Author Topic: Downloading Music and Rights  (Read 43571 times)

judd stephens

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 505
    • View Profile
Re: Downloading Music and Rights
« Reply #40 on: April 20, 2009, 09:39:41 PM »
Thinking that because something CAN be shared is reason for it being justifiably shared is rubbish. Not even radical socialism would be so stupid as to say that.

Oh yes they can... well, maybe not say it... ;D

ffcal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 874
    • View Profile
Re: Downloading Music and Rights
« Reply #41 on: April 20, 2009, 10:11:23 PM »
I'm wondering now why most artists don't see it that way?   Why not just stream the whole album, or everything but the last minute or 30 sec. of each track?   

I don't think there is a "one size fits all" solution to this issue.  Two labels I have worked with (Projekt and Cuneiform) have made sample tracks available through sampler compilations.  Another label (Foundry) embedded two tracks from my album with Carl Weingarten (Invisibility) in a podcast interview, which I thought was a pretty creative approach.  One problem I have with streaming is that it is too easy to capture the stream digitally using software.  If the stream is hi-fi, it is too easily captured and rendered into MP3.  If the stream is lo-fi, it degrades the listening experience and may not be representative of what the track actually sounds like.  (Try listening to Thomas Koner at 128 kbps!)

Forrest

Brian Bieniowski

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 271
    • View Profile
    • Quiet Sounds Podcast
Re: Downloading Music and Rights
« Reply #42 on: April 21, 2009, 06:05:59 AM »
Over the years I've met a lot of big music fans who only download their music and never pay for any of it.  The trouble, aside from the obvious piracy/copyright issues, is that we've moved into a society where most people really don't care about the effort it takes to produce a memorable product—it's the instant gratification of something new, which is quickly shuffled away to be replaced by the next new thing, and so on.  It's a problem, and one that widespread access to the internet has only exacerbated: absolute access to whatever you want, generally for free.  It will almost certainly get to the point (perhaps we are already there) where people expect quality product (whether it be news, books, music, movies, etc.) for free, and will resent the honest artist who cares to make a little money by selling his or her work. 

I don't know what the solution to this issue is, but I'm pretty sure the creative-commons based viral meritocracy approach I see bandied about now and again by people like Cory Doctorow and the like is not going to be it.  I'm glad when stuff is given away for free by the artist (though I prefer to possess quality reproductions intended to last beyond the limited life of my hard drive), but, as we see with things like the current state of YouTube, I'm not convinced that this Free Art society is necessarily going to get the best work into the hands of the people who are looking for it, and still earn profit for the more marginal artists and creators.

For my own part, I do use the various "music blogs" (better we should call them pirate sites!) to sample music I can't already sample elsewhere, or to possess music that is unavailable/out of print (I'm really tired of limited edition CDr releases).  My feeling is that if the album is something I will listen to more than once or twice, it's worth the $12 or so dollars for a physical copy.  Otherwise, I delete the files from my hard drive.

Brian Bieniowski

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 271
    • View Profile
    • Quiet Sounds Podcast
Re: Downloading Music and Rights
« Reply #43 on: April 21, 2009, 06:19:24 AM »
Another label (Foundry) embedded two tracks from my album with Carl Weingarten (Invisibility) in a podcast interview, which I thought was a pretty creative approach.


I really like the promotional potential of podcasting and homespun mix-sharing (and not just because I do my own).  It's a little bit like what radio used to be like before it went into the pockets of major media corporations.  It's a creative medium, and not a piratical one like blogs with whole albums available for download.  I've found a ton of great electronic music from various podcasts (the Ghostly Int. one is great, and the Foundry one Michael was doing was extremely entertaining, not to mention the efforts of Dave Michuda/Undershadow/Rick Leon, among others), and much of it lead to me buying music I didn't previously know about.  I think it would be great if more labels and music fans created these.

Oh, and on the note of the topic at hand:   ;D

http://www.arcamax.com/nonsequitur/s-531723-422328

jkn

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2731
  • cake or death? cake please.
    • View Profile
    • Relaxed Machinery
Re: Downloading Music and Rights
« Reply #44 on: April 21, 2009, 07:57:23 AM »
A lovely circular argument... have to agree with Bill... we'll never change Immersion's mind so what's the point?

edit:   decided not to say what I said...    I'll leave the rest though.   John K-N

..................................................

Regarding pricing of downloads at the big stores like iTunes, Amazon, eMusic, Rhapsody, etc...  again - we're kind of back to the artists and labels at our level of the music industry - our little tiny niche of awesomely cool music that most people don't buy...  well... we can't really drive those prices.   They're set by the digital provider.   If you want to get your music into those sites to get the additional exposure - that's the price you pay - losing control.   iTunes can choose what to price it, whether to sell tracks individually or make them 'album only' etc...   

At AtmoWorks we've been looking very hard at all these types of sites and how to get into them in the best way that works for us - and we've found it... but yes - ultimately it means we lose some control over the release.   Our ultimate goal with getting our releases into iTunes, etc... is not the additional revenue that will come back - but hopefully reaching some casual fans of ambient and electronic and getting them to come directly to our artists and our store.   It's more about marketing/promotion.

« Last Edit: April 21, 2009, 08:08:59 AM by jkn »
John Koch-Northrup .: jkn [AT] johei.com .: owner / artist .: http://relaxedmachinery.com .: http://twitter.com/jkn .: http://flickr.com/johei

bunkdata

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
Re: Downloading Music and Rights
« Reply #45 on: April 21, 2009, 08:28:36 AM »
I love this topic!  Very current and appropriate for the times!  I agree that music in any medium is REAL and up to the artist to decide if money should be charged for the work.  If they decide this, and someone doesn't pay, then in short, it's stealing plain and simple.  With that said, I found this article online that I thought I would share as it seemed appropriate for this topic.  Flame on!

Study Finds Pirates Buy 10x More Music Online than Non-Pirates
http://i.gizmodo.com/5219587/study-finds-pirates-buy-10x-more-music-online-than-non+pirates

Best,
Nathan

michael sandler

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 179
    • View Profile
Re: Downloading Music and Rights
« Reply #46 on: April 21, 2009, 12:39:49 PM »
Over the years I've met a lot of big music fans who only download their music and never pay for any of it.  The trouble, aside from the obvious piracy/copyright issues, is that we've moved into a society where most people really don't care about the effort it takes to produce a memorable product...

By coincindence, the other day I saw a documentary about the 1970 Festival Express tour. What amazed me was that at each show, gangs of hippies showed up demanding free admission. Never mind the cost of putting on such a shindig or the fact that the musicians and promoters depended on that admission fee to make a living.

Same as it ever was.

MikeS

Stellar Auditorium

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 22
    • View Profile
Re: Downloading Music and Rights
« Reply #47 on: April 21, 2009, 03:36:36 PM »
That's an excellent conversation here, I've been very concerned about this matter lately, as anyone else who has even a small place in the music industry. It's obvious that everyone here is talking from their own perspective, and I don't see, in the responses to Immersion, a wilingness to understand the way of thinking that is the current, especially for the young generations, who are more accustomed to "music piracy" than anyone else. 

I believe art, thought, and intellectual property in general is something which is too much important to be treated like a simple commodity. Obtaining the essence of a work (the actual music of a cd, the text of an e-book) does not constitute theft according to my ethics, and that comes from someone that is a musician and a label owner at the same time (I have financed about 7 releases in total, some mine, some of other people). While all the arguments made in favour of the intellectual property holders are no doubt correct - one should not produce something without receiving back something, again) I believe the cultural benefits attainted by the "liberation" of art and information are way more important. I've been a part of the generation that grew up with music piracy (I'm 25 years old) and I just own a 10% percent of all the music I have ever listened; being totally honest with myself, I have to say that I could never have enough money in my life to attain the same amount of musical knowledge. And I own about 800 cds, Lps, and cassettes altogether... I have also produced a great part of my music with the help of pirated music software (I know talking about these things in a public forum is a taboo, but I feel it's very important for this conversation). I would never have made the music I've made or have the knowledge I have without internet and file sharing. And exactly the same happens with most people in my generation, who I noticed have became people with quite high knowledge, character and artistic thought because of this situation.

It's also very important to be realistic; it's not music piracy that financially kills musicians, it's that people don't buy cds anymore. I would have bought exactly the same amount of music hadn't piracy existed, because the amount of money I spend in music has more or less stayed the same throughout these years, listening to a much wider amount of music has only allowed me to select much more carefully and attain only the pieces or art that are the most important to me, which I want to experience in the best audial and visual quality available. This, need to have a physical representation of something I love, and the knowledge that this system can only continue to function if the music producers receive back financial support, is what drives me to still buy music to this day, and this is exactly what I believe we, as the "music industry", should propagate to the music listeners and the world. Not the stern, conversative approach that considers downloading some music a theft, and will do everything it can in order to punish it, as all corporate labels do at this moment. The problem, of course, is that very few people think in the way that I have described, essentially because the majority's approach to art is much more superficial comparing to people in this forum, for example. The again, this is a bonus for small, specialized labels and genres. In any way, the tide has definitely changed and, independently of everyone's opinion, it doesn't seem to be going back in the immidiate future.

Musicians and labels got to find new ways in order to survive. I have personally given for free all albums of mine (as a musician, I mean) as a download to everyone that asked me; mainly because I believe that art is personal communication and this is what I was seeking at the time; however, I also provided the link to some mp3 blogs, and in result, while my work was practically unknown at that time, I recieved an influx or orders for some cassettes and cd-r I had released then. This proves that, unless the music is actually heard first, it can't be expected to sell, and that more and more people are buying music nowadays in the way that I have described: not as to listen to the music, they have already done so, but in order to attain it in the best quality available, and as a physical object which by "owning" represents their adoration towards it. Of course, it doesn't always work that way: there's a fine line between availability that helps and hurts an album. It's a very complex issue, but just think of the following: some blogs have more hits per day than a medium size ambient/drone/experimental label's website...

Finally, musicians and labels should always try to provide to the public new things that can't be reproduced. It really hurts when I see some cheap jewelcase releases with a 4-page booklet and mediocre layout: why would anyone want to own that? Also, live performances: that seems to be the only certain source of income for musicians at this time: the experience of a performance can never be really reproduced. I'd love to see performances of ambient artists but there are so few, especially of the Hypnos type, not the drone bands that are all over nowadays. And the list should definitely go on...

APK

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2231
    • View Profile
    • DataObscura
Re: Downloading Music and Rights
« Reply #48 on: April 21, 2009, 04:10:25 PM »
This is like starting the thread all over again.

Its a shame, buying an album used to be about the music, but now it's apparently all about the packaging :-\
« Last Edit: April 21, 2009, 04:20:15 PM by APK »
www.dataobscura.com
www.dataobscura.com/apk
The Circular Ruins / Lammergeyer / Nunc Stans

Stellar Auditorium

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 22
    • View Profile
Re: Downloading Music and Rights
« Reply #49 on: April 21, 2009, 05:08:19 PM »
Is it? I don't know, I'm not sure that everything I mentioned has been adressed before.
 
I don't think it can be just "about the packaging", even if file sharing continues to be thrive and be practised. Mp3 files that are available in blogs range around 256 kbps, which is a rather mediocre quality, at least regarding to the audiofile's needs. Also, a new digital format, that would would surpass the 44.1 khz 16 bit quality would be of great use to the industry, to do the same thing that blu-ray does to the dvd (don't forget that cds are falling and vinyl is rising because digital formats never actually surpassed true analog quality). Generally, I feel that physical media's biggest capacity for quality and immidiate access will always give them an edge over downloads, but then again, that only concers people that care about these things in the first place.

9dragons

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 586
  • The Viatorium Press - Dedicated to the Weird
    • View Profile
    • The Viatorium Press - Dedicated to the Weird
Re: Downloading Music and Rights
« Reply #50 on: April 21, 2009, 07:32:29 PM »
This is like starting the thread all over again.

Its a shame, buying an album used to be about the music, but now it's apparently all about the packaging :-\

I'm 36, my earliest intensive music buying time was mainly in the tape era, so I can't say this for sure, but it seems to me that with the first vinyl era, packaging played a huge role in people's enjoyment of music. Look how lavish and awesome, and how much care went into most vinyl album covers, not to mention the added value of the large image space itself. I think the death of the cd could in part be attributed to this downshift in packaging ethics. Really, we are getting much less for the same price these days. And cds certainly don't have the longevity of vinyl either. As a hyper visual and tactile person, the packaging is very important to me when I consider paying the little money I have to spare on an album. So, though I don't do the illegal download thing (I could count on one hand the amount of stuff I've downloaded, and of those albums, if I were to really like them, the real object would be purchased), the only way I can see to really fight it is to include something with your product that cannot be as easily reproduced as the musical data.

I'm just looking at the hard facts, and how small labels could perhaps overcome them.

I also see, that along with the vinyl renaissance, tapes are coming back! This is great for me, brings back some magic. How long has it been since our music had miniature screws holding its body together? Tapes used to pack a killer amount of art in such a small package. I particularly remember the multiple foldouts of those Derek Riggs cassette covers for Iron Maiden! That stuff was great. It shows me even more how depressing cd packaging has become in general. Again though, I am not saying this justifies downloading, from my personal perspective. But it may be what is driving some to take part in it.
« Last Edit: April 21, 2009, 07:34:59 PM by 9dragons »

ffcal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 874
    • View Profile
Re: Downloading Music and Rights
« Reply #51 on: April 21, 2009, 09:31:27 PM »
I, too, have a fondness for vinyl and cassette, though I have to admit it's much more pleasant experience listening to Klaus Schulze and Eno on CD, as opposed to vinyl.  No more snaps, crackles and pops.

I think the decline of the CD has more to do with the fact that you can't really compete with "free."

Forrest

Paul Vnuk (Ma Ja Le)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 360
    • View Profile
    • Paul's Myspace
Re: Downloading Music and Rights
« Reply #52 on: April 21, 2009, 10:10:27 PM »
I really think Mike nailed it when he was talking about the false "noble" perception of this whole art & music being a right thing...

I am so sick of the whole "entitlement generation" with its, I deserve attitude.

All the arguments are just...justifications.

Almost every artist in history wanted to get paid and their end game goal was to SELL their work, (yes I am sure you can all state one or two who you think didn't). If not sell it then they looked for patrons to support them, even early jazz musicians did this.

Everyone needs money to survive and keep doing what they do.

So then on most forums (not this one so much as many ambient/space folks don't play live) everyone says, give the music away and then make your money by touring and merchandise. Ahhh ok, but then these same people bitch about ticket prices and the bands being greedy.

The bottom line is give me my music, make it great and give it to me cheap or free. You are trying to dictate the market based on your own values, not that value of the music or performance.

...now on to Mr. Immersion (I am proud you held your tongue John, but I cannot) you come off as self righteous and authoritarian in so many of your posts, and yet to many of us you have no clue.

You clearly want the world your way. According to you: Musicians do not deserve to get paid, we should all use cheap low end gear as that is all that today's music requires, anyone who uses a Mac is a rich, elitist idiot, we should never use compression to master and you want the secrets of creating depth of field floating...which for me raps up your clueless and arrogant package in a neat little bow. Did I miss anything?

You love to praise Steve Roach and how his music is the best there is and then you proceed to steal from him as you are not patient for the mail to arrive? (I am only borrowing this car for tonight officer, I have one on the way tomorrow). The ridiculous part is, why don't you e-mail Steve, tell him how much you love his music and then demand he give all of it to you for free as he does not deserve to make a living at it or recoup the cost of his studio gear, as you feel he should probably just use cheap software anyway...how dare he have a real synth and hi-end gear...oh wait aren't you saving up for an Eventide H-8000FW so you can have your floaty black hole reverb?

Sorry man, your arguments do not hold water or value. You just want what you feel you deserve. You need to think of an economic model in your new world order which offers, food, gear and housing to artists and musicians. Most artists and musicians I know do a better job with better tools and more importantly the free time to create it and living on ramin noodles and working a crappy 50 hr a week job may be great for a few years, no artist will sustain them selves forever in that model...but it sounds truly like you do not care.

You and your generation are not Robin Hood stealing food and money from the rich overlords to give to the poor, you are stealing works that someone else put money, blood, sweat, emotion and time into and that is something my friend that you and the world do not deserve as a right! If an artists choose to give away their craft, it is their right to do so, not the other way around.

...Mike and moderators, if this is out of line and too personal, feel free to delete it. I have vented and I will retreat again into the shadows...

Paul

"I liken good ambient to good poetry ... enjoyable, often powerful, and usually unpopular" APK

Ekstasis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 902
    • View Profile
Re: Downloading Music and Rights
« Reply #53 on: April 21, 2009, 11:16:52 PM »
How much your work is worth is up to the consumer to decide, so it is very relative, . It is not up to an label to decide a "price". 


This is incredibly naive.  The music is made by the artist, but the consumer is the only one who has control of it?

I agree that the consumer has the right to decide to buy or not buy music at a given price.  The idea that the person who made the music has no say in the matter is ridiculous.  It's just something you tell yourself so you'll feel better ignoring the rights of creative people whom you claim to respect.

Do you seriously believe that listeners will voluntarily send "donations" for music they've obtained illicitly?  This happens very, very rarely.  I know that Hypnos has never once received one of these "I downloaded your album via bittorrent and enjoyed it so much I wanted to send along the $6 I feel the recording is worth" donations.

I do believe that sometimes, a person downloads an album and really likes it enough to purchase the CD legitimately.  But far, far more often, human nature takes over and they think, "well, I already have the recording, so why should I go pay for it?"


Alright, I will try to respond to all attacks one by one. I have had insomnia the past two days...so have had no energy or will to respond...

Considering all personal attacks etc it is quite clear the middle age is quite high on this forum, somewhat to my surprise...I have never been called a "Thief" of a person in my own generation, so we are without doubt getting towards and generation shift.

And as I said, a very few people make money on their music especially in these times, however, it is now cheaper then ever to create your own music, since the digital studio almost everyone can afford and home studio. People like me can't afford nothing, no cds at all almost, and no software. So in my case I would not be able to record any music at all if it wasn't for piracy.

And when we are talking about pirate copies and financial losses, it is very important to clearly we are talking about an POTENTIAL loss, first of all, do you have the money to buy it in the first place ?  and is it even worth spending money on ?

We shall compare the good and bad sides and find the balance... What I am interested is the common good, and find the right balance...
The only thing that is talking against that the music and the whole information society would flow free, is the economic aspect.
To build such society we need to get out of this capitalistic market economy system.

I have tried to explain to you that to live and survive on making independent music is very hard and for 99,9% only a dream.  Steve Roach is one of the very few people who create ambient music who sell so many cds albums and can survive on his music.

And if you are going to survive on your music you must have your own label like Steve Roach. You should know when you buy a CD, most of the money goes to the label, this "industry" and middle hand is something we can live without in the future, instead this small fraction of the profit should go directly to the artist in some way or another. I have not interest to support labels in the future, we need to get rid of this middle hand, since the money gets in the wrong pocket, the artist is the one who should get the most part of the profit. The norm that the artist earn on one cd is about 7-10% the rest the label takes. Most artist do never sell more then 1000 copies, can you explain to me, how an artist should survive on this income ? I do not get the equation to work... So even though you all talk so much about buying cds legally, it is still not a solution to the problem. Only the state and politics have the power to come with any kind of solution that would help musicians to survive on music.

In Sweden where I live, there is no problem to be a musician full time, since I live in an social democratic country, this basically does mean, you do not need to work if you do not want, at least if this group is a minority otherwise the whole system would of course collapse, We have about 15% unemployment in Sweden, but that is already changing ,since the young generation do not want to work at all, they all want to live in freedom.

And this argument and logic that and artist must make money on the music is just bullshit, if that was the case no independent music would exist.

Yes I am a dreamer, I guess I live ahead of my time, my philosophy is based on an utopia. The whole economy aspect is a quite complex and long discussion in itself, to survive on creating music in this capitalistic market economy will not be easy in the future that is for sure. But politicians could make it easier for musicians if they wanted, in Sweden where I live we did have an musician grant before in the 70s during the hippie era, the whole political climate is radically more different now... in theory it could work, but in an cynical capitalistic society it does not work since people of course would abuse it.

I would rather see something like PROUT http://www.prout.net/ in the future, http://www.thevenusproject.com/ have a lot of interesting ideas as well










Ekstasis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 902
    • View Profile
Re: Downloading Music and Rights
« Reply #54 on: April 21, 2009, 11:25:35 PM »
Immersion - It sounds like you believe that Mr Roach should have a day job too
and make music in his spare time - and that, therefore, works like "Mystic Chords"
should not exist.

I do not think so no. I am aware that too have a day job, and live an artistic life does not always work.
To be musician is a lifestyle... However, as I said, unless you have talent like Roach and do not own your own label, these is no
way you can survive on cd sells, that is the reality. Some pocket money from cd sells will not help. If you have your own label and release many cds
and you sell a lot, you might be able to survive...However, this will only work for a very few privileged artists... the common independent artist can never survive on cd sells... unless we close down internet of course, but then we still have the problem that the labels get the most part of the money....

As I said, earlier I think the state and politics is the solution....in my country the state takes responsibility...

Ekstasis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 902
    • View Profile
Re: Downloading Music and Rights
« Reply #55 on: April 21, 2009, 11:27:56 PM »
Sorry to say that, but Immersion is full of shit. His whole arguing is so incredibly naive and stupid
that it almost hurts. But in the end its bullshit to even argue with him. I stopped arguing on the
internet, since the last time it was a monkey who was in front of the other pc.

Just one last question. Did Immersion ever released his own Cd? If not, then he is certainly
disqualified to discuss this thing here. Plain and simple.

Well I think the same about you...but this is human nature..and conflicting opinions is only natural...I will waste no time and energy to convince you about anything...

judd stephens

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 505
    • View Profile
Re: Downloading Music and Rights
« Reply #56 on: April 21, 2009, 11:30:21 PM »
I've long been on the side that downloading music without the artist receiving money was unfair, or theft, bad karma, whatever the name shall be.  This thread makes me think about it deeper though.  Admittedly I don't know if I've formed this thought completely, but to what extent should the musician, or the law, decide that people can share? 

Seems like the main arguments against downloading are the artist loses money and the offense of feeling someone has stolen one's art and work.  Music has been compared to a commodity, an experience that one pays for.  Well, if I pay for that "experience", what exactly is mine, as the consumer?  And who are you to tell me who I can share that "experience" with?  I know that's a tough question to ask, trust me, but it begs the question, to what extent? 

If I share a dinner party with 10 guests while ambient music is playing, have those guests stolen something from a musician because they listened and enjoyed an experience without paying for it?  If no, why not?  Find that ridiculous, well what if I burned a few discs for some of them as a gift?  Let's say myself and a forum member have an e-mail discussion where we trade some music, as in burn it for each other.  Have we stolen something? 

Is there something deep down that judges "well sharing music is okay, as long as it doesn't affect my sales in a big way"?  Why would anonymity and ease of file sharing make that more immoral than trading tapes with friends back in the 80's?  If somehow the internet was regulated so that file-sharing was completely erradicated, wouldn't many people mail each other cd-r's and exchange that way?  Would that be less frowned upon, because it wouldn't be as prevalent and affect the artists bottom line as much?

People are saying "stealing is stealing" like that's an actual argument, and I do understand the feeling.  But if music is a commodity and experience, well they can be traded and shared.  If music is a product like so man are arguing, and I guess that's a fair argument, then tell me exactly what I own by purchasing "it".

Ekstasis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 902
    • View Profile
Re: Downloading Music and Rights
« Reply #57 on: April 21, 2009, 11:46:55 PM »
Immersions comment that listeners/consumers have rights but artists do not is the basic assumption that throws everything out. Despite the possibility of language misunderstandings and the difference between 'younger' and 'older' generations I add my twopenny worth.

No One has any rights, rights are just agreements between 'civilised' people and when societies are basic and violent the concept does not exist. A right has no physical reality, Christ! it's only a few years ago that we would have all been sweeping chimneys or down mines at 7 years old - no time for rights then (I only mention this as evidence of statement, not wishing we were 'back' then or anything).....and within Immersions arguments anything that has no physical reality can be ignored. The 'right' to have music for free can be taken away as easily as the 'right' to life - just by being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Music may not hold any value because the internet, big companies or listeners devalue it, but just because the flow of information makes it so easy does not make it right. If someone managed to organise the flow of our belongings out of our homes that would not make that right either.

my disagreement is simple. I don't think things (music or otherwise) should be taken for free - if someone chooses to give something for free that is different...

I advocate copyright, in the sense that if a person have done something he or she should be associated with the work and no on else, I see this is an fundamental right and important. This protection is important since it gives you the right to own the rights to your work. However these rules are not universal, within certain cultures hip hop and electronic music sampling and copying from others is wildly acceptable.  No other person should be able to make "profit"  on your work and print cds this is rights I agree with.

However when we speak about file sharing we are not talking about profit, we are talking "potential" financial loss.... There is no guarantee even though you downloaded something that you will actually buy it. If the artist could decide I think he still would prefer as many people would listen to the music, if they would not buy the music anyway.



Ekstasis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 902
    • View Profile
Re: Downloading Music and Rights
« Reply #58 on: April 22, 2009, 12:05:12 AM »

...now on to Mr. Immersion (I am proud you held your tongue John, but I cannot) you come off as self righteous and authoritarian in so many of your posts, and yet to many of us you have no clue.

I think the same about you.

You clearly want the world your way. According to you: Musicians do not deserve to get paid, we should all use cheap low end gear as that is all that today's music requires, anyone who uses a Mac is a rich, elitist idiot, we should never use compression to master and you want the secrets of creating depth of field floating...which for me raps up your clueless and arrogant package in a neat little bow. Did I miss anything?

And you clearly want the world your way ????

You love to praise Steve Roach and how his music is the best there is and then you proceed to steal from him as you are not patient for the mail to arrive? (I am only borrowing this car for tonight officer, I have one on the way tomorrow). The ridiculous part is, why don't you e-mail Steve, tell him how much you love his music and then demand he give all of it to you for free as he does not deserve to make a living at it or recoup the cost of his studio gear, as you feel he should probably just use cheap software anyway...how dare he have a real synth and hi-end gear...oh wait aren't you saving up for an Eventide H-8000FW so you can have your floaty black hole reverb?

Sorry man, your arguments do not hold water or value. You just want what you feel you deserve. You need to think of an economic model in your new world order which offers, food, gear and housing to artists and musicians. Most artists and musicians I know do a better job with better tools and more importantly the free time to create it and living on ramin noodles and working a crappy 50 hr a week job may be great for a few years, no artist will sustain them selves forever in that model...but it sounds truly like you do not care.

You and your generation are not Robin Hood stealing food and money from the rich overlords to give to the poor, you are stealing works that someone else put money, blood, sweat, emotion and time into and that is something my friend that you and the world do not deserve as a right! If an artists choose to give away their craft, it is their right to do so, not the other way around.

...Mike and moderators, if this is out of line and too personal, feel free to delete it. I have vented and I will retreat again into the shadows...

Paul



Ah damn, *snore*... you did sink to a quite low level now... obviously you did take everything personally, to be honest I think it is quite silly and naive of you.
You only make yourself look foolish.

Obviously some one is not allowed to have different opionions then yourself.

Read my replies above if you want know more....

As I said earlier, there is no easy solutions on the problem, and cd sells which you think is the solution is not the solution, besides for a very very few group of artist like Steve Roach. However what I care about is not only popular artists, I care about the small independent artists as well.  As I have said earlier, we need a totally different political climate in future, this is what I strive for and what my discussion is based upon.  I am not the reactionary, I see past the now and towards the future, that is what we all must do if things are going to change and if we ever are going to live in a better world.




judd stephens

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 505
    • View Profile
Re: Downloading Music and Rights
« Reply #59 on: April 22, 2009, 12:12:10 AM »
I'm wondering how many people who say "taking something from me that I did not freely give to you is stealing" also disapprove of the income tax?   ;D 


Oh wait that's right... that tax money just goes back to help the poor people of society... right.