John S Stuart
Thread
Posts in chronological order
1sharppencil
and the sh*t hits the fan...
Holly2003
As a matter of interest John, did you have the "ownership rights and permissions" of Queen's BBC recordings that you shared here last year? Does anyone who shares stuff here have those rights and permissions?
Michael Allred
[QUOTE] [b]Holly2003 wrote:[/b]
As a matter of interest John, did you have the "ownership rights and permissions" of Queen's BBC recordings that you shared here last year? Does anyone who shares stuff here have those rights and permissions?
[/QUOTE]
Exactly! Veiled threats from JSS are laughable and if anything happens to Fuller, the SAME should happen to JSS.
As a matter of interest John, did you have the "ownership rights and permissions" of Queen's BBC recordings that you shared here last year? Does anyone who shares stuff here have those rights and permissions?
[/QUOTE]
Exactly! Veiled threats from JSS are laughable and if anything happens to Fuller, the SAME should happen to JSS.
queenfanbg
dont get it ,sorry ...
DaveyLane
David Fuller is King, and bollocks to you elitists and your methods of sharing only among your small circle of nerds. Hats off to him for letting us hear this stuff, the rest of us with actual lives sure do appreciate it.
soxtalon
Actually if you want to get technical JSS didn't publish the BBC tracks at all. Someone else did after an agreement of sorts that he didn't mind what said person did with them. So in a technical sense - he never published anything.
Michael Allred
[QUOTE] [b]soxtalon wrote:[/b]
Actually if you want to get technical JSS didn't publish the BBC tracks at all. Someone else did after an agreement of sorts that he didn't mind what said person did with them. So in a technical sense - he never published anything.
[/QUOTE]
Has JSS *ever* uploaded anything that he didn't own the copyright to? Hmm? I'm sure the big bad nasty RIAA could find that out.
Actually if you want to get technical JSS didn't publish the BBC tracks at all. Someone else did after an agreement of sorts that he didn't mind what said person did with them. So in a technical sense - he never published anything.
[/QUOTE]
Has JSS *ever* uploaded anything that he didn't own the copyright to? Hmm? I'm sure the big bad nasty RIAA could find that out.
tero! 48531
[QUOTE] [b]John S Stuart wrote:[/b]
This is "serious" so I posted here in the serious discussion forum.[/QUOTE]
It's just a shame that your post can't be taken seriously.
I get it that you're pissed off, but you're looking like a real wanker by starting another thread just to make empty threats.
Either that or it proves that the fanthology was never going to release anything despite all the public claims to the contrary. If you're threatening somebody with possible legal actions, you wouldn't have wanted to do that same morally reprehensible thing yourself, right??
This is "serious" so I posted here in the serious discussion forum.[/QUOTE]
It's just a shame that your post can't be taken seriously.
I get it that you're pissed off, but you're looking like a real wanker by starting another thread just to make empty threats.
Either that or it proves that the fanthology was never going to release anything despite all the public claims to the contrary. If you're threatening somebody with possible legal actions, you wouldn't have wanted to do that same morally reprehensible thing yourself, right??
Gaabiizz
Another one bites the dust
Ozz
And things went Full Retard.
I wonder how beneficial is to draw RIAA attention to QZ indirectly and the SHARING done in the forum.
I really understand and support JSS in this DF issue, but suddenly all the BBC FLACs, and other stuff in my HD feels like having done a devil's pact.
Its hard to say it but, Anyone who shares stuff privately knows the risks of doing so. You eventually will found lying people just because thats the nature of the beast (We Humans).
Is that solved with rants and rage ?
Or maybe we can get to that point when we realize that stuff is just stuff, and im sure the reputation JSS have built in QZ is much more valuable than the most prized of his acetates.
Because making people happy is priceless, and everytime someone releases an unknown Queen jewel, the fight over the credit is useless. You know you made people happy and thats the whole point.
Well, maybe we're not there yet.
I wonder how beneficial is to draw RIAA attention to QZ indirectly and the SHARING done in the forum.
I really understand and support JSS in this DF issue, but suddenly all the BBC FLACs, and other stuff in my HD feels like having done a devil's pact.
Its hard to say it but, Anyone who shares stuff privately knows the risks of doing so. You eventually will found lying people just because thats the nature of the beast (We Humans).
Is that solved with rants and rage ?
Or maybe we can get to that point when we realize that stuff is just stuff, and im sure the reputation JSS have built in QZ is much more valuable than the most prized of his acetates.
Because making people happy is priceless, and everytime someone releases an unknown Queen jewel, the fight over the credit is useless. You know you made people happy and thats the whole point.
Well, maybe we're not there yet.
brENsKi
edit - wrong thread oops!
bryony
Biggest load of rubbish I've ever heard...
what next ?? My Dad is bigger than your Dad ??
JESUS !!
what next ?? My Dad is bigger than your Dad ??
JESUS !!
Micrówave
Does the RIAA have a "secret witness" number you can call to turn in people and get a reward?
Could we then take the reward money and buy unauthorized acetates from artists thus making the RIAA liable?
Could we then take the reward money and buy unauthorized acetates from artists thus making the RIAA liable?
brENsKi
(202) 775-0101