View Full Version : Music Industry Sues 8,000 More People
Another "in the news (http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=entertainmentNews&storyid=2006-10-17T123018Z_01_L17771857_RTRUKOC_0_US-MEDIA-MUSIC-LAWSUITS.xml&src=rss&rpc=22)" post. What do the Orgahs think of the music industry's attempt to sue its way out of a bad business model? What would you do differently? What should the labels do, now that they're so behind technologically?
Music industry in 8,000 new file-share lawsuits
Tue Oct 17, 2006 8:30am ET166
By Kate Holton
LONDON (Reuters) - The music industry has launched a fresh wave of 8,000 lawsuits against alleged file-sharers around the world, escalating its drive to stamp out online piracy and encourage the use of legal download services.
The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI), which represents the world's music companies, said on Tuesday the new cases were brought in 17 countries, including the first ones ever in Brazil, Mexico and Poland.
The trade group said more than 1 billion music tracks were illegally downloaded last year in Brazil, the largest market in Latin America. Record company revenue has nearly halved in Brazil since 2000, IFPI said.
IFPI has said some 20 billion songs were illegally downloaded worldwide last year.
The industry has now filed about 18,000 lawsuits in the United States, the largest market for music sales, and 13,000 in the rest of the world.
The legal proceedings involve both criminal and civil suits and are aimed at "uploaders" -- people who put copyrighted songs onto Internet file-sharing networks to offer to music fans without permission.
The IFPI said many of those targeted for legal action were parents whose children had been illegally file-sharing. Others facing law suits included a laboratory assistant in Finland and a German parson.
The group added that more than 2,300 people had already settled their case for illegally file-sharing copyrighted material with an average payout of 2,420 euros ($3,034).
John Kennedy, chairman and chief executive of IFPI, told Reuters in an interview he was encouraged by the group's progress, although he said the fight against online piracy would be an ongoing battle.
"It's not getting easier but we are encouraged enough by the results to keep on going," he said via the telephone from a trip to Brazil. "It will never go away completely."
He said the success of high-speed broadband was combining with the threat of legal action and fears of computer viruses to encourage more and more users to opt for legal online services.
While the cost of pursuing individual legal cases has been very expensive, he said the music industry had benefited from its settlement of more than $100 million in July this year with long-time antagonist Kazaa, one of the world's best known file-sharing networks.
"It put some money back into the war chest to try to clean up the online world," he said. "Legal offerings will only thrive and open in different countries if there is a chance of them succeeding."
Legal downloads represent about 11 percent of total music sales, but still do not make up for declining CD sales. Total music sales declined 4 percent in the first half of 2006.
Kennedy said the drive to see digital sales make up for the loss in the physical format was the "holy grail" for the music industry and said he hoped to see it happen by 2007.
Here they wanted to make the mp3 players 30 euro's more expensive, and these euro's should go directly to this shady foundation that 'protects the rights of artists'. This shady foundation that protects the rights of artists lost half of their capital on the stock market, money that should have gone to the artists :laugh4: No honor among thieves.
Just let it collapse, and give music back the artists :2thumbsup:
R'as al Ghul
10-17-2006, 14:55
Saved from slashdot a while ago, concerning the MPAA but it's relevant here, too:
Just nuke whole ISPs and be done with it(Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 24, @04:14AM (#14791253)
By the standards the MPAA is claiming for these suits, ANY ISP anywhere should be shut down because their internet connections are allowing the theft.
Shut them down, shut down the whole internet.
Hell, then go after Dell, Apple, HP, etc etc because the computers they make are used to steal movies and worse, as servers to distribute stolen movies.
Then go after CRT and LCD display makers, keyboard and mouse companies, speaker manufacturers, network card makers, router makers, and just wait until they start going after the electric utilities for providing the power used to steal movies.
And the thieves need places to live, food to eat, and possibly jobs to supply the money to buy the food, so go after their homes, their cupboards and their jobs too.
And eyeglass and contact lens companies for making it possible to see these movies. Heck, just fire off some nukes and blind everyone. That'll keep the movies safe.
Best anti-theft ever: just don't make the movies in the first place, then sue for lost profits and loss of business! Brilliant! I should trademark this one!
It just made me laugh. :laugh4:
Anyway, the law suits are pathetic. This won't change anything.
Imo, the Record industry brought this onto themselves when they started to release CD's. A vinyl album was roughly between 15DM (7.5 €) and 25DM (12.5 €). When the first CD version of vinyl albums became available they raised the price to 30 DM (15€) and more. As a customer that meant less haptic experience, smaller text, no booklet, plastic in exchange for paper and a higher price. Doh! Also, the production price of a CD was wayyyyy below that of a vinyl album.
They've completely screwed their customers.
BTW, copyright and piracy was never heard of at that time, nobody seemed to care if you made a copy of a friend's album on Tape. My buddy and me used to buy a lot of vinyl at that time and what I bought he'd copy and the other way round.
Now that it's digital it's suddenly a crime, eh? And now that I meet my buddies online we're criminals? How did that happen?
What would you do differently?
The download stores are a good idea, actually. But I get less value for my money because I don't have a cover and a sleeve. Also the use is heavily restricted by DRM. I'd say make it cheaper than buying a real CD and get rid off DRM. Then it might work.
What should the labels do, now that they're so behind technologically?
I dont think they are behind technologically, they're just stuck in a different century.
BTW, there're studies out there showing that during the heyday of Kazaa the record sales went up. There're several other studies on Piracy and copytheft that show the opposite of the allegations by IFPI. If interested I can dig them up.
One has to keep in mind that the Record and Movie industry is a very powerful one with huge influence and power on media and journalism. Their main goal is to protect their property and interest. It's a battle for attention and semantics. For example, the term copytheft is plain wrong in German legislation. Theft is clearly defined and copying is not theft, but the record industry continues to call it that and everybody plays along. Once the meaning of an expression gets enough attention it sticks, if correct or not.
Also, when buying empty CD's a certain amount always goes to artists, no matter what I want to burn onto them. Imagine an architect or photographer who's a high output of data and wants to burn backups, he's financing artists he's never heard of the whole time just because he has the possibility to burn music. WTF? There's clearly something wrong.
P.S.: I do not sympathise with somebody who downloads and then burns copies and sells them.
R'as
yesdachi
10-17-2006, 15:33
Record companies tried too hard for too long to control the industry and now their greedy butts have been punked by a bunch of tech savvy music lovers.
I don’t think there is an easy fix, online song stores are a good start but it wouldn’t hurt if they dropped the price of the CD’s!!!
I love capitalism but it is lame that 100 people get to me millionaires (I’m exaggerating) off one song! The entire industry is considerably bigger than it should be, or has to be.
I don’t buy that much music anymore because it is not worth that much to me and I don’t think I am alone, maybe one of the reasons music sales are down is because their music sucks, people are disgusted with the industry, and free online music stations are available all over. I’m sure pirates are a factor but not the only one. IMO people hate big music companies like they hate big oil companies and don’t care if they screw them.
I could care less, really. I can't remember the last album I bought from a major label (excepting, maybe, Nuclear Blast). Tape trading was kind of a big deal back in the day, but it was way less accessible than the intarwebs. I'll just keep doing what I'm doing.
doc_bean
10-17-2006, 18:33
What the record companies are doing is nothing compared to the new 'standards' the movie industry is trying to enforce with the new HD DVD and Blu Ray formats. Pretty much ALL your hardware will need to be specially made so you wouldn't be able to copy anything (incl the motherboard).
What the record companies are doing is nothing compared to the new 'standards' the movie industry is trying to enforce with the new HD DVD and Blu Ray formats. Pretty much ALL your hardware will need to be specially made so you wouldn't be able to copy anything (incl the motherboard).
But I want one of these AWESOME ps3 consoles :(
Blodrast
10-17-2006, 20:26
What should be done ? The record companies should finally accept that it's time to change their business model. Actually, they are trying to do that, by redefining the notion of ownership, and changing the situation from the consumer _owning_ something into the consumer _renting_ something, and paying for it every time it rents it.
It's disgusting how the oh-so-righteous big guys complaing that the "pirates" take the poor artist's money, when in fact it's the big record labels who actually do that. What's the percent that the artist sees from the price of a CD?
Also, all these "figures" - they're all so vague and hand-wavy... on the one hand sales have increased to record levels, on the other hand "we are starving because of the piracy"... yeah, right.
Keep locking out the consumer, keep making it a crime to copy your own stuff -- ooops, my bad, it's never gonna be your own again, you're just renting it --, and we'll all be criminals...
If there was no DRM crap, if they didn't try to lock you out into a certain technology, if they didn't charge ridiculous prices, people _would_ buy. How come the price of a CD has not only not decreased, but increased over the years ? Surely the technology has advanced from 30 years ago, has it not ? So then how come I'm charged more ? It sure as heck ain't the quality ~;)
I haven't bought a music album in a veeeery long time, and I will continue not to. I did get a bunch of used CDs a while ago, in some non-mainstream CD-shops - great stuff (at great prices, too)! But buying "new" stuff, at full price - no, thanks. Somehow, I'll survive, I'm sure.
edit: oh, and btw, as for the announcement, the comments on slyck said that there was nothing in the press in brazil today about this. Go figure.
It's the age old arms vs. armour game. One takes the lead temporarily, then the other. Back and forth, on and on. This is nothing different.
But IMHO, the "arts industry" has absolutely been their own worst enemy. They treat the consumer like a pirate, make the consumer empathize with the pirate, and then turn the consumer into a pirate. The security measures they are introducing to protect material are insulting to the average consumer and do nothing but create animosity between the consumer and the company.
Besides, charging $20+ for an album that has been out for ten (thirty?) years, has been played on the radio fifteen thousand times, and now resides on a CD that cost the company ten cents to make, well, you're just begging people to rip you off.
On the other hand, I just bought four classic albums last week on CD for the charming price of $9.99 each. Good quality CDs with a nice booklet inside. I'll pay ten bucks. I think that's reasonable.
Blodrast
10-17-2006, 20:59
Another thing: if I'm buying my music in digital format, then let me friggin do whatever I want with it! Don't lock me onto a single platform (iPod or whatever), don't fill it with DRM crap, not allowing me to move it between my various music-playing devices, and DON'T sell it to me at some crappy quality - what's wrong with lossless ?
I can't have this ? Damn, then I guess you can't have my money, either.
Sadly, for every "me", there'll be 20 middle-class moms and dads who'll shell out the cash without blinking or thinking. Why question anything, that's the way it is, now move on and don't block the way, please, sheeple!
sharrukin
10-17-2006, 22:12
DRM is I assume the .wma and m4p/m4v file formats? If so, they can be cracked easily. Just convert them to mp3's. Is FLAC the new mp3? I know it's not used a lot now, but I assume that it's gaining ground?
You know this just doesn't make any sense at all. They are inconveniencing their own customers and leaving the pirates to do a land office business supplying the needs of their own frustrated customers. The Spanish tried to prevent their colonists in the new world from trading with anyone other than the Spanish government and it was great for the British smugglers. This sort of thing doesn't work regardless of how much control you have. The black market in the former Soviet Union is a case in point. A totalitarian state was unable to control the 'pirates' even under with such Draconian controls. Apple, Sony, and Microsoft have no chance of succeeding. They will in all likelihood succeed in reducing their market share and sales, but little else IMHO.
Microsoft especially should know better. They rose to prominence because IBM was not willing to supply PC customers with what they wanted, preferring to deal with business machines. They thought that the PC market wasn't for them and music and gaming was better left to the smaller companies. I recall talking with a dealer at an IBM outlet telling me that they didn't even have gaming ports on their computers. They also tried to force a proprietary operating system and architecture on their customers. It didn't work for IBM then, and it will not work today.
Imo, the Record industry brought this onto themselves when they started to release CD's. A vinyl album was roughly between 15DM (7.5 €) and 25DM (12.5 €). When the first CD version of vinyl albums became available they raised the price to 30 DM (15€) and more. As a customer that meant less haptic experience, smaller text, no booklet, plastic in exchange for paper and a higher price. Doh! Also, the production price of a CD was wayyyyy below that of a vinyl album.
RightO
The music companies did go to court about this, I'd say very early 90's from my memory, apparantly not much came from it that I know of.
Live music is the future. Look at the Drive-By Truckers, you can get every song they've ever written free and legal on http://www.archive.org/details/etree. Yet they still make enough money because 1) they're music is good enough that people want to buy their albums and 2) they play a show that people want to see, and then they tour almost constantly.
Umphrey's McGee is the same story.
Blodrast
10-17-2006, 22:39
DRM is I assume the .wma and m4p/m4v file formats? If so, they can be cracked easily. Just convert them to mp3's. Is FLAC the new mp3? I know it's not used a lot now, but I assume that it's gaining ground?
You know this just doesn't make any sense at all. They are inconveniencing their own customers and leaving the pirates to do a land office business supplying the needs of their own frustrated customers. The Spanish tried to prevent their colonists in the new world from trading with anyone other than the Spanish government and it was great for the British smugglers. This sort of thing doesn't work regardless of how much control you have. The black market in the former Soviet Union is a case in point. A totalitarian state was unable to control the 'pirates' even under with such Draconian controls. Apple, Sony, and Microsoft have no chance of succeeding. They will in all likelihood succeed in reducing their market share and sales, but little else IMHO.
Microsoft especially should know better. They rose to prominence because IBM was not willing to supply PC customers with what they wanted, preferring to deal with business machines. They thought that the PC market wasn't for them and music and gaming was better left to the smaller companies. I recall talking with a dealer at an IBM outlet telling me that they didn't even have gaming ports on their computers. They also tried to force a proprietary operating system and architecture on their customers. It didn't work for IBM then, and it will not work today.
Yes, you're right. And they probably know you're right, too. But, they're greedy, and I guess they're betting on the fact that sure, there'll always be "pirates", but 90%+ of the population will just nod when they're told that they would be breaking the law if they tried to copy their songs around or play their movies on multiple devices, and just shell out the cash.
I mean, so what if it's been different so far and you could copy around your vinyls or tapes or whatever - from now on it's gonna be like we want. After all, look at us, we've been losing billions and billions of dollars from pirates every year - hell, every minute !! We're going bankrupt, look at the statistics!!!
I'd buy CDs more often if they were more affordable. Baying 15-20 dollars for about 45 minutes of music is a rip off. I'd buy online if it were cheaper too.
Then for albums of people that are dead already like Elvis and Chuck Berry shouldn't cost near as much. If there's no artist to pay it should cost less not the same.
scotchedpommes
10-18-2006, 04:25
This seems like an entirely pointless exercise. DRM is the Digital Rights
Management system, and yes, there are workarounds, although I'd imagine here
is not the place to delve into those. I'm not all that familiar with the iTunes
system - and I only made the mistake of purchasing one song from there.
Doubtless those who use DRM are in the process of trying to block millions of
pirates yet.
Oh, and Chuck Berry isn't dead. [Yes, some of you may say Elvis isn't either, I
know. But still.]
sharrukin
10-18-2006, 05:13
This seems like an entirely pointless exercise. DRM is the Digital Rights
Management system, and yes, there are workarounds, although I'd imagine here
is not the place to delve into those. I'm not all that familiar with the iTunes
system - and I only made the mistake of purchasing one song from there.
Doubtless those who use DRM are in the process of trying to block millions of
pirates yet.
Oh, and Chuck Berry isn't dead. [Yes, some of you may say Elvis isn't either, I
know. But still.]
Well I made the mistake of purchasing about 150 to 200 songs from their online store which came in a format I couldn't use for CD's for the car, etc. A little later an update for Itunes wiped almost all of them out. Gone into the great aether along with my money. Ahh...good times! For some odd reason it left a few mp4's behind? Didn't touch any of the mp3's for whatever reason.
That was the last time I believed anything they had to say!
Blodrast
10-18-2006, 07:27
Well I made the mistake of purchasing about 150 to 200 songs from their online store which came in a format I couldn't use for CD's for the car, etc. A little later an update for Itunes wiped almost all of them out. Gone into the great aether along with my money. Ahh...good times! For some odd reason it left a few mp4's behind? Didn't touch any of the mp3's for whatever reason.
That was the last time I believed anything they had to say!
Of course, you can convert them into a format that you can use anywhere, and on any kind of devices, and as many as you want, BUT:
1. why the hell would you have to do that when you've already paid the bloody money for it ?!
2. you'd be breaking the law :2thumbsup: You dirty, rotten criminal, you!
Well I made the mistake of purchasing about 150 to 200 songs from their online store which came in a format I couldn't use for CD's for the car, etc. A little later an update for Itunes wiped almost all of them out. Gone into the great aether along with my money. Ahh...good times! For some odd reason it left a few mp4's behind? Didn't touch any of the mp3's for whatever reason.
That was the last time I believed anything they had to say!
I could be wrong- but I believe if you call them up and complain loudly enough to the Itunes people they may let you re-download previously purchased songs... especially if you make the case that an update destroyed the originals. I have never done so- but I have heard of it happening. Can't hurt to try.
Personally, I think Itunes is one of the best online music stores out there. It's DRM is the least draconian that I know of and you actually purchase the songs. I'll never understand what would make someone subscribe to any of the services where you're only renting your music- if you end your subscription, all your music is gone. :dizzy2:
As to the lawsuits: I think it's so funny that the record companies are complaining about their falling sales when at the same time they seem to be going out of their way to alienate as many of their customers as they can. Sued another 8,000 fans eh? Boy that sure makes me want to go out and support your business practices by buying a CD. :no:
I also agree- CDs are too expensive for what you get.
sharrukin
10-18-2006, 07:51
I could be wrong- but I believe if you call them up and complain loudly enough to the Itunes people they may let you re-download previously purchased songs... especially if you make the case that an update destroyed the originals. I have never done so- but I have heard of it happening. Can't hurt to try.
Personally, I think Itunes is one of the best online music stores out there. It's DRM is the least draconian that I know of and you actually purchase the songs. I'll never understand what would make someone subscribe to any of the services where you're only renting your music- if you end your subscription, all your music is gone. :dizzy2:
As to the lawsuits: I think it's so funny that the record companies are complaining about their falling sales when at the same time they seem to be going out of their way to alienate as many of their customers as they can. Sued another 8,000 fans eh? Boy that sure makes me want to go out and support your business practices by buying a CD. :no:
I also agree- CDs are too expensive for what you get.
The problem comes from a company that seems to think that they own the customer along with his/her wallet.
I still have Itunes loaded as its not a bad music player, but I don't use their store. I don't much care for the idea of begging them to actually deliver what I have already paid for! In any case I found a...a workaround, if that's what it's called. I have all the music files I lost, and I found out about format convertion and other things after watching my money go bye-bye.
Blodrast
10-18-2006, 08:10
OT, but too funny to miss:
http://www.apple.com/support/windowsvirus/
"We recently discovered that a small number - less than 1% - of the Video iPods available for purchase after September 12, 2006, left our contract manufacturer carrying the Windows RavMonE.exe virus."
Perhaps I should make a new thread on this ?... :2thumbsup:
@sharrukin: see? I was right about you! You, Sir, are indeed a criminal! :laugh4:
sharrukin
10-18-2006, 09:00
OT, but too funny to miss:
http://www.apple.com/support/windowsvirus/
"We recently discovered that a small number - less than 1% - of the Video iPods available for purchase after September 12, 2006, left our contract manufacturer carrying the Windows RavMonE.exe virus."
Perhaps I should make a new thread on this ?... :2thumbsup:
@sharrukin: see? I was right about you! You, Sir, are indeed a criminal! :laugh4:
I am just rightfully reclaiming cargo that I have already paid for. ~:) Besides I already have most of the songs I want on Cd's anyway. When they went to CD's from cassettes, that was a nice chunk of change, I tell you. I had to pay one company $70 for converting a cassette to CD as it never made it into CD. Unfortunately most modern music IMO kinda sucks, so even if I was so inclined, there aren't any music ships out there to board! I mean what? Aqua or rap? :ahh: Itunes doesn't even carry most of the music I want. The silly part is that I actually paid for most of the songs that I later found a workaround for.
Here they wanted to make the mp3 players 30 euro's more expensive, and these euro's should go directly to this shady foundation that 'protects the rights of artists'. This shady foundation that protects the rights of artists lost half of their capital on the stock market, money that should have gone to the artists :laugh4: No honor among thieves.
Just let it collapse, and give music back the artists :2thumbsup:
Awful, seems their record setting profits need to be even higher. I've completely stopped buying CD's. Havent bought one in 4 years, don't plan on starting. I buy music from Ipod becuase the workarounds are simple to put it on a cd or whatever I choose. I've never completely understood why people in the USA put up with the DMR, as you do have a right to make yourself a backup copy for anything. Personally I don't see why when I buy some blank CD's that I should be paying a record company exec because somebody somewere decided to burn some music and sell it. Sharrukin if their update did delete the songs then that is more then likely illegal, and also called stealing, you may want to call their support center. Anyways back to making backup copies of music.
__________________
Speak softly and carry tactical nukes.
BigTex
Ridicolus
"Hilary Clinton is the devil"
~Texas proverb
R'as al Ghul
10-18-2006, 10:45
Actually the whole debate about copying is greatly entertaining.
It's the one big backlash of globalisation that the big companies, the global players have to suffer and the best is that they keep whining and can't do anything about it. There's a certain Scandinavian torrent site, which I'm not allowed to name here, that posts the letters of complaint by the music industry on their site along with brilliant replys on how the DMCA is restricted to the US of A, how torrents aren't music files and that it's not illegal to post torrents. :laugh4:
Smaller companies and artists don't seem to have such a big problem to adapt but the big companies are just to inert.
R'as
Everyone I know downloads music. The industry is screwed. Everyone below 25 expects music to be totally free. Might buy an album occasionally, but not often.
Everyone below 25 expects music to be totally free.
I really hope that concept becomes embedded in our brains. I like to buy albums as well, but only oldies - which are just as expensive as modern records - (I remember seeing beatles albums for 17 euros in HMV. 17 quid!) Piracy is just more attractive
I really hope that concept becomes embedded in our brains. I like to buy albums as well, but only oldies - which are just as expensive as modern records - (I remember seeing beatles albums for 17 euros in HMV. 17 quid!) Piracy is just more attractive
It sure is. I think the legal download services have made it worse. I can either pay £8 for an album or download it for free, and they will both be the same quality, except one is more useful and easier to share. What a debate...
sharrukin
10-18-2006, 17:00
Sharrukin if their update did delete the songs then that is more then likely illegal, and also called stealing, you may want to call their support center. Anyways back to making backup copies of music.
Its only stealing when the little people do it! Corporations are simply renegotiating the contract. I don't think there is anything they haven't covered in the contract.
I back up every thing these days. I have the songs now anyway so there support isn't really needed.
THE CONTRACT (parts of it anyway)
----------
9. Purchase of Apple Content
a. Products Requirements. You acknowledge that use of Products may require the use of other hardware and software products (e.g., the ability to make copies of Products on physical media and render performance of Products on authorized digital player devices), and that such hardware and software is your responsibility. Once a Product is purchased and you receive the Product, it is your responsibility not to lose, destroy, or damage the Product, and Apple shall be without liability to you in the event of any loss, destruction, or damage.
9c.... Apple reserves the right to modify the Usage Rules at any time.
d. You acknowledge that some aspects of the Service, Products, and administering of the Usage Rules entails the ongoing involvement of Apple. Accordingly, in the event that Apple changes any part of the Service or discontinues the Service, which Apple may do at its election, you acknowledge that you may no longer be able to use Products to the same extent as prior to such change or discontinuation, and that Apple shall have no liability to you in such case
11d. d. In order to access and retain your electronic records, you may be required to have certain hardware and software, which are your sole responsibility.
13b. b. Removal of Apple Content or Other Materials. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, Apple and its licensors reserve the right to change, suspend, remove, or disable access to any Products, content, or other materials comprising a part of the Service at any time without notice. In no event will Apple be liable for the removal of or disabling of access to any such Products, content or materials under this Agreement. Apple may also impose limits on the use of or access to certain features or portions of the Service, in any case and without notice or liability.
14b. Termination of the Service. Apple reserves the right to modify, suspend, or discontinue the Service (or any part or content thereof) at any time with or without notice to you, and Apple will not be liable to you or to any third party should it exercise such rights.
18. Disclaimer of Warranties; Liability Limitations.
a. APPLE DOES NOT GUARANTEE, REPRESENT, OR WARRANT THAT YOUR USE OF THE SERVICE WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR ERROR-FREE, AND YOU AGREE THAT FROM TIME TO TIME APPLE MAY REMOVE THE SERVICE FOR INDEFINITE PERIODS OF TIME, OR CANCEL THE SERVICE AT ANY TIME, WITHOUT NOTICE TO YOU.
b. YOU EXPRESSLY AGREE THAT YOUR USE OF, OR INABILITY TO USE, THE SERVICE IS AT YOUR SOLE RISK. THE SERVICE AND ALL PRODUCTS AND SERVICES DELIVERED TO YOU THROUGH THE SERVICE ARE (EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY STATED BY APPLE) PROVIDED "AS IS" AND "AS AVAILABLE" FOR YOUR USE, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, TITLE, AND NONINFRINGEMENT. BECAUSE SOME JURISDICTIONS DO NOT ALLOW THE EXCLUSION OF IMPLIED WARRANTIES, THE ABOVE EXCLUSION OF IMPLIED WARRANTIES MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU.
20. Changes. Apple reserves the right, at any time and from time to time, to update, revise, supplement, and otherwise modify this Agreement and to impose new or additional rules, policies, terms, or conditions on your use of the Service.
These lawsuits just make the corporate side of music look like idiots. It doesn't curb illegal downloading. They shut down or neuter one method more take their place.
Personally I would use a legal downlaoding service, under a few conditions.
1.It's not run by Apple.
I'll never give Apple computers a dime of my money. I prefer the devil I know (Microsoft)
2.It has selection. I though about using Futurshop's Xfire service. I looked around and there was nothing I wanted to hear, and thus wasn't worth it. I suspect that fellow metal head Gorebag can relate.
3.It doesn't treat me like a criminal.
As it stands the only album I've bough in 4 years is Rammesteins Reise Reise.
Gawain of Orkeny
10-18-2006, 18:06
The industry is screwed
Actually the whole entertainment industry is screwed as far as the way we know it. I work for a CD and DVD distributer and also am a projectionist. All the small record stores are closing because no one wants to buy music anymore. Infact were getting ready to close our retail department . The big companies dont suffer however only the middlemen like us. They will figure a way to make their profits. About a year or two ago they actually dropped all their prices 33%. That meant we and all other stores lost 33% in inventory. Would you believe we can import many new CDs from Argentina for only 3 dollars each?
The DVD industry is also a mess. Last year I went to a convention and some company had invented a new copyright protection they said was unbreakable. A couple of hacks at the show broke it in less than half an hour. Now there going to a new format. But not just one but two. Just like they did with Beta and VHS. So now everyone is screwed until one becomes dominant.
It wont be long until all your entertainment including new movie releases will be provided and played on your computer and the world of entertainment we grew up with will be a thing of the past
yesdachi
10-18-2006, 18:14
They shut down or neuter one method more take their place.
The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers. :laugh4:
Yep. That's why I'll keep downloading communism.
Amount of music CD's I bought where the lead singer was not a cat or dog, prior to 2000: 0
Amount of music CD's I bought during the Napster heyday : 4
Amount of music CD's I have bought since the decline: 0
I have bought music from the Apple store though. Thats a business model I can support.
ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88
10-21-2006, 15:33
brought like 2-3 CD's, and rest I downloaded, only a few songs though, not a big music fan over at my part..
Prince of the Poodles
10-21-2006, 21:07
Limewire and expensive CDs with like one good song on them have ruined me on buying new music.
I am willing to pay for albums filled with quality music even though I could download it, but most of those are from the 60s and 70s. 8)
i download music, but if i really like an album i buy it (i have maybe 30)
Another "in the news (http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=entertainmentNews&storyid=2006-10-17T123018Z_01_L17771857_RTRUKOC_0_US-MEDIA-MUSIC-LAWSUITS.xml&src=rss&rpc=22)" post. What do the Orgahs think of the music industry's attempt to sue its way out of a bad business model? What would you do differently? What should the labels do, now that they're so behind technologically?
Hmm, given you have a shop somewhere and are selling sweets to kids who pay you a certain amount of money. Would it be your fault if some motorbike gang came, blew up the wall of your shop in the middle of the night and took all your sweets away? Would you say that you had a bad business model? Or that you were technologically behind because you didn't lay a minefield around your shop?
On the topic in general:
As for the music being expensive, so are Ferraris, does that make it right to steal them?
Do you have any right on another person's property?
Do other persons also have a right on your property?
Or are you just selfish and demand to get some benefits that you cannot pay for?
Hmm, given you have a shop somewhere and are selling sweets to kids who pay you a certain amount of money. Would it be your fault if some motorbike gang came, blew up the wall of your shop in the middle of the night and took all your sweets away? Would you say that you had a bad business model? Or that you were technologically behind because you didn't lay a minefield around your shop?
Compare the pricing of DVDs versus music CDs. Compare the relative size and complexity of data. Or, as a friend of mine put it, "Why can I buy Gladiator for less than the soundtrack to Gladiator?"
It is certainly possible to charge too much, offer too little, and generally make a hash of a business model. Your hypotheticals assume that without illegal P2P everything in the music industry would be hunky dory. I know at least two people who make their living from playing and recording music. Trust me, it ain't Limewire they're complaining about ...
Compare the pricing of DVDs versus music CDs. Compare the relative size and complexity of data. Or, as a friend of mine put it, "Why can I buy Gladiator for less than the soundtrack to Gladiator?"
Why should I pay for a Ferrari to drive to work?
A Ford Escort will get me there cheaper so I can just steal the Ferrari because it is overpriced.:dizzy2:
It is certainly possible to charge too much, offer too little, and generally make a hash of a business model. Your hypotheticals assume that without illegal P2P everything in the music industry would be hunky dory. I know at least two people who make their living from playing and recording music. Trust me, it ain't Limewire they're complaining about ...
It doesn't matter what your musician friends say, the overpricing of a company doesn't make your stealing right.
Next off killing Bill Gates should not be punished because he is too rich anyway.
Noone forces anyone to buy their products. Most of them are luxury goods anyway.
Okay, Husar, let's be very clear about this -- stealing is wrong. Now, with that said, are you of the opinion that the music industry should change nothing of its practices? Or are you arguing that we should simply boycott them until they straighten out? I can't tell whether you're approaching this from a position of moral absolutes or label love ...
It doesn't matter what your musician friends say, the overpricing of a company doesn't make your stealing right.
Again with the stealing :wall: ... legally, it is not stealing. It is a breach of copyright, copyprotection to be precise.
Therefore, you are not stealing, rather, you are making a copy of a program (or whatever) that you are not entitled to. The worst you could label that would be plagiarism (in the widest sens of the word, copying something someone else made). Hardly stealing ... much lower on the crime-list than stealing.
So, in the end, cease making inappropriate analogies, and start using correct ones. Please.
Therefore, you are not stealing, rather, you are making a copy of a program (or whatever) that you are not entitled to. The worst you could label that would be plagiarism (in the widest sens of the word, copying something someone else made). Hardly stealing ... much lower on the crime-list than stealing.
And that makes it better because? It's stil against the law :2thumbsup:
Yes, however, stealing is a wrong term to be used in this case.
I don't say that I oppose the laws, however, using a wrong term and analogy to make a statement that is, in it's very nature incorrect, neverthless requires correction.
Plagiarism is against the law, yes ... it is, however, a correct term, if one wants to simplify the matter to the level of using another term (such as the previously stated incorrect use of stealing).
R'as al Ghul
10-22-2006, 12:57
Copying is not stealing. It's also not a crime, it's a delict. Of course that depends on where you live. The DMCA is much more clearer and stricter than most European laws.
Would it be your fault if some motorbike gang came, blew up the wall of your shop in the middle of the night and took all your sweets away?
That's violent robbery and leaves the owner back with nothing. Copying would be the Motorcycle gang driving up to the store and using some magic device to copy/replicate all the sweets and drive away to eat them in a backyard alley. The owner of the shop can still sell his sweets.
If we didn't have the internet, people would copy cd's to tapes or, using their pc's, to cd. Since magnetic tapes music has always been partially distributed by non commercial channels. Swapping files on the internet is nothing else. In fact, I think that p2p music swapping in any form is good promotion/ advertizing for an artist. It also helps to make new smaller artists known in the first place.
Gregoshi
10-22-2006, 15:40
Here is Weird Al Yankovic's take on the issue: Don't Download This Song (http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=1130211390)
:laugh4:
Copying is not stealing. It's also not a crime, it's a delict. Of course that depends on where you live. The DMCA is much more clearer and stricter than most European laws.
That's violent robbery and leaves the owner back with nothing. Copying would be the Motorcycle gang driving up to the store and using some magic device to copy/replicate all the sweets and drive away to eat them in a backyard alley. The owner of the shop can still sell his sweets.
If we didn't have the internet, people would copy cd's to tapes or, using their pc's, to cd. Since magnetic tapes music has always been partially distributed by non commercial channels. Swapping files on the internet is nothing else. In fact, I think that p2p music swapping in any form is good promotion/ advertizing for an artist. It also helps to make new smaller artists known in the first place.
I feel so bad now because I used the wrong term to describe a form of breaking the law. also I feel bad for suggesting to obey the law and thus hurt poor musicians who would never sell a copy of their music if people wouldn't copy it illegally.:dizzy2:
For me it's mostly a matter of principle.
And Lemur, if I think a music CD or game is nice, but not worth the money, I won't buy it and live without it instead of copying it, that's the way it is supposed to be.
I am not defending any company, if their product is not worth the price, they can keep it, but I will not get hold of it illegally, because their "wrong" doesn't make my wrong right.
Seriously, the thing about advertising is a pretty cheap excuse, there are a lot more people who will obtain it illegally and not buy it afterwards than people who will later buy it if they like it. I am so sorry i cannot come up with any graphical illustration or proof of this, because people who do such stuff do not like to make their "good deeds" public it seems.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.