KaZaa Suspends Downloads 382
chill writes: "'Download Temporarily Suspended -- Download of the KaZaA Media Desktop software is temporarily and voluntarily suspended pending Dutch court decision on January 31. We apologise for the inconvenience. Please check back at www.kazaa.com for more information.'
--- Both the Linux and Windows client downloads are offline. I wonder what the judge thinks this will do to the tens, if not hundreds of thousands who already have the software?"
even funnier (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:even funnier (Score:3)
the downloadable installer actually gets most of the kazaa program from the fasttrack network, oddly enough....
Re:even funnier (Score:2, Funny)
Let's clear this up. (Score:2)
If you've got Morpheus, you don't need KaZaa. KaZaa is the main company, and Morpheus [music city] is just another client on the network.
While their goals may be different-the software is effectively the same. If you use KaZaa, you notice that some users are @musiccity, while others are @kazaa.
I've actually had people tell me that Music City is better than Kazaa.. but because there was more stuff on Music City.
What a difference a day makes. (Score:3, Interesting)
What a happy joyous world I live in. How in the FUCK did we get to this point?
Re:What a difference a day makes. (Score:2, Redundant)
Re:What a difference a day makes. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:What a difference a day makes. (Score:2, Interesting)
When cool stuff gets posted by PC World, etc. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:What a difference a day makes. (Score:4, Interesting)
What point? That there's more content freely available right now than there's ever been in the history of humankind? It's way harsh on Dmitri and Jon Johansson, but as far as the rest of us are concerned, what's the biggie?
Don't get me wrong, I think it's loathesome that content distributors can tell us to our faces that we're all guilty (of whatever new offence they want to buy with "campaign contributions"), but in practical terms, they're fighting a losing battle, and I can show you precedent. The ex-Soviet Union.
Like most truism, this one is actually true: The more they tighten their grip, the more star systems, er, customers, will slip through their fingers.
When they tell us that we're all criminals whatever we do, when they make it harder to play by their rules than to get content via P2P or on a street corner, when they try to dictate demand by controlling supply, they'll create a black market that will supply the genuine demand of you and I and Joe Public. It happened in Russia, with far tighter controls at every level of society than even the RIAA and MPAA combined can buy in the USA. The War on Piracy will be about as successful as the War on Drugs, because they are both a War on The People.
I mean, really, this is bad luck for Kazaa, but Kazaa screwed up by trying to control supply using authorisation servers. They joined the losing side there and then. If Kazaa goes under, another service will pick up the pieces, and the amount of content available will just grow and grow. The losers will be anyone who refuses to supply the demand, the winners will be you, me, Joe, and the lawyers.
Re:Just get Morpheus (Score:2)
But I'd go with LimeWire as far as Gnutella is concerned, even if there are ads. It's a damn good piece of software...
Re:Don't complain, do something. (Score:2)
I.e. You get an online interface, a simple text box in which you can write your complaint, and a list of politicians from which you can select (or even multi-select/mail-merge).
The service charges for postage/consumables via paypal, and someone then looks after printing your letter, and mailing it to the appropriate person.
That makes bitching convenient, which is what lazy
The legal system, etc. (Score:5, Insightful)
''Never in human history has technology allowed the big to crush the small with so little effort, and never have the laws and infrastructure of the world been so set up to expedite this process. [...] In reality, the legal system is a nasty, ugly thing that unless you have a great deal of time, resources and money, you're up the creek.''
He also explores the various myths of how the system works. For example -
Myth #1: What matters is who is right. Sorry, wrong -- it matters who is willing to spend the most money proving they are "right."
- and on it goes.
I wish these guys well with their fight
Re:The legal system, etc. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:The legal system, etc. (Score:2)
Any one who wants to be a politician, shouldn't.
Re:The legal system, etc. (Score:5, Insightful)
The only power they have is the legal system, and they are forced to utilize it.
Note: I'm not passing judgement on who's right or wrong. I'm just pointing out that "the big" have their side to the whole "digital rights" story too. It would be stupid to expect them to give up and walk away.
Re:The legal system, etc. (Score:2, Insightful)
But that's what the parent post is all about - they got big off of a system that would not work if it were brought in brand-new today, and now that they're big, they can crush opposition. Of course they don't want to adapt when what they've been doing has gotten them so much cash. The point is that the law allows obsolete business practices to litigate their way through a few more years of survival - hurting a lot of entrepreneurs and innovators in the process.
Re:The legal system, etc. (Score:2, Troll)
i especially like the quote, "hurting a lot of
a change in the system doesn't justify the violation of these most basic human rights. we're nothing more than looters using technology to our advantage, grabbing everything we can because we know there will be no reprecussions later on. we can't blind ourselves with these false arguments, or criticize the system for putting an end to our exploits.
if the record companies/movie studios successfully utilize the law in order to preserve their rightful property, i applaud them.
ill bite (Score:5, Insightful)
Intellectual Property is a fiction, it is not property (as in tangible asset) at all. The act of creation ceases when the work is born, only in the 'intellectual property world" does a producer feel the right to control a work once he has borne it. Does a plumber call you and ask for a fee every time you flush your toilet? No, neither should a musician, actor, author or inventor ask for fees to exercise the purpose of their past creation. Meaning, that by its regular availability, the thing *has been created* and no further compensation is necessary.
If I copy a book, I am creating a book. The original author was not present or required to make my copy - why should he be compensated? If a creator feels he needs to reach some artificial economics of scale to make his time worthwhile, thats his issue -- i refuse to have *MY* liberties eroded to enforce a concept of capitalist business practice. The creator has no business telling me what I may or may not do with my own time and equipment.
Intellectual Property, (Copyright, Trademarks and Patents) have no place in an intellectually free society. Intellectual Property is a tool of economics and not a 'rightful property by inalienable human right' -- to suggest such is absolutely ridiculous. It is neither a 'right' nor a natural, self-evident thing. It is a concept, a construct, an agreement... and those who would use it as a economic hammer are no longer entitled to it.
I no longer purchase any item that would re-enforce this system. I copy all my music CDs*, I download movies and use the library for all books and magazines. I also advocate the rest of us do as well.
Ideas dont exist in a vacuum, and to suggest that a creation of the mind has a sole creat or with inalienable right to then control it is offensive to the rest of us.
* Canadians, because our government collects a fee for the RIAA types with every CDR sold, are legally allowed to make copies of Music CDs OTHERS have bought at record stores. Stop buying and burn those discs!
Re:ill bite (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, that is what i am saying. If I write a song. only the activity of writing it should be compensated - not the use of it after it has been performed/written. The * act * of creation should be compensated. Simple. If i was a carpenter, would I collect a fee for every comfy-night you spend in bed??? NO!
It is exactly the same, patents and copy-written material are not magic. If they exist then the work required to create them has ceased. It is in the past -- what makes these things so special that their control, and the 'right' of the builder causes such a pile of ill-logic and nonsense as copyright and patent law?
You sir are a LEECH.
And you excrete dogma without a mite of critical thought. You are a PUPPET.
It's precisely this sort of attitude that Copyright is designed to thwart.
No, copyrights were granted to people to protect them from printing press owners. Copyright was granted to a person so he could sell his works. Capitalists have, by making themselves legal-persons (amongst other plutocratic-borne legislation in the USA), granted themselves copyrights... the concept was built to protect a person from publishers. Not publishers from people. Dont try and pretend this is not the case, it is indisputable and intellectually dishonest to suggest otherwise. This discussion is not a debate -- as in public debate as an exercise -- are you honestly presenting this as your opinion?
removing the incentives and rewards of creating will lead to a decline in creation.
Untrue. Intellectual Property was created all through time -- it is society itself... without copyright and patents the mechanisms through which people would have incentive would change. Was Matisse given a copyright? Mozart?
RIAA is trying to protect itself, and it's monopoly on the distribution of music, they're not attempting to foster the creation of music.
Agreed.
but that doesen't justify deliberately flaunting the law, nor taking away from the creators the rightful earnings.
Actually it does. Civil disobedience is an act of a free society. If 50%+1 of the population decides to ignore a law it should be changed - the consequences are ours to reap. If it proved true that creation ceased when copyright ended (it wouldnt) then the people would pay the consequence -- or make a new offer to potential producers. Not being a 'producer' in this dynamic doesnt mean we are with out rights. If the persons (like yourself) willing to accept this construct + the creators ("artists" (or RIAA))
But that is how (im sure you would agree) a democratic and free society should work. Im not suggesting the USA is this place, but that is another issue, and a much bigger problem.
When you say "I copy all my music CDs", you're committing piracy plain and simple.
No, by law, in Canada I am fully entitled to do this. My government has changed the construct of copyright to encourage the act. It is not "piracy".
http://www.cdrfaq.org/faq03.html#S3-33-2 [cdrfaq.org]
http://neil.eton.ca/copylevy.shtml#copy_for_frien
If you don't PAY for it, and you don't get it via available LEGAL means, you're still not entitled to STEAL it.
Life is not about money. Watching a movie or listening to music has zero effect on the producer (no incremental cost) - what part of this basic problem with the capitalist-economics of copyright are you not understanding?
Re:The legal system, etc. (Score:2)
BTW, I didn't even know there was a KaZaa client for Linux. Where can I find it?
Re:The legal system, etc. (Score:2)
You just switch the 'www' with 'archive'.
Re:The legal system, etc. (Score:2)
instead, you can use the amazing slashcode0 account.
Username Slashcode0
Password Slashcode0
That's a zero in both cases.
Have fun.
.
Hollywood makes billions of dollars (Score:5, Insightful)
Furthermore, they, as a group, have a monopoly on the creation of new fictional entertainment... Does this give you ideas?
If hollywood could (say) get even a small part of the communications (aka, the delivery) pie, they'd make more money a year than they do now.
Does this give you ideas for other sources of revenue? Make everything literally free (to download) on the internet. With, maybe, a royalty on home-user (IE, non-business) bandwidth, with statistical sampling to determine how much of that royalty should go to which entertainment industries for mass-market entertainment. Maybe add in hard drives or cd blanks. Basically, make something similar to the Audio-CDR mechanism.
After all, if they increased home telephone/communication bills by even 10% for such a royalty. 100 million people spending $100/month (cable, telephone, internet), with a 10% royalty toward entertainment production starts moving into the billions of dollars/year range.
Not only that, but suddenly there is MUCH less fighting over copyrights, hollywood doesn't have to worry about extra duplication, caues every duplication is more profit for them. It lets people do whatever they want on and with their computers.
Yeah, its annoying, and if you only backup your hard drive onto CD's, you're subsidizing brittney spears. But on the other hand, it *will* give hollywood billions and billions of dollars, and stop digital control technology.
And, in such a world, napster/gnutella/morpheus for movies would be the best thing ever for movies. 10x the bandwidth, means 10x the money coming in! Furthermore, they could make even more money from premium servers where you pay, but you get high-quality, uncorrupted, fast downloads.
The idea is to not fight humanity, but try to go along with them.
I heard about this idea, oh, about 3 years ago.
So, what do you think.
Re:Hollywood makes billions of dollars (Score:2)
Here's the problem with that. How would anyone know which artists to subsidize? As it happens right now, sales go directly to the artist who is currently actually selling music (whether or not the establishment *likes* the music), not just to whoever some "music commission" decided had artistic merit.
Further, if you don't like the power media companies have over artists now, imagine what it would be like in a world where they get no direct credit for anything they create. The "music commission" would no doubt end up being filled with industry lobbists who would try to funnel as much cash as they could to the media conglomerates, starving the people who actually stimulated demand in the first place.
This idea is a non-starter. I'll take the current system over it, warts and all.
Re:The legal system, etc. (Score:3, Insightful)
Hang on a minute while I just choke quietly in the corner. The only power? So, a big business can buy the laws they want through political bribes (aka campaign contributions), can have courts stop just about any activity they like (prima facia, before any guilt has been proven), and then can keep anybody they like in court until the little guy runs out of money and has to settle or starve, and that's the only power they have?
What more do they need? Well, it would be nice if they could get laws passed that effectively allow them to instruct their government to provide paramilitary enforcers to imprison individuals either at home or abroad, but that's beyond the realms of fantasy, surely?
Oh, wait, remind me, why did I buy that "Free Dmitri" T-shirt? How's Jon Johansson doing these days?
Only the legal system. God help us all.
Re:The legal system, etc. (Score:2)
I don't have a problem with that. I just wish they would go after the copyright infringers, instead of the tookmakers. The whole idea of vicarious/contributory infringement is bullshit, because there's no way a tool can ever be made that knows the difference between infringing and non-infringing use. Going after toolmakers is an abuse of the system.
Re:The legal system, etc. (Score:2)
No. The conclusion is: and therefore it does'nt matter to humanity if it dies a deserved death.
Morpheus is still going (Score:2, Informative)
Artist websites (Score:2)
Who cares? (Score:3, Insightful)
1) Even if the stupid Kaaza client is no longer available, Morpheus still is, and is a lot more popular a client anyways. That's like trying to shut down the WWW by banning Netscape.
2) Morpehus/Kaaza suck anyways. Even though the idea behind it is pretty genius, in practice their software sucks. Besides crashing constantly, being spyware, bloatware, and every other type of negative ware there is, and just plain being a crappy client, there is no friggin music on their network. I try searching for something somewhat well known but not quite mainstream, say "The Descendents", and I get 0 results back. And any results I do get download at 1.1 k/sec, despite claiming the user has a bandwith of "300" whatever that means. Worst of all you can only get mp3s of up to 128kpbs. I'll stick with WinMX or eDonkey2000 for now. There are plenty of alternatives to Kaaza/Morpheus that don't suck ass.
Re:Who cares? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Who cares? (Score:2)
Re:Who cares? (Score:2)
GPL = Intellectual Theft??? (Score:2)
You are insane, or a Microsoft shill.
Morpheus still up.. (Score:2)
KaZaa users are still connecting as of 06:00 GMT today. The main problem is if the courts go after the authentication servers. This isn't happening yet.
Re:Morpheus still up.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Morpheus still up.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, I have read (in the leaked RIAA memo on fasttrack) that if the authentication servers are unreachable, the software will connect to the network without authenticting. It comes with a long list of peers to try connecting to, which whenever it connects. If this is true, and kazaa etc. vanish with their servers, the software should keep working.
On the other hand, I have read (in the New York Times article on video trading yesterday) that FastTrack have the ability to shut down the software remotely. And this would seem to be borne out by the time they forced everyone to upgrade to version 1.33. (Though maybe this was accomplished in the authentication process.)
Re:Morpheus still up.. (Score:2)
Now to the on-topic bit. Fasttrack updated everyone during the authentication process. Although I can't wait for a Morpheus client for Linux, especially if it also ties into the gnutella stuff.
What it will do (Score:5, Funny)
It will get a story posted on /., prompting millions of users to simultaneously fire up their existing KaZaA software to see if the network is still up, thus melting the servers and shutting down the network...
Reminds me of a wonderful book. (Score:5, Funny)
"Someday life will be nothing more than jail and shopping."
'Nuff said.
Doesn't matter too much (Score:4, Informative)
One other thing worth mentioning: Kazaa wants you to use it so that it can make money off your processing cycles, memory, and network connection. That's right; Kazaa plans to introduce technology to allow businesses to use the Kazaa network to burden the load of distributing large quantities of data.
Re:Doesn't matter too much (Score:2)
Ok ok... spyware. The spyware is detectable by all anti-virus software. Ad-aware will take care of the other spyware as well. The 3rd party programs can be not installed... if you know how to read and use your mouse.
FastTrack, IMHO, has more promise than other P2P ideals. I love gnutella in many ways, but being able to get a full movie in 30 minutes kills the rest.
ALSO-If Kazaa does use my unused cycles, memory and connection to make money... who cares? I'm downloading a small, ok large fortune of media from that network. Do you know how many people downloaded XP [for example] from these networks? That saved people thousands of dollars.
What is your point?
Re:Doesn't matter too much (Score:2)
Well, I for one would be more than happy to give some bandwidth, cpu power and memory for exchange if I could legally download music and stuff. If, however, the plan is to count on dumb users not to read eula and spend those resources without payment this sounds ridiculous.
Forget Kazaa (Score:2, Interesting)
True file sharing technology should not sneak Gator onto your hard drive or try to sell you CDs you don't want
The future of P2P belongs to technologies like GNUtella, which can be used to set up truly decentralized file-sharing networks that CANNOT be struck down by tyrants disguised in business suits
Yes, GNUtella is harder to use, klunkier, and tends to access smaller listings of files, but given time and work, these problems will be alleviated as greed-driven fake P2P systems like Napster and Kazaa are crushed by the moneyed interests controlling the legal system.
Anyway, True Freedom belongs to those willing to work for it. Strong, free geeks will always find a way to overcome the forces of oppression. Forget Kazaa. P2P4Profit is a deservedly dead end.
Re:Forget Kazaa (Score:2)
But the last line got me. P2P4Profit is wrong. That is what clearly violates 'fair-use'.
They can't make money selling your bootlegs.
I still like Kazaa though... sorry.
What a relief (Score:5, Funny)
kazza? good riddance. (Score:2)
I just wish someone would write a file-sharing client for windows that doesn't suck so badly. Almost all of them have ads, spyware, and crummy interfaces.
Re:kazza? good riddance. (Score:2, Funny)
resolution (Score:5, Insightful)
Napshare (Score:4, Informative)
Based loosely on GTK-Gnutella, it has the best features I've seen in any type of downloader. You feed it a string to search for, the minimum file size, a string that the files SHOULD NOT contain, and the minimum server speed if you like. (someone I know *cough**cough*) personally downloaded Jurassic Park 3 and Pulp Fiction in the past 2 days since they got Napshare... and that's 700MB/piece over a SLOW cable-modem (30KBps/7KBps).
Did I mention it's been running for two days constantly, under heavy load, without any memory leaks, and not a single crash.
Re:you cant fool me (Score:2)
Re:you cant fool me (Score:2)
KaZaa MaNtraa (Score:2, Funny)
Wow (Score:2, Funny)
This is like... (Score:2, Insightful)
Way to go BUMA/STEMRA! (Dutch record company mob), a fine example of clear thinking...
Get your Kazar right here (Score:5, Informative)
KaZaA still up -- I think (Score:2, Troll)
Greetings!
I just logged on to KaZaA, did a search on 'Spears' and lots of images, MP3s, videos, etc. are available for download. Could someone please explain?
Thanks,
EAmen ! (Score:2, Offtopic)
Affectionatly known as IIIFAD.
Murphy(c)
C|Net Reporting on this... (Score:5, Informative)
Serves ya right, you cheap bastards. (Score:3, Flamebait)
Yeah, the content companies suck ass, no doubt, but that doesn't mean that NOT PAYING FOR THE SHIT YOU DOWNLOAD is going to make things any better. If you hate stupid restrictions, stop buying records from the opporessive major labels. Frequent places like Emusic.com, where the downloads are all real MP3s, no bullshit copy prevention. The albums are sold for a reasonable price, and the artists GET PAID.
And finally, would everyone stop acting like they're somehow oppressed because they actually have to PAY for their media? Cry me a river. Don't put up with copy prevention bullshit, but don't go back and *REINFORCE ITS APPARENT NEED* by "trading" stuff on Kazaa...
Hey, people just being reasonable :) (Score:2, Interesting)
I want new Vangelis. EMusic has a whopping TWO albums of "Best songs" from 1984. Sweet. Oh wait... I already have those, bought for less than $5 each. Now I am supposed to pay 9.99 per month for right to download those two albums. I don't think it's a good deal.
As for other new services where you can pay for download -- you either can't burn downloaded copies or you have to pay a full price (that exceeds the cost of a "regular" CD album) with a limit of songs. Until it gets to the level of Tivo where for 9.95 a month I can record and play and do whatever I want with the tv shows without limits it won't be a good deal and big guys will be giving out interviews screaming that "those bastards don't want to use our legal system!". Hope they'll get smart one day
Re:Serves ya right, you cheap bastards. (Score:3, Insightful)
OK. I'd like to pay to download songs. Where do I sign up?
Here's the answer: nowhere. Your options are: either drive down to your nearest record store and pay for pressing, shipping, handling, packaging, advertising, sales assistance, cashiering, and post-sale security checks; or you can download it for free. What am I supposed to do if I like one particular song and would like a legal, electronic copy of it?
The issue isn't about opression, or stealing being some kind of right. It's about a market that's unsatisfied.
Re:Serves ya right, you cheap bastards. (Score:2)
The issue isn't about opression, or stealing being some kind of right. It's about a market that's unsatisfied.
Come to think of it, I'd really like nude pics of a petrified Natalie Portman with hot grits poured down her pants, but I can't have that either. So I deal with it, life moves on. Not a perfect analogy, but it illustrates what I'm trying to get across, which is, to quote the Rolling Stones: "You can't always get what you want." If one don't like the purchasing options, yeah, that sucks, but that doesn't give one the right to just take for free whatever the heart desires.
The fact that downloadable music (well, legally downloadable anyway) is a largely untapped market may be true, but it's irrelevant to the fact that people aren't giving anything back for the stuff they copy. You're blurring the issue. The fact remains, while the available options suck, not paying for stuff is still wrong. And cliched as it sounds, two wrongs still don't make a right.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a hardcore music freak - I'm painfully aware of how corrupt the industry is, and how much they jack both consumers and artists. But until something can be worked out, what else am I supposed to do? I can't stick it to the labels without sticking it to the artists. So I have to either bite the bullet and pay for the over-priced disc, or choose not to buy the stuff. Taking without paying is not an option.
As for solutions? While Emusic's 128kbit MP3s (as oppposed to much nicer ~160kbps
Re:Serves ya right, you cheap bastards. (Score:2)
Yeah, and you know what? I can't afford that motorbike I want to ride on my salary, but it doesn't make it right to steal one.
You can't afford it, then you can't have it. That's life, kid. Deal with it. Buy a radio. Grow up.
Re:Serves ya right, you cheap bastards. (Score:2)
Last time I ventured into America (a year ago) this was the price one paid in American $$$ for some of the latest releases, and most of the re-releases.
Double CDs in Canada, unless you look far and wide, will cost $35-$45 CDN ($25-$35 US). Imports cost about 50% more.
I still don't understand why an album sells for more than (or the same as) the movie Waterworld [imdb.com] (for example). Waterworld cost $175 million [imdb.com], was a money loser right from the box office in America (so they have a lot of catching up to do in home sales), yet still retails for $9.98 US [amazon.com]. The soundtrack for that same movie, which cost far, far, far less to produce, and has had far less promotion also costs $9.98 [amazon.com].
Maybe I don't get it. Maybe it actually costs $175 million to record a record these days and I'm deluding myself. I guess you have to buy a radio station every time you record a track nowadays to get a studio quality cut?
Upload a mirror today! (Score:2, Informative)
So... whatever happened to the time when... (Score:3, Interesting)
Music is intellectual property, not physical property. When are people going to figure this out?
I remember the days when music copywrite was simply so that someone couldn't blatantly rip off some artist and then claim it as their own work. For instance, if The Verve decided to blaringly take a riff from a Rolling Stones tune without permission, the Rolling Stones should be given all the money that The Verve makes on said song, or at least a portion thereof.
Now all of a sudden intellectual property means The Ability To Listen To said song.
Since when do Music corporations have a right to limit how far the music is reached? Doesn't this compromise the artist's intent in itself? Honestly, what this is doing is once again putting more power in the hands of those with the money and reinforcing Murphy's Golden Rule (whoever has the etc.).
Morons. All of them. Especially since they don't realize the awesome power (wow, this sounds like a speech from Masters of the Universe or something) of Filesharing, and that the existence of mp3s/Divx/mpgs/exes/whatevers is going to negate any attempt to control flow of music/information. napster got shut down. Everybody said it was over. Out sprung a dozen clones. Now Kazaa gets shut down. If Morpheous, Audiogalaxy et al follow suit, I personally guarantee this number reaching out in the fifties. And eventually genre-driven ones and all that kind of stuff.... It'll be glorious.
Wow. That was cheesy. I'm gonna stop before it gets worse.
Re:So... whatever happened to the time when... (Score:2)
So... I'd say... sometime in the mid-90s.
Maybe mid-80s, if you count Vanilla Ice (Under Pressue and Ice Ice Baby, yeeesh).
Take your racism somewhere else. (Score:2)
Hrmm.. we all saw Sting on MTV singing WITH Puffy right? Puffy has loads of cash, he paid everyone enough to sample those songs.
Shaggy Blatantly Ripped off Steve Miller Band (Listen to ANGEL and then The Joker, my lord!),
Steve Miller Band? Come on! Shaggy has had way more 'hits' than them... they are basically one hit wonders. Whoever ownes the rights to SMB songs needed the cash, trust me. But, just because two songs sound similar doesn't make them the same. Plenty of songs are ripped from each other... you just didn't bother to listen close enough because it's not rap vs. classic rock.
and countless other rappers decided that other *good* classic rock songs didn't actually deserve their copywrites.
It's copyrights and since you are obviously a racist, you should know that the only Rap song that didn't pay to use the beat [etc] is Ice Ice Baby.
But while we are on the subject, most Rap songs don't take beats or lyrics from classic rock songs. They take many of their beats from Funk songs. They also take their beats from other rap songs.
No one ever points out that Country songs take from Classic Rock songs. Just noticed that.
People get paid... this isn't a rip off, it's business. I like Classic Rock first, but I'm also a Rap fan. Sometimes I don't like the 'new' songs, but at times I find myself applauding the 'new' song for the work they've done.
Look at "Changes" by Tupac. It's a good song if you listen to the lyrics. If you don't like it, I'm sure there are other reasons.
Re:Take your racism somewhere else. (Score:2)
The fucking-asshole-RIAA has this to say about your delusion: Tell me, where is 'shaggy' on this list compared to Steve Miller Band [riaa.org]? For the record, Im not a Steve Miller fan. I just feel that 'rap and hip hop' is to the art of music as as television commercials are to the art of theatre. The sole reason for its existence is to sell a product (which the performers are in-and-of-themselves) such as Shaggy, Backside Boys, 2Pac or Brittany Spears. This is not art, its a catchy jingle for the performer-as-artist-product.
you should know that the only Rap song that didn't pay to use the beat [etc] is Ice Ice Baby.
If i recall correctly there was a lawsuit sometime-ago that made sampling legal via compulsory licensing... where ice-ice-baby fits in this is im not sure.
People get paid... this isn't a rip off, it's business.
What? How does 'business' end up being a justification for an act... as if it is self-evident and natural? Give me a break pal.
Take your racism somewhere else. && It's copyrights and since you are obviously a racist
Wow, a little defensive arent we?
It's a good song if you listen to the lyrics. If you don't like it, I'm sure there are other reasons
Not to sound to harsh, im sure there must be some merit and talent somewhere in the rap/hip-hop world... just that 99% of it is blatant pap...here are always exceptions to the rule...
Re:Take your racism somewhere else. (Score:2)
2) So classic rock, and only classic rock is the true music? Most artists are about selling their product... music. Listen to the music next time. Sure, lots of hip-hop is commercial, but much more isn't. Tupac for example has some of the most profound things to say about society, that I've ever heard. I guess it's a matter of listening and not judging until you hear it.
3) Vanilla Ice was sued because he ripped off the beat. He claimed that it was different because he, or someone, added on beat every X seconds or whatever. Other artists that sample give full credit, and the record company gives 'points' on the album sales to compensate the 'rip'.
4) If you haven't noticed there is a huge business behind all that music you hear. Plenty of times rappers come up [to stardom] with only lyrics. When they hit the RIAA-fan some white guy in a suit thinks that it would be cool to use the twangs from Stairway to Heaven.
5) Yes, I'm defensive. When I hear this 'rip-off' argument it's being produced by some racist piece of shit. I'm not Black, and that isn't why I jumped.
6) "I'm sure there must be some merit..." Exactly... you don't know because you haven't listened to it.
One thing I can say with confidence though, rock and roll [in general] is a blatant rip-off of other's work anyways. How many times have I listened to covers? By respectable artists, like Jimi Hendrix or even the Beatles? I mean, this is the whole song that is ripped off. The genre was ripped off. 'Nuff said.
All in all, I'm still a good classic rock fan. Just keep that Steve Miller bullshit away from me.
Re:Take your racism somewhere else. (Score:2)
So you agree with me? I was disagreeing with you that Shaggy has had way more 'hits' than them... they are basically one hit wonders definition of artistic value... thats how *you* defined it until i presented the RIAA list, at which time you changed your mind about what 'success' is. Holy shit man, you cant argue by agreeing with me.
2) So classic rock, and only classic rock is the true music?
No, who said it was?
Most artists are about selling their product...No, publishers are about selling a product. Being an "artist" means you are compelled to create by your very existence. An "Artist" doesnt care to sell millions of units, sure, he likes to eat (as do us all), but he wont stop being an artist if it ceased being 'profitable'. If he did, he wouldnt have been an "artist" in the first place.
Tupac for example has some of the most profound things to say about society, that I've ever heard. I guess it's a matter of listening and not judging until you hear it.
Agreed. Ive never listened to Tupac. I have no opinion of the lyrics (or music). This is why i said "there are exceptions..".
3) Vanilla Ice was sued because he ripped off the beat. He claimed that it was different because he, or someone, added on beat every X seconds or whatever. Other artists that sample give full credit, and the record company gives 'points' on the album sales to compensate the 'rip'.
I believe that the legal issue had not been made of rap-sampling until this(??) test case. After this(??) test case a rap-sampler was required to pay royalties to the original copy-right owner.. again.. Compulsory license of music, for the purpose of rap-sampling was created.
4) If you haven't noticed there is a huge business behind all that music you hear.
you dont know what kind of music I listen to... Ill just tell you that your wrong. I dont pay for music that has been time-shifted (i copy it all from friends and dload mp3s). I also listen to allot of self-published artists.
Plenty of times rappers come up [to stardom] with only lyrics. When they hit the RIAA-fan some white guy in a suit thinks that it would be cool to use the twangs from Stairway to Heaven.
What kind of racist crap is that? Hey man, WTF is this "white guy with suits" bullshit. That is pretty fucking racist, IMHO. Or, are you trolling.. hmmm.
5) Yes, I'm defensive. When I hear this 'rip-off' argument it's being produced by some racist piece of shit.
Suggesting the music is 'ripped off' doesnt make the guy a racist. If the guy is racist it doesnt make the music *not* riped off. There is no relationship. Also, the 'ripping off' argument in music is worthless, mostly done by self-congratulatory music-wonks trying to pull a turf-pissing match with a commoner. Art can be the inspiration for other works, only when you involve capitalist-copy-right && $ does this become an issue.. the whole idea is bunk.
All in all, I'm still a good classic rock fan. Just keep that Steve Miller bullshit away from me.
...again, your jerking your knee, when i explicitly said "im not a fan".
Like shooting fish in a barrel.
Re:Take your racism somewhere else. (Score:2)
So...if you don't like rap, you're a racist?
But while we are on the subject, most Rap songs don't take beats or lyrics from classic rock songs. They take many of their beats from Funk songs. They also take their beats from other rap songs.
Here's part of the reason I don't like rap music. At the risk of being labelled a "racist" in your eyes, it all seems to sound the same to me. I understand that some people like it, and it's their perogative. I don't begrudge them for liking it. I just don't care for the sound of it myself.
No one ever points out that Country songs take from Classic Rock songs. Just noticed that.
Well, I don't like Country, either - does that mean I'm also racist? Or does it mean that I "even out"? My isagreement with Country is that I have a hard time with "twang" - it just gets on my nerves. (Yes, my musical tastes are rather closed-minded, I guess. Classical, Metal, Rock, Classic Rock, and Jazz)
Look at "Changes" by Tupac. It's a good song if you listen to the lyrics. If you don't like it, I'm sure there are other reasons.
Yep - like not liking rap music in general. =)
Seriously - just because someone makes an overgeneralization towards rap music, it doesn't mean they're racist. They may just not like the sound. They may have obnoxious neighbors that feel it necessary to play rap music at extremely high volumes at 2am during the week. (Hell, that's enough to make you hate any genre of music, if youre someone who has to work during the day, and thus has to be able to sleep at night)
Re:Take your racism somewhere else. (Score:2)
Who cares what you like? I don't.
My point is, the same old song and dance [Aerosmith] that we hear about it being ripped off is perpetuated by people who are racists. [usually]
Yes, there is sampling, yes there is full 'beat-stealing'. But 99% of the time people are getting paid for it. Do you think a big time commercial guy like Master P [whom I don't like] is going to risk his multi-million dollar empire by copying a few drum hits? No... the original artists get points on the album and get paid depending on album sales.
Seriously - just because someone makes an overgeneralization towards rap music, it doesn't mean they're racist.
No, it makes them prejudice
I still stick to my statement: "All white people are prejudice" [joke, like GNU]
For the record, i'm white.
Re:Take your racism somewhere else. (Score:2)
hey is this Ralph The Jew Hater?
I think you missed my point. Hit parent and read my replies to people with usernames.... you'll figure it out.
Re:FYI - OT (Score:2)
Apportioning blame (Score:5, Insightful)
A. Courts squash what they can define.
Just like America turned (rightly or wrongly) a non-nation-state terrorism incident into an old-fashioned "my country vs. yours" war, courts/governments will try and shut down companies with business models that (they argue) are based on piracy and individuals that write "harmful code".
<pessimism>
The day someone anonymously builds a true peer2peer network that scales well [slashdot.org] and people choose it ahead of something with advertising in it, the genie really will be out of the bottle. Sadly, that's when governments will decide that "anti-supply" laws we're talking about now are useless, and the "anti-demand" laws will get tougher - in essence, they'll start going after 'users' rather than 'dealers'.
</pessimism>
IMHO, wasn't it something else? (Score:3, Offtopic)
IE, we're not invading them because they have terrorists inside their borders (in which case, we'd have to invade half of the world), but because they didn't turn over *the* group of terrorists that killed 3000 of our people.
Re:IMHO, wasn't it something else? (Score:4, Insightful)
The US refused to show the Taliban the evidence they claim they have against bin Laden. Afganistan also has not extradition treaty with the US. The Taliban was therefore justified under international law to not extradite bin Laden.
Gee... (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.mpex.net/software/download/kazaa.htm
Still downloading... (Score:2, Interesting)
This is the wrong way to do it. (Score:2, Informative)
In order to really stop the network from existing, the KaZaA guys nead to really break it - for instance, force a download of a newer version of KaZaA media desktop and disable it on a particluar date.
Thinking about it, maybe the versions we all have contains a remote control code which disables them, thus disabling the entire network.
It is enough that the network is inactive for a few days or fragmented enough to make it stop. There are some mechanisms built into KaZaA to prevent that from happening, but it is not impossible.
-- Arik
Re:This is the wrong way to do it. (Score:2, Informative)
Josh Crawley
contact if you need something
jwcrawle aght iupui daught edu (just say it out loud)
Good (Score:3, Interesting)
When people wanted more than Napster, Scour appeared. When they both stopped, Kazaa etc.. hit the scene.
It's only a matter of time before Kazaa etc.. are stopped completely and I look forward to the "next big thing". Although annoying, this leads to progress and I hope it'll end up with a P2P network that you *can't* kill and that's better than Gnutella.
The best part about Kazza... (Score:2)
I don't know of any other file sharing clients that allow this kind of transfer capability, so if anyone knows of one, it might be a good idea to get the hype started!
I noticed this a couple of days ago (Score:2)
Freeing yourself of Spyware (Score:2, Interesting)
Bug or design? (Score:2)
Could've been a libc mismatch with my Debian-unstable system, but [KaZaA for Linux] wouldn't accept user input after starting up and logging in.
That might be the whole point: if I remember correctly, you start a client daemon (with &), and then you use other apps to send commands to that daemon and interact with the network. (Normally, a GUI wrapper would handle that for you.)
Re:Bug or design? (Score:2)
Now, if kazaa is shut down completely, we will forever be stuck with this version. (Hopefully the "gift" project on sourceforge will mature soon.)
Re:How does this solve anything? (Score:2, Funny)
Because a judge took a look at the binary executable and found that the byte values and/or their disposition in the executable is offensive.
Re:What to do: (Score:2, Interesting)
The fear of this happening is spreading. I recently had a few people come to me to ask about encrypting their hard drive contents. This will help for now, but I'm expecting the US to pass an equivalent law to the UK RIP Act, which requires people to turn over passwords if the government asks for them.
This country used to be about freedom for the people. What have we let happen?
Re:What to do: (Score:3, Funny)
Biometrics.
"Oh, what password officer? I just put my eyeball upto the retina scanner, my thumb on my fingerprint scanner and belch into my microphone and then hum Beethoven's fifth backwards. Then I say the list of woman I have cheated on my wife with."
Even if they tied you down to a chair and made you look in the retina scanner, pressed your hand on the scanner, and made you drink alot of carbinated soda, you could hopefuly plead self incrimination for the voice recognition part of the authentication.
Re:What to do: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:What to do: (Score:2)
It's called a subpoena, and if that doesn't work it's called contempt of court.
Even if you did nothing wrong you are going to sit in jail until you prove it.
Re:UK RIP act (Score:2)
repeat as needed.
They'll go crazy trying to figure out what you've got encrypted there!
Re:What to do: (Score:2)
> Eventually they will simply have to go after individual users if they want to stop illegal sharing. I know that if word got around on perhaps a college campus that students were being kicked out of the dorms that it would cause the casual pirates to think twice.
That strategy hasn't been notably effective as a way of stopping people from using illegal drugs.
Re:Only a matter of time (Score:2, Insightful)
KaZaA does not condone activities and actions that breach the copyright of artists and copyright owners - as a KaZaA user you are bound by the KaZaA Terms of Use and laws governing copyright in each country.
Slow down cowboy? Maybe I just type too fast...
Misleading Topic (Score:4, Informative)
This is not the case. They have taken the CLIENT software download off the website. The actual service seems unchanged.
Re:Extremely Intresting To See (Score:5, Interesting)