My e-mail to them: 10/17/2003

Pillar,
Hi My name is Bobby, and I am on your mailing list, I also run the Web site, and file sharing program "ZPoC". ZPoC is a Christian music only download p2p with the best chat/ministry rooms on the net. ZPoC is not very well know, we only have about 300 people in a room at 1 time. What I need to know is, do you want me to tell the people of ZPoC not to share any of Pillars music, or just the latest release?
My opinion about file sharing... I do not see that it will hurt "Christian" music at all.. if anything it helps people to find out about new groups, or new music. In turn you will aquire new fans (If you release good music). It also allows people to listen to the message that God gave you to share with others. Some kids are not able to go out and get all of the new release, seems "Christian" parents are more willing to buy secular music for their kids than Christian music. True there are those that only download to fill their computer, and they probably wouldn't buy the CD anyways. I truely believe that there are far more honest people who will go out and buy the latest release, and go to the concerts, when they are able to. Please vist ZPoC, download/install the software and see for your self what we have going on. Please let me know asap, so I can post your response on our web site, and make sure that we respect your decision.

In Christ (who is always listening),
Bobby
ZPoC Christian Music Network



Pillar Response: 10/21/2003
Hey whats up bobby. honestly dude file sharing is against the law man. many people are getting sued right now for things just like this and mainstream companies who file share are getting shut down. so as a Christian why would you even think about bending rules and laws? there is no excuse, even if you think its for sharing the Word of God. there are legal and proper ways to share Gods word. So please dont allow Pillar files to be shared on your site and please pray about the whole site in general.
late, kalel
pillar@pillarmusic.com



ZPoC: 10/21/2003
Please respect this request and remove all of Pillar's music from your shared files.


(modified 10/25/2003 This comment is not directed direct toward Pillar, but to all groups/people.)
(Opinion) Seems to me that if a band is truely in it for God then wouldn't they want everyone to have a chance to listen to the message God gave them to sing?
Thank You,
Bobby

Pillar Response: 10/24/2003
you never asked our persmission to file share out music in the first place. so basically youve been involved with letting people steal our music. you dont steal to spread Gods word. I cant walk into a book store and steal a pile of Bibles to pass them out to nonbelievers. There is a proper way to get those Bibles and get them out to people. just as there is a proper way to get christian music out in peoples hands. it starts with asking the owner of the music's (the record label and band) permission.

im thinking about talking to all the major managers in Christian music and the RIAA and letting know about your site. -kalel


Pillar Response: 10/24/2003
oh yeah you can email me back here on my personal account. i just have a problem with you questioning our motives and us as Christians when you are the one dealing in a shady program (file sharing). thats on thing, but then to post all that and your response for all to see (questioning our faith) is a really bad deal. Thats not would Christ would do. Christ wouldnt bring down other Christians and make them look bad to the world. -kalel

Fowler and Associates Response: 10/24/2003
hey Bobby, I have been made aware of your site although you make a good point it is still upsetting and illegal. Pillar spreads the word of God by playing shows and ministering to kids one on one and answering emails until 4am. Your blatant disrespect of the band by saying they are against downloading is not only defamation of character (which if it is not removed You will hear from our legal representation) it is ludacrous. What your point is has no bearing, it is like saying let's steal bibles from a church to pass out to unsaved people. The industry lost 9 billion dollars last year and is in the biggest market deficit in history because of illegal p2p sharing. It not only effects the musicians, but the record company employees, people working at the stores, cd manufacturing plants, trucking companies, all the way down to a mom and pop record store.

Sony laid off 1,400 music employees in the last 6 months, so some guy had to go home and tell his little girl that they have to move and they don't have any money. It all seems innocent while your at your computer doesn't it.

I really can't believe a Christian would have a p2p site but I guess that is between you and God. Pillar is about getting kids saved and have had more kids saved from their ministry than an illegal p2p site. The bible clearly states that we should obey the laws. I would expect that you would as a "Christian".

I am notifying the RIAA and EMI of your site. Maybe they will not sue you for $20 million like napster but only $17,000 like the college kids who started that one p2p site. Because if you haven't heard IT IS ILLEGAL.

Jason Fowler
Artist Management
580-774-2665
580-774-2480 fax
www.musicunited.org

Shutting Down 10/25/2003
I cannot afford to fight this, so I have no choice but to shut ZPoC Down. Sorry folks, I have greatly enjoyed the ministry we have shared over the last 2 years. Please continue to support the artist, and may God Bless You!

In Christ,
Bobby

More e-mails...

To Fowler and Associates and Pillar: 10/25/2003

The quote was not directed at Pillar rather all bands/people.. There is no need for you to push this, I have closed ZPoC.com. We had a great ministry going there, and I do not believe it hurt Christian Music 1 bit.. What hurt Christian music was bad music last year, anyways I am an individual, who was a family, and only trying to help spread christian music to places or people it has not reached before.


"Your blatant disrespect of the band by saying they are against downloading is not only defamation of character (which if it is not removed You will hear from our legal representation) it is ludacrous."
How is this Defamation of Character?



"just as there is a proper way to get christian music out in peoples hands. it starts with asking the owner of the music's (the record label and band) permission."
If you will look at my first e-mail, you will see that I asked for your permission..

Bobby

Fowler and Associates Response: 10/24/2003
Because the statement as it is set up on the site betrays the band in a manner that shows a view of them not wanting to spread the word of God, which is false, and that the band is against fans and free music. Metallica won a similar law suit against Napster during the RIAA vs. Napster INC.

We are not against free music, we have music on MP3.com and a few other places. But MP3.com pays artist royalties through the advertisements taken on the site. There are legal ways of doing what you were trying to do. The fact of the matter is a person who is not a Christian is not going to do a search for BY the Tree because they have never heard of them. Christian radio is a place they can hear music for free and Christian radio pays ASCAP and BMI royalties. We just have to look that if it is a Ministry that God will bless, I'm pretty sure it will have to be in the context of the law.

Thanks for shutting the site down and maybe God will give you a legal way of spreading his Word.
Jason Fowler
Artist Management

To Fowler And Associates
You apparently live in an area where you have a Christian music radio staion, so you are very fortunate. Howerver if you live in Yugoslavia, and many other parts of the world, ZPoC was the only way for them to listen to christian music and share it with their friends.

In your first e-mail you said.. "Pillar is about getting kids saved and have had more kids saved from their ministry than an illegal p2p site. "Since when did 1 life not become important? ZPoC has been instrumental in changing several lifes, either helping people through personal relationships, preventing suicides, (yes 1 lady has spent many hours on ZPoC and phone counseling atleast 3 people when they were ready to give in. I personally have sent bibles to several kids who had never read 1, but in church. We have taken young kids and made them into Godly leaders within our communty. It is very sad that A "Christin" would outright threatn another Christian because they do not fully understand what we are doing, and you are too blind to see.

Christian Music and the message of Christ should not be limited! Christian Music should not be under the same laws in which secular music is. The whole point of Secular music is to make money. I truely believed that Christian music should be heard by all including those who do not have a radio station, or local bookstore.

Bobby

"Thanks for shutting the site down and maybe God will give you a legal way of spreading his Word"

So much travesty committed in the name of God. This guy Bobby was doing something true and good from his heart. Pillar should be ashamed of themselves.

It's really a shame to see them get bullied by a bunch of agents & lawyers. Looks like the "Almighty Dollar" won this one.

Zuckuss, Gottagets, with all due respect, you're wrong, FLAT WRONG.

Whenever I hear about filesharers, the first thing I think about is "did they even ask the artist?"

Zuckuss: "This guy Bobby was doing something true and good from his heart."
He was so true and so good that he didn't bother to ask the artists he was trading if they minded. He was so good and so true he created a web site where people could learn more about these artists he likes (not), he pointed people to the mp3s these artists have decided to share (not), and he bought these artists' albums (not).

Gottagets: "It's really a shame to see them get bullied by a bunch of agents & lawyers."
It's a shame Bobby didn't show the same respect for the artists he was trading around by first /asking/ if they agreed. Speaking as a Christian, that's the very least he should have done since we are all brothers under Christ.

Sweet Jesus (pun intended), there are so many ways Bobby can ethically spread the word about Christian music, it's not funny. Hiding behind Christ to justify filesharing is soooo lame.

Peace,
Chuck

legal way to spread Gods word?? nazi germany, communist China, Islamic nations, southeast asia. they all have and had legal ways too.

Thanks for printing this!

There is alot of hypocrisy in the world today, and Fowler and Asses certainly fall under my definition of it. To hide behind the "it's illegal" banner and then threaten to turn Bobby in is enough to gag me for the day. Those guys are in it for the money, period. And hey, I have never heard of Pillar, but believe me, I will never want to hear them after their true motives were exposed. This is disturbing, to say the least.

"Date: October 27, 2003 @ 8:29 AM
Zuckuss, Gottagets, with all due respect, you're wrong, FLAT WRONG.

Whenever I hear about filesharers, the first thing I think about is "did they even ask the artist?"

Zuckuss: "This guy Bobby was doing something true and good from his heart."
He was so true and so good that he didn't bother to ask the artists he was trading if they minded. He was so good and so true he created a web site where people could learn more about these artists he likes (not), he pointed people to the mp3s these artists have decided to share (not), and he bought these artists' albums (not).

Gottagets: "It's really a shame to see them get bullied by a bunch of agents & lawyers."
It's a shame Bobby didn't show the same respect for the artists he was trading around by first /asking/ if they agreed. Speaking as a Christian, that's the very least he should have done since we are all brothers under Christ.

Sweet Jesus (pun intended), there are so many ways Bobby can ethically spread the word about Christian music, it's not funny. Hiding behind Christ to justify filesharing is soooo lame.

Peace,
Chuck"

fatchuck, with all do respect, you are a fucking moron! I guess you missed the vocab lesson in English class where you learn what the word "hypocrisy" means. Yeah, these dudes did sell out to the almighty dollar.

Crap like this is why I'm not christian. Your religion is damned. You abandond logic hundreds of years ago for money.
I especially like the part where this pillar representative says we are not against free music. We have music on mp3.com. A site to which there is nothing free about. This is one example of ill-logic in the statements. How about where he says file sharing is illegal dude. Last time I checked file sharing was not illegal and again without the ability to share file we should all unplug our computers and through them away because if we can't exchange data they are virtually useless. And the way I read the first letter it was a request to continue to share their music. Probably brought on by all the recent commotion over the legalities of sharing copyrighted works. Instead of saying no it is not thank you for asking us, they reply with threats of legal action and attacks on his ccharector and his faith in god. If thats not a classic christain reaction I don't know what is. As far as defamation of charector goes... You are responsable for what you say. This Bobby fellow never told Pillar the conversation would be kept in confidence. Therefore it cannot be defamation of charector. I say again. Thank you for abandoning logic I hope you make all kinds of money and are able to horde it in the name of god you greedy basterds.

Two thing.

First, it would seem that Christian producers don't understand the 'cd off a store shelf, bible off a per' analogy and how wrong it is.

Second, what exactly did Chirst say about sharing?

Third, rendering unto Ceasar is great and all, but you might want to question when Ceasar is ripping you off blind.

Fourth, change the law, and thing will be fine. Let's be like Canada, where it's o.k. to non-commercially share culture without getting sued.

Oh I can see it now. As christ breaths his final breath on the cross he utters the words. My father is against file sharing.

I think it is pretty clear that Folwler and associates of Pillar will burn in hell.

Furthermore, it is clear that they donot know anything about Christian philosophy.

Breaking a secular law is not akin to breaking a religious one.

In fact it is many Christians duty to break the laws that contrdict god's laws.

Let's be perfectly clear hear. There is no Commanment that says, Thoushall not infringe"

infringing is not stealing.

Additionally, copyright law is an afront to nature and god.

You will surely burn in hell!

And to all you christians out there who will surely get in an upheavel over the words I speak because they do not conform to your self surving idealistic way of thought. Dont think or accuse me of hating you. It would be in-correct for you to think such. I'm glad your religion is around, for without christianity and our government we could never truely know what obsured is and we may strafe in that direction without the constant reminder of how silly it is.

Wish I could source this quote, but -
"There was only one true Christian, and he got crucified."

If I remember, Christ was all about breaking unjust laws and especially kicking the money-makers out of the church. Partly the reason behind his death.

" The bible clearly states that we should obey the laws."

This Jason Fowler guy is a jack-ass.

People have been getting laid off all over the place. I've been laid off twice in the past three years, and it's not because I worked for companies with broken business models.

Also, for his Christ comment...

32: Then Jesus called his disciples unto him, and said, I have compassion on the multitude, because they continue with me now three days, and have nothing to eat: and I will not send them away fasting, lest they faint in the way.
33: And his disciples say unto him, Whence should we have so much bread in the wilderness, as to fill so great a multitude?
34: And Jesus saith unto them, How many loaves have ye? And they said, Seven, and a few little fishes.
35: And he commanded the multitude to sit down on the ground.
36: And he took the seven loaves and the fishes, and gave thanks, and brake them, and gave to his disciples, and the disciples to the multitude.
37: And they did all eat, and were filled: and they took up of the broken meat that was left seven baskets full.
38: And they that did eat were four thousand men, beside women and children.
39: And he sent away the multitude, and took ship, and came into the coasts of Magdala,

For some reason, I doubt the guy would let anyone go without, especially with something as cheap as electrons.

I suppose it's worth adding - it would be perfectly legal to get any copy of the bible written prior to 1923 and stick it on a filesharing network. It's only recent laws made in the name of money that changes that.

... I can't beleive how irritated this makes me, considering I'd never listen to this style of music. Last point: There is no way Christ or God would have said "Thou shalt not spread my word or Love if Man pass law against it." These people are fleecing the fathful.

That was quite eligant elwah thank you for that reading. I wonder who cought the fish and how they felt about having their product shared freely with thousands.

Also when did Jesus or any of the other great people who contributed to the bible say it is okay to hold discontent for others who do not hold the same beliefs? I don't remember it. In fact, I remember Jesus, on the cross, forgiving his persacuters for what they have done. Not threatening to sue. Pillar your sick individuals.

so as a Christian why would you even think about bending rules and laws? there is no excuse, even if you think its for sharing the Word of God. there are legal and proper ways to share Gods word

I dont even need to read this whole thing
Now Ithink if Christ were here and found these Christian artist wanting yopu to buy thier product, he would be upset that some one istrying to make a profit off of him. I really do belive this, the word of God and Christ should be free, is this not the way it CHristianity started.

Wait a sec, this starts with backwards logic.

"so as a Christian why would you even think about bending rules and laws? there is no excuse, even if you think its for sharing the Word of God. there are legal and proper ways to share Gods word. So please dont allow Pillar files to be shared on your site and please pray about the whole site in general. "

So these files shouldn't be shared because it's against the law. This seems to be the only real argument about why they don't want people to share Yet, many bands are more than happy to let their fans share music, so sharing music itself isn't what's wrong, it's doing it against the will of the band itself. Especially if one adopts a strict Christian mode of conduct.

Also, it should probably be noted over and over in this thread, Christ was executed by the state for doing things he wasn't supposed to. If he had simply recanted, and did what he was told, well, millions of people wouldn't be wearing crosses around their necks.

So, in essense, the problem would be removed if the bands (and labels) simply allowed people to share their music, and worked to cultivate long-term, paying fans. And the rest of the problem (danger of family destroying debt via lawsuits) would be removed if the RIAA stopped thier dumb-ass shiznit.

So the problem here isn't kids trying to get their Jesus-fix without paying the proper authorities....

Oh wait, yet it is.

But that's fine, everyone gets to fight their own fight. And I'm not a big fan of Christian rock (a bit too oxymoronic for me, YMMV), so I won't get the music one way or the other. Although it is quite a bit more likely that I'd give it a try if it were easy...but that's just me.

What part of *FILE SHARING IS NOT ILLEGAL* do you not understand??

I grew up as a kid in a Christian environment in the early/mid 80s in the midwest US. The term "Christian Rock" was considered blasphemous by a lot of people at that time. Many many people struggled and suffered to make rock music an acceptable form of evangelism. However, the true colors will always come shining through - $$$$$$$$$$.

[BTW - I'm pretty sure that the Bible is in the public domain by now.]

That conversation above ranks as *the* most ludicrous thing I've ever read on online. Having an argument "It's about money" vs. "It's about the music" is one thing. Having an argument over "It's about preaching the word of god" vs "It's about the money" - that really really shows CLEAR AS DAY where people's priorities are.

Anyway, somebody in congress PLEASE outlaw all forms of media that can be easily copied***, so we can get on with the Fahrenheit 451 & the boot stamping on the human face forever. Thank you.

As a Christian, I was surprised after discovering several Christian artists where affiliated with the RIAA. I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but this is the same group of people who promote drug use, sex, calling women 'hoes', promotes them dressing like sluts, and in some case even promote killing people, and then make a profit from selling all of them. At the same time they want to make money by selling Christian music which promotes just the opposite.

Regardless of what they say, it turns out they are still in it for the money. I believe trying to make a profit for personal gain in the name of God is called 'Simony'. Just as not everyone who sings about the devil is actually a Satanists, not everyone who sings about Christ is a Christian.

I think the only travesty of this entire thing, besides the sickening behavior of these so called christians, is that a p2p network that was probably filled with much more than pillar music was shut down because pillar didn't like it. Why didn't this guy just ban pillar music from the network?

Jason Fowler, the Paraphrase.

O.k. sorry. This should have been one post. The label's opinion is surmized fairly simply.

""The fact of the matter is a person who is not a Christian is not going to do a search for BY the Tree because they have never heard of them. Christian radio is a place they can hear music for free and Christian radio pays ASCAP and BMI royalties. "

A.K.A. We only preach to the choir. And they're the ones we fleece too.

"We just have to look that if it is a Ministry that God will bless, I'm pretty sure it will have to be in the context of the law."

I'd always heard that there really wasn't anything in front of the Guy, and that all other contexts were subservient. But again, it's not my ideology.

Chuck, I respect your opinion but you must’ve missed this part of the article from Bobby to Pillar:

“What I need to know is, do you want me to tell the people of ZPoC not to share any of Pillars music, or just the latest release?”

And then again to Fowler et. al:

“If you will look at my first e-mail, you will see that I asked for your permission..”

So your statement “It's a shame Bobby didn't show the same respect for the artists he was trading around by first /asking/ if they agreed” has no merit.

I'd hate to see this get into a debate on Christianity. The point of the article is that the file sharing issue is affecting all kinds of music. valid arguments could've been made weather or not the artists were consulted or not but to blame a particular religion for the squabble is insane. If you don't want to believe that's ok, this is America, but don't make rediculous accusations as to why you don't believe just because you agree or disagree with an issue. Lets keep focused people

anti Christan sentement is as damaging as anti semitism, anti Islam or blasting any faith.

Sorry if my comments were seen as attacking. The 'Christian Element' to this particular discussion is only because it was brought up in the original exchange of email.

Whatever floats your boat. The comments of the Malaysian Prime Minister notwithstanding.

Amen Comp!

Dear Purfus,

Got you on my prayer list. I don't recognize my faith in your opinion of Christianity. We live in America, and freedom of religion is still one of our rights for now. But if the RIAA has it's way, our rights will all be gone.

Sticking to topic and not throwing in personal opinions because you agree or disagree with a segment of the topic, is probably a great idea. In other words, we may be Christian or Muslim, black or white or plaid, old or young, male or female, American or Canadian or African, republican or democrat, college student or old fart, we are united under one banner....BOYCOTT RIAA!!!!! That's the bottom line, and the only important thing here.

Yeah, I knew something like this would make it out into the open before long... Pillar is with a Christian label that is owned by one of the Big 5 (I'm not sure since my burned CD of theirs doesn't have the record labels' name on them), as is almost every better-known Christian act out there. The same hypocrisies that exist in the secular world also exist in Christian music, which makes people ask 'are they really Christians?'. I'd bet there are PLENTY of smaller musicians, both Christian and secular, that would love to have their music heard by as many people as possible...

By the way, if you're using the Bible to defend preaching the message using ZPoC, it also says to "be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient..." (Titus 3:1)
The biggest one says "Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities...The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves" (Romans 13:1-2)

With that said, I love the idea, and wish Bobby well in his future ventures.

Chris Backe

Yeah, I knew something like this would make it out into the open before long... Pillar is with a Christian label that is owned by one of the Big 5 (I'm not sure since my burned CD of theirs doesn't have the record labels' name on them), as is almost every better-known Christian act out there. The same hypocrisies that exist in the secular world also exist in Christian music, which makes people ask 'are they really Christians?'. I'd bet there are PLENTY of smaller musicians, both Christian and secular, that would love to have their music heard by as many people as possible...

By the way, if you're using the Bible to defend preaching the message using ZPoC, it also says to "be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient..." (Titus 3:1)
The biggest one says "Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities...The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves" (Romans 13:1-2)

With that said, I love the idea, and wish Bobby well in his future ventures.

Chris Backe

they kept saying "file sharing is illegal".
I got a problemn with that language. Sharing copyrighted work may be a questionable practice but file sharing is not illegal. But ya see they say and eventually people get it in their minds that its all illegal. Detroying a great distribution method.
Hey Pillar, the diciples asked once, "is it lawful to pay taxes on th sabbath". Christ's answer to them was, "Give to Caesar what is Ceasars..give to God what is God's" I guess we see what side you are on.
To have such a fit over this shows that the love of money is more important to you. Sharing isn't hurting you. Why can you not see that it actually causes people to want to buy it.
The record companies aren;t having to lay people off because of file sharing...its because technology has made it easier for them to implement shortcuts in the way they produce stuff..they are just using file sharing as an excuse.
Why would you care? Lokk at how much money your own label is ripping off you. Why do you not have a problem with that?

I'm what you would probably call a pretty hardcore Christian. After all, I'm studying Bible classes at a Bible college. I would list some sort of statement of faith, but that would probably not be neccissary (sp?) for this discussion.

I do recall a passage in the Bible that is being broken by this interchange. I believe it was put in place for this sort of reason. http://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/bible?passage=1COR+6&language=english&version=NIV&showfn=on&showxref=on

[By the way, you can get to the bible online these days]

I really am not in support of bringing in the spiritual implications of this. This is not a spiritual battle. This is simply a battle for copyright reform. If it involves Christians, then it shouldn't.

By the way, if you're using the Bible to defend preaching the message using ZPoC, it also says to "be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient..." (Titus 3:1)
The biggest one says "Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities...The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves" (Romans 13:1-2

-- Very Interesting; If not slightly amusing. First and foremost at this point, since your crediting God for the governments in power; It's safe to assume God authorized the 3rd reich (sp?); As well as the IRAQ government formally led by Saddam Hussein. That implies God is okay with people being murdered by the thousands. And he's okay with his message being altered.

I thank you so much Chris Backe for pointing out that God does indeed create all government; And that he obviously by doing so, is totally in support of brutal slayings of person who do not agree.

You've certainly demonstrated that wonderful xian love I've so come to expect from persons of your stature.

As for the band known as Pillar; Even Christians like to make a buck.

TTYL

Make a joyful noise, but don't forget to collect the royalties.

This weekend I had a discussion with a relative, about 18 years of age, about mp3.

He told me "I thought file sharing was illegal".

Oh, how pissed off I was to hear from his mouth how BRAINWASHED he has become, thanks to the bullsh!t propraganda RIAA is feeding to the masses.

After spending about an hour educating him, and informing him of the boycott, he's become an activist, and will never buy RIAA music again.

When I read these posts about whether not it is "illegal" to spread "the Word of God", I'm further enraged.

I glean from these posts that it is the belief that our "law" supercedes the law of God. Our "law" is determined by the handful of fat pigs in the Government who have no problem ravaging us and the rest of the world of every cent and resource it has. Laws are written for the benefit of the pigs who supple from their consequences.

When the law goes against the law of God, I easily say F#ck the law.

When the law says it's ok for the RIAA to sue the pants off of the average person, just to protect their profiteering off of garbage products, and polluting the media and airwaves not only with pop-bullsh!t and propaganda, I say F#ck the RIAA.

RIAA, sue me, please! It will be the biggest mistake you've ever made.

Educate. Boycott. Revolt.

You can quote as many scriptures at me as you want, and you will never convince me that God means for me to obey someone who has contempt for Him and what His word says. The spreading of the gospel supercedes any verse that says to obey every law cause God is in charge....it doesn't mean that at all...it means God is allowing certain people to be in charge...whose side do you want to be on? The government that promotes the murder of unborn children, or someone downloading a song that leads them to Christ? Get real! You know nothing at all if that's all you know.

This article is a sad, i was able to get Christian music to share on kazaa from a Christian music company, and now share the files they have given me, on kazaa.
Seeing that the gentleman from musicunited got involved, its hard for me to have sympathy for someone who supports the misbehavior of the RIAA when they are supposed to be representing the Lord Jesus Christ.

gdz.. I thought that is what SESAC if for.. to collect the royalties for "spiritual or religious" types of music. BTW.. that is also what I thougt.. at least early Christians specialized in.. sharing with the have-nots.

I've read all 37 of the posts preceding this one and it's amazing.

While Gottagetsome is right in his followup to my original post (Bobby did ask the band and the band said No), the rest of these posts seem like a whole lot of rationalizations for ignoring the artist because it's inconvenient.

FWIW, I work with ~15 Indie artists in Cincinnati and around the U.S. and Europe to help them improve their professional standing. I consider these acts my friends as well as really good musicians. The idea that someone wants to trade their CDs over Kazaa without first getting the artists' OK seems really reprehensible. If the artists /want/ you to share their music, they'll put their music up on their web site or on a web site like DMusic.

None of these acts belong to a label, that's why they're Indies - they want to do their thing and have control over their work. Is it too hard to respect that?

"infringing is not stealing."

You're right, infringing is not stealing. It's also a pretty shitty way to treat the acts you enjoy the most.

"Additionally, copyright law is an afront to nature and god."

It was built into the U.S. Constitution from Day 1 of its ratification. Maybe you meant /copyright abuse/ ?

Chuck

I guess doing things in the name of God are FAR LESS IMPORTANT than spreading the word of the almightly dollar bill.

I hate this world.

This whole fcuking thing pissed me fof to the point where I'm tempted to move to an inhabited island, or just let myself go.

I'm tired of all this. The world is going to hell.

WE MUST DO SOMETHING RIGHT THIS MINUTE

IF WE DO NOT REVOLT WE WILL LOSE OUR FREEDOM

ONCE THE ENEMY GETS THROUGH ONE DOOR, THE REST OPEN EASIER

WE NEED TO UNITE AGAINST THE RIAA, MICROSOFT, HOLLYWOOD AND THEIR BROADCAST (SPY)FLAG AND CORPORATIONS WISHING TO TERMINATE THE CONSUMER

THE TIME TO DO SOMETHING IS NOW

STEALING A BIBLE FROM A STORE IS TOTALLY DIFFERENT FROM DOWNLOADING A SH*TTY COPIED VERSION OF A SONG

WE CANNOT LET CORPORATIONS TAKE OVER OUR LIVES, AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, OUR FREEDOM

IS FREEDOM IMPORTANT TO YOU?

THEN SAVE YOUR FREEDOM...

"Lawsuits Among Believers"
And what does this say about the day the DMCA appointed the RIAA judge, jury, and executioner?

Curchkey my fellow human being. You do that. It will be the longest prair you ever make. Actually on second thought. Don't pray for me. As you say I have the freedom to choose my religion. How can I when people like you always use the final resort of "I will pray for you". What can I say to get that type of religious intrusion out of my life? No matter what I say you will always tell me you will pray for my lost soul. No matter what I think I can not ignore the fact that someone is talking about me to their god. If I were truely free from religion you would ask for my premision to pray for my soul and I would probably not give it either.

I am not an evil person. I love, I live, I hate, I day. I am just the same as anyone else out there. I choose not to follow any religion not because I relish the thought of it but because I feel secure enough in my life and my own ideals that I do not feel the need to take on anothers. I certainly will not take on anothers ideals when they do not even make logical sense. You could say that is a matter of debate, but really it's not. Logic can be proven, religions can not. Thats my opinion and it is my right to have it. If you do not want me to express mine do not express yours first. If you will not consider mine, do not expect me to consider yours. That is to all christians not just the ones here today.

When I finished my last post a little while ago I wondered how many christians I would piss off (or as you would put it troubled or some other non affective word that denotes nothing more than concern for my soul). I thought to myself well they will probably tell me that I will be in their prairs. What a surprise I come back and there it is.

If God supports our government that is just one more reason not to believe. But I don't believe he does and whoever added that scripture to the bible was probably a government man himself, or woman herself. I certainly know that god does not think it is okay to ban drugs ( not illicits ) in this country simply because they are not profitable. Or to push chemicals because they are profitable. Case in point would be triptophan. A wonderful little molecular structure that is used by our bodies to creat seratonin. Yeah that stuff people pay a dollar a day to change the chemical balances in their bodies so the happy juice will hang around a bit longer. Funny that a country would outlaw an essential amino acid. One of the building blocks of life, but they did. Why? Because a contaminated batch made it to new mexico and killed a bunch of people. No concern for finding out the cuase of contamination or stopping it from happening in other products, just outlaw. The battles which were headed by concerned drug companies who did not own the pattents to an essential amino acid but did own a lot of anti-depresent patents. Is that god's work? I hope not.

Or how about the levels cyanide in ciggeretes. Everyone has seen the add about the product that has been banned because a small amount of cyanide was found in a contaminated batch. But one ciggerete contains even higher levels of cyanide. Ciggeretes arent illegal. Why? Because there is money behind them. The same thing that causes the formation of a lot of our laws. Money. In fact our capitalistic country is driven by money and the desire to obtain more of it. I don't agree or disagree with capitalism, nor do a take any stance on communism. I have no idea which is better or worse. I know what I have seen and that is all. And so far all I have seen is a lot of greedy motivations. So essentially by stating we should blindly support the state because of our belief in God and that God always supports the state you are saying that God supports greed as a central motivation for action. I don't know the guy/girl/entity so I cant say whether he/she/it does but I know one of the 10 simple rules he so blaintently gave us deals with the problem of greed and corruption. None of those rules state thou shalt not share.

I'm done with the religion debate compmore. No need to further deter me from stating my opinions on the matter. I've said all I have to say and I don't care to retort to anyone's objection of my opinion. It's mine all mine and I think I might patent it.

twlnki,

FUCK YEAH!

Religion has always been, and always will be, a control mechanism for the elite ruling class to keep the poor under their thumb, through fear ("you'll go to hell if you don't believe!") and wealth ("give 10% of your earnings!"). I won't go into the millions of innocent people murdered in the name of "Christianity" (but I will mention the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, and the Salem witch trials), or because one religion has differing views (ever hear of Nothern Ireland?), or that "heaven" awaits those who kill the infidel (take a look at the Middle East). Every "Christian" I have personally met has been a hypocrite, acting one way Sunday morning and entirely different during the week. And, having been the target of such hypocrisy, I realize that there couldn't be a "supreme being" that allows people to act like that in its name. File-sharing shouldn't even be a "religious" issue.

Like Billy Joel said: "I'd rather laugh with the sinner than cry with the saints" (oops...copyright infringement!)

purfus
you seem to miss the point. If your intent was to piss off christains (and that seemed to certinly be on you mind when you wrote it from your statement) You've obviously have an axe to grind and it is not needed here on this forum. You have a lot of valuable imput from the posts of yours that I've read but this has nothing to do with the issue. If you don't like Christains praying for you then ignore it. If it's pointless from your perspective then let them waste their time. If God doesn't exist then they're talking to no one but themselves and again so what. no one can control what others do you can just control your own actions. If you want tollerance shown to you then you need to show some to others. Keep in mind you fired the first shot in this discussion. You have a sharp mind and good insight in your discussions. keep it on topic and we can debate the real issues

Beautiful post, scayf!

Scayf
the above applies to you as well. I'm at this forum to discuss the issue of the RIAA. Every single human being is a hypocryte at one point or another reguardless of their faith.

"Like Billy Joel said: "I'd rather laugh with the sinner than cry with the saints" (oops...copyright infringement!)"

Actually, that's a Fair Use exception to the copyright laws. No infrinegement anywhere.

"File-sharing shouldn't even be a "religious" issue."

It isn't, it's an ethical issue. Filesharing is ethical as long as you're sharing your own creations, abandoned creations, or have gotten the OK from the original creator/author. Otherwise it's pretty sleazy.

"Religion has always been, and always will be, a control mechanism for the elite ruling class to keep the poor under their thumb, through fear ("you'll go to hell if you don't believe!") and wealth ("give 10% of your earnings!")."

Speaking as a practicing Christian, any educated Christian will tell you that "you'll go to hell if you don't believe!" is just shorthand for "you'll go to hell if you don't (agree with my beliefs)!" There are idiots in any field, yet I don't define the field by its idiots.

BTW, per "10% of your earnings!," that dates to pre-Christian and pre-Judaic pagan areas since it was considered a wise way to avoid famine and catastrophe when things went wrong. Did you ever study religious history or are you just parroting what others have told you?

Chuck

purfus,

What does your rant have to do with boycotting the RIAA?

Further, in another forum, explain the logic behind life's existence, and human nature.

Prove to me that God, however you may define it, does not exist, using whatever logic you use.

"Logic can be proven, religions can not".
Logic is much simpler than religion, thus the simple-minded are able to prove it.

But even pure logic fails.

Prove that electrons exist, logically. You can't. Just ask Heizenburg. You know 'something' must be flowing in your PC in order for you to type your rant, but it takes faith to call that flow electrons.

To be truly free from religion, you'd have to isolate yourself from the world; it's everywhere my friend.

Good luck patenting your argument. Maybe you can make some $$ off of me if I use your words.

"the rest of these posts seem like a whole lot of rationalizations for ignoring the artist because it's inconvenient."

Right on Fatchuck! These guys have more excuses and rationalizatons than there are grains of sand on a beach. It's so pathetic. They complain about the labels, but not one of them has ever sent a lousy dime directly to the artists after they take the music.

Oh, you better watch it Fatchuck, you are about to be labeled pro RIAA and an enemy of the cause

Ah Purfus my dear fellow human being!

I am so sorry to have offended you, although it sounds like you fully expected one of us to do exactly that! I should have been more explicit in my saying I would pray for you...I never intended to try to convert you. I only meant I would ask a blessing on you. A blessing is a good thing. Kind of like prclaiming may the wind always be at your back, and may you always walk in good health. That kind of thing. I do know it is no longer normal to expect even the milk of human kindness from each other. We are all too busy watching our backs. That is a sorry state of affairs. I have always been an idealist, always looking for the best in people, and so I am frequently disappointed. But I don't let that stop me from wishing you a very pleasant and happy life, and from hoping that you will continue to fight the good fight against those who would take away my freedom to pray for you and your freedom to refuse it. May our strengths be in what unites us rather than in what divides us.

At the heart of the matter is the deceit of the record labels. They stepped forward and made the blanket statement that file-sharing is wrong, period, denying the existence of those who actually would prefer to find an audience rather than sue the one they've already got.

The public either buys into it or completely rejects it, much like religion.

As chuck says, it should be a matter of the choice of the artist. But what it should be is entirely different from what it is.

The independent artist who wishes to find an audience MUST release free music into the P2P stream just in hopes of being heard.

The major label artist needs to control what is being heard.

Both the independents AND the major artists would benefit from some sort of way to distinguish between those files authorized for sharing and those deemed "illegal" -- a method which would allow the public to make the distinction BEFORE they download.

That would be nice. But the P2P's won't do it because they make their money from advertising and want the biggest user base possible. They are not going to tell their users: WARNING, IF YOU DOWNLOAD THIS FILE YOU WILL BE BREAKING THE LAW.

"infringing is not stealing."

You're right, infringing is not stealing. It's also a pretty shitty way to treat the acts you enjoy the most.

"Additionally, copyright law is an afront to nature and god."

It was built into the U.S. Constitution from Day 1 of its ratification. Maybe you meant /copyright abuse/ ?


Ok, lets start with a little copyright history. T Jefferson is our founding father who helped build our nartion upon the principlkes of "Natural Law" That is the law of God.

There is no law in nature that says, "If you hear somebody sing a song who can't repeat it without their permission." It simply does not exist in nature. For example it is perfectly natural for one to resist being murdered or having their blanket stolen, while there is no corresponding existence of a natural affornt to having another sing your song.

T Jefferson sepcifically renounced the notion of intellectual property. It is not property and shares no meanigful simliarity with it.

An artist does not have the right to control what others do with his sound recordings after he/she/it publishes it out into the universe. That is the state of nature. The recordings can be replicated without any effort on the part of the artists and there is no other way to stop such replication without turning our world into a police state. It is an affront to the laws of nature.

The copyright clause in art 3 sec 8 of our beloved constitution bares no relationship to the law we have today. CR law as the framers envisioned it lasted 14 years and did not apply to music.

And as far as the way I treat the acts that I like the most. I treat the acts that I like very well. In fact some are close personal friends of mine and when given the opportunity I buy multiples of their CDs and give them away as gifts. I go see their shows and bring my frineds with me.

As gotta go.......

"The independent artist who wishes to find an audience MUST release free music into the P2P stream just in hopes of being heard."

Actually, DMusic.com is testimony to how wrong that is. A service like Kazaa has millions of users at any time, but when I log into it, I'm logged into one node among hundreds. If an Indie (say, you) has their music on Kazaa, the odds are excellent that I will not find it since your music might be on 1-50 nodes out of 500-600 total. As an Indie, you have a much better chance of being heard if you upload your music to an index like DMusic.com, mp3.com or any of the other legal download sites. Why? There's only one node at each site.

"Both the independents AND the major artists would benefit from some sort of way to distinguish between those files authorized for sharing and those deemed "illegal"

You're right GDZ. Correct me if I'm wrong, but every Indie I know makes this really clear by having their music available for free download at their web site or off of a download site like DMusic, Garageband, mp3. If their music's on Kazaa, it's anyone's guess as to whether or not the artist OK'd that.

Sorry, but as much as I loathe the labels, if you don't like them, don't buy them or download them. By downloading major label music, you're still making them money when they Sue-and-Settle. Be honest. Buy the music you want from a used CD store or from half.com. You get the music you want, the label gets nothing.

Chuck

Don't be fooled by 'Christian Rock' anyway - most of it is the same pre-fab, manufactured-by-committee, make-a-quick-buck stuff that the labels have been pouring out on all areas of the market. They just put up a 'Christian' band as a front to rake in dollars from another source, but the money all goes back into the same drug/violence promoting sleaze-pot. Real Christian bands wouldn't have anything to do with the devil RIAA. (besides, the best Christian music is in the public domain, having been around for many decades).

Like, whatever. You should KNOW that when "religion" is brought into ANY subject, sh!t will get stirred. I was just showing "Christianity" as the hypocrisy it was, as proven by the above article.

"Sorry for gettin' up on my hind legs..."oops, another "Fair Use", I hope...

Hey guys...

I'm a regular ZPoc user...matter of fact, my home computer is busy finishing a transfer right now...and what's been missed here, was that as soon as the band requested removal, we DID remove them. It is policy to remove anyone who doesn't want to be shared. When Evanescence said "We don't want to be in Christian stores", we went and said "well, then, they don't need to be on a Christian p2p."

The thing that has been missed is that ZPoc has always been more than a p2p...there is an active chat community, including both public rooms and private chat.

yeah your right comp and I apologize for starting such a useless debate. I may have good input but I also have a hot head and have never denied that. But read my words wisely. I apologize for starting up such a useless debate. Not for my opinions on it.

fatchuck - I hold you in high esteem and your points are well taken. Bobby was definitely late in his asking for permission and was certainly in the wrong, but I do give him credit for eventually asking. I just find it overboard to start sending him letters from lawyers citing 'defamation of character' for expressing an opinion on his own website. He didn't direspectfully slander them, he merely questioned their motives. He has every right to.

"im thinking about talking to all the major managers in Christian music and the RIAA and letting know about your site. -kalel "

To me this is a very vindictive thing to say to Bobby especially from a band that espouses Christian values. He took their music off his site as they wanted. It should have been left at that. If Bobby had told them to get bent and kept the music up I could see telling him something to this effect, but he did exactly as they wanted and then questioned their motives. Pillar had every right to ask him to stop. It's their music to do whatever they want. I just get a strong feeling (as strong as you can get from a little article) that Pillar are being bad sports about having their motives questioned.

My first post was short and wasn't intended to argue that Pillar should allow free downloads if they didn't wish it.

Good day to you, sir.

sir-neon - so is ZPoC still up? The article stated that the site was to be shut down.

"It is policy to remove anyone who doesn't want to be shared."

Is it policy to ask permission BEFORE someone's music is posted on the network?

no problem Purfus. I get hotheaded too. I have a teenage son who feels the same way you do and We have really useful discussions about it. but that's a topic I like to avoid whenever possible. It's a no win argument for either side. I know we probably agree on far more than we disagee. take care

mroop. I gotta say that is an excellent question

Jesus Christ has nothing to do with 'Pillar' and the RIAA. Genuine Christians sing to help lead the lost to Christ - not for profit. Genuine Christians wouldn't have any problem whatsoever sharing their songs (or sermons for that matter) with anyone that wanted them. (Notice I say 'genuine' Christians.) Thank God for P2P networks. What Pillar - along with Fowler and Associates - did was totally self-serving and had nothing to do with God or His will. They simply did their own thing and tried to use God's name as leverage. Truth be told, those individuals don't care about God's will or the 'law' - just about financial profit.

Arg! This dude ticks me off! I mostly listen to underground christian music, and it is NOWHERE to be found. You really have to dig for it, and when you find a place that has it, they go and pull crap like this. I dont listen to Pillar, but I seriously wonder now about the people in Christian music. What are these people doing in the business if it not to get the message of the Gospel out? Where is thier heart at? The Love of money, or the mission to save the lost. Looks like in this case it is the love of money, or should I say mamon?

viscix
Date: October 27, 2003 @ 9:43 AM
'Wish I could source this quote, but -
"There was only one true Christian, and he got crucified."

If I remember, Christ was all about breaking unjust laws and especially kicking the money-makers out of the church. Partly the reason behind his death. '

Absolutely true. Breaking unjust human laws to preach God's law is what cost Christ his life. Everything that's 'legal' ain't moral.

purfus,

"What does your rant have to do with boycotting the RIAA?"
NOTHING!!!

"Further, in another forum, explain the logic behind life's existence, and human nature."
I do not know how to explain existance. If I did I would have my own religion. But I wouldn't start my own religion unless I could. As far as human nature goes, thats easy. People will do what they want, when they want, and how they want to. Some people are followers some are not. Human nature is us. If you think of it, it is your nature.


Prove to me that God, however you may define it, does not exist, using whatever logic you use.
To prove that god does not exist I would first need to disprove that he does. However, all of the counter arguments would make it an endless battle of theory. However, theories are created to show the best known answer to an issue. A theory is only acceptable as long as it is not proven wrong. But it is never known to be correct. Just not wrong. However, a theory also has logically sound reasoning behind it. Some use facts as support. Facts are only as good as the perception of them. So facts can change as well. It is not posible to prove that God exist because of the nature of the creation. It is also not posible to prove that God does not exist for the same reasons. My problem is that the reasoning is not sound. To say God exist because we say so is not sound. To back it up with no provable facts is even more unsound. Can I directly prove that he does not exist? Ofcourse not it would require me to measure something which does not exist which can not happen. It's like proving there is no invisible man. Or that a tree does not make noise in the woods when it falls if no one hears it. Use technology and record it.... no, then you've heard it.... So what you ask is imposible to do simply because of the nature of the issue at hand.
However, if I were to attempt it I would first consider the following; One side of the argument claims that God exists but there is no proof. The other side claims that god does not exist because there is no proof. Side A asks us to make assumptions. Side B is simply pointing out what is presented to it by side A. That is, nothing factual. Considering this it seems pointless to even argue the issue. Therefore I can only state that I do not know whether there exist a being such as God. Nor could I even definitively define what God is. So the question of whether or not God exist does not actually exist.


"Logic is much simpler than religion, thus the simple-minded are able to prove it."
Thank you, I could not think of a greater compliment than the accusation that I am simple minded. I assume that because you consider me simple you are complex. No body like unnessesary complexities.....

"But even pure logic fails."
I'm sorry I must have missed that... Where does pure logic fail?

"Prove that electrons exist, logically. You can't. Just ask Heizenburg. You know 'something' must be flowing in your PC in order for you to type your rant, but it takes faith to call that flow electrons."
While one cannot see an atom there is a significant amount of facts, studies, and theories on the matter. In fact there is so much stuff in this world built on the concepts of atomic theory that it would be pretty strange if what is really going on in that tiny world is much different from what we believe. I personnaly like string theory. Seems to make intuitive sense to me. However, the popular theories have a lot to back them up. Heres a cool device; http://science.howstuffworks.com/atom9.htm
Besides the theory behind the issue doesn't really matter because the rants I type into my PC are reaching you. That you and I can prove.


To be truly free from religion, you'd have to isolate yourself from the world; it's everywhere my friend.
My point exactly.


Good luck patenting your argument. Maybe you can make some $$ off of me if I use your words.
On that I probably couldn't patent an arguement. Atleast not until the FTAA goes through. For now I could probably patent my user name as my internet identity.

That said I'm not looking at this forum again. Compmore is right this is way off topic and not relevent to the boycott at this level.

As an OP from ZPoC I would like to add a few things. Note that my opinions in no way represent the ZPoC network, and do not necessarily reflect the views of any of the network staff.

P2P is NOT NOT NOT
illegal. All it does is allow users to share their personal files. (for example, I share only uncopywrited worship powerpoints)

P2P, however, does allow users to break the law. There is no reasonable way to stop this. That is the user's responsibility.

I would like to compare P2P to a car. A car allows you to break the law (speeding, driving wrecklessly.. ect). Are you saying that automobile manufacturers and gas stations should be sued because they allow people to break the law? No? How is that so different than sueing P2P programs rather than the users that are abusing and breaking the law on P2P programs?

The right way to get music -> buy it.
The right way to stop people that are breaking copywrite -> go for the illegal user, not the legal P2P program.


Keep in mind, those are just my personal views and do not represend the views of any other ZPoC network staff.

To each his own.

"Judge not lest ye be judged"
-The Holy Bible

Something I've pondered:

Hymns are copyrighted works. Every Sunday morning, they are sung by the good folk in churches all over the world. This is considered a performance, correct? When are the labels going to start cracking down on these infringements?

"Actually, DMusic.com is testimony to how wrong that is. A service like Kazaa has millions of users at any time, but when I log into it, I'm logged into one node among hundreds. If an Indie (say, you) has their music on Kazaa, the odds are excellent that I will not find it since your music might be on 1-50 nodes out of 500-600 total. As an Indie, you have a much better chance of being heard if you upload your music to an index like DMusic.com, mp3.com or any of the other legal download sites. Why? There's only one node at each site."

Actually DMusic is a great example as to why the RIAA does not need to be in control of the laws that effect the entire music industry. As far as P2P not being an effective promotional system thats not true either. Think about it. Lets just assume that the only factor in the sales of music is P2P copyright infringemnet. Which is completely obsured but I'll give the RIAA a huge bone, because theres plenty of room. Millions of people trade copyrighted works. Millions more trade legal works but we wont go there, another bone for the RIAA. Yet sales have decrease at a very slow rate. In fact some sectors have actually been growing. The biggest drop was in the singles market but thats no surprise. Not just because of P2P but because of how common place recording systems are. Radio and TV can be legally recorded and the technology has become quite cheap in the last couple decades. The RIAA knew this would happen which is why they tried to fight home recording devices in the first place. And internet resources have also hit the retail market. Not to mention there are a lot of legal ways to purchase music online and those online figures are not being reported the debates are over retail bricks outlets. And the decrease in sales of actual albums. So realistically the RIAA has contributed to the drop in sales in the singles market. However, the decrease in sales figures are not coordinated with the amount of music exchanged over the internet. Money aside more music is making it to more people these days. Thanks in great part to the internet. P2P is a big component. The web is also a great way to download, legal and not. The problem is that instead of getting with the times and finding an effective way to enter this market the RIAA has chosen to use the governments to force out their competition. Instead of fighting with business like a good little capitalist should they are battling it out in the courts, blowing our tax dollars, and making a big stinky mess for us to clean up. The RIAA does not have a right to govern all of the music in the world. That is capitalism and not what America is supposed to be.

As far as controlled P2P networks are concerned they are many. Furthurnet is my favorite. On further music must be pre approved to be shared. However, if your network consist of 300 people and is monitored control mechanisms are not really nessesary. If someone comes on the network with questionable music and the monitor decides to ask the band if it is okay before he tells the user to unshare it is not unreasonable to do so. It is unreasonable to threaten some with legal action and act in the manner that pillar representative did for what was a reasonable request for permission and a reasonable reconciliation after permission was not granted.


"You're right GDZ. Correct me if I'm wrong, but every Indie I know makes this really clear by having their music available for free download at their web site or off of a download site like DMusic, Garageband, mp3. If their music's on Kazaa, it's anyone's guess as to whether or not the artist OK'd that."

It is, but as someone in this topic has already pointed out; "There are idiots in any field, yet I don't define the field by its idiots."

Sorry, but as much as I loathe the labels, if you don't like them, don't buy them or download them. By downloading major label music, you're still making them money when they Sue-and-Settle. Be honest. Buy the music you want from a used CD store or from half.com. You get the music you want, the label gets nothing.


That is the right we all need to continue to fight for. If the RIAA is allowed to continue something as simple as buying used music could be deemed illegal.

scayf, actually all of the commonly sung hymns are in the public domain, having been published before 1923. Remember that date, it's a magic number - everything that comes before is free for all mankind. Speaking of hymns, there is a list of a few hundred of them (as well as other Christian songs) in the public domain here: http://www.mmissary.com/database/public2.htm

money is their soul object *AMEN*

This is probably the most disturbing argument, ever.

Ministry teams should be forced to stop playing songs that people write, because it's wrong and it's stealing from the artist.

Oh no, there goes the choir. There goes the purpose of being Christian and making music in the first place. The only people who can preach are those on the RIAA-affiliated labels.

But wait! We can write our own songs! We don't need someone holding our hand like that!

This is how the RIAA will become irrelevant -- people will see the hipocracy and the money controlling the strings, say, "this is too much", and drop them on their ear.

The BIBLE also has a verse stating to seperate from the immoral people. I believe thats what the boycott is about.
BOYCOTT EDUCATE VOTE

I can't believe Jesus wouldn't share a file. He died so as ye shall live, I thought.

This makes me so sick to my stomach I really wanna puke! They are out just for the money. Sorry I believe all churches are out for money and feed people stuff to brainwash them.. I believe but not in some books someone wrote supposedly way after these things took place. The bible is a history book in my opinion. Gesh even alot of American History has been found not to be true. To use God to manipulate people is SICK! I figure someday God will repremand all the bad things people do. I feel sorry for them.

Oops my bad.. just read some of the other post.. I'm not debating religion .. Just my thoughts.. sorry and didn't mean to offend anyone..

I sent this out to all my friends.. with this address so they can come read what big business is doing.

i guess when we all die we can find who brought the most people to Christ. Bobby or Pillar?

These so-called Christian music artists are blasphemous because they're profiting off Christ's name and using it in vain.

And the RIAA/MPAA are the biggest sinners of all- they peddle pornography, adultery, homosexuality and lust to children. Damn bastards.

The fact of the matter is Most of us don't understand the business

In the christian market they pay around 200,000 to market and make a record. The artist get 11% royalty rate. The record is paid for by record sales and not only that out of the 11% the artist get not the record company share. the avg. Christian artist sells 25,000 records. So they will never see a dime in record sales. So HOW IS THIS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY.
A record label is a neccessary evil. Unless you got 200,000 dollars laying around to make and market a record.
When music is downloaded it takes from the record company which puts the artist on the road for the concerts you go to, makes you aware of an artist, pays the 100,000 it takes to get a song on the radio.
God or no God Pillar and other bands have a job and when you walk your lazy butt into work everyday and don't ask for a paycheck come pay day then you can gripe.

to everyone,

give unto ceasar that which is his.

AND BECAREFUL WHAT YOU RENDER UNDER CEASER, THAT IT IS NOT GODS.

TITHE,

I don't have to defend my posistion. THANK YOU.

Chistians aren't lazy because they can't make a record. Asking for a slice of bread on a street corner, and submitting a list of personal circumstances in payment, is truely gods work.

And that might be worth listening to in a big fat record deal, in my own humble opinion. And for arguments sake, I submit the popular, "Ballad of Curtis Lowe".

that was a typo, and should certainly be CHRISTIANS

As a clerk in a grocery so concerned about the dimishing lines of servering two masters, I would ask all subordinates of the RIAA to reconsider which master they are serving.

Is any subordinate even questioning this, or am I alone, and "out there"?

Give unto cesear brings up a good point. when Jesus was making that statement he was telling judas to go pay their taxes which meant THEY HAD MONEY. Jesus had so much money he had a treasurer for goodness sake. Theologians (sp) estamate that the wise men brought, in todays money, about $400 million dollars to Jesus (they were bringing money to a king, you don't give a king a $2 tip)
Jesus spoke more about money in the bible then he did Heaven and Hell combined WHY? because he knew that it would take money to make the world go around.
---I see this boycott-riaa site has shirts and stuff for sale and they ain't given those away for free THEY MUST BE ALL ABOUT THE MONEY
---I see that ZPOC is asking for donations THEY MUST BE ALL ABOUT THE MONEY
That statement really pisses me off because we are all about the money
a church in LA gave built a $5 Million dollar homeless shelter, do you think God made that money fall from Heaven
you go to your Job everyday to pay your bills as does Pillar and all these other bands--You much watch to much MTV cribs-- you notice there they ran out of big houses for musicians and had to start using sports figures.

The fact of the matter is that if you single out a Christian band just for saying they are against downloading, by saying they are in it for the money is STUPID STUPID STUPID

Are we here to flame each other with pride, and greed? And add to the plank in our brother's eye.

This thought is supposed to support the members of Christ making HIS MESSAGE available. What evil can stop that? I say none, AND NO ONE WITH HIS MESSAGE CAN BE STOPPED!!!

A very fine house is still empty if GOD does not fill it.

dude what are you talking about I can't tell what you are arguing

I am pretty sure I'm not understood.

those that understand, let them understand.

we are talking about downgrading artist that are against downloading music
What are you talking about?

How can you downgrade Christian music? And how does profit included itself and become part of Christianity and a part of Ceaser in terms of money?

Doesn't Prophet mean something entirely seperate of money? I have a strong support system of teachers of the word, but those teachers must also continue a faith in such a system for it to work.

Isn't the sparrow allowed to survive, with consideration, and only by the grace of GOD? Can anything exist, except by his grace?

If God is going to present his full fury on me for sharing every version of "Amazing Grace" with everyone I've ever met, and all those I've not met yet. I beg his devine forgiveness.

And if copywrite lawyers comes to me with fury for sharing the same files to the same folks, I will be under GOD's jurisdiction, and Christ is my only lawyer.

I'm already satisfied with the verdict in heaven.

I hope I get a few other request,

Like the speaches of Dr. Martin Luther King jr.

amazing grace is public domain with no copyright. It is not illegal to share

The funny thing is everyone thinks they are boycotting the "man", the big industry, the RIAA etc... In turn your just hurting the artist that make the music you love. It is not the record company that pays for these albums it is the bands, why is that so hard for everyone to see that. BANDS HAVE TO PAY THE RECORD COMPANY BACK. Every time you download a song that is money that the artist can't pay back with. This site should be called Boycott-artist.com

Do you think record companies don't taylor their contracts in a way that the money is not taken from them? Get real

"There is a reason that many artists form their own label. Because they realize that to be signed with a major label they give up control and income."

This quote was taken from this site even people here agree that atist give up money. But what about the bands that are signed for 5 album deals and CAN"T get off to start their own label. Should they not be upset when someone downloads their music?

leroybrown (my grandfather's name btw) - do you really think we don't know everything you just wrote above? Its not our fault these bands signed deals that are unfair to them is it? Answer me that. Did we ,as conumers, in any way, shape or form tailor those contracts? No. You said so yourself. Do you honestly think we are all out to see our favorite artists starve? I don't think so. Go ahead and keep funding the RIAA if it makes you feel better.

I do not fund anything the fact of the matter is I don't support the RIAA i support the artist and this band Pillar saying not to download music doesn't give us the right to gripe and call them names. Maybe they just want to pay the record company back so they can pay thier rent. Who are we against here.

I reiterate, they signed the contract not me. If you read my earlier post you will see that I said Pillar had every right to not want their music downloaded it's their music do do what they want with. I have a problem with this:

"im thinking about talking to all the major managers in Christian music and the RIAA and letting know about your site. -kalel "

This is vindictive, especially for a band espousing Christian values. Bobby took down their music as they wanted. It should have ended there.

How can you posibly support the artist signed with labels without supporting labels? That makes no sense. Are you copying the music and sending the band money directly, which would be an admision to a crime and a donation to the band which would probably be used by them to hire lawyers to sue you. I think one big point you are missing is that the internet has and is bringing ways for begining artist to market themselves at very little expense. Meaning the record labels are not as nessesary as they used to be. The industry is changing due to technology. Don't take my word for it look at the growing popularity of indie music and the deminishing popularity of the big labels. People might not be buying as much but they are listening to more. And to be frank I really do not care about the artists. I'm sorry if it hurts your feelings but I do not. The labels and therefore the artists have drawn a line between consumers and big labels and those on one side are being threatened by the other. The artists have chosen to side with the labels. Whether or not they have good reason is irrelevent they have declared war on the demands of consumers and the free market. Thats their doing not ours. The problem that is cuasing so much debate is the RIAA wants to control this new market that is threatening them. A couple grand on equipment and software and web page or even better P2P will promote your product at a very low cost. Much less than the priceless cost of your creations.

The industry needs to be allowed to grow with technology but it is being restrained.

Well the argument isn't whether to download Pillar's albums or not, because I'm simply not going to. Nor will I venture to buy them either.

The new "normalcy" is to sue individuals for downloading, but good luck suing them or griping at them because they're increasingly unsatisfied customers who simply choose not to buy the music.

When I receive bad service at a restaurant, I take my business elsewhere, and it’s as simple as that. The same applies to music. I'll take my music dollars where the service, from the labels down to the artist, is better. And it really ends there.

I know a band in my area named subseven ever heard of them? Probably not. They are an indie band have stuff all over the web. Freaking great band band. They all have full time jobs hoping to make it someday. You going to mail them money for a cd, probably not.
You ever heard of 50 cent, yeah he is on a LABEL.

By the way my whole arguement is not against downloading music, well maybe a little, If you only like one song go to itunes or napster and get it or buy the single for God's sake. My point is bashing the band for saying not to download the music because they are christians.
Ministry is free rent is not. God's love is Free, the water bill is not.
The guys are Christians, the band is a business.
In the great words of Eddie Degarmo "The ministry is free, the cd is $15 bucks"

-------------------------------------------------------------------
"The fact of the matter is Most of us don't understand the business...In the christian market they pay around 200,000 to market and make a record. The artist get 11% royalty rate. The record is paid for by record sales and not only that out of the 11% the artist get not the record company share. …..A record label is a neccessary evil. Unless you got 200,000 dollars laying around to make and market a record...When music is downloaded it takes from the record company which puts the artist on the road for the concerts you go to, makes you aware of an artist, pays the 100,000 it takes to get a song on the radio."
-------------------------------------------------------------------

All major label artists get between 7-11% royalty cut, not just the Christian scene (or the ones working with the major labels).

Paying hundreds of thousands of dollars to get one song on the radio is actually illegal. The secular artists can probably get away with rationalizing it, but for the Christian acts that cite downloading as "theft," the "necessary evil" rationalization won’t get them far.

Speaking of theft, the record companies take over 3 billion dollars worth of CDs and other merchandise associated with the artist, and give them to radio and TV stations, for FREE. This is the "free goods" deduction coming out of the pocket of artists too. Amusingly, when the labels do this, it’s called "promotion" as oppose to "theft."

What really affects an artists’ cut --- this new inexpensive promotion via the internet, or the usual label promotion that costs over $3 billion/year, an amount coming out of the artist's pocket? Hint: artists have been complaining about label royalty mismanagement for over a decade.

Back to not understanding the business. It should be clear that the main object is REFORM. As with all other structures that created more problems than eliminated, people get fed up, there's a call for reform and then things start to change in excruciatingly painful ways.

The real fact of the matter is artists shouldn’t have to be indentured to the labels as they are, period. Trying to blame downloading on these crappy business conditions on p2p has been a great way for the RIAA to skirt the artists’ decade-long criticisms, and it make their situation worse when fans, and incredibly THEY themselves start buying into that trap.

Reform concerns become a blaringly clearer issue when you factor in the irony in the reactions coming out of the major label Christian music scene.

Yes Mr. Brown, I hear ya loud and clear. I don't think I've heard of subseven, and I'm sure they have to work other jobs to get by. But that's the problem and what the issue of reform wants to address. These bands have to struggle because the nature of the big industry is anti-competitive and prevents actually talented artists to function comfortably as "free-agents."

His underground work was great, but 50 Cent is grossly overrated now.

"Paying hundreds of thousands of dollars to get one song on the radio is actually illegal"

UHH NO-- I am not talking about payola---you have to print special cd's for radio, you have to hire someone to "track" the single, in the mainstream this is around $1000 + per week. You have to send promotional items such as t-shirts and such and so on and so on.

The fact of the matter is I have been signed to a major label, and an indie label, I have signed these contract and I know how the business works. Bands make their money playing shows not cd's sales BUT BUT BUT there is a thing called soundscan, which means everytime someone buys a cd they put a mark on the soundscan as a cd sold. The booking agent takes that and goes to a promoter and shows him that # and that determines the band worth in that market. As does mtv, print adds and such. and that is how they get paid. Whetheryou agree or not that is why artist need the capitol a label has.
No freaking indie web band is going to sell out an arena in a town a 1000 miles away. THAT"S WHAT COMPANIES DO FOR THE ARTIST.

And where is the will of almighty GOD?
How do you know, unless you have asked?

And most importantly, do you agree with GOD's decision?

and who cares what is illegal or not, isn't everything concerning the soul contrary to what is legal to some degree. Aren't we discussing that issue now?

No freaking indie web band is going to sell out an arena in a town a 1000 miles away. EXCEPT BY A MIRACLE OF FAITH!

example: gerry garcia

still selling strong!

excuse me to the other dead heads:

Still living strong, is certaintly more important to selling.

But I was making a point to someone with only one language, (casting pearls before swine), in hopes they would not be trampled, my appologizes.

maybe an internal definition of christian music is in order, perhaps we should include the "ganji smoking" christians of other countries, and let GOD decide if they are part of few called. I'd give them better odds than myself.

your the hermit cause you must not get out much

and so, at the end of this sermon,

Many are called and few are chosen. When my GOD last selected a few of the entire human race, he selected eight people. Noah, and his family. I think that is fairly selective.

I am very thankful that he gave his own son to become one of us, and judicate for us. And after facing an unfair trial, and unfair execution, I have no reason to doubt that I may be unreasonably sought after, and unfairly tested.

I anticipate my fate with open arms, and feel the need to warn everyone, that such acts will warm the heart of christ if they are done so for his names sake.

no, i stay home and read quite a bit.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"UHH NO-- I am not talking about payola---you have to print special cd's for radio, you have to hire someone to "track" the single, in the mainstream this is around $1000 + per week. You have to send promotional items such as t-shirts and such and so on and so on."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. Brown,

Okay. I didn’t think you were referring to something other than radio consolidation.

Clearly some methods of self promotion are expensive.

But again I say, "reform" to the business. Because it's rather ironic that a major contract artist still has to shell out $50 000 or more anyways, to get one song on a radio station's play list, illegally. And of course, royalties generated from all that illegal record spinning ultimately goes into the pockets of the companies, not the damned ARTISTS behind the musical product wrote. And here I am, thiniking the whole point of an indie band/artist getting signed was to make things easier.

The fact that an indie's self-promo/royalty accumulative methods are just as difficult as a signed commercial SUPERSTAR reflects the need for REFORM in the business.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The fact of the matter is I have been signed to a major label, and an indie label, I have signed these contract and I know how the business works. Bands make their money playing shows not cd's sales BUT BUT BUT there is a thing called soundscan, which means everytime someone buys a cd they put a mark on the soundscan as a cd sold. The booking agent takes that and goes to a promoter and shows him that # and that determines the band worth in that market. As does mtv, print adds and such. and that is how they get paid. Whetheryou agree or not that is why artist need the capitol a label has.
No freaking indie web band is going to sell out an arena in a town a 1000 miles away. THAT"S WHAT COMPANIES DO FOR THE ARTIST."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. Brown,


Okay man --- I appreciate and fully acknowledge that you're speaking directly from experience in both spheres, as I don't have such experience. I'm relatively new to these industry issues (in their political sense), and the closest "experience" for me is watching friends who are/were in the indie scene and who once PERSUED getting signed to the majors, but couldn't even get THAT far.

That's just it. Booking agents will take you seriously if you're associated with a known company, but you gotta be noticed, or signed FIRST! And I'm sure you can tell me that you can't just show up at Sony and get signed, just like that. BTW, why didn't you stick with the majors after acquiring that opportunity?...

On top of all that, major artists sell out arenas because that's what companies do for an artist TEMPORARILY. "New Kinds On the Block" once sold out arenas. Where the heck are they now? There was morgasbord of commercial acts that were big in the early and mid 90s, tourig like hell. I can't even recall and count out 5 on my fingers today.

You know how many great major artists are treated as "has-beens" because their style isn't the "Flavour of the Month"?

And for those majors who have the energy to tour throughout their careers, the concerts seem to be just about all the major artists RELY on to make a descent living, because most labels, as far as I'm aware, don’t get a cut of the tour profits unless the artist somehow signed those perks away too. Meanwhile, I'm sure they got into the biz hoping to make something off their own records, not just touring.


So I don't see it as meaning much. Sheryl Crow, Don Henley, Tom Petty and others have had successful tours, but at the end of the day they form pissed-artist-coalitions aimed at attacking shady industry practices that drive most of the greats to tour if they wanna generate royalties they'll keep.

There's gotta be more to the business than just a 5 year commercial career. Too many of them are sick of being told that they're not commercially viable because their 5rd album only sold 10 million copies when their previous one sold 11.

The instantaneous commercial buzz doesn't mean much to artists who are afraid of being suddenly dropped because their critically acclaimed artistically evolved projects didn't live up to the bizarre commercial expectations made by the companies.

Well..Let me say this..you all say that Pillar and all of them will surely burn in hell..I say that that is judging them when it isnt your place to judge them at all. Thats Gods place to judge them. Yes, Bobby's heart was in the right place. But..if you read the e-mail..he askes Pillar if they can share their files..and Pillar said no..That should be enough..but he kept it going..I'll say this..the way to support Pillar is not by that..but my joining their Street Team and giving out fliers and handouts and other things like promo cds. The legal way.

back,


All will be judged, according to God's will.

period.

"Mr. Man" has his part, and each soul that ever exisited on earth has there part. All we have to do is pick a team.

how simple is that?