Huguenot

I understand the sympathy argument, but two people arguing over a fish dinner doesn't give you the right to walk off with it ;-)

I don't know much about hankering for the colonial purview, but 7% tax means I'll be here for a while ;-)

Quite right Jah, that was the benefit of the loss in quality in multiple copies in the eighties and nineties. They'd be tempters for the 'real thing'. A great benefit for the band. It doesn't apply in the noughties with the tech quality at our disposal, that's why it's a problem now...

I'm on record on this site as agreeing with musical copyright. ;-) There's been years of ingenuity, imagination, effort and investment in making Scrabble as popular as it is. You don't just steal it and make money off it 'coz you fancy it. 'Backlash' against Scrabble is idiotic, if someone has a backlash against me because I wouldn't give them my car then they can go swing! If no-one buys Scrabble then the ultimate loser is the public, who have no game, and no-one makes any new ones. Intellectual property theft is like me making money by copying and pasting 'The Greater Thoughts of Sean MacGabhann' from this website to a multi-million dollar novel. SMG would be the first to see me in court I suspect ;-) With intellectual property in the music industry, multiple issues get conflated in order to win consumer support for an essentially selfish motive. In no particular order: * Bands get a raw deal on rev share contracts from record companies * Bands want free marketing because they all think they're good even when they're bad * Nobody likes bean-counters and grey suits and it fulfils a primal instinct to consider them 'parasites' * Stealing non-tangible assets (sound or images) from musicians is considered a victimless crime * Petty anarchists don't want to pay for any entertainment, they want it all for free * Fair minded individuals feel they should be able to enjoy entertainment purchases on multiple private platforms * People bring up silly examples like 'Happy Birthday' to support their case * The advent of digital technology makes it easier to make multiple copies without reduction in quality and get away with it In no particular order, if bands are offered bad contracts it's because they sign them. If they sign them it's because they want marketing and access to facilities, because they know it has a value. If they didn't want it, they wouldn't sign it, they'd just play in the local pub. Most music companies lose money on most bands. If you have an issue in this area set up a free legal consultancy for new bands. I bet you won't because it costs money and effort to get the education and the resources necessary. You'll want to get a return. Bean-counters and grey suits are nothing of the sort. In my experience these guys are very hardworking financiers, marketers and technicians. If their contribution has no value, then the bands should do it themselves and see where it gets them. B*llock nowhere is my guess. Advertising and promotion costs money. On another thread here people are bemoaning the lack of quality on TV but don't like paying for it. Guess what - there's a connection here too. Petty anarchists don't want something for free, in fact they want other people to pay for them. Running a band is an expensive pastime. We should be up in arms at the sheer arrogance of these thieves who are the reason why buying music is so costly, they are stealing from bands, from people who promote bands, from venues, from media outlets and from the people who pay over the odds for retail music. Wanting to play music on multiple platforms for one individual or household is being addressed by the technical community. The 'Happy Birthday' argument is just plain silly. Copyrights have limited duration and are established to allow artists and their families to enjoy the benefits of their hard work. Happy Birthday was originally 'Good Morning To You' and in the public domain. You cannot copyright something already in popular usage. I note that Google is already being subject to copyright oversight because to 'Google' something is rapidly become to mean 'search' and will be subject to less copyright control as a result. Finally, because a crime is simple to commit and easy to get away with is not reasonable grounds for suppoprting it - so is punching strangers in the street. I cringe every time I hear my close friends roll out this argument. I assume this argument is what SMG is referring to with 'welcome to the 21st century'?? Music (like money) doesn't grow on trees, many people have to work very hard to generate it and get it to us. If bands don't want their revenue they can distribute it online copyright free. Many have tried this and few have repeated it. If it was a successful marketing solution record companies wouldn't exist. If bands do want revenue then please don't mix and match your arguments 'music should be free because record companies have nasty contracts' is a particularly silly one.

I understand that it's removal is the precursor to the launch of the legitimate version. If that is the case, then I reckon Hasbro have behaved reasonably in letting these two guys have it up for as long as they did. Scrabulous generated cash from Scrabble by delivering paid-for advertising to users accessing a stolen game. They piggy-backed on Hasbro's marketing investment to reap undeserved rewards. They even stole the name. I'm a big believer in copyright - I think the rewards for ideas and inventions should be returned to those who have created and invested in them. Without this incentive we'd never have such world bridging pastimes in the first place.

Intelligent Design?

And for longer term fans we have the Dirty Wheelchair.

Hmmm, a wee bit american but 'Nonce Odors'

How's that? ;-)

Ermmm..... ;-) I love the way he's on a one-footed tippy-toe

Don't forget to see Knossos!

Flirt Puss? Split Furs? Fist Slurp?

Definitely Twix/Raider - go on, butter us up you Irish love bunny.

Hmmm.. didn't Twix used to be called Raider overseas? Is it still?

I believe that the Topic bar is still in production, and is also French - exported to the UK on top of onion boxes and white flags. The Snickers Bar used to be Marathon in the UK, but it was originally called Snickers. It was the Brits that renamed it. Having said that, I'm sure we could also less accurately blame the French.

Quite right ClareC, additionally the use of 'class' as a synonym for 'quality' as opposed to 'category' could well be a criteria as well! Brendan, it's shocking isn't it :( . However we can argue that, as with cricket, the game's not in the rules but in the detail. However... "Tell me where you went to school, what your father's job was then, and your home postcode, and I'll quite happily put you in a pigeonhole." It's a bit pooey to be be told you've got no 'class' as in quality because of what your Dad did. Presumably if you had real class you wouldn't draw conculsions on a person's calibre based on their postcode, but on their actions. Which brings us into a Nietzschean dilemma - is working class a frame of mind or do you have to actually engage in working class pursuits like sitting on your arse doing nothing all day? ;-) I'm feeling very working class today!

Lol! I know, only teasing ;-) Did you read the article? I particularly like 'Most of the old markers of class fade as, for men, a ubiquitous "bloke" is created and women look "smart".' More importantly, if wealth were the definer, then you end up with a very fluid 'class war' army consisting mainly of callow youths (who'll leave you behind as they age) and geriatrics. Research I mentioned on another thread suggests that 70% of individuals born into one of these wealth 'quarters' or classes will leave it by the time they're 35. If you need long term resentment to build up sufficient grounds for revolution then you've only got 30% of 25% of the population to play with. So if in the first generation you've only got 7.5% of the population in indentured long term 'working class', then by the second generation (20 years later) you've only got 2%. Not really enough for a working majority, let alone raising a battalion! Perhaps the class war has already been won, and rabble rousing will have about as much as success as waving a cudgel to campaign against the vikings?

M&Ms and Treats are related? Naaaah?

Hurrah for Birthdays... I've got the key of the door, never been erm... 38... before :D

I love this kind of petty nonsense Declan, it's kind of housing estate yob isn't it? 'English race'? I wasn't aware that there was one. *Makes note to self, must pursue racial purity as social strategy* 'Perception is reality'? Oooooh, goodie. *Makes note to self, use stereotyping as a weapon* 'History as justification'? Plenty of giggles with this one. *Makes note to self, visit sins of fathers upon the sons* Mix those little jugs of glee together and waddaya get.... ooh, I don't know Declan, use your imagination ;-)

Another interpretation of the great East Dulwich debate "A single adult living in the middle will have an annual income of between ?13,400 and about ?29,600. Being at the top of that band entails working for ?15 an hour for a 38-hour week. Live on your own and earn more than that, and you are not Normal - you are in the best-off quarter. Have two kids and a joint income of ?60,000-plus, and you are not Normal." Middle class means over ?13,400 a year...? Upper class is over 30 grand a year? Aspirational? Class mobility? Can CWALD regain her credentials by taking a pay cut? I think we should be told? "You are in the Wealthy group if, should you and your spouse simultaneously drop dead today, your estate would be liable for inheritance tax (the single-person inheritance tax threshold is now ?312,000)." Does this then mean that the act of being a homeowner in East Dulwich with the inherent househould equity precludes you from being working class? Exercise 'right-to-buy' and the game is up.

I know this'll sound a little contrary, but I think TV probably needs to undergo some sort of funding revolution. Fragmentation in other media, particularly t'interweb, is driving down cost of reach for advertisers. This means that with fixed ad break durations TV companies are making less money than they need to make programs. Word on the street is that ITV's revenues will be down 18% year-on-year. With no end in sight, that's enough to shut the boogers down unless they handle it correctly. Whilst these network stations have a mandate for original programming others don't. Are we happy to move to a subscription model if that's what it takes? (The TV license goes to the BBC not other independent networks).

CWALD! Gerrofit! 'WE think the work YOU want....?' Firstly you didn't win the election, therefore you have no mandate to misrepresent 'we'. Secondly, with due respect, you push paper for a living! Underclass oppression can give anyone an identity, but that doesn't mean it's an honest one! Establishing a common grievance is the first step to mob rule, a process in which the final step is democracy. Let's not go through the bloodshed again. Either way, to claim leadership is to elevate oneself, by definition you become the ruling class.

Never thought I'd say it, but I'm with MM on this. SMG your arguments are shocking - wheeling out hard luck stories as an excuse for rational debate? Poor show. The point is that none of these people are 'entitled' to anything. Feeling sh1t and having a bad back does not get you cash. Your daughter attempting to top herself is not an overdraft. Finding work soul-sapping and tedious is not a reason to pull fivers off trees. These fivers are mine and yours, not an anonymous government. We should make a considered effort to accept that government is neither anonymous nor independent. I insist that DWP make unreasonable endeavours to make sure that they're not giving our money to people who don't deserve it. If whinging Brenda can fill a coke machine to make some cash then she bloody well should. If you feel strongly about her then you should slip her a twenty every week, but trust me, she won't like you for it, she'll hate you and ask for more. That's the paradox with benefits.

By Il Dulce I guess you meant the 'big softie'? A reflection of the more rotund areas? Did someone seriously Google 'Pasta Poetry'? erm.... why?