#1
The issue on illegal pirated filesharing on the Internet has become such a big issue in the US and the rest of the world.
A civil war is about to start, where the Anti-Filesharing West Coast and the Pro-Filesharing East Coast is about to split into yet another Confederation and Union... No, I'm overreacting.
It does make sense because most American media and entertainment are made in California... okay, I'll stop.

Seriously though, it is a big problem, I think.
It's one of the causes that music and film quality these days are significantly dropping in the past decade or so.
Console Video Games are growing on the other hand because it's difficult to rip games from the PS3 or the Xbox 360.

I'm against it, definately, though I admit that I use Limewire (still!) when I can't find the Album anywhere and I want to have it so bad.
I try to rent it instead of buying it second hand because the artist and the record company gets a penny for it.
Think about it, I wouldn't want my artwork to be just stolen if I used my sweat and tears to make it to make some money.

Although Dave Grohl did say "If you're selling 30 million records and complain about losing a nickel because some kid used Napster to get your album, then **** you." which is a totally valid statement, I think.
So maybe it's injustic when you get indie music... no.
#3
I need music. I have no money. Easy solution.
Quote by MoogleRancha

You sir, are a genius.

I salute you.

Quote by iwontwait
The bestowing of this thread on my life is yours. Thank you, Benjabenja.
#4
"It's one of the causes that music and film quality these days are significantly dropping in the past decade or so."

No. It's not like bands are saying "Hey guys, someone is going to download our album, lets make our songs sub-par"

Rage.
Quote by Ez0ph
That was a different Feb08er that threatened to suck you off
I remember that


Sadly, I was the threatened.
Quote by Firenze


Let it be known that I concur with everything this gentleman says, ever.



www.myspace.com/tarsusmusic
#5
Without downloading music, I can't tell if a band is good or not. If I like them then I go to their concert which means more money for the artist. If not, then they loss nothing.
If Rock is a life-style, then Metal's an addiction

Yelloooow!


Of The


UG Challenge

#7
Quote by LazyLatinoRocke
Without downloading music, I can't tell if a band is good or not. If I like them then I go to their concert which means more money for the artist. If not, then they loss nothing.

Well I figured these things out by listening to 30 second samples on iTunes, which aren't that effective when it's Pink Floyd, but it does give me an impression that the band appeals to me or not.
#9
Bands don't make money on albums, anyway, unless you're Michael Jackson or Britney Spears and your albums go fucking diamond. The RIAA does. Hence why they care.
#10
If I like a band enough, I'll go and buy their album and support them. Sometimes its good to try a band out first, though. If they are great and youre like I really like these guys, then youll probobly buy the rest of their albums. I also like having a neat iTunes, so its nice to get real CDs whenever I can
#12
Quote by betrayedloyalty
If I like a band enough, I'll go and buy their album and support them. Sometimes its good to try a band out first, though. If they are great and youre like I really like these guys, then youll probobly buy the rest of their albums. I also like having a neat iTunes, so its nice to get real CDs whenever I can

That's valid I guess.
I mean, some of my friends claim to be the biggest fan of Coldplay, U2, or whatever and all they have in their iPod was a couple of their songs from Bittorrent
#13
The idea of file sharing does hurt the industry. Though so many people love the music, most of those people illegally download it from peer 2 peer networks. The people that love the music, ultimately, have killed the music industry. Itunes gives out singles, and the bands receive less than ten cents per single downloaded. Youtube, myspace, purevolume - all these networks, though intentionally helpful, are a false idol.

Rock bands who aspire to be famous are most likely to fail, whereas country singer, pop singers, and rappers are constantly successful.

There will never be a beatles ever again because of record sales today. There can't be a mania anymore. There's simply no economical argument between 14.99 and free. Only a moral one.
#14
Quote by greennblue10
The idea of file sharing does hurt the industry. Though so many people love the music, most of those people illegally download it from peer 2 peer networks. The people that love the music, ultimately, have killed the music industry. Itunes gives out singles, and the bands receive less than ten cents per single downloaded. Youtube, myspace, purevolume - all these networks, though intentionally helpful, are a false idol.

Rock bands who aspire to be famous are most likely to fail, whereas country singer, pop singers, and rappers are constantly successful.

There will never be a beatles ever again because of record sales today. There can't be a mania anymore. There's simply no economical argument between 14.99 and free. Only a moral one.


Trent Reznor made $750,000 putting out a free NIN album. The idea that artists are losing money due to filesharing is just plain wrong.

Furthermore, if you were able to make money selling albums to begin with, no bands would tour and sell merchandise.
#15
Quote by radomu
Well I figured these things out by listening to 30 second samples on iTunes, which aren't that effective when it's Pink Floyd, but it does give me an impression that the band appeals to me or not.

I don't get any kind of impression listening to a 30 second sample. But you are still listening to the song free. Why should I be given a free 30 second sample when I can enjoy the full song and the same price? I think the artists will understand how happy it will make some people be. Like I said before, I don't get any kind of impression listening to 30 second samples so I download the full song, if I like band, go to concert = more money for artist. If not, either way it was free.
If Rock is a life-style, then Metal's an addiction

Yelloooow!


Of The


UG Challenge

#16
i do it. I rather do it then pay because there is a chance I wont like most of the songs on it and with itunes that **** gets expensive.
Quote by Tyler Durden
It's only after we've lost everything that we're free to do anything.

Erowid
#17
Quote by greennblue10
The idea of file sharing does hurt the industry. Though so many people love the music, most of those people illegally download it from peer 2 peer networks. The people that love the music, ultimately, have killed the music industry. Itunes gives out singles, and the bands receive less than ten cents per single downloaded. Youtube, myspace, purevolume - all these networks, though intentionally helpful, are a false idol.

Rock bands who aspire to be famous are most likely to fail, whereas country singer, pop singers, and rappers are constantly successful.

There will never be a beatles ever again because of record sales today. There can't be a mania anymore. There's simply no economical argument between 14.99 and free. Only a moral one.


+50
#18
Quote by boreamor
The Pit is not a blog.


This.


With the way that most major labels are set up, the artists aren't losing all that much money by someone not buying an album. Touring is where the money is made.

Indies win in the age of file sharing because they're not spending exorbitant amounts of money to create the music, so they can turn a quicker and more consistent profit. Couple this with the fact that a lot of music on smaller independent labels is harder to find for download online, and the exploding sales of vinyl (Indie labels often include a free digital download with records, which is a huge time saver for customers, motivating them to buy more vinyl), and it all add up to more people at concerts.

The problem isn't downloading, it's antiquated business models.
Also, most entertainment corporations are headquartered in New York (aka the east coast) and there's a ton of recording studios there as well. AKA any idea about a coastal rift in opinion over pro or anti file sharing is bull****.


In short, stop making threads.
"There he goes. One of God's own prototypes. Some kind of high powered mutant never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die."-Duke
#19
Quote by radomu
The issue on illegal pirated filesharing on the Internet has become such a big issue in the US and the rest of the world.
A civil war is about to start, where the Anti-Filesharing West Coast and the Pro-Filesharing East Coast is about to split into yet another Confederation and Union... No, I'm overreacting.
It does make sense because most American media and entertainment are made in California... okay, I'll stop.

Seriously though, it is a big problem, I think.
It's one of the causes that music and film quality these days are significantly dropping in the past decade or so.
Console Video Games are growing on the other hand because it's difficult to rip games from the PS3 or the Xbox 360.

I'm against it, definately, though I admit that I use Limewire (still!) when I can't find the Album anywhere and I want to have it so bad.
I try to rent it instead of buying it second hand because the artist and the record company gets a penny for it.
Think about it, I wouldn't want my artwork to be just stolen if I used my sweat and tears to make it to make some money.

Although Dave Grohl did say "If you're selling 30 million records and complain about losing a nickel because some kid used Napster to get your album, then **** you." which is a totally valid statement, I think.
So maybe it's injustic when you get indie music... no.



You, Sir, are stupid!


The issue about file sharing isn't that the artists don't get enough money, it's all the other people in between with the making of the songs and discs for sale.

and second point- video games are easy to rip and burn- just because you don't know, doesn't mean the pirates don't
#20
Quote by greennblue10
The idea of file sharing does hurt the industry. Though so many people love the music, most of those people illegally download it from peer 2 peer networks. The people that love the music, ultimately, have killed the music industry. Itunes gives out singles, and the bands receive less than ten cents per single downloaded. Youtube, myspace, purevolume - all these networks, though intentionally helpful, are a false idol.

Rock bands who aspire to be famous are most likely to fail, whereas country singer, pop singers, and rappers are constantly successful.

There will never be a beatles ever again because of record sales today. There can't be a mania anymore. There's simply no economical argument between 14.99 and free. Only a moral one.


Although it would hurt me and others, I really do think though that putting a lock on the albums that denies them access to any compute will also hurt sales.
No one's going to bother.

I really am disappointed that rappers and pop singers are the most successful now, it shows how sheepish people are.
#21
Quote by greennblue10
The idea of file sharing does hurt the industry. Though so many people love the music, most of those people illegally download it from peer 2 peer networks. The people that love the music, ultimately, have killed the music industry. Itunes gives out singles, and the bands receive less than ten cents per single downloaded. Youtube, myspace, purevolume - all these networks, though intentionally helpful, are a false idol.

Rock bands who aspire to be famous are most likely to fail, whereas country singer, pop singers, and rappers are constantly successful.

There will never be a beatles ever again because of record sales today. There can't be a mania anymore. There's simply no economical argument between 14.99 and free. Only a moral one.


A band makes most of it's money via touring. If they cut out the huge recording company and hire someone to record them and produce it to a decent standard, without a famous producers name, it'll cost less. They could then sell the album via digital download which isn't hard to set up with either the same dynamics as In Rainbows or a fixed price set up to a paypal account, they will make more money. Especially if the album cost roughly £5.

They could get more fans this way because it's more affordable and they could then set up their own tours. Or hire someone faily cheap to do it. This will make them alot more money.

In recording industry, the companies don't pay for the music. They pay for the label. E.g. Roadrunner, Rick Rubin, etc.
#22
Although albums nowadays are still expensive, I can't believe they are charging us averagely 20 dollars for most albums in today's economic screw up that the US caused.
five dollars is totally valid
#23
Quote by radomu
Although it would hurt me and others, I really do think though that putting a lock on the albums that denies them access to any compute will also hurt sales.
No one's going to bother.

I really am disappointed that rappers and pop singers are the most successful now, it shows how sheepish people are.




It shows nothing. ANY music being widely popular shows how sheepish people are. The only thing that Hip hop being popular shows is that most people have different taste than you do.
"There he goes. One of God's own prototypes. Some kind of high powered mutant never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die."-Duke
#24
Quote by civildp1


It shows nothing. ANY music being widely popular shows how sheepish people are. The only thing that Hip hop being popular shows is that most people have different taste than you do.


well, you're right but it was actually a quote from Eric Clapton
#25
Quote by radomu
well, you're right but it was actually a quote from Eric Clapton



"quotes go like this."-Me


And quoting someone's opinion on an issue often implies that you agree with that opinion. So my point stands.
"There he goes. One of God's own prototypes. Some kind of high powered mutant never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die."-Duke
#26
Quote by TooFast
"It's one of the causes that music and film quality these days are significantly dropping in the past decade or so."

No. It's not like bands are saying "Hey guys, someone is going to download our album, lets make our songs sub-par"

Rage.


So true. That just made my day. May I sigg it?
#27
Quote by drummerdude952
So true. That just made my day. May I sigg it?

Yes you may.
Quote by Ez0ph
That was a different Feb08er that threatened to suck you off
I remember that


Sadly, I was the threatened.
Quote by Firenze


Let it be known that I concur with everything this gentleman says, ever.



www.myspace.com/tarsusmusic