I completely agree.. if nobody buys it, then less people will make it, except the ones that would make it if people bought it or not...Surface_Tension wrote:Having the technology to steal doesn't give you the right to steal. I could have a crowbar, but if I crack you in the head with that shit, I go to prison. I can't pull the old "but I had a crowbar" routine when the coppers roll up.
What I mean, is just because you have access to stolen shit doesn't mean you should take advantage of it. On a base level it's wrong. It's illegal. You can call it practicing civil disobedience or whatever, but at the end of the day it's stealing and it is a crime in most countries on the planet.
The problem is that people feel like they are entitled. Not too long ago, you'd either hear something on the radio, at home or in a club, but you only had a few choices for media to play it on. Now you have infinite access to music and you feel entitled to hear the entire tune. Fair play, all of our releases are able to be streamed in their entirety on our blog in decent quality.
But I promise you that socialism only works if people give back what they take from the system financially. If you just take and never support the art, there won't be nearly the same amount of art and some quality artists may not be able to afford their hobby. For a lot of people it would be a dream to eek out a meager living from their craft and that sense of entitlement can kill that shit real fast.
My question is tho.. How much money do you lose, and how much promotion do you gain?
coz if the first out weights the latter, then I am utterly opposed, but if its the opposite then no harm no foul, imo..
