It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.



page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 1 2003 @ 09:49 PM
if you like winmx...
get napmx.
it's a tool that works with winmx, and lets you get on all the opennap servers. meaning... more search results.
direct download link:

posted on Jan, 2 2003 @ 03:52 AM
i use emule/edonkey grokster and mirc!

posted on Jan, 2 2003 @ 11:30 AM
IRC dcc connection. No spyware no worries of getting caught. It's all good baby..

posted on Jan, 2 2003 @ 04:21 PM
i use grokster. i used to use morpheus but that new version really seems to..... SUCK. not to mention i could never find what i was looking for on it.

posted on Jan, 2 2003 @ 05:13 PM

Originally posted by AegisFang
i used to use morpheus but that new version really seems to..... SUCK. not to mention i could never find what i was looking for on it.

that's because musiccity morpheus now uses gnutella technology. if you still want the reliability and service of the old morpheus, get kazaa or kazaalite.

posted on Jan, 2 2003 @ 09:21 PM

Originally posted by JamesG

It's not stealing, it's trading

Incorrect sir.

The exchange of intellectual property on Peer-To-Peer networks is trading in your mind as "head in the sand" justification for your illegal acts.

Regardless of your opinions of the problems relating to the current system in which artists receive remuneration for their musical efforts, it is the system whereby they gain livelihood. Are so so callous as to deny payment to the artists who create the music you enjoy?

The is no such thing as a free lunch. You will not like the results of your actions, actions the future will judge as selfish and short-sighted (to say the least).

posted on Jan, 2 2003 @ 09:51 PM
UM, yeah, feel real bad about not buying the cd. I mean, they only millionares, how can we deny them from becoming billionars? I swear, how wrong of us not spending 25 bucks because we like two songs on a cd. Notice the sarcasm if you didn't before.

posted on Jan, 2 2003 @ 09:53 PM
So then, James... why do you continue to steal from musicians? Sarcasm aside, not all are wealthy.

posted on Jan, 2 2003 @ 10:39 PM
I won't steal, I'll keep myself with a paycheck for not buying a cd for 25$ to get two songs. And what songs I get, oldies, oldies that made the people millions, or Weird Al, also with a shiznick load of money. Sorry, I think they can do without an extra 25$.

posted on Jan, 2 2003 @ 11:20 PM
Winston Smith,

Well...someone bought the music first...obviously, or else it wouldn't be on the internet... Second, I personally don't see how it's wrong to share music you bought.

Wouldn't you say, it should also be illegal to record song's off the radio or movie's off the TV? If all this was oh so wrong, why do they give us the technology to commit these theft's of 'intellectual' property? Before CD's were even heard of, was it illegal to record your favorite song's off the radio onto cassette?

Did you know, they are selling this thing that record's whatever you want off TV? Movie's, show's, music video's, all onto DVD...You can even convert your VHS tape's to DVD. Wouldn't this all be considered stealing as well? If so, why allow these thing's to be sold in the first place? What purpose does this device serve beside's recording your favorite show's and movies onto dvd?

I don't think the law's are very clear enough yet as to when it's stealing intellectual propertie's. Until then, it's sharing/trading. When they wanna make the law where it's illegal to convert your vhs tape's to dvd, then I'll consider it stealing...

posted on Jan, 3 2003 @ 07:28 AM
You seem to be incapable of understanding the basics of how very wrong you are. An attribute rampant in your digital "nothing-else-matters" culture.

James said: "Sorry, I think they can do without an extra 25$."

This line demonstrates your fundamental lack of knowledge on this subject. Artists get paid royalties on sales, usually a per-item amount ranging from .50 to 2.5 depending on the terms and length of their contract with the publisher/distributor. Your culture is just as incapable of discerning quality art (one could argue that much of popular music is not art any more) as it is incapable of understanding that artists should be compensated.

Again you said: "Second, I personally don't see how it's wrong to share music you bought."

Fundamental lack of knowledge again. It's against the law... therefore, wrong. One could argue there are several laws that are wrong, indeed, the anarchist movement obtains much mileage from such a thought. However, in this case, a law guaranteeing remuneration for valuable intellectual property is not wrong.

Again James shows us his infantile command of of the subject with: "Wouldn't you say, it should also be illegal to record song's off the radio or movie's off the TV?" No. The FCC has established that this is legal for personal use. Just as it is legal to make copies of your music CD for personal use not distribution. Once you distribute a copy, you are breaking the law.

And finally, James shows us lack of command of several attributes of intelligence with his closing statement: "I don't think the law's are very clear enough yet as to when it's stealing intellectual propertie's." Well, they are very clear, and as I eluded to above, easy to summarize. Perhaps one more time may help you understand. You can make copies for personal use, but you cannot give those copies to someone else. Does that help?

If you are unable to discern the quality and value of an art-form, you don't deserve to have it. Part of this equation is the willingness to ensure the artist is paid for your enjoyment. A concept of simple human courtesy that has eluded you.

And before you attack me for assuming the two names are the same person, I am quite aware of the so-called "controversy" on this site over the two James names. I, as many others here, do not believe you are two different people. You make the same grammar, syntax, and spelling mistakes over and over again. If you want to do better at your ruse, one of your personalities should use a spell checker.

posted on Jan, 3 2003 @ 03:08 PM
Musicians/artists are not losing money because of file sharing programs, I myself have been influenced on many occasions to buy a cd after having listened to the songs on my computer. Music has been shared in different ways since long before the days of napster, eg: tape recording, swapping/lending with friends

posted on Jan, 3 2003 @ 03:28 PM
Is that your denial-based justification for stealing music through file sharing programs?

Indeed, the sharing of music was occurring, though not to the massive scale of today's file sharing networks. Music CD sales are taking a serious slump. And no one is deluded into thinking that the music publishing houses are not the ones with the most to loose. When we compare the losses in this fiasco, music publishers are loosing the most money. However, music publishers are at the core of the current distribution system that enables artists to derive income from the sale of their music. When the publishers suffer, musicians, especially "up-and-coming" artists, are the ones who will suffer in the end.

The irresponsible attitude of you and the others on this thread toward the value of art (regardless of your opinion of popular music) makes me sick. I fear for the future.

posted on Jan, 3 2003 @ 04:17 PM
kazaa is always handy because you can use it download more than music, and it's probably the most user friendly program to download music with, but the only problem is all the ad's and all the unwanted junk on your puter. another program i use is called XoloX

posted on Jan, 3 2003 @ 07:55 PM

Originally posted by excalibur745
another program i use is called XoloX

xolox uses gnutella.

[Edited on 1-4-2003 by echelon]

posted on Jan, 3 2003 @ 10:13 PM
Mr. William Smith,

You sure the law's are clear enough? I'm not so sure. Not when all you hear about 'distribution' being illegal only when it come's to the internet, file sharing software, and such technologies of more recent year's. May I remind you, there has never been any huge concern over distributing cassatte tape's or vhs tape's, which was very common, I can personally attest to that. It has only become a problem due to the technology that allow's 'mass' distributing, such as file sharing software. I noticed, you failed to say anything about the device (don't remember name) that will allow you to record movie's off your tv and onto dvd. It's already being sold, and most likely already hacked. Why is it still being sold, if intellectual property is such a big concern?

Me and JTL may share the same name, similar view's and grammar, but don't be so pigheaded to think we are the one and same. I also don't appreciate all your insult's and would like you to STFU. If you'd like to continue, I'll have...well...nevermind. Just don't screw with me. I've just about had it with moron's like you, toltec. Ooops...William Smith. Funny...smith is such a common name...

posted on Jan, 3 2003 @ 11:12 PM
The "device" you're having difficulty with is either TiVo or ReplayTV, otherwise known as PDVR (Personal Digital Video Recorders). The same attributes of copyright law associated with video tape apply to these devices.

Mr. James, what experience do you have with intellectual property law? We can assume none, given the nature of your stance. Illegal distribution is very clear, and the process of illegal distribution (cassette, CD, Internet, photocopy, etc.) is immaterial. The fact that peer to peer networks didn't exist when the laws were written is not a factor. You are actively involved in breaking the law and denying artists fair compensation for their work.

Certainly, you must know the true nature of my chosen handle for this site, as well as the "location" indicated in my profile.

posted on Jan, 4 2003 @ 12:19 AM
Toltec (aka 'William Smith')

No, Toltec, I don't know why you chose that handle or location. Nor do I care, Toltec. Nor do I care for anything you have to say, Toltec.

bub bye Mr. 'Smith'

posted on Jan, 4 2003 @ 08:24 AM
Odd. Perhaps the origin of the handle he's chosen has not yet appeared in the "required reading list" of your education (assuming high school). Or, worse, your school system's district does not include the source in required reading.

Sad. Especially for one frequenting a site such as this.

posted on Jan, 4 2003 @ 09:17 AM

You as a admin, should know better. Your one sick ----. I have not insulted you once until you started insulting me. Where the ---- do you get the right's to pull this ----. You show lack of courtousy you stupid little ----.

[Edited on 4-1-2003 by William]

[Edited on 28-2-2003 by Thomas Crowne]

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in