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
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

UPC victory in piracy case

13

Comments

  • #102
    DOC09UNAM
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,305 ✭✭✭DOC09UNAM


    Alofthedunnes wrote: »
    http://www.independent.ie/national-news/upc-scores-landmark-victory-in-illegal-downloads-case-2374221.html

    It's a shame really because it would have been the saviour of the music business in Ireland (and probably the world as other countries followed suit). Now they'll have to wait until the government passes legislation to force the service providers to block illegal downloading. Good luck with that.....

    I'll be the first to admit that I use torrents to download TV shows that have already been shown on TV. I never download music as it's robbing the artists of valuable income.

    The only way the music business is going to thrive again is by stopping large scale copyright theft. And the only way to do this is to force the ISP's to stop illegal downloading.

    What's your opinion on what way this is going to pan out? Will they ever be able to stop torrents?

    You are robbing actors of royalties for every dvd/boxset.

    Using your logic, i'm only downloading music that has been shown on the music channels, i'm not stealing.


  • #103
    Clanket
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,087 ✭✭✭Clanket


    DOC09UNAM wrote: »
    You are robbing actors of royalties for every dvd/boxset.

    Using your logic, i'm only downloading music that has been shown on the music channels, i'm not stealing.

    Ah good ol logic. Can justify anything to anybody.


  • #104
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Alofthedunnes wrote: »
    And you're welcome for my specific & well-thought-out answer.

    Your so full of it.
    You download TV shows and boxsets and use torrents, yet you take the moral highground when it comes to music artists because?????........oh you are robbing them of their income (which is gained really from idiots who buy the album then realise its crap and bin it).
    You are stealing from the artists because you download and listen to the whole album before deleting it (yeah right:pac:), as you don't buy the album as you have already listened to it and thought "your not having my money."


  • #105
    DOC09UNAM
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,305 ✭✭✭DOC09UNAM


    Alofthedunnes wrote: »
    Ah good ol logic. Can justify anything to anybody.

    Well i'm using the logic you used, you download tv shows, probably alot more expensive than anything I would download, as I don't have the internet speed for it.

    You can't have one rule for you, and one rule for another.


  • #106
    Bi6N
    Closed Accounts Posts: 58 ✭✭Bi6N


    maccored wrote: »
    So you think theres no need for a solution then, all's fine as it is?

    I won't loose sleep over it thats for sure, much bigger atrocities hardly get this amount of public debate. Systems always break, this one is broken.
    But its certainly not dead, I've been a musician for years, nearly every gig I've played was free. I also work, anything I could ever make from music was a blessing.

    Now I live on the side of the line I call reality, some issues are so complex they can't be controlled or solved, but may evolve into something better.
    I support free media, that is my opinion.

    maccored wrote: »
    there seems to be a lot of half thought out 'oh but the rich made too much money anyway' thinking going on in this thread. thats completely missing the point.

    I'm very happy for UPC and its pirate customers.
    What is "the point"? Please enlighten me.


  • #107
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    RVP 11 wrote: »
    Your so full of it.
    You download TV shows and boxsets and use torrents, yet you take the moral highground when it comes to music artists because?????........oh you are robbing them of their income (which is gained really from idiots who buy the album then realise its crap and bin it).
    You are stealing from the artists because you download and listen to the whole album before deleting it (yeah right:pac:), as you don't buy the album as you have already listened to it and thought "your not having my money."

    while i dont exactly agree with alofthedunnes' thinking on the matter, i fear you may have seriously misinterpreted what the guy was trying to say.


  • #108
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    DamagedTrax wrote: »
    while i dont exactly agree with alofthedunnes' thinking on the matter, i fear you may have seriously misinterpreted what the guy was trying to say.

    Don't think so.
    He thinks it's ok to download TV shows off torrents but disagrees with downloading music and would call it stealing despite doing it himself and deleting it afterwards and if he likes the album buys it.:pac:
    It's still copyright theft even if he does buy the album after(BS).


  • #109
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    RVP 11 wrote: »
    Don't think so.
    He thinks it's ok to download TV shows off torrents but disagrees with downloading music and would call it stealing despite doing it himself and deleting it afterwards and if he likes the album buys it.:pac:
    It's still copyright theft even if he does buy the album after(BS).

    discounting what he said about tv (its not a subject im interested in talking about to be honest as my business is in music, not tv), lets look at his statements on music downloading for a second.

    you claim its BS but yet its actually a pretty decent way of doing things (again discount the tv thing, he's clearly in the wrong there). its how i generally do things too. i own thousands of cds, vinyls and LEGAL downloads and the majority of these in the last 5 years are purchased because i downloaded the album first and liked it. i too will delete it if i dont like it.
    i have a close friend who operates on the same principals and he owns (at last count) nearly 10,000 vinyls and god knows how many cds. are you going to say that what we do is wrong and hurting the industry?

    the whole situation is so messed up right now that anything that leads to sales in those figures is a good thing.

    the problem does not lie with people like ourselves but with people that will NEVER spend money on music. people that think that free music is their god given right.. infact i take that back, these people dont even think anymore as far as i can see.. i think society has destroyed their inbuilt moral compass to a point where they BELIEVE that what they're doing isnt wrong or affecting anybody.


    and before anyone says it, YES i am taking the moral highground on this and if you've spent half as much money as i have on music or put half as much work into the industry (often with little returns) then you're very welcome to join me up here. its warm and dry but the view isnt very nice :-/


  • #110
    Android 666
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,577 ✭✭✭Android 666


    Alofthedunnes wrote: »
    If the answer is no then let me explain. I did not watch some series of shows that were shown on TV in times gone past for whatever reason. So they get to season 5 and I watch a couple on TV after hearing from friends that it's a great show. I'm intrigued so I decide I'll go back and watch from Season 1. So I go to the video shop to see if I can rent it and they don't have it. So what's the alternative? Buy the boxset? The digital age is here. I do not want bulky box sets taking up room in my small apartment. I've enough of them already from times gone past. So I download to catch up. I watch the downloads and delete them once watched. I've now caught up with the TV and watch future episodes on TV. SO call me what you want, I'm contributing.

    And you're welcome for my specific & well-thought-out answer.

    Em, you're not really contributing, you can actually download series from ITunes and pay for them. You're saying that you download the series, watch them and delete them so that's not really stealing because well the boxsets take up too much space on your shelf. But the fact of the matter is that you had to pay for the boxsets and when you think about are you ever going to watch the boxset of a series more than once?

    It's not really a well thought out answer. It's just the one that appeals the most to you and the one that justifies your wooly thinking on the issue.


  • #111
    Clanket
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,087 ✭✭✭Clanket


    RVP 11 wrote: »
    (yeah right:pac:),

    Just because you might not be able to do it doesn't mean it's not true.
    DOC09UNAM wrote: »
    Well i'm using the logic you used, you download tv shows, probably alot more expensive than anything I would download, as I don't have the internet speed for it.

    You can't have one rule for you, and one rule for another.
    RVP 11 wrote: »
    Don't think so.
    He thinks it's ok to download TV shows off torrents but disagrees with downloading music and would call it stealing despite doing it himself and deleting it afterwards and if he likes the album buys it.:pac:
    It's still copyright theft even if he does buy the album after(BS).

    I'll re-point you to my last post

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=68461861&postcount=99

    RVP, I'll ask you the same question I asked Forest Master. Are you someone who downloads whatever they want, when they want, with no consideration for the people who've produced it?


  • Advertisement
  • #112
    Minstrel27
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,818 ✭✭✭Minstrel27


    Alofthedunnes wrote: »
    Are you someone who downloads whatever they want, when they want, with no consideration for the people who've produced it?

    Who are you to judge seeing as you seem to download television shows whenever it suits you?


  • #113
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Alofthedunnes wrote: »
    Just because you might not be able to do it doesn't mean it's not true.





    I'll re-point you to my last post

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=68461861&postcount=99

    RVP, I'll ask you the same question I asked Forest Master. Are you someone who downloads whatever they want, when they want, with no consideration for the people who've produced it?

    I don't download copyrighted material at all unless i've paid for it.
    I have a massive collection of Blu Rays and DVD's and support the industry.
    I don't pre-download the movies and TV shows to preview them first either.


  • #114
    Clanket
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,087 ✭✭✭Clanket


    Android 666 wrote: »
    Em, you're not really contributing, you can actually download series from ITunes and pay for them. You're saying that you download the series, watch them and delete them so that's not really stealing because well the boxsets take up too much space on your shelf. But the fact of the matter is that you had to pay for the boxsets and when you think about are you ever going to watch the boxset of a series more than once?

    It's not really a well thought out answer. It's just the one that appeals the most to you and the one that justifies your wooly thinking on the issue.

    If you can download the series I'm talking about (Entourage) from Itunes it's a new thing because you certainly couldn't when I wanted it.

    Call it what you want. I'm not taking any moral high ground. I'm just outlining my circimstances and dealings with illegal downloading. My main point being that I don't agree with it when people download absolutely everything, all the time.

    I doubt there's very many people left who have not downloaded something illegally at some stage or another.


  • #115
    Clanket
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,087 ✭✭✭Clanket


    RVP 11 wrote: »
    I don't download copyrighted material at all unless i've paid for it.
    I have a massive collection of Blu Rays and DVD's and support the industry.
    I don't pre-download the movies and TV shows to preview them first either.

    Well fair play to you then. You're a better person than I.


  • #116
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Alofthedunnes wrote: »
    You're a better person than I.

    Obviously.:)


  • #117
    coach22
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 519 ✭✭✭coach22


    long may illegal downloading continue. any music ive downloaded the artist is minted anyway so couldnt careless.


  • #118
    DOC09UNAM
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,305 ✭✭✭DOC09UNAM


    Alofthedunnes wrote: »
    Just because you might not be able to do it doesn't mean it's not true.





    I'll re-point you to my last post

    http://m.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=68461861&postcount=99

    RVP, I'll ask you the same question I asked Forest Master. Are you someone who downloads whatever they want, when they want, with no consideration for the people who've produced it?

    That post is the biggest load of bullshít ever.

    You want a series 1-5 of a program, so you download it, and you don't pay for it.
    Lets say on average that would be 15-20 euro a box set, which is 100 euro.

    I download maybe 7-8 albums a year, not that many really, and last year I went to 4 gigs and oxegen, so the music industry more than made there money back from me.


  • #119
    Android 666
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,577 ✭✭✭Android 666


    Alofthedunnes wrote: »
    If you can download the series I'm talking about (Entourage) from Itunes it's a new thing because you certainly couldn't when I wanted it.

    Yes you can
    Alofthedunnes wrote: »
    Call it what you want. I'm not taking any moral high ground.

    Yes you are. You said:

    RVP, I'll ask you the same question I asked Forest Master. Are you someone who downloads whatever they want, when they want, with no consideration for the people who've produced it?

    Looks like moral high ground to me
    Alofthedunnes wrote: »
    I'm just outlining my circimstances and dealings with illegal downloading. My main point being that I don't agree with it when people download absolutely everything, all the time.

    I'm in full agreement with you.
    Alofthedunnes wrote: »
    I doubt there's very many people left who have not downloaded something illegally at some stage or another.

    I have downloaded stuff illegally. There I have said. It's like a weight off my shoulders…


  • #120
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    coach22 wrote: »
    long may illegal downloading continue. any music ive downloaded the artist is minted anyway so couldnt careless.

    since any artist you've downloaded is "minted", you're taste in music must be obviously 1 dimensional and limited to maybe 50 cds? so i ask you, why bother getting involved in a debate like this, when those 2 brain cells you've just killed when typing your message could clearly be put to better use elsewhere? is it really wise to waste them on something so trivial as stealing? :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • #121
    Clanket
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,087 ✭✭✭Clanket


    I think most honest people do it on the basis of convenience and price. It's a hell of a lot easier to download than to physically buy (have to take a trip to the shops or wait on a delivery) and if the price isn't right people wont pay.

    Music is still overpriced but bargains can be found in different places.


  • #122
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Alofthedunnes wrote: »
    I think most honest people do it on the basis of convenience and price.s.

    I think there is a flaw in your argument.
    I think most honest people either go without or pay for the damn thing if they want it so much.


  • #123
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    Alofthedunnes wrote: »

    Music is still overpriced but bargains can be found in different places.

    middlemen profits are too high. if you break down what music is worth to the creator then its far from overpriced. infact the majority of musicians are working at nearly sweat shop wages. for every millionare musician there are literally thousands (of huge talent) on the breadline.

    for instance, look at the price differance (in tower records) on a general release and an "import". thats daylight robbery... and you can be damn certain that the artist isnt seeing that differance.


  • #124
    Clanket
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,087 ✭✭✭Clanket


    RVP 11 wrote: »
    I think there is a flaw in your argument.
    I think most honest people either go without or pay for the damn thing if they want it so much.

    RVP as a bastion of honesty, how do you feel about people recording from the TV? Is that ok?
    DamagedTrax wrote: »
    middlemen profits are too high.

    Yep that's beyond argument DT. IMO the only good thing that will come of illegal downloading is a new system. That's a lot fairer to artists.


  • #125
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Alofthedunnes wrote: »
    RVP as a bastion of honesty, how do you feel about people recording from the TV? Is that ok?


    .

    Now you're baiting me because i have high moral standards.
    Your hypocrisy never ends.

    I know it happens, i would only have an opinion on them if they came on here waving their virtual willies about doing it.


  • #126
    Forest Master
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,466 ✭✭✭Forest Master


    Alofthedunnes wrote: »
    And you're welcome for my specific & well-thought-out answer.

    Eh, it wasn't specific at all. And you're still a complete hypocrite. The fact that you can't grasp why doesn't negate that fact one bit.

    And you actually avoided the only question I asked that required a specific answer:
    Forest Master wrote: »
    So can you please tell me EXACTLY where the cut-off point is between "serial" downloading and "acceptable" downloading? Please tell me exactly where the line is drawn. e.g. 3hrs of content per week is okay,but 4hrs isn't, etc..


  • Advertisement
  • #127
    Bi6N
    Closed Accounts Posts: 58 ✭✭Bi6N


    DamagedTrax wrote: »
    since any artist you've downloaded is "minted", you're taste in music must be obviously 1 dimensional and limited to maybe 50 cds? so i ask you, why bother getting involved in a debate like this, when those 2 brain cells you've just killed when typing your message could clearly be put to better use elsewhere? is it really wise to waste them on something so trivial as stealing? :rolleyes:

    In regards to your reply to Coach22
    How about you let other members voice their opinions without implying they are stupid for having one you don't agree with.
    Everyone is welcome regardless of how they word what they say.


  • #128
    Clanket
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,087 ✭✭✭Clanket


    Forest Master wrote: »
    Eh, it wasn't specific at all. And you're still a complete hypocrite. The fact that you can't grasp why doesn't negate that fact one bit.

    And you actually avoided the only question I asked that required a specific answer:
    RVP 11 wrote: »
    Now you're baiting me because i have high moral standards.
    Your hypocrisy never ends.

    I know it happens, i would only have an opinion on them if they came on here waving their virtual willies about doing it.

    Lads you both know where I stand on it. Call me what you will. It's not going to change anything.

    My first post said "What's your opinion on what way this is going to pan out? Will they ever be able to stop torrents?"

    Good to see how a debate on something has ended with people calling names. Keep up the good work.


  • #129
    rustyregan
    Registered Users Posts: 89 ✭✭rustyregan


    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.


  • #130
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    Bi6N wrote: »
    In regards to your reply to Coach22
    How about you let other members voice their opinions without implying they are stupid for having one you don't agree with.
    Everyone is welcome regardless of how they word what they say.

    just as i am entitled to think that they are stupid and voice my opinion on it.

    .. just as you are entitled to voice yours, as is anyone else.

    my opinion of his post doesnt encroach on his rights to post, it only serves to point out my disgust at his obvious lack of intelligent commentary on the subject and to question why he even bothered in the first place.

    to come into a music production forum, populated by many working producers/engineers/artists and make the statement that he made, is at the very least asking for trouble and most likely done to bait rather than contribute.


  • #131
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    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 http://www.yo utube.com/wa tch?v=NsIMn eMXm2E if you're feeling machostic) 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.

    agreed.. its not ALWAYS illegal downloading that leads to bad sales.


  • Advertisement
  • #132
    jtsuited
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,401 ✭✭✭jtsuited


    All of this should have been dealt with ten years ago, more specifically post-napster and pre-itunes.


  • #133
    rustyregan
    Registered Users Posts: 89 ✭✭rustyregan


    DamagedTrax wrote: »
    agreed.. its not ALWAYS illegal downloading that leads to bad sales.

    Indeed. To be honest, I think the recession is sometimes a factor too. People are preferring to save rather than spend, in Ireland anyway. Apparently medium to big gigs in the UK are selling out regularly, but few over here seem to (that's just anecdotal).

    Just as a matter of interest, what do you think of reports like these: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/illegal-downloaders-spend-the-most-on-music-says-poll-1812776.html ?

    Do you think that illegal downloaders are mis-reporting the amount they are spending to try to justify their downloads?

    Personally, I think the phenomenon of downloaders spending more on music might well be true. I think that people download music and if they hear something they really like they'll want to go to the gig if the act are playing. That's human nature. Some will also want to buy the record or otherwise remunerate the musicians/label etc.

    I think the trick is to harness the revenue stream from the x% who do enjoy the music that they've downloaded illegally (or in some cases legally). I don't think they're thieves or see themselves as such - more as music fans who want to express their fandom by going to gigs, buying records, interacting on some level with the bands (myspace etc) and in other less conventional ways. From the record company point of view, I'd imagine that might mean adding non-music value to releases, be it artwork, a dvd with videos, doing limited runs and making sure people know they're limited and that kind of thing. In terms of selling mp3s or flac - that's going to be a hard sell but if people know their money is going straight to the band/indie label and not some dodgy outfit in Russia or Steve Job's R&D budget, they might be more inclined to splash the cash.


  • #134
    Denalihighway
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,075 ✭✭✭Denalihighway


    Forest Master wrote: »
    Eh, it wasn't specific at all. And you're still a complete hypocrite. The fact that you can't grasp why doesn't negate that fact one bit.

    And you actually avoided the only question I asked that required a specific answer:

    To be honest I think you're taking advantage here. Although technically, there is hypocrisy here, you're well aware (well at least you should be) there is a massive difference between someone who has occasionally listened to a torrent and then maybe enjoyed it and bought everything they could find relating to that artist etc and someone who EXPECTS to get all art and media for free, just because the internet allows them to. Unfortunately you've called Allthedunnes bluff because you know its impossible for him/her to put a figure or define what is takes for someone to be a 'serial downloader'.

    These are the people were are talking about. It's about the sense of entitlement of these people. Many of them (no doubt a few people who have already posted) defend this by citing the 'cool', street credible example of 'greedy record companies' etc. This is just a ruse much of the time, plain and simple.

    It's a convenient excuse to just plunder what ever they can whenever they can. Many of these do not give back, by way of album purchases, gig tickets etc.

    THESE are the people we are referring to. They care not that there is an infra-structure of independent musicians, studios, artists etc on the breadline crumbling because people feel entitled to get things for free because of the internet. They should stop hiding behind pseudo-anti-capitalism and just come out and say that they download stuff for free...BECAUSE THEY CAN.

    If I'm not talking about any of you, then don't take offense.

    But coming out and saying something like 'musicans are minted, so I'm feeling my boots' (I'm paraphrasing some gombeen earlier) kind of illustrates what I'm talking about. Some people just care about themselves, we all know them. The can sleep just fine by doing whatever they want. Fair play to them, maybe it would be more fun to be like that, but I'm not like that.

    Yes the record companies were and are greedy, and they are getting their comeupance now. Albums and itunes downlads are still too expensive. The models are changing for the better. But this isn't the point.

    Art is worth money, always has been. If someone invests not just their life, but their money in creating something remarkable then then if people like it, it stands to reason the person must be rewarded financially IF ONLY to perpetuate the chance of them producing more. This is the point people are missing.

    Oh...and about the actual, topic...I actually support the court decision.


  • #135
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    i dont think a blanket statement such as that reported by the independent really means anything in real world terms.

    it may be true in some cases but for every one person that first downloads and then buys their music, theres could be another 1000 or another 3 that doesnt, nobody knows.

    and a poll of 1000 people is crazy. if i take a poll of 1000 people in cambridge im damn sure that im gonna get totally differant results than if i pop over to sao paulo and take the same poll.

    and yes some people will lie to internally justify illegal downloading. thats just human nature. no polls can quantify the human mind IMO.


  • #136
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    Denalihighway wrote: »

    Oh...and about the actual, topic...I actually support the court decision.

    same as. this court decision is not really about illegal downloads in my eyes. its about the freedom to choose NOT to illegally download, which is a freedom we all deserve.

    i can walk into my local shop and stick a box of teabags under my jacket if i want to. i choose not to.. but if the shop took away that choice by locking everything away behind bars then im pretty sure i'd find a new shop very quickly.


  • #137
    Denalihighway
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,075 ✭✭✭Denalihighway


    DamagedTrax wrote: »
    same as. this court decision is not really about illegal downloads in my eyes. its about the freedom to choose NOT to illegally download, which is a freedom we all deserve.

    i can walk into my local shop and stick a box of teabags under my jacket if i want to. i choose not to.. but if the shop took away that choice by locking everything away behind bars then im pretty sure i'd find a new shop very quickly.

    that's exactly the way I see it. Liberty loses out otherwise.

    But it's inevitable the debate will go into the downloading thing innit? Always good for a bit o the 'ol banter


  • #138
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    same as the old P2P debate. P2P is an invaluable resource for me. i can get large sessions to clients overseas in a matter of minutes but like any technology it will get abused.

    if we boil it down to bare facts i could stab someone with a butter knife, should we ban them just incase i flip one day?


  • #139
    bytey
    Closed Accounts Posts: 266 ✭✭bytey


    krd wrote: »
    What was ever "free" about the internet?

    .

    i meant free as in you can surf to any page , download what you want , do what you like , at the moment freely - with no lockdowns ( like china )

    i did not mean free as in it costs nothing to do so .

    all of this is destined to end .

    and you really need to get a massage :pac:


  • #140
    TelePaul
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,093 ✭✭✭TelePaul


    I've been thinking a little more about this and it strikes me that as the ubiquity of music increases, its value decreases. I don't download illegally and very rarely legally, but I know people who couldn't possibly consume the amount of music they download in a manner approaching meaningful. People hear a single they like, download an entire album and just play the one track. This strikes me a s a waste of time, effort and bandwidth, while on a more abstract note, I think it undermines the value of the album format.


  • #141
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    telepaul, how would you feel about a (legal) new format. the single file album.

    basically you'd pay maybe half the price to download the entire album as 1 file so that the true "album" lovers could listen to it as was intended. i know i would jump at that for certain albums (the first 2 "streets" albums spring to mind and the new "plan b" one - both are concept albums based on a story from start to finish).

    obviously it wouldnt work as all it would take is a simple audio editor to kill individual sales of anything more than 4/5 tracks from an album, but for all the "choice" that we are given by online download stores maybe it would be nice to remove that choice for those who so wished?


  • Advertisement
  • #142
    Neurojazz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,759 ✭✭✭Neurojazz


    Stay on topic! ;)


  • #143
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    oi!

    cheeky mod... i saw what you did :P


  • #144
    coach22
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 519 ✭✭✭coach22


    DamagedTrax wrote: »
    since any artist you've downloaded is "minted", you're taste in music must be obviously 1 dimensional and limited to maybe 50 cds? so i ask you, why bother getting involved in a debate like this, when those 2 brain cells you've just killed when typing your message could clearly be put to better use elsewhere? is it really wise to waste them on something so trivial as stealing? :rolleyes:

    8,000 songs and counting, all the latest software such as flash cs4 dreamweaver etc, 100s of movies! THANK YOU UPC


  • #145
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    coach22 wrote: »
    8,000 songs and counting, all the latest software such as flash cs4 dreamweaver etc, 100s of movies! THANK YOU UPC

    good for you but karma can be an awful bitch...


  • #146
    SeanHurley
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 347 ✭✭SeanHurley


    There is a fierce amount of BS on this thread, mainly from people who never frequent the Music Production Forum.

    As far as I am concerned stealing is stealing. People can try justify it but if you take something that has a monetary worth without paying for it you are stealing. Yes music is over-priced, yes the system is completely flawed but illegal downloading is still stealing.

    The argument that musicians are "minted" is ridiculous. Most of us barely break even from music. Using that rationale most people on this thread are "minted" in the eyes of any homeless person in Ireland so does that make it ok for a homeless person to call around to your house and randsack it???

    I think the Spotify model is something to look towards to be honest. A monthly subscription to a high quality streaming site. As broadband quality improves I feel streaming is the way to go with artist getting royalties on a per-play basis.

    The teenage politics of "sticking it to the man" by illegally down loading is pathetic. You are stealing something that isnt yours end of.

    Rant over.:cool:


  • #147
    longhalloween
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,207 ✭✭✭longhalloween


    I always thought it was overly complicated to download music.

    iTunes is completely outdated, slow and it takes forever to find the music I want, fill out the registration forms, credit card info ect and eventually download it.

    My internet connection isnt the best but I find its much simpler and quicker to torrent music. A quick google search and thats it!

    I never buy CDs because i end up ripping them onto my iPod and never use them again.


  • #148
    Denalihighway
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,075 ✭✭✭Denalihighway


    DamagedTrax wrote: »
    good for you but karma can be an awful bitch...

    I wouldn't even waste your breath on this one DT.

    I am curious though, I wonder is he/she either:

    a) 16 years old or
    b) a little soft in the 'ead like or
    c) a troll

    either way... :rolleyes::pac:


  • #149
    Neurojazz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,759 ✭✭✭Neurojazz


    DamagedTrax wrote: »
    good for you but karma can be an awful bitch...

    Damaged, your sat there with a studio and the ability to make kick ass music.... the karma has already done it's work :) - take a moment to look around :)


  • #150
    Denalihighway
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,075 ✭✭✭Denalihighway


    longhalloween wrote: »
    I always thought it was overly complicated to download music.

    iTunes is completely outdated, slow and it takes forever to find the music I want, fill out the registration forms, credit card info ect and eventually download it.

    My internet connection isnt the best but I find its much simpler and quicker to torrent music. A quick google search and thats it!

    I never buy CDs because i end up ripping them onto my iPod and never use them again.

    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?


  • Advertisement
  • #151
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    Neurojazz wrote: »
    Damaged, your sat there with a studio and the ability to make kick ass music.... the karma has already done it's work :) - take a moment to look around :)

    true.. although today i only seem to have the ability to smoke cigs :D


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement