To all of you piraters, what would you do?

I have 1 simple answer to & for this thread.

You will never stop piracy. As long as there are open ip networks (no IPV6 won't change this), and audio outputs (Soundblaster anyone?), there will always be some type of way to find and download whatever you want to try. Then if you like it and decide that it is something you would use/listen to regularly, buy it! Support whoever took the time and effort to capture your interest or imagination. With some of the pricy software out there like "Adobe" then just look at open source options that offer full .pdf compatibility and much more! This would also include the 3D Modeling software, you can often find great OpenSource programs or Commercial ones at a much cheaper price! Don't lock youself into one OS anymore, it's not necessary.

Originally posted by mirello
I've always heard all of you guys talking about how the mpaa, and riaa reacts to people illeagly downloading movies and music, well if you were working in these industrys, what would you do?

Taping of TV and radio has always been legal. No one cared if you taped a radio song, copied it and gave it to a friend. Everyone had tapes.

It seems to me that downloading illegally is practically unstoppable. There will always be a way for p2p sharing.

More importantly, I've bought CD's because I've downloaded songs and found that the CD was to my liking. If I want a CD, I will buy it.

The record label companies and artist whining to me is comparable to the baseball strike of '95. A bunch of whining prima donna's who really have nothing to complain about.

There has to be something wrong with a concept where people are paid to produce a product, then have to turn around and give their pay back to the company to get the products they the workers produced.
Who wins in this system?

The companies themselves are far more criminal than any piraters.
They sell us slavery as freedom and chaos as peace. They get away with it by keeping us pacified with shiny consumer junk. People destroy their health (soul) trying to reach that imaginary "Amerikkkan Dream"...
And they're not happy. They don't understand why, and still think more material possessions will give them the fix they're looking for. And they do, for a short while. But then you need more, and more, and more....
More addictive than crack...

Money = the beast=don't worship money...it will bring you a short term fix but destroy you in the long run. We were warned. Think about it.



"In the decor of the spectacle, the eye meets only things and their prices."

"We want structures that serve people, not people serving structures."

"Since 1936 I have fought for wage increases.
My father before me fought for wage increases.
Now I have a TV, a fridge, a Volkswagen.
Yet my whole life has been a drag.
Don't negotiate with the bosses. Abolish them."

"The boss needs you, you don't need the boss."

"Man is neither Rousseau's noble savage nor
the Church's or La Rochefoucauld's depraved sinner.
He is violent when oppressed, gentle when free."

"The prospect of finding pleasure tomorrow will
never compensate for todays boredom."

"The cause of all wars, riots and injustices is the existence of
property."
(St. Augustine)

Graffiti from May 1968 (for those who know what happened that day)

If the replication and unauthorized storage of copyrighted music is thievery does that make me a thief for having memories of how a song goes? Am I guilty of copyright infringement for whistling a tune or writing down the notation of how a song goes. Am I guilty of illegal file sharing if I sing a Beatles song to my girlfriend and she then remembers it? Those are unauthorized copies and by the logic of the corporatist what I am doing is thievery. When you break it down to its logical conclusion it all sounds kind of ridiculous or at least it does to me.

What is a computer but an external memory device?
It stores data the same way my brain does (not literally of course) so why should the laws be any different for either?
In both cases the memory is extracted and then replayed for my benefit.

I can understand the prosecution of true thievery of intellectual property true thievery where a man takes the credit for another mans inspiration and profits by his theft. I cannot understand the logic behind the current application of copyright law.

Guess it was fun for some while it lasted...the free virtual jukebox/theater age might be nearing its sunset...your pockets have acquired too many quarters the past few years and the execs want in.

The owners and operators of the Grokster peer-to-peer (P2P) network -- the lead and most well-known defendants in one of the Supreme Court's seminal decisions this year -- agreed today (Nov. 7) to shut down operations to settle the three-year-old piracy case with the nation's major record companies, motion picture studios and music publishers.

The settlement includes a permanent injunction prohibiting infringement, directly or indirectly, of any of the plaintiffs' copyrighted works. This includes ceasing immediately the distribution of the Grokster client application and ceasing to operate the Grokster system and software. An RIAA spokesperson also said Grokster is to pay the plaintiff companies $50 million in damages.

A consent judgment will be submitted to U.S. District Court for the Central District of California court today for its approval.

www.billboard.com...

[edit on 7-11-2005 by Vajrayana]

Originally posted by Ponderosa
These artists still get paid millions of dollars, so do producers and the like. They should be more concerned on whether their art is affecting people, reaching people, and more important things than dollars and cents. I do feel bad for those unfortunate enough to be laid off due to loses taken in these industries, maybe if they paid the people at the top a bit less and shared the wealth.

Originally posted by The Parallelogram
As for me, I have no compunctions against downloading music. The artists are able to live exorbitant lifestyles at the expense of their listeners, and the activities of my fellow thieves and I have yet to affect this fact.

Where is this myth of musicians as millionaires coming from? What you see on MTV represents an incredibly small group of “musicians” and many of those people don’t have the kinds of money they want you to think they do. A lot of them are borrowing from the “company store” so to speak and living off of advances that have yet to be recouped.

Originally posted by Sport Kensington
This is how bands should make their money: The band gigs all over. A friend buys their CD at their show. He likes the music. He copies the CD and gives it to his buddy...his buddy likes it...his buddy makes a copy and passes it to a friend. Soon, 5 of the first guys friends like the band and are going to make sure they go see them live when they come to town. They pay the $15 to see the band, they buy a $25 t shirt at the show, and a $5 bumper sticker.
Screw record companies. Bands should make their money by live shows. The music should be free, the band should make their money off the tickets and schwag they can sale at the show.

Originally posted by Shadowflux
If I were in the RIAA I would stop screwing over musicians. These agents and corporate suits steal everything from the artists. Think about it, a cd costs you 20 dollars. That money goes to pay for the agent, the laywers, the marketing execs, the owner of the company, the limosuines, the mansions, the private jets, the caviar, the store you bought it in, the graphic designer, the factory workers, the factory owner and if there's anything left over it goes to the musician.
What musicians should do is bypass the music industry and directly market to the fans who're downloading the music. Make a reasonable price per song or another method of payment. Increase merchandising and go on tour. The reason people still "steal" music is because they can either pay 20 dollars for a cd or pay 99 cents a song (there're generally 20 songs on a cd). These days a band can handle it's own distribution and marketing.

These are great ideas and valid points but they do nothing to solve the problem of capitol. Where is a band supposed to come up with the front money to make all that merch and finance a major tour? Hotels, vans, gear, food and a living wage need to be fronted by somebody and that somebody, unfortunately, is the record company. Until venture capitalists get into music that’s the way it will stay. And no venture capitalist in his right mind would get into music for the same reasons the record company’s charge so much for CD’s and give bands nothing. As mentioned earlier for every band a label signs and is a smash there are 100 that they spent just as much money on and made none back.

Originally posted by mirello
uh guys, about every single argument you've got is nullified by itunes, I keep hearing "they make 1 song and crap up 9 more to fill up an album" WELL, #ING DOWNLOAD IT ON ITUNES FOR 1$ IF YOUR TOO CHEAP FOR 20$, Also, how does if your not going to pay for it in the first place make it not stealing, lets say i buy a candy bar and never eat it, does that entitle me too a free one, no

Excellent point.

Originally posted by SportyMB
Music should not be ALL about the bucks. What would Hendrix and Van Zant say about this??? They would probably give a loud verbal FU to all the Metallicas out there. There are some things that surpass the laws in the books.....and the love of music is one of them.

If I were a big-time musician like Nelly, Metallica or whoever else...I would be honored for people to listen to my music. There are some kids who cant afford to buy the latest CD.....why not let them enjoy your music.

This isn’t about enjoying music, it’s about the fact that money goes into making, recording, and distributing it and when it’s not paid for it’s stealing!
Also I think it’s incredibly ironic that you’ve mentioned Hendrix and the guy from Skynard as examples of model musicians that would set this straight if they were still alive. Hendrix was a junkie who would do just about anything for money, how do you think the Band of Gypsies record came about? He signed a record deal while he was already under contract with someone else and did that live record to fulfill his obligations to that label. And although it wasn’t Ronnie VanZant, one of the skynard guitar players was handed a guitar owned by Hendrix by Frank Zappa and he dropped it on the floor because he considered it soiled by the color of Hendrix’s skin. (That’s paraphrasing, there’s no need to repeat the comment on this board). Sounds like the enlightened type who’d want to give away his music to me.

Originally posted by UofCinLAPeople here - you do realize that for every major star act there are about a hundred that never break even for the label. That is what the stealing really hurts and why the cost structure is so high....Now, artists can embrace giving it away to get the name out and hope to recoup in live shows and the like or they can stick to their guns and protect their copyrights. Tough call for any musician....

This is a great point and it’s disingenuous marketing that a lot of these bands do when they come out for downloading.

Originally posted by ANOKAnd the musicians themselves are just selling their soul to the devil for fame and fortune, so to speak.Instead of just excepting the music industry set up, musicians and bands need to change the set up.
Some have tried and succeeded to survive on the outside, some have tried and failed (but it takes more than some to kill it totaly)...Not because it's too difficult, but because promotion and distribution is controlled by the "music industry". If you do it by your self you may be lucky and get your CD in independent record stores for sale.
Stores that don't count to wards Chart positions. Very hard to generate sales with no radio or TV promotion.

You don't have to be a good musician to get a contract, you just have to be sellable...The studio and session musicians will take care of the playing.

What is so greedy about making a living wage? Not all musicians want to be famous! I don’t know you at all but your posts in this thread have a sour grapes vibe to them.

Originally posted by boogyman
Am I guilty of copyright infringement for whistling a tune or writing down the notation of how a song goes. .

Yes as a matter of fact you may be, depending on what you’re using the notation for.

Originally posted by boogyman
Am I guilty of illegal file sharing if I sing a Beatles song to my girlfriend and she then remembers it? Those are unauthorized copies and by the logic of the corporatist what I am doing is thievery. When you break it down to its logical conclusion it all sounds kind of ridiculous or at least it does to me.
What is a computer but an external memory device?
It stores data the same way my brain does (not literally of course) so why should the laws be any different for either?
In both cases the memory is extracted and then replayed for my benefit.
I can understand the prosecution of true thievery of intellectual property true thievery where a man takes the credit for another mans inspiration and profits by his theft. I cannot understand the logic behind the current application of copyright law.

This is absurd, just because I own a computer doesn’t mean I can go to an art gallery and take a painting off the wall.

I can’t believe nobody has brought up Clear Channel here and this is a conspiracy site! Clear Channel decides what’s on the radio and who makes it and who doesn’t. These guys are all in bed with each other. They actually have regional meetings to decide play lists for entire parts of the country! Look in your area to see how many stations in your market they own. Not only do they own the radio stations but they own tons of live music venues and billboards and other media as well. They are deserving of a thread of their own.
The idea that just because you hope to make a living making music means you’re a greedy opportunistic monster is crazy. If I love a band I buy their CD’s because if I don’t they won’t be able to make records any more. A label is a bank that loans the money to bands to make records, merchandise and tour. If I don’t buy that bands music, the label will never recoup their investment and then they won’t invest in future albums or tours from the band. That leaves a band I love with no means to continue to make great music. And the idea that every band should just play shows and sell merch is childish and idealistic. If a bunch of guys have bills to pay and mouths to feed then there’s almost no way to do that without outside involvement. Free downloading is great promotion ONLY if it gets people into a show where you can make money off merch or a cut of the door/bar.
There is still great music out there today but as ANOK mentioned the distribution channels are controlled and manipulated by a small handful of people. The problem is live music venues are evaporating, and the industry is in hit single mode. They would rather take a moron/bimbo who will do what their told and make 2 or 3 “hit” songs and an album of garbage than do old style artist development. If it’s not a million seller out of the box then it’s considered a failure by the label. And this leaves no room on the airwaves for people concerned about quality and substance. Downloading doesn’t hurt the big artists at all, it hurts the up and comers who are on labels trying to seek a wider audience.

Got to admit that its nice to burn a compilation of your fave tunes. As someone who works in programming, certain companies are always on the lookout and are actively engaged in SPIKE tech. Basically making it impossible to copy their music CD's. Things like the Cactus Data Shield, etc. Any new ideas in this area are rewarded and funded by these corporations R+D. You may start seeing more soon. On the other hand and the not so well known side is they actively upload, sometimes the very first versions of latest mp3 singles for you to download. They contain all sorts of nasty little suprises from 1 minute of music then loud noise so you waste your time, looped choruses, and spyware obviously. Thats what they are doing now and don't be suprised if a new format appears in the future. Specially designed as to be Corporation friendly. Anyway like i said nice to download a tune or two. Why were at it we could download a film or two, nice

Here we go I'll tell you what I'll do to help out these poor musicians who are losing so much money on their crappy one hit cd's. I will take over their job and let as many people who want to download my music and they can take over my job and they will never again have to suffer the terrible inconvienience of having someone "steal their music" and I will profit from it. Maybe this is a good thing for music in the long run. Instead of record companies signing any idiot with a guitar maybe this teaches them to go out and acutally find quality musicians and bands who have more than one hit in them.

Originally posted by josyk81
Here we go I'll tell you what I'll do to help out these poor musicians who are losing so much money on their crappy one hit cd's. I will take over their job and let as many people who want to download my music and they can take over my job and they will never again have to suffer the terrible inconvienience of having someone "steal their music" and I will profit from it. Maybe this is a good thing for music in the long run. Instead of record companies signing any idiot with a guitar maybe this teaches them to go out and acutally find quality musicians and bands who have more than one hit in them.

Again, this isn't about just downloading Elotn John/Brittany Spears superstar artists. If you download a band of quality musicians who have more than one hit in them they are never going to be back in major distribution chanels for a second album because the first wasn't profitable.

stealing money from the good musicians, not just the one hit wonders the guys/gals who put out 10 good songs on an album. Its ok i spose download the odd artist but when you download the whole album your argument goes south.

Originally posted by josyk81
Here we go I'll tell you what I'll do to help out these poor musicians who are losing so much money on their crappy one hit cd's. I will take over their job and let as many people who want to download my music and they can take over my job and they will never again have to suffer the terrible inconvienience of having someone "steal their music" and I will profit from it. Maybe this is a good thing for music in the long run. Instead of record companies signing any idiot with a guitar maybe this teaches them to go out and acutally find quality musicians and bands who have more than one hit in them.

Interesting that after all this time that folks are still going to great lengths to justify taking what doesn't belong to them...

As a owner of a pirated MS XP Proffesional cd i would say i like owning a "free" copy of this highly "priced" overly flawed operating system.

I download everything, period. Tons of music, movies, tv shows, software, games, and i actually enjoy installing pirated material to all my friends computer. I actually recommend to everyone to get the pirated version instead of the ''real'' one. Hell, i'll even provide the warez copy if needed. I encourage my friends when they come over to bring a portable harddrive or their laptop so they can refill on the newly released stuff. I invite friends over so they can watch the latest (downloaded) movies on my projector at home instead of spending money to go to the teather. I mean why the hell would i want to pay for 20 minutes of ads / previews and then 120 minutes of a crappy movie. I carry a 20gb usb drive around at all times and its loaded with the most used applications and the latest games isos and i drop the stuff on every computer i see. I pirate for at least 5000$ a day in various forms (just reformating the computer of a friend with winxp pro, antivirus, firewall, office 2003 pro, adobe CS2, a few games and various apps like nero is already more than 5000$ value) I mean do software companies really expect us to pay for all this stuff? they are crazy. I only pay for hardware (hell if i could pirate hardware i would do it) and the games that absolutely need to be bought like world of warcraft. Even quake 4 you can play multiplayer with a pirated version now. Copyrights? that means i have the right to copy it. Poor little artists? make me laugh. Artists can aquire a INSTANT notoriety because of piracy since it makes their stuff spread much faster than with classic, money generating channels. More people listening to the stuff = more fans = more people at concerts = more money for the artist at the end of the line, but less for the record company. Hence all the drama By the RIAA, they are not defending the artists, they are desesperatly trying to keep their jobs a little while longer.

So...

If i was one of those greedy fat corporate pig @ RIAA / MPAA / ETC. i would hire a professional hitman to gun me down. Im probably their worst enemy.


[edit on 10-11-2005 by moonchild]

sorry double post, i quoted myself instead of editing my post.

[edit on 10-11-2005 by moonchild]

Downloading music for free is NOT stealing, in my opinion. The artist only has claim to the credit for performing and writing the music. Music and movies are NOT property, they are ideas and thus, once made public, belong to everyone. The CD that the music is on is property, as its a physical object. But the songs themselves belong to no one and everyone.

I could really care less what the law says. The law in its current form reduces ideas, literature, and cultural things to emrchandise and property. Downloading an old Metallican song is no more stealing than is downloading a PDF of shakespeare's King Lear.

So downloaders are NOT thieves, and the RIAA are nailing their own pathetic coffin shut. They cannot stop progress or the spread of ideas, songs, or information. They either need to get with it or forever be left behind in the stone age and become extinct.

So your argument is 'I can do it and I will so there!'.

An example -

A great game is created reviewers say not to be missed - 10,000 copies sell at 30.00 Dollars = 300,000 dollars of that the company that wrote the game gets 170,000 dollars back cost of producing the game 250,000 in wages, business costs. Piraters pirate game available online sales drop no more money for software company - company goes under - No follow up games. Damn i enjoyed that game pity no more coming out ah well whats next to download. It costs money to produce these games the software houses need to pay the programmers and everyone else involved in the process. Common sense. Same for music to a degree no money no music.

Surely you agree when someone produces something 'A nice piece of furniture' you pay for it, but when they produce a piece of software because its available for free(but not really) online you take it. You would not walk into a shop and lift the furniture would you NO why because its stealing and youll get arrested. No difference. Tell it to the unemployed programmers and multimedia specialists, who can't get work because mid level applications are not worth any money because of pirating. There is a thing called freeware, guys create and give it away for free and ask for donations to keep producing more - Its not an easy process creating these games and apps keep going the way we are and we will see a marked decline in production both in Music and Software so be warned

Originally posted by Munro_DreadGod
Its not an easy process creating these games and apps keep going the way we are and we will see a marked decline in production both in Music and Software so be warned

EVERYBODY PLEASE PIRATE COUNTRY MUSIC!

download a few of those sickly patriotic american movies with fighters flying over the slow mo american flag cheers

Moonchild, saying youe the embodiement of what every anti-pirate fears, isnt going far enough

yea i know. I think this whole piracy Bs antipiracy argument is stupid. If for any reason you feel bad about it and for you it equates to stealing, well by all means go out and buy the damn thing. By doing so ppl like me will still be able to download evertything we can put our dirty paws on.