FacebookTwitter
Hatrack River Forum   
my profile login | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hatrack River Forum » Active Forums » Books, Films, Food and Culture » Opinions on Pirating (Page 1)

  This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4   
Author Topic: Opinions on Pirating
Jimbo the Clown
Member
Member # 9251

 - posted      Profile for Jimbo the Clown   Email Jimbo the Clown         Edit/Delete Post 
Personally, I see nothing wrong with file sharing. It's the same as borrowing a cd from a friend, except on a wider scale. Of course, if you like the artist, pay them for what their works. What about y'all; what do you guys think?
Posts: 135 | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DarkKnight
Member
Member # 7536

 - posted      Profile for DarkKnight   Email DarkKnight         Edit/Delete Post 
Except that it not the same as borrowing a cd from a friend. If your friend borrows the cd you no longer have the cd and you cannot listen to the song.
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
pH
Member
Member # 1350

 - posted      Profile for pH           Edit/Delete Post 
You really don't want to get me started on music piracy. You really don't. So I'm going to do my best to avoid this thread, but first I must say this:

It's stupid. Piracy is really, really stupid. What's the point? You can't afford to pay $.99 a song or $9.99 an album? Then how can you claim that music is important to you? Seriously, if you're not willing to pay a fee that is really not that high, you don't deserve to listen to the music.

Oh, and $14.99 a month gets you unlimited transfers to an mp3 player nowadays in a completely legal manner.

Can't pay $14.99 a month? Your problem. Not mine. What did you do BEFORE teh intrawebs made piracy possible? Did you actually have to go (gasp!) pay for music?

The music industry is an INDUSTRY. It IS a business. If you don't like it, go download from artists that personally make their songs available for free, legal download.

-pH

Posts: 9057 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
mr_porteiro_head
Member
Member # 4644

 - posted      Profile for mr_porteiro_head   Email mr_porteiro_head         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by DarkKnight:
Except that it not the same as borrowing a cd from a friend. If your friend borrows the cd you no longer have the cd and you cannot listen to the song.

I loaned a CD to a friend the other day and I was able to continue listening to the music, as I generally listen to the mp3s of it on my computer.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
vonk
Member
Member # 9027

 - posted      Profile for vonk   Email vonk         Edit/Delete Post 
yeah, what about that? you buy the cd:legal. you download the cd to you pc:legal. you give the cd to a friend:legal. but somewhere in there is piracy, right?

and if you want free music, got to archive.org. get all the free music you want and its completely legal.

Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
cheiros do ender
Member
Member # 8849

 - posted      Profile for cheiros do ender   Email cheiros do ender         Edit/Delete Post 
pH has it right. The people I know who are most into music have never downloaded, have huge collections, and regularly go to concerts. The only reason any intelligent (albeit selfish) person would want to download songs for free would be to get either their friends to like them without having to very hard or to make money, also without trying very hard.
Posts: 1138 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
mr_porteiro_head
Member
Member # 4644

 - posted      Profile for mr_porteiro_head   Email mr_porteiro_head         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
but somewhere in there is piracy, right?
Wrong.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
cheiros do ender
Member
Member # 8849

 - posted      Profile for cheiros do ender   Email cheiros do ender         Edit/Delete Post 
There's no piracy in what mr_porteiro_head did. All fair. May even encourage his friend to go buy the CD, which benefits the industry. And if his friend instead wants to download for free that's not his fault at all.
Posts: 1138 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DarkKnight
Member
Member # 7536

 - posted      Profile for DarkKnight   Email DarkKnight         Edit/Delete Post 
for mr_porteiro_head and cheiros do ender...
so if you sit down and work for hours and hours and hours and write the best PC game ever written, copyright it, market it, and then sell only one copy, you will not have any issues with that because the millions of people who play your game are only 'borrowing' that single purchased copy?

Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
vonk
Member
Member # 9027

 - posted      Profile for vonk   Email vonk         Edit/Delete Post 
ok cool. so ripping CDs and then passing them along to friends is not pirating. but buying a CD and ripping is for a friend is pirating. or am i wrong again?

and i don't think it is at all wrong to download music if it is provided legally and free.

Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
fugu13
Member
Member # 2859

 - posted      Profile for fugu13   Email fugu13         Edit/Delete Post 
There are a couple ways copyright infringement could occur in mph's example:

If he gives it (permanently) or sells it to his friend but keeps the songs on his computer.

If his friend rips the songs off the cd.

Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
mr_porteiro_head
Member
Member # 4644

 - posted      Profile for mr_porteiro_head   Email mr_porteiro_head         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
The only reason any intelligent (albeit selfish) person would want to download songs for free would be to get either their friends to like them without having to very hard or to make money, also without trying very hard.
This is not true. There are many reasons an intelligent person might want to download music for free.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
mr_porteiro_head
Member
Member # 4644

 - posted      Profile for mr_porteiro_head   Email mr_porteiro_head         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
There are a couple ways copyright infringement could occur in mph's example:

If he gives it (permanently) or sells it to his friend but keeps the songs on his computer.

This is not what happened. I loaned the CD to a friend for a week. She gave it back and no longer has the music.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
vonk
Member
Member # 9027

 - posted      Profile for vonk   Email vonk         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by cheiros do ender:
The only reason any intelligent (albeit selfish) person would want to download songs for free would be to get either their friends to like them without having to very hard or to make money, also without trying very hard.

thats rather insulting. i download music for free all the time. i download live music concerts and don't feel like this is steeling from anyone, as none of these recordings are available for sale. so how about thinking of all of the possibilities before judging people you don't know.
Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dagonee
Member
Member # 5818

 - posted      Profile for Dagonee           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
yeah, what about that? you buy the cd:legal. you download the cd to you pc:legal. you give the cd to a friend:legal. but somewhere in there is piracy, right?
Listening to the song while the CD was on loan might quite possibly not qualify for fair use (which is what authorized you to copy it in the first place).
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
fugu13
Member
Member # 2859

 - posted      Profile for fugu13   Email fugu13         Edit/Delete Post 
I didn't think it was, just pointing out that the people taking your example to extremes might be crossing one of those lines [Smile] .
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
mr_porteiro_head
Member
Member # 4644

 - posted      Profile for mr_porteiro_head   Email mr_porteiro_head         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Listening to the song while the CD was on loan might quite possibly not qualify for fair use (which is what authorized you to copy it in the first place).
I don't think I ever did. I just said that I could have. But I might have. And if I happened to, I wouldn't feel any guilt for it.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
pH
Member
Member # 1350

 - posted      Profile for pH           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by vonk:
quote:
Originally posted by cheiros do ender:
The only reason any intelligent (albeit selfish) person would want to download songs for free would be to get either their friends to like them without having to very hard or to make money, also without trying very hard.

thats rather insulting. i download music for free all the time. i download live music concerts and don't feel like this is steeling from anyone, as none of these recordings are available for sale. so how about thinking of all of the possibilities before judging people you don't know.
I find it rather insulting that people think that they "deserve" music for free.

Cue the random judgments about the music industry and how horrible it is.

-pH

Posts: 9057 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dagonee
Member
Member # 5818

 - posted      Profile for Dagonee           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
thats rather insulting. i download music for free all the time. i download live music concerts and don't feel like this is steeling from anyone, as none of these recordings are available for sale. so how about thinking of all of the possibilities before judging people you don't know.
If they are bootlegs, they're still copyright violations. Indeed, live music performances have special protection under copyright law - the authots do not have fix their live performances in a medium to gain protection.

Whether the author (copyright lingo for creator of a work) wants to sell the work or not isn't material as to whether you are violating the copyright, nor would it be worth much protection if sued about it.

Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
mr_porteiro_head
Member
Member # 4644

 - posted      Profile for mr_porteiro_head   Email mr_porteiro_head         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
I find it rather insulting that people think that they "deserve" music for free.
Has anybody expressed that attitude in this thread?
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TL
Member
Member # 8124

 - posted      Profile for TL   Email TL         Edit/Delete Post 
The music industry is horrible. If they didn't overprice their products (15 bucks for a disc that costs less than a dollar to press?) so ridiculously, there would be no need for piracy.

Piracy is the result of megalocorporategreed.

Posts: 2267 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dr Strangelove
Member
Member # 8331

 - posted      Profile for Dr Strangelove   Email Dr Strangelove         Edit/Delete Post 
Are we voicing opinions on the legality of pirating? Because I think it's pretty clearly against the law, in most cases.
Posts: 2827 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
vonk
Member
Member # 9027

 - posted      Profile for vonk   Email vonk         Edit/Delete Post 
they are not bootlegs. they are available, for free, completely legal, on www.archive.org. check it out. downloading these concerts is a way to experience live music that you will never ever get again. i also own most of the bands CDs or vinyls, but i absolutely love live music and enjoy listening to the concert recordings more than the CDs. this is not steeling, or copyright infringment. nor do i get the music because i "deserve" it. i get it because i like it and its there so i'm gonna listen to it.

all i'm saying is that there are more reasons to download free music than becuase you are cheap, lazy, selfish, or a theif.

Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
prolixshore
Member
Member # 4496

 - posted      Profile for prolixshore           Edit/Delete Post 
Who pays 15 dollars for a cd anymore? You can generally get them for 10 most of the time.

--ApostleRadio

Posts: 1612 | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
mr_porteiro_head
Member
Member # 4644

 - posted      Profile for mr_porteiro_head   Email mr_porteiro_head         Edit/Delete Post 
I think that using the term "pirating" for copyright violations is a little silly.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
prolixshore
Member
Member # 4496

 - posted      Profile for prolixshore           Edit/Delete Post 
I hope it isn't neccessary to point this out, but the cost of pressing the cd is in no way the full cost of the cd. There is also the cost of printing, the band's contract costs, the cost of shipping it out to stores, the profit for the music industry, and the profit for the store that sells it to you to consider.

--ApostleRadio

Posts: 1612 | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jay
Member
Member # 5786

 - posted      Profile for Jay   Email Jay         Edit/Delete Post 
I really thought that they could have used downloads as a way to get more listeners. I know when it used to be free I listened to more music. If I though an artist was interesting I might go and see some their other stuff. They needed to figure out how to make it work for them. Sort of like how radio is free or email is free. I guess I just see it as being an advantage for them to have more listens. I understand what they’re trying to do and say, but I think they could have dealt with it better. Somehow making it work for them through advertising or something. They way they’ve done it I think has made it so they have less when they could have had so much more.
Posts: 2845 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
blacwolve
Member
Member # 2972

 - posted      Profile for blacwolve   Email blacwolve         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by prolixshore:
Who pays 15 dollars for a cd anymore? You can generally get them for 10 most of the time.

--ApostleRadio

Um, no you really don't.
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
prolixshore
Member
Member # 4496

 - posted      Profile for prolixshore           Edit/Delete Post 
I know I do. The most I've paid for a cd in the last 4 years was 12 dollars. If you are paying 15, you are a sucker. [Smile]

--ApostleRadio

Posts: 1612 | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Scott R
Member
Member # 567

 - posted      Profile for Scott R   Email Scott R         Edit/Delete Post 
"Pirates, my bucko, have real ultimate power."

And that's all there is to it.

Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
fugu13
Member
Member # 2859

 - posted      Profile for fugu13   Email fugu13         Edit/Delete Post 
Dagonee: luckily, large numbers of musicians allow people to make, distribute, and listen to recordings of their concerts for free as official policy. I suggest people interested in finding such take a look at http://etree.org and the live music archive at http://www.archive.org/audio/etree.php .
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mintieman
Member
Member # 4620

 - posted      Profile for Mintieman   Email Mintieman         Edit/Delete Post 
I don't see why it's wrong for somebody to download music when they weren't going to purchase it in the first place.

Before piracy, I wasn't into music at all. I couldn't afford to be, being a poor student priced out of the market. After the advent of napster and such, I was able to first develop, then widen my musical taste to the point that I skip meals in order to be able to fund my constant concert ticket purchase, and purchasing of band merch.

Not to mention all the CD's I buy.

I'm not sure how monetary value correlates to depth of meaning to a person pH. I'm sorry that you think that many of us poor teenagers don't "deserve" to listen to the music considering we can't afford to purchase it, but frankly speaking the piracy-obsessed music fans underpin the sales of alot of the best bands going around today.

After all, I would never have heard most of my favourite bands without filesharing. Is it so wrong to suggest that perhaps filesharing has enriched my life, and also allowed me to support (almost fanatically at times) the musicians that truly deserve it, as opposed to being limited to the few bands I would have been able to find if I had been forced to purchase every album that caught my eye on my search for the niche of music I now call my own?

Posts: 122 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
fugu13
Member
Member # 2859

 - posted      Profile for fugu13   Email fugu13         Edit/Delete Post 
Mintieman: you're the one attributing depth of meaning to monetary value. You're saying there's nothing wrong because its not costing the other people anything, and even gaining them something. However, the reason its wrong has nothing directly to do with money, but with it violating the rights reserved to other people under the law. The people who own the copyright, having either created a work or purchased the rights from the creator (or previous rights holder), have the right to decide (absent certain "fair uses") how a work is, among other things, copied. When you copy it outside the limits they have set up under the law, you are illegitimately coopting that right.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
mr_porteiro_head
Member
Member # 4644

 - posted      Profile for mr_porteiro_head   Email mr_porteiro_head         Edit/Delete Post 
I know that I have bought more CDs because of my "pirating" activities than I ever would have bought otherwise.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TL
Member
Member # 8124

 - posted      Profile for TL   Email TL         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
The music industry is horrible. If they didn't overprice their products (15 bucks for a disc that costs less than a dollar to press?) so ridiculously, there would be no need for piracy.

Piracy is the result of megalocorporategreed.

I wanted this to fall directly under the "Cue the random judgments about the music industry and how horrible it is" post from pH...

The thread moves too fast for me.

It would have been mildly funny, there...

[Smile]

Posts: 2267 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mintieman
Member
Member # 4620

 - posted      Profile for Mintieman   Email Mintieman         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by fugu13:
Mintieman: you're the one attributing depth of meaning to monetary value. You're saying there's nothing wrong because its not costing the other people anything, and even gaining them something. However, the reason its wrong has nothing directly to do with money, but with it violating the rights reserved to other people under the law. The people who own the copyright, having either created a work or purchased the rights from the creator (or previous rights holder), have the right to decide (absent certain "fair uses") how a work is, among other things, copied. When you copy it outside the limits they have set up under the law, you are illegitimately coopting that right.

Mm, if you're going to move the argument to one solely based on current laws, than alas, I have no legs to stand on. However, the terms "right" and "wrong" dont correlate in my mind with the terms "lawful" and "unlawful". My sense of morality tells me that empirically speaking, I am doing little to no harm to the artists whom I sample the works of, and I do a great deal of good for the ones I love.

But you are right. I'm disrespecting the rights of those I claim to respect at the moment, and if it wasn't for pesky needs like uni fees and food I'd probably respect them as much as possible.

Then again, without filesharing, I wouldn't have known enough about these artists to feel guilty about disrespecting them in the first place, nevermind feel an obligation to purchase their material.

Posts: 122 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Kristen
Member
Member # 9200

 - posted      Profile for Kristen   Email Kristen         Edit/Delete Post 
Mintieman: You're too poor to afford to pay for a 99cent itunes song? I'm sorry if that's the case, that really does stink, but there are a lot of outlets for free music, and hopefully your friends can take pity on you and lend you cds. And a lot of musicians publically have stated it is okay to pirate their music.

I don't pirate any of my music. I agree with everyone who thinks it is wrong. I think all their reasons are valid.

I think it is unethical to exploit the public nature of music in the modern age: the fact that musicians rely on its widespread distribution to make a living and make a name for themselves (in most cases, touring just doesn't cut it anymore). Believe it or not, most musicians aren't multimillionaires and along with concert sales, they need those albums profits to make a living to continue to make their music as good as possible.

And shame on those who pirate classical music and other lesser known genres and new artists. The cds are usually $5 anyway! These people and orchestras need every cent they get from their record sales. Also, from a practical point of view, the more money they make, the cheaper your tickets are going to be.

Posts: 484 | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
camus
Member
Member # 8052

 - posted      Profile for camus   Email camus         Edit/Delete Post 
It is really a tragedy that online music stores usually only offer a 30 sec clip, which is usually never long enough. In the rare case where I am looking for a specific song or want to sample an artist a bit more before I buy it, I have [no] problem with "illegally" downloading the song first. Of course, I always purchase it if I do like it and intend to listen to it.

[ March 31, 2006, 04:57 PM: Message edited by: camus ]

Posts: 1256 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Bokonon
Member
Member # 480

 - posted      Profile for Bokonon           Edit/Delete Post 
We need more of it. So the Noodly One has decreed.

-Bok

Posts: 7021 | Registered: Nov 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mintieman
Member
Member # 4620

 - posted      Profile for Mintieman   Email Mintieman         Edit/Delete Post 
Kristen: I'm actually to poor to purchase music, because of... all the money I spend purchasing music. My wants are unlimited, and my resources finite. So I fill the gap by pirating music, knowing full well that it just contributes to me spending yet more money on music.
Posts: 122 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
camus
Member
Member # 8052

 - posted      Profile for camus   Email camus         Edit/Delete Post 
Mintieman,

As was mentioned earlier, there are legal channels that allow you to have access to a very large amount of music for a very low price.

Internet radio is free. In fact, there are even some programs that automatically record the music and divide them into songs for you.

Subscription music is becoming cheaper and cheaper. If you already buy one CD each month, then you're probably paying more than you would for a subsciption service.

Used CD stores are your friend.

Posts: 1256 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
vonk
Member
Member # 9027

 - posted      Profile for vonk   Email vonk         Edit/Delete Post 
i definitely recomend Winamp's Shoutcast Music. It's free radio and has an incredibly vast selection. introduced me to a lot of different music.

Edit to Add: there is also Shoutcast TV on Winamp. It has lots of free tv including the Simpsons, Family Guy, Futurama, Scrubs, the Sopranos, Seinfeld and pretty much any other tv show you could want to watch.

Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mintieman
Member
Member # 4620

 - posted      Profile for Mintieman   Email Mintieman         Edit/Delete Post 
Subscription services tend to be US only. I'm in Australia.

Used CD stores are my friend, even if the money doesn't go to the artists. Concert tickets tend to be the main way I give them my money.

Posts: 122 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Sterling
Member
Member # 8096

 - posted      Profile for Sterling   Email Sterling         Edit/Delete Post 
A few thoughts:

The problem with most of the current download-for-a-fee systems is that most of them want to install some kind of software on my system, leeching memory, eating bandwidth, and/or gleaning information from me. Some put tight controls on the music preventing me from playing it on my MP3 player, a different computer, or a burned disc. And despite these roadblocks, there's no guarantee that any of these services will actually offer music I want to hear, especially if I'm hoping to find a specific song.

While I have a lot of sympathy for the artists tring to make a living on their music, I don't have a whole lot for the industry. The record companies make fortunes off of contracts that put the artists themselves into debt. Their slowness in responding to the phenomenon of digital transfer is significantly a result of their fear of losing control and profit. Now that they've finally started to realize they have to do something in this arena or turn it over to the Napsters, Groksters, and Morphei, they frequently respond by treating customers like criminals, hindering those who want to make fair use of their music and barely putting a dent in the illegal P2P trade. Observe Sony's fiasco with covert software on music CDs.

A Seattle writer once suggested that, given the digital format of CDs, record companies ought to be sued for "bundling" nine mediocre songs with the one halfway decent song you ought to hear, much like Microsoft was under scrutiny for bundling potentially unwanted software with Windows. I think she was kidding, but it's an amusing idea.

I don't trade MP3s over P2P networks with distant strangers. I have on occasion been known to trade them with friends when there was particular music that the other might want to know about and perhaps not have access to. Which also raises the question of how one is to access music that fans have copies of but the copyright holders, in their infinite wisdom, have failed to keep on the shelves or rip to MP3 format and sell. With increasingly ludicrous intellectual property laws, a piece of music can dwindle out of existence long after its creator's death when with the help of its fans and more lenient laws it could have endured.

To say piracy is stealing is too simple. It *may* remove profits from those who would normally profit from the purchase, but only if the pirate would have bought the music if the pirate option was unavailable. Ignoring this point, speculations about "losses" from piracy tend to be accountants' pipe dreams. Unlike traditional theft, piracy does not remove the product from potential purchase by someone else.

Which is not to defend the pirates. Artists should be able to make a living from their work, and people with hard drives full of pirated swag certainly contribute to a "why *should* I pay" mentality. If more pirates were ethical, and used downloaded music only to preview music before purchase, we'd all be a lot better off. Given the unlikelihood of a sudden swell of ethics in the P2P community, and the hostile uselessness of the RIAA response, I think we need to find another option.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation has a few ideas; take them how you will.
http://www.eff.org/share/?f=compensation.html

EDIT: phrasing error

[ March 31, 2006, 07:06 PM: Message edited by: Sterling ]

Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Enigmatic
Member
Member # 7785

 - posted      Profile for Enigmatic   Email Enigmatic         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head:
I think that using the term "pirating" for copyright violations is a little silly.

You wouldn't be the only one.

--Enigmatic

Posts: 2715 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Synesthesia
Member
Member # 4774

 - posted      Profile for Synesthesia   Email Synesthesia         Edit/Delete Post 
I'm not selfish...
I simply find file sharing to be a useful tool.
Case in point, Dir en grey.
Without Audiogalaxy I never would have discovered them. I pay about 10-15 bucks for singles of them and 30 bucks for Japanese import CDs. Not to mention how must I spent to see them last week and how much I'd pay to see them in Japan.
Without file sharing I'd never have discovered the best band ever in the whole world...

But I do admit I tend to dl and have a lot of songs on my computer. This is mostly because I am impatient. Mostly I buy CDs from Half.com or these used CD places or from the library.
I do not have a "why should I pay mentality." I like the instant gratification of finding the exact song I want. I like the listening to Country, metal and R and B on Launchcast (Which I started paying for).
I need to buy more CDs. Like Pink Floyd's the Wall and Vulgar by Dir en grey.

Also, isn't bootlegging worse than "pirating"?

And what I like about magpie-ing music is how I get to listen to whatever I want and arrange it in the way I want in mixes that don't make any sense.
Not a good reason, but metal with country then with some old skool jazz song, priceless.

[ March 31, 2006, 07:13 PM: Message edited by: Synesthesia ]

Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
pH
Member
Member # 1350

 - posted      Profile for pH           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by TL:
The music industry is horrible. If they didn't overprice their products (15 bucks for a disc that costs less than a dollar to press?) so ridiculously, there would be no need for piracy.

Piracy is the result of megalocorporategreed.

Do you know how much it costs to record a cd? To get the artwork together? To PROMOTE the cd so that you've heard about it in the first place? What about the artists' living expenses?

-pH

Posts: 9057 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
pH
Member
Member # 1350

 - posted      Profile for pH           Edit/Delete Post 
And as for people going on about how you can't listen to the music before you buy it:

I've said this about a million times. Napster. I use Napster. I've been using Napster for over two years.

Napster Lite is $0 a month, but you pay $.99 a song, just like iTunes.
Napster is $9.95 a month, and you can play or download as much music as you want, but you can't take it off your computer without paying $.99 per track. I had Napster until a few weeks ago, and I listened to a TON of music on it. I found a lot of new bands on it, too.
Napster to Go is $14.95 a month, and that's what I use now. I can download all the music I want AND transfer it to one of my mp3 players (I believe you can have two per account) without paying a per-song fee. If I want to burn the songs to an actual cd, it's $.99 a track.

Most albums on Napster are $9.95 apiece, too.

Oh, and you can put it on more than one computer and transfer all of your music to the second and third computers, as well.

-pH

Posts: 9057 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Synesthesia
Member
Member # 4774

 - posted      Profile for Synesthesia   Email Synesthesia         Edit/Delete Post 
I read this book by Tori Amos where she talked about how musicians often end up owing a ton of money to their music companies for their tours, for pretty much everything.
Maybe that's a more larger problem than file sharing. Companies taking chunks of money away from young musicians, them having to pay lawyers, management, everything.A lot of musicians seem to make only a small precentage off their record sales.
It doesn't excuse it, but it's a serious problem. People are working their butts off so that managers and companies can make more money off of music than the musicians.
File-sharing is a useful tool and shouldn't really be banned.
Do you realize that Dir en grey sold out whole concert halls in Germany and America and France WITHOUT any radio exposure or exposure on MTV? Just by the power of the internet?
Companies and individual musicians should find a way to harnass that instead of trying to destroy it...
But dang, do debates stress me out... Having the physical CD (even if in the case of Dir en grey CDs or Tori Amos CDs even, I'll just take all the albums and put them on one disk in the form of MP3s and not even touch my original CD, especially with Diru, we're talking 30 bucks a pop for a CD here!) is a lot better than mp3s. Same with movies. It's better to buy the DVD or get it half price somewhere than to download some scronky little avi or mpg file. It's what the folks that are against this don't get. There's really nothing like the real thing, but you got to admit fitting 400 or 500 songs all on one CD is useful for people who cannot afford Ipods. And I tunes and places like that don't always have that obscure out of print stuff I love.

Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Sterling
Member
Member # 8096

 - posted      Profile for Sterling   Email Sterling         Edit/Delete Post 
Not that I agree with TL, but the cost of recording is a lot less than it used to be. A home recording studio based around a computer can be put together for a few thousand dollars (software, computer, hardware, room acoustics...) The cost of the artwork will vary, depending on whether all rights are purchased outright or if the artist gets a royalty per album. Promotion... Sigh. That's a whole other ball of wax. Word of mouth can't be bought, radio stations aren't supposed to be but sometimes are, and other than that, I haven't seen a single music promotion that was much besides an annoyance (especially before movies.)

As far as living expenses, videos, tours, and so on, many artists end up paying for a substantial portion of same and going into debt, trying to break even from sales of albums and knicknacks on their tours.

There's a lot about the music industry that suggests many artists could do better on their own. Which is another reason the companies are moving glacially on digital distribution.

You may have seen this, but Ms. Love's comments still bear a look: http://archive.salon.com/tech/feature/2000/06/14/love/

Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4   

   Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Hatrack River Home Page

Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2