Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

What's your view?

I say downloading

Although I don't do it personally, I think it's fine.

I do it all the time.

I've done it...*cough* esnips *cough*

I don't, considering it's immoral and illegal. BTW, I think we have like 10 threads on the matter.

too lazy to rip... So i say download.

Originally posted by Kram3r
I don't, considering it's immoral and illegal. BTW, I think we have like 10 threads on the matter.
That's awsome. good for you.

I actually did do a search but couldn't find a thread.

oh well

Same as Kramer.

-AC

I use to do it before I knew what the heck I was doing. I stopped now and I dont do it...after I tried to go to a website to get music and it said that the website had been shut down and my IP address had been stored, scared the living hell out of me. I just go buy the CD and rip it to my mp3 player.

I'm both for and against downloading songs off the internets.

I do a lot of mash-ups in my spare time, so when I need an acapella or an instrumental, there's no outlet for it other than limewire. When it comes to sampling albums, I usually try and use MySpace, but sometimes one or two songs off of an album isn't enough, so I'll download a couple of tracks to make that decision. Otherwise, I don't usually nab entire albums, I just sit around the house and listen to my ProjectPlaylist most of the time.

Originally posted by Kram3r
I don't, considering it's immoral and illegal. BTW, I think we have like 10 threads on the matter. Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Same as Kramer.

-AC

I only download music I would never buy.

Originally posted by Kram3r
I don't, considering it's immoral and illegal. BTW, I think we have like 10 threads on the matter.

Not immoral, but I do not do it, for reasons I can't quite explain. I guess I feel good with it.

Originally posted by RedAlertv2
...though that could be interpreted to mean you download all your music.


Personally, I think downloading is a good way to sample new bands before making a purchase.
Even if you took it as I download all my music, it's not cheating anyone out of money as I'd never buy it anyway.

Yeah thats what I would do...just download like 1 or 2 songs to see if you would buy the album. They actually cant complain that I downloaded their songs for free, as I bought the albums afterward.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Not immoral, but I do not do it, for reasons I can't quite explain. I guess I feel good with it.

Not immoral? How don't you consider stealing from an artist immoral?

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Morals are relative, so it's not definitely immoral. To me it is, to others it's not. Financially it's wrong.

Even though I hate to admit, you're right. I just hate it how people can think it's not stealing because they can simply get away with it so much easier. Generally speaking anyway, it's considered wrong otherwise there'd be no law against it, even though I know that doesn't apply to every individual's perspective anyway.

That is what annoys me, people think nothing of it because it's so easy.

Then they apply the lame argument of "I don't have money to go buying stuff I might not like.". There are legal ways to sample music, like there are changing rooms to try on clothes.

It's laziness and stupidity. That said, people who download albums have no right to complain if it's bad or if they don't like it, since they didn't pay for it. Like not voting in an election and moaning that a candidate you dislike emerged victorious.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
That is what annoys me, people think nothing of it because it's so easy.

Then they apply the lame argument of "I don't have money to go buying stuff I might not like.". There are legal ways to sample music, like there are changing rooms to try on clothes.

It's laziness and stupidity. That said, people who download albums have no right to complain if it's bad or if they don't like it, since they didn't pay for it. Like not voting in an election and moaning that a candidate you dislike emerged victorious.

-AC

Exactly, people miss the point all the time. I hate having to fight the argument when people say it's "victim less" and that "It doesn't matter anyway. They're rich and make heaps of money from touring". They know that's not the point and refuse to believe the principal on purpose when it's shit like that's more or less black and white.

Ignorance is bliss and all that.

-AC

I don't download entire albums, but I do download select songs once in a while. Its not illegal in Canada, so I'm slightly less conflicted about it then some might be. I try not to download less known artists and buy to support their work, but I have no qualms about downloading the occasional big band song.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Arctic: They can, actually. You are taking their music in a way it's not intended, they have every right to complain.

Morals are relative, so it's not definitely immoral. To me it is, to others it's not. Financially it's wrong.



It is cheating people out of money, what kind of logic do you possess to say it isn't?

You own a downloaded album, so therefore they have just lost one sale. I'm not sure from what pit you hauled that logic, but I suggest it's returned hastily.

-AC
If downloading wasn't possible, I'd still not buy the album, I do not have the finances to buy everyu album I want to listen to. So they're not losing a sale because I'd never buy them, no matter what the circumstances. I'm not saying downloading music is alright, I'm just saying I do it when I don't like the band enough to ever buy it.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Arctic: They can, actually. You are taking their music in a way it's not intended, they have every right to complain.

Morals are relative, so it's not definitely immoral. To me it is, to others it's not. Financially it's wrong.



It is cheating people out of money, what kind of logic do you possess to say it isn't?

You own a downloaded album, so therefore they have just lost one sale. I'm not sure from what pit you hauled that logic, but I suggest it's returned hastily.

-AC


I suppose they could complain, but it doesn't really matter anymore. I realized that it was wrong to do it and I stopped. I deleted all my downloaded music off of my mp3 player and began buying the albums instead...so...yeah...I just never realized because it was extremely easy to do, all I had to do was download it then copy it from my music player to my mp3 player, it seemed so harmless...but I have learned.

Originally posted by Kram3r
I don't understand. How does this give you the right to listen to it?
Erm, in my post I stated that it wasn't alright. I'm not giving excuses, I'm merely explaining what I do.

Originally posted by Kram3r
Saying you don't have the finances to buy and therefore not able or not willing to purchase seems like an excuse to me.
You're missing the point. I do not download all of my music, I have bought dozens of albums that I have downloaded and enjoyed, in fact because of downloads my tastes in music have broadened to new levels, so you could say that bands are making more money out of me because of illegal downloads. because without them I'd probably be still listening to chart music and I would not be buying them, simply because I could just turn on Radio 1.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
His analogy is right on actually. A principle is a principle, regardless of whether others might benefit from breaking it.
No shit... I'm not saying downloading music is morally right though. Meaning it was totally out of context.

Originally posted by Kram3r
I like it how people can throw away morals at the drop of a hat when it becomes an "inconvenience" to them. BTW, regardless of the quality of my analogy my point is still obviously made.
I throw morals out of the window when they don't agree with my way of life. The morality of it isn't a major big deal to me, I'll not lose sleep over anything of the sort. I have no problems with doing it.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
I'm sorry, but to me you're basically like a person on welfare that's robbing a grocery store and saying "screw the rules, I'm not gonna let myslef starve just becasue I need my money for rent so I can have a roof over my head until I get my life back on track"...pretty much.
I have no problems with someone stealing a loaf of bread to feed himself if that's his last resort but that is a totally different scenario. I know what I'm doing is wrong but I really couldn't give a shit. People smoke pot and that's wrong but people doing it don't care. People have different morals. Deal with it.

I read over your posts again...I can see how you have a point.

File sharing has contributed to 90% of my music library. I don't pretend that its justifiable in anyway according to society's current moral code. But shit, I steal stuff. Tough shit. I'm going to always look for the easiest way to get something I want. Furthermore, buying CDs is a waste. I usually don't want all ~20 songs that are on the CD. I listen to 4 or 5 songs on an album. There is a handful of albums that had a full playlist I enjoyed. Why spend $15-20 on 4 songs when I can download them for free. And don't give me the "Support the Artist" argument. They aren't losing a dime, artists usually don't get paid per CD sold. They get a lump sum and MAYBE a bonus depending of albums sold.

Thing is, if everyone thought like you, you wouldn't have those 90 out of 100 songs in your library, 'cause musicians comin along would be like "screw it...there's no money in this."...(which in all honesty I'd say is a statement that should be seriously considered before they start whining)....But you're biting the hand that feeds you.

Originally posted by Marxman
Why spend $15-20 on 4 songs when I can download them for free.
Ouch...comments like that makes me squirm.

Originally posted by Marxman
Why spend $15-20 on 4 songs when I can download them for free.

Why not purchase the songs individually?

Originally posted by Kram3r
Why not purchase the songs individually?
Not always possible is it? How about, he just deal with it...No, you can't have a cookie, eat something else.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Not always possible is it? How about, he just deal with it...No, you can't have a cookie, eat something else.

What the hell? Yes it is.

i download because i dont wanna pay 20 bucks for a cd that has what 5 good songs out of 20 tracks. i usualy dl the album listen to it and if i like it i delete it then go buy it. and nowadays musicians relese there stuff 2 weeks online before the album drops so technicaly its not wrong.

Music is such a big part of my life that I don't mind spending 00.99 on a song from itunes.

I used to download a lot. But I stopped about 2 years ago and now buy all my music...well, or most. Stuff that is unattainable I might still download. Except for that there are legal sites like radioblocclub.com, musicovery.com, pandora.com where you can listen to music legally.

I've already made my stance on the subject. I will not be adding more to it.

Originally posted by Kram3r
What the hell? Yes it is.

I usually wanna buy hard to get stuff. If hear a dj spin a track that I like, I might be able to find it on a downloading network, but rarely find it online to by.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
How pathetically stupid.
Man you're harsh...he's admitting his moral shortcomings, and actually has some fair, hard to argue, points he's made...you clearly didn't read his earlier posts which talk about legality and morals...or just didn't get it.

...btw, I'm still wating for you to rip apart my last main post on the subject. Let's see if you...get it. Hee hee

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
I usually wanna buy hard to get stuff. If hear a dj spin a track that I like, I might be able to find it on a downloading network, but rarely find it online to by.


Then you must be looking on only one or two sites... Google your song and the album name and you will probably find your song.

And Alpha, I agree with you on everything you said, except there's no reason to call anyone pathetic or stupid. Not to mention pathetically stupid!!!

Originally posted by lorddreamer
Then you must be looking on only one or two sites... Google your song and the album name and you will probably find your song.
Sure. I just did to humor you...and I didn't find it. What are you and the other dude suggesting, that because some dude who listens to U2 can find find their songs online, I can find what I want? Usually I'm not looking for an "album" becasue a lot of the artists I like don't really make them.

Pussycat Dolls should, also Girls Aloud (two of them).

I will volunteer.

Yeah, of What Hole? magazine.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I don't have a problem with anyone coming to their own moral conclusion...
Wait a sec. Why aren't calling me a freakin idiot...WHAT'S WRONG WITH YOU? Put up your dukes!

Because you don't hold a stance that I consider to be idiotic, nor are/were you being an idiot.

I only call people it if they are, not if they're not being.

-AC

...No fun. How about this then. Although I wouldn't download it, I think all music should be free. It's artists who have their heart and head in the wrong place that sit there complaining and whining about people stealing their new record.

Music is here to share...and it comes from somewhere much greater than us. There's two kinds of musicians in this world, ones who come up with music and say, "wow I'm good"...and ones who come up with music can say, "wow that's good"...and that's the correct reaction. They didn't ACTUALLY create the song out of their own abilities. They didn't make their brains, emotions or soul to come up with it...that's ridiculous. Even with a guitarist...there's ones who stand there ripping on their axe and are like "look how awesome I am"...and ones who rip on their axe and can say "hey...look what's happening, look what I can do", which is the proper reaction. Their hands are doing it, but they didn't create what they're doing...it's coming out of them from creation.

I'd personally feel like a s*#% charging someone for my music...I'd feel good just wanting to give it to them and have them enjoy it, and have them save their money too...like it should be. If they really enjoy it, they might give me money to make more. I'm just lucky to be someone who's being used to deliver it, and unlike most rock stars who think they're the bees knees , I'll be happy playing my role in the grand scheme of things and won't b*%$# if someone decides to copy my CD and give it to others.

It's truly sad how pathetic and whorish a lot of popular musicans are. They'll b*%$# about this downloading thing just so they can stay in the game to get the next record deal or paycheque...and for what...so that they can give the world what they've probably fooled themselves into thinking is actually a relevant album, but what is most often truly uninspired song writing, and almost always a poor excuse for an entire album...and this is no surprise considering the driving force for a lot of them is usually money, not inspiration. What a lame, embarrasing existence. Can't say this is true for all musicians, some have lots of money and don't need to whore themselves out, others don't want to becasue of their integrity... but as a whole, popular musicians are a bunch of whores who in the grand scheme of things have no real business charging ANYONE for anything...especially crap that was created for cash. Pathetic.

Bring it.

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
Pussycat Dolls should, also Girls Aloud (two of them).

I will volunteer.

There are one and a half pussycat dolls that should...and indeed 2 Girls Aloud...the others should go die...because they are ugly.

Hmm, that was almost subtle. Except for the dying part. And the reasons for the dying part.

Originally posted by Marxman
File sharing has contributed to 90% of my music library. I don't pretend that its justifiable in anyway according to society's current moral code. But shit, I steal stuff. Tough shit. I'm going to always look for the easiest way to get something I want. Ironic, such a selfish attitude coming from a supposed Marxist.

Originally posted by PiruBlood
i download because i dont wanna pay 20 bucks for a cd that has what 5 good songs out of 20 tracks.

I suggest listening to some bands that are capable of putting out a good song percentage of more than 25%.

Yeah, try The Smiths. They are 100/100.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
...No fun. How about this then. Although I wouldn't download it, I think all music should be free. It's artists who have their heart and head in the wrong place that sit there complaining and whining about people stealing their new record.

Ahh, see, now that I know you're only looking for arguments that I think are stupid, just so we can enter a pointless impasse, I'll give your arguments much less attention.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Music is here to share...and it comes from somewhere much greater than us. There's two kinds of musicians in this world, ones who come up with music and say, "wow I'm good"...and ones who come up with music can say, "wow that's good"...and that's the correct reaction. They didn't ACTUALLY create the song out of their own abilities. They didn't make their brains, emotions or soul to come up with it...that's ridiculous.

Not half as ridiculous as that statement is.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Even with a guitarist...there's ones who stand there ripping on their axe and are like "look how awesome I am"...and ones who rip on their axe and can say "hey...look what's happening, look what I can do", which is the proper reaction. Their hands are doing it, but they didn't create what they're doing...it's coming out of them from creation.

Read that back to yourself, please. It's sad that you do this just to get a reaction, no further will I indulge such stupidity, I'm afraid.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
I'd personally feel like a s*#% charging someone for my music...I'd feel good just wanting to give it to them and have them enjoy it, and have them save their money too...like it should be.

Yes, and then maybe everybody will do their jobs for free...right?

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
If they really enjoy it, they might give me money to make more. I'm just lucky to be someone who's being used to deliver it, and unlike most rock stars who think they're the bees knees , I'll be happy playing my role in the grand scheme of things and won't b*%$# if someone decides to copy my CD and give it to others.

There's a difference between "Hey man, I'm doing this cos I want more money." (Greed) and "Hey man, pay for that, I worked hard on it.". Artists aren't all going out there with the standpoint of "This music is for you listeners.". They make it for themselves, as it should be, and due to the human necessity of working for a living, charge people who want said music. There's a difference between making your work available to people and making it FOR people. Any true artist does the former.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
It's truly sad how pathetic and whorish a lot of popular musicans are. They'll b*%$# about this downloading thing just so they can stay in the game to get the next record deal or paycheque...and for what...so that they can give the world what they've probably fooled themselves into thinking is actually a relevant album, but what is most often truly uninspired song writing, and almost always a poor excuse for an entire album...and this is no surprise considering the driving force for a lot of them is usually money, not inspiration. What a lame, embarrasing existence. Can't say this is true for all musicians, some have lots of money and don't need to whore themselves out, others don't want to becasue of their integrity... but as a whole, popular musicians are a bunch of whores who in the grand scheme of things have no real business charging ANYONE for anything...especially crap that was created for cash. Pathetic.

So we've established that being in it for the greed is stupid. Congrats.

You can be an entirely selfless musician who gives away music if you want to, but there are people inbetween who do it for a living but aren't hell bent on greed. They don't deserve to be ripped off.

You saying "I would be fine giving my music away!" is all well and good, but you aren't interested in a, nor do you have a, music career that you depend on to live off. So it's easy for you. If I wrote a song, I'd have no problems putting it up for download if people wanted to hear it, I don't intend to live off it. If I did, I wouldn't.

Don't assume there are two extremes with nothing in the middle; The travelling free musician and the greedy mainstream "artist". Also, don't give me that bs of "If they enjoy it, cash shouldn't matter.". If you enjoy it, you have every right to want to do it for a living, and to do that, you need to be paid. Maybe if people stopped being so selfish as to expect their favourite artists to be poor and just get a normal job while doing music for free, and actually paid for music more, we'd not have as much shit in the mainstream.

You said yourself, musical careers do not stand out as a practicality, so it's extremely possible that these mythical travelling musicians are doing it because they don't believe it could happen another way, not because they see art as something that should be free. Proof? How about every real artist that has ever made a living? Are they wrong? No.

People live lives working jobs they hate, and in a lifetime, jobs take up a whole chunk. Woe betide someone actually wants to do something they love.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Bring it.

Know your role.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I'm afraid.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
They make it for themselves, as it should be, and due to the human necessity of working for a living, charge people who want said music.
Sure...even I make music for myself. That's fine. I can go and sell it if I really want...nothing really wrong with that (although I'd rather give it away), but after that point, you shouldn't give a flying crap what the person who bought your music does with it...if he decides to share it for free online with the rest of the world, so be it. Musicians know that can happen, so bitching about the way things are with downloading these days is like bitching about gravity if your parachute isn't opening...they know the risk...yet still they b*%&#, and I have no respect for that. Even if you writing music for yourself, you can still just give it away.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Know your role.
That's actually the most intelligent comment I've hear you make. Nice.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Sure...even I make music for myself. That's fine. I can go and sell it if I really want...nothing really wrong with that (although I'd rather give it away), but after that point, you shouldn't give a flying crap what the person who bought your music does with it...if he decides to share it for free online with the rest of the world, so be it. Musicians know that can happen, so bitching about the way things are with downloading these days is like bitching about gravity if your parachute isn't opening...they know the risk...yet still they b*%&#, and I have no respect for that.

To quote Mike Patton: "It's your right to choose how you listen to music, it's not your right to choose how it's distributed. Things are simply too far out of the artist's hands now.".

Do people have ability to do something they shouldn't? Yes. Should they have that ability? No. Will they ever NOT have that ability? Unlikely. This doesn't mean musicians have to shut up and like it. Accept that it happens, yes. Like it? No.

If people are pro-downloading, and are allowed to say so, the opposite will also exist, and rightfully so.

-AC

I was thinking that downloading using programs like LimeWire it is pretty hard to rip off artists that are not wealthy as it is difficult to find many lesser known artists on these sites whereas finding popular music from rich artists is rather easy.

If you don't pay for an artist's work in an illegal manner, you're ripping them off.

As for the "They're wealthy!", bs. I'm sure the first person who dropped litter thought "It's only me.". When more or less everyone on Earth does it, it becomes a problem.

-AC

Just look at Lupe Fiasco's debut (which was great by the way)his sales were down,due to downloading.
Some of it is the Artist/Record lable's faults though,for having the music leak out.

It's not the artist or label's fault that people are c*nts who want to leak the music is it?

-AC

Well if you can download the whole Album weeks,even months before it's release who's fault is it?Some of it has to go to the artist.

Originally posted by Skeets
Well if you can download the whole Album weeks,even months before it's release who's fault is it?Some of it has to go to the artist.

Why? For making it?

Having songs/Albums leak on to the internet,before it's release.

Originally posted by Skeets
Having songs/Albums leak on to the internet,before it's release.

Yes, why must the artist take some of the blame?

It's not the artist's fault someone has leaked the album against their will.

-AC

Shouldn't he have at least some responsibility over his own work?
I have heard of artist who only record with specific people in a specific local because of this.

Originally posted by Skeets
Shouldn't he have at least some responsibility over his own work?
I have heard of artist who only record with specific people in a specific local because of this.

Yes, and it's obvious that some people do not do that. It doesn't mean they are to blame, they obviously work with people they feel they can trust. It's not their fault they can't.

The artist isn't responsible for what someone else does.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
If you don't pay for an artist's work in an illegal manner, you're ripping them off.

As for the "They're wealthy!", bs. I'm sure the first person who dropped litter thought "It's only me.". When more or less everyone on Earth does it, it becomes a problem.

-AC I agree with you, I wasn't defending just saying. I agree that the problem is becoming worse.

Now a question:
Does anyone think that downloading actually helps a lot of artists? I tend to think that it does as people discover artists in this way and then become customers of both albums and concerts.

It does, it can help and a fool would deny that.

It's just a bigger problem than it is a solution, doing more harm than good.

-AC

I download stuff that isn't easily available, such as tracks from games or movies that I already own. So it doesn't matter, I own the original medium that they exist on. I don't consider it stealing, as a result. You may disagree, if you do I suggest you contact someone who cares, I.E.: not me.

But it doesn't matter, download if you want, it's not hurting anyone except overpaid musicians. But beware, if you download music for free, recording artists will be forced to live a life of only semi - luxury.

That's actually false and you're only quoting South Park again, who served nothing more than to make the situation worse.

I wonder what Matt Stone and Trey Parker have to say about not allowing YouTube to freely show their episodes. What's the deal with them only wanting the episodes shown in places they will get paid for?

I told you about this before, you stupid idiot, Backfire. Why you being an idiot? Hate you scum.

-AC

What do people here think the difference is between downloading current music and older music from no longer active bands? If I were to download an old Led Zeppelin album would that be as bad as downloading, say the newest Tool album?

Of course it would.

Their members are still alive, split or not. It's still their work.

Also, in the case of bands like Tool, their music is designed to be heard as a body of work. It's not like downloading a single. So in that case there's the added concept of not hearing it in a way that was intended. First impressions only happen once.

Moreover, many songs get mislabelled and miscredited. Illegal downloading causes more problems than it solves.

-AC

Matt Stone and Trey Parker have said they don't give a shit about people illegally downloading their stuff In fact, they're all for it, they support people downloading episodes on the internet because that way it gets out to more people and perhaps some people who wouldn't usually watch it end up seeing it, become a fan, and start watching it normally. Don't make the mistake of thinking they're the ones that are taking it down off of youtube. That would be Comedy Central or Paramount, who own the rights to the episodes.

If I'm quoting south park, it's not false, because south park is never incorrect.

Your scum, whining about some rich whiny musician not being more rich than he already is, scummy butt. Go penetrate your kitty again, deviant.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Of course it would.

Their members are still alive, split or not. It's still their work.

Also, in the case of bands like Tool, their music is designed to be heard as a body of work. It's not like downloading a single. So in that case there's the added concept of not hearing it in a way that was intended. First impressions only happen once.

Moreover, many songs get mislabelled and miscredited. Illegal downloading causes more problems than it solves.

-AC

But let's not go crazy here. The only problem illegal downloading solves is allowing some lazy cock-shit to listen to music he's to poor (shitty, ugly, stupid, etc) to purchase.

But downloading porn illegally, I don't think anyone's against that.

For their sake, I hope not. Because if I'm deprived of my illegal, free porn, their ass if forfeit, and by "their" I mean "yours, Alpha Centauri's.

Originally posted by BackFire
Matt Stone and Trey Parker have said they don't give a shit about people illegally downloading their stuff In fact, they're all for it, they support people downloading episodes on the internet because that way it gets out to more people and perhaps some people who wouldn't usually watch it end up seeing it, become a fan, and start watching it normally. Don't make the mistake of thinking they're the ones that are taking it down off of youtube. That would be Comedy Central or Paramount, who own the rights to the episodes.

If I'm quoting south park, it's not false, because south park is never incorrect.

Your scum, whining about some rich whiny musician not being more rich than he already is, scummy butt. Go penetrate your kitty again, deviant.

I swear Matt Stone and Trey Parker had more of a say in their own work than the companies they work with...I'd have thought so anyway. They didn't seem like the kind of people who'd hand over control so easily. Though saying that, rules are MUCH tighter on filmed property than audio.

You quote South Park because you're a fool, bloody idiot fool, which is why I don't take it seriously, since we mostly agree on downloading, and you're just being a pragmatist.

Originally posted by BackFire
But let's not go crazy here. The only problem illegal downloading solves is allowing some lazy cock-shit to listen to music he's to poor (shitty, ugly, stupid, etc) to purchase.

Hahaha.

"I'd like this copy of In the Zone by Britney Spears please.", "Nah, too ugly.".

-AC

Wow this is getting entertaining.

We're joking, I don't actually have any sexual connections to the man, he's just a deviant.

I do, on the other hand, want to stab him in the face (Nah, joking).

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri

"I'd like this copy of In the Zone by Britney Spears please.", "Nah, too ugly.".

-AC

Okay, that just gave me an image of you saying that to someone (jokingly), and it cracked me the hell up.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I swear Matt Stone and Trey Parker had more of a say in their own work than the companies they work with...I'd have thought so anyway. They didn't seem like the kind of people who'd hand over control so easily. Though saying that, rules are MUCH tighter on filmed property than audio.

You quote South Park because you're a fool, bloody idiot fool, which is why I don't take it seriously, since we mostly agree on downloading, and you're just being a pragmatist.

I'm sure they have a lot of say in their work, but the companies that they work for still have the power to pull episodes off of the internet if they want. Matt and Trey have that power too, they just don't exercise it.

Plus, they're admitted sell-outs, so I wouldn't be surprised if they give up their rights to their work easily for large sums of cash.

Your big words are making my balls boil and my dick cement, beware the rod of unholy light, my friend, it will find you and smite you down, all over your face.



Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Hahaha.

"I'd like this copy of In the Zone by Britney Spears please.", "Nah, too ugly.".

-AC

Speaking from experience there, AC? Glad you're comming out about this stuff. It's important to accept certain things. Like that you're about 4 seconds away from being raped. Then again, it's not rape when you love it, as you certainly do. Deviant.

Originally posted by BackFire
Your big words are making my balls boil and my dick cement, beware the rod of unholy light, my friend, it will find you and smite you down, all over your face.

If that wasn't funny, it would be vile. Well, it's still vile, just not solely.

Originally posted by BackFire
Speaking from experience there, AC? Glad you're comming out about this stuff. It's important to accept certain things. Like that you're about 4 seconds away from being raped. Then again, it's not rape when you love it, as you certainly do. Deviant.

I actually feel a sense of dread.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
If that wasn't funny, it would be vile. Well, it's still vile, just not solely.



I actually feel a sense of dread.

-AC

You should, I'm not going to use lube. You filth mongrel, I'm going to give you a vagina.

Hahaha!!!

argue clapping

See what...SEE WHAT I shitting mean? You always cross the line, but make it funny enough to overlook.

-AC

Okay...that was pretty sickening.