Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Music File Sharing Right Or Wrong?  
User currently offlineTangoecho From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 127 posts, RR: 2
Posted (9 years 11 months 16 hours ago) and read 3929 times:

In the news today in the UK there is a big clamp down on Illegal music file sharing.

Question 1: Do you think it's right or wrong?? (your thoughts)

Question 2: Do you, or have you ever downloaded music through file sharing??

I do file share, and don't think it's a problem apart from the fat cat music companies not getting as much as they used too.

Stu..  Big thumbs up




Contact Aberdeen tower on 118.10 G'day.
57 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineJamotcx From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 1037 posts, RR: 25
Reply 1, posted (9 years 11 months 16 hours ago) and read 3878 times:

Well to be honest looking at the lifestyle that most of these people that make music have, I'm all for file sharing! Fair enough if the prices were slashed so that they got on average the same as everyone else in a year then I would have no problems with buying the stuff.

I know this isnt everyone's opinion, and when my software is out there and people are distributing it as warez I'll be really pissed off, but I'll probs still have the same opinions on music warez.


Jamo


User currently offlineMdsh00 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 4124 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (9 years 11 months 16 hours ago) and read 3864 times:

In a way it is wrong because you aren't paying for the music that you are listening to. On the other hand, I don't feel too bad because sometimes these record companies deserve it. I believe that the companies make way more per album sold than the artist themselves. My philosophy is that I will purchase the albums of artists that I truly like and support. Many of today's albums (especially crap like Clay Aiken, Britney, J-lo) are all 2-3 good songs padded with junk.


"Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a big fat white guy who is threatened by change."
User currently offlineNoUFO From Germany, joined Apr 2001, 7953 posts, RR: 12
Reply 3, posted (9 years 11 months 16 hours ago) and read 3860 times:

I do file share, and don't think it's a problem apart from the fat cat music companies not getting as much as they used too.

Wrong. It will always be talented newcomers that suffer from illegal file "sharing" (which is an euphemism btw).

If you publish a new album from an unknown band, you'll have to spend at least EUR 100,000 - EUR 150,000. To cover expenses and make some profit, that very album would have to hit the top ten rankings. Over the recent decades, profits that came pouring in thanks to more successful musicians, had been used to subsidize new talents.
Tony Banks, keyboarder of Genesis, in an interview said that their record label barely made any profit over the first ten years!
Nowadays, record labels are reluctant to support new bands, and that - to a large extend - is a result of theft.



I support the right to arm bears
User currently offlineNoUFO From Germany, joined Apr 2001, 7953 posts, RR: 12
Reply 4, posted (9 years 11 months 15 hours ago) and read 3848 times:

Well to be honest looking at the lifestyle that most of these people that make music have, I'm all for file sharing!

What lifestyle? If all members of one band together receive EUR 2.50 per record sold (5 musicians = 0.50 each), this band is extremly successful. What you say is that you are willing to steal overpriced flight tickets because the CEO of the airline and his small inner management circle earns millions. It's the ground crew that will receive pink slips.
And if some musicians are multi millionaires, because millions like their music - what's wrong with that?

I believe that the companies make way more per album sold than the artist themselves.

That's correct, and I tell you what: My publisher makes more money from my books than I - who wrote them - do. But still I want people to buy my books. Name one musician who says that it's ok to steal music, because record label make more money than they do.

Many of today's albums (especially crap like Clay Aiken, Britney, J-lo) are all 2-3 good songs padded with junk.

Love it or leave it. Or buy singles. You won't steal a car because you only like its front part, do you?

[Edited 2004-10-07 23:16:21]


I support the right to arm bears
User currently offlineArmitageShanks From UK - England, joined Dec 2003, 3621 posts, RR: 15
Reply 5, posted (9 years 11 months 15 hours ago) and read 3839 times:

It's stealing. Period.

If a record company wants to charge 45 dollars for a CD, they can. If you don't like it, go out there and make some better music and sell it cheaper. If someone makes something others like, they should have the right to sell it at any price they want.


User currently offlineYhmfan From Canada, joined Feb 2004, 607 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (9 years 11 months 14 hours ago) and read 3824 times:

I agree that file sharing of current music is inappropriate.
However, when you are looking for some of the "Golden Oldies" or some obscure music I see no problem with it.
You either cannot find it in the stores or, if you find the song, it is bundled in a collection of 10 other CD's for only $19.99 for the next 24 months!!!



If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you
User currently offlineCaptoveur From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (9 years 11 months 14 hours ago) and read 3822 times:

Is it stealing? yes.

I think there are some seriously positive side effects though. Now the music industry has to put out better CDs. Before, it was not unheard of to have say 12 songs on a CD, maybe 1 of them was good and people would blindly buy the CD not knowing. Now, with file sharing, you can download the whole CD before you go out and buy it, if it is worth your money, you spend it. If not those CDs sit on the shelf collecting dust. So in other words: File sharing may force Britney Spears to have to work where she belongs, a strip club.

Also, it does help bands nobody has heard of get their stuff out there, for free. Some bands also, don't give a shit.

Do I do it? yes. I go out of my way to download Metallica, even though I hate them. Then I delete that crap and download them again. I have difficulty with a guy who flys around the country in a learjet telling me not to do something because I am hurting his income. I download other music, some stuff I like, some of it is for a class I am presently taking. It simply would not make sense for me to go out and buy 20 cds from as many bands for my history of rock class (I needed an art credit). So I go download the required listening.


User currently offlineKilljoy From Finland, joined Dec 1999, 646 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (9 years 11 months 14 hours ago) and read 3818 times:

It's not as simple as "go out there and make some better music and sell it cheaper". If someone sells towels for 100 €, I can go buy another brand, because my objective is to dry myself, not to use a towel. I can not, however, buy an album from CCR if the Rolling Stones are overcharging, because my objective isn't to listen to music, it's to listen to the Stones.

Each distributor in essence has a monopoly on the music it's selling. It's also not a natural monopoly - it has been granted by the government. Therefore it is not at all clear that they have the right to charge whatever they want. It's just how it's been for a long time, and no one in power seems to realize that there are alternatives.

Rampant piracy is the result of a broken system, not a sudden increase in "theft" as the major labels would want us to believe. Furthermore, there is no reason that releasing a piece of music needs to cost anything. You just put it on the internet and spread the word. If it's good, people will hear about it.

In theory, that is. The problem is that so much money is spent on marketing music, that you can't really have your voice heard without utilizing the same tactics yourself. The market is stacked against the small players! Put simply, the record companies are creating the problem that requires their existence. (And the executives are laughing all the way to the bank)

Artists would be much better off just releasing stuff for free and requesting donations. If the entire market operated this way, enough people would be willing to donate to make it work. In fact, the population is so huge, and the costs so low, that everyone would have to give a completely negligible sum.

As a final note, artificial scarcity is evil. It is unconscionable to restrict art (music) to only those who can afford to pay for it, when distribution has a marginal cost of zero. The record companies need to go down in flames.


And to finalize my rant with a note about software, having your binaries warezed is appropriate punishment for not open sourcing your program in the first place  Big grin .


User currently offlineNUAir From Malaysia, joined Jun 2000, 1181 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (9 years 11 months 14 hours ago) and read 3805 times:

Other ways to copy things that are considered to be legal...

Radio

VCR

DVD

CD burner

Cassette Deck

I used to always copy music from the radio when I was growing up and I even shared my tapes and made recordings for my friends. Now we are prosecuting 12 year old girls for doing the same thing on the internet....

This seems to be just a case the recording industry getting greedy.

If they were smart they would have caught on early and sold their music through sites like RealOne and Imusic. Now they are pissed off because of their lack on inovation and ability to adopt to new trends.




"How Many Assholes we got on this ship?" - Lord Helmet
User currently offlineNoUFO From Germany, joined Apr 2001, 7953 posts, RR: 12
Reply 10, posted (9 years 11 months 13 hours ago) and read 3786 times:

I used to always copy music from the radio when I was growing up and I even shared my tapes and made recordings for my friends. Now we are prosecuting 12 year old girls for doing the same thing on the internet....

No. Broadcasters pay for songs they play on the radio, and so you did when you bought a cassette tape. Not to mention that each dublicate caused a loss in quality.

Not so the internet. You simply can not control distribution via the net. It's still stealing, plain and simple.

Furthermore you don't need to buy CDs blindly. You can listen to them first.

Rampant piracy is the result of a broken system, not a sudden increase in "theft" as the major labels would want us to believe.

It's a result of both.

Artists would be much better off just releasing stuff for free and requesting donations.

Artists want to get payed, they don't wish to rely on donations.

The record companies need to go down in flames.

What a joke. Musicians need the industry to record their music. Only wealthy musicians have studios of their own. They need engineers, producers and distribution channels other than the internet. You have no idea what you are talking 'bout.
Many - if not most - record labels act on behalf of their shareholders; it's pure capitalism not supporting arts. True. But the fact that they radically reduced their support for unknown artists is also a result of Napster & Co.

And then there are small recording companies. They care for their musicians but people still give a rat's ass and steal their music.

All this talk about wealthy CEOs laughing their butts of in their business jets is one lame excuse for ... stealing.



I support the right to arm bears
User currently offlineArmitageShanks From UK - England, joined Dec 2003, 3621 posts, RR: 15
Reply 11, posted (9 years 11 months 13 hours ago) and read 3776 times:

What if someone started taking gas from your tank every night. Not a lot, just a gallon or liter.... You would be mad. It's the same thing. Artists and record companies put time and effort into making these albums and they deserve to profit from them.

User currently offlineMirrodie From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 7443 posts, RR: 62
Reply 12, posted (9 years 11 months 12 hours ago) and read 3772 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

the whole music sharing thing is a farce.

And hte arguements above are great. I mean, all I have to do is pick up the CD at the local library and copy the songs.

Its absolutely ridiculous.



Forum moderator 2001-2010; He's a pedantic, pontificating, pretentious bastard, a belligerent old fart, a worthless st
User currently offlineSuperfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 39857 posts, RR: 74
Reply 13, posted (9 years 11 months 12 hours ago) and read 3768 times:

There is no way in HELL I can feel sorry for the industry that's given us Nstink, Toby Keith, 50 cent, Nelly, Pink, Creed and other garbage on MTV.

I can careless if that industry falls flat on it's face!


The industry has failed to promote talent like they used to back in the 1960s, 1970s and early 1980s.
The industry rather get some illiterate punk from high school or some skinny chick and slap a bunch of makeup on them and call them artist. The record company laughs all the way to the bank as they rack in 95% of the profits from CD sales and the so-called artist is to make there money on tour.
As if someone is stupid enough to spend $150.00 to see Nelly.



Bring back the Concorde
User currently offlinePhotopilot From Canada, joined Jul 2002, 2731 posts, RR: 18
Reply 14, posted (9 years 11 months 9 hours ago) and read 3741 times:

Well it's really simple here in Canada.

You see, we have all PAID for the music we download. So it's not stealing as far as I am concerned. Of course, you ask yourself how we pay for music we download. Well it's really simple.... and outright theft on behalf of the music industry.

Every time you buy a blank cassette, blank CD (to burn) or blank Videotape, you pay a royalty fee that is turned over to the Recording Industry. Of course it doesn't matter that the blank Cd's I purchase are being used to archive the digital photos that I take with my personal digital camera. Just to store my photos I am ripped-off and forced to pay royalties to the recording industry. Ask me how that is fair? They steal from me, and therefore I feel absolutely no guilt or remorse when I download music that belongs to them.

They have even tried (unsuccessfully so far) to get the government to impose a fee (to be turned over to them of course) on every SD or CF chip sold. They are trying to say that these are used to put music on for MP3 players. Oh, and they also want a fee to be added to USB keys that people like me use to transfer files from home to work. Every single possible digital storage media the recording industry wants to tax. Oh, and the absolute silliest is that they want to add a fee to all Hard Drives in the neighbourhood of $4.00 PER GIGABYTE of storage space. Now calculate the FEE they want for the next 80 Gig hardrive you might want to buy.

So now you see how GREEDY the recording industry is, and how they want to extort money even from people who use digital media for other uses. So they have lost all my respect or support and I now download freely whatever songs I want and can find on the net. You see.....I've PAID FOR THEM ! ! !

Steve


User currently offlineSolarix From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (9 years 11 months 9 hours ago) and read 3739 times:

The real crooks in this are those belonging to the RIAA.

User currently offlineCaptoveur From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (9 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3717 times:

There is no way in HELL I can feel sorry for the industry that's given us Nstink, Toby Keith, 50 cent, Nelly, Pink, Creed and other garbage on MTV.

Yet again Superfly makes an excellent point. Talent is a thing of the past in music, now it is all about who looks good, because they can make anyone sound good in a studio.

The Beatles were artists, Bob Dylan was an artist, Little Richard was an artist. Britney Spears is NOT an artist, Nstync were NOT artists, Hilary Duff is NOT an artist by any stretch of the imagination..

Both lists are long and distinguished, MTV claims to have revolutionized the music industry, and that is true to an extent, they made it totally devoid of actual musical talent. I have to admit I am pretty sick of continuing to support their shitty industry with the few dollars I have. In recent years I have bought fewer CDs and downloaded more. This is also a product of most new CDs coming out stretching to have 1 good song on them. Why should I pay like $12 for one song that I will get tired of in a few weeks then shove it on a rack in the corner and not think about it again for a year or two?

My girlfriend used to buy a lot of music, she has stacks of CDs, I thought it might just be a product of us turning into grouchy senior citizens but it seems like everything coming out is absolute crap. Neither one of us has paid money for music in over 2 years, simply because a few good songs come out, but no good CDs come out that we can justify the expense of paying for.


User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (9 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3706 times:

It should be up to the artists.

Simple solution:

If you want people to have it free, artists can put the songs on their site for free or through managements site for free.

If the artists don't want that, then charge a download fee in the same manner.


User currently offlineKilljoy From Finland, joined Dec 1999, 646 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (9 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3688 times:

Yes, studios and engineers are needed. But that's just a small part of what the companies are doing, and studios can get much cheaper technology today than 50 years ago.

I should've said that *current* record companies need to go down in flames. Small ones that care for their artists are ok, too.

I still think that a completely new business model is needed, though. And I think a lot of people would be surprised to find out how much money would be donated if that was the way the market worked.


User currently offlineNUAir From Malaysia, joined Jun 2000, 1181 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (9 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 3684 times:

Here is my insider version of this whole music sharing thing...

I am a product of Northeastern University (NU of NUAir) and am still good friends with Sean Fanning's ex girlfriend. We would have graduated in the same class at the business school had he stayed.

I remember when she first told me about his idea for Napster and I said the idea was complete shit, who would go to the internet for poor quality music with no selection, to listen to it on their computer speakers? People want to play cd's on big systems and I said the mini-disk would be the next music revolution!  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

Now Sean has 5 condos and over $500,000 in investments and I'm working for someone else renting a shit apartment in DC.

The idea was never supposed to be this big. It was for a bunch of roomates to share songs from cd's that they purchased and as people found out about it, it grew exponentially until almost everyone at Northeastern was signed on (this goes back to my radio arguement). It actually overloaded the main server at NU because of all the transfers that were going on. Eventually others found out about it and everyone was hooked up. At this point Sean spoke with a friend of mine who was an intern with Sony in NY and proposed this whole idea of music sharing and being able to distribute music online. Sony almost laughed him out of the office for many of the same reasons I disagreed with it and said it would never catch on...

Well it did. The record companies made a huge huge huge mistake and because of that they want to penalize us for doing this even though cd sales are still growing at the same rate, because as I said people still want to have music on cd's to play in the car or where ever. So you go online, download some songs, like the artist, and buy the album. This sounds perfect!

...but you can always use your computer to burn the cd and never have to pay anything at anytime and as this technology catches on pre-recorded cd sales could be the victim.

Now before that happens Sony and others have a perfect opportunity to release a superior product much like itunes where they could control the formatting of music and even program into each song file the ability to burn the song or transfer it. Have you ever tried to download your ipod music onto another computer? If they control the distribution they can control who has the music once again and go back to over-charging us for the crap that they put out.

but I think to feel sorry for the recording industry is a joke. The best musicians I know play down at a local jazz cafe for peanuts and arent millionairs and dont look beautiful but the music is great. If your a musician you should be doing it for the love of music not million dollar contracts. Most of the greatest musicians in American history died broke.






"How Many Assholes we got on this ship?" - Lord Helmet
User currently offlineJamotcx From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 1037 posts, RR: 25
Reply 20, posted (9 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 3680 times:

Well to be honest looking at the lifestyle that most of these people that make music have, I'm all for file sharing!

What lifestyle?


Hmmmm your kidding right? Lets take a look at Britney Spears, what lifestyle indeed.

As far as I'm concerned if I can get anything for a cheaper way then so be it. Unless someone wants to give me sh*t loads of money, then fine I'd pay it. But as a student I find it hard enough to live on my money, nevermind paying for music.


Jamo


User currently offlineAa757first From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3347 posts, RR: 8
Reply 21, posted (9 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 3666 times:

Well to be honest looking at the lifestyle that most of these people that make music have, I'm all for file sharing!

Do I think Avril Lavine (sp?), Eminem (sp?) and Good Charlotte are God's gift to the music world? Nope. Did they earn that money? Yes. Even if it was pretending to dance on stage while singing a terrible song, people still handed over their money to see them.

Fair enough if the prices were slashed so that they got on average the same as everyone else in a year then I would have no problems with buying the stuff.

Gee, how kind of you. I guess I'll go steal a Dell computer with Windows XP because both Michael Dell and Bill Gates are way to rich. Then I'm going to steal a new car, cause car company CEOs make way to much.  Insane

Many of today's albums (especially crap like Clay Aiken, Britney, J-lo) are all 2-3 good songs padded with junk.

Go to WalMart.com. They charge $0.88 a song and the owners of the music agreed on that price.

Now, with file sharing, you can download the whole CD before you go out and buy it, if it is worth your money, you spend it.

I'm sure most people don't bother to spend $14 on CD after they have the whole thing sitting on their hard drive. Both Borders and Wal-Mart have listening stations. Scan the UPC code and you can listen to a sample of the music. Or listen to the radio.

The industry rather get some illiterate punk from high school or some skinny chick and slap a bunch of makeup on them and call them artist. The record company laughs all the way to the bank as they rack in 95% of the profits from CD sales and the so-called artist is to make there money on tour.

People gladly fork over $14.95 or $17.95 or whatever it is to listen to them sing. I agree. They can't sing. For your second point: no one force the so called artist to sign the contract that said they make 5% of the CD revenue.

Unless someone wants to give me sh*t loads of money, then fine I'd pay it. But as a student I find it hard enough to live on my money, nevermind paying for music.

Would you steal a book or a magazine from Borders because one of the authors were making more then you thought was the appropriate salary? Please. Did the musician steal the money? No. People handed over their cash because they liked the "music", or their dancing or their body or why ever they purchased the CD.

I like this analogy. If you wanted a CD really badly, would you walk into Fye, pick up a CD, put it in a shopping bag and walk out? For most people, I doubt it.

AAndrew


User currently offlineStratofish From Germany, joined Sep 2001, 1051 posts, RR: 5
Reply 22, posted (9 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3658 times:

I have said it many times and I will again:
music is a peace of art and CULTURE and should (must) NOT be done, produced, played ..etc. for the sake of money! It´s bad enough there are "professional artists" out there who make a living off their (so called) music.
So by all means, it is RIGHT!!!
BTW, I have lost a great deal of interest in those music acts who openly speak out against sharing/copying and I will never ever listen to anything from them again, let alone buying their stuff.
And I never bought more CDs and concert tickets as in the good ole Napster days. Because, how do you find good new music? It's (or was) through file sharing, the media sure don't help you finding good music these days.



The Metro might be the Sub(optimal)way
User currently offlineDash8King From Canada, joined Nov 2001, 2742 posts, RR: 11
Reply 23, posted (9 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3642 times:

But still I want people to buy my books. Name one musician who says that it's ok to steal music, because record label make more money than they do.

Nikkie Sixx of Motley Crue and Alice Cooper are two I can think of off the top of my head. Sure they want you to buy they're CD but they understand downloading will not stop and say go for it. I know Motley Crue openly lets you videotape their performances(bootlegging) and what not.

I don't usually download, for the most part I buy. I think I have 60 songs in my library.


User currently offlineImonti From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (9 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3632 times:

I file share and I wont lie, it isnt right, but some bands now are become more open to file sharing, often up and coming ones as it is used to get them publicity.

The offspring did it
Seether.

Then offsprings record label told them to stop it or we pull the plug.
Seether not sure why.

My father prints cd jackets, so I should be against file sharing as the more cd jackets that are printed the greater his businesses profits, how ever in the grand scheme of things, a few cds lost means nothing. So it doesnt only hurt the music industry but other industries as well.

But this is how a friend of mine views it, and he has bought more cd's than has had hot breakfasts. If he is told band X is good, he goes and will download a song or 2 and if he likes it go and buy the CD, if he doesnt he deletes the songs and doesnt buy the cd, I also take that view. WHy buy a spend and your moolah on something you dont like? Itis quite a simplistic view, but in a nutshell that is me and file sharing.

Hey eay to his own, and I dont see how one person can criticise another for file sharing, "he with out sin, cast the first stone" ANy one that has never committed a crime can then say people who file share are bad/or what ever etc etc.


25 Matt D : The only way to enjoy music......
26 Superfly : Aa757first: The masses will buy ANYTHING that industry spoonfeds them. The average JoBloe just isn't sophisticated enough to seek out good music. Joe
27 Dl021 : fly...dude..just because you don't like the music does not mean that it ain't stealing and wrong. I agree that there is alot of crap being put out, bu
28 Jamotcx : Gee, how kind of you. I guess I'll go steal a Dell computer with Windows XP because both Michael Dell and Bill Gates are way to rich. Then I'm going t
29 Superfly : DIO21: Gordy shouldn't have sold the rights to Motown so cheap. The bulk of Chuck Berry's sales have already been purchased and he's made his money. K
30 Matt D : Superfly: No comment on the R2R clip featuring the Akai GX-747 blasting out the opening to "Living In The Limelight" by Peter Cetera?
31 NoUFO : Jamotcx, Taking arguments out of context doesn't help. Read my entire post. Wealthy musicians like Spears or Springsteen only represent a small number
32 Dash8King : Now dont get me wrong I do buy music, but only music from artists I feel is deserving. Eg small unheard of groups/artists. So if they get big do you s
33 MartinairYYZ : Question 1: Do you think it's right or wrong?? (your thoughts) I think it is right... all these years of stealing our $$$ for worthless crap should be
34 NoUFO : I think it is right... all these years of stealing our $$$ for worthless crap should be repaid in our lifetimes! I didn't pay one single Euro for wort
35 NUAir : NOUFO, Sean didn't make that much money on Napster until he sold it. Before that he was taking in a few grand on advertising revenue but not much more
36 MartinairYYZ : 1) Would you still think it's ok if you were a musician who has to feed a family? Umm.... other than poor people and hobos who perform in the subway,
37 Post contains images NoUFO : NUAir, the problem is that talented musicians simply give up while others don't even think of starting a career as an musician. They "disappear" in of
38 Jamotcx : Taking arguments out of context doesn't help. Read my entire post. Wealthy musicians like Spears or Springsteen only represent a small number of artis
39 Bruno : Screw the record companies. The play by a different set of rules than other industries. Making the moral right or wrong argument doesn't apply to an i
40 JAGflyer : I don't feel guilty using P2P programs. So the artist makes $7,000,000 instead of $9,000,000. They still have more money than the know what to do with
41 Post contains links NoelG : I've downloaded music from P2P a couple of times in the past, but after the demise of Napster got so fed up of all the pop ups and viruses infecting m
42 Post contains images NoUFO : JAGflyer, You didn't bother reading the tread, did you? I don't feel guilty using P2P programs. So the artist makes $7,000,000 instead of $9,000,000.
43 Seb146 : Here is my opinion about file sharing: There is music not available or not popular in one country and nearly impossible to get in said country. File s
44 NoUFO : But, Britney, Jessica and all "alternative" bands (the ones that sound the same that are played every 5 minutes) and the other crap that culture wants
45 Superfly : Honestly, serious music lovers and 'true' fans buy there favorite artist CDs, and records. Those who's only source for music is file shareing aren't s
46 Post contains images Fritzi : I used to download music but I´ve quit. It was a real pain in the ass to burn CDs and having find the freakin song title in a folder with 500 other s
47 Stratofish : "...and downright egoistic." Excuse me? I for one make music simply for the love of it and I don´t expect my audience to pay for it. So how is denoun
48 Post contains images Jamotcx : I used to download music but I´ve quit. It was a real pain in the ass to burn CDs and having find the freakin song title in a folder with 500 other s
49 NoUFO : Yes, Startofish, stealing other people's work is egoistic, and whether or not you make music for the fun of it is a non-issue, since you can not impos
50 Superfly : How come established talented artist that's been in the industry for a long time never come out against file sharing? It's only the new untalented one
51 ConcordeBoy : Right
52 NoUFO : How come established talented artist that's been in the industry for a long time never come out against file sharing? Abtually they do, i.e. Peter Gab
53 Post contains images Superfly : NoUFO: OK besides him!
54 Stratofish : Superfly hit the nail on it's head. Often bands become more popular through the net and file-sharing. And concerts is a whole different story, the art
55 EA CO AS : Rampant piracy is the result of a broken system, not a sudden increase in "theft" as the major labels would want us to believe. Interestingly enough,
56 NoUFO : OK, I can agree with some views EA CO AS shared, but not with the following. Often bands become more popular through the net and file-sharing. This is
57 JETPILOT : Next they will be prosecuting yard tool sharing for letting your neighbor use your hedge cutter. I am a strong advocatre of ownership and actually doi
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Animal Experiments. Right Or Wrong? posted Sat Feb 25 2006 22:50:10 by Cosec59
Music File-Sharing: A Professional's Opinion posted Mon Dec 30 2002 17:13:39 by Shawn Patrick
Smacking Children - Right Or Wrong? posted Fri Oct 4 2002 09:50:19 by Saintsman
Selling Body Parts: Right Or Wrong? posted Fri Jul 13 2001 22:10:17 by Matt D
How Can I Add A Music File? posted Mon Nov 6 2006 03:06:30 by Kmh1956
Free File Sharing Services? posted Mon Jul 3 2006 20:29:29 by Tbar220
File Sharing V.2 posted Wed Dec 7 2005 22:22:14 by Seb146
Music File Converting, Help Needed. posted Tue May 10 2005 15:38:13 by Thom@s
Any Home Network Wizards Here? File Sharing? posted Sun Feb 27 2005 00:21:34 by Clrd2go
File Sharing Programs posted Tue Sep 28 2004 07:08:43 by CannibalZ3