Downloading Music. Is it stealing? - Page 3

Neil · 05-03-2007, 05:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman

no rindy when i was young it meant exactly what it said, as any jack brad driver or customer will testify, its people that dont know any better that twist things to suit todays ways.

How much stuff can a business afford to lose from the back of lorries before it starts to affect the company then the employee's? Where I work had a couple of lorries stolen full of finished goods , that hit the company hard which could affect my job or loss of it.

WillowTheWhisp · 05-03-2007, 08:32

I've always known the phrase "fell off the back of a lorry" to mean that it had been acquired by unlawful means. I never imagined stuff really did fall of the backs of lorries.

andrewb · 05-03-2007, 08:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

I don't really download music, but I have watched illegal copies of DVD's, so I'm not whiter than white, but just because you feel are being 'ripped off', is it justification for what to all intents and purposes is stealing?

If someone was caught nicking a loaf of bread from ASDA, would their excuse that the same loaf at Tesco's was cheaper, therefore they were being 'ripped off', stand up in court?

This is the thing, if you take a loaf of bread you are stealing it because ASDA/TESCO can't sell that loaf, because its now in your position.

It is not the same thing when music is concerned unless you are actually stealing cd's from the shop, its a breach of copyright.

Tinkerbelle · 05-03-2007, 09:00

Bands and artists believe it's stolen though Cyfr, you have their product without paying for it.

entwisi · 05-03-2007, 09:25

I think it how the law defines possesion, If you download music its an abstract item, it can't exist on its own as it needs something else to persist (Hard disk, CD, etc) hence the music item is a copyright issue. If you stole a physical CD from Music Zone(Just to link this back to a thread where we were all symapathetic to Lindsey and her collegues) then its theft.

One issue with this debate is that people rarely see the big picture(to use some management clap trap). you feel aggrieved at the price of CDs so you download it. This stiffles new talent as the music labels don't make as much money so can't gamble of lesser known talent. You also put the whole music retail trade at risk and people like Lindsey lose jobs/careers/houses etc then when you need as specialist to help you they aren't there anymore.

WillowTheWhisp · 05-03-2007, 12:25

But there's the other side of the big picture too where having heard something you may not otherwise have heard you then head off down to Music Zone to see if they have any more CDs by this artist.

I still wish we had the old listening booths.

entwisi · 05-03-2007, 12:56

Willow, how many 'random' items have you downloaded? as in just chosen soem random name and thought I'll listen to that. Also there are places like MusicBrainz where people recommend other things that you may like so there is no reason to do it illegally, likewise Amazon etc do similar recommendation lists

WillowTheWhisp · 05-03-2007, 14:41

I'm very random Ian - that's the fun of it.

I'd never heard of MusicBrainz but just being recommended something isn't the same as actually hearing the performer. I've seen some of the Amazon "if you liked that you'll like this." recommendations but some of them are not remotely like the thing they are linked to.

So I find someone who has something obscure that I already have and like and I have a look at what else they go for - especially if they have a few totally unrelated things that are also favourites of mine. I wouldn't just go out and buy another thing they have though. I'd like to listen to it to see if it is something I'd like or not. Then I might toddle off and try to buy it - and probably find out it's unavailable anyway because it was deleted 20 years ago

chav1 · 05-03-2007, 14:43

half teh stuff i download i wouldnt buy , teh internet is better than sitting with my finger on the record pause button each week when teh top 40 is on hoping to stop recording before the DJ starts talking

i do have quite a dcent CD collection that is paid for of artists i realy like but i wont buy an album for teh sake of 1 song and wont buy cd singles because lets face it who likes swapping cds around when driving its much easier to make a compilation cd of your favourites ongs off teh net

jambutty · 05-03-2007, 15:41

Whether it is stealing or a breach of copyright is a moot point. If you download the music that is on a CD illegally you are not buying the CD and thus the seller is not making a sale. If you walk into a shop and pinch the CD the seller is still not making a sale. It’s a technicality but the end result is the same. The seller loses a sale! So it is a breach of copyright and also stealing.

People would have a different outlook if they were the musician whose work is being pirated and few justified royalties coming in or the shop owner who isn’t selling as many CD’s as expected.

I do not download music primarily because modern pop music is a load of old tosh. But then it would be to an old fogey like myself. My musical tastes didn’t progress past about 1985.

Like most other people I have recorded from the radio and even from a friend’s record so I too am a thief in that respect. But the resultant tapes never lasted very long.

If my kind of music were available as an illegal download, would I download it? The point is academic because as far as I know it isn’t but then CD’s of older music only cost around a fiver and you get the artwork and the write up about the artists, which you do not get with a download. So I would probably not download.

andrewb · 05-03-2007, 15:49

http://www.jamendo.com/en/ I think this is a great idea. You can download independent artists songs for free without stupid DRM, and donate if you really like them.

shakermaker · 05-03-2007, 15:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by jambutty

Like most other people I have recorded from the radio and even from a friend’s record so I too am a thief in that respect. But the resultant tapes never lasted very long.

This is the same as P2P downloading, Jambutty. Users on programs such as Limewire share their own music (can be ripped off a CD they bought onto their computer) and other people download copies of it through the program.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jambutty

If my kind of music were available as an illegal download, would I download it? The point is academic because as far as I know it isn’t but then CD’s of older music only cost around a fiver and you get the artwork and the write up about the artists, which you do not get with a download. So I would probably not download.

With other programs on the net such as Bittorrent, you can download whole albums with sleeve notes & cover artwork, so you can burn your own complete copy.
The music industry has been running a complete swindle for decades; charging way too much for recorded music. I have to agree with Chav on this one in that the industry's karma as come around to get them.
The internet is taking over the major label's territory and they don't like it; getting internet download sites shut down is just the last shameful action of the majors.
Music is now belonging to the actual artists more, not less.

andrewb · 05-03-2007, 15:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by jambutty

Whether it is stealing or a breach of copyright is a moot point. If you download the music that is on a CD illegally you are not buying the CD and thus the seller is not making a sale. If you walk into a shop and pinch the CD the seller is still not making a sale. It’s a technicality but the end result is the same. The seller loses a sale! So it is a breach of copyright and also stealing.

I can see where you're coming from, but I really disagree with it. Thats the same reasoning the Recording Industry Ass. of America (RIAA) use.

Every person that downloads an album does NOT mean a record label has lost a sale. A lot of people simply will do without having the album if they couldn't download it, because they don't wish to pay the £16 or whatever it is for a cd these days. This is why the RIAA's facts are so wrong, because they use that reasoning.

andrewb · 05-03-2007, 16:05

Oh Yeah, I forgot to mention, as Shakermaker says, the RIAA and others are trying to get sites that do not even host music content closed.

There are sites which users submit 'torrent' files to. A torrent basicly tells a downloader's computer where it can download from. But the torrent file in itself does not contain any music. A hoster can't practically regulate all of the content posted, so because it contains SOME copyrighted content they get shut down because they can't afford a legal battle!!

Digital Cameras are used to record SOME films in cinemas illegaly, should we be banning digital cameras?? It's really pathetic what they can do with so much money behind them.

Billcat · 05-03-2007, 16:16

While I have no love for the record companies, it is stealing pure, plain and simple. You are taking someone else's property without permission and without payment.

Just because Landrover vehicles are a total rip-off, that in no way justifies my taking one. Same goes for the recording industry.

Recording artists have the right to control how their work product is sold, just the same as folks who produce anything. If you don't like the price, don't buy it!