Why are you stealing?

[Da Realist]

Not everything is cut and dry. You may have some big superstar complaining how everybody is bootlegging their stuff, but then you have that one guy who is fighting just to get heard on the radio. What happened with Napster is that guys who normally wouldn't get a nod from any record company got to spread their music for basically free. I'm not going to lie and say nobody did anything illegal, but it also provided another way to get noticed.

As far as the stealing goes, I think some of it is a refusal to pay for a crappy product. It's rare you find a cd now that you can sit all the way through or can turn it on any song and you'll just listen. For the most part, companies are hoping you download a few singles or a song for your phone and that's it. That and they throw some idiot out there who can't rap or sing and want you to buy his stuff eventhough he's going to be gone after a couple of albums. So, I say until artists put effort into their music or the companies start pushing decent foks, find what you want for cheap and make your own cds.

 

[Alle_Gory]

Stealing is stealing. What is not cut and dray about that?

I'm not physically taking anything. So if I photocopy a page from a book, am I stealing it? No. It's called copyright infringement.

If you can't afford it then don't buy it.

Well, duh. I download it instead.

Alot of people try to dance around that fact that they are thieves

So I'm a thief then. So is everyone else who has ever stolen anything. Intangible items (like songs) count. So you stole someone's idea, BAM! You're a thief.

Face it its not cut and dry at all. If it was, there wouldn't be a discussion.

Now, let's put it this way:

I'm frugal with my money, I don't spend it on something unless it meets certain standards. So with music, I rarely spend money. I will buy CDs that I already know are good, I've listened to them beforehand. I "stole" a copy then I bought a copy. Is it stealing?

 

[Paradox]

Not everything is cut and dry.

Stealing is stealing. What is not cut and dry about that?

You may have some big superstar complaining how everybody is bootlegging their stuff, but then you have that one guy who is fighting just to get heard on the radio. What happened with Napster is that guys who normally wouldn't get a nod from any record company got to spread their music for basically free. I'm not going to lie and say nobody did anything illegal, but it also provided another way to get noticed.

OK

As far as the stealing goes, I think some of it is a refusal to pay for a crappy product. It's rare you find a cd now that you can sit all the way through or can turn it on any song and you'll just listen. For the most part, companies are hoping you download a few singles or a song for your phone and that's it. That and they throw some idiot out there who can't rap or sing and want you to buy his stuff eventhough he's going to be gone after a couple of albums.

So because you don't like the entire CD you steal the singles that you like?

So, I say until artists put effort into their music or the companies start pushing decent foks, find what you want for cheap and make your own cds.

You mean you want people to steal music until you and some others (whoever they are) feel that the artist is good enough to produce music? What is good music to you is horrible to someone else and visa versa.

 

[speakeasy]

Not everything is cut and dry. You may have some big superstar complain For the most part, companies are hoping you download a few singles or a song for your phone and that's it. That and they throw some idiot out there who can't rap or sing and want you to buy his stuff eventhough he's going to be gone after a couple of albums.

*cough* Soulja boy *cough*

 

[Alle_Gory]

What is good music to you is horrible to someone else and visa versa.

Exactly. And what if you download something you would not have bought in the first place. You're not taking a physical copy, and you're not depriving the publisher of a sale either way.

Is it theft?

 

[speakeasy]

Some artists think the whole piracy/downloading issue is mainly a distraction from the real exploitation in the music industry. Courtney Love offered some really interesting opinions a few years back when the whole Napster debacle was going on:

http://archive.salon.com/tech/feature/2000/06/14/love/index.html

 

[Alle_Gory]

Some artists think the whole piracy/downloading issue is mainly a distraction from the real exploitation in the music industry. Courtney Love offered some really interesting opinions a few years back when the whole Napster debacle was going on:

http://archive.salon.com/tech/feature/2000/06/14/love/index.html

This brings up another good point. Paradox, you shining white knight of morality, tell me what you think of 'stealing' from a real thief.

There's lots of publishers screwing artists out of their hard earned money, so is it wrong to screw the publisher as a consumer?

 

[horaholic]

This breakdown of the cost of a typical major-label release by the independent market-research firm Almighty Institute of Music Retail shows where the money goes for a new album with a list price of $15.99.

$0.17 Musicians' unions
$0.80 Packaging/manufacturing
$0.82 Publishing royalties
$0.80 Retail profit
$0.90 Distribution
$1.60 Artists' royalties
$1.70 Label profit
$2.40 Marketing/promotion
$2.91 Label overhead
$3.89 Retail overhead

It's interesting, that if you pay to download music, sometimes it costs as much as if you bought the cd, except you dont get the packaging for it. Thats a rip off in my book. Or you can consider it making up for piracy.

Just so you know, if you download an album, that you definitely would have bought, you basically took around 35 cents from each band member. I have had a talk with rockstars about this, and they did say there has been a very significant profit loss since the downloading craze has begun.

I do it too, and I admit, there are SOME albums I would have bought anyway, but most of them I wouldn't have, so I dont really consider that stealing. As far as movies go, if I download one, the only company I'm 'stealing' from is blockbuster (and I probably wouldnt have gone out to rent movies that day either.. Movies make their profits from theatre sales, and selling dvds. I will never BUY a dvd. I still go to the theatre just as much as before, so my downloading movies has zero financial impact on anyone. If you wait for a film to go to dvd then rent it, your money has not gone to the production company, it has gone to blockbuster or wherever. That isn't much different from napster. Hell, the only places I know of to get good music is used record stores. Im fairly certain the artists dont see a dime from them either.

Technically, you're stealing every time you change the channel, or go the the bathroom during a commercial break. What if you buy a book, and let someone else read it? Did they just steal from the author? If so, then everyone who goes to the library is stealing too.

I agree, the situation is out of hand, and in many cases it does cost someone money, but there are a lot more where someone downloaded something that they wouldn't have bought anyway, therefore noone is out money. It's hard to draw the line, though. There is a giant difference from stealing something intangible, and stealing a physical CD, because with the latter, people actually LOSE money, as opposed to not gaining money.

 

[Desdinova]

Here's where I stand on the whole thing...

First of all, I have an extremely LARGE music collection. I have many genuine CDs, cassettes, and LPs. Most of my collection is not recorded / burned. I generally find the sound of most MP3s awful, as they usually sound like they're playing in shallow water.

However, I DO download MP3s. There are three basic reasons for this:

1) To check out a new band, I will download a few MP3s that were recorded by them. If the majority of the songs appeal to me, I will buy the album so I have have 'water-free' music. If the album is full of 'filler', the band needs to put more effort into song writing to earn my money.

2) If an album is out of print, that's the record company's fault. I will download an entire album that I cannot buy.

3) If a single-disc album costs me more than $30.00, I will not buy it. I generally refuse to pay an ungodly amount of money for an album that needs to be imported. This is also the record company's fault for not offering the album in my country. Here is an example of an album I downloaded because it's too bloody expensive. If I ever find a copy at a decent price, I will buy it to eliminate the MP3 sound quality curse. I SHOULD be able to find the album I want in a local CD store.

 

[speakeasy]

I remember one of my favorite bands a few years ago being asked about what they think people illegally downloading their music. There response was paraphrasingly, "well, we download other people's music too, so I guess it would be hypocritical for us to complain about it."

I know guys that play in bands who download shvt all the time. I'm willing to bet most artists do it themselves to other bands. I bet you anything.

I think there's a difference between downloading something for your own personal use, and downloading something to make copies and sell for profit like you will see when you go to poor countries, guys selling all these burned CDs for like $2 each. To me, that's always been what "piracy" means, when you are selling copies of someone else's work for a profit. Now once again, I'm not saying that downloading for one's own usage is moral, it is wrong, I admit it, but there are degrees of wrong too and I don't think downloading some song I heard on the radio is nearly as bad as standing on a street corner selling copies of music and movies.

 

[speakeasy]

Here's where I stand on the whole thing...

First of all, I have an extremely LARGE music collection. I have many genuine CDs, cassettes, and LPs. Most of my collection is not recorded / burned. I generally find the sound of most MP3s awful, as they usually sound like they're playing in shallow water.

However, I DO download MP3s. There are three basic reasons for this:

1) To check out a new band, I will download a few MP3s that were recorded by them. If the majority of the songs appeal to me, I will buy the album so I have have 'water-free' music. If the album is full of 'filler', the band needs to put more effort into song writing to earn my money.

2) If an album is out of print, that's the record company's fault. I will download an entire album that I cannot buy.

3) If a single-disc album costs me more than $30.00, I will not buy it. I generally refuse to pay an ungodly amount of money for an album that needs to be imported. This is also the record company's fault for not offering the album in my country. Here is an example of an album I downloaded because it's too bloody expensive. If I ever find a copy at a decent price, I will buy it to eliminate the MP3 sound quality curse. I SHOULD be able to find the album I want in a local CD store.

4) If it's an import album that cost like $30 fvcking dollars for the CD.

 

[Duffdog]

Stealing is never acceptable.

I can't believe you would put forth the idea that the founding fathers should not have stolen the colonies and created the US. Maybe you are all happy about taxation without representation-- or as most people in the US would call it, "stealing." If you were in Britain, you would not call it stealing, you would call it "colony tax"

Heres an alternative view. Say I owned all the food in the world and only wanted certain people to have it, would it be ok for your family to live by stealing food or should they just die?


But if I came to your house and took your house at gunpoint then it belongs to me. Correct? Who does the world belong to?

That is a very naive view of the world. The fact is, you can't do it because I would shoot you first. If you could do it, then you would be free to rename your actions "manifest destiny" or "progress" or whatever you felt was ok. That is the fundamental axiom of modern life, those who have something have the responsibility to defend it from those who would take it from them. Oh, and as to your question about who owns the world; Currently the US owns the world because we have the most weapons and nobody can defeat us by force. As soon as our weapons technology falls behind, the next country with the most weapons will own the world.

Theft is theft no matter when and where.

So, would you prefer that the human race never existed in the first place? According to you, we should never take anything that didn't belong to us-- including food from mother earth and other things necessary for survival.

In conclusion, you seem to like philosophical discussions that paint the human race as a virus and/or bad. If that is the case, feel free to be the first to sacrifice yourself for the greater good.

 

[Paradox]

This brings up another good point. Paradox, you shining white knight of morality, tell me what you think of 'stealing' from a real thief.

There's lots of publishers screwing artists out of their hard earned money, so is it wrong to screw the publisher as a consumer?

I am not a shining white knight of morality. I'm a regular guy like you and the other DJ's here. I just making a point.

Artists sign agreements with record labels of their own free will. Some artists negotiate good deals some do not.

That doesn't make stealing music and videos right

 

[STR8UP]

This brings up another good point. Paradox, you shining white knight of morality, tell me what you think of 'stealing' from a real thief.

There's lots of publishers screwing artists out of their hard earned money, so is it wrong to screw the publisher as a consumer?

Typical left-wing "victimhood" rationalization.

There's a BIG difference between someone who signed a contract of their own free will, as Paradox pointed out, and someone who takes intellectual property and doesn't pay for it.

I'm one of those who is on the fence about this subject, as I am not convinced that it causes as much harm as people make it out to.

That said, I own a couple of trademarks myself, and if someone were to try to use the names that I created for my brands to profit off of the work I put into building them you better believe their ass would get sued.

As far as music goes it's a little different though due to the exposure aspect which creates opportunity for adding axillary revenue sources (download the song for free, pay for the concert ticket because you liked the music).

 

[Paradox]

Technically, you're stealing every time you change the channel, or go the the bathroom during a commercial break.

No that's not true. Broadcast companies are aware that you have to go to the bathroom...lol. Advertisers pay to advertise on programs according to the Neilson ratings. The Advertisers pay to advertise their product during the program hoping that you will just sit and watch the show. You are free to change the channel but advertisers pay to advertise during the broadcast hoping that you will watch that show. If you change the channel you are watching another show and maybe a different advertiser...or maybe the same advertiser who has brought a block of time across several different stations.

What if you buy a book, and let someone else read it? Did they just steal from the author? If so, then everyone who goes to the library is stealing too.

Technically yes sharing a book or music is stealing. if it's with one person or a million. A public library is set up so that people can have access to books and research material. Publishers and book companies consent to have their books in libraries. I'm not sure of the fees involved. Operating expenses are paid for by taxes

I agree, the situation is out of hand, and in many cases it does cost someone money, but there are a lot more where someone downloaded something that they wouldn't have bought anyway, therefore noone is out money.

Why download it (steal it) if you didn't want it?

It's hard to draw the line, though. There is a giant difference from stealing something intangible, and stealing a physical CD, because with the latter, people actually LOSE money, as opposed to not gaining money.

Go back through my previous post about the band that charged 99 cents per song

 

[Paradox]

2) If an album is out of print, that's the record company's fault. I will download an entire album that I cannot buy.

Many times you can't find an album that is out of print but it can be found. That is if you really wanted to pay for it

3) If a single-disc album costs me more than $30.00, I will not buy it. I generally refuse to pay an ungodly amount of money for an album that needs to be imported. This is also the record company's fault for not offering the album in my country. Here is an example of an album I downloaded because it's too bloody expensive. If I ever find a copy at a decent price, I will buy it to eliminate the MP3 sound quality curse. I SHOULD be able to find the album I want in a local CD store.

So once again, if I want something and I think it's too expensive should I steal it?

 

[Paradox]

So, would you prefer that the human race never existed in the first place? According to you, we should never take anything that didn't belong to us-- including food from mother earth and other things necessary for survival.

In conclusion, you seem to like philosophical discussions that paint the human race as a virus and/or bad. If that is the case, feel free to be the first to sacrifice yourself for the greater good.

This is just silly my friend. Humans need food and shelter. Those are basic needs but do we need to steal music? That's my point

As far as the rest of your statement well...The truth is that we need to live together in harmony. what stops this from happening? Bad people. That's why laws were created, so that we can live with each other. I could go on and on about mankind and laws....but you are a very intelligent man so you know what I'm getting at.

 

[speakeasy]

If the worst thing people ever did was download some music for free, this world would be utopia. There's genocide going on in Darfur. I just think there's bigger issues out there to get passionate about than Sony and BMG losing some profit.

 

[PRMoon]

I steal music and movies because I have almost no chance of getting caught. If internet security was like a crack commando team that would bust me as soon as I though about downloading music for free, then I likely wouldn't do it. Seriously, everyone I know and their mom steals copyrighted material since I was in college. That's 10 years of solid theft, and I've met exactly 3 people that have been caught. Of those three only one was summoned to trial and the case ended up being dropped before his trial date.

As a side note, I've done conciderably worse and far more illegal acts in my short time on this planet and not been caught. I've also colluded with police and done illegal things with them and on their behalf. The system has nice wholes for those who know how to slip in and out of. Will I lose sleep over stealing music??? I think that question has already been answered as well.

 

[Alle_Gory]

Typical left-wing "victimhood" rationalization.

What's left and right wing? Conservative and liberal?

That said, I own a couple of trademarks myself, and if someone were to try to use the names that I created for my brands to profit off of the work I put into building them you better believe their ass would get sued.

We're discussing copyright infringement without any kind of monetary gain.

Use of a trademark or copyright for profit I would consider to be actual theft. You're depriving the owner of real revenue they could have had and instead keeping it for yourself (as the infringee).

I am not a shining white knight of morality. I'm a regular guy like you and the other DJ's here. I just making a point.

Yeah, I know. I'm just giving you a hard time. You're in the same boat as us if you've ever copied something. Music, books, taking photos of things you should not have.