1. Dear Guest, if you haven't already... enter to WIN Samplitude Pro X4!
    Dismiss Notice

YEAH for the RIAA

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by RecorderMan, Jul 29, 2003.

Tags:
  • AT5047

    The New AT5047 Premier Studio Microphone Purity Transformed

  1. jdsdj98

    jdsdj98 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2002
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    Buzain, you've missed the point entirely. File sharing is completely legal if I offer up a word document of something I've written for anyone to download and do as they please with.

    If I take SOMEONE ELSE'S intellectual property, convert it to a file of my liking without their permission, and offer it for distribution ("share" it with) to anyone to do as they please with it, that's flat out wrong and illegal. And these aren't laws that are just now being introduced. as you seem to suggest. They've been in existence since the introduction of copyright law long, long ago. This is simply a new arena in which it applies, and there are lots of battles to be fought in how the law applies to it. But I really don't see how anyone can say that it's completely legal and ethically OK for this practice to continue unabated. That's just freakin' crazy, man.

    If I offer the file to you and anyone else, I have violated that fine print that I guarantee you will find on every commercially manufactured CD and tape you own: "Warning: Unauthorized reproduction of this recording is prohibited by Federal law and subject to criminal prosecution." If my one .mp3 becomes 500 identical .mp3's through downloading, I have violated that. And if you download that .mp3 from me, you have as well. How can you argue against that? The warning is right there on every CD you've ever bought. Don't say you weren't warned, and don't feel sympathy for those being sued. Sure, it's a heavy handed tactic, and it probably isn't the best way to go from a PR standpoint, but the RIAA and the owners of the intellectual property rights of any recording have every legal leg to stand on to do so.

    Read the fine print and pay for your music, man. Some of us make a living in media duplication and take this issue extremely seriously.

    And no, copyright law will never apply to a forum like this, where the OWNERS of those ideas share them FREELY AND VOLUNTARILY.

    Certainly don't want this whole thread to go up in flames, but I feel pretty strongly about this issue, doing what I do.
     
  2. kevinwhitect

    kevinwhitect Kev Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2003
    Location:
    In a chair in front of a computer screen
    Home Page:
    Buzain, just a slight clarification: piracy is not only offering something of someone elses up for sale to make money yourself, it is depriving one of the opportunity for a sale.

    E.g.- Because you now own a copy of a song you like for free, you might not go and actually purchase it.

    In both cases the vendor is robbed of legitimate income.

    That being said....

    I think what we're witnessing is something very common...it's just that it's dramatic and high profile.

    We're witnessing the clash of capitalism and technology. Other industries...take the Travel Agency industry for example....have been devastated and gutted by the same interaction.

    Technology is always altering the landscape: Buggy whip manufacturers have been put out of business by automobile manufacturers....and on and on.

    This is a common market occurrence....it's just painful to watch in this particular industry.

    The core questions are:

    -Is music going away? Nope. People will still want to listen to music.

    -Is the old distribution method changing? Yup. Technology has changed the way people want there music delivered.

    -Who is actually getting hurt? Well, most affected are the institutions of the old vanguard. Coincidently, these are the folks that are "doin' the suin'". Too often, these people, who make mega-dollars off of other creative people's efforts, complain that folks are stealing their products...fail to note that they, by pricing their product at greatly inflated prices, have been stealing from the music buying public themselves for a long time now. In one sense, turnabout is fair play. Still, stealing is wrong, and I do not support it...from either side.

    -Aren't the artists getting hurt too? The big name sellers are...to some degree...but they represent less than 1% of the total. Ironically, smaller selling artists rely heavily on file sharing to get there music heard. Right here, on this board, you can go to sites where artists (like myself) gladly have you download and share their music. Therefore, folks who could least afford file sharing, because they don't sell a lot, wind up being the ones who most support it. Consequently I would appreciate it if the lucky, pampered people would stop whining and put it in perspective. It's not like they are underpaid. If they hadn't received their "big break", they would be handing it out voluntarily, just like the rest of us. To me, it comes off bratty and crass.

    -What will happen from here? What always happens. Enterprising capitalists will move in to fill the void. Those that best serve the wishes of the market will flourish. Once entrenched, they too will begin suing to retain their market position.


    And the wheel of life turns again.......


    Best-

    Kev.
     
  3. Dave Nyberg

    Dave Nyberg Guest

    The music industry might get hurt but it's still not proven that mp3's and the downloading of music actually makes the sales to drop. In some places music sales are rising even. I think that the whole mp3 thing has made ppl aware of how much money they pay for their music. Now, every artist will agree to the fact that the music labels take way too much of the pie that is the sales of music. The ppl are getting really tired of paying so much money for music. And they can't really be blamed. I for one like a retail cd because of the quality and i find it hard to understand that one will prefer a low quality mp3 over a high quality cd. But it doesn't take away the fact that the ppl pay way to much for a cd. When you buy a cd you pay for the right to play and listen to the music but if you scratch the disc you won't get a new one 9 out of 10 times. These things are all proof of the plain robbing the labels excercise.

    A medium selling artist get's what of the total amount of what a cd costs? maybe 10% if you are lucky. And this is after all the costs have been deducted. What happens to the other 90%. It goes to the label executives which live well from it. And the RIAA is sueing little kids for the downloading of music now. How pathetic. This has been going on for ever. Before mp3 ppl would copy cassette's. There really hasn't changed anything. This is just a sorry excuse for the RIAA to hunt down little kids and make them pay a few thousand dollars.

    Don't get me wrong, i'm all for the recording industry. But it's not like there hasn't been earned money and producers are still earning money. The big studio's need to make place for bedroom studio's now. It's evolution. And i'm sure the music industry will find a way...


    Just my 2 cents....
     
  4. Dan Shay

    Dan Shay Guest

    This shouldn't be an issue.

    Society should outright subsidize arts as programs for quality of life improvement.

    And the arts ought to be as free as knowledge and sharing are to science.

    Y'all caught up in the capitalists web, on that hampster wheel of life, fighting over crumbs.

    Like Archer-Daniels-Midland copywrites lifeforms, then sues neighboring farmers when ADM's crops pollenate theirs.

    You can justify evil means when the ends are just to get fed.
     
  5. anonymous

    anonymous Guests

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2001
    Yeah...the capitalist web...right. I suggest you head over to North Korea and check out their wonderful socialist-communist way of life. It's a joke, it always has been, and always will be. There has never been a great socialist society (that was actually fair to its people)...and there probably never will be. BTW there's not a whole lot of music and art coming out of these places...in case you didn't notice. What music did come out of the USSR was good, but state approved, homogonized, and who knows the millions of great records that could have come out of that culture if the state didn't have control over you, your money, your food, and your career.

    Music and art should absolutely NOT be free. The freedom should be for the people to decide what to buy, and then others to decide what to make. It's something we call FREEDOM. Socialists would like to control every aspect of our lives, from our career, to our time off of work, to the amount and type of food we eat. Don't you see, it's that very control over the minute aspects of one's life that eventually leads these socialist governments down the road to the North Korea's, and USSR's of the world. And if you think the USSR was awesome, I've got some Slovakian relatives who would beg to differ. Their hatred for the USSR is thicker than you can imagine. Socialism was absolutely awful for them, and they are quite bitter.

    Get a life, go eat some GM food...it's really quite good, it's providing food for people who have none, and has the potential to save BILLIONS of people from starvation and malnutrition...actually. You would probably rather them starve, and be happy in your commune though, I'm quite sure.

    I'm quite happy buying and selling music...it works quite well. I'm happy to live in a world where I have the choice to be a musician, engineer, doctor, garbage collector, or bum. In your society, there would be quotas on who could be and do what, or wouldn't everyone choose to be rock stars? That's not a world I care to live in. If you want to give up your ability to create art, you go for it...I'm not going to do it.
     
  6. Might I remind y'all that the only artist who gets hurt by illegal downloads are the ones who have recouped their advances. And there are very few of them.

    Oh, and the indie. They got no advance to recoup.

    Most of us singer/songwriter types make our only income from live performance...no different than before the technology of recording was invented by Mr. Edison.
     
  7. kevinwhitect

    kevinwhitect Kev Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2003
    Location:
    In a chair in front of a computer screen
    Home Page:
    Jay- A minor clarification in order big guy....

    The prior post's comments were a dig at capitalism, not the U.S...You seemed to bristle at his comments.

    Don't confuse capitalism with democracy or socialism with communism. Capitalism and socialism refer to economic systems. Democracy and Communism are forms of government.

    Even democracies can contain elements of socialism. Canada's health care system, for instance, or Social Security in the U.S. are both examples of socialism existing within vibrant democracies.

    The comments related to the government supporting the arts don't mean that he wants us all to convert to communism (I for one, wouldn't do it for all the reasons you eloquently cited in your post).

    The writer just wants more socialism-style support for artists than what is currently being done...versus having to "sell your soul" to the masses for commercialism...which is also not a form of government...though some might argue it's a type of religion.

    :D

    His concept, however noble, is not entirely realistic though. Government has enough trouble keeping it's bills paid. Artists are not high on the priority list.

    I don't see it happening anytime soon. So I'm not going to hold my breath.

    In the meanwhile, perhaps other economic models within the scope of good ol' capitalism will emerge...and artists can shed the yoke imposed by the controlling emperors of distribution, the RIAA and all others who dictate what, and what doesn't, get heard.

    It will be interesting....guaranteed.

    Best-

    Kev.
     
  8. anonymous

    anonymous Guests

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2001
    Yes Kev1, or 'big guy' or should I say 'Mr. Condescension' you are correct. ;) However, Socialism and Communism go hand in hand, if you want to look historically, and Capitalism and Democracy go hand in hand as well...in I think every major democracy. Truly, there is no such government that is driven purely on the principals of capitalism. It probably wouldn't work.

    There are elements of Socialism in every single government, though major elements of capitalism rarely shine through for the people in communist states. Sure, I was making a generalization there, but I think everyone got me, and I think it's a fair and accurate parallel to draw.

    Yes, I did bristle at his comments, because if we aren't the ultimate capitalist society of any substance, then I don't know who is. So I guess those comments had to take aim at the US system...which I happen to think is excellent. And yes, it is true, I love this country. Sorry...but I do. In this country, if you really put your mind to it, I believe you can do anything. If you have no drive, the government will still throw you about fifty bones to try to help you out. Do they make you rich? No. Do they put you on the same level as someone who's busting their ass? No. However, you can take what they give and use what's in you to become whatever you want.

    I think everyone has the right to speak their mind, but I also have the right to speak mine. I think that socialism, and communism, go together like wine and cheese...and likewise, capitalism and democracy go hand in hand like gold and chains. ;)

    The less government control...the better. The more we hand the power over to the government, the less control we have over what's done in our lives. Let the government pay the bills for entertainment...and they'll also end up controlling the entertainers. Does anyone really believe the government would have payed the bills for Eminem to make records? In a country that is PRIMARILY a capitalist society, the people dictate what to make with their pocket books.
     
  9. kevinwhitect

    kevinwhitect Kev Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2003
    Location:
    In a chair in front of a computer screen
    Home Page:
    Jay-

    I certainly meant no offence. And I did not intend to come off condescending.

    I definitely don’t think that you are a simple minded, flag waving idiot.

    My offering was posted after reading (a couple times) your initial reply to the other guy, and it wasn’t entirely clear from your post that you understood the subtle differences in the definition of the terms you were using…so I mentioned it, clarified....then moved on to other things.

    Have you ever heard the saying, “the camera lies”? Where, say, a television camera can make a small gathering of people look like the million man march?

    These forums can do the same.

    Without certain common communication cues, such as vocal inflections and other non-verbal input, one might misinterpret the intent of a given post.

    For instance, by your usage of the winking smilie, I infer that you were not intending to be insulting in your reply by mocking me with “big guy (I was trying to be friendly)” and “Mr. Condescension (which I was NOT trying to be)”.

    Maybe you were…

    Without the aforementioned extra communication information, it’s hard to tell.

    No matter….

    I quite agree with your philosophy of government. I want their hands out of most things too. I have a healthy disrespect for government. Yet, I also have a healthy respect for the consequences of defying it.

    Meanwhile (to twist a quote from Garret Morris—remember him?/SNL), “Capitalism been berry berry good to me.”

    Like Winston Churchill said: Democracy is the worst form of government….but every one else sucks ass way more.

    Okay, I might have paraphrased there a little.

    In your corner....I love the U.S.A. too...most of the time, anyway.

    Best-

    Kev.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice