|
|
Normal Rooms | General | 4 users AntiStaticCleaningWi, melinda_halliwell_tu, Mistress_SinisterLov, littlegothgirlthatco |
|
|
|
|
|
Currently no members online:)
You are an anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here |
We have 59 guests online !
|
|
|
|
|
Forums You are not logged in | | |
|
|
feralucce
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 1810 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 2/8/2003 at 11:13 PM |
Ok... I've been discussing the ethics of piracy with most of my friends,
and we've decided to take teh gloves off and put this out there for
EVERYONE to chat at.
the definition is The unauthorized use or reproduction of copyrighted or
patented material. Now. Napster Kazaaa, all of that makes it so easy, but
moreally is it right?
One of my friends cited the fact that it takes money away from the artists
and that is punishing them for the pricee of the cd. I agree with this,
BUT, the record company actually pockets most of teh proceeds. I mean, if
you are like me, you buy cd-rs 100+ at a time... even at retail, the price
of a cd is only 17 cents if you shop right. NOW... I know a band, prodiuced
their first album themselves... per cd after recording, they spent 3
dollars a disk... and that was payin retail for all services... so... where
is the 15-25 dollar price tag coming from...
second instance... video. if it's been on tv, cable, pay per view... is it
moral to download the fucker and rip it to vcd?
just food for thought kiddies
Feral ____________________ The earth turns on a tilted axis - just doing the best it can.
Hohenheim of Light~Full Metal Alchemist |
|
|
Ironboots
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 893 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 12/8/2003 at 09:52 PM |
That's a good metaphor (err... simile), Shade... Your morality depends on
the company you keep... If the section of society that you look to support
for is doing something, then you'll approve of it, too.
Myself, I think that most people think small-scale file-sharing is ok, so
I'm cool with it, too. ____________________ Piggy's got the Conch! |
|
tallidaho
Member Posts: 50 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 12/8/2003 at 09:14 PM |
Oh boy. Where do I start on this one?
Privacy has always been a legal issue, if for nothing else, the assumed
"right to privacy" that has been addressed by the supreme court several
times. Very long story that I could go on for about hours short, Privacy is
the base issue in everything from illegal search and seizure to FCC
regulations.
If anyone wants the long explanation, just ask, and I'll give you the full
rundown. ____________________ Being Passionate is the only way to survive |
|
Abbadon
Fanatic Posts: 499 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 12/8/2003 at 05:21 PM |
What the hell has the legal system got to do with privacy? ____________________ Light is changing to shadow, and casting a shroud over all we have known. |
|
Shade
Fanatic Posts: 289 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 12/8/2003 at 10:01 AM |
I'm coming to the conclusion that I have a very loose(if at all) grasp on
morality these days, and I'm happy with it that way. But my understanding
of the concept of Morality is that it is similar to daylight savings time.
Morality is defined by the local (for a defined value of "local") community
in terms of the community. Or, to translate out of puritan and back into
human: Morality is not what the majority does, but what the majority thinks
the rest of the majority thinks is OK. Just because everyone eats pop tarts
at midnight in the small town of Blime doesn't make it ok, but, if a
majority of people are willing to go on record as saying that eating pop
tarts at midnight is OK, then it is a moral act.
So to make that a bit more conclusive and personal; I personally don't
think there is anything wrong with file trading. In order to speak on the
morality of the issue, I would have to see what the majority says, and I
would guess that they will not be willing to say it's ok, no matter how
many copies of Brittny spears and the new hulk movie they have uploaded to
someone else in the office. ____________________ It is only through the lack of sex that humanity derives the need for an
all encompassing blind love. And in that moment of extreme horniness with
no relief in sight, in that moment can be found the birth of religion.
-Me |
|
tallidaho
Member Posts: 50 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 12/8/2003 at 07:33 AM |
Evolution is an inevitable thing. Everything that is today, digital, was
once not. All music was once recorded on big circular disks that went
'round and 'round at 45 RPM (and still do, in my house) All video was once
availible only at the movie houses. The development into other formats,
digital included, is something that the "industry" not only should have
expected, but planned for by making high-quality products.
An example: When recordable VHS tapes came out on the market, you can bet
that the movie studios were NOT happy with that. People could now record
copies of their movies. Doom and destruction were predicted. And yet... the
movie industry survived. Hell, in the long run, it thrived. Why? Because
the studios started producing a higher-quality (arguably) product, and
developed a higher-quality format, giving people a reason to pay $15 for a
VHS tape, or even to cough out the money for a DVD player and DVDs.
Of course, it is now possible to record DVDs. And yes, the pirates will
find a way to get past the protection software on the new CDs and DVDs.
Video will be traded. Music will be traded. The industry should, instead of
working against those that like the product enough to download it, should
embrace it.
Another example: I've got a South Park / Matrix spin-off comedy video on my
computer- distributed free on the creator's website, there is about 10
seconds of self-promotion at the beginning. Sure, I don't ENJOY watching
it, but I don't have the motivation to go into my video editor and delete
it, because it's 10 seconds and it's pretty far down on my priority list.
So why not allow music and video to be distributed for free with a small
amount of advertising at the beginning and end, with ad-free versions
availible for a small amount of cold, hard, digital cash? This business
model works well for many online not-online companies.
So the morality?
Forgetting that everyone's morality is slightly different, I think that it
is okay to share/download video, music, etc. in reasonable amounts (not
1000's of songs an hour- that one could not logistically ever listen to)
because it is pushing the studios and "the industry" into devlopment and
innovation- and without innovation, there is stagnation and compliance,
neither of which are really beneficial.
That's my two cents. ____________________ Being Passionate is the only way to survive |
|
feralucce
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 1810 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 10/8/2003 at 08:15 AM |
Actually... it truly does depend on the medium... file sharing... is
considere4d a public exhibition of the materials... Now... when I download
an mp3, it get's sorted to a folder that IS NOT shared. In the napster
class action suit there was a group that did the same thing. THese people
were declared innocent of all charges. the reasoning: since they were not
using the files for public exhibition, they were not in vioation of
copyright law.
____________________ The earth turns on a tilted axis - just doing the best it can.
Hohenheim of Light~Full Metal Alchemist |
|
Britva
Moderator Posts: 37 Registered: 1/8/2003 Status: Offline
|
posted on 9/8/2003 at 11:10 AM |
There's a kernel of truth there, but check out this quote from an article
called 10 Myths About Copyright:
2) "If I don't charge for it, it's not a violation."
False. Whether you charge can affect the damages awarded in court, but
that's main difference under the law. It's still a violation if you give it
away -- and there can still be serious damages if you hurt the commercial
value of the property. There is an exception for personal copying of music,
which is not a violation, though courts seem to have said that doesn't
include widescale anonymous personal copying as Napster.
The copyright violation in trading mp3s is not that you are making money
off of someone else's copyrighted material, but rather that you are hurting
the commercial value of the songs you are sharing. |
|
feralucce
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 1810 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 8/8/2003 at 11:38 PM |
actually... by technical definition, if you are not selling, or playing in
a public forum, copyright has little to say...
Feral ____________________ The earth turns on a tilted axis - just doing the best it can.
Hohenheim of Light~Full Metal Alchemist |
|
Ironboots
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 893 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 6/8/2003 at 09:31 AM |
Hmmm... Digital video? I've never done it (never had the bandwidth ) so I've never
considered the morality of it before...
Part of me says that its immoral, but then part of me wonders what the
difference is between stealing mp3s and stealing movies. I'm mixed. On one
hand, movies are made with tight budgets where money=amount of creative
power; Less money in the budget means that the producer has less
opportunity to get creative and instead has to play the puppet of the
financially-minded film exec. Meaning we get crappy movies.
BUT I think that some people's salaries (actors, directors, producers,
anyone with a "name") are over-inflated, which means that they're just
porkin' out, and it'd be okay to steal.
I guess you could say I hate rich people... ____________________ Piggy's got the Conch! |
|
Britva
Moderator Posts: 37 Registered: 1/8/2003 Status: Offline
|
posted on 6/8/2003 at 07:52 AM |
Let me see if I can make my moral argument more clear then. What I was
trying to say is that everyone agrees stealing is wrong (well, mostly), so
the morality of mp3 trading mainly rests on whether or not you agree with
our intellectual property laws that say a piece of art is the property of
the person who created it. Most people take this fact for granted and see
mp3 trading as stealing and therefore immoral. However, there are other
possible systems where art would not be the property of the creator and
therefore distributing it would not be stealing. In this kind of system,
mp3 trading would be moral.
In other words, the morality of mp3 trading is not absolute but rather
rests on the current legal climate. Currently, though, I don't see any way
to get around the fact that mp3 trading is stealing (excpet for the few
exceptions mentioned above). |
|
feralucce
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 1810 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 6/8/2003 at 07:34 AM |
Britva: we all know the legality... in this forum... I want to discuss the
morality of it, because asI have pointed out in my column there are some
pretty stupid things that have been made illegal...
BUT since that discussion doesna seem to have worked out... let's go to a
grey area, fuck mp3s... Digital video... rips of stuff that has been on
cable but not broadcast... is it moral to copy that?
____________________ The earth turns on a tilted axis - just doing the best it can.
/>
Hohenheim of Light~Full Metal Alchemist |
|
Britva
Moderator Posts: 37 Registered: 1/8/2003 Status: Offline
|
posted on 5/8/2003 at 09:27 PM |
I don't think this is a moral question so much as a legal one. The only
things you're really running up against when you share mp3s are our current
trademark, copyright, and intellectual property laws. Now I'm not saying
that these laws are right or wrong, I'm just saying they're not the only
way to do things.
For example, imagine a system where all recorded music was free to be
shared and distributed. Musicians would continue to make a moderate income
from touring, and they would have an incentive to make high quality
recordings to pull in audiences for their shows. The musicians would
probably make less money in this system (although the amount they make from
a recording is suspect as mentioned in above posts), but can you think of
any good musicians who are in it for the money? I think the argument that
paying less for something inevitably leads to inferior quality falls apart
when it comes to music.
On another note, the media industries always get full of doom and gloom
when a new technology comes out. They said TV would kill movies, they said
casette tapes were going to ruin the recording industry, they said VCR's
were the apocalypse. Meanwhile I can get any book I want from the public
library down the street for free (and sanctioned by the government no
less), but we still have a publishing industry. Go figure.
[Any copying or distribution of this post without express written consent
of the author is expressly prohibited] |
|
feralucce
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 1810 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 5/8/2003 at 08:48 PM |
Yes, a socialist republic...
Gasoline, like cd's is defined as a commodity... something that the average
person doesn't truly need.
THere are certain things that NEED to be price contrroled. I mean...Look at
software these days... R&D is a lot of dosh, yes, but EACH COPY of windows
solds is 100... Other single disc software packages run frrom 500 to
1,000... I'm not talking government policing, the public should stand up
and say.. FUCK YOU... I'm not paying for Joe Rockstar's signing company to
screw me up the ass anymore...
but we're off subject again.. the morality of it... where does it lie?
Feral ____________________ The earth turns on a tilted axis - just doing the best it can.
/>
/>
Hohenheim of Light~Full Metal Alchemist |
|
Xaoswolf
Fanatic Posts: 463 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 5/8/2003 at 06:26 PM |
Well, you can buy some Joe Knockoff CD's.
It's the same thing with that new $80 pair of Nikes. If you don't want to
pay that much, you go to payless and get something similiar.
Also, the reason that the RIAA is having trouble is because they aren't
following the market.
Lastly, what CD's are people buying that are costing over $20?
Seriously, I remember a few years ago when they were like $16, but most
that I see now are under $13, unless you want an import. ____________________ 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 5/8/2003 at 09:01 AM |
I don't know about that, Xaoswolf... People these days...
But the market ISN'T regulating prices, especially with respect to cds...
There's no controls. Lets say I want to buy Joe Rockstar's new cd. His
label puts a twenty dollar price tag on it, since its a hot item. If I want
to get Joe's music, I have to pay the twenty dollars. I can't go to a
competitor somewhere else, because that's the only label Joe's got.
There's no price competition, which means the market system failed.
[Edited on 8/5/2003 by Ironboots] ____________________ Piggy's got the Conch! |
|
Xaoswolf
Fanatic Posts: 463 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 5/8/2003 at 08:55 AM |
Feral Gasoline is a bit differant than CDs.
You won't see people panicking to get to Sam Goody to stock up on Back
Street Boys CDs because the price is going up. You won't have lines going
around the block because they are affraid that there won't be any CD's
tommorrow. ____________________ 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 5/8/2003 at 08:19 AM |
Dessert storm? *snickers*
But when you regulate to that degree, aren't you just creating a socialist
society?
And wouldn't that piss off a lot of businessmen and other types? You know,
the types that pretty much own our government?
Oui... We need a revolution or two. Just for fun.
____________________ Piggy's got the Conch! |
|
feralucce
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 1810 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 5/8/2003 at 05:53 AM |
Xaos: I disagree... government regulation of prices in a couple countries,
social democracies, to be exact leads to several interesting things...
Honestly a trruly regulated government allows everyone to be employed, have
government supplied health care and everything is affordable... by
regulating wages and not prices, the government completely negates the
point of making a minimum wage at all by letting the average company bump
up the price to compensate... ALTHOUGH... this is far from the point...
though I think I might just have to do an article on this
Feral
BTW... when dessert storm started and the white house stepped in to
regulate gasoline prices... EVERYONE (save the oil moguls) agreed...
____________________ The earth turns on a tilted axis - just doing the best it can.
/>
/>
/>
Hohenheim of Light~Full Metal Alchemist |
|
Domkitten
Fanatic Posts: 470 Registered: 23/9/2002 Status: Offline
|
posted on 5/8/2003 at 02:57 AM |
Two Cents:
I like downloading music. I like it a lot. Generally I only download stuff
I can’t get at all, or stuff I’ve bought so many damn times
I’m simply not willing to do it again. For example, I admit, I like
the natural born killers soundtrack. I’ve bought about twenty copies,
all of which eventually get jacked at parties, or loaned to friends.
I’ll be damned if I’m going to buy it again.
Beside, the point however, I like downloading music. And I think, that in
the long run, as the internet develops faster, and technology with it, that
musicians will begin to like downloading music even more.
First of all, the musicians we are stealing from generally have contracts
with major labels. To bad for them, really, because yes, downloading their
music really does lose them a lot of money. When you are signed to a major
label you get advanced money based on how much money the label will be
expecting you to make for them. Also, you pay for everything. Oh, sure you
get an advance, but you have to pay for everything from the studio, to the
packaging, you pay for you lawyer, you pay for distribution, you pay the
fucking caterers.
Most artist for major labels actually end up owing money, a lot of money.
In this scenario Brittany Spears has to shake her ass almost 365 days a
year just to afford to pay all the people off that are working for her, so
yes, by downloading her music you are taking money out of her pocket. In
reality they live like rock stars but they are owned by the man. And woe be
it if they want to switch labels, they have to buy their own freedom, or
they cannot record anywhere else for a better deal.
Now, the pros, for musicians who are not signed to a major label are many.
One, it’s free exposure. Two people who download the music might
actually take an interest and buy the cd they distribute, thereby putting
money in their personal pocket. MP3’s are the kind of exposure one
cannot get on the radio. I love listening to new bands, and I’ve
found, and gone on to buy lots of cd’s because I was able to find an
artist I’d never heard of before.
For some it works. For the RIAA it doesn’t, because in a lot of ways
it puts the power and the power to earn back into the hands of the
non-rockstar, cutting out them the middle man. They like being the middle
men. They don’t have to perform, they don’t have to pay for
anything, and they are paid for by the artist. They make money being there,
and so, for them MP3’s are a horrible system.
The music industry wasn’t all to happy about recordable cassettes and
the radio, but I shall have to dig through my music history notes to site
dates and what not.
In the long run, however, the artists will win, things will evolve, and the
RIAA which is an outmoded dinosaur anyway will be forced to change.
For those of you still convinced that it is best to bow down to the might
of the blanket law suiting of the American people, here is an expense list
for a band that has made 3 million for the record company, and is still not
making money:
Note the advances they get, compared to what they need to pay out, and
their final take home pay:
The Big Advance: $ 250,000
Artist Pays:
Manager's cut: $ 37,500
Legal fees: $ 10,000
Recording Budget: $ 150,000
Producer's advance: $ 50,000
Studio fee: $ 52,500
Drum Amp, Mic and Phase "Doctors": $ 3,000
Recording tape: $ 8,000
Equipment rental: $ 5,000
Cartage and Transportation: $ 5,000
Lodgings while in studio: $ 10,000
Catering: $ 3,000
Mastering: $ 10,000
Tape copies, reference CDs, shipping tapes, misc. expenses: $ 2,000
Video budget: $ 30,000
Cameras: $ 8,000
Crew: $ 5,000
Processing and transfers: $ 3,000
Off-line: $ 2,000
On-line editing: $ 3,000
Catering: $ 1,000
Stage and construction: $ 3,000
Copies, couriers, transportation: $ 2,000
Director's fee: $ 3,000
Album Artwork: $ 5,000
Promotional photo shoot and duplication: $ 2,000
Band fund: $ 15,000
New fancy professional drum kit: $ 5,000
New fancy professional guitars [2]: $ 3,000
New fancy professional guitar amp rigs [2]: $ 4,000
New fancy potato-shaped bass guitar: $ 1,000
New fancy rack of lights bass amp: $ 1,000
Rehearsal space rental: $ 500
Big blowout party for their friends: $ 500
Tour expense [5 weeks]: $ 50,875
Bus: $ 25,000
Crew [3]: $ 7,500
Food and per diems: $ 7,875
Fuel: $ 3,000
Consumable supplies: $ 3,500
Wardrobe: $ 1,000
Promotion: $ 3,000
Tour gross income: $ 50,000
Agent's cut: $ 7,500
Manager's cut: $ 7,500
Merchandising advance: $ 20,000
Manager's cut: $ 3,000
Lawyer's fee: $ 1,000
Publishing advance: $ 20,000
Manager's cut: $ 3,000
Lawyer's fee: $ 1,000
(Money they make for selling Records here)Record sales: 250,000 @ $12
=$3,000,000 (three million but wait...)
Gross retail revenue Royalty: [13% of 90% of retail]:$ 351,000
Less advance: $ 250,000
Producer's points: [3% less $50,000 advance]:$ 40,000
Promotional budget: $ 25,000
Recoupable buyout from previous label: $ 50,000
Bands Income: Net royalty: $ -14,000
Record company income:
Record wholesale price: $6.50 x 250,000 =$1,625,000 gross income
Artist Royalties: $ 351,000
Deficit from royalties: $ 14,000
Manufacturing, packaging and distribution: @ $2.20 per record: $ 550,000
Gross profit: $ 7l0,000
The Balance Sheet: This is how much each player got paid at the end of the
game.
Record company: $ 710,000
Producer: $ 90,000
Manager: $ 51,000
Studio: $ 52,500
Previous label: $ 50,000
Agent: $ 7,500
Lawyer: $ 12,000
Band member net income each: $ 4,031.25 (Live that rock an roll life style
baby!)
You can view the whole story of the above band at Here, written by Steve
Albini
For more on the history of recording music check out this fantastic program
by NPR that you can listen to online at Here.
One last thing to keep in mind. If the American people really want thier
MP3's then they better make damn sure to vote. Yeah, the recording lobby is
huge, but last time I checked KaZaa had over 3 million subscribers and that
is a lot of votes if the people start to get there asses in gear. What we
need is a grass roots movment to take back the music.
I want rockin roll baby.
____________________ It's like kegel exercises for your throat.~Monolycus |
|
|
|
|