Anya
Extreme Fanatic   Posts: 656 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 20/7/2003 at 09:25 PM |
http://www.msnbc.com/news/938385.asp
Yay...watch out you "evil music stealers on the net." *sarcasm*
[Edited on 7/21/2003 by Anya]
|
| |
| |
Ironboots
Extreme Fanatic  Posts: 893 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 21/7/2003 at 01:28 PM |
*shrugs*
*continues downloading music on his friend's computer*
 ____________________
Piggy's got the Conch!
|
| |
Anya
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 656 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 21/7/2003 at 02:31 PM |
Rofl. That's harsh. 
Whether it's a hoax or not, I'm not taking any risks. Rather be accused of
paranoia than getting arrested.
Oh yeah...here's a link that supposedly explains how they're going to crack
down on this stuff:
http://www.riaa.com/news/newsletter/062503_b.asp
[Edited on 7/21/2003 by Anya]
|
| |
AloneSoul
Fanatic   Posts: 522 Registered: 6/7/2002 Status: Offline
|
posted on 21/7/2003 at 06:54 PM |
*bursts fourth from a glass coffin*
Grrr!
Must...
Crush...
Capitalism! ____________________
 but at least you know, just how much pain there is in living
|
| |
Anya
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 656 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 21/7/2003 at 08:10 PM |
I understand some of the music artists being upset at the mp3 incident, but
I also think there is MUCH more to the cause of the music industry's money
rates dropping than just mp3's.
|
| |
Monolycus
Fanatic  Posts: 580 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 21/7/2003 at 11:07 PM |
Capitalism is antithetical to artistic expression. When profit becomes
more important than content, you are just pandering. See: Lowest Common
Denominator.
|
| |
Anya
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 656 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 22/7/2003 at 06:42 AM |
Oooooo, Mono responded! *gives him lotsa hugs and cookies*
Where ya been?
|
| |
Anya
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 656 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 22/7/2003 at 07:11 AM |
I actually like some of Madonna's music...only one song by Aguilera.
Otherwise, not really been into their stuff. But as I said, I think there
was likely more to the cause of the percentage drop than just mp3's. If I
was patient enough, I could probably make an album with enough browsing.
|
| |
Xaoswolf
Fanatic  Posts: 463 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 22/7/2003 at 09:42 AM |
Mono, it really doesn't have anything to do with artistic expression. If
someone wanted to, they could still paint or sing, they just wouldn't get
money unless people liked them.
*begin jackassery*
Look at me, I want music but I don't want to pay for it so I'm going to
download it for free. Then when the company starts going after the people
downloading their product for free, I'm going to whine about it.
Boo hoo.
*end jackassery* ____________________
Sometimes I dream about dinosaurs shopping for cargo shorts at the Gap.
Does that make me a bad person?
|
| |
Ironboots
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 893 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 22/7/2003 at 09:59 AM |
*begin jackassery*
Boo hoo... I'm a poor record executive whose 6 figure (at least) income is
getting cut into by those meanie mp3 pirates! At this rate, I won't be able
to afford my solid-gold rolls royce! Woe is me!
*end jackassery*
And capitalism -does- have a lot to do with artistic expression. If you can
make a buck by calling something 'art', then you're gonna do it. And you'll
get a large corporation behind you to launch an advertising and marketing
blitz to sell your "art". (and by "art" I mean tits and ass, in the case of
the latest pop stars).
If, however, you didn't have to sell yourself short in order to make money,
you could create whatever you damn well want. You don't have to please the
shareholders. Its your idea and it'll float by itself.
____________________
Piggy's got the Conch!
|
| |
Monolycus
Fanatic Posts: 580 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 23/7/2003 at 01:53 AM |
Anya: Had my hands full dealing with damned reality. Thanks for the
cookies, though.
Xaos: I disagree.
Boots: Agreed. Don't know why everyone thinks motive has nothing to do
with output. They think it's equally likely that someone who is working
for the defense department is going to invent the same thing that someone
working for their local plumber will invent. Form follows function, and if
an "artist" wants to sell a lot of product, the end product will reflect
that. There is probabaly a more succinct way for me to say it, but my head
really hurts right now.
|
| |
Ironboots
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 893 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 23/7/2003 at 08:39 AM |
| Yep, damn reality... Good thing I only have to deal with it for 24 hours a
day... ____________________
Piggy's got the Conch!
|
| |
Xaoswolf
Fanatic Posts: 463 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 23/7/2003 at 10:49 AM |
I always love to hear the good old "they have more money than me so it's ok
if I steal from them" argument.
Hey, I make tomes more money than the average homeless guy, so I guess it
would be fine for them to mug me right? ____________________
Sometimes I dream about dinosaurs shopping for cargo shorts at the Gap.
Does that make me a bad person?
|
| |
Anya
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 656 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 23/7/2003 at 01:54 PM |
Nah, not really. I'm not 100% for the Communism philosophy. I actually do
not mind there being rich people...assuming they work for it.
A lot of the mp3's I have are more of what I would call "exotic" music. I
eventually try to get the albums, but they're more difficult to get for
they're not what I would call mainstream...not in this area, anyway.
|
| |
Ironboots
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 893 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 23/7/2003 at 06:11 PM |
Well, you see, Xaoswolf, there are people that have money, and those that
do not...
...
And then there are those that have gratuitous amounts of money.
"If money's such a problem, well they got mansions, think we should rob
them"
-Good Charlotte (I have not downloaded this song illegally... yet...)
Be realistic... does a rich person NEED all those cars, houses, toys, and
miscellaneous bling bling? I don't think so. Which is why I question why
they have to sell cds at such a marked-up rate, then claim that we're
cutting into the artist's livelihood.
SOMEBODY is getting more of the fat than they should be, and that's why
prices are so high. For a starting artist, more of the fat goes to the
record executive, while a seasoned artist who knows better claims more of
the fat (hence the rockstar mansions). So its one of the two...
And I'm not gonna give up eating my 20 99-cent tacos (that's 10 small meals
for me!) at jack in the box just so I can buy a cd with one song and a
bunch of filler and support a record exec who spends 80 bucks a night on
dinner or a rock star druggie who bought a $100 lump of crack. ____________________
Piggy's got the Conch!
|
| |
Nicholas
Member   Posts: 74 Registered: 17/3/2003 Status: Offline
|
posted on 24/7/2003 at 05:41 AM |
I think file sharing has made artists more money in some cases. If I hear
something that I really like, I get the song of the net, and then if it was
good enough, I'll download about 3 other random songs of that album... if
they're all good I buy the bloody CD. At present I've probably spent $200
on music between Cradle of Filth and Tool, and then there's like another
$250 on all my other CD's (and I have a burner, so it's not an issue of not
being able to burn music).
If I only like one or two songs by a band, I'm not going to waste my
money by buying their CD, especially since when I tend to like one song
I'll get sick of it eventually. File sharing is more or less a way to spare
myself the grief of buying a CD I don't like, which I am proud to say I
have not done since elementary school, coincidently when I started up with
Napster or whatever it is now. If the record company and or band is losing
money because I'm not screwing up, that's what they get for giving me one
juicy song somewhere in the middle of 9 shitty ones that robbed me of my
$20. THIS IS WAR!
[Edited on 24/7/2003 by Nicholas]
[Edited on 24/7/2003 by Nicholas] ____________________
"Be neither a master nor a slave to pudding, for there is a time to gather,
and a time to cast pudding away"
|
| |
dead-cell
Fanatic  Posts: 344 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 24/7/2003 at 09:00 AM |
Mono would you call Shakespear pandering?
____________________
co-worker: "Your gay!?"
myself: "Didn't you see my rainbow pin?"
co-worker: "I just thought you liked skettles."
-(yes, it actually happened to me)
|
| |
Anya
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 656 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 24/7/2003 at 11:49 AM |
My stepdad had an interesting idea for the Music Industry:
Instead of spending money on all that manufacturing of music and stuff,
they should do what Apple is doing: sell the music on the net. That would
1) let people get only the songs they like and 2) be cheaper for you won't
be spending all that money on CD's.
His all in all comment was that if they were not selling stuff for insane
prices, they'd not be having to deal with all the "music stealers" on the
web.
Dead-Cell: I do not think Shakespeare himself would be pandering since he's
dead.
|
| |
Monolycus
Fanatic Posts: 580 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 24/7/2003 at 12:59 PM |
Dead-Cell: I hope you aren't suggesting that Shakespeare's motives were
simply to make money. Since few scholars can even agree on the topic of
who Shakespeare was or how his name was supposed to be pronounced, it seems
a little premature to assert that we know his motives for writing. While
his plays might be how he made his livelihood, he (or she) would certainly
have been able to make more in Elizabethan England as a merchant than a
playwright, and his large body of sonnets also indicate that he wrote
because he enjoyed it and had something to say. No, I would not suggest
that he (or she) was pandering or selling out... as a matter of fact, it is
hard to suggest anything at all except that a large body of written works
exist and that I enjoy them. If I didn't already own hard copies of the
complete works, I would download them (legally or illegally) and his estate
wouldn't make a farthing from me.
~M.
|
| |
dead-cell
Fanatic Posts: 344 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 24/7/2003 at 03:35 PM |
Anya: good point *pandered
Mono: I'm afraid so. It is the misconception of what plays/poems he wrote,
not his identity. Shakespeare himself liked to spell his name many ways.
After his death Shakespeare’s close friends decided he had written great
things, and set fourth to preserve Shakespeare's plays and poem. His
friends had to track down which plays were truly his, and not some
imposture. They mainly relied on their own memories to help fill in the
blanks others had cut out. What we have to day is less than a fraction of
Shakespeare plays. Back to my point; no doubt Shakespeare enjoyed his
talent, but he also knew how to make a buck off of it. As you maybe well
aware of he wrote his plays in such a way that the poor got the lowbrow
jokes, and mingled in jokes for the wealthy as well. He wanted to make a
profit in the theater knowing full well he could attracted both rich and
poor alike. I am not saying that Shakespeare was a sell out, but living in
London was quite costly and considering his family lived out of town. True
he may not have been rich, but poets in his day were not quiet the starving
artist we know today. However despite our little digression, I agree music
companies seem to be taking more than their fare share of the profits, and
the days of free a internet are fading into the sunset.
____________________
co-worker: "Your gay!?"
myself: "Didn't you see my rainbow pin?"
co-worker: "I just thought you liked skettles."
-(yes, it actually happened to me)
|
| |
