Piracy

The availability of information for free is something everybody must get used to live with.

Snow Dog wrote: ExittheLemming wrote: Snow Dog wrote: chopper wrote: Nathaniel607 wrote: SouthSideoftheSky wrote: akamaisondufromage wrote: I remember the 'Home Taping is Killing Music' campaign when I was younger and it certainly didn't do that. Isn't that a bit like saying: I remember the 'Smoking Kills' campaign when I was younger and it certainly didn't do that as there are people who smoke who are still alive. The argument cannot be that downloading totally kills music, the argument must be that it kills some music. It is plausible to think that in the absence of illegitimate downloading, the music available in the world would be different in some way; some artists would probably be here that are not. Name one artist that was undeniably destroyed by piracy. I can't think of any. Maybe there are a couple, but certainly not many. Nick Barrett of Pendragon came close, I believe he had to remortgage his house to keep going. Is it provable that illegal filesharing is to blame? Andy Partidge of XTC went broke years before file sharing existed. That's interesting (me being an XTC fan) How so fair canine? All that i remember is that some time in the eighties or maybe early nineties.....God time is weird, I just can't recall now......that he had to sell his house and move back in with his mum. Poor album sales maybe or bad record or management deal?

Too bad, I know that his income must have been solely record sales (as XTC stopped touring entirely circa 1982) and there was talk of the band having to make a hefty payout to a former manger at one time after a law suit or somesuch.

cphil wrote: I really don't care if people copy and distribute pop or rapp , nobody wants to hear or discus it in 10 years time. I'm talking about rock music. 2 weeks after the release of Glasshammer's "IF" I found a download on the web. There is nothing the music industry can do, close the illegal sites down and they appear somewhere else - impossible !

Prog-centric mindset much?

"Non-rock music isn't worth being compensated for, so download away!"

If I didn't disregard your opinion at the first post, I did at this one.

Not that I agree that downloading = stealing all the time (and have repeatedly argued against that opinion), but grow and open mind, man.

chopper wrote: Nathaniel607 wrote: SouthSideoftheSky wrote: akamaisondufromage wrote: I remember the 'Home Taping is Killing Music' campaign when I was younger and it certainly didn't do that. Isn't that a bit like saying: I remember the 'Smoking Kills' campaign when I was younger and it certainly didn't do that as there are people who smoke who are still alive. The argument cannot be that downloading totally kills music, the argument must be that it kills some music. It is plausible to think that in the absence of illegitimate downloading, the music available in the world would be different in some way; some artists would probably be here that are not. Name one artist that was undeniably destroyed by piracy. I can't think of any. Maybe there are a couple, but certainly not many. Nick Barrett of Pendragon came close, I believe he had to remortgage his house to keep going.

Well, I could argue it's cause Pendragon just aren't that great.

chopper wrote: If an artist sells 50 000 units (it rarely happenes to new and unknown ones ) and pirates own 100 000, there surely must be something wrong with this picture. So , Pirates don't steal they just promote the artists for free. All the illegal copies on servers and hard drives are just file sharing. I get it now.

(what the hell happened here?!?)

But, if there was no file sharing, they still might only have sold 55,000. The other 45,000 might only have it because it's free. In fact, they may have only sold 40,000 thanks to losing the sales caused by the people who got it for free telling their friends about it.

I created a poll for this subject yesterday and it was closed, but i guess its ok if it doesnt have the options to choose and vote huh?

cphil wrote: I really don't care if people copy and distribute pop or rapp , nobody wants to hear or discus it in 10 years time. I'm talking about rock music.

Isn't that hypocritical?
Have to be honest...this comment makes me want to completely disregard everything you've said/will say.

Such a big fuss about the piracy, yet pop or rap you don't care if it happens to?
You don't like those genres, neither do I at all, BUT it is the artists work and they would also suffer from illegal downloading. But you don't care because "I dont like those, Im talking about rock here"

Kinda narrow minded of you.

Peace

We've had this discussion a number of times, but it is always really interesting, and i will add my tuppence worth again.

The vast majority of music i get these days is downloaded. However, i pay for every single one of them, legally, and above board. In fact, I've had a huge splurge recently on a pile of new stuff.

I find streaming on stuff such as Last FM quite useful in order to try new stuff before I physically buy it.

I never use bit torrent sites, for both moral and PC security issues.

However, previous contributors have made reference to the old days of taping vinyl LPs amongst friends. Yep, guilty as charged. It's always happened, and, in reality, file sharing is really only a modern day equivalent of this.

You will never really stop it, and, as ever, it is the moral stance of the user which decides the day.

I honestly think that bthe internet has done far more good than bad for Progressive Rock. Loads of people wouldn't have even heard of most of these downloaded bands if it wasn't for communities like ours. So some download..some download and buy..and some just buy.

lazland wrote: We've had this discussion a number of times, but it is always really interesting, and i will add my tuppence worth again. The vast majority of music i get these days is downloaded. However, i pay for every single one of them, legally, and above board. In fact, I've had a huge splurge recently on a pile of new stuff. I find streaming on stuff such as Last FM quite useful in order to try new stuff before I physically buy it. I never use bit torrent sites, for both moral and PC security issues. However, previous contributors have made reference to the old days of taping vinyl LPs amongst friends. Yep, guilty as charged. It's always happened, and, in reality, file sharing is really only a modern day equivalent of this. You will never really stop it, and, as ever, it is the moral stance of the user which decides the day.

Since that last poll thread will now drop like a rock, I'll restate myself.  I don't think I'll ever warm up to them except for the occasional freebie. 

I did a pay to download of Porcupine Tree's Futile.  Now that was worth it as it came with printable booklet art, just two sides, but at least it had a track listing, credits, etc.  I, of course made my own CD from it and put it in a case, even printed out a label for the CD.  I've done the freebie download of NIN's The Slip and had to get a hard copy.  I've done the name your own price download of In Rainbows, probably paid too much as again I went out and got a hard copy.

Most of the taping I did of LPs were my own albums, although I did have a few copied to cassette from friends or the library.

And I've bought more that a few used CDs and LPs.  But the majority of my stuff these days is new and original sale should have resulted in some artist compensation.  Also, I buy directly from the artist's web site whenever possible.

I am no pirate though, arrgghh.


Edited by Slartibartfast - October 23 2010 at 15:36

Snow Dog wrote: I honestly think that bthe internet has done far more good than bad for Progressive Rock. Loads of people wouldn't have even heard of most of these downloaded bands if it wasn't for communities like ours. So some download..some download and buy..and some just buy. At the end they all spread the word and the  bands become more known.

Couldn't agree more