Matthew! Posted July 15, 2008 Share Posted July 15, 2008 A little branch off from the 'does anyone still buy cd's?' thread. Do you download? Free music, not free music? I personally do. As I explained in the other thread, I download (for free) to discover, and when I find music I like, I become a paying customer. With record labels and such still leeching off of talented musicians, I really don't see much of a problem with my choice either. What is the band losing, a buck fifty? If I like them, I'd much rather go see them live or buy a shirt or something. That way they walk away with a much larger cut of the profit. Also, this way I can hear more music. Without downloading, I would've never heard of some of the artists I now love, and the world of music today would be very different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoubleNecker Posted July 15, 2008 Share Posted July 15, 2008 Yeah, I download quite a lot. I've downloaded almost a 1,000 albums since Janurary and of a few of those albums, I bought on cd. I download because I want what I want now, but if I have money and I see the album, I'll get it. If an album is extremely hard to find, I'm gonna download it (if I want it) and that's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarlaxle 56 Posted July 15, 2008 Share Posted July 15, 2008 I just don't have the money to spend on 15-20 albums a month and that's that. If a band is playing live though, they'll get my 30 bucks for the ticket and 20-30 for a shirt. If I want a CD in higher quality audio, then I'll be sure to buy it though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electrophile Posted July 15, 2008 Share Posted July 15, 2008 Yeah, but not through p2p file sharing software. If you know where to look, you can find blogs and communities that are devoted to sharing music with people, usually people that sign up for it. LiveJournal has a great community for it. I'm not made out of money. There are certain artists whose material I collect, so I buy their releases regardless, usually on CD and vinyl if available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3hrsoflunacy Posted July 15, 2008 Share Posted July 15, 2008 I download tons of music. utorrent is running 24/7 sometimes. None of it officially released. Well, one time I did, kind of on accident. I didn't know it was officially released and the artist is long dead and I really don't care if I am ripping off his estate or family because they weren't the ones that actually produced the material I wanted anyway. Electrophile is right, there are plenty of blog sites and forums that share live music. I actually am a mod on two other forums dedicated to sharing live music (lossless, NO mp3's). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electrophile Posted July 15, 2008 Share Posted July 15, 2008 I found a great site that catalogs mp3 blogs by music genre, so if you're looking for some classical music, you go to that section and a list of sites come up. Same goes for basically every other genre. Saves a ton of time searching through Google. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bring Them On Back Posted July 15, 2008 Share Posted July 15, 2008 Yes, I download music off of Limewire all the time. I still buy albums if I think they're really worth it, and mostly I just download to find out about new stuff. I often listen to Nights With Alice Cooper Radio Show, then when I hear new bands I download a bit and see if I like them, sometimes if they're great I'll go and buy a full album. I don't have enough cash to buy loads of albums either, but I reckon people should be able to have access to music without loads of money. Bands shouldn't be so obsessed with being millionares, the money they earn off of playing gigs (if they're any good) would be equal to anyone else's income at least. Has any of LZ said anything about it before? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zero Posted July 15, 2008 Share Posted July 15, 2008 it's morally wrong to download a band's entire catalogue or even a single cd. it doesn't matter what i or anyone else thinks or tells ourselves to justify doing it. it's not our property . and if it were something that personally belonged to us most of us would change our tune and would then label it stealing. all that being said i've downloaded a few things before. some where mp3 rips of stuff i already owned on tape or vinyl. most of the other stuff were cds i believed i would never be able to acquire at a cd store. others i would have probably not been inclined to buy if i had ran across them in a store. still wrong. i'm a whore and a thief and a hypocrite. that's the price you pay when you put your hands in someone else's cookie jar. nothings really free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew! Posted July 15, 2008 Author Share Posted July 15, 2008 it's morally wrong to download a band's entire catalogue or even a single cd. it doesn't matter what i or anyone else thinks or tells ourselves to justify doing it. it's not our property . and if it were something that personally belonged to us most of us would change our tune and would then label it stealing. I can see where you're coming from, but I honestly believe this form of stealing largely benefits the music industry. Screw labels. When I download, I end up loving artists I would never hear otherwise, because I don't want to buy cd's of bands whose material is largely foreign to my ears. And in that way, the band makes more money off of me, because I will then buy their vinyl or merch. Or see them live. The only people who really lose are the labels. And I'm not stealing from them, since I don't buy the physical cd. I steal from the band, but if I like them, I give back more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2bitnogoodjive Posted July 15, 2008 Share Posted July 15, 2008 Yes I will download. I have gotten many MFSL and DCC titles in FLAC that are out of print and sell for outrageous amounts on Ebay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alien Posted July 15, 2008 Share Posted July 15, 2008 i download mostly bootlegs : excellent stuff out there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock N' Rollin' Man Posted August 1, 2009 Share Posted August 1, 2009 http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachus...usic_downloads/ A Boston University graduate student was ordered yesterday to pay four record labels a total of $675,000 in damages for illegally downloading 30 songs and sharing them online in only the second such lawsuit to go to trial. After deliberating for about three hours, the jury in US District Court in Boston concluded that Joel Tenenbaum infringed on the copyrights of songs such as Nirvana’s “Comes As You Are’’ and Beck’s “Loser.’’ The record labels were awarded $22,500 for each infringement. The verdict was reached the day after Tenenbaum, a 25-year-old doctoral student in physics, unapologetically admitted from the witness stand that he had illegally downloaded and shared hundreds of songs from 1999 to at least 2007 through peer-to-peer networks. As a result of his admission, US District Judge Nancy Gertner ruled Thursday night that Tenenbaum had conceded liability, and she directed the jury to consider only how much he should pay in damages. “I’m disappointed but not surprised,’’ Tenenbaum told reporters after the ver dict in the civil case. “But I am thankful that it wasn’t much bigger, that it wasn’t millions.’’ Tenenbaum could have been ordered to pay as much as $150,000 for each song, or a total of $4.5 million, because the jury concluded that the infringements were “willful.’’ Under federal law, the jury had to award at least $750 for each infringement. Tenenbaum’s mother, Judie of Providence, said that if the award stands, he will have to declare bankruptcy. “What choice would he have?’’ she said. Earlier this week, she said that prospect was “horrible’’ considering her son’s misdeeds. “We’re not talking about capital murder,’’ she said. “We’re not talking about Bernie Madoff.’’ The Recording Industry Association of America promptly issued a statement praising the jury for recognizing “the impact of illegal downloading on the music community.’’ An economist called as an expert witness by the record labels had testified that CD sales have plunged since 1999, largely because of file sharing, although Tenenbaum’s lawyers challenged that assessment. The association also said it was pleased that Tenenbaum testified that he never intended to deprive recording artists of income. “We appreciate that Mr. Tenenbaum finally acknowledged that artists and music companies deserve to be paid for their work,’’ the statement said. “From the beginning, that’s what this case was about. We only wish he had done so sooner, rather than lie about his illegal behavior.’’ Tenenbaum’s attorney, Harvard Law professor Charles Nesson, who told jurors his client is part of a generation that thinks nothing about downloading music for free, said he will appeal. “It was not a fair verdict because the jury never got to hear the fairness issue,’’ he said. He was referring to Gertner’s ruling before jury selection that the defense could not argue that Tenenbaum had the right to download and share songs under the fair use doctrine of copyright law. Nesson said yesterday that the ruling is “vulnerable’’ to challenge. Andrew Beckerman-Rodau, a professor at Suffolk Law School who specializes in intellectual property law, said before the verdict that he was puzzled that Tenenbaum did not settle the suit out of court before trial. The only logical explanation, he said, is that Nesson hopes to obtain a precedent-setting ruling on a matter such as the fair use doctrine, which he considered doubtful. Regardless of whether Nesson appeals, his plate will be full with another matter related to the suit. Weeks before the trial, lawyers for the record labels asked Gertner to sanction him for taping depositions without the permission of the plaintiff’s lawyers. The lawyers said they would drop their motion if he destroys the tapes, but Nesson told the judge yesterday that he wants to keep them. Gertner has yet to rule. As Joel Tenenbaum tells it, his battle against the recording industry was set in motion in 1993, years before he began to download music illegally. Tenenbaum was 9 when he saw Michael Jackson perform at the Super Bowl halftime show and was so mesmerized that he told his parents he wanted to be a singer like the self-proclaimed King of Pop. Tenenbaum gave up that ambition, but he still loves music and plays the piano. And as a skateboarding teenager in 1999, he began to amass a huge collection of music he downloaded, first from Napster, then from Kazaa, and later from other peer-to-peer networks. A few years ago, he received a letter from the recording industry at his home in Providence demanding payment for songs he had shared online with potentially millions of other people. He is among about 18,000 people against whom the industry has sought to enforce copyrights. Most settle out of court for $3,000 to $5,000, but Tenenbaum took the matter to trial. Although Gertner precluded both sides from presenting evidence about negotiations, Tenenbaum said on the witness stand and in an interview yesterday that he wanted to settle but the record labels kept increasing the sum. At one point, he said, he offered $3,000, but the labels insisted on $4,000. Cara Duckworth, a spokeswoman for the recording industry, said Tenenbaum neglected to mention that at one point he demanded thousands of dollars from the labels and that he flagrantly continued to download. In the only other downloading lawsuit to go to trial, a federal jury in Minnesota in June ordered a woman in that state to pay record labels $1.92 million for infringing on the copyrights of 24 songs. Tenenbaum did not appear to help his case with his three hours on the stand Thursday. He matter-of-factly admitted lying in sworn statements to the record labels and falsely blaming others he said might have had access to his computer in Providence, including his two sisters, friends, and house guests. After the verdict, Tenenbaum acknowledged that his lies might have hurt him with jurors. He said they never heard about how he had already admitted some of his falsehoods in other sworn statements. In his closing argument yesterday, Nesson said his client “became addicted to free music’’ and implored the jury to award the most modest damages possible. “What is the value of the infringement? It’s what he’d have to pay for it if he purchased it on Amazon . . . 99 cents,’’ Nesson said. “This is a federal case, and what’s it about? It’s about a kid in his bedroom clicking on a computer screen.’’ But Timothy M. Reynolds, one of the lawyers for the record labels, countered that “the defendant is a hard-core, habitual, long-term infringer who knew what he was doing was wrong but did it anyway.’’ Reynolds was among a team of lawyers for Sony BMG Music Entertainment, Warner Bros. Records Inc., Arista Records LLC, and UMG Recordings Inc. So what does everyone think of this? I think no matter what side your on, you know that this fine is way too harsh. Just the big record companies and RIAA trying to make a precedent and using a scare tactic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarlaxle 56 Posted August 1, 2009 Share Posted August 1, 2009 Why do people still use P2P for music? Just a question...you can find everything for direct download from sites like mediafire and rapidshare with 0 risk of being sued. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trm989 Posted August 1, 2009 Share Posted August 1, 2009 Why do people still use P2P for music? Just a question...you can find everything for direct download from sites like mediafire and rapidshare with 0 risk of being sued. Exactly. Just type in "Band - Album - .rar" and you're all set. Hell, you've even got search engines for those sites. Although, there is the case for extremely rare music that can only be found through P2P networks. But the people sharing aren't always so welcoming... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaliforniaÜberAlles Posted August 1, 2009 Share Posted August 1, 2009 Why do people still use P2P for music? Just a question...you can find everything for direct download from sites like mediafire and rapidshare with 0 risk of being sued. I still find downloading some rare and lesser known material to be difficult through that method. So having Soulseek comes in handy for those rare cases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hots on for nowhere Posted August 1, 2009 Share Posted August 1, 2009 i try to avoid downloading as much as possible i just love the feeling of holding the actuall music in my hands rather than seeing on my computer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_Lena_Zep Posted August 1, 2009 Share Posted August 1, 2009 i try to avoid downloading as much as possible i just love the feeling of holding the actuall music in my hands rather than seeing on my computer Same here. Edit: I like to dig through vinyls and feel like I'm searching for treasure. Of course, I usually don't find anything rare, but I don't like to see the music on my desktop screen, it's just not right. However, I still download music from net. Easier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zosodude13 Posted August 1, 2009 Share Posted August 1, 2009 A great place to find free CD's to rip/burn is from the library. check out your local library, I'm sure they have something. I do not use torrents, but I trade music with friends and others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_Lena_Zep Posted August 1, 2009 Share Posted August 1, 2009 A great place to find free CD's to rip/burn is from the library. check out your local library, I'm sure they have something. Thank you, thank you for that information!!!! Never thought of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy's A Legend Posted August 1, 2009 Share Posted August 1, 2009 I don't like to download music, I prefer to have the physical thing, whether it's CD or vinyl, it's sad that CDs are being used less becuase you can download them free. And what about the artists themselves? how does this effect them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zosodude13 Posted August 1, 2009 Share Posted August 1, 2009 Thank you, thank you for that information!!!! Never thought of it. You are welcome! I've found 25 albums of good stuff! Granted, not from 1 library, but several from around the county. So, check you local area's website and see who has what! It can't hurt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electrophile Posted August 1, 2009 Share Posted August 1, 2009 Maybe if the record industry got off their asses and lowered the price of CDs, more people would be inclined to buy them. Or maybe if music in general got better, people wouldn't download one or two songs off an album, they'd buy the whole thing. If you take the actual physical properties of a CD - the plastic jewel case, the CD, the paper and the ink.....you'll get what? Maybe $2? So why are they still selling the damn thing for $15 in some places? I can get the whole album off iTunes for less than that. It's another example of the industry being left in the dust by technology and the economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaliforniaÜberAlles Posted August 1, 2009 Share Posted August 1, 2009 A great place to find free CD's to rip/burn is from the library. check out your local library, I'm sure they have something. Absolutely. The library doesn't always have a great selection of popular music, but their classical selection is immense. I've definitely buffed up my classical music collection through the library quite a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footsteps of Dawn Posted August 2, 2009 Share Posted August 2, 2009 I like CDs the best (for sound quality and being able to listen to them in the car...my CD burner is malfunctioning), but I also use iTunes (good price, lets you test drive). I'm kinda against free downloading, even though I used Napster back in the day, but I don't do that anymore. Except for that one time when I downloaded a demo you can't buy anywhere, but I digress. I think MySpace provides the perfect solution for small-time artists who just want to get their songs heard, though. You can listen to the whole song right there and see if you like it or not, but then you have to pay if you want to download it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swede Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 I don't think I've ever downloaded a song. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.