downloading music for free! whats your opinion?

[kalimus]

Originally Posted by Angrybird 12

Your name wouldn't be Sheldon Cooper would it?

Bazinga!

Originally Posted by CamaroSkooter

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?

Well firstly, I'm surprised how you find the download of an unreleased CD to be in violation of the law, but a released CD not. Isn't the action of uploading an unreleased CD onto a torrent making it "freely available?" What does it matter if the CD is in stores or not? And no, your having heard it doesn't make it theft, your possession of it does. The instant you download it, it belongs to you (see the borrowing analogy below).

Secondly, I would share your opinion of borrowing a CD from a friend, except that many songs that are on torrents are there from the same "leaching" settings. Many of those songs were likely not purchased by the person that uploaded them ether. That's speculation on my part, because there is no way to confirm nor refute it. But the nature of a torrent being what it is... I believe my assumption is the safer bet.

I use the store analogy because while in the store, that album is not owned by you... in that case, you aren't stealing from the artist, you're stealing from a store. So from a pure "who gets the money" standpoint, you're supporting the artist by stealing it from a store instead of stealing iit online. Every download online, is a CD not bought or stolen. The artist doesn't get any of that money. In a store, the artist (label) already received the money. Although... this is about to tangent wildly so I should move on....

Whether you take a physical media or a digital media, it's the same. What you do, is listen first and pay if intend to keep it. But most importantly, you are taking it before you pay for it. It's not something you are "borrowing". What you do with it after you take it is irrelevant in my mind. You aren't borrowing something that someone purchased, and then returning it. You haven't taken it from anyone's hands, causing them to no longer have it. When you download it, you now possess a copy, while the originator still possesses it.

Lastly, I believe it is the uploader and the downloader that are in violation of the law. The uploader is providing an unauthorized distribution. The downloader is receiving an unauthorized copy. Why music is looked at any differently than computer software is beyond me.

Where what you are doing specifically might be morally acceptable to you or others, doesn't make it legal. I can only debate legality, because morals are truly not universal so many can not be "right" or "wrong". If intent was the basis on which a law was judged things would be very different.

This is an interesting conversation... because it's really based off our subject view of intent. Your intent is not to steal, assuming what you say is true (I have no reason to believe otherwise). So although legally wrong, is it morally wrong if your intent is innocent? Dang morals.

[Angrybird 12]

As with a lot of things it falls into the, "it's only illegal if you get caught " mentality people have.

[midnighter]

Free doesn't come without a catch.

[CamaroDreams07]

Originally Posted by Angrybird 12

As with a lot of things it falls into the, "it's only illegal if you get caught " mentality people have.

I think we all understand it's illegal and take the risk accordingly.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2

[BAD DAB]

Originally Posted by RubyCamaro

Artists make nothing off album sales because of what piracy has done to the industry. How about I steal the product or services you produce/provide? The quality & variety of the music available today suffers greatly because of what digital music & piracy has done. The quality of the sound of what you get with digital music sucks! It has been so compacted that you lose so much of the separation & quality of sound it is just crap. That is why I hate to see the auto industry taking CD players out of cars. When I want to listen to good music, I want to be able to pop in a DC. Okay enough, This could go on endlesly.

Ruby you hit that right on the head! I agree with you completely.

[GbrilliantQ]

Justin timberlakes new album sold 970,000 albums..... In one week.

piracy is increasing sales. Look at movies and video games... I'm not saying it's right but the notion it's causing people and companies to lose money is just plan wrong.

Sent from my Note 3

[Angrybird 12]

Duke University published these Q&A's

Q. What is music piracy?
A. The general term "piracy" refers to the illegal duplication and distribution of sound recordings and includes four specific forms:

Pirate recordings are the unauthorized duplications of only the sound of legitimate recordings. The packaging may not duplicate the original art, label, title, sequencing, combination of titles etc.

Bootleg recordings are the unauthorized recordings of a musical broadcast on radio or television or of a live concert -- also known as underground recordings.

Counterfeit recordings are unauthorized recordings of the prerecorded sound as well as the unauthorized duplication of original artwork, label, trademark and packaging.

Online piracy refers to the unauthorized download of sound recordings from Internet sites. Downloading even one song onto a PC is piracy, even if it isn�t resold.

Q. How much damage does music piracy do?
A. The industry loses about $5 billion every year to piracy worldwide -- $1 million a day in the United States alone. (These figures only include physical product.)

Q. What is online piracy?
A. It�s playing or downloading from the Internet songs and lyrics without getting authorization to, and without compensating the artists. Unauthorized Internet music archive sites using MIDI technology or MP3 files provide illegal sound recordings online to anyone for downloading into a personal computer. They are often then reproduced and played indefinitely without compensation to the artists.

Q. How much is the music industry losing to online piracy?
A. Currently, RIAA is only able to provide anecdotal information of losses to the industry based on evidence uncovered in the discovery phase of their past litigation against illegal music archive sites using MP3 technology.

Q. Who gets hurt by music piracy?
A. Consumers lose: Piracy drives up the price of legitimate recordings. The sound and materials of pirated music are also often of a poor quality, and the product can�t be returned.
Artists, musicians, songwriters and producers lose: They don�t get the royalties and fees they�ve earned -- and 95% of all artists depend on fees to make a living. Their reputations also suffer when the fakes are of poor quality.
Retailers and distributors lose: Their prices can�t compete with those of illegal vendors, which means less business and fewer jobs.
Record companies lose: 85% of all the recordings issued don�t even make back their costs. Record companies rely on the remaining 15% of recordings that are successful to subsidize less profitable types of music, to cover the costs of developing new artists and to keep their businesses operational.

Q. What do pirates copy?
A. The hits. The illegal marketplace copycats the legitimate market. What�s at the top of the charts is what�s on the pirates� Top 100.

Q. If bootlegs aren�t released into the market and consumers can�t get a live concert recording otherwise, there are no displaced sales. Why is that considered piracy?
A. Bootleg recordings do compete with previously released recordings. But more importantly, performers deserve (and legally retain) the right to control the content, reproduction and distribution of their own performances.

Q. Is "sampling" considered piracy?
A. Sampling describes two separate uses of recorded music. In the first, an artist uses a sample of another song -- often a familiar song by another performer -- to provide musical material for their own composition. In the second, a consumer downloads a portion of recorded music. Sampling is considered piracy; therefore, radio and nightclub disc jockeys along with other "samplers" are not exempt from copyright laws. Each song they use must be authorized- even if the CD is made by a legitimate manufacturer.

Q. How can you tell if a CD is counterfeit or pirated?
A.
Check these seven points:

The packaging has blurry graphics, weak or bad color.
The package or disc has misspelled words.
The price is often way below retail value.
You�re buying it not in a store but at a flea market, from a street vendor, at a swap meet, or in a concert parking lot.
The record label is missing or it�s a company you�ve never heard of.
It has cheaply made insert cards, often without liner notes or multiple folds.
The sound quality is poor.
Q. What is a CD-Recordable and how can you tell the difference?
A. With the new problem of CD-Recordables or CD-Rs, which cost only $400 for the hardware and $1 for a blank disc, RIAA has confiscated 23,858 illegal CD-Rs, as opposed to 87 in the same period last year. But, CD-Rs are easy to spot. These CDs are typically gold on one side with a greenish tint on the non-graphic or "read-only" side. Major record companies generally do not release products in this format, so consumers can be aware of the illicit recordings.

Main Source: http://www.riaa.org/

[GbrilliantQ]

The same riaa that sued limewire for 72 trillion dollars in "damages" lol

Sent from my Note 3

[Angrybird 12]

Originally Posted by GbrilliantQ

The same riaa that sued limewire for 72 trillion dollars in "damages" lol

Sent from my Note 3

Then why did they close the lawsuit on a $105 million settlement?
They represent the artists that lose money on pirated music. They have even sued SiriusXM over not paying for music they play.
Would you like it if someone took something you created and gave away copies for free?
You think any of the vendors on this site would appreciate you making a copy of one of their products and selling it or giving it away?

[Grimlock]

Originally Posted by GbrilliantQ

http://www.theguardian.com/music/200...buy-more-music

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/2526417

Arrrrrrggg

Sent from my Note 3

Those articles do not make sense. Those who illegally download music is X times more likely to buy music than those who illegally download music... wait what?

I am part of this "younger generation," and intellectual property, while not tangible is just as bit important. I might be in the minority to actually appreciate that concept. I do both, download music [legal and illegally] but I still buy albums. There are many reasons; testing a song/album out before buying, the ridiculous "exclusive" songs that retailers control, not to have a shelf littered with albums, etc. Not trying to make an excuse but these are some of the things that have nudged me to go about my pirate ways.

Illegally downloading music is just another problem as speeding, IMO. People know it's wrong but do it anyway. You won't be able to eradicate pirating by imposing fines and jail time. The internet and its users are always a step ahead whatever countermeasures are taken, and the law is slow to catch up.

[kalimus]

Originally Posted by GbrilliantQ

Justin timberlakes new album sold 970,000 albums..... In one week.

That's beacuse most of his fans are 14 year old girls who don't know how to operate a computer.

[CamaroDreams07]

Originally Posted by kalimus

That's beacuse most of his fans are 14 year old girls who don't know how to operate a computer.

Yeah those 14 year olds who have had laptops since day 1 probably can't use a computer.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2

[GroundPilot]

Originally Posted by ChrisBlair

My opinion is that this is going to kill the music industry.

No it will not, though it may kill the ability to make money from RECORDED material, but then again until modern times musicians made money from the PERFORMANCE of their songs.

[motorhead]

It wasn't uncommon for people to record music off the radio on to cassette years ago. I can't ever remember artist or record labels complaining back then. Many times that would send me to the store to then buy the album. What about Youtube? I spend hours listening to music on there. It's like having every song ever made, damn near at your finger tips for free. I frankly can't understand why anyone would buy a song as long as they still let that happen.