Username: Password: lost p/w?
home | help | subscribe | search | register
Poly-Ticks
Posted by DMembernelson brodhead in on February 29, 2004 at 5:41 PM



Freedom doesn't exist. Its a lie. Freedom is the most abstract of abstract nouns. The ones in power think they can choose what we can or cannot do. From slavery to the Kent State Massacre, we know we can't trust the government to look out for our best interest, and now they label me and others pirates while the RIAA cries and i don't see them going broke.
I love music with my heart its my passion i live for. Because i wnat for free shoudn't put me in the same catagory as murderers and molesters. I am not a criminal i am simply a music lover with limited resources.
They called Grace O'Malley a pirate when all she wanted was her and her dead husbands land. They call me a pirate because the rich are losing a few dollars. There is too much politics in politics and the RIAA adds to the drama by saying i am a crook.
I was prosecuted by the RIAA and i still download music. Called me ignorant but i prefer a fan


User Comments

Advancedundeath
Date: February 29, 2004 @ 6:06 PM
You weren't prosecuted. You just fell victim to the worst band of thieves in the world.
AdvancedTheSherminator
Date: February 29, 2004 @ 6:22 PM
"I am not a criminal i am simply a music lover with limited resources. "

I really wish people would not say this. This is not an excuse. This idea tends to favor socialism anyway. Unless I am stealing food because I do not have the money, I don't think I can apply this at any other time and expect it to be accepted by anyone as reasonable.

But all you have to do, of course, is mention the price fixing that goes on and you're credible in my book. They've been found guilty of it, and still don't do anything about it. If they steal, people should steal back. I think you are wrong if you don't steal back. That doesn't apply 100% though, since P2P isn't stealing, it's copying, but you get my drift.

"From slavery to the Kent State Massacre, we know we can't trust the government to look out for our best interest..."

Yeah. And now the hand of the government is becomming increasingly heavy thanks to Bush.

This country has been a world super power since the 1940's. Wow, 65 years. That ranks right up there with.. 1/3 as long as every other country. Corruption is abound. Whoever says the US will be in power forever is a loony.

Forgive my tangent, but I think it was important.

Thanks for the submission and I did like reading it.
DMemberSuitablyTwisted
Date: February 29, 2004 @ 6:31 PM
Don't blame Bush. The Democratic platform is thinly disguised socialism. The problem is professional politicians. Reform will not occur until we have term limits on all elected officials. Currently, they look at their job not as serving "we the people", but a lifetime trough from which to gorge. Look at Ted Kennedy. He serves none but himself, and has made a career of it. The President is limited to two terms, and he must stepp aside. If Congress were also so limited, it would be impossible to set up the complex network of graft that exists in today's world. It takes years to become that crooked.
Advancedundeath
Date: February 29, 2004 @ 6:38 PM
Don't label all Democrats the same thing. You can't lump them all into the same grouping. If you do, I'll have to smack ya...
AdvancedTheSherminator
Date: February 29, 2004 @ 7:46 PM
Bush is an idiot, a facist, and a bigger threat to this country than Saddam Hussein was (don't get me wrong, blow up Iraq, I support it regardless of 'weapons'). And I think what SuitablyTwisted meant to say was, "The Democratic platform is commonly percieved as, and most public members can be accurately described as 'socialists in disguise.'"

There are democrats that are perfectly good, reasonable people with valid views. My mom is a republican. She can be fit to the same description.

These people are not the "republicans" and "democrats" in charge right now.

I do blame Bush. For one, it is ludicrous that he is taking his biggoted religous views about gays and trying to ban marriage via CHANGING THE CONSTITUTION. For another.. I'll tell you when I have 12 hours of free time to type. And not one of my reasons will be the war.

Vote Nader or Kucinich.
Advancedawehr
Date: February 29, 2004 @ 8:13 PM
from his response, bush doesnt like the suits but is too lazy to do anything about it. from kerrys response kerry would pass further legislation to facilitate it.

As for what you say, I have emailed my father, who is an fbi agent, and asked him what this link is supposed to mean, if he can complain to his superiors, and if he can suggest to me why I shouldn't levvy countersuit for libel if the fbi should try to come after me for grabbing my anime soundtracks(which arent under us copyright).
Advancedawehr
Date: February 29, 2004 @ 8:15 PM
I think the current US copyright code could be overturned under a well fought constitutional argument. You honestly cannot call 120+years "limited" and under loose interpretation (50% of the judicial camp uses loose interpretation) this means modern copyright law in both its scope and period is unconstitutional.
Advancedawehr
Date: February 29, 2004 @ 8:17 PM
I am not for a complete absence of copyright law, such a shock would cause chaos simply because the economy is so used to the heavy onus of copyright beurocracy, but it would force an immediate focus on rewriting said copyright law, and possibly would grab enough attention to restore consumer rights.
DMembernessn12
Date: February 29, 2004 @ 8:31 PM
i appreciate yall opinions
DMemberbluerhythmjo...
Date: March 1, 2004 @ 2:15 AM
awehr, we already fought the US Copyright code in the Supreme Court and lost... we have to concentrate on putting elected officials in office who are willing to change the laws to conform to reality.
I do, however, give an unequivocal thumbs up to Sherminator's comments on 'Dubya.' The fact is, Bush's call to amend the Constitution is an empty election-year gimmick designed to appeal to his far-right base, who are upset by the fact that he's put the country into record debt, and because Bush is letting the U.S. get flooded with immigrants who provide cheap labor to his corporate buddies. He knows that the 'gay marriage amendment' will never pass in the Senate, and even if it does, it will never get 3/4 of the states to support it. Furthermore, the issue is not even ripe yet - the Republicans passed a law in 1996 that does exactly what the amendment purports to do. The law has not been declared unconstitutional, so why go through the massive time and expense required to amend the Constitution when existing law accomplishes what the amendment purports to?
DMemberiH8RIAA
Date: March 1, 2004 @ 2:03 PM
this is complete truth.

the govt has been corrupt since the 1900s, if my teacher is right (and not politically biased)

i dont think it will get any better.
You must be logged in to post replies to news articles.
Log in or register with the form at the top of the page.

 

 

 

search

news tree


advertising



 

 
© DMusic LLC - Advertising | Employment | TOS | Subscribe