Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Ulrich Kinbote · Mar 18, 2006, 11:09 PM

A lot of people here seem to take a righteous view of file sharing. But really, isn't it just like dubbing cassettes or recording the radio to cassette or taping programmes off the TV? But here's the point: I buy more CDs now because of file sharing, because it has broadened my musical horizons. Once I've sampled a few tracks, if I like what I hear, I go out and buy the CD. I want good quality music and I want the cover art, track and album details, and, of course, to support the artist. And actually, since being able to preview most music free at iTunes, I don't even really need file-sharing (although, they should give you more than 30 seconds. Why not let us preview the whole track at least [i]once[/]?)

File-sharing has led to a looting-mentality, but this is only temporary. File sharing is no more of a long-term threat to the music industry than TV was to the movie theatre. People will become more musically literate as a result, and the music industry will benefit.

OB1 · Mar 19, 2006, 03:38 PM

I agree.

ShortcutToMoncton · Mar 19, 2006, 03:47 PM

I agree.

SpaceMonkey · 04:35 PM

I don't think that the "looting mentality" is as temporary as you suggest. On university campuses today, huge numbers of people simply download entire albums from the Direct Connect hubs that get set up on the internal campus networks--it's not about previewing the tracks. Once they leave campus, I believe that human nature is such that it is very difficult to ween these people off of this kind of "free and unlimited content" mentality.

Y3a · Mar 19, 2006, 04:27 PM

Listen to internet radio and write down what you like and go buy it. if you steal it (have it on yer hard drive and didn't PAY FOR IT) then you are looting the hard work, inspiration, and creativity of those artists!

YOU CAN copy your CD tracks to a cassette and listen to it yourself, but no selling it, or trading it.

I buy more now from listening to "Secret Agent" on SOMA-FM (iTunes/Electronica) than I have for years. I was a DJ and I still have over 4000 LP's and over 800 CD's.

Chuckit · Mar 19, 2006, 04:42 PM

Like Ulrich said, if it weren't for Internet downloading, I wouldn't be buying albums today. Radio sucks.

ShortcutToMoncton · Mar 19, 2006, 04:51 PM

I have about a couple thousand downloaded tracks. I'm a poor student who loves music but can't afford too many CDs. Thus, I download. However, I agree with the original poster – I find it merely gives me a wider appreciation for music, and expands my listening tastes.

I almost always buy CDs that I already own, in downloaded form. I think it's a very effective way to benefit both me and record companies. I get lots of music that I normally couldn't afford, but I also buy lots more albums that I normally wouldn't listen to.

Of course, record companies piss me off, too, so to be honest I'm quite happy to rip them off if I so desire. When The Rolling Stones, The Beatles, Bob Dylan and Jimi Hendrix CDs are still selling at $18-$25+ unless on sale, the feeling that you are being blatantly ripped off is almost too much to bear. Those albums cost no more than production to make – the markup is simply enormous.

greg

Now Playing: Donny Hathaway – The Ghetto

Anti-Spam · Mar 19, 2006, 05:08 PM

I love getting things for free, because its well free. I bit torrent porn, and lime-wire the music. I dont even share with other people, i use a modified bit-torrent client, so that i never upload anything to anyone, and yay yippi. FKCU the world,they make enough money already, im just thinking out number one. ME...

And dont give me the. OMG your a thief.. GO to church and prey for me,
cause i wont be praying for you.

Ulrich Kinbote · Mar 19, 2006, 07:30 PM

Originally Posted by Anti-Spam

I love getting things for free, because its well free. I bit torrent porn, and lime-wire the music. I dont even share with other people, i use a modified bit-torrent client, so that i never upload anything to anyone, and yay yippi. FKCU the world,they make enough money already, im just thinking out number one. ME...

And dont give me the. OMG your a thief.. GO to church and prey for me,
cause i wont be praying for you.

People like you give illegal file sharing a bad name.

wallinbl · Mar 19, 2006, 07:36 PM

Rationalize it however you want. That doesn't make it legal or right. Why do people feel the need to repeatedly excuse themselves for doing it?

besson3c · 08:11 PM

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton

I have about a couple thousand downloaded tracks. I'm a poor student who loves music but can't afford too many CDs. Thus, I download. However, I agree with the original poster – I find it merely gives me a wider appreciation for music, and expands my listening tastes.

I almost always buy CDs that I already own, in downloaded form. I think it's a very effective way to benefit both me and record companies. I get lots of music that I normally couldn't afford, but I also buy lots more albums that I normally wouldn't listen to.

Of course, record companies piss me off, too, so to be honest I'm quite happy to rip them off if I so desire. When The Rolling Stones, The Beatles, Bob Dylan and Jimi Hendrix CDs are still selling at $18-$25+ unless on sale, the feeling that you are being blatantly ripped off is almost too much to bear. Those albums cost no more than production to make – the markup is simply enormous.

greg

Now Playing: Donny Hathaway – The Ghetto

Maybe the prices of these albums is taking advantage of the demand for these artists, but do you have any idea how much it actually costs to produce a record? It's a lot more than people think. I hope that you would be supportive of smaller artists who have really taken a financial hit to produce their album(s).

ShortcutToMoncton · Mar 19, 2006, 08:04 PM

For the same reasons that people excuse themselves for speeding? People rationalize everything.

I haven't checked lately, but it was also not illegal to download in Canada as of a while ago. (Moral implications are entirely another matter…but let's face it, I'm a man of few morals.)

greg

ShortcutToMoncton · Mar 19, 2006, 08:10 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

Maybe the prices of these albums is taking advantage of the demand for these artists, but do you have any idea how much it actually costs to produce a record? It's a lot more than people think. I hope that you would be supportive of smaller artists who have really taken a financial hit to produce their album(s).

My point was for older, "classic" albums (like the ones I listed) which have been money-making revenue for record companies for decades, and which cost merely the price of pressing CDs (minus any production costs such as SACD, remastering, etc...which many find to be merely a cash grab anyways). In addition, they seem to rarely go on sale. I bought The Stones' Let It Bleed for $10 at Future Shop the other day when it got marked down…I've never seen it for less than $19 otherwise, and its often $25 (the new ABKCO reissues or whatever are expensive). That's a lot of raping.

That pisses me off.

greg

Chuckit · Mar 19, 2006, 08:11 PM

Originally Posted by wallinbl

Rationalize it however you want. That doesn't make it legal or right.

Of course, it was already right. We're just explaining how.

wallinbl · Mar 19, 2006, 08:14 PM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Of course, it was already right. We're just explaining how.

Are you that delusional?

besson3c · Mar 19, 2006, 08:16 PM

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton

My point was for older, "classic" albums (like the ones I listed) which have been money-making revenue for record companies for decades, and which cost merely the price of pressing CDs (minus any production costs such as SACD, remastering, etc...which many find to be merely a cash grab anyways). In addition, they seem to rarely go on sale. I bought The Stones' Let It Bleed for $10 at Future Shop the other day when it got marked down…I've never seen it for less than $19 otherwise, and its often $25 (the new ABKCO reissues or whatever are expensive). That's a lot of raping.

That pisses me off.

greg

Yes, I'm less concerned about supporting the estates of musicians, and it bothers me that the jazz labels rarely sign on a new artist - they make most of their money selling music produced by jazz masters. The jazz masters *should* be listened to, and their contributions cannot be over-valued, but on the other hand, selling nothing but nostalgia and history is somewhat lame too.

SeSawaya · Mar 19, 2006, 08:17 PM

I'm amazed at how record stores in Malls have virtually dissapeared now. It's hard to find CDs anymore where I live. Luckily I can still sell mine at gigs. iTunes has been good too.

Dr Reducto · Mar 19, 2006, 08:18 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

Maybe the prices of these albums is taking advantage of the demand for these artists, but do you have any idea how much it actually costs to produce a record? It's a lot more than people think. I hope that you would be supportive of smaller artists who have really taken a financial hit to produce their album(s).

For a major record company album, it DOES cost a lot to produce, because the record companies want it that way so that the artist will never see any royalties and pretty much always be in debt to the company.

Maybe another way to look at it though is that what computers giveth, computers taketh away. Computers may be used to pirate albums, but have also allowed a wider democratization of music. First and foremost, it has allowed even DIY outfits to produce respectable sound on a shoestring (Jeff Rosenstock of Bomb the Music Industry! was able to do an entire album using garageband and the internal mic of his mac, with pretty good results......and now he tours with his computer as it plays the drums and other instruments), and it allows a wider audience for even niche music, through downloads and forums where people of similar tastes can get together and talk about bands they would like but never hear.

simonjames · Mar 19, 2006, 08:44 PM

I agree with Dr Reducto and would like to add that the music industry is one of the few Performance Arts that (I know of that) allows an artist to make a single piece and then sell it again and again.

As a business consultant I would not get very far if I wrote one report and then tried to use it again and again.

As a glass artist I would be the laughing stock if I made only a dozen articles in my life.

All musicians should make most of their living by doing live concerts. Recorded music should be cheap or free.

Music, like theatre, is best done live.

besson3c · Mar 19, 2006, 08:46 PM

Originally Posted by simonjames

I agree with Dr Reducto and would like to add that the music industry is one of the few Performance Arts that (I know of that) allows an artist to make a single piece and then sell it again and again.

As a business consultant I would not get very far if I wrote one report and then tried to use it again and again.

As a glass artist I would be the laughing stock if I made only a dozen articles in my life.

All musicians should make most of their living by doing live concerts. Recorded music should be cheap or free.

Music, like theatre, is best done live.

Everyone likes to assume that life on the road is a life of glamor. It's not. It sucks.

Until we can come up with a business model where musicians can be paid for the work they do, I support the sales of CDs and other recorded music.

besson3c · Mar 19, 2006, 09:03 PM

On top of that, unless you are a big star and can sell out a stadium or something, working the door at bars is not always that great either. In many cases, even a gig every night wouldn't provide a livable wage.

This is where the "starving artist" expression comes in.

Just wanted to provide you guys with a dose of reality where it is necessary. A lot of people seem to make incorrect assumptions about what it means to have a career in music.

Anti-Spam · Mar 19, 2006, 10:23 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

On top of that, unless you are a big star and can sell out a stadium or something, working the door at bars is not always that great either. In many cases, even a gig every night wouldn't provide a livable wage.

This is where the "starving artist" expression comes in.

Just wanted to provide you guys with a dose of reality where it is necessary. A lot of people seem to make incorrect assumptions about what it means to have a career in music.

Ever heard of.. Find another day job, dont expect to get sympathy, because you wanted to use a hobby as your main purpose in life. I have a hobby, its tennis. I dont spend every day and weekend trying to make it as a international tennis player, because well i suck, and im assuming you do too, or else people would buy your CD and go to your gigs. GIVE it up, and find a proper job!!!

SeSawaya · Mar 19, 2006, 10:31 PM

Originally Posted by simonjames

All musicians should make most of their living by doing live concerts. Recorded music should be cheap or free.

you dont consider $10 a CD cheap or next to free? Welcome to the 21st century. I'm sure you dont work for free. If you do, please contact me as I have much work for you.

goMac · Mar 19, 2006, 10:31 PM

Originally Posted by Anti-Spam

I love getting things for free, because its well free. I bit torrent porn, and lime-wire the music. I dont even share with other people, i use a modified bit-torrent client, so that i never upload anything to anyone, and yay yippi. FKCU the world,they make enough money already, im just thinking out number one. ME...

And dont give me the. OMG your a thief.. GO to church and prey for me,
cause i wont be praying for you.

You do realize if you don't upload anything you download slower... right?

ShortcutToMoncton · Mar 19, 2006, 11:14 PM

Originally Posted by Anti-Spam

and im assuming you do too, or else people would buy your CD and go to your gigs. GIVE it up, and find a proper job!!!

Nonsense. There are plenty of absolutely great bands that make or made great music, but in today's competitive and MTV-driven market find it hard to support themselves.

The band that wrote my namesake and this song (cntrl-click and save, please, it's AAC) had 11+ years, 4 albums, a couple Junos for Best Canadian Hard Rock album, quite a few hits and enough talent to slay anyone (as the guitar in that song can attest)…but called a hiatus on music a couple years ago because of a lack of support from their label. It's not an easy business to do well in, especially if you like to play things by your own rules.

greg

Now Playing: I Mother Earth – Shortcut To Moncton

besson3c · Mar 20, 2006, 12:21 AM

Originally Posted by Anti-Spam

Ever heard of.. Find another day job, dont expect to get sympathy, because you wanted to use a hobby as your main purpose in life. I have a hobby, its tennis. I dont spend every day and weekend trying to make it as a international tennis player, because well i suck, and im assuming you do too, or else people would buy your CD and go to your gigs. GIVE it up, and find a proper job!!!

Most professional jazz and classical musicians do not make their entire living playing music, but supplement it with income from things like teaching. This is just the way things are. Money from CDs are usually a drop in the bucket within these genres (most jazz and classical artists are not marketed by the major record labels who would be in the best position to push a CD). It's not a question of talent, it's simply a question of the supply outstretching the demand.

In fact, it can be argued that the jazz and classical musicians among us are among the most talented musicians in music. You hear them when you watch the movies you watch, you hear them with big name musical acts, you hear them having musical flings with all sorts of big name players. Yet, they still can't make all of their income from playing music.

Your assertions are very naive.

simonjames · Mar 20, 2006, 02:52 AM

SeSawaya - a $10 CD? I am guessing this post must come from the USA cause you can't buy a $10 album in Australia nor Europe.

Theatre actors get by on live performances - why can't musicians?

The music industry has been ruined. Just look at the current state of play of live music and big names. Whats the use of paying $200+++ to see the gig on a giant screen? The music industry is corrupt - its been destroyed by the large labels and corporations. The rot began with the likes of Milli Vanilli and spread like cancer so we've ended up with shows like Idol and Pop Stars - talentless whores who enjoy 10 seconds of fame. Chewed up and spat out until the next money spinner comes along.

himself · Mar 20, 2006, 05:05 AM

Originally Posted by simonjames

SeSawaya - a $10 CD? I am guessing this post must come from the USA cause you can't buy a $10 album in Australia nor Europe.

Theatre actors get by on live performances - why can't musicians?

I know a number of theater actors & performance artists who still wait tables, but your point is well taken. The music industry has a level of control over its "product" that is unheard of in other media industries, and it benefits no one but the music industry.

But, the general rule is that artists don't make lots of money at all, unless your visibility is extremely high.

wallinbl · Mar 20, 2006, 05:37 AM

Originally Posted by simonjames

Theatre actors get by on live performances - why can't musicians?

So, then what are all the movie theatres showing, and what's on all those DVDs they are selling at Walmart?

SeSawaya · Mar 20, 2006, 08:31 AM

you can thank the Eagles on their Hell freezes over tour for the incredible spike ticket prices. You can thank promoters for the incredible ticket prices now. You can hire a GREAT band for $10-15k. The promoter will pull $20-50k . THATS whats wrong with this.

Also, CD sales???? MOST artist get 35¢-$2 per CD. That means they are $100,000 in debt once they've sold 80,000 units. (because WE pay for the studio, distribution, packaging, touring, everything. The record company just FRONTS you the money. You have to pay it ALL back) I know no actor that has to pay to make a movie.

I love how people are 'experts' and yet have never worked a min in this industry. Keep working your 'job' and enjoy your mondaine work. I for one would'nt trade what I do for ANYTHING.

Dr Reducto · Mar 20, 2006, 09:42 AM

Originally Posted by besson3c

Everyone likes to assume that life on the road is a life of glamor. It's not. It sucks.

Until we can come up with a business model where musicians can be paid for the work they do, I support the sales of CDs and other recorded music.

CD Sales as they exist now are part of what keeps artists in the poor house. Well, more like, the way record companies do business with record sales is the culprit.

Even large, popular artists will end up in debt to a record company if they are the typical pump and dump one hit wonder on MTV.

Bands I know who make a living as being a band make all their money through touring, and merch. Merch espescially so, because you can get a shirt made for 3-4 bucks and sell it for $15-20 at shows. And they own the rights to their band name, unlike the music, which is often controlled/owned by someone else.

Dakar · Mar 20, 2006, 09:46 AM

Originally Posted by SeSawaya

Keep working your 'job' and enjoy your mondaine work. I for one would'nt trade what I do for ANYTHING.

Particularly the ability to spell.

turtle777 · Mar 20, 2006, 09:52 AM

Originally Posted by Dakar

Particularly the ability to spell.

Got nothing else to contribute, eh ?

-t

Dakar · Mar 20, 2006, 09:53 AM

Originally Posted by what_the_heck

Got nothing else to contribute, eh ?

-t

If you're going to be extremely uppity, at least spellcheck your post. Otherwise, I wouldn't care.

ReggieX · Mar 20, 2006, 09:58 AM

Originally Posted by simonjames

Theatre actors get by on live performances - why can't musicians?

The music industry has been ruined. Just look at the current state of play of live music and big names. Whats the use of paying $200+++ to see the gig on a giant screen? The music industry is corrupt - its been destroyed by the large labels and corporations. The rot began with the likes of Milli Vanilli and spread like cancer so we've ended up with shows like Idol and Pop Stars - talentless whores who enjoy 10 seconds of fame. Chewed up and spat out until the next money spinner comes along.

1) It's a totally different job, why should your requirements for them be the same?
2) The music industry's one hit wonders goes back farther than Milli and Ice.

Y3a · Mar 20, 2006, 10:04 AM

you forgot about all the looser bands and artist they put out CD's of and they NEVER make money. You can get the CD's because the music industry can offset the losses by selling Beatles albums.

besides buying the stuff in the recording studio, hiring the engineers, publicists, graphic artists, lawyers, and signing the artists which is a gamble, they have to market them correctly. Any clown who gets a freebee takes money away from the system, and les n less artists get bucks as the label goes broke because of theft. Free music??

turtle777 · Mar 20, 2006, 10:09 AM

Originally Posted by Dakar

If you're going to be extremely uppity, at least spellcheck your post. Otherwise, I wouldn't care.

SeSawaya made a valid point, his lack of care for spelling doesn't negate it.

-t

Dakar · Mar 20, 2006, 10:11 AM

Originally Posted by what_the_heck

SeSawaya made a valid point, his lack of care for spelling doesn't negate it.

-t

Did I say that it did?

wallinbl · Mar 20, 2006, 10:12 AM

Originally Posted by SeSawaya

I'm amazed at how record stores in Malls have virtually dissapeared now.

I'm not. They were ridiculously priced. I'm betting Walmart ran them off. As much as people complain about prices, retail markup on CDs is really high.

davesimondotcom · Mar 20, 2006, 10:25 AM

Car theives are good for the auto industry, too. Right?

Nice rationalizations...

turtle777 · Mar 20, 2006, 10:30 AM

Originally Posted by Dakar

If you're going to be extremely uppity, at least spellcheck your post. Otherwise, I wouldn't care.

Well, your comment about spelling sounded like it.
But maybe, it was just a petty comment, nothing else

-t

Dakar · Mar 20, 2006, 10:34 AM

Originally Posted by what_the_heck

Well, your comment about spelling sounded like it.
But maybe, it was just a petty comment, nothing else

-t

Actually I said exactly what it was - a dig on someone being uppity and not being able to spellcheck their post.

Edit: I'm sorry if I find it amusing when someone talks down to people in such a poor manner.

SeSawaya · Mar 20, 2006, 10:50 AM

Are you going to be ok? Do you want me to hold your hand? Maybe get you a cup of hot chocolate? Get over it and buy my CD!!!!

wait let me raise the price to reflect a stores markup!!

turtle777 · Mar 20, 2006, 10:51 AM

Originally Posted by Dakar

Actually I said exactly what it was - a dig on someone being uppity and not being able to spellcheck their post.

Well, I don't think it was uppity.

SeSawaya is a musician, he knows the industry (unlike most here who just speculate), and he knows how musicians are exploited. All these dumb comments about music should be free and musicians should only make money doing concerts is BS. SS just pointed that out. Nothing uppity about it, unless, you need to label him that way to cover up your bad consciousness.

-t

Chuckit · Mar 20, 2006, 10:54 AM

Originally Posted by davesimondotcom

Car theives are good for the auto industry, too. Right?

Nice rationalizations...

People who download music are not stealing anything — the "victim" has just as much before as he does afterward. "Intellectual property" is not real property. If I have one CD and you steal one from me, I have no CDs left. If I have one idea and you steal one from me, I still have one idea.

Ergo, your comparison sucks.

Dakar · Mar 20, 2006, 10:58 AM

Originally Posted by what_the_heck

Well, I don't think it was uppity.

He assumed everyone's work was 'Mondaine' compared to his. I consider that uppity.

turtle777 · Mar 20, 2006, 10:58 AM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

If I have one idea and you steal one from me, I still have one idea.

Wow, you must be dumber tha I thought. You really believe this sh!t ?

Ah well, no wonder, with an IQ of 15 you probably never had any idea at all, let alone one that somebody would steal !

-t

Chuckit · Mar 20, 2006, 11:03 AM

Your inability to actually argue against what I said seems to indicate I'm smarter than you suggest. Or at the very least smarter than you.

turtle777 · Mar 20, 2006, 11:05 AM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Your inability to actually argue against what I said seems to indicate I'm smarter than you suggest.

-t

wallinbl · Mar 20, 2006, 11:15 AM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

People who download music are not stealing anything — the "victim" has just as much before as he does afterward. "Intellectual property" is not real property. If I have one CD and you steal one from me, I have no CDs left. If I have one idea and you steal one from me, I still have one idea.

You're right, they're not stealing in the formal definition of stealing. They are obtaining something that they are legally forbidden to obtain. It is illegal, it is against the wishes of the copyright owners, and it is wrong. It doesn't matter that the copyright owner wasn't deprived of a copy, and it doesn't matter that people think they buy more music than they did before they were downloading. It doesn't matter than you can make some argument about how it all increases CD sales. As the owners of the content, they get to dictate how it is obtained.

At some point, people are going to have to realize that they are causing all the things they complain about. DRM is getting worse and worse because people insist on downloading things without paying for it. The music industry is becoming more anticonsumer because the consumers are acting like immature fools and creating a situation that the music industry sees as a threat. You don't get to go through life dictating how other people conduct their business by doing whatever the hell you want. If you think music is too expensive, then don't buy it. You're not entitled to have a copy for free, and you're not entitled to have a copy at a price that you set. You're welcome to participate in the existing market. If you decide that the market doesn't appeal to you, then don't participate.

If people quit buying music, then the industry would react to the change. But, instead of not buying, people have resorted to violating copyright law because they can't handle the thought of not having the music that they claim isn't worth their money. Doesn't make much sense, does it?