View Full Version : Ethical question to all downloaders
Do you consider what you are doing, includes me, as stealing, if you know its "illegal"?
What about this scenario, your friend steals you a say psp or xbox 360 would you take it and just use it? I dunno to me the two are the same principles so I wouldn't mind buying a stolen psp :S
Hopefully not locked thread. It is a serious thought
Mischief007
11-16-2005, 11:05 PM
I do download stuff but if you look at my DVD collection, it's growing. So it my legit video game collection, etc...
As far as music. I can't buy the stuff here, it is too old, or are live mixes ;).
I remember when I was (I think) 15 years old, and as a gift I did get beautiful shine stereo Panasonic, not big maby 20 '' long-50 cm. not to big but with 2way speakers and few led as Vu Meter just radio and single cassette taperecorder.
I was recording like crazy from any good radio station and I have 15-20 tape cassettes from that time ...today after 27 years...
Legend
11-16-2005, 11:41 PM
Thats my thoughts exactly.
If i can record music off the radio, why can't i download the song too.
Cat person
11-17-2005, 12:03 AM
Is it legal to record music from the radio? Not that I care, I am just wondering if it is legal.
Limey32
11-17-2005, 12:07 AM
From what I always knew, yes.. as long as you didn't sell it. So what is the difference downloading as long as you don't sell it? It was illegal to tape a movie on the old Viewers choice channels back in the 80's too.. but everybody did. Same thing, different times.
Cat person
11-17-2005, 12:25 AM
I can't really see any difference between recording a favourite song from the radio or downloading it from the internet as long as it's not sold to someone else. I suppose the ethics police will see a difference though! :)
networkguy
11-17-2005, 12:31 AM
Sure its stealing, in a sense, however its because its so easy that we don't think of it as such. If it was harder to get with more risk and potential punishment, we'd think twice about it. Taping shows off tv with your shiny new dvd recorder is just as illegal, but its become so commonplace in the last 25 years since vhs recorders came on the market, we don't think twice about doing it.
NG
RiderMMX
11-17-2005, 12:47 AM
Downloading, Stealing, Sharing - What does it really matter? Everyone does it and from my point of view, I think its okay as long as you are not doing it as a business and making money out of it.
Its like this scenerio.. Driving on the HWY 401 at 120km/hr. The speed limit is 100km/hr. Anything above that is ILLEGAL. But everyone drives over 100km/hr. or at least 90% of us do. To be honest, I have seem Police patrol cars cruising at around 120km with the rest of the traffic and if everyone started driving at the speed limit, there would be traffic jams, so, I guess same applies to music, software, gaming and other industries.
But then, this is my personal view. :)
Why the saying: "Rules are made to be broken" to a certain extend. Cheers!
Mr. Apollo
11-17-2005, 12:49 AM
Yeah I know it's illegal and is considered stealing. However, I am a lot more apt to do that then to go into a store and steal a Xbox 360 or PSP. Maybe it's becuase the file is a non-physical item and you can do it from the privacy of your own home. It just seems more acceptable. Now, accepting a Xbox 360 or PSP from a friend is something alltogether different. ;)
Jackthemeangiant
11-17-2005, 01:59 AM
Well with movies I justify it by the fact that I work in a video store and get movies for free anyways. This way I just get to see them about a month before I would normally.
With music, I still purchase lots of music. I just download a few songs to make sure that I will like an album first. To me, downloading music is just a tool to filter out the crap that I don't want to buy.
bpbpbp
11-17-2005, 11:44 AM
I think its okay as long as you are not doing it as a business and making money out of it.
That's the way I like to think of it.
However, even though you're not making money out of it, there is no money going to the artists (assuming you're using an illegal download service).
I think the whole ethics behind this started getting to me recently. I started purchasing CDs of those artists who i enjoy listening to (That is, listening to their mp3s first! :vil: ) . I'm splurging, but hey, if it's making me feel better about it, why not? I'm very picky and narrowminded when it comes to choosing my music.
Marsher
11-17-2005, 12:49 PM
Add a twist:
Say you are a Musician ( just a normal guy not a big star by any means)... you release your first cd,..... people like it and suddenly everbody is downloading it..... and your income from it goes out the window....... would you think it is OK then?
Jackthemeangiant
11-17-2005, 01:00 PM
Add a twist:
Say you are a Musician ( just a normal guy not a big star by any means)... you release your first cd,..... people like it and suddenly everbody is downloading it..... and your income from it goes out the window....... would you think it is OK then?
That is why I purchase music still. My band will be releasing our first album in a short time, and I don't want this to happen.
I think it's stealing, it doesn't stop me from downloading tracks I want to hear, etc., but I also buy a lot of music as well. Many times I download something, end up loving it, and going out and getting the record because I want a good quality version, or I will just want to support the artist. Record sales are good. There are some decent labels to buy from (such as the one that will put out our record in Feb./March).
Good luck on putting out your record JtMG. Ours comes out in a couple months it's been 3 years in the making.
Exmortis
11-17-2005, 01:41 PM
I can't really see any difference between recording a favourite song from the radio or downloading it from the internet
There is a HUGE difference. For radio recordings, the radio stations pay royalty fees for each and every songs played (be it in full or partial). Radio stations pay for your consumption of the product. When downloading, nobody gets anything.
Wow, never thought I would get this many replies. Ya, I find the topic really hard to answer when confronted. It seems that stealing is stealing unless your downloading music at home, which then its not stealing because we all live by the ideology of stealing as being a physical act. I am not condeming anybody because I too download music, to be honest can't remember the last cd I purchased (game wise Half-life and only because of cd-key, sad eh :( ) I just wanted to see what others thought, as for artists not getting money.... 14.99 for a half-a** cd is stealing hehehe, thats how I think of it, and if the cd is good, then I will buy it. I actually own 3 copies of scarface :D
cam124
11-17-2005, 06:49 PM
ok stealing is bad, music downloading bad, game downloading bad, but...these companies only complain, and try to stop us because they are greedy people that want to leach money off people charging 50.00 for a game when it would only cost them about appx. 3.00 to make, i understand the company needs money to fund the game but why must we suffer, i say the hell to them and keep on DOWNLOADING!!!!! :)
Exmortis
11-17-2005, 07:15 PM
want to leach money off people charging 50.00 for a game when it would only cost them about appx. 3.00 to make
How did you figure that amount?
Mischief007
11-17-2005, 09:08 PM
As another example. The new t.A.T.u. album that came out. I had it ONE WHOLE MONTH before it hit the stores. Guess what I did on the day it became available? Bought it. I want them to make music because they have such a unique sound.
That's how I place my priorities. It's a cruel world but it has to be done this way. I've bought too many things that were crap and sold for pennies afterwards. This way I can listen first and decide.
Another scenario. My sister wanted 2 albums (store bought) onto her iPod Nano. She couldn't rip them because they were audio XA cds. So, I downloaded it for her and she put it on her iPod. Legally she can do that.
How did you figure that amount?
Im wondering the same thing.
Thaiwoo
11-17-2005, 10:55 PM
What gets me going is the fact that some movies make 100 Mio. $ or more in the movie theaters. Then they make money on rentals and eventually charge $20 or more in some cases for your to buy it.
If they would make them available for around $ 5 most people in my opinion wouldn't bother to make copies. They can produce the DVD's that cheap since they sell lesser popular ones at Walmart for a couple of bucks.
I also read somewhere (maybe even on this board) that in China, stores sell pirated copies of DVD's and CD's. They look real and they don't even know that they are copies. Most big stars do not make any money from the sales because of that. They earn their living to go on tours and with advertisement gigs.
If they would make them available for around $ 5 most people in my opinion wouldn't bother to make copies. They can produce the DVD's that cheap since they sell lesser popular ones at Walmart for a couple of bucks.
just to clarify are you saying that the problem is the greedy film makers overcharging that are resulting in people downloading music and games?
What gets me going is the fact that some movies make 100 Mio. $ or more in the movie theaters. Then they make money on rentals and eventually charge $20 or more in some cases for your to buy it.
If they would make them available for around $ 5 most people in my opinion wouldn't bother to make copies. They can produce the DVD's that cheap since they sell lesser popular ones at Walmart for a couple of bucks.
I also read somewhere (maybe even on this board) that in China, stores sell pirated copies of DVD's and CD's. They look real and they don't even know that they are copies. Most big stars do not make any money from the sales because of that. They earn their living to go on tours and with advertisement gigs.
The movie producers dont make money each time an item is rented, thats profi for the rental place.... and usually when the movie is a less popular on the shelves at blockbuster we sell the extras. Some titles go from 16.99 - 9.99 in about a month used. Many people buy the used movie cause paying ten bux for constantine is a great deal. wait a couple more weeks and poof its 6.99.. my internet is too slow to download movie anyways. :mbx:
ok stealing is bad, music downloading bad, game downloading bad, but...these companies only complain, and try to stop us because they are greedy people that want to leach money off people charging 50.00 for a game when it would only cost them about appx. 3.00 to make, i understand the company needs money to fund the game but why must we suffer, i say the hell to them and keep on DOWNLOADING!!!!! :)
3 bux for a game? are you nuts its takes PAID programmers tonnes of time to make a game, then marketing, packaging, so on so forth. Some of the prices may be reduculous but there is no way a game costs 3 dollars to make.
Exmortis
11-18-2005, 10:04 AM
What gets me going is the fact that some movies make 100 Mio. $ or more in the movie theaters.
C'mon... How many movies out there are saved from the red ink because of home video release? Plenty! There are plenty of movies that don't make a single dollars of profit during its theatrical run and that includes many big budget blockbusters and then gets saved by DVD sales/rentals. Ever noticed how quickly movies jump from the theater to DVD? Could it be because it's extremely expensive? The number you're refering to is revenue, not profit. You seem to ignore the actual cost of making and releasing the movie...
And you're gonna complain because they charge $20 to purchase a movie? Ever heard of rental window pricing during the VHS days? Should we go back to that system instead? I think not...
Rustynut
11-18-2005, 11:01 AM
I see nothing wrong with copying music for your own use from the web. To me it is the same as an earlier post stated about recording from the radio back in the days of the cassette tape recorders.
As for downloading, it is to me a great sampler and if I like the artist I will spend the money for their album to support them.
It is the ones in the front line that complain publicly about how much they are losing to downloads, they are the ones I would pick as the first to download provided they have any good or worth while material to offer.
Downloading has gotten out of hand I agree and it should be upto the artist what material he / she considers a " Loss leader " to further their exposure.
Ripping CD's and posting the material should be only the domain of the artist not every person with a program. That is where I find difficulty in justifying that.
I do and will in the future take music from a CD I have purchased and compile another CD in a fashion I prefer to hear usually mixed with various artists.
As for the "Oldies" some of which are very hard to find, is not that what the web is for? To locate such files?
Exmortis
11-18-2005, 11:06 AM
To me it is the same as an earlier post stated about recording from the radio back in the days of the cassette tape recorders.
I already explained why it's not the same.
Rustynut
11-18-2005, 11:09 AM
I already explained why it's not the same.
Just agreeing with ya there.
Thaiwoo
11-18-2005, 10:46 PM
just to clarify are you saying that the problem is the greedy film makers overcharging that are resulting in people downloading music and games?
Nope that's not what I'm saying. If the priceswere lower nobody would bother making copies.
Thaiwoo
11-18-2005, 10:49 PM
C'mon... How many movies out there are saved from the red ink because of home video release? Plenty! There are plenty of movies that don't make a single dollars of profit during its theatrical run and that includes many big budget blockbusters and then gets saved by DVD sales/rentals. Ever noticed how quickly movies jump from the theater to DVD? Could it be because it's extremely expensive? The number you're refering to is revenue, not profit. You seem to ignore the actual cost of making and releasing the movie...
And you're gonna complain because they charge $20 to purchase a movie? Ever heard of rental window pricing during the VHS days? Should we go back to that system instead? I think not...
I guess I din't research my rant to well :hsh:
Not sure what the rental window pricing is all about?
Thaiwoo
11-18-2005, 10:50 PM
Interesting link I just read about copyrights
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051118/ap_on_hi_te/music_copy_protection
Exmortis
11-19-2005, 09:39 AM
Not sure what the rental window pricing is all about?
Back in the days of VHS, the release of a movie would come with a very high MSRP. A brand new movie on VHS would easily sell for $100-$150 for a certain period of time. That period of time was called "rental window". A window where pretty much only movie rental stores would be expected to buy the movie at that price or have a special agreement with the studio/distributor to get it at a special price. So if someone wanted to see the movie at home, he'd be forced to rent it or pay an unreasonable price to buy it.
The rental window could last 3 months or more depending on the studio and then the movie would get priced to own. DVD shattered this whole system that had been working like this for more than a decade. Warner Brothers was the biggest advocate of DVD and promised movies in the $20's during the design of DVD. This agressive and unusually low pricing for a brand new technology made DVD extremely popular and at a speed never seen before in the history of consumer electronics. You never see something so new priced so low (the players were expensive, though, but not for long). Laserdisc (remember the huge 12" clunker discs) was never able to achieve a reasonable pricing even after being out for a decade and received a death blow from DVD.
So there... :)
Take a movie like "Master And Commander". That movie cost $150mil just to make (does not include printing on film, distributing, marketing, etc), but it made $90mil at the box office. Sounds like it's swimming in cash if you only hear of the $90mil it made, right? That movie was saved from the red ink by DVD.
Iceman-007
11-25-2005, 07:33 PM
That's the way I like to think of it.
However, even though you're not making money out of it, there is no money going to the artists (assuming you're using an illegal download service).
I think the whole ethics behind this started getting to me recently. I started purchasing CDs of those artists who i enjoy listening to (That is, listening to their mp3s first! :vil: ) . I'm splurging, but hey, if it's making me feel better about it, why not? I'm very picky and narrowminded when it comes to choosing my music.
the artist don't get any money when you buy a CD anyway the greedy record labels take it all, they only get like 80 cents a CD, and by people downloading music more people will be exposed to their music, so therefore more people will want to go to their concert so their will be a higher attendance at the concert and they will be able to charge more money per seat, this is where artists make most of their money from concerts
Pigginfriendzee
11-26-2005, 09:56 AM
i have no problem stealing from corportate america's music, film or video game industry, especially in the area of microsoft, they dont need my money, the little guys do. I try to buy the games I like from the little companies (pretty much every game company cept EA)
Exmortis
11-26-2005, 11:37 AM
the artist don't get any money when you buy a CD
they only get like 80 cents a CD
You're contradicting yourself right there.
Anyway, how did you figure the $0.80/CD? Have you ever read a contract? I also asked cam124 where he got his numbers, but he never replied. People seems to know the numbers, but sources are never revealed.
Lee Anne
11-27-2005, 01:26 AM
I have downloaded MP3's then gone out and bought the Cd many times, I have also saved myself $20 by listening to an album first and finding out the one song on it was the only good song on it
Denton
11-28-2005, 05:58 PM
Iceman is right, artists who are signed to a major record label don't make much money from CD sales. Here's an article you might find interesting: http://www.negativland.com/albini.html
Many insiders have also stated that artists make even less from digital music sales on iTunes. They're definitely getting ripped off.
I personally don't see anything wrong with sharing. We've pretty much all done it in one shape or form. How many of us here have copied a cassette or taped songs from the radio? Have you ever made a copy of your friend's music CD? Ever make a copy of old PC games which came on disks? Sharing online or sharing with real friends is the same thing. The only difference is that online, you can share with many more people.
Still, if you look at the figures, the music industry, hollywood and the gaming industry are all in great shape. People are still buying...alot. Over 1 million songs are purchased on iTunes every day. Many of the people who shop on iTunes are well aware that they can download higher quality songs for free on P2P but they still buy.
It's really not stealing. It's unauthorized copying.
Marsher
11-28-2005, 06:10 PM
But if the Record Companies do not make any money, they will not make any recordings and if they do not make recordings then the Musicians will not make anything from the sales at all. Also they will not make much money from concerts since who is going to pay to go to a concert if you have not been able to listen to a recording to see if you like the music.
You can try to justify it all you want but theft is theft.
Marsher
11-28-2005, 06:11 PM
I have downloaded MP3's then gone out and bought the Cd many times, I have also saved myself $20 by listening to an album first and finding out the one song on it was the only good song on it
You can do that by listening to the CD in the record store.
Hatshepsut
11-28-2005, 07:06 PM
Here's my 2 cents worth: I don't download music, I buy music CD's. I use the internet (amazon.com) to preview songs, and if I like them, I buy the album (we are not an iPod family yet).
Friends have lent me bootleg copies of favourite films I have already seen in the theatre, such as Lord of the Rings, so I can watch them again prior to them coming out on DVD (I'm not going to pay to go to the theatre to see the film twice). But when the films come out in DVD I always purchase my own copies. I don't purchase bootleg DVDs of films that are commercially available or will be commercially available shortly. I go to the movies regularly and buy a fair number of DVD's from amazon.ca, amazon.com and HMV every year. The reason why is I enjoy the art that comes with the case, and the bonus DVD features. eg. I bought Batman Begins two-disc deluxe edition with comic, and Exmortis' example, Master and Commander Collector's Edition.
That being said.....when all hope was lost that Space:Above and Beyond, the series would ever be released on DVD, I bought the series off Ebay at the beginning of this year. Did I feel guilty, not in the slightest. And I am not about to buy a commercial copy from amazon.ca now that it's been officially released, because the DVD has no bonus features or other incentives for me to do so. I also recently purchased from ebay the rare films Century with Clive Owen and Alfred the Great with David Hemmings on DVD. Bootleg yes, but both no longer available on VHS and not available on DVD. Again I don't feel guilty.
So if it's available commercially now or announced for the future, I will buy it through conventional sources, if not I will source it as creatively as I can, which can include a burned DVD from someone recording it off TV, or a copy of a master tape.
Denton
11-28-2005, 07:57 PM
But if the Record Companies do not make any money, they will not make any recordings and if they do not make recordings then the Musicians will not make anything from the sales at all. Also they will not make much money from concerts since who is going to pay to go to a concert if you have not been able to listen to a recording to see if you like the music.
You can try to justify it all you want but theft is theft.
There's no evidence pointing to a decline in sales. The stats actually reveal an increase in sales. I'll dig up the stats for the music industry when I get the chance, but in the meantime check out this link: http://www.edwardjayepstein.com/mpa2004.htm
Much like the RIAA, the MPAA is claiming huge loss in sales as a result of copyright infringement. The link above proves they are lying.
I rather not get into a long argument about what constitutes theft but I find it hard to believe that people are still calling the act of copying theft. Downloading files which people are sharing is not theft. It's unauthorized distribution or copying. There is a big difference.
Besides, like most of the people who post on this forum, I still buy stuff even though I am aware of how to obtain certain material online. There's a difference between pirates who profit from selling copyrighted material and file sharers who like to share files and sample stuff.
Iceman-007
11-29-2005, 02:38 PM
You're contradicting yourself right there.
Anyway, how did you figure the $0.80/CD? Have you ever read a contract? I also asked cam124 where he got his numbers, but he never replied. People seems to know the numbers, but sources are never revealed.
I got the numbers from a TCM member who is a muscian
LastChancers
12-07-2005, 01:12 PM
Personally, I don't d/l anything and haven't for years because as an audiophile, I find the sound quality of MP3's to be subpar. I do however make copies of my own CDs (and sometimes I borrow CD's from friends) and make my own compilation CDs. Just like I did in the old days when I would make mixed tapes from my record collection.
As for those who do d/l from the net, this is my own personal opinion but I don't really see this as a moral infraction. As another poster mentioned already, it isn't technically stealing and more or less legally defined as unauthorized copying and/or distribution. Either which way, I don't find it to be theft per se and I don't think it's the end of the world. If you view things on a historical level, you find numerous examples of the phenomenon of natural correction. That is, the economy and industry as a whole corrects itself and adjusts itself to whatever current social and technological development society generates. This is Darwin 101. You have to evolve and adapt to survive.
For example, the movie companies screamed bloody murder when VHS and Beta tapes were introduced and the argument that the new technology would destroy Hollywood took up a lot of time in the courts. But eventually, the argument was settled and VHS and Beta companies were levied and had to pay a certain amount of money to the Movie companies to offset their concerns. And as time has proven, videos did not end up bankrupting Hollywood. Far from it. The movie studios ended up raking in more money from VHS sales and now DVD sales. It is now a substantial part of their overall take on a film.
I think it may be the same with the recording industry. Although people have been taping their records with cassettes for a long time the real concern now is the mobility of the act. You no longer have to physically own the recording to make a copy of it..you can get it online. As I said before, I don't care for the sound quality of MP3's so this has never been an issue for me, but a lot of people download MP3's on a regular basis. I find it difficult to shed tears for more established recording artists and record companies but if you look at less mainstream artists then it becomes a different story. However, I have heard of a lot of groups who have taken to the net like a fish to water and have realligned themselves by selling songs for d/l on the web. This is a good example of the industry correcting itself to fit with the times. The old models no longer apply and so new ones are being designed to work more effeciently and effectively in today's digital world. The old record company model is a dinosaur. Eventually you will see more artists forsaking the old ball and chain and establishing sleeker new record companies that are able to focus on selling to their demographic. Jane Siberry is a good example of this as she started her own record company (Sheeba records) and all her recordings are released exclusively on this label. The Cowboy Junkies have also done the same thing recently and they have talked about how rewarding the experience has been as the big labels do not care for you and do not foster talent any longer. They only care about artists who sell millions of CD's not for talent that sell under 500,000 units to a loyal fan base.
In the end, I am hoping that artists will be able to control their product better and gain more profit from what they make. As I mentioned, a lot of bands are already doing this now and the roster is growing now that the infrastructure is allowing for such models to exist. I feel the internet plays a large role in this restructuring.
In conclusion, I think the moral of dilemma of d/l is an interesting one but it is more or less a sidenote to the more pressing concern, which is to do more with how the industry must change (because you can't stop technology) in order to remain competitive.
Sorry for the rant, but just my 2 cents on the topic.
L.C.
Carz n Compz
12-11-2005, 10:04 AM
I do not consider it bad to D/L of P2P. The music is paid for by someone and in my opinion if you download a few songs off Limewire you might like the band and then go out to buy their CDs. That's what happens with me when I try a new band.
Braddon
12-21-2005, 01:04 AM
Doesn't matter to me.
I'll download everything and anything I can. If it's g ood and worth buying, I will buy it.
It's sorta like renting but for free. I rent it for free, and check it out, if it's really good and I love it, then I buy it, if it's meh, or not so good, then I didn't lose any money.
Braddon
12-21-2005, 01:11 AM
C'mon... How many movies out there are saved from the red ink because of home video release? Plenty! There are plenty of movies that don't make a single dollars of profit during its theatrical run and that includes many big budget blockbusters and then gets saved by DVD sales/rentals. Ever noticed how quickly movies jump from the theater to DVD? Could it be because it's extremely expensive? The number you're refering to is revenue, not profit. You seem to ignore the actual cost of making and releasing the movie...
And you're gonna complain because they charge $20 to purchase a movie? Ever heard of rental window pricing during the VHS days? Should we go back to that system instead? I think not...
IT wouldn't happend, because we'd just download even more and buy even less.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.7 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.