Dont steal music!
11-21-2001, 12:41 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Dont steal music!
Right at the end of that I-Pod commercial it says "Don't steal music" in small letters at the bottom. I guess that guy in the commercial bought the CD that he then uploaded the music from (sure).
Drugs are bad...ummmkay.....
Scot
Drugs are bad...ummmkay.....
Scot
11-21-2001, 01:39 PM
#3
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Sydney
Posts: 3,936
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How can you steal a bunch of bits abyway? The idea that people can own information is absurd. Artists and record companies need to think of another way to make a living - by offering people something they actually want to pay for.
11-21-2001, 02:03 PM
#4
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Wheeler Army Airfield, HI
Posts: 18,759
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If a damn CD didn't cost $20 I wouldn't be against buying more. Think about how much money these record co/artists make. Surely they can afford to kickback a little to their loyal fans.
11-21-2001, 02:11 PM
#5
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Santa Clara
Posts: 1,607
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
naishou,
Wow, man, wow. What you just said is an absolute absurdity. The "idea that people can own information" is prescient and necessary for business and society at large.
I don't think anyone I've ever met has said they didn't think artists deserve to get paid for their work. I have to admit that I think CDs are bit too expensive sometimes, and I definitely think the record industry deserves about 1/10th of the share they now get -- but I will always support the artist's need to eat and sleep in some form of shelter.
Artists work hard for those bits -- they're not made by magic. Surely anyone who entertains you deserves some kind of compensation. If we don't feed and house those artists, they're going to stop making music. I don't think anyone wants that.
Also, intellectual property is necessarily "ownable." Anything that takes hard work, ingenuity, and skill to create, whether it is material or not, has intrinsic worth. The blueprints for a new house, the masks for a new microprocessor, and the bits of an artist's recording all have intrinsic worth.
I don't care if you steal top 40 bubblegum fad bullshit that no one wants to pay $16 for -- but if you really love a band, you shouldn't have a problem with providing them sustinence in return.
- Warren
Wow, man, wow. What you just said is an absolute absurdity. The "idea that people can own information" is prescient and necessary for business and society at large.
I don't think anyone I've ever met has said they didn't think artists deserve to get paid for their work. I have to admit that I think CDs are bit too expensive sometimes, and I definitely think the record industry deserves about 1/10th of the share they now get -- but I will always support the artist's need to eat and sleep in some form of shelter.
Artists work hard for those bits -- they're not made by magic. Surely anyone who entertains you deserves some kind of compensation. If we don't feed and house those artists, they're going to stop making music. I don't think anyone wants that.
Also, intellectual property is necessarily "ownable." Anything that takes hard work, ingenuity, and skill to create, whether it is material or not, has intrinsic worth. The blueprints for a new house, the masks for a new microprocessor, and the bits of an artist's recording all have intrinsic worth.
I don't care if you steal top 40 bubblegum fad bullshit that no one wants to pay $16 for -- but if you really love a band, you shouldn't have a problem with providing them sustinence in return.
- Warren
11-21-2001, 02:21 PM
#6
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Santa Clara
Posts: 1,607
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
itweintz,
You're half right. The record industry makes an absolute killing off of CD sales. The artists, on the other hand, typically get very little. A reasonable record contract for a decent band's first album might be worth $125,000 or so -- and for a four person band that records about once a year -- that's not much better than minimum wage. Sure, there are megastars that make oodles of money, but there any many, many more bands that don't get much at all.
I'm all about paying for the music I love. I'm also all about removing the pointless middleman (the RIAA) who makes it so expensive and provides virtually no benefit to the consumer.
For a digression...
I'd like to see an electronic distribution system in which you may download any album for just a buck or two -- and all the money goes pretty much directly to the artist(s). If, however, you really like the music, you'd be encouraged to donate a few bucks more. I would gladly pay $10-$15 for an absolutely incredible album. There are many more I'd like to have, but really only value at $1-$2.
Because music is a form of art, and is therefore judged subjectively, everyone will assign their own numerical value of worth to any given album. You shouldn't have to pay any more for it than what you feel it is worth.
Naturally, most people will just pay the bare minimum, take it and leave -- but that's ok -- most people can afford $1, so they won't have much incentive to steal it -- and even $1 per album is a HUGELY improved profit for the artist.
I think it would be a win/win situation for fans AND artists, unlike both CD distribution and the internet bootleg community.
- Warren
You're half right. The record industry makes an absolute killing off of CD sales. The artists, on the other hand, typically get very little. A reasonable record contract for a decent band's first album might be worth $125,000 or so -- and for a four person band that records about once a year -- that's not much better than minimum wage. Sure, there are megastars that make oodles of money, but there any many, many more bands that don't get much at all.
I'm all about paying for the music I love. I'm also all about removing the pointless middleman (the RIAA) who makes it so expensive and provides virtually no benefit to the consumer.
For a digression...
I'd like to see an electronic distribution system in which you may download any album for just a buck or two -- and all the money goes pretty much directly to the artist(s). If, however, you really like the music, you'd be encouraged to donate a few bucks more. I would gladly pay $10-$15 for an absolutely incredible album. There are many more I'd like to have, but really only value at $1-$2.
Because music is a form of art, and is therefore judged subjectively, everyone will assign their own numerical value of worth to any given album. You shouldn't have to pay any more for it than what you feel it is worth.
Naturally, most people will just pay the bare minimum, take it and leave -- but that's ok -- most people can afford $1, so they won't have much incentive to steal it -- and even $1 per album is a HUGELY improved profit for the artist.
I think it would be a win/win situation for fans AND artists, unlike both CD distribution and the internet bootleg community.
- Warren
Trending Topics
11-21-2001, 03:37 PM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Bedford
Posts: 4,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think the record companies are as worried about the person who downloads for their own use as they are about the wholesale exchange that was taking place on Napster. Their biggest worry is the thief who makes thousands of copies of a CD and markets it in China or other third-world countries. I think ASCAP could clearly explain their position on this subject.