No, I am talking about legal music dammit. Not the stuff people host on their MySpace from 3rd parties. There are tons of artists on MySpace that let you listen to their music by their choice, not pirates.
| |
Baladin wrote:
No, I am talking about legal music dammit. Not the stuff people host on their MySpace from 3rd parties. There are tons of artists on MySpace that let you listen to their music by their choice, not pirates. I'm not saying that it's pirated music. I'm saying that publishers are allowing it on myspace simply because piracy made them realize it was a wanted service (free music). It was advertising, and that they probably get revenue from myspace directly (which myspace recovers because they are offering an added service). | |
Baladin babbled:
...If you can't afford it, you shouldn't have it... Uh-huh. This coming from a self-professed thief. Does this apply to unaffordable housing and medical care, too? :) if you weren't going to buy it anyways, you didn't or shouldn't have any interest in it to begin with. That makes absolutely no sense. There are lots of ways to be interested in something without needing to buy it. They're called 'hobbies'. ...It is stealing, it is wrong, get over it... When it is clear that companies are over-charging for music/concerts, radio stations don't play diversely, and MTV is mostly "reality" tv garbage, then the law should be challenged until it gets changed. Distribution of music freely is one method of letting the companies know, "hey! this ain't right!" Is it illegal? Of course! But then again, most of the free-world 'freedoms' came about due to illegal acts. Imagine that! | |
Hey Digi, I am a theif, in some senses, I don't care, I wasn't saying that, I was simply saying that, don't try to say it isn't wrong when it is.
| |
Baladin wrote:
Hey Digi, I am a theif, in some senses, I don't care, I wasn't saying that, I was simply saying that, don't try to say it isn't wrong when it is. I want to challenge your idea of "wrong". There's an old story about rabbits. It goes more or less like this: A man comes into town on his horse and sees two rabbits by the side of the main street. He thinks to himself, "I shall build a fence around those rabbits and they will be mine!". So, the man does it and puts a price tag one each rabbit. The price tags say $10. A mother and daughter come strolling down the street and the daughter remarks at the beauty of the rabbits. "I would like a rabbit, mother!" she cries. "Perhaps you may have on on your birthday if you please," says the mother. Two months later, the mother and daughter come by. The daughter is in good spirits on her birthday, wearing spring lilies in her hair. "Mother," she said, "I want a rabbit today!" By the time, there were a dozen rabbits in the pen, each marked with a $10 tag. "Surely sir," said the mother, "You could lower the price on your rabbits now that you have so many!" "No," said the man, "These are my rabbits, and this is my price." The mother and daughter walked away disappointed, unable to afford the price. As months went by, the rabbit population continued to rise, and eventually the man had trouble putting tags on all of the rabbits. The next time the mother and daughter came by, they noticed that there was a fine handsome rabbit with no tag on it standing just beside the fence. "Surely," reasoned the daughter, "since there are so many and this one has no price tag, it would not be wrong to give it a home." The mother agreed, and they put the handome rabbit in their basket and strolled off. | |
Jamesburrow wrote:
Lol. Although unrealistic, I do love the analogy! Same here, did you come up with that PH? George Gough | |
That is a stupid story. There is nothing wrong with what the man is doing, because he is obviously raising the rabbits for a profit. If this guy is breeding and selling rabbits and one is just on the outside of the fence and it looks like the rest of the rabbits, it would only make sense to assume that the rabbit is one of the ones he bred and belongs to him.
When you go into store, you can go into a toy isle where they sell dozens of the same actions figures. If one of them happens to not have a price tag on it, that doesn't give you the right to just take it. The girl stole a rabbit and deserves to be curbed. If she wanted one so badly she should have either paid for a rabbit or went and found one herself. | |
KodeNerd wrote:
Jamesburrow wrote: That particular storytelling is mine, but it's a story that's been around for generations and that was told to me when I was young. It's a fable of sorts, with the moral of the story being something about abundance. | |
PirateHead wrote:
there is also a large amount of music that can be listened to for free, in full, legally, without purchase. I don't think anyone has a problem with bands releasing free songs and albums. What I'm saying is that claiming it's your right to pirate music, a luxury item, simply because you're not satisfied with the current methods for sampling music is selfish. In an ideal world where everyone does the right thing it would be a sweet system, but as it stands people who go out and buy the album make up a small portion of the people who illegally download music. If the artist is fine with you downloading and sharing their music that's ok, but you can't just assume it's ok with them. Unless they're offering their own download service, which as it happens I've setup for several smaller bands, your best to assume they don't want you to. Why is it so hard to honour their wishes not to have you sample their music through piracy? If it's truly a good business model like you seem to think then artists and labels will move towards it on their own. People didn't have to steal cars before car dealerships started allowing test drives. | |
Does it really make any difference? Bands get most of their money from their overpriced shows, not albums. The albums are mainly just for advertising and getting the name out.
Sueing people for sharing music just makes me less likely to buy from that record company.. I downloaded a song from one of the bands on my good list and ended up buying the album a little later.. turns out it's one of my favorite albums. I also downloaded an album and bought the disk later, not really intending to listen to it much.. but that's a different story. I also download music that I already own. It's nice to have it on my computer, since that's where I listen to it most. Sometimes I'm unable to put it on the computer though, for example, I have Gran Turismo 4, which has loads of music on it. I can't get it off though, so I have no choice but to download it. | |
DarkView wrote:
If it's truly a good business model like you seem to think then artists and labels will move towards it on their own. People didn't have to steal cars before car dealerships started allowing test drives. Once again you're veering into fallacies from the land of scarcity. Car theft is terrible because it robs somebody of their investment, their means of transport, and a scarce resource. And by the same token, by stealing a car I gain a very valuable asset which I can profit from greatly. Music "theft" is not theft in the same sense - when I steal music, it isn't gone. When I gain that music, it's no huge boon to me, and I'm certainly not making profit off of it. Thus, if people started stealing cars rampantly (as is the case in South Africa), there would be major changes in society as a reaction. Music "theft", however, is benign and hardly disruptive. Unless you live in a parallel universe where music is scarce, and you believe that you are entitled to make megabucks off of it. That is why the multinational music labels are reacting so violently. | |
For starters, I don't equate digital music piracy with traditional theft. My example wasn't highlighting that you wouldn't steal a car. It was just pointing out a case where a business owner chooses to do something differently because overall it makes them more money.
They offer test drives because without test drives you don't sell as many cars. If these 'just give what you feel is right' models do have merit and make it so much easier to promote new artists then they'll take off. PirateHead wrote: Car theft is terrible because it robs somebody of their investment Musicians and record labels don't invest in their music? Do you have any idea how much it costs to produce a cheap album? When I gain that music, it's no huge boon to me So because it doesn't have a great value to you it's ok just take their work and 'create' your copy? This argument seems to boil down to the idea that because the copying process doesn't cost you (or anyone else) anything it's ok to use elements that people do invest heavily in to create your copy, even though that's clearly against their will. Unless you live in a parallel universe where music is scarce Well in your world where music is worthless the second it's been recorded musicians have to work at Burger World instead of producing music, so music probably will end up pretty scarce. | |
DarkView wrote:
Car theft is terrible because it robs somebody of their investment The difference is, when you take the car, you aren't just taking a copy of the car you are taking the car itself. Boom, they no longer have that car anymore. When you pirate a CD, the artists, labels, stores, etc all still have their CD, you just have a copy of it that will most times be of lower quality. | |
DarkView wrote:
Well in your world where music is worthless the second it's been recorded musicians have to work at Burger World instead of producing music, so music probably will end up pretty scarce. And yet somehow musicians have been making a living for *thousands of years*, despite an unfortunate lack of recording technology and big record labels! | |
PirateHead wrote:
And yet somehow musicians have been making a living for *thousands of years*, despite an unfortunate lack of recording technology and big record labels! And what would you know, they've been getting paid for their work for *thousands of years*. | |
So if someone invents a replicator tomorrow. And we are able to create a copy of anything we want from thin air, are you saying that we should not compensate inventors. If we replicate cars, would we not want to compensate automakers for designing cars.
All new car production would halt, and we'd be driving the same cars for the rest of eternity. (not so bad I guess) Other new stuff wouldn't be invented, we'd be copying old stuff, old books, old food, old technology. New music won't be created, we'll be listening to the same old same old. Of course, when someone invents a replicator, we would need to transform our society to start rewarding innovators in some other way. More than likely simply by putting their name in lights (since people would no longer need money). Since of course, artists still need to be payed for their work, because they can't eat off warm fuzzy feelings, a new method of revenue must be created, otherwise we risk losing music. Suing people for following instinctive feelings is simply wrong. People steal music because music makes them happy, the more music the merrier. People don't realize the consequences it has for the artists. So, if a new method is created, the problem would be solved. Offer music for download free, with a donation button, that would filter out the crap real quick. Good musicians would make loads, crap musicians would not. Musicians can still make money from concerts and tv appearances and ads. It's really not that hard to do. But big business fears change. | |
Is it my problem if a musician is dumb enough to try and make a living off of an album? They have been doing LIVE PERFORMANCES for years. Not selling albums. If they really tried making a living off an album, they wouldn't make enough to live on a street corner.
The only real money in recording is lawsuits. | |
Goop2 wrote:
Is it my problem if a musician is dumb enough to try and make a living off of an album? How is that stupid? You have a group of people that are coming together to create art and then distribute it digitally. You know, other people do this. You might be familiar with them. They're called game developers. | |
Erm... WAY off topic... and no <_<