this is a piece of shit
music-downloading woes
-
its4am_isanybodyhome
- Posts: 2078
- Joined: 3/15/2003, 7:04 pm
- Location: in hell, with my pet bunnies
- Contact:
Lando wrote:People will find ways around it. Different programs, zipping files to give them different extensions or even tags. The hackers will always be one step ahead of the authorities...
Exactly. I just don't get what the government thinks it's going to accomplish with any attack on P2P programs. The Internet is all about the sharing of information, so how are they ever going to limit the transfer of MP3s? With their logic, you'll have to sue all the instant-messenger programs that have a "Get File" option. Also, even if they do happen to view all the MP3s on your computer, there's no way they can tell which ones you've downloaded or which tracks you might have just ripped from a CD that you own. In my view, the RIAA had this coming - they charge us $15 for a piece of plastic that costs like a nickel to make, and this is their payback.
<font color="#9879c7">~Sarah</font>
-
finding emo
- Posts: 1635
- Joined: 4/27/2002, 6:25 pm
- Location: New York City (Queens)
- Contact:
buzhwa wrote:Lando wrote:People will find ways around it. Different programs, zipping files to give them different extensions or even tags. The hackers will always be one step ahead of the authorities...
Exactly. I just don't get what the government thinks it's going to accomplish with any attack on P2P programs. The Internet is all about the sharing of information, so how are they ever going to limit the transfer of MP3s? With their logic, you'll have to sue all the instant-messenger programs that have a "Get File" option. Also, even if they do happen to view all the MP3s on your computer, there's no way they can tell which ones you've downloaded or which tracks you might have just ripped from a CD that you own. In my view, the RIAA had this coming - they charge us $15 for a piece of plastic that costs like a nickel to make, and this is their payback.
I believe that more goes into the cost of the cd than the disc itself... the artist has to be paid, producers, use of recording equipment, etc., etc. I don't think its fair that they're doing this to people, but I also don't think its fair to download an entire CD, fall in love with it, and NOT BUY IT. Personally, I think artists should be HAPPY about these programs, otherwise some artists wouldn't get the exposure that they do (mainly bands whose CDs cannot be found in stores in certain countries)
"I wrote on my palm before I went to have it read to see if she would read that too."- Mitch Hedberg
-
Sufjan Stevens
- Posts: 6738
- Joined: 3/17/2002, 12:25 pm
- Location: Detroit, MI
Maybe artists should strive to make more than one or two good songs per cd. Then their sales might just go up. Why buy a cd for one song when you can download it?
That is why I don't feel bad for the music industry. Most music out there is just over-produced drivel, with an exception of a song or two per cd. Why would anyone want to spend $15 to hear the one song and find out that the rest of the cd sucks? You can't sell the cd back to the store, and you take a $15 hit to your wallet. I'd rather download the one song than buy a cd.
That is the exact reason I don't own a Powderfiger, Harvey Danger, or Local H cd. In most cases, the common person couldn't even name the song that they sang, but can tell you they love that song when they hear it. In cases like that, would you rather buy the 12 song cd from each of those bands, or would you rather download each song and put it on one cd?
That is why I don't feel bad for the music industry. Most music out there is just over-produced drivel, with an exception of a song or two per cd. Why would anyone want to spend $15 to hear the one song and find out that the rest of the cd sucks? You can't sell the cd back to the store, and you take a $15 hit to your wallet. I'd rather download the one song than buy a cd.
That is the exact reason I don't own a Powderfiger, Harvey Danger, or Local H cd. In most cases, the common person couldn't even name the song that they sang, but can tell you they love that song when they hear it. In cases like that, would you rather buy the 12 song cd from each of those bands, or would you rather download each song and put it on one cd?
I faced death. I went in with my arms swinging. But I heard my own breath and had to face that I'm still living. I'm still flesh. I hold on to awful feelings. I'm not dead... My chest still draws breath. I hold it. I'm buoyant. There's no end.
Naveeder Val wrote:I believe that more goes into the cost of the cd than the disc itself... the artist has to be paid, producers, use of recording equipment, etc., etc. I don't think its fair that they're doing this to people, but I also don't think its fair to download an entire CD, fall in love with it, and NOT BUY IT. Personally, I think artists should be HAPPY about these programs, otherwise some artists wouldn't get the exposure that they do (mainly bands whose CDs cannot be found in stores in certain countries)
Yeah, I know the profits don't all go to the RIAA, and I agree that it's not fair to burn a whole CD, but, I tend to like only one or two songs on most artists' discs, so, like Alan said, I'm not going to go out and buy the disc just for that. Also, I think some artists are actually happier having their MP3s out there for the worldwide market.
<font color="#9879c7">~Sarah</font>