Lending someone something you own isn't illegal.

 

That is the point.

 

Oh, okay.

 

I totally missed that point. I was like, "WHAT!?"

I for one absolutely love pirated movies, music, and games because I don't have to pay for it. I would never weigh in on the morality of stolen media either mainly because I don't care.

A man who makes no apologies. I like that.

Over the past 20 years or so, I have taped concert shows like King Biscuit and Westwood One Superstars..for my own use. Yes, i do listen in my car, and I have copied a few for friends of mine. What will thet get me? LI?

 

You've heard about this f-ed up law they just passed in Australia? You CAN record a program off the air, but it can only be viewed once..you must destroy the copy afterwards. Let' say you tape a show and you watch it later. That's legal. If somebody else watches the tape later...that is illegal.

 

Now tell me this...how the HELL are they going to enforce that????

No way would I steal movies. You guys fail to realize there's a lot more to the movie than the headlining actor/actress, a big-name director, and a big production studio. There's a bunch of people doing work for $10 an hour to make a living that get the biggest screw-job thanks to the piracy of movies. I'm not gonna put someone out of a job because I don't want to spend $15 on a DVD. Also, pirating DVDs forces production companies to put out crappy movies that will be moneymakers because they lose financial flexibility to make great movies that might not be huge successes because of piracy by individuals over the entire film industry.

 

People that steal movies are selfish and very short-sighted.

I personally download alot of ISO's and IMG files and burn them to DVDs. But all of these are movies I would never buy on my own (Underworld 2, London, Aeon Flux, Find Me Guilty), so they are losing nothing because of me downloading the full DVD of something I wouldn't even rent.

 

I don't download just the movie file because:

 

A) It's not appealling for me to sit at the computer for 2 hours to watch a movie.

B) Quality isn't fantastic, and I'm a stickler on that.

C) I don't download cam files or things like that.

 

I never feel for the movie industry because I probably support it more/as much as anyone I know. I see a ton of movies in theatres. I also buy a ton of DVDs (well over 100 now).

 

Music I feel the same way. I download alot of illegal stuff, but if I didn't download or the technology didn't exist, I wouldn't be buying that music.

 

I download because I can, not because I don't want to pay the money and I wouldn't pay money for 80-90% of what I download.

 

Illegal downloading has probably helped alot of artists. Bands I would usually never go out and buy I actually may if I really like stuff of theirs I have downloaded or if I wanted some new or older stuff of theirs.

 

The music and movie industry has lost $0.00 because of my downloading.

 

 

 

 

Do you purchase any music whether it be via digital download or actual CDs?

Yes. I probably buy more now then any other point of my life, partly because of downloading.

I have never downloaded a movie, the bootleg ones where a guy brings a crappy video camera to a movie threatre are mindnumbing to sit through and you get a headache from watching them, and the real DVD quality movies are several gigs in size and just way to big to download on a measly DSL connection, so it's just not worth it. And with places like deepdiscountdvd.com where you can buy DVD's for like $5 bucks, i'd rather just buy the DVD and add it to my collection than download an AVI file or something.

 

I have been a a huge WRC fan (World Rally Championship) for probably 12 years now, I would get up at 5am to watch rally's live from Sweden and other places. Well this past season the Speed Channel opted NOT to renew their contract with the FIA for the American WRC TV rights and nobody else picked it up, therefore the entire 2006 WRC season is not on TV in America at all. I am not going to stop watching and following my favorite sport because some corporate big wigs didn't want to renew a TV contract, so I download the european coverage of every WRC event from torrent websites and I delete the files after I finish watching, I see absolutely nothing wrong with this. The most interesting part is having to sit through the british TV commercials, some of them are hilarious :thumbup .

 

As far as music goes, I don't even really download any music by modern artists, I mostly like classical.... I doubt downloading the 1812 Overture is taking money out of Tchaikovsky's pockets :lol .

I personally download alot of ISO's and IMG files and burn them to DVDs. But all of these are movies I would never buy on my own (Underworld 2, London, Aeon Flux, Find Me Guilty), so they are losing nothing because of me downloading the full DVD of something I wouldn't even rent.

 

I don't download just the movie file because:

 

A) It's not appealling for me to sit at the computer for 2 hours to watch a movie.

B) Quality isn't fantastic, and I'm a stickler on that.

C) I don't download cam files or things like that.

 

I never feel for the movie industry because I probably support it more/as much as anyone I know. I see a ton of movies in theatres. I also buy a ton of DVDs (well over 100 now).

 

Music I feel the same way. I download alot of illegal stuff, but if I didn't download or the technology didn't exist, I wouldn't be buying that music.

 

I download because I can, not because I don't want to pay the money and I wouldn't pay money for 80-90% of what I download.

 

Illegal downloading has probably helped alot of artists. Bands I would usually never go out and buy I actually may if I really like stuff of theirs I have downloaded or if I wanted some new or older stuff of theirs.

 

The music and movie industry has lost $0.00 because of my downloading.

 

 

 

 

Do you purchase any music whether it be via digital download or actual CDs?

Yes. I probably buy more now then any other point of my life, partly because of downloading.

 

 

Well in your case then the new system is working but I think you are in the minority.

 

I think its safe to assume that many people are downloading a lot of music while actually paying for very little.

 

Eventually both music and the listening public will be the ones that suffer. It will become so impossible to make a living being a recording artist that fewer and fewer young people will want to go down that road. And consquently the product will become so horrific that no one will want to spend the time to download all the crap out there let alone purchase it.

 

File sharing is theft no matter how you buff and polish it.

Hollywood needs to get some new writers to make movies that people will actually want to see. The public may finally be getting tired of the crap they put out 90% of the year. It's getting to the point where there will only be 10 good movies per year at the most.

 

They are also spending WAY too much on movies that fail miserably at the box office. Case in point: Poseidon. That movie cost at least $130 million to make, and has made about $35-40 million at the box office so far. How can you make back that much money?

I think I got something to add...

 

What about video games?

 

I know you can download nintendo, sega, genesis, SNES, etc, etc. to your hearts content as long as you own the cartridges. But what about when the system is so obsolete you can't find those cartridges? Or, better yet, it's an arcade game that you can't just go out and find?

 

I have no qualms about downloading and enjoying those games. And, since the Wii is the first system to actually have a lot of back-up support as far as downloading and buying games, I don't consider it stealing. Because there's few to little (in the case of the arcade games: almost none) resources to get these games otherwise.

 

Quick aside: you guys work in the film industry or DVD production or something? I've never heard people that are so adamant on this subject; I'll be honest, for the most part, I could care less. But, I have some minor questions/quibbles.

 

 

 

 

yes i guess my posts are biased. i work in music production. while i make money doing it, it pales in comparison to what the biggest acts in the world make. people have to understand that VERY few recording artists make boatloads of money. For every U2, Colplay and John Mayer there are 10,000 recording artists who are struggling to make a buck.

Eventually both music and the listening public will be the ones that suffer. It will become so impossible to make a living being a recording artist that fewer and fewer young people will want to go down that road. And consquently the product will become so horrific that no one will want to spend the time to download all the crap out there let alone purchase it.

 

File sharing is theft no matter how you buff and polish it.

See, but that's the opposite of what has happened. Since 1999-2000 when song sharing became big on the internet, music has changed for the better. A lot of bands that would not have otherwise been discovered have emerged as big acts. Rock music specifically and its many genres has adapted to suit the online culture in the sense that many acts are now discovered through word of mouth online. The quality of music has gone up, not so strangely, since Napster and co. rocked the free world. While the RIAA continues to be clueless, the bands themselves have realized their fans are going to do it regardless so they might as well adapt. And they have.

 

What's come since the rise of the internet music market has seen music's role change drastically. Napster is pretty directly responsible for the iPod's rise to dominance in the world. The CDs that have been coming recently from old and new rock bands alike have been great quality, something not really seen on a huge level since the mid-90s. A big reason for that I believe is the need to create more complete albums to satisfy the fact that songs are downloaded online. If you make a great album, people will want to give you money because you deserve. I can point you already to two people just in the small group speaking in this thread who support online file sharing and think that way. And it's a rising trend. Another reason better music is coming out is the aforementioned reason that acts are being discovered by people other than the music industry now, so bands that people actually like are hitting the forefront. Hell, the entire emo genre is basically internet based.

 

So, in summary, you're wrong.

Does anyone know if since the onset of napster, have album sales gone down? B/c if they havent significantly it isnt that big a deal. Online downloads are not theft, b/c as someone said u are sharing somehting someone bought.

Does anyone know if since the onset of napster, have album sales gone down? B/c if they havent significantly it isnt that big a deal. Online downloads are not theft, b/c as someone said u are sharing somehting someone bought.

 

 

Actually sales of Metallica have gone down...you can thank Lar$ for causing it...

Does anyone know if since the onset of napster, have album sales gone down? B/c if they havent significantly it isnt that big a deal. Online downloads are not theft, b/c as someone said u are sharing somehting someone bought.

 

 

 

 

Album sales have gone down like the Titanic.

 

Digital sales are starting to creep up but not nearly enough to offset the decrease in CD sales.

 

Also, digital sales are typically singles only and not albums.

 

 

 

In reference to online downloads not being theft...........so what your saying is that just because some kid in California purchases a digital download, its OK for him to "share" it with 5,000 other people?

 

:lol

 

 

 

Juanky, each member in a 4-piece band receives approximately 4.5% of the entire pie in terms of profits. So, if CD sales are the lowest they have been in decades and digital sales are no where near offsetting the losses, whose pockets are getting vacuumed?

 

Yes, major labels are losing money and none of us here are going to lose a tremendous amount of sleep over this but the artists are losing $ as well and that is whats called good ol bulls*** folks.

 

Someone please explain to me how it is somehow just that recording artists are losing hard earned dollars due to file sharing??

 

A question to all those in favor of file sharing: WHEN YOU GO TO WORK DO YOU EXPECT TO GET PAID?

Hollywood needs to get some new writers to make movies that people will actually want to see. The public may finally be getting tired of the crap they put out 90% of the year. It's getting to the point where there will only be 10 good movies per year at the most.

 

They are also spending WAY too much on movies that fail miserably at the box office. Case in point: Poseidon. That movie cost at least $130 million to make, and has made about $35-40 million at the box office so far. How can you make back that much money?

 

They didn't know prior to the movie coming out that it would be a flop, however:

 

-TV rights

-international box office

-international TV rights

-DVD sales

-corporate tie-ins

Does anyone know if since the onset of napster, have album sales gone down? B/c if they havent significantly it isnt that big a deal. Online downloads are not theft, b/c as someone said u are sharing somehting someone bought.

 

 

In reference to online downloads not being theft...........so what your saying is that just because some guy in California purchases a digital download, its OK for him to "share" it with 5,000 other people?

 

:lol

 

I know. It's just ridiculous. You're "sharing" with people you don't even know. Very generous world we live in.

Hold on a sec....some people have said that because of file sharing if they dowload some songs that they really like then they will go buy the CD....i could see this happening with DVD's because of the quality but songs generally have good quality and hence why would anyone buy the CD when they have the good quality songs for free....i dont see the logic behind that???

You want to support something you like, at least I do. Plus a 128-192kbps bit rate on a track is just 'Ok' to me anymore. I like a higher rip of my music.

 

Like I said before, I don't think anyone is losing money if you get something you had no intention of buying in the first place.

Hold on a sec....some people have said that because of file sharing if they dowload some songs that they really like then they will go buy the CD....i could see this happening with DVD's because of the quality but songs generally have good quality and hence why would anyone buy the CD when they have the good quality songs for free....i dont see the logic behind that???

 

 

 

 

:thumbup

 

 

 

Does anyone know if since the onset of napster, have album sales gone down? B/c if they havent significantly it isnt that big a deal. Online downloads are not theft, b/c as someone said u are sharing somehting someone bought.

 

 

In reference to online downloads not being theft...........so what your saying is that just because some guy in California purchases a digital download, its OK for him to "share" it with 5,000 other people?

 

:lol

 

I know. It's just ridiculous. You're "sharing" with people you don't even know. Very generous world we live in.

 

 

:thumbup

 

 

Hey guys I just bought a Hummer H2 and Id like to "share" it with all of you.

 

Ill make it available so ALL of you can use it FOREVER for FREE.

Hold on a sec....some people have said that because of file sharing if they dowload some songs that they really like then they will go buy the CD....i could see this happening with DVD's because of the quality but songs generally have good quality and hence why would anyone buy the CD when they have the good quality songs for free....i dont see the logic behind that???

 

 

If I like the artist I will.

 

I bought Iggy Pop's last two albums from some online listening nonsense. But, I don't really download music that much.

 

Movie's, however, I will definitely buy and support, just for special features and packaging (sad, but true).

 

But, you know what's really sad? This is the first GOOD discussion we've had in awhile where no one's had to resort to calling someone a liberal and all the other that goes along with messageboard trash talk in the current events forum.

It's theft in technicality only. If you wanted to you could go on amazon.com and listen to a piece of every song from a CD. How is that ok but listening to the entire song of choice theft?

 

 

 

Juanky the person that owns the rights to the song should be the one who decides if you get to listen to the whole song for free.

 

Its all about the ownership. If you owned a 4000 square foot home on the ocean in Malibu shouldnt you be able to decide who gets to go inside?

 

Lending someone something you own isn't illegal.

 

 

 

Lending? I wouldnt go there.

 

Its GIVING not lending. File sharing is giving (permanently giving) not lending.

Hold on a sec....some people have said that because of file sharing if they dowload some songs that they really like then they will go buy the CD....i could see this happening with DVD's because of the quality but songs generally have good quality and hence why would anyone buy the CD when they have the good quality songs for free....i dont see the logic behind that???

I have 100+ CDs, of which only three I do not own directly because of music downloading. I had only bought one CD in my life before Napster came around.

No way would I steal movies. You guys fail to realize there's a lot more to the movie than the headlining actor/actress, a big-name director, and a big production studio. There's a bunch of people doing work for $10 an hour to make a living that get the biggest screw-job thanks to the piracy of movies. I'm not gonna put someone out of a job because I don't want to spend $15 on a DVD. Also, pirating DVDs forces production companies to put out crappy movies that will be moneymakers because they lose financial flexibility to make great movies that might not be huge successes because of piracy by individuals over the entire film industry.

 

People that steal movies are selfish and very short-sighted.

 

 

 

:notworthy

 

Someone who sees the BIG picture.

Hold on a sec....some people have said that because of file sharing if they dowload some songs that they really like then they will go buy the CD....i could see this happening with DVD's because of the quality but songs generally have good quality and hence why would anyone buy the CD when they have the good quality songs for free....i dont see the logic behind that???

 

 

 

 

:thumbup

 

 

 

Does anyone know if since the onset of napster, have album sales gone down? B/c if they havent significantly it isnt that big a deal. Online downloads are not theft, b/c as someone said u are sharing somehting someone bought.

 

 

In reference to online downloads not being theft...........so what your saying is that just because some guy in California purchases a digital download, its OK for him to "share" it with 5,000 other people?

 

:lol

 

I know. It's just ridiculous. You're "sharing" with people you don't even know. Very generous world we live in.

 

 

:thumbup

 

 

Hey guys I just bought a Hummer H2 and Id like to "share" it with all of you.

 

Ill make it available so ALL of you can use it FOREVER for FREE.

 

 

If I buy a monet or a klimt and display it somewhere that the whole world can see, how is that not sharing with 5000 people i dont know?

Hollywood can not get away with saying that "movies suck now because of piracy." That's not a good enough excuse, as a lot more people are pirating music than films, which are much larger files. Movie piracy has been overblown in the industry, it's not damaging DVD or box office sales.