Did I unknowingly pluck any feathers? I am new here, and I only gave
my opinion in order to participate in the group. Not to be quoted for
every paragraph I write.
We are talking within the relms of public domain right? If ALL public
doomain were now to become illegal today, there would be such a
devistating witch hunt; it would not even be funny.
As far as my favorite artist, I personally are more likely to buy the
full CD; any other artist, I buy the 99 cent downloads, cause I
mostly only like a few songs from an album. I do this because I
respect the fact that it is not public domain.
but, if you feel that strongly about this issue (bast on the last
post), why be involved in a group such as oldradioshowsonmp3? a place
that shares, that which was copyrighted at one time? Because if
that's the case, morally we should all be paying royalties for the
billions of transfers, that have been taken place since day one, for
what we associate now as public domain.
Don't get me wrong, I write poetry, and I do understand the personal
side of copyright; but I also know that it is possible for
intellectual property to, can, and inevitably DO age out it's market
value (depending on what it is). Our world is moving much too
rapidly, and our attention span for works of the past, are very short
(as a whole). Having said that, I doubt I would personally screem
like a stuck pig, neiter would I use that analogy to discribe
personal actions, neither is it part of my being.
You know, All though Bill Gates developped DOS, in the late 70's... I
don't think he would go through the trouble of sueing, a small group
of people giving out copies of DOS,to other people cause they have no
way of getting it otherwise. It maybe hard to believe but, there are
people that still have old DOS machine's, and lost their operating
systems. They ALL hold the original LICENSES, should they get
prosecuted as well? Especially when bill gates no longer supports,
produceses, nor sell DOS? What about programers who need to study old
style programming from orginal DOS? Should the schools be sued and
held reponsible, for a 20+ year old unsupported, and out dated
software? After all, DOS, was part of HIS intellect.
And it is common sense that feeling does not apply in law, but the
reality is, "feeling" is what drives people to do or not to do;
whether they have the legal awareness or not, regardless of what side
of the fense yous stand.
--- In email@example.com
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Yogiraj" <yogiraj@...>
> To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Sent: Monday, December 11, 2006 6:54 AM
> Subject: [OTRMP3] Re: twilight zone
> I think the problem is, unfortunatley, the greed within the music
> movie industries are so great;
> If the copyrights being violated were yours, you'd scream like a
> As they are not, bash those who own those copyrights as "greedy".
> The usual lie/ne is this: the music industry rips off artists, so
> acceptable to also rip off the artist.
> everyone is trying to ad to the law, in order to get a piece of the
> thus creating such a mess, they need a seven lawyer team to figure
> I hadn't noticed. Who is "everyone"?
> I never understood why a copyright owner, would B**ch about someone
> a 50 year old sound file, that has no market, or real dollar
> And yet, as owner, they are free to make a decision to which others
> but to which decision those others have no say.
> If they were, it would wind up in the $0.99 cent stores. Some
> need to get a LIFE..
> I see no need to steal from others. Others have noted that there
is so much
> OTR available that one couldn't listen to it all in a lifetime.
> Groups like oldradioshowsonmp3 is no threat to film/music, however,
> companies that make P2P software are; there is where new marketable
> products are downloaded, at verfy high speed. Personally, I feel
> spyware & viruses, just is not worth using these softwares.
> My feeling is, no one should be sueing anyone, that isn't making
> of OTR & OTM, especially if the intellectual property is no
> longer marketable.
> Law isn't feeling. That question has likely been ruled upon in the
> Reading such decision/s would impart the reasoning for the law
being as it
> is. You might even find the reasoning to be persuasive, even
> you also.
> We are a special community of people, that seek out OTR. They know
how to re
> ach out to us if they tried. Because in truth, most of us would not
> anyway, because I'm not paying $18.99 for a CD with a total of 7
> episodes of OTR, (especially in mono quality). They really need to
> Who's bothering you?
> Both OTR & OTM are a way of reconnecting with our past.
> Fine -- so long as not using someone else's assets, without their
> permission, as your means to connect with your personal past.
> I really feel that this stuff should be free to use. Many of these
OTR & OTM
> performers are not even alive for heaven's sake. Who's the crooks
> Feelings are not law. Nor are they the law. If you had a favorite
> of all times, would you steal from him, behind the claim of loving
> By contrast: _because_ I love The Beatles I _will not_ steal from
> One must not rail against other's perceived greed as means to
> avoid examining one's own.