piracy and ur opinions

[homercles337]

Originally posted by: Zorba

Originally posted by: CycloWizard
For myself, I was a freshman in college when Napster was released. I downloaded songs like it was my job. I discovered a lot of new music this way and have since purchased CDs for bands I never would have considered had I not previously downloaded their stuff illegally. I stopped downloading years ago and have bought only three CDs in the past five years (more or less), whereas I probably bought >10 per year before while I was downloading.

The RIAA also needs to decide what exactly I'm buying when I pay for a CD. Am I buying a license to the music, or the physical CD itself? Their current stance is that I own neither, which is unacceptable.

I also feel that the RIAA would suffer a great financial shortcoming if they somehow became more efficient in prosecuting piracy. I think it's the single greatest idea for free advertising ever developed.

I agree here. When I was downloading all the time I bought lots of CDs. Now I hardly buy anything, and the last couple I bought ended up sucking 🙁. Downloading is also about the only to find out about underground stuff, since the radio only plays the ~top 30 new songs.

No its not. If youre into music you find it by going to shows, reading zines, or talking to others (this is just like sharing). I have more than 1000 CDs many of which were purchased from bands touring, looking to get gas money. I dont download music for this reason. If HBO produces a popular series that folks love HBO should make it available. These companies have flawed business models and deserve to loose money by being behind the curve and not meeting said demand. I should mention that i own hundreds of casettes that were "shared" by talking when i was in high school. I have burned discs in the same vein. People share, people talk, its natural. Some people "get" this, other ignorant bafoons dismiss it as stealing. If there was a valid business model it would not be an issue for most. Broken distribution models do not warrant rampant random persection or prosecution.

 

[Tom]

Originally posted by: BrownTown
I got an email two days ago informing student at my school of the punishments for piracy. The punishment is as followed: delete the pirated stuff and write a letter apologizing for stealing it. I mean on one hand I guess it kicks ass that I am more or less immune to being sued since my college refuses to turn me over. On the other hand, the risk/reward is of course waaay in favor of pirating. The WORST that can happen is that I lose the stuff I pirated (after I've watched all the movies and listed to all the songs a hundred times). It is simply impossible to come out behind. I know that most other people still stand the risk of being sued, but it is still very unlikely. Also, for me, I am legally an adult, but I have pretty much nothing to my name, even IF the RIAA could sue me, what are they gonna get?, I mean I don;t really own anything, could they get money from my parents now that I'm an adult? If not, than all they can get are my clothes and textbooks, thats the only even remotely expensive stuff I have to my name.

You are probably strong enough to steal old lady's purses too, as long as you have no personal ethics..

 

[ayabe]

Originally posted by: Slackware[/i

And the man is right, Tool is a suckfest that only true Emo victims can truly appreciate and only because they feel that liking Tool is way cool.

Tool is Emo? Another gem to add to your laundry list of falsehoods, are you going for the record?

 

[piasabird]

One thing you might look at is what is an honest and fair level or percentage of profit. Also how much do the artists make and how much does the studio or producer make. Then compare that to other industries.

Here is another view on the subject. In the old days artists might make between $0.03 - $0.20 on each record sold. I am just throwing numbers out there because I do not know. However, I think $0.20 per recording may be high.

So when an album or CD is sold today for say $14.95 or whatever, how much does the Production company get and how much does the artist get? Is it fair? How much of it is actually Profit and for whom?

You can set up a duplication machine and make copies for like $1.00 - $2.00 if you are counting a label. How much does it really take to make a CD and how much should be charged to the consumer to make a fair profit.

Today people complain about the price of gasoline which has a profit margin of 2% - 10%. Some inductries have larger profit margins, but what is fair and is the consumer being ripped off? This has a direct relation to the price, and may be a motivation for the consumer to want to justify not paying the music producer.

There are other people who just like stealing or for some reason have mental association with the Internet being free.

 

[libs0n]

I completely forgot that I wasn't American. In Canada, the case the CRIA(Canada's RIAA) brought against ISPs to get them to divulge the identities of prolific filesharers so that they could be sued was dismissed by the Supreme Court, the judgement saying that p2p applications were akin to photocopiers being in public libraries, or something along those lines. That it fell under Fair Use provisions, or what have you. Take that, The Man.

Of course, the Heritage Ministry, whose jurisdiction copyright falls under, is notoriously corrupt. The last Minister was turfed by the voters for being such a stooge of the CRIA, and unfortunately the Conservatives' replacement is also on the take. If they enact similar laws as exist in America, then I could rightly say that I'm militantly anti-copyright and I do what I do in protest of. But since it's legal, then the only pleasure I have is telling self-rightous blowhards to shove it and consider joining the twenty first century instead of trying to lay the framework of the twentieth as well as your rigid thinking overtop.

Ha, no doubt there is some truth to your words, JediYoda, that I and others are arguing from our position, justifying our actions after the fact to ourselves and others. I will say this, however: I consider myself an ethical man, and strive to live up to my ethics, but the idea that downloading music or a movie or a computer app was the same thing as stealing is not one of my morals. Though shalt not kill I'll buy, Though shalt not make a copy of a digital file I will not. Tell no lies, claim no easy victories, but never, downloading the tv episode you missed the other day is wrong.

Now I'll get to that point I forgot about my own personal reasons for filesharing: Immediacy. A week or so ago there was a thread in OT about the The Chicago, the mile high skyscraper that Frank Lloyd Wright designed. Or maybe it was the Burj Dubai. Anyways, from that thread, I went to Wikipedia's entries on tallscraper constructs, and was particularily taken with the Tokyo Sky City concept, as it's space plateaus reminded me of the districts in the Carfree city. One of the sources for that Wiki entry was a discovery channel program on the subject. Now, a few years back I had previously seen said program, but wanted to rewatch it under new eyes. So I searched for it within emule, downloaded it, and about a week later it finished and I watched it. This is how I imagine the internet, how I make it work for me: a fluid medium with which to expand my knowledge and satisfy my curiosity. Tools like p2p are essential to me to make that work, as essential as wikipedia, or google, or Anandtech.