Downloading music

[Doublehex]

Ah, now this is a subject that has been rocking the courts as of late. What aspect of downloading music, if any, is legal, and what parts aren't?

As much as you would like to think, there are lawyers who are divided on the issue. Now, I can't remember said names, but I do remember that one person said that sending music online is like that of putting up the car radio.

Now, that's a bit too far. It is a very different issue; yes, everyone can hear the music, but its not permanent. Unlike downloading music, which, yes everyone can listen to, but it is permanent, and thus, the artists and record company loses money.

On the other hand, the IRAA has stated stuff like ripping CDs for personal use is illegal, you needing a CD for each CD player you have, etc. They're essentially saying you don't own the CD. You are just borrowing it; you just paid for it and you get to hold on to it for as long as you want. I believe that is going too far.

Of course, there are loop holes. I heard one case where a man downloaded an album after he had paid for it. It was just gonna take a few weeks for it to arrive to his house. He was found innocent, and thus, it [I]could[/I] be argued that what he did was legal. There are those who say that it was illegal because he achieved the downloaded songs through 'illegal' means. The debate goes on.

How do albums from other countries (Japan, Russia, places like that) apply into this? Most albums and anime soundtracks, as far as I know, are not available to us. Is it illegal then, to download music that is not available to Americans through commercial means? Is it legal for us to download foreign items that [I]are[/I] available through commercial means, because they most likely have not been licensed with an American company?

Let's see what you guys have to say, because [I]everyone[/I] has some alternate idea on this issue.

[TheShinje]

It should all be illegal. Downloading music may not be physically stealing the CD but the effect is the same. It's taking the data that a company is [b]selling[/b], and enjoying it without [b]paying[/b] for it.

I can't stand those who claim to be the new Robin Hood because they download the CD after disagreeing with the price tag. If I disagree with the price, I don't buy it! Besides, Robin Hood didn't steal from the rich to give to Robin Hood, though music pirates might equate themselves with the poor, the analogy is ultimately flawed.

Music might be hideously expensive, but it's the industry's right to charge what they wat for the product [b]they[/b] put out. It's a luxury item. You don't have to buy it, and you won't die without it .

I think the music priates have to stop the "Robin Hood" act and get over it already.

[Korey]

[FONT="Garamond"]I'm going out on a limb and say this...I've downloaded music from the internet...legally. As a person who is studying mass media, I can tell you that the presence of downloading music isn't going to affect record sales at this point in time. To prove a point, when radio was released, people worried about the sales of records because people could listen to the radio for free instead of paying money to get the record. Naturally, the record sales dropped a little bit, but not so much as to having people go out of buisness. Now when the jukebox was introduced, people were again worried about the sale of records, but the opposite held true here. If people heard that particular record on the jukebox, then they were more likely to buy records. So society, at least in Western society, is very "on the fence" on this sort of issue. Will record sales decline? I don't think so. The US government has put in place strict regulations about the illegal downloading of material from the internet, not only music but other things....such as ROM files for emulators. However, I believe that there are plenty of altertnative and legal sources of downloading music or getting a particular album without having to pay an exhorbitant fee.

Now on that subject, I really must question how much do you consider exhorbitant? I pay anywhere from $12 U.S. to $20 U.S. for a CD and I know that most CD's on iTunes cost in the range of $9.99 to $12.99 U.S. I know lots of other things that are ridiculously over priced, and CD's aren't in my scope of that. Now finding records and stuff like that can be a little pricey depending on where you buy them, but the same holds true for CDs. If you are buying CDs from somewhere like the mall or Best Buy or something like that, then yeah, you're gonna pay more. Welcome to the capitalist society my friends. Wal Mart, on average, doesn't sell CDs for more than $15 U.S., but then again, you won't get the uncensored lyrics you want. So there's the question, do you spend money to get what you want? Or do you sacrifice it to get something at a lower price, but yet your satisfaction wanes?

To those of you who steal music, the piper will eventually come calling for you. As a person who loves music, I think that stealing music from the internet isn't just a disservice to the music artist, but it is a disservice to fans of music everywhere because you are degrading yourself and society with your ravenous appetite and empty wallet. [/FONT]

[DeathKnight]

[color=crimson]How about Radiohead releasing their newest album in a digital format where you pay what you want for it? They are one the biggest band who comes to mind who is experimenting with the internet like that.

For those who don't know:

Radiohead fulfilled their EMI contract with Hail to the Thief, and they decided to release their newest album digitally and in a 2 CD collector's set that includes additional material for like 30-40 bucks, if memory serves. They let you pay however much you want for the digital download. 0-10-20, whatever amount you feel is appropriate.

I believe they intend to release a normal CD sometime next year as soon as they get sign a new record deal with a company. I don't know if they'll stop the digital download when they sign a contract, but I'd imagine it would change. Right now Radiohead gets nearly 100 percent of the amount you pay since they don't have to share it with a record label.

Until those possible changes, you can have at it for whatever price you want.[/color]

[Horendithas]

[COLOR="Indigo"]I don't really download music so I couldn't say, but if it is being shared illegally, or rather without the consent of the owner of the CD or the company that produced it then of course it's illegal to download the music.

The only thing I don't agree with is the statement that making a copy of a CD that you paid for legally is illegal. If you are making a copy for your own personal use, then I see no issue with that at all. If you're making it with the intent to give someone else a copy who had not paid for the CD then yes I could see it. But just for your own personal use?

That's just greed on their part to expect you to buy the same CD twice so you have a disk at home and one that you use in say your car or a different player in the home. Plus I like to make a mixed disk since I don't have an ipod and use a portable CD player, so I like putting only my favorites songs on a disk to carry around. It's more accessible than carrying around ten disks and switching them out just to listen to a different song.[/COLOR]

[James]

[color=#606060]I don't have much to say about this that isn't already pretty obvious.

Downloading music - or any copyrighted material - illegally is stealing, as has been said. I think most people would agree with that.

There is also plenty of free media online, but that's another story.

A while back I used LimeWire to download music for free. This was obviously illegal, but I did it as a way of sampling new music. I rarely downloaded a track and when I did, I always made sure to go out and buy the single or album.

So there is also a slightly different debate related to the ability to back up your purchased content - I don't like that I can't move my Virtual Console downloads around with Wii, for example. If I purchased it, I should be able to store it anywhere.

These days the need for LimeWire is pretty much eliminated. I now use iTunes Music Store and it's really convenient.

I recently purchased my first song through the iTunes Music Store on iPod touch - I have never seen a more convenient way to sample and purchase music. Being able to do it right from the iPod, rather than using a computer, is even better.

And really the prices are pretty decent compared to CD equivalents. There are, of course, advantages to CD (I personally like having the physical disc and album cover, as well as any bonus tracks that may not be available on iTunes).

But yeah, even now I'm not always reliant on iTunes Music Store either. I still do buy CDs now and then. So it's a mixture for me.[/color]

[2010DigitalBoy]

[COLOR="DarkOrange"]Personally, I've never downloaded music. I have, but only a couple Japanese songs and recently a bunch of unavailable Shabutie tracks. Meaning that I haven't robbed anyone.

However, that's only because I can always find what I want on youtube anyway so I don't have to dl. Do i support it? yes. Why? Because personally, I WILL NOT buy an album that I have not heard at least 3 tracks from. I find it silly to put your money into something you don't even know the contents of. [/COLOR]

[Aberinkula]

[COLOR="Olive"]I don't care about it. besideds, isn't Limewire file sharing? it says that it's legal, but what do I know! Downloaded it, didn't work, so I deleted it. But I looked up music I couldn't obtain easily. Avenged Sevenfold's Almsot Easy and Co&Ca's the Running Free. But I don't see the big deal about it. If I get Vorizen DSL, I'll probably downoad it again and try it out. If so, yeah.

As for personal copies being illegal. I say big *** whoop. So I want an extra copy! I'm not selling it for profit. And if my friend's don't have money, or just want to experiance a band for the first time without wasting money for something they hate, I say give them a copy. No harm done. And for some artists with fame in abundance, they can go without $15-25.[/COLOR]

[John]

The main issue really holding back the credibility of digital music rights for me is that the vast majority of suits and legislation filed for the cause is done by the RIAA on behalf of their labels--the artists get almost no say in the matter (if any), and if I recall correctly, they don't get much of the money from the suits either. The reason the commotion over music pirating is so huge isn't because of artists complaining about being deprived of their own revenue, it's because the record labels and their representatives are worried about losing the income that they leech off of musicians' creative works.

Not to say that the musicians are fine with it, that's obviously not the case. It's just that they're generally not causing nearly the uproar about it that their labels are, lol. As a matter of fact, there's a surprising number of small artists either giving their music out for free, or having it released on a label and telling their fans to pirate it (no joke, heh). Interestingly enough, I've seen this happen a lot more with lesser-known artists than greater.

Speaking of whom, I'm really not losing any sleep over downloading albums from well-established, wealthy artists. Bands like Metallica (not that I'd really want to download them anyway) are in the worst position to complain about their music being stolen. Sure, it's your right, but if you've got that much money, you should try having a heart.

Another reason I download is because my dad doesn't want me buying any music that's not Christian, and I could name maybe a half-dozen Christian bands that I could stand listening to (and all of them almost certainly have more enjoyable secular alternatives). I can still pick up CDs on my own around town, but I live in a rural area with no dedicated music stores that would carry much of the stuff I like.

So until I'm out in college next year, and have my own debit card with which to order albums online, I'm stuck pirating. And honestly, I look forward to having more music on CDs for the same reason as everyone else; it's good to just have the disk there as a backup if anything happens, and album artwork and liner notes are always fun.

[Rachmaninoff]

[quote name='Revolver'][COLOR="Olive"]As for personal copies being illegal. I say big *** whoop. So I want an extra copy! I'm not selling it for profit. And if my friend's don't have money, or just want to experiance a band for the first time without wasting money for something they hate, I say give them a copy. No harm done.[B] And for some artists with fame in abundance, they can go without $15-25.[/B][/COLOR][/QUOTE]I can guarantee you that if you were that artist and you knew lots and lots of people were essentially screwing you over since they felt like you were [I]fine because you had fame[/I]. You wouldn't be saying that. It's easy to make a claim like that when you are not the one who is doing [I]without[/I]. That kind of thinking is shortsighted and just another justification for stealing.

Obviously if you're downloading music without permission and without paying it's illegal and just plain stupid to rip someone else off when you know damn well that if someone was cheating you, then you'd likely be upset over it. No one likes to be ripped off by others who just want something for nothing.

I do agree that making your own copy of a CD for your own use shouldn't be illegal, but making copies for your friends should. That's still giving someone else the music who didn't pay for it.

[Aberinkula]

[COLOR="Olive"]No one notices when you give it to a friend though, so that law is an easy swerve.[/COLOR]

[Rachmaninoff]

[quote name='Revolver'][COLOR="Olive"]No one notices when you give it to a friend though, so that law is an easy swerve.[/COLOR][/QUOTE]That's not the point though, it's the mentality of thinking there's nothing wrong with doing so. ;) Take John for example, he downloads stuff but it's not because of saying the artist or music company can get by just fine, but more because it's one of the only ways he can get the music.

And, yeah, it's pretty common to share music with your friends. In all honesty, if it's something that one can't go out and buy anymore I can and will make a copy. But if they can buy it... I usually shove them in the direction of the nearest store. But then I'm an adult and I don't like people expecting me to share what I worked hard for and paid for.

If they really want it that bad, they can go and get a job so they can pay for it themselves. I find friends who would 'freeload' off of what I've bought downright annoying at times.

[celestialcharm]

[COLOR="DarkOrchid"][FONT="Book Antiqua"]I'm not sure if it's just because of my mid terms, but isn't downloading [I]legal[/I]? Isn't it uploading that's illegal? Or maybe that's just in Canada?[/FONT][/COLOR]

[John]

[quote name='celestialcharm'][COLOR=DarkOrchid][FONT=Book Antiqua]I'm not sure if it's just because of my mid terms, but isn't downloading [I]legal[/I]? Isn't it uploading that's illegal? Or maybe that's just in Canada?[/FONT][/COLOR][/quote] I don't see any reason for that to be true. If it were true that one was illegal while the other wasn't (and that sounds kinda crazy in the first place), it would be more logical for downloading to be the illegal one. Then again, everyone knows Canadians aren't quite all there in the head--it must have something to do with the low air pressure. :)

[Doublehex]

I think its about time that I actually entered this debate I started. Now, I download music, but not rock bands, pop, or anything 'American' because I have no taste for that type of music. The only music I enjoy are complete orchestral. Thus, my entrie Music folder is made up of movie, anime, and video game soundtracks.

Now, of these, 80% are Anime soundtracks, and you can't get these in stores or online, or at least to my knowledge. The other 20% falls into video game soundtracks and movie soundtracks. Same rule I have for anime soundtracks apply to video game soundtracks, but I own all of my movie soundtracks. I just don't listen to the CD - I rip them as mp3s onto my computer.

So far, the topic has been entirely on Western music. What of the East? Is that legal? And what of music you can't acquire in America? Is that acceptable? My mindset was yes, because if I can't acquire it through commercial means, that is no reason as to why I still can't listen to it. Would I love to give the composers their money's worth? Certainly. But am I able to? Unfortunately, not, or at least without a price much higher than given in Japan.

[Korey]

[quote name='Rachmaninoff']I can guarantee you that if you were that artist and you knew lots and lots of people were essentially screwing you over since they felt like you were [I]fine because you had fame[/I]. You wouldn't be saying that. It's easy to make a claim like that when you are not the one who is doing [I]without[/I]. That kind of thinking is shortsighted and just another justification for stealing.
[/QUOTE]

[FONT="Garamond"]My sentiments exactly. When the shoe's on the other foot, you wouldn't say it is very fair to cheat you money when you work hard to make music and produce records. As far as record revenues go, for major label artists...most of the profit goes to the record label and little of it actually goes to the artists themselves. They do make enormous amounts of money, but not all of the sales that go to them. Now indies is a completely different ballgame, since they earn most of their own sales, but their sales pale in comparison to that of the major record label artists.

Downloading is the illegal part, since you can upload tons of copyrighted material to sites for use. You upload music to websites or to your computer and the files show up as data on your site of choice, whatever it may be...but downloading is actually taking this data from one place and putting it on your computer. The qualm with downloading, and more specifically file sharing is that it puts many a computer at risk ... because you are basically downloading a file from someone else's computer. The file is actually located on someone's computer, not from the net. The programs like Kazaa and Limewire and their likenesses only give you the path to that file and show you how many people or computers are hosting them. If you wanna get a song off of my computer, for instance, all I would have to do is give you the destination to the file and it's yours. However, I could also send you the location of a very potent virus that makes your puny computer ping all over the place.
Also, the people that download those songs can infect your computer when they download your files, since the channel from your computer and theirs is wide open and oh so hackable.[/FONT]

[Aberinkula]

[COLOR="Olive"]Actually if I was an artist with tons of fame and money, I wouldn't care. It's for the fans mostly.

However, I believe the opposite applies with fameless/moneyless bands than filthy stinkin rich ones.[/COLOR]

[Aaryanna]

[COLOR="goldenrod"][FONT="Comic Sans MS"]So what your saying Prem is since they are rich they should be stolen from? So why don't they have the right to earn more money? I mean that is what your logic is coming across as. Also what [I]you would do [/I]vs what [I]they would do[/I] isn't the same thing. Just cause you might not care doesn't mean that those artists who are rich don't. :p

If they want their music to be free, once they are no longer under contract they can simply provided it themselves to the public. That's their decision to make not yours, not mine or anyone else's. The fact that they are rich is meaningless really, since they didn't start out rich, they got that way from working hard and those sales that people are now saying they can do without since they are rich.

Seriously, if you're getting the music illegally then obviously you are stealing. I try to avoid downloading music since I know it's wrong. It is harder when it's something that you can't find or is overseas and way beyond the budget of a teenager like myself. But still, I do try to steer clear of doing any downloading.

I'll use youtube to check things out to see if I would like it, but I don't look for sites that host the songs so I can download it. Though it helps that I'm not really into music a lot so it's easier for me to afford what I want since it isn't a lot. [/FONT][/COLOR]

[Aberinkula]

[COLOR="Olive"]NO! But if it happens they shouldn't complain or sue. Unless it gets way out of hand. I'm not evil, music is my life so I don't want any artist to really suffer. [spoiler] Well, every rap artist, but that's a different story.[/spoiler]

But out of all honesty, the best time to download music is when you are under 13. The law has certain limits in some states. Try not to be tried as an adult. I mean downloading like 20 songs shouldn't have that big a penelty. You could just listen then delete the song to fufill your dream. Then download it again next time you want to hear it and keep repeating. (That's a joke, don't do that. Tht was just a little fun poker *pokes Aaryanna*) But those that download over 500 are definitly villains. Under 100 should be the limit for everone.[/COLOR]

[James]

[color=#606060]I don't really find any justification in the term "they're mega rich anyway and they need to be more understanding".

Rubbish.

If you steal intellectual property from someone - even a mega corporation - you are still fundamentally stealing. Attempts to justify this by saying that the band or company somehow deserve it are pretty ridiculous.

I think we can say that some bands handle this situation improperly...but really, if they don't want people stealing their music, they don't have to put up with that. If you are the artist, you have the right to set pretty much whatever sales terms you want. If it affects your album sales negatively, then you'd obviously have to re-think your strategy.

I mean, what Radiohead is doing is kind of cool and it's a nice experiment, but if I were a music artist there is no way I'd take that path. And I shouldn't really be expected to, especially when I've put a great deal of work into something that I expect to be duly compensated for.

This is a separate issue to how we may feel about DRM or the RIAA or whatever. I kind of think that should be pointed out. I have a lot of issues with the current state of DRM (although this is changing slowly), but that doesn't mean I'm prepared to circumvent the law because I disagree with the current DRM standard.[/color]

[Korey]

[quote name='James'][color=#606060]I don't really find any justification in the term "they're mega rich anyway and they need to be more understanding".

Rubbish.

If you steal intellectual property from someone - even a mega corporation - you are still fundamentally stealing. Attempts to justify this by saying that the band or company somehow deserve it are pretty ridiculous.[/color][/QUOTE]

[FONT="Garamond"]Ridiculous indeed. Revolver, I still think that your argument is pretty flawed, because no amount of fame or wealth justifies being stolen from. You say you wouldn't care, because the music is for your fans and if they are listening, you don't care. Now I would like to apply this theorem into a different context. Let's say, hypothetically, that you do let people download your music illegaly. Your album sales flop and you get let go from your label because you can't sell albums anymore. No label wants to sign you, because you can't sell records. You don't have any means of making money anymore, because you lost your main source of income. Does it seem like a good idea to have someone downloading your material from their computer for free now?[/FONT]

[Aberinkula]

[COLOR="Olive"]What's worse than stealing an artist's music? Stealing their ideas. Now that REALLY bugs me how peopple just take ideas.

I do not know the laws for covering bands at concert or local gigs though, never read anything that thouroughly explins covers.

[QUOTE]Does it seem like a good idea to have someone downloading your material from their computer for free now?[/QUOTE]

Well, I'd just go home and do local crap and sing with a local label. Then, I'd wait till I could find another label. Or I could go to colelge for a while since you don't neceserilly need a degree for popular music. A town near my house has a local record label called Madstop, which is the towns name backword. There is tons of other crap I could do to get back my career. Some bands stay alive by just passing by.[/COLOR]

[John]

[quote name='Revolver'][COLOR=Olive]Some bands stay alive by just passing by.[/COLOR][/quote] More of them don't.

[Aberinkula]

[COLOR="Olive"]But hey, if some can do it, I can do it too. But I'd probably lose my record deal because I suck at playing the bass... as of now.[/COLOR]

[celestialcharm]

[quote name='John']I don't see any reason for that to be true. If it were true that one was illegal while the other wasn't (and that sounds kinda crazy in the first place), it would be more logical for downloading to be the illegal one. Then again, everyone knows Canadians aren't quite all there in the head--it must have something to do with the low air pressure. :)[/QUOTE]
[FONT="Book Antiqua"][COLOR="DarkOrchid"]
Yeah, I always thought that made no sense. I looked more into it and I found:

[QUOTE][LIST]
[*]Downloading a song for personal use is not an infringement.
[*]Placing a song in an on-line music-sharing directory such as Kazaa is not considered distribution
[/LIST] [/QUOTE]
and
[QUOTE]But legal experts have said it may be difficult for those companies (major record labels) to come after Canadian internet users.
[/QUOTE]
because
[QUOTE]Justice Konrad von Finckenstein said the Canadian Recording Industry Association hadn't shown copyright infringement by 29 people who had allowed their music files to be uploaded.

Making files available in online, shared directories is within the bounds of Canadian copyright law, von Finckenstein ruled. [/quote]
Thus, I can [I]legally[/I] download music, but I don't like to anymore because of annoying viruses![/COLOR][/FONT]