I think maybe a rule should be put out there. Download for free, but in exchange, you must join a street team, or buy merch, or go see a gig or something.
That I think is fair.
As it stands, those who are anti downloaders are fighting a losing battle. No way in hell, anyone, is going to stop people from getting music for free.
Good point, I think many people who dont download act like those who do, are criminals and scum. I personally dont download because I hate the artists. I dont even necessarily download because I hate the multibillion dollar companies who are a bunch of wusses. I download, because I love music plain and simple.
I have a massive cd collection, massive collection of cd's I downloaded. I dont do it because I love stealing. I do it because my life is meaningless without music. I do it, because I dont think people have a right to charge 18 bucks for a new cd. As I said, if I have 100 bucks, makes much more sense to buy 3 or 4 spindles of 50 blanks, than to go to a store and get 5 cd's at most at 18 bucks a pop. Just common sense.
?
I have a massive car collection. A massive collection of cars I stole. I don't do it because I love stealing, I do it because my life is meaningless without a Mustang in the driveway. I do it, because I don't think people have the right to charge 30 grand for a Mustang.
Do you know how crazy it sounds? You feel you have the RIGHT to free music.
Also, I haven't seen you analyze the cost breakdown of the CD. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on that.
Believe me, when I was growin up, I thought the worst thing you could turn out to be was normal, So I say freaks in the most complementary way. Here's a song by a fellow freak - E.V
Good point, I think many people who dont download act like those who do, are criminals and scum. I personally dont download because I hate the artists. I dont even necessarily download because I hate the multibillion dollar companies who are a bunch of wusses. I download, because I love music plain and simple.
I have a massive cd collection, massive collection of cd's I downloaded. I dont do it because I love stealing. I do it because my life is meaningless without music. I do it, because I dont think people have a right to charge 18 bucks for a new cd. As I said, if I have 100 bucks, makes much more sense to buy 3 or 4 spindles of 50 blanks, than to go to a store and get 5 cd's at most at 18 bucks a pop. Just common sense.
?
I have a massive car collection. A massive collection of cars I stole. I don't do it because I love stealing, I do it because my life is meaningless without a Mustang in the driveway. I do it, because I don't think people have the right to charge 30 grand for a Mustang.
Do you know how crazy it sounds? You feel you have the RIGHT to free music.
Also, I haven't seen you analyze the cost breakdown of the CD. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on that.
Thats what i was getting at but when he said 'i have a right to free music because...' i mean shit. There so much wrong with that sentance it's a bit daunting in where to begin to be honest. Know any good philosophers?
Im not completley against downloading because its not all bad but 'I have a right to free music' is 100% evil. Its the same values and morals people live by claiming benifits all their lives. I'm entitled to x because of y. BULLSHIT! The fact is you download music because you can. You can get away with it. If you could steal ipods or bread or ben and jerrys ice cream for free and never get caught you would and you'd justify it to yourself in one way or another. Have a REALLY good think as to what 'I have a right' actually means. Think about it one word at a time.
Just because you love music doesnt mean you have the right to steal it. Just because they dont get rich off cd sales doesnt mean you can steal it. I have stated in a previous post other ways you could support artists but you havnt replied. I say again take 15 % of your next pay check and just give it away. Its not all of it but its a good portion. You seem to come up with the same argument repeatedly but still haven't explained why you think you have a right to free music.
Yeah, but where is it written that artists deserve to make vast amounts of cash? For all you or I know, many vaguely mainstream artists could make a perfectly decent living. And if it doesn't work out, they could do what the rest of us do, and move on to the next job. Lily Allen just bought a fucking island, and she's totally a product of the downloading age. Save the moral 'you don't have the right' stuff, it's absolutely null and void in this day and age. People feel they have the 'right' because the record lables did nothing ten years ago to protect their artists - oh, and there's next to nothing the record labels can do about it. No sooner will they put in some anti-piracy measure, before some tech-savvy bod will have worked out a way around it. I don't think there is anyone out there who doesn't understand the sentiment you are clinging to, but it's so outdated it's unreal.
This is the most interesting point for me. Maybe a lot of artists won't make as much money if filesharing becomes de rigeur, but as long people pay for the music they do enjoy - which I don't think anyone would, or should, object to doing - it could actually create a better environment for deserving artists to survive outside of record companies. By way of comparison, it could be like the modern equivalent of patronage back in the Renaissance - if an artist is good enough, people will give them money to create art. But stopping people from getting acquainted with the art in the first place through prohibitive pricing is doing no one any favours.
The reality is, people don't mind giving money to bands they like - and the artists themselves are capitalising on this, but the record companies are lagging embarrassingly far behind the curve.
Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
I find it sort of interesting how some of you are ganging up on me. The millions of others who download arent on this board, but I am, therefore, some of you feel you can put me through the ringer and make me sound like I am a bad person. My whole point is, I dont think the fines for filesharing are accurate and accetable. I have given the example, of a mother of 4 getting a 1.6 million dollar fine, and no one responded. Whats an acceptable punishment and fine? Cause I sure as hell dont think 1.6 million is acceptable. And also filesharing in the big picture, is low low, or SHOULD be low low on the priorities list of police and law enforcement. We have bigger fish to fry than fining Suzy or Johnny Whats Their Name, millions because they downloaded the new Neil Young CD.
I also think we all operate on our own moral and ethical views. Almost everyone is against murder and rape, and for good reason. But what about jaywalking. Or crossing the street when the walk sign isnt white yet? How about going as I said before, its midnight, its a highway, and their are very few cars around, and you put on the gas and go a 5 mph above the speed limit. All of those are illegal, and I think if most of you were honest, we all have done. Maybe not habitually, but once in awhile. How about its 1am, deserted road, no cars around, and you make a turn and you dont put on your blinker? How many of you have done that? Again this is illegal stuff, but most people have done it, so its no big deal to most people.
All I am saying, is that the penalty for downloading is poppycock. And I am also saying that its silly to waste time on this message board berating me for being no better than a common thief, because people are gonna continue downloading.
Its such a waste of time for all the antidownloaders to even harp on it. By telling people, "Dont download", thats not gonna stop anything. Lars Ulrich tried to stop fans, he was unsucessful. Orrin hatch and others have suggested major jail terms for downloaders...downloading continues. Massive fines and British government scare tactics....and downloading continues.
Its such a silly fight to even have. If you dont like downloading...dont. Simple.
ultimately its a question of what is more supportive of an artist, financially, and in terms of word of mouth. Buying a cd at a store where the artist gets a dollar and change. and thats it. Or buying a t-shirt with Jay-Z's picture on the front and the words Jay-Z on it, and buying a ticket for his show in Seattle, and telling all my friends how great Blueprint III is. To me, their is no question what is more beneficial to Jay-Z's bank account and to his fan base and to getting his music more exposure.
You show support for an artist by buying merch, tickets for a show and spreading the word.
What have you done by going to a store and getting a cd? You gave an artist 1 dollar and change. Wow! Amazing.
if you buy a cd you are essentially supporting the slave system that is operational in the industry. Thats how I look at it.
The artist deserves more. In respect. In money. In assistance and guidance.
Support for the current system of paying artists peanuts just doesnt cut it. I am surprised so many of you are so willing to buy into it.
I dont really give a damn what you all say, I think an artist deserves more than 1 dollar and change, for their works of art. And I dont think they deserve to be treated as they are treated. I think the less money someone like Irving Azoff has, the better.
The question becomes what is a bands music worth to you? Or a band worth to you? What is Vitalogy or Murmur or Californication worth to you?
The way to show support of that art which I assume if worth more than 1 dollar and change to you, isnt that you guy buy a cd from a store. Because things arent gonna change for the artist they are gonna continue making measley sums as long as the current system is intact. Only when things change do they get a better way of life.
Why anyone would continue to pour money into a corrupt and worthless and exploitative relationship with artist and label is beyond me.
As I said, what do you do if you feel a certain company is sexist or treats their workers badly. One thing you DONT do, is continue on shopping there as if everything is kosher and copasetic.
To be honest, I don't think people specifically take umbrage with you downloading music, so much as your sense of entitlement, Musicismylife78. Most people who download acknowledge that it's a less than perfect solution to a broken industry, and a reality that needs to be adapted to in some form. Whereas you seem to think that it's your innate right to own all music ever for free, as long as you can rationalise it in some way.
Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
I find it sort of interesting how some of you are ganging up on me. The millions of others who download arent on this board, but I am, therefore, some of you feel you can put me through the ringer and make me sound like I am a bad person. My whole point is, I dont think the fines for filesharing are accurate and accetable. I have given the example, of a mother of 4 getting a 1.6 million dollar fine, and no one responded. Whats an acceptable punishment and fine? Cause I sure as hell dont think 1.6 million is acceptable. And also filesharing in the big picture, is low low, or SHOULD be low low on the priorities list of police and law enforcement. We have bigger fish to fry than fining Suzy or Johnny Whats Their Name, millions because they downloaded the new Neil Young CD.
I also think we all operate on our own moral and ethical views. Almost everyone is against murder and rape, and for good reason. But what about jaywalking. Or crossing the street when the walk sign isnt white yet? How about going as I said before, its midnight, its a highway, and their are very few cars around, and you put on the gas and go a 5 mph above the speed limit. All of those are illegal, and I think if most of you were honest, we all have done. Maybe not habitually, but once in awhile. How about its 1am, deserted road, no cars around, and you make a turn and you dont put on your blinker? How many of you have done that? Again this is illegal stuff, but most people have done it, so its no big deal to most people.
All I am saying, is that the penalty for downloading is poppycock. And I am also saying that its silly to waste time on this message board berating me for being no better than a common thief, because people are gonna continue downloading.
Its such a waste of time for all the antidownloaders to even harp on it. By telling people, "Dont download", thats not gonna stop anything. Lars Ulrich tried to stop fans, he was unsucessful. Orrin hatch and others have suggested major jail terms for downloaders...downloading continues. Massive fines and British government scare tactics....and downloading continues.
Its such a silly fight to even have. If you dont like downloading...dont. Simple.
To the Mothers, tough shit. They knew what they were doing was illegal, and if they get caught, they should face the consequences. If I get caught jay walking, I'll man up and face the consequences.
Musicismylife, direct question. IF the artist got all $20 from the CD, and I mean every cent, would you go buy all the music you've stolen?
Believe me, when I was growin up, I thought the worst thing you could turn out to be was normal, So I say freaks in the most complementary way. Here's a song by a fellow freak - E.V
To be honest, I don't think people specifically take umbrage with you downloading music, so much as your sense of entitlement, Musicismylife78. Most people who download acknowledge that it's a less than perfect solution to a broken industry, and a reality that needs to be adapted to in some form. Whereas you seem to think that it's your innate right to own all music ever for free, as long as you can rationalise it in some way.
I dont see how acknowledging anything solved anything. The problem isnt that people download. its that, as I said, its the artist not being paid overall by those in power for their art. Thats the failing. Downloading has little to do with it. If I buy Jay-Z's cd right now, it doesnt help him at all, in fact as i keep pointing out, it perpetuates a slave system that is inherently evil. So I dont feel entitled to anything. What I do think is entitled, isnt to me, its to the artist. And my buying cd's from here on out isnt going to change that. I am talking a massive dismantling and overhaul of the current industry system and installing a new one, where the artist and label get 50 50 earnings. How is buying a cd going to bring us closer to that needed reality?
Again, you guys seem to be all about the artist, but only when its suggesting people dont download. Whoever, posted that breakdown of cd sales, showed us, artists are being ripped off, not by us, but by who they work for. When I or others suggest a new way of doing things, a new system, no one responds and no one takes it seriously.
One way in which I am moral, or try to be moral, is if I dislike a company I refuse to spend money there. For instance, Nike, is a company I hate. I hate their labor practices, I hate their sweatshops and I hate the fact they seek global domination. So, as small as this act is, I refuse to buy their products. I know, my own act wont topple Nike. But in this analogy, all of you are essentially suggesting that I continue buying Nike because if I didnt buy Nike, those Taiwanese laborers who get paid 50 cents, wouldnt get paid anything unless I buy the new Air Jordans. Thats crazy and insane. The solution isnt that. its to work to force Nike to close sweatshops, to try and do as much harm as possible to the company
I find it sort of interesting how some of you are ganging up on me. The millions of others who download arent on this board, but I am, therefore, some of you feel you can put me through the ringer and make me sound like I am a bad person. My whole point is, I dont think the fines for filesharing are accurate and accetable. I have given the example, of a mother of 4 getting a 1.6 million dollar fine, and no one responded. Whats an acceptable punishment and fine? Cause I sure as hell dont think 1.6 million is acceptable. And also filesharing in the big picture, is low low, or SHOULD be low low on the priorities list of police and law enforcement. We have bigger fish to fry than fining Suzy or Johnny Whats Their Name, millions because they downloaded the new Neil Young CD.
I also think we all operate on our own moral and ethical views. Almost everyone is against murder and rape, and for good reason. But what about jaywalking. Or crossing the street when the walk sign isnt white yet? How about going as I said before, its midnight, its a highway, and their are very few cars around, and you put on the gas and go a 5 mph above the speed limit. All of those are illegal, and I think if most of you were honest, we all have done. Maybe not habitually, but once in awhile. How about its 1am, deserted road, no cars around, and you make a turn and you dont put on your blinker? How many of you have done that? Again this is illegal stuff, but most people have done it, so its no big deal to most people.
All I am saying, is that the penalty for downloading is poppycock. And I am also saying that its silly to waste time on this message board berating me for being no better than a common thief, because people are gonna continue downloading.
Its such a waste of time for all the antidownloaders to even harp on it. By telling people, "Dont download", thats not gonna stop anything. Lars Ulrich tried to stop fans, he was unsucessful. Orrin hatch and others have suggested major jail terms for downloaders...downloading continues. Massive fines and British government scare tactics....and downloading continues.
Its such a silly fight to even have. If you dont like downloading...dont. Simple.
To the Mothers, tough shit. They knew what they were doing was illegal, and if they get caught, they should face the consequences. If I get caught jay walking, I'll man up and face the consequences.
Musicismylife, direct question. IF the artist got all $20 from the CD, and I mean every cent, would you go buy all the music you've stolen?
I find it sort of interesting how some of you are ganging up on me. The millions of others who download arent on this board, but I am, therefore, some of you feel you can put me through the ringer and make me sound like I am a bad person. My whole point is, I dont think the fines for filesharing are accurate and accetable. I have given the example, of a mother of 4 getting a 1.6 million dollar fine, and no one responded. Whats an acceptable punishment and fine? Cause I sure as hell dont think 1.6 million is acceptable. And also filesharing in the big picture, is low low, or SHOULD be low low on the priorities list of police and law enforcement. We have bigger fish to fry than fining Suzy or Johnny Whats Their Name, millions because they downloaded the new Neil Young CD.
I also think we all operate on our own moral and ethical views. Almost everyone is against murder and rape, and for good reason. But what about jaywalking. Or crossing the street when the walk sign isnt white yet? How about going as I said before, its midnight, its a highway, and their are very few cars around, and you put on the gas and go a 5 mph above the speed limit. All of those are illegal, and I think if most of you were honest, we all have done. Maybe not habitually, but once in awhile. How about its 1am, deserted road, no cars around, and you make a turn and you dont put on your blinker? How many of you have done that? Again this is illegal stuff, but most people have done it, so its no big deal to most people.
All I am saying, is that the penalty for downloading is poppycock. And I am also saying that its silly to waste time on this message board berating me for being no better than a common thief, because people are gonna continue downloading.
Its such a waste of time for all the antidownloaders to even harp on it. By telling people, "Dont download", thats not gonna stop anything. Lars Ulrich tried to stop fans, he was unsucessful. Orrin hatch and others have suggested major jail terms for downloaders...downloading continues. Massive fines and British government scare tactics....and downloading continues.
Its such a silly fight to even have. If you dont like downloading...dont. Simple.
To the Mothers, tough shit. They knew what they were doing was illegal, and if they get caught, they should face the consequences. If I get caught jay walking, I'll man up and face the consequences.
Musicismylife, direct question. IF the artist got all $20 from the CD, and I mean every cent, would you go buy all the music you've stolen?
I live in a world where you should get the punishment that fits the crime. Downloading 22 songs doesnt equal 1.6 million in damages no matter how you cut it. To put it another way, 22 songs is roughly 2 cd's worth of songs. 12 on one cd, 12 on the other. At most thats 40 bucks worth of product. How is 1.6 million an acceptable punishment.
And the lady, the mother specifically said she couldnt afford the 1.6 million. So why did they even go ahead with such a ludicrous sum of money?
punishments should fit crimes. If you steal 2 candy bars, I think the punishment should be lighter than if you steal 2 cars, or steal 20,000 dollars from a bank.
I dont think every criminal should be given the same sentence. Murder and Rape are alot different than stealing a car, so I obviously think the rapist and murderer should get harsher sentences
with any band its all about getting as many people to hear your music as possible. Thats the goal of every single band in history, except for maybe Fugazi.
But the point is, buying a cd from a band isn't going to alter that one way or another.
I think its beyond cool as well, that the current downloading era, has forced bands to try new things in terms of releasing music.
I have said before, I have an aquaintance I went to college with, he started playing music just for fun in his dorm. Anyways, his music has really taken off, he is in a band, they are doing well, and on his website he has all 3 of his albums for free. And every release gig he has played for those 3, he has given the cd's out for free.
That to me, is pretty smart thinking. It recognizes the current paradigm in music, and it plays off it.
Realistically, I dont think they are on a label at the moment, but what do they lose by doing that, giving the stuff out for free? They are getting the music in the hands of people reguardless of if its free or not.
How is it smart thinking? Will they ever be able to actually make a living off their music? "Getting music into the hands of the people" may sound noble, but eventually, the band may want to get some $$ into their hands.
I find it sort of interesting how some of you are ganging up on me. The millions of others who download arent on this board, but I am, therefore, some of you feel you can put me through the ringer and make me sound like I am a bad person. My whole point is, I dont think the fines for filesharing are accurate and accetable. I have given the example, of a mother of 4 getting a 1.6 million dollar fine, and no one responded. Whats an acceptable punishment and fine? Cause I sure as hell dont think 1.6 million is acceptable. And also filesharing in the big picture, is low low, or SHOULD be low low on the priorities list of police and law enforcement. We have bigger fish to fry than fining Suzy or Johnny Whats Their Name, millions because they downloaded the new Neil Young CD.
I also think we all operate on our own moral and ethical views. Almost everyone is against murder and rape, and for good reason. But what about jaywalking. Or crossing the street when the walk sign isnt white yet? How about going as I said before, its midnight, its a highway, and their are very few cars around, and you put on the gas and go a 5 mph above the speed limit. All of those are illegal, and I think if most of you were honest, we all have done. Maybe not habitually, but once in awhile. How about its 1am, deserted road, no cars around, and you make a turn and you dont put on your blinker? How many of you have done that? Again this is illegal stuff, but most people have done it, so its no big deal to most people.
All I am saying, is that the penalty for downloading is poppycock. And I am also saying that its silly to waste time on this message board berating me for being no better than a common thief, because people are gonna continue downloading.
Its such a waste of time for all the antidownloaders to even harp on it. By telling people, "Dont download", thats not gonna stop anything. Lars Ulrich tried to stop fans, he was unsucessful. Orrin hatch and others have suggested major jail terms for downloaders...downloading continues. Massive fines and British government scare tactics....and downloading continues.
Its such a silly fight to even have. If you dont like downloading...dont. Simple.
To the Mothers, tough shit. They knew what they were doing was illegal, and if they get caught, they should face the consequences. If I get caught jay walking, I'll man up and face the consequences.
Musicismylife, direct question. IF the artist got all $20 from the CD, and I mean every cent, would you go buy all the music you've stolen?
So do you jaywalk? You sort of came close to saying you did, but didnt fully admit it. Do you? If you do you are breaking the law. Its illegal. Why do you feel breaking that law is acceptable but others arent? Do you steal food, and stereo equiptment? Do you drive drunk? If you dont, why not? How can you pick and choose what laws to break and what laws not to break? Breaking the law is breaking the law.
Oh for sure I jaywalk, but I'd accept the punishment.
PLUS, jaywalking isn't hurting anyone, where stealing music is.
And using you're argument, all breaking of the law is breaking the law, so filesharing=murder?
Believe me, when I was growin up, I thought the worst thing you could turn out to be was normal, So I say freaks in the most complementary way. Here's a song by a fellow freak - E.V
punishments should fit crimes. If you steal 2 candy bars, I think the punishment should be lighter than if you steal 2 cars, or steal 20,000 dollars from a bank.
I dont think every criminal should be given the same sentence. Murder and Rape are alot different than stealing a car, so I obviously think the rapist and murderer should get harsher sentences
I agree with what Rhino said above: the one thing i cant understand is your sense of Entitlement. everything else i get.
The penalty of $1million or whatever it was is not just for 22 songs, its for the general damage theyre seen to have done. The 22 songs are used as evidence of the crime, the court would have insisted on showing several types of, instances of & repetitions of filesharing to charge the guy. 22 songs that they can factually prove with complete evidence. 22 songs that are indicators of the probable millions of occassions that someone copied files from him, and for every single copy made, the money lost to those who are legally due to receive it.
If you think about the number of times people downloaded his copy for free, for each song, for every single album, its very likely that $1million is only a fraction of what the market value of that music was.
Seeing as you said earlier that Music, books & movies are what you spend your cash on: Would you steal books? are you entitled to those? Or paintings? Do you download movies? Do you see them the same way or differently? Genuine Q here.
I jaywalk because the benefit of jaywalking outweighs the consequences and risk of me getting caught, I know it's wrong and I realize I'm not entitled to jaywalk whenever I want to free of consequence.
I speed because the benefit of speeding outweighs the consequences and risks of me getting caught I know it's wrong and I realize I'm not entitled to spped whenver I want to free of consequence.
I don't murder because the risks of getting caught and the consequences involved aren't worth the benefits.
You steal music it's because the benefit outweighs the consequences and risk of geting caught, but understand it's wrong and you shouldn't consider yourself entitled to steal whatever music you want free of consequence.
Record shops will either take a loss and hope that their other merch can bring in a profit (by selling t-shirts posters, coffee, food).
Or retailers will hike the price on mainstream/more popular artists in order to lower the price on indie artists.
Lil' Wayne 17.99....Pissed Jeans 7.99
What I'm getting at, is that the physical price of a cd is actually very low, for all they know (record labels, record stores) if they dropped the price by half, they may sell over double the amount which would off-set the reduction and bring in more profit. I know I would be more likely to take a chance on a new band's cd if it was only say £4.
Comments
That I think is fair.
As it stands, those who are anti downloaders are fighting a losing battle. No way in hell, anyone, is going to stop people from getting music for free.
Do you know how crazy it sounds? You feel you have the RIGHT to free music.
Also, I haven't seen you analyze the cost breakdown of the CD. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on that.
Thats what i was getting at but when he said 'i have a right to free music because...' i mean shit. There so much wrong with that sentance it's a bit daunting in where to begin to be honest. Know any good philosophers?
Im not completley against downloading because its not all bad but 'I have a right to free music' is 100% evil. Its the same values and morals people live by claiming benifits all their lives. I'm entitled to x because of y. BULLSHIT! The fact is you download music because you can. You can get away with it. If you could steal ipods or bread or ben and jerrys ice cream for free and never get caught you would and you'd justify it to yourself in one way or another. Have a REALLY good think as to what 'I have a right' actually means. Think about it one word at a time.
The reality is, people don't mind giving money to bands they like - and the artists themselves are capitalising on this, but the record companies are lagging embarrassingly far behind the curve.
I also think we all operate on our own moral and ethical views. Almost everyone is against murder and rape, and for good reason. But what about jaywalking. Or crossing the street when the walk sign isnt white yet? How about going as I said before, its midnight, its a highway, and their are very few cars around, and you put on the gas and go a 5 mph above the speed limit. All of those are illegal, and I think if most of you were honest, we all have done. Maybe not habitually, but once in awhile. How about its 1am, deserted road, no cars around, and you make a turn and you dont put on your blinker? How many of you have done that? Again this is illegal stuff, but most people have done it, so its no big deal to most people.
All I am saying, is that the penalty for downloading is poppycock. And I am also saying that its silly to waste time on this message board berating me for being no better than a common thief, because people are gonna continue downloading.
Its such a waste of time for all the antidownloaders to even harp on it. By telling people, "Dont download", thats not gonna stop anything. Lars Ulrich tried to stop fans, he was unsucessful. Orrin hatch and others have suggested major jail terms for downloaders...downloading continues. Massive fines and British government scare tactics....and downloading continues.
Its such a silly fight to even have. If you dont like downloading...dont. Simple.
You show support for an artist by buying merch, tickets for a show and spreading the word.
What have you done by going to a store and getting a cd? You gave an artist 1 dollar and change. Wow! Amazing.
The artist deserves more. In respect. In money. In assistance and guidance.
Support for the current system of paying artists peanuts just doesnt cut it. I am surprised so many of you are so willing to buy into it.
I dont really give a damn what you all say, I think an artist deserves more than 1 dollar and change, for their works of art. And I dont think they deserve to be treated as they are treated. I think the less money someone like Irving Azoff has, the better.
The question becomes what is a bands music worth to you? Or a band worth to you? What is Vitalogy or Murmur or Californication worth to you?
The way to show support of that art which I assume if worth more than 1 dollar and change to you, isnt that you guy buy a cd from a store. Because things arent gonna change for the artist they are gonna continue making measley sums as long as the current system is intact. Only when things change do they get a better way of life.
Why anyone would continue to pour money into a corrupt and worthless and exploitative relationship with artist and label is beyond me.
As I said, what do you do if you feel a certain company is sexist or treats their workers badly. One thing you DONT do, is continue on shopping there as if everything is kosher and copasetic.
To the Mothers, tough shit. They knew what they were doing was illegal, and if they get caught, they should face the consequences. If I get caught jay walking, I'll man up and face the consequences.
Musicismylife, direct question. IF the artist got all $20 from the CD, and I mean every cent, would you go buy all the music you've stolen?
I dont see how acknowledging anything solved anything. The problem isnt that people download. its that, as I said, its the artist not being paid overall by those in power for their art. Thats the failing. Downloading has little to do with it. If I buy Jay-Z's cd right now, it doesnt help him at all, in fact as i keep pointing out, it perpetuates a slave system that is inherently evil. So I dont feel entitled to anything. What I do think is entitled, isnt to me, its to the artist. And my buying cd's from here on out isnt going to change that. I am talking a massive dismantling and overhaul of the current industry system and installing a new one, where the artist and label get 50 50 earnings. How is buying a cd going to bring us closer to that needed reality?
Again, you guys seem to be all about the artist, but only when its suggesting people dont download. Whoever, posted that breakdown of cd sales, showed us, artists are being ripped off, not by us, but by who they work for. When I or others suggest a new way of doing things, a new system, no one responds and no one takes it seriously.
One way in which I am moral, or try to be moral, is if I dislike a company I refuse to spend money there. For instance, Nike, is a company I hate. I hate their labor practices, I hate their sweatshops and I hate the fact they seek global domination. So, as small as this act is, I refuse to buy their products. I know, my own act wont topple Nike. But in this analogy, all of you are essentially suggesting that I continue buying Nike because if I didnt buy Nike, those Taiwanese laborers who get paid 50 cents, wouldnt get paid anything unless I buy the new Air Jordans. Thats crazy and insane. The solution isnt that. its to work to force Nike to close sweatshops, to try and do as much harm as possible to the company
yes.
I live in a world where you should get the punishment that fits the crime. Downloading 22 songs doesnt equal 1.6 million in damages no matter how you cut it. To put it another way, 22 songs is roughly 2 cd's worth of songs. 12 on one cd, 12 on the other. At most thats 40 bucks worth of product. How is 1.6 million an acceptable punishment.
And the lady, the mother specifically said she couldnt afford the 1.6 million. So why did they even go ahead with such a ludicrous sum of money?
I dont think every criminal should be given the same sentence. Murder and Rape are alot different than stealing a car, so I obviously think the rapist and murderer should get harsher sentences
How is it smart thinking? Will they ever be able to actually make a living off their music? "Getting music into the hands of the people" may sound noble, but eventually, the band may want to get some $$ into their hands.
So do you jaywalk? You sort of came close to saying you did, but didnt fully admit it. Do you? If you do you are breaking the law. Its illegal. Why do you feel breaking that law is acceptable but others arent? Do you steal food, and stereo equiptment? Do you drive drunk? If you dont, why not? How can you pick and choose what laws to break and what laws not to break? Breaking the law is breaking the law.
PLUS, jaywalking isn't hurting anyone, where stealing music is.
And using you're argument, all breaking of the law is breaking the law, so filesharing=murder?
I agree with what Rhino said above: the one thing i cant understand is your sense of Entitlement. everything else i get.
The penalty of $1million or whatever it was is not just for 22 songs, its for the general damage theyre seen to have done. The 22 songs are used as evidence of the crime, the court would have insisted on showing several types of, instances of & repetitions of filesharing to charge the guy. 22 songs that they can factually prove with complete evidence. 22 songs that are indicators of the probable millions of occassions that someone copied files from him, and for every single copy made, the money lost to those who are legally due to receive it.
If you think about the number of times people downloaded his copy for free, for each song, for every single album, its very likely that $1million is only a fraction of what the market value of that music was.
Seeing as you said earlier that Music, books & movies are what you spend your cash on: Would you steal books? are you entitled to those? Or paintings? Do you download movies? Do you see them the same way or differently? Genuine Q here.
I speed because the benefit of speeding outweighs the consequences and risks of me getting caught I know it's wrong and I realize I'm not entitled to spped whenver I want to free of consequence.
I don't murder because the risks of getting caught and the consequences involved aren't worth the benefits.
You steal music it's because the benefit outweighs the consequences and risk of geting caught, but understand it's wrong and you shouldn't consider yourself entitled to steal whatever music you want free of consequence.
Record shops will either take a loss and hope that their other merch can bring in a profit (by selling t-shirts posters, coffee, food).
Or retailers will hike the price on mainstream/more popular artists in order to lower the price on indie artists.
Lil' Wayne 17.99....Pissed Jeans 7.99
What I'm getting at, is that the physical price of a cd is actually very low, for all they know (record labels, record stores) if they dropped the price by half, they may sell over double the amount which would off-set the reduction and bring in more profit. I know I would be more likely to take a chance on a new band's cd if it was only say £4.