Illegal downloads

[Fonze]

Do you think it's okay to get music without paying for it?

In a way I see it as bad but in another way I see it as taking a little money from millionaires.

[P_chan]

I thought the were inappropriate for all ages:D

[Fonze]

Is it Illegal to sell downloaded CD's here? I ask that cause at the Hamby flea market there's a couple of guys that sell them and don't seem scared.

[Fonze]

hey if a record company offered me lets say......a couple of ipods(80 gig) and some free music I dont know. peep peep peep.chirp chirp.

[Sex Wax]

Mediatti on base was giving out warnings. I'm not sure what Konnect was doing...if anything.

I think it may be a only be a matter of time before Internet Providers will have to follow some sort of Government restrictions and start punishing more people. They tried to do it before, but now with all the music, games, programs and movies that are illegally download, it's easy to download.

I just hope that it doesn't get so bad that even copying pictures from other websites induces the wrath of the internet watchdogs.

IMO, if it's on the Internet, it should be free for everyone.

I understand artists need to make money, so maybe they need to go back to Records instead of MP3's and get rid of DVDs.

Maybe then, i can use my kick ass record player again.

Or better yet, my 8-track tape player.

[Blues]

Do you think it's okay to get music without paying for it?

In a way I see it as bad but in another way I see it as taking a little money from millionaires.

Stealing is Stealing. No simpler than that. Steal only from the rich? communist mentality? :-|

Is it Illegal to sell downloaded CD's here? I ask that cause at the Hamby flea market there's a couple of guys that sell them and don't seem scared.

Its bad enough someone steals downloads, but then sells it profit? Would you think the same of other counterfeit items?

[Richard Burns]

Downloading is not stealing.

The record companies and big business lobbied the government to label it as such. It's not.

Furthermore an artist only makes about $1 off an album if their with a major label. It's the record companies getting the money.

If it's an independant artist I'll buy the album.

Mini Thin puts that in perspective I'll post it in a minute.

I'll say if the artist is famous already it's not stealing. If it's an independant artist it's stealing.

[Sex Wax]

Wait....why did Blues groan me.......i'm irked now

[Richard Burns]

As far as selling other counterfait items such as fake coach bags I support it as long as they're being sold cheaper.

Maybe if shit wasn't so expensive......

The zanpa I'm drinking is real.

Either way I don't care. I stole when I was a young teen. I had no choice and I'm not proud of it. I only stole from stores though. Not people.

[Blues]

I think it may be a only be a matter of time before Internet Providers will have to follow some sort of Government restrictions and start punishing more people. They tried to do it before, but now with all the music, games, programs and movies that are illegally download, it's easy to download.

Most of what the public sees are civil lawsuits not federal government "punishment" and if anyone is caught for piracy its usually distributors caught selling on a larger scale.

Also there are plenty of "eyetee" geeks who are fighting for the rights of the IT public to keep separation of government and ISP. Lookup Net Neutrality and EFF.

IMO, if it's on the Internet, it should be free for everyone.
China thinks the same way, and they're communist.
Shouldn't companies and software developers be entitled for compensation of a product a customer uses?

I understand artists need to make money, so maybe they need to go back to Records instead of MP3's and get rid of DVDs.

Major record label contracts do not work in favor of artists, the internet has actually been an equalizer for bands to get worldwide exposure without having to need the thousands of dollars that publishers use to front artists.


Also content from WAREZ sites put your system at risk for virus, spam, and trojans......

I groaned because I simply disagree with the statements for debate purposes.

If you were kidding around then I apologize, I didnt see any smilies to tell the diff :D

[Tanimaga]

Wait....why did Blues groan me.......i'm irked now

Because your white.

[Sex Wax]

Because your white.

Actually, I'm off white, with a tinge of tan and grill smoke.

[Tanimaga]

Actually, I'm off white, with a tinge of tan and grill smoke.

You all look alike to me. :)

[Sex Wax]

You all look alike to me. :)

I think you are an illegal downloader person. You must be punished by being chained to a telephone pole and being titty-whipped by an entire Female Roller Derby Team.

[Blues]

I think you are an illegal downloader person. You must be punished by being chained to a telephone pole and being titty-whipped by an entire Female Roller Derby Team.


Thats a good idea at the next promotion ceremony :thumbup:

is titty-whipped wipping your tits, or being whipped by titties? i prefer the latter. :D

[Sex Wax]

I think it may be a only be a matter of time before Internet Providers will have to follow some sort of Government restrictions and start punishing more people. They tried to do it before, but now with all the music, games, programs and movies that are illegally download, it's easy to download.

Most of what the public sees are civil lawsuits not federal government "punishment" and if anyone is caught for piracy its usually distributors caught selling on a larger scale.

Also there are plenty of "eyetee" geeks who are fighting for the rights of the IT public to keep separation of government and ISP. Lookup Net Neutrality and EFF.

IMO, if it's on the Internet, it should be free for everyone.
China thinks the same way, and they're communist.
Shouldn't companies and software developers be entitled for compensation of a product a customer uses?

I understand artists need to make money, so maybe they need to go back to Records instead of MP3's and get rid of DVDs.
Major record label contracts do not work in favor of artists, the internet has actually been an equalizer for bands to get worldwide exposure without having to need the thousands of dollars

Also content from WAREZ sites put your system at risk for virus, spam, and trojans......

I groaned because I simply disagree with the statements for debate purposes.

If you were kidding around then I apologize, I didnt see any smilies to tell the diff :D

Dude, Maybe my point did,'t come off so well.

Illegal downloading = bad

Government punishments also = bad

Better marketing and more control by media distributers in favor of artists = good.

Compensation for artists = good

China = bad

[Tanimaga]

I think you are an illegal downloader person. You must be punished by being chained to a telephone pole and being titty-whipped by an entire Female Roller Derby Team.

Guilty as charged! My tits are glorious.

[Richard Burns]

http://www.japanupdate.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12916&highlight=Mini+Thin+puts

**** thes record labels.

[uriel]

Downloading is not stealing.

The record companies and big business lobbied the government to label it as such. It's not.

Furthermore an artist only makes about $1 off an album if their with a major label. It's the record companies getting the money.

If it's an independant artist I'll buy the album.

Mini Thin puts that in perspective I'll post it in a minute.

I'll say if the artist is famous already it's not stealing. If it's an independant artist it's stealing.

BS. stealing is stealing. damn, the morals of people really are crashing. what is the difference between STEALING from someone who's famous and STEALING from someone who isn't? both are stealing, but when you make the argument to yourself that it isn't hurting the rich guy all you're doing is justifying your THEFT.

as far as the bolded statement, it is. artists MAKE music for sale. they're not giving it away for free. their JOB is to MAKE music to SELL. i can't stand this way of thinking when it comes to music or movies. would you work for free? why would you think it's okay to tell someone else they should?

[Richard Burns]

Because file sharing is no different than giving a CD you bought to your buddies.

But I'll add to this.

For example I'll buy Mini Thin's album because it supports him.

But buying a Linkin Park album is pointless ass the band doesn't see mch of that money anyway. It all makes these record labels rich. **** the labels. They're ducking musc up.
Whaever.

I have no morals anyways so maybe I'm biased but whatever.

[Richard Burns]

I think every artist worked for free at some point. The lve of the musc. Yes being rch some day is nice. But a true emcee does it for the love of the music.

[Richard Burns]

Then wh not ban lmewire and torrent sites than???????

[maraxus]

mpaa/riaa make more money 'prosecuting' downloaders than they do off of retail sales.

[uriel]

Because file sharing is no different than giving a CD you bought to your buddies.

But I'll add to this.

For example I'll buy Mini Thin's album because it supports him.

But buying a Linkin Park album is pointless ass the band doesn't see mch of that money anyway. It all makes these record labels rich. **** the labels. They're ducking musc up.
Whaever.

I have no morals anyways so maybe I'm biased but whatever.

that's the dumbest argument i've ever heard, and the sad thing is that i keep hearing it from different people. yes, it is different. if you BUY a cd, and give it to a friend, you're giving it to 1 person. when you're file sharing, you're giving it to anyone and everyone. it's not your property, and you're taking it. that's called stealing. it doesn't matter if the label or the band is making most of the money. the point is that it isn't yours and you (and millions like you) seem to think it is because you want to "stick it to the man".


I think every artist worked for free at some point. The lve of the musc. Yes being rch some day is nice. But a true emcee does it for the love of the music.

again, that is such BS. "the love of the music" doesn't put food on the table. besides, they were doing it for "the love of the music" so they could eventually make MONEY doing it. this is just more BS for THIEVES to justify their actions.

[uriel]

Then wh not ban lmewire and torrent sites than???????

yeah, because they have the manpower to ban every torrent site right when it pops up. how many thousands of those sites are there?

mpaa/riaa make more money 'prosecuting' downloaders than they do off of retail sales.

BS. huge settlements are "awarded", but they are settlements against people who don't have that kind of money to even pay. so tell me, where does this money they "make" come from?

[Richard Burns]

****ng bullshit.
If I buy a CD or buy a download it MY property because I bought it. So if I file share I'm sharing a file I paid for.

What I don't ge is wh you're stickng up for these greedy ass record labels and bid businss.

[uriel]

i guess it's just my principles of not stealing that's getting in the way of me sticking it to the record labels. if record labels are so jacked up, maybe the moronic bands need to stop signing with them. so because a business is big, and they make more than you, or whatever, stealing from them is okay, because they're big? would you walk into wal-mart and take off with some cd's? they are for sure one of the more corrupt, dirty, and underhanded corporations out there and i don't see you rising up against them saying we should be clearing out their shelves. i personally don't like record labels, however taking music or movies for free is far more distasteful to me personally. that's why i don't do it.

file sharing is easily justified, again, by people like you, who say well, it's my property, i'm just doing with it what i please. if you get a license to broadcast over radio waves, and decide to "share" your cd with whoever can get signal, is that not also wrong? how is it different?

[uriel]

so basically you just feel entitled to things because the entity selling it already has a bunch of money? kind of communistic, dontcha think?

[Richard Burns]

If an artist is worth a shit people will buy the album.

Example is JayZ. He's a CEO. He's a multimillionare. But I will buy the Blueprint 3 because he's the freaking truth. One of he best artists ever. He owns his label so he sees the money.

Mini Thin's album I'll buy because he's independant and will see that money.

[Sex Wax]

OK....I still buy CDs. More so for my music collection, than to pay the bands, but I know if I buy a CD, the band will be paid....a little from my purchase.

That being said, If I want to rip it and give a copy to my friend, or a copy for my wifes car, I'm gonna do it.

It may not put money into the bands pocket per se, but they just made another fan.

I will not however put it onto the internet to be copied.

I won't charge my wife or my friend for the copy I made.

[uriel]

OK....I still buy CDs. More so for my music collection, than to pay the bands, but I know if I buy a CD, the band will be paid....a little from my purchase.

That being said, If I want to rip it and give a copy to my friend, or a copy for my wifes car, I'm gonna do it.

It may not put money into the bands pocket per se, but they just made another fan.

I will not however put it onto the internet to be copied.

I won't charge my wife or my friend for the copy I made.

ripping it for your own personal use, i.e.- wife's car, ipod, backup copy, is completely different that what rb is saying.

what rb seems to be saying is that it doesn't matter that I'M a thief, because someone ELSE will buy it.

[Sex Wax]

ripping it for your own personal use, i.e.- wife's car, ipod, backup copy, is completely different that what rb is saying.

what rb seems to be saying is that it doesn't matter that I'M a thief, because someone ELSE will buy it.

Are you a thief? If you are, then most people that have computers or mix-tapes are guilty.

IMO.....The band needs to get some sort of compensation for all the hard work they and the crews have put into making a song.

And to pay the sound guys, the labelers, the distributors, and the producers need to make thier money back.

My whole point of view is there need to be stricter controls over the initial release of the album, so people like us can buy the CD, instead of being tempted to download it for free. The way things are now, there's only a small window of time for the bands to make money after the CD is released, and the time it hits free internet distribution.

RB's point of view can be confusing at times.

[uriel]

Are you a thief? If you are, then most people that have computers or mix-tapes are guilty.

IMO.....The band needs to get some sort of compensation for all the hard work they and the crews have put into making a song.

And to pay the sound guys, the labelers, the distributors, and the producers need to make thier money back.

My whole point of view is there need to be stricter controls over the initial release of the album, so people like us can buy the CD, instead of being tempted to download it for free. The way things are now, there's only a small window of time for the bands to make money after the CD is released, and the time it hits free internet distribution.

RB's point of view can be confusing at times.

the problem with stricter controls is that you have people who fight tooth and nail trying to say that music shouldn't be controlled, it should be free for all, oppressed by the man, yadda yadda. ya dig? yeah, rb can be confusing.

[Sex Wax]

the problem with stricter controls is that you have people who fight tooth and nail trying to say that music shouldn't be controlled, it should be free for all, oppressed by the man, yadda yadda. ya dig? yeah, rb can be confusing.

I'm sorry if I'm also being confusing, I'm kinda on the bands side, but also on the fans side. So it's confusing for me also. I want the max amount of people to have access to a bands music, for the least amount of money with out breaking any laws......if that makes any sense.

[uriel]

i follow ya.

[SnaFu]

I'm sorry if I'm also being confusing, I'm kinda on the bands side, but also on the fans side. So it's confusing for me also. I want the max amount of people to have access to a bands music, for the least amount of money with out breaking any laws......if that makes any sense.

Your post about the bands and all of the behind the scenes people hit the nail on the head. As far as the major recording labels, they are leeches who jack the artists and their "peon" employees. Not thet I think the employees are peons.

Maybe this seems a bit idealistic but if people want to rip off music off the internet, most bands have web sites now and maybe people can find a way of supporting their favorite artists directly. Ie.. Buying t-shirts or donating money directly to the bands.

It still doesn't do much for the sound engineers, recording technicians, cover artists, ect who make it all happen. Not to mention there are thousands of independant lables out there owned by by kick ass artists who are just trying to get by.

Whats wrong with just purchasing the songs on i-tunes? It's still cheaper than buying the CD and it's not stealing.

Bottom line is that stealing is stealing.

[Richard Burns]

Okay I'm actually confusing myself now.

I'll say I want bands, artists, producers etc etc to get paid. It just pisses me off to no end that these record companies hord their money, **** people over. If that makes any sense.

[Richard Burns]

If somebody puts music they bought on limewire that is personal use. Their not selling it for profit.

[uriel]

Okay I'm actually confusing myself now.

I'll say I want bands, artists, producers etc etc to get paid. It just pisses me off to no end that these record companies hord their money, **** people over. If that makes any sense.

maybe you should be pissed off that RETARDED BANDS keep signing RETARDED CONTRACTS. that's "contracts", as in, legally binding.

[uriel]

If somebody puts music they bought on limewire that is personal use. Their not selling it for profit.

no, that is not personal use. that is putting out for the public to have for free. the ones "using" that, are stealing. not from you, but from the people who legitimately sell it.

[Blues]

Your post about the bands and all of the behind the scenes people hit the nail on the head. As far as the major recording labels, they are leeches who jack the artists and their "peon" employees. Not thet I think the employees are peons.

Maybe this seems a bit idealistic but if people want to rip off music off the internet, most bands have web sites now and maybe people can find a way of supporting their favorite artists directly. Ie.. Buying t-shirts or donating money directly to the bands.

It still doesn't do much for the sound engineers, recording technicians, cover artists, ect who make it all happen. Not to mention there are thousands of independant lables out there owned by by kick ass artists who are just trying to get by.

Whats wrong with just purchasing the songs on i-tunes? It's still cheaper than buying the CD and it's not stealing.

Bottom line is that stealing is stealing.

I agree with what you're saying.

Traditional record companies are pissing money away trying to hold down to old business methods. Digital distribution WILL eventually replace physical CDs and they need to get their ass in gear before they piss off all of the fan base and have no money to make at all.

Producers, sound engineers, and songwriters, etc. are paid upfront for their work by the record companies advance money. So once the CD has been made everyone but the artists have been paid. The record company eats about 90% of the profit and the artist gets a royalty check in the mail. The bulk of most artists salary are generated from live tours and merchandise which could run above 100,000+ if the artist is super popular. But I have to disagree that all record label artists are super rich, its just like a pyramid. There's only a few Jay-Z, Metallica, that are mega rich, but for 80% alot are hard working people to pay their bills. Have you seen some of the MTV cribs of lesser famous artists like P.O.D??

The problem I have with arguments like RB are the people who download every single thing they watch and listen to and don't even make an attempt to buy anything simply because they can do it. If LimeWire and Mininova, and Pirate Bay, and the ilk disappeared, what would all the illegal downloaders turn to for their media? Legal downloads or direct theft in stores?

The bigger issue is that its actually easier to get stolen content than it is to have legitimately paid content. DRM sucks balls and makes it harder for the honest people to handle their media. The companies are going to have to get over the fact that yes some people may make a mix CD for their friends, but pirates are still going to crack DRM anyways. If your product is any good, PEOPLE will pay for it. And their in lies the problem, bands, movies, music, sucks for the most part today....

I like how easy it is to download in itunes, and its so much frickin faster with the servers they have instead of bittorrent :thumbup:

[Richard Burns]

Yes they signed the contracts but it's the same thing as a military recruiter. They'll tell you just enough and the rest you find out once you're in.

A good example was 50Cents first deal in 1999IIRC with Columbia. Basically he got a 50,000$ deal, a contract with fine print, after all the crap they charged him for he was left with 10 grand for himself and had to go back to selling drugs eventually to live.

[uriel]

so a military guy that doesn't like his contract gets a pass from you if he decides to desert because he doesn't like his contract?

again, retard doesn't read contract, retard signs contract, now retard deserves sympathy? my math kinds sucks, but 1+1 doesn't equal 3.

[Richard Burns]

Like I said earlier if a band/musician is good people will buy it anyway. I know I have a pretty big CD collection.

Downloading is not steling. Those who bout the song have the right to share it with whoever the want IMHO.

[SnaFu]

maybe you should be pissed off that RETARDED BANDS keep signing RETARDED CONTRACTS. that's "contracts", as in, legally binding.

Many of these retarded bands are young and just starting out and my guess can not afford a high priced lawyer to make any sense out of the fine print and legal mumbo jumbo embedded into the contracts by the major record labels high priced legal team. If they do question a particular clause in the contract the manager probably tells them "Oh... Don't worry about that. That's just a standard statement but it won't affect you. By the way, there's the door if you don't like it. Good luck finding someone else to cut a deal with."

What would you say about someone who needs a job in any other sector of our society and there is an intelectual property clause that states anything you design is the sole property of the company. How many people can afford to walk away from that job because of that clause in the employment contract? Is that person retarded or should he take a minimum wage job flipping burgers to prove a point?

[Blues]

Yes they signed the contracts but it's the same thing as a military recruiter. They'll tell you just enough and the rest you find out once you're in.

A good example was 50Cents first deal in 1999IIRC with Columbia. Basically he got a 50,000$ deal, a contract with fine print, after all the crap they charged him for he was left with 10 grand for himself and had to go back to selling drugs eventually to live.

Isn't it their responsibility to look over the contract before they sign it? If I was serious about the music business I would at least read some books about music business practices to ensure I don't screw myself or at least hire an entertainment lawyer to look it over.

Should a recruit view a contract just the same? also nowadays you can go online and talk to other people who are in the military so that you arent left totally in the dark by your recruiter, and also they could set up a commanders call to meet real live military to get an honest opinion. So its only up to the recruit to find out what they want to know.

I think the point you're really trying to make is that was 50s only major record offer so he HAD to sign it because he didnt have any better offers and didnt have any leverage to negotiate a better deal. But here's the thing for alot of musicians: alot of their first contracts are shitty. not alot of people get to negoitate unless they have alot of hype.

[Richard Burns]

so a military guy that doesn't like his contract gets a pass from you if he decides to desert because he doesn't like his contract.

Actually I posted before in other threads I believe military members should be allowed to give a 30 day notice and quit.

[Blues]

Like I said earlier if a band/musician is good people will buy it anyway. I know I have a pretty big CD collection.

Downloading is not steling. Those who bout the song have the right to share it with whoever the want IMHO.

lets see. you buy a CD and burn it to a friend: -$15 for business
download and share CD online (say modest number of 10 people) -$150

now your talking real money that people can relate to. and if one person shares a CD on a large scale torrent site you're looking at thousands of lost dollars...

Totally different argument you are trying to make. Yes I believe in fair use, if you BOUGHT it then you share among family and friends, but DO NOT put it back online for worldwide distribution.