You wouldn't download a car...
Illegal downloading and file sharing IS theft, why don't you admit it? Watch
- 29-12-2010 04:21
- 29-12-2010 04:26
- 29-12-2010 04:27
At the end of the day - if people are provided with an opportunity to receive something free at the click of a button, with little potential for reprisal then they will do it. Music or not.
- 29-12-2010 04:32
Well I just admit it. And I don't care if it's theft because as people have said there is minimal threat of reprisal.
- 29-12-2010 04:41
"In criminal law, theft is the illegal taking of another person's property without that person's freely-given consent"
I'm not taking it without their consent, I'm copying it without their consent. Therefore I am not a thief when I torrent my music, but a pirate. ARRRRR!
- 29-12-2010 05:04
Finding it very hard to care tbh... If you can't make a living then there are other jobs in the world, go do them. If you want to make music shut up and make it. How are you actually going to stop internet piracy? I'm pretty sure it's impossible. Stop whining and use it to your advantage (Arctic Monkeys being a good example)
(Original post by Beadle's About)
- 29-12-2010 06:13
Same old argument I'm afraid....trying to make excuses for not paying for something.
By not paying for the music, the artist isn't getting his/her fair share of money into their bank account (or paypal account). If they can't make enough money out of their music, they will go out of business and won't be able to record or tour with any more music.
So it does hurt the artist by not paying, and also hurts the future of music.
However, since I happen to be an independent music-promoter – and one with a significant Youtube and Facebook presence – I hereby grace you with the perfect opportunity to put your money where your convictions are:
Downtempo Music: 'Oblivion' by March Rosetta - Buy it here.
Trip-Hop Music: 'Mr. Happy' by X:THC - Buy it here.
Electro-Funk Music: 'Coastin'' by Tryezz - Buy it here.
Nu-Jazz Music: 'As Sweet As Love' by Andy Compton - Buy it here.
Electro-Funk Music: 'Give Some More' by Ruckazoid - Buy it here.
Trip-Hop Music: 'Escape From Day' by Coto Normal - Buy it here.
Downtempo Music: 'Disagreements' by StewRat - Buy it here.
Neurofunk: 'The Phantom Menace' by Soul Cube - Buy it here.
Nu-Soul Music: 'Joyride' by Giovanca & The Please - Buy it here.
And remember: these are all unsigned artists, so every penny counts.
Well? What the **** are you waiting for?Last edited by Profesh; 29-12-2010 at 06:19.
(Original post by tazarooni89)
- 29-12-2010 06:23
See the edit to my previous post:
Free downloading does either one of the following things:
 It enables me to listen to music I would have otherwise not listened to.
 It enables me to listen to music for free, that I would have otherwise paid for.
You're talking about situation 2, where downloading the music for free means the artist is financially worse off than he would have otherwise been. I agree, this could be said to hurt the music industry. But I'm talking about situation 1. It makes no difference to the artist whether I download the music for free or not - he gets no money either way.
I'm not robbing the artist of money he would have otherwise got. If I decided not to torrent the music, he would have still got no money from me.
(Original post by Beadle's About)
- 29-12-2010 06:30
Why is it that music fans who illegally download and file share music always come up with reasons to try to justify their theft of artists' music?
Why do so called music fans kill the very thing they love? By downloading music without paying, you're killing what you claim to be so passionate about. That's hypocritical if you ask me.
Here's the thoughts of a few other musicians on this subject:-
Singer Doogie White told RockAAA: “We’re in danger of never hearing the next Black Sabbath, Deep Purple, Iron Maiden, AC/DC or Metallica. New bands struggle to get advances because record companies won’t take the risk.
“All we’ll be left with is the X-Factor because so-called fans stole the very thing that gives the scene life – the music.
“You get the trotted out lines: ‘If you made a decent album…’ ‘I can’t afford all the albums I want…’ ‘You guys have made enough money…’ It’s self-justification for theft: they steal music because they can.
“Then they say, ‘But I always buy a t-shirt.’ Yeah, you do – because the merch guy would crack your head if you stole one.”
Case study: Jamie Mallender
I’m an independent artist based out of my website, JamieMallender.co.uk. I do everything from the writing, recording, playing all the instruments and singing to the releasing and publicity, all by myself.
It’s hard work and I have absolutely no funding behind me at all. I know who buys my material and who doesn’t because I receive an e-mail confirming every individual download. But then I receive e-mails from people who claim to love my music. They’re full of compliments – but I know they didn’t buy it legally.
Some are blatant about it, as though it doesn’t matter, while others are sly. Take my latest track, Slip Away. It’s 79p! How much is 79p to you, for God’s sake? If you like an artist, pay for the tracks you want. Support us or we’ll disapear. If music is so important to you, like most people claim it is, put your money where you mouth is – or I will not be able to afford to create it any more.
Some people remain under the illusion that all artists are wealthy and so one more illegal download won’t matter. It’s not the case. It’s not the 80s any more. Many of us are scratching around to make enough money to feed our families.
You wouldn’t expect a plumber to come and fix your bog for free, so why should my music be stolen and no one do anything about it? It’s theft.
C'mon people....you wouldn't kill off footballers' livelihoods if you were a football fan by not paying to get into a football match or by stealing a football shirt. But people who claim to love music have no problems robbing the artists of part of their income by not paying for their music. The hypocrisy of so called 'music fans' is just unbelievable. You are killing it for the current generation of musicians, who are struggling like hell to make a living from their music.
When I buy - even used to buy - albums, I bought them to go on the shelf - to show off the design of the cases, to show off the pedigree of my music taste, to show which bands were more special than the morass in my iTunes. Music is marketing. Nobody would shell out for the tracks of this Jamie bloke because, well, it's like homeless people. Once you give money to one you feel obliged to give it to them all - suddenly Jamie is special in your music collection, but what if you find another artist just like him? And there's so many small artists that you would find yourself playing them off, thinking, whose lyrics are better, whose musicianship is sharper? And that's no way to experience music.
Small bands are better off doing gigs for local record shops. In my experience this seems to increase custom and exposure for both parties. As musical recordings become more disposable, so people should theoretically demand more unique experiences through gigs. The perceived uniqueness or specialness of an experience is proportional to its exclusivity. I don't understand why the modern consumerist machine doesn't understand this - even the consumers have a hard time understanding it. They've no idea why they're always depressed.
(Original post by Hegemony)
- 29-12-2010 06:33
It isn't unreaonable to suggest that a significant portion of illegal downloads are situation . So what's the point of your argument?
In any case, I'm not sure where you get the idea that "nearly all people" fall into situation . It seems a bit of a bold suggestion to me.Nearly all people who illegally download are still harming the music industry according to you. I just bite the bullet and admit I'm immoral.
It's the job of the industry to devise a profitable method of distribution which is more attractive to consumers than all unprofitable alternatives.Last edited by tazarooni89; 29-12-2010 at 06:45.
- 29-12-2010 07:02
I don't care if Metalica's lead singer wants to buy a new jet gulfstream or if his boss wants to take his family to a 6 star hotel in hawaii instead of a 5.
THey are filthy rich exploiting young people into believing THAT is music.
I'll happily keep on torrenting.
PS: people used to record over the radio but not much of it was done you know why?
albums sold for 99cents and not 25quids.
- 29-12-2010 07:08
Example: J Cole. Hes only been recently signed and hasnt released a single under his label yet. He sells very few CDs yet he is signed to RocNation and makes around $50k a show.
- 29-12-2010 07:50
because denial is not just a river in Egypt.
(Original post by electriic_ink)
- 29-12-2010 09:05
Meh, the music industry has been ripping people off for years and still is. Example:
Matt Cardle's new single (~15 mins of AUDIO) costs £4
Scott Pilgrim vs the World (~110 mins of VIDEO + extras incl music videos) costs £20
(Original post by tazarooni89)
- 29-12-2010 09:45
The point of the argument is to say that downloading for free does not necessarily harm the music industry. In my case for example, every last one of my downloads falls into situation  and as such has no effect on the music industry.
In any case, I'm not sure where you get the idea that "nearly all people" fall into situation . It seems a bit of a bold suggestion to me.(Original post by tazarooni89)
I wouldn't really call it "immoral". That'd be like saying getting a lift to work every day is immoral because it saves me having to buy my own car, and therefore harms the car industry. Taking a book out of the library for free is immoral because it saves me from having to pay for my own copy of the book, and therefore harms the publishing industry.
It's the job of the industry to devise a profitable method of distribution which is more attractive to consumers than all unprofitable alternatives.
I apologise if I'm being incoherent, I'm still slightly drunk and I haven't slept yet.
- 29-12-2010 09:55
Exactly, why can't people accept that it is a crime, and that if they are caught there will be consequences.
All these people who complained about the Digital Economies Bill, claiming it's an infringement on civil liberties... - oh sorry, I didn't realise it was your right to not be punished (very ****ing leniently in fact, considering there's a 3 strikes rule...) for committing a crime
I don't judge people for doing it, I myself may or may not download pirated material from time to time
But to complain that you'll be punished (leniently) after you're caught three times is just quite ****ing pathetic really...
- 29-12-2010 09:55
Sorry but me downloading that music may indeed result in me buying a ticket for their next tour AND a T Shirt.
I think they get profit from me in the end.
I'm not buying a CD just in case I hate it, however I am buying 3 new albums today because I love the bands and I can't be bothered to bring my laptop to work to d/l it.
EDIT: My Engrish sucks.
- 29-12-2010 10:00
I always wanted to be a pirate and being as i am not Somalian nor do i have an eye patch this is the closest i could get
- 29-12-2010 10:07
Not music, but still very relevant. Proof that illegal downloading of digital media does not automatically mean a loss of sales: http://torrentfreak.com/call-of-duty...f-2010-101228/
- 29-12-2010 10:29
im pretty sure there was a BBC Panaroma on this matter a while back and they said the people who download illegally still spend more money on music (concerts/albums) than people who buy legally.