do_While(True)

Yoinked from mmeubiquitous

Rules:
1. Have your music library ready.
2. Choose one (1) song from your music library whose title starts with the first letter (or number) of your screen name.
3. Repeat this process with each successive letter (or number) in your screen name until you run out of letters (or numbers).
4. Post up your results.

J - "Jabberwocky" by Cruxshadows
A - "Almost Human" by Voltaire
C - "Codemonkey" by Johnathan Coulton
K - "Killer Queen" by Queen
O - "One Child" by Savatage
F - "Further" by VNV Nation
A - "Another Day" by Dream Theatre
L - "Last Comfort" by ThouShaltNot
L - "Lonely Lonely" by Feist
G - "Ground" by Assemblage 23
E - "End of Creation" by Psychecorp
E - "End" by Linkin Park
K - "Kissed by a Rose" by Seal
S - "Silent Lucidity" by Queensryche

What. The. Hell!?
Just what do These Guys think they're doing?
For convenience:
US music publishers are calling for the imprisonment of owners of websites that contain song lyrics, guitar tabs and musical scores.

And of course, the same three-note reasoning:
'Unauthorised use of lyrics and tablature deprives the songwriter of the ability to make a living, and is no different than stealing,'

I mean..! There's just..!
Words fail me.
OK, look people. Music means things to people. Lyrics say something. We're not talking about taking someone's design for 'silent Velcro' or something like that, and selling it so they can't. Some kid who posts lyrics on his blog isn't hurting the musician, he's supporting him. That's the 'effing fanbase, you idiots! If a kid goes online to get guitar tabs of a song he likes so he can learn to play the guitar and emulate an artist he admires, that is a good thing. And it doesn't hurt the artist!

I still hold that file-sharing is doing more good for artists than harm, and that the big 'issue' here is that CD sales are going down. I've even admitted that I'm willing to pay a reasonable price to get the music files I'm interested in, and have been looking into services like iTunes and Napster; so if you want your corporate revenue, there you go.

But don't cry to me about "the poor starving artist," and how we're "denying him a living." If you had your way, Mr. Corporation, you'd be taking food out of his 'effing mouth yourself; he's a cash-cow to you, but he really means something to us, the fans. He speaks to us, he puts to music what we can't even get in words.

And even at that, there are no more than two types of artist out there, by my reckoning: those who make obscene amounts of money, on the order of pro-athletes or third-world countries, and as such won't even notice a dip in their record sales; and actual artists who make more off their live shows, their actual performances, the thing that makes them artists, then off of record sales. And even at that, I don't see any problem if someone can take your song, and play it his way, and have people like it more. that's his skill set, that's his talent. There's no 'safeguard' to me 'making a living' if someone else gets hired because he's a better programmer. That's the downside of this great Capitalistic society we have: you can sell anything, but if you can't get people to buy your product, your performance, you're out of luck. That doesn't mean art isn't beautiful -- and it sure as hell doesn't mean art should be a slave to the All-Mighty Dollar! Anyone who started out doing music because they had something to say should know that, and anyone who became a musician solely to make money deserves to take a financial hit as consequence.

-snear- Put people in jail for lyrics and guitar-tabs posted online? You people make me sick.