I just went looking for an old copyright thread to revive, but there are too many old ones to choose from.
I wasn't around for most of them. Maybe one of you longstanders remembers a goodie to revive.
― Maria D. (Maria D.), Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:28 (nineteen years ago) link
― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:29 (nineteen years ago) link
― amateur!st (amateurist), Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:29 (nineteen years ago) link
― luna (luna.c), Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:30 (nineteen years ago) link
― Momus (Momus), Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:31 (nineteen years ago) link
― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:31 (nineteen years ago) link
― hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:32 (nineteen years ago) link
― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:32 (nineteen years ago) link
― hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:34 (nineteen years ago) link
― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:34 (nineteen years ago) link
― nabisco (nabisco), Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:34 (nineteen years ago) link
― Gear! (Gear!), Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:35 (nineteen years ago) link
Gear, if you don't like the discussion, go read another thread, for Christ's sake. Nobody's talking about Mark's book anymore; we're just talking about copyrights.
― nabisco (nabisco), Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:37 (nineteen years ago) link
keep in mind i don't give a shit about this book and am flabbergasted/not at all surprised by the responses here.
in my experience, people who completely cannot see the point behind being offended by copyright infringement and are wandering around going information is free! free like a baby deer! or some shit are people whose thoughts aren't worth stealing to begin with.
also, like elvis telecom said, those threads were all utterly shit, wtf? THAT is more an indicator of "ILX's demise" than this infight ever will be.
i'm thinking of making a compilation of everything dan, andrew farrell, and john d. ever said on ilx though and flyering the entirety of columbia university with it, i think they're ok. and gear! otm! hstence to the izzo is also correct in that this should just be a separate thread cos i kind of feel bad for mark at this point?
― allyzay, Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:37 (nineteen years ago) link
― Gear! (Gear!), Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:37 (nineteen years ago) link
― hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:38 (nineteen years ago) link
― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:38 (nineteen years ago) link
― Gear! (Gear!), Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:43 (nineteen years ago) link
― St. Nicholas (Nick A.), Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:44 (nineteen years ago) link
― Momus (Momus), Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:45 (nineteen years ago) link
― hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:49 (nineteen years ago) link
― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:49 (nineteen years ago) link
― Elvis Telecom (Chris Barrus), Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:50 (nineteen years ago) link
― cinniblount (James Blount), Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:51 (nineteen years ago) link
― Momus (Momus), Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:53 (nineteen years ago) link
― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:55 (nineteen years ago) link
― Momus (Momus), Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:58 (nineteen years ago) link
Possession is 9/10ths of the law, Momus.
― hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:58 (nineteen years ago) link
― cozen (Cozen), Thursday, 24 June 2004 19:59 (nineteen years ago) link
― Momus (Momus), Thursday, 24 June 2004 20:00 (nineteen years ago) link
― Momus (Momus), Thursday, 24 June 2004 20:03 (nineteen years ago) link
― cinniblount (James Blount), Thursday, 24 June 2004 20:05 (nineteen years ago) link
also, this:
That's the law's problem, not ours.
sounds a lot like what George Bush would say regarding Abu Grahib, imo.
― hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 24 June 2004 20:08 (nineteen years ago) link
didn't he do that already, and pay a hefty financial price for it?
Xpost:
I think a plausible explanation for J0hn's fear and loathing here is that it took the idea of this book to make him realise the self-betrayal implicit in his every post. In something akin to Heidegger's account of 'the Uncanny', he was jolted out of 'posting-as-habit' and suddenly saw posting as vulnerability, self-betrayal, even a kind of unwelcome self-recognition.
― Momus (Momus), Thursday, 24 June 2004 20:13 (nineteen years ago) link
― Michael Daddino (epicharmus), Thursday, 24 June 2004 20:14 (nineteen years ago) link
― Momus (Momus), Thursday, 24 June 2004 20:14 (nineteen years ago) link
― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 24 June 2004 20:15 (nineteen years ago) link
(Sorry Dan.)
― Momus (Momus), Thursday, 24 June 2004 20:16 (nineteen years ago) link
― hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 24 June 2004 20:16 (nineteen years ago) link
― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 24 June 2004 20:17 (nineteen years ago) link
― Michael Daddino (epicharmus), Thursday, 24 June 2004 20:17 (nineteen years ago) link
― cinniblount (James Blount), Thursday, 24 June 2004 20:18 (nineteen years ago) link
― cinniblount (James Blount), Thursday, 24 June 2004 20:19 (nineteen years ago) link
― VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 24 June 2004 20:20 (nineteen years ago) link
― cinniblount (James Blount), Thursday, 24 June 2004 20:22 (nineteen years ago) link
Dude blount she made eBay remove a friend's listing of a found sealed copy of the Tron sdtrk, claiming it was a bootleg.
xpost - Dan don't look at the celebrity herp thread, please.
― hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 24 June 2004 20:23 (nineteen years ago) link
― Michael Daddino (epicharmus), Thursday, 24 June 2004 20:24 (nineteen years ago) link