reposting. . WHEN THEY SEE AN ARTIST FUCK THU AND YOUR COPYRIGHT! l! YOU FUCKING FUCK!!! SHARING IS GREAT!! WHEN" SOMEONE REPOSTS THEIR IDEA: HE STOLE IT!!! SOM reposting WHEN THEY SEE AN ARTIST FUCK THU AND YOUR COPYRIGHT! l! YOU FUCKING FUCK!!! SHARING IS GREAT!! WHEN" SOMEONE REPOSTS THEIR IDEA: HE STOLE IT!!! SOM
Upload
Login or register

reposting

Click to block a category:GamingPoliticsNewsComicsAnimeOther
WHEN THEY
SEE AN ARTIST
FUCK THU AND YOUR COPYRIGHT! l!
YOU FUCKING FUCK!!!
SHARING IS GREAT!!
WHEN" SOMEONE
REPOSTS THEIR IDEA:
HE STOLE IT!!!
SOMEONE REPORT THAT THIEF! E!
...
+3701
Views: 91688 Submitted: 02/06/2012
Hide Comments
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (346)
[ 346 comments ]
Anonymous comments allowed.
asd
#3 - martiini
Reply +219 123456789123345869
(02/06/2012) [-]
Welcome to the internet.
Welcome to the internet.
#157 to #3 - funkmasterflex
Reply +29 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
#201 to #157 - davegrowl
Reply +6 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
#67 - givehimthemulk
Reply +85 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
When people share music they don't say they wrote and performed the song. Flawed logic!!
#68 to #67 - fogschmog
Reply -11 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
Looking at this ******* baby you must. Smarter than you it is dumb ****.
#78 to #68 - anonomysmonkey
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
Dude shut the **** up. This guy has a point. Artist aren't bitching about not getting recognition they're bitching about money. We all know who wrote most of those songs. However, when somebody retoasts we're angry about the recognition not any money we've lost.
#77 to #68 - escoba
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
User avatar #80 to #77 - fogschmog
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
I dont know if this wasnt clear enough but Im totally sharing givehimthemulks opinion...
He is a 100% right and I support what he said. Just thought doing the Yoda instead of jus toenail clippinging and saying yeah thats right would be a bit funny...appearantly I am not as smart as stewie..
User avatar #76 to #67 - jinjo
Reply -10 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
Bt when you take that song.. that's also taking money out of their pocket. Obviously the Foo isn't losing any sleep over the potential money they're losing, but for a smaller band.. say Illscarlett? They need the money being a not so well known artist.

I used Illscarlet 'cause you probably wouldnt know them I wouldn't think, pretty good Ska-ish bands though,
#205 to #76 - davegrowl
Reply +7 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
You definitely have a point there, but I think that there are 2 points where money isn't that big of a problem: 1) when your starting out: It's better and easier to have your music spread around for free , rather than selling songs nobody likes, not making a profit, possibly losing money, and being disappointed. 2) When you are a big name band with millions of dollars already and you approve of the 1st point (i.e. Dave Grohl)
You definitely have a point there, but I think that there are 2 points where money isn't that big of a problem: 1) when your starting out: It's better and easier to have your music spread around for free , rather than selling songs nobody likes, not making a profit, possibly losing money, and being disappointed. 2) When you are a big name band with millions of dollars already and you approve of the 1st point (i.e. Dave Grohl)
User avatar #284 to #205 - darkoneten
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
That's got to be the stupidest ******* post I've ever seen. so your saying:

>when the band is small, they should be giving out music for free, so i'm not going to pay
>once the band is big, they're a big name, they already make a bunch of money, so im not going to pay.

SO if you follow both of those statements, then how the **** does anybody make any money? It doesn't ******* make sense you ignorant idiot.
User avatar #299 to #284 - tairygreene
Reply -3 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
Glad someone else could see the ridiculous logic applied here.
#81 to #76 - anonomysmonkey
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
Yeah I actually feel bad when I'm about to torrent local band music so I usually pay for it.
User avatar #83 to #81 - jinjo
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
I just prefer to buy my music, I like having a cd collection.

Also I want to be a musician when I'm older, so I have the mantality that I should try to support the industry.
#89 to #83 - anonomysmonkey
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
Yeah I don't have a problem with artists making money but the music industry is kind of a monster. Like how they've helped slowly bring copyright from 25 years to life of the author + 70 years and make the enforcement of copyright laws so strict. How they've destroyed families with lawsuits. It disgusts me that it's no longer about music but about money.
User avatar #97 to #89 - jinjo
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
Yup. And 'artists' that are marketable :/
User avatar #180 to #76 - banjofrank
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
you should do a little research into how much money an artist gets from an album sale. An albm that you pay 10-15 dollars for, the artist will typically get around 1 dollar, while the remaining goes to the record label. If you want to be a musician, you'll need to make your money from live music, which I think is fair. Who decided that musicians, the one group of people who get to make their living doing what they love, should be paid to do so when everyone else has to slave at jobs they hate for **** pay. I say this as both a minimum wage employee and also as a working musician. If I can ever make enough to keep enough to keep a roof over my head and a few dollars on the side from music, I'll literally be living the dream, but you need to keep working, same as any other job.
User avatar #186 to #180 - jinjo
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
I know that, that's basic knowledge. But still, that's money out of their pocket, that fact remains.

And like I said, Foo Fighters, Metllica, Red Hot Chili Peppers etc. aren't really affected by that. They're huge bands, they get the opportunities to play big shows, they're known enough to go platinum in multiple countries in a week.

Illscarlett (example I'm using) don't get the opportunity to play the ACC, or Rock in Rio, or Rock AM Ring. Their record sales affect they're income a lot more than they affect bigger bands. That dollar between those five being ripped from them when they don't sell many records as a smaller band, is a lot.
User avatar #213 to #186 - banjofrank
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
If a band is good, and put on a good live show, they'll be able to get by. If they're not, then they're just not working hard enough, or are possibly just bad songwriters. Being a musician means that you pay your dues on the way up, there's alot of sleeping in vans, playing **** shows where nobody knows you, but if you do well, love the music and enjoy yourself and can still manage to sell a few cds, next time you come back you'll get to play a slightly bigger venue. As a musician, you should just be buzzing that people like your music enough to want to listen to it. The record industry structure is flawed in a big way anyway. Given the choice people will give their money to the artist directly, but we're just not comfortable paying off some dickweed in a suit who knows nothing about music. I cite as an example here Radiohead's Album "In Rainbows" which they allowed the customer to name their own price and the majority of people were happy to pay normal cost because they knew it was going to the artist directly. Another example, albeit from a different area of showbiz is Comedian Louis CK's latest show which he financed himself and asked people to pay him directly. he made over 1 million dollars (most of which he gave away cause he's a ******* hero). I guess my point is this, as long as we're being asked to pay people who have nothing to do with the creative process, we're gonna pirate, but it's ok cause we're still happy to pay good hard cash to see the bands live when they tour. I haven't paid a cent for Explosions in the Sky's cd's, but I've gone to see them live 6 times at a cost of over 250 euro. I saw them last month in Belfast. I'll happily pay to see them again and I'll download any new material without the slightest of guilt.
User avatar #15 - squiresparkle
Reply +58 123456789123345869
(02/06/2012) [-]
What would be really funny, is if this was a retoast
#19 to #15 - anon id: b77af4c7
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/06/2012) [-]
#144 - wafflemastur
Reply +36 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
**wafflemastur rolled a random image posted in comment #48 at What if **
#182 to #144 - huytranasd
0 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #325 - HonkIfIDriveWell
Reply +33 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
You're confusing piracy with plagiarism.

Piracy: Technically stealing, but most people who pirate only do so for personal use and wouldn't have acquired the product at all if piracy wasn't an option, so the creator of the product isn't losing any potential profit.

Plagiarism = Stealing someone's intellectual property and claiming it as your own for personal gain. People who do this are dicks.
#160 - zdshdci
Reply +30 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
I see your point.
#168 to #160 - CaptainAwesome
Reply +22 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
That was quite cleaver of you.
#171 to #168 - hawklife
Reply +15 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
#184 to #171 - wutda
Reply -12 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
^That is too maintstream, here have this
User avatar #327 to #184 - downstrait
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
get off my internet, you internet hipster.
#189 to #168 - klondikemonster
Reply +8 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
Well that was knife of you to say that!
#90 - bitchimflawless
Reply +20 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
#94 to #90 - thatsmrnoob
Reply +30 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
#291 - sutrakama
Reply +21 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
**sutrakama rolls 65**
#300 to #291 - arean
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
User avatar #301 to #300 - gothdino
Reply +26 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
**gothdino rolls 33**
#309 to #301 - mrfunman **User deleted account**
+18 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #313 to #309 - piikachu
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
dat roll
#302 to #301 - gothdino
Reply +8 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
Sweet.
Sweet.
#320 - danielmoody **User deleted account**
0 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
#330 to #320 - wtj
0 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
#322 to #320 - kwiiz
Reply +23 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
Comment Picture

#352 to #322 - blackzero
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(02/07/2012) [-]
first time i have ever seen a didnt read gif get + toenail clippings.
first time i have ever seen a didnt read gif get + toenail clippings.
User avatar #30 - notabtard
Reply +17 123456789123345869
(02/06/2012) [-]
Pirates still acknowledge the creator, and know who made it. retoasters are OK if:
a: they do the same
b: it has been a sufficient period of time that people have forgotten about the post so that it is funny again.