Free music or stealing?

Cox News Service ^ | 12-23-2002 | Phil Kleur

[montag813]

Free music or stealing?

Borrowing a copy of music which was legally purchased, like recording LotR off cable and lending the tape to your friend.

[DAnconia55]

Downloading music, intercepting cable signals, etc., are not immoral acts. Certainly we can make them illegal, but in themselves they are not immoral.

You are stealing intellectual property.
Theft is immoral.

You may want to justify away that you're not stealing, but you are.

[DAnconia55]

I doubt that considering the people (RIAA and Hollywood Liberals) who sell music at ripoff prices

Ripoff implies theft. The people using Napster/Kazaa are thieves, not the producers of the CD.

You have the choice to buy the CD at the price offered, or not. Nothing else.

You do not have the right to steal the work of the artist, because you don't like the price of the painting.

[DAnconia55]

and the rest of them are simply older, unique tunes that won't drive me to buy a whole CD just to hear them

I believe after a certain time, the copyrights expire, and you can do this.

[DAnconia55]

Interesting opinion for one who frequents a site that does just that. The articles reprinted here are also copyrighted and this site has already settled a suit in the matter. Of course, I don't hold that it is stealing or unethical at all. I believe that Free Republic is making legitimate use of the "Fair Use" provision in copyright law that allows people to exchange copyrighted materials for disussion so long as they do not profit by it.

Invalid comparison.

A correct comparison would be a music critic group all of whom listen to a track and then comment on it.

None of us here print the entire articles to hardcopy in a similar format to the newspaper and leave them laying around the house forever.

We're also a press here. There is no right to freedom of music guaranteed in the Constitution.

[FITZ]

People have been copying music since before the 8-tracks, if they make it impossible with CDs---which is up to them to do ---certainly not the government's job ---then people will record casettes.

[Revolting cat!]

This is becoming the new I Am a Bad American thread. And, as the late great Paul Lynde used to say "I'm shick of it!" (I think it was Paul Lynde.) I've said and heard everything there is to say and hear about it. So let me focus on another seemingly trivial aspect. How many trillions does RIAA say they're losing? Where would that money come from? Where does it go if not to purchase the latest Faith Hill? This custom of presenting totally dishonest figures is what, in my eyes, destroys the credibility of these organizations. I don't want to hear any more when I hear that 40 million children are in poverty, that there are X million homeless, that 10% of everybody is "gay"!

The point here is that most of the downloaders would not purchase the overpriced CD's to own the one or two tunes from each of them that they are now downloading! You make bogus claims, you don't deserve sympathy!

[philo]

Quick: Do you remember the Tradewinds other hit?

[SamAdams76]

None of us here print the entire articles to hardcopy in a similar format to the newspaper and leave them laying around the house forever.

I've got three-ring binders of posts dating back to the Prodigy days of the mid-1990s. (I really do need to get rid of them as I haven't looked at them in years).

It could also be argued that people who download MP3s don't keep them into perpetuity. I eventually clean all my MP3s off my hard drive from time to time. I only download them to sample music I haven't heard before. I give them a few listens and either buy the CD or trash them. It just isn't practical for me to waste time archiving music I don't care for to CDs.

My public library has an entire room dedicated to music CDs and movies on DVD/video. People are free to borrow those as they do books. It is probably easier to copy CDs at home from those than to download the individual MP3s. I wonder why there isn't a clamor from the RIAA about that.

[SamAdams76]

Quick: Do you remember the Tradewinds other hit?

"Mind Excursion."

I'm a 60s and 70s music junkie.

[koax]

i just downloaded it, and win xp immediately asked permission to report a "problem" to its maker, bill gates.

one of my college computer instructors says that ms routinely collects copyright infringement info.

[philo]

Congats, You just won a copy of the T.A.M.I. show!

[Paul C. Jesup]

Ahh but it is a ripoff because it cost less than a dollar to produce a music CD and the RIAA get 98% of the gross of each music CD, the other 2% is used to pay for the creation and advertising of that music CD, what is left over of that 2% (which it basically nothing) is then given to the artist. That plus the RIAA basically has a monopoly in selling of music in the U.S. and the price fixing on all music CDs makes it a ripoff.

Notice how a DVD movie cost less than the soundtrack on CD of that very movie.

But that is not what pisses me off about them. What pisses me off is the fact that they are trying to cripple and control any and ALL new technology so that they can maintain their monopoly indefinitely.

So tell me DAnconia55, are you an agent for the RIAA? Or the MPAA?

[Paladin2]

Actually a statistical case could likely be made that for all of the shared files, the number of instances of a given cut being simultaneously playing are less than the number of "licenses" that have been sold. Therefore there are enough "licenses" to cover use. No case. Technology has provided efficiency to lower costs by providing better utilization.

[Paul C. Jesup]

That might be true, if it can be proven, with record of sells, than that can be used to crush the RIAA's arguements.

[Six Bells]

The piper must be paid.

[kAcknor]

....the industry says it's obvious what's happening.

kAcknor Sez:

This is what's obvious to me:

I recently heard a song on the radio that I liked. Had to listen around a few weeks because of the irritating habit they have of not telling the name of the groups they play, but I eventually found out. Then while Christmas shopping I passed a shop in the mall and decided to get the CD with the song.

Found it.

$19.98!!!

They have to be kidding. The only cut I knew was that one, and it just wasn't worth it.

So, the "industry" catches my ear, hooks me into wanting the cut. Has me actively searching and anticipating buying the CD, then blows it completely by overpricing.

I DJ a bit for a local Swing Dance club, and dance myself. But if they want me to spend cash on unknowns (like the rest of that CD) they can forget it. I'll stick to stuff I listen to first at the club or from friends. I'm finished with getting one good song, and the rest trash.

If they want to fix the "problem" they better look at their own first. Discounts, sales and fair pricing works. It's time for the music companies to learn this.

"yIQeqQo' neH, DoS yIqIp!" (Don't just aim, hit the target!)

Basic HTML help for new FR posters. <Ver 1.4>

[M. Thatcher]

A "thank you" would be nice.

Thank you.

[fnord]

If you download the Electric Amish, you will surely burn in hell ...