Several states criminalize sale of used CDs

[003]

Canada is looking like a mighty nice place to live right about now.

 

[necropimp]

Quote:

Originally Posted by marvin /img/forum/go_quote.gif Nope. Due to Federal laws, out of staters can never buy handguns. Another wonderful way to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

there are exceptions... for example i could go to utah and purchase a C&R eligible handgun even though i am from indiana because i have a C&R license... of course i don't actually use it for out of state face to face purchases i use it for mail order purposes

 

[aaron-xp]

Crappy music isn't the only reason why people of today have stopped buying music albums. Similarly, DRM stuff doesn't really affect the "masses", as they would rather turn to their "alternative" (read: Free) sources to get tracks they want.

Similarly, the argument of "why should I buy a CD to get a song" is flawed, as all the people whom I know download from "alternative" sources download entire albums whenever possible.

The fact is that if there is a free alternative, people would always go for it as it would allow them more music for less money (only the cost of a broadband connection). Hence, all or at least, most of my classmates, have more tracks of music than me. In fact, I know of people who really really adore certain bands, buying tickets to concerts and stuff, but yet do not buy their CDs as tracks can be got free. Making CDs slightly cheaper would benefit people like us who buy CDs, but would not really encourage the others to do so, as there would be free sources.

To quote someone in front of me in the meet-and-greet session in Rachael Yamagata's concert in Singapore,

"She should be honoured, this (her CD) is the first CD I bought in like 5 years."

(Okay, this may not be really related to the current topic, but is something I have been wanting to say for a long time)

 

[Darkestred]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aaron-xp /img/forum/go_quote.gif Crappy music isn't the only reason why people of today have stopped buying music albums. Similarly, DRM stuff doesn't really affect the "masses", as they would rather turn to their "alternative" (read: Free) sources to get tracks they want. Similarly, the argument of "why should I buy a CD to get a song" is flawed, as all the people whom I know download from "alternative" sources download entire albums whenever possible. The fact is that if there is a free alternative, people would always go for it as it would allow them more music for less money (only the cost of a broadband connection). Hence, all or at least, most of my classmates, have more tracks of music than me. In fact, I know of people who really really adore certain bands, buying tickets to concerts and stuff, but yet do not buy their CDs as tracks can be got free. Making CDs slightly cheaper would benefit people like us who buy CDs, but would not really encourage the others to do so, as there would be free sources.

I agree with both assessments. But, i think is a strong correlation between the age of the ipod/computer for the younger crowd (18 and below), versus the age of cd player for those 22+. Hell, its possibly in 20 years there will be no music because of this epidemic type situation. By i digress, dont take my age figures literally.

I am 26. I grew up during the fading of vinyl(from a tech standpoint) and the introduction of the cassette and then the cd player. Is it possible this instilled the viewpoint of: i like the band... must buy them. Opposed to a 16 year old with an ipod and computer: i can download this band for free? i must have this song on my ipod.

I know not all young kids are like this, but im sure the number is easily around 50% or more.

I'll admit, i download music illegally and quite a bit. My collection went from about 20k of my own collection to 52k in about 1 year. I dont feel ashamed because if the band puts out a solid album I buy it. I have ~500 cds both new and old.

if it wasnt for these torrents/newsgroups/music sites with message boards etc, i would have kept on living without knowing about all these great bands, bands that currently adorn my, to buy list. At the same time, these same places saved me from buying 1 of the numerous disappointments experienced as a kid - a crappy cd.

So the arguement could go, alot of younger kids steal music, but offset that with other people wind up buying more cds by using the net to find artists that cant be found outside of a good radio station/music scene.

The scary thing is alot of people who are my age have developed the idea that, i dont have to buy a bands stuff or why would i buy their stuff if i can get it for free. That makes me sick.

I always say, if you like the artist's album, buy it, when I discuss music. I would love to tell these people if you do not support the artist, there wont be music in x years. It will be a novelty only found in small clubs and in history books.

 

[redshifter]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrBenway /img/forum/go_quote.gif I would be a lousy political speechwriter, because whether I am right or wrong, I deal bluntly in issues. That's not how the Bushes and Clintons of this world get elected. Doesn't it bother you to see a huge, well funded entity attempting to strip you of basic property and free speech rights?

Quote:

If you don't think that banning this practise constitutes a restriction on property rights, I would be curious to know exactly what you do think constitutes a restriction on property rights.

so is it a restriction or a stripping of my rights? you know you can't win an argument saying my rights are "stripped", so you change your argument. this was my point all along. your hysterical diatribe about the end of american culture based on very little evidence. i agree with your thread's point. i do NOT agree at your chicken-little attitude. the sky is not falling, man.

as for my style of discourse, i have avoided calling your logic "laughable" and comparing your argument to that of a child. you have not extended the same courtesy to me. you may think you have been insulted, but that is just the sting of being wrong. so it seems benway, when losing an argument your best defence is to insult and try twist your way out of your own words. yeah, we're done here.

 

[nysulli]

to say that the downloading craze will lead to the downfall of music is going a bit far. keep in mind that bands make practically no money from each CD they sell, its the companies who make all the money that way.

If you truly want to support your favorite band, go to their shows, support their tours.

the sad thing is since CD's have come down in price from their 15 bucks a disc days, i had begun to buy again, i've always bought cd's from my favorite bands, but recently i've started to buy more, just because i don't feel like i'm being dragged over the coals.

now this happens, and yeah, theres no proof that RIAA is behind it, but i'm sure they have something to do with it, why target cd's otherwise, in reality i think these states are really doing independent music stores a huge disservice with these laws, at a time when many are struggling (several have closed in my area).

unfortunitly, this might be the final straw for me with the recording industry, i'm back to my boycott on buying music, i love music, but i have principles, and i refuse to let big business tell me what i can and can't do

 

[Darkestred]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nysulli /img/forum/go_quote.gif to say that the downloading craze will lead to the downfall of music is going a bit far. keep in mind that bands make practically no money from each CD they sell, its the companies who make all the money that way.

i agree and disagree. It depends on the label, contract and how many units they are pushing. as an example: When a band enters gold/platinum status they will make more per cd. But yes, as to the part i took out in your quote, bands will make their hunk touring.

 

[Nugget]

If some small potatoes record store clerk tried to fingerprint me I'd roll my thumb around in the ink and then jab it right in his eye.

 

[Jaska]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrBenway /img/forum/go_quote.gif We are about to become as irrelevant as Europe.

But still a very long way from as irrelevant as your comment about Europe. Why that post remains intact puzzles me.

 

[marvin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by eyeresist /img/forum/go_quote.gif Lets keep our facts straight: NARM isn't pushing these laws, the guy from NARM is *telling* the Billboard reporter about a trend he's observed. And any link to the RIAA is pure speculation, there's no evidence except that they may potentially benefit.

Thanks!

Must not have read it clearly enough as I was really wondering about this part:

Quote:

Originally Posted by NARM Coverage: New Laws Threaten Used CD Market Traditionally, used CD sales are protected by first-sale doctrine in copyright laws allow owners to resell CDs, according to Mitchell. Also, a CD resale is also protected by the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment, argues Mitchell. Since selling a CD could be seen as an indication that the owner does not like or agree with the content, the collection of identification information could be seen as a violation of first amendment rights.

Doesn't make too much sense that the NARM's outside counsel would argue against these laws if the NARM was pushing them.

 

[DrBenway]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aaron-xp /img/forum/go_quote.gif Similarly, the argument of "why should I buy a CD to get a song" is flawed, as all the people whom I know download from "alternative" sources download entire albums whenever possible.

I think your view is based on anecdotal evidence, gleaned from talking to a limited number of people. Overall, I think people are more single-track oriented than they have been since before the rise of the album-as-artform in the mid 60s.

My view is supported, I think, by the way illegal download sources are structured. Search results from LimeWire, etc pretty much consist of lists of individual tracks. There is generally no way to download an entire album with a single click, or even to reliably search in such a way that the results include all (or even most) tracks from a given album. Assembling the entire track list can be a lengthy, frustrating process.

Bit Torrent is quite different, offering the opportunity to download entire albums at a go, but my sense is that BT is not the most widely used tool. It's not as user friendly as LW or BearShare, and there is no way to shut out the prying eye of the RIAA and their ambulance chasers.

Once you get to the legal side of things, single track shopping seems to completely dominate. iTunes seems to bear this out. Their recent attempt to entice single-track customers into "completing" albums is an obvious attempt to get users to more often download entire albums.

While I was a downloading demon in the free-for-all days of Napster (ca 2000-2001), I pretty much walk the straight and narrow these days, for a simple reason: the SQ of illegal downloads tends to suck. I have an eMusic account, which I am reasonably happy with. I'd prefer lossless, but you know how that discussion always goes. Point is, the labels have an opportunity to compete on quality, and they simply don't. They want it both ways: sell a substandard (128k) product, and then whine when consumers don't feel moved to pay for it.

 

[DrBenway]

Quote:

Originally Posted by redshifter /img/forum/go_quote.gif yeah, we're done here.

Congratulations. You got the last word. Now go high five your friends. You the man!

 

[F1GTR]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Superpredator /img/forum/go_quote.gif Oh, also: I'm with DrBenway. Rock on dude.

X 3

 

[F1GTR]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ken36 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Corruption prevails.

With Capatilism.

 

[DrBenway]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaska /img/forum/go_quote.gif But still a very long way from as irrelevant as your comment about Europe. Why that post remains intact puzzles me.

Sure, if you disagree with or just dislike a post, it should be taken down. Censorship is good, huh dude?