From: owner-ceremony-digest@monkey.org (ceremony-digest) To: ceremony-digest@monkey.org Subject: ceremony-digest V2004 #2 Reply-To: ceremony@monkey.org Sender: owner-ceremony-digest@monkey.org Errors-To: owner-ceremony-digest@monkey.org Precedence: bulk ------- + Ceremony list web page: http://www.monkey.org/~laps/ceremony/ + See the above site for subscribing/unsubscribing and back issues. ------- ceremony-digest Friday, January 9 2004 Volume 2004 : Number 002 (Fac33) [update] -> _international_2(requests)_____060104________ (Fac33) 808State covers of BM and Confusion RE: (Fac33) 808State covers of BM and Confusion Re: (Fac33) 808State covers of BM and Confusion RE: (Fac33) 808State covers of BM and Confusion RE: (Fac33) 808State covers of BM and Confusion RE: (Fac33) 808State covers of BM and Confusion LYRICS this is beyond bizzare nw ncrmzfrgp kj (Fac33) [reply] -> _bootlegs_ (Fac33) Re: ceremony-digest V2004 #1 ADV: Attention All Staff and Personnel: RE: (Fac33) Re: ceremony-digest V2004 #1 Re: Application Declined (Fac33) RE: ceremony-digest V2004 #1 Account Overdue RE: (Fac33) Re: ceremony-digest V2004 #1 Re: (Fac33) Re: ceremony-digest V2004 #1 RE: (Fac33) Re: ceremony-digest V2004 #1 (Fac33) RE: (OT) pre-owned (was: ceremony-digest V2004 #1) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 07:19:23 -0600 From: "-1" Subject: (Fac33) [update] -> _international_2(requests)_____060104________ [update] hello again everyone.. we've gotten a great response so far: about 20+ have agreed to distribute it.. and at least 30 or more will be receiving a copy.. i will close the offer in about 2 weeks. so if you haven't sent me your mailing address yet..please do so AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.. by the way, the artwork is coming along very well now.. thank you again for your interest.. later || || | | | ne gat ive1 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 07:20:03 -0800 (PST) From: robert dawson Subject: (Fac33) 808State covers of BM and Confusion Here's the latest from 808state.com on their covers of Blue Monday and Confusion. "808 State "Prebuild" album on Rephlex. All paperwork has now been completed, hoping for a March release date. To be proceeded by a single with 808 cover versions of New Order's "Blue Monday" and "Confusion". A Guy Called Gerald and New Order have approved the release of the covers, the only hurdle now being Arthur Baker who needs to approve Confusion." Just fyi. bob ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 10:17:57 -0600 From: "Ivarsson, Torbjorn (T)" Subject: RE: (Fac33) 808State covers of BM and Confusion > -----Original Message----- > From: robert dawson [mailto:dawsonrd@u.washington.edu] > Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 10:20 AM > > Here's the latest from 808state.com on their covers of Blue > Monday and Confusion. > > "808 State "Prebuild" album on Rephlex. All paperwork has now > been completed, hoping for a March release date. To be > proceeded by a single with 808 cover versions of New Order's > "Blue Monday" and "Confusion". A Guy Called Gerald and New > Order have approved the release of the covers, the only > hurdle now being Arthur Baker who needs to approve Confusion." Implying of course that the AGCG sign-off applies to a not-mentioned cover on the album, not implying that AGCG has anything to do with BM or Confusion... Right? T. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 11:33:55 -0500 From: "Daniel McCarthy" Subject: Re: (Fac33) 808State covers of BM and Confusion - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ivarsson, Torbjorn (T)" > Implying of course that the AGCG sign-off applies to a not-mentioned cover on the album, not implying that AGCG has anything to do with BM or Confusion... Right? > AGCG was a member of 808 State at the time and so his permission might be needed for the re-release. Also, I've heard that the 808 State versions of the two NO songs are rather loose interpretations, so if AGCG wrote any additional music as part of those versions he'd probably also get a publishing credit on them. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 08:42:33 -0800 (PST) From: robert dawson Subject: RE: (Fac33) 808State covers of BM and Confusion On Tue, 6 Jan 2004, Ivarsson, Torbjorn (T) wrote: > > > > "808 State "Prebuild" album on Rephlex. All paperwork has now > > been completed, hoping for a March release date. To be > > proceeded by a single with 808 cover versions of New Order's > > "Blue Monday" and "Confusion". A Guy Called Gerald and New > > Order have approved the release of the covers, the only > > hurdle now being Arthur Baker who needs to approve Confusion." > > Implying of course that the AGCG sign-off applies to a not-mentioned cover on the album, not implying that AGCG has anything to do with BM or Confusion... Right? > Oh, actually the AGCG sign-off refers to Pre-build. It is a collection of Pre-Newbuild material. So it was done back when he was still part of 808state. bob ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 17:56:53 -0000 From: "Nick King" Subject: RE: (Fac33) 808State covers of BM and Confusion Yup, Gerald was a member of 808 State back in 1988, and so was involved with both the recordings of Prebuild and the New Order covers. Any cover version of 'Confusion' requires Arthur Baker's permission, as he co-wrote it! Both covers are very good, btw, and are essentially instrumentals with a very 'acid' feel, and they're likely to be 12" only. If Confusion doesn't get the nod, then there'll be a different b-side. L8rs, Nick ;-) > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-ceremony@monkey.org > [mailto:owner-ceremony@monkey.org] On Behalf Of Daniel McCarthy > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ivarsson, Torbjorn (T)" > > > Implying of course that the AGCG sign-off applies to a > not-mentioned cover > on the album, not implying that AGCG has anything to do with BM or > Confusion... Right? > > > AGCG was a member of 808 State at the time and so his > permission might be > needed for the re-release. Also, I've heard that the 808 > State versions of > the two NO songs are rather loose interpretations, so if AGCG > wrote any > additional music as part of those versions he'd probably also get a > publishing credit on them. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 21:00:42 +0000 From: "Peter Zarustica" Subject: RE: (Fac33) 808State covers of BM and Confusion LYRICS Yes Loose interpretations is a good definition. None of the covers has the original lyrics. 808 State's BM goes: It's soo hard I can't stop It's soo hard I can't stop It's soo hard I can't stop It's soo hard I can't stop sang by Gerald Simpson 808 State's Confusion goes: Cooonf-sion Cooonf-sion Cooonf-sion Cooonf-sion Taken from an old vinyl record ;) It's rough but it's really good, especially for those into early acid (funk) house music. all the best Pete _________________________________________________________________ Find a cheaper internet access deal - choose one to suit you. http://www.msn.co.uk/internetaccess ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 06 Jan 04 18:23:53 GMT From: "Florine Benjamin" Subject: this is beyond bizzare nw ncrmzfrgp kj - --DCB3620E3B8 Content-Type: text/plain; Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Your Instant Access is Granted to: CLICK THE LINK BELOW TO BEGIN FOR FREE http://www.beyondbizarre.com/defaultA.php?id=3D805098 Thank you - --DCB3620E3B8-- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 23:00:46 -0600 From: "-1" Subject: (Fac33) [reply] -> _bootlegs_ hi mr van, whether it shows up or not for sale is out of my control... if it does show up, i will try to stop it, i've seen many bootleg and questionable items show up on ebay, that have been taken down.. the point was, i wanted to make sure to the people that do want to participate, that this project was not intended to give you something free, that you could then take, and turn around and profit from..is that too much too ask? yes, we've discussed the legalities and distribution issues to death already, so there's no point in bringing that up... i am a cynic also, BUT there are times, especially when dealing with music fans, that i have been proven very wrong.. i worked on a similar project for the group 'underworld'... we basically took soundboard recordings from several of their recordings, and did a continuous 'mix of our own concert.. the project was called 'bootleg babies', and it had similar project constraints.....no money was asked for, only fans were involved, and the result was an amazing professional product (that even outdid their own commercial live album 'everything, everything'), check it out : http://www.dirty.org/underworld/fan.html in fact, later on, the band asked for it to be put on their official site, and you can also download the mp3 files for yourself......a high quality .wav version is also available from members on their mailing list (rtsr-trade at yahoogroups)... now, i also know that something of this magnitude may never happen with 'new order'...but then again you never know.... what if someday, they release a 'rarities' set, (much like the cure, and other groups are putting together).....or what if they put up files for downloading on their site? wouldn't everyone here want to pay for such an item? i would........many of you already bought 'international', and even 'retro' (with or without the bonus disc).....while i held off.... what made you buy it? was it just because it was 'new order', there must have been some incentive.....but there just wasn't any for me.... even if they never come out without a 'comprehensive' rarities set, at least we, the fans, have a chance to listen to something for the time being... is there anything else going on in the musical world of 'new order' that we know of? i really don't see that much discussion here lately......... wouldn't it be great to see all kinds of reactions (good and bad) from the people that are hearing new songs from one of their favorite bands? i am just hoping that people can experience hearing some of the rarer and harder to find material, without going through all the trouble i did... no, the band doesn't owe us anything....and no, i don't think i'm any more important a 'fan' than anyone else on the mailing-list... i'm more excited in being able to share something, that i know other people might be able to enjoy....thats more a reward to me, than any amount of money... if you want to dismiss this project, (or any others), as ultimately being a failure for legalities, then fine, the cynics have won.. but for me, this 'experiment' is already a success (as witnessed by the hundreds of requests, and downloads of the material in mp3 format)......and now, with the generous offers for distributions and requests, i'm still impressed with the cordiality of everyone.. the point of discussion on a mailing-list for a musical group is ultimately (i hope) about music... why can't it just come down to that? later || | || || || ne gativ e 1 Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 13:16:35 -0600 From: "J. Van" Subject: (Fac33) Re: ceremony-digest V2003 #62 >> ********************** >> finally, i hate to keep >> mentioning this...but if >> i see even one copy of this >> sold/distributed for money/ >> or in any questionable >> manner that i'm not >> comfortable with... >I hate to be cynical but I can almost guarantee you that someone, somewhere >will take this and sell it on Ebay in a few months.... so beware. All it >takes is a single person to ruin it for everyone. On a similar note , >theres nothing worse than seeing that a concert that you personally recorded >in the past end up as a bootleg CD for sale for $20 in a NYC record store. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 23:17:11 -0800 (PST) From: "Hardy, Joe" Subject: (Fac33) Re: ceremony-digest V2004 #1 This is amazing. Nicholas, you admit you engaged in illegal activity but you seem dead set in trying to justify your behavior while at the same time slamming - -1 for basically doing the same thing you did. Some questions for you: When did -1 ever say "it's not illegal"? So it was okay to make the anthologies as long as it didn't "harm the band"? And -1's project is somehow going to "harm the band"? It was okay to distribute the anthologies in 1997, but not now in 2003? It was okay to distribute the anthologies because "most of them were vinyl and tape recording gather **** FROM PEOPLE OF THIS LIST **** and delivered exclusively *** TO PEOPLE OF THIS LIST ****"? How did -1 "try to convince people it's legal when it's not"? Isn't NOOL condoning MP3 sharing by allowing members to post messages in its forums about FTP's? Your attitude seems overly paternalistic to me, but maybe it's just me. All that being said, I remember at the time wishing I could afford the anthologies and I personally have no problem with either the anthologies or -1's project despite the questionable legality of both of them. Personally, I break the law every day when I drive to and from work. Amazingly enough I don't feel bad about it at all. And I apologize for the overly harsh tone of this email and promise not to touch this topic again. On a lighter note, I noticed on NOOL's forums someone said that Kon Kan's "I Beg Your Pardon" was a cheap knockoff of Bizarre Love Triangle. Is that true? If so, can someone explain how? I admit that I love both songs. Joe > Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 23:29:31 -0500 > From: "Nicolas LeBlanc" > > Subject: RE: (Fac33) [reply2] -> > _legal_issues_and_the_past_ . . . > I just made a > point that you should stop saying to people it's not > illegal when it is, I > never said what I did back then was legal neither, > but I stopped the minute > I saw this could cause harm to the band (remember, > in 1997, nobody was > expecting them to go back together), Recycled never > came, but I didn't do > any of those afterwards for sure. > > Plus I had my share of problems due to those and > collaboration with the > labels, which led to many problems with someone at > Reprise, and it was all > fixed then, so I don't think anyone would care of a > few sets of mp3 cds were > distributed back in 1997, so it was a complete public > project and many people > contributed.. Many people can vouch for this... > > Anyways, as I said, I seriously don't see why you > went into a personal > attack about this, I only said to you that you > shouldn't try to convince > people it's legal when it's not... back in 1997, I > thought doing a little > compilation of out of print stuff wouldn't harm > anyone, hence why I did it, > I stopped the minute I saw it could cause money loss > to the band, and I > stuck to my word. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 Jan 04 05:18:43 GMT From: "Admin" Subject: ADV: Attention All Staff and Personnel: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - --6A__53B4AEEF_C Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Attention All Staff and Personnel: You must respond by 5 P.M. Wednesday, January 7,2004 Avtech Direct a leading computer manufacturer is offering a limited allotment of BRAND NEW, top of-the-line, name-brand laptop computers at 50% off MSRP to all Who respond to this message before: 5 P.M. Wednesday, January 7,2004 All laptops are brand-new packed in their original boxes and come with a full manufacturer's warranty plus a 100% satisfaction guarantee. These professional grade laptops are lightweight and fully equipped with the next generation WiFi technology, making these the very best performing computers that money can buy. Avtech Direct is offering these feature rich, top performing laptops with the latest Wireless technology at an amazing price to all who call: 1-800-318-1388 by 5 P.M. Wednesday, January 7,2004 Laptop AT-1000S Series- Sleek, Slim and Wireless Ready * 1 Giga Pro Transmeta Crusoe CPU for incredible power * 128 MB SD RAM, Upgradeable to 256 * 20 GB Hard Drive upgradeable to 30 GB * CD-Rom Drive upgradeable to DVD/CDRW * WiFi Next Generation Wireless Technology for total freedom * 14.1 XGA TFT Ultra Sharp Liquid Display * Premium Sound and Video * Total Connectivity 56k v90 fax modem, 10/100 T-base LAN Net Card * 1394 Fire wire and USB 2.0 Ports * Soft Touch Keyboard * Internet and Network Ready * Extra Long Life Battery Pack * 1 Year parts and labor warranty with * Priority customer service and tech support MSRP $1299 ......................................... Your Cost $647 Laptop AT-2000 Series Plenty of Power and Wireless Ready * 2.0 Intel Processor for outstanding speed and performance * 256 MB SD RAM, Upgradeable to 512 MB * CD Rewriteable and DVD Combo Drive * 20 GB Hard Drive upgradeable to 40 GB * WiFi Ready-Next Generation Wireless Technology for total freedom * 15.1 XGA TFT Ultra Sharp Liquid Display * Premium Sound and Video * Total Connectivity 56k v90 fax modem, 10/100 T-base LAN Net Card * 1394 Fire wire and USB 2.0 Ports * Soft Touch Keyboard * Internet and Network Ready * Long Life Battery Pack * 1 Year parts and labor warranty with * Priority customer service and tech support MSRP $1999 ......................................... Your Cost $947 How to qualify: 1. You must be a Student or Staff Member. 2. All laptop computers will be available on a first come first serve basis. 3. You must call 1-800-318-1388 by 5 P.M. Wednesday, January 7,2004 and we will hold the laptops you request on will call. 4. You are not obligated in any way. 5. All computers are 100% Satisfaction Guaranteed Avtech Direct 1-800-318-1388 by 5 P.M. Wednesday, January 7,2004 If you wish to be removed from this mailing list, Please go to http://www.techadvice.org/remove.htm - --6A__53B4AEEF_C-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 19:57:14 -0500 From: "Nicolas LeBlanc" Subject: RE: (Fac33) Re: ceremony-digest V2004 #1 Well, it's a past-due subject, but I'll reply anyways.. >When did -1 ever say "it's not illegal"? I was referring to his "in case you're wary of implications, please don't feel obligated to do it... i feel as long as we don't start selling copies, and keep it amongst the fans, we are ok.." Which meant to me "it's ok as long as we don't sell it", I implied that it's not a matter of selling it or not. >So it was okay to make the anthologies as long as it didn't >"harm the band"? And -1's project is somehow going to >"harm the band"? It was okay to distribute the >anthologies in 1997, but not now in 2003? I don't mind his project at all, many people missed the point, I replied concerning the legal issues of this project, I was just saying that it's not ok even if it's free, those people CAN have problem even if they don't sell it, so they distribute it to their own risk... I know people are not stupid, but I felt like saying this at the moment. >It was okay to distribute the anthologies because "most of them >were vinyl and tape recording gather **** FROM PEOPLE >OF THIS LIST **** and delivered exclusively *** TO >PEOPLE OF THIS LIST ****"? By saying that, I was referring that I was not alone in this project, sure I was in charge, but I didn't do it alone, it was a collective project. >How did -1 "try to >convince people it's legal when it's not"? Isn't NOOL >condoning MP3 sharing by allowing members to post >messages in its forums about FTP's? Uh... to be honest, I use to think in freedom of speech, if people feel like talking about it, it's their problem, they are leaving a proof behind! Plus, I can't control everything that is written in the forums... >All that being said, I remember at the time wishing I >could afford the anthologies and I personally have no >problem with either the anthologies or -1's project >despite the questionable legality of both of them. >Personally, I break the law every day when I drive to >and from work. Amazingly enough I don't feel bad >about it at all. I do break the law a lot since 1997 in that domain and I sure don't feel anything about this either, I spent so much money in music over the last decade, that I'm happy that I can now get my revenge, if I feel the music is worth it, I'm buying it (I bought all New Order releases from the last few years), but to me, mp3 just replaced taping songs off the radio.. or from a friend, sure quality is better, but most will agree that the best way to pay tribute to the artists anyways is going to their gigs.. I don't say we shouldn't buy albums, but since singles aren't easily available anymore, I won't pay 15$ for one song! Then again, the whole idea was not against -1's project, in fact it's a good idea and I enjoyed his mp3 in the past (not to mention the exclusivities), I was just replying about the "no sale is ok" thing... ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 Jan 04 22:41:47 GMT From: "Rosalyn Mcintosh" <1nnetkg@aol.com> Subject: Re: Application Declined - --F699.FC_3E8.8ADC_F9 Content-Type: text/html; Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


aqjpg m eoks djq mbb udcfzqyqn s - --F699.FC_3E8.8ADC_F9-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 22:24:25 -0500 From: "Mat Tarbox" Subject: (Fac33) RE: ceremony-digest V2004 #1 For the sake of folks getting the Digest version of Ceremony, could we please all go back to the old system where we did not include all 100 lines of the post we are replying to? Please only repost relevant lines! 95% of my last Ceremony Digest was repeated text.... Thanks fellas... -mat austin tarbox ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 08 Jan 04 11:01:08 GMT From: "Meredith Salazar" <79jeafhqx@netscape.net> Subject: Account Overdue - --95A69.A62F Content-Type: text/html; Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
ELIMINATE YOUR CREDIT CARD DEBT = WITHOUT BANKRUPTCY!
Tired of making minimum pay= ments and barely getting by?

This is NOT co= nsolidation or negotiation...

This is COMPLETE DEBT ELIMIN= ATION

STOP MAKING PAYMENTS IMMEDIATELY!=
Are you drowning in debt?
Here's what we can do for YOU...
    <= li>Terminate your credit card debt!
  1. Allow you to stop making payments i= mmediately!
  2. Obtain a ZERO BALANCE statement from your creditors!
Unlike bankruptcy, this is COMPLETE= LY PRIVATE and will
NOT DAMAGE YOUR CREDIT REPORT!
You will NOT lose your home or any other a= ssets!











Please end future announcements
ELIMIN<= !tjptcwvydwohmkmccfroxysal yjwd dl snbgvrvltkoi ugo gtll a po>ATE YOUR CREDIT CARD DEBT WITHOUT BANKRUPTCY!

Tire= d of making minimum payments and barely getting by?

= This is NOT consolidation or negotiation...

This is COMPLET= E DEBT ELIMINATION

<= strong>STOP MAKING PAYMENTS I= MMEDIATELY!
A= re you drowning in debt?

Here's what we can= do for YOU...
    <= li>Terminate your credit card= debt!
  1. Allow you to stop making payments = immediately!
  2. Obtain a ZERO BALANCE statement from your credit= ors!
Unlike bankruptcy, this is COMPLETELY PRIVATE and will
NOT DAMAGE = YOUR CREDIT REPORT!
<= /table>










You will NOT = lose your home or any other assets!

<= div align=3D"center"> Request your FREE CO= NSULTATION now
Please end future announcements<= /td>



= btgkqeucpuocwynm - --95A69.A62F-- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 08:57:12 -0800 (PST) From: "Hardy, Joe" Subject: RE: (Fac33) Re: ceremony-digest V2004 #1 I appreciate your response, Nicolas. So can we all join hands and sing "Kumbaya" now? Or maybe, given our mutual love for all things NO and the fact that I'm not sure anyone outside the US knows what "Kumbaya" is, sing "World in Motion" as WIM is the closest NO song to "Kumbaya" that I can think of. Joe "Love's got the world [or in this case the Ceremony list] in motion" Hardy - --- Nicolas LeBlanc wrote: > Well, it's a past-due subject, but I'll reply > anyways.. > > >When did -1 ever say "it's not illegal"? > > I was referring to his "in case you're wary of > implications, please don't > feel obligated to do it... i feel as long as we > don't start selling copies, > and keep it amongst the fans, we are ok.." > > Which meant to me "it's ok as long as we don't sell > it", I implied that it's > not a matter of selling it or not. > > >So it was okay to make the anthologies as long as > it didn't > >"harm the band"? And -1's project is somehow going > to > >"harm the band"? It was okay to distribute the > >anthologies in 1997, but not now in 2003? > > I don't mind his project at all, many people missed > the point, I replied > concerning the legal issues of this project, I was > just saying that it's not > ok even if it's free, those people CAN have problem > even if they don't sell > it, so they distribute it to their own risk... I > know people are not stupid, > but I felt like saying this at the moment. > > > >It was okay to distribute the anthologies because > "most of them > >were vinyl and tape recording gather **** FROM > PEOPLE > >OF THIS LIST **** and delivered exclusively *** TO > >PEOPLE OF THIS LIST ****"? > > By saying that, I was referring that I was not alone > in this project, sure I > was in charge, but I didn't do it alone, it was a > collective project. > > >How did -1 "try to > >convince people it's legal when it's not"? Isn't > NOOL > >condoning MP3 sharing by allowing members to post > >messages in its forums about FTP's? > > Uh... to be honest, I use to think in freedom of > speech, if people feel like > talking about it, it's their problem, they are > leaving a proof behind! Plus, > I can't control everything that is written in the > forums... > > >All that being said, I remember at the time wishing > I > >could afford the anthologies and I personally have > no > >problem with either the anthologies or -1's project > >despite the questionable legality of both of them. > >Personally, I break the law every day when I drive > to > >and from work. Amazingly enough I don't feel bad > >about it at all. > > I do break the law a lot since 1997 in that domain > and I sure don't feel > anything about this either, I spent so much money in > music over the last > decade, that I'm happy that I can now get my > revenge, if I feel the music is > worth it, I'm buying it (I bought all New Order > releases from the last few > years), but to me, mp3 just replaced taping songs > off the radio.. or from a > friend, sure quality is better, but most will agree > that the best way to pay > tribute to the artists anyways is going to their > gigs.. I don't say we > shouldn't buy albums, but since singles aren't > easily available anymore, I > won't pay 15$ for one song! > > Then again, the whole idea was not against -1's > project, in fact it's a good > idea and I enjoyed his mp3 in the past (not to > mention the exclusivities), I > was just replying about the "no sale is ok" thing... > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 13:06:16 -0500 From: "Neil" Subject: Re: (Fac33) Re: ceremony-digest V2004 #1 - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nicolas LeBlanc" To: "'Hardy, Joe'" ; Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 7:57 PM Subject: RE: (Fac33) Re: ceremony-digest V2004 #1 > Well, it's a past-due subject, but I'll reply anyways.. > > >When did -1 ever say "it's not illegal"? > > I was referring to his "in case you're wary of implications, please don't > feel obligated to do it... i feel as long as we don't start selling copies, > and keep it amongst the fans, we are ok.." > > Which meant to me "it's ok as long as we don't sell it", I implied that it's > not a matter of selling it or not. > > > Then again, the whole idea was not against -1's project, in fact it's a good > idea and I enjoyed his mp3 in the past (not to mention the exclusivities), I > was just replying about the "no sale is ok" thing... > This is a good example of how we all interpret things differently. FWIW I read -1's "we are ok" comment as meaning that we're less likely to pi$$ anyone off by not charging for this project. On a positive note I can't wait to get my copy! Neil. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 09:13:45 -0000 From: "Duddridge Lee" Subject: RE: (Fac33) Re: ceremony-digest V2004 #1 I do remember Raj saying somewhere that the band/management were aware = of his project and not too worried about it, which I took to be the = reasoning behind his "we are ok" assertion. I too am looking forward to = receiving a copy and I know others who are. As long as everyone = respects the spirit of the project without seeking to exploit it for = personal gain, then I'm happy with it. One thought: How much does the band get when places like Vinyl Exchange = sell on "pre-owned" (i.e.2nd hand) copies of old releases ? Hmmm . . . Cheers all Lee > > Then again, the whole idea was not against -1's project, in fact it's = a good > idea and I enjoyed his mp3 in the past (not to mention the = exclusivities), I > was just replying about the "no sale is ok" thing... > This is a good example of how we all interpret things differently. FWIW = I read -1's "we are ok" comment as meaning that we're less likely to pi$$ anyone off by not charging for this project. On a positive note I can't wait to get my copy! Neil. Confidentiality and Disclaimer: This email and its attachments are = intended for the addressee only and may be confidential or the subject = of legal privilege. If this email and its attachments have come to you = in error you must take no action based on them, nor must you copy them, = distribute them or show them to anyone. Please contact the sender to = notify them of the error. This email and any attached files have been = scanned for the presence of computer viruses. However, you are advised = that you open any attachments at your own risk. Please note that = electronic mail may be monitored in accordance with the = Telecommunications (Lawful Business Practices) (Interception of = Communications) Regulations 2000. - ------- + Ceremony mailing list web page: http://www.monkey.org/~laps/ceremony/ + To talk to a person, send mail to . ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 07:10:44 -0600 From: "Ivarsson, Torbjorn (T)" Subject: (Fac33) RE: (OT) pre-owned (was: ceremony-digest V2004 #1) > -----Original Message----- > From: Duddridge Lee [mailto:Lee.Duddridge@lsc.gov.uk] > Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 4:14 AM > > One thought: How much does the band get when places like > Vinyl Exchange sell on "pre-owned" (i.e.2nd hand) copies of > old releases ? Hmmm . . . I believe the main difference is that when reselling a pre-owned record the ownership of the record itself is transferred, whereas when filesharing, giving/selling CDs/DVDs, etc. the "record" (or tracks) are shared (ownership not transferred). It's kind of like reselling your licence to a computerprogram, you can do that but you have to remove the program from your own computer. These discussions (always very similar) are on every music related discussion forums I attend. We can discuss this to eternity, but the fact remains: when sharing files, giving/selling homemade CDs/DVDs/tapes/etc., copyright is violated. Violating copyright is illegal. Even if the copyright-holder doesn't enforce the copyright, the violation is illegal. As I've said before, I believe everyone is doing (or has done) something illegal. We all are doing it as a calculated risk. I keep a lot of scans in the New Order Discography - I calaculate the risk of being shut down and sued as very low... ;) T. ------------------------------ End of ceremony-digest V2004 #2 ******************************* ------- + For information on subscribing/unsubscribing and the digest archives, + see the Ceremony web page: http://www.monkey.org/~laps/ceremony/ + To talk to a person, send mail to .