P2P Legal Defense Fund

[Geoz]

Yeah i heard in the UK there was this farmer who shot this kid who was stealing stuff from his house. The kid died and he went down for murder. - there was also quite a bit of debate whether he had the right to protect himself and his property. Thing was though he was being robbed loads. Personally I think if you gave people that right to defend with a gun it could be used a deterrent but then also more guns would be available. Also it wouldn’t stop the real desperate people in society either.

 

[vampireuk]

His conviction was reduced to manslaughter and he is now free.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Personally, I like to see tougher punishments for these things. In some arab countries, they cut your hand off if you are caught stealing, and that is a damn good deterrant. If everybody feared for their life when they burglarize, I guarentee you that it would happen much less.

 

[Xade]

Damned right, and it's good that you guys over there can defend home and land which is your own. We are distinctly lacking that sort of thing over here.

Mind, we don't have a Patriot Act, so... advantages both side of the pond

 

[AlphaWolf]

Mind, we don't have a Patriot Act, so... advantages both side of the pond

I have heard people complain about the patriot act, but I honestly have no idea exactly what it is other than requiring any companies to divulge personal information to the government (its never affected me and I haven't had time to read up on this stuff.) I do remember hearing that it will expire sometime this year unless congress renews it though, as its only supposed to be temporary.

 

[smegforbrain]

I do remember hearing that it will expire sometime this year unless congress renews it though, as its only supposed to be temporary.

Bush wants it to become permanent.

It basically gives the gov't the power to do stuff like go to a library and get records of everything you've ever checked out, etc. Some of it is an attempt at keeping up with the times - a roving wiretap is to deal with cell phones, etc.

But because of the whining of privacy groups, it's hard to tell which parts are legit and which is Big Brother (and we all know that Bush is Big Brother).

 

[AlphaWolf]

Bush wants it to become permanent.

Are you sure about that? I thought I read a news article the other day where he said he only wants to renew it until the situation in the middle east has calmed down.

 

[Alchy]

Google "patriot act 2". Land of the free my ass...

 

[AlphaWolf]

Google "patriot act 2". Land of the free my ass...

You know, I couldn't even read that beyond the second paragraph. It's so biased its pathetic. It looks like it was written by micheal moore or something (that guy that even hollywood liberals boo-ed off of the stage)

 

[Gorxon]

http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/main_news.cfm?NewsID=8493

I guess it doesnt come as a surprise...greedy bastards...
From what I have heard iTunes hardly make any money at all from each song they sell. It's just that they sell loads that keep them going.

 

[Xade]

Hah, well I already hate downloading albums instead of buying CDs. Now I simply laugh. Let's have the twelve year-olds and the 30something coffee table crew have their fucking downloads at $5 a song. Fuck them. All of them.

BUY CDs YOU RETARDS.

 

[smegforbrain]

Err, ok, Xade.

All in all, the biggest roadblock for me with online downloading is the restrictiveness of it all. It's a necessary evil though.

I tried iTunes with those Pepsi cap downloads. Then I found out the song wouldn't run outside of iTunes unless I burned the song off, then ripped it back into mp3 format.

This is NOT user friendly in the least.

Back to the Patriot Act. If the War on Terror takes as long as some say (which would be decades), then the Patriot Act will likely be made permanent if some like Bush get their way.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Back to the Patriot Act. If the War on Terror takes as long as some say (which would be decades), then the Patriot Act will likely be made permanent if some like Bush get their way.

"They" tend to overblow these things. Everytime a war breaks out, these hippies start to gather up into a big scum line and protest in these assanine ways, like having a puke out, (what the hell is that supposed to accomplish anyways?) chanting their cheezy "ho ho hey hey" slogans, or something equally childish because they aren't reliable enough to flip burgers. When they don't get their ways, they start destroying property and throwing bottles of acid at riot control officers demanding peace "or else". Then when that isn't enough, some idiots like michael moore begin to support them and cry "world war 3." It invariably happens :doh:

 

[smegforbrain]

Who says these are the hippies talking?

It's actually people who are experts in the area or from the Bush Administration (who are not experts).

 

[AlphaWolf]

It's actually people who are experts in the area or from the Bush Administration (who are not experts).

Are these the same experts that predicted that the US would take up thousands of casualties before overthrowing Baghdad? Have these experts' predictions ever been accurate before?

I recall several of these self claimed "experts" predicting it on the scale of Vietnam. In Vietnam there were 13 vietnamese killed for every US soldier killed. In this war its easily over a few thousand towliebans and saddomizers for every coalition soldier.

In vietnam their population overwhelmed us by more than 13:1, hence our problem. However, in this "war on terror" they do not carry a few thousand to one population over us, not by a long shot. Plus, 85% of the Iraq population is in favor of the US' presence there. Both of our economies benefit from this presence. The towliebans and saddomizers' numbers will run out, and I personally am betting that it will not last longer than 3-5 years. From every angle you look at it, we have the upper hand, and the only exception is the filfthy hippies spreading their toe cheese on the streets of DC and doing anything in their power to bring down the home front because they want to prove some assanine point.

 

[rcgamer]

Hah, well I already hate downloading albums instead of buying CDs. Now I simply laugh. Let's have the twelve year-olds and the 30something coffee table crew have their fucking downloads at $5 a song. Fuck them. All of them.

BUY CDs YOU RETARDS.

maybe when your paying for them out of your own pocket you will see things differently, its easy to talk shit when your digging in daddys wallet for the money. they started this service to entice the filesharers to obtain music legally (wich i presume is what you want) then turn and price it higher than anyone would pay. typical money grubbing bastards.

 

[Xade]

Hurr hurr, I have a job incidentally, earning £7.35/$13 an hour, which isn't bad for somebody 17. Enough of your cynicism, wiseguy.

And christ, if I'm a 'punk' kid paying for all these albums, full-time working goons can comfortably pay for their own, can they not?

 

[rcgamer]

well , punk (your word) kids dont have bills to pay, like rent , electricity, etc. And most of the filesharers are kids not adults. The point is that itunes offered a legit way for people to obtain music they want at an easy to swallow price. now the music association tells them that its not enough to get the music legally , they have to pay ridiculous prices as well. I would expect this to be another move by the music association that blows up in their faces. its only going to push more people to get the music illegally.

 

[smegforbrain]

FYI, iTunes isn't the one jacking up the prices on these songs. It is, once again, the companies within the RIAA.

In fact, Apple is losing money on the actual songs.

 

[rcgamer]

"now the music association tells them that its not enough to get the music legally , they have to pay ridiculous prices as well. I would expect this to be another move by the music association that blows up in their faces. its only going to push"