File sharing - good or bad?

[Asprilla 96]

Your missus is shagging around behind your back, you know it but your too weak to do anything about it. Hows that grab you?

38436[/snapback]

 

You give a lot away with your insults.

[luckypierre 0]

What I dont like about this arguement is its focus on the internet and downloading. There was a thing called tapes before you know.

 

You might not download of the internet now but did you tape songs off the radio when you were a kid? How about copy your mates CD or LP? Keep that film you videotaped of the TV for longer than you should?

 

A lot of indie bands owed their careers to word of mouth through tape trading. The whole punk rock/hardcore scene in the US was built on tape trading. Illegally copying music is nothing new and there'll always be those that never buy anything. On the whole though artists benefit from getting their music heard by as many people as possible.

Edited September 24, 2005 by luckypierre

[Asprilla 96]

What I dont like about this arguement is its focus on the internet and downloading. There was a thing called tapes before you know.

 

You might not download of the internet now but did you tape songs off the radio when you were a kid? How about copy your mates CD or LP? Keep that film you videotaped of the TV for longer than you should?

 

A lot of indie bands owed their careers to word of mouth through tape trading. The whole punk rock/hardcore scene in the US was built on tape trading. Illegally copying music is nothing new and there'll always be those that never buy anything. On the whole though artists benefit from getting their music heard by as many people as possible.

38438[/snapback]

 

Good post

 

I agree with much of what you say. My only concern is that once you stop paying for something, it's hard to go back. When I was a kid, having the LP was far nicer than having a recorded tape.

 

Also, as record companies phase out the physical product itself, they are in danger of losing that desire to own the recording. Once a recording is zeros and ones why would anyone care if it was the original data or copied data.

[Definitely Maybe 0]

*Tin hat on*

 

I download music, and dont pay for it. I know I shouldnt, I know its wrong, but I do.

 

Im not going to try and justify it, so feel free to shoot me down. Its there, available for free, with little chance of being caught. All it takes is a click of the mouse and you've got an album for fuck all.

 

Gemmil, Aspirlla, feel free to give me a good telling off.

[Asprilla 96]

*Tin hat on*

 

I download music, and dont pay for it. I know I shouldnt, I know its wrong, but I do.

 

Im not going to try and justify it, so feel free to shoot me down. Its there, available for free, with little chance of being caught. All it takes is a click of the mouse and you've got an album for fuck all.

 

Gemmil, Aspirlla, feel free to give me a good telling off.

38440[/snapback]

 

It's not for me to tell you off!

 

It's entirely a matter for your conscience. I've said how I feel about it and why, but I'm not naieve enough to think it doesn't happen.

[maggiespaws 0]

I'm not buying this "I download a song and then if I like it I'll buy it" malarkey.  Why would you if you've already got the song?

 

I love the way the thieves take umbrage at being called thieves though.   "But it's the music industry!  They charge too much so I scavenge."

38328[/snapback]

 

 

I'll answer the first point Gems. It's one of the reasons I don't use legal download sites like iTunes (even if I am a mac lover). There is nothing like owning the actual CD. You don't just buy the cd, it's the packaging, the sleeve notes etc. Sound quality is an issue too, not all of the stuff you can download is of a good quality (although this is notthe case with iTunes). Lastly, I buy the albums I like because I want to support the artist. I like their album, so I pay them for it.

 

I actually buy more albums now than I used too, yet I still download too. Nine times out of ten however, I'm buying an album I've actually heard. I downloaded the last Oasis album 6-8 weeks before it came out, I had it on pre-order with cd-wow 4 weeks before it came out and it was delivered soon after it came out. I promptly deleted the version I had downloaded and re-ripped the actual cd onto my mac.

 

The difference is that I now only buy albums I actually like. I rarely buy an album I haven't listened to first (with the exception of the Foo Fighters last album - it had such good write ups that I just bought it).

 

What I am doing is not legal, but I can live with myself as I tend to buy the stuff I keep.

 

On the flip side, you have a point as there are plenty of theiving gyppos would dont even do this

[Asprilla 96]

I'm not buying this "I download a song and then if I like it I'll buy it" malarkey.  Why would you if you've already got the song?

 

I love the way the thieves take umbrage at being called thieves though.   "But it's the music industry!  They charge too much so I scavenge."

38328[/snapback]

 

 

I'll answer the first point Gems. It's one of the reasons I don't use legal download sites like iTunes (even if I am a mac lover). There is nothing like owning the actual CD. You don't just buy the cd, it's the packaging, the sleeve notes etc. Sound quality is an issue too, not all of the stuff you can download is of a good quality (although this is notthe case with iTunes). Lastly, I buy the albums I like because I want to support the artist. I like their album, so I pay them for it.

 

I actually buy more albums now than I used too, yet I still download too. Nine times out of ten however, I'm buying an album I've actually heard. I downloaded the last Oasis album 6-8 weeks before it came out, I had it on pre-order with cd-wow 4 weeks before it came out and it was delivered soon after it came out. I promptly deleted the version I had downloaded and re-ripped the actual cd onto my mac.

 

The difference is that I now only buy albums I actually like. I rarely buy an album I haven't listened to first (with the exception of the Foo Fighters last album - it had such good write ups that I just bought it).

 

What I am doing is not legal, but I can live with myself as I tend to buy the stuff I keep.

 

On the flip side, you have a point as there are plenty of theiving gyppos would dont even do this

38452[/snapback]

 

You're right about the quality too.

 

mp3s are nowhere near as good as CD.

 

The work I do can involve tight deadlines but I still have to post the music on a CD.

 

An mp3 maybe 4MB but that same track in an uncompressed format would be over 20MB.

 

That's quite a lot of information that you're chucking away.

[peasepud 59]

I'm not buying this "I download a song and then if I like it I'll buy it" malarkey.  Why would you if you've already got the song?

 

I love the way the thieves take umbrage at being called thieves though.   "But it's the music industry!  They charge too much so I scavenge."

38328[/snapback]

 

Nah sorry like but thats bollocks.

 

Im not saying the music industry pricings the reason for me downloading its all down to having a listen first before deciding to buy. There are some bands that I wont download but go out and buy the album when its released because I know that I want to get it. Now why would I bother if I was happy enough with a copy?

 

At the end of the day I like owning and building up a varied CD collection and wouldnt wank that up by slotting in a couple of crappy copied versions in there. At the same time because of the wonders of technology, gone are the days of hearing a great single on the radio going to HMV and shelling £12 quid out on the album to find its shite. Now I can download the album, listen to it and if I like it go out and purchase.

 

What difference is it to a friend lending you the CD so you can listen to it before deciding to buy yourself?

[Asprilla 96]

I'm not buying this "I download a song and then if I like it I'll buy it" malarkey.  Why would you if you've already got the song?

 

I love the way the thieves take umbrage at being called thieves though.   "But it's the music industry!  They charge too much so I scavenge."

38328[/snapback]

 

Nah sorry like but thats bollocks.

 

Im not saying the music industry pricings the reason for me downloading its all down to having a listen first before deciding to buy. There are some bands that I wont download but go out and buy the album when its released because I know that I want to get it. Now why would I bother if I was happy enough with a copy?

 

At the end of the day I like owning and building up a varied CD collection and wouldnt wank that up by slotting in a couple of crappy copied versions in there. At the same time because of the wonders of technology, gone are the days of hearing a great single on the radio going to HMV and shelling £12 quid out on the album to find its shite. Now I can download the album, listen to it and if I like it go out and purchase.

 

What difference is it to a friend lending you the CD so you can listen to it before deciding to buy yourself?

38464[/snapback]

 

It does say (I think) "no unauthorised hiring or lending on the sleeve" normally.

 

But hair splitting aside (!), common sense says that those people here who download music to see whether or not they like an album (then go out and buy the CD) aren't the problem.

 

There are clearly 2 types of "downloaders". Those with integrity and those without. Those who use downloading as a kind of review to decide what to buy, and those who just steal.

 

The problem is lost revenue. If you don't buy it and get into the mindset that music is free, then you are basically a thief.

[Pilchard Chops 0]

I have spent thousands of pounds over the last 40 odd years buying music, I have replaced most of my favourite LP's with cd versions so buying the same music twice. If I now download a cd version of an LP I have am I stealing?

 

I still buy music by my favourite artists but I wound buy nowt else before downloading and listening. Ive been ripped off for years I have no guilt at all downloading music for my own listening pleasure.

[Asprilla 96]

I have spent thousands of pounds over the last 40 odd years buying music, I have replaced most of my favourite LP's with cd versions so buying the same music twice. If I now download a cd version of an LP I have am I stealing?

 

I still buy music by my favourite artists but I wound buy nowt else before downloading and listening. Ive been ripped off for years I have no guilt at all downloading music for my own listening pleasure.

38471[/snapback]

 

Whether or not you feel guilty, it's still illegal.

 

You have the right to break the law (if that's not an oxymoron!) if you are prepared to accept any consequences of being caught.

 

Interesting point about replacing formats you previously bought though. You could argue that you bought the right to hear that song and it was the inadequacy of the medium that gave out.

[Pilchard Chops 0]

By Roger Bohn, rbohn@ucsd.edu

University of California at San Diego

 

As im an itellectual midget

 

The argument that downloading is theft derives from the position that music is “intellectual property.” RIAA ads claim an explicit parallel between downloading a song and shoplifting a CD—the implication being that intellectual property is no different than physical property, and therefore the wrongness of physical theft that we learned in childhood applies directly to electronic data files. But intellectual property is actually very different than physical property and should be treated differently. The key distinction is that intellectual property, unlike physical property, can be used simultaneously by multiple users without interfering with other users. Therefore, our natural concept of theft does not have an obvious or automatic extension to the use of intangibles like music. Walking out of a store with an album under your shirt deprives someone else of the chance to possess and use that physical album; downloading a song has no such effect, and therefore must be evaluated differently.

 

Societies choose certain types of ideas and turn them into “intellectual property” by artificially restricting the rights of people to use them. To phrase it concisely, “Intellectual property is created by Man, not God.” Society chooses rules for defining and controlling the uses of intellectual property based on its collective interests. The purpose of intellectual property laws is to encourage creation of new ideas, without going so far as to overly restrict the ability of non-creators to use and benefit from those ideas. Intellectual property in music is created by copyright laws, and the rights of music copyright owners exist only because they are defined by laws. The Internet and accompanying technologies have created revolutionary ways of distributing music, and the appropriate balance between encouraging idea creation and encouraging idea re-use should shift. Just as the then-revolutionary technologies of photography, the Xerox machine, and broadcast radio did, when technological revolutions occur they create new possibilities that society must choose how to deal with. The RIAA’s simplistic assertion that downloading is theft amounts to claiming that it alone has the right to choose how society handles musical intellectual property.

 

And what of the music industry’s other main argument—that downloading is immoral because it hurts the industry? Even if true, many technological changes hurt individuals, companies, and industries, yet that is no reason to hobble them. Americans understand that new technology should not be forbidden merely because it is disruptive.

 

There is also a more subtle error in this argument about economic harm. Even if we accepted the premise that technological change should be forbidden if it causes such harm, looking only at the music industry would be the wrong way to do the accounting. The overall economic impact of downloading is almost certainly a net positive. Digital music is a big driver of personal computer upgrading, broadband Internet use, multimedia hardware and software, and the like. It is not facetious to say that Intel, Microsoft, Seagate, and even Cox Communications and Sony lose more from strong laws on digital copying than the music industry stands to gain.

 

Thus the music industry’s two arguments that downloading is immoral are distorted and invalid. The basic principle behind copyright—that society will be better off if artists have some legal rights to profit from their art—is still sound. But society is also better off if the benefits of new technology are allowed to flow. There are various ways to meet both objectives, such as the new Canadian system of collecting fees on music hardware. Another approach would be modest centrally collected subscription fees for broadband Internet connections—analogous to cable TV fees.

 

The music industry’s insistence that it should have veto power over what people do with their computers is not good for the economy or society at large, and we should not take its claims seriously. Our children are not virtual shoplifters. They have a better understanding than some members of Congress that revolutionary technology causes disruption and requires adapting codes of behavior—and it should.

[Asprilla 96]

Horseshit.

 

Copyright exists to protect and remunerate the individual/s who develop whatever has been given that copyright.

 

Books, software, computer games, music, films all cost someone something to develop. If you take that away, you take away the ability for someone to make art and the world becomes lifeless.

 

His argument that the Sony/Microsoft should profit from the theft of other people's intellectual property is ridiculous.

 

It's like saying football matches should be free, or clothes or food.

 

If I was a parent, I'd be hoping my child wasn't being taught by him.

[Kid Dynamite 6010]

how come you are in the minority for every argument you start on here? do you do it on purpose?

[Asprilla 96]

how come you are in the minority for every argument you start on here? do you do it on purpose?

38497[/snapback]

 

Let's just have a look at these "minority" arguments.

 

I don't like racist jokes

I don't agree with taking music without paying for it

I think Souness should get more time (!)

 

 

 

They're the ones that came up so far. I'm just prepared to stick my neck out and say what I think, even though it may be easier to go with the flow. I'm not going to change to fit in, fuck that.

[maggiespaws 0]

how come you are in the minority for every argument you start on here? do you do it on purpose?

38497[/snapback]

 

Let's just have a look at these "minority" arguments.

 

I don't like racist jokes

I don't agree with taking music without paying for it

I think Souness should get more time (!)

 

 

 

They're the ones that came up so far. I'm just prepared to stick my neck out and say what I think, even though it may be easier to go with the flow. I'm not going to change to fit in, fuck that.

38500[/snapback]

 

Hmmmm, lets see....

 

I not a fan of the first one either, I'm guilty of the second one, but as you've read my above post I wont bother to explain and I agree with the third!

 

I guess I must be in the same minority as you then AF? I'm not so sure it's such a minority either. It might not be the overall majority, but I think this minority is a little bigger than J69 would give credit for!

[peasepud 59]

how come you are in the minority for every argument you start on here? do you do it on purpose?

38497[/snapback]

 

I actually agree with the basis of AFs argument, if everyone went out and downloaded music instead of buying CDs then the music industry would go down the pan and hard working, talented artists/ songwriters would lose their livelyhoods and their right to make money off what is at the end of the day their property.

 

All Im saying is that I dont agree that everyone who downloads is a thief.

[Happy Face 29]

I'd happily pay if I knew the artist was receiving 90% of the sale, rather than a money-grabbing institution that sees fit to sue some of it's biggest customers (way to promote empathy to your cause!  ).

38105[/snapback]

 

If I thought Lars Ulrich was getting 90% It'd put me off ever buying an album.

[Asprilla 96]

how come you are in the minority for every argument you start on here? do you do it on purpose?

38497[/snapback]

 

I actually agree with the basis of AFs argument, if everyone went out and downloaded music instead of buying CDs then the music industry would go down the pan and hard working, talented artists/ songwriters would lose their livelyhoods and their right to make money off what is at the end of the day their property.

 

All Im saying is that I dont agree that everyone who downloads is a thief.

38511[/snapback]

 

Like I've said, I have no problem with people who download then buy/delete.

 

However, it does require an individual to have integrity.

 

Quite a hard one for many to here to grasp as it requires some self accountability!

[Rob W 0]

I've had a change of heart from being a Sandalista

 

Anyone who breaks the law should suffer the full force of the law - preferably of the Islamic variety

 

A few hand removals will solve the illegal downlaoding problem!!!

[Thompson 0]

I download and buy CD's, the artists who i download are multi millionaires anyway so fuck them (tin hat on )!

[Dr Kenneth Noisewater 0]

I download TV shows but not music. Where does that put me in the argument?

[BlueStar 0]

I don't know why people are even arguing. There is no music inductry any more, it died out in the 80's, as we were warned

 

[Asprilla 96]

I download TV shows but not music. Where does that put me in the argument?

38565[/snapback]

 

Make your case!

 

It's not for us to say. Give us your opinion.

 

There's also a good current slant to the story which is the impact of pubs illegally showing live premiership football on Saturdays. Maybe you feel differently about that? Maybe not. Maybe you feel that as Premiership clubs charge too much for your liking, you are entitled to find it elsewhere for free.

 

How does that affect your clubs ability to buy the players you want?

 

I care less personally about the football issue as I am not employed in the industry, maybe you feel different?

[Dr Kenneth Noisewater 0]

I download TV shows but not music. Where does that put me in the argument?

38565[/snapback]

 

Make your case!

 

38574[/snapback]

 

Well, I don't feel that I am cheating or stealing from anybody. Perhaps it could be said that this is the 21st century equivalent of recording a whole TV series from your television on to videotape?

And have I already paid for it through my TV license?