Gene Simmons: The fans destroyed the record industry.

  • Thread starter Thread starter TrueTone500
  • Start date Start date
sah5150":1inajm2b said:
Shark Diver":1inajm2b said:
satannica":1inajm2b said:
Shark Diver":1inajm2b said:
About as simple as logic gets. ;)

About as poorly thought out as it gets :)


Ok.

Don't have a counter argument why other artist are making $, just insult. Very Metal of you :lol: :LOL:
Well, I think the only argument you can make is that downloading/technology killed the record industry and not the music industry. Whether you are Lady Gaga or any other artist, you now make your money through touring now. The industry is upside down from where it was. You used to make your money on record sales and the tours were to promote the album. Now you pretty much know the album will be downloaded and you won't make much money on that. You now charge $500 for a concert ticket, instead of the $25 it used to be... The more your music is downloaded, the more people are gonna show up at your concerts.

IMO, in general, people who listen to music don't value it anymore. They think of it as "free" because it is easy to get it free. Of course, it's wrong to do it, but there's no going back now...

Steve
Ok... How does a start up band go out to tour without funding from their album?
 
ChadVanHalen":2sdurlpp said:
sah5150":2sdurlpp said:
Shark Diver":2sdurlpp said:
satannica":2sdurlpp said:
Shark Diver":2sdurlpp said:
About as simple as logic gets. ;)

About as poorly thought out as it gets :)


Ok.

Don't have a counter argument why other artist are making $, just insult. Very Metal of you :lol: :LOL:
Well, I think the only argument you can make is that downloading/technology killed the record industry and not the music industry. Whether you are Lady Gaga or any other artist, you now make your money through touring now. The industry is upside down from where it was. You used to make your money on record sales and the tours were to promote the album. Now you pretty much know the album will be downloaded and you won't make much money on that. You now charge $500 for a concert ticket, instead of the $25 it used to be... The more your music is downloaded, the more people are gonna show up at your concerts.

IMO, in general, people who listen to music don't value it anymore. They think of it as "free" because it is easy to get it free. Of course, it's wrong to do it, but there's no going back now...

Steve
Ok... How does a start up band go out to tour without funding from their album?
I dunno.

Steve
 
ChadVanHalen":ovwtv8xu said:
sah5150":ovwtv8xu said:
Shark Diver":ovwtv8xu said:
satannica":ovwtv8xu said:
Shark Diver":ovwtv8xu said:
About as simple as logic gets. ;)

About as poorly thought out as it gets :)


Ok.

Don't have a counter argument why other artist are making $, just insult. Very Metal of you :lol: :LOL:
Well, I think the only argument you can make is that downloading/technology killed the record industry and not the music industry. Whether you are Lady Gaga or any other artist, you now make your money through touring now. The industry is upside down from where it was. You used to make your money on record sales and the tours were to promote the album. Now you pretty much know the album will be downloaded and you won't make much money on that. You now charge $500 for a concert ticket, instead of the $25 it used to be... The more your music is downloaded, the more people are gonna show up at your concerts.

IMO, in general, people who listen to music don't value it anymore. They think of it as "free" because it is easy to get it free. Of course, it's wrong to do it, but there's no going back now...

Steve
Ok... How does a start up band go out to tour without funding from their album?

I don't want to be that dude, but...

Lady Gaga: 25m+ albums, 65m+ singles sold
Katy Perry: 10m+ albums, 40m+ singles sold
Nickelback: 50m+ albums sold
Linkin Park: 60m+ albums sold
Etc etc

Records are still selling, just not everyone's records. And when was it ever any different?
 
If nobody is illegally downloading your music - you are not even relevant. It has been this way many years.
 
sah5150":1olg0j1y said:
ChadVanHalen":1olg0j1y said:
sah5150":1olg0j1y said:
Shark Diver":1olg0j1y said:
satannica":1olg0j1y said:
Shark Diver":1olg0j1y said:
About as simple as logic gets. ;)

About as poorly thought out as it gets :)


Ok.

Don't have a counter argument why other artist are making $, just insult. Very Metal of you :lol: :LOL:
Well, I think the only argument you can make is that downloading/technology killed the record industry and not the music industry. Whether you are Lady Gaga or any other artist, you now make your money through touring now. The industry is upside down from where it was. You used to make your money on record sales and the tours were to promote the album. Now you pretty much know the album will be downloaded and you won't make much money on that. You now charge $500 for a concert ticket, instead of the $25 it used to be... The more your music is downloaded, the more people are gonna show up at your concerts.

IMO, in general, people who listen to music don't value it anymore. They think of it as "free" because it is easy to get it free. Of course, it's wrong to do it, but there's no going back now...

Steve
Ok... How does a start up band go out to tour without funding from their album?
I dunno.

Steve


The point was there is $ to be made because obviously people are making it. Don't blame downloading because YOU aren't making $. If someone else is making $, in the same environment, then it can be done. As others have stated Rock/Metal just isn't in vogue now so corporations aren't throwing $ at those bands.

Instead of bitching and whining about illegal downloading, use the internet tools that are there for young bands. I have purchased (ITUNES) at least 9-10 albums in the last month from videos posted here introducing me to new bands, or from something I saw on YouTube. I hadn't purchased anything new in quite a while until recently. Finally heard some stuff I like. Like Nirvana killed hair bands, Rap killed Grunge/Metal. It is simply what happens. You can be upset all you want that Metal isn't the king, and people who don't listen to it are stupid, talentless hacks, and blame every download and record company you want - might as well go scream at the wind.

I am not advocating illegal downloading - just feel it is not a major factor in why a band can't find success.( Again, obviously there are artist finding success.) Whether it changes the music paradigm that was before - well of course it does.

Didn't Metallica over come the snub by the industry and become one of the biggest bands ever, ushering in a new style of music? You can go out and create your own destiny, or sit around and complain about how everything is against you. Up to you.
 
gtr31":10b3txt3 said:
The definition of stealing is taking something that does not belong to you

No it's not, which kinda proves my point: you don't know what stealing is.

The definition of stealing - or, to be more accurate, "theft" - in layman's terms is taking away from someone something that they possess. If I break into your home and steal its contents, I have deprived you of something you own. Your house contents aren’t there for you to use any more because I took them away. If I steal from a shop I have deprived the shop owner of something he owns. The shop stock isn’t there any more for the shop owner to sell because I took it away. When I copy a digital file, no-one is deprived of something he owns. No-one is prevented from doing anything because nothing has been taken away from anyone.

To put it even more simply: if downloading files is stealing, then taking someone's photograph is kidnapping.
 
Shark Diver":3jk4kqlb said:
The point was there is $ to be made because obviously people are making it.
The irony is, it's not the people you think are making $.

Don't blame downloading because YOU aren't making $.
I have made money selling my albums. The fact is, it doesn't matter how good a new band's album is, nobody's going to buy it! And that's nobody!

If someone else is making $, in the same environment, then it can be done.
It is not the same environment. Comparing Lady Gaga and some grindcore band from some estate in the Midlands is just complete idiocy!

As others have stated Rock/Metal just isn't in vogue now so corporations aren't throwing $ at those bands.
Rock/Metal are not the only non mainstream genres and most certainly has never been in vogue. Rock and metal for almost 90% of fans is a lifestyle! It just seems people are now content to sell themselves short because of their overriding feelings of entitledness!

Instead of bitching and whining about illegal downloading, use the internet tools that are there for young bands.
Oh the tools are there, complete with lots of GoogleAds! But really, I cannot take another load of bloody singer/songwriters! One more tit with an acoustic guitar singing about feelings/life questions/911 or some such hoary old bollocks! Jee zus! If this is the kinda crap we're content with now, then I despair!


I have purchased (ITUNES) at least 9-10 albums in the last month from videos posted here introducing me to new bands, or from something I saw on YouTube. I hadn't purchased anything new in quite a while until recently. Finally heard some stuff I like.
Good for you. Personally I buy 9-10 albums a month. But that's because I buy the stuff I like. Have never, will never download! There's no great reward to being honest, I just want to support the scene I grew up in and believe in.

Like Nirvana killed hair bands, Rap killed Grunge/Metal. It is simply what happens. You can be upset all you want that Metal isn't the king, and people who don't listen to it are stupid, talentless hacks, and blame every download and record company you want - might as well go scream at the wind.
This isn't the same thing. Changeovers in mainstream rock and metal has always happened, nobody's denying it. But the fact is every time, those bands sold their recorded work be it CD, cassette, vinyl. It's what enabled them to exist. It's what enabled them to appear in magazines. It's what enabled YOU to hear about them in the first place. What if I told you that simply due to downloading, there is a WORLD of music you will NEVER hear, simply as their complete lack of revenue prevents them from garnering the reach that was afforded all those artists in the 80s/90s simply through sales of their recorded music? The fact you've never heard these bands or are ever likely to hear these bands should, frankly, worry you.

I am not advocating illegal downloading - just feel it is not a major factor in why a band can't find success.( Again, obviously there are artist finding success.) Whether it changes the music paradigm that was before - well of course it does.
It is a huge factor! It is a majorly huge factor. And yes, it changes the paradigm. All these throws of "Get a new model, you dinosaur"... You really think the music industry and label bosses haven't already thought this through and gotten a new model? It just so happens the new boss is FAR worse than the old! We have played right into their hands, illegal downloading is the best thing that could have happened for them! It's the 40s/50s all over again where you're only a "star" if they "make you a star!" That means only stuff rubber stamped and sanction by some tit in a suit! Any subgenres or non-mainstream genres which, as I've said, they don't know how to market or just straight up don't understand, well they're taken care of. Gone. No more. Extinct.

You are honestly trying to tell me that this is a good thing? For fucking real, man!?!?


Didn't Metallica over come the snub by the industry and become one of the biggest bands ever, ushering in a new style of music?
Yes, but AGAIN you are forgetting the most basic principle. Metallica started in a time where illegal downloading didn't exist. You wanted Kill 'Em All, you bought it. End of story. And people were not entitled enough to just go and steal the record from the store. It's simple science. Artist makes record, fans buy record, Artist uses money to tour/interviews/reviews/etc, gets more fans, Artist makes another record, fans buy record, etc etc. If NOBODY buys the record because they have stolen it via an online download, that artist makes NOTHING. Nada. Zip. Studio time isn't free. Guitars don't grow on trees. Advertising your gigs in the back of magazines that fans read also costs money. Getting on the decent support acts again costs money. Everything is money when you're trying to plug and grow your band! If you have flat zero coming in from your record sales, you're dead from the get go. There is nothing else any new or young band can do! At all!

You can go out and create your own destiny, or sit around and complain about how everything is against you. Up to you.
What a great way of telling everyone they deserve their failures! I hope you don't fall off your high horse there, you could break your arse!
 
shgshg":35v7j251 said:
gtr31":35v7j251 said:
The definition of stealing is taking something that does not belong to you

No it's not, which kinda proves my point: you don't know what stealing is.

The definition of stealing - or, to be more accurate, "theft" - in layman's terms is taking away from someone something that they possess. If I break into your home and steal its contents, I have deprived you of something you own. Your house contents aren’t there for you to use any more because I took them away. If I steal from a shop I have deprived the shop owner of something he owns. The shop stock isn’t there any more for the shop owner to sell because I took it away. When I copy a digital file, no-one is deprived of something he owns. No-one is prevented from doing anything because nothing has been taken away from anyone.

To put it even more simply: if downloading files is stealing, then taking someone's photograph is kidnapping.

Yes, you have robbed them of a sale, simple as that! An artist has decided their channel of distribution and that is to charge $x for a recorded product. By illegally downloading you have circumvented this channel. AKA theft! Simple as that! You have robbed them of the ability of making that sale to you! This despite there already being plenty of channels for you to sample and artist's music prior to purchase. There are several means available at your disposal. The fact that you circumvent all these devices made available to you and just download the music from a torrent site is just you being lazy and opting to steal it! The tired hoary retort of "I wouldn't have bought it anyway" is neither here nor there. Just because you wouldn't have bought it anyway doesn't mean you can then just go ahead and take it, it means you don't get it. Simple as that! You don't want it? Great, no problem, nobody's forcing you. There is plenty of free music on the internet which is totally great and if you turn on your radio, there is plenty mainstream pop that has been carefully selected and targeted towards markets which, OK you personally may not fit into, but it's free! Just the way you like it!

Downloading is theft. You can argue it if you like, but all you're doing is saying "I'm an entitled selfish asshole and fuck everyone else!". Up to you really, mate!
 
satannica":2nvb58l8 said:
Shark Diver":2nvb58l8 said:
The point was there is $ to be made because obviously people are making it.
The irony is, it's not the people you think are making $.

Don't blame downloading because YOU aren't making $.
I have made money selling my albums. The fact is, it doesn't matter how good a new band's album is, nobody's going to buy it! And that's nobody!

If someone else is making $, in the same environment, then it can be done.
It is not the same environment. Comparing Lady Gaga and some grindcore band from some estate in the Midlands is just complete idiocy!

As others have stated Rock/Metal just isn't in vogue now so corporations aren't throwing $ at those bands.
Rock/Metal are not the only non mainstream genres and most certainly has never been in vogue. Rock and metal for almost 90% of fans is a lifestyle! It just seems people are now content to sell themselves short because of their overriding feelings of entitledness!

Instead of bitching and whining about illegal downloading, use the internet tools that are there for young bands.
Oh the tools are there, complete with lots of GoogleAds! But really, I cannot take another load of bloody singer/songwriters! One more tit with an acoustic guitar singing about feelings/life questions/911 or some such hoary old bollocks! Jee zus! If this is the kinda crap we're content with now, then I despair!


I have purchased (ITUNES) at least 9-10 albums in the last month from videos posted here introducing me to new bands, or from something I saw on YouTube. I hadn't purchased anything new in quite a while until recently. Finally heard some stuff I like.
Good for you. Personally I buy 9-10 albums a month. But that's because I buy the stuff I like. Have never, will never download! There's no great reward to being honest, I just want to support the scene I grew up in and believe in.

Like Nirvana killed hair bands, Rap killed Grunge/Metal. It is simply what happens. You can be upset all you want that Metal isn't the king, and people who don't listen to it are stupid, talentless hacks, and blame every download and record company you want - might as well go scream at the wind.
This isn't the same thing. Changeovers in mainstream rock and metal has always happened, nobody's denying it. But the fact is every time, those bands sold their recorded work be it CD, cassette, vinyl. It's what enabled them to exist. It's what enabled them to appear in magazines. It's what enabled YOU to hear about them in the first place. What if I told you that simply due to downloading, there is a WORLD of music you will NEVER hear, simply as their complete lack of revenue prevents them from garnering the reach that was afforded all those artists in the 80s/90s simply through sales of their recorded music? The fact you've never heard these bands or are ever likely to hear these bands should, frankly, worry you.

I am not advocating illegal downloading - just feel it is not a major factor in why a band can't find success.( Again, obviously there are artist finding success.) Whether it changes the music paradigm that was before - well of course it does.
It is a huge factor! It is a majorly huge factor. And yes, it changes the paradigm. All these throws of "Get a new model, you dinosaur"... You really think the music industry and label bosses haven't already thought this through and gotten a new model? It just so happens the new boss is FAR worse than the old! We have played right into their hands, illegal downloading is the best thing that could have happened for them! It's the 40s/50s all over again where you're only a "star" if they "make you a star!" That means only stuff rubber stamped and sanction by some tit in a suit! Any subgenres or non-mainstream genres which, as I've said, they don't know how to market or just straight up don't understand, well they're taken care of. Gone. No more. Extinct.

You are honestly trying to tell me that this is a good thing? For fucking real, man!?!?


Didn't Metallica over come the snub by the industry and become one of the biggest bands ever, ushering in a new style of music?
Yes, but AGAIN you are forgetting the most basic principle. Metallica started in a time where illegal downloading didn't exist. You wanted Kill 'Em All, you bought it. End of story. And people were not entitled enough to just go and steal the record from the store. It's simple science. Artist makes record, fans buy record, Artist uses money to tour/interviews/reviews/etc, gets more fans, Artist makes another record, fans buy record, etc etc. If NOBODY buys the record because they have stolen it via an online download, that artist makes NOTHING. Nada. Zip. Studio time isn't free. Guitars don't grow on trees. Advertising your gigs in the back of magazines that fans read also costs money. Getting on the decent support acts again costs money. Everything is money when you're trying to plug and grow your band! If you have flat zero coming in from your record sales, you're dead from the get go. There is nothing else any new or young band can do! At all!

You can go out and create your own destiny, or sit around and complain about how everything is against you. Up to you.
What a great way of telling everyone they deserve their failures! I hope you don't fall off your high horse there, you could break your arse!

Pretty much disagree with everything you said. :lol: :LOL: Because you don't like a style of music it's crap? Laughable. I won't hear music because bands can't sell albums? Heard some good music on Youtube today from some bands that have never made an album. Simple live clips. Maybe some will quit because they aren't making it, but how is that any different then all the bands you've never heard of that I saw playing on the Sunset strip living out of their cars? Most bands simply aren't good, or lucky, enough to make it. They give up. And telling someone to make their own destiny and quit whining about how hard it is isn't being on a high horse. Yes if all you do is whine - then you deserve your failure. Talk about entitled! Most of us fail. It's the people who pick themselves up and sans the whining that eventually succeed. Even if it's not exactly what they thought they'd succeed in. But whatever, keep complaining while other artist persevere.

Never download music? Well how long do you think it will be until that will be the only way to get music? CDs are already becoming obsolete. Satannica, nothing personal, but I just see your view as dated. It is simple Darwinism - adapt to the new environment or die.

I'm not going to keep debating this. We obviously disagree. And that's cool. That's what this place is all about. :)
 
Shark. Sorry man but comparing a bands song to taking a photograph of someone is such idiocy I don't even feel I can explain the difference to you in a way you'll understand. Wow. Don't mean to offend, but you couldn't be more wrong.

Taking intellectual property without paying for it is stealing.

Justify all you want, it won't change a thing.

It's really a broader symptom of what's wrong with just about everything these days. I'm sorry for my kids that were leaving things this way for them.
 
Badronald":1ul7r0nl said:
Shark. Sorry man but comparing a bands song to taking a photograph of someone is such idiocy I don't even feel I can explain the difference to you in a way you'll understand. Wow. Don't mean to offend, but you couldn't be more wrong.

Taking intellectual property without paying for it is stealing.

Justify all you want, it won't change a thing.

It's really a broader symptom of what's wrong with just about everything these days. I'm sorry for my kids that were leaving things this way for them.


When did I ever say anything about a photograph? I think that is someone else...

And I agree with your view :lol: :LOL:
 
shgshg":3orpjbdv said:
gtr31":3orpjbdv said:
The definition of stealing is taking something that does not belong to you

No it's not, which kinda proves my point: you don't know what stealing is.

The definition of stealing - or, to be more accurate, "theft" - in layman's terms is taking away from someone something that they possess. If I break into your home and steal its contents, I have deprived you of something you own. Your house contents aren’t there for you to use any more because I took them away. If I steal from a shop I have deprived the shop owner of something he owns. The shop stock isn’t there any more for the shop owner to sell because I took it away. When I copy a digital file, no-one is deprived of something he owns. No-one is prevented from doing anything because nothing has been taken away from anyone.

To put it even more simply: if downloading files is stealing, then taking someone's photograph is kidnapping.

Semantics... call it counterfeiting or forgery then.
 
stephen sawall":x5z8d84b said:
If nobody is illegally downloading your music - you are not even relevant. It has been this way many years.

I agree.

If people are illegally downloading your stuff it means you are successful to some degree in the market already.

I can see someone with their magnum opus defending the old model and no one cares enough to even put in the effort to download it illegally.

Just saying I truly believe it's in the best interest of the artists not to adhere to the old ways and be creative.
 
shgshg":1mayp9an said:
gtr31":1mayp9an said:
The definition of stealing is taking something that does not belong to you

No it's not, which kinda proves my point: you don't know what stealing is.

The definition of stealing - or, to be more accurate, "theft" - in layman's terms is taking away from someone something that they possess. If I break into your home and steal its contents, I have deprived you of something you own. Your house contents aren’t there for you to use any more because I took them away. If I steal from a shop I have deprived the shop owner of something he owns. The shop stock isn’t there any more for the shop owner to sell because I took it away. When I copy a digital file, no-one is deprived of something he owns. No-one is prevented from doing anything because nothing has been taken away from anyone.

To put it even more simply: if downloading files is stealing, then taking someone's photograph is kidnapping.

Intellectual Property
Intangible rights protecting the products of human intelligence and creation, such as copyrightable works, patented inventions, Trademarks, and trade secrets. Although largely governed by federal law, state law also governs some aspects of intellectual property. Intellectual property describes a wide variety of property created by musicians, authors, artists, and inventors. The law of intellectual property typically encompasses the areas of Copyright, Patents, and trademark law. It is intended largely to ENCOURAGE the development of art, science, and information by granting certain property rights (WHICH YOU HAVE NO RESPECT FOR) to all artists, which include inventors in the arts and the sciences. These rights allow artists to protect themselves from infringement, or the unauthorized use and misuse of their creations. Trademarks and service marks protect distinguishing features (such as names or package designs) that are associated with particular products or services and that indicate commercial source.

Copyright laws have roots in eighteenth-century English Law. Comprehensive patent laws can be traced to seventeenth-century England, and they have been a part of U.S. law since the colonial period. The copyright and patent concepts were both included in the U.S. Constitution. Under Article I, Section 8, Clause 8, of the Constitution, "The Congress shall have Power: To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." The first trademark laws were passed by Congress in the late nineteenth century, and they derive their constitutional authority from the Commerce Clause. The bulk of intellectual Property Law is contained in federal statutes. Copyrights are protected by the Copyright Act. Patents are covered in the Patent Act. Trademark protection is provided by the Lanham Act.

:cheers:
 
Drew":3kxome0d said:
shgshg":3kxome0d said:
gtr31":3kxome0d said:
The definition of stealing is taking something that does not belong to you

No it's not, which kinda proves my point: you don't know what stealing is.

The definition of stealing - or, to be more accurate, "theft" - in layman's terms is taking away from someone something that they possess. If I break into your home and steal its contents, I have deprived you of something you own. Your house contents aren’t there for you to use any more because I took them away. If I steal from a shop I have deprived the shop owner of something he owns. The shop stock isn’t there any more for the shop owner to sell because I took it away. When I copy a digital file, no-one is deprived of something he owns. No-one is prevented from doing anything because nothing has been taken away from anyone.

To put it even more simply: if downloading files is stealing, then taking someone's photograph is kidnapping.

Semantics... call it counterfeiting then.

What they are stealing is the intellectual property I believe . The artist rights to distribute their work and profit from it are taken away. Example, if you design a shirt, and someone copies that design and gives the copied shirts away you could have a warehouse full of shirts still to sell - but why would someone buy them if they can get it for free? You still have your shirts. No physical property has been stolen from you. But your design was stolen.
 
Shark Diver":25d7l0j4 said:
Drew":25d7l0j4 said:
shgshg":25d7l0j4 said:
gtr31":25d7l0j4 said:
The definition of stealing is taking something that does not belong to you

No it's not, which kinda proves my point: you don't know what stealing is.

The definition of stealing - or, to be more accurate, "theft" - in layman's terms is taking away from someone something that they possess. If I break into your home and steal its contents, I have deprived you of something you own. Your house contents aren’t there for you to use any more because I took them away. If I steal from a shop I have deprived the shop owner of something he owns. The shop stock isn’t there any more for the shop owner to sell because I took it away. When I copy a digital file, no-one is deprived of something he owns. No-one is prevented from doing anything because nothing has been taken away from anyone.

To put it even more simply: if downloading files is stealing, then taking someone's photograph is kidnapping.

Semantics... call it counterfeiting then.

What they are stealing is the intellectual property I believe . The artist rights to distribute their work and profit from it are taken away. Example, if you design a shirt, and someone copies that design and gives the copied shirts away you could have a warehouse full of shirts still to sell - but why would someone buy them if they can get it for free? You still have your shirts. No physical property has been stolen from you. But your design was stolen.

I agree and I was just pointing his idea that this, by definition is not stealing is silly.
 
ahh this debate could go on and on .

I still don't understand how rap artists get away with taking something like the police "every breathe you take" throwing their own ridiculous grew up in the hood lyrics on it and call it and original.
How useless and uncreative do you have to be ,to take someone else song and record your vocals and lyrics over it .

You would never see an artist release a Davinci print that they drew and apple tree on and call it an original. WTF seriously
 
gtr31":386uz70f said:
You would never see an artist release a Davinci print that they drew an apple tree on and call it an original. WTF seriously

:lol: :LOL: :thumbsup:
 
Depth, intellect, and profundity, like many things, need to be reflected in the mirror that is the perceiver.

This is a kitchy way of saying dumbshitcrap will attract and appeal to dumbshitcrap.
 
Back
Top