If i downlaod music i do so to see if it's worth buying, but then if it's not i don't get it so that i've got the CD.Originally Posted by kalniel
95% of what i download is TV shows though, which having got a TV licence and video recorer and a digital recorder in my PC i don't see a problem with.
if i couldnt download music/tv shows, i'd just find another way to get them anyway, whether thats waiting till they are on special offer at rock-bottom prices (in which case the companies will barely make profit on them anyway)
or more likely i'll just get PVR/Sky+ and watch everything that way and find a way to archive it. With music i would just borrow it or record it off the radio like i used to back in the minidisc days.
Music isnt a necessary industry, it started small and quality and now its just hyped up commercialised bs like the horrendous fashion industry, overcrowded and diluted. Just because there are more artists now than there have ever been doesnt mean they all deserve to be rich and succesful.
i think the only exception i would have would be if there was a highly efficient online store that guaranteed a large proportion of the price would go to the artists and directly-related crew and had realistic prices for CDs and downloads.
I don't buy the 'pirate stuff to see if its worth getting' arguement at all. You've still gained use of the product illegally.
If you don't agree with the law then ask someone to change it! It's not our right to pick and choose which laws we will bother to obey or not. I might decide I don't like paying tax, but just because I don't like it it doesn't make it right for me not to do.95% of what i download is TV shows though, which having got a TV licence and video recorer and a digital recorder in my PC i don't see a problem with.
but your most likely gunna get done for not paying tax then u r if pirate
Amen brother!
(takes a deep breath...)
Music isn't a necessary industry Marcos? I strongly disagree. You find music in every aspect of life - in adverts, film scores, in bars and pubs...it unites people and provides a complete alternative form of expression and communication. Think about your life without any music at all. Then you realise that is necessary and the industry is necessary. Maybe it doesn't do things the way people want them to, but if you hate the commercial stuff (like me) then find artists who write original and inspiring music and support them instead. There is no justification for pirating. It is illegal and immoral. We need to encourage and reward the flow of creativity - not stifle it. Otherwise the world will become a very dull and sterile place...
(...and relax...!)
you can have Music without the current Music Industry though. You may find that the current industry actually stifles expression and communication, pushing dollars towards ACTS and Performers, not talent and music.Music isn't a necessary industry Marcos? I strongly disagree. You find music in every aspect of life - in adverts, film scores, in bars and pubs...it unites people and provides a complete alternative form of expression and communication.
With regards to opinion on Piracy and also quality, it seems immoral for a customer to use and not pay for a product service. To an extent this is true.
But to what extent is it true that the majority of these businesses are producing incomplete products and services that do not fit the description, and require Patching, or Service Packs 6 months, 12 months into the product life cycle. Morally should the software creator in this instance not credit back the customer for loss of usage/functionality during the time before the product was perfected?
Also, in Law, cars do not get "stolen" very often, they simply get "Taken Without the Owners Consent".
I think a similar law needs to be created for IP, such as "Usage without the creators consent". This would carry a different sentance to common "Theft", and could be legislated for appropriately. Obviously those using without creators consent for Commercial resale activities would be hit harder than those using it for personal benefit.
The free market failed when parallel imports were made illegal.
Then that should be pursued through the correct paths - we consumers in Britain have an amazing amount of consumer protection that we can leverage in our favour, legally. What we should not do is decide to take the law into our own hands.
Yeah could be an idea - usage outside of the license conditions perhaps. People reselling could be hit with the theft charge though I think.I think a similar law needs to be created for IP, such as "Usage without the creators consent". This would carry a different sentance to common "Theft", and could be legislated for appropriately. Obviously those using without creators consent for Commercial resale activities would be hit harder than those using it for personal benefit.
Only as far as buying the same product from lots of different sources, but as far as music and software are concern there's still a lot of choice of retailers. There is also a very free market in so far as choice of product, enabling consumers to walk away from a product they don't need if they feel it's not value for money.The free market failed when parallel imports were made illegal.
I might be wrong here but its different because, If you record something off the TV then your watching it legaly and also watching the adverts, so the broadcasters, ITV BBC ect get there money.
You straight download the shows and they get non of that advertising revenue.
So in effect its very different, you record it then they still get paid for that showing, straight download it and they loose out.
Salazaar : <Touching wood as I write this...>
im not saying that we should take into our own hands, but i dont think that our current law system is in a state or of technical knowledge to understand the problem nor legislate for it.
Yep, this maybe more EULA friendly too. People using for commercial or reselling should be come down on by a ton of bricks.
Only as far as buying the same product from lots of different sources, but as far as music and software are concern there's still a lot of choice of retailers. There is also a very free market in so far as choice of product, enabling consumers to walk away from a product they don't need if they feel it's not value for money.[/QUOTE]
Its only a perception of free choice though.
Are the retailers able to buy freely from worldwide sources? Or do they all use the same 2-3 big disties for their core lines? What difference between a CD in USA and a CD from UK? or indeed, Branded jeans from the US or from the UK?
Yes the customer has the right and ability to walk away and not buy a product they do not see value in. But what if there is no alternative, as all retailers have the same offer, based upon the same manu/distie pricebooks? And what if these were for example, 50% more expensive than the price in another country- but no retailer is allowed to bring in cheap stock, nor are those retailers with cheap stock allowed to sell to the customers in that other country?
not factual, the money for the adverts would have been paid irrespective of whether you recorded it or watched it on the internet at a later date.I might be wrong here but its different because, If you record something off the TV then your watching it legaly and also watching the adverts, so the broadcasters, ITV BBC ect get there money.
If you recorded it and fast forwarded through the adverts, you infact ripped the advertisers off even more, because it will register that you watched xxx channel at xxx time and they will have stats to show that the tv was tuned in during the advert, but if you infact skipped the adverts, then you are misleading the network and then the advertiser may be told inflated advert viewing figures. If you downloaded it that stat would not have registered to begin with...
I think that's where the retailers in the UK would have the right to enquire about anti-competative practices/monopolies.
You don't buy my argument?
Dear god no, my worlds just callapsed
I can assure you i have a cd collection worth about £1500, and i buy legitemate copys of windows unlike many.
And why on earth would a law need changing when they don't enforce it?
The simple fact is when you download a film made by spielberg with tom hanks or some other such people, you really don't care that your doing them out of what amounts to a few pounds of royaltys. It's not that you don't think it's wrong.
A friend that downloads alot made me laugh one day, he said it was almost like being robin hood, stealing from the incredibly rich so the poor could watch a show
Like I said I might be wrong, im sure though that the amount of money they would get would be based on the viewing figures though? so more downloads then less viewing figures could mean less money?, Really the BBC are the ones with the right idea with there iplayer.
Still at the end of the day its still stealing whichever way you look at it.
Salazaar : <Touching wood as I write this...>
While this may be what you read in some places an artist's income from the massive contracts that you see them is generally in large part an advance, secured on the performance of their record. The record company *does* take a large chunk, but until that advance is repaid (through sales of their music) the artist generally doesn't see a penny in royalties. While there are massive acts making money hand over fist (see Metallica etc) you have to also think of the (and I paraphrase Henry Rollins her) "teeny tiny indie bands who are getting everywhere in the back of a van, sleeping on floors and living off of macaroni cheese. You go and see these bands, you buy their album or next month they might run out of macaroni cheese"
Pedantry aside, I really don't see the "I pirate it because I can't afford it, but I wouldn't buy it anyway so it's not a lost sale" line. If you want something enough to use it then buy it or find a suitable cheaper (or free) alternative. If you won't pay the money then you don't need it enough.
not many will agree with you has millions still download and pirate stuff because they dont have a nice stable job like some of us have here who can afford 100's of pounds on a single software etc.
free alternative producs are generaly crap hench why people gof or whats best weather they download it or buy it.
Buy why do they need it? If they don't need it enough to spend the money on it then they shouldn't have it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
