Online music downloading, p2p etc.

[THCi]

Originally posted by Saracen
[b]If that was aimed at me, then I do take offence at that remark. My comments are not from some "high and mighty" abstract point of view, they are because my living depends on copyright.

Can I enquire as to what you do?

[Saracen]

Originally posted by Ravens Nest
If that was aimed at me, then I do take offence at that remark. My comments are not from some "high and mighty" abstract point of view, they are because my living depends on copyright
Saracen please lets not start some silly arguement over this, i come on this site to debate topics with other people and i enjoy the chats, i dont want to argue as life is to short

I was just being honest with people, i always try to be

The no offence at the end of my last post was about me hoping that my point of view would not offend too much.

What i meant when i said high and mighty is i felt like i was being dictated to when all i was putting down was that i felt that since having broadband i had bought a lot less albums (and i have felt guilty about it) so what i wrote was i am trying to rectify this by buying the albums that i appreciated playing filtering the bad (well not bad, i just did not like them much)
i.e. White stripes (heard they were a good band copied all the albums off the internet, didnt like them much so have deleted them)

There will be no silly argument so far as I'm concerned, but I'm confused about who was dictating anything to you. You expressed a viewpoint, I expressed a contrary viewpoint ... and gave reasons. You then implied I was being "high and mighty". The only point in my post that I can see that was even slightly less than polite was when I said that people trying to justify their illegal activities by moaning about the price of CD's winds me up ... and it does.

Where have I dictated anything to you?

This forum is for debate and by definition that involves people expressing, and hopefully justifying, contrary points of view. That is exactly what I've been doing. Yet it seems that if I express a contrary point of view to yours, I'm being either "dictatorial" or "high and mightly".

At no point have I tried to stop you doing what you are doing, or expressing your point of view freely and openly. What I HAVE done is disagree with you and express the reasons why I disagree. That's debate ...... and it is what this particular forum is all about. You are entirely free to express your opinion, as am I, providing we both stay within the rules of the forum and the board. But in a debating forum, if you express an opinion, you'd better be prepared for people to challenge it

I understand some of the reasons why people download music .... i.e. to listen to it before buying. But as someone else pointed out, you can always listen in a record shop. The point remains, if you illegally download music YOU are putting YOURSELF at risk if you come to the attention of the RIAA and they decide to take legal action. It is entirely in your own hands to avoid that risk of court action.

I applaud you for buying some of the music you've downloaded and deleting the rest BUT .... do you seriously believe that is typical of the downloading community? I doubt either of us can prove it one way or the other, but I simply don't believe that is typical action.

Originally posted by Ravens Nest
so what i wrote was i am trying to rectify this by buying the albums that i appreciated playing filtering the bad (well not bad, i just did not like them much)

Do you see what im saying, im not stealing im filtering what i like and dont like, just for a while i did not buy the ones i liked just kept listening to the copys but now i am buying them

.....

I dont see any harm in it, but yes Kazaa and other search programs are hurting the music industry sadly .

I see entirely what you are saying, and personally I have no problem at all with you or anyone else doing that. But that wasn't the point I was objecting to. You said you are now trying to buy some of the material you have downloaded, and added

But a lot of the reason for not buying is Price, CD albums should be 9.99 old albums 4.99 & singles should be 99p
I also think DVD's should be no more than 9.99 and 4.99 for old films.

THAT is the point I was objecting to .... justifying the illegal downloading on the basis that in your opinion the price is too high.

Also, my point was not aimed at you specifically, but at the people downloading illegally in general.

The only reason so many people are prepared to break this law is that they know they are likely to get away with it. Suppose you knew that there was a 90% chance that you'd get caught, and that you'd get 5 years in jail if you did ... would you still pirate music? No of course i would not, but dont you see that it can be good to try before you buy, there are negatives but im buying the albums, i dont see a problem.

Yes, I see why you'd want to listen before you buy. I've been caught before with duff albums - and especially duff games software. But if you choose to risk being sued by breaking the law, you can hardly blame the people suing you because you broke the law. You only risk it because you think you can get away with it. If you don't, then tough - you shouldn't have broken the law.

Nothing I say here is going to stop people pirating music. and I know that. But it might stop the self-righteous justification that goes on. It is the copyright owners right to decide what they wish to charge. If that is £1000 per CD, then that is their right (not that they'd sell many). But that does not justify anyone deciding they are going to take what belongs to the copyright holder just because they either can't afford it or aren't prepared to pay the price. Good point about them being being able to charge what they want, But cant they see that sometimes sales are not as good not just from Pirating but the High prices... charge less and you'll get more impulse buying, i know i would take chances on albums if they were cheaper, you know you hear a couple of good tunes from a band and take a walk in Woolworths and see it at 4.99 well i wouldnt sit looking at if for too long i would buy it.(Thats what i think anyway)

The RIAA seem to refuse to admit that there is any other cause of slumping sales than piracy, and I'm certainly not going to defend the RIAA on that. I happen to agree with the people that are of the view that a large part of the reason for declining sales is the poor quality of much of the commercial dross being released as music in recent years. Personally, I have also often refused to buy an album because it is, in my view, overpriced. I'll either wait for a sale, or buy it when I'm abroad (usually, in the USA). One of my pet gripes for YEARS has been the disparity of pricing between the UK and US - which is why I have bought most of the albums I've bought in the last decade or so in the US. Now, I admit I'm fortunate to be able to do this, and many people can't. But it does reflect the fact that I practise what I preach. I could afford to buy albums at full price in this country, but I simply won't pay the price that is often demanded of me. That has often meant I've gone without a given album that I would otherwise have bought - because I decline to be ripped off.

I just think the RIAA should leave us all alone, to make our own decisions on whether we buy. That's like saying "lets leave it to the burglars to decide whether to burgle you or not, and the police should not get involved". If you break the law, then you take the chance that you will get caught and you pay the price if you do. There is quite a difference from typing a name and getting a song and planning the break in of someones house, of course everyone worrys about being caught but i feel some leniance is needed sometimes, also the RIAA could leave a positive message like "we understand that some people download music because they think it is too expensive, we have talked to the copyright holders and come to the conclusion that CD prices do need to come down as this will increase sales and as of next month the prices will drop to a more pallitable price range, but we will still protect copyright of these songs as strongly as ever"

But we all know it wont happen, perhaps i should have not said leave us alone, but said be more leniant and allow time to buy the CD's that you have copys of.
[/b]

I've seen nothing to suggest that the RIAA will simply prosecute individuals for a bit of downloading. I am aware of steps being taken to get people's internet access removed where sufficient evidence of illegal filesharing is going on, but hey, that's a chance you take. I doubt that many individuals will be sued - it is too time-consuming and expensive .... other than to make a few high-profile examples of people.

But I'm curious about one remark of yours earlier.

but searching peoples machines for copyright material is just plain wrong.

Do you have any specific instance of that in mind, or a link to a news story?

If they catch you participating in a file-sharing network, they may take action. But if you mean they are somehgow electronically breaking into your machine to search the contents of the hard drive then that, so far as I'm aware, is illegal (Computer Misuse Act 1990), at least in the UK, and is, in fact a criminal offence and does carry the potential for a jail sentence (of up to 5 years IIRC).

[Ravens Nest]

)when I said that people trying to justify their illegal activities by moaning about the price of CD's winds me up ... and it does. Yes i think me saying it was high & mighty was a bit too severe in hindsight , that section of your original post that you have highlighted was what originally upset me.

This forum is for debate and by definition that involves people expressing, and hopefully justifying, contrary points of view. That is exactly what I've been doing. Yet it seems that if I express a contrary point of view to yours, I'm being either "dictatorial" or "high and mightly". At no point have I tried to stop you doing what you are doing, or expressing your point of view freely and openly. What I HAVE done is disagree with you and express the reasons why I disagree. That's debate ...... and it is what this particular forum is all about. You are entirely free to express your opinion, as am I, providing we both stay within the rules of the forum and the board. But in a debating forum, if you express an opinion, you'd better be prepared for people to challenge it Well i do enjoy a good debate, and i suppose this has turned into a good one i was feeling at times it was just getting a bit too heated (Especially in this weather)

I applaud you for buying some of the music you've downloaded and deleting the rest BUT .... do you seriously believe that is typical of the downloading community? I doubt either of us can prove it one way or the other, but I simply don't believe that is typical action. Thanks i was going buy all my copied albums in original format anyway, actually this topic has made me decide to accelerate my buying all the albums i enjoy listening to at the moment (Well when i can afford to anyway).

And yes i agree with you, what i am doing is not typical of the downloading community, but im pretty honest (Actually to a fault sometimes ) most people just copy and copy and will not buy its just a free for all sadly..

But a lot of the reason for not buying is Price, CD albums should be 9.99 old albums 4.99 & singles should be 99p I also think DVD's should be no more than 9.99 and 4.99 for old films.

THAT is the point I was objecting to .... justifying the illegal downloading on the basis that in your opinion the price is too high. Also, my point was not aimed at you specifically, but at the people downloading illegally in general. Yes i suppose the price of albums is a weak excuse for downloading albums, i think now looking back i should have wrote i will buy them when they are cheaper as they are too expensive.. but i do think they should lower the prices, i would buy more and take more chances with different types of music.

I do think the music industry has stagnated and needs some more variety and more reasonably priced albums would be a step in the right direction.

Do you have any specific instance of that in mind, or a link to a news story? If they catch you participating in a file-sharing network, they may take action. But if you mean they are somehgow electronically breaking into your machine to search the contents of the hard drive then that, so far as I'm aware, is illegal (Computer Misuse Act 1990), at least in the UK, and is, in fact a criminal offence and does carry the potential for a jail sentence (of up to 5 years IIRC). Well not a direct search of your hard-drive but like you said participate in file-sharing, if you use file-sharing programs like Kazaa you have a shared folder and thats where you download your mp3's and its the same place people upload from you (you dont have much choice to them uploading from you as it is built into the program no way around it).

But after whats been going on with the RIAA im keeping off it now

The RIAA are searching peoples hard-drives through there My shared folder, taking this information and keeping a history and i suppose, finding a good candidate and then taking legal action against them.

I do wish it didnt need them to come to this conclusion, i think as i've said before i like to preview first before i buy, but they are just doing there jobs.

It's stopping me from previewing as im afraid of being caught, when i know im someone who will buy later.. it's a little too time consuming going to shops and asking to preview an album, also a lot of shops do not do that now, downloading was much faster, but now it's not worth the risk

[tonicblue]

I think it does affect it. I heard that $5,000,000 (or summit with a five and lots of 0's) is lost from microsoft every year from softwear pirating. I download music but then later usually by the album. Unless that one song downloaded is the ony one by the artist I like.

[woody]

Originally posted by Skii
Well I haven't bought a single CD since I got Broadband, but then again there hasn't been any new music for a long time that has interested me.

So I guess the only record sales I harm are those who have already made their millions.

Same here. also for those of us who live in towns with top 40 only record shops there ain't much choice if i do want to go out and buy a cd.

[Ravens Nest]

top 40 only record shops I hate it when theres a lack of choice.

Seems to me they think the top 40 is enough, all i can say is space must cost a fortune! you cant tell me they cannot make some room for an a-z of artists?

[Agent]

I'm not going to comment on the legality's and the right / wrong aspect of it, but i just want to make my view on the RIAA known.
IMO the RIAA is going around this totally the wrong way. They will not win the battle against on-line music piracy this way, only encourage it. It seems to be they are scared to embrace the new technology, and instead want to fight it.
So what happens if Kazza users get successfully sued ?
Kazza users move away from it to other networks, which the RIAA must pursue. The money they will get off successfully suing people will no where near cover the costs of going after people to sue them.
Even if the RIAA go after networks currently in place like WinMX, they are already behind. With the new event on P2P encrypted networks, the RIAA don't stand a chance of stoping music sharing. Projects like Freenet will make sure the RIAA cant track users and successfully sue them.

The RIAA needs to find a happy medium of which people can obtain music as fast as the Internet, but the artists still get paid there royalties.
The stuck up attitude they have at the moment isn't going to get them anywhere. Apart from their site rooted a few more times perhaps.

[robertirwin]

I've dabbled with a couple of the legal online music-buying systems but I've not found any yet that aren't really really horrible to use or only have a very limited range of stuff. I also don't want crappy WMA files that have copy protection - I just want to save the file onto a CD and play them in a car, not worry about wheter my machine crahes and my files get deactivated or somrthing. I just want to pay a farir price per song, and get a receipt at the end saying I now legally own a certain range of mp3s. none I've seenare as painfully simple as that.

[Punky]

i love music, its plays a large part in my life, but i really can't afford to buy every single album i want. i admit i havn't bought an album for a long time, but that's because of the expense of them. i use p2p software (no names...), i download songs every day nearly, because i love music but can't afford it. if record companies lowered prices, then i'd buy albums, as would a lot more other people i guess. the last album i did buy was 'Mediocre Generica' by Leftover Crack (damn good hardcore/skacore/thrash/other stuff band), and inside the cover it says to feel free to make copies. i love that attitude - it makes the music available to people who can't afford it. maybe its just me ranting, i don't know.

[Jiff Lemon]

Originally posted by Bindibadgi
That's another point - sometimes you cant get stuff over here, and rare B sides etc which ive found on the net too.

A long time ago, Virgin were toying with the idea of producing your own CD collection. You walked into a virgin Megastore, wandered over to a pc, found the tunes you wanted and they were burnt onto CD - Full quality, No fancy packaging and all legitimate.

So what happened? Vanished without a trace.

Seems an obvious solution to me - The few downloads I've done are things I've been unable to get through conventional sources at a reasonable price.

[THCi]

Thats probably an idea that would work as well, and if it was within a VirginMegastore it would have been legit as well. Shame they got shot of it... probably because it didnt take off as well as they expected.

[Theo]

I disagree with downloading music which is unauthorised other than for evaluation purposes. I like to have the opportunity to decide whether a cd is good enough for me to spend my money on or not. Kind of like the 5 cd players in HMV, but with more choice.

A bit of a different direction, but same topic kind of.. what about the downloading of a film that has either been discontinued or is unavailable (and won't become available ever) in the country that you live in? For example - Crossroads with Ralph Macchio and Steve Vai. I scowered every music, video, charity and online shop looking for that film. But everywhere told me it was discontinued. Seeing as it's discontinued, no more royalties would be made from it, presumably, so it would be all good to download? Any opinions on that?

[Ravens Nest]

Originally posted by Theo
I disagree with downloading music which is unauthorised other than for evaluation purposes. I like to have the opportunity to decide whether a cd is good enough for me to spend my money on or not. Kind of like the 5 cd players in HMV, but with more choice.

A bit of a different direction, but same topic kind of.. what about the downloading of a film that has either been discontinued or is unavailable (and won't become available ever) in the country that you live in? For example - Crossroads with Ralph Macchio and Steve Vai. I scowered every music, video, charity and online shop looking for that film. But everywhere told me it was discontinued. Seeing as it's discontinued, no more royalties would be made from it, presumably, so it would be all good to download? Any opinions on that?

Well if you cant buy it anymore then they are not losing any money, so i think you should be able to download it.

Becomes abandonware (or AbandonTV in this instance) in my book..

But nearly all companys hold on to there copyright religiously so if you did get caught then you would still probably get in trouble, it would be a funny\ironic story for the papers.

[Jiff Lemon]

And thats is where the media industry is going wrong.

We want it, they can't provide it (or want a kings ransom for it).

It's not feasible for them to to release old material in a conventional sense, so why not make it available for authorised download?

[Ravens Nest]

Here's an interesting post about the RIAA give it a read if you download copyright material.
http://www.kxxv.com/main.cfm?ID=1&NewsID=3027&Type=Full

[Swafe]

gonna keep this short and sweet

yes it has affected the industry, it obviously would

however not as much as they have made out, its benefitted some artists, and hurt some others, but either way sales are relativly similar to what they were

they need to get a life, its only harming them slightly, a price they should pay for extorsionate cd prices