hoyablue Posted August 1, 2003 Share Posted August 1, 2003 Also Lokheed, your anology about Serial Killers is wrong, if you bothered to quote me, then bother to read what you quoted... "No matter what benefits come out of a situation, if it were attained by doing something wrong, it stays wrong. If killing one innocent man meant the society would be 10x richer, that still doesn't change the fact that killing one innocent man is wrong." I'm afraid that serial Killers aren't innocent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurnedMyWorldToBlack Posted August 1, 2003 Share Posted August 1, 2003 MP3 technology should've been used to preview songs, so that you can get a better understanding of what an album sounds like so you can buy it. Unfortunately, people go overboard and think this is replacing CD's and the hard copy. I would like to see the RIAA sue people over sharing WAVs instead of MP3s, since MP3's are a copy (an elaborate yet downsized copy) of the real thing. This is what I treat MP3's this is what I don't want to replace CD's. Of course CD's haven't replaced vinyl either, for all that I know they just enhanced the appeal of it for DJ's (since we don't like low quality)I like MP3's because of the convinience of previewing the music over and over again, holding me over until I find the high quality version on CD so I can satisfy the stupid RIAA's greed. Another thing I like about it is it brings out the generosity in everyone. Those who use p2p software are the gems of the earth, sharing to over 3 million friends takes alot of trust not to mention compassion towards others. I tip my hat to y'all. The RIAA could learn a thing or two from us. :whistle: I agree with you. If I download something and I like it I buy, if not I delete it, it is amazing some of the great music you can hear, that you would have never known about. Unfortunatly the greed with the RIAA will be thier downfall. The thing that really Pi$$e$ me off the most is the fact that the price of cd's has gone up, no other media that music has been on has ever gone up almost all of it has gone down tapes, records, eight tracks. I think if the RIAA and the music industry as a whole started treating it's consumers better then they wouldn't have the problems they are having now. B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JK1150 Posted August 1, 2003 Share Posted August 1, 2003 that last option made me laugh. don't worry about it, they are only going after the people who rip the music for now i believe, maybe the well known sharers too, but that's it The RIAA is playing a war of terror, it hopes that everyone will be afraid of sharing and will disable it, destroying the community. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxdesmus Posted August 2, 2003 Author Share Posted August 2, 2003 "No matter what benefits come out of a situation, if it were attained by doing something wrong, it stays wrong. If killing one innocent man meant the society would be 10x richer, that still doesn't change the fact that killing one innocent man is wrong."I'm afraid that serial Killers aren't innocent. do you really wanna open this can of worms?....are any of us really innocent? but whatever. :rolleyes: The RIAA and similar organizations can eat me...greed, that's their only motivation. :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johngalt Posted August 2, 2003 Share Posted August 2, 2003 Not only greed, but they are making a big hubbub about how artists aren't getting paid an dall that - what about hte record comapnies and agents and all them that get greater than their fair share of hte profits of hte musicians? It is them that I dislike supporting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aem4162 Posted August 2, 2003 Share Posted August 2, 2003 anita in riverside ohio usa says **** the riaa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldmate15 Posted August 2, 2003 Share Posted August 2, 2003 Dont really care much about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johngalt Posted August 2, 2003 Share Posted August 2, 2003 anita in riverside ohio usa says **** the riaa Damn skippy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rianu Posted August 2, 2003 Share Posted August 2, 2003 if i get a letter, i'll mail it back to them with a silver spoon attached to it with the message stating, use your evidence as a napknin while you eat my ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
persianpsycho Posted August 2, 2003 Share Posted August 2, 2003 how scared is the RIAA of me... :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicane-UK Veteran Posted August 2, 2003 Veteran Share Posted August 2, 2003 Not so much as scared.. just really pi$$ed off with their 'godlike' powers and abilities to use scare tactics and bullying on people who have no way of defending themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ryan Posted August 3, 2003 Share Posted August 3, 2003 Not at all. They'll have to catch me first. :ninja: I don't share anything, I never have. As far as I'm concerned, they should pay more attention to the ones who do share stuff and not the ones who download it. :shifty: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kombolcha Posted August 3, 2003 Share Posted August 3, 2003 before the whole riaass crap i used only download music.. since then i've downloaded 6 movies more mp3's and all kinds of video's. those ###### goblins ain't got nothing on me :pirate: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WigglesTheFish Posted August 3, 2003 Share Posted August 3, 2003 Not so much as scared.. just really pi$$ed off with their 'godlike' powers and abilities to use scare tactics and bullying on people who have no way of defending themselves. i agree, i hate their strongarm tactics an bullying poor college students (which i am)... they do scare me a bit though i have backed off file-sharing lately... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CloudEngineer Posted August 3, 2003 Share Posted August 3, 2003 anita in riverside ohio usa says **** the riaa I like your way of thinking (Y) **** the RIAA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VII Posted August 3, 2003 Share Posted August 3, 2003 screw morals, screw supporting artists, and screw the riaa... gimme free music Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
survivorx Posted August 3, 2003 Share Posted August 3, 2003 Before attacking, the RIAA would have to make a public discussion... The RIAA gives the feeling to fight against terrorism. It is like the new law which will pass in the United States soon... it will be necessary to take appointment to have an authorization to travel to the United States... With friends we have decided to cancel our trip (hollydays) for the next year in your country. And personally, I think that I will never come back again to the United States or for a long... long... long... time... Sorry for my bad english. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clide Posted August 3, 2003 Share Posted August 3, 2003 nspeds, I am glad you brought intelligent conversation to the thread, however I can't say I agree with your views completely. First, I would like to say that I rarely listen to music, so I haven't downloaded mp3s since the days of Napster (and even then I didn't download hardly any). So I am not scared of the RIAA and I could care less how this all ends up. Ok...now... nspeds I know you are not defending the RIAA so I will try to keep the focus off them, however they are entagled with your argument about stealing music being wrong. I agree with you to an extent about stealing music being wrong, but it depends who you are stealing it from. Stealing it from the artist is wrong, there is really no way around that. But stealing it from the RIAA is not entirely wrong. As Lokheed said "If you you kill a serial killer, is that so wrong?" your response was that a serial killer is not innocent, but niether is the RIAA. They have been stealing money from the consumers and the artists for a long time. I think this is one of those cases of what goes around, comes around. I think good will come out of this situation, I think(hope) the RIAA will kill itself trying to protect the monopoly it had going, and new buisnesses will emerge offering cheaper music with a choice of what you pay for and with more benefit to the artists. I know this doesn't make the stealing entirely right, but I think it does make it less wrong. Those greedy money grabbers wouldn't risk their money to change with technology and as a result they will end up driving the RIAA into the ground (hopefully). This sue-fest is not the answer to their problems. It will just cause the music theives to innovate and find new ways to steal music. The RIAA will die unless they realizes that the music industry has changed and that they need to change with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StOnD Posted August 3, 2003 Share Posted August 3, 2003 I'm not worried about them. And I can assure you that I have NEVER, nor will I ever pay the RIAA a dime. I have never bought a CD, and I never will. I do download some music and I like music but I don't like it enough to pay their highway robbery prices on it. If I couldn't download music so easily I still wouldn't buy it. So in theory, my downloading of music is not costing anyone, it just gives me noise to have running in the background while I'm working. I don't share music either, that argument is invalidated. I had (before my hard drive died and I lost it) about 7 gigs worth of music. Less than 1/3 of it had actually been listened to attentively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mAcOdIn Veteran Posted August 4, 2003 Veteran Share Posted August 4, 2003 well I don't plan on ever buying a car, but I do have a car I stole because it gives me a faster way to get to work, but I don't consider it stealing because I never would have bought it anyways, and if I didn't steal the car I could just take the bus. I didn't even use it that much last week. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PureEdit Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 well I don't plan on ever buying a car, but I do have a car I stole because it gives me a faster way to get to work, but I don't consider it stealing because I never would have bought it anyways, and if I didn't steal the car I could just take the bus. I didn't even use it that much last week.;) Somebody LOST something because you stole the car, downloading music hurts nobody if you really would not have bought it anyway :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mAcOdIn Veteran Posted August 4, 2003 Veteran Share Posted August 4, 2003 well I don't plan on ever buying a car, but I do have a car I stole because it gives me a faster way to get to work, but I don't consider it stealing because I never would have bought it anyways, and if I didn't steal the car I could just take the bus. I didn't even use it that much last week.;) Somebody LOST something because you stole the car, downloading music hurts nobody if you really would not have bought it anyway :p Not if I stole the car from the dealer. GM can cover the costs of 1 car being stolen. How is this any different than music? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PureEdit Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 With music, there are no costs to cover, the whole world can download 100 songs, and nobody has lost anything :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mAcOdIn Veteran Posted August 4, 2003 Veteran Share Posted August 4, 2003 This would be true if there wasn't an industry built on creating and selling music. If say Metallica worked at microsoft or something and only made music on the side, then yes there would be no loss, but since making music for most bands and artists is a full time job then everything that isn't sold is a loss of a possible sell for them, which equals less revenue. Same with the RIAA(even though I don't like the RIAA). Thier whole function is to produce music and distribute it. If they buy all this high tech equipment to record and mix say the next kid rock album but no one buys it then that'sa profit loss. Not only does kid rock go back to living on food stamps, but the studio loses money, and all the people that worked on getting that record out the door. Even though music is not a physical product like a car, it's still a product none the less, and there is no difference between stealing music or stealing a car. Both of them equal a loss of a potential sale in thier respective industries and lower profits for thier respective manufactuers. Now maybe you think it's partly justified because artists and producers and so on make so much money, but it's still the same concept, and while it may not hurt Metallica that much because they're already well enough off, it will hurt newer small bands that are just trying to get a leg up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johngalt Posted August 5, 2003 Share Posted August 5, 2003 And you are forgetting an even larger part of the deal - you mentioned that a corporation could afford to cover the cost of 1 car - but who really pays? The Consumer - that's who. In addition to having to pay all the workers on the line building the car, and all the researchers in R&D who are making the cars "better", and all the executives, who are making the corporation "better", the corporation now has to cover the monetary loss of the cars that are stolen. The same applies to music. The earlier comment about the whole world could download 100 songs b/c with music there are no costs to cover was made by someone who obviously has not worked in the industry. There is time spent writing and practicing the songs, then there is the pay of the producers and engineers, not to mention the use of the recording equipment to record the song. Along with that there are the costs of manufacturing the music on media to be sold, along with the advertising and promotion that the corporations put out to get the word spread about the music. Finally, there is the pay back to the musicians for the actual performances and support of the music they write. Put it all together, and it adds up quickly. Those same 100 songs, say 10 CDs worth, at an average price of $!7 per CD, are worth $170. Now, factor in 100 people downloading the pirated songs - and there goes $17,000 in revenue. That's for 100 people folks. If the artists would offer electronic media at a discounted price where I could preview the sings to decide what I wanted to buy, and perhaps even buy only the songs I wanted to buy, then I would immediately support it. I hate the RIAA with a passion, b/c the music industry has become just that - and industrial machine, a veritable juggernaut that is rolling down everyone in it's path simply b/c of its size and the length of its arms. But, in fairness, I have to say that there is no denying the fact that the artists lose money too. One of the reasons that if I like an album enough, I buy it, and that I am trying to acquire mostly vintage stuff that I already own but am too lazy to attempt to rip (cassette to MP3 is not all it is cracked up to be) as well as Live DJ streams that I listen to once and discard. Yeah right. The only part of that that is true is the buy the group's album that I really really like - if I like them enough, then I buy their albums, I go see them in concert, and I rave about them afterward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts