|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Hell: An excuse for downloading music illegally?!
|
|
|
Go Anne Go
Amazonian Wonder
# 3519
|
Posted
I think the record companies should be brought to bear. While I happen to agree with the record companies prosecuting for copyright infringement, those who live by the sword of litigation threats die by the sword of litigation threats. But it isn't an excuse to download music illegally. It is, however, a great excuse for calling Camden council to report that they're flyposting!
Posts: 2227 | From: Home of the 2004 World Series Champion Red Sox | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
AngelaSo
Shipmate
# 6699
|
Posted
One doesn't need an excuse for downloading music illegally. If you claim to be poor, have a computer, and you have an internet connection, you would download.
Ange
Posts: 135 | From: London Canada | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
rosamundi
Ship's lacemaker
# 2495
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by AngelaSo:
One doesn't need an excuse for downloading music illegally. If you claim to be poor, have a computer, and you have an internet connection, you would download.
Ange
Speak for yourself. I only have broadband because my housemate bears half the cost. I can't afford to buy CDs, so I don't, and frankly, it would never cross my mind to download music. It's theft, unless the artist has given his explicit permission, or the work in question is out of copyright.
Deborah
--------------------
Website.
Ship of Fools flickr group
Posts: 2382 | From: here or there | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
lord_of_the_beans
Apprentice
# 6631
|
Posted
At www.walmart.com you can download singles for 88 cents(american) - Just FYI - almost like stealing ![[Yipee]](graemlins/spin.gif)
--------------------
voices are calling - lets do the "Time Warp" again
Posts: 49 | From: here is where I am | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ender's Shadow
Shipmate
# 2272
|
Posted
Not the original point of my post ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif) seems to have gone all purgatorial to me.....
--------------------
Test everything. Hold on to the good.
Please don't refer to me as 'Ender' - the whole point of Ender's Shadow is that he isn't Ender.
Posts: 5018 | From: Manchester, England | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Orb
Eye eye Cap'n!
# 3256
|
Posted
But music posters are really cool! As is graffiti and street art. I'm guessing others will disagree though...
--------------------
“You cannot buy the revolution. You cannot make the revolution. You can only be the revolution. It is in your spirit, or it is nowhere.” Ursula K. Le Guin, The Dispossessed
Posts: 5032 | From: Easton, Bristol | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
DJMarc
Shipmate
# 141
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ophthalmos:
But music posters are really cool! As is graffiti and street art. I'm guessing others will disagree though...
I agree. camden is slowly losing a lot of it's charm for alternative culture it is all slowly receding towards The Stables Markets and the Lock with The Underworld all on it's own up by the Tube station.
Marc
--------------------
I don't need a six pack I've got a kegg!
Posts: 132 | From: Dudley | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ophthalmos:
But music posters are really cool! As is graffiti and street art. I'm guessing others will disagree though...
We will. Some of us find it scruffy and menacing. Especially wrt graffiti - if people think that the Criminal Damage laws are for other people to obey, not them, what other laws do they take a similar view to?
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nonpropheteer
6 Syllable Master
# 5053
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by rosamundi:
I can't afford to buy CDs, so I don't, and frankly, it would never cross my mind to download music. It's theft, unless the artist has given his explicit permission, or the work in question is out of copyright.
Deborah
I download music all the time. Before CDs, my friends and I used to make copies of each others tapes, or make our own compilations because face it: There are usually only 2 or 3 good songs on any albumn. The band may have 10 good songs they want to publish, but the record companies will split them up onto different albumns to force you to buy two or three CDs to get the songs you want.
The music industry has made money off of me because of peer-to-peer music file trading.
The quality of these file transfers are rarely as good as an actual CD (IME) unless you are paying for them - in which case a royalty is being paid to the record company. If I want to check out an artist that I have heard about, say Nina Simone, I am not going to go pay $14-$25 for a CD. I will download some songs, and if I like the artist, I will consider buying the CD. Since I discovered P2P, the number of "store bought" CDs I own has increased by 10 fold (until 2001 I only owned 3 CDs). The only reason I have bought the CDs I own now is because of the availability of 'pirated' music.
That bit being said:
I hate fly posting. I hate advertising period, but realize it is a necessary evil; at least until we've totally dismantled free market capitalism. Then the government will control the record industries and can encourage the comrads...er, citizens to purchase a CD a week or something. Then advertising won't be necessary.
Posts: 2086 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Papio
Ship's baboon
# 4201
|
Posted
I pretty much agree with RooK and NP.
There's no way that I can afford Ł15 for an CD if I have no real idea what it is going to sound like (and who knows if the one song I may have heard represent the album as a whole. It may not).
There is also no way that having a few poor-quality tracks is as good as having the CD or even LP (since I like vinyl, cos I am sad ![[Razz]](tongue.gif) )
On the P2P site I use (KaZaA), a lot of the more obscure rock and metal bands (which is my rather questionable taste) only have a few tracks available. There is often no way to download the whole album and so the only way to hear the whole album is to buy it. However, as the music I listen to tends to get very poor media exposure, the only way to know what a band sounds like is often to download a few tracks or get some stuff hometaped from a friend or something.
At the moment, I am lucky if I can afford on CD every couple of months (although I try to do so) but nearly all the CD's I have bought in the last couple of years have been of bands I first heard on KaZaA and I wouldn't have bought those albums otherwise, because I wouldn't have known that I liked the bands.
Those who think that people like me are harming the music industry couldn't be more wrong. As I have argued on various other threads, there is virtually no difference between P2P downloading and tape-trading.
A lot of the better known rock and metal bands only became well known through tape-trading. Illegal tape-trading increased a given bands fanbase, which resulted in increased gig attendance and street cred for the band, and this is what got them noticed by the record labels in the first place. Ironically, this is precisely what happened in Metallica's case. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
In the same way, once they had been signed, people would hear an illegal copy of the bands wors and go out and buy it if they enjoyed it, or go to a gig, or buy a t-shirt or whatever.
Illegal music copying can and does actually help smaller bands (alternative music sales are up ) and only really "harms" bands that are definately going to sell many hundreds of thousands of copies anyway. Incidentally, I know a fair number of metal fans who now refuse to buy Metallica records or merchandise explicitly because of what they did to Napster.
The records companies themselves are harming the music industry by damaging their own credibility, just as much as the people who download 100GB of music and never buy a CD are. Actually, the only downloaders I think who do the music industry are the pirates who sell piss-poor recordings outside gigs and so forth and largely these are the people that the record companies get fed up with too.
Not sure why I have bothered to say all that, since I have said it all before ad infinitum. But hey.
--------------------
Infinite Penguins.
My "Readit, Swapit" page
My "LibraryThing" page
Posts: 12176 | From: a zoo in England. | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
Papio:
Sure you've got an excuse. Tell it to the judge.
Copyright breach is still theft. You can be sued and it can be a criminal matter. One day you may write, compose or record something and you might get cheesed off at getting nothing for your efforts.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Papio
Ship's baboon
# 4201
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
Papio:
Sure you've got an excuse. Tell it to the judge.
Copyright breach is still theft. You can be sued and it can be a criminal matter. One day you may write, compose or record something and you might get cheesed off at getting nothing for your efforts.
Not if my music gets passed around the net, my fanbase get's increased and I end up getting a record deal and a music career out of it.
Theft Smeft! Who cares? Illegal mucic trading has benifitted more bands then you can shake a stick at. That isn't just some lame excuse. It's a historical, empirical fact that can easily be found in any number of books on popular music. Do you think the bands would still rather no-one downloaded stuff for free even if it meant they had a much smaller fanbase and sold much fewer records? Do you honestly? I bloody don't!
Why do you think that some bands put free mp3's on their websites or say in interviews that downloading is ok? Because they know what side their bread is buttered on, that why. It is abso-fucking-lutely not even bloodly marginally different from tape trading. The bands who tend to slag off downloaders tend to be the famous bands who have "made it". Funny that.
As I say, alternative record sales are up, due to the increased exposure of the bands.
And no-one is gonna sue me. They are only suing people who download shitloads and shitloads, enough to make it probably that it is for commerical purposes. And they haven't started doing it in the UK yet anyway.
--------------------
Infinite Penguins.
My "Readit, Swapit" page
My "LibraryThing" page
Posts: 12176 | From: a zoo in England. | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Papio.:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
Papio:
Sure you've got an excuse. Tell it to the judge.
Copyright breach is still theft. You can be sued and it can be a criminal matter. One day you may write, compose or record something and you might get cheesed off at getting nothing for your efforts.
And no-one is gonna sue me. They are only suing people who download shitloads and shitloads, enough to make it probably that it is for commerical purposes. And they haven't started doing it in the UK yet anyway.
They are not only sueing people who download stacks of material. A 12 year old kid was sued for down loading a dozen tracks. OK, the injuction was merely threatened (most in this area are warning shots) but it is still theft.
I had a running battle with people in my church about copyright material and only after 4 years have they got the licenses. We had a production at Easter, directed by a law studnt who's dad's a lawyer and she used copyright material without permission and not subject to the limited exemptions.
If bands decide to allow copying that is their right to choose, not yours to abuse.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Papio.:
Then convince me that I am doing active harm to a band by finding out what they sound like and telling my mates about them if I think they are good. ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
You're doing no harm at all. Like you aren't often doing harm if you drive too fast. Still an offence though. Strict Liability and all that.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
irreverentkit
Apostle's Amanuensis
# 4271
|
Posted
At 88 cents (Wal Mart) or 99 cents (iTunes) a pop, you can download for cheap and stay legal.
Don't steal. If you take a 25 cent chocolate candy from the display next to the cash register, that's still stealing. Even if you think the 7-11 is making too much money off that candy, it's still stealing.
P.S. Kazaa acts like spyware and all kinds of people can get INTO your computer. Mr Irreverent, governor of all computer paranoia and protection, says just say NO to Kazaa!
Posts: 1010 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Go Anne Go
Amazonian Wonder
# 3519
|
Posted
Ah, here we go again. How MANY times have I heard this conversation! The argument that "oh, it increased my CD sales" Yes, you maybe, but not generally. "Alternative music sales are up" - statistically this is the biggest pantsload out there.
As Sioni said, tell it to the judge. Here's the simple facts:
1. Copyright. Break it down and it is really simple - the right to copy. If you have the right to copy then you can copy under the terms you've been permitted. If you don't have the right to copy, then you don't. End of freaking story. Ways that give you permission:
a) the explicit permission of the author. Which might be the band *and it just might not be the band.*
b) implied licenses - having MP3s to download on a website for example. These in fact may be specific licenses - we allow you to copy this for your own personal use, etc. Read the terms, baby.
c) the copyright expiring on a piece of music - currently a varying range of 20-75 years after the death of the author based on where you are.
Think of it like a house. When we were all growing up, there was always a house in the neighbourhood where everyone ran through, in and out, all day, the owners didn't care, were happy to have everyone round, come play in the pool, what have you. Some bands (Phish, the Grateful Dead) are like this. And some bands, just getting started, etc are like this too. And there was always the other house which was locked up tight, with a vicious dobie named "Muffin" that you weren't allowed in without express invitation. Other bands are like this. There are many reasons why they might be like this - onerous record company contract terms, selfishness, fear of what might happen if the music is released generally. But the point is, just because the first set of people let you in their house all the time doesn't mena the second set of people gave you permission. And any kind of justification you come up with really isn't going to work.
Yes, they are suing people. Even people who've just done relatively minor downloads. Currently, plenty of websites allow you to download just the one song that you want for under a dollar at a time, and new music is being added to these sites every day. Mostly the suits are being settled out of court, basically because there's no defense at law to this.
--------------------
Go Anne Go, you is the bestest shipmate evah - Kelly Alveswww.goannego.com
Posts: 2227 | From: Home of the 2004 World Series Champion Red Sox | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Papio
Ship's baboon
# 4201
|
Posted
Go Anne Go:
I see no evidence at all that I am doing anything wrong. I am not buying fewer C.D's then I would be otherwise, if anything I am buying more.
Sales of less well known albums are up. If I am wrong, prove it. And frankly, I actually don't care if you think I am immoral. Sorry and all that, but I really, truly don't give a monkeys.
The law is simply wrong on this issue and the record companies are talking a load of shite. Those are the facts, so far I am concerned.
Do the record companies, or anybody else, actually believe that cracking down on KaZaA or whatever is going to stop music "theft"? Do they think that it wasn't invented before most people had the internet?
If they do, they are simply cretins. If they don't, but they think that cracking down on P2P downloading is going to "solve" the "problem" then they are equally cretinous.
Posts: 12176 | From: a zoo in England. | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Go Anne Go
Amazonian Wonder
# 3519
|
Posted
Whether or not you are wrong is a moral question. What you are doing is definitely illegal. I allege that what you are doing is also wrong, in the classic "think what would happen if they did it to you?" format.
CD sales went down due to Napster and Kazaa, and now after crackdowns they're up again. Plus, legal downloads of singles at reasonable prices are taking off. There are PLENTY of legal alternatives, and they're not expensive, so really what you're doing when you illegally copy music is taking money out of artists mouths. The law has been this way since the Statute of Anne way back when. Pertains to books, music, art, the whole lot.
Justify all you want, but I'm sure not going to defend you when the Federales come for you! If you think you're so in the right, why not turn yourself in to challenge the law? Because you're a big mouth and small trousers, that's why.
--------------------
Go Anne Go, you is the bestest shipmate evah - Kelly Alveswww.goannego.com
Posts: 2227 | From: Home of the 2004 World Series Champion Red Sox | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
I've tried to think where it says that if people are paranoid cretins it's okay to steal from them, but I can't. Perhaps you will enlighten us, Papio?
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
duchess
Ship's Blue Blooded Lady
# 2764
|
Posted
What-the-law-says put aside...and how people are stealing from Metallica etc put aside...
How is downloading music (mp3) different from just recording a song off the radio?
I honestly would like to know.
--------------------
♬♭ We're setting sail to the place on the map from which nobody has ever returned ♫♪♮
Ship of Fools-World Party
Posts: 11197 | From: Do you know the way? | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Go Anne Go
Amazonian Wonder
# 3519
|
Posted
Legally, downloading a song isn't any different than recording it off the radio. Practically, recording a song off the radio loses something in the transmission (announcing, back announcing, fade in and out, static, cutting off ends to segue into something else), and if you're taping it, it also loses something in the reproduction.
Taping off radio (and in fact VCR recording) in the US now includes a small fee on every blank tape and blank VCR tape to go to compensate copyright holders based on the amount of play etc they get. But with taping, every subsequent taping loses a little bit of quality, tapes stretch, etc. It also took a fair bit of time and effort to cue up tapes, etc. Now through the magic of techonology, it can all be automated and through digital techology no quality is lost in quick, cheap easy reproductions. This is partly why the huge fuss.
Well, that and people like Papio, who think theft is ok if it suits them just fine. If he's in the UK, the British arm of the RIAA is indeed filing lawsuits and if he's not, I'm quite certain there's someone he can turn himself into. "Hey! I'm a copyright infringer!" Won't get you the chicks, baby.
--------------------
Go Anne Go, you is the bestest shipmate evah - Kelly Alveswww.goannego.com
Posts: 2227 | From: Home of the 2004 World Series Champion Red Sox | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Go Anne Go
Amazonian Wonder
# 3519
|
Posted
I think on my next visit to Blighty, I'm going to Papio's house and steal his car. It would suit me well, and he's a cretin, so under his own justifications this is just fine! It might even cause me to buy my own car if I like owning his. But if I don't like it, well then I can just keep it anyway and not buy a car.
--------------------
Go Anne Go, you is the bestest shipmate evah - Kelly Alveswww.goannego.com
Posts: 2227 | From: Home of the 2004 World Series Champion Red Sox | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Papio
Ship's baboon
# 4201
|
Posted
Um, I don't own a car and I rather suspect that the number of music fans who have never downloaded a song, or taped off the radio or tape a friends album must be rather tiny.
It's hardly as though it is an unheard of thing to do, but I guess that anyone who's ever done it is a cretin. Ah well.
Some people here are acting as though I have downloaded thousands of songs (I haven't) or as though anyone who has ever owned an illegal copy of a song is a major-league criminal or something. Really, it ain't a big deal. I know (in real life) almost no-one who would even consider it an issue whatsoever. I can't believe that people are getting upset cos someone they have never met downloads a few songs off an album before buying it. I mean, I really can't see why people are making a fuss about it. It strikes me as rather sad.
Posts: 12176 | From: a zoo in England. | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Go Anne Go
Amazonian Wonder
# 3519
|
Posted
So where's the line? One song? Ten songs?? A hundred? A thousand????? Where's the line between what you think is ok, and what you think isn't? And why is that the line? Since you can now download songs legally and cheaply, why don't you do that?
You might not have a car, but you get my point. Trying to justify something illegal, being so proud of it, and yet not willing to turn yourself in (so it obviously isn't some great stand against infringements of civil liberties) does make you a cretin, not to mention your horrid language.
Some people call us sad. Other people call us internationally qualified copyright lawyers. Like say, my Mom, and the degrees on my wall.
--------------------
Go Anne Go, you is the bestest shipmate evah - Kelly Alveswww.goannego.com
Posts: 2227 | From: Home of the 2004 World Series Champion Red Sox | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
Some call you a waste of time.
I don't consider downloading MP3s for evaluation purposes a big deal. Of course, I also don't consider $0.99 per song a big deal either, so I tend to use iTunes while the record companies fool themselves about music piracy. It doubt it matters much, because the end result is the same: the music companies are going to have an increasingly difficult time selling the majority of the utter shyte they produce.
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Papio
Ship's baboon
# 4201
|
Posted
Where did I say that it was some "great stand for civil liberties"? Find where I said that and I'll cave in . And If the word "bloody" is horrid then you ought to hear me when I am actually angry.
So, wanting to know what an album is like before I buy it makes me a cretin, but hammering on at someone over a total non-issue, and misrepresenting what that person is saying doesn't make you a cretin? Ok, I'll bear that in mind.
Oh, and the fact that you have a degree clearly makes you much brighter than some poor sod who is about to graduate. Yeah, it must do.
I think I would be rather sad if I was "proud"! that I have the ability to double click on a song on KaZaA, and I really don't think that FYI. I am not "proud", I just can't believe that anyone actually thinks that I am some sort of bogey-man because I am sick of buying albums and then discovering that the one or two songs I have heard legally do not actually represent the album.
And I am also annoyed by people who simply won't acknowledge that tape-trading was an important factor in some bands popularity.
--------------------
Infinite Penguins.
My "Readit, Swapit" page
My "LibraryThing" page
Posts: 12176 | From: a zoo in England. | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Papio
Ship's baboon
# 4201
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
I've tried to think where it says that if people are paranoid cretins it's okay to steal from them, but I can't. Perhaps you will enlighten us, Papio?
Again, where did I say that?
I said (in summary) that record companies were cretins if they think they can stop music piracy and that bands need exposure, esp if they are not well known. I have since said that I don't consider downloading a few songs to be a big deal and RooK has (i think?) agreed with me.
I also said, on another tediously similar thread, that wealthy owners of record comapnies are not going to miss a bit of loose change. Which they aren't.
I have not said that any theft is fine so long as the victim is a cretin. I simply have not said that.
--------------------
Infinite Penguins.
My "Readit, Swapit" page
My "LibraryThing" page
Posts: 12176 | From: a zoo in England. | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
FatMac
Ship's Macintosh
# 2914
|
Posted
I have only one thing to say (in a very concerned and pious voice):
"What Would Jesus Do?"
--------------------
Do not beware the slippery slope - it is where faith resides.
Do not avoid the grey areas - they are where God works.
Posts: 1706 | From: Sydney | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by linzc:
I have only one thing to say (in a very concerned and pious voice):
"What Would Jesus Do?"
Possibly something like "Rendering unto Caesar..?"
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Papio.:
Do the record companies, or anybody else, actually believe that cracking down on KaZaA or whatever is going to stop music "theft"? Do they think that it wasn't invented before most people had the internet?
If they do, they are simply cretins. If they don't, but they think that cracking down on P2P downloading is going to "solve" the "problem" then they are equally cretinous.
I took this as part of your defense of downloading music illegally. If it was not meant as such, I withdraw my remarks about your argument. But I still think you're doing something you ought to know is wrong.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
AngelaSo
Shipmate
# 6699
|
Posted
RuthW, I know you are a great believer of one shouldn't downland music from the net. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
I agree with Papio. In fact, music "theft" has been around for a looong time - Long before the invention of KaZzA or other P2P software.
And pop music CDs are really overpriced. I agree that a classical music CD should worth $20CAD or more, knowing that many classical musicians aren't making that much of money. Pop stars like Britney Spears already have loads of money and they don't need me to contribute to their income.
Posts: 135 | From: London Canada | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
The oil companies are evil and gasoline prices have gone through the roof while my income has remained the same, so I'll just fill up the tank without paying.
What is the difference between that and what you describe, Angela?
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Go Anne Go
Amazonian Wonder
# 3519
|
Posted
Ok, so now the arguments seem to boil down to:
1) big music companies won't miss a bit of "spare change" so it is ok to steal from them.
2) Britney spears seems to have a lot of money, so it is ok to steal from her.
3) Classical musicans don't make a lot of money (although I live round the corner from Yo Yo Ma, and he seems to be doing just fine, thank you) so it is not ok to steal from them.
Apparently, it is all relative.
Tape trading did help some bands, but not many. Also, people were more likely to buy a regular copy of the tape as the copied version was diminished in quality. Not true with MP3s. And in fact there *was* litigation over copying on blank tapes, which is why in the US at least there is a surcharge included in the price of every blank tape to cover copyright infringement! (Ditto, VHS tapes.) So everyone had to pay for it, whehter they were doing it or not. Which is what is happening and going to happen more as people pirate music. I'm being forced to pay for Papio's crimes. We all are! What a cretin!
Oh, and Mr. "About to get a degree" I'm not claiming betterment than you because I have a degree. I'm claiming better education than you because I'm about to finish my fourth degree. In this area! I'm claiming I'm better than you because I don't steal.
--------------------
Go Anne Go, you is the bestest shipmate evah - Kelly Alveswww.goannego.com
Posts: 2227 | From: Home of the 2004 World Series Champion Red Sox | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Go Anne Go
Amazonian Wonder
# 3519
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Papio.:
Where did I say that it was some "great stand for civil liberties"? Find where I said that and I'll cave in
You're trying to justify somehting illegal, without being willing to take the consequences for it. While things that are illegal can be wrong, like say the old Jim Crow laws, the people that broke those laws were willing to be made an example of to show the inhumanity of those laws. You're not. YOu're just being a weasel. You still haven't said how many song you think are ok to download before it is just too much.
quote:
So, wanting to know what an album is like before I buy it makes me a cretin, but hammering on at someone over a total non-issue, and misrepresenting what that person is saying doesn't make you a cretin? Ok, I'll bear that in mind.
There's nothing wrong with wanting to know what an album sounds like before you buy it. What is wrong with it is not using the many many many legal ways of doing it (borrowing it, scanning it at the local disk station at the music store, listening to tracks on the radio, previewing it on a bands website, iTunes, Napster, to name but a few) but instead using an illegal way to do it.
quote:
Oh, and the fact that you have a degree clearly makes you much brighter than some poor sod who is about to graduate. Yeah, it must do.
That's one semester shy of four degrees (two each US and UK) in this particular area of specialty.
quote:
I think I would be rather sad if I was "proud"! that I have the ability to double click on a song on KaZaA, and I really don't think that FYI. I am not "proud", I just can't believe that anyone actually thinks that I am some sort of bogey-man because I am sick of buying albums and then discovering that the one or two songs I have heard legally do not actually represent the album.
No, what is sad is that with so many legal alternatives open to you and open to you easily, you choose to freely break the law because it tickles you and suits your fancy.
And I am also annoyed by people who simply won't acknowledge that tape-trading was an important factor in some bands popularity.
[I am more than annoyed by your wilful neglect of Preview Post. Fool]
[ 04. June 2004, 23:02: Message edited by: Sarkycow ]
--------------------
Go Anne Go, you is the bestest shipmate evah - Kelly Alveswww.goannego.com
Posts: 2227 | From: Home of the 2004 World Series Champion Red Sox | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nonpropheteer
6 Syllable Master
# 5053
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
The oil companies are evil and gasoline prices have gone through the roof while my income has remained the same, so I'll just fill up the tank without paying.
...but the seller has no right to say what you do with your gas after you buy it. You can siphon off a few gallons to give to your friends or a stranded motorist. You can even resell it if you want and can find a buyer.
If CDs were sold like gasoline or any other product, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Posts: 2086 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Papio
Ship's baboon
# 4201
|
Posted
RuthW - I do understand your position and cheers for withdrawing your remark since you did indeed misunderstand what I was saying. My fault perhaps.
GoAnneGo - No, your not "being forced to pay for my crimes" because, as I have already said, I don't in fact download as a substitute for purchasing. I buy CD's legally and I probably bought more CD's then I would have otherwise. The reason I don't buy more CD's then I do is that I genuinely cannot afford to do so. I now believe that you have never downloaded a song illegally, however, since you apparently think that they are of the same quality as a CD. They are not.
Oh, and it's hell, if you think that I should specify how many songs I have downloaded then tough luck cos I ain't gonna. If I like the songs, I buy the record and if I don't like the songs I delete them.
As for the rest of you unsubstantiated remarks about me, I really don't care. You can twist my words and call me fluffy names but just don't think that I give a shit.
Posts: 12176 | From: a zoo in England. | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Papio
Ship's baboon
# 4201
|
Posted
For the benifit of the terminally stupid, if I don't know what a band sounds like or I don't like the band, I am not going to buy that CD anyway. Therefore, the record company are not losing money because I haven't purchased the CD since I had no intention of doing so anyway.
If, on the other hand, I download 2 or 3 songs of a band that I have heard of but haven't heard, like the tracks and then buy the CD then the record comapany are actually making money from me.
The reason is: I have bought a CD which I would not have purchased if I hadn't heard it. Paying to download songs defeats the object of this.
So, in my case at least, you arguement is horseshit, Anne.
--------------------
Infinite Penguins.
My "Readit, Swapit" page
My "LibraryThing" page
Posts: 12176 | From: a zoo in England. | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rain Dog
Shipmate
# 4085
|
Posted
Talking of which one of the artist's I got into via P2P downloads (and have since bought all of the records) has come out in favour of what I was doing all along ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Thea Gilmore Interview here
The bits re: P2P:
quote:
How about file-sharing - some argue that lots of artists are losing out because of it...
Well lots of records companies are arguing that anyway!
So do you think it has helped you or the opposite?
Well I think the whole hoo-ha about file-sharing is a load of bollocks. The record industry will argue that it's killing the music business. That's rubbish - what's killing the music business is record companies with their lack of belief in music and their lack of faith in artists they can't control every single aspect of. At the same time, I don't like the thought that people think that music should be for nothing, I think that's wrong; I think music, like any form of art, should have a price on it; people shouldn't feel it should be free but I think that file-sharing is a fantastic tool. I tend to find that most people who file-share, are the very same people you'll find in a record shop on a Saturday, buying a record they downloaded off the internet.
(C) CDtimes.co.uk
(Admins, I hope the above quoting is OK. If not, please remove the quote and leave the link)
Posts: 620 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Nonpropheteer:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
The oil companies are evil and gasoline prices have gone through the roof while my income has remained the same, so I'll just fill up the tank without paying.
...but the seller has no right to say what you do with your gas after you buy it. You can siphon off a few gallons to give to your friends or a stranded motorist. You can even resell it if you want and can find a buyer.
If CDs were sold like gasoline or any other product, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
CDs are sold like gasoline, and you can give them away, sell them, buy used CDs, whatever. There's a great store here that buys and sells used CDs.
So I assume what you are pointing at is the fact that CDs can be duplicated. And you're right, in that way they are not like gasoline. Though if there's a patent on a process to refine oil into gasoline and you infringe on that patent, you'd be in legal hot water with the oil company who owned the patent.
In any case, stealing is stealing is stealing. And I don't know why that is so hard to understand.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rain Dog:
(Admins, I hope the above quoting is OK. If not, please remove the quote and leave the link)
So you recognize the importance of copyright law?
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Papio.:
For the benifit of the terminally stupid,
Anne? Or me? Either way, you might want to rethink that phrase.
quote:
if I don't know what a band sounds like or I don't like the band, I am not going to buy that CD anyway. Therefore, the record company are not losing money because I haven't purchased the CD since I had no intention of doing so anyway.
There are all sorts of legal ways to find out what a band sounds like. And even if there weren't, you'd still be stealing.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Papio
Ship's baboon
# 4201
|
Posted
I think the point is that the alleged harm of downloading is outweighed, in at least some case including my own, by the fact that people are getting a broader knowledge of music and are therefore more aware of what that are doing when they go to the record store.
(Nods agreeably at Rain Dog)
--------------------
Infinite Penguins.
My "Readit, Swapit" page
My "LibraryThing" page
Posts: 12176 | From: a zoo in England. | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Papio
Ship's baboon
# 4201
|
Posted
For the benifit of anybody who can't grasp the fact that the record companies are not losing money because I haven't purchased an album that I wouldn't have purchased even if I had no way of pirating it?
--------------------
Infinite Penguins.
My "Readit, Swapit" page
My "LibraryThing" page
Posts: 12176 | From: a zoo in England. | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rain Dog
Shipmate
# 4085
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
quote:
Originally posted by Rain Dog:
(Admins, I hope the above quoting is OK. If not, please remove the quote and leave the link)
So you recognize the importance of copyright law?
Not wanting to get shipOfFools into trouble was my main objective
But generally I do only use P2P to get bootlegs of concerts (which are given the thumbs up by the likes of Ryan Adams, Wilco, Willard Grant Conspiracy and most bands I'm into). I know quite a few artists personally and most of them feel sharing is infringing on their intellectual property - granted they have relatively low profile so it allows them to not be hit as hard by p2p and they have a loyal fanbase who will always buy their records. Globally, I do think artists should be protected from this so globally yes I do agree with copyright protection but I think record companies are barking up the wrong tree and failing to see there's a lot of promotion in P2P sharing.
It's their their lack of support of real artists that's killing them not P2P.
[ 04. June 2004, 15:59: Message edited by: Rain Dog ]
Posts: 620 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rain Dog
Shipmate
# 4085
|
Posted
missed a crucial NOT in that last post.
All the artist I know think sharing is _not_ infringing on their inellectual property.
Posts: 620 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
