

FFH5

Premium Member

join:2002-03-03

Tavistock NJ 1 recommendation FFH5 Premium Member Re: Vote for this guy to kill SOPA said by shorn : »news.cnet.com/8301-31921 ··· s-author

Even if Smith were to lose(unlikely given his huge election war chest), that wouldn't mean there aren't 10 people willing to take his place to introduce RIAA supported laws.

nutcr0cker

join:2003-04-02

Chandler, AZ 1 recommendation nutcr0cker Member Re: Vote for this guy to kill SOPA "Even if Smith were to lose"

totally agree there are too many scum Republicans around. The only solution would be to deport all neocons



kingdome74

Let's Go Orange

Premium Member

join:2002-03-27

Syracuse, NY 5 recommendations kingdome74 Premium Member Re: Vote for this guy to kill SOPA So it's just Republicans that are scum? LOL, please, this issue spills shit all over both parties.



statecop

Premium Member

join:2002-09-16

Heflin, AL 2 edits 4 recommendations statecop to nutcr0cker

Premium Member to nutcr0cker

To many scum republicans? Are you really that stupid? Maybe you should read something other than the Huffington post. There were just as many Democrats supporting that. If you listen to anyone other than ultra-liberals then you would know that almost all conservative minded talk show host (Glenn Beck ect) were very much against this from the start. Big government is something for you leftist not something us true conservatives want.



I am a Republican and most conservatives that I know were against this. This is the type of Big Government we do not need from ANY party. You Democrats claim to be so open minded...what a joke.



The fact is we need to hold ANY political figure to the fire on this no matter what party they are from. I am a state republican executive committee member in my state and I plan to hold one of our elected officials (Republican) to the fire on just this issue.



Maybe you should do the same rather than using it as a political tool to help your side. They are just as much to blame!



Here is an idea....ENFORCE the laws that we already have on the books!

your moderator at work hidden : Off topic



viperpa33s

Why Me?

Premium Member

join:2002-12-20

Bradenton, FL viperpa33s to nutcr0cker

Premium Member to nutcr0cker

Scum Republicans? What about the scum Democrats who supported the bill? There are just as many scum Democrats as there are scum Republicans drinking the MPAA/RIAA koolaid. Democrats would tend to support this bill more since the MPAA/RIAA supports Democrat politicians.



MacBridger

Late to the party

Premium Member

join:2001-01-11

Morgantown, WV 1 recommendation MacBridger Premium Member Re: Vote for this guy to kill SOPA It's not a party issue and that's the problem. SOPA/PIPA had bipartisan support. But D wants to blame R and R wants to blame D...



Blame the individual reps and senators that sold their votes! I know I'm looking for someone to replace Bob Casey this election. The choices aren't good, but I'll take an honest man whose politics I disagree with over a corrupt man who says the right things.



Rogue Wolf

voted for you for GOAT

join:2003-08-12

Troy, NY 2 recommendations Rogue Wolf Member Re: Vote for this guy to kill SOPA Shh! You're giving away their plan to keep us divided and bickering with each other so that they can push through anything they please!



MacBridger

Late to the party

Premium Member

join:2001-01-11

Morgantown, WV MacBridger Premium Member Re: Vote for this guy to kill SOPA I know, I'm probably being blacklisted as we type.

moonpuppy (banned)

join:2000-08-21

Glen Burnie, MD moonpuppy (banned) to nutcr0cker

Member to nutcr0cker

said by nutcr0cker: "Even if Smith were to lose"

totally agree there are too many scum Republicans around. The only solution would be to deport all neocons





Harry Reid (D-NV) was still looking for support to try and pass this legislation.



KrK

Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy

Premium Member

join:2000-01-17

Tulsa, OK Netgear WNDR3700v2

Zoom 5341J

KrK to FFH5

Premium Member to FFH5

The way to get politicians to fall in line when it comes to blatant corruption (er, lobbying) is to slap them down hard.



When the public ejects one of them in a dramatic fashion, his successor remembers it well... and won't be as eager to make the same mistake.



So yeah, eject Lamar Smith. He's crafted other idiot tech bills as well.



DataRiker

Premium Member

join:2002-05-19

00000 DataRiker to shorn

Premium Member to shorn

said by shorn : »news.cnet.com/8301-31921 ··· s-author

Nice find. I think I will donate to him on my next paycheck.



Nightfall

My Goal Is To Deny Yours

MVM

join:2001-08-03

Grand Rapids, MI Nightfall MVM Not that the RIAA or MPAA will learn....but..... www.forbes.com/sites/ins ··· ill-you/



Transmaster

Don't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus

join:2001-06-20

Cheyenne, WY Transmaster Member Re: Not that the RIAA or MPAA will learn....but.....



From a venture capital firm "Y Combinator"



»ycombinator.com/



Here is a paragraph I pulled from the whole article;



The main reason we want to fund such startups is not to protect the world from more SOPAs, but because SOPA brought it to our attention that Hollywood is dying. They must be dying if they're resorting to such tactics. If movies and TV were growing rapidly, that growth would take up all their attention. When a striker is fouled in the penalty area, he doesn't stop as long as he still has control of the ball; it's only when he's beaten that he turns to appeal to the ref. SOPA shows Hollywood is beaten. And yet the audiences to be captured from movies and TV are still huge. There is a lot of potential energy to be liberated there.



(The rest of this can be read here: »



Hollywood is dying and they know it, they are going down kicking and screaming, and they don't care who they take down with them. Nice link Nightfall, there is an internal link in this article that, least for me, puts a whole different light on this whole issue.From a venture capital firm "Y Combinator"Here is a paragraph I pulled from the whole article;The main reason we want to fund such startups is not to protect the world from more SOPAs, but because SOPA brought it to our attention that Hollywood is dying. They must be dying if they're resorting to such tactics. If movies and TV were growing rapidly, that growth would take up all their attention. When a striker is fouled in the penalty area, he doesn't stop as long as he still has control of the ball; it's only when he's beaten that he turns to appeal to the ref. SOPA shows Hollywood is beaten. And yet the audiences to be captured from movies and TV are still huge. There is a lot of potential energy to be liberated there.(The rest of this can be read here: » ycombinator.com/rfs9.html Hollywood is dying and they know it, they are going down kicking and screaming, and they don't care who they take down with them.



Nightfall

My Goal Is To Deny Yours

MVM

join:2001-08-03

Grand Rapids, MI Nightfall MVM Re: Not that the RIAA or MPAA will learn....but..... said by Transmaster: Nice link Nightfall, there is an internal link in this article that, least for me, puts a whole different light on this whole issue.



From a venture capital firm "Y Combinator"



»ycombinator.com/



Here is a paragraph I pulled from the whole article;



The main reason we want to fund such startups is not to protect the world from more SOPAs, but because SOPA brought it to our attention that Hollywood is dying. They must be dying if they're resorting to such tactics. If movies and TV were growing rapidly, that growth would take up all their attention. When a striker is fouled in the penalty area, he doesn't stop as long as he still has control of the ball; it's only when he's beaten that he turns to appeal to the ref. SOPA shows Hollywood is beaten. And yet the audiences to be captured from movies and TV are still huge. There is a lot of potential energy to be liberated there.



(The rest of this can be read here: »ycombinator.com/rfs9.html)



Hollywood is dying and they know it, they are going down kicking and screaming, and they don't care who they take down with them.





Either way, a revolution is underway. Hollywood isn't dying, but the way they do business is. I think what you will see are more and more companies doing business themselves. Just like you saw music artists releasing their own work on the internet. Studios may start kicking in on this kind of thing down the road.Either way, a revolution is underway.



Snakeoil

Ignore Button. The coward's feature.

Premium Member

join:2000-08-05

Mentor, OH Snakeoil Premium Member Re: Not that the RIAA or MPAA will learn....but.....



Ever here of a movie called Ink?

It was an indie film. The producers couldn't find a distributor, so they "released" it on the bit torrent circuit. With in one week the mvie had 500k shares, and the requests started coming in. Requests for a DVD copy, etc. I saw Ink, by watching it through Netflix.



Thanks to the "evil" Bit Torrents, this was an indie film that got to be seen. The puppets are slipping their strings and doing their own danceEver here of a movie called Ink?It was an indie film. The producers couldn't find a distributor, so they "released" it on the bit torrent circuit. With in one week the mvie had 500k shares, and the requests started coming in. Requests for a DVD copy, etc. I saw Ink, by watching it through Netflix.Thanks to the "evil" Bit Torrents, this was an indie film that got to be seen.



n2jtx

join:2001-01-13

Glen Head, NY n2jtx Member Another Round Well we know there will be around round of proposed legislation but; 1) the people writing the proposed laws are now going to have to face the fact that they will need to engage the tech industry instead of writing it all behind closed doors. 2) if the continue down the same path they did before, they will again receive another dose of massive outrage as they experienced a few weeks ago. In the end, it is people who vote for politicians, not corporations, despite the amount of money they pile onto them.

Wilsdom

join:2009-08-06 Wilsdom Member Re: Another Round The vast majority of voters are not making any rational choices. A lot of elections are close to 50/50 like a coin toss, so having funding to be a legitimate side of the coin is the only thing that matters.



elios

join:2005-11-15

Springfield, MO elios Member Scary thought Scary thought but i think they know exactly how the net works and what they are doing

think about that for a minuet



FFH5

Premium Member

join:2002-03-03

Tavistock NJ FFH5 Premium Member Re: Scary thought said by elios: Scary thought but i think they know exactly how the net works and what they are doing

think about that for a minute

Of course they do. Way too many people ascribe stupidity to those they oppose. If a politician votes for a law the internet elite don't like, it must be because they don't know anything about the internet. But it is just as likely they know how the internet works, but just don't like how it works. It is a weakness and arrogance to ascribe stupidity to your opponents.

Kearnstd

Space Elf

Premium Member

join:2002-01-22

Mullica Hill, NJ Kearnstd Premium Member Re: Scary thought if they knew how the internet worked they would have opened a legal download service as soon as they saw Napster. Today they cry about being at the whim of Apple and its iTunes, but the RIAA in typical form of big entertainment fails to grasp modern technology. just as the MPAA tried to kill the VCR, the RIAA has tried to kill pretty much anything with a record button.

ISurfTooMuch

join:2007-04-23

Tuscaloosa, AL ISurfTooMuch Member Re: Scary thought They actually did open one way back then (the name escapes me at the moment), but its prices were too high, so it never caught on.



These guys have known all along what people want, and, even if they didn't know at first, they can pay for market research to find out. It's just that they don't want to offer what consumers want because they'd have to reduce their profits.



MacBridger

Late to the party

Premium Member

join:2001-01-11

Morgantown, WV MacBridger Premium Member Re: Scary thought The problem is that the internet is going to allow artists to directly appeal to their audiences without the MPAA or RIAA getting their cut. It's just going to take time for the artists to come around to it. Right now it's a gamble for them to forsake the AA's, but as time goes on more and more will. This is what the MPAA and RIAA are fighting... Their own extinction.



elios

join:2005-11-15

Springfield, MO elios to Kearnstd

Member to Kearnstd

you missed my point they saw Napster and saw them losing control of there grip on sales

this whole thing is about control they know damn well what the market wants they just dont want to do because it means losing control over every thing they worked to build up

axus

join:2001-06-18

Washington, DC 1 recommendation axus to Kearnstd

Member to Kearnstd

I believe lots of money is made from iTunes, and music piracy is down from the pre-iTunes days. RIAA hates iTunes more than they hate piracy, because they think they could be getting even more money.

sandman_1

join:2011-04-23

11111 sandman_1 to FFH5

Member to FFH5

said by FFH5: It is a weakness and arrogance to ascribe stupidity to your opponents.





»www.thedailyshow.com/wat ··· internet No, sometimes they are just stupid.



coldmoon

Premium Member

join:2002-02-04

Fulton, NY coldmoon to FFH5

Premium Member to FFH5

Just out of curiosity, who are these "Internet Elites" you are going on about and why the use of the coded language?

LucasLee

join:2010-11-26 2 recommendations LucasLee Member Re: Scary thought said by coldmoon: Just out of curiosity, who are these "Internet Elites" you are going on about and why the use of the coded language?





really rose to prominence once a some former professors recently ran for government office (ie. Obama in the US, and Ignatieff in Canada).



apparently completing significant post-secondary education makes you too smart to be in charge. big words and forethought are scary concepts. the rabble just wants to shout slogans and insults.



in my opinion, it's only the next sensible step after the words "liberal" and "socialist" were equated with the "evil red communism" of the McCarthy era.



heaven forbid people care for their communities as much as their own self-interest. "elite" is just the new buzz word insult used by people that are attempting to align themselves with allegedly slighted "ordinary taxpayers".really rose to prominence once a some former professors recently ran for government office (ie. Obama in the US, and Ignatieff in Canada).apparently completing significant post-secondary education makes you too smart to be in charge. big words and forethought are scary concepts. the rabble just wants to shout slogans and insults.in my opinion, it's only the next sensible step after the words "liberal" and "socialist" were equated with the "evil red communism" of the McCarthy era.heaven forbid people care for their communities as much as their own self-interest.

rradina

join:2000-08-08

Chesterfield, MO 920.3 39.3

·Charter

1 recommendation rradina Member The RIAA Doesn't Get It Wikipedia is not evil and we are not against them. Most of us understand and respect copyright law. What the RIAA must remember is that their business model enjoys operating in a free society where the artists they represent can produce any kind of music they like. It's certainly arguable that some of what's produced may not benefit society. However, we all enjoy a society that protects free speech and our right to express ideas. Society has chosen to tolerate this right because far more good comes of it than bad.



Unfortunately this very beneficial freedom means that the RIAA must also tolerate an environment where folks might do things that are not beneficial to their business model. They don't have the right to walk up to the proverbial "Forrest Gump" microphone and not just unplug him but lock him up because a word or two might be unfair and illegal. They have the burden of proof and of being very specific with censure. Arduous as this process is, time and time and time again it has proven to be necessary to protect the freedom that we all enjoy.



There are no easy answers. There are no short cuts.

PDXPLT

join:2003-12-04

Banks, OR PDXPLT Member Re: The RIAA Doesn't Get It said by rradina: Most of us understand and respect copyright law. As much as I disliked SOPA/PIPA, I doubt this statement is true. As Bill Maher said on his HBO show recently, "people just want to get their [stuff] for free". The dirty little not-so-secret about the opposition to SOPA/PIPA is that alot of the people (probably most of them) opposing it did so becase they like copyright infringement, and want to continue doing so. How many of the public even knows was "internet architecture" is, let alone how SOPA/PIPA would screw it up? It was just a morally convenient hat to hang their opposition on. You certainly see it on this site; i.e., Karl has already labelled any forthcoming replacement legislation as "awful", sight-unseen.

rradina

join:2000-08-08

Chesterfield, MO 920.3 39.3

·Charter

rradina Member Re: The RIAA Doesn't Get It True, we want our stuff but I believe most of us are willing to pay a reasonable price. Isn't the billions earned 99 cents at a time through iTunes an example of that willingness when folks don't feel like they are shafted?



Granted, there will always be those that want it free. Unfortunately we have a society with an entitlement segment but even if we had a perfect system to prevent any unauthorized access without proper compensation, these folks might just do without on principle.



I suppose an example might be the tethering "because we can" fee most carriers charge so that you can use your phone as a WiFi hotspot. With metered billing, this isn't reasonable and many go to great lengths to defeat this and do it anyway. Is this still wrong? Yes but folks feel justified and frankly, the phone companies should let them do it because when they go over, they get another $10/GB. They might find that they actually increase revenue. As it stands now, most probably don't try to circumvent it (they may not have the skills) and don't add it to their plan. No extra revenue. If the carriers simply let folks use it without the "because we can" fee, usage would go up and overage fees would increase. More folks who then find it valuable and consistently go over would get higher plans.



In other words, it seems like there's only a huge problem when most folks feel justified in being dishonest or ignoring the law.



lurk3r

@199.5.150.x lurk3r Anon Boycott The answer's pretty simple, as long as the RIAA presses this type of legislation noone buy their crap.

ISurfTooMuch

join:2007-04-23

Tuscaloosa, AL ISurfTooMuch Member Oh, they get it I have to agree with another poster that the RIAA and MPAA get it. It's just that they don't like the current reality, so they want to change it to suit themselves.



I also have to agree with a post I read somewhere else (Slashdot, I think). You'll notice that Sherman is taking aim squarely at Google and Wikipedia, not the millions of people who called Congress. That approach isn't by chance. What he's doing is demonizing those organizations, and the first thing you do in a war is to demonize your opponents, since that makes it easier to take measures against them later on. What he's doing is setting the stage for some sort of action against these organizations and possibly any others who might take similar action in the future. You aren't going to see a direct connection to the SOPA/PIPA protest when the proposed legislation comes, but the connection will be there if you look hard enough. Google and Wikipedia drew blood, and the studios aren't used to being challenged, so they're going to fight back.



The only question at this point is what kind of legislation they will either propose themselves or get their stooges in Washington to propose. If I had to guess, it will be something like making a site civilly and criminally responsible for any material posted on it or anything it links to. In short, if a user posts content on your site, or you link to anything that is illegal in the United States, you're just as responsible as if you posted the content there yourself. In essence, you'll have to screen everything that your site contains or links to before that content goes live to avoid liability. That will essentially kill Google and Wikipedia.



Just my prediction.



FutureMon

Dude Whats mine say?



join:2000-10-05

Marina, CA FutureMon Re: Oh, they get it said by ISurfTooMuch: I have to agree with another poster that the RIAA and MPAA get it. It's just that they don't like the current reality, so they want to change it to suit themselves.



I also have to agree with a post I read somewhere else (Slashdot, I think). You'll notice that Sherman is taking aim squarely at Google and Wikipedia, not the millions of people who called Congress. That approach isn't by chance. What he's doing is demonizing those organizations, and the first thing you do in a war is to demonize your opponents, since that makes it easier to take measures against them later on. What he's doing is setting the stage for some sort of action against these organizations and possibly any others who might take similar action in the future. You aren't going to see a direct connection to the SOPA/PIPA protest when the proposed legislation comes, but the connection will be there if you look hard enough. Google and Wikipedia drew blood, and the studios aren't used to being challenged, so they're going to fight back.



The only question at this point is what kind of legislation they will either propose themselves or get their stooges in Washington to propose. If I had to guess, it will be something like making a site civilly and criminally responsible for any material posted on it or anything it links to. In short, if a user posts content on your site, or you link to anything that is illegal in the United States, you're just as responsible as if you posted the content there yourself. In essence, you'll have to screen everything that your site contains or links to before that content goes live to avoid liability. That will essentially kill Google and Wikipedia.



Just my prediction.





Would you sue msnbc.com because someone dropped malware on your system via an ad graphic? msnbc.com has no control over what ads are going to show up or when.



- FM That may kill Wikipedia; but google is not the actual content author so the argument is a bit weaker when applied to them. On the other hand, they could be looked at as a "facilitator" or even perhaps an involuntary accessory for making the websites with the alledged infringing links or content more easily available.Would you sue msnbc.com because someone dropped malware on your system via an ad graphic? msnbc.com has no control over what ads are going to show up or when.- FM



TechyDad

Premium Member

join:2001-07-13

USA 1 recommendation TechyDad to ISurfTooMuch

Premium Member to ISurfTooMuch

In short, if a user posts content on your site, or you link to anything that is illegal in the United States, you're just as responsible as if you posted the content there yourself. This was essentially SOPA. Right now, if someone on BBR posts something that infringes copyright, the copyright owner complains to have it taken down. BBR will most likely comply and all is well. Under SOPA, though, the copyright owner would have complained to the Justice Department and BBR would have been taken down. Also, linking to a site that contained copyright infringement would have been a crime also. So if I linked to a BBR news story while a poster on one of BBR's forums uploaded a copyrighted image, my site could be taken down also.



The former law would have killed Wikipedia, Twitter, Facebook, BBR, and tons of other sites. The latter law would have killed Google and every other search engine.



The RIAA considers this a feature, not a bug. They'd love nothing more than to wake up one morning to find out that the Internet has gone away and they are fully in charge of distribution once more. This was essentially SOPA. Right now, if someone on BBR posts something that infringes copyright, the copyright owner complains to have it taken down. BBR will most likely comply and all is well. Under SOPA, though, the copyright owner would have complained to the Justice Department and BBR would have been taken down. Also, linking to a site that contained copyright infringement would have been a crime also. So if I linked to a BBR news story while a poster on one of BBR's forums uploaded a copyrighted image, my site could be taken down also.The former law would have killed Wikipedia, Twitter, Facebook, BBR, and tons of other sites. The latter law would have killed Google and every other search engine.The RIAA considers this a feature, not a bug. They'd love nothing more than to wake up one morning to find out that the Internet has gone away and they are fully in charge of distribution once more.



newview

Ex .. Ex .. Exactly

Premium Member

join:2001-10-01

Parsonsburg, MD newview Premium Member I'm not a pirate ... I'm not a pirate, never have been and never will be ... but I recognize a heavy-handed self-serving agency as represented by the RIAA, both in the SOPA/PIPA issue and the many years previous.



I've grown to distrust and dislike their motives and tactics and similar tactics by their sister agency the MPAA. I would certainly believe the evil Wikipedia over those liars any day.



mackey

Premium Member

join:2007-08-20 mackey Premium Member Will somebody please think of the children!! The only question now is what kind of "Save our Children from teh Evil Terrorists!!1!one!1one1!!!" bill will they try to sneak the new revision into?



/M



Octavean

MVM

join:2001-03-31

New York, NY Octavean MVM We are on the menu "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to eat for dinner"



Benjamin Franklin.



TechyDad

Premium Member

join:2001-07-13

USA 1 recommendation TechyDad Premium Member RIAA Translation The hyperbolic mistruths, presented on the home pages of some of the worlds most popular Web sites, amounted to an abuse of trust and a misuse of power. "No fair! We thought we had a slam dunk and so didn't mobilize all of the TV stations we own to spread the pro-SOPA message. Plus, our bought-and-paid-for Congressfolk went back on their words." When Wikipedia and Google purport to be neutral sources of information, but then exploit their stature to present information that is not only not neutral but affirmatively incomplete and misleading, they are duping their users into accepting as truth what are merely self-serving political declarations. "We own the patent on exploiting 'stature to present information that is not only not neutral but affirmatively incomplete and misleading.' See our 'pro-Copyright educational materials' that make no mention of fair use for an example. See our claims that MP3s are material objects according to one law but aren't according to another law depending on how it best benefits us for another example."



"How dare these organizations oppose what we say it true with facts! Don't they know that facts are poisonous to the RIAA? From now on, we insist that all discussions about SOPA-style laws only draw their arguments from RIAA-approved sources." Here's a handy translation from RIAA-speak into plain English."No fair! We thought we had a slam dunk and so didn't mobilize all of the TV stations we own to spread the pro-SOPA message. Plus, our bought-and-paid-for Congressfolk went back on their words.""We own the patent on exploiting 'stature to present information that is not only not neutral but affirmatively incomplete and misleading.' See our 'pro-Copyright educational materials' that make no mention of fair use for an example. See our claims that MP3s are material objects according to one law but aren't according to another law depending on how it best benefits us for another example.""How dare these organizations oppose what we say it true with facts! Don't they know that facts are poisonous to the RIAA? From now on, we insist that all discussions about SOPA-style laws only draw their arguments from RIAA-approved sources."

thataboi

join:2004-03-09

Springfield, OR thataboi Member where is thou files? I am a certified computer tech and finding drivers for hardware is getting increasingly difficult. You find a link to the driver only to find out the link is dead because the website hosting the file has public sharing disabled.

The Antihero

join:2002-04-09

Enola, PA The Antihero Member Just like a typically bully They just love to push people around, but when someone stands up to them, they whine like a little bitch.



anon6

@comcast.net anon6 Anon lol its funny how these rich people like to whine and don't want to share anything unless they make a handsome profit doing so...



CBLMorphis

join:2001-02-25

Riverside, CA CBLMorphis Member Bigger Fish To Worry About I think we need to worry about Global Terrorisum then the poor little RIAA // MPAA losing their little to nothing greedy moneys.



Heres a solution guys, Produce better shit, and you wont be loosing money. Really? You think?



Doctor Four

My other vehicle is a TARDIS

Premium Member

join:2000-09-05

Dallas, TX Doctor Four Premium Member I have three words for Cary H Sherman Pot, Meet Kettle.



Or,



Pot. Kettle. Black.



Either of which mean the same. The 'H' in Cary Sherman's name stands for hypocrite.

The Antihero

join:2002-04-09

Enola, PA The Antihero Member Re: I have three words for Cary H Sherman I have two words for him. The second one is "You."

Timmn

join:2000-04-23

Tinley Park, IL Timmn Member I ran across this, and thought "History repeats". www.forbes.com/sites/jos ··· the-vcr/



Before the evil internet, it was the evil VCR.



Edit: Someday, I will actually learn either how to spell, or how to use spell check. Before the evil internet, it was the evil VCR.Edit: Someday, I will actually learn either how to spell, or how to use spell check.