is that people (artists, the record industry, and distributors) did spend alot of money to provide you with that music in a recorded format. At 01:47 PM 7/27/00 -0500, you wrote: >and I have to admit with some shame that >those just aren't very compelling when compared with the cost of replacing >hundreds of albums. It's not going to happen. > > >> --- BLATZMAN@aol.com wrote: >> > I am one of those people who have made purchases >> > BECAUSE OF Napster. Is it >> > just me? Has anyone else on this made a purchase >> > because of Napster? >> >> i've made many! here are just a few off the top of my >> head >> >> cat power - moon pix >> xtc - apple venus vol. 1 >> moby - play >> skavoovie & the epitones - ripe >> john linnell - state songs >> kraftwerk - computer world >> >> =jbj= >> >> >> __________________________________________________ >> Do You Yahoo!? >> Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites. >> http://invites.yahoo.com/ >> > > > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 13:10:25 -0700 (PDT) From: John Barrington-Jones Subject: RE: is it me? I'm as selfish as the next guy, but for some reason, when it comes to full albums, in most cases i want the real tamale; the case, artwork, etc. i want the original. other than a few box sets, and one cd that is available only in south america, i have yet to download an entire album on mp3 and not buy the original. i use mp3's for two purposes: 1) obtain songs that i know i do not want to go out and buy on a whole cd--- oldies, one hit wonders, cheese whiz, nostalgia. 2) broaden my musical horizons, expose myself to new bands, learn some musical history. np: a Stranglers mp3 of "Who Wants The World". - --- Brian Huddell wrote: > I know a lot of people who have purchased an album > after downloading all or > part of it. But I have found, somewhat to my > surprise, that I personally > have done so only once. My MP3 collection is big > (almost 600 albums > including boxed sets) and really well indexed, and I > only collect albums at > 160kbps or higher so the compromise in sound quality > is minimal. My DVD > player handles CDRs full of MP3s so I'm not tied to > my computer. Bottom > line is I don't have any practical motivation to > replace my MP3s with CDs. > That leaves ethical motivations, and I have to admit > with some shame that > those just aren't very compelling when compared with > the cost of replacing > hundreds of albums. It's not going to happen. > > I suspect that the recent studies showing that > Napster et al have helped > sales reflect the fact that a lot of people aren't > entirely comfortable with > MP3 yet. As the sub-$100 hardware proliferates and > people start to realize > that MP3 music can be free AND practical I imagine > many of the music > industry's fears will be realized. > > > --- BLATZMAN@aol.com wrote: > > > I am one of those people who have made purchases > > > BECAUSE OF Napster. Is it > > > just me? Has anyone else on this made a > purchase > > > because of Napster? > > > > i've made many! here are just a few off the top of > my > > head > > > > cat power - moon pix > > xtc - apple venus vol. 1 > > moby - play > > skavoovie & the epitones - ripe > > john linnell - state songs > > kraftwerk - computer world > > > > =jbj= > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites. > > http://invites.yahoo.com/ > > > > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites. http://invites.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 16:17:22 -0400 (EDT) From: Aaron Mandel Subject: Re: is it me? On Thu, 27 Jul 2000 BLATZMAN@aol.com wrote: > I am one of those people who have made purchases BECAUSE OF Napster. > Is it just me? Has anyone else on this made a purchase because of > Napster? i have, though i've also *not* made purchases because i was interested in something but checked out a few songs on Napster and disliked them. (yes, i try to make sure what i'm hearing is a representative sample, not songs disowned by the artist, etc.) people who download and keep songs from Napster that they could otherwise buy: i take it you don't tip at restaurants either? a ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 16:05:25 -0500 From: "Brian Huddell" Subject: RE: is it me? > people who download and keep songs from Napster that they could otherwise > buy: i take it you don't tip at restaurants either? This will get very boring very quickly, but here's my last volley. I buy as many CDs as I can afford to buy, period. As my salaries have gone from pathetic to less pathetic the number of CDs I buy has steadily increased. 2 years ago I started getting music for free on the Internet, and the number of CDs I buy has continued to increase. As far as the music industry is concerned I'm a better consumer now than I've been at any other point in my life. The only difference is that I now have a lot more music than I used to. I'm inclined to agree that collecting this ill-gotten music is wrong in some very real sense. In fact, my son is about to be old enough that I'm going to feel a need to conceal the fact that Daddy is stealing music with his computer. I know many of you live lives that don't involve compromise or rationalization so you may find this difficult understand. In the restaurant analogy above someone has done a service specifically for me and if I don't tip them they will have done it for next to nothing. But if you accept as true the fact that I buy as many CDs as I possibly can and still pay my bills, and that the number of albums I download bears no relationship to the number of CDs I buy, how can you extend that analogy to downloading music from the Net? I'm not talking about the rightness or wrongness of it. I'm talking about doing to an artist what you do to a waiter when you don't tip them. I really don't see it. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 15:08:33 PDT From: "Proctology Now" Subject: Re: the italian job received this note from my italian connection. don't see it listed at the auditorium, but there you are: And......... I have just read today on a weekly music insert of most popular newspaper that a date of Robyn has been announced for August 19th in Alberobello; I cannot believe it! Alberobello is way down south of Italy....... how can it be? I would like to organize a couple of show in North of Italy where I have contacts; ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 15:15:18 PDT From: "Proctology Now" Subject: eb all over my "hard drive" the tipping analogy is perhaps not perfect, as the diner *does* (presumably) pay in full for the meal. but if we accept the courtney love argument at face value (and i can't determine any reason why we should not), then it might indeed be rather a polite act to send a premium *directly to the artist* for each "file" downloaded -- making sure to keep the rekkid company out of the loop. of course, not owning a hard drive, this is merely a theoretical discussion for me. any thoughts on netdrive.com, incidentally? i read their privacy statement, and rather than reassuring, it actually looked to me quite scary. ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 15:20:34 -0700 (PDT) From: Capuchin Subject: RIAA v. Napster and other reasons to vote for Nader I'm sure you were all waiting for my diatribe on the subject. Here goes. On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Bayard wrote: > please pass the gnutella... > http://cbs.marketwatch.com/news/current/napster.htx?source=htx/http2_mw Let me quote and rebut a few choice pieces from this article: The Recording Industry Association of America sued the online music store in December, saying Napster encourages an unrestrained, illegal, online bazaar. The suit was brought on behalf of 18 separate record labels. Online music store? Does anyone consider Napster's service a "store"? This is the music industry's attempt to make it appear as though Napster profits from the distribution of copyrighted material. Napster could be considered a carrier service and, like the telephone company or FedEx, should not be held responsible for the content distributed through that service. By trying to get Napster to filter out the copyrighted material, the RIAA is attempting to get Napster to "look" at the data they pass and therefore lose their carrier status. I work at a telecommunications company. And if we filter ANY content, we become liable for ALL content. We dont' filter content, therefore we're not liable for content. This is a solid defense for services like Napster. Napster ultimately could be found guilty of encouraging some 20 million of its subscribers to share recorded songs in digital format via its service - -- without permission from the songs' artists or the record companies that own the songs. First, this is more propaganda from the RIAA. The RIAA does not represent the copyrights held by artists. The RIAA represents copyrights on recordings held by recording companies. Nearly every recording company contract maintains that recordings made are the property of the recording company and not the artist. But perhaps more importantly, here is NOTHING in the legislative or judicial record that says a person needs permission from a copyright holder to distribute for non-commercial purposes. It has continuously been upheld by the courts that ALL non-commercial copying is legal. I recommend reading this sound-bite-size interview with David Boies (former DoJ attourney in the Microsoft case, which he handily won) who has taken on the Napster defense: Judge Patel shot Napster down on nearly every one of its defenses. The judge agreed that most individuals access Napster to make copies of albums for personal use -- not for profit. Still, she contends that Napster is taking money out of the pocket of record companies since individuals don't have to buy recordings. Understand first, that Judge Patel is the judge that granted the preliminary injunction BEFORE trial. Injunctions of this sort are filed by plaintiffs to put someone out of business before they can really make their case in defense of allegations. The judge is WAY off base here. Saying that Napster is taking money out of the hands of the record companies is ridiculous. Is it taking the money out of the hands of newspaper writers when you read an article aloud on the bus? Does that mean reading aloud should be illegal? You can say there's a difference, but only in degree... in the number of people that get to hear it and in the slight interpretation your reading might give the article. But in that sense, the sharing of digital music (never called that by the press, of course, it's always "trading"... because nobody would ever give something away for free, why, that just makes no sense! but the simple fact remains that I've never "traded" data in my life. I've traded media, but never data. I suppose this somewhat made sense in the BBS days of upload/download ratios, but gone for the most part.) is LESS infringing on the author because there is less "interpretation" on the part of the person sharing and it is truer to the source material. In other words, there is no legislative or judicial or Constitutional RIGHT to make money off of your work. There are protections against misuse of labor and protections against physical property theft and theft of money, sure. There are also these other, temporary rights called Copyright and Patent. These are DISTINCT from the other protections of property. These specifically grant the exclusive commercial right to authors and inventors to their respective works. This is not a right to MAKE MONEY on your work, simply a protection that prevents OTHER PEOPLE from making money on your work without your permission. I could be granted an exclusive right by the USPTO to Poop-On-A-Stick, but that doesn't mean I have any right to make money from it. The commercial viability of the work itself is distinct from the protection granted. In this age of information, the commercial viability of information is very low. The commercial value of a thing is inversely proportional to supply and directly proportional to demand. On the demand side, you can say "well, lots of people want "Enter Sandman" by Metallica, so "Enter Sandman" by Metallica is valuable!" and that works to a point. But in an age of digital information, supply is infinite. I can make as many identical and perfect copies of "Enter Sandman" by Metallica as I like. There will never be a scarcity. As supply goes to infinity, value must approach zero. "Enter Sandman" by Metallica is infinitely reproducable and therefore without commercial value. Now, a live performance of "Enter Sandman" by Metallica itself is rare (they can only do so many shows) and in high demand (they can pack arenas all over), so that is quite commercially valuable. And it can easily be argued that proliferation of recordings of said performance only serves to increase demand for live performances and does nothing at all toward increasing the supply (it's not gonna make Metallica die younger, for example, or prevent them from doing shows as frequently as they choose). Anyway, those are just a few of the arguments. You've read my previous rant about the Constitutional protection of copyright and patent and how it is being misapplied in today's legal landscape, so I won't bore you with it here. Jeme. - -- _______________________________________________ Capuchin capuchin@bitmine.net Jeme A Brelin _______________________________________________ [cc] counter-copyright http://www.openlaw.org ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 02:47:11 +0200 From: "Noe Shalev" Subject: Re: is it me? >I am one of those people who have made purchases BECAUSE OF Napster. Is it >just me? Has anyone else on this made a purchase because of Napster? > Not only ou not the only one, most napster user do the same: Study: Napster users buy more music http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-2306997.html?tag=st.ne.1002.bgif.ni ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 17:52:08 -0700 (PDT) From: Jeff Dwarf Subject: what'll really happen with this napster shit (from someone who'd know) "It's hard for artists who've reached a certain level of economic means to be taken seriously when they start talking about copyright issues," David Bowie told reporters earlier this week while attending the Yahoo! Internet Life Online Music Awards. "I will pose a scenario, though: In six months' time, when the copyright issues have been resolved, the record labels join up just in time to find a way where you have to pay to use it. Napster will be one of many." ===== "Life is just a series of dogs." -- George Carlin __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites. http://invites.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 01:22:14 GMT From: "James Hadfield" Subject: RE: Napster Rules > >This will get very boring very quickly, but here's my last volley. I buy >as >many CDs as I can afford to buy, period. As my salaries have gone from >pathetic to less pathetic the number of CDs I buy has steadily increased. >2 >years ago I started getting music for free on the Internet, and the number >of CDs I buy has continued to increase. As far as the music industry is >concerned I'm a better consumer now than I've been at any other point in my >life. The only difference is that I now have a lot more music than I used >to. I'm inclined to agree that collecting this ill-gotten music is wrong >in >some very real sense. In fact, my son is about to be old enough that I'm >going to feel a need to conceal the fact that Daddy is stealing music with >his computer. I know many of you live lives that don't involve compromise >or rationalization so you may find this difficult understand. > >In the restaurant analogy above someone has done a service specifically for >me and if I don't tip them they will have done it for next to nothing. But >if you accept as true the fact that I buy as many CDs as I possibly can and >still pay my bills, and that the number of albums I download bears no >relationship to the number of CDs I buy, how can you extend that analogy to >downloading music from the Net? I'm not talking about the rightness or >wrongness of it. I'm talking about doing to an artist what you do to a >waiter when you don't tip them. I really don't see it. If you go to a restaurant because of the excellent service, then the restaurant making money off of that excellent service should pay its employees to reflect their abilities. No? Or have I just seen too much or too little of Reservoir Dogs? Downloading music from Napster is stealing in much the same way that saving a jpeg and sending it to a friend to enjoy is theft. Which is to say, not at all. Not in a digital realm, anyway. The availability of software like Napster in the digital age is guaranteed by the nature of the medium. Napster is reality - despite all attempts to dismiss or do away with it, it will survive. So learn to love it and accept it as just. Methinks this culture is too hung up on commerial value... ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 00:03:58 EDT From: "brian nupp" Subject: Geek Question #21 On the Rhino release of Groovy Deco, the last track Kingdom of Love says it is a "previously unissued mix." Is this the same version that was released on the Nightride to Trinidad 12''? Also, this is as far as I know the only studio song where both Matthew Seligman and Andy Metcalfe appear on the same song. Thanks Brian N. ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 08:34:23 -0500 From: "Brian Huddell" Subject: RE: is it me? The opposite of my downloading somebody's album isn't my buying it. I buy all the CDs I can afford. The thing I'm doing that bothers you is listening to music that I haven't paid for. Suppose I acquire a conscience and decide to atone by throwing out all my MP3s. There, they're gone. Now everything's fine, right? No? So it's the listening that constitutes an injustice to the artist, not just the having? How many times do I have to listen before I've taken food off the artist's table? I'll listen to entire albums (that I haven't paid for) over and over in my friends houses and cars. A few people have said they feel ok about downloading and listening to something as long as they don't keep it, or make sure they buy it later. But the listening is the crime right? I'm suggesting that there's a gray area here and the analogies people are trying to apply aren't particularly gray. I'm surprised that there are so many fegs who didn't spend hours taping their friends' records (and taping their records for their friends) in high school and college. That seemed an essential formative activity for music geeks. > Just to be *devils advocate*, as I'm pretty much a dullard deviod of pesky > opinions: I sure would rather *steal* a lifetimes worth of food, stereos, > appliances, etc. than buying them in the store. Can I come to your house > and take all your stuff? I didnt think you'd mind, it really is only the > money you made from your labor. > > I have my own philosophies about whether music should even be sold > commercially. But the fact is that people (artists, the record industry, > and distributors) did spend alot of money to provide you with > that music in > a recorded format. > > At 01:47 PM 7/27/00 -0500, you wrote: > >and I have to admit with some shame that > >those just aren't very compelling when compared with the cost of > replacing > >hundreds of albums. It's not going to happen. > > > > > >> --- BLATZMAN@aol.com wrote: > >> > I am one of those people who have made purchases > >> > BECAUSE OF Napster. Is it > >> > just me? Has anyone else on this made a purchase > >> > because of Napster? > >> > >> i've made many! here are just a few off the top of my > >> head > >> > >> cat power - moon pix > >> xtc - apple venus vol. 1 > >> moby - play > >> skavoovie & the epitones - ripe > >> john linnell - state songs > >> kraftwerk - computer world > >> > >> =jbj= > >> > >> > >> __________________________________________________ > >> Do You Yahoo!? > >> Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites. > >> http://invites.yahoo.com/ > >> > > > > > > > ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V9 #209 *******************************