Urgent request
 

In article ,
Comp Piper wrote:
I'd be interested to know if it would still be petty if it were *your*
money. Somehow, I doubt it.


In the words of the greatest usenet piper that ever lived,
"Shut the **** Up and just play!".

A piper that plays with himself but virtually.

--
*42.7% of statistics are made up. Sorry, that should read 47.2% *

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

Urgent request
 

On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 14:54:44 +0100, Dave Plowman
wrote:

In article ,
Zipper wrote:
Oh great, another petty arsehole.

I'd be interested to know if it would still be petty if it were *your*
money. Somehow, I doubt it.

And, FWIW, I don't earn my living or any part of it by royalties.

Then you have no excuse for being a petty arsehole, now do you?

Urgent request
 

On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 14:54:44 +0100, Dave Plowman
wrote:

In article ,
Zipper wrote:
Oh great, another petty arsehole.

I'd be interested to know if it would still be petty if it were *your*
money. Somehow, I doubt it.

And, FWIW, I don't earn my living or any part of it by royalties.

Then you have no excuse for being a petty arsehole, now do you?

Urgent request
 

On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 16:40:48 GMT, "Comp Piper"
wrote:


"Dave Plowman" wrote in

I'd be interested to know if it would still be petty if it
were *your*
money. Somehow, I doubt it.


In the words of the greatest usenet piper that ever lived,
"Shut the **** Up and just play!".

I don't recall saying that, but if you remember it I'll take your word
that I said it.

Urgent request
 

On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 16:40:48 GMT, "Comp Piper"
wrote:


"Dave Plowman" wrote in

I'd be interested to know if it would still be petty if it
were *your*
money. Somehow, I doubt it.


In the words of the greatest usenet piper that ever lived,
"Shut the **** Up and just play!".

I don't recall saying that, but if you remember it I'll take your word
that I said it.

Urgent request
 

I Sat, 25 Oct 2003 17:37:37 +0100, "Stimpy"
wrote:

Zipper wrote:
Look you jerkoff, if it looks like an arsehole, and smells like an
arsehole, then it is an an arsehole. You look, smell, and act like an
arsehole. We were talking about funerals, nobody has to pay royalties
to play a tune at a funeral, and only a low-life piece of **** would
question that, or exopect them too.
Arsehole.

Wrong, you ignorant ****, funerals are not exempt from copyright law.


I didn't say they were you flaming dingleberry! Only that a PETTY
ARESHOLE would consider harassing the family to get their 5 cent
royalty check.

Urgent request
 

I Sat, 25 Oct 2003 17:37:37 +0100, "Stimpy"
wrote:

Zipper wrote:
Look you jerkoff, if it looks like an arsehole, and smells like an
arsehole, then it is an an arsehole. You look, smell, and act like an
arsehole. We were talking about funerals, nobody has to pay royalties
to play a tune at a funeral, and only a low-life piece of **** would
question that, or exopect them too.
Arsehole.

Wrong, you ignorant ****, funerals are not exempt from copyright law.


I didn't say they were you flaming dingleberry! Only that a PETTY
ARESHOLE would consider harassing the family to get their 5 cent
royalty check.

Urgent request
 

On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 17:39:01 +0100, "Stimpy"
wrote:

Baggy wrote:

The whole point is, nobodys playing for profit or making any money
over playing the tune, yet this jerk tells us we should be very
careful or we might get in trouble. Only a gr1 arsehole would post
something like that over a funeral. It's not enough someones loved one
is being laid to rest, but now the family is supposed to worry about
the cops showing up ands arresting them for playing a tune. What a sad
jerkoff he is...

You really are a **** aren't you? The OP was merely expressing a
reluctance to break copyright law by playing a commercial recording at a
funeral. Given that copyright law still applies and the church is unlikely
to hold a PRS licence, it seems a reasonable concern.

Petty arsehole.

Urgent request
 

On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 17:39:01 +0100, "Stimpy"
wrote:

Baggy wrote:

The whole point is, nobodys playing for profit or making any money
over playing the tune, yet this jerk tells us we should be very
careful or we might get in trouble. Only a gr1 arsehole would post
something like that over a funeral. It's not enough someones loved one
is being laid to rest, but now the family is supposed to worry about
the cops showing up ands arresting them for playing a tune. What a sad
jerkoff he is...

You really are a **** aren't you? The OP was merely expressing a
reluctance to break copyright law by playing a commercial recording at a
funeral. Given that copyright law still applies and the church is unlikely
to hold a PRS licence, it seems a reasonable concern.

Petty arsehole.

Urgent request
 

On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 14:01:07 +0100
Dave Plowman wrote:

I dont think anyone was suggesting that artists be asked to
*perform* for free, It was merely said that most would not object to
their work being played (legally or otherwise) at a funeral.

I can't really see the difference between a funeral and anything else.
If the deceased was poor and those paying for the funeral also, then
maybe. But otherwise things have to be paid for in life or death.

Strictly yes.

But what happened to pride and honour?

I'd be *thrilled* if someone saw fit to play a composition of mine at a
friend / loved ones funeral. Money would not come into it.

--
Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux

Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with
ketchup.