| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
the saint
Joined: 09 Dec 2003
Location: not there yet...
|
 Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 1:55 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Bulsajo wrote: |
| Have you asked your friend what his stance on it is? I would have thought that any band struggling to 'break out' would be happy to get as much exposure as possible. (Unless the name of your friend's band is "Metallica"). |
No I haven't. That's true. I do know him very very well though and I would guess that he would be quite shocked at the very thought of me asking. I also have a feeling that other friends of ours and his family would feel betrayed by this - especially if lack of sales means he was to fall on hard times. We all agree that he is worth paying money for. They would be thinking "well if you think he is worth distributing and you are doing okay, why aren't you paying your dues"... and they have a point. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
PECisDplace2B
Joined: 19 Aug 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 03, 2004 8:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I download gig's of music every year, but I don't feel bad. I also buy about 500$ worth of CD's every year. I enjoy the superior quality over crappy 192kb MP3's, and for some stupid reason I get more enjoyment over having a real copy of 'The Wall' as opposed to one I copied.
As far as I'm concerned, I'm the Music industry's model consumer and I don't want my free MP3 downloads taken away, that goes the same for Movies. I spend hundreds every year on DVD's and going to the cinema so these industry execs can chill the *beep* out. I believe I've paid my dues to these guys. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Swiss James
Joined: 26 Nov 2003
Location: Shanghai
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 03, 2004 8:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| PECisDplace2B wrote: |
| I enjoy the superior quality over crappy 192kb MP3's |
Can you really hear the difference though? When I switched from a Panasonic Discman to an iRiver playing 192's I thought the sound was much better with the MP3s. I've just read a study where some real audiophile geeks couldn't tell the difference at 256kbmps, but with these cloth ears I don't even need to go that high.
("when deciding between 256 kbps encoded MP3s and the original CD, no difference could be determined, on average, for all the pieces." http://www.geocities.com/altbinariessoundsmusicclassical/mp3test.html) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PECisDplace2B
Joined: 19 Aug 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 03, 2004 8:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Swissjames,
Yeah your're right I can barely hear the difference between 256kb and Cd's, unless I'm familiar with the track, then I can tell I'm losing some of the richness of the recording, but maybe that is psychological. However with 192kb's I can tell the difference and I don't enjoy them as much. However I don't own a personal mp3 player that might have some nice software to smooth out the sound. I still burn all my stuff to cd and play it on my stereo or in the car or in my sony diskman. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The King of Kwangju
Joined: 10 Feb 2003
Location: New York City
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 04, 2004 5:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| the saint wrote: |
| You have a point but it is not an answer to the question I asked. I asked you if you personally would take a book from B&N as easily and as justifiably as you would from a P2P network. |
No, I wouldn't. But what I'm saying is that you can't compare the 2 so easily. If I take a book from B&N, no one else can buy it. If I download it from a P2P network, no one loses it and another one gets it.
| Demophobe wrote: |
| E-books? Who cares...like photocopying a library book. |
Actually, I think this is what the Canadian judge said in his ruling, something about a photocopier in a library. Sounds like you 2 think quite alike.
I do believe artists should be paid for their work, and they are getting paid. But what would you rather have, 100 people buy your book and 100 read it, or 100 people buy your book and 1000 read it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the saint
Joined: 09 Dec 2003
Location: not there yet...
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 04, 2004 11:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The King of Kwangju wrote: |
what would you rather have, 100 people buy your book and 100 read it, or 100 people buy your book and 1000 read it? |
Well the answer to that question would depend on why you wrote it. The former for money, the latter for fame.
BTW, thanks for replying to the question. I thought that your answer would be the same as mine. I'm not sure I agree with your objection to my comparing it with P2P from the viewpoint of the income of the creator which is the point I am struggling with. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Demophobe
Joined: 17 May 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 05, 2004 1:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The King of Kwangju wrote: |
Actually, I think this is what the Canadian judge said in his ruling, something about a photocopier in a library. Sounds like you 2 think quite alike. |
Perhaps, but on this issue, I am a work-in-progress. Since posting the thread, I have had some doubts about my "ruling". I am still on the fence and can see both sides clearly, but I haven't decided which side I'm hopping to just yet. It really is a tough question for me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the saint
Joined: 09 Dec 2003
Location: not there yet...
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 05, 2004 2:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Demophobe wrote: |
| The King of Kwangju wrote: |
Actually, I think this is what the Canadian judge said in his ruling, something about a photocopier in a library. Sounds like you 2 think quite alike. |
Perhaps, but on this issue, I am a work-in-progress. Since posting the thread, I have had some doubts about my "ruling". I am still on the fence and can see both sides clearly, but I haven't decided which side I'm hopping to just yet. It really is a tough question for me. |
Re music, how would you feel about downloading stuff by bands, say, over ten years since they produced it? Surely they don't need the money at that point because a) they either never made it or b) they did. I'm considering this one as it won't harm startup bands and certainly doesn't harm bands that have made the big time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The King of Kwangju
Joined: 10 Feb 2003
Location: New York City
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 05, 2004 9:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
It's a difficult issue for everyone, which is what makes it so interesting.
But to base your decision on why the artist/programmer created the work (for love or money) or how much money they have is probably the worst way to tackle it.
Sometimes the artist might not even know the answer himself. And even if he does, how will you know? The media? And how do you know if that's accurate?
And is a poor person more deserving of money than a rich person? What is "rich?"
Maybe its better to put the onus on yourself. If you like it and use it all the time, buy it, regardless of who made it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Demophobe
Joined: 17 May 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 05, 2004 1:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pehaps I wasn't clear on the issue that I have....it's purely moral. I am not basing it on who is rich and who isn't, but more along the lines of getting something for nothing which I am circumventing the "right" way of ownership, and that is to pay each their dues. If it costs money and I want it, pay, regardless of who the owner is. I guess it's about what I personally feel is "stealing".
@ the saint: A good friend recently made some ideas known that I am thinking are good guidelines to follow. A kind of 5 year, public-domain-type thing. If the movie is on TV, it's recordable, therfore downloadable. The same as you said for older music, and I agree that it is probably cool. Also, if the book is in the library, it's probably ok to d/l the e-book.So, movies, e-books, music are all covered. That leaves software, which is of course, stealing.
In other words, if the product has been made avaliable through forms of mass-media in which one could easily and "legally" take "ownership" without using any form of circumvention/undermining anybody, then it's fair to d/l and within what I would call morally sound. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the saint
Joined: 09 Dec 2003
Location: not there yet...
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 05, 2004 4:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Check this out...
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6186259/site/newsweek/
Sounds interesting... also a quote from the RIAA spokesperson about someone else removing the right for a creator to withhold sharing on P2P networks is worth reading too... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
