Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
UPC victory in piracy case
Options
Comments
-
The other day I needed a newspaper so I conjured up an exact copy, instantaneously, for no cost, leaving the original newspaper where it was. Funny enough that industry is doomed as well.Denalihighway wrote: »I know exactly what you mean man!
The other day I needed some money to buy a newspaper. The ATM was, like, 500 yards down the road, so to make things a bit easier I just took the newspaper right off the stand.
Sure who's gonna notice one newspaper eh?
Give it up lads, the genie is out of the bottle.0 -
The other day I needed a newspaper so I conjured up an exact copy, instantaneously, for no cost, leaving the original newspaper where it was. Funny enough that industry is doomed as well.
Give it up lads, the genie is out of the bottle.
So is your argument: because you "able" steal music it is morally ok to do so?
Can I ask how you earn a living? Because what you are saying is "out of the bottle" is people's livelyhoods here. I don't imagine you would go to work everyday for your boss not to pay you at the end of the week because people are able to steal product or service you work at.0 -
The other day I needed a newspaper so I conjured up an exact copy, instantaneously, for no cost, leaving the original newspaper where it was. Funny enough that industry is doomed as well.
Give it up lads, the genie is out of the bottle.
so you'd break the law by infringing on copyright and reproducing something you had no express right to reproduce.
give it up lad, you're an ignoramous with no original thoughts or ideas of your own, so to make yourself feel better you steal the hard work of others. the genie is out of the bottle.0 -
I'm not necessarily condoning illegal downloading, but seriously: **** the big record labels. Music today would be better off without them - they've destroyed a couple of decades worth of pop music. Instead of firing all their resources into sueing teenagers in America they should be coming up with bloody good ideas if they want to keep afloat. I think online we can see more democratic ways for musicians to get their music heard. The balance of power is seriously shifting, I think for the better.0
-
You can't tar all "big labels" with the same brush.
There's no way to change people's behaviour. We can proselitise about the morals of it, but it will change nothing. The 80 year blip in musical history where you could put a huge markup on plastic with music in it, is over. Recorded music is no longer viable. It's back to performing, and exploiting copyrights for a living, like it was for 500ish years prior.0 -
Advertisement
-
No, I read the guardian online...DamagedTrax wrote: »so you'd break the law by infringing on copyright and reproducing something you had no express right to reproduce.
give it up lad, you're an ignoramous with no original thoughts or ideas of your own, so to make yourself feel better you steal the hard work of others. the genie is out of the bottle.
I regularly contribute to and document software projects published under the gpl, lgpl and various other open licences.
Luckily, I work in an industry which is tech savvy and has actively worked to embrace change in the world of information. Instead of trying to litigate and insult the entire world back to the 1980s.
The pure ignorance, vitriol and hatred you have exhibited in this thread is indicative of how you and your ilk have fundamentally failed to cope with or understand the change faced by your industry.
You can carry on ranting and raving and pissing and moaning while ever more people proceed to ignore you and transfer stuff around the internet.
Best start retraining as a stonemason or something, its hard to "steal" that gear without a huge crane0 -
i meant free as in you can surf to any page , download what you want
You mean music and film - where you have made a zero contribution to the cost of production.
You're the guy who sneaks into the cinema without paying. Climbs over the wall of a concert. Shoplifts music.
And magically thinks right is on their side. Did you really think you weren't stealing when you downloaded all that music and film?, do what you like , at the moment freely - with no lockdowns ( like china )
We do have lockdowns - my internet connection blocks me from making skype calls to land lines - because my provider wants me to use their phone service. The same provider could easily block torrents and rapidshare but they won't because they don't sell music and film. They make money from helping the whiny little shoplifters.
Oh and China when it comes to piracy is the worst culprit in the world. Only a tiny fraction of the DVDs and CDs sold in China are legitimate.i did not mean free as in it costs nothing to do so .
It's completely unsustainable if only the bandits are profiting and the producers are getting nothing.all of this is destined to end .
And it won't be a bad thing either.and you really need to get a massage :pac:
That little whiny ****ers will have to pay for their music and film.0 -
No, I read the guardian online...
I regularly contribute to and document software projects published under the gpl, lgpl and various other open licences.
Luckily, I work in an industry which is tech savvy and has actively worked to embrace change in the world of information. Instead of trying to litigate and insult the entire world back to the 1980s.
The pure ignorance, vitriol and hatred you have exhibited in this thread is indicative of how you and your ilk have fundamentally failed to cope with or understand the change faced by your industry.
You can carry on ranting and raving and pissing and moaning while ever more people proceed to ignore you and transfer stuff around the internet.
Best start retraining as a stonemason or something, its hard to "steal" that gear without a huge crane
i had a long reply posted and all but i genuinly cant be bothered...0 -
DamagedTrax wrote: »you obviously are under some misapprehension that i am either A. an artist who's tracks are getting downloaded illegally or B. someone who works for a label.
as i am neither of the above and my income is not reliant on royalties, your typecasting me within a certain "ilk" is way off the mark. i also dont need to change with the industry as i already get paid for a job that i do, which encompasses a hell of a lot more than just the mainstream recording industry. the fact that you seem to draw issue with me wanting to see artists protected against thieves says more about your own moral upbringing than anything else.
and dont get all sanctimonious with your "ignorance, vitriol & hatred" BS. if you want to come into this forum condoning what is essentially stealing, then be prepared for a backlash.. the name on the forum may just give away the reasons why.
my position on this is clear and concise, as is yours. i suggest we stop this now as i honestly have no more interest in discussing this topic with you. claiming the old "its not really stealing, its reproducing" adage holds no water with me. infact it suggests to me that you've actually thought a lot about how you will justify what you do and im pretty sure that thats worse than the average joe who is downloading songs all day but doesnt even realise that he's doing something wrong.
much like trying to hold a a reasonable conversation with a creationist, ive gotten to that point where im actually staring at the screen in disbelief, so i'll bid you adeu...
I make tunes and have worked in/with the music industry for years - and I 100% agree with Ciaran C there... there is no point crying about the situation... artists need to look at new ways of making money because change, well, happens... I'm old enough to remember when all artists wanted was a way to 'get the music out there' and that huge huge want is a reality now - true, it's created new challenges and things are in a state of flux at the moment but with some creative thinking and, dare I say it, stand-out talent, many many many more bands will make a good living as compared to a lucky few making an absolute fortune...0 -
rustyregan wrote: »Anyone watch this being covered on the 9pm news last night? They showed a clip of Sharon Corr doing a sickeningly bad cover of Everybody's Gotta Learn Sometime (see htt p://ww w.yo utube.com/watch?v=NsIMneMXm2E if you're feeling masochistic) and then Sharon talking to an interviewer saying how her heart is being broken by illegal downloaders, because, like, she knows when she looks at the sales figures that they're going to be severely reduced by illegal downloading. It's nothing to do with her music being bland, unoriginal and forgettable crap that no sane person wants to buy. No, it's the damned downloaders. It seem some performers (well S.C. and Aslan anyway) seem to instantly blame illegal downloading for their poor sales when the answers might be somewhat closer to home. I mean, who would even spend the time downloading and listening to this stuff for free? And I know people like crap music, but has-been rock stars going ultra bland always find it hard to sell records. Maybe if they're doing a Kylie style 're-invention' or whatever they're going to shift a few units, but hardly by churning out uninteresting covers of well known hits from 30 years ago.
Indeed.
As far as I can see, illegal downloading is almost wholly responsible for getting some of the best acts of the last ten years on the map. Without it, many of those bands - particularly the weird, daring ones - would still be waiting for a major to look their way to help them get anywhere at all.
Sharon Corr might have done alright back when there was sod all else to listen to, but the times they are a'changin' thank Christ.0 -
Advertisement
-
jill_valentine wrote: »Indeed.
As far as I can see, illegal downloading is almost wholly responsible for getting some of the best acts of the last ten years on the map. Without it, many of those bands - particularly the weird, daring ones - would still be waiting for a major to look their way to help them get anywhere at all.
Sharon Corr might have done alright back when there was sod all else to listen to, but the times they are a'changin' thank Christ.
Jill. My little friend. This "map" you speak of. Only acts who are already on this "map" are illegally downloaded. Free promotional copies on pitchfork are not illegal downloads.
I'll explain how it all works. Musicians buy musical instruments, which costs money. Usually spend years, thousands of hours learning to play them. They also spend years learning how to write and create original music.
Then the musicians spend money on recording. Which usually cost thousands for decent recordings.
Then to get on the "map" cost more money. Behind any act you'll ever hear there are marketing people plugging the recording. Ads in the music press - videos. All of that costs money.
Even if a band is to make money touring. They need money to get started. Very few people can afford professional demo recordings - trips to New York and London - and to pay publicists out of their own pockets. I know one well known Irish band whose parents were rich enough to finance them - but for most people it just isn't an option.
The story that the Artic Monkeys became big through illegal downloading is bull****. Their record company spent hundreds of thousands promoting them. The Myspace story was bull****. The music press will generally not take you seriously unless you have a publicist. Radio stations will not play your records unless you pay pluggers to get them on the radio.
Every time you download illegally from an artist big or small - you're gyp'ing someone. So what if you go to Oxygen. It's like saying "Oh I shoplift most of the time - but it's ok, because occasionally I buy something"Sharon Corr might have done alright back when there was sod all else to listen to, but the times they are a'changin' thank Christ.
Now we have Simon Cowell. Thank Christ.
Or trustafarian indie music.0 -
Ah I just wanted to rattle the cages of the thread a bit :rolleyes: I know that certain "big" labels would fund subsidiary labels that would promotoe experimental music etc and that's great, but not all of them have been so supportive of anything that isn't commercially successful.You can't tar all "big labels" with the same brush.
There's no way to change people's behaviour. We can proselitise about the morals of it, but it will change nothing. The 80 year blip in musical history where you could put a huge markup on plastic with music in it, is over. Recorded music is no longer viable. It's back to performing, and exploiting copyrights for a living, like it was for 500ish years prior.
This might be of interest to the people on this thread: http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/2010/how-much-do-music-artists-earn-online/
It's a data visualisation that compares the different methods of promoting your music, and how much you have to do for each medium to make the US monthly minimum wage.
The responsibility is on the big labels to prove how they're still useful to musicians. You can produce an album today for cheaper than ever. You can book your own gigs, organise the pressings of your own vinyl or cds, get your music up on iTunes/cdBaby/Amazon etc. It's a feck load of extra work, but you're not paying out massive dividends to Sony. The difficult part, and it has always been difficult, is to stand out enough to get people to care about your music. Perhaps the power lies more in the popular music blogs rather than the labels these days.0 -
maxell2010 wrote: »I make tunes and have worked in/with the music industry for years - and I 100% agree with Ciaran C there... there is no point crying about the situation... artists need to look at new ways of making money because change, well, happens... I'm old enough to remember when all artists wanted was a way to 'get the music out there' and that huge huge want is a reality now - true, it's created new challenges and things are in a state of flux at the moment but with some creative thinking and, dare I say it, stand-out talent, many many many more bands will make a good living as compared to a lucky few making an absolute fortune...
what suggestions can you put forward as an alternative to the normal channels of making money?0 -
Imogen Heap, NIN, Prince, Christy Moore, Saw Doctors, Sharon Shannon.DamagedTrax wrote: »what suggestions can you put forward as an alternative to the normal channels of making money?0 -
i meant suggestions for the process of generating alternative income rather than artists names.
might be an idea to see them in this thread and discuss.0 -
DamagedTrax wrote: »i meant suggestions for the process of generating alternative income rather than artists names.
might be an idea to see them in this thread and discuss.
Surely this thread is for entertainment value only? If anyone posts anything that goes against the IRMA line, they get patronised, accused of being shoplifters, con artists, thieves (a lot of this), ignoramuses, bandits etc. Even people who agree with you DamagedTrax are probably put off by the accusations made on this thread. I don't think anyone should try to provide constuctuive ideas on this thread if you're going to just insult them or ignore the ideas when they're presented to you.0 -
rustyregan wrote: »Surely this thread is for entertainment value only? If anyone posts anything that goes against the IRMA line, they get patronised, accused of being shoplifters, con artists, thieves (a lot of this), ignoramuses, bandits etc. Even people who agree with you DamagedTrax are probably put off by the accusations made on this thread. I don't think anyone should try to provide constuctuive ideas on this thread if you're going to just insult them or ignore the ideas when they're presented to you.
Stone The Crows...Have you read the thread? If not, read it FFS.
Both DT and I are all for internet freedom and support the UPC judgement, which is an argument essentially about liberty rather than filesharing.
We also support the technologies involved in filesharing.
We also acknowledge the the game has changed and filesharing is somewhat inevitable. We acknowledge that revenue streams must be reinvented and we are tech savvy.
What we are discussing (listen up Ciaran_C also) is the hypocritical small minded many who justify wholesale downloading by citing stuff like "those greedy record labels"...when in reality they do it...BECAUSE THEY CAN. A few of these empty vessels with the faux ill-conceived 'politics' have already posted here and left with their tail between their legs.
If someone dropped their lifesavings on the street and no-one was around, would you take it? If you did it wouldn't be any different to robbing their gaff - but it would be easier BECAUSE YOU COULD.
Get it? Or will we just give up?
I do believe the industries claims that a lot of these downloads would ordinarily have been sales is bullsh*t. They exaggerate this to suit the anti-filesharing agenda. This revenue they think is missing wouldnt ever exist anyway - I dont know many people who could avoid to buy 5,000 songs in the space of a year!
I also believe the case that a lot of people who download will eventually purchase items and go to shows. Great. The direct to fan abilities now are staggering and approaches like pre-sales etc are proving to be quite successful for those with an established fanbase.
We are not talking about those people though, we are talking about people who download incessantly and share incessantly with no intention of ever rewarding the person who created it and with no appreciation of what it could be doing to the infrastructure whose fruits they seem interested in.
That's all we're talking about - those people. They don't know what they're talking about.0 -
Erm, sorry if this has been dealt with, but has there been any major drop in TV viewing figures in say the last 3 years?0
-
i have no problem talking about alternative selling ideas with anyone in this thread. if you read back on my posts you'd probably realise this. like i said earlier ive been involved with some pretty underground scenes and we utilised a lot of differant ways to make our money as the mainstream music industry hadnt a notion about where we were coming from and what we were doing.
so dont for one minute think that im backing the major labels way of handling things here. some of the court cases they've brought against people really disgust me.
my concern in all of this is the real people that are suffering because of illegal downloads (people like you or me who are just trying to feed themselves) and 100% NOT the fat cats who are moaning because their million dollar christmas bonus dropped by a few % last year.
the only people that im taking issue with in this thread are those coming on basically saying that they just steal music and dont give a crap about it or try the old "music is just information and information should be free line". its not "just information" and it shouldnt be free. its the hard work of people and they deserve to get paid for it, just like a teacher, accountant, warehouse worker or any other profession that you care to name.
if someone told you that the work that you do is worthless and that they were just gonna steal your wages every week i can be damn certain that you'd be up in arms about it too.0 -
Denalihighway wrote: »Get it? Or will we just give up?
There's just a lot of angry people around, isn't there? Keep with the crusade dude. Bye now.0 -
Advertisement
-
TV is a different beast to music, but I think a big part of piracy on the TV side is due to delays between territories, which is daft.
As for the music industry.....
Piracy is always going to be an issue. There's always going to be people who will see nothing wrong in it.
That's not what has the industry in a bind. The problem, as I see it, is caused by how the role of the record label should have been changed by the internet.
What do labels offer to artists, at a very high level?
1. Capital - money to get stuff recorded.
2. Promotion/brand development - experience in marketting the act, and establishing them as a commercial enterprise.
Historically, you couldn't afford to record as a band without the finance that a label would provide. That's all changed.
Recording is now affordable, so the role of the "gatekeepers to getting a record made" is gone, and the labels need to accept that. The opportunity for them to generate revenue out of owning recording rights and by dictating commercial terms in contracts is lessened massively by the fact that bands can fund and own their recordings nowadays. Now, with that in mind, here's what I think the labels should have spent the last 10 years doing, instead of trying to sue people.
Develop an online platform that provides bands with customisable websites that feature the following, all managable through an easy to use admin panel:
1. Content management - easily add pages,news items,tour dates,etc.
2. Media players for music and video
3. Mailing lists management
4. Visitor trending reports
5. Tight integration with social networking sites, allowing news updates to be pushed to all the bands online presences in one go, from on location
6. Web store functionality with options for people to buy tracks, albums, physical copies, merchandise, etc.
Once you have a platform like this, you can offer it commercially to bands, either with a flat fee, a percentage of sales from the included store, or a combination of both. It'll cost to build it, but you only have to build it once, after that it's just maintenance and development. Why would bands pay for it? Well, if they knew that all of their visitor stats, sales figures, mailing list signups, etc. were feeding into reports that formed the basis of the label's A&R prospect pipeline...well you don't need to be a rocket scientist to see that bands will jump at the idea of route into A&R for a label which might subsequently get involved.
So, rather than being the people to make it possible for a band to produce a product, the labels should have set themselves up as service providers to bands by providing that online platform and treating the bands like clients. The data gathered in the course of that service provision could provide them with a ready made list of acts to check out for potential investment/signing, while reducing their costs. As a service provider, they could branch out into giving all sorts of other services to bands using their platform who they don't even have the expense of signing/investing in: media consultancy, press release writing, critical assessment services...lots of things that their position as an "industry authority" would make appealing to bands. All of this could generate revenue for the label, and that's without them actually having to sign anyone. Signing someone then becomes more like a "joint venture" type enterprise. Even after signing, all of the online infrastructure to manage a band's web presence is in place, and has momentum. Not only that, but there is already a direct relationship between the artist and fans, meaning people are more likely to buy there than iTunes, knowing the artists gets a bigger chunk, which potentially means more venenue for the label from sales percentages.
Imagine if labels had all developed variations on this theme over the last number of years?
Imagine if they had realised there was money to be made in enabling artists to sell directly to their client base, instead of being the middleman?
Would it have eliminated piracy? No way.
I think it would, however, have resulted in a much healthier industry by giving artists a much better opportunities to make money from their material, and giving consumers the chance to engage directly with the artists. It would encourage a sense of patronage, which would be in stark contrast to the feeling consumers have in todays market, where they know that when they hand over their €10 for an album, the artist is going to get a pittance compared what the label gets.
Labels have created an "us and them" atmosphere that has pushed people into illegal downloading.
If they had facilitated direct relationships with artists instead, and embraced the new roles available to them, we wouldn't be having a debate on this scale.0 -
rustyregan wrote: »There's just a lot of angry people around, isn't there? Keep with the crusade dude. Bye now.
jaysus I'm not angry at all begorrah...I'm flyin it.
A lot of ignorance around also. Have a good one...0 -
rustyregan wrote: »If anyone posts anything that goes against the IRMA line, they get patronised, accused of being shoplifters, con artists, thieves (a lot of this), ignoramuses, bandits etc.
i would like someone to give me a simple answer in relation to this. we've been thru every scenario in this thread already so please please please answer the question asked... we are not politicians, we do not need to hide behind hyperbole..
Q. how is somebody who freely and regularly takes the product of somebody else's hard work (without express permission and without due payment) not a thief?0 -
You mean music and film - where you have made a zero contribution to the cost of production.
You're the guy who sneaks into the cinema without paying. Climbs over the wall of a concert. Shoplifts music.
And magically thinks right is on their side. Did you really think you weren't stealing when you downloaded all that music and film?
We do have lockdowns - my internet connection blocks me from making skype calls to land lines - because my provider wants me to use their phone service. The same provider could easily block torrents and rapidshare but they won't because they don't sell music and film. They make money from helping the whiny little shoplifters.
Oh and China when it comes to piracy is the worst culprit in the world. Only a tiny fraction of the DVDs and CDs sold in China are legitimate.
It's completely unsustainable if only the bandits are profiting and the producers are getting nothing.
And it won't be a bad thing either.
That little whiny ****ers will have to pay for their music and film.
are you some class of a lunatic ?
ALL I EVER SAID WAS :
the internet is going to be locked down within ten years , and freedom to surf will be removed - and likely solving the very problem you are having a stroke about
THATS ALL I SAID
suddenly I'm the guy thats downloading the whole web ?
suddenly im a shoplifter ?
ASSUME MUCH ?0 -
0 -
World English DictionaryDamagedTrax wrote: »i would like someone to give me a simple answer in relation to this. we've been thru every scenario in this thread already so please please please answer the question asked... we are not politicians, we do not need to hide behind hyperbole..
Q. how is somebody who freely and regularly takes the product of somebody else's hard work (without express permission and without due payment) not a thief?
theft
— n
1. criminal law the dishonest taking of property belonging to another person with the intention of depriving the owner permanently of its possession
See if you can spot the reason yourself.
FYI, a COPY of a song is not "the product of somebodys...hard work". The original work is the product. A copy can be made by a blind, paraplegic seven year old, and has no inherent value in the age of the internet. It is ABSURD to suggest that it has any value.
You can give it value by making it part of a subscription service (streaming), or ensuring easy, convenient access to it everywhere (iTunes) or performing it in person (gigging) or by several other methods. In the past it had value as ordinary people could not create endless copies of it, so there was a revenue stream attached to pressing and distributing copies. That is OVER.
You can go back to ranting and raving and throwing your toys out of the pram now there chief.0 -
World English Dictionary
theft
— n
1. criminal law the dishonest taking of property belonging to another person with the intention of depriving the owner permanently of its possession
See if you can spot the reason yourself.
FYI, a COPY of a song is not "the product of somebodys...hard work". The original work is the product. A copy can be made by a blind, paraplegic seven year old, and has no inherent value in the age of the internet. It is ABSURD to suggest that it has any value.
You can give it value by making it part of a subscription service (streaming), or ensuring easy, convenient access to it everywhere (iTunes) or performing it in person (gigging) or by several other methods. In the past it had value as ordinary people could not create endless copies of it, so there was a revenue stream attached to pressing and distributing copies. That is OVER.
You can go back to ranting and raving and throwing your toys out of the pram now there chief.
Ah right, so ok to copy 'copyrighted' works.0 -
Whether its "ok", by you or anyone else, is irrelevant. 165 million (and climbing) music tracks are transferred every day. In the face of these numbers the morality of it is academic.Ah right, so ok to copy 'copyrighted' works.
Time to face the reality of the situation. And adapt, or die.0 -
Whether its "ok", by you or anyone else, is irrelevant. 165 million (and climbing) music tracks are transferred every day. In the face of these numbers the morality of it is academic.
Time to face the reality of the situation. And adapt, or die.
Nothing to do with numbers. It's your choice.
Adapting yes fine, do it daily - but also even that Darwin coined that phrase he was probably aware that people extend themselves beyond those base animal instincts in an effort to 'lend a hand' aware that sometimes people have weaknesses and down time in life.
You are partially contributing to the grind no doubts. It's a pity that the file-sharers can't get out of the gutter and help contribute to others efforts for their hedonistic endeavors kicking back and enjoying the hard earned fruits of their clicking.
So, anyway - back to the daily adapting.0 -
Advertisement
-
Whether its "ok", by you or anyone else, is irrelevant. 165 million (and climbing) music tracks are transferred every day. In the face of these numbers the morality of it is academic.
Time to face the reality of the situation. And adapt, or die.
Thank you. Finally. Wasn't that hard was it? It didn't take too long either...0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement