Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: JAGED on December 19, 2008, 03:19:23 PM
-
Well it's about time. I'm sure there are those of you on both sides of this fence. What do you think about this?
Critics say the legal offensive ultimately did little to stem the tide of illegally downloaded music. And it created a public-relations disaster for the industry, whose lawsuits targeted, among others, several single mothers, a dead person and a 13-year-old girl.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,470039,00.html (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,470039,00.html)
-
Thanks, Captain Obvious.
Not you Jaged ;)
-
Is it bad to download a missed TV show episode? How is this any different from TIVO?
-
Ive been with and against the music industry for years. Ive been flip flopping on this difficult issue.
I guess the world may have to prepare for a reality where artists make their big bucks on public broadcasting and concerts. Any other form of distribution except for those of us that will buy the cd will have to be seen as nothing more than PR for the artitst and they will have to make the best of it.
For me my solution is just gonna have to be the way to go.
-
Is it bad to download a missed TV show episode? How is this any different from TIVO?
Well with a downloaded one, you could potentially move that copy to other computer or share it with other users. Also you could put it on other media such as DVD, IPod, etc. This is a big no no.
Now they said they're were going to instead work with ISPs to help stop the pirating. Who know what invasive stuff they'll try and get them to do.
-
One side of me says it is stealing. The other side thinks the rich are worrying about not being as rich.
They see how much they are loosing not how much they already have. It makes me wonder if these kind of websites would ruin the music industry or would it just not be as fruitful.
-
Well with a downloaded one, you could potentially move that copy to other computer or share it with other users. Also you could put it on other media such as DVD, IPod, etc. This is a big no no.
Now they said they're were going to instead work with ISPs to help stop the pirating. Who know what invasive stuff they'll try and get them to do.
Disclaimer: I'm not a TIVO expert! I understand you can offload from TIVO to your PC (correct me if I'm wrong) so, again, what's the difference?
-
The difference is that you're not downloading it from a source that violated the copyright.
-
One side of me says it is stealing. The other side thinks the rich are worrying about not being as rich.
They see how much they are loosing not how much they already have. It makes me wonder if these kind of websites would ruin the music industry or would it just not be as fruitful.
It is stealing, there is no grey area. You're also not taking money from the executives and it's not a case of the rich trying to get richer. By stealing music, games and movies you impact those that make the stuff, like the sound engineers, studio musicians, distributors, etc.
Maybe it's because I work in an industry that is directly impacted by piracy, all I know is that every little piece of sh*t that pirates on of my company's games, it's taking food from my table and that frankly pisses me off.
So for those that pirate music, games or movies, you're nothing but thieves and there is nothing you can do to justify your actions.
ack-ack
-
Well it's about time. I'm sure there are those of you on both sides of this fence. What do you think about this?
Critics say the legal offensive ultimately did little to stem the tide of illegally downloaded music. And it created a public-relations disaster for the industry, whose lawsuits targeted, among others, several single mothers, a dead person and a 13-year-old girl.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,470039,00.html (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,470039,00.html)
THE WAY I See it, is if you gave me one of your ac/dc cd's to copy, no one would come after you, right?
d/l'ing them from the net is the same to me.
-
The difference is that you're not downloading it from a source that violated the copyright.
So, it's fine to offload from TIVO, but it's not fine to download from someone else who offloaded from TIVO? Seems like a fine line...
-
It is stealing, there is no grey area. You're also not taking money from the executives and it's not a case of the rich trying to get richer. By stealing music, games and movies you impact those that make the stuff, like the sound engineers, studio musicians, distributors, etc.
Maybe it's because I work in an industry that is directly impacted by piracy, all I know is that every little piece of sh*t that pirates on of my company's games, it's taking food from my table and that frankly pisses me off.
So for those that pirate music, games or movies, you're nothing but thieves and there is nothing you can do to justify your actions.
ack-ack
:aok
-
It is stealing, there is no grey area. You're also not taking money from the executives and it's not a case of the rich trying to get richer. By stealing music, games and movies you impact those that make the stuff, like the sound engineers, studio musicians, distributors, etc.
Maybe it's because I work in an industry that is directly impacted by piracy, all I know is that every little piece of sh*t that pirates on of my company's games, it's taking food from my table and that frankly pisses me off.
So for those that pirate music, games or movies, you're nothing but thieves and there is nothing you can do to justify your actions.
ack-ack
Well there is one side of the fence for ya.
It's always the people doing the work that suffer.
-
It is bad in that the people who worked on creating the product don't get paid for their efforts by piracy. But as the OP quoted from the news article, the industry's hard-ass aproach of setting their lawyers loose on "offenders" is backwards. The industry needs to realise the market has changed, and while they were wasting time and money to try and stop the inevitable they could of been investing and developing in ways to go with the flow/change and make some profit if not a fortune.
-
It is stealing, there is no grey area. You're also not taking money from the executives and it's not a case of the rich trying to get richer. By stealing music, games and movies you impact those that make the stuff, like the sound engineers, studio musicians, distributors, etc.
Maybe it's because I work in an industry that is directly impacted by piracy, all I know is that every little piece of sh*t that pirates on of my company's games, it's taking food from my table and that frankly pisses me off.
So for those that pirate music, games or movies, you're nothing but thieves and there is nothing you can do to justify your actions.
ack-ack
I've always been of a similar line of thought. I have always approved of music downloading though, when used responsibly.
I've have got into countless bands because I downloaded or heard a track of theirs on the internet. I would never have otherwise heard this band's music and never would have been tempted to buy any of their releases.
Having said that, if I do truly like a band I will go out of my way to buy their records, merch and tickets to gigs, even if I have already downloaded the stuff.
As a matter of fact, I just ordered in a cd the other day... I had to spend over 2 hours in god-awful city traffic and it cost me a lot of money but christ is it satisfying to put that cd into the stereo and listen to that song that you heard on the internet whilst reading the lyrics and flipping through the booklet.
Long live hard-copy music!!!
-
The calculation of money lost to piracy is a big farce. I am absolutely sure that over 90% of pirated music/movies/TV/software would not have been bought anyway. They are being pirated because it is easy.
The vast majority of computer games are total garbage, even if they are a huge production. People download them, play for two days and un-install forever. Call it a demo or trial if you like. For a small number of top products, people might have actually bought them instead. If they could not be pirated, people would simply have less games or no games at all - they would not buy them except the odd one. Online games make their money from subscription and do not face this problem.
TV episodes is even a greater farce. Most people don't pay per view - they pay per channel whether they get to watch it or not. If an episode was aired while they could not watch it, then they paid for a product that they did not get. If then they go and download it from the web or tivo it, it makes no difference. The other people who download episodes are those who have no access to that channel. Either because it is un-available in their region or that they are not willing to pay for it. In both cases it is not money that it lost to the industry. You may call the latter case stealing, but the simple truth is that if it was not easy to download that show, they would simply not watch it - it is not very likely that this is what will make them pay for cable company to get the channel.
My case is even stranger. I am currently in a country that dubs all TV shows. The place I'm staying in has TV. It already paid for the episodes, but it is not a great fun for me to watch. If I down load the episodes that were aired this week, but in english instead of the dubbed version. Did I pirate it? I mean, it was already payed for with a different sound track. If I can't download it in english, it means that the show is being payed for, but not being watched - should someone sue for their money back?
-
What?? Are single mothers, dead people and 13 yo girls above the law? I think not, string em up on the oak tree and clear some bandwidth so i can finnish d/l this great album.
-
This is not what it looks like.
The move from suing individual filesharers is just a public front to something much much worse.. The industry lobbyers have advanced legislation up to the point where they can extend their grip into internet service providers. This means that RIAA can now scan your internet usage and issue a shutdown through your ISP, judging from the news about them shifting into operating directly with ISPs.
-
Sounds like instead of getting ridiculous lawsuits there will be ISP's closing out people from the internet without a court order, simply based on a tip given by some copyright organisation. Doesn't sound to me like they will be getting any more justice this way. You can't just ban people from using internet nowadays, it's just not possible. Even prisoners over here have been given the right to access internet on regular basis. But who do you complain to, when you're blocked from using all the ISP's in your area, which might be just one, and you haven't been officially convicted of anything?
I don't think piracy itself is a right to block person from using internet, especially without being convicted of something. Even a convicted person should have the right to access internet, unless he's one of the worst (or best) hackers in the world and just can't restrain himself from hacking into places.
-
Always seemed to me that most of the theft in the music industry was being perpetrated by the record companies ripping off the songwriters and musicians. The songwriters and musicians get very little from record sales. The "artists" make most of their money from concerts. That is what really pisses off the record companies, downloading music free takes from them, but not much from the "artists".
-
Famously, Robbie Williams released his new album and and statement to fans 'Not to waste money on it, get it online next week'
-
http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=Yz-grdpKVqg
-
Famously, Robbie Williams released his new album and and statement to fans 'Not to waste money on it, get it online next week'
Who was it that sold their latest for what ever you wanted to pay for it.
-
Who was it that sold their latest for what ever you wanted to pay for it.
Wasn't that Coldplay?
-
This is not what it looks like.
The move from suing individual filesharers is just a public front to something much much worse.. The industry lobbyers have advanced legislation up to the point where they can extend their grip into internet service providers. This means that RIAA can now scan your internet usage and issue a shutdown through your ISP, judging from the news about them shifting into operating directly with ISPs.
Not so, NZ has implemented a law like this already. Essentially the RIAA monitor public trackers, and issue infringement notices to ISPs. The law here is a bit vague but the general gist is 3 strikes and you're disconnected. Of course there's plenty of other ISPs to move too for infringers, but it's a pain in the backside.
They cannot scan your internet usage to establish proof of illegal file sharing, that's just an urban myth put out by piracy circles.
I think it's a good thing, it won't stop piracy, but it will make it less attractive, and force it back into the shadows where it belongs out of mainstream use.
Oh and ack-ack, it's not stealing, technically it is copyright infringement. The stuff that goes out the back of the factories that physically produce your titles - you know the biggest segment of piracy - that's stealing.
-
Who was it that sold their latest for what ever you wanted to pay for it.
That was Radiohead's In Rainbows album. They gave it away (or let you pay whatever you wanted for it) and when they released the hard copy it STILL went to number one.
http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/index.php/2008/01/09/on-the-charts-radioheads-in-rainbows-takes-number-one-three-months-after-debuting-via-the-web/
-
About time. The greedy rich people will finally get shut up, and the poor people like me will be allowed to leech all the music my little heart desires.
-
I don't blame them for stopping the lawsuits but in mho stealing is stealing. I don't buy much musing these days but when I do it's hard copy or it's from a vendor on the net.
-
That was Radiohead's In Rainbows album. They gave it away (or let you pay whatever you wanted for it) and when they released the hard copy it STILL went to number one.
http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/index.php/2008/01/09/on-the-charts-radioheads-in-rainbows-takes-number-one-three-months-after-debuting-via-the-web/
Yeah, thats the one