Mario Party 9 and looking into finally getting a new computer
oh, and an application to a university  

Just beautiful!

Haha we broke low-temperature records yesterday.

-32C ... -49C overnight with the wind chill factor.
(-49 C = -56 F)

Anyone else been colder than that?

It's been a "much nicer" -25C this evening, -30C with the wind.
(-30 C = -20 F)



...And it's supposed to be back up to 0 C (32 F) by Saturday.

I was out last night, coming home from a friend's house... Yeah, you don't want to be out when you're seeing -49 written anywhere. That's BLOODY FRICKING COLD!

I couldn't get a picture of the overnight temperature, but here's one of the morning's. As you can see, the evening is colder than the morning, and it just goes crazier as that night goes on.


Comeon, I'm sure somebody here is going through colder stuff than I am in southern Canada! Bring it on!

Admins and mods:
Please do as you wish with this entire subforum of the Gang of Five. I know it is no longer applicable, but if you wish to preserve it for archival reasons, that's fine by me.

I'm really two-sided on this issue.

On one hand, I agree with Darkhououmon and others in this topic to an extent. The concept of blocking someone's (sometimes hard) work because it contains a section of someone else's work is a slippery slope. Someone did the work to produce something for the public BASED ON an existing work because the existing work is interesting to others and therefore a review/cover/commentary/music video/etc. may be interesting to fans of the original content.

The point where I really struggle with this issue is, what gives me the right to use someone else's hard work to get myself ahead (even if no money is being earned, just reputation, pride, fun, etc.)?

If I produced something on a large scale and sold it, I'm not too sure I'd want 'Average Joe' using part (or the entirety) of my work without my consent nor without any idea of how many people are doing so.

Let's try one scenario:
For example, let's say I make a movie. You own a movie review website. You review my movie. Your advertising/sponsors pay you based on your traffic. You are making money because my movie exists, but you never even have to contact me. This is apparently okay.

Let's try another scenario.
I own Apple and I design and sell the new iPad 3 (sake of example). You see it and decide, hey, you want to make a device that can run iPad apps..but it's not an iPad. You sell your device which runs its own software but is also designed to be compatible with iPad apps, to increase your "traffic" (consumer base). This would be very illegal without my permission.

What exactly is the difference?

If you want to make a successful youtube channel (or other venture), I encourage you to use more original content rather than relying on the success of others.

With that being said, I do understand that people enjoy making fanmade music videos, etc. etc. At which point in history was it ever acceptable to do that though? Movies have had warnings at their beginnings for decades now, explicitly stating that public performance of the 'licensed' (not owned!) video is illegal.

To me, it almost sounds like people are wanting to change the rules, now that they have computers powerful enough and media available enough to play with. It was never okay to publicly perform someone's copyrighted work directly, without consent.

As a final closing comment, what is youtube's name and slogan?
YOUTube: Broadcast Yourself.

Youtube was originally designed for users to create original content and share it with the world, not exploit to step the boundaries of copyright ownership.

¬ ¬ ¬ Yeah, action9000...what you said about nothing being able to replace the original song, since there's never even been a cover of it, was just wrong. I'm sorry

Fair enough, but we'll never be able to reproduce the exact original song in the exact original context of the film. That's mainly what I was getting at. While covers can certainly sound 'better' than an original (it happens all the time), the original always has a level of 'geniuninity (is that a word? "level of genuineness" is the concept I'm going after ) that cannot be achieved with any cover - because it's not the original.

In Short, could ANY cover ever 100% replace the song in the film and work BETTER than the version we hear in the film? I would say no, simply because we are not the voice actors for the characters who are supposed to be singing.

For listening to on its own, I'm sure it's possible for a cover to sound better than the original. When placing a cover in the context of the film, I don't think anyone could make it work better than the original, for that reason alone. Any other vocals would simply sound out of place.

Sorry about that Tim, it would've been quite an awesome game if we could have gotten it further... But I agree that we were missing some vital members in our team and free time is not our best friend these days.

That it would have. Ah well, at least we tried and we got to have some fun impressing both others and ourselves in the process.

I mostly listen to video game music. I love the classic 8-bit tunes, and also the epic orchestral pieces. You interested in that any?

Absolutely I am! As a matter of fact, you can check out some remasters of some classic video game tracks I've done up on my Youtube channel, found in my signature, if you're curious.  I've just started it up fairly recently so there isn't a lot of content yet. Tons more will be on the way though!

I'm quite familiar with the Land Before Time soundtrack, as I own a CD of it and made a point of ripping it to my computer.

Aside from that obvious point though, while Horner may not be the most highly-respected composer in this current era (a number of other artists and critics claim Horner to be a bit of a music thief, but there's controversy anywhere you look), I find that his scores are able to bring an atmosphere to a scene that few others of the modern day can achieve.

Speaking of controversial, I can honestly say that I felt that Horner's music in the Land Before Time was an overall stronger presentation than Shore's Lord of the Rings soundtrack. One could also argue that Shore had a LOT more content to try and score and therefore time was more of a constraint (look at the differences in the lengths of the two films!!)

Anyway, that's a whole other can of worms, maybe not best-suited to an LBT forum (though perhaps on the right sub-board...).

Hey everyone, pleasure to be here!

As you can probably guess from the username, I'm a bit of a music geek.    That doesn't stop me from enjoying good animation though. Animation is definitely among my preferred genres of film, just as soundtracks are among my preferred genres of music.

 I look forward to talking with everyone here!