Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nuclearbuddha)
    I don't download at all anymore, so I'm not worried. However... there's obviously a reason why thousands of people are downloading music illegally, and it's usually because they'd like to hear an album before they buy it. It'd be nice if some computer know-it-all type person could come up with a programme that would let us listen to whole albums once for free, with absolutely no way of downloading them. Obviously if it were based on IP addresses some people would just use other computers to listen to the album repeatedly, but it'd help to solve the downloading thing.
    thats a great idea and it could be a stream.the problem with 30 second samples on sites is that you get no idea of the shape or feel of the album
    i think to listen to the album once would be good if it actually worked.as with everything on computers these days, one can bypass most security protections.and of course bittorrent is a good way of downloading albums all at once.
    but i dont think a few examples being made of sharers will stop it happening.

    another point is that albums cost so much so its NOT SUPRISING!.i think that even now there is no attempt made to lower prices.for example in virgin today you can buy the amazing Pink Floyd album "The Wall" for....wait for it....£34.99.
    that is complete extortion.i would definitely buy more cds if they were cheaper.its much nicer to have the cd than reams of downloads but i cant justify spending more than 10 quid an album if im going to buy loads.the record companies need to lower cd prices which isnt happening!
    sorry to go on but i do feel strongly on this subject.
    Offline

    11
    (Original post by dysthymic)
    thats a great idea and it could be a stream.the problem with 30 second samples on sites is that you get no idea of the shape or feel of the album
    i think to listen to the album once would be good if it actually worked.as with everything on computers these days, one can bypass most security protections.and of course bittorrent is a good way of downloading albums all at once.
    but i dont think a few examples being made of sharers will stop it happening.
    Agreed, no matter how much they worked on securing whatever system streamed the music, somebody would spend days finding out how to bypass the security and share this knowledge, and downloading would be as much of a problem as it apparently is now.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by daft)
    Just as a point: I think they only prosecute you for sharing the music, not downloading. So, for example, if you download using Limewire, but you don't share any music, then you should be fine.
    Exactly. I download thousands of songs, but what people tend to forget is that current legislation states that if you share copyrighted material, then thats illegal - not if you download it.
    Offline

    11
    They've been a little silly about that, because sharing involves two or more people. :p:
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    I'm not atall worried as it seems to only be the people uploading/sharing the files, I only download
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ryan)
    I'm not atall worried as it seems to only be the people uploading/sharing the files, I only download
    Hmm, that's what I thought as well but I did quite a lot of research on the whole music downloading business (for a French oral, strangely enough :confused: ) and there have been cases, particularly in America, where people have been busted simply for huge amounts of downloading. I'll have a look through my old notes and see if I can find the links, because that's one of the things that seriously put me off dowloading.

    Plus the fact that my university has a very hardline policy on people using the Uni network for filesharing, one guy at the beginning of term was kicked out of halls and fined for excessive downloading. It is worrying quite how much of your internet activity "they" (whoever "they" are) can monitor, I wish I was a technical nerd so I could understand exactly who they are and how they do it
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zoecb)
    I think they haven't got a chance in stamping it out. It's not like you can control the internet.
    (Original post by One-Prophecy)
    The music organisation only targets people who share their files/music. I download but don't share, so not worried...
    They don't need to control the internet, just make an example of enough people so that everyone wants to download but not share, and the whole mentality that keeps P2P afloat collapses. No more downloading of any volume worth worrying about.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    to be honest, what happens where I am is not so much downloading, but people ripping music from their cds, putting them onto their computer and then sharing them with a USB stick with each other and transferring them to each others laptops.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    They can stop UK residents sharing all they like but that won't solve the problem. Filesharing is still legal in Canada and people in places like Eastern Europe and the like are hardly going to be strongly policed. Hence, people will still be able to share so they have to stop them downloading too. Problem with this is that it's much more difficult to know that someone who downloads has a large illegal music library on their computer - it's much easier if you can see by what's being shared (i.e they can hardly make a £5000 case out of someone who's downloaded the odd single here and there).

    Action is taken more often against people who share because it's easier to catch them, not because they're aiming to stamp out people sharing and leave those downloading alone.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Not at all. I have protected myself, and furthermore, not one person has been sued for obtaining music on the file sharing software I use
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    You only have cause for concern if you download (very) big name artists, in very large quantities, use the wrong filesharing apps, and are online a lot - and live in west europe/usa. I don't see any ethical problems w/ filesharing provided you give a fair portion of your money back to artists through purchasing.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jeff2233)
    I'm sure many of you may have heard in the news today, but the UK music industry won a landmark case in the fight against illegal music sharing. Two men have been ordered to pay between £1,500 and £5,000 for sharing thousands of files online. So, are you worried about the consequences of illegally downloading and sharing music over the internet?

    In the early days of Napster, I downloaded a hell of a lot of music. However, now I don't download at all due to fears of arrests, fines etc. I love buying CDs but being able to download a track as a way of discovering and trying a new band is such a great thing to be able to do.

    No. You'll notice that it is only sharers who are getting ordered to pay damages - and the could probably only be set at about a £1 for every shared song at the very most. I don't actually share music, I just download it. I have therefore not damaged anyone and am not liable for any of their mince.

    More significantly, as a student I don't have any real money for them to take off of me. We live in an age where people who commit GBH are asked to pay £100 fines at £3 a week, so I hardly think the courts are going to care about me. Plus I don't believe anyone has ever actually been prosecuted by the Crown Office for downloading music. If I thought I was at risk of any sort of legal action, I could easily take precautions that would make me untracable...

    Anyway, if they outlaw sharing, it'll just be done via servers in other countries anyway.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I have therefore not damaged anyone and am not liable for any of their mince.
    Sharing is obviously worse, but still by downloading you have lost the producer/distributor profits no?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ladle)
    Sharing is obviously worse, but still by downloading you have lost the producer/distributor profits no?
    I agree... I am in favour of downloading, but saying that you are not harming anyone simply by downloading is crazy. The fact that you are downloading means you are avoiding paying for the CD, so obviously somebody somewhere is losing out, whether it's the artist, record company or whoever.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ladle)
    Sharing is obviously worse, but still by downloading you have lost the producer/distributor profits no?
    Who says I'd buy the music if I wasn't getting it for free? By damaging I more meant that I am not depriving anyone of anything - by my act of downloading, I'm not placing an owner in a worse position than he was before.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LibertineNorth)
    Who says I'd buy the music if I wasn't getting it for free? By damaging I more meant that I am not depriving anyone of anything - by my act of downloading, I'm not placing an owner in a worse position than he was before.
    Come on, if you didn't have the ability to download for free, you would have to buy the album... the fact that you are enjoying the music but not paying for it shows that you are depriving the owner. Just think if a million people took that attitude, would you still say that the owner is not losing out?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jeff2233)
    Come on, if you didn't have the ability to download for free, you would have to buy the album... the fact that you are enjoying the music but not paying for it shows that you are depriving the owner. Just think if a million people took that attitude, would you still say that the owner is not losing out?
    I think a lot of people tend to download the stuff they're not really excited about (and so aren't so desperate to own the CD) or haven't been able to hear much of. If a band's good enough I'm sure people would want to own the actual product complete with artwork and the like (perhaps there's an issue with the music industry being flooded with mediocrity).

    For me, the main problem lies with the record companies not making their product appealing enough - most of the time they think it's fine to slap out some tiny artwork as a little booklet (gone are the days of gorgeous vinyl record slips - how about an album cover poster being included record compaines?) and expect people to still buy their product. It's not much more expensive for them to include a live footage/documentary "bonus DVD" that would encourage the punter to own the CD over downloading. The problem is that when they actually include such "bonus material", they either cynically re-release it with this after about 6 months to get people to buy an album twice or bump the price up even further (£16 for a CD is a pisstake), thus alienating the consumer from any pluses they may have had over downloading.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    i either buy all my music as cds (still, almost always off the internet as in-shop prices are just mental) or now through itunes. the way you can buy a single song for only 79p is fantastic.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The prices of CDs should be reduced. That will stop people from downloading. Loads of people such as myself can't afford to splash out £16.99 for one CD album. Every time I go into Virgin or HMV I am instantly put off because of the prices then I leave.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Marrissey)
    I think a lot of people tend to download the stuff they're not really excited about (and so aren't so desperate to own the CD) or haven't been able to hear much of. If a band's good enough I'm sure people would want to own the actual product complete with artwork and the like (perhaps there's an issue with the music industry being flooded with mediocrity).

    For me, the main problem lies with the record companies not making their product appealing enough - most of the time they think it's fine to slap out some tiny artwork as a little booklet (gone are the days of gorgeous vinyl record slips - how about an album cover poster being included record compaines?) and expect people to still buy their product. It's not much more expensive for them to include a live footage/documentary "bonus DVD" that would encourage the punter to own the CD over downloading. The problem is that when they actually include such "bonus material", they either cynically re-release it with this after about 6 months to get people to buy an album twice or bump the price up even further (£16 for a CD is a pisstake), thus alienating the consumer from any pluses they may have had over downloading.

    I agree, but I would say that the music industry is gradually realising that people will not settle for such mediocrity anymore, and are making efforts to improve the situation.

    For example, I recently bought The Strokes' new CD for £10.99, which is 14 tracks long, working out at 79p per track... whether or not the tracks are any good is another matter, but that is more or less what you would pay using itunes. In addition to that, the CD case is not simply a plastic box with a pathetic little inlay, it has the feeling of something that actually took some effort to produce... in fact, it's as close to the old style vinyl cases that you can possibly get with a CD, and the booklet is thick, contains all the lyrics and a lot of artwork. I don't think this is an isolated case either, a lot of the CDs I have bought over the past year have been similar in content and price, and also included live footage etc.

    I think you have to see the argument from both sides... filesharing is a fantastic way to promote and discover new bands, but anyone with a shred of musical conscience appreciates the amount of time, effort and money that goes into recording most albums (I say 'most' because there are always exceptions.) I know that there are a lot of music fans who will buy the CD after downloading a couple of tracks, but I would dare to say that they are in the minority, now that it is so easy to download a whole album for free. It doesn't matter what you think about the morals of certain record companies or the credibility of a specific band, by downloading for free, someone is losing out on money that is rightfully theirs.

    This site is quite interesting to read, it mainly refers to Napster but the arguments can be applied to the whole business of illegal file sharing. http://www.stormloader.com/mnd/FIS/napster.html
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: February 5, 2006
Poll
Black Friday: Yay or Nay?
Useful resources

Articles:

TSR wiki music section

Quick link:

Unanswered music threads

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

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

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