Is SOPA bad?

Yes ... SOPA and PIPA are bad. Paid for by big money interests. The artist probably won't get diddly out of this deal. But the rich movie companies, will get richer. The rich, corporate record execs will get richer. It costs big money to lobby Washington.​
When Google and Wikipedia come out and say this is bad mojo, it's probably bad mojo. And quite frankly, our current group of mostly aging congressmen (average age 58.2), they can't seem to grasp the simple concept of "don't spend more than you make !" They didn't get it 10 years ago, and they seem to not get it now. So something as "complex" as the internet ... they shouldn't even get involved in that.​
 
I love the idea of this legislation. It means eventually, I'll no longer be exposed to new music made by real musicians, as examples would be almost impossible to find. After some time of adjustment, I'd be much happier as a consumer of music that the big corporations think I should listen to. I wouldn't have to concern myself with playing drums anymore, as machines would do the job just as well. That would release a huge amount of time for me to exist in a happy moronic state, thus making my life far less complicated. I say vote it in ;)
 
todays generation deserve my music for free out of respect for all the stuff I "stole" when I was a kid. don't want to be a hypocrite, not my style.
companies, well they can and will pay a premium.


So your music and the work you put in to make it are valueless? It's a quaint notion, but music made by amateurs will never attain the standards of professionals.
If you can generate enough revenue from commercial licensing alone then you're doing very well.
 
There are laws now against copyright infringement and piracy but this will take away due process and the gestapo will find you guilty without a trial and it will lead to other legislation dealing with things in the same way. Inforce the laws now in effect and we will be find. Lawyers just love to make laws to pad their resumes and keep each other employed. Without lawyers we wouldn't need lawyers.
 
The phrase 'Intellectual Property' is as nonsensical as this legislation. How can one own a thought? It's not who thinks of an idea first but who patents it first in any case. I think the 19th-21st century adventure in copyright will ultimately be looked back on as a mistake.

Dan Bull offered some interesting thoughts on the subject of filesharing in 2009, in this riposte to a statement made by Lily Allen about it.

And in looking for that video, I found he'd said something about SOPA too.
 
all the musicians will go underground into a secret bunker. sort of like fightclub, but better.

screw sopa, screw leftwingobamascum, screw them all.
left is right is center is bullshit

as long as i have a midi keyboard a drum kit and a computer and electricity then i can quite easily amuse myself for the next 50 years
 
So your music and the work you put in to make it are valueless? It's a quaint notion, but music made by amateurs will never attain the standards of professionals.
If you can generate enough revenue from commercial licensing alone then you're doing very well.

valueless?

my music will be incredible, but it's much better when you hear it live with the energy. on record its dull. why charge for a lesser form of it? i'll charge a high price to see it live. you realise mozart and beethoven were employed by big families (companies) to create music and play it live. the sooner we get back to that sort of model the better.

who gives a shit about recorded sound, edison wasn't trying to invent copyrights or make middle management record label dickheads when he was inventing stuff back in the day. screw the industry, if you're a musician then play music, you don't need some shit A&R man with a rubbish degree from a poor university trying to tell you what to do.

it takes me about 5 hours to make one of my tunes, as long as i earn enough to eat and pay taxes so i can breathe oxygen then who cares what else i make? screw big cars big houses nice holidays. im a musician and that is what i do, all the other shit would just get in the way.

all my music will be creative commons (except for adverts/films/etc). remix do whatever you want with it. how can someone own a melody or a chord progression? you telling me thats fair? thats disrespectful to sound man. at the end of the day if you can whistle then you're a musician.
 
Last edited:
sopa.gif
I think I love you. That was the best thing I have seen in the course of history.
 
I love the idea of this legislation. It means eventually, I'll no longer be exposed to new music made by real musicians, as examples would be almost impossible to find. After some time of adjustment, I'd be much happier as a consumer of music that the big corporations think I should listen to. I wouldn't have to concern myself with playing drums anymore, as machines would do the job just as well. That would release a huge amount of time for me to exist in a happy moronic state, thus making my life far less complicated. I say vote it in ;)


I'm with you all the way on this. I feel that the internet has allowed too many people to do too many things as they like. It's become dizzying anarchy--and that's no way to live.

I wish only that they further broaden the definitions in the bill to allow corporations a more complete control over things. The way the legislation is now, some of these "artists" could still slip through the cracks and muddy up what should be a nice, clean, and concise collection of media.

And pirates too. They're just out to steal money from these wonderful media groups. Jealousy, perhaps?
 
definetly bad and ridiculous and alot of politicians are back tracking on it already, but what confuses me is how many people who are for big gov't getting involved and controlling all things like medical, education, taxes etc etc but hey don't mess with my internet thats personal and I don't trust the government who is obviously persuaded by big business, but ya know just on this subject.....LOL
 
Search for 'Ron Paul SOPA' for some great views. It's nasty legislation, that has such vague language, it leaves lots of power open to abuse. Couple this with the NDAA act (section 1021) and other legislation we have (Patriot Act), and there's a lot to be worried about, including the general political atmosphere we have. These bills have too many shady areas that all can be abused. There's almost the potential now for a complete takeover of every citizen's rights, and yet people aren't worried. As we keep expanding our corrupt system, the beliefs and traditions of freedom this country was founded on slip farther and farther away. Now they can search our homes without warrants, detain us indefinitely without charges, and they are trying to block the Internet now, the greatest tool for many freedom movements, and home to alternative non-corporate media sources. This is wrong.
 
all the big internet companies will just start doing blackouts
if facebook or google have the balls to do it then the bill will be out straight away
 
it takes me about 5 hours to make one of my tunes, as long as i earn enough to eat and pay taxes so i can breathe oxygen then who cares what else i make? fuck big cars big houses nice holidays. im a musician and that is what i do, all the other shit would just get in the way.


But how will you earn the money to buy the food/pay the taxes. Without owning what you create how can you make even a penny from it? How would you charge a high price for live perfomances without the label promotion in the first place? The starving musician thing is all very romantic but it starts to hurt the old noggin after a while.
 
There have been a couple of bands on the outer ends of the discussion, two that come to mind are the Grateful Dead and Metallica. The Dead actually had an area for tapers, they almost encouraged it. Metallica was in a wicked big law suit with Napster, Dr. Dre was in on it too. They wanted to be compensated for their "property".

My music teacher back in Seattle used to talk about a more subtle form of piracy, just burning somebody else's disc onto an MP3 player without buying it. But here is the rub for me, if I "borrow" your CD of "Name Your Band" and load it into the laptop and listen, there is a much greater chance I will buy more of your music if I like it.

Shutting off all sites because some entity is making money from it seems silly to me. So I have form a better opinion on SOPA, it's dumb legislation. I also learned that it invokes a pretty ugly response from a lot of people. But hey, it's the internet, right?

And that cartoon with the Koala and the Goat was awesome, I was wondering of I could borrow it, are there royalties?
 
But how will you earn the money to buy the food/pay the taxes. Without owning what you create how can you make even a penny from it? How would you charge a high price for live perfomances without the label promotion in the first place? The starving musician thing is all very romantic but it starts to hurt the old noggin after a while.

I think since you 2 live so near to each other, you ought to have a fight about it :)
 
And that cartoon with the Koala and the Goat was awesome, I was wondering of I could borrow it, are there royalties?

The koala/goat thing is from The Oatmeal (http://theoatmeal.com/sopa), and he has given permission to freely yoink it in the interests of all who oppose SOPA and PIPA.
 
So what's going to happen if this gets in?

Unless you are a US service provider you don't really need to care. But if you are a US service provider and provide links to overseas 'pirate sites' such as Pirate Bay then you can be made liable.

Just your standard US legislation's over the top way of getting global control of the world's media. Nothing to worry about at all - move along now - nothing to see here.
 
Back
Top