This is OT and if BV doesnt want this thread on iorr.org I understand and I'll erase it. np.

Anyway my question is how iorrians feel about sharing files and downloading, do you see it as an illegal activity or not.

To me it's just illegal to steal/copy from the producer but in no way illegal to share (torrents)/download. Whats your opinion on this?

It's illegal......if it's official stuff .............recorded live songs is no problem...........and if you bought a record official you can download copies as many as you want.

__________________________

Imho records now sound stale and sterile (plus thanks to the current trend in Mastering they sound too "hot"/compressed for me) so I don't buy commercially released CDs nor do I illegally DL them.

But I'll gladly DL audience tapes of shows by artists I enjoy. Bands usually sound better live than in a studio.

Sharing torrents is not stealing simple as that. You share stuff that possibly was uploaded at some point by someone. This is less stealing than what we did with our cassette tapes back in the day. I buy tape you borrow and make copy. Same thing. I wouldnt steal a purse or a car but I like everybody else have no problem with downloading films. The techonlogy is here and in progress.

er ... hold that "like everyone else" - not "everyone" downloads films. and having the technology is no excuse.

sharing official stuff by electronic means is not the same as "what we did with our cassette tapes".
on most people's cassette-copying equipment the results were so lossy that it was a self-limiting activity:
after about two "generations" of copies no one who likes music at all would bother copying further.
with digital technology one upload can generate endless generations of copies that will sound "good enough" to miles of people.

it robs the artists in various ways, not just of money from potential sales - it also robs them of leverage within "the industry".
and people go around wondering why no one makes good albums anymore. it makes me weep

grr & bah humbug

Yeah sure, but at the same time it's not stealing, youre not really taking anything just sharing because it's possible to do so. The artist has to sell by playing concerts, selling side products or find new ways to make money. Theres no way around it, the technology is here.

Damned right it's stealing.
If it's on a computer and/or device of yours, and you didn't pay for it, you're a thief, just as if you shoplifted it from a store.

[thepowergoats.com]

Apologies if I shared this before on IORR, but here is a response to a blog entry a young women wrote about how she feels somewhat guilty about never paying for music. The professor who answers her makes some interesting points that I never thought about before. It certainly stirred up a lot of debate when I posted it on FB.

[thetrichordist.wordpress.com]

What about sharing/downloading a car?

Quote
Redhotcarpet
This is OT and if BV doesnt want this thread on iorr.org I understand and I'll erase it. np.

Anyway my question is how iorrians feel about sharing files and downloading, do you see it as an illegal activity or not.

To me it's just illegal to steal/copy from the producer but in no way illegal to share (torrents)/download. Whats your opinion on this?

Its not illegal to share/download unofficial material. And if you're concerned about the Stones' position on it, they don't have a problem with it.

Copyright infringement or manufacturing and selling bootlegs are different matters, though. Likewise with the actual theft of their own recordings, of course.

Quote
Gazza

Quote
Redhotcarpet
This is OT and if BV doesnt want this thread on iorr.org I understand and I'll erase it. np.

Anyway my question is how iorrians feel about sharing files and downloading, do you see it as an illegal activity or not.

To me it's just illegal to steal/copy from the producer but in no way illegal to share (torrents)/download. Whats your opinion on this?

Its not illegal to share/download unofficial material. And if you're concerned about the Stones' position on it, they don't have a problem with it.

Copyright infringement or manufacturing and selling bootlegs are different matters, though. Likewise with the actual theft of their own recordings, of course.

The laws in the states night be a different. A friend of mine owned a Beatle bootleg site for a number of years. He was very strict about only selling material that was unreleased. After about 3 or 4 years in business, he received a cease and desist letter from the record lable. Come to think of it, unreleased and un-official can be 2 different things like a fan shot concert vs. out-takes from a studio that made it "out" of the studio.

I used to download illegally when Napster/Winmex was around. I was pissed at the time because you couldn't buy a single anymore. A group put out one good song and your were obligated to buy their whole damn CD when they only had one good song. That has changed with ITunes and others, and I now download official materials.

Now, there are lots of Stones stuff, BBC cuts, alternate takes, that nobody is going to let us have in an official way. I would have no problem downloading these kinds of things 'illegally'. But I don't because I've had problems with viruses on some of these sites. Therefore I troll a local flea market that has bootleg music vendors.

Quote
BluzDude

Quote
Gazza

Quote
Redhotcarpet
This is OT and if BV doesnt want this thread on iorr.org I understand and I'll erase it. np.

Anyway my question is how iorrians feel about sharing files and downloading, do you see it as an illegal activity or not.

To me it's just illegal to steal/copy from the producer but in no way illegal to share (torrents)/download. Whats your opinion on this?

Its not illegal to share/download unofficial material. And if you're concerned about the Stones' position on it, they don't have a problem with it.

Copyright infringement or manufacturing and selling bootlegs are different matters, though. Likewise with the actual theft of their own recordings, of course.

The laws in the states night be a different. A friend of mine owned a Beatle bootleg site for a number of years. He was very strict about only selling material that was unreleased. After about 3 or 4 years in business, he received a cease and desist letter from the record lable.

I didnt suggest 'selling' unreleased material was ever 'legal'.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-07-15 22:24 by Gazza.

I think downloading is perfectly fine - it's actually legal to download (mind you, not upload) where I live. I often discover music I wouldn't have bought and at the end I sometimes buy concert tickets for that band. It's not stealing, because stealing implies that you take something away and then it's gone. MP3s or movies cannot be stolen, the original stays. I also think that downloading cds or movies is just a result of the industry being to slow to adapt. If we (Europeans) had the possibility to stream movies online for 99cents, no one would download torrents.

They are actually thinking about introducing a yearly fee of let's say 100€ here and you can download whatever and from wherever you want, the state then shares the fee with copyright holders. A cultural flatrate in the modern age.

Streaming for a low fee, downloading directly from the artist (without a record company involved), founding artist you like on Kickstarter etc., flatrates, that's the future. Downloading is no crime.

People like with ssssoul (judging from here opinion above) are stuck in the past and an example of those who just don't get what is happening and why it is happening.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-07-15 23:27 by Lorenz.

Quote
Lorenz
People like with ssssoul (judging from here opinion above) are stuck in the past and an example of those who just don't get what is happening and why it is happening.

it's much better to be stuck in the future, lorenz. i salute you.

Quote
kleermaker
What about sharing/downloading a car?

Good point because you cannot do that and the person likely to steal a car has nothing in common with the millions of people who like to see a film or listen to a song. Steal a car means you commit a crime, listen to a song (pieces of a song put together really) is not a crime.

If it one day will be possible to upload a Saab bit by bit and then download the millions of bits and put it together into a functioning car I'll be the dummy.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-07-16 00:00 by Redhotcarpet.

Quote
Gazza
Its not illegal to share/download unofficial material. And if you're concerned about the Stones' position on it, they don't have a problem with it.

I have to disagree here. As video and audio recording is prohibited at most shows, the resulting tapes are illegal, and so is sharing and downloading them. Though the Stones may tolerate this, they still chase recording equipment at shows. The Black Crowes, in contrast, officially support tapers, and have encouraged them to report to their own security if the venue's security was annoying them.

As for studio outtakes, I guess it's tricky when it's about outtakes that have no legal existence. But as soon as the song is registered with a songwriting editor, I would say alternate versions fall under the same copyright. And very often this material is stolen from the studio.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-07-16 01:03 by gwen.

Quote
gwen

Quote
Gazza
Its not illegal to share/download unofficial material. And if you're concerned about the Stones' position on it, they don't have a problem with it.

I have to disagree here. As video and audio recording is prohibited at most shows, the resulting tapes are illegal, and so is sharing and downloading them. Though the Stones may tolerate this, they still chase recording equipment at shows..

I didnt say they didnt. And the reason they dont allow it is because of the likelihood of the recordings being mass distributed for profit.

But once the illicitly recorded material is in the public domain, they have no problem with it being shared amongst fans. For free.

Sharing and downloading such material is NOT illegal. The Stones allow it. We had a torrent site on Rocks Off for a couple of years and while the Stones' legal people kept an eye on it (we knew because it was possible to trace the IP numbers of site visitors), our understanding was that as long as copyrighted material was not being uploaded and nothing was being sold, it was OK.

The list of artists who specifically prohibit bootlegs to be shared on torrent sites is very small. The Stones are not one of them.

Quote
gwen
As for studio outtakes, I guess it's tricky when it's about outtakes that have no legal existence. But as soon as the song is registered with a songwriting editor, I would say alternate versions fall under the same copyright. And very often this material is stolen from the studio.

Same standards to what I said above apply as far as the Stones are concerned. Saying that, they (like most bands) would be far more likely to pursue the theft of studio material. I dont recall any occasion when the Stones did this, however - which is hardly surprising as some of the material which has been leaked down the years has come directly from the band themselves (eg Woody - Dirty Work outtakes) or their relatives (eg the Voodoo Lounge outtakes).



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 2012-07-16 01:21 by Gazza.

Old timers bootleggers will be very glad if we couldn't share/download anymore the stuff they stole to the true tapers and fans for makin' big $$$ £££ €€€ with it.
I recall when I used to spend my €€€ with some of these crooks ...it was a while ago now

HMN

Quote
Honestman
Old timers bootleggers will be very glad if we couldn't share/download anymore the stuff they stole to the true tapers and fans for makin' big $$$ £££ €€€ with it.
I recall when I used to spend my €€€ with some of these crooks ...it was a while ago now

the industry is still doing remarkably well. some folks just gotta have those silvers....

Perhaps, it's time to think about a new management of payment!

Is the price for a cd too high or too low?
Shoud musicans - producers - labelbosses ... earn as much as possible?
Thinking of multi-million-earning labelbosses and Rockstars...
Did they really deserve sooo much money?

At least it's all about one thing:
Is our money-system really the system we need longer in the future!
It is crap! All around the world it is nothing but bad!
It is time to think about this!
THIS IS REALLY THE ONE AND ONLY PROBLEM IN OUR WORLD!
The only way to fix all our problems in this world!
CHANGE THE MONEY-SYSTEM!

Ok send all your money to me................... and then change the system

__________________________

Quote
Lorenz
I think downloading is perfectly fine - it's actually legal to download (mind you, not upload) where I live. I often discover music I wouldn't have bought and at the end I sometimes buy concert tickets for that band. It's not stealing, because stealing implies that you take something away and then it's gone. MP3s or movies cannot be stolen, the original stays.

Uploading is illegal? That's what you do when you put a CD on your computer. You don't download music from a CD.

Where do people get the idea that "it's not stealing" when you download music illegaly? How did that become OK? How is it not stealing when you get something for free that costs money? Do you eat a donut while in a grocery or donut shop and not pay for it? All the time? Do you go the grocery and not pay for anything that you consume? How did consumption of a product become free?

That's stealing. No way around it. Don't give me that line of shit that the industry is too slow. It's stealing. Period.

When Napster and Morpheus were the rage I didn't bother with music I could get on CD, I bothered with remixes or live tracks of things I knew did not exist on CD or were never available in my part of the world on CD ie something I could never find. And bootlegs.

It's changed since then, and except for the young and dumb, it really wasn't very long ago. There's no reason to steal music nowadays. And how come people will stupidly and happily pay through the nose to go see a band yet they won't plunk down $10 or $15 for a record? What is that about?

A lot of people don't care about the art of music anymore. The zombies have taken over. A LOT of people spend a lot of time looking at a tiny screen watching video or finding songs, whether it's behind the wheel, at supper with family, during dinner with people from work (ever see people have an actual conversation anymore?), riding on a bike, riding on a Segway or walking on a sidewalk. And a lot of times those people have the stupid little ear pods and they can't hear shit that's going on around them. Even when they're driving, which is illegal to begin with.

It's wonderful in the sense that maybe a few idiots will be taken out. It's horrible that it's all about small screens and small devices and small sounds. Laziness and a lack of giving a flying fuckall about quality.

Welcome to the machine indeed.

Quote
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
That's stealing. No way around it. Don't give me that line of shit that the industry is too slow. It's stealing. Period.

actually, it's not. and i won't bother adding an unnecessary punctuation words when the punctuation mark is sufficent.

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
That's stealing. No way around it. Don't give me that line of shit that the industry is too slow. It's stealing. Period.

actually, it's not. and i won't bother adding an unnecessary punctuation words when the punctuation mark is sufficent.

How unexclamatory of you. And, like, you know, actually, like, it is stealing. Like, right question mark

Quote
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
That's stealing. No way around it. Don't give me that line of shit that the industry is too slow. It's stealing. Period.

actually, it's not. and i won't bother adding an unnecessary punctuation words when the punctuation mark is sufficent.

How unexclamatory of you. And, like, you know, actually, like, it is stealing. Like, right question mark

no. saying it is doesn't make it so.

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
That's stealing. No way around it. Don't give me that line of shit that the industry is too slow. It's stealing. Period.

actually, it's not. and i won't bother adding an unnecessary punctuation words when the punctuation mark is sufficent.

How unexclamatory of you. And, like, you know, actually, like, it is stealing. Like, right question mark

no. saying it is doesn't make it so.

Says who

With all due respect to those that disagree,l think downloading music from the net is fine with me,for much too long the record companies,have been ripping off the public,with their cd prices,etc,and lets not even go into how some bands take advantage of their public by charging $400 and up for a seat in a concert,so its Karma and now its time for them to suffer...

"No dope smoking no beer sold after 12 o'clock"

I do think that in the current setup, downloading a free copy of something you could easily buy officially is stealing - and neither the record company's alleged big profits nor the fact that "everybody does it" justify doing it, if in the end the result is that it is harder for artists to make money from their work. I'm as inconsistent about this in practice as most of us are, since I've made mixtapes in my time, recorded music and films off-air, downloaded a few very-hard-to-buy official releases and bought lots of second-hand CD's and DVD's (what's the copyright position there, and how is it different from a download copy?) But on the whole I don't have a problem with paying for most of my music.

The idea that "an original can't be stolen" looks silly - taken to its logical conclusion, it means that as long as there is one original mastertape for which the artist has been paid, then 20,000,000 free copies don't matter. But actually, live bootlegs do work like that - because the artist has been paid a big enough fee for the original performance, so that extra copies are sort of irrelevant - so maybe the idea isn't so silly IF the artist's fee for the original is big enough. What is needed is a change in the setup, and I like the idea mentioned in Lorenz's post: a kind of electronic version of the old Public Lending payment for library books, which compensates authors for the sales they lose because the copy they sell to a library is read by many people who won't buy the book.

We've had this kind of wrangle every time the technology changed (like the complicated rules that used to restrict the time given to recorded music on the radio, so as to keep live musicians in work). Sooner or later the rules catch up with the new technical realities (like paid downloads) and Home Taping never does actually Kill Music - but the artist is worthy of his fee, and if we want decent music, somewhere along the line it does need to be paid for.

Green Lady.....Home Taping never does actually Kill Music...... you're right there, in fact with me it's often gone the other way, I taped Angie off the TV in 1973 (with my microphone pointing at the TV speaker) and within weeks I had about 5 Stones albums and all the rest since, also a mate gave me a taped copy of a Love & Rockets album and I went on to buy them all........
I think record companies should take the footballers's approach, "It all pans out over the season" and maybe they should stop being so greedy and then maybe the punters wouldn't feel so ruthless about getting all they can for as little as possible...........(I think most people do have have an innate sense of fair play somewhere even if it is a bit deep in some).................



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-07-16 14:07 by EddieByword.