Cockos, Reaper, and Justin Frankel

[James Steele]

I did NOT kick Kubi off the board. He requested very matter-of-factly that his account be deleted. I honored his request.

[Shooshie]

I did NOT kick Kubi off the board. He requested very matter-of-factly that his account be deleted. I honored his request.

See the edit to my post.

Thanks,

Shooshie

[n2mpujack]

Please, reinstate Kubi. He can just avoid the place if he wants to, but this stupid thread was NEVER intended to divide the forum or cause conflict. Pardon my naivete in believing that I could pull off a discussion about something that's kind of subtle without it turning into a brawl about exactly what I did NOT post about. But I do not want to have Kubi's deletion on my conscience, and that's exactly what has happened. He is one of my favorite people in this forum, and has been most helpful.

Again, I vote for locking up this thread, and I most certainly will avoid controversy in the future, providing that I can predict what is going to be controversial. I actually thought that what I was posting was interesting and would be perceived so, if we just looked at it for what it is instead of bringing in our PERCEIVED associations with things we all don't like.

Further, I resent what someone said earlier: "It's a shame this thread even got started - I mean - what was the point other than to stir up controversy on a subject that is anathema here?" That is so wrong-headed to the point of willful ignorance that I don't know where to start, so I'll leave it at that.

For goodness sakes, lock up this thread before someone else asks to be deleted.

And please put Kubi back on the roles. Nobody should be deleted during a heated discussion for any reasons except bullying, racism, etc. In other words, for not being able to control their impulses. Kubi is as level-headed as they come, but anyone can lash out and say "delete my account" when they're mad. Give him time to cool off and think about it. This place would not be the same without our more knowledgeable posters, and he is among the best of us.

Sorry to break my promised silence, but this went too far.

People have a choice themselves of whether to do damage or not. It was Kubi's choice. I'm setting the board policy on this, and that's how it is. People can choose to either deal with it or choose to publicly harangue me over it. If you choose the latter, I may delete the post. If you get your feelings hurt because I tell you a fact: that I don't care what YOUR particular personal point of view is and how YOU think it makes this forum look, you're free to get huffy about it. I honestly don't care who somebody is, or what they've done or not done, I'm not obligated to sit through your scolding.

Seriously... If somebody doesn't like it... I've said time and time again: phpBB.com is the site where you can download this board software for free. Get some server space, install it, start an alternate site and devote your time to it and you can make the rules.

That doesn't make it ok to delete Kubi, even if he asked you to during a heated discussion. For goodness sakes, let him cool down. Then if he wants to be deleted, by all means let him have what he wants. We all get hot under the collar and say things we regret. But what you've created here is a gathering place of people with opinions. When opinions clash, people say things. We're people, not saints.

My apologies to all for starting this thread. If I had predicted the outcome -- and I did not expect it to become this way, regardless of whether anyone thinks I "should have" -- I would certainly not have posted it. I just thought we were grown up enough to discuss this. I was wrong.

Shooshie

Shooshie:
In technical and musical matters I have great respect for you, but in this matter you still don't get it on several levels.
You KNEW Reaper was and is a controversial subject and how it get's under people's skins particulalry James's. I would have (and do have) enough respect for his stance on this to not have brought the subject up and rubbed salt into the wounds.
Another thing where you're wrong is with Kubi's departure. HE asked to be deleted, James did not take this action on his own. I don't know what the back-and-forth with James was on this that led to Kubi's departure but it had to really be something. It's like when you're in a relationship with someone and you and that person have a major irreconcialable differences - would you want to stay in that relationship? Kubi is the one you should be appealing to, not James.
One thing you did get right was you were naive to think a touchy subject like this could be discussed given the excoriation of the subject software.

To tell the truth I was very surprised that you could start such a thread. It seemed very unlike you.

[AnthonyS]

I do not support C•••••' aggressive pricing scheme, nor their lack of copy protection. It is my own personal opinion that they are using free copies to build market share and I think it's harmful.

So I gotta ask - what's your take on unsigned bands releasing their albums as free downloads on youtube and myface to build fan base? Harmful?

It's not exactly the same as releasing a DAW.

That said, I'd answer it this way: if you look forward to a day where all DAW software is inexpensive, but coded by someone who holds a day job and programs in their spare time, then it's a good thing.

In the particular situation of a band, you're creating a fan base that is being conditioned to expect your music for free. You may discover this is an illusory fan base that will tell you how wonderful you are until the day comes that you ask them to pay money to come see you or shell out money to purchase a CD or download an album on iTunes. But sooner or later you must monetize the fan base or make sure you're really happy with your day job that's paying the bills. I think the best advice to a young kid starting out is get a government job when you're 18, put in 20 years until you have some sort of pension, and then you can give your music away all day long.

I think the biggest worry is creating the perception that your music is worth exactly what someone can pay for it... or not pay for it. Still, I don't agree that this is a fair comparison.

Just my $.02 on the whole "giving away the music for free" thing. Not to stray away from the original post too much, but I totally agree with you James. Once you give it away, people expect it for free forever.
Case in Point: My band released a CD back in 2001, that we pretty much gave away. Yes, we sold some copies, but the majority were handed out at shows and to friends. Our latest CD cost us close to $10,000 and four years to make. It was a long, arduous process that had many roadblocks, speed bumps, personnel changes, etc. We are charging $13.99 on CD Baby. Fair? I think so. But the same people we gave away copies to, except this one for free. Sort of like, "where's my copy?"

On the piracy issue, yeah, it would be so easy for me to grab a copy of L.A. Scoring Strings or the Waves Diamond bundle from a torrent site. Can I afford the $$$$$? Heck no. Does that mean I should just steal it? Of course not. It just means that I'm not entitled to use until such time that I can actually afford it. Which may be never. Then, so be it. Unless of course, enough people buy my CD at 13.99!!

[n2mpujack]

Something that has been in the back of my mind on this whole deal is: have the Reaper programmers put in some kind of time bomb so that after a while if you haven't paid the fee (whatever that may be) the program buys the farm (and possibly your computer as well)? Almost like a crack dealer that gives away the first couple of samples, gets you hooked, and to keep getting product you pay through the nose.

I mean, the name of the software puts me in mind of the euphemism for death. Whether it's the death of daw software as we know it or something else only the principals involved know.

[Shooshie]

Shooshie:
In technical and musical matters I have great respect for you, but in this matter you still don't get it on several levels.
You KNEW R••••• was and is a controversial subject and how it get's under people's skins particulalry James's. I would have (and do have) enough respect for his stance on this to not have brought the subject up and rubbed salt into the wounds.
Another thing where you're wrong is with Kubi's departure. HE asked to be deleted, James did not take this action on his own. I don't know what the back-and-forth with James was on this that led to Kubi's departure but it had to really be something. It's like when you're in a relationship with someone and you and that person have a major irreconcialable differences - would you want to stay in that relationship? Kubi is the one you should be appealing to, not James.
One thing you did get right was you were naive to think a touchy subject like this could be discussed given the excoriation of the subject software.

To tell the truth I was very surprised that you could start such a thread. It seemed very unlike you.

The truth? I'd say the truth is that you aren't getting much of what I've said in this thread, or you couldn't actually believe a word of what you just said. Sorry, but you're simply wrong.

Maybe if you weren't so busy turning it into a "salt in the wound" thread, you might have understood me from the start, and maybe some of this could have been avoided.

And by the way, the subject I was discussing in this thread was not touchy. I had learned new information (to me, anyway) that I thought might cast a new light on the subject of Cockos and Reaper. Seems most of you either missed that or chose to ignore it so you could continue ragging from the other threads. I happen to understand the problem with Reaper and Cockos very well, and you'll find me agreeing with it and arguing against SOS, and so forth in other threads. But this thread looked at something different. You can go back and read it if you want to. I'm not going to write it again.

Shooshie

[bongo_x]

It’s just hard for some people to have a discussion without it turning to anger. There is almost nothing you can post on an internet board that doesn’t get someone in an uproar (often not about what you wrote, but what they think you wrote), so a discussion with any subtlety is doomed.

bb

[n2mpujack]

And by the way, the subject I was discussing in this thread was not touchy. I had learned new information (to me, anyway) that I thought might cast a new light on the subject of C••••• and R•••••. Seems most of you either missed that or chose to ignore it so you could continue ragging from the other threads. I happen to understand the problem with R••••• and C••••• very well, and you'll find me agreeing with it and arguing against SOS, and so forth in other threads. But this thread looked at something different. You can go back and read it if you want to. I'm not going to write it again.

Shooshie

The thing I've learned over the years, and in a hard way, is if something bothers someone or some group of people I don't bring up that subject with that person or group of people. Yeah, that might leave me with unresolved issues that concern only me, but the community as a whole is better off that way.

[marko]

OK, here's my 2 c****

OK, this is now getting ridiculous - all I did was type c**** ...... as in 'dollars and c****'


(OK being serious now)

I can't seem to pin myself down to a fixed, generalized viewpoint which I feel is 'correct' - because I don't feel there can be a viewpoint or solution which can be applied universally.... which is what a lot of these kinds of discussions seem to end up searching for, in vein.

So instead I'll just go off on a massive philosophical tangental waffle ride..... jump onboard if you want. ...... otherwise skip to next post, no offense taken!

Whenever there is real change there is much upset. When the boat rocks stuff gets broken. Some of it is fair and justified some of it isn't. And on the subject of 'fairness' I also don't think we should use the past as a yard stick for fairness either just because it was stable and we were comfortable and safe with the status quo. Strictly speaking the old system (I mean traditional business models before the internet and other new technologies began this whole paradigm shift) was to a greater or lesser extent just as 'unfair' as today - David generally never stood a chance against Goliath ........... but it was far more stable and fairly static and in many ways more comfortable. Everyone knew the rules. And that stability allowed everyone to get settled in their own area of expertise and that enabled everyone to feel secure and safe and learn a craft and make a living at it. I think when you break it down it is often the threat to our security/ safety (and that of those around us who we rely on) which is the main issue that concerns us - it's about practical stuff - even if we discuss it as if it were intellectual/ ethical. OK so it's usually a mixture of both really.

The point I'm trying to make is that **increased freedom** (like an encounter with the truth) can be absolutely devastating...... meaning it can shake up or even destroy all that we relied on, that comfortable and 'fair' status quo.

These days we're all encouraged to 'embrace the future' and to worship, celebrate and above all have absolute faith in 'progress' as the solution to everything - even to all the problems that 'progress' has itself created. But what's commonly known as 'progress' actually amounts to no more than technological advances plotted against time -hardly something to put faith into! Sure, a 'Star Trek' technology based utopia is waiting for us at the end of the rainbow - but that is exactly where it will always remain. Yet alongside this blind faith in 'progress' we're also being heavily encouraged to stay locked into 'old paradigm' thinking regarding the implementation of ever more extreme rules, regulations, laws etc. This to me makes no sense at all - it's totally contradictory. There's can be no such thing as a dystopian utopia ... and don't believe anyone who tries to convince you otherwise!

Therefore IMHO the only viable solutions (applies to all areas of life) to the massive changes we see taking place will come from our own equally (at the very least) original and imaginative paradigm shifted levels of thinking, attitudes and behaviour. If you drive across America you can use a variety of vehicles but once you hit the Pacific Ocean you need to totally change your thinking from 'wheel based' vehicles to 'hull based' vehicles - end of story. Well, we've hit the Pacific folks. The solution(s) to the challenges thrown up by technology will also have to come from somewhere entirely new and not by tweaking (or amplifying) old concepts and behaviours.

A lot of people kind of instinctively see how outdated a lot of the 'old paradigm' thinking is - how it was based on a hierarchy model based on centralized power and control that is now crumbling. But IMHO this new social/ business/ intellectual/ cultural anarchy (which is what it is) desperately needs something the old rigid system never really needed in order to function.

What this new system requires in order to work is: personal responsibility.

That is why I applaud James' stance (and the fact he is taking a stance) not so much because I agree with him (or disagree with him for that matter) but because thinking about this kind of stuff seriously and acting from the position of personal responsibility has to be part of this whole revolution/ solution/ paradigm shift. Whether we like it/ realise it or not we are actually all gaining enormous power as individuals - the evidence for this is that how we think/ behave has a huge impact on the world around us in a way it couldn't have even a few short years ago when we were never anything more than mere consumers and/ or tiny cogs in a machine that was far bigger than we were.

Today, increasingly, we're more than just consumers - we are participants - (even if most of us are still behaving like consumers) therefore choosing to support this, support that, copy this, buy that, spread this information, create this software, join this community, spread this idea ..... all of these things have very real and immediate consequences! If that isn't the evidence of our increased power and the need for responsibility in directing that power then tell me what else is it?

We are used to thinking of responsibility in terms of 'ethics' - doing the right thing - but today it is becoming far more than 'just' ethics (not that I'm downplaying the importance of good ethics!) - it is also now increasingly about POWER too. How we ordinary plebs CHOOSE to behave today really does increasingly have the POWER to influence and even create the world we get back in return.

In that sense I feel that (part of) the paradigm shift is realizing that we even have to stop thinking in terms of being 'obedient' because that's 'the law' or whatever ... obedience is NOT responsibility. Instead we need to think (I mean as a society) in terms of being truly responsible - as a consequence/ necessity of having personal power/ personal freedom. Responsibility and freedom go hand in hand and each enhances the other. An attitude and true understanding of responsibility in this sense goes way, way, WAY beyond mere obedience.

Obedience is about respecting the authority and power of others (like 'mummy and daddy' who provided all our needs so we should be obey them as a consequence) - and mummy and daddy will tell us this is being 'responsible' - it is not, it is being obedient.

Obedience is limitation - hardly in keeping with today's mood of unprecedented change and expansion in all areas of human civilization is it?! No one is interested in being obedient and for good reason - it's now a completely out dated motivation.... even if most people haven't quite figured out what exactly is the new motivation!

Personable responsibility on the other hand is all about engaging with freedom, power, expansion, possibilities, taking on new concepts and far more in step with the fast pace of change and empowerment we see all around us. It cannot be stressed enough how the obedient/ dutiful attitude is simply not good enough (intelligent enough) to motivate people in these times. We need to drop it and evolve beyond it. Just like we evolved beyond human slavery, women as inferior etc which were once accepted as normal, unchangeable attitudes and behaviour.

Increased power and freedom will never, ever make people more obedient - it will make them LESS obedient! And rightly so! And so any system relying on obedience at its core is doomed to fail ... and, again, rightly so!

We need to think in the age we are in - it is an age of personal freedom and expansion of technology, ideas, etc Those who want to resist this inevitable evolution will try and impose more (outside) control and enforce obedience. Those who see where we really are will look instead towards a new fresh mood of personal responsibility as a compliment to our personal freedom/ empowerment. This widening difference in approaches applies as perfectly to the music/ recording industry as it does to the wider world. You can see this split in everything that is going on today!

The thing is: people alive today (in the Western world anyway) haven't really had a true taste of proper responsibility/ power - because the western world is far more controlled by 'authority' than anywhere else on the planet. That is why they are still thinking in terms of obedience (for instance with copy protection) which is why when they have the freedom to be disobedient (piracy etc) they take it! In this sense a culture of obedience actually leads to irresponsibility! (ie naughty children)

So now that thanks to technology (internet, software etc etc) we are increasingly able to do everything ourselves (or amongst ourselves) personal responsibility is becoming more about us all choosing to create the kind of industries / culture/ society that we want for ourselves ..... for instance by supporting the aspects of industries / culture/ society that we value voluntarily (when we could just as easily get away with not supporting it, not valuing it and making use of free and usually second rate alternatives). It is a testament to the crazy corporate world (and it's associated notions of obedience) that we have been living in for so long that the idea of voluntarily (as opposed to reluctantly) and actively supporting our own industry/ culture / future (!) seems like such a radical (and quite frankly ridiculous) idea.

The point I am making is this: It really doesn't matter what rules, regulations, copy protection systems etc are or are not in place - until we relearn how to value stuff again no one will be particularly willing to support it. The way we will learn to value stuff again is to take back control of it and learn about the consequences of personal responsibility (or lack thereof) for ourselves - which is exactly what we are all now in a position to do, and what is starting to happen. It is really all about just growing up! Being consumers has given us all such a childish/ teenage like attitude.... hence the 'wild party' that is piracy and the whole irresponsible attitude in culture generally ...but eventually even teenagers get bored of drinking neat vodka, setting fire to their parents' back garden and filling the swimming pool with jelly ... eventually irresponsibility (and the mess it produces) gets very, very boring.....

-o-

Moving on.... as much as I love DP I think it is just inevitable that the brand of DAW we use will become increasingly irrelevant - just as the way our electricity is generated is something we don't worry about these days (OK so energy production is maybe not such very good analogy, but you see what I'm getting at).

What I mean is that the concept of defending that which we rely on (for instance DP) - defending its 'right' to exist is really a 'legacy concept' (to coin a new phrase!) from the deeply hierarchical old school business model. It is 'king of the castle' mentality. It's no longer appropriate. I don't mean we shouldn't care what happens to DP, but we need to be thinking more in terms of 'mutually championing/ supporting/ protecting' what we value and not merely trying to defend what we (seek to) own/ control (there's too many people with a hand on the steering wheel now for the second model to work).

And this leads back again to personal responsibility and it requires that we (the general public) all do something truly revolutionary: think about stuff and actually have an opinion about what we really want, what direction we want the industry/ culture/ the world to go in etc. For example: do we want the music industry (and culture in general) to go (further) down the drain or get more interesting again? These are revolutionary questions to ask because to even ask them seriously is to assume the power to answer them! (BTW sorry if this is all getting too Yoda-ish!)

Because, given that we all have access to the technology and the tools and means of communication it really is up to us (if enough of us decide to assume that responsibility). There is absolutely no reason why we have to all take responsibility - but if we don't then someone else will be in calling all the shots.

There was a time when questioning the direction we want things to go in would have been irrelevant - because we had no control, we all knew our place and all had our niche (it was unfair, in a literal sense, but it was stable and secure). And I know many would argue that we ('the people'!) have less control now than ever before. I do get that, I really do - but I think that's just an old out of date idea that just hasn't been properly challenged yet. Ideas are powerful things! It cuts both ways.

Like the 6 billion dollar man - "we have the technology" .... and when this outdated idea is challenged it will fall like Goliath.

I guess what I'm suggesting is that because now that any old David can compete with any Goliaths out there that we are heading towards a world filled with Davids and without any Goliaths.... and as a consequence of this our basic attitudes (whether we are making music, recording music, making software etc) have to change to reflect this new situation.

Culturally, socially and in terms of business it's a bit like we are all changing from being employee status to being self employed status. When you are a corporate employee you can steal all the stationary you like ..... this attitude doesn't work so well when you are self employed! Again it's all about figuring out the difference between mere obedience and actual responsibility.

It's corporations that are clinging on desperately (I mean look at them - it's pathetic! LOL) ...... the rest of us have got to learn to let go a little ... free your mind .... only those who can go with the flow will survive / prosper ............ BUT to go with the flow these days means to radically change our attitudes, behaviours, outlooks, mindsets ....

To sit back and watch what happens and expect the future to deliver while clinging to old ways is NOT going with the flow ....

The potential problems / solutions surrounding software competition, copyright and digital information etc are numerous and will keep on coming (as in everything else in life) .... that is why our mindsets, attitudes, philosophy, intelligence, critical thought, imagination and sense of personal (and collective) responsibility (as a recognition of our personal and collective power!) are soooooooo crucial right now - more so now than ever before. This may all seem irrelevant or fanciful - and in fact this is exactly the problem, because the solutions have come from a more evolved, 'higher' perspective (and be implemented with a mood of voluntarism) because we are all becoming more responsible/ powerful ... whether we like it or not!

If we can get that attitude right, figure out our priorities then the inevitable 'rocky boat ride through the choppy seas of rapid technological change' will at least be heading in roughly the right direction - which is all that matters... seriously that's the only thing that really matters!

While I support your "can't we all just get along and do the right thing" philosophy, and "personal responsibility" are words that fall from my mouth with alarming regularity, I would like to point out a couple things.

Stealing is stealing, I don't care what you call it. It is human nature to take the path of least resistance and the path of least resistance is always not paying for it if you can get away with it. And since the software in question here was written by someone who made his money in what is unquestionably an illegal enterprise, there is a case to be made that he shouldn't even have the personal freedom or access to the necessary tools to be creating a free DAW. He should be doing time for the theft of millions of dollars in intellectual property.

Calling the entire music sharing fiasco a "new paradigm" simply makes my jaw drop. And while I think iTunes and the ensuing system of digital delivery has a lot of advantages, it was nothing more than taking advantage of damage control.

Holding on to the old ways? You're kidding me, right? If you come into my house and rob me, expecting you to pay the price for breaking the law is hardly a quaint notion. But because the effects of "file-sharing" are so widely dispersed, so difficult to control, and publicly appear to affect people who are already "succesful", no one really cares.

I for one am glad to see things shaken up in the music industry, but that doesn't change the fact that the process was criminal. There is no arguing that. Like it or not, laws were broken, and very little was done about it. And some people made a KILLING off of it.
And some of those people are now living on their ill-gotten gains, and writing software that threaten other portions of the industry.

I am complete agreement with you about what we must do both personally and collectively and I am truly grateful that you took the time to compose such an obviously well-reasoned and thoroughly thought-out post. I must have read and re-read it 5 or 6 times.

Any discussion we have at this point, however, is like Captain Hindsight. I care very little about this free-ware, and very deeply about why the people who propagated the whole file-sharing business walked away from it.

If someone set off a huge bomb that destroyed an entire city, and then moved away and opened a business, the discussion of how that new business is affecting the neighborhood he now lives in so misses the point that it makes me insane.

[Shooshie]

Deleted

[Shooshie]

And by the way, the subject I was discussing in this thread was not touchy. I had learned new information (to me, anyway) that I thought might cast a new light on the subject of C••••• and R•••••. Seems most of you either missed that or chose to ignore it so you could continue ragging from the other threads. I happen to understand the problem with R••••• and C••••• very well, and you'll find me agreeing with it and arguing against SOS, and so forth in other threads. But this thread looked at something different. You can go back and read it if you want to. I'm not going to write it again.

Shooshie

The thing I've learned over the years, and in a hard way, is if something bothers someone or some group of people I don't bring up that subject with that person or group of people. Yeah, that might leave me with unresolved issues that concern only me, but the community as a whole is better off that way.

Jack, buddy, you still miss the point. My first post was NOT ABOUT THIS CRAP. You guys turned it into this. You guys answer for it. Did you even read it?

So tell me; if you don't talk about controversial stuff in groups of people where it offends them, why did you choose to do that here? My first post was about new information I'd just read in Time Magazine about the guy who owns Cockos and writes Reaper. I said that we might ought to at least see what he is doing, because there may be something for us to learn about the whole DAW business model. I also said that it may amount to nothing, and the guy may be a little sh¡t who knows nothing about music or recording. But until we establish that, it would be a good idea to find out if there's anything we're missing about the DAW business, whether it be the way they are sold or the way they are written.

You and a few others bullied your way into turning it into a thread about piracy. You even insinuated that I accept piracy. I don't stand for bullying types; I'm a bully to bullies. I'm a goddam independent who stands up for what I think. Been that way all my life. I used to go around pulling the bullies off the little kids on the playground. I was big and they couldn't bother me. I still do the same thing, even if it's online, and you, buddy, are acting like one. You will not succeed in taking what I said and turning it into what you want it to mean.

Got it?

Now here's where we stand: I started a thread. You didn't read it. You joined in when you thought you could make it about something flammable. Maybe I'm over-estimating your intellectual capacity to understand what I fricking wrote, but if you can handle DP, you surely have the intelligence to read and write. So quitcher bitchin and go read my first post or two. When you sufficiently understand what I wrote, then come back here and apologize to me.

Got it?

And also, you might learn about Kierkegaard. I referred to him in a post that you totally misunderstood. The particular book that explains what I meant by "universal" and "particular" would be something like "Fear and Trembling." That's close enough to catch it in Google. Maybe you can find some Cliff's Notes if reading is a problem. You have "God" in your signature, so I'm sure you'll relate to what K. writes in Fear and Trembling. It tells how some people act outside the moral canon, because they hear a different voice. The universal sees their actions as criminal, whereas in fact they are responding to a higher calling. I'm not sure that applies to these guys, but history has certainly made a place for them that I would not have expected.

Frankly, I see the paranoia and closed-mindedness in this thread as an indictment of the poor education we have in this country, and perhaps elsewhere. Try not to play it up too much, ok? You're making us look bad.

Shooshie

edit: deleted insulting words at the end.

[bongo_x]

...And since the software in question here was written by someone who made his money in what is unquestionably an illegal enterprise, there is a case to be made that he shouldn't even have the personal freedom or access to the necessary tools to be creating a free DAW. He should be doing time for the theft of millions of dollars in intellectual property…

I thought he created Winamp. What bothers you so much about Winamp that you think the government should lock him up?

bb

[Shooshie]

While I support your "can't we all just get along and do the right thing" philosophy, and "personal responsibility" are words that fall from my mouth with alarming regularity, I would like to point out a couple things.

Stealing is stealing, I don't care what you call it. It is human nature to take the path of least resistance and the path of least resistance is always not paying for it if you can get away with it. And since the software in question here was written by someone who made his money in what is unquestionably an illegal enterprise, there is a case to be made that he shouldn't even have the personal freedom or access to the necessary tools to be creating a free DAW. He should be doing time for the theft of millions of dollars in intellectual property.

Calling the entire music sharing fiasco a "new paradigm" simply makes my jaw drop. And while I think iTunes and the ensuing system of digital delivery has a lot of advantages, it was nothing more than taking advantage of damage control.

Holding on to the old ways? You're kidding me, right? If you come into my house and rob me, expecting you to pay the price for breaking the law is hardly a quaint notion. But because the effects of "file-sharing" are so widely dispersed, so difficult to control, and publicly appear to affect people who are already "succesful", no one really cares.

I for one am glad to see things shaken up in the music industry, but that doesn't change the fact that the process was criminal. There is no arguing that. Like it or not, laws were broken, and very little was done about it. And some people made a KILLING off of it.
And some of those people are now living on their ill-gotten gains, and writing software that threaten other portions of the industry.

I am complete agreement with you about what we must do both personally and collectively and I am truly grateful that you took the time to compose such an obviously well-reasoned and thoroughly thought-out post. I must have read and re-read it 5 or 6 times.

Any discussion we have at this point, however, is like Captain Hindsight. I care very little about this free-ware, and very deeply about why the people who propagated the whole file-sharing business walked away from it.

If someone set off a huge bomb that destroyed an entire city, and then moved away and opened a business, the discussion of how that new business is affecting the neighborhood he now lives in so misses the point that it makes me insane.

Thank you so much for making your print bigger than everyone else's. It makes me that much more aware of your importance. And also thank you for telling us what it is that made you insane. Otherwise, we might have thought you were born that way.

So let me ask you, Captain Hindsight, if you ever made a tape of something when you were a kid. We all had cassette recorders, right? Who made it through childhood and college without ever recording something they really liked onto a cassette?

Sorry, the generational loss of quality excuse doesn't fly, because I had a Nakamichi Dragon, which was so technologically advanced that you couldn't distinguish which was the source when I A/B'd them. I copied all my records and listened to them on tape so that I wouldn't be grinding down the grooves. I captured the first pristine playing of them, without pops, then put them back in their sleeves for good.

There are plenty of reasons to have software that copies files and even that shares them over the net. That you are blinded by one argument tells me much about you.

That you either did not read or do not understand my original post in this thread tells me a lot more about you. The kind of blather you're exuding is good for BLOCKING discourse, but little else. Now that you and Jack have effectively prevented anyone from talking about my original post, what am I supposed to do, thank you? No. I'll tell you what I'll do:

I'll give you a chance to reread it and come back here and talk intelligently about it, perhaps apologizing to me for what you did to my thread. When you refuse to do that and choose to flame me instead, which is pretty much a guarantee, given what you've demonstrated in the brain capacity so far, I'll tell you what an idiot you've been.

Deal?

Deal.

Shooshie

[MIDI Life Crisis]

There. The name of a certain company and it's software are automatically replaced.

Not very helpful for those of us who came to the party late and don't know what you guys are talking about. C....., R......, A......, P......!

[Phil O]

I had learned new information (to me, anyway) that I thought might cast a new light on the subject...

So, getting back to your original post. I'm having trouble finding anything positive to learn from this. I don't think this business model is good. It may indeed be the future, but it's not good. All this situation has done is confirm what I already knew was bad about certain business practices. So I'm asking this seriously, Shoosh. What positive things have you learned from this? Is there anything here we can use in a win-win fashion (at least from your perspective)?

Phil