downloading music for free! whats your opinion?

[CamaroDreams07]

[QUOTE=ChrisBlair;7162147]LOL

So if I rob you for 100 dollars and then give your 100 dollars plus 30 of my own money to charity, I'm not a thief?

(if you reply "No that makes you the US government" then I would agree)[/QUOTE

Thief yes. Harm the economy, no.



Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2

[kalimus]

Originally Posted by CamaroSkooter

I never said I didn't buy my music. I just prefer to make sure the CD isn't full of crappy songs before I buy it. And I keep the "illegally" downloaded copy as a high-quality digital version of what I just purchased.

Let me break it down for you:

I download an album and have a listen.
If it sucks, I delete the album off my hard drive.
But if it has more than 2 good songs on it, I go buy the CD.
I keep the "illegal" digital download to have the high quality digital version.

But according to you I'm a thief. Man, I wish everything was that black and white in my world...

So if you take a CD from a store to see if you like it, then throw it out if you don't, that's not stealing? And if you do like it, you can go back to the store and give them money for it and that makes it ok? It's the same basic logic man. Or do you consider it different because the artist didn't produce physical media that costs extra? Or is it different because the middle man didn't spend money (i.e. the store buying the album to sell to you)? Not that my original statement was specifically directed at you, but regardless, it is what it is.

Anyone can justify anything, and not everything is black and white. But downloading without paying, even if you discard it when you don't like it, is pretty black and white to me. I "stole music" when I was younger too, every time I had a friend burn me a copy of a CD they paid for. I also had an evolution of my morals, and don't do it anymore. It was just as wrong for me to do that as it is to download music for free when not provided by the artist/recording company.

ETA: I'm not trying to "judge" anyone, but it's an opinion conversation, and let's just be honest about what it is. I completely understand why you do it, and I understand why a lot of people do things they do that are "wrong". Myself included with other things. I'm not perfect either.

[AGM 1LE]

Originally Posted by ChrisBlair

But isn't that the same as it being OK to steal from a rich person's home because "they can afford it"?

You're saying this piracy is OK because the only people that see a loss are wealthy. That the fact they are wealthy means it's OK for them to have things stolen from them.

To a poor person, I'm wealthy, with my camaro and whatnot, even though I don't even see 60K in a year. Would it be OK for them to rob me?

not saying that. Just voicing my opinion that they make to much money for what they do

[PHXLT1]

Originally Posted by AGM 1LE

not saying that. Just voicing my opinion that they make to much money for what they do

That may be true but when your good as a band (TOOL) is then more people want to buy your album, t shirt, cd, concert ticket and what else they sell. So that's why they make what they make. Buuuut! (And I say that with a big kardashian but) if you downloaded music to groups you knew you were taking from would knowing it was coming out of their pocket would you still do it? I'm refering to a group you like. I just think we won't see quality music because music companies will begin to sign anyone to make a buck.

[AGM 1LE]

Originally Posted by PHXLT1

That may be true but when your good as a band (TOOL) is then more people want to buy your album, t shirt, cd, concert ticket and what else they sell. So that's why they make what they make. Buuuut! (And I say that with a big kardashian but) if you downloaded music to groups you knew you were taking from would knowing it was coming out of their pocket would you still do it? I'm refering to a group you like. I just think we won't see quality music because music companies will begin to sign anyone to make a buck.

I usually listen to my XM in my car, or local country stations / a CD in my truck. dont really listen to music outside of driving and if I do its usually grooveshark. I dont really care either way towards pirating, doesnt impact me really.
I am saying that it probably doesnt make as big of an impact as you think. Like you said, most of the money comes from things other than CD/itunes. I have a ton of band/concert shirts and I bet they made more $ on those those than on all of my CDs. And the artist themselves gets a very small amount of $ from a CD sale anyways: producers, label, etc ......
And NIN still makes a bunch of mone and they release most of their stuff free on their website

[GbrilliantQ]

I bet everyone in this thread has recorded radio on a cassette or taped a show on vhs. Same thing.
That are old enough to know lol.

Arrrrrrrggg

Sent from my Note 3

[hrpiii]

Most of the 'newer' or younger generation don't see the 'stealing' because it's all digital. Just like downloading a pic, or a document, or copying and pasting on their computer. Because this generation don't have to 'physically' touch something, they don't seem to get the 'feel' like they are actually stealing. Sit at their computer, push some buttons, and magically free music shows up.

This is my opinion and what I have talked to younger generation and how they see it. Stealing is stealing, whether it is a physical item or digital item.

[Spartan01]

SouthPark did a fantastic episode on this very subject;
Lars Ulrich wants a gold shark bar, now he has to wait a few months..
Brittney Spears can now only afford a Gulfstream 3, not the 4
MasterP's little boy has always wanted a private island in Polynesia, now he cannot afford a private island...

[CamaroSkooter]

Originally Posted by kalimus

So if you take a CD from a store to see if you like it, then throw it out if you don't, that's not stealing? And if you do like it, you can go back to the store and give them money for it and that makes it ok? It's the same basic logic man. Or do you consider it different because the artist didn't produce physical media that costs extra? Or is it different because the middle man didn't spend money (i.e. the store buying the album to sell to you)? Not that my original statement was specifically directed at you, but regardless, it is what it is.

Anyone can justify anything, and not everything is black and white. But downloading without paying, even if you discard it when you don't like it, is pretty black and white to me. I "stole music" when I was younger too, every time I had a friend burn me a copy of a CD they paid for. I also had an evolution of my morals, and don't do it anymore. It was just as wrong for me to do that as it is to download music for free when not provided by the artist/recording company.

ETA: I'm not trying to "judge" anyone, but it's an opinion conversation, and let's just be honest about what it is. I completely understand why you do it, and I understand why a lot of people do things they do that are "wrong". Myself included with other things. I'm not perfect either.

20 years ago music didn't suck nearly as much as it does now. You got a lot of quality music for what you paid. Now, the prices may have dropped a little, but the quality dropped a lot more.

Not to mention, I have very frequently seen CD's in stores, all priced exactly the same, some with 14 songs, others with 9, all with a run time of less than 30 minutes. Seriously?!

But let's go back to my example. If I bought the album first, and then downloaded it later to get the quality digital version, I'm still considered a "thief."

Sure, some might say why not just buy the digital version and download it from iTunes or Amazon or whoever. The problem there is, I've yet to find a digital distributer that doesn't include some form of Digital Rights Management attached to every music file they sell. This DRM always limits where the file can be transferred to and what type of device it can be played on. Whereas I can purchase a CD and that CD will play on any and every CD player I stick it in. When the music industry figures out how to handle digital rights management in a non-invasive way that is much less hassle, I will be much more willing to quit "illegally" downloading music. But until then, I will continue with my ways.

[Angrybird 12]

Originally Posted by CamaroSkooter

20 years ago music didn't suck nearly as much as it does now. You got a lot of quality music for what you paid. Now, the prices may have dropped a little, but the quality dropped a lot more.

Not to mention, I have very frequently seen CD's in stores, all priced exactly the same, some with 14 songs, others with 9, all with a run time of less than 30 minutes. Seriously?!

But let's go back to my example. If I bought the album first, and then downloaded it later to get the quality digital version, I'm still considered a "thief."

Sure, some might say why not just buy the digital version and download it from iTunes or Amazon or whoever. The problem there is, I've yet to find a digital distributer that doesn't include some form of Digital Rights Management attached to every music file they sell. This DRM always limits where the file can be transferred to and what type of device it can be played on. Whereas I can purchase a CD and that CD will play on any and every CD player I stick it in. When the music industry figures out how to handle digital rights management in a non-invasive way that is much less hassle, I will be much more willing to quit "illegally" downloading music. But until then, I will continue with my ways.

I have had no problems copying my iTunes purchased music and making CD's or MP3's and playing them in all my cars.
My thoughts are as long as I paid for my original copy I can use it any way I want for my personal listening pleasure.

[kalimus]

Originally Posted by CamaroSkooter

20 years ago music didn't suck nearly as much as it does now. You got a lot of quality music for what you paid. Now, the prices may have dropped a little, but the quality dropped a lot more.

Not to mention, I have very frequently seen CD's in stores, all priced exactly the same, some with 14 songs, others with 9, all with a run time of less than 30 minutes. Seriously?!

All justifications. Valid statements, but justifications all the same. Same can be said of almost any product you buy these days. Quality has declined on many things.

But let's go back to my example. If I bought the album first, and then downloaded it later to get the quality digital version, I'm still considered a "thief."

You didn't answer my question, but ok. This was not your original example. In this case, you have bought the tracks on that disc prior to downloading them. They are now yours. I wouldn't see any reason why you couldn't re-download those tracks as many times as you like.

I'm not sure what "quality digital version" you're talking about though, unless you're downloading lossless. If memory serves, you can rip lossless from disc anyway. Even before that, I ripped my CDs at 320kbs, which is still higher than most of the bit rates that downloaded songs are.

Sure, some might say why not just buy the digital version and download it from iTunes or Amazon or whoever. The problem there is, I've yet to find a digital distributer that doesn't include some form of Digital Rights Management attached to every music file they sell. This DRM always limits where the file can be transferred to and what type of device it can be played on.

I have never had this problem with DRM. Ever. I've only had an issue when trying to replay it on a different media player in its source format. I've never had an issue with burning MP3's to a CD (as MP3) and having them not play in a normal CD player. In fact, this is why DRM doesn't work, because you can burn it as an audio CD (vice MP3), and then rip it back to the drive like you would do with a standard CD, stripping the DRM from it.

Whereas I can purchase a CD and that CD will play on any and every CD player I stick it in. When the music industry figures out how to handle digital rights management in a non-invasive way that is much less hassle, I will be much more willing to quit "illegally" downloading music. But until then, I will continue with my ways.

You say "illegally" like what you're doing isn't illegal. It is. Just because you disagree with it doesn't make it any less so. That's what I do when I say "speed limit" That said, I agree that DRM is worthless. It's been pretty widely accepted that it doesn't do what it intends to do... not sure why the music company is still trying to push it. Lining someone else's pockets probably.

Disregard all the red. It really makes me "sound" so angry! Maybe I should try yellow. That's the color of a milk dud box, which is of course the most apologetic of the boxed candies...

[Angrybird 12]

Originally Posted by kalimus

Disregard all the red. It really makes me "sound" so angry! Maybe I should try yellow. That's the color of a milk dud box, which is of course the most apologetic of the boxed candies...

Your name wouldn't be Sheldon Cooper would it?

[Caddyroger]

Originally Posted by PHXLT1

This is getting interesting........



So the bands don't make any money from album sales? So if I sell 5 million albums I don't see a penny of the sales? Or not much of it anyway.

You would not sell 5 millions albums but yet 5 millions would be down loaded by thief.

[CamaroSkooter]

Originally Posted by kalimus

Disregard all the red. It really makes me "sound" so angry! Maybe I should try yellow. That's the color of a milk dud box, which is of course the most apologetic of the boxed candies...

LOL

I think you should have made the red bold too, just to add more emphasis

I put "illegally" in quotes because the exact same action is illegal in one example, but not illegal in another. There's a term in courtroom legalese called "jury nullification" which is a very similar concept to what's being discussed.

If I get called in for jury duty and one of the lawyers asks me if I believe ______ is a crime and I say no, they will dismiss me because they don't want the jury tainted with someone who will never be convinced the defendant is guilty of the crimes they're accused of if the juror doesn't even believe that particular crime should be considered a crime.

So, in that same way, I have a very specific definition of what I consider illegal when it comes to music and movie downloads.

I fully believe that someone who takes an album that's not even released yet and uploads it to a torrent site or other file sharing method is breaking the law.

However, I don't believe perusing a list of freely available downloads, clicking on one, and downloading it to check it out should be considered illegal, especially if your settings prevent others from in turn downloading it or any part of it from you (known as leeching).

If I download an album, and don't like it, I delete it. This is exactly like borrowing a CD from a friend who already bought the CD, then returning that CD to my friend.

Does my having heard the product without paying any money constitute theft? What if I was riding in the car with my friend while he was playing the album? Does that constitute some End User breach of contract?

I reject your comparison that it's like stealing a CD from a store and then throwing it away.

If I download an album, and like it, I keep the download and go out and buy the album. In this regard, this is like borrowing my friend's CD, enjoying it, and then going out and buying the same CD.

I don't go through iTunes because I don't want that bloatware installed on my machine, and I certainly don't want a dime of my money going to Apple...ever. But that's just me. Even if DRM really isn't an issue like y'all are saying, I still want a physical medium to hold onto in my collection. I keep the "illegal" downloads, though, because I suck at cleanly ripping CD's like I described earlier.

I realize I'm probably in a small minority of people who use torrent sites to download music.

But the fact is, once something becomes shared on the internet, does it remain illegal for a person to download a file off the internet if they don't have to pay for it? Does the crime lie with the person who is downloading or with the person who is uploading? Or is it a shared crime?