P2P/RIAA/MPAA/etc, etc: Your stance...

The friendliest place on the web for anyone with an interest in aquariums or fish keeping!
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

P2P Sharing: Your stance

  • I do it and I am NOT afraid

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I do it and I AM afraid

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I used to do it but I stopped

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I have never done it but am considering

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I have never done it nor ever will

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • P2P? Is that a new type of candy?

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
Status
Not open for further replies.

tbonem91

Aquarium Advice FINatic
Joined
Nov 13, 2003
Messages
720
Location
Colorado Springs, CO, USA
I'm not condoning copyright infringement

but I am curious how many people here are concerned about P2P network users being sued and locked up.

If you wish to remain anonymous, by all rights do so. :)


edit: the reason I ask is because a coworker of mine just got a letter from Universal Studios and they are considering pressing charges on him for allegedly having a movie file publically available...
 
Its flat out illegal to trade copywritten works unless you have obtained previous written permission by the copywrite holder. That makes the trading of music and video files on the internet Illegal for the most part. Yes there are a few small artists and lables who have allowed legal trade of some songs off an album but for the most part this is not the norm.

I have very strong feelings on this because I work in the IT field at a college and for some reason our kids think its their write to trade these files on our network.
 
I would offer my opinions on this, but it would most likely anger many people and possible result in revoke of access.


So, I'll just say this. Nice topic :)
 
I'd rather not vote but I will say that the big corporations have had it too good for too long. Hopefully things will change for the better as a result of this era.
 
wasnt there a big scare about how the record industry was going to fold when people were able to tape songs off the radio?
 
I used to do it, the novelty wore off (or my conscience got to me), and now I pay yahoo $3.99 a month to listen to their radio. Cheap, legal, really good selection, and no commercials.
 
It depends, in my opinion, if you are sharing the music to tell your friend about a great new CD that they should buy, or if you are just ripping from a CD/friend's computer because you don't want to pay for it. I think charging $18 for a CD when the production company sees nearly all the profit and the little bands suffer is aweful, but it is better that the bands get what little bit they can, than nothing at all. I think those huge companies need to revamp their policies and give the artists some more money for their work. The amount of profit they make off of other people's hard work is rediculous. Everyone always complains about the rich musicians in hollywood, but they forget about the 100s of little bands who have great talent and potential, but who also need money from CD sales to become known. Anyway, when I get out of college, and if I don't have a specific career in mind, I may put my "plan" into action. I've got some ideas which might help turn around the music industry. :D
 
...of course, its legal up here....


So was decrypting of Direct TV signals until about a year ago. That is another subject where people have been sued.

Direct TV was sucessfully sueing people for 18 months until a few "die hards" decide to really fight them about the equipment that they owned. Now it seems that DTV is now getting their collective butts handed to them because of it. Seems that more and more judges are saying that the "equipment" that they own is not just for "stealing" Satelite signals but can be and is used for other "smartcard" applications. Heck, MicroSoft sells the reader/writers on their website.

Anyway, that one of the other things that is going on also with "illegal" activities..LOL

I think that the pricing of the software and music has alot to do with why people "share" what they have. I mean, look at some of the graphics programs out there. You need to take a second mortgage out just to buy it, them 6 months later they release another version and the stuff is no longer compatitable with the previous version, so you have to buy it again. (Well not all are like that...I just got a little carried away) Of course you get to buy the upgrade at only half the cost....LOL

As for music, the way I look at it is this:

It cost to physically produce the CD (with packaging) about 60 cents when done on a mass production level. You pay 10 to 18 dollars for a music CD. Alot of money is going somewhere. I seen a breakdown once of where it went based on percentage but I can't find it. I do know the Artist does not get the money everyone thinks they do. They make a small % of the Royalties but are paid up front by the recording studio/producer or what ever. Still, someone is making a ton of money for a simple item of very little cost material wise. Someone once told me, (this someone was and is actively downloading music illegally) "You spend all that money for a CD and the idiots just spend it on drugs, guns, cars and houses. Then they kill themselves (suicide) or die from a drug overdose or shot. By not buying the music I can still listen to it and not contribute to their death."

Although I don't agree with him on most of this, some of it does hold true. Yes I think pricing has alot to do with it....LOL

Lets really get this discussion going. I would like to hear what everyone else feels on this subject. I remember when I used to "copy" records (you know, those little round plastic circles that you put on a machine that had this needle on it...) to cassette tapes for my car, and I would occasionally give one to my friend or relative. Same thing. But no one made a big thing about it, same with the old VCR. Sure you could not really exchange them on the internet then, but you could still exchange them. It was still not legal. Corporations were not losing alot of money on that kind of stuff back then, they are now. It's all about the money. Which brings me back to they charge too much..LOL


There are just too many people getting their "cut" in everything that is done anymore to make anything cheap. I am not saying that the people who do the work to make, and (or) develope the music, video, and software should not be paid, but all the people in "chain" that don't do squat are also getting paid and alot of times more than the "creator/artist".


Now ask me how I feel about drug dealers? and what to do with them?... :)
Better yet, don't ask...LOL

Mike
 
While I DL music OCCASIONALLY....I would much rather go out and buy a CD. The Quality is much better, you get the nice pictures and booklet that comes with the CD...etc. lol I used to do it alot, but I don't wanna go to jail for downloading a song..so I don't really do it much anymore.

I agree with Sparky though...if companies didn't charge so much darn money for a CD that costs next to nothing to make...perhaps people who buy more of them.
 
I totally agree, if prices dropped, people would be more willing to buy things - $18 for a CD or $25 for a new DVD - or $Hundreds or so for S/W - if these saw a decrease, I am positive that the p2p sharing would also decrease.

I used to DL movies but since I started making more money, I have stopped and now buy pre-viewed DVD's from Blockbuster... $9 is a lot more to my liking.
 
I totally agree, if prices dropped, people would be more willing to buy things

There is this camera that I want, the one I really want costs about 8000.00, with no lenses. The cheapest on is about a grand, with no lenses, I can't afford either, if the prices were to drop by 40-50%, I could probably swing one, but that's not happened, nor is it going to, does that make it OK for me to steal it?
 
I think the poll needs to make the distinction between legal and illegal fire-sharing. There's absolutely nothing wrong with P2P as a technology.
 
I honestly wouldn't even know where to go to illegally download a song or a movie. And even if I did, there really isn't anything new out there that I find so appealing that I would be willing to risk a lawsuit to hear/see it. Maybe it's just the cultural curtain that closed behind me when I left the targeted 18 - 35-year-old audience, but I haven't been too impressed with most recent albums and movies.

Why are the record labels and movie studios cracking down on illegal downloads? Why are they hurting? I think it's because they have suffered from a long string of high profile flops in the record stores and at the box office. Also, the record labels and movie studios can no longer count on sales in Europe and Japan to rescue them from their stupid, expensive mistakes anymore - the overseas audiences have become a bit more discriminating in recent years. Remember Waterworld and The Postman? They lost BIG money in the US, but the Europeans and Japanese LOVED them so much that they actually turned a profit! Unfortunately, this was not the case for Gigli, which fared as well overseas as it did here.

I think kids here in the US are getting wise too. They resent shelling out $18 for a CD that contains one decent (but ridiculously overplayed) song, while the rest of the album doesn't even qualify as B-side material. Perhaps they have been spending some quality time with their older siblings' or parents' CCR, Simon&Garfunkel. Led Zep, Pink Floyd, and Beatles albums and now they know what they've been missing. :wink: This is not to condone piracy, but it should be a wakeup call to the industry that lawsuits will not increase sales: higher quality material will increase sales.
 
it is very difficult for bands to be spitting out 12-18 songs in a year and have all of them of good quality so I don't necessarily have a problem with that. I expect to like some songs, and others not so much. The problem is that the contracts bands are practically forced into signing have an ungodly short amount of time to get material writen and then recorded, which is why there are complaints about not having enough "good" material on CDs simply because creative process time has been cut. On top of that pressure, if a band doesn't succeed to a certain degree on their first CD sales, they get dropped! It takes a long time and lots of mistakes for good material to come. What record companies want are automatic huge hits. This started with the sensation of the Beatles because they were truly the first huge money makers, and after that, record companies got greedy and started forcing musicians to spit out music in hops that one good song is enough to make them a hit. Before the Beatles, musicians had a lot more leeway in making mistakes and the record companies gave them time and a few records before they made the decision to either cut or promote further.

Now, as for programs, those things are expensive!!! I am currently trying to raise enough money for some desperatly needed programming equipment for my college's radio station and it is almost impossible. $3600!!! I also love to dable in photoshop and some 3D movie programs, and those cost even more. So I think prices and greedy corporations are behind all this file swapping stuff.
 
If they think it's bad now, what's it gonna be like when the majority of the world has highspeed internet access? There is no way they can beat this so they're gonna have to just accept it and change their business models accordingly.
 
If I truely like a band- I will buy their Cd hands down, no questions asked. And most of the times the bands I like can be found for up to $10 at some music stores so its not that big of a deal.

However, when it comes to bands who pump out one good song (or catchy song) and won't be seen again- not because of lack of money from people burning instead of buying but because they flat out suck- why should I spend $10- $18 to support a career there is no hope for?

Sparky said:
"You spend all that money for a CD and the idiots just spend it on drugs, guns, cars and houses. Then they kill themselves (suicide) or die from a drug overdose or shot. By not buying the music I can still listen to it and not contribute to their death."

You know, I agree with that- not the "i help not contribute to their death" part but the concept in general. What do all of these musicians spend MY hard earned money on? Things that I will never in a million years be able to own.. and some things I would never be caught dead doing. Why? Because they hire someone to write their music and use recording equipment to make them sound good. There are some musicians and actors that I admire... but others- what did they do to deserve what they have? Im going to be a teacher and hopefully make a difference in 100's of lives... what will I get? Ha! Now, I can sing like the dickens but that doesn't mean I should make millions. The concept astounds me.... there are people that work so hard and are middle class people. And then there are people who (most of the time) have things done for them and make millions. It just stinks

sorry for the rant... *grrr*
 
People need to develop some idea of what actions are ethical and what actions are unethical on the net. Just cause you have high speed does not mean yoru gonna be downloading files. Just like having a gun does not mean your gonna go out and comit crimes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom