Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Illegal downloading and file sharing IS theft, why don't you admit it? Watch

    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I can't really say i feel sorry for musicians is not exactly like their living in poverty, they still have great privileged lives and on the face of it their are bigger problems than musicians and record labels not having their pockets stuffed with money. Anyway if a musician truly had passion for music he won't be doing it for the money so there will still be great musicians and probably less rubbish, fake, fame-seeking ones
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Call it theft if you want but I always buy everything I like and go to **** loads of gigs too, so I feel no guilt downloading whatsoever. The way I see it, downloading music is me trying on a new pair of shoes. If I don't like it I delete it. If I do, I buy it.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    “Downloading’s the same as what I used to do – I used to tape the charts of the songs I liked [off the radio]. I don’t mind it,” Gallagher said about his past as a copyright infringer.
    “I hate all these big, silly rock stars who moan – at least they’re ****in’ downloading your music, you ****, and paying attention, know what I mean? You should ****in’ appreciate that – what are you moaning about? You’ve got ****in’ five big houses, so shut up,” he added.
    Although it could have been framed more delicately, Liam does have a point. It is far from obvious that music piracy is actually hurting sales. If it doesn’t, piracy is only broadening the fanbase of an artists at no cost, and that can never be a bad thing.
    Then again, a comment like Liam’s is easy to make for someone who has already sold more than 50 million albums during his career.
    Liam’s brother Noel, who is the former lead guitarist of Oasis, has made similar comments in the past. Although Noel admitted to be a complete computer illiterate, he went on record stating that he doesn’t mind people passing along his work for free online.
    “If people are willing to have faceless CDs like that in their collection, good for them. It would be absolutely ludicrous for a rock-star to demand that people pay money for albums because the kids haven’t got that much money to pay for an album, so if they can find it for free, go ahead!”
    It’s needless to say that many Oasis fans have taken this advice from the Gallagher brothers to heart. The most popular download on BitTorrent at the moment is the band’s discography, which is still getting thousands of new downloads every week.

    Thumbs up to the Gallagher bros.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Who cares
    All I know is I'm listening to whatever type of music I want for freeeee
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    The whole reason that illegal downloads became so popular is because a few years ago the music industry were charging extortionate amounts of money for new albums. I remember when it used to be £15 for a newly released album at the very least!

    And why did they charge so much? Because they got greedy, thats why. And when you get greedy, you get stung - cue illegal downloads.

    It has actually worked out quite well now thanks to illegal downloads - albums are much cheaper, and bands have recognised that if they want to make money, they should go on tour - which is in the job description for a band!!

    It is a win win situation now - music is cheaper, and bands play more gigs.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    A person shall be guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it.
    Illegal downloading and file sharing IS NOT theft, why don't you admit it?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Beadle's About)
    Same usual reasons everyone comes up with to justify their theft. Did you even bother to read the original post?

    A question for you so called music fans out there.....do you actually care about new artists, or do you just care about getting music for free on your computer so you've got more money spare to spend down the pub?

    C'mon, I want to know. You can't call yourself a music lover yet blatantly take someone's music without paying. I'm not talking about millionaire rock stars from the 80s. I'm talking about struggling musicians who don't have any money and are entitled to be pay for their creative works.
    From the wording of your post, you seem to condone downloading tracks from well-off artist.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    My 'stealing' music via the internet has led to my supporting a far greater number of bands, many that I'd never have given a chance otherwise, than I otherwise would have.


    The same is true for countless other people. Especially with more underground forms of music, it's really more of a benefit than all the greedy, **********, millionaire ****heads in bands like Metallica, and their labels, would have you believe.


    I care about music, I've introduced a lot of music (that I may have found through less legal ways) to a large number of people, resulting in their going to shows, buying CDs and buying merchandise. I still buy CDs and DVDs myself, as many as I would if I stopped downloading. I go to a ****load more shows than most people and I buy **** loads of merch too.


    This whole thing is bull****.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Downloading doesn't kill music. If you really like a band then you will still go to their gigs and buy their CD's.

    The problem is that the record companies haven't yet realised that the Internet exists and have failed to adapt their business model.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Without illegal downloading i would never have got into 95% of the bands i'm into and they would have lost out on live show revenue plus me buying the cd in the future when i have the money to afford. If i bought all the cds i would be paying money for cds i regret buying which i think is not worthy of the price, and also i wouldn't be able to afford many other cds and so would never get into other artists, and so some of those artists ultimately lose out on live show revenue. Also, i have got other people into the music i get into, so ultimately there is a line of support to the artist which gets made. If the artist is good enough it will get big just from word of mouth, simples.

    I hate this argument. I have absolutely no problem with illegal downloading and don't feel bad about it at all. Those musicians who complain at it are not worth my time and are in the business just for the money. Music is not about money which it is too much about these days, but rather the enjoyment one brings out from listening to the piece of music.

    You also don't seem to understand the word "theft" and what it means. Stealing a CD from a shop is theft but actually making a copy of a file and copying that (illegal downloading) is not theft. Just copyright breach i believe.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Beadle's About)
    x
    I agree wholeheartedly with your opinion on this topic. I buy all of my music on iTunes or buy the physical album and upload it to my computer.

    Record companies are signing so few bands now because of the economic recession, and now that illegal file sharing is rife, there is even more risk of making a loss should bands be funded to record and produce. Bands are just not getting signed any more, and independant artists can't afford to record and produce if they aren't getting a return on it.

    Unfortunately, the sad truth is that people will not pay for something they can get for free. You've just literally got to shut the file sharing websites down. Limewire getting shut down was a huge victory for music. Millions of people that claim to love music are killing it, because they "Just don't care" that they're stealing.

    You just have to introduce better alternatives and ramifications for being caught file sharing. Spotify is the best thing that's happened to music in a long time; no downloading, just streaming, and bands get paid for allowing their music to be on there AFAIK. It allows people to listen to music without having to buy it straight away, so any arguments people use such as "If it wasn't free I wouldn't have been sent it to listen to..." are redundant. It's a shame the major labels are so picky with their artists' music on YouTube or that would be another great place to listen to music.

    IMO you can't stop people file sharing, because people want music for free. Music has to adapt to change, as does anything if it wants to survive. There are some people in the music industry that are living in the stone age, but music gets listened to online now, there's no avoiding that. They've got to change the way they promote and market music if they're going to beat file sharing. Try to ignore the people saying they don't care about file sharing though, OP. It's something you have to know first hand about the music industry to understand it I think.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Xhotas)
    Because if I want to support an artist they can get their arses down to ****ing Peterborough and show me why I should be supporting them.
    I'm from the area too and sadly we hardly get anyone decent come and play.

    Downloading music from the internet illegally is just a continuation of when people used to tape songs off the radio. Should we not be condemning those who did that? Or are we so one track minded that we conveniently forget that those upstanding middle class parents are in the same boat as any other teenager or younger person who's downloaded music illegally?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hegemony)
    I understood your point, I just don't see how illegal downloading not necessarily harming the music industry is much of a point in its favour when illegal downloading does harm the music industry
    It's a pointin its favour because, although some types of free downloading harm the music industry, other types do not. This means that it is perfectly possible to download music for free without harming the music industry.

    Just because a person downloads for free doesn't automatically mean they should feel guilty about harming the music industry because in many cases, they are not.

    (I can't of course quantify what proportion arise from situation [2], but as I said before it seems reasonable to suggest a significant amount do, perhaps not nearly all people).
    I don't know... I mean I'm not saying you're wrong, but how do you know situation [1] isn't the more significant? Without some sources or statistics, this just seems like guesswork really...

    I also don't see how one can accurately discern whether or not they are situation [1] downloading or situation [2] downloading when there is (if you only believe situation [1] downloading to be permissible) an incentive to convince yourself that you wouldn't buy albums or singles that you have been situation [2] downloading.
    Well actually, I consider both types of downloading to be "permissible". As I said, even though situation [2] could be said to "harm" the music industry, I think it is the music industry's job to develop a profitable distribution method which is more attractive to consumers than all unprofitable alternatives. It's not my job to prevent myself from using those alternatives.
    (Especially since it isn't active harm to the music industry, it's just a lack of support for the music industry).

    Stealing is immoral (I assume you accept this, I don't but that doesn't matter if you do). None of those things were stealing or copy right infringement, you weren't owning someones car when you sat in it, you weren't owning the library book when you borrowed it, but you are taking ownership of the music files you download. Now, you could argue that intellectual property shouldn't exist but that's a different argument.
    I only accept that stealing is immoral, not because of my gains, but because of someone else's loss (because it is the loss that is the undesirable effect). If I steal someone else's car, it's not immoral because I've gained a car, it's immoral because someone else has lost their car. Doing bad things to other people is immoral - not doing good things for yourself.

    In the case of downloading, I'm gaining a music file, but I'm not causing anyone else to lose their music file. We could argue over semantics, and whether or not this should be called "stealing" or "taking ownership", but it is for this reason that I do not believe it is immoral. I haven't caused a loss to anyone else, I've only caused gains for myself.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Because it isn't theft. They're not losing anything, as I won't ever buy an album without hearing it or go to gigs/buy merch/etc. Admittedly I very rarely buy albums at the moment because I'm a student with very little money, but I do go to quite a lot of gigs which I wouldn't if I hadn't heard the bands. If they made albums cheaper I'd buy more, otherwise they'll have to wait until I have a job
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    I admit it wholeheartedly, still do it though.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I know it is, I still do it.

    -rebel-
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    If i bought music, I'd be over £1000 poorer.

    But I still love music.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    It isn't theft.
    It is copyright infringement, and is a civil matter, not a criminal one.

    Also, people who download music illegally also buy more music than other people in general. That is a fact.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by concubine)
    My 'stealing' music via the internet has led to my supporting a far greater number of bands, many that I'd never have given a chance otherwise, than I otherwise would have.


    The same is true for countless other people. Especially with more underground forms of music, it's really more of a benefit than all the greedy, **********, millionaire ****heads in bands like Metallica, and their labels, would have you believe.


    I care about music, I've introduced a lot of music (that I may have found through less legal ways) to a large number of people, resulting in their going to shows, buying CDs and buying merchandise. I still buy CDs and DVDs myself, as many as I would if I stopped downloading. I go to a ****load more shows than most people and I buy **** loads of merch too.


    This whole thing is bull****.
    This x1000.

    Your argument is bull****. Not only does downloading music not necessarily harm bands, I'd argue in most cases, it helps them generate revenue. Word of mouth, particularly when it comes to more underground and lesser known bands, is so ****ing vital to everything and what better way of doing so than via the internet. By virtue of seeking out such bands, the majority of the individuals in question are passionate enough about the music to then go see said bands, buy their merch at the gigs etc. People that don't give a **** about music generally just listen to whatever is shoved under their nose because they are casual fans. I don't know anyone who delves into more experimental/underground forms of music that simply leeches the music without putting a significant amount of money towards bands they are passionate about. As has been stated, those than download ****loads of music generally do so due to their love of music and spend more on music than the casual music fan popping into HMV to buy the latest Usher single.

    And, whoever made the point about illegal downloading killing major labels being a good thing... I wholeheartedly agree. The corporate big wigs aren't interested in preserving bands for the sake of the music itself... only simply in preserving bands for the sake of their own bank balances.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WelshBluebird)
    Also, people who download music illegally also buy more music than other people in general. That is a fact.



    A far more succinct way of getting to one of my points. Those that download lots tend to be far more interested in music and thus buy, and support it, more.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
    Useful resources

    Articles:

    TSR wiki music section

    Quick link:

    Unanswered music threads

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.