[Blazestorm2]

There's a difference between making a copy of something, and going into the store and taking it off the shelf.

If he can't see that, he's a moron.

I'm not saying artists aren't entitled to rewards for their music/movies etc. that is copyrighted, but it's not like anyone is making a profit off copying your music etc. It's just that you're not making as much money as you could be if they paid for it. Honestly I think the entertainment/media industry is going to change directions and move away from trying to sell the songs themselves. A lot of bands are giving away their music. People who want big box sets with collectors items, true fans, are shelling out 4-5x much for one of those then people who just download the albums. NIN did this recently, and a lot of other bands are doing similar...

I dunno... blah...

[MonkeyWithaGun]

Your wrong joe... and you know it! or maybe you don't and thats what's wrong with the kids these days.

-patrick

[sammyboy005]

good stuff

[WillyW0nka]

Music prices are ridiculous, that's why people don't pay for it. One could easily spend $10,000 filling up an Ipod the "legal" way in the itunes store. It's ridiculous to charge $.99-$1.49 per song download.

[Blazestorm2]

My point was that artists try to make copyright infringement the same thing as stealing. It's similar, but it's not the same...

There's also a difference between people pirating software for personal use, and pirating software to sell / make money off of. I disagree with the last part. But if it weren't for pirated software I would have never had access to Sony Vegas for video editing, I wouldn't have learned how to use it. But now I purchased a legitimate copy because of certain jobs I might have been making money off of using Vegas.

But the line with media/music gets kinda gray too. As a musician, I'd be pissed if someone took my music and put it in an advertisement or movie without my permission and made a profit off of it. But there's also the personal use side of it, they're not trying to exploit your efforts for personal gain. They just want to listen to your music. Then there's certain media that is really only going to be for personal use (Movies more specifically), so you do feel that you should be getting paid if people want to see what you have to offer.

See what I'm getting at? I think there's a difference... I give my videos out for free, but when someone took my footage, and slapped a 30 second advertisement for "their company", and then tried to post it over pbnation I was pissed. They never asked me, and even if they did I'd still say no.

Stuff like the Zune Pass is actually a good deal for both parties, $15 a month gets you 10 songs to keep, and unlimited access to the music on there. You get to listen to new music without pirating it, without "stealing" it etc. No 30 second "demos" or anything. You have access to their entire library as long as you're paying the monthly fee, and you still get to use 2/3 of that monthly fee on songs to keep forever.

Differin opinions...

[spyderman_xtra]

Hell yeah
"Some people were born to be Doctors, but I was born to steal ****"
Morgan Freeman in Code

[MonkeyWithaGun]

But there's also the personal use side of it, they're not trying to exploit your efforts for personal gain. They just want to listen to your music. Then there's certain media that is really only going to be for personal use (Movies more specifically), so you do feel that you should be getting paid if people want to see what you have to offer.

I get it now Joe... If I steel a car for personal use only and not for the intent of reselling it, than it is OK. After all I just wanted to see what the car manufacture had to offer. Thanks for clearing that up for me...

-patrick

[jmac3]

Originally Posted by MonkeyWithaGun

I get it now Joe... If I steel a car for personal use only and not for the intent of reselling it, than it is OK. After all I just wanted to see what the car manufacture had to offer. Thanks for clearing that up for me...

-patrick

Not the same.


Stealing music is well stealing, but not the same as that.

[WillyW0nka]

Originally Posted by MonkeyWithaGun

I get it now Joe... If I steel a car for personal use only and not for the intent of reselling it, than it is OK. After all I just wanted to see what the car manufacture had to offer. Thanks for clearing that up for me...

-patrick

Stealing a car? Give me a break.

Song download = $.99-$1.49
Toyota = $20,000

Musicians make money from live performances, merchandise, guest appearances etc.

-Toyota makes their money selling their product. There's no way to download a Toyota, you have to just flat out take it and run. If this happened, they would go bankrupt. Musicians won't, because they have other sources of income NOT related to music sales. Sure musicians have something to lose when people pirate music, but Toyota would have EVERYTHING to lose if people just started lifting their cars.

-The overly inflated costs to download music cause people to steal it. I mean when you're charging that much per song, KNOWING that people can EASILY get it for free, what do you expect is going to happen? With music downloads, there's a free and easy alternative to paying for it. With cars...well good luck going out and snagging one without getting caught and sent to jail for grand theft.

-How much does it cost Apple when a song is pirated? Nothing, they don't lose a single dime. How much does it cost Toyota when someone drives the car off the lot for a test drive and doesn't make it back? Thousands of dollars, and most likely someone's job.

-Stealing a car is NOT the same thing, if you think it is, you're being a drama queen. You can argue "well it's the principle of it" or "stealing is bad no matter what you take" but those are purely moot points from a biased and judgmental perspective.

[jmac3]

Originally Posted by WillyW0nka

-How much does it cost Apple when a song is pirated? Nothing, they don't lose a single dime.

Oh how very wrong. If it was impossible/just as illegal to steal songs people would be buying them from places like Itunes. Ipods are one of the most popular MP3 players.

Therefore everytime someone with an Ipod steals music that is money that could have gone to Itunes/artist.

[MonkeyWithaGun]

Originally Posted by jmac3

Not the same.


Stealing music is well stealing, but not the same as that.

Sorry kids it is the same... stealing is stealing.

steal |stēl|
verb ( past stole |stōl|; past part. stolen |ˈstōlən|)
1 [ trans. ] take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it : thieves stole her bicycle | [ intrans. ] she was found guilty of stealing music from the internet | [as adj. ] ( stolen) stolen goods.

Just say I stole the music and cop to it. Then your just a thief.

But when you say I stole the music and it's OK because it not stealing... then your a stupid thief.

-patrick

[WillyW0nka]

Originally Posted by jmac3

Oh how very wrong. If it was impossible/just as illegal to steal songs people would be buying them from places like Itunes. Ipods are one of the most popular MP3 players.

Therefore everytime someone with an Ipod steals music that is money that could have gone to Itunes/artist.

Sorry, but you're the one who is wrong. Apple doesn't lose any money when a song is downloaded off of itunes, the same way Dye doesn't lose money when someone buys an Ego. Just because somebody doesn't buy an item from you doesn't mean you lost money. Does Publix lose money for every loaf of bread someone makes at home? No. Their books are completely unaffected.

"Potential" money isn't real. Nobody includes imaginary money in their financial records, because there is no possible way to calculate it.

If you still don't get it, here's another example:
If I didn't just pirate "More Than a Feeling" would have Itunes have just raked in $.99? No, because I probably just wouldn't have downloaded it if I was going to have to pay for it. Did my pirating a Boston classic cost Itunes any money? No, they didn't lose a dime.

But back to the Toyota case, they DID pay for those cars to be made, they have money invested in them, and if someone takes them, they're losing assets. If someone pirates a song, Itunes loses nothing.

[jmac3]

Apple pays to run Itunes. Apple pays for the right to sell songs on Itunes.

Sure you may not have got that download, but if you would go to jail for stealing that song, and you wanted that song you would have to pay for it. Be it buying the CD, or downloading it from a paysite.

[WillyW0nka]

As someone already mentioned, I like the idea behind the Zune Pass. Not 100% sure how it works, but it's $15 a month for unlimited music access, and at the end of each month you get to keep 10 of the songs that downloaded? If that's about right, then The first step to fixing all of this nonsense is to make people actually want to pay for the music. Quality music and downloads at a low price would provide people with the incentive of buying instead of stealing. Offer decent discounts on purchasing full albums or multiple albums and people won't WANT to risk getting caught pirating because it's not that expensive to just go out and buy the music, plus you get quality music. I can't stand anything on Limewire or Freezewire or whatever everyone has now because it all sounds like exactly what it is, garbage ripped over the internet.

Originally Posted by jmac3

Apple pays to run Itunes. Apple pays for the right to sell songs on Itunes.

Sure you may not have got that download, but if you would go to jail for stealing that song, and you wanted that song you would have to pay for it. Be it buying the CD, or downloading it from a paysite.

And nobody is stealing access to Itunes or the right to sell songs on Itunes, so once again, they're not losing anything they paid money for.

[Blazestorm2]

Originally Posted by MonkeyWithaGun

I get it now Joe... If I steel a car for personal use only and not for the intent of reselling it, than it is OK. After all I just wanted to see what the car manufacture had to offer. Thanks for clearing that up for me...

-patrick

You're comparing stealing a car, to downloading a copy of a song or movie... really?

Media (Music, Movies, Photos) are completely different from a physical product... (CD, DVD, etc.).

If you get Netflix and make a back-up copy on your HDD, is that the same thing as going down to Walmart and taking the DVD off the shelf and running out the door?

I'm sorry we don't see eye to eye I guess...

[jmac3]

Originally Posted by WillyW0nka

And nobody is stealing access to Itunes or the right to sell songs on Itunes, so once again, they're not losing anything they paid money for.

The songs on Itunes are the same songs that you stole. Basically by using torrents you are stealing access to Itunes entire library.

This goes for more than just Itunes. Goes for all of them.

[jmac3]

People who try to say that stealing music isn't stealing make me facepalm.

This coming from me. I steal music, I steal movies, I don't care. At least I know I am stealing money that should be made

[MonkeyWithaGun]

But back to the Toyota case, they DID pay for those cars to be made, they have money invested in them, and if someone takes them, they're losing assets. If someone pirates a song, Itunes loses nothing.

It's the artiest I am more focused on the one that pays real money to make an album... time, studio, equipment, production cost it all adds up.

So don't be fool there is a hard cost to every song that is made just like a car.

But just because you can duplicate a song with little to no cost does not make it a free item, and does not make it free game for any one to take.

To say bands just make their money on live performances, merchandise, guest appearances etc is not just the case there is a lot of small bands that can't afford to tour. Do you have any idea how much small bands get paid at a show? Little to nothing.

-patrick

[WillyW0nka]

Originally Posted by jmac3

People who try to say that stealing music isn't stealing make me facepalm.

This coming from me. I steal music, I steal movies, I don't care. At least I know I am stealing money that should be made

I don't think anyone in here is trying to say it isn't stealing.

[WillyW0nka]

Originally Posted by MonkeyWithaGun

It's the artiest I am more focused on the one that pays real money to make an album... time, studio, equipment, production cost it all ad up.

So don't be fool there is a hard cost to every song that is made just like a car.

But just because you can duplicate a song with little to no cost does not make it a free item, and does not make it free game for any one to take.

To say band just make their money on live performances, merchandise, guest appearances etc is not just the case there is a lot of small bands that can't afford to tour. Do you have any idea how much small bands get paid at a show? Little to nothing.

-patrick

There is no hard cost to songs in the Limewire database, it would be impossible to assign every download a cost other than that of electricity. Reason being? A song can be downloaded an infinite number of times. If it cost a band $75 for 30 minutes in a recording booth to get their track on a CD, and they uploaded it to limewire, how could you possibly find out the cost of each individual download? $75/infinity? Sorry, but the cost to create a track in a studio is a sunk cost, and the downloading of music doesn't affect that cost in any way.

Yes, I do know how little small bands make at live performances. Do you know how little they make selling CD's/downloads? Both numbers are equally

[MonkeyWithaGun]

You're comparing stealing a car, to downloading a copy of a song or movie... really?

So riddle me this oh mighty Joe... so because an item can be copied then it is free... Ideas are easily copied but yet our courts are filled with patent infringements. Do you have any understanding of Intellectual Property (IP).

-patrick