Jump to content
Why become a member? ×

Illegal downloading, file-sharing and what i think- what do you think?


MiltyG565
 Share

Recommended Posts

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1361389151' post='1985264']
Not if it's a live event that's being streamed.  Again, 'streaming' and 'downloading' are words deliberately chosen to emphasise the differences between these two methods of transmitting data.
[/quote]

Yes the terms are used to [i]emphasise[/i] differences, but again: only technophobes and conservatives see the two as fundamentally different. The method of transmitting data in both is exactly the same.

Edited by heminder
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='MiltyG565' timestamp='1361391100' post='1985326']
If everyone had your view on this, i'm sure jobs in the music industry would dry up very quickly.
[/quote]

History is against you on that one. Has the music industry dried up since tape recorders and CD-Rs were made available for home copying?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='MiltyG565' timestamp='1361391194' post='1985328']
And if the law you were talking about is the one i think it was- It was a highly discriminatory law, with no legal reasoning for it.
[/quote]

So what? It was illegal and, therefore according to your earlier arguments, it was wrong to break those laws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='skankdelvar' timestamp='1361391231' post='1985332']
If someone offers me something for free, fair enough. I either accept or decline.

If someone invests their time and money in making something and sells it through channels designed to inhibit free distribution (however faulty), it seems only polite to respect their wishes.

Of course, one may act against the seller's wishes and one may even devise some justification for so doing. But fundamentally, it's one's own wishes versus those of the seller. And observation has shown there is no greater spur to ingenious thought than finding reasons to justify one's own wishes particularly when it comes to getting something for free that other people pay for.
[/quote]

Yep, all fair points, but it also provides some illumination about why it is impractical to criminalise downloading per se - because it all depends on the circumstances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='heminder' timestamp='1361394538' post='1985403']
Yes the terms are used to [i]emphasise[/i] differences, but again: only technophobes and conservatives see the two as fundamentally different. The method of transmitting data in both is exactly the same.
[/quote]

The method of transmission may be the same but the application most certainly is not and it is the application that matters, not how a bunch of bits happen to be moved about. Only geeks care about that stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The music industry as we know it has existed for about 50 years, right? A mere blink of an eye in human history. In the 1800s music writing/performance was funded by the aristocracy, in the early 20th century sheet music was the main industry, from the 50s to the late 90s multitrack recording to a professional standard required massive investments in studio time and distribution was also a potentially massive cost, and now you can have a home studio more flexible than many could dream of 20 years ago, record an album and distribute it yourself by self financing.

Things change, and the record industry as we knew it is not something that will or even should necessarily last for ever...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='skankdelvar' timestamp='1361391231' post='1985332']
If someone invests their time and money in making something and sells it through channels designed to inhibit free distribution (however faulty), it seems only polite to respect their wishes.
[/quote]

Its the bit where their wishes extend to dictating what the person who paid good money for it does with it subsequently that is dodge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Wil' timestamp='1361396285' post='1985451']
Things change, and the record industry as we knew it is not something that will or even should necessarily last for ever...
[/quote]

We could continue this thread for another few hundred posts but we'll never improve on that succinct summary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1361396984' post='1985482']
Its the bit where their wishes extend to dictating what the person who paid good money for it does with it subsequently that is dodge.
[/quote]

But if you avoid paying for it, then you aren't even getting caught up in the "Dictating what the person who has paid good money for it does with it".

Right, whatever. I'm not arguing with you or Flyfisher anymore. There's no point. If anything, you're too smart for your own good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='MiltyG565' timestamp='1361398232' post='1985515']
But if you avoid paying for it, then you aren't even getting caught up in the "Dictating what the person who has paid good money for it does with it".
[/quote]

If the person that buys it decides to send you a copy of it, is that up to them, or can someone tell you that you can't have what someone gave you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='MiltyG565' timestamp='1361398232' post='1985515']
Right, whatever. I'm not arguing with you or Flyfisher anymore. There's no point. If anything, you're too smart for your own good.
[/quote]

I don't want to speak for Mr Foxen, but I don't think I'm being particularly smart about all this. I'm just pointing out all the issues. You've started out from a 'black or white' position, which would certainly make things simple if it were true, but it's not, so it isn't. The music industry is struggling with the same thing - they want things to be black and white but no matter how much they wish for it and throw around their highly paid barristers, it all remains murky and grey.

Bow out of the discussion, by all means, but playing the 'trolling' card is not really worthy is it?

Goodnight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1361396215' post='1985449']
The method of transmission may be the same but the application most certainly is not and it is the application that matters, not how a bunch of bits happen to be moved about.  Only geeks care about that stuff.
[/quote]

Yes, geeks care about it because like I said technophobes and conservatives try to think of things with ancient mindsets and thus break and restrict technology with their regressive laws - it's been going on ever since the printing press was invented and probably even before that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1361398939' post='1985529']
Exactly. There are plenty of examples of bands (some quite famous) giving away their music for free. Should we criminalise that? :lol:
[/quote]

If a band gives it's music away for free that is the decision of the band and fair enough. I know a band (Show of Hands) that actively encourages people to file share because they believe that it adds to sales. That too is their right. They may be correct or not but that's irrelevant, it is their choice.

However when a band decides that it doesn't wish to give their music for free away isn't that also their right? If you then decide to take it for nothing, then no matter how good your "reasoning", you are a thief, same as if you took something for free off my market stall. The fact that you can run faster than me, are bigger than me or have your mates with you doesn't alter the fact that you are a thief. All it means is that you've found a way to get away with it and you can then justify it to yourself (and your mates) on the grounds that I should be bigger, faster or have more mates than you.

Doesn't alter the fact that you have taken what was not yours, you're a thief.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='heminder' timestamp='1361399433' post='1985539']
Yes, geeks care about it because like I said technophobes and conservatives try to think of things with ancient mindsets and thus break and restrict technology with their regressive laws - it's been going on ever since the printing press was invented and probably even before that.
[/quote]

I suspect we're saying the same sort of thing. I'm saying the mechanisms are irrrelevant because it's only really how these things are applied that actually matters. Technophobes and conservatives may try to control these things but they don't have a particularly successful track record do they?

New technologies enable new possibilities, people respond with new behaviours, law makers respond accordingly and things progress. As you rightly say, it's been going on for just about forever and I see no indication of it stopping anytime soon - however much the music industry dislikes it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='oggiesnr' timestamp='1361399930' post='1985550']
then no matter how good your "reasoning", you are a thief, same as if you took something for free off my market stall. The fact that you can run faster than me, are bigger than me or have your mates with you doesn't alter the fact that you are a thief.[/quote]

No. If a thief steals something (from your market stall), that means that you, the owner, don't have it anymore. That very very plainly does not happen with digital downloading. They are very different scenarios. Regardless of the morals of it, they are different situations. There is no thievery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1361399893' post='1985546']
Not repeatedly producing variations on the same false analogy expecting it to not pointed out each time is probably a good call. I'd be interested to hear a new point though.
[/quote]

When do you ever give up?

Please, just give up. I don't care anymore. You are smarter than me. Well done. You have out-worded me. Well done.

Out of interest, when are you releasing an album?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

milty, if you don't like what they are saying, don't respond... you have said 4 times you are not arguing anymore, but then come back. don't do it.

this whole thread could run and run and run.

lets just agree to disagree and let it end before it all ends in tears

people download music, end of. the music industry is still worth millions, it will evolve it always has

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='oggiesnr' timestamp='1361399930' post='1985550']
If a band gives it's music away for free that is the decision of the band and fair enough. I know a band (Show of Hands) that actively encourages people to file share because they believe that it adds to sales. That too is their right. They may be correct or not but that's irrelevant, it is their choice.
[/quote]

Agreed.



[quote name='oggiesnr' timestamp='1361399930' post='1985550']
However when a band decides that it doesn't wish to give their music for free away isn't that also their right?
[/quote]

Agreed.



[quote name='oggiesnr' timestamp='1361399930' post='1985550']
If you then decide to take it for nothing, then no matter how good your "reasoning", you are a thief, same as if you took something for free off my market stall. The fact that you can run faster than me, are bigger than me or have your mates with you doesn't alter the fact that you are a thief. All it means is that you've found a way to get away with it and you can then justify it to yourself (and your mates) on the grounds that I should be bigger, faster or have more mates than you.

Doesn't alter the fact that you have taken what was not yours, you're a thief.
[/quote]

I'm not really saying it's acceptable behaviour, I'm saying it's not theft because no one is being deprived of anything.

Suppose someone can only afford to buy one album each month. Imagine they wish to choose between two bands. They choose to buy band A's album, thereby "depriving" band B of some income. It could be argued that band B is worse off as a result of the decision to buy band A's album, but it not really a valid argument is it? Otherwise we'd all be guilty of always depriving someone of something as a result of our spending habits.

I think a big problem with these sorts of discussion is that they tend to concentrate on the extremes. Thus, if everyone downloads everything and never buys any music ever again then the industry will disappear. Well perhaps. But that's not what happens is it? The reality is rather more uncomfortable, so people tend to ignore it in favour of extreme examples that are not relevant in practice - like 'downloading is theft'.

Here's an example of an uncomfortable truth: http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2009/apr/21/study-finds-pirates-buy-more-music

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...