Suing America: A Synopsis of Events in File Sharing…

Written in 2003 as a full-fledged report for 12th grade English, this essay’s goal was not to express opinion, but to give a broad spectrum of what has actually happened in the events of file sharing. There may be a little bias against the RIAA, however, as dave’s personal opinions against the RIAA can be clearly described in this article: File Sharing and the RIAA Theory. The preceding article was written to actually be used as quotes for THIS essay, but dave decided against using it in the end (teehee). The end report (including Works Cited) was eleven pages long.

————————————

Peer-to-Peer (or P2P) programs allow consumers to locate whatever music they would like, with great ease and provides a tremendous variety of music to choose from. The P2P companies and their users have come under siege by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), which is determined to abolish all file sharing. P2P programs allow users to download files from other users, through the network that the P2P program is using. The RIAA is trying to end the sharing of copyrighted music in this fashion, as well as any and all files by any means possible. They see file sharing programs as the means for transferring, and the users receiving the files as the main copyright infringers.

To gain a full understanding of how the RIAA has begun suing individual users, it is necessary to learn about the history of file sharing. The first file sharing program, Napster was the beginning of the file sharing saga. Before Napster, it was hard to get any MP3s. MP3s were usually found on unreliable web sites that did not have the MP3 files at all, but “the MP3 world was changed when Shawn Fanning, a 19 [year] old dropout from Northwestern, conceived of an idea he called Napster, a program that allowed users to share MP3 files over the Net with other Napster users” (“Stealing or Sharing” 1). Napster offered the ease of use of a search engine, and a variety of music which was unparalleled by any music store. As more and more people began using Napster, more files were shared, and it became easier to find the songs people wanted. However, this new innovation came with consequences, especially for the RIAA. It used to be that “music [was] confined to physical mediums: audio cassette tapes and compact discs” (“Stealing or Sharing” 1), but no longer with the creation of Napster. The RIAA didn’t like that at all, because their product was now out of their controlled distribution. While Napster was enjoying a period of prosperity, heated debate over the topic of free distribution of music was underway. The bottom line was that it had indefinitely changed the way music was sold and what was bought, as the common consumer was now smart enough not to buy five dollar CD singles or an overpriced album with at most one or two good songs on it, out of twenty or even less. Instead, the consumer could just download the one song they liked from Napster. Napster was definitely the way to share music.

The fall of Napster would not only bring down itself, but all others who invested in it, such as Bertelsmann. Bertelsmann is a very large corporation in Europe, which owns companies such as BMG (a music distributor). Bertelsmann helped Napster on numerous occasions when it needed money, and eventually filed bankruptcy because of their investment. In December of 1999, the RIAA began its lawsuit against Napster. The RIAA, trying to hamper Napster from sharing music online, only helped advertise it to the public at large. When the media started covering the RIAA’s lawsuit, the popularity of Napster exploded and Shawn Fanning “was plastered all over magazines, in newspapers, and on TV” (“Stealing or Sharing” 2) for the next year. Even though the RIAA had sued Napster in 1999, an actual ruling did not come until “July 26th, 2000, [when] U.S. District Judge Marilyn Patel ruled in favor of the record industry and ordered Napster to stop allowing copyrighted material to be swapped over its network by midnight two days later” (“Stealing or Sharing” 2). Napster had to place filters on what their users could download, but users found ways around the filters by renaming the files. The RIAA was not satisfied with the filtering that Napster was doing. When time almost ran out “on July 28, 2000, nine hours before Napster would have had to shut down, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the company should be allowed to continue operating” (“Stealing or Sharing” 2). Through the RIAA’s eyes, this court ruling would later do even more damage to the RIAA’s business. The RIAA was suffering from the “five percent fall in worldwide music sales during 2001, [that had been] the worst drop-off since the introduction of the CD in 1983” (Menn 310). The RIAA was also concerned over the “sales of blank CDs [which] topped those of recorded CDs” (Menn 310). The drop in profit and the sales of blank CDs suggested to the RIAA that they were losing a lot of money to the piracy explosion, and laid the blame on Napster.

After all the court battles with the RIAA, Napster was eventually shut down for good. On July 11, 2001, “Napster lawyer Steve Cohen told [Judge] Patel that Napster could relaunch the system and weed out 99 percent of the improper songs” (Menn 276), however, Patel would not accept anything less than one hundred percent of all copyrighted material prevented from being downloaded. Steve Cohen was “unable to promise a faultless system” (Menn 276) and Napster remained closed down. This was a huge win for the RIAA, and helped stop the flow of distribution of copyrighted music, as well as file sharing in general. The free version of Napster was gone forever, and Napster had gone into a transition stage to a paid music service. Only recently, in November 2003, Napster finally reopened as a pay service.

Many lessons were learned after Napster had been shutdown. Out of Napster’s demise, a whole new generation of P2P programs was created, including Morpheus, Gnutella, Kazaa, WinMX, and Audiogalaxy. These new P2P programs “had a central design that made it so that the companies didn’t host central lists of files on the P2P network” (“Suing Individuals” 1), which was the major fault in Napster’s case against being shutdown. The reason that Napster failed in the courts was because it had had “supervisory” power over what their users were downloading because they had kept the list of files on a central server. Since the new P2P programs didn’t have a central server with a list of files being shared, they didn’t have the same liability as Napster had. The new P2P programs had succeeded, and “by 2002 those services were almost as easy to use as Napster was, had as many users as Napster did at its peak, and were far harder to shut down” (Menn 309), and the RIAA now had a bigger problem on their hands. Instead of one major P2P program to deal with, they had multiple P2P programs which they almost couldn’t close down at all. The RIAA would not go down without a fight though.

The RIAA decided to take a different approach. Instead of only fighting the new generation of P2P programs in court, they decided to educate the consumer about how it was wrong (and illegal) to download copyrighted material. One tactic they used to educate the public was to try to get sympathy from the public for the RIAA and all the people in the music business. The RIAA constantly said that “illegal file sharing robs songwriters and recording artists of their livelihoods, and also undermines the future of music itself by depriving the industry of the resources it needs to find and develop new talent” (“Begins Suing” 1). The RIAA also claimed that “illegal file sharing threatens the jobs of tens of thousands of less celebrated people in the music industry, from engineers and technicians to warehouse workers and record store clerks” (“Begins Suing” 1). The RIAA has many powerful names under its power, and often have their most famous artists talk about how file sharing is bad. They even went as far as to say that “all the industries are failing because of file sharing, from CD packers to guitar players” (“Begins Suing” 3). The RIAA also promoted the “switching from downloading free music illegally, to a paid service, downloading legally” (“Begins Suing” 1), which was not going over well with the public at large. Some people did make the change over to a paid service, but most stayed with a free service, because they were smart enough to not pay for what they could get for free. Obviously after a few months of preaching for sympathy, the RIAA concluded that getting people to be sorry for rich artists and multi-billion dollar corporations would not work.

The RIAA had to change their tactics, and in May of 2003, the RIAA stopped reaching out for sympathy from the public as a number one priority. Instead, the RIAA took a completely opposite approach, and started to scare everyone with threats of lawsuits. One such example of the RIAA trying to scare people, was when they sent out “more than four million Instant Messages since May [2003] directly to infringers on Kazaa and Grokster” (“Begins Suing” 2) saying that their identities were not anonymous when they illegally offered music. As well as trying to scare people on a personal level, the RIAA has been pushing for “the right to hack into your computer and delete your stolen MP3s” (“Hack Your PC” 1), which raises many privacy issues. The RIAA had also been hinting about suing individuals who shared copyrighted music online. These new tactics seem to work, as “61% of those polled in August admitted they knew sharing copyrighted music was illegal, up from 54 in July, and 37 in early June” (“Begins Suing” 2), looking like the RIAA was accomplishing what it set out to do. The RIAA is also offering “amnesty” to those who “voluntarily pledge to stop distributing music illegally, by wiping their hard drives clean of all illegal music, and promise to never share or download any illegal music again” (“Begins Suing” 1), in exchange for a promise of not being sued. The RIAA has been trying anything it could in recent months to get people to stop what they were doing.

The RIAA has used the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998, or the DMCA, in their pursuit to subpoena individuals. The DMCA was originally “signed into law by President Clinton on October 28, 1998” (“Act of 1998” 1), and contains five different sections, called titles. The title that the RIAA uses to subpoena anyone they want, is Title II, the “Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act” (“Act of 1998” 1), which creates limitations on the liability of people committing copyright infringement. The DMCA enables the RIAA to go past the courts, and directly subpoena the Internet Service Providers (or ISPs) for the identities of whom they want to sue, which saves the RIAA a lot of time and money. The RIAA does not sue the ISPs themselves for copyright infringement, because the DMCA states that online service providers have limited liability for what their users do while using the service provided by the ISP. If the ISPs do not know that their users are committing copyright infringement, and they are not gaining any money from the copyright infringements, then they are not liable for any damages.

Even though the RIAA has sent subpoenas to certain ISPs to gain the identities of those in question, some ISPs have fought back against the RIAA, to keep their users’ identities secret. One such ISP, Charter Communications Inc., “said it has sued the recording industry to block it from getting names of its customers for alleged song-swapping on the Internet” (“Charter Sues” 1), considering the relationship with their customers their most important responsibility. Not only Charter Communications, but Verizon Communications and SBC Communications have also “gone to court to challenge the industry’s interpretation of the law, which they say violates due-process and free-speech rights and threatens privacy” (“Charter Sues” 1). The ISPs have become an obstacle, even a last line of defense, in the RIAA’s path to gain the identities of file sharers.

The file sharing community was reluctant to believe that the RIAA would sue every single file sharer there was. However, the RIAA followed through on its threats in September 2003, and “filed copyright infringement claims against 261 infringers on Kazaa and Grokster” (“Begins Suing” 2). There have been settlements outside of court, but an actual case is yet to go to trial. In recent weeks there has been a swell in the number of subpoenas the RIAA is issuing, since the “RIAA announced on June 25 that it would… [gather] …evidence in order to bring lawsuits in September against computer users who illegally distribute copyrighted music” (“Begins Suing” 2). There have been so many subpoenas, that the offices filing these subpoenas had to take people from other, more important, cases and dedicate their time to the RIAA’s subpoenas. The RIAA said that they were suing people who distributed “substantial amounts (averaging more than 1,000 copyrighted music files each) of copyrighted music on peer-to-peer networks” (“Begins Suing” 1), hoping to make the P2P experience a more unpleasant one, forcing the people that had the most files off of the networks. Unsuspecting people, like grandparents, were slapped with a subpoena, and were liable to pay $50,000 to $150,000 for each song that infringed copyrights. These unsuspecting people didn’t even know that they had any songs on their computers that infringed copyrights, because relatives used their computers to download them. By the process of elimination, the RIAA can almost force people to switch over to a pay service, because they are not able to find the files they want or they do not want to run the risk of being sued.

There are always two sides to an argument, and the RIAA’s attempts to kill P2P networks have support from some, but not from others. Politically, the government is behind the RIAA, because there is copyright infringement going on. The Copyright Office has not changed the DMCA, despite the petitions and emails from the public. Public opinion is against the most recent course of action the RIAA has taken. Many new websites advocating the boycott of the RIAA have risen up against the RIAA. One such web site is boycottriaa.com, which posts news articles about file sharing, in addition to boycotting the RIAA. Some web sites even have “campaign[s] to make file sharing legal” (“How to Not Get Sued” 1). These web sites also help out the file sharer, by suggesting several ways to avoid being sued by the RIAA, such as disabling “the ‘sharing’ or ‘uploading’ features on [the] P2P application” (“How to Not Get Sued” 1), which will keep a user from being targeted by the RIAA. This method, however, undermines the whole idea of P2P file sharing. The RIAA would get what they wanted if everyone disables their sharing.

The RIAA’s recent actions against the world of file sharing will have a definite effect on the way file sharing will continue in the future. From day one of the file sharing era, the RIAA has been out to stop it. File sharing has many more legal uses than just sharing songs, such as music from unsigned bands, sharing pictures, and other files people want. The RIAA fails to realize this, and they want to shut down all the file sharing networks of the world. The longer the RIAA fights against file sharing, the more people will be inclined to boycott the RIAA, and the RIAA will see more of their profits slide downward than when unrestricted file sharing first began.

——————————————–

Works Cited

“Charter Sues to Block RIAA from Getting Names.” 7 October 2003 <www.reuters.com>

“Digital Millenium Copyright Act of 1998, The. U.S. Copyright Office Summary.” 14 October 2003. <www.loc.gov>

“File Sharing: Stealing or Sharing amongst friends?” 8 October 2003 <www.misbridge.mccombs.utexas.edu>

“How Not To Get Sued By The RIAA For File-Sharing (And Other Ideas to Avoid Being Treated Like a Criminal)” 14 October 2003 <www.eff.org>

Menn, Joseph. All the Rave: The Rise and Fall of Shawn Fanning’s Napster. New York: Crown Business, 2003.

“Recording Industry Begins Suing P2P File Sharers Who Illegally Offer Copyrighted Music Online.” 5 October 2003 <www.riaa.com>

“RIAA Wants to Hack Your PC.” 7 October 2003 <www.wired.com>

“Why Are the RIAA Suing Individuals for P2P File Sharing?” 5 October 2003 <www.filesharingwatch.com>

 

The File Sharing Debate: Against File Sharing

Written in 2002, this was what dave used for his assignment. The assignment was to write on a certain debate, and debate with other people in your group who took the other side of the issue. Dave was put onto the “Against File Sharing” side for the debate, however, the things said in this article do not necessarily align with what dave believes. The points made in this speech would be from someone’s point of view (like the RIAA) that they would use against file sharing.

————————————-

File sharing services are nothing more than the carts that a shoplifter uses at a grocery store that has no security and employees that don’t care to look at what you’re doing. That’s how millions of people steal from the music, and other, industries, giving a negative effect to the sales of their products. File sharing directly affects the economy, as record sales for the music industry are at an extreme low. If these “shopping carts” are taken away for good, it will be a serious deterrent to the illegal sharing of files.

As the file sharing programs become more and more popular, less will actually want to spend money for what they can get, for a fraction of the cost, by downloading the items they want and burning them onto blank CDs, with no money at all given to the original producers. Its like the people that make the items are working for no money, which is basically slavery.

File sharing programs state they are not responsible for what their users download, even when they know that the law is virtually being broken with every download, and they take no serious steps, that go past words, to stop the illegal distribution.

In the past, file sharing programs connected users to users through a central server, and once these companies were closed because of that fact, they became sneakier, and made the “central server” its users, which is nearly impossible to close down millions of people’s computers, so then they won’t be liable to what illegal activities are happening indirectly because of them.

When file sharing programs use users as a server, they are mostly people using a connection at their college, because they have a lot of bandwidth to support the traffic of people downloading. These colleges are ending up having to pay larger and larger amounts for their internet connections because of this.

Having even one piece of something illegally downloaded, it is still, may I remind you, illegal. You can be sued for petty theft or even grand theft if you have enough illegal items on your computer. If you get convicted, then you’ll most likely end up having to pay a lot more than what you were downloading is worth. When it comes to downloading illegally, it’s a gamble.

File sharing does not only conflict with the law, but will impact society itself. Children are growing up thinking that music should be free, when it should not be free. Creativity will suffer, because fewer will be willing to take the risk of pursuing a music career. Moral issues also come into play, because you may not care that you’re stealing, but you still admit that what you are doing is wrong.

If file sharing is allowed to continue, many parties will miss out, such as: Struggling artists that have not made it in the big time and are just starting out, record industry workers which will most likely be fired because they can’t be supported by the record industry to keep them on the payroll, and record stores, which will lose almost all its business, putting many more out of work.

————————————-

Works Cited

Dalnas, Eric, Matthew Roloff, and Keith Jenci. File Sharing: A debate With a focus on trading MP3s. 4 December 2002. <http://www.mredkj.com/other/sharing.html>.

University of Alabama. 4 December 2002. <http://resnet.ua.edu/about/acceptuse.html>

 

File Sharing and the RIAA Theory

November 2, 2003

Now, this goes pretty deep into the past (a whole 4 years or so), but it all started with Napster. Napster was a revolutionizing program, and one of the most useful ones you could get your phone line transferring to your computer by far, in 1998. I was actually apart of this “revolution,” and its sort of a bragging right, to say that “I was there, and I had done that,” because I had downloaded Napster while it was still free. The original Napster was and will still be the best file sharing program (music-wise) in my mind. All the other file sharing programs pale in comparison to Napster, but some have come pretty close to it.

Pretty much as soon as Napster had came, the RIAA threw a hissy fit. You wanna know why? Because the consumer got smart enough to not buy a CD Single for $4 or buy an overpriced $20 album for only one song, when they could get the one song for free. The RIAA lost a total of about, oh I’d say, $50 and some change when people stopped buying their stupid singles. Because their lovely little single was shot and killed, the RIAA was out for blood.

About a year after its release, Napster came under a heavy lawsuit by the RIAA. This was a really bad move by the RIAA. When the media started covering it, the popularity of Napster exploded. Instead of having a 100,000 or so people downloading increasing at 1,000 users or whatever a week, it was 2 million people, and increasing at about 10,000 users a week. I’m not sure if these are the right numbers, but I’m just giving a comparison to what it was before and after. The RIAA just made the problem worse, and millions of files were being transferred a day. Instead of possibly working out a deal with Napster to use it to their advantage, they sued them. In retrospect, this would have been a good thing for Napster, but at the time, it probably would have had the disadvantage for us. And yes, I know that Shawn Fanning’s uncle was pretty much the one in charge of Napster, and the guy was a complete idiot as a business man. But if things had worked out in a fashion that it would have been favorable for all parties involved, this wouldn’t be such a big problem.

Many lessons were learned by the eventual downfall of Napster. The reason why Napster was shut down was because they had a central server which kept the listings of all files being shared. This was something that could not be included in the next generation of file sharing programs. Well anyway, that’s what happened, and the RIAA hasn’t been able to shut most of them down completely. The RIAA has impacted some of the file sharing programs to place some sort of restriction on what can be downloaded in their policy, but not any actual filters or things that will actually stop the downloading of that certain file.

The RIAA claims that they, and the artists and songwriters and seemingly everyone in the mix is getting screwed by the whole file sharing deal. Artists are payed millions and millions of dollars to make albums with at most 1 or 2 good songs on it, out of 20 or even less. Rarely ever do you actually find a CD that actually has good songs all the way through and doesn’t all sound the same. The artists are just going to be incovenienced a little bit because they won’t be having their 300 million dollar check coming in the mail from good ol’ uncle RIAA, instead just getting a 240 million dollar one. File sharing is not going to kill the fan base for a certain artist. Nothing is as intense as seeing an actual band or artist in concert, so they just have to have more performances and work harder for their millions of dollars. Sure, I know all about how artists and bands get drained from touring so much, but if they don’t want to make up the money they lost with more tour dates and junk, then they can just live in semi-luxury, which is still about 3 million times better than how I live and most other people in the world. All of them (except the really stupid ones) don’t even use all their money, they just hide it in a bank somewhere until they decide to buy an island somewhere, or even build one. I don’t care if you disagree with me or not, this is just the plain truth.

So, now to more recent events. Have you heard now, that the RIAA is suing America now? I saw a picture (below), that says if you file share, you support communism, and a devil that looks like Stalin will become your dad who approves of what you’re doing because he’s looking over your shoulder all the time. This is exactly what the RIAA would have you believe if this kind of propaganda still worked (we’re in the “terrorism” phase).

Kid: Look at me daddy, I downloaded Madonna – Like a Virgin today!

Devil Stalin: Good job, kiddo. Tomorrow we’ll get the next Creed album before its made.

This campaign for educating the public is not a well-intentioned one, mind you. Buried in the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (or the DMCA), is a statement that basically says that if a copyright violator does not know that he is committing copyright infringement, they will not be responsible for the full penalty of their wrong doing. But guess who comes around and starts teaching everyone that sharing music is a bad thing? The good ol’ RIAA, helping out the American public everday. So when they start suing everyone, they can go for the maximum penalty, and scare everyone into thinking that file sharing is a horrible thing to do, even if it is legal. It’ll be just like going to a strip bar. And mp3s will be demonized, and the RIAA will probably want to make it so that the mp3 is never used again, even though it is a very good file format to use for sound.

(Ok, the thing I said about the people committing copyright infringement not being responsible isn’t actually real. I thought I saw it in there when I was looking at the thing, but it was only meant towards ISPs. I could’ve sworn I saw it in there for regular people too)

So, basically what I’m saying is, don’t fall into the RIAA’s traps, and boycott the RIAA. The RIAA is too conservative, and their endless stream of subpoenas being handed out to the American public will have a tremendous backlash one of these days. Universal is the only company in the RIAA that I will somewhat support, because they have lowered the prices of their CDs to 10 bucks. That’s what CDs should cost, not 20. You could get 2 really crappy movies for that price, and still have enough to buy Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: The Movie, and STILL have change. Probably enough to buy another couple crappy movies.

Fuck the RIAA.

 

The “lol” Theory

lol. LOL. lmao. lollllllllll. lllllooooollllll. llllllol. looooooool. rofl. roflmao. we’ve heard it all before, but do people ACTUALLY laugh when they say “lol” anymore? lol seems to be a misused internet slang. Sometimes people say “lol” when they dont even mean it or they dont even laugh and they just do that so they make people think that something was funny or for some weird reason like that. Most people do it because they don’t know what else to say. But what drives us to having to use “lol” and its many many other forms created because possibly “lol” is just too plain now. ROFLMAOWWMA (Rolling on the floor laughing my ass off while wiping my ass). face it lol and all of its derivitives are just dumb, now. There should be something new that we say instead of lol and junk. Maybe it should just be “imadumbass” for right now. Whaddya say?

 

The Melon Gripe

Melons melons melons. There are so many melons in the world, it’s horrendous: watermelon, cantaloupe, Honeydew Melon. I mean who comes up with these names? I don’t eat Honeydew because its name deceives me into thinking I’m eating honey-flavored rain. And cantaloupe….I don’t even know about that, but I know the majority of it tastes pretty nasty. I didn’t even know there was a u in cantaloupe until I typed this up in Microsoft Word. Thank God for automatic spelling check, huh?

 

I like watermelon. Artificially flavored things that taste like watermelon! Half the time, watermelon has seeds in it, and it’s always too mushy. I like the really crisp watermelon, like how it is around the rinds. Mmm….rinds. The only time I hate the artificial flavoring is when it tastes like plastic.

 

The Metric System is for Wussies

This entry is part 2 of 4 in the series This Is Satire

This was written as an editorial and given as a speech in front of dave’s 12th grade English class.

———————————-

America has come to be the most advanced country in the world. We are a super power, yet we don’t use the metric system, like the rest of the world. Sure, you could say that the U.S. is trying to be different than all the other countries of the world, kind of like how we have cars with the drivers on the left side. But, this is not the case.

The reason America does not change to the metric system, is because the metric system is for wussies. Everything is so easy in the metric system, a scientist may say. Everything goes in increments of ten. Well maybe we don’t want to go in increments of ten. We assert ourselves against this, because we’d rather go in increments of different numbers that don’t have any relation between them. I have grown to love the Imperial/US System of measurement. I can guess how far a mile is better than a kilometer. A mile is a lot more efficient to use than a kilometer, in the U.S. One mile is easier to say than 1.609 kilometers, for instance. If you said you had to run the 1.609 kilometer in P.E. today, nobody is going to understand what that means. They’re probably going to think it was some cheesy relay race.

Besides that, if we actually DID change to the metric system, we’d have to spend billions of dollars changing all the street signs to say 1.609 km to the next exit, and its variables. This money would have been spent on Medicare or helping the homeless, or building another shiny new air craft carrier with a big bow on it, but no, its going to be spent on changing street signs. Street signs too much money to replace.

The movement for the metric system is just another example of a minority ruining it for the majority. What does the majority think? Of course, they’d probably want the system they’ve grown up with their whole lives, and have used almost everyday of their lives. If the metric system were to be in place, all monetary issues aside, it would take a few generations to flush out the use of inches and feet. Textbooks would have to be replaced and tracks would have to be redesigned. The whole sport of football will just become one big confusing experience. Football fields would be made to have 91.44 meters instead of 100 yards. Hooray, he’s made it to the 55.82 meter line! The metric system will go so far as to ruin the way we eat. Gone are the days of using a tablespoon, you have to use a slightly bigger version of it, called the Fifteen Milliliterspoon. How fun is that? Now we have to buy all-new silverware!

However, if we did have the metric system in place, the only conceivable advantage would be that it is easy. It is a lot easier to say how many meters are in a kilometer than it is to say how many feet are in a mile. Everything has some sort of relation to them, and whoever made it thought it just made sense how it is.

However, things are the way they are for a reason. The reason is because it’s been in place since the beginning of the United States, no better reason than that. Nothing good can come out of converting to the metric system. The only thing that CAN come out of it is the spending of money. People are used to the way things are, and there is no reason to change. For those that had tried to change to the metric system, they just had to spend even more money to convert back to the way they had it before. We’ve done without it for 200 years, why not for the rest of time?

 

Gay Stupid Memorex

A long time ago, there was this moderately good deal for getting a 50 cd pack of cd-rs at Office Depot. The thing was this: get a 50 cd pack of cd-rs and you get a 25 pack of multicolored slim cases, and an 8 dollar rebate. That day, i was filling it out and i sent the rebate out. That was at least 6 months ago.

Now on the 8th of April, i saw another good deal with Memorex cds. This was the deal: 2 packs of 100 cd-rs and 2 packs of 25 slim cases all for a little less than 40 bucks. Those smug bastards think they can get away with me having to buy 150 more slim cases to cover the rest of them. Well they’re WRONG! Anyway, i have to admit that was a good deal. But it got me to thinking. What the FUCK happened to my 8 dollar rebate?! Its been like 6 months! They said it would take a long time, but it shouldn’t take half a year to process a fucking rebate. I want my 8 bucks! What if I had rent to pay, and I needed that 8 bucks THAT month?! Now i’m 8 bucks in debt, and the landlord isn’t letting up on me for that 8 bucks! I don’t have a job, i just can’t PAY anyone I want and BUY anything I damn well please!

Now, I am announcing today, the Get Dave Back His Rebate From Memorex After Buying the 50 CD-Rs With a Free Pack of 25 Multicolored Slim Cases and a Rebate That Never Came Back After He Sent It In Foundation. Or GDBHRFMAB50CDRWFP25MSCRTNCBAHSIIF for short. Now I will stop at nothing to get my 8 bucks back. I will write emails, make phone calls, and I’ll drive over there to Michigan or San Francisco or wherever the hell they are. And you are free to join me in my quest. Write emails to Memorex, with the subject line “Give davepoobond’s Rebate Money, You Fat Pigs” or something along the lines of a denoting them to a farmyard animal.

Be on the lookout for a road trip. If you give me your address, and you’re along the way to either Michigan or San Francisco, I’ll swing by and pick you up. You better bring some money, because I’m not driving a U-Haul, unless you buy one for me, then you can come for free.

 

10-10-Dead

I remember a time where there were more than just one 10-10 number. 10-10-220, is the only one around anymore that you hear about. 10-10 numbers used to be everywhere you looked. There was 10-10-900, 10-10-100, 10-10-Prostitute, almost anything! But for some reason, they all disappeared, and 10-10-220 remained.

Now, I don’t know what happened to all those other annoying faggot ass 10-10 numbers, but 10-10-220 gets even more annoying with every new commercial. They use washed up actors (ALF) and once-popular-but-not-anymore sports figures (Mike Piazza, Hulk Hogan) and stupid country singers. They put them in stupid situations that wouldn’t happen in a million years, like that country singer guy and Mike Piazza playing darts and wanting some crappy chicken.

Now, I’m getting pissed off at stupid ALF and stupid Mike Piazza even more. Y’know what? They should put Mike Piaza and ALF in the same show. A talk show, like Regis and ____ (I put the blank because lately Regis has been trading hosts around like people at a 10 person orgy). It will be the worst show ever. And Hulk Hogan will be one of the band guys and they’ll have allegedly gay people on to interview like Ryan Seacrest and that stupid host from Married By America. But that’s a different rant.

Terry Bradshaw is another sucker that has fell into the 10-10-220 vortex. Recnetly I saw another commercial with a gopher somehow getting a dollar, and then Terry, who already has millions of dollars, goes down the gopher hole and hilarity(?) ensues….Good job Terry, you got a buck, so you can make a 20 minute phone call. Yaaaaay! DIE TERRY BRADSHAW YOU AND 10-10-220!

FUCK YOU 10-10-220! Why don’t you save YOURSELF 10 cents a minute by stopping your commercials and 10-10-die!

 

The Mystery of Shakespere

Note: I wrote this for school.

————————-

The mystery of Shakespeare is a very controversial issue. Uprising as a conspiracy in the last couple hundred of years, it is said that William Shakespeare himself actually didn’t write the plays, poems, and other works of art. There is proof that a William Shakespeare was born, shown on a birth certificate, and that he went to London to become an actor, shown on programs that had his name on it, being a character in the play.

 

Evidence that Shakespeare himself didn’t write the plays is that in the plays, it shows a sense of education that Shakespeare might not have known anything at all about, such as the great battles in other countries, history of different countries, and more that a son of a glover would most likely never know about, even if he did go to school.

 

The man that most people think is the real person that wrote all the works, was a man named DuVere. He was of royalty, and lived in the royal palace of England. He knew Queen Elizabeth, and had a private tutor that would have taught him everything that he needed to write the plays, poems, and others.

 

DuVere would have known the Duke of New Hampton, a man that has shown up in a lot of the Shakespearean sonnets, unlike William Shakespeare, who was just an actor.

 

DuVere wrote the plays and such, but put them under Shakespeare’s name, so that no one would find out he was the one that wrote them, because it was Un-Christian to write these things.

 

Why They Leave Pistachios In The Shells

The reason is, so they can put less pistachios inside the bag of pistachios because, the shells take up more than half the bag. So, instead of 1 bag, they can make 3 bags out of the same amount of pistachios, so its 3 for the price of 1 and they save money, because they dont have to make people open the pistachios by hand and throw out the ones that dont have a crack in it they just jam it in the bag, and make US do it. WE should get payed for cracking open the shells! BLAHHHHHHH!

 

Wires

I hate wires. Wires are really really stupid. Wires always get tangled up even if they’re in the same bag with something for 5 damn minutes, and then when you take it out of the bag, its all tangled up with any other wires that were in there, then you gotta spend 30 minutes untangling all the wires from each other, and while you hold a wire in your hand while your unraveling the others, THAT wire tangles up by itself in an even more complicated way, making you unravel the damn wire 2 times. Why can’t they make smart wires? Wires that won’t frickin’ tangle up when you put them together in a bag or whatever? AAAAAAAHHHH!

 

What is Culture?

Culture is a way of life made up of religion and values, languages, social, or qanizahms customs and traditions, artistic expressions, and economic orginizations made by stupid people, during stupid, untechnological times that probably cant explain what a piece of poop in a can of beans is doing there in the first place, or tell you why i’m writing this thing!

 

The G8 Summit Meeting: The Truth Behind the Closed Doors

In case you forogt, this is the “Group of 8” Meetings that happened a while ago.

———————————–

First, lets talk about how much George W. Bush sucks at being president. My pinky could run the U.S. better than that prick! At least my pinky never touched cocaine………or so I think….. and HE’S GONNA PUT US INTO WW3 because of his fuckin ballistic missile shit! We should launch HIM into the air and blow HIM up like a ballistic missile! That’s the only goodness we’d get out of that system! Here’s a little reenactment of Bush. Sr. talking to his son about the Ballistic Missiles:

 

Bush, Sr.: “Bush, Jr. WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING!”

 

Bush, Jr.: “I’m….getting ready for Desert Storm!”

 

Bush, Sr.: “You stupid idiot!!!! ::smacks him in the balls::”

 

Bush, Jr.: “Not my sack daddy, please stop smacking them around”

 

Bush, Sr.: “I TOLD you that i won that war a long time ago! Haven’t you seen that fancy pancy movie Three Kings?”

 

Bush, Jr.: “Ballistic missiles are fun to watch blow up Russia with! even though i had gay sex with the leader of Russia- ooooopss!”

 

Mrs. Bush, Jr.: “George! how DARE you! and without ME! I told you to not do anything sexual with any of the foreign leaders unless i was with you!”

 

Anyway. onto the G8 Summit…These are random things that could have happened during the meetings….

 

(Bush, Jr. plays with 2 missiles, making them fly in the air, and then have them crash into each other, throwing the pieces at the members of the G8 Summit committee)

 

Bush, Jr.: “…and so ends my explanation on the Ballistic Missiles”

 

(end)

 

Bush, Jr.: ::nudges the President of France next to him:: hey, sugar….wanna come back to my place?

 

President of France: ::bites Bush’s shoulder::

 

Bush, Jr.: AHHH! SON OF A BITCHHH

 

(end)

 

::Leader of Japan is talking about how Pokémon is good for the heart and soul, when….

 

A WHOLE GROUP OF MALE WHORES COME IN!!::

 

Bush, Jr.: ah! they’re finally here!

 

(end)

 

Bush, Jr.: AUHH! I’M A STUPID FACE POO MOM

 

(end)

 

Trash Cans – The Portal to Another World

Have you ever been in a trash can? I haven’t, but I’ll tell you why trash cans may be the portal to another world. It may not be an instantaneous portal, but it’s a portal nonetheless.

 

Pretend you’re a Hostess Cup Cake Tray. Oh boy did the person that ate those cupcakes like those cupcakes. “mmmhmm” he even said, as he crumpled you up and stepped on you, that torturous bastard!

 

But you live anyway, as you’re tossed into the trash can. You try to heal your wounds, but it takes a while. That’s when a Janitor Monster comes. He’s so big and smelly its not even funny. He ties up the bag you’ve made a home in, and met your friends Banana Peel and Clothes Tag.

 

Everything is dark now. You’re moving around…going up…oh no! You’re falling! Aaaahhh!!! And finally you’re at the landfill. Nothing happens until night, when…The Aliens COME!!! AAAH!! They take the trash and make new aliens out of you so that one day, the Earth’s trash will kill them! Ironic ain’t it? The aliens give you a lot of sexual pleasure too. Its good to be trash!