If I had to guess I'd say I spend about £5 on music per month. And I'd say I spend about £20 a month buying tickets to see bands.
On average.
On average.
He was doing an impression of Parker and his hypocrisyZimmer wrote:
Probably.Vilham wrote:
You totally missed that one didn't you...Zimmer wrote:
stuff
Him going all high and mighty about stealing that then doing it to members of this forum.
So, does that make them invalid?mikkel wrote:
I've heard all of the justifications before.Lai wrote:
I download, then when I really like it, the quality or "unsolidness" will start to bother me and I buy the CD. No download = no real like = no buy CD.mikkel wrote:
While it's apparent to everyone that the record industry has been lying, cheating and stealing grossly and repeatedly, and in the most disgusting manner in this back-and-forth between them and copyright violators, I still wish people would cease to argue that violating copyright is an acceptable thing to do, and simply start voting with their wallets and their words. A bitterly spent dollar is just as good as any other dollar to this repulsive industry.
Not sure that any justification of illegal activity is valid except in extremis circumstances...which music certainly is not.Lai wrote:
So, does that make them invalid?mikkel wrote:
I've heard all of the justifications before.Lai wrote:
I download, then when I really like it, the quality or "unsolidness" will start to bother me and I buy the CD. No download = no real like = no buy CD.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
No, I spoke out against it for absolutely no reason.Lai wrote:
So, does that make them invalid?mikkel wrote:
I've heard all of the justifications before.Lai wrote:
I download, then when I really like it, the quality or "unsolidness" will start to bother me and I buy the CD. No download = no real like = no buy CD.
yes.Lai wrote:
So, does that make them invalid?mikkel wrote:
I've heard all of the justifications before.Lai wrote:
I download, then when I really like it, the quality or "unsolidness" will start to bother me and I buy the CD. No download = no real like = no buy CD.
This has as much bearing on the legality of pirating music as a headline reading "Murderers Give Most to Charities Benefitting Dying Patients" has on the legality of killing people. In other words, it's wholly irrelevant.Wreckognize wrote:
Not to mention the massive amount of money illegal downloaders spend on concert tickets.
They've already made deals with iTunes, Audiogalaxy, Napster, and any number of other digital delivery services so people don't have to buy whole CD's for one or two songs. If that isn't enough to satisfy music fans and keep the recording industry from dying out, then apparently music fans don't care enough about music to keep the product coming.No matter how much the music industry tries to deny it, the business model of CD sales is dead, and no amount of litigation can bring it back. The music industry can either find a new way to make money off music or die off like any other company who fails to adapt to a changing market.
I agree with this, but I don't think the study was even beginning to claim that piracy is in any way legitimate - merely that the music industry is going about the completely wrong method of tackling it. All stick and no carrot, and it's not a very well-directed stick.HollisHurlbut wrote:
This has as much bearing on the legality of pirating music as a headline reading "Murderers Give Most to Charities Benefitting Dying Patients" has on the legality of killing people. In other words, it's wholly irrelevant.Wreckognize wrote:
Not to mention the massive amount of money illegal downloaders spend on concert tickets.
Again - this is not about "music fans don't care" (please read that statement again, because it sounds pretty misguided to me), it's about the fact that A. the business model provided by the industry is flawed (and the whole iTunes, Napster thing - it's the same model just on a slightly more detailed scale). There are alternative business models available, like Qtrax and other similar things (I don't think Qtrax is the most successful but it's the only one whose name I can remember) which do provide a model that will probably be much more suitable. And B. It shows that the stated aim of the music industry's current anti-piracy strategy i.e. to increase sales by forcing people to buy music legitimately, will most likely have the most opposite effect. Again... not a very well-directed stick.They've already made deals with iTunes, Audiogalaxy, Napster, and any number of other digital delivery services so people don't have to buy whole CD's for one or two songs. If that isn't enough to satisfy music fans and keep the recording industry from dying out, then apparently music fans don't care enough about music to keep the product coming.No matter how much the music industry tries to deny it, the business model of CD sales is dead, and no amount of litigation can bring it back. The music industry can either find a new way to make money off music or die off like any other company who fails to adapt to a changing market.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
You don't seem to get it, do you?HollisHurlbut wrote:
This has as much bearing on the legality of pirating music as a headline reading "Murderers Give Most to Charities Benefitting Dying Patients" has on the legality of killing people. In other words, it's wholly irrelevant.Wreckognize wrote:
Not to mention the massive amount of money illegal downloaders spend on concert tickets.They've already made deals with iTunes, Audiogalaxy, Napster, and any number of other digital delivery services so people don't have to buy whole CD's for one or two songs. If that isn't enough to satisfy music fans and keep the recording industry from dying out, then apparently music fans don't care enough about music to keep the product coming.No matter how much the music industry tries to deny it, the business model of CD sales is dead, and no amount of litigation can bring it back. The music industry can either find a new way to make money off music or die off like any other company who fails to adapt to a changing market.
It's not about the "legality" of what is done anymore, it's about the whole "OMFG WE'RE RUINING THE MUSIC INDUSTRY, ALL BANDS ARE GONNA DIE OUT AND WE'RE GOING TO END UP WITH NO MUSIC". Which is just utter bullshit.
The music industry finding a new way to make money? Do you know how much an artist gets for selling a CD? Absolutely fuck all (to be precise 79p) and you REALLY THINK that that is going to kill off artists? No. Is it going to kill off thieving recording companies? Probably. Do I give a shit if it does? Nope. It will be better for the industry anyway. They rip off artists and treat them like shit (I know, as my friend works for one).
Everybody has already stated that they don't care about it being illegal, and those who choose not to download illegally do it, not because it is illegal, but because they think it's going to benefit the artist. You're wrong. So very wrong.
You would be helping out the artists a lot more if you pirated all their albums but then went to a few concerts.
The music industry encompasses the record companies, something which I (and many other people) don't give a shit about, so if you want to make a valid case, say the "artists", because if it wasn't for them, we wouldn't have a music industry.
You want the music industry to die out? You're going the right way about it. Internet piracy has more power than anything else on the internet, and if the government and record companies decide to do something drastic, they are going to get a real smack in the face. Coldplay, Pearl Jam and the sort have already stated in interviews they don't want piracy to stop, because it would seriously damage the artists.
I only care about the artists, and downloading music is not damaging them. What IS damaging them is them turning around and saying "Oh, piracy is terrible, but I don't do any gigs, and because of piracy, I'm not going to record any more music" (read: Lily Allen). Well that's their own damned fault now.
Now, as for the whole bollocks of iTunes and stuff.... Why would I want to pay stupid amounts of money for shitty quality music on a shitty program? Thanks, but if I want to listen to music, I'll choose what I get and what quality it is. iTunes just fails. So does Napster.
I do buy music, especially if I enjoy it. I also go to concerts. I spend more money on music in a year than I do on computer games or any of that shit. But do I pay for all my music from iTunes or buy CDs? No.
Not all record labels are evil. The major labels (Universal, Sony, Warner, EMI) are but there are plenty of smaller labels who are still in it for the music.
I get about 2 CD's a month usually. Nothing beats actually having the CD tbh.
How much do you spend on music each month?HollisHurlbut wrote:
This has as much bearing on the legality of pirating music as a headline reading "Murderers Give Most to Charities Benefitting Dying Patients" has on the legality of killing people. In other words, it's wholly irrelevant.Wreckognize wrote:
Not to mention the massive amount of money illegal downloaders spend on concert tickets.They've already made deals with iTunes, Audiogalaxy, Napster, and any number of other digital delivery services so people don't have to buy whole CD's for one or two songs. If that isn't enough to satisfy music fans and keep the recording industry from dying out, then apparently music fans don't care enough about music to keep the product coming.No matter how much the music industry tries to deny it, the business model of CD sales is dead, and no amount of litigation can bring it back. The music industry can either find a new way to make money off music or die off like any other company who fails to adapt to a changing market.
Nah, you'd be surprised at how much worse the smaller ones are because they can abuse their artists more (the smaller the record label, usually the smaller the artist, therefore the smaller the holding power the artist has on the record label).aimless wrote:
Not all record labels are evil. The major labels (Universal, Sony, Warner, EMI) are but there are plenty of smaller labels who are still in it for the music.
Except for the fact that a lot of the smaller ones are run by the artists themselves....Zimmer wrote:
Nah, you'd be surprised at how much worse the smaller ones are because they can abuse their artists more (the smaller the record label, usually the smaller the artist, therefore the smaller the holding power the artist has on the record label).aimless wrote:
Not all record labels are evil. The major labels (Universal, Sony, Warner, EMI) are but there are plenty of smaller labels who are still in it for the music.
No. That's untrue. There are smaller record labels, I know of quite a few. Friend works in one of them.Bertster7 wrote:
Except for the fact that a lot of the smaller ones are run by the artists themselves....Zimmer wrote:
Nah, you'd be surprised at how much worse the smaller ones are because they can abuse their artists more (the smaller the record label, usually the smaller the artist, therefore the smaller the holding power the artist has on the record label).aimless wrote:
Not all record labels are evil. The major labels (Universal, Sony, Warner, EMI) are but there are plenty of smaller labels who are still in it for the music.
I'm not talking about indie labels.
i like watching people justify stealing
You may not karma the same person in a 24 hour period.Red Forman wrote:
i like watching people justify stealing
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Red Forman wrote:
i like watching people justify stealing
It's stealing a potential profit. If the record labels had their way, I would have had to pay for every song I have on my computer (and in fact I have for a good portion). This lets me receive something for nothing.Winston_Churchill wrote:
http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n48/ … cylulz.pngRed Forman wrote:
i like watching people justify stealing
When you think about it a CD is just a physical copy. The only original is the master recording tapes.
And yes, I pirate music. I don't try to paint it as anything different though.
I honestly would never buy a CD and never have. Theyre not losing any money from me and not gaining any either. A different system is needed, concerts I will do once I live in a bigger city and, as Zimmer said, thats where artists make their moneyHurricane2k9 wrote:
It's stealing a potential profit. If the record labels had their way, I would have had to pay for every song I have on my computer (and in fact I have for a good portion). This lets me receive something for nothing.Winston_Churchill wrote:
http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n48/ … cylulz.pngRed Forman wrote:
i like watching people justify stealing
When you think about it a CD is just a physical copy. The only original is the master recording tapes.
And yes, I pirate music. I don't try to paint it as anything different though.
I don't think anyone in this thread has said "It is ok to steal[pirate] because..." or anything along the lines of that.FEOS wrote:
You may not karma the same person in a 24 hour period.Red Forman wrote:
i like watching people justify stealing
Last edited by 13/f/taiwan (2009-11-02 20:15:07)
There are several who have done exactly that.13/f/taiwan wrote:
I don't think anyone in this thread has said "It is ok to steal[pirate] because..." or anything along the lines of that.FEOS wrote:
You may not karma the same person in a 24 hour period.Red Forman wrote:
i like watching people justify stealing
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Yeah probably. I should read more, lol.FEOS wrote:
There are several who have done exactly that.13/f/taiwan wrote:
I don't think anyone in this thread has said "It is ok to steal[pirate] because..." or anything along the lines of that.FEOS wrote:
You may not karma the same person in a 24 hour period.
Last edited by 13/f/taiwan (2009-11-02 20:21:44)
You're saying it's untrue that there are a lot of small record labels run by artists.Zimmer wrote:
No. That's untrue. There are smaller record labels, I know of quite a few. Friend works in one of them.Bertster7 wrote:
Except for the fact that a lot of the smaller ones are run by the artists themselves....Zimmer wrote:
Nah, you'd be surprised at how much worse the smaller ones are because they can abuse their artists more (the smaller the record label, usually the smaller the artist, therefore the smaller the holding power the artist has on the record label).
I'm not talking about indie labels.
Which is bullshit. I could give you a big list if you want....
It's okay to pirate because if you like a band or artist you end up watching them in concert and supporting them that way...FEOS wrote:
There are several who have done exactly that.13/f/taiwan wrote:
I don't think anyone in this thread has said "It is ok to steal[pirate] because..." or anything along the lines of that.FEOS wrote:
You may not karma the same person in a 24 hour period.
