Duende Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 All the "I've never illegally downloaded music" comments are interesting. I guess it's like asking couples how much they have sex. You tell people what makes you sound better. An estimated 50 to 70% of all internet use is used for piracy. LMOL good analogy... But I am one of the people you probably roll your eyes at! I only have original DVDs, books and music. BTW, is it criminal to buy an album, put it on your i tunes and then later sell the cd? Is that a legal loophole? Matt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stein Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 LMOL good analogy... But I am one of the people you probably roll your eyes at! I only have original DVDs, books and music. BTW, is it criminal to buy an album, put it on your i tunes and then later sell the cd? Is that a legal loophole? Matt "not all music is entertainment" So, if you sold someone, say, a Children of Bodom CD, that might be a criminal offence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duende Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 "not all music is entertainment" what kind of music isn't in your opinion Stein? i find hair metal for example very 'entertaining' Matt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff-7 Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 All the "I've never illegally downloaded music" comments are interesting. I guess it's like asking couples how much they have sex. You tell people what makes you sound better. An estimated 50 to 70% of all internet use is used for piracy. Or maybe our parents raised us well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky4 Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 Or maybe our parents raised us well. You must be the "He" in "Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone". Congrats!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky4 Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 "not all music is entertainment" So, if you sold someone, say, a Children of Bodom CD, that might be a criminal offence. What's with all this Children or Boredom stuff? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShredAstaire Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 This one's still goin eh? Good work Steve! :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stein Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 what kind of music isn't in your opinion Stein? i find hair metal for example very 'entertaining' Matt I was actually quoting someone else when I wrote that. It is a british quote. And, the guy knows something about music. I was also making reference to something I read about a British law, where goods sold for an intended purpose have to not fail in normal usage of it's intended purpose. Something like that. And, lastly, I just recently heard for the first time the band I mentioned, and just could no longer restrain myslf. And, keep in mind that being an American, common sense, especially when it comes to the law, is not held to a high standard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy R Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 Andy, good commentary, goes to the heart of the matter (of this hijacked thread) and I also realize this comes from some experience and knowledge of poeple's experience. The record industry is notoriuous for having theives and snakes. Bad and misleading contracts, stealing profits. Problably THE example of the worst society has to offer in the business world. Even going so far as to sign a number of bands just to KEEP them from recording and making them compete, or just simply wanting to keep the rights should anything happen. And no doubt plenty of times where the record company would not think twice about misleading or stealing from an artist. And for all the honest ones there are, chances are the dishonest ones are gonna get to someone first, because that is how they do it. Personally, I am at odds to the way the whole thing is set up to begin with. It does not reward hard work and effort, or even talent. Just even considering songwriters vs performers. Get a song on the radio and you could be set for life for an hours worth of work, but the performer doesn't eat if he doesn't work. And who is the responsible talent for the success? The thing that decides the napster issue for me, is that while an argument CAN be made agaisnt the record industry, Napster and what they did takes it to the next step. What napster attempted to do represents the purest form of what is wrong with the industry they made money from. And to me. the worst of society. That is by making money from something of which you did not contribute. And worse, preventing the ability for those who could, all the while telling us they don't deserve of need it. And, as you have likely seem more than I, what about all the other poeple employed in the making of the music industry. Look at all the poeple it takes to make a record. Surely, they deserve a piece of the pie. Records don't sound great just because of the musicians, and when the musicians slack off by not having songs done or can't do the performance, how many hours does the rest of the crew spend making it good? I am going to sum this up with a judgement I may have no place in having. I think that between you and the Napster guys, you have contributed more to the music industry than they have, but they have made a lot more money there than you. And it is guys like them who make money the way they do that make it so guys like you make your money in the computer industry rather than the music industry. And You have much more to contribute than they do. Like I said before I can't speak for the Napster guys motives or agenda. So I am not attempting to defend their ethics one way or the other. I know that they just basically did what has been done by other industries ( blank tapes and recorders, cd and dvd recorders) etc... in the past but utilizing the newest technology. People have been making copies in one form or another for years. Agreed that the distribution system is at a much greater scale but it comes down to the same principle. Thank god for bootlegs! What a wonderful capturing of history! Sometimes evolution and revolution are caused and incited through rebelling against what is the current standard for what is considered to be "legal/illegal" , "Moral", and "Unethical". It forces change and a shift from status quo. As in any "war" there will always be some collateral damage but a lot of the "music Industry" insiders also profited greatly on the fact that it was pretty much a locked-out, insider industry that gave few chances for people to "break in" due to "good ol boy" mentality. Look into how many musicians are actually "first call" studio musicians for the music and film industry as well as songwriters, producers, engineers, studios etc... Has file sharing hurt them more than Pro Tools or You Tube? I find this to be a hard topic to take a real moral and ethical stance as I do believe it is fundamentally wrong to steal. I also work hard and wouldn't want someone stealing from me and especially continuing to profit from it. There is just so much ambiguity at where the line is in this arena. I unfortunately am unable to to strictly follow my own belief in this 100% and that is why I feel my opinions are also contradictory. Essentially you shouldn't be able to listen to a song on You Tube if you don't own it. Essentially you shouldn't be able to even post yourself playing a cover of that song ( realizing that there is probably not much profit making going on in that area) What about cover bands? They are making money playing other peoples songs... Isn't that stealing too? Dj's? You are essentially breaking the law and stealing when you do this. So is a little bit of stealing OK or does stealing in a different way make it more acceptable. It's like being "Kinda Pregnant". Is it less tragic or wrong to murder 1 person than it is 1000 or just more noticeable or if you do it more or less "Humanely" ? Is Albert Einstein a genius or a murderer? Was Napster morally corrupt or was it the thousands/millions of people that utilized it responsible? To me this gets to be like pondering infinity.... so I digress... In the end... right or wrong I feel that Napster forced a change for the better of all ( at least future) musicians and forced a hole into the industry where the people can and will decide who are successful and not the Music and Radio industry... All of this technology has enabled most all musicians an economical and fair way to be seen, heard, marketed, and distributed and potentially make money and or become "Famous" It's now up to the musicians to figure out a way to leverage and profit from this as now the playing field is essentially open to be heard by millions.It also makes it a lot easier for the music industry to find the people they want to put their money behind... My Brain cell hurts.... Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShredAstaire Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 How on earth did a Dave Grhol thread turn into a piracy thread? What the heck happened here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MojoRedFoot Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 It happens a lot. Any thread can be turned into a piracy thread. Someone mentioned Metallica and everyone loves to hate on them for one reason or another and Napster is still a hot issue I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff-7 Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 It happens a lot. Any thread can be turned into a piracy thread. Someone mentioned Metallica and everyone loves to hate on them for one reason or another and Napster is still a hot issue I guess. Come on Matt, it's only been like a decade... haha. Only posted the vid for humor purposes promise I wasn't instigating anything on Metallica's behalf! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ne14t? Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 I take some blame for the derailment, I was harassing the guy who couldn't grasp why its illegal to download music, I fed the troll, sorry! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fl00dsm0k3 Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 How on earth did a Dave Grhol thread turn into a piracy thread? What the heck happened here? still tring to figure that out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff-7 Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 still tring to figure that out It's the Gibson forums, it goes fine for a while then it flies off the handle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dem00n Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 Music will always exsit. The end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 . Piracy sucks. . . . . No matter who's doing the sucking. . . <_< Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy R Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 Like I said before I can't speak for the Napster guys motives or agenda. So I am not attempting to defend their ethics one way or the other. I know that they just basically did what has been done by other industries ( blank tapes and recorders, cd and dvd recorders) etc... in the past but utilizing the newest technology. People have been making copies in one form or another for years. Agreed that the distribution system is at a much greater scale but it comes down to the same principle. Thank god for bootlegs! What a wonderful capturing of history! Sometimes evolution and revolution are caused and incited through rebelling against what is the current standard for what is considered to be "legal/illegal" , "Moral", and "Unethical". It forces change and a shift from status quo. As in any "war" there will always be some collateral damage but a lot of the "music Industry" insiders also profited greatly on the fact that it was pretty much a locked-out, insider industry that gave few chances for people to "break in" due to "good ol boy" mentality. Look into how many musicians are actually "first call" studio musicians for the music and film industry as well as songwriters, producers, engineers, studios etc... Has file sharing hurt them more than Pro Tools or You Tube? I find this to be a hard topic to take a real moral and ethical stance as I do believe it is fundamentally wrong to steal. I also work hard and wouldn't want someone stealing from me and especially continuing to profit from it. There is just so much ambiguity at where the line is in this arena. I unfortunately am unable to to strictly follow my own belief in this 100% and that is why I feel my opinions are also contradictory. Essentially you shouldn't be able to listen to a song on You Tube if you don't own it. Essentially you shouldn't be able to even post yourself playing a cover of that song ( realizing that there is probably not much profit making going on in that area) What about cover bands? They are making money playing other peoples songs... Isn't that stealing too? Dj's? You are essentially breaking the law and stealing when you do this. So is a little bit of stealing OK or does stealing in a different way make it more acceptable. It's like being "Kinda Pregnant". Is it less tragic or wrong to murder 1 person than it is 1000 or just more noticeable or if you do it more or less "Humanely" ? Is Albert Einstein a genius or a murderer? Was Napster morally corrupt or was it the thousands/millions of people that utilized it responsible? To me this gets to be like pondering infinity.... so I digress... In the end... right or wrong I feel that Napster forced a change for the better of all ( at least future) musicians and forced a hole into the industry where the people can and will decide who are successful and not the Music and Radio industry... All of this technology has enabled most all musicians an economical and fair way to be seen, heard, marketed, and distributed and potentially make money and or become "Famous" It's now up to the musicians to figure out a way to leverage and profit from this as now the playing field is essentially open to be heard by millions.It also makes it a lot easier for the music industry to find the people they want to put their money behind... My Brain cell hurts.... Andy What... no Takers? Nair a genuine rebuttal...? What has this Dave Grohl sucks, Napster Piracy/Metallica are sell outs thread come too??? Sheesh Maybe it just needs a little something else.... How about Ace Frehley is a racist?? And It has Ed Roman to boot! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=de972gpj_h8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damian Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 I gave you a +1 Andy because you post well.............Why the thread title changed................ .......... I gotta give Gene a WTF for talking about morality..........He should talk about monogamy......... I haven't downloaded anything myself because I haven't learned how to yet...I have my people do it for me.............. [thumbup] ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stein Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 Ok..I'll rebutt. Comparing the napster version of file sharing to the cassettes we used to have is not an accurate analogy. At the time of cassettes, we made copies for each other and valued them only because we were actually TOO POOR to buy the record, but we DID buy the records of the bands we really liked. The tapes we traded were of poor quality and was not a product to compete or threaten the recording industry. Niether were bootlegs, as because they were illegal, they could not be distributed in a way to threaten the business. By the time of napster, poeple had forgotton what sound quality was and were starting to use downgraded digital media for everything, and to have a file shared copy was to the consumer at the time just as good to them, and thus a real true threat to the record business. Regarding "collateral damage", sure, I can live with that. I'll take one for a bro. I believe that for the most part, Metallica was aware of the damage they would suffer to thier image and reputation, and I get the impression that they were doing it because they thought it to be the right thing to do as much as anything. And also regarding Metallica, they had kids. They grew up. We all did. It is a hard thing to do when you are that ****ed up when you are young, and even harder when you have built your living and career on things you just can't do anymore and when you have to change your ****ed up ways. Even harder they made themselves on the reputation of "authenticity". I wouldn't exactly come to any one of them for advise on jesus or the last word on the right thing to do, but to want to be better poeple, to admit to being assholes at times while thinking they don'rt want to be assholes. Somehow they found a way to stay together, still be "authentic", and still give us themselves as a band, I admire that. I don't know them personally and have never met them, I'm just going on what they have chosen to share with the public. As far as business practices and ethics, what is right and wrong, the way I myself judge it, is based on motivations and contributions. I like money just as much as the nexy guy. I dig the stuff. Give me cash and I'll take it. But if there is efforts of making money and no real contribution being made, it problably isn't right. Not that anyone is perfect and we all do things that aren't right from time to time not realizing it. And thus, if you point out to a person and explain that what they are doing is not right and explain why, and they respond by making excuses for themselves, THEN we can judge those actions and make observations of character. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 Well... Over the past number of years this has been an ongoing discussion. Two factors: 1. Increasing "digital rights" questions that actually make some things difficult that are quite legal and result in loss of music as much as loss of an original medium. 2. "We" had also best be prepared for a different paradigm of music distribution 'cuz it ain't 1960. In ways I think it's not dissimilar to the change in performance and venue paradigm of the 1950s. But we'll never again return to the "record" and "radio" with a bit of three-network television channels tossed in. The question today is how to use the Internet to develop and improve a musician or band's income. The bottom line is the bottom line. My personal opinion is that even "piracy" probably has been good for many musicians' bottom line - the well known but niche market musicians and bands who can use more exposure. It's the biggies whose revenues had come from selling recording media and copyrighted tunes/lyrics who likely are most hurt. m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Searcy Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brundaddy Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 When it comes to anything Gene Simmons sez, I'll "consider the source" ... I promise you he's no angel where ideas on racial caste systems are concerned. As long as people aren't using the files to make money, file sharing is a good thing. Once paid subscriptions and download fees come into play, that's where the artists usually get boned. You're a fool if you think the main purpose of iTunes is to pay artists. That's a legally mandatory afterthought. The big, fat question is how do you define piracy? In The City of God, St. Augustine tells the story of a pirate captured by Alexander the Great, who asked him, “How dare you molest the sea?” The pirate replied: “How dare you molest the whole world? Because I do it with a little ship only, I am called a thief; you, doing it with a great navy, are called an emperor.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy R Posted May 1, 2011 Share Posted May 1, 2011 Well... Over the past number of years this has been an ongoing discussion. Two factors: 1. Increasing "digital rights" questions that actually make some things difficult that are quite legal and result in loss of music as much as loss of an original medium. 2. "We" had also best be prepared for a different paradigm of music distribution 'cuz it ain't 1960. In ways I think it's not dissimilar to the change in performance and venue paradigm of the 1950s. But we'll never again return to the "record" and "radio" with a bit of three-network television channels tossed in. The question today is how to use the Internet to develop and improve a musician or band's income. The bottom line is the bottom line. My personal opinion is that even "piracy" probably has been good for many musicians' bottom line - the well known but niche market musicians and bands who can use more exposure. It's the biggies whose revenues had come from selling recording media and copyrighted tunes/lyrics who likely are most hurt. m As always Milod you see directly at what I'm getting at. Some times a break and advancement past a current Paradigm is caused by force or people "breaking the Rules" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy R Posted May 1, 2011 Share Posted May 1, 2011 Ok..I'll rebutt. Comparing the napster version of file sharing to the cassettes we used to have is not an accurate analogy. At the time of cassettes, we made copies for each other and valued them only because we were actually TOO POOR to buy the record, but we DID buy the records of the bands we really liked. The tapes we traded were of poor quality and was not a product to compete or threaten the recording industry. Niether were bootlegs, as because they were illegal, they could not be distributed in a way to threaten the business. Actually I disagree that this is a bad analogy. If you look back the Record and Movie Industry has tried to stop every "New" consumer grade products that allowed people to copy music or video. Always using the same argument. You also skipped CD, DVD, Blue Ray. You also wrap everything into justifications around what " you/we" did concerning motives, reasons and justifications for doing what was still Piracy and illegal. Not everyone went and bought the albums and not everyone was too poor to buy them either. I could say I still do the same today ( and actually do ) if it is something I like and want to support. By the time of napster, poeple had forgotton what sound quality was and were starting to use downgraded digital media for everything, and to have a file shared copy was to the consumer at the time just as good to them, and thus a real true threat to the record business. Not everyone is or was an "Audiophile" Regarding "collateral damage", sure, I can live with that. I'll take one for a bro. I believe that for the most part, Metallica was aware of the damage they would suffer to thier image and reputation, and I get the impression that they were doing it because they thought it to be the right thing to do as much as anything. And also regarding Metallica, they had kids. They grew up. We all did. It is a hard thing to do when you are that ****ed up when you are young, and even harder when you have built your living and career on things you just can't do anymore and when you have to change your ****ed up ways. Even harder they made themselves on the reputation of "authenticity". I wouldn't exactly come to any one of them for advise on jesus or the last word on the right thing to do, but to want to be better poeple, to admit to being assholes at times while thinking they don'rt want to be assholes. Somehow they found a way to stay together, still be "authentic", and still give us themselves as a band, I admire that. I don't know them personally and have never met them, I'm just going on what they have chosen to share with the public. I actually don't really care about Metallica one way or the other. They ( at least Lars ) made a stand for what he thought was best for the band. How that worked out for them concerning fans I'm not sure As far as business practices and ethics, what is right and wrong, the way I myself judge it, is based on motivations and contributions. I like money just as much as the nexy guy. I dig the stuff. Give me cash and I'll take it. But if there is efforts of making money and no real contribution being made, it problably isn't right. Not that anyone is perfect and we all do things that aren't right from time to time not realizing it. We also do things that aren't right "from time to time" completely aware of what we are doing is wrong ( or technically) illegal/moral but we choose individually where that line is. Every time I mention the coverband scenario everybody gets pretty quiet about their opinion and I have never had anyone try to defend it. And thus, if you point out to a person and explain that what they are doing is not right and explain why, and they respond by making excuses for themselves, THEN we can judge those actions and make observations of character. My ramblings here are not in defense of Napster or any company that tries to profit from pirated music. My defense or point is that at a "consumer level" its the same thing that has been happening for years just in a different medium. Napster was only a minor threat to the music, radio, television, and movie industry. The real threat overall to those industries is the internet and digital technology in general. The masses now have a way to communicate, utilize multimedia and reach millions of people without being controlled, filtered, judged, screwed by these industries that had a monopoly of the analog and print world. I believe that at some point these same entities will eventually get together and pay the right politicians and essentially try to "buy" the internet through legislation. If there is a way they will and again they will have control of the who, what, where, when, and to how many that people will be able to freely and easily be able to " communicate and market to" Hopefully we as a nation and the rest of the world of people ( those whose governments have not already started doing this) will not allow this to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.