Log in 
New user? Messages in thread: 33.
| Crooks - 7/12/2000 - by Jim Roepcke None. | ||
|
In my opinion, Napster is a theft-engine. An accessory to piracy on a mass-scale. Reply |
| RE: Crooks - 7/12/2000 - by dave rogers None. | ||
|
Hmmm...should have copied your text or opened this page in another window, I'm flying Reply |
| RE: Crooks - 7/12/2000 - by Jim Roepcke None. | ||
|
First, there does seem to be a certain, limited legal use of a facility like Napster. Reply |
| RE: Crooks - 7/12/2000 - by dave rogers None. | ||
|
I have friends who brag that they haven't bought a CD in over a year. Their cars Reply |
| RE: Crooks - 7/12/2000 - by the gregor None. | ||
|
Second, I think the dynamic that is driving the development and deployment of this Reply |
| RE: Crooks - 7/12/2000 - by dave rogers None. | ||
|
Whether advisible, or not, artists agree to contracts with the record companies. Reply |
| RE: Crooks - 7/12/2000 - by Jim Roepcke None. | ||
|
It is just to illustrate that a negative aspect of the current economic distribution Reply |
| Re: Crooks - 7/12/2000 - by Greg Pierce None. | ||
|
on 7/12/00 10:08 PM, Jim Roepcke at jim@roepcke.com wrote: > I love the idea Reply |
| Re: Crooks - 7/12/2000 - by Greg Pierce None. | ||
|
on 7/12/00 9:31 PM, dave rogers at nubuckaroo@earthlink.net wrote: >> Whether Reply |
| RE: Crooks - 7/12/2000 - by Joe Mahoney None. | ||
|
Hi Jim I can sorta see where you're coming from but I can't agree. I believe the Reply |
| RE: Crooks - 7/12/2000 - by Jim Roepcke None. | ||
|
Should Napster be responsible for the legality of the files they point to? Because Reply |
| RE: Crooks - 7/12/2000 - by Joe Mahoney None. | ||
|
Jim The kids killing kids analogy is quite an emotional one. The situation you describe Reply |
| RE: Crooks - 7/12/2000 - by Jim Roepcke None. | ||
|
The kids killing kids analogy is quite an emotional one. The situation you describe Reply |
| RE: Crooks - 8/29/2000 - by KidsAreAlright None. | ||
|
Jim you are a sad, sad little man. Reply |
| RE: Crooks - 8/29/2000 - by Jim Roepcke None. | ||
|
Actually I'm a sad big man, but thanks for noticing. Jim Reply |
| RE: Crooks - 8/29/2000 - by Jim Roepcke None. | ||
|
BTW, please expand on your comment, explain what you disagree with, if you can. Reply |
| RE: Crooks - 7/12/2000 - by Jim Roepcke None. | ||
|
If Napster was really pro-artist, they would have put a micropayment system in the Reply |
| RE: JS res - 7/12/2000 - by Dave Winer None. | ||
|
Jim, in fairness to your readers, I think you should explain to them that you have Reply |
| SA - 7/12/2000 - by Jim Roepcke None. | ||
|
You've asked others not to question your editorial integrity, to edit your home Reply |
| RE: SA - 7/13/2000 - by Donald W. Larson None. | ||
|
Jim, Between the years 1992 and 1994, I convinced the company I was working for Reply |
| Re: JS res - 7/13/2000 - by Sean McMains None. | ||
|
Jim, in fairness to your readers, I think you should explain to them that you have Reply |
| Re: JS res - 7/13/2000 - by Jim Roepcke None. | ||
|
Hi Sean, But it only gets better! Not only did Dave accept a resignation I never Reply |
| Re: JS res - 7/13/2000 - by Greg Pierce None. | ||
|
on 7/13/00 1:14 PM, Jim Roepcke at jim@roepcke.com wrote: > The moral is, if Reply |
| Re: JS res - 7/13/2000 - by Donald W. Larson None. | ||
|
Jim, I'm curious what the FTC has to say about "Restraint of Trade" issues when Reply |
| Re: JS res - 7/18/2000 - by Dave Winer None. | ||
|
Jim, I don't want you in the SA program, because we've been fighting at this level, Reply |
| Re: JS res - 7/19/2000 - by Mark Morgan None. | ||
|
Mr. Winer, I have read this entire thread. I have no idea why you think Jim was Reply |
| Re: JS res - 7/20/2000 - by Jim Roepcke None. | ||
|
Hi Mark, I haven't even had a chance to reply to Dave's latest letter myself, so Reply |
| Re: JS res - 7/20/2000 - by Mark Morgan None. | ||
|
I don't feel I was criticizing Dave there. I feel I was trying to invoke an answer Reply |
| RE: Crooks - 7/12/2000 - by Jim Roepcke None. | ||
|
I posted this on discuss.userland.com, but it was deleted (big surprise), so here Reply |
| RE: Crooks - 7/12/2000 - by Dave Winer None. | ||
|
This was posted on discuss.userland.com, then deleted: In response to: http://discuss.userland.com/msgReader$18520 Reply |
| RE: Crooks - 7/12/2000 - by Jim Roepcke None. | ||
|
I posted this on discuss.userland.com, but it was deleted (i can't figure out why Reply |
| kids - 7/12/2000 - by Jim Roepcke None. | ||
|
What will Napster and the like do to kids' perceptions of property, and the right Reply |
| Cake - 7/26/2000 - by Jim Roepcke None. | ||
|
WSJ: Napster Lays Claim to New Frontier, But It Doesn't Want Any Company -- I think Reply |
