I'm sure you all know about the curfuffle with the RIAA and all their gung-ho lawsuits against students, OAPs and the like. Just want to know what the general idea is here...

I voted to the singles one, but then, I'll download whatever i can, given the chance

a bit off topic for a second, but i just want to ask does anyone have a clue why my pc wont play mp3's from a rewritable disc?? the cd, full of archived mp3s, wont play on my pc. it says i need PROGRAM which is needed for running html applications.

but back to the topic, i think downloading mp3s is great, but the legality and moral implications are slightly dodgy. but it doesnt really stop me, so i dunno. i suppose i shouldnt be doing it, but musics about more than money. but it is party about money, so im going in circles. ahh well

i have expressed my opinions on this before, in some other thread, but i can't find it, so bleah...

anyway, i believe that everything should be up for download. the record industry is f--ked, so i don't see a problem with it...

well...I picked "everything" only cause what I think wasn't there...I think that out of the way stuff should be...But not really pop. stuff (popular...not Pop genre only)...like stuff that's NOT on the radio should be downloadable...



did that make any sence?

Arses. I shouldnt have been so specific with the oldies one. I should have said anything that is outside the current mainstream... oh well.

oh...then just subtract one from everything..and add one to oldies lol

argh... *confuzzled*... I'm too tired to speak (or type) coherantly

When I download mp3's its usually something hard to find, or not carried by a major record label.

I have also sent money to artistis whose music I've downloaded because as frelled up as the RIAA is, I believe it's important to support art.

Which sometimes makes me feel bad that I buy all my cd's second hand because I dislike the RIAA so much.

I think that everything should be downloadable. If it weren't for music downloads, I wouldn't have heard of ANY of the bands I listen to because where I live it's impossible to find any of their music. As a result, I wouldn't have gone out of my way to buy their albums, either. I keep hearing about how the music industry is suffering because of music downloads, but I can't imagine it... if I hadn't been able to download music, I wouldn't have spent the hundreds of dollars I've spent on music over the past few years. It boggles my mind. Really.

Then again, maybe if the big reconrd companies want us to buy their albums they shouldn't charge $25 for them. Now *there's* a thought...

But you've discovered all these bands that are outside the mainstream, the RIAA wants you to be listening to nothing but n-sync or linkyn park because that's the easiest way for them to make money so they try and make it hard for you to find alternative music (which is very easy with file sharing).

Another option should be added to the poll, regarding the sale of MP3 in a legimate manner.

The reason.

90% Don't rip mp3's at a decent rate, I'd love to whap down my credit card and download 196kbps MP3's with full bandwith.

I'd only pay for digital music if it was encoded at something like lame --alt preset standard or mpc. Most of the time you can't really tell the difference much but if you get to listen to it on decent speakers the difference between that and 128kb/s is obvious. I think more bands should have free music on their websites, I can think of a few (no knife, sparta, zwan, ok so these bands suck but that's not the point...) but there really should be more, it's a great way of getting yourself known.

what do i think? i think the government should have no place watching for people to download so they can get sued... they *SHOULD* have something better to do with their time then to see if people download music... which belongs to everyone, not to the people that write it so they can make money so they can live in a HUGE house and have alot of cars and alot of expensive things......

I'm too tired to say a big response, so I'll just say this:

You can't own musical creativity and expression.

True, but coming from someone who's known her share of bands that are trying very hard and very seriously to make it big, unknown bands are more than happy (for the most part) to get their music out into the world free of charge, only because it gives them more of a chance to become well-known and get more gigs. Sure, they sell their cds online too, but they give people a taste of what's on them for free. (in the case of one of them, they let people DL as much as they want, and then once you've dl'ed all the songs on a particular CD, they won't let you DL them again...instead you get a message to buy the CD if you like the songs so much...LOL) Seriously, though, most of the hollering being done in the music industry over "the rights to own music" is coming from Executives and the very rich, spoiled musicians who've forgotten that the reason behind making music is supposed to be so that it can be shared with EVERYONE, regardless of how much money they have!

I say that the music industry can kiss my firm, peachy arse. CEOs and various corporate hoors have turned it into one huge money-spinning machine, which is why music has become so generic in recent years. Let the corporations go to hell for all I care, even if they do employ thousands of hard-working innocents who want nothing more in life than to feed themselves and their sweet, loving families... bugger.

Yes you can say.

"Rar rar rar, creative expression rar rar" and such, but the music industry employs a lot of people, and i don't mean the artists.

"rar rar rar music should not be sold rar rar... rar rar redundancy rar rar"

When it all comes down to it...are thousands of people whining about wanting to legalise p2p software and other such resourses because we don't want to have to cough up the cash?

Yes, we are. But also because we shouldn't have to put up the cash. CDs are ridiculously overpriced, and it's entirely the fault of the record companies.

So you should just be given CD's and other forms of media for free?
CD's may be sold at a ridiculous price, but being handed out for free is hardly the answer.

You misunderstand me. Maybe if CDs were reasonably-priced, we'd buy them. But if they insist on f*cking us over them, the only real way we can hit back is by downloading the albums. If we download enough of them, their sales will drop and they'll be forced to lower prices.

Probably. Its Monday morning and I'm hacked off.

IMO, I download stuff (when I can, being as I have a cack connection) because I just don't want to pay. I'd still probably download stuff (if I was on a decent connection) if CD prices were very low. Its not just the coughing up of the cash...its just easier to click a few buttons than drag my arse into town to buy it.

The cash is certainly a part of it (and I'm hardly willing to pay $20-30 for ten songs) but for me and a lot of people it's more a question of wanting access to music we wouldn't be able to listen to otherwise. Maybe if CDs were reasonably priced and major record stores stocked more music on smaller labels, downloads wouldn't be necessary. I don't think that's ever going to happen though.

Yeah, that's the other problem with the music industry that has people clamoring for more p2p software: the so-called "popular" music scene is actually at an all-time low when it comes to actual head-count popularity. The underground scene is, by and large, making more money and getting more wide-spread popularity...and that's mostly BECAUSE of people dling and sharing songs on the internet. People listen to the music, love the music, and then buy tickets to go to shows. That's how most of the underground artists get their money these days...not through CD sales, but through tours.

But thinking back to the first days of widespread music.....troubadours, bards, wandering minstrels, small bands that played at faires and travelled with acting troupes....they didn't sit in a studio, crank out compilations of their greatest hits, and then sit back and bitch at people for listening to some other bard play their music for free. For them, music was the joy. It was something to be shared with the people, not hoarded only for those who could dole out the cash to hear it. Granted, there were private minstrels, house musicians and the like, but they were the exception, not the rule. The underground music scene is much more in touch with the older roots of "popular music", and I don't see why it should be different.

I think that you should be able to download. It helps when you are to poor or wish to check out a band. Though I think that if you have the money for that kind of stuff that you shouldn't. I mean I can see people without enought money downloading them but people with the money need to go out and spend it on the cd.

It seems RIAA harps on this one point alot, they said that "pirating" was the cause of the rising costs in the first place, so back when the tape machines made it possible for some to copy one tape millions of times to sell real cheap out in the open markets.

They argue then that you can burn as much , and easier with the same quality as the original to your freinds and neighbors, but they seem to forget something, it's not sold, it's free, the way I see it it doesn't infringe the copyright, because most anyone wont go burning tha latest Britanny Spears and sell a CD for a $1 or wahtever...keeping that money from getting to the people that worked hard to place that CD in the store...really? well, if thats the case , then htey need to go find a job elsewhere like every other industry...

with downloading MP3's... nobody profits...its for personal use... If i had the time and money, I'd fight that point...

gah...

Oh....since this is pretty much on-topic when we're talking about the music industry, did anyone else hear about the 3 major music companies lowering prices on CDs? I think it was a couple weeks ago that they sent out the articles saying it was about to happen...apparently they're dropping prices on new cd's down to like $10-$12, which drops used CDs down to $7-$9.

guess they finally figured out part of the problem was their own greed....then again, I think it was too little, too late. Nobody respects them anymore.

The music industry is one of the greatest monopolies in the country, and if they cant handle a little competiton, let them fall from power.

umm... i hope you're being sarcastic. because, y'know, the colapse of the music industry would be a BAD thing. if it all turned into a giant kazaa, then there would be almost no artists left because you can't survive off of making songs for free.

Quite unfortunate for corporate music then huh. Real music is played for the joy of it, not for money, and frankly briteny spears or most rappers don't strike me as true musicians, not because they don't play an intrument, but because they are in it for the money.

this is a good point, and im glad it was made. i hate paying for CDs of bands that ive never heard of, or not sure if it would be good listening, but i will gladly pay for the CDs that i like, and i know is good listening. and im sure that goes the same for many others as well. if everything was free, you would have very few bands lasting for more then a few CDs, and i doubt the CDs would be very good, seeing as they would receive no money from the music, and they would have to have full time jobs, meaning they wouldnt have much time for writing good music... i could be wrong, but after a day of school and/or work, im not always the most creative person afterwards.



bands and artists should get paid for the music they make, but it should not the main reason they get into music. if a band/artist doesnt get paid for the music they write, they might be more prone to not lasting very long. and that isnt good for the fans they have, even if you dislike them.


(mind you, im sick right now, and the points i made just now might not make a whole lot of sense, if they dont, go ahead and reply and shoot me down with your ((probebly better)) logic, k? good.)

Fans are irrelevant. I hate monopolies and their abuse of the consumer. The death of the west lies in monopolies taking over as leaders of government, manipulating the consumer. If you want to play music, play for the joy of playing, and if you can't play without fans to adore you, you have an insecurity issue.

but isnt the point of music having people other then yourself and your band (if your in a band) listening to it? how else is your band gonna get publicity (of any sort) if no one knows about you? sure, word of mouth can get you far, but to who? people who like that particular genre? people who might be seen as not liking a certain genre, but actually do, might not get to hear about the music they want to.

Exactly! I mean, I wouldn't know that half the songs I know now that are good if I didn't have WinMX and downloaded them. After I download them, if I like 'em, I go buy the CD. Simple as that.

The point of music varies, but fan starved people I have an issue with. Music has for centuries played a role in culture, and if the culture accepts it, it will spread, even if only by word of mouth. But what abou those who play just for themselves, or for a small community (like many underappreciated garage bands), the record industry either corrupts them by accepting them by conforming them to the satus quo, or hurts them by not giving them proper recognition.

Here's a fact for you, a few months ago (well i'm not exactly sure of the time frame but it was not long ago) anyway, in the UK it took merely 4000 record sales to get into the top 10!!! the artist won't make sh1t out of a market like that!! and i dare anyone of you to prove thats not because of kazaa and the like!

now obviouly the market's moved over to album sales but with more and more people turning over to broadband connections it takes maybe 30 minutes to download an album.



ooh here's an idea (i just had it a few minutes ago) seeing as single sales are slumping why not making downloading of singles free? that way the numbers can be tallied and the top ten can actually mean something again! albums have to be bought still, you can't produce a real kicking album on a home computer...well you can but imagine how much better it'd be if you mixed it on a state of the art desk!


sorry, i waffled a bit there

edit: i realise now that the idea i "had" was already one of the options....d'oh!

I'm perfectly fine with downloading as long as the downloaders are. As long as they realize the effect of their actions its ok with me. I have a strong beleif that things suceed or fail on their own resolve, and if the record industry dies because its supporters are too foolish to realize the ultimate price of their downloading, so be it. As long as the government doesn't take action I'm perfectly fine.

I do not believe it should be legal to download CDs. CDs just like software have licenses and they are protected by law. The fact that you feel they are overpriced does not make it ok to violate the licenses. That's like saying the Acura NSX is way too overpriced and Honda makes enough money so I'm just gonna take one. If you feel it is overpriced, then don't buy it. No one is forcing you to buy it.

so your saying that just because someone doesnt have the money that they shouldnt get to listen to music that they want? we cant depend on the radio for all genres, theres too much censorship (of cursing and certain subjects of songs), and they dont play the genre's that people want.

except for the fact that music has been a large part of human life for thousands of years. And you're logic is busted. Things aren't immoral because they're against the law. Things should be against the law because they are immoral.

an acura nsx is not a work of art, so, in my opinion, they're not really accurate comparisons...

YES!!!

EXACTLY!!!

If you can't afford something you have no right to steal it. If that means you have to do without, then you have to do without.

No it is not a work of art, but it is a business and a product. So you are saying it is ok to steal "art" from businesses that produce them, but not ok to steal objects?

If you were a painter and you sold one painting to someone who then made copies and distributed for free all over the internet would you be upset? This is how you make money. Just because you happen to be a great painter and make a lot of money does not change the fact that people are stealing your work.

but, art shouldnt be expensive to a point where people have to "steal" to enjoy it, just because a group of dumbasses felt that they needed some extra money to enjoy their already extravegent lifestyle, it shouldnt be wrong to SHARE music with people. MP3s are like the radio, in ways, your sharing music that you didnt pay for. should we get rid of the radio? if MTV actually played music, should we get rid of that too?

if i sold it, what is done with it after that is out of my control. it's not like people mass-produce the same painting.

music is not always neccesarily a business and a product. the problem we have here derives out of people who make art purely for business...

It shouldn't be, but it is. That does not give you the right to steal it.

I'm sorry if you feel the "dumbasses" who happen to make a lot of money don't need anymore, but that does not give you the right to voilate a license and steal their work.


Since when does sharing involve making copies and distributing them to the world? Sharing means, I give you mine and I'm without it until I get it back. There is only ONE of the item.


The radio pays for their songs and is licensed to play them. MTV as well.

The reason CDs were so expensive was because of the pricing mechanism - simple economics. As long as people were prepared to buy them, the corporations were prepared to sell them at a high price. Prices will now fall because people were not prepared to buy CDs. As soon as they do fall, you should, with a morally sound economic mind, go out and buy the cheap CDs. if prices creep up again, then immediately switch back to downloads. Use the pricing mechanism to your advantage, but do not completely abandon the music corporations - they employ real people you know!

are you gonna do that to EVERY SINGLE THING I F--KING POST?

JaJay, your consistent ill-posting is beginning to grate. Please try and be more conciliatory with your language.
"Manners cost nothing and buy everything". Or something preachy like that.



Polocrunch: Stretching the definition of hypocrisy beyond belief since 2003.