From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V10 #69 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Friday, March 9 2001 Volume 10 : Number 069 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: tapermaniax! [Eric Loehr ] Re: tapermaniax! ["Jason R. Thornton" ] Re: tapermaniax! [Rob Gronotte ] Re: tapermaniax! [dmw ] Buy me a Soft Boys t-shirt? ["Gene Hopstetter, Jr." ] Re: tapermaniax! [Rob Gronotte ] Re: Quiz! [Glen Uber ] take this in rememberance ["ross taylor" ] Re: tapermaniax! [Eric Loehr ] Re: Cathode Ray Gun [The Great Quail ] Re: seriously OT DRM grumbles. [Viv Lyon ] Re: Cathode Ray Gun [GSS ] tapemania [Bayard ] delurking to push streaming content [DDerosa5@aol.com] Re: tapermaniax! ["brian nupp" ] Re: Cathode Ray Gun [Eb ] Re: seriously OT DRM grumbles. ["JH3" ] Re: Cathode Ray Gun [woj ] Re: US Copyright law [Capuchin ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 13:54:26 -0500 From: Eric Loehr Subject: Re: tapermaniax! I certainly have no objections to this stuff being on spleensmaniax! , but would also happily belong to a separate taper/tradermaniax list. However the details work out, it's a great idea! Eric "this message recounts as my vote" At 12:17 PM 3/9/01 -0500, recount chocula wrote: >some more "has anybody transferred this to cd yet?" requests. > >the 6/21/00 great american music hall and 6/22/00 sweetwater shows. >someone's asked me for a copies of both on cd. i have first gen cassette >dubs of eddie's recordings which i would prefer not to transfer if i can >avoid it. has anyone done the transfer? are there better recordings? > >also, is there any interest in a tapermaniax mailing list for discussion >about recording robyn gigs, coordinating transfers, trading, etc.? i know >bayard thinks it's a good idea. anyone else? would the feg populance be >annoyed if such talk happened on fegmaniax? > >woj ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 11:07:22 -0800 From: "Jason R. Thornton" Subject: Re: tapermaniax! At 12:17 PM 3/9/01 -0500, recount chocula wrote: >would the feg populance be >annoyed if such talk happened on fegmaniax? As someone who has almost zero interest in taping, and is too flaky to really get involved in trading much, I have to say that I would absolutely NOT be annoyed by such talk taking place on fegmaniax. I mean, this really is, first and foremost, what this forum is intended for, discussions surrounding all aspects of our enjoyment of the music of Robyn Hitchcock. I think that would include all the elements of Hitchcock recorded media trading, the potentially boring details about pre-gig meetings that many of us cannot attend, all the technicalities of coordinating tape-trees, the pounding out of thorough discographies, debates on Robyn's use of reverb, etc. Don't get me wrong. I've probably never posted a single message ON topic to fegmaniax, and I truly adore and value the off-topic discussions and all general bullshitting that goes on here, but I see no reason why the taping talk should be chased offlist. If anything, keeping it here might attract the relatively few newcomers we get to the trading process, or even might finally convince a few of us uninterested non-tapers to become somewhat involved. Any messages that bore me or I think are utter propaganda, I either skim through or delete, without complaint. As long as it's of interest to some segment of our community, I say keep it all coming. "Only the few know the sweetness of the twisted apples." - Sherwood Anderson ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 14:09:49 -0500 (EST) From: Rob Gronotte Subject: Re: tapermaniax! > the mysterious rob: > > On the opinion side, I can't beleive any reasonable person would not > > support reasonable copyright / Intellectual Property rights laws. > That's very interesting, considering that you then list your URL of > secretly-obtained concert recordings. ;) Many would consider it > reasonable to make making those tapes illegal. By the way, I'll be > taping the Soft Boys at 5 gigs if you wanna trade. Well, it is true that most of them were secretly obtained, but it also says on my list that I don't sell recordings, so I don't think I am a hypocrite on this issue. I have even had people write me and offer me fairly large amounts of cash for stuff on my list, all of which I have turned down, quite a big deal for someone currently as poor as I am. (BTW, I know you sent this teasingly, and I didn't take offence.) I should be at the Baltimore show myself, which I assume is one of the ones you are attending, hopefully we can say hi there. Rob Why don't you come up and surf me sometime? --> http://www.patriot.net/users/rob ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 14:32:25 -0500 (EST) From: dmw Subject: Re: tapermaniax! On Fri, 9 Mar 2001, Rob Gronotte wrote: > > reasonable to make making those tapes illegal. By the way, I'll be > > taping the Soft Boys at 5 gigs if you wanna trade. > I should be at the Baltimore show myself, which I assume is one of the > ones you are attending, hopefully we can say hi there. I've been at a few shows which obviously had a few tapers in the audience. Has anyone ever tried bringing multiple source tapes from the same gig into the presence of a decent mixer and trying to compile a single recording that maximizes the strengths & minimzies the weaknesses of the individual recordings? Obviously a mix of soundboard feed and room sound might be the most interesting thing to experiment with, but even when you're mostly dealing with the sound from the pa stacks, all spots in the room are not going to sound equal, and i imagine that some of them would sound better for some tunes than others. and it seems like you might get a better sense of dimensionality in the resulting mix. i doubt this would be possible with analog cassettes, since you'd encounter too many tape speed variations, but you can synch DATs, can't you? This is all fairly hypothetical, of course. My sound reinforcement/ recording gear is analog. Uh, I guess the compressor might be digital... - -- d. np ANdy * Leslie Zwerling _somewhere near pop heaven_ - - 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: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 13:38:56 -0600 From: "Gene Hopstetter, Jr." Subject: Buy me a Soft Boys t-shirt? It looks like I won't be able to catch the Soft Boys live this month, but I would be *most* grateful if someone could buy a t-shirt (and any of the other tasty items which might be sold at the shows) for me. Contact me offlist if you'd like to help me. I'll be glad to send a check to cover the cost of the t-shirt, s&h, and your trouble right away, too. NP: Robert Wyatt, "Shleep" ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 14:40:46 -0500 (EST) From: Rob Gronotte Subject: Re: tapermaniax! > I've been at a few shows which obviously had a few tapers in the audience. > Has anyone ever tried bringing multiple source tapes from the same gig > into the presence of a decent mixer and trying to compile a single > recording that maximizes the strengths & minimzies the weaknesses of the > individual recordings? > > Obviously a mix of soundboard feed and room sound might be the most > interesting thing to experiment with, but even when you're mostly dealing > with the sound from the pa stacks, all spots in the room are not going to > sound equal, and i imagine that some of them would sound better for some > tunes than others. and it seems like you might get a better sense of > dimensionality in the resulting mix. I did have someone with good CD editing software do this for me before with a board and an audience tape of a Yo La Tengo show. It is usually not worth the effort, but in this case the audience tape sounded good on the loud songs, but there was too much chatting in the quiet songs, and the board tape sounded good on the quiet songs but had a bad mix on the loud songs (too much vocals, too little guitar). So the guy mixed them together using a different ratio for each song; more of the board tape in the quiet songs (with a bit of audience just for ambience), and more of the audience tape in the loud songs. It turned out really well. Rob Why don't you come up and surf me sometime? --> http://www.patriot.net/users/rob ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 11:44:56 -0800 (PST) From: Glen Uber Subject: Re: Quiz! On Fri, 9 Mar 2001, Michael R Godwin wrote: >What was the first Beatles single _not_ about love? "Nowhere Man" >What was the final Beatles single? "Real Love" Cheers! - -g- "A person can only work so many hours a day and two's my limit." - --Mike Jasper )+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+( ) ) Glen Uber // uberg at sonic dot net // Santa Rosa, California ) )+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+()+( ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 14:47:24 -0500 From: "ross taylor" Subject: take this in rememberance RH sonic book & SB tickets both came yesterday. I hadn't heard any of the songs before. Ring Them Bones-- C,mon, it rocks! I like organ rockers. Has a big dollop of that Nuggets era greasy kid stuff. I may represent the target audience. Take This in Remembrance-- I think it's a damn fine song, but I may be a sucker for this kind of shit having lost my own father just a few years ago. Plays electric guitar like it was meant to be played by itself. Is his mother still alive? Erie Green Storm Lantern-- This is the sort of thing Jagger should be doing if he had the sense. Mick, it's not too late, you could probably still pull it off ... On the other hand that's OK, we don't need you, we've got somebody else & he does it quite well. The Rolling Stones used to be my favorite band & now they're the big corporation I hate least. Here's one of the poems-- Train These Bubbles I train these bubbles to be good To float away in times of need And in the simple act of greed I breath you in the way I should Oh pouncing girl! Oh beeswing cat! Surrendering between your paws Surrendering between your jaws I am your prey that not be flat I train these bubbles to be mad To clock the language of despair Through matted jagged clotted hair To penetrate your breathing ear And burst inside you, lillypad ... >Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 13:53:35 -0500 (CDT) >From: GSS >The old line hard disk vendors can not survive >without bending to the >desires of the entertainment industry. Just as >all those companies I >listed above will be unable to ignore the >"requirements" of the >entertainment industry. Makes me feel some better about the no TV thing. But isn't it sorta weird that for all these years average Joes/Joesies have had access to fully programmable C*O*M*P*U*T*E*R*S ? I would have made an asterisk box around the word but the keys of this card-punch machine are hard to hit. Eisenhower must've been spinning in grave. >From: GSS >Subject: on a happier note, i guess Hey, y'all-- #!/usr/bin/perl -w # 531-byte qrpff-fast, Keith Winstein and Marc Horowitz # MPEG 2 PS VOB file on stdin -> descrambled output on stdout # arguments: title key bytes in least to most-significant order $_='while(read+STDIN,$_,2048){$a=29;$b=73;$c=142;$t=255;@t=map{$_%16or$t^=$c^=( $m=(11,10,116,100,11,122,20,100)[$_/16%8])&110;$t^=(72,@z=(64,72,$a^=12*($_%16 - -2?0:$m&17)),$b^=$_%64?12:0,@z)[$_%8]}(16..271);if((@a=unx"C*",$_)[20]&48){$h =5;$_=unxb24,join"",@b=map{xB8,unxb8,chr($_^$a[--$h+84])}@ARGV;s/...$/1$&/;$ d=unxV,xb25,$_;$e=256|(ord$b[4])<<9|ord$b[3];$d=$d>>8^($f=$t&($d>>12^$d>>4^ $d^$d/8))<<17,$e=$e>>8^($t&($g=($q=$e>>14&7^$e)^$q*8^$q<<6))<<9,$_=$t[$_]^ (($h>>=8)+=$f+(~$g&$t))for@a[128..$#a]}print+x"C*",@a}';s/x/pack+/g;eval Like many phrases I use I don't really know what all that means, I just keep repeating it because I think it sounds good. >From: Michael R Godwin & >Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 19:35:22 -0800 >From: "Russ Reynolds" >Am I the only person on this list who owns "The >Concert For Bangla Desh"? >If not, I bet I'm the only one who's listened >to it within the past year >(Side 5 is still worth the effort). Side 5 is "our friend, Bob Dylan" right? My copy went down in the flood (in my basement). And then how many whatevers are there of the Complete Basement Tapes? Or does that count as spoken word? #1 When born-- Tennessee Ernie Ford,"16 Tons" Well, there it is. Seek ye the one known as Quail-- Russell Edson-- Does this count as the 3rd time I've seen someone compare Robyn to him? Getting paid-- As far as the whole big copyright thing goes, something that doesn't seem to get mentioned is that a contributing problem could be that artists sometimes keep making stuff even if they never get paid. Even if you beat them with nightsticks. Even if you make them or someone they love dig his own grave & then shoot him. There was even that J.L. Borges story of a condemned man who managed to stretch time between when the bullets were fire & when they hit so he could finish his play. Oh, god, I'm a digest behind! This list gives me carpal tunnel & eye crosserosis. I'm going to go relax w/ the Anglo American Cataloging Rules. Ross Taylor Join 18 million Eudora users by signing up for a free Eudora Web-Mail account at http://www.eudoramail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 14:59:49 -0500 From: Eric Loehr Subject: Re: tapermaniax! At 02:32 PM 3/9/01 -0500, dmw wrote: > >I've been at a few shows which obviously had a few tapers in the audience. >Has anyone ever tried bringing multiple source tapes from the same gig >into the presence of a decent mixer and trying to compile a single >recording that maximizes the strengths & minimzies the weaknesses of the >individual recordings? > I planned this out mentally after the Halloween Iron Horse gig a couple of years ago -- I had/have three separate recordings of the show, two from analog cassette and one from minidisc -- but I never got any further than working on the better of the two analog recordings in CoolEdit to reduce some distortion and boost the volume during the non-music portions. (Great show by the way!) >Obviously a mix of soundboard feed and room sound might be the most >interesting thing to experiment with, but even when you're mostly dealing >with the sound from the pa stacks, all spots in the room are not going to >sound equal, and i imagine that some of them would sound better for some >tunes than others. and it seems like you might get a better sense of >dimensionality in the resulting mix. > Yep -- this would be worth a try, although probably not with the Iron Horse gig, as the tapers were mostly all sitting in the same place at my table. ;-} >i doubt this would be possible with analog cassettes, since you'd >encounter too many tape speed variations, but you can synch DATs, can't >you? > >This is all fairly hypothetical, of course. My sound reinforcement/ >recording gear is analog. Uh, I guess the compressor might be digital... > I myself only have analog ins to the PC, so I'm not digitall either. Eric ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 15:16:38 -0800 From: The Great Quail Subject: Re: Cathode Ray Gun Michael wolfs, >I don't know to what extent this is directed at me, (the "move to >Oregon" bit makes me think it might be, just a little bit) Heh heh . . . I didn't know you didn't own a TV, I was actually taking an all-too easy poke at Cappy! So don't take it too personally, and besides, I have a mental image of Oregon as being filled with naked hippies running around eating home made ice cream and using Hot Tuna bootlegs as currency. >Now, I just find that TV just rubs me completely the wrong way. >The content and testimonials run seamlessly together into a >shrill melange that is not entirely unlike reconstituted mashed >potatoes. That's my take on it, anyway. If you get more out of >it, more power to you. I suppose I just don't understand.... I mean, you can turn it off, you can change the channels.... But you did allude to a childhood enslavement, which I can certainly understand. In fact, I am still being deprogrammed from my "Scrappy Doo must Die" incident. >But I'm not going to sit in a room while >someone scrapes their fingernails on a chalkboard just for the >sake of not being called "weird". I can take it. I've been >called worse. Heck, I've been called worse by you, even. Yes, being called weird by me is something else, isn't it? I hope you are truly considering the source! >I'd love to hear your response to a book called Rich Media, Poor >Democracy, by Robert McChesney, Quail. It strikes me as >essential reading for anyone who purports to consume media >"critically." I am vaguely familiar with the book -- I paged through it during an argument I had a while back with a person who hated all cathode ray tubes. But I think it's fairly easy to watch TV critically -- I mean, no one forces me to watch "Becker," and I think you can safely assume that commercials are trying to sell you something. And of course that the news is largely sensationalistic and driven by profit and the government's approval. But as far as entertainment goes, there's Futurama, The Simpsons, The Sopranos, Oz, South Park, occasional cool shows with bugs fucking to Mozart, occasional cool shows about Hitler on the History channel, there's Live from Lincoln Center, there's King of the Hill, the X-Files, Ebert & Doper, Buffy and Angel, various Star Trek amusements, Mash reruns, Babylon 5, and Will and Grace. Oh! And there's the Styx episode of Behind the Music. I mean, all that fun for the price of a TV, some electricity, and a little brainwashing by the Beatrice corporation! Sign me up! >For knick-knacks, a nice bureau is quite attractive, uses less >power, and is much less likely to explode. TVs can explode?!?? Wow, cool! There's another point in their favor! - --Quail PS: I am in the middle of a massive U2 marathon -- every CD, single, ep and bootleg I own, which is quite a lot. LJ is loving it! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 12:42:15 -0800 (PST) From: Viv Lyon Subject: Re: seriously OT DRM grumbles. On Fri, 9 Mar 2001, Viv Lyon wrote: something that should have just gone to Doug. Whoops. Gotta watch that to: line. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 14:38:04 -0500 (CDT) From: GSS Subject: Re: Cathode Ray Gun On Fri, 9 Mar 2001, The Great Quail wrote: > I have a mental image of Oregon as being filled with naked hippies > running around eating home made ice cream and using Hot Tuna bootlegs > as currency. Do you know my birth mother? That covers most of them, until you cross the big Hill and get east of Crater Lake. ;-} All hail Jorma. gss ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 15:54:20 -0500 (EST) From: Bayard Subject: tapemania wow... either work has picked up, or the fegs are even more talkative than usual. I have screens of unread messages in my inbox! that almost never happens. rob sez: "Well, it is true that most of them were secretly obtained, but it also says on my list that I don't sell recordings, so I don't think I am a hypocrite on this issue." I don't think so either, I was just pointing out that others might. As I understand it, copyright does not just control the selling of an item, but also the copying ot dissemination of such. IE, we would not be permitted to photocopy and trade books, or copy and trade CD's or CD-ROMS, any more than we are allowed to trade concert DATs. However, the concerts are still a bit of a gray area. By the bye, I see Pearl Jam (i think it's pearl jam) has put something like 20 of their last year's gigs on 2-CD sets and five of these were on Billboard's chart at the same time. Beat the boots, indeed! And yes, I was teasing you. :) =b ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 16:00:47 EST From: DDerosa5@aol.com Subject: delurking to push streaming content hey fegz-- thought I'd post to such an e-savvy group that I'm now doing a weekly interent radio from the dc.indymedia.org site, called (for now) "Beltway Unbuckled", every Friday at 8 pm eastern, 5 pm of course on the left coast. Tonight's topic is Korea, as our fearless leader just dissed the Nobel prize winning leader thereof, but we are always up for phone calls and topic suggestion, or better names for the show. I think you can listne in from either the site above or the indymedia Seattle site, but you should check. If you care. On tonight's show we have Christopher Hitchens and two other guests. It's supposed to be an hour, but often runs long (we've been doing it about a month now and finally decided to tell our friends...) uh, that's all I got, except that I've never heard my life's theme song (the Supremes doing "I hear a Symphony"?) Maybe I'll check out the MP3 when I get my new computer next month. I'll see you DC fegs at the 9:30 club in a few weeks, just someone like bayard post wherever we're meeting. (bayard, if you want, I'll bring that Bongos Bass and Bob LP I promised you) OK, I'm off to happy hour. dave ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 16:03:15 -0500 From: "brian nupp" Subject: Re: tapermaniax! Tape away! The more the merrier! Captian Crunch _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 13:04:28 -0700 From: Eb Subject: Re: Cathode Ray Gun MWolfe: >To the extent that I am proud of >my TV-lessness, it is because I recognize how powerful and >seductive it is, and how much of a hold it had on me for so much >of my childhood. >Now, I just find that TV just rubs me completely the wrong way. OK, but you seem to be the biggest film-goer on the whole list! Do you really put *that* much distinction between the two mediums? Particularly, when talking about *current* film? Elsewhere.... Amy Correia's opening some dates for Richard Thompson...nifty. And yet she tells me that she hadn't even heard of Thompson, until now. Ouch. http://www.rollingstone.com/features/newfaces/nf_correia_more.asp Interesting, Eb-indulgent link: http://www.arts.ubc.ca/german/lps/images/p8.html. Svend Riemer is my grandfather -- he was an important mind in the sociology field, in his day. Not sure what he has to do with the University of British Columbia, though (he was a UCLA/Wisconsin professor, mostly). I guess it's related to Norbert Elias, whoever that is. Gosh...busy day on the list today. Eb now still hating: Our Lady Peace (oh lordy, is this supposed to be a *concept album*??) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 15:20:03 -0600 From: "JH3" Subject: Re: seriously OT DRM grumbles. >...Soldiers at Fort Lewis are the first in the nation to form >a combat unit with the agility of an infantry force and the >training of a SWAT team. DAMN, why didn't *I* think of that? It's like two elite strike forces in one! Why, it's a much more marketable idea than the "condom-phone." >Tanks and heavy vehicles are giving way to light >armored brigades of 7,000 men and women... To be fair, 7,000 men and women would probably outweigh the average tank. >Explosive grenades on the firing range are sometimes >replaced with flashbang grenades. Those wacky pranksters! Always good for a larf, but for those on the receiving end I do think it gets old after the first few dozen times... >The initial training has attracted worldwide attention.... >German television has twice sent camera crews. Well, you knew *that* was coming! JH3 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 16:37:45 -0500 From: woj Subject: Re: Cathode Ray Gun when we last left our heroes, The Great Quail (quail@libyrinth.com) exclaimed: >all that fun for the price of a TV, some electricity, and a little >brainwashing by the Beatrice corporation! Sign me up! and how many breasts does she have? woj ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 13:55:33 -0800 (PST) From: Capuchin Subject: Re: US Copyright law For those that delete things out of hand: 1) I correct a few misconceptions about the US Constitution expressed by Rob. 2) A VERY brief response to DMW regarding DVD and copyright law. 3) A specific attempt to counter the notion that non-commercial, non-promotional copying is illegal. 4) An explanation as to why there is currently no commercial value in ideas. 5) My view of "service based creation" and employment for creators and the economic incentive to create. Ok, so now you only have to read it if you're interested in any of those things. I suspect most people won't. On Fri, 9 Mar 2001, Rob Gronotte wrote: > > All of copyright law is unconstitutional. Hasn't stopped us yet. > > > > The first amendment specifically states that Congress shall make NO LAW > > abridging the freedom of the press. This was an AMENDMENT to the > > Constitution of the United States of America and therefore should override > > any laws made in the name of Article I Section 8's provision for Congress > > to pass laws to promote the progress of science and the useful arts by > > securing for a limited time to authors and inventors the exclusive right > > to their writings and discoveries. > > Sorry, this doesn't fly. It sasy CONGRESS may make no law. Congress > didn't make the constitution. (In fact vice/versa, the Constitution made > the Congress.) I'm not going to give you a lesson in Constitutional law, but let me rephrase this compensating for your misunderstanding of what I said. (I'm not blaming you for misunderstanding, it's absolutely possible that I didn't present it clearly.) The first amendment should AMEND the part of Article I Section 8 that is the Congressional justification for copyright law. Congress should not have been able to enact ANY of the subsequent "Copyright Acts" becaues they were all in violation of the first amendment. > > (Let's see what other reasons we can find that support the > > unconstitutionality of existing copyright law....) > [snip] > > These hit the ground as well. Just because something is not mentioned in > the Constitution doesn't mean that it can't be done by Congress. The > Congress (mostly) says what cannot be done, not what can be done. That > whole section about copyrights is unneccessary, even without it Congress > could pass any copyright laws. That's a mistaken belief as well. The TENTH Amendment clearly states that any power not specifically enumerated in the Constitution shall be reserved for the states or the people. This means that if the Constitution doesn't say specifically that Congess can do it, Congress CAN'T do it. And since the first amendment should AMEND the power granted to Congress to creat copyright > On the opinion side, I can't beleive any reasonable person would not > support reasonable copyright / Intellectual Property rights laws. Does that mean you don't think I, the EFF, and hundreds of law and commerce experts worldwide are reasonable or that we don't exist? On Fri, 9 Mar 2001, dmw wrote: > I don't think the problem is with intellectual property (and the > notion of direct compensation for its creation) per se; I think the > problem is that copyright holders are, certainly in the music world, > the enabling corporations, NOT the creators themselves. I mentioned this specifically... that copyright law should, in the US, only cover authors and inventors, if it covers anyone at all. But then how do you address the issues "science and the useful arts", the first amendment, etc.? > Certainly it should include watching it (without regard, in my opinion, to > what country you happened to be in when you purchased it, or which country > you purchased it from). Well, nothing in the legislation supports this view, anyway. It's a "bonus" and the only real reason for CSS on DVD videos. > I don't agree that your personal use necessarily includes making > copies without further qualification. The law would disagree with you and agree with me. > I do agree that the DVD key system effectively dis-allows "fair use" > access to the work. "Fair use" is a very recent provision to copyright (US106sec16 & 17, I believe) law that basically codifies what was previously common law. The idea being that if you buy a copy, that copy is YOURS and the rights of the copyright holder end. This is the "first sale" doctrine and ALL non-commercial and non-promotional use. > > There are people out there who BELIEVE they are doing something wrong when > > they dub a movie they've purchased or rented or a CD they bought or > > borrowed. > > Yup, and you're arguing, for the most part, with one of them ;) Although > i've come to believe guerilla tactics are called for in some > cases. There's nothing "guerilla" about living a law-abiding life. The entertainment syndicates would have you believe that all copying is illegal unless it's for "personal use", but that's simply not the case. > Jeme, you've probably seen Jaron Lanier's little extrapolative piece which > starts with a circa 2001 court-ordered Napster shutdown and ends about > twelve years hence with a total police state, haven't you? If not, I'll > dig it up and forward to you. It's provocative reading, but I still think > there are limits to the sheepness of people. I'd love to see it. You should check out David Brin's article about public surveillance (which, I believe, was a chapter excerpt from a non-fiction book of his on future society). It was in Wired originally (though whether that was before or after the book, I don't know) and you should be able to do an author search on their web page. It's fascinating. On Fri, 9 Mar 2001, Rob Gronotte wrote: > I'm not sure I understand what you mean here. Is it that copies can be > made so cheaply by anyone that there will be no profit possible and > therefore no incentive to make them? Not quite. Rob is trying to say that people WON'T make copies because it's so cheap to do it there won't be any profit. This is based on the mistaken belief that people make copies for profit. I don't make copies for profit. I make copies because I want to disseminate information. I don't sell information. It's basic economics: supply and demand. A bicycle is valuable because there are a limited number of bicycles. If I buy a bicycle, that's one less bicycle you can have... because it's mine. Information doesn't work that way. If you digitize a work (be it artisitic or scientific), you essentially put it in a condition that can be infinitely reproduced without loss. I can own a copy and you can own a copy and I can give my copy to a million people AND STILL RETAIN MY COPY, therefore I lose nothing. Since it is infinitely reproducible with NO loss to the original holder of the work, then one copy is the same as a million copies. The supply is infinite and thefore, regardless of what the actual demand is, the supply is greater than the demand and the value is zero. This is why leaves don't make good currency. On Fri, 9 Mar 2001, Rob Gronotte wrote: > Unfortunately if that were to be true, there would also be no incentive > (economic anyway) for the original creator to make copies of his work > available. Read again Doug's story. He put out thousands of dollars... because he NEEDED to make that record. However, and I don't want to insult Doug, I think somewhere in his heart he really hopes to make money on his creation and possibly become filthy rich by it. An creator does not create for the profit motive. A creator creates because, if he does not, he will explode/implode/immolate himself/etc. Creation is its own motive. I am a creator. And I'm paid for it. And who owns my work? Nobody. Here's how it goes: I work for a telecommunications company. They sell the service of transfering bits from one place to another. It's really no different from a trucking company or a bicycle messenger service or even a janitorial company (who gets paid for the service of moving dirt from one place to another). I write computer programs. The people that pay me to write these programs need to USE those programs. They don't sell them. That's not the business they're in. They're in the business of moving bits... not selling them. But they need computer programs that do particular things to help them in their job of serving their customers. So they pay me to create those programs. But after the program is created, they recognize that they can have their copy and use it and they LOSE NOTHING by letting other people take a copy... because transfer of that copy does not mean they lose their copy. So I write stuff and my company uses it... and other people use it, too... because it doesn't hurt anyone to operate that way. I'll have you know that my group's review... that is to say, the standard to which we are judged and to which our economic compensation and success is measured... includes contributing at least one major piece of software to the Community per quarter. That is to say, if we don't share with the world, we've failed. And I make a very nice living, thank you. There is no reason why AT&T shouldn't do the same with video and audio creators. They should pay to supply content for their cable lines... after all, the more content, the more interesting cable becomes and the more likely people are to pay for a subscription. It doesn't matter to AT&T whether or not that information is copied by the cable subscribers OR EVEN REBROADCAST FROM THE HOME. Hell, that just means more traffic on their network and therefore more reason for people to subscribe. > Well, it wasn't in the the US, but the recent arrest of a Napster user in > Holland made world-wide headlines. Make no mistake, copying things for a > friend IS illegal, without regard to whether you make a profit from it or > not. Actually, Doug, you're the one making the mistake. Copying for a friend is perfectly legal. I'd like you to show me why it wouldn't be. The goal of copyright and patent is no longer the protection of the purity of an idea, but the creation of artificial scarcity... so that abundant things will appear scarce and increase in economic value. We find the same thing in the telecommunications world... MCI and AT&T are "spinning off" their long-distance services because the margins are becoming too low... they want to make it more expensive to provide those services because the abundance of voice bandwidth is taking the profits away. Power is control and you cannot control something that is abundant. This is the lost connection between the two meanings of the word "free". If it is uncontrolled, you cannot make money on it. J. - -- _______________________________________________ Capuchin capuchin@bitmine.net Jeme A Brelin ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V10 #69 *******************************