Do you steal music???

[c-ba55]

Unless perhaps you're a professional composer/songwriter who doesn't perform the song live, but depend on album sales/royalties for compensation...what about this person, just screwed?

All specific niches are not guaranteed to be protected. New ways to make money will be found though, as the demand for quality music remains high. People always fret their way through economic revolutions. What about the xxxx, how will they make money? Nobody will have any incentive to yyyyy.

The internet and mp3s are transformative, displacing technologies. They exist, and you have to ask yourself how to deal with the future, not the past.

There's great music in Cuba. Money does not create music.


Frankly, the world would be a better place if the guy writing Brittney Spears' songs, and all the other people in this "game" for the money were plumbers instead.

 

[Marcus Willett]

People always fret their way through economic revolutions. What about the xxxx, how will they make money? Nobody will have any incentive to yyyyy...There's great music in Cuba. Money does not create music.

True, but that's just avoiding the issue and saying something will happen (i.e., someone else will take care of it, kinda like someone else paying). Money doesn't create great music, very true. It's also true that we all need money to live. If I can't make money with my art, what happens? I HAVE to find something else to do to make money. What then? None of us have more than 24 hours in a day, and all of us have finite resources of energy and time. If I have to take away time/energy from my art because some people feel like thet should get it for free and I don't make any money as a result, my art suffers.

I've been in the situation where I wrote stuff for people that I'll never make a dime off of if others download for free. OK, how much time can I devote to something that doesn't pay the bills? I gotta eat too, you know? This whole idea that artists will just go and create out of love (which is essentially true) REALLY skips over the fact that they have to deal with economic reality. How many of you who are NOT making your money from music would appreciate you employer demanding more and more time from you without any more compensation? How much effort would you put into your job then?

Ultimately this will bite you in the ass. If good, talented artists can't make a living be full-time artists, we all suffer. Downloading others' work (without their permission, which I call STEALING, I don't give a damn what the legal term is) is perhaps more a symptom, but again, you are either part of the problem (even if your part is simply doing nothing) or you are part of the solution, and we all face this choice every day with every act.

Write a book, take a year off to devote yourself to it. Invest a huge amount of time, lose a year's income to invest in your dream, take a huge risk, watch it be well received as a great work; highly lauded. Watch all your potential financial windfall vanish because others would rather just copy it, rather than actually PAY for something they want...sound like fun?

 

[Marcus Willett]

Quick questions:

Is having access to music you like a right or a privilege? If it's a right, then we are all entitled to it (like say, legal defense) regardless of ability to pay. All recordings should be free of charge to all at all times, after all, it's a right. Sound sustainable?

If it's a privilege, you have to pay for it (like cable TV). Is there any reason why some should have to pay but not others? I can't afford cable, but I really want it, and it doesn't take away from anyone else, so I should just tap into the signal that's already there (hey, I'll add a signal booster to offset any signal quality degredation so there's REALLY no loss to anyone at all) and get it free then?

 

[c-ba55]

True, but that's just avoiding the issue and saying something will happen (i.e., someone else will take care of it, kinda like someone else paying). Money doesn't create great music, very true. It's also true that we all need money to live. If I can't make money with my art, what happens? I HAVE to find something else to do to make money. What then? None of us have more than 24 hours in a day, and all of us have finite resources of energy and time. If I have to take away time/energy from my art because some people feel like thet should get it for free and I don't make any money as a result, my art suffers.

If it ends up not being worth it to you to make music, don't. I'm not worried about the total amount of quality music in the world going down. The society does not have an obligation to support the artist.

 

[Marcus Willett]

If it ends up not being worth it to you to make music, don't. I'm not worried about the total amount of quality music in the world going down. The society does not have an obligation to support the artist.

It's not a question of it being worth it. It's a question of paying the bills. Please explain to me why you or anyone should be entitled to something free of charge, unless of course, it's a right.

 

[Marcus Willett]

The society does not have an obligation to support the artist.

Obligation? No, I suppose not. Do you really want to live in that world? I don't have an obligation to be nice either. Or help people in need. Or have good manners. I could go on all day...is it really coming down to only doing what you are obligated to do? Is that the world you wanna live in?

 

[c-ba55]

It's not a question of it being worth it. It's a question of paying the bills. Please explain to me why you or anyone should be entitled to something free of charge, unless of course, it's a right.

That is the same question. You want the listening public to pay your bills by the business model of your choosing. If they choose not to, so be it. Your bills go unpaid, or you find alternative ways to pay them. If that means you can't make music anymore, oh well. Your life goes on, the future of music goes on.

 

[Marcus Willett]

I'll try this again.

Please explain to me why you or anyone should be entitled to something free of charge...

 

[Marcus Willett]

You want the listening public to pay your bills by the business model of your choosing. If they choose not to, so be it.

Almost. Here, I'll perfect it.
I want everyone to pay for the things they want (unless it's a right). If the public chooses not to, that's their right, but they don't get the thing then.

Can't have it both ways; you like my art enough to take it and have it and enjoy it (against my wishes), but you don't feel like paying for it. Uh no, sorry, no free lunches.

 

[Bob Rogers]

While I do feel that downloading music is stealing, I don't feel that downloading is even in the same ballpark as stealing someone's bass.

Consider: If you make a copy of someone's music, and don't buy it later, the absolute worst thing that happens is that the person downloading didn't buy it. That means that the entire band didn't make their 40c on the album, and the label will drop them if it happens enough. While this is bad news, it's not a huge concern for an established act (since they probably won't get dropped). That album wasn't taken away from someone who was going to buy it. But were you planning to buy it in the first place? If you hear it and like it, you might end up buying it. So while on the surface it's technically theft, it's still possible that it will lead to a sale that would have never happened without you stealing in the first place.

If I steal your bass, you are done making music unless you have more. I have singlehandedly (unless this is John Turner's bass and I need two hands to lift it) deprived you of something that took you several hours of work to earn the money for. I had to do it while several people were watching, including your angry band members, so there was a physical risk involved. With downloading, there is no risk involved. As a species we are cowards (or pragmatic, your call), and that isn't going away anytime soon.

If you concede that downloading is stealing, then to me you're saying it is "in the same ballpark." The argument you make about the degree of harm certainly matters, but it is vulnerable on two points. First is the "slippery slope" argument that I have alluded to. But the second is "cumulative effect." Your argument - "yes it's wrong, but the effect of my action is so small that it doesn't matter" is also used by litterers and other polluters. "One pint of old insecticide in the river, who cares?" Well, maybe no one, but I still think it's wrong.

 

[Bob Rogers]

C-ba55 -

I'm not sure I understand your position. Are you saying that there should not be any protection of intellecutal property? That argument is certainly out there on the web, but I don't see it posted in music forums very often.

 

[c-ba55]

C-ba55 -

I'm not sure I understand your position. Are you saying that there should not be any protection of intellecutal property? That argument is certainly out there on the web, but I don't see it posted in music forums very often.

I'm saying the world is what it is, and musicians need to figure out how to get what they need out of it, in terms of artistic and financial satisfaction, rather than expect the world to return to a previous state.

 

[Bryan R. Tyler]

I'm saying the world is what it is, and musicians need to figure out how to get what they need out of it, in terms of artistic and financial satisfaction, rather than expect the world to return to a previous state.

And finding ways to stop illegal downloading is the way to do it, NOT having musicians be forced to deal with it and find another way to make money. A suiting analogy for that logic is that the reality of the world today is that there are car theives. The answer to that problem is better legal protection and car manufacturers making their vehicles better equipped against theft, NOT to just take the apathetic view of "ok, they're going to steal cars anyways, people need to find a different way to get around."

Downloading music from people who don't want it freely downloaded or distributed is the same as stealing a CD from a store. No matter what the reasons are that people come up with for downloading it-be it "the industry gets my money not the artists" or "I just download an album and if I like it I'll go out and buy it." I wonder if the folks at the music stores would be okay with somebody stealing an album and coming back to pay for it if they don't like it. You don't eat your food at the grocery store and then only pay for what you like. You want to get a taste? Use the sample soundclips that are legally available for almost every album out there from places like Amazon.com.

A lot of folks don't seem to get that their reasoning behind illegally downloading music DON'T MATTER to the people who created it and don't want it downloaded.

 

[Brendan]

A lot of folks don't seem to get that their reasoning behind illegally downloading music DON'T MATTER to the people who created it and don't want it downloaded.

Oh, I get it, I'm just apathetic about it.

 

[Bryan R. Tyler]

My apathy has been noted in the past.

Your apathy is only bested by your forgetfulness

 

[Norwegianwood]

Do I steal music?
Yes I do.

 

[Marcus Willett]

OK, everyone can relax now, I'm back.

So what did I miss...lessee...

I'm saying the world is what it is, and musicians need to figure out how to get what they need out of it, in terms of artistic and financial satisfaction, rather than expect the world to return to a previous state.

Lots of things are they way they are, and very wrong. Some cops stop and beat up people for no reason, that's just the way it is. OK, leave town? Don't go out at night? Cower in fear and hope for the best? How about FIX the problem. Acknowlege that it's wrong, punish those who do it and don't tolerate it as a society.

And finding ways to stop illegal downloading is the way to do it, NOT having musicians be forced to deal with it and find another way to make money. A suiting analogy for that logic is that the reality of the world today is that there are car theives. The answer to that problem is better legal protection and car manufacturers making their vehicles better equipped against theft, NOT to just take the apathetic view of "ok, they're going to steal cars anyways, people need to find a different way to get around."

Well done sir. There seems to be this pervasive idea in society today that quaint old-fashioned notions like right and wrong don't apply in the digital world. After all, it's just a copy, right? You didn't lose anything...jeez. Still waiting for anyone to justify (if they can) my movie and cable TV scenario.

Ideas are property. That's why we have patents, copyrights and trademarks. Take that away and let's see what kind of world we're left with...should be interesting.

'm not worried about the total amount of quality music in the world going down.

That, perhaps is the differnce between us, my friend. I consider music and being a musician as a sacred trust and duty. If that is truly how you feel, you have my pity.

Oh, I get it, I'm just apathetic about it.

Now THAT is something I can respect; at least he's not bullsh*tting me or himself.

 

[Brendan]

Your apathy is only bested by your forgetfulness

This is true, even without the humorous intent. My brain is like buckshot: giving up accuracy for being able to hit everything in a 3 foot square radius.

 

[Norwegianwood]

I'm sure someone else have pointet this out many times before in this thread, and their arguments have been killed to death even more.
Still:
Last night a drummer I played with told me all about D'Angelos woodo and how terrible it was that I as a bassist had not heard it. He said it had some of the best basswork ever on it. Ok, I said, and went straight to limewire and downloaded it. I liked what I heard, so I decided to buy it when I get the bucks.
I have never downloaded a whole album ever. But I download songs all the time to check out new things.
If that makes me a thief, then fine by me. At least I don't do drugs.
That's something.

 

[msquared]

I download songs all the time to check out new things. If that makes me a thief, then fine by me.

Well, of course. Because try-before-you-buy is the new thievery.

THINK OF THE CEOs, MAN!