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: 5
91
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 12:46 PM
link   
Without any doubt, right or wrong, we are experiencing a massive paradigm shift.

To speak to the possible conspiracy of allowing file-sharing to happen, the best answer I can think of is "bread and circuses". In other words, to keep the masses docile and entertained.

But there are so many things going on ...

For the last 20 years I have watched many people I know become entangled in under-employment and wage stagnation. More time and less income certainly is a contributing factor.

Add to this the never ending onslaught of how companies make massive profits using less than ethical practices and you create a mindset where people just don't care. They adapt the Crowley view of "do what thou wilt". I see more and more people taking this path on many things.

And the world has been sold on "free". Google is one of the best examples of this - they have successfully competed by gaining traffic to their sites through free video, free maps, free docs software, free language translation, etc ... all paid for by advertising revenue. And in fact, this is the basic business model of most content sites - ATS included.

There is no easy answer to this. And probably no right or wrong answer - that's the thing about change and evolution - what can survive, will survive. And at the expense of weaker ideas, systems, etc.




posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJM8507
This is a very well written piece!

I personally feel that we are headed towards a society where... people will research, write, and pursue art out of the love for it and its benefits to everyone.

[edit on 27-6-2010 by DJM8507]

What a pile of crap, unbelievable naiveté of wishful thinking and not real world experience. It's hard enough now to survive using up every working minute of the day.



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by chefc14
 


I agree with everything you're saying,and have--like you--done the same with many bands--not just Metallica (meaning buying their music numerous times over due to either a new medium being invented and also because I have "lost",due to various circumstances in my life along the way,my music several times over and always paid to replace it).But--the reason I'm replying to you is to also add a very important and ironic reminder:Any HUGE Metallica fan (myself included) knows that a bootleg tape of their music entitled "No Life 'Til Leather" played a very big role in their being discovered and making it "big".Wonder what ol' Lars has to say about THAT?Seems to me that Metallica long ago forgot where the freak they CAME FROM and how they GOT THERE in the first place.
Just sayin'.....



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by GhostR1der
many people I know will download movies or albums that they don't think are particularly good and are often inferior quality, if they like them they will purchase them


I always read that "downloading them illegally eventually leads to them purchasing it" but I have not seen one single instance where this has happened. Not one.



Has anyone noticed the prevailence of cheaper camera technology (not much film nowadays),


Wow, never thought of that. Making movies is cheaper nowadays. Much cheaper.


A couple of points of yours here I wanted to discuss. I have downloaded some media, and have because of that download found media I wanted to add to my collection. It is very common for people to download an app or music or video, and then purchase it when it becomes available or affordable.

The highest grossing movies, were also downloaded illegally. Avatar, Alice in wonderland, Titanic, Dark Knight are all movies that grossed over a billion dollars, but were downloaded from torrent sites. Would they have made more if they weren't downloaded? that's a subjective question and can only be answered by "perhaps". One can be assured that some people who saw these movies in the theaters or on DVD also downloaded them. Were these movies downloaded in areas where they weren't released? Without a doubt would be a fair answer.

The point in the above is that, although these movies were downloaded, they still achieved tremendous success and financial reward. So the studios claiming that the downloads are destroying the industry are simply lying. Produce movies or music that isn't crap, and you will be able to make a living.

The second point I wanted to touch base on was the inexpensive digital cameras. Directly because of the advent of digital cameras, some true artists; the photographers have been slowly driven to the poor house, yet, we hear not a peep out of mainstream media.

As every other person in most developed countries has a 12 megapixel digital camera and is willing to offer up their pictures to the stock purchasing agents for little or no money, they have run the photography industry to ruin. Gone are the days where a keen eye and an attention to composition and placement make for good shots, now software and photoshop can make up the difference that once took skill, patience and dedication.

The same will happen with video. Even now Cannon has several cameras that produce 1080p right at the lens, and a variety of software can fix the "rough spots".

How does this relate to the original topic? Well, the photography industry has had to adapt to the changes in the technology and the availability of comparative product. The photographer need to produce much better quality work in order to separate themselves from the average person. So too will the movie studios and the music industry.

The internet has not killed the music industry. Today we have artists producing and distributing their own music directly to the fans. We have a wider and more interested population base than ever before and people who would never be able to enjoy this media have been able to become fans and later purchase the media if/when it becomes available.

The sheer amount of money that has been generated by the movie studios clearly shows that people will still buy the media, still attend the theaters even though they can download and enjoy the media at home. Maybe it's time for the movie studios and the music distributors to wake up or to step aside and allow technology to really help introduce new industries or new business models that can be profitable and not at the expense of each person becoming a criminal.

Also for the record, I went to the theater to see Iron man 2, not because I couldn't find it online, but because I wanted to see it in the theater. When the blu ray comes out I'll buy that as well, but I will also download it so I can play it on my ps3 without having to get off my butt to scratch the disc.

..Ex



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 12:54 PM
link   
You know, I could argue about file sharing, but just the premise of the OP's thread is illogical to begin with.

How could there be a conspiracy in the works to allow file sharing when for the past 15 years corporations and governments have been working together to make it illegal and easily prosecutable?

Why would the USA try to go around it's own sovereignty through policy laundering via treaties?

Why would there be continuous attempts by record labels who prosecutes someone for file sharing just to make an example of them and make it a big story for a day or two?

For a theory on an on going conspiracy, this thread sucks at legitimizing the possibility of there being a conspiracy to begin with.

[edit on 27-6-2010 by SpectreDC]



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 12:55 PM
link   
piracy originally is caused by these companies not embracing current technology... Ive been watching "television" via a computer for years.. a pc is connected to my television and all my programming comes in via the internet. I want to be able to watch tv on any computer , any place , any time.. this is how i can do that..

I am a netflix streaming customer, this is the only service i pay for, and this is the future of programing delivery, I can watch all the content i want any time i want from where ever i am on any device that may be in front of me..

Netflix still has issues to sort out, but guess wha,t its not there issues, its the very issues that started this message, the movie companies are the ones making bad consumer experiences..

I also supported netflix early on when they started there mail based service.... again a industry breakthrough all you can eat rentals for a flat rate..

I vote with my dollars and netflix gets my dollars since they have the system that is delivering content the way i like it and at a fair price..



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 12:57 PM
link   
This is a message that appears at the top of your browser if you have ad filtering software activated and visit ATS:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"It looks like you're using some kind of software designed to block advertising while surfing our site.

We work very hard to provide an efficient Internet presence that services over 200,000 daily visits from people and automated web spiders. A large web site like this, that can handle that amount of traffic, is increasingly expensive to operate. Our only viable source of revenue (for now) are the ads displayed on each page.

If you enjoy our content, please enable our domain in your ad-blocking package."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Apparently, even this forum needs to generate revenue in order to continue to exist.

That fact, in an of itself, should end this absurd argument. To those that think everything should be free: Divest yourselves of all material goods by giving them away. Labor for free and give away your knowledge and talent for nothing. Then wait to see if society returns the favor by keeping you alive. Odds are, it won't. You'd be a bum.

The truth is, we are all selfish. Those that want it for free want it for themselves through some false sense of entitlement. Those who want to be paid for their labors also want it for themselves, and resent those who would steal their work. The current system works only because those who want certain things are willing to pay someone to produce them. Those that don't want them, spend their money elsewhere. If enough people move away from an industry or service, it will fail.

To the poster who is a proponent of ridding the world of "useless" jobs such as waiters, book store employees, and other service industry workers: Apparently, you don't get out much. How would one travel without a restaurant, a cab driver, or hotel/hostel to stay in? By showing up for "free BBQ's" held by a group of neighbors? Sure. Right until the second that uninvited guest ate the last hot dog.

You must be young and not realize that, at some point, you will be unable to fully care for yourself - either due to injury or age. Maybe nurses and doctors should also fall into the "free" category. I'm sure that these people would all be willing to endure years of education, the long hours of residency, the debt, gladly absorb the cost of the insurance necessary to practice medicine, the licensing, and so on.... just so someone can mooch off their labors - and risk being sued for malpractice by that same mooch. Odds are that the proponent of such a theory doesn't know the sacrifice made as they have never even attempted to apply themselves. It's easier to steal than work.

Farm workers may be deemed worthless. Then cities can be destroyed to make way for gardens, so it's residents could grow their own food and raise their own livestock. They could carry the buckets of water to their gardens from a lake or river because the worker who is tasked with keeping the water flowing is now considered useless. And why pay taxes to support health departments and agencies that control disease? I'm sure that every individual who grew their own garden and raised their own livestock would follow strict sanitary standards. They would have learned all about it for free on the internet that would likely cease to exist because the content providers can't exist for "free" either (which is why I began this rant to begin with).

What you are condoning, in your myopic view, would result in anarchy. Once anarchy takes root, violence and war is not far behind.

The United States has sunk to new lows in morality and character. We are a society in decline. This debate proves it. The fact that the thievery without consequence has permeated the fabric of this country should give one pause...



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 01:07 PM
link   
I don't see ANY conspiracy here. If anything, the entire situation is as cut and dry / out in the open as it could get. The butthurt parties lobby for laws to protect intellectual property, copyrighted material, and the people who infringe on those via illegal means aren't doing so with any other regard than to possess said products.

It's not like somewhere in an ivory castle in the sky, a panel of RIAA Jews, and "secret chiefs" are rolling around in piles of cash and sending jackals and agents out to lobby for stricter laws. It's all done publicly.

You could argue that private torrent trackers are done "secretly" but anyone with 10 minutes of internet experience and a URL can get a membership to nearly any of them.

Nice thread, interesting topic.




posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tanulis

What will royally SUCK, however, is if I get popular enough to where no one bothers to buy it, and just download it from somewhere else. At that point, my popularity will hit a ceiling, and I'll go back to meager profits. Personally, if I really like an independent artist I WILL buy their album, because were in this together.. the problem is that the average consumer doesnt think that way. =(


First off, I would like to commend you for embracing the new business model. I think you will in fact be successful as you become very popular on your target demographic.

I thought about what you had wrote above, and it occurred to me that you control what you produce. YOU decide how you will sell it, thus you control how successful you will be.

I would suggest that when the day comes that you have so many fans that you are afraid they will simply leech your music, you can decide to offer one track for free at a highly reduced bit rate, and that same track at a very high bitrate for like a buck. The fans will hear the lower quality version, and if they are your fans, they will buy the much higher version. Another option would be to offer half the track for free, and the whole track for a buck.

Regardless, I think you will do very well and not have the real leeches, the mainstream music labels, hanging over your head and determining your success for you. R.I.P. Frank Zappa.

..Ex



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 01:17 PM
link   
You know what I think? I think it's the Record Companies who are the criminals. You see, each and everyone of us a SOME talent that they can give to the world FOR FREE, to make the world a better place. True, some talents are better than others,......but as it was freely given to them by GOD, they should freely give it to the earth. The wake up in the morning and get a real job just like the rest of us have to do, instead of taking all of OUR money we worked hard for and building a media machine that makes a man or a woman look like a god who is worthy of your hard earned cash. I make music, and many tell me it's catchy and some would even buy it if it were an album, but I give it to the internet for free, to listen to, and then I work everyday at a lumber yard.Yeah, it could be better all around, were I to get signed somewhere, and all of the glitz and glammor and women and money..........but you have to screw a lot of people to do that and you're only thinking of yourself and those who run the media machine, but mostlt, YOU are only thinking of YOURSELF, and the money machine is only thinking of THEMSELVES. You both just happen to be living in the same room; Yes, to make music is incredibly hard, but it is a talent to be shared NOT BOUGHT. If this world is to even remotely be fair, all MEDIA must be as "plays to the plebians" for entertainment. Don't make us pay for what are obvious distractions, manipulations and symbolisms anyway.



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 01:18 PM
link   
as a twenty-two year old emerged in the world of art, I would beg to differ. Money can be made, and the crowds will come to spend the money if you know how to arrange the kind of social events they enjoy. It's not just about the music, or the book, but the atmosphere you place them in. That's what they pay for, and that is how many young artists are thriving. Online sales are used mostly for merch, clothing and other necessities people will buy because its impossible to download... and of course, the much necessary social media marketing. It's all a tool, and one that can be quite effective if you wield it with a knowledge of your target market.

and for the record, me and many of my associates in my generation are still very materialistic in the sense that we buy books, and art and yes - even vinyl's. Unfortunately, It's all about marketing, like it always is.



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 01:30 PM
link   
I admit I have done my share of music downloading, however there is a just cause(I know I know, the new mentality)but bear with me. The reason I downloaded music I because the music that I listened to is not available virtually anywhere in the whole of Sydney as far as I am aware. I am talking about Hard Dance Music, mainstream in the Netherlands however here in Australia it is nowhere close to mainstream, There used to be an old independent CD shop that sold the genre of music but it has since closed down, in that sense the only place I could turn to get the music I so much love is the internet. But if it were available around here I'd be happy to buy it.

Edit to add: I am also an active raver, I go to events, I spend over $1000 per year on rave tickets, merchandise, CDs and so on, In some cases even more.. Usually $120-200 per ticket plus merchandise and everything else. So to say that I'm simply leeching and not giving any sort of revenue to the artists is wrong, I download music because it is unavailable in my area, and frankly i dont have the time/money to travel almost 1000km down to Melbourne just to buy a CD. I go to raves because of the atmosphere, because I love the scene.

-b0s-

[edit on 27-6-2010 by b0sanac]



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 01:40 PM
link   
if a person uses ASIO drivers (Free)
and the appropriate cards ( soundblasters work well 5 to 25 $)
you can have up to ten simultaneous inputs in a 100 dollar computer.
(multitracking live- the holy grail of home recording)
you can link more than one computer or buy a 16 channel interface for a couple hundred bucks
24 bit 195 k sampling - top of the heap quality
-104 db noise floor ( a sure sm57 only hears -70 db )

some 20 dollar recording mikes
some half decent software
a really good bi amp boom box for mixing

a couple hundred bucks and you are as good as the best studio
if you have some creative and technical skills
add a decent cam
all legit

potentially better than the full priced product of ten years ago.

why subsidize a useless bloated redundant industry that like sony has been caught ripping off the public so often?
like the MSN no one cares if they go bankrupt because the product sucks
so badly

so I support starving artists all the time, free sound tech, free advice,
free lessons, l record the local coffee house for free...
people are amazed at what can be done for free or cheap...

it all comes down to what YOU can DO

man made art for years for free
every cave painting and traditional song is free
to be enjoyed, copied, played, or whatever

and i can swing a mean hammer cause i am not a one dimensional artist

the " piracy" laws being passed are the "conspiracy"
they are all about totalitarian control of a mediam that is exposing the corporate globalist fraud at a totally incredible rate.

using starving rich people as an excuse to take away civil rights







[edit on 27-6-2010 by Danbones]

[edit on 27-6-2010 by Danbones]



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 01:40 PM
link   
i have always had a rule never just go out and buy a video game always rent it and play it before you buy it that way you know you are getting what you want

i was included in the original napster trial for downloading dr dre and metallica
and i to was surprised at metallicas stand on downloading there music and that day they lost a lifetime fan at least up to that point

i had purchased most of there albums on tape cassette and on cd
but from that day on in about 1999 i have never and will never support anything that band does

i repair computers and i always will fix a computer for someone for free because i have a natural talent for it and i would feel bad if it would keep someone from being able to play on a computer i have done so for 15 years and i imagine i will continue to do so it makes me happy it also keeps me poor

but i have never really regretted fixing someones computer for free

sometimes its good to do what your good at and not charge people it makes them happy and it usually makes me happy to



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 01:44 PM
link   
Although I agree that for the most part file sharing does a lot of damage to musicians it's not completely bad for them. As a teenager I did a lot of illegal downloading (mostly music), and never bought an album because I only liked one song or two from a particular band's album (there was no ITunes back then). But then I came across a band called Alice in Chains, I started downloading the songs from one of their Greatest Hits albums and really liked them a lot, I downloaded a few more songs but then I realized that I was really into them. I then decided to buy a couple of their CDs at a store. Since then I have bought all of their studio albums, a DVD with all their music videos (since MTV doesn't play any music nowadays), and it has also happened with other bands like Metallica, Soundgarden, Nirvana, and Led Zeppelin. I know it's a small percentage of people who actually buy the CDs if they really like them, but without sites like napster I wouldn't have found some of these great bands. Which reminds me I need to buy some of the Rolling Stones CDs too. >.<

As for books, call me old fashioned but I just can't imagine myself reading a book on a computer screen or one of those fancy Kindle from Amazon, I have to have the book in my hands.



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 01:55 PM
link   
I'd like to "open your eyes" to the reality of file sharing.

I wrote a book, it took me 12 months, it was my livlihood.

Them some scum sucking "file sharers" took it upon themsleves to deicde it should be free.

So my income is gone, and the upshot is that I won't be bothering to write anything else.

Therefore our "advancement" stops dead in it's trakcs, since no one will work for free.

Or maybe you will - would you go to work, put in the effort, and then at the end of the month get nothing because someone else decides you don't deserve to be paid?

The only people who think making other peoples efforts free to everyone else is a good idea are the kind of people who sit on their backsides and contribute nothing in the first place.

How about you go and spend 12 months researching and writing something and then we'll give it away for free so that you get nothing for a year of work.

Bet you'd love that you self interested, blinkered moron.



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by v3_exceed

Originally posted by Tanulis

What will royally SUCK, however, is if I get popular enough to where no one bothers to buy it, and just download it from somewhere else. At that point, my popularity will hit a ceiling, and I'll go back to meager profits. Personally, if I really like an independent artist I WILL buy their album, because were in this together.. the problem is that the average consumer doesnt think that way. =(


First off, I would like to commend you for embracing the new business model. I think you will in fact be successful as you become very popular on your target demographic.

I thought about what you had wrote above, and it occurred to me that you control what you produce. YOU decide how you will sell it, thus you control how successful you will be.

I would suggest that when the day comes that you have so many fans that you are afraid they will simply leech your music, you can decide to offer one track for free at a highly reduced bit rate, and that same track at a very high bitrate for like a buck. The fans will hear the lower quality version, and if they are your fans, they will buy the much higher version. Another option would be to offer half the track for free, and the whole track for a buck.

Regardless, I think you will do very well and not have the real leeches, the mainstream music labels, hanging over your head and determining your success for you. R.I.P. Frank Zappa.

..Ex


What absolute guff.

there is no business model in giving away your service, products, or time for free, just bankruptcy.

The issue I have is with someone else deciding that they'll give away my stuff for free - who the Hell gives them the right.



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


I know that. The thing is, they need legislation to stop foreign servers.
Is there such a law in place? Then Limewire would be gone.
Corporations in this world have more laws protecting them than the consumer. I have no time for their whining. If the RIAA and others want control, get international law passed. Then no one has an excuse, and anyone who violates the law gets busted. Until then, RIAA and others have to take the lumps. You can't have everything your way just by crying.
Make it a law that foreign servers that violate our laws can be shut down. Until they remove the platforms that allow illegal activity, there is going to be illegal activity. It's that simple. If you want something so, take the actions necessary, because if you don't, you'll just have to deal with it.

[edit on 27-6-2010 by DHSreallybugsme]



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 02:11 PM
link   
I too have a few comments but keep in mind I'm from Canada and we are only just changing our copyright laws for the worse.

A) Copyright should expire at 10 years from date of first publishing/recording then perhaps content will not just fade into obscurity because someone may actually have it. I have books from the '60s that you just can't get in a bookstore anymore. And if you purchase it online, it's always used so the author gets squat anyway.

B) There is a lot of content that I obtain from other countries that you just cannot get here in Canada. This is what I download. Awesome trance stuff from Europe and Fansubs from Japan. Content not available in your own country should be exempt.

C) Because of fiscal responsibility, I have come to download a movie to view it prior to purchasing the dvd. If it's a keeper, I do actually purchase the dvd. If the movie sucks, it gets deleted.

D) I no longer pay attention to north american music. It has been at least 5 years since I've obtained anything good.

Perhaps that's the real problem with the recording industry, no one is purchasing music anymore 'cause there isn't any good music so they're blaming it on filesharing. Even the bands mentioned previously have been around for more than 10 years..



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 02:16 PM
link   
Easy access; fine print; hidden legal loopholes...
Sounds a lot like the mortgage scam that enticed so many. Basically the same tactics over and over again---using leverage to control and dominate. Give them a taste of ice cream---one generous lick----then take it away from them.




top topics



 
91
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join