What Kind Of Idiots Exist...

[cappella(m)]

I heard that the Itunes Windows Software was already downloaded more than 1000000 times after 3 days of launching..

http://www.mp3-world.net/d/news/dienste/ap...eswin1mio.shtml (http://www.mp3-world.net/d/news/dienste/appleituneswin1mio.shtml)

This link is in german.. but the fact is
WHO ARE THIS STUPID IDIOTS WHO DOWNLOAD THIS CRAP AND PAY 99$ for a song...

may be they're bad informed or they're just stupid assholes.. AND the same are who use napster or any service where you have to pay for music..All those assholes support the RIAA !! so go to hell !!!

Down with this programms...

[kAb]

I hear itunes is a good music player.

But if you want to know who downloads this, It'll be parents who don't want to be sued because their kids were downloading free music. They'll compromise w/ the kid and say "Ok, we'll pay for your music"

It'll also be people who were scared by the RIAA, or who just don't believe in downloading.

I hear that there are ethical people in the world...

[Sid Hartha]

Originally posted by cappella(m)@29 October 2003 - 17:42
I heard that the Itunes Windows Software was already downloaded more than 1000000 times after 3 days of launching..

http://www.mp3-world.net/d/news/dienste/ap...eswin1mio.shtml (http://www.mp3-world.net/d/news/dienste/appleituneswin1mio.shtml)

This link is in german.. but the fact is
WHO ARE THIS STUPID IDIOTS WHO DOWNLOAD THIS CRAP AND PAY 99$ for a song...

may be they're bad informed or they're just stupid assholes.. AND the same are who use napster or any service where you have to pay for music..All those assholes support the RIAA !! so go to hell !!!

Down with this programms...
You're preaching to the choir, dude.

[kazaalite911]

Originally posted by kAb@29 October 2003 - 18:07


It'll also be people who were scared by the RIAA, or who just don't believe in downloading.

I hear that there are ethical people in the world...
I agree, let them support a paid downloading site. Maybe it'll even out the paid/pirated thing and the RIAA will stop f&*King w/ all P2P programs. Even when there was napster, I used to pay $2.99 (or was it $1.99??) for (1) song download from I forget where, for rare songs that I couldn't find on P2Ps. To me that's cheaper than buying the whole album at the store or even just the single.

[ghost944]

i got i to play music, not to download it ;) ;)

[DasScoot]

I'd be an iTunes user, if I wasn't broke.

Oh, and it's 99 cents, not 99$ :lol:

[Johnny_B]

Almost everybody has a computer with an internet connection, nowadays.
Most of these people are just plain n00bs who still don't know jack sh*t about P2P.
Remember, there are still people paying to use Kazaa! :o

Wait until they understand it. When they do, they will start thinking: "Why can't I share or download other file types?" or "There must be another way to get these files for free!"

Then they will open their eyes and start getting into the real filesharing.

[Sparkle1984]

Right here we go for the Google translation (of the link you put in the first post): ;)



Apples International Telecommunication Union it version for Windows only already broke through "three and a half" day after release the million-border.  As the enterprise communicated, the software was time downloaded since the start Thursday passed already over one million.  In the same period those likewise bought user over the platform over a million Songs.  In the meantime a user has itself to develop also the trouble made a Videotrainingsworkshop for iTunes and offers these on his side.  "as we started iTunes for Mac in April, the million-border after seven days were reached", said Apple CEO Steve job.  "we put a great start down, were pleased during our competition still in the starting holes scharrt", the Konzernboss.  For April altogether 14 million songs were downgeloadet over iTunes, with which the on-line net curtain is prominent Download service of the world.  Apple gelauncht its Windows version of iTunes past week.  The software is available provisionally only in English language and is to be present against end of the month also on German.  Europeans however still cannot use the music service.  Outside of the USA one can rehearse-hear titles only, to the purchase needs one a credit card with American calculation address.  For Windows users, who would like to use gladly iTunes, there is a Videotrainingsworkshop, which is offered free of charge in the InterNet.  It shows Download, installation, configuration and use of iTunes under Windows.  The Download is approximately 10.6 MT largely

[cappella(m)]

The translation of google is not very well but still shows the neccessarry information we need to know.. We should not only hate and boycott the riaa we also should hate and boycott this idiots who use the "Pay for music" services...Itnues etc...

:angry:

[djfactory]

maybe if so many people are paying
they will stop screwing with the kazaa network ;)

[tommxx]

people, people! Dont be mad, do what I do, use the pay boards like iTunes to get IDEAs of what songs to download, like the top 100 lists. Then go to the P2Ps and download 'em! HA!
Lots of people just likes to waste money I guess!

[cappella(m)]

Yeahhh..that's a great Idea... Watch the top 100 on Itunes and then download it on KLite.. !!


I don't think that they forget kazaa when many people pay for music .. You know..Idiots never stop ... They'll will not let the filesharing in freedom.. the only thing that would be better if no one would pay for music..everyone would stop buying cds ... only after all that all this labels would realise that what they do to us is wrong !! may be then they would let us in freedom...but it's not possible that everyone stops buying cds...

[tracydani]

So what exactly is a fair price to you guys? 99 cents a song is not bad for a start, considering what we have been being charged for a cd when we don't even want all the songs.

Do you really think that free is the best answer? Do you really think the artists are gonna sit back and say gee... I think I'm gonna dedicate my life to making music and giving it away :rolleyes:

At least these companies are beginning to see the light. I think we should wish them the best of luck and hope that their success leads to better prices in the long run.

I read earlier that one of the pricing ranges was something like $19.95/month unlimited dl's. Not a bad deal in my opinion. Especially when you consider what some of us spend on our systems so we can pirate more and faster :lol:

Either way, 99 cents a song or $9.95 for 10 songs that I want is far better and worth the price then $14.95 and up for a cd that has songs I don't want.

I say good luck, and when they are a success (which I firmly belive they will be) we can rest easy that they will leave us alone for the most part.

TD

[cosmic doobie]

http://www.blackmaxpc.com/avatarsmiles/smiles/gives.gif

[DasScoot]

Originally posted by tracydani@30 October 2003 - 22:24
So what exactly is a fair price to you guys? 99 cents a song is not bad for a start, considering what we have been being charged for a cd when we don't even want all the songs.

Do you really think that free is the best answer? Do you really think the artists are gonna sit back and say gee... I think I'm gonna dedicate my life to making music and giving it away :rolleyes:

At least these companies are beginning to see the light. I think we should wish them the best of luck and hope that their success leads to better prices in the long run.

I read earlier that one of the pricing ranges was something like $19.95/month unlimited dl's. Not a bad deal in my opinion. Especially when you consider what some of us spend on our systems so we can pirate more and faster :lol:

Either way, 99 cents a song or $9.95 for 10 songs that I want is far better and worth the price then $14.95 and up for a cd that has songs I don't want.

I say good luck, and when they are a success (which I firmly belive they will be) we can rest easy that they will leave us alone for the most part.

TD
Agreed. This is what we've been telling the RIAA they ought to be doing all along.

[InverseKinetix]

Originally posted by tommxx@31 October 2003 - 05:36
people, people! Dont be mad, do what I do, use the pay boards like iTunes to get IDEAs of what songs to download, like the top 100 lists. Then go to the P2Ps and download 'em! HA!
Lots of people just likes to waste money I guess!
I use the net for getting tracklists for full albums and the right order and also movies. 1 monitor looking at tracklists, 2nd monitor searching on kazaa. Thanks internet. woot woot

[Sparkle1984]

Originally posted by tracydani@30 October 2003 - 21:24
So what exactly is a fair price to you guys? 99 cents a song is not bad for a start, considering what we have been being charged for a cd when we don't even want all the songs.

Do you really think that free is the best answer? Do you really think the artists are gonna sit back and say gee... I think I'm gonna dedicate my life to making music and giving it away :rolleyes:

At least these companies are beginning to see the light. I think we should wish them the best of luck and hope that their success leads to better prices in the long run.

I read earlier that one of the pricing ranges was something like $19.95/month unlimited dl's. Not a bad deal in my opinion. Especially when you consider what some of us spend on our systems so we can pirate more and faster :lol:

Either way, 99 cents a song or $9.95 for 10 songs that I want is far better and worth the price then $14.95 and up for a cd that has songs I don't want.

I say good luck, and when they are a success (which I firmly belive they will be) we can rest easy that they will leave us alone for the most part.

TD
:sleeping: :sleeping: :sleeping:
Why would anyone want to pay when we can have it for free??

The singer should do it for the love of it, nothing else, and not be greedy.

[DasScoot]

Originally posted by Sparkle1984+31 October 2003 - 19:49--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Sparkle1984 @ 31 October 2003 - 19:49)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-tracydani@30 October 2003 - 21:24
So what exactly is a fair price to you guys?&nbsp; 99 cents a song is not bad for a start, considering what we have been being charged for a cd when we don&#39;t even want all the songs.

Do you really think that free is the best answer?&nbsp; Do you really think the artists are gonna sit back and say gee... I think I&#39;m gonna dedicate my life to making music and giving it away :rolleyes:

At least these companies are beginning to see the light.&nbsp; I think we should wish them the best of luck and hope that their success leads to better prices in the long run.

I read earlier that one of the pricing ranges was something like &#036;19.95/month unlimited dl&#39;s.&nbsp; Not a bad deal in my opinion.&nbsp; Especially when you consider what some of us spend on our systems so we can pirate more and faster :lol:

Either way, 99 cents a song or &#036;9.95 for 10 songs that I want is far better and worth the price then &#036;14.95 and up for a cd that has songs I don&#39;t want.

I say good luck, and when they are a success (which I firmly belive they will be) we can rest easy that they will leave us alone for the most part.

TD
:sleeping: :sleeping: :sleeping:
Why would anyone want to pay when we can have it for free??

The singer should do it for the love of it, nothing else, and not be greedy. [/b][/quote]
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...hahaha...


hold on...*wheeze*....



HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[Sid Hartha]

Originally posted by Sparkle1984@31 October 2003 - 19:49
Why would anyone want to pay when we can have it for free??

The singer should do it for the love of it, nothing else, and not be greedy.
You may not realize this, but most recording artists are not rich.

Do you work for no pay? :huh:
How do you pay your bills? :huh:
How do you get food to eat? :huh:
Have you even thought this through? :blink:
Isn&#39;t taking things without paying greedy? (that would mean you) :ph34r:

[Sparkle1984]

Originally posted by Sid Hartha+31 October 2003 - 19:56--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Sid Hartha @ 31 October 2003 - 19:56)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Sparkle1984@31 October 2003 - 19:49
Why would anyone want to pay when we can have it for free??

The singer should do it for the love of it, nothing else, and not be greedy.
You may not realize this, but most recording artists are not rich.

Do you work for no pay? :huh:
How do you pay your bills? :huh:
How do you get food to eat? :huh:
Have you even thought this through? :blink:
Isn&#39;t taking things without paying greedy? (that would mean you) :ph34r: [/b][/quote]
In my post I was referring to the world-famous rich singers such as Madonna, Britney etc. It is them who are greedy. Not the poorer ones.

It always annoys me how people in the third world are expected to work for virtually no pay. So why should we have to feel sorry for the rich people?

[Sid Hartha]

Originally posted by Sparkle1984@31 October 2003 - 21:15
In my post I was referring to the world-famous rich singers such as Madonna, Britney etc. It is them who are greedy. Not the poorer ones.

It always annoys me how people in the third world are expected to work for virtually no pay. So why should we have to feel sorry for the rich people?
You never made any distinction about rich people. You said "Why would anyone want to pay when we can have it for free??"

[cappella(m)]

The whole sing is not about the artists.. It&#39;s about the corporations RIAA and the big labels...They want us to buy the music because THEY need money..The artist just gets a very very small part of the money which this labels earn..I would better pay this few cents directly to the artists as to pay 99 cents to the labels &#33; the artist just gets a few cents of them.....when it would be fair the song should cost 0,09 cents..that&#39;s what the artist gets... may be this would be not such a big problem..or if we would have a song flatrate for may be 2,99&#036; a month...that&#39;s sure better.. &#33; May be than all people would pay... B)

[Switeck]

Originally posted by cappella(m)@31 October 2003 - 18:14
The whole sing is not about the artists.. It&#39;s about the corporations RIAA and the big labels...They want us to buy the music because THEY need money..The artist just gets a very very small part of the money which this labels earn..I would better pay this few cents directly to the artists as to pay 99 cents to the labels &#33; the artist just gets a few cents of them.....when it would be fair the song should cost 0,09 cents..that&#39;s what the artist gets... may be this would be not such a big problem..or if we would have a song flatrate for may be 2,99&#036; a month...that&#39;s sure better.. &#33; May be than all people would pay...&nbsp; B)I&#39;ve read reports that says OF that &#036;0.99 per song the artist gets &#036;0.09.
No joke -- less than 10% of the price the user pays goes to the artist.

Saying it&#39;s about &#39;artist rights&#39; is just a smokescreen for the recording industry to rob us all: consumers AND ARTISTS&#33;

[wormless]

replying to the topic "what kind of idiots exsits"

topic answer: me&#33; :P :lol: :lol:

[Sid Hartha]

Originally posted by Switeck@1 November 2003 - 02:46
I&#39;ve read reports that says OF that &#036;0.99 per song the artist gets &#036;0.09.
No joke -- less than 10% of the price the user pays goes to the artist.

Saying it&#39;s about &#39;artist rights&#39; is just a smokescreen for the recording industry to rob us all: consumers AND ARTISTS&#33;
...and we get to rob the artists too BY NOT PAYING&#33;&#33;&#33; YAY&#33;&#33;

uhmm, wait a sec. How are WE getting robbed if we&#39;re not paying for anything?

Okay here&#39;s how it goes:
the ARTIST is getting robbed by the recording industry... and us.

but that&#39;s okay &#39;cause its like, uh, freedom of speech or sumthing... I read that somewhere i think.. maybe on a message board somewhere

Just remember this: it&#39;s not about the artists.

:blink:

[Sparkle1984]

Originally posted by Sid Hartha+31 October 2003 - 21:37--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Sid Hartha @ 31 October 2003 - 21:37)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Sparkle1984@31 October 2003 - 21:15
In my post I was referring to the world-famous rich singers such as Madonna, Britney etc. It is them who are greedy. Not the poorer ones.

It always annoys me how people in the third world are expected to work for virtually no pay.&nbsp; So why should we have to feel sorry for the rich people?
You never made any distinction about rich people. You said "Why would anyone want to pay when we can have it for free??" [/b][/quote]
Because I just forgot to make the distinction in my first post on this topic&#33;&#33; I can&#39;t remember everything &#33;&#33; :angry:

You say I am greedy &#33;&#33; Well since you are in this forum, I assume you are probably a filesharer as well? So why don&#39;t you confess yourself to being greedy then, if you expect other people (ie me) to confess?

[paul_smith]

99 dollars for a song? :blink: u cud go and buy the album 5 times <_<

[cappella(m)]

99 cents per song..that was my mistake in the first post :D

[DL.]

iTunes = a 30 second preview of any song in their catalogue free + all album and release info + a pretty good player + a music data base, also usefull when searching other "sources" and organising your own collection.

What kind of idiot doesn&#39;t use it? :blink:

Be thankfull for these programs that allow music to exist on the internet. Someone pays- puts it in their shares- you get to download it for free. :)

If it weren&#39;t for people paying for music, a very large percentage of the music you enjoy now would never have existed.

Why would anyone waste the time, effort, and expense to create something with no return?

To those who spout free access to all works, thanks for fucking up something good. <_<
In moderation, the file sharing community wasn&#39;t such a bad thing.
Your careless attitudes are making it harder to find decent new software though. :angry:
Why bother to create anything, only to be completely ripped off by hordes of you thankless internet thieves?
Give back a little if you can or at least allow those who can, and will, to live in peace with themselves. ;)

[Sparkle1984]

Give back a little if you can or at least allow those who can, and will, to live in peace with themselves.&nbsp;

I do though, because I share everything that I download.

But I thought that if you get a file on ITunes, it&#39;s in a different format so it can&#39;t be transferred anywhere else? Or am I wrong about that?

[DL.]

I thought that if you get a file on ITunes, it&#39;s in a different format so it can&#39;t be transferred anywhere else? Or am I wrong about that?

Re-encode&#33;


AAC: MPEG-4 audio
AAC (for Advanced Audio Coding, a big part of the MPEG-4 specification) is the cutting-edge audio codec that’s perfect for the Internet. AAC encoding compresses much more efficiently than older formats like MP3 (which iTunes still supports, by the way), while delivering quality rivaling that of uncompressed CD audio. In fact, some expert listeners have judged AAC audio files compressed at 128 kbps (stereo) to be virtually indistinguishable from the original uncompressed audio source

Share&#33;


New Music Sharing feature
iTunes 4 has a Music Sharing feature that uses Rendezvous to give you remote streaming access to your personal music library from any room in your house. Let’s say, for instance, that you have thousands of AAC and MP3 music files stored on a mac or Windows computer in your home office. The iTunes software works so smoothly on both platforms that you can share music with any combination of Macs and Windows PCs on a local area network — regardless of whether you’re running iTunes off a Mac or PC. And you won’t have to manually configure anything, either.

[Sid Hartha]

Originally posted by Sparkle1984+1 November 2003 - 14:48--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Sparkle1984 @ 1 November 2003 - 14:48)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by Sid Hartha@31 October 2003 - 21:37
<!--QuoteBegin-Sparkle1984@31 October 2003 - 21:15
In my post I was referring to the world-famous rich singers such as Madonna, Britney etc. It is them who are greedy. Not the poorer ones.

It always annoys me how people in the third world are expected to work for virtually no pay. So why should we have to feel sorry for the rich people?
You never made any distinction about rich people. You said "Why would anyone want to pay when we can have it for free??"
Because I just forgot to make the distinction in my first post on this topic&#33;&#33; I can&#39;t remember everything &#33;&#33; :angry:

You say I am greedy &#33;&#33; Well since you are in this forum, I assume you are probably a filesharer as well? So why don&#39;t you confess yourself to being greedy then, if you expect other people (ie me) to confess? [/b][/quote]
Don&#39;t make an angry face at me just because your post didn&#39;t make sense&#33;

By the way: You&#39;re the one who&#39;s calling people greedy - not me. I just put the question back to you - which you didn&#39;t answer.

You accuse people of being greedy after saying saying things like "Why would anyone want to pay when we can have it for free?", which I took to mean that you never pay for the music you enjoy (and seem to be making fun of those who do). Seems kind of greedy to me - you don&#39;t think so?

Yes, I am a filesharer. I also happen to buy lots and lots and lots of music - have been for many years - and plan to continue doing so. I download to check out new music - not to cheat anyone. If I download something that I really like, I&#39;ll buy it. It must seem kind of stupid to you I guess, but greedy?

[DasScoot]

I&#39;m not greedy, just broke. If I could afford to pay for the stuff I download, I would.

[DL.]

Originally posted by DasScoot@2 November 2003 - 04:59
If I could afford to pay for the stuff I download, I would.
I wonder if you would if actually put to the test?

Let&#39;s say a certain program you like very much sells for &#036;400

Ok, the copyright holder agrees to carry payments over 20 years. A rediculous scenario but what could make it easier for either of you?

That&#39;s &#036;1.67 per month.

&#036;20 per year

Surely even the most pathetic computer user can afford that.

My guess is that even at this pittance level, most would not pay or would just ignore the invoice after the first few months.

In all honesty, open sharing really is bad for all of us as individuals. Especially when it comes to more high end programs.

When it took at least some skill to get these programs, there was little harm to the software makers and artists. A few thousand copies leak out to the more elite users who likely wouldn&#39;t have paid the price anyway. They in turn recommend the software to those who can and will pay.

Now, every kid in the world can type in a search and ripp you off in a matter of hours and all they recommend is that their peers do the same.
Be sensible about this. It will come to an end soon at this rate.

Oh, I still share stuff. Just don&#39;t expect to get the latest build or the full commercial software from me anymore. I know what effect this has had on new software releases and it just isn&#39;t sensible to continue the rape of these developers, people like me and you. Families to feed, a life to live, payments to make.

Yeah, it was a lot more fun when it took some skill or inside info to get all these cool programs. Now it&#39;s just plain theft.
Hell, most of you don&#39;t even care if they can identify you. It&#39;s a real "fuck you" world isn&#39;t it&#33;
I&#39;ve been there too but, now I&#39;ll do whatever I can to give a bit back.
I beta test where possible, I give testimonials, provide links and info, any small thing to minimise the impact all this.
It&#39;s time for wiser, more selective sharing I think. ;)

[DasScoot]

I barely download software anymore, actually the last one I&#39;ve downloaded in the past few months was just to replace one I lost when I reformmatted.

Actually, come to think of it, most of what I download now are TV shows I wouldn&#39;t be paying for anyways - just this way I don&#39;t have to worry about them only showing the episode once every few months/years.

[Sparkle1984]

Now, every kid in the world can type in a search and ripp you off in a matter of hours and all they recommend is that their peers do the same.
Be sensible about this. It will come to an end soon at this rate.

Yes, virtually everybody in my faculty at university does it - how many computing science students can afford software which costs hundreds of dollars?

Also, our university has a special contract/licence thing, which means that the computing students can have copies of visual Studio and Win XP pro to take home for free, but only for the remainder of our course.

[UKMan]

Originally posted by Sid Hartha+2 November 2003 - 05:30--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Sid Hartha @ 2 November 2003 - 05:30)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by Sparkle1984@1 November 2003 - 14:48

Originally posted by Sid Hartha@31 October 2003 - 21:37
<!--QuoteBegin-Sparkle1984@31 October 2003 - 21:15
In my post I was referring to the world-famous rich singers such as Madonna, Britney etc. It is them who are greedy. Not the poorer ones.

It always annoys me how people in the third world are expected to work for virtually no pay. So why should we have to feel sorry for the rich people?
You never made any distinction about rich people. You said "Why would anyone want to pay when we can have it for free??"
Because I just forgot to make the distinction in my first post on this topic&#33;&#33; I can&#39;t remember everything &#33;&#33; :angry:

You say I am greedy &#33;&#33; Well since you are in this forum, I assume you are probably a filesharer as well? So why don&#39;t you confess yourself to being greedy then, if you expect other people (ie me) to confess?
Don&#39;t make an angry face at me just because your post didn&#39;t make sense&#33;

By the way: You&#39;re the one who&#39;s calling people greedy - not me. I just put the question back to you - which you didn&#39;t answer.

You accuse people of being greedy after saying saying things like "Why would anyone want to pay when we can have it for free?", which I took to mean that you never pay for the music you enjoy (and seem to be making fun of those who do). Seems kind of greedy to me - you don&#39;t think so?

Yes, I am a filesharer. I also happen to buy lots and lots and lots of music - have been for many years - and plan to continue doing so. I download to check out new music - not to cheat anyone. If I download something that I really like, I&#39;ll buy it. It must seem kind of stupid to you I guess, but greedy? [/b][/quote]
Well said Sid Hartha :beerchug:

You buy what you want and dont let these whining morons convince you of anything else. The attitude of most seems to be "rip off everyone and everything" and allways an excuse about "i cant afford it, cause i&#39;m a poor student...blah blah blah..&#33;"

People who dont have respect for anyone elses opinions, dont deserve any respect in return.

Peace
UKMan

[teleping]

Hello.
This sort of talk about music and other types of "goods" you can get from internet, and whether that&#39;s ethically or morally or however acceptable, WILL NOT ever stop being vain in theory and in some practice, until other one of these conditions apply:

1. Internet will be "made free and wholly accessible" w/o any filtering, monitoring, analyzing etc., maybe with the exception of viruses/trojans and other unsolicited traffic. This however is in contradiction with virtually every nation&#39;s or similar organization&#39;s laws, since it should include free "ownership" for everything someone has on his/her computer. An example, the infamous (in klite board at least :) RIAA, operates on assumption that afore mentioned "free access" is and will always be as much criminal as it could be, &#39;cause otherwise the RIAA&#39;s reason to exist would be void. Same thing with all the record labels, distribution (&#33;) companies etc. Take some distribution company for example, they would not exist had the internet get developed&running before the company: they would not have the "social need" or whatever term it is described to have a market that has "come to be" because of people needing it, not because a person inventing it. I mean, the internet is quite an efficient distributor as it is already w/o there being a need for it in the first place.

2. Internet will be more accurately described as a big-ass intranetwork, where everything goes through/by some sort of filtering mechanism, like TV censoring today: if there&#39;s something "bad" (ethically/morally wrong) coming to "market", IT (ANY TYPE OF INFORMATION) WOULD BE ALWAYS CENSORED, STOPPED, BLOCKED, REMOVED, ERASED, DELETED, not to mention analyzed in a way that would without a question REMOVE the individual rights to ANY SORT OF PRIVACY WHATSOEVER&#33;&#33;&#33;

I cannot imagine anyone "sane" wanting the second option, there are too many warnings out there projected by film makers&#39; and writers&#39; imagination etc. that the mere thought of anything resembling even in smallest possible way (like paying for going to movies; this is starting to tell You something about my sense of reality and relationships) makes me mad; so of course I am mad, even the doctor says so :)
But nevertheless, I&#39;d rather see a world w/o borders and limitations and laws and copyrights, and I have to say at this point that I&#39;ve written and performed music and graphical&litural side of art too, and I&#39;ve taken a s**tload of student loan while studying to be a software engineer, so anyone wanna say something stupid like "you wouldn&#39;t pay for it anyway" or any kind of ridiculement about poverty, even when I&#39;m living in a so-called "high living standard" country, I would like to see him/her personally living for 2 months WITHOUT FOOD OR ELECTRICITY &#39;cause he/she had to by a 400 € software to complete a course for the studies.No, I don&#39;t think anyone here stands by their words when they are saying that money is not the reason for a really, really large amount of people.
Bear w/me another moment please, if You&#39;ve come this far :) ..though I&#39;m getting tired myself, too..
If/when I do music, software, paintings or social-political development models for high-level services for retarded people&#39;s access-enhancing of arts for local community, I would take anyday a long-reaching understanding-and-need-to-make-money&good-FOR-OTHERS-NOT-ME-mentality than a decent salary..
But since this will always be only a dream in some people&#39;s dreams, I say that I want good for others, and take the good for myself. That&#39;s what everyone does, and You die if You don&#39;t.
If You still think I&#39;m a joke and "all artists want their listeners/whatever to pay for everything", read something about Darwin&#39;s theories, there seems to be some sense in something, and take a look at some statistics about poor people&#39;s "buying force" and then do something You haven&#39;t obviously done before: think, "empathize", in a way that raises a sense of sympathy..
Or You can do whatever you were gonna do anyway, I don&#39;t have the faith to believe that it would help anyway.. so no stress, people, YOU CAN BE AS STUPID AND MEAN AND GREEDY AS YOU WANT, IT CHANGES NOTHING&#33;

Happily Yours ..not.. -teleping

[teleping]

Hi again&#33;
DON&#39;T READ THIS&#33; THIS IS NOT RELEVANT&#33;
Unless you are in some way interested of the previous post of mine...
Seems I posted the same thing twice so I edited it, and I&#39;d like to apologise if anyone got bored, pissed or anything similar: same goes to moderators or whoever if this was out of line or something, I also confess being a nosy a**hole who thinks he knows nearly everything there&#39;s to know about something I think I know..and sorry for that gibberish english, I can&#39;t write without thinking Our True Lord Saviour His Merciful Divinity The Creator Of The Five-Part Trilogy Of The Holy And Unquestionable, Also Ineffable Truth Douglas Adams, and trying not to try to be like him (as a writer, I think/hope...) takes a lot of energy, so it makes me happy and unhappy and quite irrealistic pretty much whole the time..