• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Do you steal music???

Status
Not open for further replies.
#221
c-ba55 said:
As an example of working within the new economic framework, the guy that writes and maintains Bittorrent (one of the biggest methods of file-sharing) puts it out there for free and includes a "please donate if you think this is worth something" message. Doing only this, he manages to support his family. And 100% of his revenue is obviously exactly from the "thieves."
Click to expand...
You left out the part about it being his CHOICE to do this. I'm all about freedom of choice.
 
#222
It should be noted that BitTorrent, while it is a big player in the illegal software and music downloading scene, is also fairly popular with LEGAL downloading arena. People that Donate to it aren't necessarily 100% thieves, as many software developers, and content providers(free movie clips and the likes) use the protocol to distribute their software(freeware and shareware and such) which saves them money on bandwidth.

The same cannot really be said about most other illegal software/music channels, where the vast majority of files transferring through them are copy protected.
 
#225
heath_the_great said:
and really...is touuring to earn money so bad...id love it...
Click to expand...
It might seem fun until you've lived on the road month after month, year after year.

c-ba55 said:
When there is a real connection between an artist and a fanbase, the fanbase will support the artist.
Click to expand...
I see. And your suggested method of said support would be what then?
 
#227
c-ba55 said:
They do everything themselves, and keep the money. Fans love them, and do not steal from them.
Click to expand...
So, where is the money coming from? Do the fans buy the CD's? Do they seem them live? I can't see Nik live. If I don't buy his CD's how am I gonna support him? Other than just saying "support", what specific mechanism are you talking about?
 
#228
bigbeefdog said:
Errrrrr........ no, not exactly. If the laws were as you guys describe, the issues would probably be clearer. However, the courts have upheld one's right to make a copy (of purchased music) for personal use (known as the "fair use" doctrine).
Click to expand...
True, but that's not what I was addressing. I was saying that while you own the disc, you don't own the music; it is not your property to do with as you please. If it were, I could take instrumental sections of Sting's songs, overdub my own vocals and sell it online. Or just copy the disc itself and sell it. With different edits. In different keys...I could do anything with the music I want if it was my property, but it's not. That was my point.

Pretty standard stuff from the back of a sample CD that also applies to just about any commercial recording (emphasis added):

"The contents of this disc are licensed...ANY reproduction or DUPLICATION in whole or in part, BY ANY MEANS, for the purpose of giving, TRADING, lending or resale is STRICTLY PROHIBITED without the epressed WRITTEN consent of (copyright holder)"
 
#230
Marcus Willett said:
Do you make your living in the music business? If so, I'd be curious what you do. If not, then it would be accurate to say that you literally do not know what you are talking about.
Click to expand...

I did do music full-time for 2002 and 2003. I spent so much time hustling for a buck, that I decided to return to my day-job career and at least get paid for the **** I don't really want to be doing. I feel like I have a better chance of making an actual significant musical contribution to society under my current setup.
 
#231
Marcus Willett said:
So, where is the money coming from? Do the fans buy the CD's? Do they seem them live? I can't see Nik live. If I don't buy his CD's how am I gonna support him? Other than just saying "support", what specific mechanism are you talking about?
Click to expand...

Yes, fans buy the CDs and see them live and buy the T-shirts. In the case of Watt, let him sleep over and feed him. If he has to go to the hospital and can't put on his usual full-strength show for the next year or so, go see him anyway, just out of love and respect.

If Nik doesn't know how to make money, too bad for Nik.
 
#232
c-ba55 said:
Yes, fans buy the CDs and see them live and buy the T-shirts. In the case of Watt, let him sleep over and feed him. If he has to go to the hospital and can't put on his usual full-strength show for the next year or so, go see him anyway, just out of love and respect.

If Nik doesn't know how to make money, too bad for Nik.
Click to expand...

Well, Van Gogh died poor and alone, only selling one painting in his lifetime. Too bad for Vincent. He must not have been very good.


Not that anyone illegally copied Van Gogh's work (while he was living anyways), but I felt like saying that to disprove your idea that real artists, not just entertainers, can't always find a way to make ends meet, and the world does end up a worse place for it. His paintings inspired generations of artists and art admirers-imagine how many more beautiful and inspiring pieces of work he could have made. The same is true for musicians.
 
#234
Bryan R. Tyler said:
Well, Van Gogh died poor and alone, only selling one painting in his lifetime. Too bad for Vincent. He must not have been very good.

Not that anyone illegally copied Van Gogh's work (while he was living anyways), but I felt like saying that to disprove your idea that real artists, not just entertainers, can't always find a way to make ends meet, and the world does end up a worse place for it. His paintings inspired generations of artists and art admirers-imagine how many more beautiful and inspiring pieces of work he could have made. The same is true for musicians.
Click to expand...


He didn't give up though, did he? He made as much art as he could. And the rejection fueled his art. If VanGogh isn't crazy and f'ed up, he's probably not that good. Happy artists don't make for great art. He had the real kind of talent that compels you to use it. That he couldn't make money didn't stop him from contributing massively to the human culture. He didn't say, oh well, I can't make a living painting. I think I'll throw away my painting stuff and become a fieldhand to live and die in comfortable obscurity.
 
#235
c-ba55 said:
He didn't give up though, did he? He made as much art as he could. And the rejection fueled his art. If VanGogh isn't crazy and f'ed up, he's probably not that good. Happy artists don't make for great art. He had the real kind of talent that compels you to use it. That he couldn't make money didn't stop him from contributing massively to the human culture. He didn't say, oh well, I can't make a living painting. I think I'll throw away my painting stuff and become a fieldhand to live and die in comfortable obscurity.
Click to expand...

Actually, he did give up. He committed suicide after a stint in a mental institution brought on by disease and severe depression. Much of his famed work was created before he was "crazy and f'ed up" (he was only active for about a decade)-he was plenty good, happy or not. That he couldn't make money kept him from contributing far more to the human culture. He tried to rely on the money of his brother for support, but it was not enough, and his lack of recognizition and poverty brought on severe depression.
 
#236
Bryan R. Tyler said:
Actually, he did give up. He committed suicide after a stint in a mental institution brought on by disease and severe depression. Much of his famed work was created before he was "crazy and f'ed up" (he was only active for about a decade)-he was plenty good, happy or not. That he couldn't make money kept him from contributing far more to the human culture. He tried to rely on the money of his brother for support, but it was not enough, and his lack of recognizition and poverty brought on severe depression.
Click to expand...

Well bummer for him. He didn't have what it took. His ability to contribute came to an end. Lots of people only have ten good years. Most mathematicians, for example, only do anything good in their 20s or 30s, and then kind of coast.
 
#237
c-ba55 said:
Well bummer for him. He didn't have what it took. His ability to contribute came to an end.
Click to expand...

I suppose carrying that sort of apathy would make stealing an easy and guilt-free choice. After all-it's not you, right? Why should you care if it's not you? Lots of folks in third-world countries starve to death every day. Bummer for them. Guess they didn't have what it took.

Mr. Willett was correct in saying you're either part of the problem or part of the solution. Apathy does not lean towards the "solution" side.
 
#238
Bryan R. Tyler said:
I suppose carrying that sort of apathy would make stealing an easy and guilt-free choice. After all-it's not you, right? Why should you care if it's not you? Lots of folks in third-world countries starve to death every day. Bummer for them. Guess they didn't have what it took.

Mr. Willett was correct in saying you're either part of the problem or part of the solution. Apathy does not lean towards the "solution" side.
Click to expand...

Hey, it's a tough world. That's the whole point here, is you better get yours. Nobody is going to give it to you. "artists" have been coddled by record companies for a long time now, and it has led to decadent, controllable, soft-headed, easy-to-rip-off artists making disposable music. Doing something real, and rejecting crappy music will do more for the world than any amount of worrying about whether other people are getting theirs.
 
#239
c-ba55 said:
Hey, it's a tough world. That's the whole point here, is you better get yours. Nobody is going to give it to you. "artists" have been coddled by record companies for a long time now, and it has led to decadent, controllable, soft-headed, easy-to-rip-off artists making disposable music. Doing something real, and rejecting crappy music will do more for the world than any amount of worrying about whether other people are getting theirs.
Click to expand...

The problem isn't that nobody is going to give it to them. The problem is people are taking it FROM them, and attempting to blame the system in a poor excuse to cover their theft.

I'm legally blind and can't drive, but would like a car for when I want someone to drive me somewhere. The last thing I need is the physical car and it's CD player full of crappy music. Taxis are too annoying to use or flag down, and cost a phenomenal amount. Buses has unacceptable Bus Schedules, and 99 cents seems really high for an fare. I am left with stealing as the only option. If I could buy (really buy...total rights of ownership) a car for $0.25, I would do it. Or if there were volume discounts at least, I would do it. I would buy a lot of cars if it was set up more to my liking. Instead I buy none. Stealing is preferrable to getting ripped off.

And I'm heading to your neighborhood.

Stealing is stealing, whether there is monetary loss or not. A song or CD is copyrighted property of an artist, and if you obtain a copy of it by any other means than legally purchasing it yourself or recieving it from from someone who has legally purchased it for you, it is theft. If you don't like those conditions, then you don't get the music. If you choose to take it illegally anyways, may karma have its way with you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back