Except ASCAP's influence and American copyright laws are only applicable in America and countries with which they have an agreement. There are only approx 50 that have such an agreement and I don't believe Iraq is one of them - although I couldn't find an up to date list.
That quote really strikes a nerve with me. Even aside from the fast it's their music, these bands and their members have the right to pass moral judgement as American citizens.
Aren't these the same type of ultra-right wing agencies usually saying every American needs to protect national security?
Now when American's show opinions on the issue, it's "laughable"?
Are you certain of that? ASCAP defines public performance as follows (and note that it specifically exempts parties and private social gatherings):
A public performance is one that occurs either in a public place or any place where people gather (other than a small circle of a family or its social acquaintances.) A public performance is also one that is transmitted to the public; for example, radio or television broadcasts, music-on-hold, cable television, and by the internet. Generally, those who publicly perform music obtain permission from the owner of the music or his representative. However, there are a few limited exceptions, (called "exemptions") to this rule. Permission is not required for music played or sung as part of a worship service unless that service is transmitted beyond where it takes place (for example, a radio or television broadcast). Performances as part of face to face teaching activity at a non-profit educational institutions are also exempt.
I find the mention of on-hold music interesting - it's somewhat similar use of the music (besides the obvious double entendre of being on hold being torture), in that its not something you choose to listen to, it's not a primary component of a profit making venture (eg. music at a bar or for-pay social gathering like hockey games at the Saddledome), but you are still on the hook for it because you are publicly broadcasting it. Even elevator music has to be licensed, when nobody specifically is gathering to listen to it (they just wanna ride the elevator)
It's an academic question at best, obviously the topic of torture is much more important here than whether or not Trent R gets paid more money, and for all we know, De La Rocha is in Gitmo
Except ASCAP's influence and American copyright laws are only applicable in America and countries with which they have an agreement. There are only approx 50 that have such an agreement and I don't believe Iraq is one of them - although I couldn't find an up to date list.
Iraq is a signatory member of WIPO though, and the Berne convention falls under WIPO jurisdiction, so I think it does apply to them.
Iraq is a signatory member of WIPO though, and the Berne convention falls under WIPO jurisdiction, so I think it does apply to them.
Good point. You may in fact be correct. However we're talking about people that are going against the Geneva convention and torturing people. International enforcement of intellectual property rights seem like the least of their worries.
I'm not even sure where to start tearing this apart. Its so incredibly ignorant, I'm inclined to believe you're simply a troll and don't believe a word of it.
Its not like they're playing them some Enya for their meditation sessions here. This is being used as a sleep deprivation technique and you can be sure its being used in conjunction with other forms of torture.
As for the 'rights of terrorists', I believe that everyone should be granted basic human rights. If you can prove they've committed terrorist acts and mass murder, then fine, give them a fair and open trial and lock them up. The Red Cross has estimated that 80% of people detained and tortured at Abu Gharib were the 'wrong people'. How is that acceptable to you?
If you honestly believe what you said, its truly astonishing and appalling.
edit: Mr. Nage Waza, what you just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response, were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Are you being serious? I will respond point by point:
I am no troll and am confused with your response.
If the music is being used as sleep deprivation and the purpose is somehow to fight terrorism then I am all for it. You must be incredibly naive if you think that is somehow over the top...we have soldiers dieing oversees right now.
I don't care what the Red Cross says - I simply stated that if they are playing music in order to reduce mass murder, then I am all for it. We can argue if the prisoners are the right people or not - in another thread. That was not my point, even if you are trying to cram it into this thread.
What is appalling or astonishing about what I said? Years ago the Americans ended a war with massive bombs in Japan killing hundreds of thousands (I forget the exact numbers), now music is being used to somehow extract information to defend us. I have no idea if it works or not, but they must be using it for a reason.
And what in what I wrote was insanely idiotic? I think I am being pretty clear. I am one of those people that think torture can be used if it means saving lives - this may or may not make me join the majority of thinkers, but in no way shape or form is it idiotic or insane. Debatable for sure, yet why the name calling? You also claim I was rambling and incoherent - are you sure you read my posts? How are people dumber for reading about what happens to be a legitimate point of view that is supported by many nations around the world, including the United States. Let me ask you - if torturing someone would lead to the safe release of someone in your family, would you approve of it? These are tough ethical questions that do not deserve name calling or other idiocy.
I have previously gone into any debate regarding torture and am not sure where my own limits are for what is acceptable, yet I do know that forms of torture take place in Canada and many other places. Some are very mild (mental anguish, sleep deprivation) while other types of torture are very painful. I do have a family member that I could ask if you feel like knowing more about what takes place in Canada, but if you are on the team that thinks anything 'George Bush USA' does is wrong, then forget about it.
And may your god have mercy on all of our souls if some lunatic explodes something here in Calgary. If there ever were major bombs going off in Calgary you would see many people jumping the fence to use any means necessary to extract information.
Good point. You may in fact be correct. However we're talking about people that are going against the Geneva convention and torturing people. International enforcement of intellectual property rights seem like the least of their worries.
Agreed. I do wonder though, if at the very least, the musicians do have legal recourse to stop the use of their music for the purpose of torture (since the US has mangled their interpretation of what happens in these places to skirt the legality of international treaties on torture, and the musicians obviously aren't gonna stop that)
edit: Mr. Nage Waza, what you just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response, were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Actually Mr. Nage Waza made some valid points. You on the other hand are a living example of what liberal indoctrination will do to an individual's ability to reason.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Calgaryborn For This Useful Post:
Thanks Calgaryborn, I think I happened to stumble into a thread where they were not welcoming apposing points of view. I was basically belittled for not agreeing with them.
Are you being serious? I will respond point by point:
I am no troll and am confused with your response.
If the music is being used as sleep deprivation and the purpose is somehow to fight terrorism then I am all for it. You must be incredibly naive if you think that is somehow over the top...we have soldiers dieing oversees right now.
I don't care what the Red Cross says - I simply stated that if they are playing music in order to reduce mass murder, then I am all for it. We can argue if the prisoners are the right people or not - in another thread. That was not my point, even if you are trying to cram it into this thread.
What is appalling or astonishing about what I said? Years ago the Americans ended a war with massive bombs in Japan killing hundreds of thousands (I forget the exact numbers), now music is being used to somehow extract information to defend us. I have no idea if it works or not, but they must be using it for a reason.
And what in what I wrote was insanely idiotic? I think I am being pretty clear. I am one of those people that think torture can be used if it means saving lives - this may or may not make me join the majority of thinkers, but in no way shape or form is it idiotic or insane. Debatable for sure, yet why the name calling? You also claim I was rambling and incoherent - are you sure you read my posts? How are people dumber for reading about what happens to be a legitimate point of view that is supported by many nations around the world, including the United States. Let me ask you - if torturing someone would lead to the safe release of someone in your family, would you approve of it? These are tough ethical questions that do not deserve name calling or other idiocy.
I have previously gone into any debate regarding torture and am not sure where my own limits are for what is acceptable, yet I do know that forms of torture take place in Canada and many other places. Some are very mild (mental anguish, sleep deprivation) while other types of torture are very painful. I do have a family member that I could ask if you feel like knowing more about what takes place in Canada, but if you are on the team that thinks anything 'George Bush USA' does is wrong, then forget about it.
And may your god have mercy on all of our souls if some lunatic explodes something here in Calgary. If there ever were major bombs going off in Calgary you would see many people jumping the fence to use any means necessary to extract information.
My position is that torture is wrong. Period. End of argument.
Even if you did agree that torture is justified in certain cases... Is it acceptable to detain 4 people without due process and torture them for every 1 terrorist you do this to? And how will this prevent terrorism in the long run? All these innocents that they're kidnapping and torturing... does that make them more or less likely to consider joining a terrorist organization next time they start soliciting new recruits? You're actively feeding what you're trying to prevent.
As for bombing Japan... "Well, we've done worse than this in the past so this is ok" and "Two wrongs make a right".
As for my edit, its a quote from Billy Madison and meant to be taken slightly tongue in cheek. Don't take it personally - its a joke.
And how is what I wrote ignorant? Whatever we can do to stop mass murder is worth it, IN MY OPINION. Of course I don't mean feeding babies to sharks, but music to a terrorist seems fine to me. And it seems fine to many governments.
If someone does not agree with you, it does not make them ignorant.
I don't understand how people want to protect the rights of terrorists...the first chance they get they will kill as many of us as possible.
I hope some of my favorite bands produce some albums specifically for this cause - torture metal!
Except they're not all terrorists...
__________________
"An adherent of homeopathy has no brain. They have skull water with the memory of a brain."
The Following User Says Thank You to HPLovecraft For This Useful Post:
Thanks Calgaryborn, I think I happened to stumble into a thread where they were not welcoming apposing points of view. I was basically belittled for not agreeing with them.
Further to the points I've made about the ethics of torturing people, the long term fallout, concern for the innocent victims, the breaking of international agreements, the obvious human rights problems, etc. and you're fine with the consequences of all those issues, there is a simple question: Does torture work? By that I mean: does it produce quality intelligence?
There is more and more information (studies, articles, testimony of ex-military) out there that is suggesting that it doesn't. Someone being tortured will tell them anything to make them stop even if its untrue or no longer up to date. If they don't have anything, they will make something up.
edit: I'm not against opposing points of view. In fact, I'd welcome them and some intelligent debate. If you have facts, logical reasoning, statistics, etc. please bring them to the table. If you don't back up your points beyond "Terrists boo! Torture yay!", your opinions will be mocked and ridiculed. If you build a logical, rational and fact based position defending torture, in the end I may disagree with you but at least I can have some respect for your argument. Who knows, build a good enough argument and you may even sway some people.
Further to the points I've made about the ethics of torturing people, the long term fallout, concern for the innocent victims, the breaking of international agreements, the obvious human rights problems, etc. and you're fine with the consequences of all those issues, there is a simple question: Does torture work? By that I mean: does it produce quality intelligence?
There is more and more information (studies, articles, testimony of ex-military) out there that is suggesting that it doesn't. Someone being tortured will tell them anything to make them stop even if its untrue or no longer up to date. If they don't have anything, they will make something up.
edit: I'm not against opposing points of view. In fact, I'd welcome them and some intelligent debate. If you have facts, logical reasoning, statistics, etc. please bring them to the table. If you don't back up your points beyond "Terrists boo! Torture yay!", your opinions will be mocked and ridiculed. If you build a logical, rational and fact based position defending torture, in the end I may disagree with you but at least I can have some respect for your argument. Who knows, build a good enough argument and you may even sway some people.
Not to get into the argument on either side, because frankly I don't want to do that.
Is torture efficient? The standardized torture that we all think about, the waterboarding, the pulling out of fingernails with pliers, cigarette butts to the genitals, bottom of the feet etc, beatings, invasive techniques, really aren't that effective, first and foremost at the start a person will tell you anything to stop the pain, the data that you get from it is wildly unreliable. Plus the human body and pain is an amazing thing, if you're not an imaginative torturer you're subject will get used to the pain, gain defiance and stop cooperating no matter what you do.
The current forms of torture the sleep deprivation, mental abuses, loud music etc take to long. We're not working on children here, we're working on very tough minded heavily indoctrinated people, for the most part they're going to outlast you, because they know that the longer they delay even if they eventually break the information is outdated.
I remember reading a book on the most effective uses of torture.
number 1 was used by german interrogators in the camps where they bought the victim into a nice clean room and sat him at a table and there was a bubbling pot of stew sitting off to the side. The interrogator knew that the victim was hungry so he was basically nice to the victim, he didn't give him the food or ask questions right away. They chatted while the victim got hungrier and started eyeing the food. Then the interrogator said that he would like to get to know him better and served himself the food, slowly eating and enjoying every bite, then he would start mixing general questions into the mix, then asking them in different ways, then asking deeper probing questions. Meawhile the victim is confused because this guy is very nice, and his hunger which was noticable before is now on a level beyond any pain. At the end of the second World War the American's and the Russians bought over as many of these interrogators as possible to learn their craft.
The other way of doing things that was highly effective was what Stalin enjoyed and that was no physical torture for the accussed but a ton of harsh abuse for his family, this worked especially well if the accussed had young children.
A man can steel himself against physcial abuse, but he can't every steel himself against his youngest daughter being raped in front of his eyes no matter how committed to a cause he is. The secret is not to kill the family members, but to really make them suffer and show that you can keep them alive and suffering for ever. Plus the head interrogator had to play like he was on the side of the victim. "Come on comrade, I really want to stop this, but you have to help me and help your son and your daughter and wife. You have my word if you cooperate nothing further will happen to them".
Of course after they had broken, Stalin usually exiled the family to the gulags where they were almost sure to break and die and executed the broken man.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
