How many of you steal music? Many of my friends who are musicians steal music. It's kinda ironic don't you think?
I'm just curious as to how you feel about it.
I'm just curious as to how you feel about it.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
stealing music,etc...
- Thread starter 4 stringed fury
- Start date
- Status
Theft is theft.
I don't walk into your house and eat food out of your fridge, don't take it from mine.
We all gotta eat.
I don't walk into your house and eat food out of your fridge, don't take it from mine.
We all gotta eat.
Define "stealing" music. Do you mean stealing the Cd from a store, or downloading off of a Peer-to-peer network? or do you mean stealing songs and other things like that?
I hear so many people using ideas in their music that aren't necessarily theirs. Same lines, same grooves...
...How is that theft?
or are you talking about 'music piracy'?
You're in Tennesee and I'm in Canada so there's a huge difference in the culture of copyright just based on our experiences with living in 2 different countries that treat the subject differently.
Up here it's perfectly fine to make copies as long as you're not making money from reproducing the music and distributing it.
To buy every bit of music one would want to have would simply be impossible for most people. I could think of about 200 albums I want to have on my computer and another 100 that I want on vinyl.
The way things are going, people still like to buy hard copies of the music that means most to them. With so many artists making product, not everything resonates with people fully.
Another important aspect of this is Concert tickets and Merchandaise. Most artists make a huge chunk of their income from playing live and from selling t-shirts. In addition to that, licensing the rights to use of an artist's music is becoming a bigger and bigger way to make music for artists.
So the 'album' (EP, single, LP, presentable package) is really just a business card to gain as many interested listeners to an artist as possible.
Say i made an album...a clean record with a power trio, a couple of overdubs. Spend the time and some of the money on Preproduction (get it down tight, tour the set (pay for gas and a bit of promo), get some good vibes) and then track it in a great sounding room and have it mixed/produced/mastered to budget I could spend a humble ten Grand on a great sounding record...most likely a 45 minute album or a 7 song EP...
That recording could either be pressed and sold as merch and as my sole income from reproduced works would drive me to become upset when thinking I was being ripped off by filesharing...
...Or I could sell the album but share it electronically with my fans. Get some rapport with a fanbase and take donations for downloads...that I could, say, donate to charities or help fund my arts community somehow.
The more people that I could tie into downloads, and my website, the more people in my email list, the more people in the fanclub, my myspace page, facebook friends..the more clout I would have and proof of interest for licensicing music for video games, television, movies, corporate films, multimedia projects and productions for government based groups etc.
I could also use this to get a record deal.
So that $10K to make a clean album could then be further infused with high priced mixing and mastering (or an advance to cut another few tracks) and then rerelease the record, or pay us to tour and share profits for merch with a label interest.
How many ringtones could I sell?
How many pairs of panties would hot girls buy from the merch booth?
How many frisbees would fly around on the beach in my hometown with my band's logo on it.
I have a 'white cowbell oklahoma' cock rag. I use it to wipe off my golf discs.
I want to see them every time they come to town and tell people to see them. and I never paid for an album but they more than made their money back from my free copy of 'cincerro blanco'
So it will come down to how much money is being spread around the industry and how the various formulai work in their own context.
To make a hardline rule about it will keep you out in the cold.
Why not come in and set up a genius playlist in iTunes while I put on some coffee?
.r.
...How is that theft?
or are you talking about 'music piracy'?
You're in Tennesee and I'm in Canada so there's a huge difference in the culture of copyright just based on our experiences with living in 2 different countries that treat the subject differently.
Up here it's perfectly fine to make copies as long as you're not making money from reproducing the music and distributing it.
To buy every bit of music one would want to have would simply be impossible for most people. I could think of about 200 albums I want to have on my computer and another 100 that I want on vinyl.
The way things are going, people still like to buy hard copies of the music that means most to them. With so many artists making product, not everything resonates with people fully.
Another important aspect of this is Concert tickets and Merchandaise. Most artists make a huge chunk of their income from playing live and from selling t-shirts. In addition to that, licensing the rights to use of an artist's music is becoming a bigger and bigger way to make music for artists.
So the 'album' (EP, single, LP, presentable package) is really just a business card to gain as many interested listeners to an artist as possible.
Say i made an album...a clean record with a power trio, a couple of overdubs. Spend the time and some of the money on Preproduction (get it down tight, tour the set (pay for gas and a bit of promo), get some good vibes) and then track it in a great sounding room and have it mixed/produced/mastered to budget I could spend a humble ten Grand on a great sounding record...most likely a 45 minute album or a 7 song EP...
That recording could either be pressed and sold as merch and as my sole income from reproduced works would drive me to become upset when thinking I was being ripped off by filesharing...
...Or I could sell the album but share it electronically with my fans. Get some rapport with a fanbase and take donations for downloads...that I could, say, donate to charities or help fund my arts community somehow.
The more people that I could tie into downloads, and my website, the more people in my email list, the more people in the fanclub, my myspace page, facebook friends..the more clout I would have and proof of interest for licensicing music for video games, television, movies, corporate films, multimedia projects and productions for government based groups etc.
I could also use this to get a record deal.
So that $10K to make a clean album could then be further infused with high priced mixing and mastering (or an advance to cut another few tracks) and then rerelease the record, or pay us to tour and share profits for merch with a label interest.
How many ringtones could I sell?
How many pairs of panties would hot girls buy from the merch booth?
How many frisbees would fly around on the beach in my hometown with my band's logo on it.
I have a 'white cowbell oklahoma' cock rag. I use it to wipe off my golf discs.
I want to see them every time they come to town and tell people to see them. and I never paid for an album but they more than made their money back from my free copy of 'cincerro blanco'
So it will come down to how much money is being spread around the industry and how the various formulai work in their own context.
To make a hardline rule about it will keep you out in the cold.
Why not come in and set up a genius playlist in iTunes while I put on some coffee?
.r.
I'm sorry I didn't make this clear up front, I didn't think it would be that ambiguous to understand. I mean using things like limewire,Torrents, or other piracy ways too.
It's absolutely impossible for me to buy every album I want to hear, and I buy quite a few. The ones I can't afford I download completely guilt free.
If I wouldn't have ever purchased a hard copy, and no one is "out" a copy because of the download, then no one is "hurt" by my downloading an album. I get to hear music I otherwise would not have listened to and the band now has one more fan.
The only people who "lose" from peer-to-peer file sharing are the record companies and large pop acts that are glorified white-noise for people. THAT crap is taking a huge hit because no one wants to pay for it. Good bands with quality music will always be able to move product.
If I wouldn't have ever purchased a hard copy, and no one is "out" a copy because of the download, then no one is "hurt" by my downloading an album. I get to hear music I otherwise would not have listened to and the band now has one more fan.
The only people who "lose" from peer-to-peer file sharing are the record companies and large pop acts that are glorified white-noise for people. THAT crap is taking a huge hit because no one wants to pay for it. Good bands with quality music will always be able to move product.
I don't download music I haven't purchased, but I absolutely love watching people rationalize it.
Mike
Mike
We've had these threads in OT before and they can get really nasty. So I'm not getting involved. 
I don't think it's stealing. I think stealing is only wrong because someone loses what you've taken. Without the loss its just copying and receiving. It's kind of selfish to want to have things and not let other people have them at no loss to you. But if controlling information is your thing, that's cool.
Metallica Sue Canadian Band over E, F Chords
MONTREAL - Metallica are taking legal action against independant Canadian rock band Unfaith over what they feel is unsanctioned usage of two chords the band has been using since 1982 : E and F.
People are going to get on our case again for this, but try to see it from our point of view just once, stated Metallicas Lars Ulrich. Were not saying we own those two chords, individually - that would be ridiculous. Were just saying that in that specific order, people have grown to associate E, F with our music.
Metallica filed a trademark infringement suit against the indie group at the US district court for central California on Monday. According to the drummer, the continued use of the two chords causes confusion, deception and mistake in the minds of the public.
Metallicas lawyer, Jill Pietrini, told us that the band decided to take legal action only after first sending a letter of complaint to the Canadian bands singer/songwriter, Erik Ashley.
We sent a demand letter and havent reached a resolution, so we had to sue, she said. They continue to shamelessly feature the two chords on their website song samples and we just cant have that.
Ashley, in the meantime, is still shocked by the entire story, and hasnt yet decided how the band will respond.
I thought it was a prank at first, he told us. Now Im not sure what to think.
Ulrich states that hes not trying to prevent Unfaith from using the two chords, only that he feels Metallica should be credited for them whenever used, and is calling for 50% of all revenue generated from any song using them.
Its nothing personal against them, he added. We intend to enforce our rights with any band intending to use Metallica-branded chords in the future.
This marks the first time anything of this kind has ever been tried in court, and it will be interesting to see how things develop.
Metallicas website has issued an official statement on the suit here.
Unfaiths official website hasnt officially responded at print time.
MONTREAL - Metallica are taking legal action against independant Canadian rock band Unfaith over what they feel is unsanctioned usage of two chords the band has been using since 1982 : E and F.
People are going to get on our case again for this, but try to see it from our point of view just once, stated Metallicas Lars Ulrich. Were not saying we own those two chords, individually - that would be ridiculous. Were just saying that in that specific order, people have grown to associate E, F with our music.
Metallica filed a trademark infringement suit against the indie group at the US district court for central California on Monday. According to the drummer, the continued use of the two chords causes confusion, deception and mistake in the minds of the public.
Metallicas lawyer, Jill Pietrini, told us that the band decided to take legal action only after first sending a letter of complaint to the Canadian bands singer/songwriter, Erik Ashley.
We sent a demand letter and havent reached a resolution, so we had to sue, she said. They continue to shamelessly feature the two chords on their website song samples and we just cant have that.
Ashley, in the meantime, is still shocked by the entire story, and hasnt yet decided how the band will respond.
I thought it was a prank at first, he told us. Now Im not sure what to think.
Ulrich states that hes not trying to prevent Unfaith from using the two chords, only that he feels Metallica should be credited for them whenever used, and is calling for 50% of all revenue generated from any song using them.
Its nothing personal against them, he added. We intend to enforce our rights with any band intending to use Metallica-branded chords in the future.
This marks the first time anything of this kind has ever been tried in court, and it will be interesting to see how things develop.
Metallicas website has issued an official statement on the suit here.
Unfaiths official website hasnt officially responded at print time.
yes it was
From what I've heard, it was the band story only to make em being known. Anyway, back to topic
I download music, I don't call it stealing much, but I download effing lots of music. It's pratically not stealing because the bands I get their cd aren't popular enough to make money on the cd sales. I mean, little underground labels do not give money to the band for cd sales. They usually just pay the studio to record the cd. That way, they give a band the chance to record. But nowadays, recording with computer is soo easy that most underground bands don't need a label anymore. I remember the day that I received the cd The pax Cecillia - Blessed Are the Bonds. The band is litteraly giving away cds and they even pay for shipping to Canada.
Bands do make money on gigs. So, I go to all the shows my money can buy and always buy T shirt, because merch pays a lot too. Finally, I still buy the cds that I find to be the best cds I've ever heard. I buy about 2-3 cds per month which is a lot more than most people. The advantage of the internet is when I buy a cd, I do not waste money on a bad album because I know that this particular album is stellar because I've listened to it again and again before finally deciding to buy it. That's my point of view, and it's gonna stay this way.
Quite simple... I download stuff I'm curious about, but don't want to waste money on if it turns out to be not what I'm looking for... If I do like it, then I get the album. The new metallica album... hated it and deleted the download.
The other stuff I download is good rips of albums I already own on vinyl, stuff that'll never make it into the shops anymore.
I also download an awful lot of CC licensed or trade friendly stuff.
Jamendo is a great source of music albums that are CC licensed and are good, but the artists either don't want to do a commercial release, or else can't get label interest and it's the best way of getting their music out there.
The other stuff I download is good rips of albums I already own on vinyl, stuff that'll never make it into the shops anymore.
I also download an awful lot of CC licensed or trade friendly stuff.
Jamendo is a great source of music albums that are CC licensed and are good, but the artists either don't want to do a commercial release, or else can't get label interest and it's the best way of getting their music out there.
Ironically, the last album I bought I didn't even need to pay for - Radiohead's "In Rainbows.'
Other than that, yes.
Other than that, yes.
If I want to check out a new band/artist, I often download an album or a few songs of theirs, illegally. If there is a specific song I want to do a cover of, I download it too. I buy music when I really like an artist and want to support it. That's perhaps 20 CD's a year.
For starters, "stealing" music is not stealing in the traditional sense. If I steal your amp, I effectively revoked your right to use your amp. If I download your song, I do not revoke your right to further exploit your song in a commercial fashion.
That being said, I do think that piracy or music downloads from P2p networks is a problematic phenomenon, but it is rather one that has not been handled correctly by the industry. A usual example is DRM, i.e. mechanisms to supposedly ensure against piracy. A DRM-ed song imposes limits (such as only using it with a specific device or a specific number of devices). A downloaded song imposes no limitations, i.e. it is a superior product and better value for money.
Absolutely. It's pretty interesting how humans can rationalize just about anything and then truly believe in that rationalization.
bc
- Status
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Does the truss rods engagement add stability to the neck?- Latest: Zootsuitbass
-