What??!! You mean that after suing kids, passing laws and invading people's homes; it turns out that file sharing actually helped sales?!! But we were told differently < /sacrasm>
1 posted on
03/30/2004 10:05:36 AM PST by
Hodar
To: Hodar
Remember how the vcr was going to end the motion picture industry?
To: Hodar
File sharing makes no difference to record sales It doesn't matter -- it's still morally wrong to download music you haven't paid for, unless the copyright holder says you can. Regardless of whether or not it is causing financial damage to the record labels, it is still stealing.
Not to say that I approve of the RIAA's tactics in cracking down on this stuff -- most of their targets are small-time anyway. They'd be better served in trying to stop real piracy rings rather than a few file-swappers.
I really hate this whole issue because both sides are acting like jerks.
3 posted on
03/30/2004 10:10:58 AM PST by
kevkrom
(The John Kerry Songbook: www.imakrom.com/kerrysongs)
To: Hodar
As predicted, the greedy buttheads in the recording industry were wrong again. Let's see, they predicted disaster with cassette tapes, nope, they predicted disaster with recordable cd's, nope, hmmmmmm seems like a pattern here.
4 posted on
03/30/2004 10:11:16 AM PST by
agitator
(...And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark)
To: Hodar
Maybe sales are down because THE MUSIC SUCKS!
5 posted on
03/30/2004 10:12:52 AM PST by
Paradox
(Click clack, click clack click click clack clack clack.)
To: Hodar
I knew it all along!
8 posted on
03/30/2004 10:15:39 AM PST by
zook
To: Hodar
I download, I buy, and I think there is no moral problem at all. There's especially no moral problem when I download material that is out of print or embargoed by the copyright owner (e.g., Disney's "Song of the South).
10 posted on
03/30/2004 10:18:07 AM PST by
zook
To: Hodar
All of the file sharing created Buzz...enthusiasm for music, the joy of the discovery of new music and new musicians..all of which led to CD sales. I hope the music industry rots.
To: labowski; LibertyGrrrl; marktuoni; itsamelman; Sam's Army; RepoGirl; Redcoat LI; mylife; ...
please let me know if you would like to be added to or removed from the ping list.
16 posted on
03/30/2004 10:30:05 AM PST by
bc2
("Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown" - harpseal)
To: Hodar
Has the RIAA looked at what effect used CD sales has had on new sales? I know I'll check Amazon, EBay, Half.com and a few other sites for used CDs and buy those. The internet has made used CDs much more widely available than just checking what the local used music store has (usually twenty copies of last year's hot album).
I know RIAA hates used sales and every once in a while raises a stink about them.
22 posted on
03/30/2004 11:12:15 AM PST by
KarlInOhio
(Bill Clinton is the Neville Chamberlain of the War on Terror.)
To: Hodar
They said that while there were a large number of downloads during this period most people who shared files appear to be individuals who would not have bought the albums that they downloaded anyway. Wonder what they based this on.
To: Hodar
RESEARCH APPEARS to back up what teenagers have been saying for years - file sharing is not stuffing the music industry.
Don't that mean "stiffing".
26 posted on
03/30/2004 11:41:06 AM PST by
Paul C. Jesup
(The Motto: 'Live and let live' is a suicidal belief...)
To: Hodar
The issue is not whether it positively affected CD sales, the issue is that each free download violates composers' rights to sell downloads.
Comparing downloads to CDs is apples to oranges, and is irrelevant.
To: Hodar
But it's still illegal, and still wrong. A study doesn't make immoral behavior moral.
33 posted on
03/30/2004 12:18:38 PM PST by
flashbunny
(Taxes are not levied for the benefit of the taxed.)
To: Hodar
I'll sum up my personal experience after visiting my 15 year-old niece...
"Uncle Matt, last year I bought 3 or 4 CD's a month. Now with Kazaa, I haven't had to spend any money! Isn't that great!??"
I'm in the software business and I know human nature. Please spare me the "it helps promote sales" argument. It's an arrangement that the artists/creators never approved. Whatever its problems, radio was an arrangement that was worked out. That said, I sincerely hope they work out the issues with an electronic format. It will force artists and record labels to put out better stuff if people can buy one song at a time.
34 posted on
03/30/2004 12:21:04 PM PST by
AsYouAre
To: Hodar
In college, you just walked down a few doors to your friend's room and looked at their album collection. You would then 'tape' what you wanted. Today, it would be so easy to do the same with cds (burn your own cd). I honestly don't understand why college students need to go online for music. You could even set up your own wireless network on campus and share music.
35 posted on
03/30/2004 12:21:52 PM PST by
Snowy
(Microsoft: "You've got questions? We've got dancing paperclips.")
To: Hodar
Its not illegal OR immoral. . .if you dont get caught
To: Hodar
Heck, back in the days of dinosaurs, we'd tape off the radio and yet the record business is still alive and well.
To: Hodar
Surprise, surprise
49 posted on
03/30/2004 2:47:48 PM PST by
Houmatt
(This is not here.)
To: All
There have been historical instances of records actually selling a lot more once they appeared on file-sharing clients.
Take Wilco's "Yankee Hotel Foxtrot." It shot up 50 points higher on the music charts than any other album from the group when it debuted. The thing that was different? Buzz created due to leaking the entire album on Kazaa prior to its release.
54 posted on
04/16/2004 10:57:46 PM PDT by
rwfromkansas
("Am I not destroying my enemies when I make friends of them?" -- Abraham Lincoln)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson