Napster.... Freedom or Fraud?

[MrSiD]

I will not pay for downloading the compressed junk called MP3...

MP3 has some use when played through computer speakers. But for serious listening no self respecting music lover will ever play MP3 =)

If I like an artist, I buy the record. Napster is just a way to search for new music, try out different styles and artists with ease. (Ease which is relative, on many days its jammed useless..)
So in that sense Napster is only beneficial for the new artists hoping for their break.
(One good example of this is Darude who recorded his hobby music on MP3, spreaded it on internet and is now nr. 1 on european hit singles chart.. I don't see HIM complaining.)

Of course I can see the lost market in all the youngsters with their portable cd-radioplayers (suitable for making background noise.) But the reality is that those kids couldnt afford to buy records anyway, so nobody really loses there. In my experience, the people who listen to music seriously and own a lot of records will not trade down in quality.

As much as many people would like it, MP3 can never reach the quality of the original recording. There's a market even for the next generation of cd, SACD (Super-Audio Compact Disc.) For many, the 16-bit CD quality is not enough.

Sure an MP3 coded at 320Kb/s can come close to the original CD. Still, due to extra processing, its performing worse than the original (if not for any other reason, then for going through several pre-amp stages, and even worse, some embedded audio device in the coding computer.) And with low compression rates the limit for the amount of stored music maxes out fast in the portable devices.

Sure the computer can store 80 gigs easy and cheap these days.. But most computers generate enough background noise by themselves to cancel any serious listening.
Not to mention computer remote controls are pretty rare stuff even today.

The day they charge for Napster, happens two things: Napster the original dies.

Bootleg hacked Napster servers will set up in Russia and other generally lawless places.

- Business will continue underground as usual..

.02

[MiG Eater]

If Napster allowed millions of users free access to subcription based services (like MA access to AH, for instance), would you feel differently Nate?  I'm curious, because we are on opposite sides of this discussion.

MiG

[TheWobble]

"If Napster allowed millions of users free access to subcription based services (like MA access to AH, for instance), would you feel differently Nate? I'm curious, because we are on opposite sides of this discussion."

thats really not a justifiable comparison, Napster isnt doing ANYTHING, the users are, I use napster most of the time to fiind comedy routiens and funny sound bites, or other stuff.  Napster doesent allow anyone to get into a restricted area of any kind or to bust past pay services, i just allows people to trade mp3's

comparing it to hacking into pay to play game is unrealistic dirty pool.

[SOB]

 

Originally posted by MiG Eater:
If Napster allowed millions of users free access to subcription based services (like MA access to AH, for instance), would you feel differently Nate?  I'm curious, because we are on opposite sides of this discussion.

MiG

Eh?  On one hand, you've got a company actively hacking into another company's software and providing access to it.  On the other hand, you've got a company providing users with a way to swap files with an .mp3 extension point to point between themselves.

I see you were trying to make a point, but that's a pretty big leap...you're comparing apples to oranges there.


SOB

[MiG Eater]

I disagree that this is an apples and oranges comparison.  There is a direct comparison between the two.  Aces High is a creative work that is distributed for free with the hopes that people will pay for access to Main Arena online player service.  The software that runs the service, I assume, is proprietary and copyrighted.  HiTech Creations chooses to provide the only method that allows large scale public play.   This gives the folks at HiTech an income and a reason to keep producing updated versions and improving the online service.

Recorded music is a creative work that many musicians hope to make money from through distribution services like record companies, for instance.  For people that have made music their career, from bar bands up to  mega groups, they depend on income to live.  Buyers aren't paying for the creative work (the music, in this case), they are paying for the way it is delivered to the consumer.  Yes, everone down the chain gets a cut and CD's are way overpriced but a musician can make enough on their percentage to make a living if their work is  popular.  The musician can choose not to work a full time job and have the ability to create better or new music that will support him or herself.  Napster removes the need to buy CD's or download pay-for-play songs.  It allows unrestrained public distribution of copyrighted creative works by 17 million+ users.

Imagine if a service came along that distributed the software that runs the AH Main Arena and associated servers.  What if it allowed anyone to set up their own large scale arenas for free public access?  Many would not feel compelled to pay HiTech a monthly subscription for a service that they can get for free.   If there were enough of these arenas, HT may not be able to afford the legal fees to shut them all down.  

Re. my example in the post above:   Would Nate feel compelled to keep creating the artwork for the amazing airplanes we fly if people flew in public AH arenas made free by a third party?  Would we see continuous updates if the programmers did not derive income from their work?  The answers maybe yes, just as some musicians are happy-as-can-be knowing their music is being heard by the masses with no thought about compensation.  I'd bet the answer would be no to both questions, however (I don't know if everyone at HT is a paid employee, so forgive me if this is a bad assumption).  I can state, without a doubt, that it sure is better to get paid for your work than to not get paid.  

Musicians and programmers both like pizza <G>, but you still need an income to pay for it.  

MiG


[This message has been edited by MiG Eater (edited 02-01-2001).]

[Nash]

Exactly, MiG. It's the same thing and most definitely NOT an apples and oranges comparison.

 

Imagine if a service came along that distributed the software that runs the AH Main Arena and associated servers.

Thus freehost is "the radio" of the flight sim world.

Try this...

6 people band together to create an original work of intellectual property. At the start, they typically make jack-all money for it, and work insane hours in the hopes that they will be successful in that people enjoy what they've produced and will reward them for it. At this point, some may even develop nasty drinking habits  . And at this point, their chances of failure are monumentally greater than their chances of success. But they continue on and finally create that work. They then copyright it and decide on appropriate channels of distribution and terms (pricing etc.) It is understood that if people enjoy the product enough, they will pay for it. If not enough people enjoy it, they don't get paid, and will likely be out looking for new jobs sooner than later.

Then overnight, another group of people create inanimate, morally ambivelant lines of code (much the same as it's not the guns that kill people, right?) that allow you to bypass that distribution channel as well as receive the product absolutley, 100%, unjustifiably, free of charge.

So seriously... who am I talking about here? Bands and Napster? Or WBs and Freehost?

[TheWobble]

comparing hackers cracking an AH server to a program that allows people to share their mp3's is RETARDED.  Your just trying to play the guilt card against napster.

NAPSTER IS COMING!! HIDE YOUR DAUGHTERS!

[Nash]

All right then wobble, tell me how it's different? Bear in mind - you can't use the sharing of uncopyrighted files defence. Get serious - like you use napster strictly for the purposes of recording fart sounds and swapping them with yer neighbours.

Mind you, with you I don't exactly put that oustide the realm of possibility.  

Anyways, the so called "sharing" of *copyrighted* files, however, is indeed illegal, and is something most everyone here so far has copped to. Hence - you're using the program illegally to enjoy copyrighted work.

Yer turn wobble.



[This message has been edited by Nash (edited 02-01-2001).]

[TheWobble]

Yup, its illegal, but then again so is driving with no shoes on, but ive never been ticketed for it, why? cause its on the fringe of law and does no real harm and is an outdated law.  

Plus seeing as how its illegal it must hurt the people who make the music, the artists right? well why do most of the artsists who are traded on napster not mind it, or even like Napster, if it does so much harm?, why havent record sales gone down since it came our? in fact they have gone UP so ya cant say the record companies are being hurt by it either.  for it to be a crime there must be a victim, and yet so far there has been NO proof that anyone is getting hurt by it.
With no proof that anybody has ever been harmed by Napster I fail to see how its wrong, much less how its a crime.

I do see, and very much respect Your argument though, its one of the best I have seen.

[Nash]

<shrug>

This whole justification routine is clearly a demonstration of a lack of respect for musicians, and what they offer to society. Nothing new, really.

All it amounts to is lowering the value of music and the people who create it to the point where piracy is tolerable. Hell, justifiable. It's ok for music, but not ok for software. Nice values at work here.

Try to think about how large a part music was in your growing up, and how large a part it is in your life right now - even though you might not even realize it in those terms.

Your 'diddly the parents' songs, your break-up songs, your wedding song, the songs you listened to when you graduated and became yer own man, and the songs you listen to that remind you of those things.

Cheesy, right? But is this of such trivial value to you? Do you think of the scum sucking industry and the over-paid musicians (yeah right) when you listen to them? Do you realize the enormous ammount of absolute toejam, nevermind the next to impossible odds, that the person whose voice is now coming out yer Volvo's JBL speakers had to wade through?

What if Lennon, Hendrix and hell I dunno, the Clash... or who cares... U2, whatever floats yer boat... What if they had decided to get "real jobs" instead? If you dig music to the extent that you use Napster to find it, then surely this idea, and this attitude, must make you a bit uncomfortable, no?

It seems not. But again... not too suprising, really.

Sad.



[This message has been edited by Nash (edited 02-01-2001).]

[TheWobble]

DAMN, yer good at this Nash!
but I still must ask, who is being hurt?
record sales havent gone down since napster, so the artists and record companies still get just as much if not more money.  

And when they artists whome you are portreying as victims are asked about their feelings about napster they say that they dont mind it, and many like it.  If it was hurting them in any way why would they say that?

[This message has been edited by TheWobble (edited 02-01-2001).]

[Nash]

Ya can't use a statistic like that wobble... because record sales, much the same as movie rentals, are pretty much always on the rise. Just the same as each summer there is nearly always a new record setting movie. How that is, I don't know.

What I do know is that for every CD you d/l instead of pay for, you are directly taking money out of a musician's pocket just as if you reached into his pocket and pulled it out. What does your not paying for his work amount to? A couple of bucks. A bagel and a coffee, pretty much. Hehe yeah, I kind of like that. For every CD you d/l instead of pay for, you are stealing a bagel and a coffee...  from someone who had to live on Kraft dinner in order to create the work you appreciate so much that you choose to steal it from him    

So think of that! You Napster Freaks    

Uhm...but seriously, stats show that record sales are down almost 5% within a five mile radius of college campuses. This despite the natural rise in sales everywhere else (why is that? growing population? I dunno). A couple of interesting things about that stat, however...

Napster is basically the domain of college students. They are the ones most keenly interested in music, and the uhm, demographic most keenly familiar with Napster. Napster was *created* by a couple of college students. Now, 30-40 year olds use Napster, sure... but they are also used to paying for music. What happens when a whole generation comes of age that has no concept of paying for music?

Another thing too... The kind of music that turns a college student's crank is most definitely NOT yer Britney Agualara World Singer Bon Jonvi pop phenom. They are the Pavements, the GBVs, etc. that, let me make clear, aint nowhere NEAR rich. In all likelyhood they literally shake their coat so as to let the change fall to a point where they can reach through the lining in their pocket to finesse it out and give to the Starbucks girl for the coffee and bagel.

I don't care HOW diddlyed up the music biz is; you are stealing from these people. Like I said, you make that choice. But justifying it borders on insulting.



[This message has been edited by Nash (edited 02-01-2001).]

[Nash]

Reflecting on it, I think I'm restraining myself quite admirably, truth be told.

What I could say, is.....

Don't be diddlying morons about this. If ya like it and want to own it - gawdamn pay for it... you cheap bastards.

SHEESH.

But no, I wont go that far  

[TheWobble]

"record sales, much the same as movie rentals, are pretty much always on the rise. Just the same as each summer there is nearly always a new record setting movie. How that is, I don't know"
 very good point i never thought of it that way.  

Artists get anywhere from 7-12 cents for every CD they sell, I think thats pretty screwed up.  And usually when I dl something from Napster its only 1 song that I like, I have never dl's more than 3 songs from a single album, if it has more than 3 I buy it. I just cannot make myself pay $15 for a cd, that IMO has only 1 or 2 good songs, especally knowing that the artist who made it is only going to get a dime of that $15,
So in other words I dont want to pay a record company who didnt even make the Album $14.90 for 1 or 2 songs on it, thats $15 for about 7 miniutes of music.  the artists are getting dicked by the record companies BAD, and the record companies (and thos who believe them) point thei finger at Napster as a good scapegoat.  Thast why the Artists dont mind napster, they arnt the ones ling money, the record companies are.  Maby if the record companies gave the artist a fair deal they would actually care if they lost a few copies to a free service.

I must admit Nash, looking from a straight legal standpoint you for sure are right, but I and many like me are REBELS!!  

VIVE LA REVOLUTION!!
 

I like your arguing style btw  

[Nash]

You don't like the industry, you have better ideas, therefore it's ok. Maybe you don't like the fact that AH hasn't enough clouds, or if the niki makes two complete circles, it still retains enough E to power California and half of Oregon. Or maybe you don't like the fact that they charge 30 bucks and perhaps they aint paying Nate enough. Steal from them too.... why not, eh?

Like this is... uh... YOUR call to make?

REBEL? VIVA LA REVOLUTION?

If only Gandhi, Marx, or Jefferson were around to witness this great act defiance. Frame it however ya want - you don't give a toejam about that. While ya sit there chompin' on yer third bag of pork rinds, you reach over, click a button and it plays you a song. That's all, wobble. No, seriously man, that's all.