General discussion

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #2228669

    should music be free to download on internet

    Locked

    by narvash_red ·

    should the music industry allow free music to be downloaded without any restrictions with it

All Comments

  • Author
    Replies
    • #2470766

      why?

      by w2ktechman ·

      In reply to should music be free to download on internet

      For me, if I think it is worth listening to, I dont mind purchasing it. If it is something that I dont want to buy, I can do without it or listen to it on the radio when they play it.
      No big deal to me. However, I hate the idea of buying something and then being restricted in its use. If I buy a wrench or power tool, I can use it for many things, lend it out for a few days, or whatever. With new music/movies, this is disallowed. And they keep trying to tighten the grip, like buy a new copy to use in the car, and a new one to use in the mp3 player, and a new one for the computer, and….

    • #2470751

      No

      by jamesrl ·

      In reply to should music be free to download on internet

      Though some flexibility would be good.

      If the artist and producer want it to be free, all well and good.

      If you wrote and book and got someone to publish it, would you want someone to post it on the internet and give it away? Maybe – if it was a book on say politics and getting the message out was more important than the money you get. But most authors write for money.

      I think fair use would be to allow someone who purchased the article, whether software or a book or music, to make copies for various media that they own. I don’t think that any of those copies should be deistributed to others without the express permission of the author.

      James

    • #2470643

      Nothing is really free

      by mjd420nova ·

      In reply to should music be free to download on internet

      I use the smart recorder of the Creative software that came with the sound card I use. It allows me to record anything I am listening to. I often go to VH1 and pick a genre like cool jazz or reunion(rock) and record what I find interesting. These are streamed in .WAV formats and I record them in 44kc stereo, 16 bit and save as .WAV format. I don’t get to choose any selections or order of play so I might listen to 5 songs before I get one to record. I also have to listen to a 30 second advertisment every five songs or so. I then take these selections I’ve recorded and assemble them to burn on a CD. This can be done with streaming radio stations or any other source. I haven’t recorded any new music, it just isn’t my bag as most music today is meant for listeners about 40 years younger. I don’t sell those CD’s, they are just for my personal use in the car or on my home enterainment system.

    • #2470637

      Eh ?

      by tony hopkinson ·

      In reply to should music be free to download on internet

      Do you mean chnage their business model ?

      Mind you iff they did that, it would bee down to the composers, not a bunch of suits.

    • #2470613

      Who should be the one to really answer that question?

      by joer ·

      In reply to should music be free to download on internet

      The person who created the music, or the person who wants to listen to it?

      • #2470585

        The creator should

        by w2ktechman ·

        In reply to Who should be the one to really answer that question?

        be able to put a value on it, and the listener should be able to decide whether they want to pay that price or not.

        but that is not how it really works. The labels put a value on it and try to squeeze all sides into submission to get every cent that they can.

    • #2470584

      Yes, if the owner, composer, performer and/or producer so desires

      by drowningnotwaving ·

      In reply to should music be free to download on internet

      Otherwise it is up to them to determine a fair market price for the product and see if their product competes either on its merits or value proposition.

    • #2470568

      Time to put up your own answer, Narvash

      by drowningnotwaving ·

      In reply to should music be free to download on internet

      Declare your hand.

      • #2625785

        ok i will

        by narvash_red ·

        In reply to Time to put up your own answer, Narvash

        personally its up to the the consumer and the people who made the songs (writer,singer,etc) but would increase sales to the cd itself or would it lead to a fall in sales that the real question. personally i think they should allow at 2 songs from every cd to be free so they can gauge the consumers reactions.

        • #2625754

          again, why

          by w2ktechman ·

          In reply to ok i will

          that would be a promotional thing, and up to the people creting it and/or distributing it.

          Why do you think that it should be mandatory? Is it because you value music/entertainment but only if it is free???

          If it is of value to you, then purchase it unless it is offered for free. But you shouldnt whine because you want something and it costs something.

          If you dont want to pay what is being asked, you, as the consumer, can and should just do without it. There, simple. If enough consumers do without it, then the value is being set by the consumer, and prices are likely to go down.

        • #2625500

          whose says im whining

          by narvash_red ·

          In reply to again, why

          its what i was stating that i haven’t finished the post and my break ended .
          here it is CONTINUED:

          even when they do this it would become a limiting factor on sales due to the fact most people dont buy music cds for all the music tracks. they buy because its the few songs they like and want to hear.does it answer your question… no it doesn’t. because anything i have stated is what i believe to the best of knowledge. its just what i do for a living saling of foods when someone want to try something we give a sample to them to try, it maywant them to buy it same thing with music,and everything else.

        • #2625494

          This is still up to

          by w2ktechman ·

          In reply to whose says im whining

          the creators and/or distributors. If I go into a store, I usually dont take the samples, but they usually only offer a small morsel, not enough to get my fill.

          So, going by the same idea, wouldnt it be better to offer a free 10-30 second demo of 1 or 2 songs? I mean, in the food industry, I dont see too many companies offering a free whole sandwich so that you may possibly purchase a whole ham.

        • #2623233

          to you w2ktechman

          by narvash_red ·

          In reply to This is still up to

          take a deep breath and pull your head out of your ass.its called specials buy something and you get something free. like for example we were saling a 12 pack of soda(coke,sprite,ect) and with it you the store brand soft drinks you can do this method SIMIALAR TO MUSIC(HINT!!!!!!!!!!). instead of having to buy something you can recieve free without any membership or anyother hidden fee.

        • #2623216

          I think we’ve gotten your point

          by tig2 ·

          In reply to to you w2ktechman

          But you have missed the points of others.

          First- you have no business flaming someone for asking a question, regardless of what you perceive the over tone is. Keep a civil tongue.

          Second- There is a great difference in the foods/retail industry and the music industry. In the foods industry, a “buy one, get one” strategy works because the item is a consumable. As in, you consume it, it’s gone. You have to get more or do without.

          The music industry is a sustained consumable. I can consume it (listen to it) every day for a month, year, ten years. I don’t have to re-purchase it, the media continues to work.

          The model you describe works well for consumables (gone on consumption) and poorly on sustained consumables (lasts as long as the media survives).

          The availability of music is dependent on the artist and the producer. Many indie bands are taking it to the net, other performers are not. To use your food analogy, they are the General Mills and Nabiscos- they alone decide if they will participate in a give-away.

        • #2623179

          ooh, a bad attempt at flaming!

          by w2ktechman ·

          In reply to to you w2ktechman

          Ok, I took a deep breath. I am sure you can find advertised specials for buy one, get one free (or 2 for a special price). I am sure that I have seen them before.
          However, just because you are a cheap-ass SOB, does not mean that the rest of the world will contort itself to your wants.
          As stated before, this is entertainment. If you cannot pay for it, then you can do without it. If you dont want to pay the offered prices, it will likely go on sale somewhere at some point in time. If those prices are too high, you can do without it without having to suffer starvation or death.

          Now, If you really want to have free music, without memberships or hidden fees, why not start your own company/website and offer it? Or are you afraid of things like lawsuits???
          Or how about, starting a band, recording the music, and offering your own supply as an example (for free).

          C’mon grow the F*** up already. Sitting with a Dil** up your A$$ all day does not make you right. Stop bouncing around the couch with that thing and join the real world. The sun is good for you once in a while. Looking outside a window is good as well. Now, go find a job, be it pulling weeds or mowing lawns to earn a little more cash to enjoy your music. Stop buying soo much candy and doughnuts as well, and you may have the money to purchase something.
          Pull out the Dil** and go to a record store and you wont have to sign up for anything.

        • #2625390

          re: ooh, a bad attempt at flaming!

          by danlm ·

          In reply to to you w2ktechman

          damn, I’m impressed.

          I have been known to download music. But I know that what I did was illegal. This twit is rationalizing what he is doing… I don’t rationalize… I know what I do, I know what I did, I know if it was right or wrong(legally or morally), and I know I won’t explain myself… If I ripped off music because I couldn’t stand the money hungry pricks(metalica, bite my a$$). It was ripping them off, and it was illegal.

          What ever, nice one w2k… I very much enjoyed reading that response.

          Dan

        • #2625250

          Thank You Dan — edited

          by w2ktechman ·

          In reply to to you w2ktechman

          I guess I was started getting irritated this morning, cause this WATB just wont get it.
          If he wants to steal, then he should do it and shut up about it, rather than constantly whining…

          ANyway, glad you enjoyed.

          Sorry Mae, royalties were sent via email…

        • #2624804

          That’s the point. You give a sample, not a whole course

          by drowningnotwaving ·

          In reply to whose says im whining

          (i am assuming that, by the way – if you tell me that you give away whole meals then my logic following is pretty stuffed 🙂 )

          There are ample opportunities to sample a sound – go to the store and ask them to play a track or two, (nowadays) search the net and find a website with the tracks on it. You’ll normally get up to 29.99 seconds of recorded bliss.

          You can most likely sample the music without having to buy it nor break any copyright laws.

        • #2624509

          yet

          by narvash_red ·

          In reply to That’s the point. You give a sample, not a whole course

          what about hearing the whole song. and listen to it all you want. would you prefer that over this method?

        • #2624507

          hey by the way

          by narvash_red ·

          In reply to yet

          give your opinion on the artist and bands. if you want too, name your favourite songs.

        • #2624489

          Yet you still dont get it (or dont want to)

          by w2ktechman ·

          In reply to yet

          your whole argument seems to be that you just want it free. That alone wont make it free.

          Your only other argument is that with food, smaples are given, and you were showed that many artists have samples to listen to, or you can go to a record store (in some cases) and listen to the cd (or part of it).

          But you still persist that all music should be free to download. If this were the case, what would be the reason for bands to create new music?

          Now, think of it a little bit differently. A cd costs what, $7-25 (new, used, or multi disc). How many times will the song be played by you to listen to it? If you dont want the cd, you also have the choice (for many titles) to download for (I think the going rate is) $.99 per song.
          If you listen to the song say 99 times in your life, it is $.01 per hearing.

          Now, lets add some more. You probably spend more on batteries, and/or power to listen to it than you will for the song in the long run. And dont forget the stereo equipment costs as well. Most people upgrade or buy new equipment somewhat often.

          So, to sum it up AGAIN, why should it be free just because you dont want to pay for it. This time put up a real argument rather than this whiny ass titty baby (WATB — Sorry Mae, it was justified here though) crap that you have been posting.

      • #2624769

        Even though I can’t stand FYI

        by danlm ·

        In reply to Time to put up your own answer, Narvash

        They do that now…. They have head phones all through their selections of music so that you can get a taste of what the album/cd/music is like. They might not have all the cd’s they have in stock accessible, but they do have something from every section. Borders does this to, and a couple other music stores I’ve been in.

        My dislike of FYI is only because I do not think they carry a wide enough variety of music. I’m old, I’m ugly, I’m cranky. And I want a larger selection of blues, old rock, jazz, and someone at the freaken store that knows more music then what is hot at the current time.

        Chuckle, ok… Im done being a cranky old prick.

        Dan

    • #2624696

      Music Industry

      by genera-nation ·

      In reply to should music be free to download on internet

      Never Happen – where is the money in that. Talking voodoo economics there.

      It would be the artist that could however – like the recent Radiohead album.

      NOTE: Radiohead are an indi band and have no record company!

      • #2624512

        duh… heard the news lately

        by narvash_red ·

        In reply to Music Industry

        they’re giving their songs away for free almost. yet people still downloading it illegaly this is the point right here should all music be legal to download for free.

        • #2624501

          If you are saying the law

          by tony hopkinson ·

          In reply to duh… heard the news lately

          is a waste of time because it’s unenforcable then I’d have to agree.

          If you are saying you don’t want to be judged as breaking the law when you download, then I would not.

          Two completely different animals.

        • #2623239

          i just relized it

          by narvash_red ·

          In reply to If you are saying the law

          i was thinking it over lunch time yesterday
          and i relized that no one can enforce without going extreme. i mean come on are you going to get life in prison for downloading a song. sheesh how would you like to answer the bald head guy with tats livin with ya in a cell,and he askes “what’d you do to get here?”
          well congrats you gonna get your salad tossed tonight.

        • #2625457

          Perhaps not prison

          by tig2 ·

          In reply to i just relized it

          But some hefty fines. And RIAA isn’t finished yet. Nor is Sony and their rootkit fetish.

          Follow the law of the land. You get to sleep in your own bed that way.

        • #2625001

          But IF all artists…

          by genera-nation ·

          In reply to duh… heard the news lately

          there you go!

        • #2624988

          Would you?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to But IF all artists…

          Writing, compiling, recording, manufacturing and studio time costs a fortune. Would YOU spend all of your money, remember no time to work full time, all of your efforts and all of your time to give the finished product away? No. And why should you? Because some kid doesn’t want to spend his allowance?

          I download and trade demos all the time, most artists do too, but I also buy msic I like, after hearing it. It’s really the least you can do.

        • #2624865

          No, but in my opinion that model is wrong for this day and age…

          by genera-nation ·

          In reply to Would you?

          OK, so you get the music for free. What about all the other aspects of the industry. Concerts, memorabilia, top quality CD pack (better than just the norm) with book should you wish to actually buy the physical product. I know that for the bands I really like, I buy the product (well I always buy even when a download) but it would be nice to get the music for free with the option to buy a higher quality product.

          Allowing the free music gives the startup bands a higher chance to be heard as the distribution is cheaper. If they are actually ant good then the rest (as above) can follow.

        • #2623218

          Your still missing it though

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to No, but in my opinion that model is wrong for this day and age…

          While in a fantasy world that would be ideal, it is no reality and simply doesn’t work.

          First of all, do you have ANY idea how many bands are looking for a break by offering music free? If you chose less than a few million you would be sadly mistaken.

          YOu suggest there are other ways to make money, and many DO that, see Ozzy, Iron Maiden, Judas priest, who have had LITTLE to no radio play but run on their merits as a touring act that puts on a great show. THeir legions of dedicated fans, download and buy their CD’s (because they still release a product worth the money), go to the concerts and buy t-shirts etc.

          BUT…how does a band go on tour? How does a band print shirts? How does a band produce a (good)CD? If you had ANY idea just how much all this costs, you would be able to understand why labels or management is needed. First of all, the marketing is a full time job. Secondly how do you get into the record stores with your free CD? How do you get airtime in the best media outlet, the radio station?

          The only way to do this in North America is to sign.

          Now, your suggestion actually does work in some places in the world, distribution contracts offer the artist fexibility. An example, just an example as they really do vary: XYZ band signs a distro contract with The Sanctuary Group. Sanctaury is a fullly rounded artist management and touring company (started as Iron Maiden’s label back in the day).

          $3000.00 signing and distro bonus.
          They can take your home made CD and market it into retail stores around the world where they have priority display space. They are a touring company that owns an airline, so they set you up to tour with a successful act (if your band can support the tour). They also get you a free video shoot, and some airtime on MTV at a low cost. They then provide all resources as needed, at a low cost to help you get into the scene. Ultimately the bad has control but they are supported by the label at a cost of say, $4 per CD.

          In the US industry, you are owned. Sold your soul to the devil.

          The artists is told what they have to produce in a three or five year term, th elabels producer mixes and changes teh sound/musicians as desired to achieve wht the label thinks will sell. They put it out and the artists gets a tiny income per disc. YOu go on tour and have chanmpagne in nice hotels, tours of local sights, first class flight etc.

          When your CD sells, they take your 25 cents per album (that the artist gets) and deduct the touring costs, champagne, tours, flights etc. This is why so many artists ended up bankrupt or at least near broke after selling millions of albums and touring the world.

          It isn’t until those artists are wellestablished that they are able to break out and start theri own label and produce their own product, often relying on newer acts signing to them in order to pay the bills. And so the sycle continues.

          So as far as simply making a CD, releasing it for free, having it appear in stores and on the radio, creating a video and having it aired, touring and selling merchandise all for FREE…It’s just a far fetched dream.

          Artists don’t get noticed on P2P forums until they are already in teh spotlight, believe me I have heped several good bands who relied on P2P to make it. By gettng them distro contracts, they are able tomove to the next level. Once they have distro, it’s easier for them to go solo and release on P2P such as Radiohead. You have to remember, Radiohead had some great, professional exposure long before becoming popular. Distribution, not ownership.

        • #2625454

          And I think that we will start to see a change in the model

          by tig2 ·

          In reply to No, but in my opinion that model is wrong for this day and age…

          It just isn’t here yet.

          John Ondraisak with Five for Fighting released a single to be used by anyone in any way they choose. I love that song. I bought the CD.

          You’re right- ethical people will choose to support the artist that gives freely. But it is a paradigm shift that will require time.

        • #2625388

          Ethics or education?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to And I think that we will start to see a change in the model

          Not to disagree with you in any way, but is is it really an ethical issue? I know it’s usually seen as an ethical issue (perhaps for ease of segregation, as always), I usually look at that too. Call me unethical then. 🙂

          I don’t think that having or not having ethics really has that much to do with music downloads, even the most ethical people will share files this way. Ethics to me is a far more important issue, based more on core values than whether someone downloads music or not. I wouldn’t decide who I would trust or associate with based on whether they downloaded Avril Lavigne or not (well maybe if it was Avril it would raise a red flag). I don’t think a persons god would deny them heavenly passage because they downloaded Judas Priest or Puff The Magic Dragon.

          Perhaps education is the proper answer, as it is in so many other areas of life and knowledge. If people understood what went into producing such work, the hours as a kid playing guitar or pounding drums in the basement, while friends play baseball at the park. Lessons, upgrades, study and complete dedication to what you do. Years of working BS jobs because you just want to play guitar and make it as a musician. Most musicians, with some experience, will say they would be happy just earning a living making music, the millionaire dreams are really not that important, though welcome.

          People just need to know what goes into what they take. Sure they would still download many artists and never buy anything, but so many would go out and buy what they liked too. There’s nothing like a well packaged and presented CD, I don’t care where you get yoru downloads.

          Oh well, just a new idea I guess. Education, who’da thunk it.

      • #2624990

        Almost

        by oz_media ·

        In reply to Music Industry

        I pretty much agree that artists are FAR better off without labels. As you don’t know me yet, I have worked in artist management, scouting and promotions for about 19 years now. I find North American badns and shop them into Europe where they get a fair deal.

        What bands NEED for a deal is not outright ownership that the US labels demand. Just distribution and tour support,if they are good they will take off. Just look at OzzFest, whish has birthed more superstars than CBS records (exaggeration of course).

        NO music shouldn’t be totally free, but it shouldn’t be a market dictated by the record labels, who own the radio stations, CD stores, Video stations etc. 4 major corporations OWN the entire industry outright.

        Radiohead IS an indie band but they made a fortune touring beforehand.

        They had tour and distribution support, not a full label signing.

        In Europe, distribution and tour contracts are the thing everyone seeks, just a foot in the door not ownership. Sure the promoter/ label makes some money, but not even pennies on the dollar to what a major label signing does.

    • #2625083

      That’s entirely up to the owner of the rights.

      by charliespencer ·

      In reply to should music be free to download on internet

      Be that the creator, the performer, or the distributor, it’s entirely a decision of the owner and not of the listener.

    • #2624993

      No, not the ‘music industry’ just the controllers.

      by oz_media ·

      In reply to should music be free to download on internet

      The RIAA should disappear along with CRIA. In Canada, Socan and so many others can offer artist protection, suport and legal help. No need to make dough off selling an artists music.

      Many artists now will just completely subterfuge the labels and be quite successful with a little effort of thier own.

      The labels should just sign and distribute as they do in Europe, out here they want total control and ownership. This results in less money for an artist, less freedom of expression for an artist, tight deadlines thta produce rough material, costly products at the store and worst of all, they own the radio stations and dictate what we must listen to.

      Now if Judas Priest was not on a label and they released a CD, I would definietly download a copy, but I would also be first inline to buy one too. I KNOW what I am getting, quality recording, quality ebgineering, a decent booklet with lyrics and images etc.

      Plus, because they actually do play instruments and sing, I would be buying tickets to their shows.

      No need for a label there.

      • #2624987

        re CRIA

        by jaqui ·

        In reply to No, not the ‘music industry’ just the controllers.

        at least they aren’t as rabid about music downloads, or not all of them.

        We do have to credit Netwerk Music for funding that Texas family’s fight against RIAA for downloading music.
        [ RIAA made claim about an artist under Netwerk’s label, and didn’t consult Netwerk before filing, so Netwerk paid to fight RIAA. ]

        • #2624945

          I have to agree Jaqui

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to re CRIA

          Firstly, Nettwerk did the right thing but it was also in thier better interests to do so, it put them on the map with future artists as ‘the good guys’. As Avril’s label, they have promoted her songs to Canadians and Americans alike, not supporting the suit would have negative impact on her Canadian and probably US CD sales also. Being a hip hop/pop focused label, they have it in thier best interests to work with youngsters to fight what kids support. Of course, having them falsely represented was the added kick into gear.

          Nettwerk is a pretty good label with a reputation for looking out for the artists concerns as well as thier own. With stiff competition, this lets them shine against the big four and helps them sign new artists without the massive initial signing bonuses that the big four offer. Too many Canadian artists go south for money, now with many artists supporting downloads, they have taken the right side for sure.

          Funny how this doesn’t really have impact in Canada the way it does in the US though, when you get the corporate greed away from it.

          Sure Nettwerk is in it for money andnotoriety, but they also do so somewhat fairly, I’ve seen thier contracts and they really aren’t THAT bad. OF course they have to make money but they are not overdoing it.

          Good for them and good for Canada, nice to see SOMEONE in Canada finally stand up to US corporate greed and not just cater to it.

        • #2624930

          It also probably helped that it is legal to download in Canada.

          by jaqui ·

          In reply to I have to agree Jaqui

          It would be a minor item, but under the impetus offered by the RIAA suit, the fact that the Canadian Artist’s work, under a Canadian label, was downloaded, in accordance with Canadian Law could also have had a small part in the decision.

          While the pop / hip hop genre doesn’t interest me, I will be more inclined to purchase stuff under Netwerk’s label knowing they will stand up against abuse of content protection. It was, and is, a very good business decision on their part.

          We just need to get Mannheim Steamroller to sign with them 😉
          That is an interesting group to listen to.
          [ I own half their works, the entire Fresh Aire series and thier 25th anniversry collection ]

        • #2624887

          Wow it’s been a while for me

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to It also probably helped that it is legal to download in Canada.

          Lon gtime since I’ve heard that name. I thought they were pretty cool at one time, nt that I don’t like them now but just that I haven’t listened in a while. I was into that years ago when playing with new keyboards, easy to sample. Ooops bad word ‘sample’ I always rag on sample artists.
          It was for fun though, not trying to pass off someone else’s work as my own.
          Just checked out thier site, will have to go back when I have more time. Touring to Spokane and Everet in December.

          Think I’ll download some to throw something new in the truck 😉 , it is October afterall. Cheers, a forgotten artist revived for me.

        • #2624872

          lmao

          by jaqui ·

          In reply to Wow it’s been a while for me

          I actually listen to them more than any other group.[ I must like them, I bought the complete Fresh Aire series in cassette twice and in CD once ]

          excellent working to or relaxing to music, up tempo usually, not harsh for when others come into the space. Can be low volume and used in the background to keep a lighter mood and set tempo for working to.

        • #2625462

          Cassette?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to lmao

          Cassette? Like the Maxell guy being blown out of his chair?

          I was looking for some glue the other day, because I was out of dope (just kidding, of course…I never run out)and found an old shoebox with a Maxell XLS II (awesome tape!). Tape was titled TTSB Slowly’. It took me a bit to remember what it was but then I had to laugh, ‘Tunes To Screw By Slowly’.

          Just proves that my inasnity started many moons ago! 🙂 Cassette, whatever next, 8-TRacks? uh yeah still got a bunch of them too, alongside my VHS collection.

    • #2623477

      Do you consider downloading from CDs at the Library Illegal?

      by supahtech ·

      In reply to should music be free to download on internet

      I’m just curious of the TR consensus of the legality of this. Sometimes there is an ease of use issue. It?s easy to download for free, but it takes some effort to go to the library with my laptop, borrow 20 CDs, rip them all, and go borrow another 20. (Or like the member that records live streaming music to CD-that is stealing the same as downloading for free right? Just with more work/effort-no one is getting paid for that music that you now have) the librarians don’t care, they have all their products for free lending, that is what libraries do. If they started arresting people and prosecuted them for stealing, I probably would not do it any longer. They have just about every CD that is out, at the library, and ones that they don’t have I can have on order from other libraries-where they will ship it to my local library in a day.

      Should libraries all close down because they are hurting the authors? profits? Should I feel bad? I don?t have a lot of money, but I pay a lot of taxes, and those taxes pay for things like Libraries, so why not use them to the fullest extent?

      They won’t refund you the taxes just because you don’t use the library…

      • #2623228

        it doesn’t harm anybody

        by narvash_red ·

        In reply to Do you consider downloading from CDs at the Library Illegal?

        its a fixed profit and no one continuely get money for everytime you listen to song
        it harmes no one except your guilty conciense.

        • #2623166

          You are nothing but a thief

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to it doesn’t harm anybody

          And a sad, pathetic one at that, desperately trying to justify your theft.

          If you listen to the CD at the library, no harm, no foul. If you make an illegal copy for yourself, you now have something that you WOULD have had to pay for, which WOULD have created more profit for the people who made the CD.

          I bet you steal software as well. How about a candy bar from the corner store?

          You are a lowlife thief.

        • #2625449

          a lowlife thief

          by w2ktechman ·

          In reply to You are nothing but a thief

          yup, that sums it up all right…

          At least a good theif knows what to steal :0

        • #2625405

          At least a good thief

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to a lowlife thief

          Is HONEST about if he/she/it is stealing something or not.

          This low life will continue to rationalize and reason himself into thinking that he has done nothing morally, ethically, or legally wrong.

          Definitely not someone you would invite into your home.

        • #2468325

          it takes some one to rationalize and not have any qualms

          by narvash_red ·

          In reply to At least a good thief

          someone can become dangrous when they no qualms just remember that. a rational man is more dangrous than a irrational one.
          i do this and i can have no regret see ya

        • #2468256

          Rational

          by tig2 ·

          In reply to it takes some one to rationalize and not have any qualms

          First- never assume that you are more dangerous than I. I have stared death down and I am still here. I assume you only pretend to the same.

          Second- the fact that you have no regret or regard for your immoral acts simply tells me that if you show up in my yard, I should shoot first and ask questions later. I have little doubt that you would do the same.

          Man is not a rational animal. He is a rationing one. In that rationing, he is capable of morals and ethics.

        • #2468319

          JD — I think he has had enough of me.

          by w2ktechman ·

          In reply to At least a good thief

          his only replies are to you now…lol
          I guess its your turn to tear him apart :^0

        • #2468243

          I have said what I have to say

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to JD — I think he has had enough of me.

          and am done with this scum.

          Time to move on, lest pali gets more troll whacks! 😀

          It is more and more clear that is all he is, a troll.

          Don’t feed the trolls. ;\

        • #2468237

          R U Sure that

          by w2ktechman ·

          In reply to JD — I think he has had enough of me.

          he deserves a Troll status? Hmmm, I think he be more a bug than a full blown troll. Like a fly maybe? A little irritant, but mostly harmless and easy to swat!

        • #2468336

          but

          by narvash_red ·

          In reply to You are nothing but a thief

          but does it mean the same thing when you buy the cd and then copy it and burn it on a seperate cd and give to friends for free. is it still stealing. you’ve bought the cd and your burning it mmm.i know we’ve all done it.
          did we break a law?
          no we didn’t steal any thing because to steal by definition is the taking of something that isnt yours. you rent a cd from the library its under your name and you are a co-owner of it if its miss placed or stolen you have to pay for it. so its techniquely not stealing.

        • #2468320

          Personally

          by w2ktechman ·

          In reply to but

          I copy cd’s for myself. I rarely even loan them out. I copy them and put the originals away.

          But, I only really listen to music anymore when I am driving anyway. an usually it is my 20 minute drive to/from work, so not much listening time.
          However, I dont buy too many cd’s either, I think I have like 20 of them right now. And, I have never had a need to download an MP3 either, nor do I own an MP3 player (except maybe my computers).

        • #2468317

          Actually

          by ganyssa ·

          In reply to but

          yes, it is still stealing. When you buy the CD and burn a copy and give it to your friends, the artist/record company/songwriter lost royalties because the friend didn’t have to go buy their own copy.

          That would be the thing you stole that wasn’t yours.

        • #2468266

          They don’t lose royalties there

          by cactus pete ·

          In reply to Actually

          Blanks are surcharged for that reason!

        • #2468246

          How does a specific artist

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to They don’t lose royalties there

          collect royalties of something he doesn’t know is being copied?

        • #2467572

          Blanks

          by cactus pete ·

          In reply to They don’t lose royalties there

          Blanks are surcharged with the expectation that the IP (Intellectual Property) is being stolen. You don’t have to know it’s being stolen, you just assume it is.

        • #2468244

          I can’t figure out which it is

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Actually

          either this assclown is just pushing peoples buttons just to get a rise out of them, or he really is that stupid AND that much of a lowlife scum.

          Either way, I am through with him.

        • #2468258

          I disagree with you entirely

          by tig2 ·

          In reply to but

          I buy a CD. I listen to that CD in my home and in my car. I may play it on my computer. I may save it to my computer so that I can rip a copy for my car.

          I don’t rip you a copy. You want it? Go buy it.

          I have had an instance when a friend loaned me a copy of her CD because I wanted my partner to hear a cut on it. We ripped it to disk, I returned her copy, and purchased the CD.

          We haven’t ALL done it.

          Yeah, I know- I had what I wanted. Why not leave it at that?

          Because the artist- in this case, Mark Schultz- deserved to get something from me, just as I had something from him.

          Your pathetic self-justification does you no credit. Theft is theft. JD has the right of this.

        • #2468248

          You sir, are scum

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to but

          you can make a copy for yourself to use, so you don’t have to carry the original around, but every time you give out a free copy, you are stealing and your little buddies are receiving stolen property.

          Technically, you ARE stealing. You paid for ONE copy, not Two, three, or ten. It would be just grand if you were the next person to end up in court over this.

          If I like a song, I go buy the cd. I would NEVER pay a buck to download a single song. That is just moronic to pay that (IMO).

          Hope you don’t pocket things when you go to visit friends and family.

        • #2623938

          Twisted Logic

          by mbennett ·

          In reply to but

          Sorry buddy, but your logic is twisted. If you own a CD and you burn a copy for your friend, you are still in possession of a legal copy but your friend is NOT. He/she now has an illegal copy. And as far as being co-owner of a CD rented from the library, that’s absolutly incorrect. You don’t ‘co-own’ an apartment if you’re renting it, do you ?? If you lose the CD, you are simply paying to replace the copy that the library owns. You do not become an owner of the CD yourself.

    • #2625400

      Yes and No

      by roobee81 ·

      In reply to should music be free to download on internet

      Maybe do a one song free download. Kinda so they can let people know what they sound like. I think that would be cool.

      • #2625385

        Do you have broadband?

        by tig2 ·

        In reply to Yes and No

        I forget and think you have mentioned.

        There are a couple of good web based “new music” providers that give listeners a chance to hear a song and then will give you a location to either sample it (hear 30 seconds) or download (if the artist has chosen that distribution method).

        It’s kinda cool because you never know what you might hear and some of the music is well worth the second listen.

        • #2625345

          A few options

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Do you have broadband?

          Future Shop usually offers samples of a discs playlist, as does Amazon. They will offer samples of a couple of tracks ifnot samples for the whole CD.

          You’ll also usually find the targeted single and a couple of other samples from the CD at the artists website these days, artists know what the industry wants, labels seem to simply tell us what we want.

    • #2467482

      Free Music, Cost on Concerts

      by paul.matthews ·

      In reply to should music be free to download on internet

      With MP3’s, and digitalised music, I think songs should be free to download. They could have special CD with collectors items for those who wish to keep memorabilia of their favourite artists. I have many cd’s collecting dust. As soon as I’ve copied it to my PC/Ipod I don’t require the CD any more.

      The artist makes lots of money from concerts. Look at Prince. 10 days or so at the 02 in London, and he gave his CD away for free.

      I’ve seen many artist at concerts that I probably wouldn’t of seen, mainly because I’ve obtained a copy of their album. Perhaps more artist could sell DVD’s of their concerts and gain more money from that instead.

    • #2624132

      Bad Question

      by dr_zinj ·

      In reply to should music be free to download on internet

      The music industry is totally dehumanized and depersonalized. And large, multi-partite bureaucratic organizations usually aren’t competent to make those kinds of decisions anyway.

      My point is, music should be AVAILABLE to download from the internet. The artists, or their designated representatives, should be able to set a price for copies of their works. People are willing to pay more for higher quality recordings, so factory CDs/DVDs are not going to disappear just because it’s downloadable. A reasonable price per song has been established as being $1.00 or less. Reasonableness of price can be discovered by tracking how much consumers are willing to by at various prices, and how many are willing to pirate works they want but are unwilling to buy at the prices offered.

    • #2624091

      Music – No. MP3’s YES!

      by nodisalsi ·

      In reply to should music be free to download on internet

      Because MP3 is a one-way compression transformation, it has as much intrinsic value as a copy of the artists’ work as a taped radio broadcast. I can’t believe so many people actually PAY FOR MP3s as if they were printed copies – they are MUGS!!!

      AFAIK: the artist earns 0.7c (US cents) per recorded track of their music. So printing and selling CD’s can remain the mainstay of the music industry without any need to change.

      I don’t know what the broadcast royalty a radio-station would normally pay – but if it’s MP3s we’re talking about, I’m sure the download site can come to a similar arrangement and pay royalty for tracks downloaded a certain number of times by distinct subscribers.

      But paying for each MP3 single – pah! MUGS!

      (edited to add a link)
      FYI a background story: Jimmy Page visited a Glasgow court and gave evidence against a bootlegger/music pirate.
      http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/6970651.stm
      I think it makes interesting reading since Led Zepplin used to hire bouncers to *beat up *bootleggers at their concerts.

    • #2624018

      YES TO FREE MUSIC, BUT!!!!!!

      by gpotvin ·

      In reply to should music be free to download on internet

      Music should be free on the Internet Five years after being released. After all it is Us the fans that make these Artist and record companies Very Wealthy. Its high time they give us something in return.Think of it as reforestation!if you replant the trees, the forest will thrive. all will benefit.

    • #2623990

      Just use Pandora

      by jpatrickf ·

      In reply to should music be free to download on internet

      I just use Pandora, radio from the music genome project. You get to listen to music that fits your style, no commercials, and it’s all free over the internet. It’s your own radio station with no interruptions. Plus I can be introduced to new artists that play music that I like. Why illegally download music when there are such great resources out there that provide such high quality and LEGAL ways to listen to music?

      http://www.pandora.com/

    • #2623988

      bad question, answered backwards

      by dougosborne ·

      In reply to should music be free to download on internet

      Any geek will tell you that ultimately there can be no effective restrictions on files traded on the internet. Some in the music industry dream or assume that there is or will be some ultimately secure form of distribution, where one person pays for one file and that is the only pereson who can listen to it (and restrictions on length of licence or types and numbers of devices it can be listened-on), but we know that is impossible.

      P2P is not “downloading”, it’s “file trading.” iTunes is downloading, since they store the files in a single place, in an attempt to derive revenue from people and provide a satisfying shopping experience.

      Free music is just that, pointing to the half-thought-out ideas some have expressed that record companies should give out some of the music to entice consumers to buy all of it. Unfortunately, all of it is already available to everyone, totally unlike soda or any physical product.

      A question is: should we never drive faster than the posted limit? Our cars can drive faster than 65, our roads can sometimes handle it, and sometimes the cops let us speed freely. Society profits if we all drive at a safe speed, so most of us do it, most of the time. Should anyone smoke pot? It’s widely available, and puts money back into the economy (even if this economy is underground or darkly criminal) and no dies from smoking a joint once in a while (compared to cigarrette smoking, which is still legal with restrictions).

      The music industry has to realize that for more than a decade, just about all music has been freely available to just about anyone. Who has profited from this? Time/Warner, Verizon, Comcast…and maybe Seagate.

      Why should any of us have to understand fine points of intellectual property law to convince us not to copy a friend’s CD or share a file of a Maroon5 song? We were convinced by the music industry for a century that music was free from a radio we could buy for a few $$, at the expense of sitting through commercials. Copyright holders derive revenue from airplay from Performance Rights Societies like ASCAP and BMI (and in Europe and other places, not the US, artists derive revenue from a royalty the radio station pays – a double paycheck if they own their copyrights).

      Since Time/Warner, Verizon, Comcast, et al, derive profit from the distribution of copyrighted content, they are the ones that should compensate copyright holders. They know full-well what is being traded (check out bigchampagne.com if you didn’t know) and if they pay at rates similar to ASCAP and BMI for broadcast, copyright holders will recieve more revenue than they could ever dream of, at the cost of one dollar or-so a month to subscribers.

      This is not an easy solution – ISPs in some cases are also content providers, and the record companies are largely cut out of the system (good, says me) – but it is the ONLY way.

    • #2623825

      Samples suck ! We need a way to enable music discovery

      by blainebauer ·

      In reply to should music be free to download on internet

      That’s the basic problem – samples suck. I’ve heard 30-second samples that sounded like instrumentals, but the song had a really bad singer. I bought a sweet tune on iTunes one time, only to find out that it was about suicide.

      Narvash says they should post two songs…but many of the albums that sell well only have two good songs! The big labels are already hurting because people can download the two good songs from iTunes. They’ll never go for that.

      There are two competing behaviors with free music. One is people who are just stealing music. The other is people who download for music discovery. This second group will buy music that they wouldn’t have bought had it not been for free downloads.

      Currently music discovery is way too inconvenient – you can’t download an album just to check it out. Samples suck. I don’t have time to spend an hour standing in a record store, and most of the time the sampling albums they are are stuff I don’t want anyway. If there was a legally way to just temporarily “check out” music, I’d be all for it. But there isn’t.

      Because of downloads, however illegal, I’ve spent more in the past 10 months on music than I did in the entire decade of the 1990s. I just avoid RIAA labels because I know they’re against the whole idea (apparently they don’t want my money).

    • #2468148

      Would you buy a shirt you’re not allowed to try on?

      by blainebauer ·

      In reply to should music be free to download on internet

      Sure, just downloading and keeping music is illegal and wrong. It cheats the people who’ve spent money on making, marketing, and distributing music.

      But on the other hand, let’s look at our other choice. At best, we only get little samples. If we buy the music and don’t like it, TOO BAD.

      Think what would happen if a company in any other industry worked that way. Say I want to sell shirts. You want to see the shirt? TOO BAD, I’m only going to show you just a sleeve. You want to try it on? Well TOO BAD, you’ll have to buy it first. What if you don’t like it after you try it on? TOO BAD, no exchanges or returns.

      Now the world has gone global. I can buy off websites anywhere. But not the music industry – they operate as if there are these artificial boundaries and if you want to buy a song from a website in another country…TOO BAD.

      Retail has evolved to provide convenience and service to customers…all except music retail. If any company worked the way the music industry works, they’d be out of business in short order. And guess what is happening to big labels? The same thing. TOO BAD.

    • #2468098

      Depending on what we understand by ‘free’…

      by ashknazi ·

      In reply to should music be free to download on internet

      Every music should be like a site that gets paid by Internet everytime someone downloads it. Our concept of freedom doesn’t eliminate our concept of property nor our respect to properties of other.

    • #2468063

      Free?

      by quasar kid ·

      In reply to should music be free to download on internet

      Why isn’t my automobile free? How come I can’t go to a restaurant for free meal? Why aren’t computers free? Why do we expect things on the Internet to be free?

      • #2467892

        PAY ,PAY, PAY ,FOOL !!

        by gpotvin ·

        In reply to Free?

        In answer to all your questions.T Barnum said it best. ” A Sucker Is born Every Minute”

        • #2467834

          Something to mention

          by w2ktechman ·

          In reply to PAY ,PAY, PAY ,FOOL !!

          If you think it is worth having, then why is it not worth purchasing?

          If you can do without it, then dont pay the high price? Do without it! If enough people do this then 1 of 2 things will happen. Price adjustments, or it will go away. Usually price adjustments are first. This usually happens until a reasonable amount of people believe the cost to be adequate and buy it.
          If costs for producing something are too much, and there is too low of a profit margin, then the item may go away.

          But stealing is stealing. No way to say it isn’t, no matter what mask you convince yourself of.
          So, who is the sucker???

        • #2467313

          looks like your the “SUCKER”

          by gpotvin ·

          In reply to Something to mention

          No wonder corporations have taken over this country. Suckers like you buy into that Corporate “B–L S–T”

        • #2467305

          your logic confuses me

          by w2ktechman ·

          In reply to looks like your the “SUCKER”

          but all you are is a petty thief. Ive got no more time for you

        • #2468514

          I understand your confusion!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Buttttt !!!!!

          by gpotvin ·

          In reply to your logic confuses me

          I do not understand how in the world that the act of posting my opinion about music on the internet makes me a petty thief.After all Sir, I did not “TAKE” anything,I just “GAVE” an opinion.It seems aparent that you may have A disconnect in the logic circuitry of your main processor which is causing your confusion.

      • #2467306

        bad understanding

        by dougosborne ·

        In reply to Free?

        Physical Property and Intellectual Property are very differrent things.

        When a copyright holder’s Right to Copy, and to profit from, their work is infringed upon, generally their ownership of the work – their ability to keep and to profit from their work – has not ended. When a car is stolen, a car is gone…

        We have figured out how to allow musicians to profit from their music in many ways: live performances, piano rolls, sheet music, Edison cylinders and other records, radio broadcast (through agreements with ASCAP, BMI, etc.). We just have to figure out how to enable copyright holders to generate revenue from their work on this new-fangled thing called the Internet.

        And remember, we grew up thinking music was free – we listened to music on the radio and passively sat through a few commercials to pay for the music. Since we figured out how to do this we radio, we have to figure out how to do this for the Internet.

    • #2843885

      record music

      by annmiller ·

      In reply to should music be free to download on internet

      i think this will be infringement for you to download music without gaining confirmation of original artist. But someone suggest using this utility to record streaming music from the internet, which claims to use it for their own playback, anyone give suggestions about this one?

    • #2888746

      reply

      by richelandrews ·

      In reply to should music be free to download on internet

      Thanks for sharing this. Maybe some of you hopes to convert YouTube music into MP3. I have here a tool that converts YouTube music into MP3. Here’s how, just paste the URL of the chosen music video that you want to convert and in a couple of minutes, it will be converted. No hassle cause its 100 % free!! http://www.flockee.com/static/youtube-to-mp3/?category=youtube-to-mp3-converter

Viewing 23 reply threads