PHP Developers Network

A community of PHP developers offering assistance, advice, discussion, and friendship.
 
Loading
It is currently Wed Nov 21, 2018 6:08 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Audiogalaxy Petition
PostPosted: Sat May 25, 2002 11:08 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2002 3:21 pm
Posts: 209
Location: Springmont, PA USA
This forum thread is for those who wish to back a fellow PHP-using site, Audiogalaxy, from the threats of the RIAA. As seen that they are being sued for not providing adequate security measures against copyrighted songs, I'd like to be the first to sign the petition in the fact that Audiogalaxy is the PREMIERE music service on the internet, and they follow guidelines from the day they are issued.

Another point: what the RIAA doesn't understand, is that music-sharing will NEVER die... no matter if it's a company like Audiogalaxy, or an underground network, copyrighted songs will find their way across the internet....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 25, 2002 2:04 pm 
Offline
Forum Contributor

Joined: Sun May 19, 2002 9:58 am
Posts: 225
Location: Sussex, UK
:oops: What is the RIAA? :oops:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 25, 2002 7:37 pm 
Offline
Forum Newbie

Joined: Sat May 04, 2002 7:47 pm
Posts: 12
Now while I agree that the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) does go overboard in their attempts to stop the spread of illegally copied music, I think you are going a bit far.

Quote:
Another point: what the RIAA doesn't understand, is that music-sharing will NEVER die... no matter if it's a company like Audiogalaxy, or an underground network, copyrighted songs will find their way across the internet....


Are you suggesting that because there will always be people breaking the law that it is somehow OK?

Quote:
Another point: what the police don't understand, is that murdering will NEVER stop... no matter if it's a guy like Ted Bundy, or a street gang, murderers will find someway to kill....


I know that is taking it to the extreme, but it is the same concept. Just because something is going to happen anyway doesn't make it right.

Now, the reason I bring all this up is directly related to PHP. How you ask? Well, one of the big problems with the acceptance of PHP in the corporate would is the same problem the rest of Open Source is having. The corporate world views the Open Source world as a bunch of kids who like to pirate music, copy warez, and generally just don't belong around the corporate world. I for one an trying to change this image. I would hope that you, as a founder of the PHP Devloper's Network, would like to change this image also....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 25, 2002 11:49 pm 
Offline
Forum Contributor
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 20, 2002 10:47 am
Posts: 118
Location: East Coast
audiogalaxy is the best music sharing software since napster. I also agree that music sharing will never die, another medium of sharing will just be found.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 26, 2002 12:09 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2002 3:14 pm
Posts: 1767
Location: Montreal, CA
Matt: I agree with you. I have never used AudioGalaxy, but I have download music freely from the Internet. I do support the artists however, by purchasing CD's of one's that I like (heck, I have discovered artists by downloading them from the Internet! and bought their CD's).

This doesn't mean it's right, but I don't pretend I am some freedom fighter either. It's like speeding, or not stopping at a stop sign completely for 3 seconds. You know its wrong, you do it anyways because you can...but you don't do it excessively.

However, I would disagree with your assessment about corporate America's perception of Open Source. Look to many companies, and they are turning to Linux. This might have more to do with IBM's support (a very corporate company) of Linux, or the recent parade of news on the topic. It might have to do with Linux's low cost v.s. MS's stringent licensing tactics. Whatever the reason, Open Source technologies are taking off. No company worth anything will base a technical judgement on some "script kiddie" persona. If they do, I don't foresee them making good judgement in other places as well.

I agree, though, that AudioGalaxy is merely another one that knew what it was doing and it got caught. What does this mean to PHP? Nothing. They use PHP? So what? Napster used C++ (I assume..or VB, or Delphi, or whatever) but that doesn't make AT&T, Microsoft, or Borland any worse.

In the end: Do I really care? Not really. Anyways, I will go back to listening to my CD I just bought today at what I consider to be a reasonable price for the value (as compared to the $10 you pay for movies, the CD is with me always), and go on coding my PHP for the company I work for.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 26, 2002 12:26 am 
Offline
Forum Contributor
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2002 11:11 pm
Posts: 217
Location: Northern California
Frankly I don't care how the corporate world feels about open-source. As a matter of fact I hope that they continue to view it as h4x0rs (or what ever) and don't try to spread their grubby, greedy hands all over it. Look at the products that come from each, on one hand we have Windows, a bloated overpriced hunk of eye candy. And the other side is Linux/BSD a variety of OS that you can configure to fit almost any needs and many times you can find a configuration already made for you. We have asp, a relic of a scripting engine that bogs down servers and is almost never updated. On the other side JSP/PHP/PERL/PYTHON three valuable choices that have been modified to interact with a multitude of OSs providing the fastest solution around, and are updated on a regular basis. Now I ask why would you possible want corporations getting involved with the obviously better institution. All they would do is ensure that they have a stake in the money, attempt to close "their" code additions and ruin the idea of open-source. Just look at what RedHat (a seemingly novel open-source company) is doing with their Tux web server. I tell you now, very little if anything good will come from corporations getting involved (with the exception of Hardware manufactures). Oh the days when people cared about advancing the technology rather than making a bunch of money.

Cheers Sam


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 26, 2002 12:34 am 
Offline
Forum Contributor
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2002 11:11 pm
Posts: 217
Location: Northern California
Just a note to Andrew: I agree with you on the audiogalaxy quandry. They are buy far the best music downloading software out right now (I have over 60 gigs downloaded from audiogalaxy already).

Note to all: Tis sad however that people are forced to choose between buying CDs and giving the artists a small cut and "stealing their songs." I have over 1000 CDs and LPs and I will continue to buy them even though I download from AG (mostly long sets and such, I only have about 150 album songs).

Cheers Sam


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 26, 2002 1:26 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2002 3:14 pm
Posts: 1767
Location: Montreal, CA
sam wrote:
Now I ask why would you possible want corporations getting involved with the obviously better institution. All they would do is ensure that they have a stake in the money, attempt to close "their" code additions and ruin the idea of open-source. I tell you now, very little if anything good will come from corporations getting involved (with the exception of Hardware manufactures). Oh the days when people cared about advancing the technology rather than making a bunch of money.


Sam, I think you are confusing corp's that build technology, and corp's that use technology. I very much doubt WalMart is going to start making an OS or Web Server, but they will surely want to use one. I never said anything about Corporations getting involved in the creation of open source products, but even then, many of the open source products of today were started from corporations, such as universities (BSD's, Apache), Java as you mentioned (Sun), and many more are supported by corporations (IBM supporting both Java and Linux rather openly), the Military (Internet, and if you don't think the Military is not a corporation, hehe...).

But like I said, when I was talking about Corporations, I was refering to corporations USING said technology. I don't see how you would NOT want corporations switching to Linux over Windows.

Also, you make the claim of corporations "ruin[ing] the idea of open source", which makes very little sense. Open source isn't an idea, it's a way to develop software. Just because you have a product that is opened up to the world doesn't make it open source software by definition. Open source is a way of developing software, the inclusion of many into one if you will. Corporations won't in any way destroy the development process of Open Source. And if the do contribute code they want to keep proprietary, that is their decision. Is it wrong? No, that is RMS thinking. Forcing other's to do something with their source code is just as bad as completely proprietary code.

It's my code, let me choose and be content with it.

Quote:
Oh the days when people cared about advancing the technology rather than making a bunch of money


When was that? Not the sixties, nor the seventies, nor the eighties. Most major advancements (even Linux) involved making money, or making up for lack of money. Linus himself even says that he wouldn't have created linux if he could have afforded a Unix version. And People still do care about advancing technology, but where is the harm in making money off this advancement? Tell me why I shouldn't get paid for something I create. Maybe I am misreading your statement.

The point: Corporations that develop software for OSS will not destroy the open source development process, unless the developers let them. We want corporations using this OS technology (which is where you were confused, I believe). And in the end, the people that push technology, will embrace this technology, and push it further (Look at Dreamworks, and porting everything over to Linux) then we dreamed. If a few people make a buck off of it, then so be it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 26, 2002 3:09 am 
Offline
Site Administrator
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 19, 2002 10:24 pm
Posts: 6887
The record labels only go after companies that they can. What have they done to Kazaa, Music City, Limewire, etc..? All this is a silly argument. In 50 Years all software will be open source and the only way you will be able to make money selling anything that has to do with computers is by selling hardware, or "MAYBE" a custom written script or application.

Why do I feel this way and how can I back it up you may ask?

First of all, An operating system is a heck of a lot harder to code then any software or "WAREZ - such as MS OFFICE, MS VISUAL STUDIO, MACROMEDIA DREAMWEAVER, CUTE FTP, ETC..." Look at Linux, it's becoming more and more popular and in the years to come will become a serious threat to Microsoft, if it isn't already, and linux is one of the many to come in the future.

Second, Let us take Cute FTP for example, It's a great FTP program, however SMARTFTP, "Search for it on http://www.downloads.com" is a lot better, and it's free! A lot of people enjoy programming computers, and I can see a future where it wouldn't be hard at all to find a program to suite your needs. This Forum for example is Open Source.

Now what about music.. What about it? With the P2P apps available the record labels are fighting an uphill battle. Sony recently introduced a new copyright protection scheme that can be defeated by simply drawing a line around the outside of the music CD with a permanent marker.

Now do the music artist deserve money for making the songs? Heck yeah they do, and in the future most of it is probably going to come from live concerts. Think about it, you don't have to pay to listen to a song on a radio, or in a night club, so why pay to listen to it on your stereo, or computer?

Just my opinion...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 26, 2002 8:45 am 
Offline
Forum Contributor

Joined: Sun May 19, 2002 9:58 am
Posts: 225
Location: Sussex, UK
agtlewis wrote:
Think about it, you don't have to pay to listen to a song on a radio, or in a night club, so why pay to listen to it on your stereo, or computer?


However, nightclubs generally charge people to go in and they pay for the music (I'm not sure if they need to pay royalties or not), and with radio stations they generally have adverts so they are paying the artists for the music. In both these examples the artists are being payed for their work, but with music on your radio they aren't. I'm not saying that you are wrong, in fact I think that music sharing is a great idea - i just thought I'd make it clear what I thought.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 26, 2002 9:28 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2002 3:14 pm
Posts: 1767
Location: Montreal, CA
agtlewis wrote:
The record labels only go after companies that they can. What have they done to Kazaa, Music City, Limewire, etc..? All this is a silly argument. In 50 Years all software will be open source and the only way you will be able to make money selling anything that has to do with computers is by selling hardware, or "MAYBE" a custom written script or application.

Why do I feel this way and how can I back it up you may ask?

First of all, An operating system is a heck of a lot harder to code then any software or "WAREZ - such as MS OFFICE, MS VISUAL STUDIO, MACROMEDIA DREAMWEAVER, CUTE FTP, ETC..." Look at Linux, it's becoming more and more popular and in the years to come will become a serious threat to Microsoft, if it isn't already, and linux is one of the many to come in the future.


First of all, Open Source and File Sharing are very different from one another. Secondly...you are mistaken in your statement that Kazaa and MusicCity haven't been sued. They have been.

Secondly, where do you get the notion that in 50 years software will be free? Capitalism will keep software making money. I have found that proprietary software can be better than it's open source companion (though, this is definetly not the case in all situations, it's equally split up).

Your argument that an OS is a lot harder to write than any software maybe correct, but that means very little. Linux is not yet ready for the average consumer, and those that say otherwise haven't needed to deal with the average consumer. The average consumer does NOT just surf and read email.

agtlewis wrote:
Second, Let us take Cute FTP for example, It's a great FTP program, however SMARTFTP, "Search for it on http://www.downloads.com" is a lot better, and it's free! A lot of people enjoy programming computers, and I can see a future where it wouldn't be hard at all to find a program to suite your needs. This Forum for example is Open Source.


And let me point out that vBulletin is about the same in user features, but have 20 times the number of admin features, and I can definetly see why they can charge for their product.

It's nice that some open source products are better than others, but show me an open source product like Dreamweaver? Better, show me an open source product better than Photoshop (GIMP is not it...when GIMP can start doing everything Photoshop can...let me know)? In fact, look to QuarkXpress and PageMaker, Illustrator, or FlashMX. Don't start comparing OS software to Proprietary, either can be good, not because of how they are made, but simply on their own merits.

agtlewis wrote:
Now what about music.. What about it? With the P2P apps available the record labels are fighting an uphill battle. Sony recently introduced a new copyright protection scheme that can be defeated by simply drawing a line around the outside of the music CD with a permanent marker.


So again, your argument is that because so many people are doing it, let them? Excuse me, but this is the same as people taking an article of mine and reprinting it on their own site without permission. In fact, IIRC, EvilWalrus got might upset when someone used his layout with his permission. And then to stand up and say illegal file sharing is okay? They are one in the same thing, and very hypocritical. We don't mind doing it to other, but when it's done to us, we raise bloody hell.

agtlewis wrote:
Now do the music artist deserve money for making the songs? Heck yeah they do, and in the future most of it is probably going to come from live concerts. Think about it, you don't have to pay to listen to a song on a radio, or in a night club, so why pay to listen to it on your stereo, or computer?


Software piracy is another problem. Working in software, and selling it, has put me in the unique perspecitve of not wanting to pirate software. Do I want people doing it to my software? No, I don't. But they do. And our software isn't no piddly $600 copy of Photoshop.

And as mentioned, you do pay for radio and night club's music. Through advertising and cover charges. I know, I was in the Radio business (my father is as well, and makes good money as a sales man. If you want to get into radio, become a sales guy, DJ's simply don't make the same money and do a lot more work =)).

Note: This discussion is getting a tad heated...so before it goes further, let me just point out that we are all friends here, and have the right to disagree. While we may not agreee with one another, the fact that we can keep this conversation sane is a sign of the strength of this board and it's members.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 26, 2002 10:22 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2002 3:21 pm
Posts: 209
Location: Springmont, PA USA
Sorry I started a fight, but it was something that was important to me. Coming from a DJ's perspective, no, we don't pay royalties to the "artists", we merely DJ from CD, record, or Mp3, my favorite being Mp3. I'm not going to go out and buy an entire CD simply for one song. It's quite assinine. Anyways, if you feel the need to, close this thread.. i may have made a mistake in opening it...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 26, 2002 10:27 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2002 3:14 pm
Posts: 1767
Location: Montreal, CA
No, not really, the thread isn't bad at all. :D It's quite a good discussion.

And the DJ's I was refering to are the one's on the radio. I have been there, and the station does have to pay royalties.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 26, 2002 6:53 pm 
Offline
Site Administrator
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 19, 2002 10:24 pm
Posts: 6887
I figured my last post would ruffle the feathers of some, but as I said, this is years into the future. Jason is right when he said that there isn't any open source software that even comes close to Dreamweaver, and at this moment in time that is correct, and he is also right about the fact that Linux is not user friendly, but 10 years from now, a lot is going to change when it comes to what's available. One thing that I would also like to point out though, and this may scare some, is that 70% (estimation) of computer users simply don't know how to get software for free, and if they do stumble onto it, they can't figure out how to use the crack. While I am not promoting piracy in any way, I am pointing out that it is very widespread, and the number of users who pirate software is probably increasing exponetially in relation to an increased number of computer users, the introduction of easy to use p2p applications, and by increased awareness by the public of what can be obtained. By Piracy I am refering to music and software. Now I have an idea which would make it virtually impossible to pirate software. This solution could be licensed to software vendors. It would require a hefty investment in research and development > $300,000 and would have the following features..

It could be patented:)
It would prevent pirated software.
It would be easy to use.
It would be inexpensive for end users.

If anyone is interested send me a resume and let me know how you can contribute to this project. bens_inbox@msn.com


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: The RIAA
PostPosted: Sun May 26, 2002 10:49 pm 
Offline
Forum Newbie

Joined: Sun May 26, 2002 10:49 pm
Posts: 7
From my seated posistion, turning my head no more than 180 degrees, I can count over 100 *legal* software CDs, and nearly the same again in *legal* music CDs.

I often find, that I hear a song on the radio, MTV Bass, something like that, if I like it, I download it. I listen to it alot for a few days... and then I rarely listen to it again. However, if I really like some music, I search for other released singles, or album tracks. If I like what I hear... I get my sister to buy the album *G*.

Now, onto the RIAA. I don't know if you heard about this at all, but when the US government was trying to rush through it's anti-terrorism bill/act/whatever-you-americans-call-it, the RIAA tried to submit their own addition, this being that if they had enough evidence, they could *hack* into your PC and delete any copyrighted music. This - luckily - was rejected. But imagine it *had* of gone through. How can they justify breaking one law to satify another? They can't. I for one am glad, than being in the UK, I am somewhat free from the RIAA, however, their actions still affect me.

I can safely say that myself and other members of my house hould have spent perhaps $500 *each* on music in the last year. My step-dad has about 36ft (I'm not counting that lot!) of CDs, all legal. My sister has about 300 CDs, I have about 100. All of mine are albums.

I can't say I condone ripping off copyrighted stuff, but surely it's a form of advertising? The same as listening to it on the radio. If you like it... you'll get the album. I'm pretty sure most of us would buy an album... I don't know, I quite like having all the paper inserts and stuff... am I the only one?

- Davey


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group