So if I go to university for four years and don't pay anything it's not considered theft? I mean I'm not taking anything physical away, which is what your argument is. What about if I go to the hairdresser today and walk out without paying? Again, nothing is physically taken, however the intangible benefits are taken away from their rightful holder.daqua_99No, and no.
The Morality of Piracy
This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="daqua_99"][QUOTE="markop2003"] It's not taking it's copying, only if you deleted the original after downloading the file would it be takingT_P_O
So if I go to university for four years and don't pay anything it's not considered theft? I mean I'm not taking anything physical away, which is what your argument is. What about if I go to the hairdresser today and walk out without paying? Again, nothing is physically taken, however the intangible benefits are taken away from their rightful holder.
Why do you think the law is currently "copyright infringement" and not put charged under a statute as theft? Best to ponder that.It isn't 'theft' under the legal definition, however the result of it is the same.
i think piracy is wrong
just the idea that downloading something that people spent tiome on making is messed up
Oh, not this thread again...
1) If the IP in question is good enough, people will always buy it to a satisfactory degree.
2) It's the record label companies that hate piracy, not the artists. Get that straight. I gaurentee the majority of artists affected by "piracy" are happy enough for the free exposure. It's far more likely that a pirate just wanted to try the music, and if they liked it, they would buy from that artists (which is what I do), and thus 1 paying fan was gained out of nothing. The more unlikely scenario (and I have yet to meet anyone who does this) would be that a pirate would download their stuff, enjoy it, and not pay for it. The end result being null and having no affect on the artist. Though I would even argue that person would still pay for a live concert when the band came to town and thus the artist would still end up getting money from piracy.
3) It's obviously not stealing. It's copying. Maybe you like to think of it as stealing in your own mind, well good for you. The law doesn't see it that way
4) An anecdote to think about: About 2 years ago, I was interested in a band but didn't have that much money. I acquired their entire discography overnight (10 albums) via download and listened to it for the next few weeks. I was blown away. I became a huge fan, and have since bought every single album, 2 live DVD's, a collectors box set and been to 2 live shows. The difference between you and me, is that you think that inital download is wrong. I would NOT have got into the band if I had not been able to hear a lot of their music at the time. I simply didn't have the money to buy any of their albums at the time. I think it IS justified. and I assure you, this is not a one of circumstance. This is how the majority of music pirates work. Once you "try" the music, if it is good enough, in your own mind, you will buy it. You can continue thinking that's not what most pirates do, but you're the one being ignorant. The ends justifies the means.
Not true at all. Most bands are are available on the internet now with websites that offer a free listen. And it's just your ASSUMPTION that bands are not against piracy. They do need to sell music to stay in the game.2) It's the record label companies that hate piracy, not the artists. Get that straight. I gaurentee the majority of artists affected by "piracy" are happy enough for the free exposure.
PerilousWolf
If they REALLY wanted to cut down on piracy, i doubt there would be an abundance of free programs (such as media conversion, and downloading programs) anyways piracy is not something i do, i may have in the past but i don't anymore. I always get that feeling that I'm committing some horrible act if i were to do it
Not true at all. Most bands are are available on the internet now with websites that offer a free listen. And it's just your ASSUMPTION that bands are not against piracy. They do need to sell music to stay in the game.[QUOTE="PerilousWolf"]
2) It's the record label companies that hate piracy, not the artists. Get that straight. I gaurentee the majority of artists affected by "piracy" are happy enough for the free exposure.
LJS9502_basic
And if they are good enough, they will stay in the game. If they reach people like me, who can try the majority of their music. Then people like me will buy their album. Small bands need exposure first and foremost. And if a band is big enough, that they don't need that exposure, then they are well and truly in the game and the negative affect piracy will have on them will be negligible.
Not true at all. Most bands are are available on the internet now with websites that offer a free listen. And it's just your ASSUMPTION that bands are not against piracy. They do need to sell music to stay in the game.[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]
[QUOTE="PerilousWolf"]
2) It's the record label companies that hate piracy, not the artists. Get that straight. I gaurentee the majority of artists affected by "piracy" are happy enough for the free exposure.
PerilousWolf
And if they are good enough, they will stay in the game. If they reach people like me, who can try the majority of their music. Then people like me will buy their album. Small bands need exposure first and foremost. And if a band is big enough, that they don't need that exposure, then they are well and truly in the game and the negative affect piracy will have on them will be negligible.
That is not a logical conclusion. If everyone justified piracy and downloaded music for free then how does it matter how good a band is or not? Not being paid is not being paid.:|[QUOTE="PerilousWolf"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Not true at all. Most bands are are available on the internet now with websites that offer a free listen. And it's just your ASSUMPTION that bands are not against piracy. They do need to sell music to stay in the game.
LJS9502_basic
And if they are good enough, they will stay in the game. If they reach people like me, who can try the majority of their music. Then people like me will buy their album. Small bands need exposure first and foremost. And if a band is big enough, that they don't need that exposure, then they are well and truly in the game and the negative affect piracy will have on them will be negligible.
That is not a logical conclusion. If everyone justified piracy and downloaded music for free then how does it matter how good a band is or not? Not being paid is not being paid.:|You're not being realistic. People will always buy music. Because there will always be people who don't agree with piracy. IF for some reason, everyone was like me, and justified piracy as a try before you buy mechanism, then everyone would check out a bands work, and if they liked it, they would buy it. Good bands will still get plenty of money. What's completely unrealistic is that assuming everyone just copies music and never pays for it, which I have already said, the majority of music pirates do NOT do.
That is not a logical conclusion. If everyone justified piracy and downloaded music for free then how does it matter how good a band is or not? Not being paid is not being paid.:|[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="PerilousWolf"]
And if they are good enough, they will stay in the game. If they reach people like me, who can try the majority of their music. Then people like me will buy their album. Small bands need exposure first and foremost. And if a band is big enough, that they don't need that exposure, then they are well and truly in the game and the negative affect piracy will have on them will be negligible.
PerilousWolf
You're not being realistic. People will always buy music. Because there will always be people who don't agree with piracy. IF for some reason, everyone was like me, and justified piracy as a try before you buy mechanism, then everyone would check out a bands work, and if they liked it, they would buy it. Good bands will still get plenty of money. What's completely unrealistic is that assuming everyone just copies music and never pays for it, which I have already said, the majority of music pirates do NOT do.
No perhaps you are avoiding the realistic. If piracy is allowed to continue...eventually it will become the norm for the majority of people. Which means less and less that actually purchase the music. That is realism. Not acting as though piracy doesn't hurt the industry. There really is no incentive to purchase what is freely taken. And whether one likes the music or not....they should pay for it if they are using it. Again...there are legal places where one can check out music without illegal downloads.It's unrealistic to not admit that one who pirates has MORE illegal music than legal. Just because they pay for band A does not mean they shouldn't have paid for bands B, C, and D.
You're not being realistic. People will always buy music. Because there will always be people who don't agree with piracy. IF for some reason, everyone was like me, and justified piracy as a try before you buy mechanism, then everyone would check out a bands work, and if they liked it, they would buy it. Good bands will still get plenty of money. What's completely unrealistic is that assuming everyone just copies music and never pays for it, which I have already said, the majority of music pirates do NOT do.
PerilousWolf
Everyone I know pirates music and they only buy about a tenth of what the illegally download. I think your assumption that humans will be 'good' is wrong. If people can get something for free they will, and once they have it the majority will not go and buy it, regardless for quality.
[QUOTE="PerilousWolf"]
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]That is not a logical conclusion. If everyone justified piracy and downloaded music for free then how does it matter how good a band is or not? Not being paid is not being paid.:|LJS9502_basic
You're not being realistic. People will always buy music. Because there will always be people who don't agree with piracy. IF for some reason, everyone was like me, and justified piracy as a try before you buy mechanism, then everyone would check out a bands work, and if they liked it, they would buy it. Good bands will still get plenty of money. What's completely unrealistic is that assuming everyone just copies music and never pays for it, which I have already said, the majority of music pirates do NOT do.
No perhaps you are avoiding the realistic. If piracy is allowed to continue...eventually it will become the norm for the majority of people. Which means less and less that actually purchase the music. That is realism. Not acting as though piracy doesn't hurt the industry. There really is no incentive to purchase what is freely taken. And whether one likes the music or not....they should pay for it if they are using it. Again...there are legal places where one can check out music without illegal downloads.It's unrealistic to not admit that one who pirates has MORE illegal music than legal. Just because they pay for band A does not mean they shouldn't have paid for bands B, C, and D.
If piracy becomes the norm, then more and more people will find small bands they never would have thought of buying from, they will become fans and then with will buy their CD's (for two reasons, a physical copy is high quality and has the lyric booklet, artwork etc and they are also supporting the band), and I have done this countless number of times. If it were not for piracy, I would be a shadow of the music fan I am today. And I would have bought easily about 1/10 of what I have bought today. Where we disagree it seems, is that you seem to think all pirates never buy after they "try". It's is a simplistic and incorrect view, probably one which you will hold on to and it allows you to stay on your moral high horse and look down at the pirates, who realistically may purchase even more music than you.
No. If one is not buying music they won't start for a small band. In addition, a small band needs to grow in order to survive. Record labels will not be behind bands that are not making money for them. So music will stagnate.If piracy becomes the norm, then more and more people will find small bands they never would have thought of buying from, they will become fans and then with will buy their CD's (for two reasons, a physical copy is high quality and has the lyric booklet, artwork etc and they are also supporting the band), and I have done this countless number of times. If it were not for piracy, I would be a shadow of the music fan I am today. And I would have bought easily about 1/10 of what I have bought today. Where we disagree it seems, is that you seem to think all pirates never buy after they "try". It's is a simplistic and incorrect view, probably one which you will hold on to and it allows you to stay on your moral high horse and look down at the pirates, who realistically may purchase even more music than you.
PerilousWolf
Um no. I said pirates don't buy all the music they illegally download. Or even most of it. You are merely justifying piracy by saying you buy a few bands that you like.
No. If one is not buying music they won't start for a small band. In addition, a small band needs to grow in order to survive. Record labels will not be behind bands that are not making money for them. So music will stagnate.[QUOTE="PerilousWolf"]
If piracy becomes the norm, then more and more people will find small bands they never would have thought of buying from, they will become fans and then with will buy their CD's (for two reasons, a physical copy is high quality and has the lyric booklet, artwork etc and they are also supporting the band), and I have done this countless number of times. If it were not for piracy, I would be a shadow of the music fan I am today. And I would have bought easily about 1/10 of what I have bought today. Where we disagree it seems, is that you seem to think all pirates never buy after they "try". It's is a simplistic and incorrect view, probably one which you will hold on to and it allows you to stay on your moral high horse and look down at the pirates, who realistically may purchase even more music than you.
LJS9502_basic
Um no. I said pirates don't buy all the music they illegally download. Or even most of it. You are merely justifying piracy by saying you buy a few bands that you like.
You don't understand the predicament of a small band. Lets say, two bands start up, in my city of Melbourne, Australia. Band A and Band B. Band A is against any piracy of any form and doesn't offer listeners a chance to download their album. But of course, they allow people to listen to 1 or 2 songs on their Myspace. A few listeners from the US go to their myspace, hear the songs...they sound pretty cool, but it would cost 25 USD to buy the album and ship it all the way to the US. It's not worth the investment just for a few cool songs. Band B on the other hands embraces piracy. They host their own torrent for their debut album, and allow people from all over the world of to listen to it free of charge. They post the torrent link of many different forums, just trying to get their stuff heard. After 1 year, Band A would have say 500 fans, and Band B, say 2000 fans. I assure, from personal experience, Band B will be making more money. What this is assuming, is that over 1 in 4 pirates would actually buy the album if they became a fan of a the band, and I think the number is even higher than that. You see it's ALL about exposure.
I understand. And as I've repeatedly stated in this thread....bands have websites to put their music out for people to listen to free. Listen. Not take. And that is the differencey you are avoiding. With the internet today it is easy for unknown bands to get exposure beyond their geographic location. Howeever, to justify piracy one has to believe that only by downloading the music illegally will they discover new bands. That is patently false with today's communications. Second....if the band wanted you to have their music for free they would allow the downloading of it on their website. You will notice that is not how these bands are being downloading since you yourself admitted to downloading illegally to see it you liked it before you bought it. When does it become the right of another to take the efforts of other individuals as their right to own the creation without remuneration?You don't understand the predicament of a small band. Lets say, two bands start up, in my city of Melbourne, Australia. Band A and Band B. Band A is against any piracy of any form and doesn't offer listeners a chance to download their album. But of course, they allow people to listen to 1 or 2 songs on their Myspace. A few listeners from the US go to their myspace, hear the songs...they sound pretty cool, but it would cost 25 USD to buy the album and ship it all the way to the US. It's not worth the investment just for a few cool songs. Band B on the other hands embraces piracy. They host their own torrent for their debut album, and allow people from all over the world of to listen to it free of charge. They post the torrent link of many different forums, just trying to get their stuff heard. After 1 year, Band A would have say 500 fans, and Band B, say 2000 fans. I assure, from personal experience, Band B will be making more money. What this is assuming, is that over 1 in 4 pirates would actually buy the album if they became a fan of a the band, and I think the number is even higher than that. You see it's ALL about exposure.
PerilousWolf
Ah so now your argument has become the cost of said item. Well....as with a capitalist society....if the cost exceeds the demand one does without. One does not take.
I understand. And as I've repeatedly stated in this thread....bands have websites to put their music out for people to listen to free. Listen. Not take. And that is the differencey you are avoiding. With the internet today it is easy for unknown bands to get exposure beyond their geographic location. Howeever, to justify piracy one has to believe that only by downloading the music illegally will they discover new bands. That is patently false with today's communications. Second....if the band wanted you to have their music for free they would allow the downloading of it on their website. You will notice that is not how these bands are being downloading since you yourself admitted to downloading illegally to see it you liked it before you bought it. When does it become the right of another to take the efforts of other individuals as their right to own the creation without remuneration?[QUOTE="PerilousWolf"]
You don't understand the predicament of a small band. Lets say, two bands start up, in my city of Melbourne, Australia. Band A and Band B. Band A is against any piracy of any form and doesn't offer listeners a chance to download their album. But of course, they allow people to listen to 1 or 2 songs on their Myspace. A few listeners from the US go to their myspace, hear the songs...they sound pretty cool, but it would cost 25 USD to buy the album and ship it all the way to the US. It's not worth the investment just for a few cool songs. Band B on the other hands embraces piracy. They host their own torrent for their debut album, and allow people from all over the world of to listen to it free of charge. They post the torrent link of many different forums, just trying to get their stuff heard. After 1 year, Band A would have say 500 fans, and Band B, say 2000 fans. I assure, from personal experience, Band B will be making more money. What this is assuming, is that over 1 in 4 pirates would actually buy the album if they became a fan of a the band, and I think the number is even higher than that. You see it's ALL about exposure.
LJS9502_basic
Ah so now your argument has become the cost of said item. Well....as with a capitalist society....if the cost exceeds the demand one does without. One does not take.
I don't think we will ever agree. I think the end justifies the means, you do not. Nothing you have said, or could say, would stop me from being able to justify piracy in my own mind. I often over-compensate bands for my piracy. If I download an album, I might like it so much, I buy all the rest of the bands albums. You would still say this is wrong and immoral. But from the bands perspective, its a fan gained, and from my perspective its a new band to be enjoy. For my band, I would rather someone download the album and enjoy it, than someone waste their money to find out they don't like it. Maybe I am not as selfish as I should be...but money is not the only important factor for an artist, you need to realise.
No the ends don't justify the means. And history is filled with many examples.I don't think we will ever agree. I think the end justifies the means, you do not. Nothing you have said, or could say, would stop me from being able to justify piracy in my own mind. I often over-compensate bands for my piracy. If I download an album, I might like it so much, I buy all the rest of the bands albums. You would still say this is wrong and immoral. But from the bands perspective, its a fan gained, and from my perspective its a new band to be enjoy. For my band, I would rather someone download the album and enjoy it, than someone waste their money to find out they don't like it. Maybe I am not as selfish as I should be...but money is not the only important factor for an artist, you need to realise.
PerilousWolf
Bands want fans...yes. But they also want compensated for their creations. No band wants a fanbase of pirates.
If piracy becomes the norm, then more and more people will find small bands they never would have thought of buying from, they will become fans and then with will buy their CD's (for two reasons, a physical copy is high quality and has the lyric booklet, artwork etc and they are also supporting the band), and I have done this countless number of times. If it were not for piracy, I would be a shadow of the music fan I am today. And I would have bought easily about 1/10 of what I have bought today. Where we disagree it seems, is that you seem to think all pirates never buy after they "try". It's is a simplistic and incorrect view, probably one which you will hold on to and it allows you to stay on your moral high horse and look down at the pirates, who realistically may purchase even more music than you.
PerilousWolf
Out of the many people I know who pirate, I can't think of any who even give a **** about "supporting the band". They care about getting free stuff.
Anyway, you can talk all you want about "try before you buy". But do you personally delete EVERY pirated song that you deem to be not worth your money?
I don't think we will ever agree. I think the end justifies the means, you do not. Nothing you have said, or could say, would stop me from being able to justify piracy in my own mind. I often over-compensate bands for my piracy. If I download an album, I might like it so much, I buy all the rest of the bands albums. You would still say this is wrong and immoral. But from the bands perspective, its a fan gained, and from my perspective its a new band to be enjoy. For my band, I would rather someone download the album and enjoy it, than someone waste their money to find out they don't like it. Maybe I am not as selfish as I should be...but money is not the only important factor for an artist, you need to realise.
PerilousWolf
But money is a HUGE factor for artists, because making serious art often costs a lot. Either in the actual monetary costs it takes to get art made, or in the time it takes to make that art and devote oneself to the kinds of practice that it takes to stay great.
The concept of paying for art is not about greed, it's also about the fact that getting paid for their art is what ALLOWS artists to meet their potential. Many artists put a LOT of time and effort into what they do, time and effort that would not be possible if they weren't getting compensated with money.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment