Discussion about illegal music downloads

[test_recordings]

It's like with any commercial venture then, people will pay for what they think something is worth (even if it takes a lot of advertising to convince them it's worth anything).

look at the assange thing. his claim from day one is that he was the "conduit" of information. the pipe for it, as you could say. he claims that he didn't know who sent him info and who downloaded it. he had no regard for whether the information he was receiving/re-transmitting was "property". he took it upon himself to in effect publish what he liked. a brazen and selfish decision.

he, like all filesharers, have this fantasy land notion that 1's and 0's floating around in cyberspace, are somehow theirs due to free access. its like being on a train, and finding a wallet. trains are public access and people are travelling in the same tunnels, but because a wallet is tangible, "hold in your hands" property, most people would do the right thing and return it, or try to contact the owner. there's a guilt decision involved. but hey you know what.....some music that someone has spent dozens of hours labouring over, who might be struggling to make rent or feed his wife or kids, has paid to have his music professionally mastered, and if lucky has found a label...well fuck that guy and his family. i won't pay him a dime because i feel big and empowered by my internet connection.

how anyone can argue in justification for ^that bullshit is beyond me.

Assange was doing what he thought was a morally-correct activity - giving people maybe not the truth about what high-power-level individuals and organisations were recording and acting on. That's a completely different topic because it's got nothing to do with commercial copyright.

The 'wallet on the train' analogy is an interesting one as it implies that one person is stealing another person's hard-earned cash but what if that person is themselves a thief? This is going back to the illegal sampling issue but also copyright infringement of someone nicking someone else's track? If I've had a track ripped off by a high level DJ/producer who turned it in to a dubplate and sent it about, if it ever got released properly he'd get some SHIT since I've got all the original files for its creation but otherwise the track's unreleasable by me since it sounds like the dubplate he put out...
Is an eye-for-an-aye then justifiable? I could quite happily take as many tracks without paying as I see justifiable, it's in that grey area

but what if the music in question is no longer for sale first hand? what if my only choices are to pay some joker £50 for the vinyl on discogs or download a vinyl rip from a filesharing website? is that still wrong? either way the artist isn't gonna get a cut...

i always pay for current music, still available in record shops/online retialers etc etc. only today i spent £15 on tunes. as well as £20 on saturday afternoon and £10 last wednesday. so i spend a fair amount.

HOWEVER, a great deal of what i want is old jungle and uk garage - not much of it available on itunes, beatport, digital-tunes and so on. am i just not allowed it even if its available for illegal download?

It would depend on who you have more sympathy for - the original DJ or the current owner of the vinyl? If you download the tune the DJ keeps his reputation going while if you buy the vinyl the owner gets some cash and the DJ keeps his rep going... I think people are charging so much for 2nd hand vinyl is that some people will buy it if they really want it but the people that just want the tune will just download it

[zerbaman]

I used to pirate a lot, and occasionally still do in times of desperation, or when a tune isn't being released and the artist isn't giving it away. Personally, I don't feel any better for it, a tune is a tune IMO, I buy tunes/records/releases/albums/EPs because I feel that the artist deserves it, kinda like a reward system, especially for lesser known artists, they wouldn't be making much but I think it's a great morale booster nonetheless. I don't have to buy much because even though I like a lot of stuff, I know that I wouldn't really get down to listening to all of it, so buying it all would be a bit wasteful for me. I don't spend enough time listening to music.
A few of my tunes have been leaked and ripped for re-uploading, I felt pretty glad about it, someone wanted it so bad they stole it hahaha, really did give me a buzz when I first saw my tunes on other people's YouTube channels. And that pretty much sums up me feeling about getting my music places, yeah it would be great if everyone payed, but the feeling and knowledge that there are people appreciating what I've done covers me really, especially because artists don't really make anything in sales compared to what they get from gigs and merchandise.
Those wondering, I've not payed for my DAW, but I've purchased some VSTs. I recently turned 16 and after my exams are through I intend to get a job, Tesco or something, so with my first paycheck, I intend to commence repaying my debts to the likes of ImageLine & Native Instruments. I feel that this is the responsibility of the artist. If you really love what you do, you shouldn't pirate forever IMO.
Anyway, these are just my thoughts on the matter

[garethom]

I felt pretty glad about it, someone wanted it so bad they stole it hahaha, really did give me a buzz when I first saw my tunes on other people's YouTube channels.

Personally I'd feel the opposite. If they want it so bad, they could pay for it, not like I'd be charging £10,000 for a track. To me it would seem they don't want to pay for it because they don't like it that much.

[AllNightDayDream]

he, like all filesharers, have this fantasy land notion that 1's and 0's floating around in cyberspace, are somehow theirs due to free access. its like being on a train, and finding a wallet. trains are public access and people are travelling in the same tunnels, but because a wallet is tangible, "hold in your hands" property, most people would do the right thing and return it, or try to contact the owner. there's a guilt decision involved. but hey you know what.....some music that someone has spent dozens of hours labouring over, who might be struggling to make rent or feed his wife or kids, has paid to have his music professionally mastered, and if lucky has found a label...well fuck that guy and his family. i won't pay him a dime because i feel big and empowered by my internet connection.

how anyone can argue in justification for ^that bullshit is beyond me.

0's and 1's are free, and you're computer generates and deletes thousands of lines of binary code every few minutes that you have it on. They have no real value, it is a tiny insignificant signal that is virtually imaginary. You guys come up with same bullshit everytime "oh what about the poor artist that put hours blah blah blah" This is music, this is the entertainment business, this is art. If some dumbass thinks he's gonna feed his family producing an album in his bedroom when he's not burial, he probably isn't bright enough to put together a halfway decent track anyway. Silly exaggerated anecdotes like yours are so exhausted and are telling of how more and more you guys don't have the emotional argument for the artists you think you have.

i hope they find a watermarking device thats un-hackable. all this digital narcissism involved in people defending their hard drives is so boring. people have to start connecting the concept of property with the internet. this attack on creativity thats been going on for more than a decade, has a toll. we're going to have a new generation of kids growing up thinking everything is free. remember that RIAA's plans for tackling napster early on, were planning for the next two decades. they see that napster had a generational effect, and the toll is that now the importance of music is based on how you can perform it (live nation), rather than the older paradigm of putting all the focus on the "album" and the songwriter. why do you think that singles are on the rise, and albums are on the decline? why do you think all of pop music essentially sounds the same? because the major record companies have no money to take risks. they have no money to spend on art; only commerce.

I'm glad you brought up singles. That's another facet in the new face of the industry. It has nothing to do with the "gimme gimme" mentality you like to give the younger generation from your oh-so-holy seat of seniority. Many people will agree when they buy an album, it's quite a feat to find a whole release you enjoy front to back without any certain tracks you tend to skip over. An album has to be pretty fucking amazing to make decent sales, and every once in a while they do. Single sales have exploded, and even selling ringtones can almost guarantee companies profits.

Apple has had more to do with this than filesharing. Ever since people were given powerful MP3 players, they realize it's loads more convenient to collect and store music as data and select individually the tracks they like, thus making singles much more appealing especially in terms of space.

This is not an attack on creativity. More music is being made and released now than ever before. In the past decade there have been brand new genres created and experimented with in a continuous cycle, you know as well as I that there are sounds out now that just weren't around before the millennium. And many of these people can dedicate their lives to it WHEN THE MUSIC IS GOOD ENOUGH. Independent labels have been making huge growth over the past years, and the total income of the industry as a whole is now made almost equally of large pop labels and specialized smaller labels. People have seen this trend coming for years now.

The bold/italic/underlined line shows me really that your side of the fence is struggling for arguments. Pop music has always been similar. That's why it's fucking pop music. This entire idea of sharing information and art and treating it as more than a commodity is to remove oneself from the large machine of the spoon-feeding pop media. Pop radio is becoming more irrelevant every day. People get real artistic music from all kinds of places like these message boards, pandora, youtube, facebook/twitter, people are being spoon-fed less and are being influenced more by other consumers like you and I, "liking" things, embedding videos, chit chatting... I see this whole thing as the opposite as you see it. This is beginning of the end for the large profiteering possessive music industry and the beginning of the era where the artist, not the a&r guy, is given his fair chance should he work as hard for it as the old industry did.

I have spent many weeks researching this topic as it is extremely interesting to me as a lover of music. I have loads of data on it. If you want to argue the real issues, which there are, intelligently without pulling half-assed recycled arguments out then maybe we can get to a better understanding.

[laurent__duval]

^^ wisdom!

\thread

[garethom]

0's and 1's are free, and you're computer generates and deletes thousands of lines of binary code every few minutes that you have it on. They have no real value, it is a tiny insignificant signal that is virtually imaginary.

Time and effort goes into those 1's and 0's. They don't just fucking randomly appear. If a company pumps millions of dollars into making a video game, and you download it, should that be free because it's just 1's and 0's?

People need to realise that in the digital age, 1's and 0's are a commodity too.

If some dumbass thinks he's gonna feed his family producing an album in his bedroom when he's not burial, he probably isn't bright enough to put together a halfway decent track anyway.

So a producer makes a few tracks, the tracks are sick, but it's part of a scene that doesn't have many followers so they aren't gonna make a lot of money from it. Even so, should they not be rewarded for the time and effort they have put in to making it if you enjoy it?

[collige]

If some dumbass thinks he's gonna feed his family producing an album in his bedroom when he's not burial, he probably isn't bright enough to put together a halfway decent track anyway.

So a producer makes a few tracks, the tracks are sick, but it's part of a scene that doesn't have many followers so they aren't gonna make a lot of money from it. Even so, should they not be rewarded for the time and effort they have put in to making it if you enjoy it?

Absolutely. However, he shouldn't be naive enough to assume that he can make a living off of it.

[garethom]

If some dumbass thinks he's gonna feed his family producing an album in his bedroom when he's not burial, he probably isn't bright enough to put together a halfway decent track anyway.

So a producer makes a few tracks, the tracks are sick, but it's part of a scene that doesn't have many followers so they aren't gonna make a lot of money from it. Even so, should they not be rewarded for the time and effort they have put in to making it if you enjoy it?

Absolutely. However, he shouldn't be naive enough to assume that he can make a living off of it.

I totally agree with that, but that doesn't mean they don't deserve some $$$ for it.

[kidshuffle]

if the original artists had to deal with file sharers it would become a full time job

Thats why lawyers exist; to deal with your grievances

And amen to AllNightDayDreams second rant (I still believe 0's and 1's are going to have to be considered commodities)

[zerbaman]

I felt pretty glad about it, someone wanted it so bad they stole it hahaha, really did give me a buzz when I first saw my tunes on other people's YouTube channels.

Personally I'd feel the opposite. If they want it so bad, they could pay for it, not like I'd be charging £10,000 for a track. To me it would seem they don't want to pay for it because they don't like it that much.

These weren't releases. And at the time I hadn't been producing for too long. These days I've not payed much attention to these things

[seckle]

sorry, but if you don't financially support the artform, your opinion on whether someone should or shouldn't choose a life in music or art....means nothing. its just more collective hot air.

stop living in fantasy land. everything costs money, and if you somehow think otherwise, you need to get out in the real creative world and find out just how expensive and hard it is. there's more than a dozen friends around me, that have 2 or 3 jobs, just to be able to continue to pursue their dreams in music, in the hope that one day it will be realized. someone thats bitching about paying .99 cents for a tune, is probably still living with mom and dad.

[collige]

Who said they didn't financially support the artform?

[Pedro Sánchez]

you need to get out in the real creative world and find out just how expensive and hard it is.

It's not though is it, the price of a laptop and an internet connection to share your art with the world.
The cost of just living is expensive but thats another thing altogether.

[AllNightDayDream]

0's and 1's are free, and you're computer generates and deletes thousands of lines of binary code every few minutes that you have it on. They have no real value, it is a tiny insignificant signal that is virtually imaginary.

Time and effort goes into those 1's and 0's. They don't just fucking randomly appear. If a company pumps millions of dollars into making a video game, and you download it, should that be free because it's just 1's and 0's?

People need to realise that in the digital age, 1's and 0's are a commodity too.

If some dumbass thinks he's gonna feed his family producing an album in his bedroom when he's not burial, he probably isn't bright enough to put together a halfway decent track anyway.

So a producer makes a few tracks, the tracks are sick, but it's part of a scene that doesn't have many followers so they aren't gonna make a lot of money from it. Even so, should they not be rewarded for the time and effort they have put in to making it if you enjoy it?

I got the article saved on my laptop that's fucked at the moment, but if anyone is into economics I read about an interesting argument Hayek made about this. It's basically like this: Classically, intellectual and digital property are value-less in terms of the Supply and Demand relationship. With a digital file that exists in absolute abundance and can be copied as many times as the consumer wants, determining the price of such a thing would be like trying to determine the price of air. With an essentially infinite supply of the product, one could say the price should be arbitrarily set by the demand (consumer). You can't steal something that is value-less (in terms of money) and in infinite abundance, and stealing implies that you are dispossessing someone else of something by taking it. You're more of a thief breathing in oxygen than you are downloading some song.

And like I said before, no one is making the argument that you shouldn't pay for good music. That's ridiculous. Everyone has to support the art they love. I just came back from a show last night, and with some birthday cash was able to cop like 7 CDs over the past two weeks. I'm just saying piracy isn't this ugly evil thing that is anti-music like some people like to think and I hate how people like to sit up holier-than-thou and call people thieves when it's just not true.

[Duffman]

I love music but don't have the funds, so I pirate if I really want an album, and when I do get dough a lot of it is spent on music. Some people just can't afford to buy a lot of music.

[Sheff]

i downloaded a few tracks illegally yesterday when i was testing out if the timecoded vinyls work in VDJ,

it was shit i downloaded 5 tracks. 4 of them was shit quality, and out of them 4, none of them had a proper intro, or the intro was mixed or missing the first beat.

was more hassle than its worth to be honest

[Duffman]

i downloaded a few tracks illegally yesterday when i was testing out if the timecoded vinyls work in VDJ,

it was shit i downloaded 5 tracks. 4 of them was shit quality, and out of them 4, none of them had a proper intro, or the intro was mixed or missing the first beat.

was more hassle than its worth to be honest

'insert song or album title' 320.

It's not that hard

[Sheff]

i know man i did

still turned out to be wank..would have saved myself much more time spending 99p pence on it

[Sheff]

or however much you young whippersnappers pay for music these days

[Duffman]

or however much you young whippersnappers pay for music these days

Don't be silly granddad

I just couldn't pay for digital downloads, I need something I can hold.