The Mellotron Group

From: Mike Dickson

Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2014 4:12 AM

To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com

Subject: [newmellotrongroup] Ethical Issue

I've been contacted by someone who wants to use my music on one of his YouTube videos. Normally I say 'fair enough' and only ask that I am credited, but this thing there is a slight difference.

The guy is an advocate of views I find ethically repugnant. His stock credit does say that others whose work is credited in his videos do not necessarily agree with his views, etc, but somehow that doesn't seem enough.

Do you think I ought to limit who can use what I produce on the basis of what they are saying?

To use a more British idiom (assuming it actually is), tell him to poke it.

Andy

;

Well then, let me rephrase my suggested reponse. Tell him to go fuck himself. It's the same as, "pound sand," but a bit more obvious.

Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@gmail.com> wrote:

>I told him to *pound sand* as suggested. It was really more a question

>regarding whether you ought to assay the ethics of everyone who wants to
>use your output. I've had a lot of requests from people who want to use my
>music and I tend to say okay to them all without necessarily reviewing what
>it is that they are doing with it.
>

>I casually asked this guy what he was doing and he mentioned *social
>;activism* which made me a tad nervous, so I did a bit of judicious Googling

>and found he was a registered sex offender who appeared to be in complete

>denial of his offences and who seemed to be advocating *'fair play for
>paedophiles'* (I paraphrase) and maintained that being registered like this

>;is completely unfair and unconstitutional, etc etc.
>

>;Aside from my *reservations *about all of this, those of you who know me

>better might also know that my 'real job' involves putting people just like
>this away in jail. A slight conflict of interests, you might say.
>
>Mike
>
>;
>On 23 February 2014 09:50, Andy Thompson <andy.thompson@virgin.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>

>> *From:* Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@gmail.com>
>> *Sent:* Sunday, February 23, 2014 4:12 AM
>> *To:* newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
>> *Subject:* [newmellotrongroup] Ethical Issue

>>
>>
>>
>> I've been contacted by someone who wants to use my music on one of his
>;> YouTube videos. Normally I say 'fair enough' and only ask that I am
>> credited, but this thing there is a slight difference.
>>
>> The guy is an advocate of views I find ethically repugnant. His stock
>> credit does say that others whose work is credited in his videos do not
>> necessarily agree with his views, etc, but somehow that doesn't seem enough.
>>
>> Do you think I ought to limit who can use what I produce on the basis of
>> what they are saying?
>>

>> To use a more British idiom (assuming it actually is), tell him to poke it.
>>
>> Andy
>>
>>;
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

>--
>*Mike Dickson*
>*Edinburgh*

I told him to pound sand as suggested. It was really more a question regarding whether you ought to assay the ethics of everyone who wants to use your output. I';ve had a lot of requests from people who want to use my music and I tend to say okay to them all without necessarily reviewing what it is that they are doing with it.

I casually asked this guy what he was doing and he mentioned social activism which made me a tad nervous, so I did a bit of judicious Googling and found he was a registered sex offender who appeared to be in complete denial of his offences and who seemed to be advocating 'fair play for paedophiles9; (I paraphrase) and maintained that being registered like this is completely unfair and unconstitutional, etc etc.

Aside from my reservations about all of this, those of you who know me better might also know that my 'real job' involves putting people just like this away in jail. A slight conflict of interests, you might say.

Mike

On 23 February 2014 09:50, Andy Thompson <andy.thompson@virgin.net> wrote:

From: Mike Dickson

Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2014 4:12 AM

To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com

Subject: [newmellotrongroup] Ethical Issue

I've been contacted by someone who wants to use my music on one of his YouTube videos. Normally I say 'fair enough' and only ask that I am credited, but this thing there is a slight difference.

The guy is an advocate of views I find ethically repugnant. His stock credit does say that others whose work is credited in his videos do not necessarily agree with his views, etc, but somehow that doesn't seem enough.

Do you think I ought to limit who can use what I produce on the basis of what they are saying?

To use a more British idiom (assuming it actually is), tell him to poke it.

Andy

--

Mike Dickson

Edinburgh

Mike, knowing your day job, i was thinking that it can't be very often that the paedophile comes directly to you and knocks on your door, so to speak.

john

On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 3:33 PM, Personal <lsf5275@aol.com> wrote:

Well then, let me rephrase my suggested reponse. Tell him to go fuck himself. It's the same as, "pound sand," but a bit more obvious.

Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@gmail.com> wrote:

>I told him to *pound sand* as suggested. It was really more a question

>regarding whether you ought to assay the ethics of everyone who wants to
>use your output. I've had a lot of requests from people who want to use my
>music and I tend to say okay to them all without necessarily reviewing what
>it is that they are doing with it.
>

>I casually asked this guy what he was doing and he mentioned *social
>activism* which made me a tad nervous, so I did a bit of judicious Googling

>and found he was a registered sex offender who appeared to be in complete

>denial of his offences and who seemed to be advocating *'fair play for
>paedophiles'* (I paraphrase) and maintained that being registered like this

>is completely unfair and unconstitutional, etc etc.
>

>Aside from my *reservations *about all of this, those of you who know me

>better might also know that my 'real job' involves putting people just like
>this away in jail. A slight conflict of interests, you might say.
>
>Mike
>
>
>On 23 February 2014 09:50, Andy Thompson <andy.thompson@virgin.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>

>> *From:* Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@gmail.com>
>> *Sent:* Sunday, February 23, 2014 4:12 AM
>> *To:* newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
>> *Subject:* [newmellotrongroup] Ethical Issue

>>
>>
>>
>> I've been contacted by someone who wants to use my music on one of his
>> YouTube videos. Normally I say 'fair enough' and only ask that I am
>> credited, but this thing there is a slight difference.
>>
>> The guy is an advocate of views I find ethically repugnant. His stock
>> credit does say that others whose work is credited in his videos do not
>> necessarily agree with his views, etc, but somehow that doesn't seem enough.
>>
>> Do you think I ought to limit who can use what I produce on the basis of
>> what they are saying?
>>

>> To use a more British idiom (assuming it actually is), tell him to poke it.
>>
>> Andy
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

>--
>*Mike Dickson*
>*Edinburgh*

I told him to pound sand as suggested. It was really more a question regarding whether you ought to assay the ethics of everyone who wants to use your output. I've had a lot of requests from people who want to use my music and I tend to say okay to them all without necessarily reviewing what it is that they are doing with it.

I casually asked this guy what he was doing and he mentioned social activism which made me a tad nervous, so I did a bit of judicious Googling and found he was a registered sex offender who appeared to be in complete denial of his offences and who seemed to be advocating 'fair play for paedophiles' (I paraphrase) and maintained that being registered like this is completely unfair and unconstitutional, etc etc.

Aside from my reservations about all of this, those of you who know me better might also know that my 'real job' involves putting people just like this away in jail. A slight conflict of interests, you might say.

Mike

On 23 February 2014 09:50, Andy Thompson <andy.thompson@virgin.net> wrote:

From: Mike Dickson

Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2014 4:12 AM

To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com

Subject: [newmellotrongroup] Ethical Issue

I've been contacted by someone who wants to use my music on one of his YouTube videos. Normally I say 'fair enough' and only ask that I am credited, but this thing there is a slight difference.

The guy is an advocate of views I find ethically repugnant. His stock credit does say that others whose work is credited in his videos do not necessarily agree with his views, etc, but somehow that doesn't seem enough.

Do you think I ought to limit who can use what I produce on the basis of what they are saying?

To use a more British idiom (assuming it actually is), tell him to poke it.

Andy

--

Mike Dickson

Edinburgh

--

john barrick

*Leo got it right the first time*

*then he added a second pickup and got it righter*

Yes. Usually it9;s the other way around. :-)

On 24 February 2014 07:23, john barrick <barrickjohn262@gmail.com> wrote:

Mike, knowing your day job, i was thinking that it can't be very often that the paedophile comes directly to you and knocks on your door, so to speak.

john

On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 3:33 PM, Personal <lsf5275@aol.com> wrote:

Well then, let me rephrase my suggested reponse. Tell him to go fuck himself. It's the same as, "pound sand," but a bit more obvious.

Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@gmail.com> wrote:

>I told him to *pound sand* as suggested. It was really more a question

>regarding whether you ought to assay the ethics of everyone who wants to
>use your output. I've had a lot of requests from people who want to use my
>music and I tend to say okay to them all without necessarily reviewing what
>it is that they are doing with it.
>

>I casually asked this guy what he was doing and he mentioned *social
>activism* which made me a tad nervous, so I did a bit of judicious Googling

>and found he was a registered sex offender who appeared to be in complete

>denial of his offences and who seemed to be advocating *'fair play for
>paedophiles'* (I paraphrase) and maintained that being registered like this

>is completely unfair and unconstitutional, etc etc.
>

>Aside from my *reservations *about all of this, those of you who know me

>;better might also know that my 'real job' involves putting people just like
>this away in jail. A slight conflict of interests, you might say.
>
>Mike
>
>
>On 23 February 2014 09:50, Andy Thompson <andy.thompson@virgin.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>

>> *From:* Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@gmail.com>
>> *Sent:* Sunday, February 23, 2014 4:12 AM
>> *To:* newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
>> *Subject:* [newmellotrongroup] Ethical Issue

>>
>>
>>
>> I've been contacted by someone who wants to use my music on one of his
>> YouTube videos. Normally I say 'fair enough' and only ask that I am
>> credited, but this thing there is a slight difference.
>>
>> The guy is an advocate of views I find ethically repugnant. His stock
>> credit does say that others whose work is credited in his videos do not
>> necessarily agree with his views, etc, but somehow that doesn't seem enough.
>>
>> Do you think I ought to limit who can use what I produce on the basis of
>> what they are saying?
>>

>> To use a more British idiom (assuming it actually is), tell him to poke it.
>>
>>; Andy
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

>--
>*Mike Dickson*
>*Edinburgh*

I told him to pound sand as suggested. It was really more a question regarding whether you ought to assay the ethics of everyone who wants to use your output. I've had a lot of requests from people who want to use my music and I tend to say okay to them all without necessarily reviewing what it is that they are doing with it.

I casually asked this guy what he was doing and he mentioned social activism which made me a tad nervous, so I did a bit of judicious Googling and found he was a registered sex offender who appeared to be in complete denial of his offences and who seemed to be advocating 'fair play for paedophiles' (I paraphrase) and maintained that being registered like this is completely unfair and unconstitutional, etc etc.

Aside from my reservations about all of this, those of you who know me better might also know that my 'real job' involves putting people just like this away in jail. A slight conflict of interests, you might say.

Mike

On 23 February 2014 09:50, Andy Thompson <andy.thompson@virgin.net> wrote:

From: Mike Dickson

Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2014 4:12 AM

To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com

Subject: [newmellotrongroup] Ethical Issue

I've been contacted by someone who wants to use my music on one of his YouTube videos. Normally I say 'fair enough' and only ask that I am credited, but this thing there is a slight difference.

The guy is an advocate of views I find ethically repugnant. His stock credit does say that others whose work is credited in his videos do not necessarily agree with his views, etc, but somehow that doesn't seem enough.

Do you think I ought to limit who can use what I produce on the basis of what they are saying?

To use a more British idiom (assuming it actually is), tell him to poke it.

Andy

--

Mike Dickson

Edinburgh

--

john barrick

*Leo got it right the first time*

*then he added a second pickup and got it righter*

--

Mike Dickson

Edinburgh

I've been contacted by someone who wants to use my music on one of his YouTube videos. Normally I say 'fair enough' and only ask that I am credited, but this thing there is a slight difference.

The guy is an advocate of views I find ethically repugnant. His stock credit does say that others whose work is credited in his videos do not necessarily agree with his views, etc, but somehow that doesn't seem enough.

Do you think I ought to limit who can use what I produce on the basis of what they are saying?

--

Mike Dickson

Edinburgh