It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Filesharing Conspiracy

page: 21
91
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 08:15 AM
link   
reply to post by B.Morrison
 


I'm glad we could get closer to a middle ground. See everybody discussion can work.


reply to post by J.Clear
 


Vinyl is becoming huge business (relatively) for indie musicians. I know Daptone records usually sells a couple dozen pieces of vinyl a day. They do over 3,500 total sales per week. At least 35% of it is on vinyl.

I think it has to do witht he style of the artist. Daptone is just a lable that begs for vinyl. Yet a band like Los Strait Jackets moves barely any vinyl. It is very situational, but I think it can be a great way to keep the hardcore fans coming back.

Little touches like that will help artists make more in the long run. I don't think it will stop the bleeding, but maybe the hemorage will turn in to a trickle.




posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 08:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by MikeNice81
Last time I checked houses, food, and clothes all took the input of labor to make them.

Food grows in supermarkets!



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 08:41 AM
link   
reply to post by darkangel831
 



Originally posted by darkangel831
I have a question that maybe one of you people "in the know" can answer for me...

First let me state that I know very little about the industry as a whole, but I do understand economics.

If File Sharing is made legal, or accepted or whatever, how will musicians make any money?

This is a serious question please, I really have no idea?


Red Jumpsuit Apparatus is offering their latest song for free as a download. They make their money from concert tours and selling their CDs at the concerts. They tour a lot! I know this because one of the band members is a blood relative.

This is how the music industry is going to cope with free fileshare.



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 09:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by dragnet53
Greed is so bad....



Yea, developers should develop games for free and publishers should publish them and offer support to customers for free.
EA has reported losses. Loss = less games being developed. The more profit they make the more developers they are able to support with their partners program or develop games of their own.

[edit on 29/6/2010 by DGFenrir]

[edit on 29/6/2010 by DGFenrir]



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 09:13 AM
link   
All I have to say is that if you have a "LOVE" for music and you quit playing music because your not making any money, then you probably didn't really have a passion for it anyway. My wife's family grew up playing bluegrass. They never made enough to live on but they still play music to this day because it's a passion.

I think you are basing your beliefs on a "monetary" system that needs to be flushed down the tubes anyway. If your supporting the 99.9% of millionaires in the world your in the wrong. Because there are only .01% of them here in the United States and most of them are Actors, Musicians, and Sports Affiliates. Why are they not Scientists or people who "better our way of living"??? We have our priorities screwed up and if you can screw the system by getting a CD, DVD, or Application for free, then I see no problem with that. I program and it's just for fun. When I make a program I don't care to make any money off of it. I make it so others can love it. That is the satisfaction I get from that.

How are these people suppose to eat? Get a real job like everyone else and quit getting paid for your "hobbies". Hopefully one day people will "WAKE UP". But like I've said in most of my posts on here, people are all talk and never stand up for anything they believe in anymore. Change is coming soon. Good luck to you and your "monetary money" system.



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 10:31 AM
link   
in Utopia, people and the industry wouldn't be against it, because the whole mentality would be different than what we have on Earth.

Here people make products to sell. Just because it's available digitally doesn't mean we can grab it for free, just like going in a store and stealing a cd when no one is looking.
I've done my share of free downloading in the past, but now I understand that I should pay for items I want - even though I can get them for free illegally. That's how it works in this planet.



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by illusion987

I have an xbox 360 system. I bought it new when it first came out for $400 bucks. Thats $400 bucks going to Microsoft. Now the only reason I bought it was because I knew I could download the games for it. I am not rich, paying $60+ per game is ridiculous especially when most are crap anyway. So the only reason I bought it was because I could download the games. I would have never bought it otherwise. So if I couldnt download the games I would have never given microsoft the $400. You see? The company didnt "lose" money, they would have never got it in the first place.


Wow, Im seeing a whole new way of Marketing. "They will buy it if we give them enough stuff to steal with it"



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 11:23 AM
link   
I find that most people arent nearly deep enough to understand that they are hurting other people.

Most people I know who illegally get things over the interweb tend to have very poor taste. They DL a lil wayne album and they think they are on some sort of cutting edge. Really all they need to do is turn on the radio and wait three minutes and he will be on. I had a friend calling me the other day and was asking where she could DL Jersey-Freaking-Shore. I told her to turn her TV to channel 40 and point her web camera at the screen, haha.

Musicians should ALWAYS play shows. It is a far better way to establish real life fans. Yeah your band may have 1235235 myspace friends, but if they dont go out and play in public then they have no room to stand on when it comes to people listening for free.

Its SOOOO easy to click "like" on facebook and never think about the band again, but if Im walking down the street and I hear good music Im going to walk towards it, hopefully sit down and buy a beer, and enjoy the atmosphere. If the band is good enough, (by that meaning more technically proficient than my band), Ill even drop a few sheckles to get a shirt or LP.

Netflicks is a good theory, but I would need like 5 discs at a time not the basic 2. I love Hulu, but ever since new management at work it has been difficult to watch.

Films- let me just say the actors are the LEAST of my concerns. They are the VERY FIRST people in line to make up their quote when a movie opens. The investors are next, and if there is any cash left the Below the line people get their piece. The people who MADE the film, put their blood sweat and tears, put up with pre-madonas, followed the directors every demand like lemmings off a cliff are the ones being hurt through pirated films. Lets not forget the HORRIFIC quality of the late 90's "screeners" The ones where someone had a freaking camera in the theater. If you can watch that and be satisfied, what with the people walking around and all, then your probably pretty low class and probably dont have much money to spend on films in the first place.

That was kind of mean, but I am a musician and film maker and I find that things like youtube have fully bastardized the art. ANYONE and I mean ANYONE can be a over night youtube sensation for some of the stupidest things. then you have people who will work on a film for a week, and it may have high production value like an Episode of 'Arrested Development', but it will never and I mean NEVER been seen as many times as the cat playing that dang piano.

Could the internet be the sign of the beast? Quite possibly.....



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 11:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
i think what is wrong, is for people to think they can own something they merely discovered.


Back in the day hunters went hunting for meat and stored it at home.

One day the hunters were out hunting and pirates came to their caves and took everything there.

Their rationale was: "It does not belong to the hunters. Nothing belongs to anyone. Animals are everywhere, therefore meat is everywhere.

Besides, they only discovered this meat, it doesnt mean they own it."

The hunters tracke down the pirates and ripped them a new one.





posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman

Originally posted by dean007
and nowadays a persons money really doesn't get them much and in most cases i simply cant afford to go buy everything i want and or need
i cant afford a 60 dollar night at the movies
i cant afford to buy the newest game
i wish i could
so if it comes down to buying alot of them the money is just not there to do it


Not to pick on you dean007, but this is the new mentality... I want it now even though I can't afford it now... This is the mentality that has gotten everyone across the world into trouble. We really don't have to have everything right now. Whatever happened to "I want that game but I can't afford, so I'm going to save my money so that I can buy it in the future?"


There are numerous problems with the game analogy. The most obvious being by the time you have it most of your friends have finished it 5 or 10 times and no longer wish to play it with you or the multiplayer aspect player base is so low that you can barely find a game to play, let alone get your friends on a multiplayer game.

Another problem is the cost, on average the newest game sells for between 60$ to 80$, not including the collectors edition with extra features or items, now for most 60$ to 80$ is not a lot of money but for most who are unemployed, laid off, or disabled or not working for any other reason, besides they just don't want to work, they just cant afford the games.

When it comes down to eating for a week or buying some new games you would choose to eat. Therein lies the problem it may be a want rather then a need but what makes someone whose parents or family are well off more entitled to something because they don't have to worry about food or shelter then someone who does?

Are we that naive to say that it is equally fair for some to have to choose in such a manner?

Another problem is most of the cost goes not to the game or disc but to the producers. The problem here is when you have a disc you can no longer play in many cases you have to pay another 60$ to get a playable game when it costs 5$ to make a new disc with the game on it. So now you have to wait another few months to save up to play a game you already owned. There are problems with all industries not just the movie and music ones. Each have there individual problems as well as similar ones across the board.



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by rick1
reply to post by debunky
 

Wrong!
This again is where we part company. Whoever designed the car owns the digital
data. Nobody goes around pushing buttons. Nobody has a say so in who pushes that button but the person who owns the data. That person markets his or her own digital data. Same with MY SONGS!




"what would be a fair price for such a car?"
"Wrong"

... no that doesnt work. We need a number here.
Another question: Why don't you charge 50$ for each playing of a recording of one of your songs?
Its your song, and you can price them as you want, right? Why not 500? 50.000?



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by immortal coil
With the increasingly incessant amount of "garbage" media out there, I can't blame people for "trying things out" before they dole out their hard-earned cash on a physical purchase. My ideology is that if you like something enough, buy it.


As skeptical of pirating as I am, big-media lost peoples trust by cynically spewing out utter trash year by year and decade by decade.

So cynically that they even laugh behind the scenes about it "Hey, it only took me 10 minutes to write the song and another 20 to produce the piece of crap and its makin me Millions!"



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 12:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 

No I don't think so. I think what is wrong is you don't know much about songwriting. I didn't walk into the woods and discover a song and call it mine.
Learning to write songs is a very long process and to be a great songwriter takes about 8 to 10 years of hard work. Think about that the next time you're sharing a writers songs.



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by debunky
 

I already charge by the song.
And I can't put a number there. Only the person who is selling that particular digital data can.. If I don't like his or her price I won't buy. In the end though they still own the data.



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 12:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Conspiracy Pianist
I think the piracy thing is merely a result of the crooked laws surrounding property in general.

Why do DeBeers own the diamond mines?

How does one gain ownership like that?

.


Back in the day they made use of the lack of education of the local populace. "Hey, can we buy this land for a few bucks? Thanks. Now the mine is mine".

The more people are educated, the more they are empowered.



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by rick1
reply to post by debunky
 

I already charge by the song.
And I can't put a number there. Only the person who is selling that particular digital data can.. If I don't like his or her price I won't buy. In the end though they still own the data.


Ok, and why does nobody charge 50.000 Dollars per song recording?



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by debunky

Originally posted by rick1
reply to post by debunky
 

I already charge by the song.
And I can't put a number there. Only the person who is selling that particular digital data can.. If I don't like his or her price I won't buy. In the end though they still own the data.


Ok, and why does nobody charge 50.000 Dollars per song recording?


I believe that this old adage applies here "Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free".

The artist's or those that have bought the rights to distribute their work believe that they have the right to set the price. What filesharing has done is give that right back to the consumer.

I can listen/read/watch your goods and I decide what it's worth. Put a donation button on your site or blog or whatever and I will donate if I think your product is worth it but if you push and try to strong arm me into paying what you want then I will push back and just rob you. It's that simple.



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 01:42 PM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 



Originally posted by daskakik

I can listen/read/watch your goods and I decide what it's worth. Put a donation button on your site or blog or whatever and I will donate if I think your product is worth it but if you push and try to strong arm me into paying what you want then I will push back and just rob you. It's that simple.


YIKES! I used to know a kid, a few years back, that was a thug. When I asked him why he stole, he told me that it wasn't fair for someone to have something that he couldn't buy. So if he saw something he wanted, he just took it. He died not long after that in some gang violence.

So that is the future of the world? If I don't like the asking price,I'll just take it?



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 01:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by ohhwataloser



This poster is hilarious. It warns of piracy on a medium that was likely not pirated.

The anti-piracy campaign is an utter fail (industry pros, are you reading this?). If you want to get the youth back on your side offer a simple-to-use all-in-one, small-fee-paid solution.



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Faiol

INTERNET PIRACY is not just about entertainment, thats your mistake, thinking that everything avaliable in the internet is just some teen movie or songs

people need access to information as general to become smarter, softwares to help their learning process, books, training courses ... if they dont have the money to do it, they should have the right to access anyway



Disagreed. I know of at least 10000000000000000 pages in Wikipedia alone that are free to read (not to mention 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 other pages).




top topics



 
91
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join