Print

[Linkman243]

Linkman243

Re: Piracy... >>

At least with iTunes the artist is still making some money, but with piracy he isn't.

Piracy > CDs > iTunes in the long term. Piracy will kill of record companies, and removing them is the only way for artists to actually make any money. Pirate your music, then send a check for $20 to the artist. Seriously.

That makes quite a bit of sense.

I think cash would probably be better. Sending your name to someone when you are trying to make up for doing something illegal just seems like a bad idea.

lol, true.  but then you'd risk someone else taking the $20 bill before it even got to the artist.  it's more about making sure the artist gets the money (instead of the record company) than making up for something illegal
and I don't agree with this... you need to look at it from the record company's point of view.  you act as if it's wrong for the record company to profit from the artist's work, but don't you realize that it was the artist who made the deal with them?  it's not like the record company is illegally profitting from someone else's work.  the artist could have chosen to distribute his own music online for free (then no money would go to the record company), but he didn't.  why should you steal from the record company because you don't like the decision the artist made?
and why do you think he didn't choose to do that?  it's because the record company isn't always bad for the artist.  having a deal with the record company usually helps to make the artist more well-known, so he's able to have more concerts and make more money that way.  if he wasn't interested in concerts and just wanted to make money from CDs then he could sell them himself, but in that case he wouldn't be making a deal with any record company so it's irrelevant.

Actually when the music industry was started the record companies were the only option for people who wanted to sell their music so they got away with taking huge cuts of the profit. No, I don't think it is wrong to profit off someone elses work but the record companies do more than profit. They charge way more money than their services are actually worth.
Now the record companies are losing their monopolies because of computers and they are trying to present the facade that they are the best option. As far as publicity goes piracy is a much better advertisement for concerts than record companies because the advertising is more widespread.

That's sort of what I was getting at by, "the artist could have chosen to distribute his own music online for free (then no money would go to the record company)."  He could just decide not to make any deal and distribute it himself over the internet, then people could get it for free, it wouldn't be illegal (in which even more people could download it since there'd be no worrying about being caught), and the record company wouldn't get the money.  Except that probably wouldn't work unless the artist is at least somewhat well-known already or if his music is so good that it will be able to spread quickly enough

o.o can someone please point out the laws behind this? Less than 10 years ago; there were no laws, or anything of that nature for this stuff. It seems to me that its only "guidelines" set by the RIAA and MPAA; and prior to that !@#$%, the fines were for the distributors of said item, not the receivers.

I assume it would be the same laws that they have for any other kind of stealing.  There might be more but it's not really necessary.  If someone broke into a store and stole all the CDs, then gave them to you and you accepted them, knowing that they were stolen, you'd still be breaking some law.  It doesn't make sense for it to be any different just because it's files and not a hard copy

Actually, The difference is that when you copy a CD no one loses the CD. There is no law that says you can't make an exact copy of something strictly for personale use. If there were than you couldn't do much of anything without infringing on some law or another.

Wasn't this already discussed?  It makes no sense to say that it is stealing just because someone loses a CD.  CDs are pretty much worthless... they cost maybe 10 cents to make.  And having the songs on your computer is much more convenient than taking out the CD everytime you want to play it.  For the most part I'd think people would rather not have the CD (unless they want to play it in their car or something).
And piracy isn't exactly "making an exact copy of something strictly for personal use."  Making a copy implies that you actually have a legal copy of it and you are just making a copy for backup purposes or copying the files to your computer so it'd be more convenient than taking the CD out every time you want to listen to it.  Downloading a copy isn't the same as making a copy.  And it isn't "personal use" if someone goes around distributing it to other people

[Giverny]

Giverny

Re: Piracy... >>

Another Piracy FTW reason:
  I bought MS Office 07 enterprise(liek $700). I get home, put the disk on the table, and my dog jumps on the table, the disk falls to the ground, and the dog jumps on it, and crack. Then Piracy really is right, as long as I only install the pirated MS Office on one computer.


*Note, these events are fictional.

^THEG_iv^er_ny_PROJECT

~LynkW-Surrender Global

• 

[Mamoruanime]

Mamoruanime

Re: Piracy... >>

Wasn't this already discussed?  It makes no sense to say that it is stealing just because someone loses a CD.  CDs are pretty much worthless... they cost maybe 10 cents to make.  And having the songs on your computer is much more convenient than taking out the CD everytime you want to play it.  For the most part I'd think people would rather not have the CD (unless they want to play it in their car or something).
And piracy isn't exactly "making an exact copy of something strictly for personal use."  Making a copy implies that you actually have a legal copy of it and you are just making a copy for backup purposes or copying the files to your computer so it'd be more convenient than taking the CD out every time you want to listen to it.  Downloading a copy isn't the same as making a copy.  And it isn't "personal use" if someone goes around distributing it to other people

That defeats the original meaning of the term "stealing". The WHOLE purpose for that words existence, and the laws thereof, is to deter someone from taking personal property from someone else so that they no longer have that item; making a direct copy of something does not harm the original items integrity at all. Just because some organizations bitched about declining profits doesnt mean that the terms definition should change.

Even at that; regarding the last bit- Thats where laws are set up against DISTRIBUTORS of files/mp3s/etc. If a teacher shows a movie to their class (which according to the MPAA is illegal), who's liable? the students? or the teacher?

[Linkman243]

Linkman243

Re: Piracy... >>

That defeats the original meaning of the term "stealing". The WHOLE purpose for that words existence, and the laws thereof, is to deter someone from taking personal property from someone else so that they no longer have that item; making a direct copy of something does not harm the original items integrity at all. Just because some organizations bitched about declining profits doesnt mean that the terms definition should change.

Even at that; regarding the last bit- Thats where laws are set up against DISTRIBUTORS of files/mp3s/etc. If a teacher shows a movie to their class (which according to the MPAA is illegal), who's liable? the students? or the teacher?

I have no idea why the word "stealing" was invented... but it certainly isn't limited to just what you mentioned (at least the current definition isn't).  Dictionary.com says, "steal... 1. to take (the property of another or others) without permission or right, esp. secretly or by force: A pickpocket stole his watch..."  Taking songs (property) without the right to from whoever's selling it (the others) is definitely stealing by that definition.  And even if it isn't "stealing", it would definitely breaks copyright laws (which is a similar issue anyway).  Regardless of whether or not you call it "stealing", it "harms the original item's integrity" because it messes up the whole supply / demand and lowers the value of the item.  This is one of the main reason's that counterfeiting money is illegal.  No one loses the item that they bought, but buying the item was a waste of their money if it suddenly becomes worthless.
And your point about the teacher showing a movie... I wasn't aware that that was illegal.  If it is illegal then the law doesn't make sense... anyone selling a movie will know that people usually watch movies with other people.  There's no agreement that you need to make saying, "I will be the only one to watch this movie and I will not allow anyone else to see it as I watch it."  It's different from if the teacher were to be distributing copies to everyone
This is pretty much the same discussion that happened before lol.  Maybe my point will be more clear if I overly simplify everything.  Let's just say piracy was legal (everything was free), and let's say that companies only profitted from sales (so ignore concerts / donations / ads on websites), and let's say that the only point in selling a song or game or whatever was for the money (so people don't make games / music because they like to or because it would give their companies good reputations or anything).  If everything was free then then there'd be no reason for a company to make a game in the first place.  And this is obviously bad for everyone who plays games / listens to the songs / whatever because there'd no longer be anything

[CelestialEsper]

CelestialEsper

Re: Piracy... >>

My personal theory is that people are afraid of their respective governments and pretends to be against piracy when, really, they do it themselves and don't want to have any evidence floating around that they downloaded Linkin Park off of Kazaa.

Okay, I know this topic is old, but I wanted to say this:

All my music is either from CD's or legally purchased off of iTunes. There are a few songs I didn't pay for, but only because the artist wasn't charging.

All my video games, all my movies, all intellectual property I have was either purchased or is a back-up copy of some other intellectual property I own.

I dunno, just thought I'd say that. I don't pirate ANYTHING.

[ZFGC Veteran since 2004]

ZFGC Veteran since 2004

[शेफाली]

शेफाली

Re: Piracy... >>

To me, downloading games and music for free isn't "stealing". It's there for the taking, so why not take it? It's like somebody placing a stack of CDs outside on the ground, and calling the police if anyone touches them.

Real-life example: I actually found a GTA: San Andreas disk on the street one day, and I picked it up and kept it. Now wouldn't it be ridiculous if the police came to my house later that day and charged me for stealing it?

[CelestialEsper]

CelestialEsper

Re: Piracy... >>

To me, downloading games and music for free isn't "stealing". It's there for the taking, so why not take it? It's like somebody placing a stack of CDs outside on the ground, and calling the police if anyone touches them.

Real-life example: I actually found a GTA: San Andreas disk on the street one day, and I picked it up and kept it. Now wouldn't it be ridiculous if the police came to my house later that day and charged me for stealing it?

It's more like this metaphor: someone robbed the bank across the street and you saw them do it. They then took some of the money and threw it your way. It lands on the ground infront of you. Yeah, it's there for the taking, but you know you have no right to take it and the person who had it had no right to distribute it. The police don't see that the robber threw it there, but if they knew you'd be on trouble too.

[ZFGC Veteran since 2004]

ZFGC Veteran since 2004

[BuffaloBurgers]

BuffaloBurgers

Re: Piracy... >>

All my music is either from CD's or legally purchased off of iTunes. There are a few songs I didn't pay for, but only because the artist wasn't charging.

Congratulations. You are 100% against consumer rights. How's it feel?

EEE HUNG HUNG HA HA

COLORADO 27 - OKLAHOMA 24

[CelestialEsper]

CelestialEsper

Re: Piracy... >>

All my music is either from CD's or legally purchased off of iTunes. There are a few songs I didn't pay for, but only because the artist wasn't charging.

Congratulations. You are 100% against consumer rights. How's it feel?

Legal, moral, legitimate, honest.

[ZFGC Veteran since 2004]

ZFGC Veteran since 2004

[Mamoruanime]

Mamoruanime

Re: Piracy... >>

Again can someone please post the laws behind these assumptions accusations that its illegal to download music, tv shows, etc?

As far as I've ever seen, the laws are for the distributors, NOT the receivers. If you see someone with a VCR and you say "Wow I wish I had that VCR", and that person says "Here! take it, its yours!", does it matter to you how THEY got it? At that point its not your concern.

[Swoftu]

Swoftu

Re: Piracy... >>

All my music is either from CD's or legally purchased off of iTunes. There are a few songs I didn't pay for, but only because the artist wasn't charging.

Congratulations. You are 100% against consumer rights. How's it feel?

You think illegal downloading is some noble crusade against 'the man'?

Haha, oh wow.

[Fox]

Fox

Re: Piracy... >>

If we just keep on piracy, maybe we'll manage the industry to stop their work and have people stop making a living out of art. Art is something to entertain the masses, it's not curing cancer and it's not stopping wars. And it's not gonna fill my belly.

So even though I feel guilty when pirating things, I also do it with this belief. And with the thought "I wouldn't have bought it, anyway".

And it's not like I download 10 albums every day, really. Yesterday I used Frostwire for the first time in 2 months. For a friend, no less.

• 

[CelestialEsper]

CelestialEsper

Re: Piracy... >>

Again can someone please post the laws behind these assumptions accusations that its illegal to download music, tv shows, etc?

As far as I've ever seen, the laws are for the distributors, NOT the receivers. If you see someone with a VCR and you say "Wow I wish I had that VCR", and that person says "Here! take it, its yours!", does it matter to you how THEY got it? At that point its not your concern.

r u serius?

[ZFGC Veteran since 2004]

ZFGC Veteran since 2004

[Kyubi]

Kyubi

Re: Piracy... >>

Again can someone please post the laws behind these assumptions accusations that its illegal to download music, tv shows, etc?

As far as I've ever seen, the laws are for the distributors, NOT the receivers. If you see someone with a VCR and you say "Wow I wish I had that VCR", and that person says "Here! take it, its yours!", does it matter to you how THEY got it? At that point its not your concern.

That's a really awesome way to look at it. And to add to it- why do they give you the ability to tape music off of CDs?

ITT it's the 80s and the internet doesn't exist yet.

Gannon-banned brother.

[CelestialEsper]

CelestialEsper

Re: Piracy... >>

why do they give you the ability to tape music off of CDs?

Because you have the legal right to own as many copies of your songs as you want, granted you keep them all to yourself.

[ZFGC Veteran since 2004]

ZFGC Veteran since 2004

[BuffaloBurgers]

BuffaloBurgers

Re: Piracy... >>

You think illegal downloading is some noble crusade against 'the man'?

Haha, oh wow.

You think that 'the man, man' deserves your moniez to screw you over? Should the recording industry even exist? Why support it when you don't have to?

Legal, moral, legitimate, honest.

Legal. Not moral in the sense that the artist sees next to nothing from what you pay for the song, and they created it. Not legitimate in the sense that it's infested with DRM and low bit rate. Not honest in that you're supporting a crooked industry.

EEE HUNG HUNG HA HA

COLORADO 27 - OKLAHOMA 24

[CelestialEsper]

CelestialEsper

Re: Piracy... >>

Not moral in the sense that the artist sees next to nothing from what you pay for the song

So the artist would rather make nothing than something?

I've heard a lot of stuff about music artists getting screwed over from these forums. Anyone have a citation or source for these statements?

[ZFGC Veteran since 2004]

ZFGC Veteran since 2004

[thibledorf]

thibledorf

Re: Piracy... >>

Not moral in the sense that the artist sees next to nothing from what you pay for the song

So the artist would rather make nothing than something?

I've heard a lot of stuff about music artists getting screwed over from these forums. Anyone have a citation or source for these statements?

I don't have a citation but try going to p2pnet.net

I know the guy who owns the site and he has talked about this many times.
I once went to a presentation of his, concerning pirated music.

Ya I'm a show off.

[BuffaloBurgers]

BuffaloBurgers

Re: Piracy... >>

So the artist would rather make nothing than something?

In the same vein as the writer's strike.

EEE HUNG HUNG HA HA

COLORADO 27 - OKLAHOMA 24

[Pyru]

Pyru

Re: Piracy... >>

Difference being, the writers chose to go on strike.

If an artist is fed up with their label contract, then they stop making music for those guys.

If you don't want to support a label, then you don't pirate music from them, you just don't buy their music. Simple enough.

It's like, you don't like McDonald's? Fair enough. But no-one's forcing you to buy their food. And you certainly don't torch down their buildings or steal their food.

Especially since your beef is really with the management and owners of the company, not the workers. There are people who work in the record industry who have absolutely no part in what you see as unfair business practises, and yet, by supporting piracy, you're stealing their livelihoods.