[earwicker7]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orcin /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well, at least you do admit that you form your opinion of people without having any personal knowledge about them, based on stereotyped conceptions of what they must be like.

Dude, you more or less said "I'm a big time CFO who believes stealing is ok." I don't see how you could possibly be any more of a stereotype; the canvas basically paints itself.

 

[dvse]

Quote:

Originally Posted by linuxworks /img/forum/go_quote.gif let me ask you, how does one tell the diff between a broadcast that I saved to tape (old school terms) vs a store bought piece of media? this is way more complex than many of you are making it out to be. by some of your logic, if I don't donate each time I happen to hear the song (radio, etc) I'm 'stealing'. sorry, but I don't buy that (lol).;

Of course you are right but I think this kind of discussion is too complicated for people in this thread - they seem to follow their gut response, without analysing the implications of their beliefs and their inconsistencies.

 

[Uncle Erik]

There's a slippery slope here.

Recently, I bought a pair of speakers from a dealer. I emailed him to check stock, went in planning to buy and bought as planned.

However, I took the opportunity to listen to his showroom. Though I bought as intended, was it OK to listen to gear I had zero intention of buying. Is that ethical? What if I bought a $20 accessory and used that opportunity to audition $5,000 speakers I planned to buy elsewhere?

I agree with earwicker on the generation gap with filesharing. I'm 36 and have never done it. I'll do the occasional legal download, but that's it. My method of sticking it to The Man is buying used.

 

[linuxworks]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik /img/forum/go_quote.gif My method of sticking it to The Man is buying used.

I've said that a few times myself.

I buy used cd's from amazon every so often and then rip to MY chosen format entirely drm free.

the good part: industry groups get NO commission at all. no taste. no piece of the action. that's good.

the bad part: artists never see anything after first-sale. it could change hands a billion times and there would be no profit to the artist.

its a hair of difference between a n-times-sold used cd and filesharing.

just another POV...

 

[linuxworks]

oh, and for those that say you have never 'fileshared':

have you never borrowed a book from the library?

there. you have 'stolen' work and not paid for it. you should feel guilty, no?

not everything in life is a money transaction and THAT is one key issue that the 'kids' today are latching onto. some just want something-for-nothing but not all of them are like that.

 

[K.I. Unlimited]

Quote:

Originally Posted by earwicker7 /img/forum/go_quote.gif People who go to a dealer with the express purpose of trying out something they know will only be purchased online are the same spoiled brats that feel they have a "right" to stolen music/videos on the internet. Some people have no moral compass.

I beg to differ on the last point. While you may think that working adults and children/teenagers who scrimp and save to get all their audio CDs have that commendable, perhaps heroic, attitude, please do note that not everyone are that well off; whether or not they feel that they have that 'right' to stolen downloaded music/videos is a different matter.

Not to mention that we're in a period of recession now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by earwicker7 /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you want free music, listen to the radio or the homeless guy on the corner who plays guitar. Don't "rip" or "burn" or whatever the **** it is you kids are calling it these days in order to convince yourself it isn't stealing.

Although I would like to agree that, morals-wise people should never have entered the downloading/torrenting bandwagon in the first place, please do try to see things from the "you kids'" POV.

I will say this again : not every works and can work, and not everyone have all that money to buy for example, 5 Frank Sinatra originals, 3 classical compilations, 2 Metallica CDs, buy 1 mid/high-end headphone from AKG, Sennheiser, Grado and Audio Technica each, buy 5 RSA amplifiers, all this in one go and STILL NOT feel a pinch.

Maybe plenty of you peeps won't feel the pinch, but think about the children/adolescents.

I was orginally a downloader; ever since I entered the audiophile world, I started to download music less (and now only resorting to downloading those VERY RARE game music like Sonic & Knuckles just to name an example) and more to saving up for my favourite artistes, and my music exploration (from a classical/jazz/soft music lover I started listening to metal and its subgenre).

So now I'm back to being on the moral highs, but at *least* I still know the pain my peers and those below/above my age range go through when they buy something which could have been spent on something more important.
I'm eighteen and studying, for the record.

My last words are to ask those head-fiers on the moral highs to come down, look at other people's PoV or get into their shoes, whatever you want to call it, and stop pointing fingers. Once again I re-iterate my point - not everyone is rich, loaded, or have a steady/assured income to support their wants/needs.

What people do with their money I do not poke my nose into, BUT looking at people who own home audio systems or have five RSA amplifiers, and start calling "them kids who do illegal" download names and start pointing fingers at illegal downloaders/filesharers, do not expect me to turn a blind eye to that ornery.

You may be in audio heaven, but please, spare a thought for others who just want their favourite music; and all they have is that $2 earbud from Daiso or some other convenience store.

 

[Yikes]

I wanted to get away, but I keep getting pulled back in.
Quote:

Originally Posted by K.I. Unlimited /img/forum/go_quote.gif Not to mention that we're in a period of recession now. Although I would like to agree that, morals-wise people should never have entered the downloading/torrenting bandwagon in the first place, please do try to see things from the "you kids'" POV. I will say this again : not every works and can work, and not everyone have all that money to buy for example, 5 Frank Sinatra originals, 3 classical compilations, 2 Metallica CDs, buy 1 mid/high-end headphone from AKG, Sennheiser, Grado and Audio Technica each, buy 5 RSA amplifiers, all this in one go and STILL NOT feel a pinch. Maybe plenty of you peeps won't feel the pinch, but think about the children/adolescents. I was orginally a downloader; ever since I entered the audiophile world, I started to download music less (and now only resorting to downloading those VERY RARE game music like Sonic & Knuckles just to name an example) and more to saving up for my favourite artistes, and my music exploration (from a classical/jazz/soft music lover I started listening to metal and its subgenre). So now I'm back to being on the moral highs, but at *least* I still know the pain my peers and those below/above my age range go through when they buy something which could have been spent on something more important. I'm eighteen and studying, for the record. My last words are to ask those head-fiers on the moral highs to come down, look at other people's PoV or get into their shoes, whatever you want to call it, and stop pointing fingers. Once again I re-iterate my point - not everyone is rich, loaded, or have a steady/assured income to support their wants/needs. What people do with their money I do not poke my nose into, BUT looking at people who own home audio systems or have five RSA amplifiers, and start calling "them kids who do illegal" download names and start pointing fingers at illegal downloaders/filesharers, do not expect me to turn a blind eye to that ornery. You may be in audio heaven, but please, spare a thought for others who just want their favourite music; and all they have is that $2 earbud from Daiso or some other convenience store.

We're in recession now? Are you insane. You are using the fact that people don't have money to justify their stealing music. Music comes under WANTS not needs. Stealing food or clothing could be condoned or at least justified if you are hungry or cold and poor, but stealing music or toys can not. You need to seriously contemplate the difference between Wants and Needs.

How does the fact that some of us here are older and have actual incomes (So we can afford our Wants) justify those of you who don't stealing? Most people who steal have some way of self justification, they have a way of rationalizing their actions: I'm owed this, or it's not a tangible physical item, or whatever. People who do wrong seldom think that it is wrong for them to do it, that is at least while they are doing it. Did Hitler believe himself to be Evil? That's right, you illegal downloaders are all mini Hitlers.

Do I really need to put a smiley face after the last sentence?

 

[linuxworks]

let me pose this question or situation:

back in the days of 'the king' (hundreds of years ago) - musicians *performed* for their supper. no performance, no supper. there was no riaa or mpaa or 'artists rights' or even ANY notion of repeated payments for PAST PERFORMANCES.

this idea of 'society owing us REPEATED PAYMENTS' is a brand new thing for mankind. its only the last few seconds of man's existance on this earth, historically speaking, where we have given 'primadonna artists' a lifelong recurring income payment for ONE single performance (in concept; the recording is a single event yet they get want to get paid 'n' times for it and also by 'm' people!)

I work a salaried job. I write software not unlike musicians writing songs. I get a steady paycheck (I hope...) no matter HOW many 'copies' my company sells of my work.

I don't get millions of dollars. I don't get 'payments' or royalties. I get a salary.

I propose (and I think it WILL happen, too, in the future) that artists draw a salary and STOP demanding recurring payments for single performance events. a lot of people in life don't get repeated payments - they don't deserve it either! imho...

during the history of human existance, the notion of some classes of people ('artists') getting recurring payments is NOT any kind of absolute thing.

absolute things include: do not kill and do not steal my hamburger.

there is NOTHING in the 10 commandments (as an example, even though I'm not religious at all) that says 'virtual property == real property'. NOTHING. this is purely a man-made concept and a very RECENT man made concept.

'payment schedules' CANNOT be likened to 'stealing'. they are just orthogonal concepts, guys.

this is a complex issue. those who want to reduce it to 'you are a thief' simply do not have the sophistication of abstract thought... but it clearly is not the same as a 'hamburger' and kids to day SEE that. even if some of you high-horse folks refuse to see beyond your programmed responses.

 

[K.I. Unlimited]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yikes /img/forum/go_quote.gif I wanted to get away, but I keep getting pulled back in. We're in recession now? Are you insane. You are using the fact that people don't have money to justify their stealing music. Music comes under WANTS not needs. Stealing food or clothing could be condoned or at least justified if you are hungry or cold and poor, but stealing music or toys can not. You need to seriously contemplate the difference between Wants and Needs. How does the fact that some of us here are older and have actual incomes (So we can afford our Wants) justify those of you who don't stealing? Most people who steal have some way of self justification, they have a way of rationalizing their actions: I'm owed this, or it's not a tangible physical item, or whatever. People who do wrong seldom think that it is wrong for them to do it, that is at least while they are doing it. Did Hitler believe himself to be Evil? That's right, you illegal downloaders are all mini Hitlers. Do I really need to put a smiley face after the last sentence?

If I have not said so, I will now. I did not condone music piracy *per se*, but I just want to ask everyone out here who's staunchly against "music stealers".

We could go on with the piracy debate and whatnot, but while peeps may be worried for the ones who's slogging their guys (and vocal cords and fingers) to get some decent music for us to listen to, and the law (not like it can do much to internet pirates) clamping down successfully on the OCCASIONAL pirate, there's no real headway.

Your likening them pirates to being Hitler is a little overboard IMO. Not that I'm in the illegal download league anymore but w/e. You should know that there are 40%-70% AT LEAST of local populations who at least own ONE illegally downloaded music. And why?

You have to understand that some songs just ain't on CD. Examples like outdated anime, disbanded bands and retired artistes who are not famous, and game OST. So if it's you who's crazy over a particular song, are you going to spend all that hassle on locating a CD that's non-existent or minimally available on eBay, or are you going to try your luck online?

And stop pushing the argument on practicality and morality. C'mon let's face it, when we're in the same situation as these 'pirates' are, are we going to act noble? And how do you know ALL of them are not guilty of what they're doing? Maybe they just don't feel that it's worthwhile to spend on CDs/lossless.

Like I said, why not put yourself in their shoes, instead of assuming higher ground? We're audiophiles, not police, and definitely not vigilantes. We're FREAKING HUMANS WHO HAVE A HEART, and it's said often that we as audiophiles not only listen to the music with our ears, but with our heart.

 

[K.I. Unlimited]

Quote:

Originally Posted by linuxworks /img/forum/go_quote.gif let me pose this question or situation: back in the days of 'the king' (hundreds of years ago) - musicians *performed* for their supper. no performance, no supper. there was no riaa or mpaa or 'artists rights' or even ANY notion of repeated payments for PAST PERFORMANCES. this idea of 'society owing us REPEATED PAYMENTS' is a brand new thing for mankind. its only the last few seconds of man's existance on this earth, historically speaking, where we have given 'primadonna artists' a lifelong recurring income payment for ONE single performance (in concept; the recording is a single event yet they get want to get paid 'n' times for it and also by 'm' people!) I work a salaried job. I write software not unlike musicians writing songs. I get a steady paycheck (I hope...) no matter HOW many 'copies' my company sells of my work. I don't get millions of dollars. I don't get 'payments' or royalties. I get a salary. I propose (and I think it WILL happen, too, in the future) that artists draw a salary and STOP demanding recurring payments for single performance events. a lot of people in life don't get repeated payments - they don't deserve it either! imho... during the history of human existance, the notion of some classes of people ('artists') getting recurring payments is NOT any kind of absolute thing. absolute things include: do not kill and do not steal my hamburger. there is NOTHING in the 10 commandments (as an example, even though I'm not religious at all) that says 'virtual property == real property'. NOTHING. this is purely a man-made concept and a very RECENT man made concept. 'payment schedules' CANNOT be likened to 'stealing'. they are just orthogonal concepts, guys. this is a complex issue. those who want to reduce it to 'you are a thief' simply do not have the sophistication of abstract thought... but it clearly is not the same as a 'hamburger' and kids to day SEE that. even if some of you high-horse folks refuse to see beyond your programmed responses.

I am glad someone out here has some basic human empathy. Instead of merely conforming to things like "all those who pirate must die", why not think of WHY they are doing so? Instead of writing it off as something so childish, like "all you illegal downloaders are little Hitlers"?

I say AGAIN. I do NOT condone piracy. But there's a reason why mass-internet piracy exists. Because the industry itself is flawed, affordable music simply cannot be provided to EVERYONE else. That's why people share music with others. My friends share great music with me, and I with them. Isn't one of the greatest things in the world, to share good things? (And yeah the bad too - you know the saying, "share weal and woe")

Think, JUST think. Not everyone's got a credit card. Not everyone has that income flowing in - yet they also want a piece of the great music. So are we going to deny them that just because we want to ride on that great moral high horse? IMO I'll rather feed the horse to a slaughterhouse or just leave it in my shed, and go take a hike.

The commendable thing those "lesser pirates" do - they share mp3/ogg music (very few of lossless because it's too big to send and host easily) and YET they do not demand profit. Now the pirates to be branded as Hilters IMO, are those who do PROFITEERING from their pirated products.

That IMO is the greatest difference between the "little Hitlers who share music amongst each other" BUT WHO SHARE THE SAME PASSION AS US FOR MUSIC, and the real pirates who should be locked up, for their greed for money. Quote:

Originally Posted by dvse /img/forum/go_quote.gif Of course you are right but I think this kind of discussion is too complicated for people in this thread - they seem to follow their gut response, without analysing the implications of their beliefs and their inconsistencies.

They don't follow their gut response at all - they're just stubbornly clinging to black-and-white beliefs and morals, which shouldn't EVEN be existing in our so-called "grey enlightened world" now.

They are the people who complain when others don't help them out at their "down times", when they'd clearly forgotten that last time while they were better off, they wrote off "the others" as nutsackers and nincompoops.

And now, "little Hitlers". Good grief to our world.

 

[Todd R]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yikes /img/forum/go_quote.gif There's nothing wrong with shopping and enjoying a stores resources. The unethical aspect is using those resources when you know that you will not buy from that dealer, even when it was the demo that sold you on the product.... In the end it will mean the demise of the Local Audio Shop. People will be forced to buy based upon magazine and on-line reviews. The days of picking a component that you like and buying it and enjoying it will be over. People instead will buy on-line and hope that they'll like it. Many more components will be sold barely used because they don't meet the persons needs.

Exactly!
You're actually slitting your own throat later just to save a few bucks now.

Now as for the original question about limited distribution:
The company may be very picky about who sells their stuff, or it could be that it's just not good to be a dealer for these particular product.

I used to carry a very well know brand of speakers which were some of the best I'd ever heard. They've won lots of awards and are pretty much loved everywhere. Excellent factory support and the owner is very active in audio forums. In business for over 20 years.
I had lots of people come over for a demo in the 3 or so years I carried them.

Never sold a single pair!

Discovered through some investigation and talking with some of these "customers" that they had ended up getting their speakers directly from the factory after hearing them at my place (and I was offering discounts too).
I was being used to do the demo work without a cut of the sale, IOW, working for free.

Von Schweikert Audio pulled a similar stunt but right out in the open.
Right on their old web page was an option to buy on line much cheaper than retail. The dealers dropped like flies.

 

[Skylab]

This thread has now degenerated to the point where people are saying it's OK to steal music if you have no extra money to buy CDs. That is really, really sad. I liked it better when we were having a perfectly reasonable discourse on Audio Dealers.

Todd, nice post by you above - interesting perspective.

 

[K.I. Unlimited]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skylab /img/forum/go_quote.gif This thread has now degenerated to the point where people are saying it's OK to steal music if you have no extra money to buy CDs. That is really, really sad. I liked it better when we were having a perfectly reasonable discourse on Audio Dealers. Todd, nice post by you above - interesting perspective.

Nobody ever said it was okay (not in this thread as I've read so far anyway)- I for one was just saying we shouldn't crack down on 'stealers' just because they've no extra money.

What happened to open-mindedness around here anyway? I thought Head-Fi was a place where subjective opinions could be laid out flat without all the moral hullabaloo.

I didn't really like derailing the thread with the "legal/illegal audio" talk but earwicker7's unforgiving post on pirates left me no choice. As much as listening to music is subjective, so a thing such as "music piracy" shouldn't be black-and-white - it can't be, people have been debating about piracy since day one.

 

[Skylab]

Personal opinion, and then I will let it rest - subjective opinion is GREAT on audio gear. It's even great on questions about things like the original topic of this thread.

It's not great on the law. The law is the law, and illegal downloads are, well, ILLEGAL. I am a big believer that people have the right to decide whether or not to follow the law. But I also believe that if you decide to break the law, you have to be prepared to pay the price. To say that someone "should be allowed" to break the law because they are poor, or because they are rich, or because of whatever circumstance, is just plain scary. I have no issue with Civil Disobedience. But don't do the crime if you can't do the time, and let's not pretend that some people should be "allowed" to break it, any more so than any others.

Forgive me if I have mis-interpreted what you said. But music piracy, today, IS black and white. It is NOT subjective. People may decide to disobey the law, but that is still what they are doing, plain and simple. People have debated it since they do not like the law. That is fine. But until it changes, the laws are actually fairly clear, at least in terms of what is clearly illegal.

 

[K.I. Unlimited]

So I take it that you peeps don't like crossing the law and generally don't like others to do it as well - what I'm asking is, would you (or/and the other Head-Fiers) around turn a blind eye to people who obtain their music illegally and be cool with it, or would you turn them in immediately, no hesitation and no questitons asked, even if they're friends and family?

What my damage is, is with people (like a few above) who, just because they can afford a good/high life, they become smug about it and diss those who can't properly afford their music. (Not like pirated audio equipment exists, and even if they did, it'll be like the fake ES7s, sucky as it is).