General discussion

Locked

Buying/Selling an iPod could get you busted

By jdclyde ·
Been reading up on article dealing with ipods and mp3's.

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/products/2006-01-23-ebay-ipods_x.htm
http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/7315.cfm

(just a few of the articles I found. I ignored blogs)

If you buy an ipod preloaded you can be charged with recieving stolen goods.

If you sell an ipod, you are suppose to either clear off all the music from the ipod, or make sure you don't have a copy saved on your computer.

If you ripped your own mp3's off of cd's, you are actually suppose to send the cd's with the ipod as you have given away your right to that music.

Where will the music industry realize threatening their clients is not good for business?

I heard this on the radio and it sounded so crazy, I just had to look it up. To my surprise it is all over the net.

What will be next?

And can you believe people are stupid enough to pay 99 cents for ONE song as a down load? duh!

I have my ipod shuffle, but only because it was a door prize at a voip seminar! I NEVER use it and find the samsung mp3 players I bought my boys for Christmas to be much better, and twice the storage for only $30 more AND have a display.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

55 total posts (Page 2 of 6)   Prev   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next
Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Mr L - I admit it

by maxwell edison In reply to If you offer no "solution ...

I demonize liberalism. I proudly admit it.

And I didn't "create a bias against him", per se, but rather he did it himself with the title of his message - Liberal Musings Alert.

Moreover, faradhi appears to be a smart and articulate guy. I've conversed with him on more than one occasion, and I'd love to engage him in some stimulating political discussion. He admits his bias, and I admit mine. Let the discussions begin!

You, on the other hand, have suddenly crawled out of some hole to spout off about a circumstance about which you know nothing. You've just identified yourself as a very foolish person.

By the way, please define a neocon for us.

Collapse -

No Problem if no solution

by faradhi In reply to If you offer no "solution ...

I freely admit that (other than voting with my dollars) I have no solution to some businesses negatively affecting the economy with greed. That does not prohibit me from seeing a problem, pointing out the problem, and doing what I can until I find a better one or someone else presents one.

Businesses are not all good. Nor are they all bad. If I demonized anything it was a very specific business practice of some corporations not corporations themselves.

BTW, I don't take too much personally. I am a liberal in many ways, Just not a bleeding heart one. :)

Collapse -

faradhi - I look forward. . . . .

by maxwell edison In reply to If you offer no "solution ...

...to more dialogue. Maybe you'll be the first one I convert from "the dark side"!

Collapse -

Max, you need to separate good from bad.

by mjwx In reply to If you offer no "solution ...

There are good corporations and bad corporations. Good corporations use their money to enhance products, better operating procedures, increase their market share (using ethical means) or branch into new markets. Bad corporations sue their customers, try to maintain absolute control over the products they sell, drown out competition and collude to set high prices.

For example, AMD good, Microsoft bad, Nothing (before they joined Interscope) good, RIAA bad. Get the picture.

Max, I know you?re an ignorant and self centred person so much of the meaning of good and bad will go right over your head but please, try.

Mike

You can?t please everyone, so choose who you are going to offend first and work from there!

Collapse -

max....Likewise

by faradhi In reply to If you offer no "solution ...

I wouldn't place any bets on it. But who knows. I might just change your mind on a few things.

Collapse -

excessive or reprehensible acquisitiveness

by Absolutely In reply to Liberal Musings Alert

Acquisitiveness is excessive or reprehensible if and only if it leads to theft or physical aggression. No person has the moral authority to tell another how much wealth they may desire, or earn, only that they must earn what they have.

The RIAA has the right to enforce their intellectual property rights. If you don't like it, you have the right to ask nicely for permission to ignore the law as a personal favor. You also have the right to try to make better music and listen to that instead, if you believe you're able. You do not have the right to steal.

The superior ability of the producer of the goods you steal is not an excuse to steal, and the word "greed" is not a mystical incantation. It does not obscure the fact that your acquisitiveness motivates you to steal, while the victims' acquisitiveness led them to produce, which benefits you by definition of your desire to have what they produce.

Money is not the root of all evil. Incompetence and envy are the root of all evil.

Collapse -

"Where will the music industry realize...?"

by Absolutely In reply to Buying/Selling an iPod co ...

jdclyde: "Where will the music industry realize threatening their clients is not good for business?"

Absolutely: When threatening their clients stops being so good for business. Which means, when the federal government stops bending over for them with gibberish like the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, that contradicts fair use precedent so thoroughly that it amounts to an abolition of all private property rights to the affected forms of what used to be property.

Collapse -

UnFair Use

by Too Old For IT In reply to "Where will the music ind ...

I am about 6 months from having a non-fiction work published. I am in fear of finding vast quantities of it inserted into some college professors handouts (or handout that has to be purchased) under "Fair Use".

Collapse -

Agreed

by Absolutely In reply to UnFair Use

I understand your fear, but "Fair Use" allows copying for some well-defined purposes. It isn't fair to punish people who use technology legally because some use it illegally.

Back to digital copying, the RIAA's real complaint is Internet distribution, yet it has prosecuted end users instead of illegal distributors.

To compare to your fear of your non-fiction work being distributed illegally: would it be fair to punish the students who receive the copies instead of the professors who copy and distribute them knowing that their actions are illegal?

Collapse -

I don't get the consumers' attitude

by maxwell edison In reply to Buying/Selling an iPod co ...

It's the consumer who wants to rip off somebody, not the music industry. If you don't want to pay for a product, you have a choice to either do without it, steal it, or get somebody else to buy it for you.

And it's not a difficult concept to understand.

If I buy a piece of music, regardless of the medium on which the music is delivered, that music is mine to enjoy, regardless of how many media forms I might elect to play it. I can copy a song from an old record album, for example, onto CD or tape or convert it to digital form for play on my ipod, or all of those options. But I can't give (or sell) one of those to another person without giving (or selling) all of them to that person. It's the music that's the product, not the medium on which it's delivered.

To think that if you buy a piece of music that it is then yours to distribute as you see fit, is the epitome of ignorance and being self-centered. If everybody did it all the time and in all cases, there would be no music industry to create the stuff to begin with. (Because only one song would be sold to only one person, who would then pyramid it to the rest of the world.) And who would create a piece of music to make a lousy 99 cents?

Back to Community Forum
55 total posts (Page 2 of 6)   Prev   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next

Related Discussions

Related Forums