Gene Simmons Declares War on Anonymous

[zidine100]

That's the common way of looking at it, but I've never agreed with that. I know my view isn't widely shared so I'm not trying to call you wrong or anything, but:
Would you ever steal a candy bar? I wouldn't. Why? Stealing is wrong. Sure, all "bad" things are excusable in certain situations, but I think we can agree that stealing a candy bar has to be the result of a simple disregard for law and/or moral values. Taking what is not yours without good reason is wrong. In other words, those who would commit crimes are fundamentally different from ordinary people, and common thieves are closer to murderers than to regular human beings.

If that's not convincing, how about this simple idea. How many people's lives would be ruined if that was the penalty for stealing a candy bar? Probably none, because no one would steal a candy bar if the punishment was that bad. If the punishment fits the crime, people are more willing to commit the crime. It's like opportunity cost in economics. When the US government raised safety requirements in cars, people in general started driving faster and pedestrian deaths increased. If the risks of an action, ie stealing a candy bar, are huge, then no one will take the risk. If every crime was punishable by death, only the stupidist or most insane would actually commit crimes.

you ever been or used youtube, im quite sure fair use will not protect you. Im assuming you have as most of the internet as we know it has been there and listened to music at least once.

edit sorry reread your post

so j walking should equal death eh?
littering should equal death?

i get what your saying here but you do see why this isnt the case... right?

And i really dont care which side wins as it stands, its not going to change all that much anyway if either side wins.

I think the old saying goes Stuck between a rock and a hard place.

As far as I'm aware, there is a difference between listening to a song and downloading it, but I'm no copyright expert.

you have to downloaded it to listen to it, streaming is of no exception here (if youtube is legal then watching tv shows online (not bbc i and other places as that you know what im meaning) is legal), as its streamed to your computer and stored in your temporary files, therefore you have downloaded the song itself and have broken copyright laws.

and i guess we will agree to differ on the law part here.
But it does sound a bit like a slippery slope to me,

but then again i dont know much about law, just what i was taught in my info systems class (they taught some basic things about copyright law and well this was discussed to a point(Streaming data of course not the slippery slope that was in philosophy) way back when i was in the academy, so take my opinion as you will.

and i just don't like excessive and knowingly unfair punishments in favor of deterrence, but hell that's just my opinion and im not going to question that it wont work, im just saying it just doesn't fit into my moral compass. Although i do see its advantages.

 

[Arcanist]

Simmons, I know you're not stupid, but... well... there's no other way to say this.

You just declared war on the internet.

YOU'RE GOING TO LOSE.

 

[bjj hero]

Gene could win that firstfight and sleep with all their women before dinner.

Please, like any of them have ever had sex without paying for it...

Unless you are talking about their sisters and mothers...

 

[FaceFaceFace]

snip

snip

snip

you have to downloaded it to listen to it, streaming is of no exception here (if youtube is legal then watching tv shows online (not bbc i and other places as that you know what im meaning) is legal), as its streamed to your computer and stored in your temporary files, therefore you have downloaded the song itself and have broken copyright laws.

and i guess we will agree to differ on the law part here.
But it does sound a bit like a slippery slope to me, but then again i dont know much about law.

and i just don't like excessive and knowingly unfair punishments in favor of deterrence, but hell that's just my opinion and im not going to question that it wont work, im just saying it just doesn't fit into my moral compass. Although i do see its advantages.

Yeah I'm no expert on copyright law so I didn't know that, thanks. It's an issue on which I usually have to agree to disagree, as my views apparently tend towards totalitarianism. It is definitely a slippery slope and I agree that people shouldn't be given punishments too steep for the crime, but it's my belief that in such a situation no one who is smart enough to be alive would break a law with such a harsh punishment. It is definitely an ethical dilemma, though.

 

[FieryTrainwreck]

Simmons is a relic, as are the many outmoded organizations standing behind him.

The US economy continues to tank because we continue to rely on intellectual property as our primary export and source of revenue, and the rest of the world simply isn't interested in paying for shitty music/movies/games anymore.

I can't really put into words how much I despise the modern day entitlement of the "artist". Every idiot thinks he deserves money for singing a song, writing a book, filming a movie, etc. It's fucking ridiculous, and it's tremendously insulting to actual artists.

 

[Thedayrecker]

He'll learn eventually

 

[Chorionicstu]

Gene Simmons can (puts on sunglasses) kiss my butt.

 

[Nurb]

Gene Simmons is a dickhead, and a bigot.

 

[Arec Balrin]

Copyrights exist for one reason and one reason only: to preserve the free public dissemination of recorded works...oh wait. No that was what it was created for, which has nothing to do with what it's for now which is almost the complete opposite of what it was originally meant to do. Damn.

 

[zidine100]

I can just listen on Grooveshark or Youtube or whatever, and that's good enough for me. I'll just grab the popcorn and sit back while I watch Gene Simmons and The Internet duke it out...

i hate to tell you this but that in itself would probably class as piracy. (youtube anyway, ive never heard of grooveshark myself.)

It's already a pretty unrealistic goal to severely punish everyone who downloads music illegally, so I highly doubt they're going to track down the IP addresses of every Youtube user who watches Rock and Roll All Night. Hell, even if that were to somehow happen, I would just have a story to tell my friends about how I was one of the victims of the Great Gene Simmons Internet Massacre of 2010.

unlikely at the present time yes (still im quite sure it would be a hell of alot easer to track down youtube users than music down loaders due to the fact they already have a solid lead on where the musics hosted).... although i wouldn't put it past some people, but do you really think most copyright holders care if its on you tube in a different file format with a picture, or a mp3 file on some torrent site. I think someone will go after youtube and its users eventually, in fact im sure of it.

snip

snip

snip

*snip

Yeah I'm no expert on copyright law so I didn't know that, thanks.

keep in mind im no expert either, just going with what i was taught in school.

 

[zidine100]

*deleted due to double post mistake.*

 

[EchetusXe]

lol, what next? Zombie Reagan declaring war on Anonymous?

I don't think Gene Simmons' "put the consumer in jail when they listen to songs without paying for it" strategy makes sense on any level, least of all in business terms.

 

[moshineko]

Simmons is a relic, as are the many outmoded organizations standing behind him.

The US economy continues to tank because we continue to rely on intellectual property as our primary export and source of revenue, and the rest of the world simply isn't interested in paying for shitty music/movies/games anymore.

I can't really put into words how much I despise the modern day entitlement of the "artist". Every idiot thinks he deserves money for singing a song, writing a book, filming a movie, etc. It's fucking ridiculous, and it's tremendously insulting to actual artists.

You make me smile.

Gene is just as much an entitled fuckwad as the people who make hundreds of thousands for driving their cars in a circle. No, actually moreso, at least those folks could likely fix, build, and drive cars on their own. Gene Simmons relies on dozens, no, hundreds of other people who make crap pay to put his album out, and he's pissy because he's only making ten million a year instead of eleven million?

Waah, waah. I'd feel really sorry for you, but they're reposessing my car and evicting me from my house, and I'm shivering too much in my unheated house to be able to work up a good pity party.

 

[soulsabr]

Ya, he's a total dick for vowing to go after people who are engaged in illegal activities, including attacking his own site. He should learn that these crimes don't hurt anybody, and that poor college kids can't afford to buy music so should be given it for free.

Oh wait...

He's a dick for saying that he wants people to lose their homes, lose their lives and put them in jail for downloading a song that's worth $0.99

If they are that stupid to risk going to jail for that then that's their problem not his.

I agree with you there, Legion. Sorry guys, but theft is theft. You break the law you go to jail and/or pay the fine; period. Rock on and happy hunting, Gene!

 

[Vanguard_Ex]

Oh this will be hilarious. Simmons seems to be pretty ignorant as to just who Anon are, and Anon themselves always prove to provide harsh yet most of the time contextually brilliant punishments.

 

[TerranReaper]

Fighting anonymous is fighting the entire internet. Anonymous doesn't have any kind of set headquarters (Although 4chan is close to resembling one), they're everywhere, even on this very site.

 

[Overlordjack]

have fun backtracing it Gene. most of the leads will go thru china.

 

[JeanLuc761]

Right because everyone only steals one song, moron. "AW damn i really wanted to donwload ebay by wierd al but i already downloaded i will not bow by breaking benjamin oh well i guess i'm outa luck"

OT: Anon are fucking cowards, i don't like gene simmons but he's in the right here. 99% of the people who are defending anon download music. I don't give a shit about how trivial it is it's breaking the fucking law. It's not bending the rules, it's not twisting the system, it is full on fuck the rules. Why should i be sympathetic to someone who knows they're doing something wrong. I feel sympathetic to the 16 year old driver who didn't know he had to pull over for an emergancy vehicle when he's on the other side of the road because no one taught him.

Go down to your police department and tell them that you have downloaded whatever amount of songs you have if you think it's so trivial. If it's like under 2 or 3 hundred then yah i aggree not a big deal but i'm betting alot of you have downloaded way more then that.

Way to talk to me respectfully, really helps your argument.

Let me pose this question to you. Let's suppose someone downloads 500 songs illegally. On the basis that each file is worth $0.99, that's a total loss of $495.00
Is it reasonable punishment to sue that person into oblivion, put them in jail, and ensure they never see a happy day for the rest of their lives?

 

[Super Toast]

Well, he's screwed.

 

[Buccura]

Nice knowing ya Geney.