[Beagle]

Quote:

Originally posted by kelly BMWs are physical property. Music files are intellectual property. When a BMW is stolen, the "original" is physically stolen. When a music file is stolen, the "original" file remains in tact. To complete the analogy, let's say you had a machine that allowed you to make an exact copy of one of your buddy's BMWs without causing any physical harm to his original BMW. At this point, I'm not saying you'd make the copy, but I'm sure you can see how the temptation would be pretty greater for the average person. It is because intellectual property and physical property differ both in the manufacturing and in the perception of value in the mind of the consumer, that it is not intelligent to structure or enforce laws regarding such properties in the same manner. I believe in order to regain an honest consumer base, the music industry will ultimately be forced to restore the perception of value of the product. Along with better (newer) music formats (SACD, DVD-A), quality recordings, more convenient access (ie: I buy the CD online, I download the mp3s for free) and yes, maybe even better quality content... this also may include reducing prices. And frankly, and no one in the industry wants to hear this, it's not just the pirates who have stopped paying for the music.

You missed the point completely. Like Jude said, if you don't want to buy music (or anything for that matter) don't buy it. But don't steal it either. Stealing is illegal, in case you forgot.

 

[dhwilkin]

It's very interesting how certain standards are applied to certain products. Take books, for example. Can you imagine a world where every single book in the store was wrapped in opaque plastic, w/ only the title, author, and cover picture visible? Me neither. Books cover such a wide range of topics and presentation styles, and there are so many of them, the very concept seems ludicrous. Yet that is how music stores are.

Here is what I'd like to see: Music stores that work much like book stores.. but what I see is not rows of open CDs, instead it is rows upon rows of listening booths. These booths would consist of a thin client PC, running a file-sharing program like KazaaLite off a central server for each store, and a pair of headphones, or a place to plug some in. Each server would act as a sharing hub, and would only know the locations of other official hubs. You get music on the server in the first place by having potential users burn 128 kbps mp3s of albums they own, assuming no the album isn't already present on the server. These people could then use the booths w/o charge. Anybody that didn't contribute, either through choice or lack of unique albums, would have to pay a small fee per month. This way, nobody gets to keep the songs, but everybody gets a chance to try them out. I realize that plan has a few kinks, but wouldn't it be a good start?

 

[RickG]

When I was growing up in the late fiftys-early sixties, my local record shop had listening booths. If you wanted to hear a record, you simply asked and they put it on for you. I understand this was very common most everywhere in those days (and before).

Much simpler times....

Excuse my nastalgic meanderings.

 

[Braver]

I started using Kazaa after Audiogalaxy died, which I turned to some time after Napster keeld over. y'know, I'm no saint. but I only download some tracks of a CD to see if I want to buy it. this way I can live with the music for a while, see if I like it. it's probably illegal too, like stealing a car to take a testdrive, but seriously, it's pretty harmless. it has kept me from buying music as much as it has encouraged me. so really, I would hate to loose that possibility. but as said before, I'm not entitled to it. it'll be back to the samples, like it used to be before I had broadband internet. so, that's like, my view on the thing.

I'm not familiar with those supposedly bad sounding albums. I habe a coupl that I think don't sound too hot, but check my profile...it's not quite high-resolution equipment. I'll take your word for it though. but still, bringing back the car-analogy, if that fast, beatiful BMW has uncomfortable seats, you either buy the car and live with it, or you don't buy the car.

the RIAA is kinda frantic tho! damn, next thing you know everyone within hearing distance of your HiFi has to own a copy of the CD your playing. I'm somwhat okay with the attack at the file-sharing, but they should quit the copy-protection ****. it's not illegal, and besides, attacking your costumers is bad policy IMO.

 

[dhwilkin]

Quote:

RickG said... When I was growing up in the late fiftys-early sixties, my local record shop had listening booths. If you wanted to hear a record, you simply asked and they put it on for you. I understand this was very common most everywhere in those days (and before).

Sure, but not only are those rare nowadays, there is so much more music now. That's the great thing about this idea, you no longer would be limited to what the store physically had in stock. What if I want to hear some obscure recording by an Asian artist? There's not exactly a huge (usually non-existent) Asian music section, or any other international flavor, available in any of my local music stores. This could solve that problem.

 

[Braver]

Quote:

Originally posted by RickG When I was growing up in the late fiftys-early sixties, my local record shop had listening booths. If you wanted to hear a record, you simply asked and they put it on for you. I understand this was very common most everywhere in those days (and before).

y'know, in most stores I know you can listen to the CD before you buy (or not buy). sometimes you have to turn it way up to listen over the current #1 dance track, but in some stores they got good setups with Marantz CDPs and Beyer or Senn headphones. the problem is that they tend to not carry those niche genres.

DH's idea is okay. one flaw tho, it'll cost money...so it won't happen. investing to help your costumers is not a consideration.

 

[dhwilkin]

Well, if the RIAA really believes they're losing so much money on album sales through mp3s coughTHATSALOADOFBULLcough, then they should look on this as a way of spending a little money now, and gain alot more later. It's not like the RIAA itself necessarily has to operate the stores, they could have franchises or something. Of course, this assumes the RIAA would act logically...

 

[acs236]

I would suggest that those who disagree with Kelly's distinction betweem intellection and physical property think it over a bit more. It's an important distinction.

Sometimes the reason we are prone to equating physical and intellection property is that they are both created by people, often with much work -- there are certainly similarities. However, think about the reasons why intellectual property is protected.

Assume for a minute that there was no copyright law. An artist/record company that puts effort and resources into putting out an album won't be able to recoup its expenses, as copied version would be freely availble. Patents work much the same way. We allow drug companies to charge prohibitive amounts of money for potentially life saving drugs as the expense of the sick because if we didn't allow them this monopoly, they would lose the incentive to spend the millions (or more) dollars of research it takes to develop and drug and bring it to market. In exchange for this monopoly, the public gets use of the drug on the free market after a twenty year period.

In short, we give up some of our rights (signficiant small "r" rights) -- to make the drugs ourselves (generic), to copy cds, etc.

Intellectual property have a different purpose than other property rights.

I'm not suggesting a free for all abandonment if IP rights. I'm just suggesting that where they stand now is not necessarily where they should be.

 

[Braver]

Quote:

Originally posted by dhwilkin Well, if the RIAA really believes they're losing so much money on album sales through mp3s coughTHATSALOADOFBULLcough,

I never quite got that. everyone says that, but why? would I be buying 3 CDs a month without the help of Kazaa and others? hell yeah. I see a lot of CD copying going down, a lot of downloading and very little CD buying among my friends and other people I know. the ones who are into music to a similar level as me do buy the CDs, but the others simply don't. they'd rather download. they might not have bought as much as they're downloading, but they're not buying anything at all nowadays. seriously, they are losing sales, no doubt in my mind.

 

[dhwilkin]

Quote:

Braver said... would I be buying 3 CDs a month without the help of Kazaa and others? hell yeah.

OK, now ask me that question. Would I be buying 3 CDs a month w/o file-sharing? Hell no. Maybe 3 CDs in four months. Since file-sharing appeared, my CD collection has at least tripled, if not quadrupled, in size. It's given me the opportunity to hear so much more stuff that I never would've even known about w/o it. Yes, there are people that use file-sharing to avoid buying CDs, but there are plenty more that use file-sharing to explore new artists, and I think the latter group more than makes up for the former group. There are (usually biased) studies done to prove either of our theories. Probably gonna have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

[jude]

Quote:

Originally posted by dhwilkin Yes, there are people that use file-sharing to avoid buying CDs, but there are plenty more that use file-sharing to explore new artists, and I think the latter group more than makes up for the former group. There are (usually biased) studies done to prove either of our theories. Probably gonna have to agree to disagree on this one.

I used to be of the same view as you on this one, but not anymore. I see far more people downloading from file sharing networks and not buying as many (if any) CDs than I do people buying more than before.

Consider also that the young music buyers probably make up a good deal of the market, and I see this as a growing problem for the recording industry.

 

[kelly]

I think dhwilkin and braver have hit on one of the paradigms.

File sharing is good for new artists and bad for already popular artists.

You could probably use this paradigm to gain insight into why my symapthy for both artists and labels is so low.

 

[john_jcb]

I have read through these posts both the long and short ones; most have one thing in common, they are trying to rationalize that copying music is not wrong. Stealing music is no different than making photostatic copies of a book. I do think that making backups for your own use is absoloutly permissable.

The fact that CD quality may be poor, that they are expensive or that you are poor does not change the fact that it is wrong to steal and trade music.

 

[acs236]

I think the real question thought is -- why? I think you're hinting at your reasons, but if you have the time or inclination, would you mind articulating them? It could lead to an interesting discussion.

Also addressed to everyone!

Quote:

Originally posted by john_jcb I have read through these posts both the long and short ones; most have one thing in common, they are trying to rationalize that copying music is not wrong. Stealing music is no different than making photostatic copies of a book. I do think that making backups for your own use is absoloutly permissable. The fact that CD quality may be poor, that they are expensive or that you are poor does not change the fact that it is wrong to steal and trade music.

 

[Jeff Guidry]

Quote:

Originally posted by arnett FYI, IF the RIAA sues anyone, it would be a civil case. no one would go to jail. just a simple fine. but the RIAA better hire several thousand lawyers to catch the millions of individuals who infringe copywrite laws (read: it ain't going to happen, folks).

My point exactly. Trying to go after thousands of end users would be like picking gnat **** out of pepper. The lawyers fees for pursuing such a strategy would bankrupt the RIAA, they are just putting out such press releases as scare tactics to keep kids from trading.

I don't doubt that they will actually haul a few very egregious cases in to court and make a big public show out of them, but I imagine you would have to have a giant amount of .mp3's available for trading to show up on their radar.

The key to anarchy is small and fast and changeable. Don't trade tons, just have a small number available. If everybody has a few, then everybody has alot!