Music Music Swappers & File Sharing: A Discussion

[Hurkyl]

Uhm, I'm not sure if you followed me. I was referring to the fact that if you tell me to check out say, Benjamins Gate (a christian metal band) and I punch it into Kazzaa, well, it has costed that band not one penny for me to find and listen and possibly become a fan of there music, hence, free advertising.

I followed you. You aren't considering the flip-side; people who would have otherwise bought an album or paid to see a performance after hearing about BG through word of mouth can just download the music off the internet and BG gets not one red cent.

Well, as I said in my previous post, I'd like to see some proof that the big 10% losses suffered by the record groups are truly related file trading. Is there any proof of that? And even so, how can we be certain its not trumped up reports to turn the table in the richies favor?

Whether or not music theft has any impact at all on the record companies is largely irrelevant to whether said theft is wrong.

 

[Zero]

Is there any validity to the notion of file sharing to be ok, under certain circumstances? I mean, obviously(to me) bootlegs are fine and dandy. I really don't see any harm in wanting to sampl,e a CD before you buy, too...especially when we are talking about a 30 minute CD that costs $20.

 

[russ_watters]

Originally posted by Zero
Is there any validity to the notion of file sharing to be ok, under certain circumstances? I mean, obviously(to me) bootlegs are fine and dandy. I really don't see any harm in wanting to sampl,e a CD before you buy, too...especially when we are talking about a 30 minute CD that costs $20.

There are bands (phish, greatful dead for example) who condone or even support legal "bootlegging." There are also a number of sites with free mp3's for download at the request of the artists who are seeking exposure.

 

[megashawn]

Whether or not music theft has any impact at all on the record companies is largely irrelevant to whether said theft is wrong.

And I and many others say it is theft to charge such a rediculous price for cds. The RIAA even anounced a price drop that has yet to take effect.

And that is what I say is damaging there sales, not online theft, but over charging. Before I even had a CD-r and was able to burn cd's, effectively taken my music out of my house, into my car, give it to my friend, etc, I quit buying cds. Many others did too.

Its quite relavent, because, if that is the source of the problem(overcharging) and they are only trying to correct the side effect(online piracy) then they will be running a big circle and never get anything accomplished, aside from wasting resources.

Like Zantra said, even if they get all the share networks to shutdown, it will just go back underground.

I find it funny that the RIAA doesn't even know about the largest file sharing network out there. I'd mention it, but I'd hate to jinx it.

 

[russ_watters]

Originally posted by megashawn
And I and many others say it is theft to charge such a rediculous price for cds. The RIAA even anounced a price drop that has yet to take effect.

I would agree and there are even possible legal actions to be taken against the RIAA, but that is largely a separate issue.

'They did something illegal before I did something illegal, so what I did should be ok' isn't a valid defense.

Its quite relavent, because, if that is the source of the problem(overcharging) and they are only trying to correct the side effect(online piracy) then they will be running a big circle and never get anything accomplished, aside from wasting resources.

Thats true, but that still doesn't make it RIGHT

 

[Zero]

Stealing on a large scale is as American as apple pie, the only difference is that it isn't rich corporations doing the stealing for a change.

 

[megashawn]

The more and more I think about it, we should all boycott cd's under the RIAA umbrella. They want to wine about the 10% losses, let's see how they feel about 30 or 40 % lossess.

I mean, they anounce that they are pressing law suits againts people downloading/sharing, and in the same breath say that they will lower cd prices. Well, they've pressed charges, but they've yet to drop the prices. More lies.

Seems like the best course of action to me.

 

[Zantra]

Originally posted by russ_watters
One clarification on taping something from the radio/tv - its not illegal and never has been (it may have/may be changing - more later). What do you think a VCR is for? These fall under "home use" and are allowed as long as you don't distribute the media. Hollywood didn't used to mind because the quality of the recording used to be significantly worse on a tape taken from tv or the radio - not anymore. Digital tv and radio has made it possible to make very high quality recordings.

Its been a few years since I researched this (I did a debate in college), so by now it might be illegal. That may have been part of the DMCA.

Remember Cassette Tapes? Though there was really no legal objection, I recall (way back when) the music industry objecting to recordable cassette tapes for the same reason. I used to record a ton off the radio. The key factor, as you mentioned, was distribution.

As for video tapes, technically it is illegal. you're correct that they don't pursue it because 1. The recordings until recently made 2nd copies pretty bad. And they did institute anti-copy measures that messed up tapes pretty decently. Litigation was deemed costly and unecessary. But you're right- the quality of recordings now have upped the stakes.

 

[jb]

Well, as I said in my previous post, I'd like to see some proof that the big 10% losses suffered by the record groups are truly related file trading. Is there any proof of that? And even so, how can we be certain its not trumped up reports to turn the table in the richies favor?

i wouldn't be a bit surprised if that 10% is caused by the excessive price of cds, and the increasing crappiness of music. without those factors, i bet the riaa would see a 10% increase due to trading.

and their lawsuits are way too excessive. $1000 or more for a song is a hell of a lot. that goes beyond the scope of damages done, assuming a cost of $1 per song from legal online sites.

 

[russ_watters]

Originally posted by jb
i wouldn't be a bit surprised if that 10% is caused by the excessive price of cds, and the increasing crappiness of music. without those factors, i bet the riaa would see a 10% increase due to trading.

Actually, what the RIAA doesn't tell you is that they have changed the way they find talent. There has been a significant reduction in the number of albums published and the number of new bands signed to record deals with major labels. The number of cd's sold per album released has not gone down.

 

[Zero]

I find myself agreeing with both sides in principle...I usually limit my online file stealing to checking out songs I read about in magazines, and then buying the CD if I like the song. I think the RIAA is fighting file sharing because it allows record executives to keep their jobs by blaming low record sales on us, instead of on the crappy CDs they put out.

 

[Zantra]

mp3 sharing going underground

I believe I just predicted this exact thing back on page one. It's a trend that will gain more and more momentum the more RIAA pursues it. Basically this is an upward trend that can't be fought. It's not just a small segment of people. MP3 sharing is in use by the masses, and it won't be squashed.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/internet/10/06/underground.internet.ap/index.html

The decentralized peer-to-peer technology that enables a computer user to share his or her music collection with strangers remains an unbottled genie -- and is now likely to evolve so ever more traffic becomes invisible not just to the entertainment industry's copyright cops but also to repressive governments, inquisitive employers and snooping relatives.

 

[megashawn]

Well, back in my younger days I used to mess around with mIrc scripting. Right before I give it up I was working on a file-sharing network that would work through mirc, peer to peer and independant of the irc network.

I might get back into it again seeing the need for a more private way of communication.

I still say we should boycott the music industry.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Brilliant!

http://apnews.excite.com/article/20031027/D7UEHP801.html

 

[Zero]

Good plan! Gotta love MIT, don't you?

 

[Mattius_]

I mean, they anounce that they are pressing law suits againts people downloading/sharing, and in the same breath say that they will lower cd prices. Well, they've pressed charges, but they've yet to drop the prices. More lies.

I think that they just dropped prices from 18 to 12 dollars a cd. But that makes one think, just how much money are they making in the first place?

Now who is stealing?

 

[megashawn]

I think that they just dropped prices from 18 to 12 dollars a cd. But that makes one think, just how much money are they making in the first place?

Well, here in NC the price change must not be in effect. I was at the mall just last week and the cheapest cd I could find was $16.

Even old cds like Pantera Cowboys from Hell (80's anyone) is going for 15-18 in any store. Its just plain rediculous.

I had a friend who works for FYE, formely known as Camelot here. He said there was a 300-500% markup on cd's at the store itself. A large portion of a cd goes to the record store you buy it at. I think I mentioned earlier about another old friend of mine who worked for a cd pressing company some years ago. Ready to sale, rolling off the line a cd costs between 50 cent and $1 to make.

I can't get nobody to do it, but I really think a boycott would get them to open there eyes. Like someone said, $1000 for a song in these lawsuits is rediculous. There legal criminals, and even the government is on there side.

I still say more proof need be provided that establishes the losses suffered by the record industry are indeed a result of file trading, and not unhappy consumers tired of overpaying.

I remember plenty of people not buying cd's before cd-r's hit the market. The only difference now, is the people fed up with paying to much now have an option to get there own music.

 

[BoulderHead]

Recent developments;

A federal appeals court dealt the music industry a serious blow Friday in a ruling that makes it harder and more costly for record companies to sue individuals suspected of illegally sharing songs on the Internet.

The sternly worded, surprise ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., overturned a lower court order that forced Internet service provider Verizon Communications Inc. to give the Recording Industry Association of America the names of subscribers suspected of illegally offering music files online.

Taken from;
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/12/20/MUSIC.TMP&type=tech

 

[megashawn]

but said Congress did not draft the digital copyright act broadly enough to cover issuing a subpoena to an Internet service providerto stop file-sharing technology, which did not exist when the law was passed.

Hah, while this is good news, this particular belief is even better.

As I said before, I've been dubbing mp3s on tapes before Bill Gates had a CD-R

And the fact that they don't know about the good file sharing programs comforts me.

 

[jb]

i don't know if any of you have heard this, but kazaalite just got shut down by... none other than kazaa's parent company, sharman. ironic eh, a company that makes its money from people illegally sharing copyrighted materials, is concerned about its own copyrighted materials.

you can chop off a programmer's arms and legs, but he can still code with his nose.

 

[The_Professional]

And a quick search at Google would turn up no reference to kazaalite K++.

In response to a complaint we received under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, we have removed 7 result(s) from this page. If you wish, you may read the DMCA complaint for these removed results.

 

[Zargawee]

I read much of this topic, but didn't finish it all(I read about 3 pages) , and I think I have to tell something.

Here in my Country Jordan, It's diffirent, Some types of Music are banned, such as Death Metal & Black Metal, so some people would go over the Internet and download them, therefore, the Internet sharing tingy will never come to an end In here as long as these types are banned.
I have to admit that the number of poeple doing that in Jordan is less than 1000 people(Including me ), Once I participated in an IRC network in here to serve Mp3's , but in the end we got bored and closed the server. and This RIAA -or whatever it is- it's just a name, you can copy the CD/Tape you want, and some stores already sells the copied CD's to customers, and with price less than $0.5 (While the original might cost you about 25$) , but anyway, some do buy the original cause of the great quality of them, but still most buy they copied ones.

also, I don't know if you discussed this, but P2P programs, such as Kazaa, morphues (Sp?) or WinMX and so many IRC networks, they all also support they users with the lastest Cracks/Serials , and that's the one which should be banned, for example, you can download Windows LongHorn(which is not released yet) from an IRC channel, or Download The $159 Windows XP Pro from the same IRC channel ...
I think they should care more about Programs, and as I read before, Artists does not get money as they get from Concerts or the T-Shirts that has their name on or Posters or anything other than their albums.

and Hey , MetallicA Are Still the Best, but they were better when Jason was around, I just hate Ozzy's X-Bassist (Robert) ...