• All Purchases made this month instantly go into the draw to win a USD $ 100.00 credit to your HoP account.
 

Forums > Social Discussion > Music Copying & Sharing / Right or Wrong?

Login/Join to Participate
Page: 1234
Durbs
BRONZE Member since Sep 2001

Durbs

Classically British
Location: Epsom, Surrey, England

Total posts: 5688
Posted:Ok, well I tried a search, but putting "Music" into the search engine comes up with loads (and loads) or "What music do you listen to" threads. So forgive me if this has been discussed before.

What are peoples views on copying CD's and file sharing?
Most of us here would call ourselves "Music Lovers" and would also call ourselves fair, honest people. Yet when it comes down to it, copying/downloading music is both dishonest (illegal) and harms the music industry which makes the music we love.

Do morals go out the window when we can get something for free?

Now, I'm not against file sharing - I think it's a great idea, especially when you look at the idea behing the original Naptser (which i believe stoped for something link New Artists Support Program) where new, un-signed bands could get their music to thousands of people. I freely admit to having downloaded songs, occasionally whole albums - but I maintain, that even if I've downloaded an entire album, if I like it, I'll go out an buy it. Likewise, if I really enjoy a couple of songs from a band I've downloaded - I'll go out and buy their album.

Where file sharing is great is getting hold of rarities - live stuff (Fantastic live Placebo album "Cabaret of Desire" which isn't an offical album) or hard-to-find rarities/b-sides.

But what narks me, is "music lovers" who will go on-and-on about how they love this band, have all thier albums - yet they haven't ever bought one of their CDs. They'll give all kind of excuses, usually either "CDs are too expensive" or "everyone else does it".
CDs are getting more expensive because more and more people are ripping off music - if you're not buying CDs, you're making it worse.
"Everyone else does it" is a rubbish excuse smile


When it comes down to it - Music copying/sharing is theft.
None of us here (I hope) would walk into a shop and take things without paying. No-one would sneak into a local farm and raid their fields for food. So why is it considered acceptable to get your music for free?

Can't people see they're damaging the music industry?
One reason we're getting more and more shitty pop bands is they make a quick buck for the record labels - teeny boppers don't download the music, they go out and they buy the singles and albums. The "true music" fans are the one sitting at home downloading all their music - which means that "proper" bands aren't anywhere near as lucrative as pop-acts.

Thoughts?

smile


Burner of Toast
Spinner of poi
Slacker of enormous magnitude

Delete Topic

nearly_all_gone
SILVER Member since Aug 2004

nearly_all_gone

Pooh-Bah
Location: Southampton, United Kingdom

Total posts: 1626
Posted:My point is, Metallica have a million easy ways of making money. They can do an interview, they can bring out a film (as they recently have), merchandising, going on tour (I know this doesn't create a lot of revenue but it certainly helps the other elements!). They have such huge status in the industry, and for them to have been exponential in the closure of the original napster was very irresponsible for a number of reasons.

Filesharing offers a huge market for unsigned bands. The unsigned scene is thriving at the moment - people feel they can get their music heard worldwide by spending a little money recording a demo and uploading it onto some network or other, so they're actually bothering to do it wheras they might just have stayed playing the local circuit for recognition otherwise.

As I said previously, I love the feeling of a CD in my hands. I don't download MP3s regularly and I wouldn't want to stop buying CDs. But I don't agree with the exploitative music industry, or at least major labels. My band released 5 CDs independantly. We signed to a company to distribute them for a small price, and we sold all the CDs we had pressed - often to people who'd never heard of us before they came on our website by chance.

I was really proud when I went on Morpheus one night and searched for my band, because there were several people online with our songs available for download.

Metallica should feel proud that people want to hear the songs they wrote, rather than taking legal action against their own fans. And I disagree that it's the same as saying you can steal from rich people because they're rich. It is the nature of the industry they're in that people will copy CDs and rip MP3s. Just because it wasn't like that when they started in the early 80s, they shouldn't resent the fact the world has moved on and they clearly haven't. People always taped their CDs and records before this came along. An awful lot of people would have a tape of a tape of a tape of a CD/Record rather than buy it new. A lot of that is down to the price issue, certainly. But the fact is, a lot of people would only have like 10 albums if they didn't download or copy. They just wouldn't buy the things if they couldn't get them for free. And that's a terrible situation for the bands, and for the fans. But it's about the same for the music industry.

I buy almost all of my CDs secondhand. To the bands and the labels, isn't that just as damaging? Well disputable, but maybe. And not illegal. Long live filesharing tongue


What a wonderful miracle if only we could look through each other's eyes for an instant.
Thoreau

Delete

Durbs
BRONZE Member since Sep 2001

Durbs

Classically British
Location: Epsom, Surrey, England

Total posts: 5688
Posted:Written by: nearly_all_gone

why would any artist who cares about their music resent me downloading it?
...
What decent musician would have a problem with that? They have to make their money, sure... but for casual downloaders, I really don't see that it harms them at all.




Well, I'm a musician (well, drummer wink ) and I'd be pissed off if I'd spent time and money recording an album - then my "fans" take it off me for free.

As for "casual downloaders" - the trouble is there are millions of casual downloaders.

The whole "i can't afford it so I'll have it for free" or "If I can afford it I'd buy it, if not I'll download it" is a bit lame really. This is probably going to sound a bit too harsh - but music is a luxury good, whatever happened to the days of saving up for something you wanted? It's not like anyone needs the music right then-and-there, it just seems like a convenient excuse.

Just to re-iterate - I'm not against file-sharing for getting hold of hard-to-find/un-released stuff, nor for "try before you buy" means - just when people have 1000's of songs which they never paid for and still claim to be music "fans".
"Friends and Enemies of Modern Music" as the Smashing Pumpkins would've said smile


Burner of Toast
Spinner of poi
Slacker of enormous magnitude

Delete

nearly_all_gone
SILVER Member since Aug 2004

nearly_all_gone

Pooh-Bah
Location: Southampton, United Kingdom

Total posts: 1626
Posted:Yeah, see your point about casual downloaders I guess. And certainly for larger bands that's a big problem.

Although I think in a lot of cases the "If I can't afford to buy it, I'll download it" argument would change if you couldn't download something to "If I can't afford to buy it, I won't have it". Which, personally, I think is less positive for the actual bands, because it doesn't get their music to the listener.


What a wonderful miracle if only we could look through each other's eyes for an instant.
Thoreau

Delete

lexa
BRONZE Member since Jul 2004

Member
Location: , United Kingdom

Total posts: 16
Posted:i am all for the for file sharing but its not becuse its free and its not becuse i cant afford it i just like the fact i dont ave to go down to the shops pick out say a game i do it in a day take it back and be offerd 19 for a game i paid 30 for a few days ago. and now the only times i bu a game is if i can see that thay have put a good amount of effort into it like i nice box a bonus cd you get my idea

Delete

Konsti


Konsti

lovable smart-ass
Location: vineyards, Vienna, Austria

Total posts: 785
Posted:Written by:
Also people often cite piracy as hurting the small bands most, but what hurts and stifles the small bands most is the current operating practises of the record industry, but that's another discussion



right on dom!!!

i admit that im one of those hoarders of music and i resent paying money for it. I think that ppl are too concentrated on the money aspect in music.
have you noticed how much CRAP is flooding the market? I feel insulted that the industries expect me to listen to that. So i have absolutely NO problem in hurting this vile industry for they pollute the minds of the young,the innocent and the stupid wink
now seriously.
maybe when the music industry becomes less profitable, then only those ppl who actually seriously care about music will start releasing. IMHO All the good music comes from smaller labels (with few exceptions).
!!!SO hurt the big labels as much as you can!!!

music that comes from small labels i dont mind paying for (alto i dont do it, cos its just too comfortable to leech it off the net). and i buy the odd psytrance or punk cd.

I sat down and calculated that through leeching 90% of my collection, i saved about 20,000 pounds (+/- 5,000 pounds cos im sure i made lots of mistakes) Now would u seriously think that i would own a collection that big if i had to pay for it? no!!!!! so if downloading/ ripping/ copying hurts the industries, so does the fact that u cant afford it. So i see no harm done from my side cos:

-I dont like major labels and think they should bleed
-If i wouldnt be able to get it for free i wont get it at all, and my collection would be only a fraction of the size that it is now.
- i buy the odd cd, from independent labels

feel free to throw wet spunges and boo me out

cool


"is optimism in austria just a lack of information?"
-Alfred Dorfer

Delete

Durbs
BRONZE Member since Sep 2001

Durbs

Classically British
Location: Epsom, Surrey, England

Total posts: 5688
Posted:Written by: the badger with a troubled past and nothing left to lose /Konsti


feel free to throw wet spunges and boo me out







Ok.... smile





Written by:


-I dont like major labels and think they should bleed

-If i wouldnt be able to get it for free i wont get it at all, and my collection would be only a fraction of the size that it is now.

- i buy the odd cd, from independent labels





~ Many smaller labels are owned/nurtured by major labels. It's is VERY hard to turn a profit in the music industry, for everyband that is making money for a record label, there is probably about 8 that aren't. Smaller labels simply can't match the output of the majors - that's why they all dream of landing a major deal. A small, independent label will make a couple of 1000 CDs - this severly limits the amount of money both they, and the band, can make. The big labels have the ability to take bands to global fame, huge tours and a damn good salary.

- Yes you could - if you were a true music fan. I had several friends whose CD collection went into 1000s of CDs. It's not your collection, its someone elses you've stolen

- Good wink



Written by:


have you noticed how much CRAP is flooding the market?



Yes - that's because it's only pop that's selling in record shops, the "proper" music is being downloaded.



Written by:


i resent paying money for it. I think that ppl are too concentrated on the money aspect in music.



Christ man - this is peoples jobs! They started off dreaming of making a living out of music - and you resent them making money from it? Jeez, why not push a granny in a puddle cos she made her own scarf?!



Written by:


maybe when the music industry becomes less profitable, then only those ppl who actually seriously care about music will start releasing



No, when it becomes less profitable, all the small independent labels will have gone bankrupt and only the majors will survive. And from your post, I really don't think your one of "those people who actually care about music"



That'll teach those pesky new song-writing artists for trying to make a living out of making music you like...



[/rant]



It just seems to me that nowadays it's almost a competition to have as bigger collection of music on your PC as possible. No, maybe if you had bought all your music your collection wouldn't be as big, but I guarantee you'd love it much more than just endless MP3s on your PC.


Burner of Toast
Spinner of poi
Slacker of enormous magnitude

Delete

Konsti


Konsti

lovable smart-ass
Location: vineyards, Vienna, Austria

Total posts: 785
Posted:Oi!

i DO care about music

and leave the granny with that pirated scarf out of it



NONONONO u get me wrong

Example: i have the entire beatles, led zeppelin, red hot chilly peppers, NOFX, pink floyd collection. thats about 30 cds in total (i think). Now those artists are not starving to death cause i just copied their cds.

but then i go out saturday night and see a bangin psytrance act: kindzadza. I go to the shop on monday and cant find a cd. i order it from the shop, where i have to wait for 2 weeks. Why do i have the money to order myself a rare and expensive (for austria) cd? hmmmmm lemme think AH! cos i didnt spend it on getting the best of beatles, NOFX..... CD.

get my point?

i dont have to pay anybody i dont want to, i can pay whom i want and still enjoy the full spectrum of music.



get my point?


"is optimism in austria just a lack of information?"
-Alfred Dorfer

Delete

Durbs
BRONZE Member since Sep 2001

Durbs

Classically British
Location: Epsom, Surrey, England

Total posts: 5688
Posted:No...

The Beatles, RCHP, NOFX etc. only got where they are today by going out and making music and money so they could continue to do it. It's not about people starving to death, it's about them earning enough money to be able to afford to make another album.
The fact that they're pretty loaded now is irrelevant - as someone earlier said - is it ok to steal from a rich person just because they are rich? Nope (IMO)

Written by:
i dont have to pay anybody i dont want to, i can pay whom i want and still enjoy the full spectrum of music.


True, but you then can't sit around complaing when all the independent labels go bust and all that's left is the majors - as all they'll say is "I told you so".


Burner of Toast
Spinner of poi
Slacker of enormous magnitude

Delete

NOn


activist for HoPper liberation.
Location: ffidrac

Total posts: 1643
Posted:Written by: MillenniuM

"NOn, It does make sense!

It's like Metallica getting upset because they're being downloaded... how many millions of dollars have their records made them?

It's just sad. "

I stilll don't understand this philosophy. I always feel like either the person hasn't thought it through, or they know something I don't.

If you keep stealing from musicians, in 10 years, there may not be any musicians! If there is no viable demand for a product, the supply will disappear.



But it's like someone said earlier most bands make their money through touring and merchandising, its the record companies that are making their money off the CDs - the time and money put in this process is more and more governed by the record company. Regardless of music sharing/ copying whatever, you cannot copy a live act, and its in this context that a band holds on to their intellectual property and makes their money, it's real and it's unique. In contrast, I feel that so many albums exist merely to exploit the listener, it isn't as personal as live music, and never will be, i sometimes get the impression with some acts that people don't care about the music or production or the overall sound of the album anymore.

I'm afraid I still can't grasp the idea of sharing music as stealing, even though I am well versed in the copyright laws and such, and i don't see it as taking money - the only reason that it could be looked at this way now is that digital downloads can be monitored and the industry is able to work out how much potential money they're missing out on. But this amount is proportional to the market - as has been pointed out before copying of albums has been going on ever since people got hold of blank tapes - the potential market has increased a hundred times over, so what does it matter if the amount of copying does too? The record industry is not losing money, the reason it's so het up about the issue is it's not gaining as much as it thinks it should. Geez, how much more can you have on top of billions anyway??

It happens in every industry, for every original painting, there are millions of prints and the money from them doesn't get to the artist, for every innovative design there are a million slightly crappier copies that manage to evade patents by subtly changing some small feature. It's almost a positive thing to react against corporate monopolisation!

And so I'm all for the local/global approach to music - small labels, lots of gigs, but use the internet to reach out to others, raise your profile, people will always go to live gigs... as opposed to the sort of shiny poster approach/ shiny image marketing approach which seem to rocket a lot of shite to the top of the charts.

I want to make 'em work for it biggrin


Aurinko freedom agreement reached 10th Sept 2006

if it makes no sense that's because it's NOn-sense.

Delete

Durbs
BRONZE Member since Sep 2001

Durbs

Classically British
Location: Epsom, Surrey, England

Total posts: 5688
Posted:Would anyone here walk into a CD shop, take a CD and walk out without paying form it?
I doubt it.

But aside from the fact you're not in the shop - there really isn't much difference going on KaZaa and downloading an entire album.

Yes, people have always copied albums - but firstly, this doesn't make it right and secondly it's never been done on this scale. Copying a CD on to tape for a few mates is entirely different to opening up your collection of 8000 mp3s to anyone who wants them.


Burner of Toast
Spinner of poi
Slacker of enormous magnitude

Delete

kiteman


Flying high!
Location: At the beach.

Total posts: 245
Posted:I have quite a large record collection Nearly 1000 12' vinyl and around 500 CD's, and around 20 CD's of downloaded music.



The reason I file share, alot of the music I have is released on White Label or from small independant labels. These people don't keep back catalouges of tunes as it's probably the only tune they are going to make and only a few 1000 get made. So once there gone there's no other way of getting a copy unless I download it.



There are also people out there who don't mind there music being put up for download as it gives them exposure in the clubs and on the pirate stations.



If everything seems under control, your not going fast enough!

It's not the size of the wave, it's the length of the ride!

Delete

Durbs
BRONZE Member since Sep 2001

Durbs

Classically British
Location: Epsom, Surrey, England

Total posts: 5688
Posted:See - I agree with this, infact this is what file sharing should be about - hard to get stuff, rarities, deleted stuff etc.

It shouldn't be a way to expand your music collection for free because you don't want to spend money on it, whatever your reason.


Burner of Toast
Spinner of poi
Slacker of enormous magnitude

Delete

NOn


activist for HoPper liberation.
Location: ffidrac

Total posts: 1643
Posted:I have to say, I don't download music myself so I don't really know what sort of ratio others do buy CDs: free downloads.

I am interested to know whether or not the listener appreciate the music in the same way if they've got it all for free, it's so fast, so speedy, do people even listen to these in the same way?? When I did have the opportunity to download music, there are tracks I've never listened to more than once, if ever... i actually think this is appalling, if I was a musician I'd be more distressed by the fact that people weren't listening to my work than that I wasnt getting paid for it.

Maybe that's just me, I'm not in the music industry and maybe I'm just naive about what i think actually drives people to be creative.... because i really believe that those who appreciate music as a true fan, are those who will be putting the money in anyway and that's the money that it's worth getting. The act of downloading hundreds of thousands of track just to show off how varied your taste is or whatever, just seems to me to be utterly materialistic, (depsite there not being much material about digital tracks) and the record companies are obviously wanting to exploit this for their own gain...


Aurinko freedom agreement reached 10th Sept 2006

if it makes no sense that's because it's NOn-sense.

Delete

Durbs
BRONZE Member since Sep 2001

Durbs

Classically British
Location: Epsom, Surrey, England

Total posts: 5688
Posted:Ah - interesting point I was discussing only last night.
In some way it devalues music having so much of it. None of this choosing & buying a CD, listening to it all the way through etc.

People get so much music, they really physically couldn't listen to it all - they don't even know half the stuff they had, had no knowledge of any what song was off what album etc.

Written by:
i really believe that those who appreciate music as a true fan, are those who will be putting the money in anyway and that's the money that it's worth getting. The act of downloading hundreds of thousands of track just to show off how varied your taste is or whatever, just seems to me to be utterly materialistic, (depsite there not being much material about digital tracks) and the record companies are obviously wanting to exploit this for their own gain...


Amen hug


Burner of Toast
Spinner of poi
Slacker of enormous magnitude

Delete

NOn


activist for HoPper liberation.
Location: ffidrac

Total posts: 1643
Posted:Written by: Durbs

See - I agree with this, infact this is what file sharing should be about - hard to get stuff, rarities, deleted stuff etc.




I agree with that too, but the problem is, how on earth do you police something like a filesharing network so that you can distunguish between 'proper' music fans and rip off merchants? if anyone can share, then there's going to be people abusing it, if no-one is able to share then you can't get those tracks!?


Aurinko freedom agreement reached 10th Sept 2006

if it makes no sense that's because it's NOn-sense.

Delete

NOn


activist for HoPper liberation.
Location: ffidrac

Total posts: 1643
Posted:Written by: Durbs

People get so much music, they really physically couldn't listen to it all - they don't even know half the stuff they had, had no knowledge of any what song was off what album etc.



I think you could replace "music" there with any number of things and that statement would still be perfectly accurate biggrin such is the nature of a 'consumer society' ubbrollsmile but that's not what this thread is about, so i'll leave that there....


Aurinko freedom agreement reached 10th Sept 2006

if it makes no sense that's because it's NOn-sense.

Delete

kiteman


Flying high!
Location: At the beach.

Total posts: 245
Posted:Written by: NOn

The act of downloading hundreds of thousands of track just to show off how varied your taste is or whatever, just seems to me to be utterly materialistic



I cannot believe how much rubbish people share. there are so many people who download and keep everything on there computer.
Corrupt files, incomplete tunes, Incorrectly named songs. Wrong artist etc.

There are no excuses for people who download stuff like that.
There only doing it for the sake of it, it aslo makes it hard to find what your looking for.

The've probably never listened to any of there stuff.


If everything seems under control, your not going fast enough!

It's not the size of the wave, it's the length of the ride!

Delete

UCOF
SILVER Member since Apr 2002

UCOF

Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: , United Kingdom

Total posts: 15414
Posted:I download songs, as does Konsti.

We have more than enough music to keep us happy for about 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, playing non repetitivley, for half a year.

Much of this was from copying cds and not downloading.

The only cd I have ever fel really guilty about copying for friends were The Cat Empire. This band are amazing and I made a fair few copies for the group of friends we had. I relised afterwards it was unfair. I have a certain beam of sun to help shift the blame onto for that one. wink

Do not forget that The Beatles, NOFX and RHCP were all started before music sharing was invented (by downloading it, not just copying a tape)

Val Doonican on the other hand..... angry


Delete

Pele
BRONZE Member since Dec 2000

Pele

the henna lady
Location: WNY, USA

Total posts: 6193
Posted:First of all I want to throw out here that many of the more famous "artists" who have spoken out against piracy also admit to having dubbed records onto tapes back when. In my eyes, that invalidates their right to argue under hypocracy. There is no difference.

There are also groups who have used it to their advantage. Eminem had a song leak to download early and they (him, his marketing team, etc) jumped on it and ran with it. It ended up enhancing his sales.
Barenaked Ladies intentionally leaked half a song from one of thier albums, with the rest of the message being a really funny one essentially advertising their album. Again, it was so well done that sales skyrocketted when the album debutted.
Alot of it has to do with how bands/people handle themselves and how creative they get. Music for download can be an amazingly powerful marketting tool, if artists are willing to educate themselves on how to use it.

Next, I download and sometimes I even create compilation cd's and burn them. I use and listen to alot of music that is simply not available readily on cd. And I am *not* spending $17 on a cd for one freakin' song, especially since I have a few where I did and they were either really short or really shyte. However, this is also speaking of 1920's ragtime, or authentic bulgarian folk songs, funky holiday tunes, obscure Egyptian, stuff like that.

When it is a group that I like that is readily available, I will download songs to make sure that I like the rest of the cd. If I do, then I delete the downloads and buy the cd.
Nope, I wouldn't walk into a cd shop and steal one off the wall, but you know what, I also wouldn't buy a wedding cake without taste-testing first. Most of my music somehow gets worked into a show, and to me I am sampling for purchase.

I don't download from small bands trying to "make it big".
I don't download entire cd's.
I will go to a concert if I really like the band.

And I have to say that the statement of some music being more "proper" than others is a pretty closed minded one. All music is valid and proper, whether or not you like it. Pop bands are doing well because they appeal to the tween-age kids esp. girls, and they have masse marketting on their side. Most of their money comes from the crap they sell, which non-pop bands tend to avoid. Do I like them? Not particularly but I damn well will defend their right to make "music". I have heard much indie rubbish in my life as well.


Pele
Higher, higher burning fire...making music like a choir
"Oooh look! A pub!" -exclaimed after recovering from a stupid fall
"And for the decadence of art, nothing beats a roaring fire." -TMK

Delete

ugoAgogo
BRONZE Member since Apr 2003

ugoAgogo

member
Location: Brighton / Canterbury, United ...

Total posts: 112
Posted:i know whats wrong:

groovejet.com <-- dont touch it

thats proper wrongness of the highest order. selling otherpeople music via download, from almost every record label under the sun.

i dont go to shops for moozik anymore, if i want a cd i buy it online for about 7 or 8 quid, works for me.
however ive just been connected to tinterneto and it is just far to tempting not to have a look for those tunes u wish you had.

h


ERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR. . . . . . . . . . . . . ZAP

Delete

Durbs
BRONZE Member since Sep 2001

Durbs

Classically British
Location: Epsom, Surrey, England

Total posts: 5688
Posted:Pele - That's what I'm saying file sharing SHOULD be used for...
As you say, for downloading "taster" tracks, or hard to find stuff.

What I think is wrong (legally and morally) is downloading your entire music collection with no wish whatsoever to buy a CD,


Burner of Toast
Spinner of poi
Slacker of enormous magnitude

Delete

Dom
BRONZE Member since Dec 2001

Dom

Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: Bristol, UK

Total posts: 3009
Posted:A thought occured to me yesterday - the arguments about downloading music causing a loss in profits for the record companies and artists. Do these points also apply to people selling cheap secondhand CDs?

Delete

nearly_all_gone
SILVER Member since Aug 2004

nearly_all_gone

Pooh-Bah
Location: Southampton, United Kingdom

Total posts: 1626
Posted:Dom, I was wondering that earlier too. The band and the label don't get any of the money, yet it's totally legal and no-one seems to have a problem with it. Of the 500 or so albums I own, I'd say only about 50 were bought new, simply because they're half the price or less if they're second hand.

You know what I found out yesterday? Coldplay only just broke even on their debut album, Parachutes. The band, that is, not the record label who obviously made millions and millions of pounds.

What's fair to the band about that?

They do it, however, as someone said before - you need a major contract to get your music heard. And if getting hear is important to you as a band, the money isn't the prime concern.

I wouldn't mind not earning money if I was married to Gwyneth Paltrow. In the financial sense, obviously. tongue wink


What a wonderful miracle if only we could look through each other's eyes for an instant.
Thoreau

Delete

Durbs
BRONZE Member since Sep 2001

Durbs

Classically British
Location: Epsom, Surrey, England

Total posts: 5688
Posted:I *think* that you need a license to trade in second hand music...

At CD fairs where a lot of second hand CD's get sold, it often seems to be the same traders. Read the back of a CD and it'll have the blurb "Not for distribution, performance, eating... without permission" or something. I worked in a 2nd hand record shop once, and we had to be careful to write down what had been sold. I don't know what happened with this data, but I wouldn't be surprised if the info went to PRS/BPI for royalties.


Burner of Toast
Spinner of poi
Slacker of enormous magnitude

Delete

Dom
BRONZE Member since Dec 2001

Dom

Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: Bristol, UK

Total posts: 3009
Posted:Written by:
I *think* that you need a license to trade in second hand music...


I'd question that as then a lot of people on ebay and Amazon would be breaking the law.

nearly: what usually happens when a band gets signed is the record company says:
"Here's a 50,000 advance. We'll spend 100,000 on studio time and another 250,00 on advertising your album. So you now owe us 400,000 of record sales."
So the record company takes the majority of the "artist's share" from the sales until this is paid off. However the record company assumes it's spent nothing for itself, if you understand, so for the first album sold the record company takes money for itself and takes more to pay off the 'debt'.


Delete

Tao Star


Tao Star

Pooh-Bah
Location: Bristol

Total posts: 1662
Posted:woah - that's really harsh. but then i guess they did choose to sign a contract - bloody capitalism.

I had a dream that my friend had a
strong-bad pop up book,
it was the book of my dreams.

Delete

Pele
BRONZE Member since Dec 2000

Pele

the henna lady
Location: WNY, USA

Total posts: 6193
Posted:Dom, that is my understanding of how it works as well. I have several friends who made their cd's on self labels or in really small studios where they can make a pretty quick break even return from CD sales at their shows and on their sites. Then again, they don't want to make it big as their form of music is nothing that mainstream of any genre would really embrace and they know it. However, they are making a living at what they do, and most of that comes from shows and swag, not cd's. They say they sell the cd's as marketting to get more people interested in their music. ex: One person buys a cd, says to person 2 "Hey you need to hear these guys!" etc.....

Durbs, I also said I think that downloading something without the intent to buy the cd is fine when the rest of the cd is shyte. I completely keep the songs I like, and have been known to keep a few from an album.

I think that this is one of those things there should be no grey areas. If you keep the songs on your computer-burned-mp3 or otherwise and you feel it is theft...it is, no matter. Finding loop holes for justification is hypocritical. I do it and truthfully, I don't bat an eyelash. CD prices have come down in the past couple of years. I buy them occassionally. Companies will feed us crap to make us feel guilty, and I don't.

I really don't have alot of pity for artists anymore who find themselves being ripped off by companies, mainly because *soooo* many groups came forward with it in the 80's and sued the hell out of companies that any artist getting into the biz now should be knowledgable and aware (or have someone who is near them) and they should always read, reread, have someone else read and reread anything before signing. But I think that is true with almost anything I have to sign my life away on.

*shrug* Just my opinion though.

Second hand cd sales in the US are not registered or anything. I know the owner of a place that sells used cd's. The money was made off the cd from the first sale primarily, and used cd's generally go for alot less than first run price. If someone is opposed to second hand sales, then they must be opposed to selling them to get rid of them as well, at which point I guess making a fashionable yet expensive piece of art deco is the only option for old cd's, which is far more insulting to a musician in my eyes (but very worthy for those damn computer "try me" cd's that come in the mail! biggrin)

Yup...I'm in a strange mood.


Pele
Higher, higher burning fire...making music like a choir
"Oooh look! A pub!" -exclaimed after recovering from a stupid fall
"And for the decadence of art, nothing beats a roaring fire." -TMK

Delete

NOn


activist for HoPper liberation.
Location: ffidrac

Total posts: 1643
Posted:Written by: Pele

And I have to say that the statement of some music being more "proper" than others is a pretty closed minded one. All music is valid and proper, whether or not you like it. Pop bands are doing well because they appeal to the tween-age kids esp. girls, and they have masse marketting on their side. Most of their money comes from the crap they sell, which non-pop bands tend to avoid. Do I like them? Not particularly but I damn well will defend their right to make "music". I have heard much indie rubbish in my life as well.



I don't know whether this was a comment on something i wrote on my post, maybe it was mentioned somewhere else too am not sure, I used the term as "'proper' music fans" i.e. people who actually appreciate the music, opposed to those who might just download for the sake of selling it on. I am definately not trying to split music up into categories of what's good and what's shite, because that's a whole other argument, taking place in a constrained fashion in the "Busted, rock my world" post biggrin biggrin Besides I already know that a lot of the proclaimed 'geniuses' of the 20th century, I don't even like...

But Pele, I entirely agree with you on the point of not feeling guilty about downloads or anything, I copy CDs all the time, and although I know legally it is theft, I just don't see it that way. I think if they're are going to crack down on anyone it should be those people, downloading whole albums and selling them on, because these people are actually making money off the music. If people are actually enjoying the music then i just don't see what the industry's problem is.

As for the second hand trading, i'd say the records were probably just to keep track of what stock was sold and what wasn't.... the traders probably wouldn't have to pay any royalties but the record companies might - for a period last year, all the photocopying in my uni was monitored to check it was within the proper limits, there was no fines or anything, they just monitored it... that's to do with copyright though because you are actually duplicating someone elses work....

I think with CDs, you aren't creating a new version, just selling on the old version, so it probably fits in with trading laws somewhere but not necessarily copyright. Secondhand bookshops and antiques stores even are doing exactly the same thing, I think royalties must only be gained on first hand sales.


Aurinko freedom agreement reached 10th Sept 2006

if it makes no sense that's because it's NOn-sense.

Delete

Fine_Rabid_Dog


Internet Hate Machine
Location: They seek him here, they seek ...

Total posts: 10530
Posted:I think the new itunes shop is a really good idea. Buy the mp3 albumn u like and download it straight to itunes with out leaving home. Its cheap to.

However, I also like to copy music off of my school network onto my laptop as it is conveniant and fast. The albumns have already been paid for, but I can't help thinking if i've commited a crime or not.... i'd like to think I havn't, but now, looking back, I can see how immoral it was. Oh dear.

I have helped to support a really talented band who have just left my school, the Purple City Amusements, by buying their albumn, and I hope they do well. IF you get the chance to listen to them, do so.


The existance of flamethrowers says that someone, somewhere, at sometime said "I need to set that thing on fire, but it's too far away."

Delete

Dom
BRONZE Member since Dec 2001

Dom

Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: Bristol, UK

Total posts: 3009
Posted:As it's related, from the ever sarcastic ElReg: Music sales rise despite RIAA's best efforts.

My problem with iTunes and many similar services is this:
Price per track in the UK: 99p
Price per track in the US: 99c
The exchange rate means we pay 45p extra. why? because we're used to it.


Delete

Page: 1234

Similar Topics

Using the keywords [music copying sharing right wrong] we found the following similar topics.
1. Forums > Music Copying & Sharing / Right or Wrong? [111 replies]
2. Learn > POI > Advanced Weaves > Forward Weave (5 beats) *help/resource aka the weave  forwards and on your right your right hand will rotate over...
3. Learn > Diabolo > Killer Skills > 2 diabolo right sun *help/resource
4. Learn > Fire Fans > Mr Jeff Fans Tutorials > left to right ESE *help/resource
5. Learn > Fire Fans > Mr Jeff Fans Tutorials > tog fold left right *help/resource

     Show more..