Join the legal Music campaign

 

This is a quite normal opinion on this topic here and unlike my post, not considered trolling.

Its ignorant, self righteous and it disgusts me.

Try and figure out how its possible to discuss a swedish jazz/fusion album with only 500 ex. printed in '74 and never reissued. With a 16 year old intelligent, kid from some country where there probably doesn't even exist a single original copy of that record. While you either bought your copy when it was brand new, or on ebay for 70 euros (which doesn't help the artist any more than a free download). Try and figure out how the kid got to hear it. You think he wouldn't rather own an original copy himself like you, if he could?
 
Do you want to stay friends or do you want keep judging, even see the kid prosecuted? A thief is a thief is a thief? No way! The world is not that simple a place. Some of you have no idea how many unfortunate youngsters who wisely stays away from all these discussions, you're hurting. This is your new friends. Your young, bright hopes for the future of prog.

(Downloading a new album you can easily find, and afford, is of course wrong)

 

I am an attorney and you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.  Intellectual property misappropriation and "theft" (larceny) have nothing in common, are not prosecuted the same way and are simply not the same "crime."  In fact, downloading music "illegally" is not even a crime -- if it was, the RIAA would be turning their private investigations over the police. 

Most file sharing applications work on a peer to peer basis ... when you're downloading a file you automatically offer the file (or parts of it if the download isn't yet complete) to the public for downloading. So even if you immediately move the file to a private, not shared folder once the download is complete, you still offered the file for uploading. So please keep in mind that most people are never "only" downloading.

But they're not (so long as the downloading is not coupled with selling copies like I explained above it may not be coupled with selling copies, but with distributing copies); they are suing people in civil court and offering settlements.  It is absolutely amazing the obscene levels of greed that artists and recording labels have, and their staggeringly arrogant campaign to brainwash the public into analogizing actual theft and copyright misappropriation is appalling.  That there are people stupid enough to swallow it is, unfortunately, no great surprise.

Ok, I have to say that don't sound like any lawyer I ever met ... you rather sound like an ultra left wing socialist.

 

The only person you can "steal" music from is a retailer.

Sorry, but this is nit-picking to the extreme. Infringement of copyright might not be called "stealing", but it has similar ranges of punishment. Theft, fraud, copyright infringement ... those are all similar crimes (you take away something from another person or company).

When you download, you try before you buy.  It's that simple.

It's the simplest and most common *excuse" for downloading, but it's not a valid defense in court.

And more exposure = greater sales to artists.

Sure, most downloaders claim that the downloads introduced them to so much new stuff ... and of course they buy some of these albums. But from my own experience a couple of years ago and from what I know from friends, I'd say that you only buy like 20% of what you download. I think it's safe to assume that hadn't you downloaded anything you would probably have ended up buying the same number of albums. In the end the number of albums you buy each month is much more determined by your budget than by your free access to albums.

I heartily encourage everyone to get as much free music as you possibly can, "legally" or no, so that you can be the most informed consumer possible.

Most bands offer free samples today. You don't need the full album to decide whether to buy it or not ... you also wouldn't request to be able to read a book in full before you purchase it.

I am not advocating that music be downloaded and sold.  I am not advocating downloading for the purposes of building your own electronic musical library in lieu of ever buying a CD.  But the disgusting, shrill, self-serving whining from the artist/label lackeys in here simply must be stopped by reason, logic and an awareness of the world we now live in.

If anything needs to stop then it's people claiming that music should be free. It can't be ... musicians need money to live, and to pay for the studio and other necessary expenses (or they make a contract with a music label which then gives them that money). Of course some artists are incredibly wealthy ... but 99% of our favorite prog artists are not.

These people are the first to want every benefit of participating in commerce and the free market and are very quick to call their music "product," yet they don't want their consumers to treat their wares like a consumer would treat any other product (the ability to try before you buy, to return it if you don't like it, etc.)

Sorry, but like I mentioned above most artists offer free sample tracks, which is more than you can ask. But what puzzles me the most about most people in favor of illegal file sharing is that you draw a conclusion like "they're not offering free samples -> I'm entitled to get these free samples against their will". If you insist on hearing the full album before buying it and they don't make it available to you ... then just don't buy it!

 

Keep whining, corporate shills.  The 21st century is here and there is nothing whatsoever that you can do about it.

The only one who's whining here is you, because you think that musicians should spend their time composing and recording music for free and then give it to you. They are not, which drives you mad ... and I'm feeling so, so sorry for you.