Music Industry Sues 8,000 More People

[yesdachi]

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.

[lars573]

Yep. That's why I'll keep downloading communism.

[whyidie]

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]

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]

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)

[Scurvy]

i download music, but if i really like an album i buy it (i have maybe 30)

[Husar]

Another "in the news" 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?

[Lemur]

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 ...

[Husar]

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.

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.

[Lemur]

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 ...

[Keba]

It doesn't matter what your musician friends say, the overpricing of a company doesn't make your stealing right.

Again with the stealing ... 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.

[Scurvy]

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

[Keba]

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]

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]

Here is Weird Al Yankovic's take on the issue: Don't Download This Song

[Husar]

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.
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.