The digital age has resulted in the playing field beginning to level out. A whole wealth of great, independent musicians are now coming through and many of them make a living without going near a record label.
OK, they wont show up in the charts because of the way that is weighted and controlled by the recording industry, but to say the music industry is dying is quite laughable.
Overall the industry made more money last year than ever, it's just the cut the record labels take is slowly reducing and that's a good thing in my opinion.
It's one thing to cut a recording for sale but another thing altogether to make a TV show or a movie. And what if everyone or most people illegally downloaded the music of those "independent musicians?" What would be their incentive to continue producing music? Would they have the time and desire to do so as they are also working a 40 hour week to get through life?
Are you actually going to bother responding and backing up your augment with FACTS, or you going to just make silly remarks.
Your starting to sound very much like some other member on here, who I had plenty of discussion with and they also lacked the ability to actually back up what they say, hrmmm:D
How is this not a fact?
Originally Posted by PPhilster
If it makes you feel better you are still taking something without paying for it. There is nothing "grey morality" about that.
I listen to a lot of stuff on YouTube, and Spotify, I listen to the radio a lot, especially online radio from around the World.
I am still consuming it without paying for it. Is that a grey area morally too?.
Content that is on YouTube is usually because, for whatever reason, a studio has decided to let it be there for it is very easy for them locate and get their content blocked. I'm sure you know that. You are struggling for something to hold onto for justification.
As I told another poster, if it makes you feel better disregard the word stealing, theft, or anything else your are trying to hold onto for justification, but the fact remains that you are still taking something without paying for it. The fact remains if everyone or most people did that, the shows, movies and music would no longer exist in the way that we know them and in the way that makes them so desirable in the first place. Those are two facts you can not talk yourself out of.
It is not about justification, it is about classing it correctly.
Downloading music etc of the internet is not theft, it is Copyright Infringement.
Definition of theft by UK Leglislation:
"A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it; and “thief” and “steal” shall be construed accordingly."
Downloading it off of the internet is in no way depriving anyone of that item. They still have it, you just have a copy of it.
In the case of a TV programme it is even less. Say for instance you download an episode of 'Anger Management' the production company will still be getting paid as the TV channel that it was recorded off had already paid to be able to show it in the first place, and in the case of most TV shows International TV channels will also pay to show it on their channels too.
Piracy is copyright infringement, not stealing or theft BTW.
Comparing piracy to stealing at item from a shop is wrong, the two are not comparable.
Stealing an item means the seller cannot them make money on that item as they no longer have it.
Piracy is just making a copy of an item, the seller still has it to sell and make money.
And if everybody is illegally making a "copy of an item" how does the "seller" make a profit? What then motivates the "seller" to continue crating and producing?
It is not about justification, it is about classing it correctly.
Downloading music etc of the internet is not theft, it is Copyright Infringement.
Definition of theft by UK Leglislation:
"A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it; and “thief” and “steal” shall be construed accordingly."
Downloading it off of the internet is in no way depriving anyone of that item. They still have it, you just have a copy of it.
In the case of a TV programme it is even less. Say for instance you download an episode of 'Anger Management' the production company will still be getting paid as the TV channel that it was recorded off had already paid to be able to show it in the first place, and in the case of most TV shows International TV channels will also pay to show it on their channels too.
As I already classify it how you like, the fact remains you are still taking something without paying for it. No tip toeing around that. That's a razor sharp fact you can never get around.
It's not factual on basis that it is gray area. Theirs the question of morality of piracy, and theirs the good side, the neutral side.
Even creators openly admit that piracy can do great things. I mean just look the ten films in charts and you'll see that the albums,games,TV shows, movies that in most cases these will be the most pirated. The films,tv,movies,games that don't do financially well will be downloaded very few times. That shows piracy obviously causes no damage, and the quality, advertising, publicity etc are far more important, and lack of those elements is the biggest problem not piracy.
As I already classify it how you like, the fact remains you are still taking something without paying for it. No tip toeing around that. That's a razor sharp fact you can never get around.
Well done, we already know that. However that is not the point, we are talking about the damages of piracy you keep going on about, how evil it is. However you seem to have no evidence of this damaging effect of piracy.
And if everybody is illegally making a "copy of an item" how does the "seller" make a profit? What then motivates the "seller" to continue crating and producing?
Well piracy has been common now for more than 10 years. Profits in most industries have only gone up and up, with some the highest grossing films and games ever to have come out while piracy is very popular, and this has not happen and their is no indication it will. So really you've just shot yourself in the foot their, as you've clearly shown piracy has actually not had any real effect.
As I already classify it how you like, the fact remains you are still taking something without paying for it. No tip toeing around that. That's a razor sharp fact you can never get around.
True but taking something wthout paying for it isn't always morally wrong in my book. Like I said if something is out of print then I don't think it is wrong to get it for free if some kind soul has uploaded it. If the companies want to make money they can release it or rerelease. However as I said before I don't think it is morally right to download something that is freely available to buy. If everyone did it then the music industry would not exist but not everyone is doing it. It has not been proven that downloading is causing the decline in the music industry. Personally I think it is more down to the fact that the music today is poor and badly mastered. Even without the Internet I think the music industry would still be in a state of decline but until more research comes along we cannot say either way.
Not going to beat around the bush here *places flame retardant jacket on*
I download all my music (and have done for years now) via usenet mainly, with the occasional torrent, yeah, morally wrong?, probably, do I feel ashamed?, not really, pay for a VPN when torrenting via TPB and KAT (I do however buy the occasional album via Amazon if I feel so inclined)
I buy all my films, TV shows and boxsets however (abeit 99% of them via the Amazon market place, unless I have an urge to own that particular DVD i'll buy it new)
As I already classify it how you like, the fact remains you are still taking something without paying for it. No tip toeing around that. That's a razor sharp fact you can never get around.
Except you are not TAKING anything, you are COPYING something there is a big difference.
Taking something removes the seller's ability to make money on that item.
Copying something means the seller still has that thing to selll but you also have that thing too.
I am not justifying anything, just telling you how it is.
Content that is on YouTube is usually because, for whatever reason, a studio has decided to let it be there for it is very easy for them locate and get their content blocked. I'm sure you know that. You are struggling for something to hold onto for justification.
I have no reason to justify anything, I have no need to illegally download personally.
90% of modern music means nothing to me, I've bought only three or four new CDs in the last ten years, and any others have all been second hand. I have a collection of BluRays too, all of them bought second hand for less than a fiver each. A huge collection of DVDs too, and not one single new DVD bought in maybe the last six year, all bought in the last six years have been second hand for less than £2 each.
So take your wrong assumptions elsewhere. You have a habit of making wrong assumptions about people on here I see.
But the whole industry is corrupt, from the unfair contract terms that give an artist very little profit from their work, that even results in some quite well known artists having to declare bankruptcy and fight their own record company in the courts, an industry that has no problem engaging in widespread copyright infringement itself while demanding no one else does, an industry that uses highly questionable accounting practices to hide profits from movies (hell, according to Hollywood accounting methods even Avatar hasn't made a profit, and we all know that is shite), an industry that demands ever stricter laws and actively bullies
and threatens countries and governments that refuse to do their bidding, an industry that engages in extortion and illegal practices to enforce copyright, an industry that demands special tax breaks and then reneges on deals and tax payments to US states and countries around the World (again, Hollywood accounting at work), an industry that has no problem pushing through laws to suit their own agenda and care nothing about the hard fought rights and freedoms those laws are slowly removing and an industry that constantly produces lies in the form of reports that are usually quickly debunked, yet refuse point blank to engage with and acknowledge independent research that doesn't toe their line.
That's an industry I have a massive problem with, and until it cleans up it's own act, that industry has absolutely no right to try and claim any moral high ground, and neither does any of it's supporters.
As for independent artists, there's a growing number who are making a decent living, some even giving their music away for free a relying on income from donations and/or live shows. OK, they'll probably never be multi millionaire huge selling artists, but for many of these smaller artists they make enough to pay the bills and don't have the hassle of a corrupt recording industry to deal with.
BIB covers it really. It's what you do with that copy after and that's where its should be...'end of'. But the industry has become paranoid about downloading and wants its stopped altogether and has met with a degree of success by persuading ISP's to block sites. Personally I see that as interfering with basic freedom of human rights. It's the thin end of the wedge toward total censorship and control from higher powers over what a person may or may not have access to......and I find that quite worrying.
Something nobody has mentioned is the vast quantity of photographs available on the internet.....99% of which will have copyright on them.
Most of us, including those who are 'anti pirating' will have saved copies of some of those photographs at one time or another......yet curiously nobody gives a flying fig about that! Another interesting point here is the use of personal photographs on sites such as Facebook and various other sites where you upload photos. Once uploaded you cease to own any legal rights to that photograph.
The bottom line being is what you do with either after......which makes me so against
but why would you see it as an infringement of human rights to prevent people effectively taking other peoples work without paying for it?
if it was your work that someone else copied and didn't pay you, or even made money from the work that you had done, without recompensing you, would you still be happy with it?
how about if you were made redundant from your job because piracy reduced the requirement for so many people doing your job? so you are hundreds or thousands of others that do that type of work around the country and world, including many of your collegues, lose your jobs and the possibility of gaining further work in that field is reduced - would you still support peoples rights to be able to download stuff for free, over the rights of the workers to have some protection for their job? look at all the jobs lost at zavvi, hmv, woolworths, best buy, gamestation, game, blockbuster, tower records, etc
Interestingly, a government report released just the other day concluded that downloaders buy more legal content too..
there have been a few studies like this, but i think they are misleading. you could do a study of diet soda and find that most diet soda by volume is bought by fat people, and then conclude that diet soda makes you fat, instead of concluding that fat people eat and drink a lot more, and there is a lot of fat people about
it's not quite the hawthorne effect, but basically the people who will be downloading music illegally are going to be music fans. and who is going to buy the most music? yup, music fans. so whilst the conclusion has been made that this means that downloading illegally leads to greater sales, the opposite may well be true instead. if illegal downloading wasn't possible then it's likely that sales would be higher as people wanting music would have to pay for it instead. people who aren't intersted in music much aren't as likely to download it illegally, and similarly aren't as likely to buy it legally either. just like a non car user is less likely to buy petrol than a car user
with studies like this in general, only so many people will participate, and using a forum as an example, you will often only have individuals from a certain type participating, so the findings aren't going to fully consider the thoughts of the whole public. then you have the issue where people participating may give answers in order to disguise their true feelings or bias the poll. so with illegal downloading, and people happy to get stuff for free, they may well give replies that are less than accurate in order to make it look like what they are doing isn't causing any harm. it's it's an open poll or people were asked to participate, the findings are likely to be skewered
what would be interesting is if you could see how much stuff was downloaded per person compared with how much they bought, to see what little percentages of stuff downloaders actually pay for
Exactly and the DVDs don't come out until after a series has finished. So how are you meant to purchase it? Ok fair enough if you've enjoyed the series you might want to buy it afterwards on DVD, but I can't see someone taking you to court for downloading this weeks current episode of Dallas, or Hawaii 5-0.:rolleyes:
tv shows are legally available to buy in places like itunes a day or so after broadcast, without waiting on the full series to come out
It's not factual on basis that it is gray area. Theirs the question of morality of piracy, and theirs the good side, the neutral side.
Even creators openly admit that piracy can do great things. I mean just look the ten films in charts and you'll see that the albums,games,TV shows, movies that in most cases these will be the most pirated. The films,tv,movies,games that don't do financially well will be downloaded very few times. That shows piracy obviously causes no damage, and the quality, advertising, publicity etc are far more important, and lack of those elements is the biggest problem not piracy.
Well done, we already know that. However that is not the point, we are talking about the damages of piracy you keep going on about, how evil it is. However you seem to have no evidence of this damaging effect of piracy.
Well piracy has been common now for more than 10 years. Profits in most industries have only gone up and up, with some the highest grossing films and games ever to have come out while piracy is very popular, and this has not happen and their is no indication it will. So really you've just shot yourself in the foot their, as you've clearly shown piracy has actually not had any real effect.
A lot longer than 10 years. Internet was around in the early 90s. Was a lot slower to download things but people still managed.
Without scrolling through and reading all the replies on this thread, yes I do download from torrent sites!! I download concerts in FLAC form from Dimeadozen and The Traders Den, plus various bands and artists own torrent tracker sites!! For example, right now Fleetwood Mac are on tour in the USA and Canada so I am downloading all the concerts from that tour on Dime and Traders Den and the bands own torrent tracker site!!
I dont feel I am doing anything illegal or feel and guilt in doing so!! I figure they they have made their money from concert ticket sales, merchandize and any endorsements!! And, any fan cannot attend every concert on a tour so why not download every concert!!
I have FULL tours of:
Prince(as well as outtakes, RARE unreleased tracks, rehearsals, aftershows, demos, etc.)
Fleetwood Mac/Stevie Nicks
Coldplay
Moody Blues
Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers
Dave Matthews Band
INXS(Michael Hutchence time)
Dire Straits
Duran Duran
Depeche Mode
Pink Floyd
Must also applaud the absolute genius who decided to put an unskippable 'You wouldn't steal a car.....' advert on ALL EIGHT DISCS of the Jeeves and Wooster boxset I bought. That'll encourage me not to pirate!
Must also applaud the absolute genius who decided to put an unskippable 'You wouldn't steal a car.....' advert on ALL EIGHT DISCS of the Jeeves and Wooster boxset I bought. That'll encourage me not to pirate!
My sister had a copied DVD of The Day After Tomorrow. First thing that appeared: You wouldn't...
Must also applaud the absolute genius who decided to put an unskippable 'You wouldn't steal a car.....'
Ever since The IT Crowd parodied it, I find it impossible to take that campaign seriously. Anymore. Officer.
"You wouldn't steal a handbag. You wouldn't steal a car. You wouldn't steal a baby. You wouldn't shoot a policeman. And then steal his helmet. You wouldn't go to the toilet in his helmet. And then send it to the policeman's grieving widow. And then steal it again! Downloading films is stealing. If you do it, you will face the consequences!" [FBI team member bursts in behind the girl downloading the film and shoots her; cut to a pool of blood on the keyboard]
Ever since The IT Crowd parodied it, I find it impossible to take that campaign seriously. Anymore. Officer.
"You wouldn't steal a handbag. You wouldn't steal a car. You wouldn't steal a baby. You wouldn't shoot a policeman. And then steal his helmet. You wouldn't go to the toilet in his helmet. And then send it to the policeman's grieving widow. And then steal it again! Downloading films is stealing. If you do it, you will face the consequences!" [FBI team member bursts in behind the girl downloading the film and shoots her; cut to a pool of blood on the keyboard]
Comments
It's one thing to cut a recording for sale but another thing altogether to make a TV show or a movie. And what if everyone or most people illegally downloaded the music of those "independent musicians?" What would be their incentive to continue producing music? Would they have the time and desire to do so as they are also working a 40 hour week to get through life?
Release the hounds.....
How is this not a fact?
Content that is on YouTube is usually because, for whatever reason, a studio has decided to let it be there for it is very easy for them locate and get their content blocked. I'm sure you know that. You are struggling for something to hold onto for justification.
Downloading music etc of the internet is not theft, it is Copyright Infringement.
Definition of theft by UK Leglislation:
"A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it; and “thief” and “steal” shall be construed accordingly."
Downloading it off of the internet is in no way depriving anyone of that item. They still have it, you just have a copy of it.
In the case of a TV programme it is even less. Say for instance you download an episode of 'Anger Management' the production company will still be getting paid as the TV channel that it was recorded off had already paid to be able to show it in the first place, and in the case of most TV shows International TV channels will also pay to show it on their channels too.
And if everybody is illegally making a "copy of an item" how does the "seller" make a profit? What then motivates the "seller" to continue crating and producing?
As I already classify it how you like, the fact remains you are still taking something without paying for it. No tip toeing around that. That's a razor sharp fact you can never get around.
It's not factual on basis that it is gray area. Theirs the question of morality of piracy, and theirs the good side, the neutral side.
Even creators openly admit that piracy can do great things. I mean just look the ten films in charts and you'll see that the albums,games,TV shows, movies that in most cases these will be the most pirated. The films,tv,movies,games that don't do financially well will be downloaded very few times. That shows piracy obviously causes no damage, and the quality, advertising, publicity etc are far more important, and lack of those elements is the biggest problem not piracy.
Well done, we already know that. However that is not the point, we are talking about the damages of piracy you keep going on about, how evil it is. However you seem to have no evidence of this damaging effect of piracy.
Well piracy has been common now for more than 10 years. Profits in most industries have only gone up and up, with some the highest grossing films and games ever to have come out while piracy is very popular, and this has not happen and their is no indication it will. So really you've just shot yourself in the foot their, as you've clearly shown piracy has actually not had any real effect.
True but taking something wthout paying for it isn't always morally wrong in my book. Like I said if something is out of print then I don't think it is wrong to get it for free if some kind soul has uploaded it. If the companies want to make money they can release it or rerelease. However as I said before I don't think it is morally right to download something that is freely available to buy. If everyone did it then the music industry would not exist but not everyone is doing it. It has not been proven that downloading is causing the decline in the music industry. Personally I think it is more down to the fact that the music today is poor and badly mastered. Even without the Internet I think the music industry would still be in a state of decline but until more research comes along we cannot say either way.
I download all my music (and have done for years now) via usenet mainly, with the occasional torrent, yeah, morally wrong?, probably, do I feel ashamed?, not really, pay for a VPN when torrenting via TPB and KAT (I do however buy the occasional album via Amazon if I feel so inclined)
I buy all my films, TV shows and boxsets however (abeit 99% of them via the Amazon market place, unless I have an urge to own that particular DVD i'll buy it new)
Taking something removes the seller's ability to make money on that item.
Copying something means the seller still has that thing to selll but you also have that thing too.
I am not justifying anything, just telling you how it is.
I have no reason to justify anything, I have no need to illegally download personally.
90% of modern music means nothing to me, I've bought only three or four new CDs in the last ten years, and any others have all been second hand. I have a collection of BluRays too, all of them bought second hand for less than a fiver each. A huge collection of DVDs too, and not one single new DVD bought in maybe the last six year, all bought in the last six years have been second hand for less than £2 each.
So take your wrong assumptions elsewhere. You have a habit of making wrong assumptions about people on here I see.
But the whole industry is corrupt, from the unfair contract terms that give an artist very little profit from their work, that even results in some quite well known artists having to declare bankruptcy and fight their own record company in the courts, an industry that has no problem engaging in widespread copyright infringement itself while demanding no one else does, an industry that uses highly questionable accounting practices to hide profits from movies (hell, according to Hollywood accounting methods even Avatar hasn't made a profit, and we all know that is shite), an industry that demands ever stricter laws and actively bullies
and threatens countries and governments that refuse to do their bidding, an industry that engages in extortion and illegal practices to enforce copyright, an industry that demands special tax breaks and then reneges on deals and tax payments to US states and countries around the World (again, Hollywood accounting at work), an industry that has no problem pushing through laws to suit their own agenda and care nothing about the hard fought rights and freedoms those laws are slowly removing and an industry that constantly produces lies in the form of reports that are usually quickly debunked, yet refuse point blank to engage with and acknowledge independent research that doesn't toe their line.
That's an industry I have a massive problem with, and until it cleans up it's own act, that industry has absolutely no right to try and claim any moral high ground, and neither does any of it's supporters.
As for independent artists, there's a growing number who are making a decent living, some even giving their music away for free a relying on income from donations and/or live shows. OK, they'll probably never be multi millionaire huge selling artists, but for many of these smaller artists they make enough to pay the bills and don't have the hassle of a corrupt recording industry to deal with.
but why would you see it as an infringement of human rights to prevent people effectively taking other peoples work without paying for it?
if it was your work that someone else copied and didn't pay you, or even made money from the work that you had done, without recompensing you, would you still be happy with it?
how about if you were made redundant from your job because piracy reduced the requirement for so many people doing your job? so you are hundreds or thousands of others that do that type of work around the country and world, including many of your collegues, lose your jobs and the possibility of gaining further work in that field is reduced - would you still support peoples rights to be able to download stuff for free, over the rights of the workers to have some protection for their job? look at all the jobs lost at zavvi, hmv, woolworths, best buy, gamestation, game, blockbuster, tower records, etc
there have been a few studies like this, but i think they are misleading. you could do a study of diet soda and find that most diet soda by volume is bought by fat people, and then conclude that diet soda makes you fat, instead of concluding that fat people eat and drink a lot more, and there is a lot of fat people about
it's not quite the hawthorne effect, but basically the people who will be downloading music illegally are going to be music fans. and who is going to buy the most music? yup, music fans. so whilst the conclusion has been made that this means that downloading illegally leads to greater sales, the opposite may well be true instead. if illegal downloading wasn't possible then it's likely that sales would be higher as people wanting music would have to pay for it instead. people who aren't intersted in music much aren't as likely to download it illegally, and similarly aren't as likely to buy it legally either. just like a non car user is less likely to buy petrol than a car user
with studies like this in general, only so many people will participate, and using a forum as an example, you will often only have individuals from a certain type participating, so the findings aren't going to fully consider the thoughts of the whole public. then you have the issue where people participating may give answers in order to disguise their true feelings or bias the poll. so with illegal downloading, and people happy to get stuff for free, they may well give replies that are less than accurate in order to make it look like what they are doing isn't causing any harm. it's it's an open poll or people were asked to participate, the findings are likely to be skewered
what would be interesting is if you could see how much stuff was downloaded per person compared with how much they bought, to see what little percentages of stuff downloaders actually pay for
tv shows are legally available to buy in places like itunes a day or so after broadcast, without waiting on the full series to come out
http://www.apple.com/itunes/charts/tv-shows/
And what if I'm watching at US pace? They certainly won't be available in iTunes UK. I've looked.
It's no worse than recording something off the TV. You get the DVDs afterwards because of all the added extras. I doubt iTunes releases those.
A lot longer than 10 years. Internet was around in the early 90s. Was a lot slower to download things but people still managed.
http://lvps87-230-78-245.dedicated.hosteurope.de/
I dont feel I am doing anything illegal or feel and guilt in doing so!! I figure they they have made their money from concert ticket sales, merchandize and any endorsements!! And, any fan cannot attend every concert on a tour so why not download every concert!!
I have FULL tours of:
Prince(as well as outtakes, RARE unreleased tracks, rehearsals, aftershows, demos, etc.)
Fleetwood Mac/Stevie Nicks
Coldplay
Moody Blues
Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers
Dave Matthews Band
INXS(Michael Hutchence time)
Dire Straits
Duran Duran
Depeche Mode
Pink Floyd
And many others!!:D:D
Dowlnoading tv shows such as breaking bad etc
Games
Movies
Music.
Im confused I thought downloading was illegal not just uploading
Yes and no.
I download mostly telly shows from the states as i cant be arsed waiting the months sometimes it takes for them to reach here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TbqBPmInjQ
Great stuff, and SO EFFECTIVE!
Must also applaud the absolute genius who decided to put an unskippable 'You wouldn't steal a car.....' advert on ALL EIGHT DISCS of the Jeeves and Wooster boxset I bought. That'll encourage me not to pirate!
My sister had a copied DVD of The Day After Tomorrow. First thing that appeared: You wouldn't...
"You wouldn't steal a handbag. You wouldn't steal a car. You wouldn't steal a baby. You wouldn't shoot a policeman. And then steal his helmet. You wouldn't go to the toilet in his helmet. And then send it to the policeman's grieving widow. And then steal it again! Downloading films is stealing. If you do it, you will face the consequences!" [FBI team member bursts in behind the girl downloading the film and shoots her; cut to a pool of blood on the keyboard]
I remember that:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALZZx1xmAzg