Posted on 06/22/2005 5:19:22 AM PDT by N3WBI3
No there is nothing wrong with sharing between you and I, the problem is the way p2p networks and bittorrent have been abused by people to cheap to spend 90 cents on an itunes song. Now its not you sharing with me its you running around giving free copies of someone else's copy-written work to everyone who wants it.
I suppose all those warez sites of software are fine and dandy right? who the heck does Adobe think they are to charge sooo much money for their product. They are big and rich and one little download by me cant hurt them...
Otherwise, its none of your business.
My business? no... the people who are being ripped off do however have a stake in it, its their business..
Not gonna happen.
I'll chip in a few bucks at the next fundraiser for starving rock stars.
That way they can continue to live the high life while playing at the Bash Bush concerts.
wow funny, I like the way that you got the point across its ok to rip off people who have more money than you. Ill just pass this note onto Hillary so when she is pushing for a huge tax increase on 'the rich' she can use this little joke..
That way they can continue to live the high life while playing at the Bash Bush concerts.
Thats why I dont listen to them, I dont try to become the arbiter of political justice by breaking the law and violating their copyright... I guess the law is only important if (a) The person is poor; otherwise its ok to steal/tax them until they are poor, or (b) they disagree with you politically...
blah, blah, blah
P2P has only made it easier to do what we have been doing for years.
If you were in my house playing a CD I like (highly unlikely), there would be nothing wrong with burning a copy of it.
THis is no different, regardless of your interpretation.
How do you even get a single?
I have never seen one in a music store, just the full CD.
Oh I see I guess that makes it ok.. Look whatever somebody has to tell themselves to make it ok to break the law (and a law which is not unjust at that) ive heard it before...
If you were in my house playing a CD I like (highly unlikely)
Sad that yuo seem to be getting snippy with me because I disagree with you..
there would be nothing wrong with burning a copy of it.
No but if we burned a million copies and started handing them out to total stranges in central park there might be an issue...
Being that I used to really be into Linkin Park here is a page for you
http://www.mattscdsingles.com/acatalog/Online_Catalogue_Linkin_Park_629.html
or on our side of the pond
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/sim-explorer/explore-items/-/B00005LE1B/0/101/1/none/purchase/ref%3Dpd%5Fsxp%5Fr0/002-6251541-2300857
But would you pay $2 for those two songs? That's the real question.
No.
And I am not convinced that it is illegal.
You say so. Others do not.
So I don't get it. You complain about spending $12 to get the two songs you want, but when you have the option to pay for only the songs you want, you won't pay?
THe songs could be 10 cents each and some people would think its too much... but hey artist are rich they deserve to have things taken without their permission..
I have been downloading music long before iPod started offering 99 cent songs.
I can get more variety (different unreleased versions of songs), pick the ones I want, keep what I want, discard the rest.
And I can do it with a program that is easier to use, more customer satisfation oriented, no pop ups, and all without pictures of half naked women and rap stars with nose, lip and eye piercings.
And on top of all of that, its legal and free.
Photographers will take rolls and rolls of film before they get the shots they believe will sell. However, I would only like to buy a photo that is of interest to me. This seems to work quite well: Lots of photos, lots of buyers, you only buy what you want.
Make singles available and then sell the snot out of them. Invest in the equipment to make downloading/purchasing/ listening as easy as breathing. Develop features that make a particular device/download site more preferable than another. Visualizations, personalizations, mixing, signal processing,fashion, etc..,
$'s just flying out the windows......
I don't feel guilty about all the songs I used to download, though. I went many years without buying a CD. Once I started downloading P2P songs I also started buying CDs again. If I found something I liked, I'd buy the CD to get higher quality.
I download a lot of music off Limewire. For me, quality would be an issue if I was doing it in leiu of paying. But I do it to learn the songs for my cover band. I download songs that have been intentionally sabotaged by the music distributor, but I don't care. I use it only to learn the songs. The occasional blank spot or "ringing bell" is irrelevant.
Recorded music is just not as valuable as it was in the 1960's. Heck, my grandfather paid over $800 for a color tv in the early 1960's. That was 14 times the monthly rent for my parents three bedroom rambler...
The culture is turning to live music for anything more than a distraction.
Paying for recorded music is SOOOO 20th century.
Making over 500 songs available for UPLOADING is what is getting people in trouble. I have a "shared" folder which never contains more than ten songs, and a "not shared" folder.
Downloading is as legal as recording off FM.
"At $0.79-$0.99 a track, people are far more willing to buy just the tracks they like. And services like iTunes, which streams 30-second samples of tracks on request, allows a little "try before you buy" without removing the incentive to pay for it altogether."
I'd pay $.10 a track. Remember, the first basic CD players were $1,200. There is no reason that music, now that it costs virtually NOTHING to make available to the public, should cost more than a dime a song. And I suspect that is the direction it will go...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.