JSngry

Absolutely. Buy one, burn 100. Then give them away or trade them for other OOP items. Nice try, Ray, but not nice enough!

Because somebody IS going to keep selling it to you over and over again. They may or may not succeed, but what gives anybody the right to sell what is not theirs? "The public" needn't pay any more times than they choose. Those who SELL to the public should pay for what they attempt to sell, period. Nice car you got there, but you've had it long enough. I think I'll sell it to your neighbor. Your cut? HAHAHAHA -YOU DON'T GET A CUT ANYMORE! Give me a FUCKING break.

Yeah. Why do you think they call it "root" beer?

FROM TEXAS ALONE: 97 soft drink 62 soda water 39 soda pop 29 cold drink 10 drink 8 Dr. Pepper 6 Dr Pepper 5 cola 3 Brand Name 3 SODIE 3 sodie water 3 fizzy 3 PENIS 2 fizzy water 2 fizz 2 sody pop 2 Sodi Water 2 Carbonated Beverage 2 CO-COLA 2 Sody Water 2 Bellywash 2 Soda Pop, or Soft Drink 2 pollypop 2 bellywasher 2 fizzy drink 2 Something to drink 1 col' drink (as in movie Cool Hand Luke) 1 gassy caffeinated colored syrup 1 soda(spanish/generic)female=7up.pop=rootbeer,etcCoke(coca)=nounPepsi=verb 1 SPRITE 1 carbev 1 I use either coke or soda equally. 1 Diet Pepsi to enlighten people or, when I'm less dogmatic, carbonated beverage a'la David Letterman. 1 Whatever the name of the drink is 1 Pantalones 1 specific name 1 soda-water/ sodi-water 1 soda water or soft drink (either one) 1 beverage 1 soft drink or cold drink 1 Pepsi 1 sometimes i calls it stankjuice other times i call it bootywater other times i calls it juicey-juice sometimes juice bruce 1 soda 1 TONIC 1 YegerMeister 1 Scotch 1 DP (Dr.Pepper) 1 Nehi Bellywasher 1 coke or pepsi 1 I grew up in Texas, and in Texas we ask for we want Coke = Coke, Sprite = Sprite etc. "Drink(s)" contain alcohol, "Soda" is associated with Soda Water/Club Soda, "Pop" is a slang term for your Dad. I now live in Alabama, and it's much different here. Here they call ALL carbonated beverages "coke." They'll say "I'd like a coke", someone will ask "what kind?" They'll respond "Dr Pepper". Although I have actually heard many of them say, "I need'a colddrink." Curiouser and curiouser! 1 sode-pop 1 Mostly coke, sometimes sodi-water or sodi-pop, but coke mostly used. both parents grew early in E. Texas and moved to Houston in late 30's. 1 I tend toward either the generic southern "Coke" or the older East Texas choice "soda pop" where both words are always said together. Many older East Texans will pronounce the "a" of "soda" as a long "e" sound, to make "sodee-pop." 1 In addition to the Southern "coke" I sometime say soda pop (or sodi pop). On an tangent, I read some of the other responses, and I am not sure where the person who said they grew up in Texas and moved to Alabama actually lived...but saying "coke" in Texas is as common as cotton. This person must have grown up in some place where there were a lot of transplanted yankees, as saying coke in Texas is no different than anywhere else in the South...and the map confirms it! 1 sosa 1 furble 1 soda water OR soda pop 1 DIET COKE 1 sodee pop 1 coldrank 1 cold drink or coke 1 dudun 1 1 Thank you, this is an extremely important topic, and a concern of mine for many years!! This survey will clear up a lot of issues. I use either one depending on who I'm talking to. Soda, for some reason, seems more formal, pop seems like a slang term from where I grew up in Indiana. I think I started using Soda when I moved to Chicago. When our family lived in Hannibal Missouri, the other kids made fun of us when we said "pop". I said, what do you call it? "Sodie-pop or sodie", they would reply. Most people I met when I lived there seemed to confuse "a's" and "i's". For example, they would say Indiani and Missoura. I never quite understood that. If I use Coke it means Coca-cola but no other soft drink. There, I just used soft drink and I didn't even realize it. I never SAY soft drink, I must just use it when I write. Keep up the good work. 1 liquid crack 1 DP 1 Cherry Pepsi 1 name of the drink 1 coke 1 trash 1 this is the most gay controversy ever...and bts i just ask for whatever drink i want 1 Large Farva 1 "Soda" if a regular drink, but always "diet coke" for diet drinks 1 Spec. Pepsi, Big Red, Sprite, etc. 1 new coke (circa 1985) 1 big red 1 have never used a generic term 1 In Texas, we order by brand only, I don't use a generic term for any of them. Down here, we say what we mean, unlike you northern fags. 1 sugar water 1 You should ask what people call retards that waste time on senseless surveys. Give me a free carbonated soft drink!!!!!! 1 Alitreacola 1 In the South, I hear African-Americans use "soda" more than "Coke". 1 so this was an issue among all my friends and we've finally come up with the conclusion to call it "PODA" (half pop/ half soda) there! 1 Coke, or Soda with all of my yankee friends... but coke is better 1 Mike wuz HERE! 1 juicy booty

I knew a few old folks as a kid who called'em "Polly Pop" (or is that "Polypop"?). One old-timer told me that used to be a real brand name, but I find that hard to believe. Too "chemical" sounding.

I call'em "soda pop", but I'm "Urban Southern".

Dude, you lived in the South for HOW long? "Soda water" should DEFINTIELY be a choice!

Buy 1 Proper, and then burn 100 more!

Bev, the issue (for me anyway) has long since moved past Proper proper (which I freely admit to begrudgingly buying on occasison) into that of public domain laws in general. Some see it as entirely a matter of who gets to make money. I see it as that (and am "understanding") PLUS who gets to NOT make money through totaly arbitrary laws not applicable to the lineage of any other occupation. On the latter point, I have no wiggle room whatsoever. Although, frankly, resentment towards privilige in general is not somethng I subscribe to. I've known jerks and saints from all economic strata. The "politics of resentment" is not for me. Maybe it's a different miilieu where you live.

The joy in your heart is palpable!

Ok, so you want chance taking AND perfection. Can't help you.

I don't know, but some labels do pay estates. Blue Note, for one. Maybe not agressively, but they do pay. And they are not alone. Not all labels are crooked. Many, yes, but not all. You think the Andorrans, the JSPs, the Propers pay anybody anything? Ah, that's right - THEY DON'T HAVE TO. Done bugger all to earn it inDEED!

And why the scorn towards those who have inherited something whilst having "done bugger all to earn it" while at the same time cheering on commercial operations who are seeking to earn profits doing exactly the same thing? Of course, the issue of the collective morality of the record industy and the equitability of public domain laws are not quite the same thing, but those who feel "entitled" to swoop down like vultures and freely feed upon the labors of others (even con-artists, mobsters, and other industry types) at the stroke of midnight on any given day seem to be crying crocodile tears with the argument that "they've had it long enough". Bullshit. Greed is greed, and transferring it to a new set of owners still leaves it as greed. Don't kid yourself.

Do you have any children? Any grandchildren? Do you hope to? If you did, and you had something to pass on, would you not do so because they've "done bugger all to earn it"? I think not! I hope not. But to each thier own, which is where the freedom to decide for yourself comes in. A freedom that expires for the heirs of intellectual property in a way that it does not with heirs of other property.

that's a nice story, but I doubt anyone on this thread stated anything that went in THAT direction. It was more like "if coors stops making beer, the recipe should be open for others to grab up and fill the taps." Keeping stuff out of a public domain is fine & dandy, but you cannot at the same time want it to be part of the cultural heritage AND keep it locked away. My guess is that any artist is in it not just for the money, but also and probably moreso for making a contribution to art and culture. From the latter perspective, the cheaper & the more widely available, the better. Having the family sit on the rights and not make works of art available is about the worst that could happen to an artist who places value on being known. Just another point to make as I am on the fence here. That's a nice story too, but unless you pass laws that force the recipie to always be made available, then them's the breaks. Hey - I'm not toally opposed to public domain, and I've stated my "compromise" earlier. But the notion that I can publish a folio of Bach fugues and, if I get lucky and catch the market at the right time (as if...), make a tidy sum and not give one cent back to the Bach estate (if there even is one) violates some fundamental principle of fairness and respect somewhere inside me. If the estate don't want it, fine. But they should have the right to refuse it, or to direct it as they see fit.

Ok, I've written some pieces, a few recorded, many more not. The odds that I'll see any significant money off of them in my lifetime is realistically less than 50/50. But in 150 years, what if somebody comes across a Quartet Out CD, or a manuscript of an unrecorded piece, in the collection of my great-great-howmanyevers whatever and says "Hey, that "Toot Toot" (or whatever) is a pretty catchy number. I think I'll use it." So they do, and it makes a nice piece of change. Are you telling me that my great-great-howmanyevers whatever should not be entitled to a piece of that action whatsoever? That does not sit well with me. It's MY music, and I want my heirs to consider it as a part of my ONGOING "material" legacy to them, as well a part of my legacy to the world in general (yeah, I know, "legacy" is a bit pompous, but c'est la vie). The laws do not allow me to do that. Whereas, if I had a collection of solid gold pocketwatches, or a lusty portfolio of stocks and bonds, or damn near any OTHER asset, I would be able to (and I SHOULD be able to), no problem. As the law now stands, that "discovery" better be made pretty damn quick, relatively (no pun intended) speaking. Again I ask - is that right? Never mind imperfect - is it RIGHT? And if it's not, then why all the noise about making it even LESS right? Make it the same for everybody.

If property is theft, what is the total taking away of ownership for no other reason than that the clock's run out?

As for the Windsors, stage a revolt, either in the street or at the ballot box, or else, again, deal with it. Those are the options, right? Either that or wait for the day when somebody will take the throne and dissolve the whole thing because they can no longer maintain an interest in and/or energy for perptrating such a fucked up gig. Day's BOUND to come sooner or later. But I'd take the revolt tact first myself I was really THAT bugged about it. It's my American heritage!

And of course, the heirs COULD combat public domain releases by building a better mousetrap and all that. But if we're going to take that tact, somebody tell the Coors family that they've had the brand name and the business long enough, and that Anheiseur-Busch is now legally allowed to make "Coors" beer using the Coors family recipie, and if they don't like it, they can just try harder. And tell the Busch family that Coors is free to do the same with Budweiser (itself a "stolen" name, I know, and I know that in a sane world nobody would be drinking that shit in the first place, but hey...). Yeah, it's a family name, and a family business, but you motherfuckers have had it long enough, says We The Law, and now anybody can use it anyway they like. If that means buying "Coors" beer that is made out of rancid Florida swamp water (like it's not already ), tough shit. It's not yours to control anymore. Sometimes the little guys benefit from the "greed" of the big guys. Not often enough, but it happens. And this is one case it does. It's an imperfect world. Deal with it!

And in answer to the inevitable, "the heirs should diversify and not be dependent, etc." argument, well, yeah, ok. Let's pass laws that dictate how people should and should not seek to provide for their income. Yeah, let's do that.

I'm not too terribly enamored with the concept of "public domain", but a realistic compromise for me would be a modified public domain, where "ownership" consists of nothing more than a "reasonable" set fee being paid for use - no more allowance of veto rights to usage, etc. And, if the heirs deem it desireable, they should be allowed release the works in question into "traditional" public domain. But it should be their choice alone. I can certainly appreciate the notion that certain works "belong" to the public at large after a while, but intellectual property is property nevertheless, and if we don't totally strip other beneficiaries of inherited property of their assets after a fixed period, why the hell should we feel good about doing it to the heirs of "creative" types? Whenever the creators of intellectual property never have to worry providing about food, clothing, and shelter for their families just like everybody else does, THEN talk to me about public domain. Until then, we and our heirs are afforded less "rights" than those of other "manufacturers". What's fair about that?

I don't see the argument here. Proper and other labels of their ilk are certainly "legal theives". But the key word is "legal", so if there's an ethically superior (relatively speaking) alternative, I'll go elsewhere, and if there's not, it won't be the first time I've willingly given my money to people who have done little to deserve it other than to offer me a quick and easy fix. Far from it. These labels that just reap the rewards of other folks' work w/o making any but the barest contribution of their own are weasels, so even if we choose to patronize them (and I have one Proper box that I bought willingly), then let's do so on honest terms and not make excuses. I'll say it - I DO do business with weasels and sleazeballs on occasion. I try not to, but sometimes, I just can't avoid it. Or, more truthfully, don't, for the sake of convinience. There, see? Not difficult at all! Have to say, however, that the notion that I should have no right to pass on my "property" to my children, and they to theirs, etc., is pretty much full of shit, as is the "property is theft" slogan. Sorry, I love both you guys, but that's some totally fucked up bullshit there. Sorry for the interruption. Carry on!

For starters: Betty Carter Sheila Jordan Jeanne Lee Sathima Bea Benjamin Do you only listen to female jazz vocalists?

Cherish every moment. My son graduates from high school in a month and... Cherish every moment. (oh yeah - CONGRATULATIONS! )

"Two sided" DVD - different format on each side. Plays fine for me, as long as I load the right side.