Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Off Topic [BG]' started by 4 stringed fury, Sep 30, 2008.
If by "society's view", you mean "lazy and cheap sense of entitlement", I can see your point. To me, neither the number of people doing it nor the ease, nor shiftless clowns who think the combination of the two make it OK will ever justify taking a product, tangible or not, that was produced by someone with the intent to sell. I'm really not sure how this can be viewed differently, especially by other musicians. If YOU want to give your music away, fine, but recognize others have put a value of thier efforts and do not.
To anyone saying this isn't really stealing because there is no tangible product, you have got to be kidding. Intellectual property is worth money and can be stolen. If you can't see this, entrepreneurialship isn't your bag.
There's no racial slur in there whatsoever. And you're saying righteous as if it's a bad thing.
You can justify theft all you want. It's still theft.
So in essence the purchaser of the music is actually LEASING it. I understand that is the old paradigm and is still accepted by many, but that paradigm is very quickly being replaced in the minds of the general populace and any amount of lamenting from the artists will not change that. I ask, who are YOU to decide which of these concepts are "right" or "wrong?"
Its not a lease, its a form of license, and its not a paradigm, its the way it is.
no there was a quite explicit racial slur in there.
you called me a gypsy implying that all gypsy's steal and that it is a bad thing to be one.
being self righteous is a bad thing. cause it implies that you have never done a moraly ambiguous or nasty thing to anyone anywhere in your life. For you to be so, you would have to be a saint.
I highly doubt a saint would call someone a gypsy, and mean it in a bad way.
He's an artist, and he don't look back...
Sure, currently the legal status of this activity is considered "theft," and I will not argue that point. However, the legal status of an event does not dictate it's moral status.
No, you are buying a copy of the music. You do NOT own any part of the copyright with this purchase, which means you have no right to distribute or sell it. These parameters were set up hundreds of years ago to protect artists from people making prints of their paintings and selling them.
I'm the owner of the music. I'm the one who you are taking from without asking or permission. That, no matter what excuse you come up with, is stealing from me. Doesn't matter how old the idea of theft is. It's still theft.
no you are not. you are arrogant.
and so if they are not a race, its hate speech.
see the bottom part where it links to ethnic and religious slurs.
The artist, the person who produced the product you want so bad, decides what happens to their product. It is their product to distribute as they see fit, not yours.
The two arn't mutually exclusive.
You didn't even read the link did you? Come on, sometimes it best just to give up. I'm sure people won't think less of you. They already know you steal music!
Most people think "if i can listen music for free on the radio, why cant i do the same in my computer?"
I am in the group that started to buy more albums after the internet, since i can first evaluate what deserves my money.
Ah, ok, but no rationalizing, crime is crime, so let put, what i guess, all 40 million americans that have download music without paying in jail. So what if society and economy would colapse?
Nah. Nothing I want to hear that bad. There's better 'and worse 'on Soundclick.
but "It's not a paradigm, it's a paradigm?" what?
Either way, I think we've all made our points. Thank you for the good conversation everyone. I think I'll get out of the way and let someone else speak for a while.
So you're stealing for the morality of it. Brilliant.
no I read the link.
you obviously do not understand what an ethnic or racial slur is.
maybe you should follow your own advice. I'm sure people won't think less of you. They already know you are an arrogant self righteous troll.
You're using the same "thinking" that got you to the point of thinking stealing was okay again. I didn't call you a gypsy. I joked that you were and even used a smiley. Here's the quote again:
I said it based off of the old stereotype that gypsies find stealing honorable, which I don't believe is true. Since you so often call anyone that judges you as morally low to be self-righteous, then you must come from a place, either physically or mentally, that thinks stealing is anything but morally low.
Where did I mention that all gypsies steal? Where did I mention that all gypsies are bad? Gee, someone must have stolen all those sentences you thought you read out of my post
Being righteous doesn't imply I've never done a bad thing. I could go around burning kittens in my spare time. It doesn't change the fact that stealing is wrong and I still have every right to tell you so.
I'll let the quote you posted speak for itself.