Jump to content
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Sign in to follow this  
ScarletMacaw

Why do we tolerate stealing?

Recommended Posts

I enjoy the "what are you listening to right now" thread. But I have noticed many people have posted Youtube videos consisting of the audio of entire studio albums. These videos are illegal. I'm not sure why they aren't removed by Youtube--I guess it's possible the artists didn't complain, but I have also read of complaints by some artists, such as Prince, that Youtube didn't remove videos after he asked. I would like to know why some people think it's ok to be complicit in this.

I have no problem with someone taping part of a concert they went to and sharing it, because it's a personal experience of a one-time event, and filmed by the person sharing it. Obviously a studio album, particularly a fairly recent one, is not meant to be shared this way. It is copyrighted material and cannot be shared without permission.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."

~ Shakespeare Henry VI

Are you for real? Lighten up ferchrissakes.

I can't exactly share the exact vinyl album I am listening to at any particular time via the forum in real time...maybe if I had Skype, which I don't. Posting a YouTube video is the closest facsimile one can get.

But the sound of a YouTube clip is still inferior to the real album, so only someone who didn't care about music wouldn't bother getting the actual album of something he/she liked. Aside from some assorted live clips, there isn't a YouTube song or album clip I've posted where I don't own the corresponding actual album. So take your schoolmarm scolding somewhere else.

I love Prince's music but he's an idiot regarding his stance on YouTube. Who knows how many album sales he's lost because it's impossible to share with friends any clips of his stuff.

Most people won't take a chance on new music unless they can sample it first to see if it is to their liking. I have introduced people to countless bands thru the use of YouTube clips and that leads to those bands selling more albums and concert tickets thru an ever expanding fan-base.

If you are stuck in the Stone Age and are just relying on radio to get your music out to the people, you're going to go the way of the dinosaurs and the Dodo bird.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoy the "what are you listening to right now" thread. But I have noticed many people have posted Youtube videos consisting of the audio of entire studio albums. These videos are illegal. I'm not sure why they aren't removed by Youtube--I guess it's possible the artists didn't complain, but I have also read of complaints by some artists, such as Prince, that Youtube didn't remove videos after he asked. I would like to know why some people think it's ok to be complicit in this.

I have no problem with someone taping part of a concert they went to and sharing it, because it's a personal experience of a one-time event, and filmed by the person sharing it. Obviously a studio album, particularly a fairly recent one, is not meant to be shared this way. It is copyrighted material and cannot be shared without permission.

And the difference between your 2 points is exactly?

Edited by chillumpuffer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True true, Strider!

YouTube has introduced me to so many different bands and live clips that have encouraged me to see bands I have never seen before. Plus all the stuff I used to have on VCR tapes that have gone like the dinosaur (or Dodo bird ;)) is right there to be seen again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

""The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."

~ Shakespeare Henry VI

Are you for real? Lighten up ferchrissakes."

I can tell that you have never produced any original, copyrighted material for sale. If you were an author, artist or composer, you would feel very differently.

"only someone who didn't care about music wouldn't bother getting the actual album of something he/she liked." Unfortunately there are many people who are not discriminating and who only listen to music for free, because they can.

"Aside from some assorted live clips, there isn't a YouTube song or album clip I've posted where I don't own the corresponding actual album." You are not typical.

"So take your schoolmarm scolding somewhere else." You've made so many bigoted remarks on this forum, I'm not surprised by your sexism.

"I love Prince's music but he's an idiot regarding his stance on YouTube. Who knows how many album sales he's lost because it's impossible to share with friends any clips of his stuff." What a joke. Prince made a major movie in the 1980s, which I am sure is widely available, via Netflix etc. He's hardly an unknown artist struggling for recognition!

"Most people won't take a chance on new music unless they can sample it first to see if it is to their liking." Amazon allows you to sample songs before you buy them. Isn't that also why bands make official music videos.

"I have introduced people to countless bands thru the use of YouTube clips and that leads to those bands selling more albums and concert tickets thru an ever expanding fan-base." Just an assumption without evidence on your part.

"If you are stuck in the Stone Age and are just relying on radio to get your music out to the people, you're going to go the way of the dinosaurs and the Dodo bird." There are many ways to become known besides FM radio, including Pandora, Spotify, and, of course, concerts! Who is living in the Stone Age? LOL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."

~ Shakespeare Henry VI

Are you for real? Lighten up ferchrissakes.

I can't exactly share the exact vinyl album I am listening to at any particular time via the forum in real time...maybe if I had Skype, which I don't. Posting a YouTube video is the closest facsimile one can get.

But the sound of a YouTube clip is still inferior to the real album, so only someone who didn't care about music wouldn't bother getting the actual album of something he/she liked. Aside from some assorted live clips, there isn't a YouTube song or album clip I've posted where I don't own the corresponding actual album. So take your schoolmarm scolding somewhere else.

I love Prince's music but he's an idiot regarding his stance on YouTube. Who knows how many album sales he's lost because it's impossible to share with friends any clips of his stuff.

Most people won't take a chance on new music unless they can sample it first to see if it is to their liking. I have introduced people to countless bands thru the use of YouTube clips and that leads to those bands selling more albums and concert tickets thru an ever expanding fan-base.

If you are stuck in the Stone Age and are just relying on radio to get your music out to the people, you're going to go the way of the dinosaurs and the Dodo bird.

:goodpost:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^ Great post Strider :-) :peace:

Scarlet- I am one who post on that thread..hence what are you listening to right now...

1. Means I went out and bought the album!

2. I enjoy the thread because I have also been turned on to new music... I then go out and buy it!

3. Members here listen to some great stuff:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The artists that I support might be grateful for YouTube, including Robert Plant. Only after a quick listen on YouTube did I decide to buy Lullaby....and the Ceaseless Roar. The same applies to many, many other artists that I have purchased music from. At $40 a pop for a LP record, I am not prepared to risk the unknown in the vast majority of cases. There is very much an upside to YouTube for artists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, the problem with YouTube and other file sharing technologies is that they enable people to only purchase the songs they want. No more buying the entire album because you like 1 or 2 songs on it. It's a boom for the customer. However, it sucks for artists who put a lot thought and time into a collections of songs that should be listened to as a whole. It's a return to a singles driven music industry. I'll admit I'm biased in favor of albums; probably because I grew up and came of age during the album era. However, many artists recorded their best work on concept albums from John Coltrane with A Love Supreme to Pink Floyd with Dark Side Of The Moon. I don't want the album format to become financially impossible for this reason.

Before anyone comments...yes, I know that A Love Supreme predates the album era of rock music. The point I was trying to make is that concept albums aren't exclusive to rock music. A Love Supreme and Come Fly With Me (Frank Sinatra) were both popular concept albums in jazz and pop respectively.

Edited by Disco Duck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The artists that I support might be grateful for YouTube, including Robert Plant. Only after a quick listen on YouTube did I decide to buy Lullaby....and the Ceaseless Roar. The same applies to many, many other artists that I have purchased music from. At $40 a pop for a LP record, I am not prepared to risk the unknown in the vast majority of cases. There is very much an upside to YouTube for artists.

I'm very much the same way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing deep or insightful I think I can add to the discussion--except to say I always thought youtube was a good window into artists whose work you may not be familiar with or you've only heard the FM radio hits and wanted to explore further, like a full album to see whether or not you could get into said artist for an entire body of work.

That's basically how I got into Rush; learning that I did love their entire studio albums--which I promptly ordered after listening on youtube--and then through YT, finding videos of their live performances.

I have to think most musicians realize what a boon youtube can be for them. Just my 0.02...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do we tolerate stealing?

Because we are LZ fans? ;-)

Sorry, I couldn't resist after reading the topic title ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, the problem with YouTube and other file sharing technologies is that they enable people to only purchase the songs they want. No more buying the entire album because you like 1 or 2 songs on it. It's a boom for the customer. However, it sucks for artists who put a lot thought and time into a collections of songs that should be listened to as a whole. It's a return to a singles driven music industry.

How many full albums are out there where you like every song? There's a few, but I think it's great to able to pick only the ones you like as a lot is just filler. Either way, the artists still make money with single sales. As for You Tube, it seems anything goes and copyright is thrown out the window. Sampling also grates on me. Can't these morons think up their own stuff?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only after a quick listen on YouTube did I decide to buy Lullaby....and the Ceaseless Roar.

Charging for that 47 minute stinker is a better example of stealing than hearing it free on You Tube. :hysterical:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Charging for that 47 minute stinker is a better example of stealing than hearing it free on You Tube. :hysterical:

Haha. It's a grower Steve. I like it more with each listen, though it wil never be in the realm of a true and iconic classic. It's pretty decent though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoy the "what are you listening to right now" thread. But I have noticed many people have posted Youtube videos consisting of the audio of entire studio albums. These videos are illegal. I'm not sure why they aren't removed by Youtube--I guess it's possible the artists didn't complain, but I have also read of complaints by some artists, such as Prince, that Youtube didn't remove videos after he asked. I would like to know why some people think it's ok to be complicit in this.

I have no problem with someone taping part of a concert they went to and sharing it, because it's a personal experience of a one-time event, and filmed by the person sharing it. Obviously a studio album, particularly a fairly recent one, is not meant to be shared this way. It is copyrighted material and cannot be shared without permission.

I take it that you don't own any Led Zeppelin bootlegs then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ScarletMacaw, on 22 Oct 2014 - 09:06, said:

"I can tell that you have never produced any original, copyrighted material for sale. If you were an author, artist or composer, you would feel very differently."

So, among your many other talents you're also a mind-reader? I should just save time then and let you write my posts for me.

"Unfortunately there are many people who are not discriminating and who only listen to music for free, because they can. You are not typical."

So the dedicated music lovers should be punished for the sins of the masses? This is a music forum dedicated to Led Zeppelin, where other music geeks can gather and share their love of not only Led Zeppelin but other forms of music. Most of us buy our records or buy the iTunes downloads and are not thieves. It's nice to have a thread where if you're stuck at work on the computer, you can click on a YouTube clip that someone has posted and have some cool jams to listen to while working. Why deprive us of that joy just because you feel not enough people who listen to YouTube will buy the album?? As you can see from what others have posted, YouTube clips have helped plenty of people make a decision to buy an album...an album that otherwise would not have been sold.

"You've made so many bigoted remarks on this forum, I'm not surprised by your sexism."

Where to begin with this broadside attack? Frankly, since when is schoolmarm a sexist term? I have used it towards men and women alike. It's a good word that comes in handy when people display priggish behaviour.

As for my "many bigoted remarks"...please direct me to these so-called remarks. It's true that I am bigot when it comes to stupidity and politically correct gobbledy-gook. I don't care for people who parrot dogma, whether it is left or right. But if by "bigot" you are accusing me of being a racist or sexist, then you've lost me.

Am I a bigot because I had the temerity to suggest that ISIL/ISIS didn't have other Muslims' best interests at heart, let alone the rest of the people who have to inhabit this planet? Am I a bigot because I don't swallow some of the propaganda you post? You act like you're the only one who has been to the Middle East and therefore the only one who knows the "truth".

"What a joke. Prince made a major movie in the 1980s, which I am sure is widely available, via Netflix etc. He's hardly an unknown artist struggling for recognition!"

Oh please...Prince's profile is hardly what it was in the "Purple Rain" days. Not that it matters anyway as pertaining to this discussion...YouTube shouldn't only be for unknown artists struggling for recognition. Yes, Prince is a major artist, but you'd be surprised how few people have any clue about his music post-"Diamonds and Pearls", which came out way back in 1991. I have even come across a sizable segment of people who self-identify as Prince fans who have lost touch with what he's been up to lately, and much of that is due to his making it hard for people to discover his music on the internet. Radio certainly doesn't play Prince as much as they once did in the past. Thanks to a lack of clips available on YouTube, people also have no idea how amazing Prince still is in concert.

One of the things that helped Daft Punk explode was their incredible gig at Coachella. As word spread and people were able to see it on YouTube the legend grew. Prince had a similarly epic performance at Coachella. Only he didn't allow any of it to appear on YouTube and there was no buzz that built off that performance. I still have to work hard to convince people to take a chance on seeing Prince in concert because they have all these preconceived notions about him and his music. One YouTube concert clip would help so much in wiping away these false notions people have.

As for his movies, I don't watch movies on YouTube or any other online service.

"Amazon allows you to sample songs before you buy them. Isn't that also why bands make official music videos."

:hysterical: Hahaha, thanks for the laugh. To quote yourself, "What a joke." Since when does a 10 or 30 second sample give you an idea of what a song is like? Can you reduce a song of many shifts and moods such as "Ten Years Gone" or "In the Light" to a short snippet? I have tried to listen to some unknown bands thru Amazon's samples and it is frustrating...if a song has a slow beginning, then the sample ends before you even hear a lyric.

As for bands making videos...um, just where are these videos being shown? MTV and VH1 don't show any music videos as far as I can tell. In fact, the only way I have seen most of my favourite bands videos has been thru Vevo or YouTube. Otherwise I would never have known these videos even existed. Goldfrapp, Tame Impala, Sigur Ros, Bjork, PJ Harvey, Broadcast, Melody's Echo Chamber, Keren Ann, Flaming Lips, Wilco, Black Angels, Flying Lotus, Black Keys, White Stripes, Beck, Sia, Uncle Acid & the deadbeats...every day I discover an unknown video thanks to YouTube.

I'll give you another example of a band that can't fit in Amazon's sample pigeonhole...Sleep. Sleep's "Dopesmoker" album is one continuous slab of music...it is one track that is just over an hour long. You can't play a 30 second sample and expect that to be enough to convince people to buy the album. You'll never hear the album played on radio, either, due to its lack of radio-sized "songs". Other than lending your buddy your own "Dopesmoker" album or making a cassette or cd copy to pass along, YouTube is the most convenient and best way to let other people know about this record in a fair way that gives them enough opportunity to explore what the music is like.

"Just an assumption without evidence on your part."

Errr no...it is an assumption on your part. When someone tells me "thanks for sending me that YouTube clip...it sounded so good I went and got their album" that goes down in my book as evidence. Anecdotal evidence it may be, but it is still a real fact...something that happened due to cause-and-effect. When that person then shares it with their friends and so on and so on, even if only 10% of those people buy the album, that is still nothing to sneeze at.

"There are many ways to become known besides FM radio, including Pandora, Spotify, and, of course, concerts! Who is living in the Stone Age? LOL."

Yada yada yada...I wasn't saying YouTube was the only way to become known. I was reacting to your screed that people who use YouTube are stealing. If you're laughing because I would rather play my own albums and create my own playlist than listen to some drone programming Pandora or Spotify, fine...have at it. But it has zero to do with the fact that YouTube is a benefit to bands, not a hindrance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoy the "what are you listening to right now" thread. But I have noticed many people have posted Youtube videos consisting of the audio of entire studio albums. These videos are illegal. I'm not sure why they aren't removed by Youtube--I guess it's possible the artists didn't complain, but I have also read of complaints by some artists, such as Prince, that Youtube didn't remove videos after he asked. I would like to know why some people think it's ok to be complicit in this.

I have no problem with someone taping part of a concert they went to and sharing it, because it's a personal experience of a one-time event, and filmed by the person sharing it. Obviously a studio album, particularly a fairly recent one, is not meant to be shared this way. It is copyrighted material and cannot be shared without permission.

Can the case be made for intellectual property rights? Also I'm not sure theft counts in this case, nothing has physically been touched

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good post Strider. Probably a waste of your time though. Close minded folks, who always believe they are right are tough nuts to crack! Good try though.

:peace:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The internet and YouTube in particular is the "new" radio.

The argument is flawed when bands, including Led Zeppelin and Neil Young among others, post music on their own "official" channels.

Downloading torrents is another issue again but as we are able to download videos etc from YouTube, I think it is a moot point.

I have posted videos of my band on YouTube as it is a good tool for getting it out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoy the "what are you listening to right now" thread. But I have noticed many people have posted Youtube videos consisting of the audio of entire studio albums. These videos are illegal. I'm not sure why they aren't removed by Youtube--I guess it's possible the artists didn't complain, but I have also read of complaints by some artists, such as Prince, that Youtube didn't remove videos after he asked. I would like to know why some people think it's ok to be complicit in this.

I have no problem with someone taping part of a concert they went to and sharing it, because it's a personal experience of a one-time event, and filmed by the person sharing it. Obviously a studio album, particularly a fairly recent one, is not meant to be shared this way. It is copyrighted material and cannot be shared without permission.

:hysterical:

I am glad you have no problem with someone taping concerts and sharing them. Next time you go to a show make sure you ask the artist if they wouldn't mind you taping/filming it. I am sure they wouldn't mind?

When i was growing up in the 70's we borrowed albums and taped them. Only a retard would think that taping an album could land you with a hefty fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:hysterical:

I am glad you have no problem with someone taping concerts and sharing them. Next time you go to a show make sure you ask the artist if they wouldn't mind you taping/filming it. I am sure they wouldn't mind?

When i was growing up in the 70's we borrowed albums and taped them. Only a retard would think that taping an album could land you with a hefty fine.

The truth is, we all did it and were rather proud of it as well.

Heck I bought a Nakamichi Dragon cassette deck so I could have "perfect sounding" cassettes...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, a lot of defensive responses. Many people seem not to have actually read what I initially posted, or maybe they weren't wearing their reading glasses.

A Youtube video of one tune might be publicity; a Youtube "video" of an entire album is not "publicity." I think I said I had no problem with someone taping "part of" a concert, not the whole thing.

In the shows that I have been to recently, I have not heard any of the artists say anything about people's obvious Iphones nor have I seen signs in the venues saying "no taping allowed." On the other hand, at Broadway theater venues, there are signs and notices indicating no taping or photography is allowed and anyone trying to do so is ejected. I don't tape shows myself. I also never taped any albums in the 70s. I borrowed and lent albums. I didn't feel like I had to own every piece of music.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...