[badcheesecrispy]

Well, I am of two minds on this issue.

1- Prices for 'music' and 'films' are extortionate and arnt worth it in the most part, also a lot of things if I couldnt get them for free/check them out first I would never buy them anyway. Likewise if I download a free song that I like I do often go out and buy the CD. I also regularly buy compilation albums just to put on for a random listen, or whilst lifting, inwhich I dont listen to or like a large part of it, as it is ****. Therefore I am paying for my free music by buying music I dont listen to.

2. These artists are entitled to make money like everyone else but its not like they dont make enough from it anyway. Heard lily allen complaining about this before, it just came across very materialistic, ungrateful and spoiled. They are making a lot more money than most people anyway often through doing very little like turning up at certain places. They are very greedy complaining like this, in this sense.

So all in all I'm not sure, I dont download pirated films as arnt into movies much (except the blue kind ), but when it comes to music, bleh, spoiled over indulged fools should stop whingeing, they've got more than 99% of this planet could ever wish for, regardless of whether every person who listens to their music has paid for it.

Something else for you 'musicians'- the majority of your music bar 2 or 3 songs per album is utter ****e and isnt worth paying for, which is why a lot of people don't. Even if you get your way, all that will happen is less people will hear your music as a lot less will be willing to pay for it than will happily listen for free.

[NDGAARONDI]

(Original post by TheHansa)
Why is it so bad that companies are preventing people taking for free and without their permsission, what they have made (aka stealing)?

Should eBay be blocked by ISPs because counterfeit goods are sold on there?

[Sisu]

(Original post by TheHansa)
It's a poor analogy because you wouldn't patent a chair but you could patent a particular model of chair, nobody owns exclusive rights to make motion pictures but a person can own a particular motion picture.

Yeah, I didn't mean to imply otherwise. Do you think they should be held accountable though? Considering it's a user-generated site, shouldn't the site be allowed to go on and whenever a violation is discovered go through normal procedures of deletion of the material? It's like a shop where customers can sell anything and someone chooses to sell Child porno, should the whole shop be closed down?

[TheHansa]

(Original post by NDGAARONDI)
Should eBay be blocked by ISPs because counterfeit goods are sold on there?

Pirate Bay's is mainly used for illegal activity whereas eBay is not.

[Carecup]

Hey guys I found a illegal download link on google, best shut it down cause its clearly facilitating illegal piracy!!!

[BoringComputerGuy]

(Original post by whyumadtho)
Of course, this can be bypassed with insouciant ease.

Precisely. Even the non tech savvy are one Google search away from finding a way around this. Pretty futile attempt to limit web freedom.

[NDGAARONDI]

(Original post by TheHansa)
Pirate Bay's is mainly used for illegal activity whereas eBay is not.

It las legitimate uses, so does eBay. Go after individual infringers and not the site. I know of no website selling counterfeit goods only to be censored as dictated by the High Court.

[jacksonliam]

This is bad, Judges shouldn't be able to block what they like from the internet. You can do exactly the same thing the pirate bay do with any search engine (find a link to download a file).

(Original post by TheHansa)
Why is it so bad that companies are preventing people taking for free and without their permsission, what they have made (aka stealing)?

The myth that filesharing = stealing is very old. Perhaps this picture could sum it up for you:


Humour aside, file sharing doesn't do the harm the record industries want you to think it does. Someone file sharing an mp3 or movie doesn't equal someone not buying one.

For example, It takes less time for me to download a movie, than it does to rip it from the legitimate DVD on the shelf and encode it myself. The same can be said about music. A 3 CD compilation could be an hours work ripping and tagging the songs - but its a 3 minute download.

I think the problem occurs when files sharing becomes piracy. I'm not sure piracy has the affect that the companies want you to think it does. Second hand music, game and movie sales is a big market - it used to be bigger. The content creators get the same amount of cash from a second hand purchase as they do from a pirated one - Nothing.

The record companies haven't changed with the times, they want to stick to old methods because they were once very successful and stupidly profitable. Their way of moving forward with overpriced 'streaming' licenses make limitations to services like spotify a joke, 99p per track is a disgrace too - its not like they have any overheads the bandwith costs nothing... and the radio royalties alone would pay for the studio time, not to mention the live music performances.

(Original post by badcheesecrispy)
Well, I am of two minds on this issue.
2. These artists are entitled to make money like everyone else but its not like they dont make enough from it anyway. Heard lily allen complaining about this before, it just came across very materialistic, ungrateful and spoiled. They are making a lot more money than most people anyway often through doing very little like turning up at certain places. They are very greedy complaining like this, in this sense.

Dan Bull's response to that is brilliant, He is an artist that puts his music out for free but still makes money selling it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HL9-esIM2CY


I don't use TPB, so I don't really give a rats pancreas if it goes down. The problem I have with the pirate bay being censored from the internet by our ISPs is that the whole point of the web is that its a free and open exchange of information, when a government starts chopping out bits it doesn't like, it just becomes a carcass of shops and news.

[internetguru]

Wasting resources supporting these industries is illogical. If you don't want your film to be copied then don't release it.

[TheHansa]

(Original post by Sisu)
Yeah, I didn't mean to imply otherwise. Do you think they should be held accountable though? Considering it's a user-generated site, shouldn't the site be allowed to go on and whenever a violation is discovered go through normal procedures of deletion of the material? It's like a shop where customers can sell anything and someone chooses to sell Child porno, should the whole shop be closed down?

I doubt they would be able to make a profit if they decided to ban pirating and employed enough people to enforce the ban. I think that they should be forced to comply with the rules and if they are enforced to a satisfactory standard and they can make money they should be allowed to continue, but even their name suggests their unwillingness to cooperate.

[FinalMH]

When will this happen to Google?

[Ewan]

The day I can download a TV show in the US the same time it's broadcast, for a monthly fee, is the day I stop using torrents. Licensing ****s us all over, we have to wait months, sometimes years to see shows over here in the UK. Same problem with films, I can get Blu-ray torrent versions sometimes before they're even shown in the cinema. The gap between cinema release & DVD is too long, what do they think if released on DVD no one will go to the cinema?

Not the same for music I know, but then I don't torrent music anyway.

But anyho... this will do nothing for any serious TPB user. I suppose new users might go elsewhere, but who cares, there are hundreds of other sites out there.

[mahjongmagic]

I'm not a Pirate bay user but it obviously isn't going to work until being legal is easier than pirating (which to be fair will probably be years away if at all) I mean, Ultraviolet, really? What is the point of it? All you sign up for is a glorified rental which can be taken away at any time if the service goes down.

[TheHansa]

(Original post by Aj12)
"Its operators line their pockets by commercially exploiting music and other creative works without paying a penny to the people who created them.

Yes providing these things for free is really lining their pockets...

Pirate Bay makes profit from advertising, nobody would go on their site if they couldn't access downloads

(Original post by jacksonliam)

Humour aside, file sharing doesn't do the harm the record industries want you to think it does. Someone file sharing an mp3 or movie doesn't equal someone not buying one.

For example, It takes less time for me to download a movie, than it does to rip it from the legitimate DVD on the shelf and encode it myself. The same can be said about music. A 3 CD compilation could be an hours work ripping and tagging the songs - but its a 3 minute download.

I think the problem occurs when files sharing becomes piracy. I'm not sure piracy has the affect that the companies want you to think it does. Second hand music, game and movie sales is a big market - it used to be bigger. The content creators get the same amount of cash from a second hand purchase as they do from a pirated one - Nothing.

The record companies haven't changed with the times, they want to stick to old methods because they were once very successful and stupidly profitable. Their way of moving forward with overpriced 'streaming' licenses make limitations to services like spotify a joke, 99p per track is a disgrace too - its not like they have any overheads the bandwith costs nothing... and the radio royalties alone would pay for the studio time, not to mention the live music performances.

The picture is garbage because as soon as you can downloads a song or movie for free it becomes worthless to the person who made it to make profit.

Well you're not going to buy something you can dowload for free, record companies don't copyright their music for their health.

If you don't like what a company is asking you to pay, don't buy it, if enough people agree with you they'll get the message.

(Original post by Zenzic)
Welcome to China, the home of oppression and censorship

Well done, stealing is illegal in China too.

[Sisu]

(Original post by TheHansa)
I doubt they would be able to make a profit if they decided to ban pirating and employed enough people to enforce the ban. I think that they should be forced to comply with the rules and if they are enforced to a satisfactory standard and they can make money they should be allowed to continue, but even their name suggests their unwillingness to cooperate.

Why should they be forced to employ more people? Again, this is like a massive shop where some users sell questionable items. There's a scarce of employees and time hence it's not their fault if they don't get through most of the reports, especially when it's as large pirate bay where we are talking thousands of files being uploaded per hour. Their revenue won't be able to accommodate that heavy task. They may not be the most cooperative organization but who cares as long as they're being legal. Some people speak to the police straight away, some people hire lawyers and delay that **** for as long as they possibly can. But, both are legal. As long as they've shown willingness to comply within the context of their manpower/number of files uploaded, I don't really think there's much compelling reason to shut them down.

[Fuzzpig]

Wait, not BT?

[JonathanNorth]

About time. Though I'll admit, I do use the Pirate Bay!

I can't defend my actions, but it doesn't feel like stealing and hey, if I am stealing -- at least it I'm not stealing from poor people. I still have a clear conscience!

[f1mad]

(Original post by badcheesecrispy)

2. These artists are entitled to make money like everyone else but its not like they dont make enough from it anyway. Heard lily allen complaining about this before, it just came across very materialistic, ungrateful and spoiled. They are making a lot more money than most people anyway often through doing very little like turning up at certain places. They are very greedy complaining like this, in this sense.

Totally agree.

Earning a fair bob for your work is one thing, being greedy is another. Mind you the labels don't help themselves by taking a massive chunk of the profit for the most-part. I don't think Artists are totally to blame.

[f1mad]

(Original post by FinalMH)
When will this happen to Google?

Haha.

Have you heard Serghey Brin lately? He's one of the biggest hypocrites to ever exist.

[py0alb]

When are record companies going to realise that albums are just gig adverts and have been for years now?