It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
reply to post by Resonant
yes, exactly. downloading music lets the owner have his pie, AND you also get to eat it. it's like....the pie is replicating or something O.o. *plays twilight zone music*
Originally posted by clintdelicious
reply to post by DangerDeath
Yes but copies are sold though arn't they? It just makes not sense why you shouldn't earn money on something which is still being sold which you created. Over here it used to be after 60 years the works are no longer in copyright so anyone can sell the music after this time. I think the artist or their family should still recieve some of the money being made since they created the product that is being consumed.
Originally posted by Resonant
Even if songs were purchased online, individually or through a service such as Rhapsody or eMusic, the majority of those proceeds do not go to the artist. The artists get pennies. There are instances where I will support a musician and buy their album, say if it were self-released (in which case, it's almost always cheaper). The best way to support an artist is to see an artist or to buy other merchandise, not by digitally buying their music. If I like and listen to an artist enough, I will buy a physical copy of their album, in vinyl if I can (not because I am pretentious, but because it's closer to owning tangible art than a CD). I've managed bands and worked for record labels and have done radio and promotions, and I know where the money goes, and it's not to the artist. People that rip off Rihanna or Lil Wayne aren't really taking away from their millions. They're locked into endorsements with Pepsi and earning royalties every time they're played in a film or on a major radio station. They have no problem selling out 40,000 seat venues. When it comes to independent artists, they require an avenue to disperse their music to the masses and doing that freely and digitally helps to virally do that, because they've realized they don't make money off of iTunes. They would rather sell out shows and sell shirts or posters and build a larger fan base. If anything, this helps weed out a majority of "artists" that enter the music industry for money alone. The industry is already saturated with individuals that couldn't care less about the art of it all, afterall it is art, and are just around throwing words at "beats" to make a quick buck. If you take out the easy money, you're left with a lot more pure-hearted talent, and that's truly what music or any artform should be.
Originally posted by RedParrotHead
reply to post by DangerDeath
So according to you, if I find enlightenment in a new sports car I should be able to just take it? Never mind all of the people who worked hard to make it so that they could earn money. Am I enslaved because I can't just have everything that I want just given to me at my demand?
We're talking entertainment here. Leisure items, not "the idea of free, unobstructed communication between peoples of the Earth" ... talk about the music with whoever you want to, nobody will stop you.