Aw, I thought it was funny!:p:p

Its funny to ask for charity on my behalf and on behalf of my Soldiers without even asking me to begin with? What's so funny about that?

If it was a joke then it was definitely missed on me.

Its funny to ask for charity on my behalf and on behalf of my Soldiers without even asking me to begin with? What's so funny about that?

If it was a joke then it was definitely missed on me.

The joke was, Ken and I don't get along so well. To put it in words ladies wouldn't be shocked by. He said he ordered 2 copies of GROUND ZERO for himself and "a friend". =I= was the "friend" he ordered the second copy for. And...thanks, Ken, but I got 'em comin'. Give the second copy to a good cause.

I'm surprised at your attitude, Wapaititititittitkev. I never said "Watch this video, it has all the answers!" I just thought it was interesting, and relevant to this discussion.

It was interesting to a discussion about why the Internet makes copyright legislation obsolete because, once one person breaks copyright, everyone on the planet can blissfully convince themselves that it is OK to own a copy of that something despite the fact that that they didn't pay for that copy.

I thought that this thread already had stated that was the case and was a discussion of why that SHOULD NOT be the case.

In other words, a discussion about B instead of A.

Unless they think they would benefit by A) a stimulating and thought provoking lecture from Cory Doctorow, the former European Affairs Coordinator for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, an acclaimed writer and regular public speaker against DRM/copyright or B) a video about cats.

Then they might want to watch one or the other, depending.

Neither one told me anything that I did not already know, so I found them neither stimulating nor thought provoking.

What about the example of Madonna, who has sacked her record manager and hired a concert manager, someone for whom the number of free downloads circulating the interent is a good thing, driving the concert ticket prices up? Or Radiohead releasing In Rainbows for a voluntary charge (many volunteering to pay £0.00) and then still raking in millions from the downloads anyway?

So the Internet is a good way for artists who already made millions under the old copyright laws to remain popular and make their money selling out 50,000 seat arenas at $200/seat.

Unless FPW is going to take his RJ series international and start performing the novels live with an interactive laser show, then you are missing the point entirely.

Sorrel often points out it's easier for established artists like Madonna and Radiohead to carry on making money from concert ticket sales, but what about emerging artists? Saul Williams http://www.side-line.com/news_comments.p...46_0_2_0_C released an album as a low quality free download for the first 100,000 visitors to his site, at the same time as having a high quality version with pdf album artwork (all DRM free) available for $5. Despite the free downloads available, he made more money from this self-release than he would have done signing a deal with a record label.

Because he made the money directly...he cut out the middle man and thereby didn't have to pay a music company to produce, distribute, publicize, etc....the album. I congratulate him on his success...do you have any numbers on how many have tried this, failed miserably and are now living in squalor?

Did you draw that yourself or did you pirate it?

Yes piracy makes a copy...of the thoughts and concepts that FPW is selling...and those thoughts are illegally obtained through piracy. Your objection to calling piracy theft is semantic and is a poor attempt to distract the discussion from the real issue: Obtaining a copy of the thoughts and concepts that FPW is selling, a copy that you may keep in perpetuity without paying FPW for a copy, is not only illegal, currently and for the foreseeable future, but is expressly against FPW's wishes as stated in this thread.

I think that FPW would be in favour of the free market driving improvements and innovations in business strategy. The market place is changing, and you can either change with it a develop new business models or you can get the government to pass new legislation to preserve your failing business.

So you think that FPW's business is failing...why would anyone want copies of his work if that was the case? It is obvious that people want copies for the exact opposite reason.

Your point about improvements and innovations in business strategy are interesting, but are only valid in as much as FPW chooses to apply them to his work...however his work, his intellectual propety, the thoughts and concepts embodied by the words he writes, are what fans should not pirate. They should respect his wishes and pay for a copy of them if they want to have a copy of them.

Thank you for the time and effort you have spent in an attempt to justify why you should not have to abide by FPW's wishes.

You have yet to make a convincing case.

Anything else you'd like to try and confuse the issue with?

-Wapitikev

Hmmm...might take me some searching to find it. I'd say about an hour.

Thanks! I'll get on that right-of-way.

Stephanie

It would be easier to find and download pirated e-novels...and since it is so easy, then everyone should do it! Bones said it was ok, so go ahead.

-Wapitikev

The joke was, Ken and I don't get along so well. To put it in words ladies wouldn't be shocked by. He said he ordered 2 copies of GROUND ZERO for himself and "a friend". =I= was the "friend" he ordered the second copy for. And...thanks, Ken, but I got 'em comin'. Give the second copy to a good cause.

Mike, yeah I got that, and that is why I didn't quote the first part of your post...I quoted the last part...the part that had to do with me.

But forget it, if you cannot admit that what you said (about me and my Soldiers...not the first line about Ken)was even a tad uncalled for then there is no making you see what you refuse to see.

Mike, yeah I got that, and that is why I didn't quote the first part of your post...I quoted the last part...the part that had to do with me.

But forget it, if you cannot admit that what you said (about me and my Soldiers...not the first line about Ken)was even a tad uncalled for then there is no making you see what you refuse to see.

The first part was a lie about me, and the second part was insulting to you.

And some people wonder why ol' Clueless gets "picked on."

Hey! He asks for it!

Ken V.

The joke was, Ken and I don't get along so well. To put it in words ladies wouldn't be shocked by. He said he ordered 2 copies of GROUND ZERO for himself and "a friend". =I= was the "friend" he ordered the second copy for.

There are liars, DAMNED liars, and Clueless Mike Lindner.

Ken V.

I - I still think that, when legal downloads of out-of-print books written by someone who died 60 year ago are available to everyone and anyone in the world BUT the nationals of that writer, there is something wrong. If the books are re-printed, or if I ever find them in a used-books shop, I'll buy them (I prefer the real thing anyway). In the meanwhile, I want to re-read books I enjoyed in my childhood and don't exist anymore.

II - I buy my DVDs, and I'm punished for it by having to go through that anti-piracy clip before being able to watch them. Unfair for honnest people

I - I still think that, when legal downloads of out-of-print books written by someone who died 60 year ago are available to everyone and anyone in the world BUT the nationals of that writer, there is something wrong. If the books are re-printed, or if I ever find them in a used-books shop, I'll buy them (I prefer the real thing anyway). In the meanwhile, I want to re-read books I enjoyed in my childhood and don't exist anymore.

Om the whole, I think that copyrights should be limited to the lifetime of the author and his/her spouse.

It seems silly for the great grand children to be getting royalties.

II - I buy my DVDs, and I'm punished for it by having to go through that anti-piracy clip before being able to watch them. Unfair for honnest people

It seems that more and more governments are treating the honest members of society as though they were criminals.

Wouldn't it be funny if pirated DVD's also have that anti-piracy advertisement.

Ken V.

Om the whole, I think that copyrights should be limited to the lifetime of the author and his/her spouse.

It seems silly for the great grand children to be getting royalties.

Ken V.

It's not even that I mind paying for the books, it's just that they don't exist. Plus (whining tone), virtually everyone in the world but me may do it... Differences in copyright laws might have made sense in the past, but with the internet the system is becoming incoherent.