Forum menu
So yeah. Home taping is killing music, my eye. I might download "illegally" but the only way I could spend any more on media is by quitting eating.
I think the illegality issue is quite interesting when combined with an interesting point raised by maccruiskeen.
Needle time is what gave rise to the original off-shore pirate radio stations, as they were able to flout the rule and play records all day.
One of the more famous pirate djs being John Peel, someone who was 100% dedicated to promoting new, quality music. It took the establishment time, but eventually it caught up. It is the establishments lack of foresight which allows the crime.
From today's illegal and immoral acts we have the future.
I think it was mentioned above that the artists are losing millions and only earn a much smaller ammount. Can this be bad? Perhaps people will stop thinking that the music industry is a quick and easy way to make money and would the loss of much of the mainstream dross be a bad thing? The quality will always survive, it might not get the recognition but you have to work hard. No such thing as a free lunch.
I'm not at all bothered if people steal my music, just as long as they don't mind me stealing from them.
You know, it occurs to me that if the record industry was so concerned over the loss of revenue from CD sales for its up-and-coming stars, they might consider paying them reasonable royalties in the first place.
Just saying.
You know, it occurs to me that if the record industry was so concerned over the loss of revenue from CD sales for its up-and-coming stars, they might consider paying them reasonable royalties in the first place.
+10 a lot of the contracts offered are just theft on paper, pay the royalties deserved. Screw the liggers, backstabbers, bureaucrats, lawyers, etc to hell.
Indeed Cougar I think it's Philipps (or one of the majors) who charge 5% for breakage relating to old 68 discs that were fragile. All their artists get royalties on only 95% of the total sales! A rip-off or what.
I'm not at all bothered if people steal my music, just as long as they don't mind me stealing from them.
As a victim of this type of abuse I completely agree with you.
What are your motives for making music? To make lots of money or introduce your ideas through your music?
my motives for making music? I can't help it, its something I *have* to do or I'd probably go insaner.
As a victim of this type of abuse I completely agree with you.
Is there really a big piracy problem for, no offence, unknown bands? I've often bought CDs from pub bands, probably never played them more than once but I like to give them support. I can't imagine anyone copying that sort of thing (at least, not on any sort of scale that would make an impact). Am I just being naiive?
All their artists get royalties on only 95% of the total sales!
Yes, but that's a misleading statistic isn't it. How much is each 'royalty' payment?
If it's not a legitimate free download then it's theft, pure and simple.
So I imagine, with all the work you do, it must stick in your throat to see the latest marketing sensation making millions overnight. These are the people I'm talking about when I refer to cutting/losing incomes.
Without these sensations I think that we would have a more representative level of incomes and a more relistic view of what you have to do to be successful. Second, there is a change and a fightback from the artists, in that the biggest earners last year were those who got off their backsides and toured.
Let's not forget the advantages the intenet has brought us, twenty years ago you would have had to pass outthe C90s to your mates, then grafted in the local bars until an agent saw you. Now you just need to put a link in your next post and have your music listened to by the 1,000s who come and read these threads.
Same with the movies, there is so much crap out there that the more discerning customer is now starting threads to ask opinions about the films, or downloading to view before buying.
When people refer to quality are they talking the about the audio visual quality or the quality of the song/script/acting etc?
In the same way ebay wont allow you to sell things like unlock codes for phones and then email you the code because its not classed in consumer law as a sale of "physical goods" downloading digital data freely found in the public domain is fair game in my eyes. stealing a disc from HMV is clearly theft, but zero's and one's downloaded off my laptop?
If it's not a legitimate free download then it's theft, pure and simple.
If a mate buys a DVD, watches it, then lends it to me, is that theft?
If I read a book, then give it to my girlfriend to read, is that theft?
If I download a movie that I otherwise wouldn't have bought / rented otherwise, is that theft?
If I download a movie and never watch it, is that theft?
If a mate copies a DVD for me, I watch it, then throw it away, is that theft?
Not disagreeing with you exactly, just trying to ascertain exactly where the line of demarcation lies. I'm not sure that "it's that simple" is wholly accurate, is all.
It's a difficult issue.
Most people’s morals and ethics tend to mirror the law (more or less, give or take, ish!). As it stands ripping, copying downloading, file sharing etc music is illegal.
If a bank left a big pile of money in the street with a sign next to it saying "taking any of this money is against the law" I would find it hard to criticize anyone for diving in and popping up with a fist full of wedge.
I think it probably is hurting the music industry. The sheer scale of downloader’s or potential downloader has blown out of all proportion and if you own a PC you too can download.
As for where the money goes have you tried buying a concert/gig ticket recently. Live music and T Shirts is where the industries at!!
but zero's and one's downloaded off my laptop?
But you're stealing the particular way that they're arranged otherwise that would hold true for all songs/music/film/photo. All the words of a song are freely available....
Also,
If I get a film from LoveFilm, is that theft?
If I take a photo of the Mona Lisa, blow it up to A4 and stick it on my wall, is that theft?
What you on about cougar? When did lovefilm become free?
Cougar, technically they are all a breach of copyright law. The authors of those works recognise this and accept it. It isn't worth the effort to chase down every breach.
If someone leaves a copy of a newspaper on a train, and I pick it up to read it, without having paid for it, is that 'theft'?
As an aside,
On point of principle, I'll never download a 'screener' recorded in a movie theatre, anything that's really new release. If I want to watch something that badly, I'll go to the cinema or rent / buy it through legitimate means. The last film I downloaded was something I already own on VHS, it was more convenient to download it than hook up the video recorder (and I had no moral issues with this as I've already bought it.
The last pirated computer game I had was on the original Playstation. I've got a couple of pirated PC games, but in both cases they're of games that I own legitimately but have damaged / lost the CDs.
If I download music and like it, I'll buy it. All too often these days, albums are two really good singles and eight tracks of crap filler.
Mostly, I download episodes of TV shows that are otherwise widely available legitimately but I've missed the broadcast of, for example if Remote Record fails because the Sky box has crashed (again).
Just for clarity:
[img] 
[/img]
I pay for spotify premium and love film, go to gigs, festivals and the cinema.
Add to that that most of the music I listen is made by people who are now dead, should I have any qualms about downloading an album that is very hard to buy/well overpriced and of no financial gain to the original artist?
I think [url= http://www.afterdawn.com/news/article.cfm/2007/05/14/trent_reznor_speaks_out_about_music_piracy ]Trent Reznor's[/url] opinion may be more valid than most on the matter too...
technically they are all a breach of copyright law
Perhaps. But that's not what I asked - I asked if it was "theft".
DVD warnings and the self-righteous don't say "piracy is breach of copyright," they say "piracy is THEFT." I'm trying to get to the bottom of exactly what is and isn't theft (because frankly, it's not theft, it's a breach of copyright as you rightly say - still illegal, but not the same thing any more than saying "bike theft is MURDER").
If I reported my bike as stolen, and the insurance company came round and saw my bike sitting there, and I say "ah, well, you see, I saw someone else with the same bike so they've obviously made a copy" I'd be arrested for fraud.
Again I have to say yes, even though I'm not qualified to say that, you have received the benefit of someone else's work without paying. Moving on to the issue of personal use or financial gain, but that's another can of worms.
This is why I said earlier that the author has a responsibilty to protect their property or accept the consequences.
If I reported my bike as stolen, and the insurance company came round and saw my bike sitting there, and I say "ah, well, you see, I saw someone else with the same bike so they've obviously made a copy" I'd be arrested for fraud.
It wouldn't be a copy, and I could prove that, would it? Not the same.
the author has a responsibilty to protect their property or accept the consequences.
That's cock, sorry.
By that argument, shoplifting is fine if the shop owner doesn't install CCTV. Mugging is fine, you should've learned self defence.
It wouldn't be a copy, and I could prove that, would it? Not the same.
Ok, bad example perhaps. Point is, if the original owner still has something, it's not theft. I'm not saying it's right / legal, but it's not theft, it's something else.
That's cock, sorry.
Really, we're talking about digital downloads. It has already been established that physical is different for digital. 🙄 Cock indeed!
QQ moar
Did a grown man really type that?
All this copying discussion is bobbins too. Just because the technology exists to make a copy, it doesn't change the ethics.
It has already been established that physical is different for digital
Has it? Where?
So what you're saying is, if it's electronic media, we can make stuff up and say it's FACT?(*)
Did a grown man really type that?
Sorry, I'm a recovering Warcraft addict. In my defence, you knew what it meant.
Just because the technology exists to make a copy, it doesn't change the ethics.
I think it makes for an interesting discussion though.
(* - see what I did there? Oh, please yourselves...)
(btw - Don, I don't mean to be pedantic but I vaguely remember English isn't your first language? FYI, it's always "different [i]from[/i]")
(btw - Don, I don't mean to be pedantic but I vaguely remember English isn't your first language? FYI, it's [u][b]always[/b][/u] "different from")
Although it is frequently claimed that different should be followed only by from, not by than, in actual usage both words occur and have for at least 300 years. (dictionary.com)
You do know the difference between a typo and bad grammar, don't you?
You do also know the difference between being pedantic, incorrect and a patronising *****, no?
😆 But thanks for that anyway. 😆
Definition of theft:
(1) A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it; and ìthiefî and ìstealî shall be construed accordingly.(2) It is immaterial whether the appropriation is made with a view to gain, or is made for the thiefís own benefit.
..ìPropertyî includes money and all other property, real or personal, including things in action and other intangible property.
But people done for music piracy are prosecuted under the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 I think.
don simon - Member
Words of one syllable for you...
You do also know the difference between being pedantic, incorrect and a patronising *****, no?
Do you?
Yes.
I ask the question again, did you feel patronised?
I assumed you were being obtuse, I apologise if you genuinely didn't understand.
I presume that people on here will be familiar with 'Intellectual Property Rights'
An idea doesn't exist as a physical object, but under certain conditions, you are still not allowed to use it.
Just for the record however - I think this thread has turned out (for the majority) to be a reasonable debate. I couldn't give two hoots who downloads music, but personally I'm more than happy to pay for it.
Did I feel patronised?
No, I though you were trying to be patronising though.
As you can probably guess, I'm a bit more thick skinned than to actually be bothered about it to the extent of being upset - I'll always rise though 😉
You say something Fred?
You do know the difference between a typo and bad grammar, don't you?
You do also know the difference between being pedantic, incorrect and a patronising *****, no?
I was actually trying to be helpful. I'll know better next time.
I was actually trying to be helpful.
Why was I singled out for help? Why do you think that the typo needed correction?
And you thought you would help by giving me incorrect grammar? For that I say patronising, if you were trying to help you would have known the correct preposition. 🙄
You say something Fred?
I was going to, but then I decided I really couldn't be bothered. Sorry.
Why do you think that the typo needed correction?
Because the sentence was difficult to read.
But like I said, I'll know better than to try and be helpful next time.
😆 🙄
Do you want some help with your English? I'm an English teacher... 😆
That doesn't surprise me, I've coached a couple of those over the years.
Anyway, you know what? It's not important and I don't care. I was trying to be helpful and you took it the wrong way. Can we go back to the original topic?