You seem to be on message Don - want the Chief Enforcer's lob? We'd allow the odd carnival of course and I'd invent a device to measure the moronity index of the musak rather than decibels.
On 23 Sep, 16:34, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > I can see it now. The ADT. Archytas' Decibel Tax. Various Judge > Dredd types scattered about Mega City One to curb the populous' > percussive passions. Violators will be punished. > > dj > > > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 10:21 AM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Bands playing at my mate's pub on Fridays give me more pleasure than > > the industry generally ever could - and they play for a few beers and > > 'bus fare'. I hate to say this, but I am now a prude who hates most > > pop musak with its robotic fanny thrusting and hardly ever hear a tune > > worth listening too. I'd be inclined to make all electronic music > > free other than paying fees for the session costs and wages - bands > > could make money from live gigs. I don't believe any of the money > > arguments. Frankly, is some dork wants millions for his tune, I don't > > want to hear it. I owe more to the guys who played free on rugby > > coaches, after cricket matches and in student halls than to any star. > > What I want is a levy on all sales to pay for all the environmental > > pollution of the 'musak industry'. This would include guards armed > > with heavy clubs on public transport and in public areas to mace those > > miserable enough to spoil our silence, and payments by the musak > > industry to victims of anti-social noise from cars and dwellings. > > These creeps are stealing our environment - put the downloads up to > > £20 and charge the record people £21 of it to restore our peace. > > Music should be for pubs, bandstands in the park, festivals miles from > > anyone who hates the crud and headphones tested and approved as not > > emitting vile 'scratching' sounds (wearers in public places should > > exhibit a licence to cover health an safety costs - compassion got the > > better of me the other day and I had to pull one of these > > somnambulists out of the way of a truck she hadn't heard coming and > > most of them will cost us through the NHS). > > > On 23 Sep, 15:07, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > > wrote: > >> Hey Jim, > > >> Yes I also agree with you. Record companies are no angels, yet the > >> point I make is one of stealing goods without paying for them so I > >> find that my moral objection stands. > > >> If you were a potter for example, would you not be a little anoyed if > >> people wanted to take your pots without paying for them? Even if your > >> distributers charged over the odds, that does not mean that people are > >> allowed to steal your goods, the old two wrongs not making a right and > >> what not ummm. > > >> I have been lookng through the comments section on that site, and > >> mostly what I see is people whinging about ohh it cost too much money > >> to buy music. Well fuck me 75p per single for download, or upto > >> £9.99 for a real honest to goodness CD is too much money? > > >> Well as my nan would no doubt say, 'I'll go to the foot of our stairs' > > >> On 23 Sep, 14:55, retiredjim34 <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > Lee - your morally correct objective is a bit off. The prime culprit > >> > in the music business has been for decades the music companies > >> > themselves. They have accountants even more skilled than the movie > >> > business at making sure all profits from record sales are consumed by > >> > production costs. Recording artists learned long ago that the only way > >> > to make any money is to tour. They view records, even platinum > >> > records, just as advertising. So please don't berate illegal file > >> > sharing without also berating record companies. Jim > > >> > On Sep 22, 6:44 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > This from the BBC today. > > >> > >http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/8267142.stm > > >> > > What do we think? > > >> > > I think that it is not moraly correct to take an artists work (in any > >> > > field) and not pay for it, that is how they make their livlyhood > >> > > afterall. So I do not fileshare myself, nor download illegaly. > > >> > > That said, this is the way things are now and I dare say it is > >> > > impossible to stop. Better then I guess that musicians seek to turn > >> > > it to their own advantage perhaps by (like NIN did) using the 'net to > >> > > give away a certian amount of their art to moisten the the lips of all > >> > > of the fans that will pay for their work. No publicity is bad > >> > > publicity and all that. > > >> > > Loss of revenue IS going to happen, this kind of piracy I think will > >> > > never stop, take the loss, and make the mony on the tours or other > >> > > merchandising I figure. Shit at least the 'net has the capacity to > >> > > make an unknown into a 'Known' in a matter of seconds.- Hide quoted > >> > > text - > > >> > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
