Blackest Eyes Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 Ill use torrents if im looking for an album or a large quantity of music, but if I want just one song im going to continue to use limewire.Im not going to give the industry what it wants. Downloading music on iTunes is a scam. Why sell mp3 players that can hold thousands of songs if you really expect people to pay for every one of them? I certainly wont, and Apple is probably hoping for that. Apple will make much more money if music is downlaoded illegally. They will make more money off the sale of an ipod than the download of one song. If people were not able to illegally download, there would probably be a significant drop off in ipod sales. If downloading music on iTunes is a scam, buying CDs is a scam. Albums on iTunes are what, $9.99? A CD with 10 songs can be $15. Not sure how iTunes is a scam at all. Your logic is totally flawed. The fact is, you are cheap. This is not about Apple, Rhapsody, eMusic, etc. This is about morals and evidently many people on this board have very low standards. Downloading music via limewire, torrents, blogs, etc is illegal. Absolutely illegal. You may as well walk into a Best Buy and steal the damn album. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 If downloading music on iTunes is a scam, buying CDs is a scam. Albums on iTunes are what, $9.99? A CD with 10 songs can be $15. Not sure how iTunes is a scam at all. Your logic is totally flawed. The fact is, you are cheap.This is not about Apple, Rhapsody, eMusic, etc. This is about morals and evidently many people on this board have very low standards. Downloading music via limewire, torrents, blogs, etc is illegal. Absolutely illegal. You may as well walk into a Best Buy and steal the damn album. I'd call itunes a scam because its a just a large DRM distributor. If I'm gonna purchase something, I don't want any DRM ****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 I'd call itunes a scam because its a just a large DRM distributor. If I'm gonna purchase something, I don't want any DRM ****. itunes dropped DRM awhile back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipwhich Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 I'd call itunes a scam because its a just a large DRM distributor. If I'm gonna purchase something, I don't want any DRM ****. If you are going to defend illegal activity, at least have a good defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 itunes dropped DRM awhile back. Really? Huh, guess I underestimated apple. If you are going to defend illegal activity, at least have a good defense. Where in that post did I defend illegal activity? I denounced DRM and that is it. Please try to keep your arguments to what I say and not to what you assume of me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipwhich Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 Where in that post did I defend illegal activity? I denounced DRM and that is it. Please try to keep your arguments to what I say and not to what you assume of me. Check the posts in the thread. Using these services for any downloading of music is illegal. Call a spade a spade. But I understand where you are coming from. It seems innocent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 Check the posts in the thread. Using these services for any downloading of music is illegal. Call a spade a spade. But I understand where you are coming from. It seems innocent. fair enough, I did mention torrenting early. however I am not going to defend the pirating of music that you do not own the license to. I will say that pirating is not the same as stealing a physical item because you are only making a copy and not removing the original ***however I in no way am implying that it makes it right*** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipwhich Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 fair enough, I did mention torrenting early. however I am not going to defend the pirating of music that you do not own the license to.I will say that pirating is not the same as stealing a physical item because you are only making a copy and not removing the original ***however I in no way am implying that it makes it right*** I hope I am not making you mad, just want you to realize it is infringement in one way shape or form. Kids are getting kicked out of college for buying papers online, stealing and reusing text written online and turning it in as their own. If you created that text/music it's not so funny. But if you are like 99% of everyone else, it's available and easily lifted. Just because it's "soft copy" doesn't make it "free". Some people put a lot of effort into it's creation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enter Apotheosis Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 Oh wow thanks!Limewire has worked fine for me for years. Frankly I dont care what you think. They tell me ignorance is bliss. Can you confirm? You're saying that even though he owns the license to the music, he should have to pay for it again because he lost it. It's legally debatable and ethically ambiguous to assume that purchasing a CD actually constitutes having a license to the music contained on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackest Eyes Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 I will say that pirating is not the same as stealing a physical item because you are only making a copy and not removing the original ***however I in no way am implying that it makes it right*** Is pirating not stealing because there is not a tangible object being taken? Even if there is not an object being taken from someone else, files are being downloaded and distributed and artists are losing money, record labels are losing money, record studios are losing money, etc. As I said on the first page, if albums are being downloaded instead of purchased, how are record labels supposed to see that a band has put out a good album and continue to support the band? No matter how you look at it, I don't know how people can deny that in the end, downloading of music illegally is killing the music industry. And seriously, who cares about DRM? If people didn't do stupid **** and share their music, DRM would not need to exist, but people have a sick sense of entitlement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fergasun Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 Part of this is simply civil disobedience against our Government and the big content lobby which has continually increased the amount of time before works of art, which are to benefit the public enter the public domain. Although I suspect it is only like 10% or less. The rest is a generation that has grown up with Napster and doesn't place the same valuation on the worth of music that the open market has. Hence, music and artists are way over-valued. I'll admit that I previously have been one who more or less was on the under-valued side, but recently I've not seen much reason to download any music, in fact I plan on learning how to produce music and I'll most likely end up licensing it different and going a different way. Oh, Newsgroups for the win... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fergasun Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 Blackest Eyes, This has been going on for 10 years. Oddly enough there have been plenty of artists who sell music and make a ton of money on it. Why, oh why couldn't Napster have been so successful that I'd never know the name of any of the Jonas brothers! Music is more and more a commodity with low barriers of entry into competition. Also, it's not theft... its copyright infringement. Theft would be someone breaking into a computer and stealing the bits. If it were theft they could get everyone under 35 for possession of stolen property. I know, I know, its a technicality... but I'm sure there would be some who question why there is such a large campaign of civil disobedience, at the same time music (and movies) are actually selling money. I don't trust P2P, Limewire, etc... and I think that the RIAA is going to start up their lawsuit campaign again. Although maybe a lot of people have gone to the legitimate sites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackest Eyes Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 Also, it's not theft... its copyright infringement. Theft would be someone breaking into a computer and stealing the bits. If it were theft they could get everyone under 35 for possession of stolen property. I know, I know, its a technicality... but I'm sure there would be some who question why there is such a large campaign of civil disobedience, at the same time music (and movies) are actually selling money. Technicality, sure, but it is still wrong. Labels and artists are losing money and real talent is struggling to actually make it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ixcuincle Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 When we're talking about music and downloading I always like to reference the South Park episode where the kids downloaded music and thought it hurt nobody. Then the cop came and gave several exaggerated examples of how elitist rich artists couldn't afford luxuries so they had to buy cheaper luxuries. It was a hilarious episode Link to said moment Lol PS Downloading music is the new wave especially free downloading, the argument in the South Park episode is that downloading helps further exposure of band music to the public, and bands make ample money off concerts and memorabilia sales. Several bands have joined in the free music craze including Radiohead if I remember correctly. In short downloading music is great and as usual South Park is never wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enter Apotheosis Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 I don't trust P2P, Limewire, etc... and I think that the RIAA is going to start up their lawsuit campaign again. Although maybe a lot of people have gone to the legitimate sites. They never stopped the campaign, really. It's just not newsworthy anymore when someone gets threatened or hit with a suit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.C.O.L.B. Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 Torrents and properly phrasing google searches. It's easy. For example, say you're searching for Marvin Gaye's album "Here, My Dear". Some searches I would try would be: - torrent "marvin gaye" "here, my dear" - "marvin gaye" "here, my dear" blog - download "marvin gaye" "here, my dear" - "marvin gaye" "here, my dear" rapidshare Guarantee you find almost anything using one of those formats. I got my wife an ipod for Christmas a couple of years ago. I had to fill it with Brazilian music. Knocked it out using those searches. And I had no idea what the hell the music was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRobi21 Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 Technicality, sure, but it is still wrong. Labels and artists are losing money and real talent is struggling to actually make it. So buy the good stuff and download the crap? But I don't like the crap.. Wahahahah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Brave Little Toaster Oven Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 I just downloaded a bunch of crap because all the people in this thread werent doing their part. now im off to go burn some trees down and deplete the ozone while I sleep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fergasun Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 Speeding is technically illegal as well. If you go back to the Constitution it says something like "copyright of limited time for the purposes of science and useful arts." I hope that as time goes on and if there is another long-term extension of copyrights another challenge goes before the Supreme Court. I'm not sure if the Eldred v. Ashcroft plaintiffs were the correct ones to have standing and not exactly what their issue was wrt copyright, but if patents expire quickly, why not copyrights? I'm just reading Stevens' dissent, and he's basically saying that the petitioners didn't argue that Congress is essentially creating the perpetual copyright, which clearly is not the intent in the Constitution. So someone in the future may make the case next time that Congress is creating a de facto perpetual copyright. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matty dread Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 Who cares if he can prove he owns it? In this case you're saying that what he's doing is WRONG because he lost the CD. You're saying that even though he owns the license to the music, he should have to pay for it again because he lost it.All he is doing is making another copy of the music he has already purchased the license for. He is not going to a store and swiping a CD off a bookshelf, he's simply making a digital copy of the music that he owns the license to. I'm asking because what if in the extreme example the RIAA comes knocking and says you're busted for downloading music, your excuse is well I used to own it, I lost the CD. Ok where's your proof?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matty dread Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 It's amazing how some can rationalize stealing. It's never been ok to walk into a store and swipe a CD off the shelf, so why is it alright to do the same thing online? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 Is pirating not stealing because there is not a tangible object being taken? Even if there is not an object being taken from someone else, files are being downloaded and distributed and artists are losing money, record labels are losing money, record studios are losing money, etc. As I said on the first page, if albums are being downloaded instead of purchased, how are record labels supposed to see that a band has put out a good album and continue to support the band? No matter how you look at it, I don't know how people can deny that in the end, downloading of music illegally is killing the music industry. I'm merely pointing out that they are not equivalent. Very similar, but not equivalent. And seriously, who cares about DRM? If people didn't do stupid **** and share their music, DRM would not need to exist, but people have a sick sense of entitlement. I care about DRM. I don't want to be locked me out of my own computer. DRM actually causes piracy in instances because people have a choice of paying money for DRM loaded crap or pirating non-DRM for free. There are instances where DRM will disable components of your computer without your permission, and that is absolutely unacceptable. I feel no sympathy for any company that pulls that crap on their paying customers. There will always be someone who can get around the DRM protection to distribute the material, so in the end, DRM is only really hurting the paying customer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 I'm asking because what if in the extreme example the RIAA comes knocking and says you're busted for downloading music, your excuse is well I used to own it, I lost the CD. Ok where's your proof?? we were discussing the morality of the issue, not the legal repercussions. if we were discussing avoiding getting sued, then we'd just bring up IP blockers. problem solved; no RIAA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matty dread Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 we were discussing the morality of the issue, not the legal repercussions. if we were discussing avoiding getting sued, then we'd just bring up IP blockers. problem solved; no RIAA. Well, I was talking about legality. Glad you have it all figured out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 Well, I was talking about legality. Glad you have it all figured out. you're saying that this post here was talking about legality and not morality? So it's ok to steal it the 2nd time around just because you paid for it once? How does that logic apply to the real world? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.