Paying for mp3's, stupid or no?

[daryn]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In risposta di:</font><hr />
I would consider that stealing. record companies did also.

--turnipmonster

[/ QUOTE ]



the fact that record companies did has nothing to do with anything. why wouldn't they?

anyway, wow. if you find a $5 bill on the street do you take it to the police station?

[daryn]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In risposta di:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font class="small">In risposta di:</font><hr />
i agree with that. however, to all those who consider it stealing: would you consider it stealing if your friend bought the tape and recorded you a copy? oh yeah, we don't use tapes anymore. eh, the question still stands.

[/ QUOTE ]

I suspect I'm in the minority but yeah, I would consider it stealing. At least if it was an exact copy of an album. I wouldn't take it unless the artist was dead. Also I wouldn't take something like a Mozart tape unless the pianist or whoever was also dead.
With a mix-tape I'm not sure because a mix-tape is almost like an ad for a bunch of bands.

[/ QUOTE ]



uh oh... inconsistencies.

with a mix-tape you have stolen songs from many artists. even worse! also, what difference does it make if the artist is dead? what if all the proceeds go to his wife? now you are taking profits away from a widow!

[turnipmonster]

I am not saying that I have never stolen music, or never will again (although I generally try not to). but, I still think it's stealing.

--turnipmonster

[daryn]

ok, i dig that.

[destro]

For that price no but anything more than than a quarter per song is too much.

[ilya]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i agree with that. however, to all those who consider it stealing: would you consider it stealing if your friend bought the tape and recorded you a copy? oh yeah, we don't use tapes anymore. eh, the question still stands.

[/ QUOTE ]

I suspect I'm in the minority but yeah, I would consider it stealing. At least if it was an exact copy of an album. I wouldn't take it unless the artist was dead. Also I wouldn't take something like a Mozart tape unless the pianist or whoever was also dead.
With a mix-tape I'm not sure because a mix-tape is almost like an ad for a bunch of bands.

[/ QUOTE ]



uh oh... inconsistencies.

with a mix-tape you have stolen songs from many artists. even worse! also, what difference does it make if the artist is dead? what if all the proceeds go to his wife? now you are taking profits away from a widow!

[/ QUOTE ]

You may be right, my position may be inconsistent. It doesn't really feel that way to me though; I think it's because 1, when you make a mix-tape, you in a way become one of the artists yourself, and probably more importantly 2, a mix-tape gives the listener a 'sneak-preview' of several artists, and may well lead the listener to buy a whole album by one of those artists. An album copy on the other hand leaves nothing out, so there's nothing for the listener to go out and buy.
As for why it should matter whether the artist is dead...well, I just figure he deserves reward a lot more than anyone else. I think you could make a case for supporting the talent scout who found him, or the guy who did the mixing or what not, but I don't think those guys benefit from individual sales, esp. after the artist is dead. 'Cos they are prolly dead too. I think the case for respecting the relatives is kinda weak, unless it's some extraordinary situation where the wife nursed him back from 6 suicide attempts and a heroin addiction. Was essential to his existence as an artist, iow.
Flip the he/she if you like, I certainly am not trying to imply that all the great musicians are men.

[daryn]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In risposta di:</font><hr />
I think it's because 1, when you make a mix-tape, you in a way become one of the artists yourself,

[/ QUOTE ]

except for the whole being famous and getting paid part



</font><blockquote><font class="small">In risposta di:</font><hr />
and probably more importantly 2, a mix-tape gives the listener a 'sneak-preview' of several artists, and may well lead the listener to buy a whole album by one of those artists.

[/ QUOTE ]


actually, the way i see it is a mix-tape cuts out all the crap on many albums, and instead gives you a nice digest of all the good songs. a mix-tape saves you the trouble of buying many albums!


</font><blockquote><font class="small">In risposta di:</font><hr />
I think the case for respecting the relatives is kinda weak, unless it's some extraordinary situation where the wife nursed him back from 6 suicide attempts and a heroin addiction. Was essential to his existence as an artist, iow.


[/ QUOTE ]


i think you might underestimate all the things a wife does for her husband!

[GuyOnTilt]

Stealing from the big names seems OK to me, but if you listen to bands that still play small bars and have to hold down second jobs, buy their album for [censored]'s sake.

What's the pinciple behind your thinking here? Would shoplifting from Sears seem okay to you, while shoplifting from Joe Shmoe's Hardware seem wrong? Or boosting a car from Carmax instead of out of someone's driveway?

Stealing is stealing is stealing.

GoT

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
This reminds me of the same thing. If the record companies take a page out of DirecTV's playbook, they will go after the site hosts and get end-user's info from them. Then the party starts.

[/ QUOTE ] A court already overuled a decision that allowed the RIAA to obtain IP addreses from ISPs.

[lowroller]

I'm sure they'll find a way. If not, then congratulations to everyone who is getting over...