Audio Banter

Audio Banter (https://www.audiobanter.co.uk/forum.php)
-   uk.rec.audio (General Audio and Hi-Fi) (https://www.audiobanter.co.uk/uk-rec-audio-general-audio/)
-   -   Urgent request (https://www.audiobanter.co.uk/uk-rec-audio-general-audio/709-urgent-request.html)

Bernard Hill October 26th 03 08:21 AM

Urgent request
 
In article ,
Comp Piper writes

"Lebowski" wrote in

Hehehehe this thread is cracking me up. In one corner -

the pious fine
citizen of society strictly adhering to the letter of the

law; on the other
side - a dude who stands up for the "ordinary guy's" point

of view, not so
worked-up over such matters. It's a wonderful tussle.

Gotta love Usenet! :)

Your right, it is a pretty humorous thread!

Can't get excited or worked up over a few pennies of
copyright royalties!

On usenet, you survive by your wits only, nothing else
matters! ;-)


On uk.music.misc we are used to politeness and helpfulness.


Bernard Hill
Braeburn Software
Author of Music Publisher system
Music Software written by musicians for musicians
http://www.braeburn.co.uk
Selkirk, Scotland


Bernard Hill October 26th 03 08:23 AM

Urgent request
 
In article , Zipper
writes
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.


I fear you are in error. The church has a responsibility to attend to
these matters and will be grateful for the advice which I originally
posted.

I can't remember ever coming across anyone so abusive as you: you have
gone down in my estimation I fear.

Bernard Hill
Braeburn Software
Author of Music Publisher system
Music Software written by musicians for musicians
http://www.braeburn.co.uk
Selkirk, Scotland


Bernard Hill October 26th 03 08:23 AM

Urgent request
 
In article , Zipper
writes
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.


I fear you are in error. The church has a responsibility to attend to
these matters and will be grateful for the advice which I originally
posted.

I can't remember ever coming across anyone so abusive as you: you have
gone down in my estimation I fear.

Bernard Hill
Braeburn Software
Author of Music Publisher system
Music Software written by musicians for musicians
http://www.braeburn.co.uk
Selkirk, Scotland


Bernard Hill October 26th 03 08:24 AM

Urgent request
 
In article , Zipper
writes
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.


Nothing about the family in my post... It's the church's responsibility
as my second post pointed out.



Bernard Hill
Braeburn Software
Author of Music Publisher system
Music Software written by musicians for musicians
http://www.braeburn.co.uk
Selkirk, Scotland


Bernard Hill October 26th 03 08:24 AM

Urgent request
 
In article , Zipper
writes
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.


Nothing about the family in my post... It's the church's responsibility
as my second post pointed out.



Bernard Hill
Braeburn Software
Author of Music Publisher system
Music Software written by musicians for musicians
http://www.braeburn.co.uk
Selkirk, Scotland


Bernard Hill October 26th 03 08:25 AM

Urgent request
 
In article , Zipper
writes
On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 23:27:04 +0100, "Stimpy"
wrote:

Zipper wrote:
If the church were a member of PRS the money would be collected and
distributed by them. No-one would hassle the family for a royalty cheque


And if not? What would you do about it? N-O-T-H-I-N-G! You're just
spouting BS to line your pockets.


Certainly nothing: but the point is that the church would want to be
aware of these issues and they may well not be.


Bernard Hill
Braeburn Software
Author of Music Publisher system
Music Software written by musicians for musicians
http://www.braeburn.co.uk
Selkirk, Scotland


Bernard Hill October 26th 03 08:25 AM

Urgent request
 
In article , Zipper
writes
On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 23:27:04 +0100, "Stimpy"
wrote:

Zipper wrote:
If the church were a member of PRS the money would be collected and
distributed by them. No-one would hassle the family for a royalty cheque


And if not? What would you do about it? N-O-T-H-I-N-G! You're just
spouting BS to line your pockets.


Certainly nothing: but the point is that the church would want to be
aware of these issues and they may well not be.


Bernard Hill
Braeburn Software
Author of Music Publisher system
Music Software written by musicians for musicians
http://www.braeburn.co.uk
Selkirk, Scotland


Bernard Hill October 26th 03 08:28 AM

Urgent request
 
In article , Keith G
writes

"Bernard Hill" wrote in message
...
In article , Baggy
writes
On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 23:18:44 +0100, Bernard Hill
wrote:

I'm with you John. What kind of an idiot would post such crap over a
funeral?

One who earns his sole livelihood by creating copyrighted products, and
who happens to be a member (and, indeed, treasurer) of a church which
takes the law and copyright responsibilities seriously.

In other words, a gr1 arsehole.


That I think is personal abuse. I am astonished that on a music
newsgroup some visitors are not aware of the importance of copyright
conformance.




Whoah! Whoah! Whoah! Enough already!


That's reasonable.


Lighten up Bernard - you're heading for total meltdown!


On the contrary, when things get heated I tend to go rather cool.

My original request (which I now regret since it has resulted in this
acrimony and especially since the tracks requested were, in fact, actually
supplied by my own son and a personal friend) mentioned that 'time was of
the essence'. If it makes you happier, a phone call this morning informs me
that neither my rips or the Amazon disk have turned up this morning and it
looks like they might miss the boat, as they are wanted Monday latest for
the funeral (of a *very* respectable Scottish woman) on Tuesday.

I already explained that a duplicate of an existing CD (but missing - due to
probably been loaned out) has already been purchased for only FOURTEEN QUID+
(not too bad for the sort of disk which can be had for 1.99 at any garage
hereabouts.....) so I don't see how anyone can be accused of trying to rip
the situation off in terms of paying one's dues to the MI as a whole. (Mel
Gibson and John Horner both phoned to express their regrets and said 'go
ahead'....... )

If the church and Funeral Director concerned haven't already taken the
necessary steps to 'legitimise' this sort of thing (given its apparent
prevalence) then it's bloody time they did!


Agreed there. But they may not be aware of the issue. I know my church
isn't.


The greedy MI as a whole needs to look to itself pretty smartish. To me the
whole concept of Royalties (especially in this day and age with the
profusion of recording devices and the ease of global distribution via the
'Net) is absolutely ludicrous and is the root of all the current problems.
(Study the Naxos concept for an example of a much better approach to the
sale and distribution of recorded music.)

(ukra and ukrav sunbscribers can a expect a rant about MI greed and its
effect on music generally in the very near future....)

As David Bowie said on the box - an organisation that is looking to sue its
own customers (see above references to Amazon in my case) is heading for
some sort of major disaster....


The law is the law, and is independent of the morality of those it
protects. That's my one and only point.



Really? You should know better then! - 'Music software'??? - You're a tiny
part of the whole bloody problem yourself, aren't you?


Bernard Hill
Braeburn Software
Author of Music Publisher system
Music Software written by musicians for musicians
http://www.braeburn.co.uk
Selkirk, Scotland

Er, why is that? I create and sell a music publishing system - ie one in
which you put your own compositions on paper. And in the literature and
web site it clearly warns you to have permission to do any work on
anyone else's music.



Bernard Hill
Braeburn Software
Author of Music Publisher system
Music Software written by musicians for musicians
http://www.braeburn.co.uk
Selkirk, Scotland


Bernard Hill October 26th 03 08:28 AM

Urgent request
 
In article , Keith G
writes

"Bernard Hill" wrote in message
...
In article , Baggy
writes
On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 23:18:44 +0100, Bernard Hill
wrote:

I'm with you John. What kind of an idiot would post such crap over a
funeral?

One who earns his sole livelihood by creating copyrighted products, and
who happens to be a member (and, indeed, treasurer) of a church which
takes the law and copyright responsibilities seriously.

In other words, a gr1 arsehole.


That I think is personal abuse. I am astonished that on a music
newsgroup some visitors are not aware of the importance of copyright
conformance.




Whoah! Whoah! Whoah! Enough already!


That's reasonable.


Lighten up Bernard - you're heading for total meltdown!


On the contrary, when things get heated I tend to go rather cool.

My original request (which I now regret since it has resulted in this
acrimony and especially since the tracks requested were, in fact, actually
supplied by my own son and a personal friend) mentioned that 'time was of
the essence'. If it makes you happier, a phone call this morning informs me
that neither my rips or the Amazon disk have turned up this morning and it
looks like they might miss the boat, as they are wanted Monday latest for
the funeral (of a *very* respectable Scottish woman) on Tuesday.

I already explained that a duplicate of an existing CD (but missing - due to
probably been loaned out) has already been purchased for only FOURTEEN QUID+
(not too bad for the sort of disk which can be had for 1.99 at any garage
hereabouts.....) so I don't see how anyone can be accused of trying to rip
the situation off in terms of paying one's dues to the MI as a whole. (Mel
Gibson and John Horner both phoned to express their regrets and said 'go
ahead'....... )

If the church and Funeral Director concerned haven't already taken the
necessary steps to 'legitimise' this sort of thing (given its apparent
prevalence) then it's bloody time they did!


Agreed there. But they may not be aware of the issue. I know my church
isn't.


The greedy MI as a whole needs to look to itself pretty smartish. To me the
whole concept of Royalties (especially in this day and age with the
profusion of recording devices and the ease of global distribution via the
'Net) is absolutely ludicrous and is the root of all the current problems.
(Study the Naxos concept for an example of a much better approach to the
sale and distribution of recorded music.)

(ukra and ukrav sunbscribers can a expect a rant about MI greed and its
effect on music generally in the very near future....)

As David Bowie said on the box - an organisation that is looking to sue its
own customers (see above references to Amazon in my case) is heading for
some sort of major disaster....


The law is the law, and is independent of the morality of those it
protects. That's my one and only point.



Really? You should know better then! - 'Music software'??? - You're a tiny
part of the whole bloody problem yourself, aren't you?


Bernard Hill
Braeburn Software
Author of Music Publisher system
Music Software written by musicians for musicians
http://www.braeburn.co.uk
Selkirk, Scotland

Er, why is that? I create and sell a music publishing system - ie one in
which you put your own compositions on paper. And in the literature and
web site it clearly warns you to have permission to do any work on
anyone else's music.



Bernard Hill
Braeburn Software
Author of Music Publisher system
Music Software written by musicians for musicians
http://www.braeburn.co.uk
Selkirk, Scotland


Dave Plowman October 26th 03 08:43 AM

Urgent request
 
In article ,
Comp Piper wrote:
On usenet, you survive by your wits only, nothing else
matters! ;-)


When's *your* funeral, then?

--
*If all the world is a stage, where is the audience sitting?

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:21 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.0.0
Copyright ©2004-2006 AudioBanter.co.uk