I got an Australian album by an Australian artist lately with an FBI warning - have they totally absorbed us now, the US? Seems like Howard sold off the whole country with that trade deal... ;)
> Alex Bond wrote: > >>I've tried all manner of topics today: > >>gay dwarves as ear plugs >>rhythm is rhythm secret hidden message in music from captain birdseye > fish->fingers > >>none of them goers *i give up* > >>hahah.today > > OK try this Alex: > > 'The Electric Institute' (a case of 'just buy it' imho) is the first EMI > CD I've bought for over a decade. So this anti-piracy statement on the > inset of the jewel case is new to me: > > "This recording and artwork are protected by copyright law. Using > Internet services to distribute copyrighted music, giving away illegal > copies of discs or lending discs to others for them to copy is illegal > and does not support those involved in making this piece of music - > especially the artist. By carrying out any of these actions it has the > same effect as stealing music..." etc. > > Now, I personally try to be scrupulous about music as I'm sincerely > passionate about all music but especially 'advanced' electronic music. > This means I've never illegally downloaded music. However I have > received music from mates which might have been acquired in that way and > I've sometimes made copies of CDs (or digitised vinyl) for friends. > > This is someone who actually *wants* to safeguard the income of > musicians and the music biz (yeah all of it, including Madonna!) - But > in EMI's view, *I'm* a crook too, as would many millions of people like > me be as well (we do exist!) > > It makes me think that maybe EMI's view is extreme or unreasonable, just > plain unrealistic, maybe just plain pointless. > > What do other people think? > > Alex, I'd particularly like to know your view, given that you were > co-executive producer? > > I bet you won't say if you agree with EMI or not!!!! ;-) > > Ken > >
