Piratebay (Page 7 of 8)

don't know if its posted yet, but here is some info about the judge in the piratebay trial beeing biased
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/04/23 … d_of_bias/

latest update:

Anders Eka, the judge that has been apointed to check if judge Norstr

they are interested in copyright stuff, one could think that would make them biased (co-judges, professors in the subject etc), but they're personal view is that they aren't, which also is a problem since if there is a slightest change that the public will look at them as biased they shouldn't take the case.

yes that is what im trying to say if some not so small part of the public believes someones is biased then he or she IS biased (even if he/she is really isnt) and shouldnt take the case! the law puts it as simple as that. the law system needs a good reputation to work and people to respect it otherwise some day people will make their own justice.

Peter Sundin, one of tpb guys on trail put it in a funny way: "i cant help to notice and get a bad feeling when all the judges in this case always have had some connection to the prosecution side but never have been friends with any of our laywers"

all unions work like the maffia, dont they?

i hear you ruud. i believe they mean well. the thing i dont like with all these musician unions is that they are always so narrow minded.

first they are against records and crying on about how records and synths and other new technology are killing "live" music. now when records are dying out they cant stop crying either. i mean wtf?

do your homework first, Rude, I did mine

it's not nonsense, I checked very carefully with Buma and they advised me NOT to become a member, because I release my own music

it's only useful to be a member of such a copyright organisation, when you're ONLY an artist, not when you're an artist who runs his own label and releases his own music

then you have to pay 0,48 cents per record to buma for your own music and you get 0,43 cents back, at least one year later

I would be getting "a nice cheque in the mail", but it would be with my own money

here in Sweden we now have several cases of election cheating/sabotage for the coming EU election

in swedish

translated here

in this video a member of Piratpartiet(the pirate party) confronts election workers about how they have thrown away pirate party ballots

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANSjR_8ydyo[/youtube]

no exceptions for people with own label, and no exceptions period.
if some jerk decides to put my music on a russian website i can't do shit.
if i want to put my own music on my own website and i happen to be a buma member i'll have to pay buma for playing my own music.
i'll get a nice check after one year, or more, with my own money back, minus a percentage for wich they did exactly NOTHING. Nothing but cash my money pay marco borsato get interest and send the rest back to me.

as long as i'm not in the BIG numbers they can suck my ### and kiss my @$$.
so tiesto or armin, please put me on your nex album, i'll be the first to join BUMA after that (if they still sell more than 1000 pieces that is, otherwise i'll gladly take a nice advance and forget about it).

it's time they, like the rest of the music industry whores , start to see it's a different time and new rules are needed.

well, the big problem is that these organisations, like the rest of the industry, are a little behind. a lot of artists make a big part of their income from copyright organisations though, and they are not all big guys. for example, you get money if your track is played on foreign radio or if stuff is licensed or covered by other artists. but i agree that its a bit silly that there are no rules or exceptions for artists who run their own labels.

@poodle: patents and intellectual property are a double edged sword. your point is a valid one, but you can also argue that a LOT of research has to go into any cure for anything, and the only way that'll ever be funded is if some company can make that money back by getting the patent. besides, patents doen't last forever, there is only a limited amount of years before basically anyone can start making a certain medicine..

ruud for president of buma
(y) i guess 'elk voordeel heb z'n nadeel' (every advanage has it's disadvantage)

95 years (which i think is the new one) for arts and 25 years (20+5) for medicine patents is not reasonable.

5-10 years for all kinds of immaterial rights is more than reasonable i think. this is a good compromise i think between letting the  person/company have a chance to earn back a profit and then be forced to invent something new to make further money.

a reasonable win-win situation for both the society and the companies

@ruud, speaking on cures etc. antibiotics research is not that complicated it is just that very very few companies actually want to do it.