piracy.An issue?

[jesse]

hey all, i really need to ask. Do you agree that piracy is an issue to the future of the entertainment industry?
should issues like morality, revenue and gradul seriousness be overweighed by simply the temptation of convieneice, substantial costs and simplisity of piracy?

Or should it instead be revered as the more important factor?

feedback will be appreciated!

[Darren]

Just my own take on things...
I don't think 'intellectual property rights' are anything other than laughable.
I am, however, some kind of artist. How do I protect my intellectual property? Simple, I don't sign anything. I let people steal my work all they want. If someone makes a bunch of money off of some of my work, I can take them to civil court and get my piece, but if someone just passes it around for no profit, I guess I get a piece of that, too. After a fashion.
I am, while posting this, sending via WLM a few songs by a popular artist to a friend in a different country. I am wondering, if I let her listen via a video conversation am I pirating? If I send it as a file am I pirating?
I just wonder if there is a difference. I remember every song I like after a few listens. I can 'hear' it in my head any time I like. Is that piracy?

[wiredmom]

In the music business there are many entities involved. Everyone here seems to want to concentrate on the record companies (as domineering dictators to the artist and the public-a status that is gradually changing) and the artists (talentless, mindless idiots who don't deserve any compensation for their work-a status that may be warranted for some but certainly not all).

There is much more to the industry. What about the recording studios, engineers, studio musicians, songwriters, duplication facilities, etc? How will they be compensated if money only changes hands for the artists live performances?

Not only that, but how would you determine the worth of a song? Currently, even though the system IS somewhat flawed, creators are compensated based on the opinions of the public (however they arrive at their like or dislike). Would every songwriter just get paid a flat fee for the use of their intellectual property? How would that encourage them to continually seek to improve and create what the listening public wants to hear. Right now, the listening public is in control becuase every purchase is a vote for what they like. If they don't like it, they don't buy it - simple as that.

And gone are the days when you had to purchase a whole album to get the recording of one or two songs that you liked (yes, that WAS frustrating!) Now you can download (legally, on sites like iTunes, AMazon, Rapsody...)just the one song or as many as you wish. Downloading is NOT illegal - but stealing is! If you want to download a song it's certainly not unreasonable to ask that you pay the meager .99 to do it!

Yes, musicians and writers will always write and perform - but we may lose a lot in quality AND quantity if we lose record companies altogether. Unfortunately, it costs a lot of money to produce an awesome recording of an awesome song and get that to the general public. And although the technology to create recorded music is available to more people than ever before, we will still lose out on many a qualified artist if the prerequisite for their trade is the boatload of cash it requires to produce said product. That would be a shame.

[Bekki659]

In my eyes, they're not going to get my money either way.
If I cant get it for free, Im just not going to get it.

I don't believe in stuff like LimeWire. I think that is kinda cheating.

But I have no problem whatsoever passing a CD around to a number of people. SOMEBODY paid for that music... and with the insane cost of a stupid CD, I think its only fair to spread the joy.

As a lowly college student with no money to begin with, it peeves me that somebody can make millions and millions of dollars off of something like music. I could work my ever-loving butt off at a law firm every day till I retire just to make ends meet... and they get to sing for a living.

Yeah pass me that copied CD.

Yes. I might be a horrible, vindictive person.

[wiredmom]

So basically you're saying that you should be able to listen to a personal copy of someone's music for free simply because you are on a limited budget? Interesting. Should you get food and clothes for free too, since those are expensive?

The point is that it takes alot of money to create that 'insanely costly' CD and if you hope to continue listening to music you need to support that industry.

Those 'millions and millions of dollars' are not going in the artist's pocket, either. They are divded between many parties who are involved in the whole process of creating that CD to make it available for sale.

If you want to listen to music for free turn on your radio...and wait for that song to come on.

I have only one question for you:

Do you plan to practice law for free?

[Bekki659]

I guess I should have mentioned that I've paid hundreds and hundreds of dollars to buy music off iTunes. Notice I also included that I do not believe in downloading off limewire. And not previously mentioned, but I would never use pirated material. I worked at a video store- I'm well aware of the implications brought on by people viewing movies for free that they would otherwise have to buy.

I do support the industry. I'm just saying, Im not going to turn down a CD of music that I like, for free, just because the people who make the CD aren't going to get another 10 dollars.

SOMEHOW those people are getting their money. In addition to everybody else getting paid.

The music I listen to would never show up on the radio.


(And I'm not going to law school. I was using it as an example... but how does that question relate at all?)

[wiredmom]

You can rationalize all you want. And no matter how much music you've already purchased, when you copy a CD that a friend payed for and use it as your own you ARE STEALING - plain and simple.

In the end, it really doesn't matter how much the artist is making - they still deserve their income. And that was my point about practicing law for free. I'm sure that WHATEVER it is that you do for a living, you do it FOR A LIVING, not just to amuse yourself or anyone else. Every workman is worth his wages. It just so happens that musicians support themselves through a variety of activities which include concert tours, TV appearances, etc. Not the least of which is selling copies of THEIR CD's.

If you think the cost of buying music for you collection is too high then I guess you should just go without it. I'd love to own a Mercedes Benz, but I think THAT is way overpriced so I just have to go without. And by the way, even though I've spend tens of thousands of dollars on other cars it still doesn't give me the right to take (STEAL) a Mercedes that belongs to someone else and drive it as my own.

I'm not saying you can't borrow a CD from a friend and listen to it while it's in your posession - but when someone makes a copy of it, either you or them, so that you can BOTH have a copy at the same time, it's stealing.

I don't know if you will ever change your mind about this - I hope you will. You sound like a fine person - but you've rationalized this in your mind to make yourself feel justified in copying music. I hope eventually you will see that it is wrong - weather it's convenient or not.

[Bekki659]

I dont see so much harm in it. If thats the worst thing I do in my life (which, unless you count sex before marriage and cursing as horrible things) I think Im doing pretty well.

Whether or not I'll ever change my mind, I'm not sure. Probably not.

Am I justifying it? Not really. I know its not particularly "right", but I dont see it as "wrong" either. Wrong would be limewire.

Humm... I think it was in the "Would you have kept the wrong change" thread somewhere on this subforum- I forget who said it, but they made a good point. They said (and excuse me if whoever said that is on the opposing side of this argument, and using your words here is not what you intended) that there are so few times that the ball bounces your way- you should take the opportunity if it does- something along those lines.

Its true... my life has been so difficult compared to most people's. If I get a CD of music for free, Im not going to turn it down. Its a small thing... but its still the ball bouncing my way.

[wiredmom]

I can see that at this time you are not going to change your mind. Again, you're rationalizing becuase it benefits you...and, believe me, I understand the temptation of it. I'm not saying I'm perfect either. But the question here was weather or not it was right to copy music and not pay for it.

I truly hope that someday when the 'ball' bounces out of your court into someone else's it does not involve something so great that it devastates you. You deserve what belongs to you...just like everyone else in this world.

What may seem insignificant to the person on the one side may be very important to the person on the other side. We are in grave trouble if we begin to define right and wrong by our own personal circumstance, desire, or need. No man is an island. What one does, affects every other one.

All the best to you.

[Vladd44]

I'd love to own a Mercedes Benz, but I think THAT is way overpriced so I just have to go without. And by the way, even though I've spend tens of thousands of dollars on other cars it still doesn't give me the right to take (STEAL) a Mercedes that belongs to someone else and drive it as my own.

You are comparing two different situations and trying to make them equal...when they are not.

If I go steal a car, there will be a pissed off owner stranded without their car.

On the other hand, if I go to one of my favorite bittorrent sites, or fire up winmx and download a few mp3s, there is no one searching through stacks of cds saying "I know I left it here somewhere, one of those filesharers must have taken it.

Without a doubt the artist has a right to make a living doing what they love. But the industry has made being a musician an ugly whorish task. Just because they have made money off of selling medium does not mean that is the way things will or even should continue.

What I find intolerable is that the RIAA believes that they should get a cut on used cd sales. If I buy an item, it should be mine to resell without restraint unless bought under a specific circumstance covering my limited rights.

I am unsure whether mp3s and other lossy forms of music compression are copyright infringements or not. I don't know of a case where there has been a judge suitably up to date to honestly debate the nuances of the problem.

I personally believe that the concept of copyright needs to be revisited. As a big open source creative commons fan the very idea of copyright is repugnant to me.

On a slightly related note: There are DVD quality versions of "Dark Knight", "Mummy 3" and "Wall-E" out at present. I would presume any bittorrent site should have them. I know they have been on usenet for weeks.

[wiredmom]

So, I guess that musicians should go out and get a real job like everyone else to pay the bills.

But when that happens, how many of them do you think will still have the energy, drive or creativity left at the end of the day to go and record that music that you love to listen to?

Not many.

And not at a very high standard of quality.