i love how people are too lazy and cheap to pay 0.99 for each song.
So let me get this straight…I can pay $15 for a cd with 12 songs; new, in-store. Or I can buy one second hand from Amazon or a pawnshop for like $5. Or….I can download a digital copy for about $12, and burn it on a (separately purchased) cd, and print all the artwork myself.
Not going with the last option makes me cheap and lazy?
Sorry, but I think it means I’m not a total sucker.
You cannot compare a mix tape to digital downloads. So you tape a song off the radio, or share a tape with a friend. You have to buy a tape (record companies got royalties on those I believe) and physically make the copy and physically hand it to your friend. Lot of work for ONE copy, and you're still adding money to the music industry. But you put a digital song in your share folder and thousands of people can get it in seconds for absolutely free without you having to lift a finger. That's a hugely different problem.
And I think you misapprehend downloaders. Many of them are casual music fans. Maybe they would buy, maybe they wouldn't. But if there was no other way for them to get that latest hit pop single, they are a hell of a lot more likely to buy the cd. Now, they'll download it and not even think about buying. On the flipside, I think a lot of these people are opting to buy those singles through itunes or amazon. It's a matter of convenience and just getting a single.
How is downloading something easier than ripping it? It takes 5 minutes to rip a whole cd you bought onto your computer as opposed to potentially hours trying to track down all the songs in varying qualities and potentially loaded with viruses or weird edits...
I can compare them…I did and will again :P Pretty sure there are taxes on blank cd’s too.
It’s the downloaders’ choice whether or not they share music they d/l…..But how is it any different to download a song than to record it from the radio?
My point is that most people have a pretty finite entertainment budget. This money would likely not be going to the record companies either way. Chances are, casual fans would be using the radio, borrowing/pirating from friends etc…hell, my music collection started by borrowing vinyl from the library and taping…I disagree that casual fans would be buying these discs en masse. I think hardcore fans are spending those same dollars on special edition sets and higher concert ticket prices….it’s not like they would have more music-budget-money just because downloading is no longer an option.
Yes, I’m rationalizing theft and don’t give a fuck! ...I'm also playing devil's advocate.
How much new material can a person realistically purchase? How many new artists and tours can a person support? The record companies are no more entitled to turn a profit on hundreds acts a year than I am to listen to or 'discover' said acts....They can’t realistically expect every artist they spend money promoting to become a platinum seller with a sold out tour….yet because someone only sells 300,000 copies of the follow up to his smash-hit debut, it gets blamed on downloading regardless of the product or other factors….it’s an easy excuse for the industry to justify bad management. I’m surprised the fuckers aren’t looking for bailouts.
Throw in 6 or 7 format changes in the last 30 years, and pardon my french…but they can fuck themselves. Find a way to adapt or become extinct, same as the industry has with every tech advancement since it's infancy. Making examples of some random music fan is not going to stuff this genie back in the bottle.
And downloading is WAY easier and faster than ripping….not that I’d know
I’m guessing you don’t use torrent….a person can find an entire album (discography for that matter) in seconds…with a decent connection; you can d/l an album in about 2 minutes flat. Type the album name into a search, check file quality, click download….quick virus scan, done. It would take longer to find the hard copy disc in a collection than to do that.
My biggest concern with the whole file sharing debate is that it may be all the excuse western governments need to bring in sweeping changes to the way the internet works as a whole.
Yes, I’m rationalizing theft and don’t give a fuck!
well thereya go!
honestly, i think we all - or at least most of us - have burned a CD, DVD, etc....for our own personal use after renting, or borrowing from a friend, or even from a website. however, being the one to actually distribute said material on the internet, as it seems this woman did....is a whole other category of 'rationalizing theft' no?
Yes, I’m rationalizing theft and don’t give a fuck!
well thereya go!
honestly, i think we all - or at least most of us - have burned a CD, DVD, etc....for our own personal use after renting, or borrowing from a friend, or even from a website. however, being the one to actually distribute said material on the internet, as it seems this woman did....is a whole other category of 'rationalizing theft' no?
hey, I call it like it is...I think the rationalization is mostly justified, for the reasons stated above.
And it depends what software you use, and how careful (or care-free) you were about sharing the file yourself. I haven't even read the article, but I'd guess its possible that this woman didn't even know she was sharing the files herself.
Yes, I’m rationalizing theft and don’t give a fuck!
well thereya go!
honestly, i think we all - or at least most of us - have burned a CD, DVD, etc....for our own personal use after renting, or borrowing from a friend, or even from a website. however, being the one to actually distribute said material on the internet, as it seems this woman did....is a whole other category of 'rationalizing theft' no?
hey, I call it like it is...I think the rationalization is mostly justified, for the reasons stated above.
And it depends what software you use, and how careful (or care-free) you were about sharing the file yourself. I haven't even read the article, but I'd guess its possible that this woman didn't even know she was sharing the files herself.
spoken like a true rationalizer.....;)
and no offense meant, i am one of the best rationalizers out there.
on this issue tho, i happen to disagree. and as to this exact case, this woman is never going to be expected to cough up that cash, it was/is simply a 'message'......
Point 1: a mix tape/ radio recording is not being sold for comercial use and therefore you are protected under the Home Recording Act of 1992. However digital downloading/file sharing is done through a business which means you are downloading for comercial use which is in violation of copyrights.
The downside is that good record companies sign good artists, without record companies you'll have to filter through loads of shitty artists in order to find an artist you'd be interested in.
This is the beauty of the internet in general….a level playing field for all. I have no problem with that whatsoever. I disagree on the filtering too... Record companies do not sign only good artists ….they sign what they think will sell….loads of shitty artists to filter thru.
The internet makes it easier than ever to find good artists, thru related searches, genre searches, ‘similar to’ links, youtube etc etc…all the promotion avenues that rely on advertising or subscriptions for their income are still available to the industry. what sharing DOES do is give us the option to filter out all the GARBAGE record companies tell us we should be listening to, and lets us easily find what we like instead.
New artists won't be able to distribute vinyl or tangible forms of music nationally
Why not? You mean they won’t be able to distribute to box stores in one massive initial shipment….mail order seems to work for cd distribution. Niche markets like vinyl shouldn’t even factor into the discussion. Again, they’re just cutting out middle men, and taking further control of their own businesses.
My only issues with cutting out record companies, is that most of these companies have people who can take bands and nurture them and actually make them sound better (not just through recording but by actually improving their skills). Record companies can also front the money for things like tours or promotional stuff and lobby record companies to get their acts on the radio. I mean if you are a small band try walking into a bank and getting a loan for a cross country tour, or to produce some singles, or posters, it isn't going to happen. Like other posters have mentioned I don't have time to listen to thousands of crappy garage bands with limited talent that will probably go no where.
spoken like a true rationalizer.....;)
and no offense meant, i am one of the best rationalizers out there.
on this issue tho, i happen to disagree. and as to this exact case, this woman is never going to be expected to cough up that cash, it was/is simply a 'message'......
none taken, I know what you're saying. I know it's not black and white.
the point that it's a 'message' is part of what bothers me. Making examples is not justice, nor is it fair to the person being made an example of....
Singling out one woman and completely turning her life upside down is a joke. The symbolic amount is a joke too....maybe she'll get to declare bankrupcy and never pay a cent (and destroy her credit etc etc) ...over something that's imo trivial and commonplace. It's still way too harsh a penalty, even if she doesn't have to pay it all.
spoken like a true rationalizer.....;)
and no offense meant, i am one of the best rationalizers out there.
on this issue tho, i happen to disagree. and as to this exact case, this woman is never going to be expected to cough up that cash, it was/is simply a 'message'......
none taken, I know what you're saying. I know it's not black and white.
the point that it's a 'message' is part of what bothers me. Making examples is not justice, nor is it fair to the person being made an example of....
Singling out one woman and completely turning her life upside down is a joke. The symbolic amount is a joke too....maybe she'll get to declare bankrupcy and never pay a cent (and destroy her credit etc etc) ...over something that's imo trivial and commonplace. It's still way too harsh a penalty, even if she doesn't have to pay it all.
as i said, we simply can agree to disagree there. i don't think it is so 'trivial and commonplace' and as long as it is considered illegal, well then.......
i think it's one thing to do so for personal use, and quite another to distribute....tho that's only imho. as to her knowledge/intent, i have no idea....but i don't think ignorance is much of a defense. i also believe i'ts been mentioned a few times she WAs offered other, much smaller amounts way earlier...and she refused, so as you say...it certainly isn't black and white there.
I can compare them…I did and will again :P Pretty sure there are taxes on blank cd’s too.
It’s the downloaders’ choice whether or not they share music they d/l…..But how is it any different to download a song than to record it from the radio?
My point is that most people have a pretty finite entertainment budget. This money would likely not be going to the record companies either way. Chances are, casual fans would be using the radio, borrowing/pirating from friends etc…hell, my music collection started by borrowing vinyl from the library and taping…I disagree that casual fans would be buying these discs en masse. I think hardcore fans are spending those same dollars on special edition sets and higher concert ticket prices….it’s not like they would have more music-budget-money just because downloading is no longer an option.
Yes, I’m rationalizing theft and don’t give a fuck! ...I'm also playing devil's advocate.
How much new material can a person realistically purchase? How many new artists and tours can a person support? The record companies are no more entitled to turn a profit on hundreds acts a year than I am to listen to or 'discover' said acts....They can’t realistically expect every artist they spend money promoting to become a platinum seller with a sold out tour….yet because someone only sells 300,000 copies of the follow up to his smash-hit debut, it gets blamed on downloading regardless of the product or other factors….it’s an easy excuse for the industry to justify bad management. I’m surprised the fuckers aren’t looking for bailouts.
Throw in 6 or 7 format changes in the last 30 years, and pardon my french…but they can fuck themselves. Find a way to adapt or become extinct, same as the industry has with every tech advancement since it's infancy. Making examples of some random music fan is not going to stuff this genie back in the bottle.
And downloading is WAY easier and faster than ripping….not that I’d know
I’m guessing you don’t use torrent….a person can find an entire album (discography for that matter) in seconds…with a decent connection; you can d/l an album in about 2 minutes flat. Type the album name into a search, check file quality, click download….quick virus scan, done. It would take longer to find the hard copy disc in a collection than to do that.
My biggest concern with the whole file sharing debate is that it may be all the excuse western governments need to bring in sweeping changes to the way the internet works as a whole.
I'm not disputing that record companies suck. I'll be perfectly happy seeing them go the way of the dodo. They're a terribly run business. Personally, I don't give a shit whether or not you download. I've done it in the past myself. There are plenty of solid reasons for opting to do it. My point is only that all your good reasons and rationalizations don't change the fact that it's illegal and that you could get fucked if you get caught. So by all means, download away. But don't cry to me if you end up getting busted and asked to pay a lot of $ for it. I say the same thing to pot smokers... yeah, it should be legal and the whole crack down on it is fucking stupid. But them's the breaks, deal with it.
And I don't believe there is such a thing as torrent. I think it's a huge hoax people are playing on us because it is SO IMPOSSIBLE to figure out how to use that nobody can possibly be getting any benefit from it
I'm not disputing that record companies suck. I'll be perfectly happy seeing them go the way of the dodo. They're a terribly run business. Personally, I don't give a shit whether or not you download. I've done it in the past myself. There are plenty of solid reasons for opting to do it. My point is only that all your good reasons and rationalizations don't change the fact that it's illegal and that you could get fucked if you get caught. So by all means, download away. But don't cry to me if you end up getting busted and asked to pay a lot of $ for it. I say the same thing to pot smokers... yeah, it should be legal and the whole crack down on it is fucking stupid. But them's the breaks, deal with it.
And I don't believe there is such a thing as torrent. I think it's a huge hoax people are playing on us because it is SO IMPOSSIBLE to figure out how to use that nobody can possibly be getting any benefit from it
hmmmm....I'm guessing you're going to be a prosecutor?
Glad others can see the drug war paralells here....there is nothing worse than somene admitting a law is bs, but then saying, 'you get busted, deal with it'. What happened to standing up to injustice? Do we turn our backs on our fellow man because an unjust law doesn't affect us personally?
and c'mon ss, I know you're smart enough to figure out torrents with about fifteen minutes effort....it's not that hard; there are tutorials all over the web. literally 10-15 mins to set up and you're rolling. Then you can d/l all the shit you'd not have paid for anyway
I'm not disputing that record companies suck. I'll be perfectly happy seeing them go the way of the dodo. They're a terribly run business. Personally, I don't give a shit whether or not you download. I've done it in the past myself. There are plenty of solid reasons for opting to do it. My point is only that all your good reasons and rationalizations don't change the fact that it's illegal and that you could get fucked if you get caught. So by all means, download away. But don't cry to me if you end up getting busted and asked to pay a lot of $ for it. I say the same thing to pot smokers... yeah, it should be legal and the whole crack down on it is fucking stupid. But them's the breaks, deal with it.
And I don't believe there is such a thing as torrent. I think it's a huge hoax people are playing on us because it is SO IMPOSSIBLE to figure out how to use that nobody can possibly be getting any benefit from it
hmmmm....I'm guessing you're going to be a prosecutor?
Glad others can see the drug war paralells here....there is nothing worse than somene admitting a law is bs, but then saying, 'you get busted, deal with it'. What happened to standing up to injustice? Do we turn our backs on our fellow man because an unjust law doesn't affect us personally?
and c'mon ss, I know you're smart enough to figure out torrents with about fifteen minutes effort....it's not that hard; there are tutorials all over the web. literally 10-15 mins to set up and you're rolling. Then you can d/l all the shit you'd not have paid for anyway
Prosecutors won't have me, I've got a record. I'm much more on the criminal defense side of things anyway. I'm not saying you shouldn't take a stand or make waves about it. But be honest, you sitting home in your skivvies downloading albums isn't exactly making a statement on anything to anyone. That's not standing up to injustice and you're not an activist. You want to make a difference, do something about it. But don't try to act like you're making some sort of noble self-sacrificing act of civil disobedience. You're stealing music. Sure on the scale of laws you could break it's at the bottom, but it's still the law and you know what you're risking to do it.
I also do all I can to change marijuana laws and the like, but that doesn't mean that I expect that if I ever get busted I'm going to be let off the hook. I'd suck it up, because I know that's what the law is and I knew that going in.
As to torrent, I've tried many many times and it is never going to work for me. Besides, it seems like an absurd concept... you download a program so that you can download a torrent so that the torrent can download a zip file so that your computer and download the zip into songs... talk about taking the long way to get to songs on my computer. I'll take a trip to the local cd shop over that nonsense any day.
Prosecutors won't have me, I've got a record. I'm much more on the criminal defense side of things anyway. I'm not saying you shouldn't take a stand or make waves about it. But be honest, you sitting home in your skivvies downloading albums isn't exactly making a statement on anything to anyone. That's not standing up to injustice and you're not an activist. You want to make a difference, do something about it. But don't try to act like you're making some sort of noble self-sacrificing act of civil disobedience. You're stealing music. Sure on the scale of laws you could break it's at the bottom, but it's still the law and you know what you're risking to do it.
I also do all I can to change marijuana laws and the like, but that doesn't mean that I expect that if I ever get busted I'm going to be let off the hook. I'd suck it up, because I know that's what the law is and I knew that going in.
As to torrent, I've tried many many times and it is never going to work for me. Besides, it seems like an absurd concept... you download a program so that you can download a torrent so that the torrent can download a zip file so that your computer and download the zip into songs... talk about taking the long way to get to songs on my computer. I'll take a trip to the local cd shop over that nonsense any day.
holy. The prosecutor comment was in response to you not wanting people to whine to you when they break the law...if you're much more on the criminal defense side...enjoy bein driven nuts by your clients for the rest of your life
I was also half kidding about standing up to injustice (being melodramatic)...missed a wink there. when did I imply that I was 'making some sort of noble self-sacrificing act of civil disobedience'? (In fact, where did I admit to d/l'ing music? ) You were just giving Byrnzie shit on the train for making assumptions about people and here you are making assumptions about me. Sometimes I think you just get off on these tough-love diatribes; bein all hardass :P
You're totally exaggerating the torrent process...(if it's so useless, why keep trying to make it work? )
You d/l the torrent client (software) once. when you save a torrent, select 'open file' and the client and torrent open together, right after you click on it (you make it sound like it's a hassle to d/l a 12kb file )...it takes 5-10 seconds to unzip rar files (which are not that prevalent) ....then it's done - on your pc in a pre-selected folder. ...the only thing that is over some peoples' heads is opening a port and/or getting around a router when installing the client....but even that is a matter of following like 5 steps/clicks...if you have BASIC computer skills, and can follow the instructions to make kraft fucking dinner, you can figure out torrents....unless you're soul, apparently
Comments
Not going with the last option makes me cheap and lazy?
Sorry, but I think it means I’m not a total sucker.
I can compare them…I did and will again :P Pretty sure there are taxes on blank cd’s too.
It’s the downloaders’ choice whether or not they share music they d/l…..But how is it any different to download a song than to record it from the radio?
My point is that most people have a pretty finite entertainment budget. This money would likely not be going to the record companies either way. Chances are, casual fans would be using the radio, borrowing/pirating from friends etc…hell, my music collection started by borrowing vinyl from the library and taping…I disagree that casual fans would be buying these discs en masse. I think hardcore fans are spending those same dollars on special edition sets and higher concert ticket prices….it’s not like they would have more music-budget-money just because downloading is no longer an option.
Yes, I’m rationalizing theft and don’t give a fuck! ...I'm also playing devil's advocate.
How much new material can a person realistically purchase? How many new artists and tours can a person support? The record companies are no more entitled to turn a profit on hundreds acts a year than I am to listen to or 'discover' said acts....They can’t realistically expect every artist they spend money promoting to become a platinum seller with a sold out tour….yet because someone only sells 300,000 copies of the follow up to his smash-hit debut, it gets blamed on downloading regardless of the product or other factors….it’s an easy excuse for the industry to justify bad management. I’m surprised the fuckers aren’t looking for bailouts.
Throw in 6 or 7 format changes in the last 30 years, and pardon my french…but they can fuck themselves. Find a way to adapt or become extinct, same as the industry has with every tech advancement since it's infancy. Making examples of some random music fan is not going to stuff this genie back in the bottle.
And downloading is WAY easier and faster than ripping….not that I’d know
I’m guessing you don’t use torrent….a person can find an entire album (discography for that matter) in seconds…with a decent connection; you can d/l an album in about 2 minutes flat. Type the album name into a search, check file quality, click download….quick virus scan, done. It would take longer to find the hard copy disc in a collection than to do that.
My biggest concern with the whole file sharing debate is that it may be all the excuse western governments need to bring in sweeping changes to the way the internet works as a whole.
well thereya go!
honestly, i think we all - or at least most of us - have burned a CD, DVD, etc....for our own personal use after renting, or borrowing from a friend, or even from a website. however, being the one to actually distribute said material on the internet, as it seems this woman did....is a whole other category of 'rationalizing theft' no?
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
And it depends what software you use, and how careful (or care-free) you were about sharing the file yourself. I haven't even read the article, but I'd guess its possible that this woman didn't even know she was sharing the files herself.
spoken like a true rationalizer.....;)
and no offense meant, i am one of the best rationalizers out there.
on this issue tho, i happen to disagree. and as to this exact case, this woman is never going to be expected to cough up that cash, it was/is simply a 'message'......
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
My only issues with cutting out record companies, is that most of these companies have people who can take bands and nurture them and actually make them sound better (not just through recording but by actually improving their skills). Record companies can also front the money for things like tours or promotional stuff and lobby record companies to get their acts on the radio. I mean if you are a small band try walking into a bank and getting a loan for a cross country tour, or to produce some singles, or posters, it isn't going to happen. Like other posters have mentioned I don't have time to listen to thousands of crappy garage bands with limited talent that will probably go no where.
the point that it's a 'message' is part of what bothers me. Making examples is not justice, nor is it fair to the person being made an example of....
Singling out one woman and completely turning her life upside down is a joke. The symbolic amount is a joke too....maybe she'll get to declare bankrupcy and never pay a cent (and destroy her credit etc etc) ...over something that's imo trivial and commonplace. It's still way too harsh a penalty, even if she doesn't have to pay it all.
as i said, we simply can agree to disagree there. i don't think it is so 'trivial and commonplace' and as long as it is considered illegal, well then.......
i think it's one thing to do so for personal use, and quite another to distribute....tho that's only imho. as to her knowledge/intent, i have no idea....but i don't think ignorance is much of a defense. i also believe i'ts been mentioned a few times she WAs offered other, much smaller amounts way earlier...and she refused, so as you say...it certainly isn't black and white there.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
I'm not disputing that record companies suck. I'll be perfectly happy seeing them go the way of the dodo. They're a terribly run business. Personally, I don't give a shit whether or not you download. I've done it in the past myself. There are plenty of solid reasons for opting to do it. My point is only that all your good reasons and rationalizations don't change the fact that it's illegal and that you could get fucked if you get caught. So by all means, download away. But don't cry to me if you end up getting busted and asked to pay a lot of $ for it. I say the same thing to pot smokers... yeah, it should be legal and the whole crack down on it is fucking stupid. But them's the breaks, deal with it.
And I don't believe there is such a thing as torrent. I think it's a huge hoax people are playing on us because it is SO IMPOSSIBLE to figure out how to use that nobody can possibly be getting any benefit from it
Glad others can see the drug war paralells here....there is nothing worse than somene admitting a law is bs, but then saying, 'you get busted, deal with it'. What happened to standing up to injustice? Do we turn our backs on our fellow man because an unjust law doesn't affect us personally?
and c'mon ss, I know you're smart enough to figure out torrents with about fifteen minutes effort....it's not that hard; there are tutorials all over the web. literally 10-15 mins to set up and you're rolling. Then you can d/l all the shit you'd not have paid for anyway
Prosecutors won't have me, I've got a record. I'm much more on the criminal defense side of things anyway. I'm not saying you shouldn't take a stand or make waves about it. But be honest, you sitting home in your skivvies downloading albums isn't exactly making a statement on anything to anyone. That's not standing up to injustice and you're not an activist. You want to make a difference, do something about it. But don't try to act like you're making some sort of noble self-sacrificing act of civil disobedience. You're stealing music. Sure on the scale of laws you could break it's at the bottom, but it's still the law and you know what you're risking to do it.
I also do all I can to change marijuana laws and the like, but that doesn't mean that I expect that if I ever get busted I'm going to be let off the hook. I'd suck it up, because I know that's what the law is and I knew that going in.
As to torrent, I've tried many many times and it is never going to work for me. Besides, it seems like an absurd concept... you download a program so that you can download a torrent so that the torrent can download a zip file so that your computer and download the zip into songs... talk about taking the long way to get to songs on my computer. I'll take a trip to the local cd shop over that nonsense any day.
I was also half kidding about standing up to injustice (being melodramatic)...missed a wink there. when did I imply that I was 'making some sort of noble self-sacrificing act of civil disobedience'? (In fact, where did I admit to d/l'ing music?
You're totally exaggerating the torrent process...(if it's so useless, why keep trying to make it work?
You d/l the torrent client (software) once. when you save a torrent, select 'open file' and the client and torrent open together, right after you click on it (you make it sound like it's a hassle to d/l a 12kb file