[mape00]

Quote:

Originally Posted by digger945 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Where does right and wrong, morals and ethics, come from without established laws?

That's an interesting question. I think it's a combination of evolution and tradition in cultures. From an evolutionary point of view, you're probably more likely to be successful if you're good in the sense of "do unto others as you would have them do unto you". Being good seems pretty rational in the long run. So this good behavior is advantageous and therefore retained through our genes and memes.

 

[digger945]

^Your good

 

[Superpredator]

Quote:

Originally Posted by olblueyez /img/forum/go_quote.gif Maybe if the Music industry and broadcasters addressed the issue where "ONE" good song is produced and then the rest of the album is filled with fluff, then all the law suits and bandwidth throttling would be unecessary. To compound this problem the radio stations only broadcast the single good song for each album untill the selling cycle is nearly dead or not at all. No buying for me unless I can preview all the songs first. Maybe if the tremendous desire to have "ONLY ONE SONG ON EACH ALBUM" was reduced to a level achieved in the past 40's, 50's, 60's, 70's, etc. then people would be more apt to buy a GD album instead of getting a free copy of the single song from the internet. This would also boost album sales in that people would be more willing to download (iTunes and the like) entire albums and this would mean more 10 dollar sales and less .99 cent sales. I have no sorrow or empathy for the music industry, they want the biggest amout of money possible for the least amout of talent and they know what they are doing. Next thing you know they will be asking Bush to bail them out. Screw them. How do you feel when you buy an album and it is clearly obvious that one song was well produced and the rest is crap? Makes me feel like I was ripped off and when people feel like that then they will find a way to circumnavigate the problem, just download the one song that is good!

I have an entire binder filled with one-good-song albums that I purchased before the advent of filesharing. I'm not sure what else to call that but a major scam perpetrated on my formerly gullible ass by the Music Industry. When it finally dies I'll be up on that coffin dancing a jig.

 

[olblueyez]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Superpredator /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have an entire binder filled with one-good-song albums that I purchased before the advent of filesharing. I'm not sure what else to call that but a major scam perpetrated on my formerly gullible ass by the Music Industry. When it finally dies I'll be up on that coffin dancing a jig.

They rip you off then expect people to ride the high and mighty "Im not going to steal, Horse". Maybe leading by example and not trying to have expensive lawyers steal money from people living pay check to pay check would be a better way to instill integrity and honesty into the customer base. How much Britney Spears and ColdPlay can we stomach? What about all the money they stole from us by having all the broadcasters play the single good song off thousands of albums??? People in Glass houses,,,. How bout all the artists with real talent who cant get a job because they have a large ass or a mole on their nose??? What happened to talent = success? Maybe everyone complaining about illegal downloads should address the deplorable condition of the music industry and the pure crap they peddle as music. Just because the singer (not artist) gives you a boner doesn’t mean its music.

 

[Uncle Erik]

Quote:

Originally Posted by olblueyez /img/forum/go_quote.gif They rip you off then expect people to ride the high and mighty "Im not going to steal, Horse". Maybe leading by example and not trying to have expensive lawyers steal money from people living pay check to pay check would be a better way to instill integrity and honesty into the customer base. How much Britney Spears and ColdPlay can we stomach? What about all the money they stole from us by having all the broadcasters play the single good song off thousands of albums??? People in Glass houses,,,. How bout all the artists with real talent who cant get a job because they have a large ass or a mole on their nose??? What happened to talent = success? Maybe everyone complaining about illegal downloads should address the deplorable condition of the music industry and the pure crap they peddle as music. Just because the singer (not artist) gives you a boner doesn’t mean its music.

I agree that we've been ripped off with the one-good-song albums, but we did buy those willingly. I've got a few of them on the rack.

That's reason enough for me to stop giving the industry money, however, I'm going to do it legally. I pick up CDs at the used record store, and I buy used vinyl. I don't mind buying directly from bands, either. Those are the only ways I can keep getting new music without having to pay the industry.

 

[olblueyez]

I have never downloaded any material in an illegal manor but I am completely in-touch with people who feel perfectly OK doing so. If corn became 20 dollars an ear then people would buy corn on the black market or even steal it. Providing less and less value provokes more and more illegal behaviour. Personally I stopped buying any music past the 1980's except for a few Jazz albums. Either I reached the age where newer music doesnt appeal to me any longer or the music they crank out sucks, or maybe its a little of both.

 

[Currawong]

I buy lossless music from Linn Records. Not a lot as it's still quite expensive for a studio master, but they and other companies are going in the right direction. I'd rather buy music a song at a time, lossless (or an album if it's that good) than go and buy a CD which I'm going to rip once and throw in the drawer. As it is, I don't see how it's productive for companies to sue their customers, and now try and screw them over by harassing their ISPs. It's been shown time and time again to make things worse and in my case it's just going to discourage me further from wanting to buy music.

 

[mrarroyo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luminette /img/forum/go_quote.gif This is not good news, I'm a bit irritated with all of you for jumping up and celebrating It's like you only read half of the news? Don't you understand the implications? Here comes a blow to the internet, and our freedom.

Are you receiving my PM's (3 so far over the last 8 days). Specifically on the Novo you have on loan/review. Please respond, thanks.

 

[Zarathustra19]

As it stands now, I only download music from bands who actually support giving their music away free as a trial run. They understand that a lot of people (including myself) will buy the things they like, and letting fans sample music first shows confidence in the fan base that encourages me to buy, especially if its on an independent label (as most of my collection is).

 

[10068]

If anyone in the fighting-music-piracy job market (i.e. record label Suits and some performers) actually understood anything, they would go after PROVIDERS, not downloaders. I think a lot of people are still like, "Oh cool, free!" without fully understanding the legal ramifications. Besides, "everyboyd does it", so it's hard for younger kids to even care that it might be wrong. Anyways my point is, go after the people sharing the music. People have ALWAYS shared music without paying for it, since the phonogram or whatever it's called, LPs and records, up through cassettes and CDs. Probably 8-tracks, too. But, sharing your CD or record with Friend Bob, Mom Sally, and Dad Frank is worlds different than downloading it and then seeding it so that an infinite amount of individuals, possibly into the hundreds, thousands, or more, can pirate the product. These people that seed copyrighted material on Torrent and other such programs are the ones that should go to jail. That is a huge crime no matter who you ask and needs to be treated as such. I don't see it as any different from the seedy guys standing in an alleyway in Los Angeles, selling DVDs that are still in the theaters for $5-10. They are shady criminals.

 

[analogbox]

Younger kids are the seeders. Calling all seeders criminals is the same thing as calling anyone who've used torrent or p2p programs criminals, including kids and "a lot of people".

Now days, you can't download anything without seeding it at the same time. And if you think about it, that's the whole point of these sharing apps, these are systematically built to share information, you can't get around that unless you do some kind of hacks to them.

I personally think it should be the original uploader who put the files on the internet the first time to be punished but there's no way one can find out who put the stuffs up in the beginning so it'll always be an endless battle.

 

[10068]

Quote:

Originally Posted by analogbox /img/forum/go_quote.gif Younger kids are the seeders. Calling all seeders criminals is the same thing as calling anyone who've used torrent or p2p programs criminals, including kids and "a lot of people". Now days, you can't download anything without seeding it at the same time. And if you think about it, that's the whole point of these sharing apps, these are systematically built to share information, you can't get around that unless you do some kind of hacks to them. I personally think it should be the original uploader who put the files on the internet the first time to be punished but there's no way one can find out who put the stuffs up in the beginning so it'll always be an endless battle.

Good points. Then why not making Torrent programs illegal? Can anyone honestly argue that they are used to LEGALLY download anything? Going after BitTorrent and other "companies" would solve a lot of these problems. Also, Torrents aren't the only things we should concern ourselves with (think of Warez sites, etc.) After you have smashed the couple major Torrent programs (again BitTorrent, but also Azureus is a big one) you can start going after the Web Hosting companies that allow this crap like Warez sites to use their bandwidth. I don't really think it's unreasonable to go after these organizations -- again, I can't think of a situation in which a Torrent program or transfer is used for legal purposes. And if it is, that's a vrey small minority of the total bandwidth usage and data transfer(s) through such a medium.

 

[Drag0n]

Nobody is off the hook. It doesnt mean people are free to download illegally without consequences. Instead, the internet service providers will just take care of it and also shut down your internet.

 

[Kicksonrt66]

Quote:

Originally Posted by iancraig10 /img/forum/go_quote.gif The RIAA was only a threat if people were stealing music. Otherwise, why worry? Ian

For one thing they were attacking sharing, P2P, torrents, etc, implying that anything transferred that way represents a copyright violation.

For one thing, torrents are the normal way to distribute things like Linux releases and lots of live concerts recorded and shared with the artist's permission.

P2P (peer to peer) includes a lot of things like voice over IP phones (skype etc) that have nothing to do with copyright material. It is just conversations!

They want those technologies banned or tightly controlled because they have the potential for copyright abuse, just as a steak knife has the potential to stab someone.

 

[Kicksonrt66]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sduibek /img/forum/go_quote.gif Good points. Then why not making Torrent programs illegal? Can anyone honestly argue that they are used to LEGALLY download anything?

Absolutely. I have used torrents to get all the the Linux releases I've installed over the last few years as well as numerous concert recordings distributed WITH the artists' permission. The site I get those torrent files from (bt.etree.org) is pretty meticulous about having explicit permission from a group before allowing their concerts to be posted.