uncle psychosis Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 [quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1340183621' post='1700410'] IMO you are confusing piracy with some music being given away for free out of choice. It's up to each band and/or record company to decide whether or not that they give (some of) their music away for free or charge for it. If it's being given away free by all means take it. If it's not free don't take it just because some other music is. Also if you want to listen to a band there are plenty of legal places on the internet where you can do so (we'll leave aside the piss-poor royalty rates these sites pay for now). There is no need to grab an unauthorised download. Therefore the argument about downloading for trying before buying falls flat. My music tastes are pretty eclectic, but I've never needed to obtain a dodgy copy of a band's work in order to find out whether or not I'm going to like them. My band give some of our tracks away for free and we expect you to pay for others. That's our choice. If you don't like it, then you can probably find plenty of others playing music in a similar style who are giving away all their songs for free. However if you think that my band has that something extra special that other bands have wouldn't you want to pay for the music if that's what was being asked of you? [/quote] I do pay for music. All the time. I don't download illegally. I respect musicians too much for that. I've said that repeatedly. I totally agree that if a musician wants you to pay for their music then you should. But according to some of the logic on display in this thread---if you make a mixtape for your mate then you're a ****, because you've "stolen" from a starving musician. Its stupid. Sometimes bands do well out of piracy (see Twigman) and to stick our collective heads in the sand and ignore that fact is just daft. Right I really am done this time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyfisher Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 [quote name='cheddatom' timestamp='1340183762' post='1700417'] So, have I got this right?.. If I download a song illegally, i'm a ****, even if i've contributed to that artist's income in other ways If I stream the same song legally, i'm a good guy. [/quote] That's my understanding - which is why this whole debate is so pointless. The world has moved on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRedX Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 [quote name='Bilbo' timestamp='1340183697' post='1700414'] The only things I have ever downloaded for free are 2 or 3 albums that were not available on itunes, Amazon or any other on-line retailer (obscure jazz stuff that was deleted years ago and has never made it onto reissues). So I couldn't have paid for it even if I wanted to! [/quote] I'm sure that you could find someone selling a second hand copy of the album(s) in question on eBay or similar. Even if they weren't available at the time you downloaded, you should feel morally obliged to buy a copy shoud it become available, or even better send the artist a donation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncle psychosis Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 [quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1340183978' post='1700426'] I'd also say would you feel comfortable doing a transaction in the Basschat marketplace with someone who you know advocates downloading for free content that should be paid for? I know I wouldn't. [/quote] I sincerely hope that isn't aimed at me. At no point have I advocated piracy and to claim otherwise is both unfair and untrue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xilddx Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 [quote name='cheddatom' timestamp='1340183762' post='1700417'] So, have I got this right?.. If I download a song illegally, i'm a ****, even if i've contributed to that artist's income in other ways If I stream the same song legally, i'm a good guy. [/quote] There are many ways to hear music before you buy it without thieving it. Your illegal actions mean that loss has occurred. Just because that loss led to some gain does not make your illegal action right or good. If you beat the sh*t out of me and that inspires me to become a Karate black belt, I'm not going to thank you for beating the sh*t out of me, am I. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRedX Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 [quote name='Johnston' timestamp='1340184049' post='1700428'] Why not? [/quote] Because essentially in my book that makes them untrustworthy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twigman Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 [quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1340183621' post='1700410'] IMO you are confusing piracy with some music being given away for free out of choice. It's up to each band and/or record company to decide whether or not that they give (some of) their music away for free or charge for it. [/quote] Neither us nor our record company(which had died) ever gave permission for any of our stuff to be loaded up to Spotify (our current record company still have not afaik allowed some of our catalogue to Spotify) or Youtube or anywhere. Almost everyone who heard us for the first time in the years 2003 to 2009 will have done so via an 'illegally' distributed source. I thank the 'distributors' whole heartedly for keeping the music alive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyfisher Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 [quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1340183978' post='1700426'] I'd also say would you feel comfortable doing a transaction in the Basschat marketplace with someone who you know advocates downloading for free content that should be paid for? I know I wouldn't. [/quote] That's sounds like just the sort of 'threat' that music business execs would come up with. What next? Criminal record checks for anyone wanting to sell something here? And how exactly are you going to differentiate between someone who legally uses services such as spotify or youtube to listen to their music for free? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyfisher Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 [quote name='silddx' timestamp='1340184414' post='1700440'] There are many ways to hear music before you buy it without thieving it. Your illegal actions mean that loss has occurred. [/quote] I wasn't talking about stealing anything or buying anything, but using a perfectly legal streaming service to listen to the music of my choice whnever and wherever I want. Nothing illegal about it - indeed, I presume the music industry supports such services. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRedX Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 [quote name='Johnston' timestamp='1340184652' post='1700450'] Would you refuse to deal with someone who doesn't inform the HMRC of their gig earnings? [/quote] Most sensible people aren't going to come on here and boast about not declaring their gig earnings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheddatom Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 [quote name='silddx' timestamp='1340184414' post='1700440'] There are many ways to hear music before you buy it without thieving it. Your illegal actions mean that loss has occurred. Just because that loss led to some gain does not make your illegal action right or good. If you beat the sh*t out of me and that inspires me to become a Karate black belt, I'm not going to thank you for beating the sh*t out of me, am I. [/quote] Well i'm certainly not going to start critiquing anyone's analogies... If you say "band A is selling song X for 50p, anyone who downloads song X and never buys a legal copy is depriving band A of 50p" - you can't argue with that. The pirates have deprived that act of 50p and there's no recompense. If that's as complicated as you're going to allow the debate to be, fair enough. Personally, I think it's a little more nuanced than that. My friend gave me a Ben & jason mix tape once and it was so good I wanted to get all of their albums. I would have bought them all too, but some are "out of print". If I ever see them in a 2nd hand shop I will buy them but I admit, I did download one of them illegally, and I'm very glad I did. It's amazing music and there's no other way for me to get it. when i was a kid we all used to make each other mix tapes. Were we *****? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gust0o Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 [quote name='Johnston' timestamp='1340183629' post='1700411'] Why isn't changing the business model so that downloading is legal (Again IIRC it is, it is the uploading that is illegal in the UK) an equally valid option. They will never stop downloading. They can't even shut down the one site they have been chasing and banned ISPs from connecting too. [/quote] You're likely quite right, chief. The genie is out of the bottle on this - and the rather limited successes of some of the American associations have only been achieved at significant legal expense, and the rather venal nature of their legal system. None of which suggests it's viable without substantial conscious and artificial support. Stop the lobbying and legal pressure and people would continue to download. If that's where the world is heading, then the best course of action would be to harness it and identify new sources of value - if people will pirate your albums, then perhaps release them for free... but draw people to your site, merchandising and touring, etc. Worked for the likes of Radiohead and McFly. Because, the honest answer is that the old distribution model no longer works; or no longer works [i]universally[/i] - which means some people here will hold a value in their music, their output, which has no bearing on what value large sections of the listening public may apply to it. In market economics you'd suggest they'd be left to wither - if you price at $5 and your customers won't pay $1, then you get your own rewards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xilddx Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 [quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1340184755' post='1700453'] I wasn't talking about stealing anything or buying anything, but using a perfectly legal streaming service to listen to the music of my choice whnever and wherever I want. Nothing illegal about it - indeed, I presume the music industry supports such services. [/quote] So what's the problem then? I thought we were talking about the rights and wrongs of ILLEGAL downloading. The music industry IS changing, there are more ways to consume music and hear it before buying it, and yet people have £100s / £1000s worth of illegal music on their devices and deprive the artist and the industry of income. I'm arguing that this is WRONG. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LawrenceH Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 [quote name='silddx' timestamp='1340183581' post='1700409'] Basically then, you are saying nothing at all. You are leaving this discussion because you don't seem to be able to articulate any sound reasoning. [/quote] Pot, meet kettle. In the single post you've quoted he is saying that while piracy might be wrong, many of the arguments against piracy based on a particular idea of cause and effect don't, in practice, work like that. If I say murder is wrong I am correct. If I say one reason murder is wrong is that it always has a negative effect on the stock market then my argument has disregarded cause and effect and is a s&*t argument regardless of whether murder is actually wrong. Plus why keep calling it 'theft' when the law specifically distinguishes between actual theft (physical object) and copyright infringement (unauthorised appropriation/distribution of intellectual property?). Copyright infringement IS wrong, but if the prosecutions used the arguments on here then the defence would be laughing all the way to the bank! I agree with what others have said that changing the business model is the realistic solution. Personally I know only 2 or 3 pro musicians whose income comes from recording/composing work, and I know many many more whose income comes from live performance. I also am not going to lose sleep at night if the major label chart-based music industry collapses, music and the music industry are very different things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyfisher Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 [quote name='Gust0o' timestamp='1340184977' post='1700462'] Because, the honest answer is that the old distribution model no longer works; or no longer works [i]universally[/i] - [b]which means some people here will hold a value in their music[/b], their output, which has no bearing on what value large sections of the listening public may apply to it. In market economics you'd suggest they'd be left to wither - if you price at $5 and your customers won't pay $1, then you get your own rewards. [/quote] Yep, and I'd suggest that it's a generation thing and will, like most such things, gradually solve itself as people drop off the end of life's conveyor belt, leaving only those who have grown up in this brave new world to swap stories about how odd it was that their granddparents actually used to pay good money for shiny plastic discs and how great it is that almost everything in the world is now online and available on demand for free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul_5 Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 [quote name='uncle psychosis' timestamp='1340131729' post='1699749'] [i]Legally [/i]they are totally different scenarios. If I walk into the Louvre, take a really, really good photo of the Mona Lisa, and then print it out and send it to my mum then have I stolen anything? Is my mum a thief? [/quote] No, but then the Mona Lisa isn't for sale, is it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discreet Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 (edited) This is going to get complicated. There are lots of FS threads on BC as it is. Are we going to have sub-sections of those threads for People Who Advocate Downloading, People Who Defraud HMRC and People Who Are Trustworthy And Above Board..? I would suggest that most people do some things on the fringes of the law they are comfortable with that other people would consider immoral and unethical! And that the very same people are unimpeachable and above-board in various other ways..! Edited June 20, 2012 by discreet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twigman Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 I view music piracy as a superb FREE marketing tool. Those that habitually download 1000s of tracks to their iPod would be unlikely to have paid for those tracks even if downloading was impossible. Many of those tracks would probably have never been heard by the downloader. The downloader plays those tracks, others hear those tracks, get curious and investigate further. Some people will dip into their pockets and buy stuff. these people may not ever have known about the music without the illegal distribution network. And how much has this promo cost the artist/record company? Nothing - it's free marketing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul_5 Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 [quote name='Twigman' timestamp='1340185564' post='1700485'] I view music piracy as a superb FREE marketing tool. Those that habitually download 1000s of tracks to their iPod would be unlikely to have paid for those tracks even if downloading was impossible. Many of those tracks would probably have never been heard by the downloader. The downloader plays those tracks, others hear those tracks, get curious and investigate further. Some people will dip into their pockets and buy stuff. these people may not ever have known about the music without the illegal distribution network. And how much has this promo cost the artist/record company? [s]Nothing - it's free marketing.[/s] revenue generated from the sale of the track. [/quote] fixed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twigman Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 [quote name='paul_5' timestamp='1340185714' post='1700490'] fixed. [/quote] You don't get it do you? The illegal distributor may/may not have bought the track. The illegal downloader has not paid for the track and probably would not ver have paid for the track anyway. The illegal downloader may not even have ever heard the track without the illegal distributor making it available. Of those that are exposed to the music via the illegal distributor, some WILL go on to buy product. Without the illegal distributor those purchases would never have been made. I know this happens - we get fans contacting us all the time who say they discovered us through this illegal channel or that illegal channel. it's excellent FREE marketing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyfisher Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 [quote name='silddx' timestamp='1340185141' post='1700469'] So what's the problem then? I thought we were talking about the rights and wrongs of ILLEGAL downloading. The music industry IS changing, there are more ways to consume music and hear it before buying it, and yet people have £100s / £1000s worth of illegal music on their devices and deprive the artist and the industry of income. I'm arguing that this is WRONG. [/quote] Yes, I understand the argument and technically you're absolutely correct. But it is only a technicality, which is why, in the grand scheme of things, it's irrelevant. What's the practical difference between having immediate, on-demand access to 1000 music files stored at home on a hard drive or having immediate, on-demand access to 1,000,000 music files stored on a hard drive in the server room of companies like Spotify or YouTube? We're only about 20 years into the internet age and already there is more music, video and books available on-demand than anyone could reasonable 'consume' in their own lifetime. The BBC is working on making its entire television and radio archive available online. The Gutenberg project was a very early example of making written material available online. The era of whole days lost visiting reference libraries is past; historical documents may still be important cultural artifacts but the information within them is now freely available. Such draconian cultural changes create many tensions and we're discussing just one of them, but short of some sort of Luddite revolution there's no going back. Indeed, even the Luddite revolution was a short-lived blip in the march of inevitable progress. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRedX Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 [quote name='uncle psychosis' timestamp='1340131729' post='1699749'] If I walk into the Louvre, take a really, really good photo of the Mona Lisa, and then print it out and send it to my mum then have I stolen anything? Is my mum a thief? [/quote] You might find that whoever has paid for the rights to sell postcards/prints of the Mona Lisa has something to say about that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discreet Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 [quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1340186180' post='1700504'] Such draconian cultural changes create many tensions and we're discussing just one of them, but short of some sort of Luddite revolution there's no going back. Indeed, even the Luddite revolution was a short-lived blip in the march of inevitable progress.[/quote] Tru dat re the inevitability, but whether it can be seen as 'progress' is not so clear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncle psychosis Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 (edited) [quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1340186220' post='1700505'] You might find that whoever has paid for the rights to sell postcards/prints of the Mona Lisa has something to say about that. [/quote] That was my point. You've infringed on someone's commercial rights (which is illegal) but nothing has been "stolen". I was merely pointing out that describing copyright infringement as "theft" was factually wrong. Ethically and morally wrong? Probably, yes. Stealing? No. Plus, nobody on basschat would call you a c**t and a thief for taking a picture of the Mona Lisa and giving it to your mum! Edited June 20, 2012 by uncle psychosis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRedX Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 [quote name='Twigman' timestamp='1340186108' post='1700500'] You don't get it do you? The illegal distributor may/may not have bought the track. The illegal downloader has not paid for the track and probably would not ver have paid for the track anyway. The illegal downloader may not even have ever heard the track without the illegal distributor making it available. Of those that are exposed to the music via the illegal distributor, some WILL go on to buy product. Without the illegal distributor those purchases would never have been made. I know this happens - we get fans contacting us all the time who say they discovered us through this illegal channel or that illegal channel. it's excellent FREE marketing [/quote] But, I would guess that the majority of interest in your band stems from the work you did while signed to your original record company back in the 80s. I would also guess that the record company paid for you to make those recordings and either made back that money through record sales, wrote off any debt when they ended your contract or went bust. If you were a new band with no known back catalogue to peddle I don't think you'd have the same attitudes to downloading. And BTW do you know what proportion of your free publicity comes from legitimate sources and what comes form those not so legal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.