Gene Simmons Declares War on Anonymous

[Captain12345]

Now this...THIS should be interesting....

 

[UrbanRonin]

Hey Gene, The Internet's got a pretty big Johnson, and your many gaping orifices are drawing its attention.

I've got popcorn, if anyone wants to share.

well so much for liking simmons, he sounds like a pretty big dick

Ya, he's a total dick for vowing to go after people who are engaged in illegal activities, including attacking his own site. He should learn that these crimes don't hurt anybody, and that poor college kids can't afford to buy music so should be given it for free.

Oh wait...

He's a dick for saying that he wants people to lose their homes, lose their lives and put them in jail for downloading a song that's worth $0.99

People already aren't paying attention to the fact that it's illegal to download music/movies because it's largely uninforced. Think threatening them with a $20 fine is going to change that?

Provide a few examples of people getting fucked over as a concequence and provide proof of the ability to track down who does, and suddenly a lot less people will take the chance.

Those who still do have made their own decision. They know the concequence, and have chosen a course of action anyway. I have no sympathy.

The current (my) generation of 15-28 year olds need to learn that they can and should be held responsible for their own actions, something society has done a shit poor job of doing recently.

Why stop there, why not hang, draw and quarter petty thieves? Want to steal a Mars bar? Tough luck, Jimmy, now you're going to be ripped in half. Twice.
Public execution for public nudity.
Lock up underage drinkers in mental institutions.
Have the families of j-walkers burned alive inside their own houses.

Move to Saudi Arabia if you want unrealistic and completely disproportional punishment for petty crimes.

Well, it looks like it boils down to some middle ground comprimise. True, a bigger punishment would make a stronger deterrent, but if a lesser punishment is consistently enforced, then it should at least lessen the frequency of the crime.

Agreed. Many of the big time organizations such as the MPAA and the RIAA have adopted, in my opinion, an almost medieval approach to deterring pirates. They target a few, blow up the publicity, and throw the book at them hoping to make everyone gasp in horror at a person having to pay several thousand dollars for 20 dollars worth of songs. The modern metaphorical equivalent of putting someones head on a pike to scare the locals.

If they were to adopt a more manageable punishment that was easier to consistently enforce on a larger scale, the act of piracy would become more defined as an action that one WILL get punished for instead of MIGHT (usually not ).

A potential issue I see here is a future effort to privatize the internet in order to install such a disciplinary system; something which has already become a major point of contention with net neutrality. I'm all for law and order, but I'm no fan of any form of authoritarian rule, be it through government or my computer's internet connection.

I'm actually somewhat partial to the notion of a benevolent dictatorship like put forth by Plato's Republic centuries ago (since I feel most people, especially myself, are stupid and function better under proper leadership), but i suppose its living in an individualistic culture like this one that has conditioned me to treasure my ability to self-determine, even if that capacity is limited by my inherent characteristics

tl;dr I know law is necessary but it has to be reasonable. I'd rather have the freedom to make stupid choices than have someone shove knowledge and values down my throat without them being my own.

 

[Uber Waddles]

While neither side is particularly right, Gene Simmons is a moron for believing people should get sued for music piracy. Dont get me wrong, I support the arts and the artists, but I dont see a problem with musical piracy.

First off, its a very petty theft, that has an extremely minimal effect on artists; recording companies LOST more money putting write protections on their songs then they lost in illegal downloaded profits. Second off, those stars still make more money than anyone needs. A bit of a communist thing to say, haha. But it has no bearing on their life. People still pay money for their songs, concerts, clothing, etc. And I honestly dont consider it stealing since the music is made widely available through public domains such as the radio, TV, YouTube...

Its just a bunch of greedy executives who can still afford gold flakes on their panko-crusted caviar while on the way to buy a 34th Mercedies. Boohoo, they lost a dollar. People dont deserve to be homeless because they stole a DOLLAR. EXPECIALLY when the act of theft has NO burden on anyone.

Its not like a piece of technology, where stealing a TV would result in a loss of profits for the business. The musical industry is EXTREMELY profitable. Its not a big deal.

As for Gene Simmons taking on a group of internet terrorists... Good luck I guess?

 

[iblis666]

this may turn out to become some interesting chaos i think ill have to cheer on Anonymous since they make things entertaining

 

[Socken]

He's a dick for saying that he wants people to lose their homes, lose their lives and put them in jail for downloading a song that's worth $0.99

It's funny because if a song of his is being pirated, and it hypothetically gets downloaded 100000 times, he loses 99000 bucks.

It's also funny because he really doesn't lose anything. The money doesn't just vanish from his account each time someone downloads a song. He just makes less than he could have made, assuming that everybody who pirated his music would buy it if they had to. And that is very questionable if you ask me.

It's not relevant though. You're suggesting that walking into BestBuy and taking a TV without paying for it isn't necessarily stealing as long as nobody else was likely to buy that TV.

Sorry I stopped reading just about there.

No, I am not suggesting that. Nowhere did I say anything about whether piracy is stealing or not, it's just that game/music companies always go "Look, 1 million people downloaded our game, that means we just lost 60 million dollars!" and it's simply not true.

And how is my point not relevant? Apparently the guy I quoted was justifying ruining people's lives who downloaded music because Mr. Simmons "loses" so much money from it. Either way, that doesn't justify anything. Someone who downloaded a song that's worth 99 cents shouldn't be punished harder just because other people did the same thing.

Also your example is flawed; if you walk into a store and take a TV, the store obviously loses the TV and thus the money put into buying/manufacturing it in the first place.

 

[Zannah]

Anonymous: Gaining sympathy, by the minute.

I mean seriously, someone downloaded a music track, so sue them for everything they have? Really? Then surely the annoyance produced by such statements more then justifies an act of vigilancy, like bringing down his site?

 

[zero_blahs]

I dont see how anon can win all they can do is hack his sites and find out his info and some secrets maybe? But paparazzi already do this to celebs? gene could prolly get 4chans site down and reduce some of the population of anon. so its really not much of a contest :/ *throws popcorn away* not a popcorn worthy event and btw your allowed to say whatever you want on the internet but your not allowed to take down someones site for it.

seriously all you people backing anon how can anon do anything to gene?

 

[Arehexes]

I'm just going to post my bit on what I think will happen rather than my views on the subject. I really don't want to have to argue with anybody on either side.

All right, let's give a suitable appearance for Anonymous.

I think Legion would suffice.
Anyway, Gene Belmont has challenged Anonymous to a battle to the death in his no-save speed run through Castlevania: Music Industry. The reasons don't matter, the fact of the matter is, he stepped into their room and they attacked him, so instead of leaving, he's going to fight back, despite the fact that the doors never locked. He might knock a few of the white formless bodies from its amorphous shell, but he is unaware of what hides inside. The core of Legion, where it is most vulnerable can only be damaged when all of its shell is destroyed, but even when just a small amount of its shell is gone, it can retaliate, and retaliate it does. You see, Gene Belmont never bothered actually leveling up. Instead, he found some equipment that made it easy for him to succeed up to this point. Well, it turns out just a few laser blasts from Legion's core will utterly destroy Gene Belmont as a result.

So there are three possible resolutions I see:
1. Anonymous eats Gene Simmons alive.
2. Gene Simmons takes enough damage that he decides to leave.
3. Gene Simmons never does enough damage for Anonymous to fully retaliate.

I'm not saying Anonymous is invincible, I'm just saying it would be damn hard to pierce into the users that make up the heart of Anonymous. They're very well defended by their countless defenses and very well hidden behind the less effective masses.

This was the best way to describe this, I give you the key to Dracula's Keep because you earned it.

 

[Tipsy Giant]

can't wait to see his pop n roll face when he backs down and realises that no-one likes someone who fights for the man

 

[AngelOfBlueRoses]

How do you kill that which has no life?

You find out what thing allows it to exist, then you hit that thing with everything you've got.

Except the thing that allows Anonymous to exist is the entire internet. You can take down 4chan. You can take down Ebaums. You can take down EncyclopediaDramatica. You can take down Pirate Bay (Wait, no you can't!), but sadly, Anonymous will always move on to something else. Take down 4chan? They'll move somewhere else. No biggie. So, the thing that allows them to exist is the internet, which you are currently using to view this forum, my good sir. I may not like Anonymous except for the occasional righteous crusade against trolls such as Scientology or Gene Simmons, and never have I counted myself among them for I avoid 4chan, but you're proposing that we hit the internet. Hit it as hard as we can. Do you see how your logic isn't exactly the greatest? Any good anon is internet savvy, and the only time that one ever gets caught is because someone stands up, takes off their mask, and brags about it.

OT: As for my view, I dislike both. Gene Simmons, you're clearly a troll. You're ruining someone's life over a ninety-nine cent song and you've not done anything worthwhile in... twenty years? Sure, file-sharing and downloading is wrong, and don't mistake me for someone who does that as I buy all of my songs and games, but suing someone OVER 9000 (Sorry, I couldn't resist) dollars for a crappy (Yes, Gene Simmons; I'm calling your music crappy) three-minute song is just excessive and life-ruining. I'm sorry that that wasn't a dollar that could have lined your already gold-ladened pockets with more cash or to have helped side your house with diamonds, but I think that you'll get by, Mister KISS-Has-Over-2500-Licenses-And-Merchandising.

Also, anyone else find it hilarious that his son completely plagiarized the Bleach Manga and that I bet he'll eventually run to daddy to get bailed out of it? Oh, the hypocrisy... it kills me.

For once I'll say, Go Anonymous. Win this one.

Edit: For those giving Gene Simmons a Chuck-Norris-esque vibe, I simply laugh at you. Ha ha ha ha ha. Gene Simmons isn't invincible. He's one guy. One man. Man is not invincible, no matter how high the pedestal you put him on. Anonymous isn't one man, though. Trying to say that you can defeat Anonymous is like saying that you can catch smoke with your bare hand. You can't defeat Anonymous. Taking down 4chan will only delay them slightly. He might catch a few punks if he's extremely lucky, but Gene simply can't win.

 

[New York Patrick]

Oh, this will be fun ;D. Gene Simmons has basically taken on the Devil's Spawn with this. It'll be interesting to see who comes out on top...

Hope like hell that they don't call truce and team up.

 

[Pendragon9]

I'd feel more inclined to side with Mr. Simmons, but didn't his son get involved in a scam involving plagiarized manga?

Yeah, not really up to defending a man who calls the kettle black.

 

[Ve1ociraptor]

If you think Mr. Simmons is going to come out of this with his dignity intact, you're wrong.

There is no way in hell he's going to beat Anonymous. You can't beat anon. It's not even possible, because anon isn't an organization. It's basically Gene Simmons vs. the Internet.

 

[BlackStar42]

I dont see how anon can win all they can do is hack his sites and find out his info and some secrets maybe? But paparazzi already do this to celebs? gene could prolly get 4chans site down and reduce some of the population of anon. so its really not much of a contest :/ *throws popcorn away* not a popcorn worthy event and btw your allowed to say whatever you want on the internet but your not allowed to take down someones site for it.

seriously all you people backing anon how can anon do anything to gene?

They already have his address and phone number. They found a sex tape of him. His website is still down. They're sending his little girlfriend jibe to every LGBT organisation they can find, and to Dr. Pepper. That could result in him losing a sponsor and costing him millions of dollars. Your move, Mr. Simmons.

 

[Andy Chalk]

Please tell me that you will be updating this as it progresses! Id love to hear more.

Genesimmons.com was back in operation last night but appears to be having more troubles at the moment. As far as that goes, we're not going to bother with a blow-by-blow account, but if either side lands a real slobberknocker we'll be sure to let you know.

 

[Andy Chalk]

Gene Simmons... who was that again? Ah yes, the "bassist" from a "band" whose success relied on face painting.

You might not care for Gene or his attitude toward downloaders, but it's not reasonable to say that his success in the music industry isn't well-deserved. Kiss is gimmicky as hell, absolutely, but it's also 100 percent ear-bleeding rock and roll spectacle. Personal dislike doesn't change that.

 

[Bruin]

Gene Simmons... who was that again? Ah yes, the "bassist" from a "band" whose success relied on face painting.

You might not care for Gene or his attitude toward downloaders, but it's not reasonable to say that his success in the music industry isn't well-deserved. Kiss is gimmicky as hell, absolutely, but it's also 100 percent ear-bleeding rock and roll spectacle. Personal dislike doesn't change that.

And personal like does?

You call it a "100 percent ear-bleeding rock and roll spectacle", I call it annoying, dated sound that's long lost its luster; a dying gasp from a nostalgic crowd.

No, I reserve the opinion that he, like many rock-stars, is overrated and seizes upon the traits of society to create music only fitting for that crowd.

I don't agree with ruining somebody's life over a dollar. It's greedy and disgusting--the hungering mouth of man's wallet in the form of Gene's Simmons' mouth, spewing out words of hatred to those who'd dare steal a dollar from their hoard.

I don't agree with thieving either. Honest musicians deserve the money they earn. As much as I may not like it; it's Gene's money. But acting like he's stabbed your mother, burglarized your house and stolen that dollar from your kid's piggy bank is ridiculous.

Anonymous seems like a bunch of little assholes.

Honestly, it's like asking me who I'd rather see win a boxing match: Hitler or Stalin.

 

[Bakfiets]

LOL Gene Simmons internet super hero. I hope he dies in a fire.

 

[SnipErlite]

www.genesimmons.com is back up. Pity.

Heh, okay so Anonymous are in the wrong, technically, again. Whatever, it'll be an amusing fight.

To be honest I wouldn't be surprised if Gene comes out of this in a bad way. Anonymous...well, they are legion. *shrug*