Music

TOPICS:

11/14/05

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

152 | 153 | 154

 ... 470

Next

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next

MXV

MXV

Riverside, CA
March 2005

NOV 15, 2005 08:05 AM

SirPsychoSexy said:
If I don't "own" the music on a CD, why can't I take it back to the store and get my money back after I get sick of listening to it?




Uhh ... because you own the physical compact disc???

And because they don't want to buy it back because they couldn't resell it for the same amount?

That's not the same as owning the actual MUSIC.


Someone pays you, you give them something, they own it. I don't care how many laws you write or how many lawyers you have. Simply trying to redefine the rules of currency doesn't cut it.




You do own it. The CD that is. Like if you buy a book, you OWN the book.

You don't own the rights to the actual story content though.

MXV

MXV

Riverside, CA
March 2005

NOV 15, 2005 08:06 AM

KMFCM said:

I download music, because buying blind makes no sense to me anymore.
it is my "rental"

if the album has 3 good songs out of 11, whoever made that record, is shit out of luck.
step your game up.




LOL, that's most mainstream artists now. They all suck except for a standout track or 2. smile

FridgeMagnet

FridgeMagnet

Chicago, IL
November 2004

NOV 15, 2005 08:16 AM

I rob banks because that's where the money is.

venomkid

venomkid

I'm lost
January 2003

NOV 15, 2005 03:39 PM

MXV said:

venomkid said:
How about you just stop rationalizing, acknowledge that what you're doing is unethical (even criminal), that you're not sorry, that you really don't care enough about the artists to buy the song off of iTunes for 99 measley cents, and move on.



Ya know what? There are a few artists that kinda suck, but they have a couple good songs in there and I like the mp3s. Might as well give them a DOLLAR; it's not that big of a deal.

I'll have to see how this iTunes thing works.


...Of course, I'll always download songs to see if the music is any good. Or if the CD is Sony DRM protected.



That's something I love iTunes for. It actually encourages artists to make albums devoid of filler and crap. Because, now, we can just go buy that one single and not shell out the $15USD for the fluff around it.

The sound quality on iTunes is pretty good. Google "Hymn" for a program to strip the DRM and make them able to play on anything.

SirPsychoSexy

SirPsychoSexy

Ridgewood, NJ
January 2004

NOV 15, 2005 06:51 PM

PointBlank said:

SirPsychoSexy said:

venomkid said:
Your argument is fallacious and doesn't take into account many things.

First, you don't own the music. Not even close. You own a copy of it, the right to listen to it, and some "fair use" rights to make copies for yourself. You could make a CD from your eight track if you wanted to.

Second, by your "musical ownership" argument, if you bought the eight track of an album and your dog ate it, you should get another one free. It's just as absurd as your insinuation that you should be getting free upgrades.

Third, when new media is created from old masters, work goes into it. Lots of work. Those people need to get paid. The words "Digitally Remastered" don't just get stamped there for no reason.

And last, artists make plenty of money off of new media re-issues, not just record companies. So you're still denying them their fair share.

How about you just stop rationalizing, acknowledge that what you're doing is unethical (even criminal), that you're not sorry, that you really don't care enough about the artists to buy the song off of iTunes for 99 measley cents, and move on.


BS.

Just because an industry springs up and tries to capitalize on a technology by rewriting the law doesn't mean I don't own something I buy. Its legalese BS.

If I don't "own" the music on a CD, why can't I take it back to the store and get my money back after I get sick of listening to it? You sell a product, you lose the ability to regulate it, since you no longer own the product. If you don't want to sell your product, then let them come and experience it without taking it with them. (clubs, live shows, movie theaters etc.)

Someone pays you, you give them something, they own it. I don't care how many laws you write or how many lawyers you have. Simply trying to redefine the rules of currency doesn't cut it.

uh, yeah, you "Own" it. But you own the CD, not the rights to the music in whatever form it may come in. Don't be fucking ridiculous, it's not "legalese." If you "owned the music," you'd be able to go to a store if you lost the CD and get a new one, but you can't. If you buy a print of a famous painting, you don't own the art, and to say you did is just stupid.


Its an object, and If i want to cut up a picaso that I buy and make a paper machet ninja claw with the pieces I can. I own an object with media on it. The music industry is trying to say what I can do with something that I bought.
In my house, on my own time, with my own tools. And I don't care how many Orrin Hatches they buy, I can still do what I feel like with my own shit.

SirPsychoSexy

SirPsychoSexy

Ridgewood, NJ
January 2004

NOV 15, 2005 06:53 PM

MXV said:

SirPsychoSexy said:
If I don't "own" the music on a CD, why can't I take it back to the store and get my money back after I get sick of listening to it?




Uhh ... because you own the physical compact disc???

And because they don't want to buy it back because they couldn't resell it for the same amount?

That's not the same as owning the actual MUSIC.


Someone pays you, you give them something, they own it. I don't care how many laws you write or how many lawyers you have. Simply trying to redefine the rules of currency doesn't cut it.




You do own it. The CD that is. Like if you buy a book, you OWN the book.

You don't own the rights to the actual story content though.


Yes, this is my point as well. They are stepping over the bounds of what I can do with the content of what they sold me.

venomkid

venomkid

I'm lost
January 2003

NOV 15, 2005 06:58 PM

SirPsychoSexy said:

PointBlank said:

SirPsychoSexy said:

venomkid said:
Your argument is fallacious and doesn't take into account many things.

First, you don't own the music. Not even close. You own a copy of it, the right to listen to it, and some "fair use" rights to make copies for yourself. You could make a CD from your eight track if you wanted to.

Second, by your "musical ownership" argument, if you bought the eight track of an album and your dog ate it, you should get another one free. It's just as absurd as your insinuation that you should be getting free upgrades.

Third, when new media is created from old masters, work goes into it. Lots of work. Those people need to get paid. The words "Digitally Remastered" don't just get stamped there for no reason.

And last, artists make plenty of money off of new media re-issues, not just record companies. So you're still denying them their fair share.

How about you just stop rationalizing, acknowledge that what you're doing is unethical (even criminal), that you're not sorry, that you really don't care enough about the artists to buy the song off of iTunes for 99 measley cents, and move on.


BS.

Just because an industry springs up and tries to capitalize on a technology by rewriting the law doesn't mean I don't own something I buy. Its legalese BS.

If I don't "own" the music on a CD, why can't I take it back to the store and get my money back after I get sick of listening to it? You sell a product, you lose the ability to regulate it, since you no longer own the product. If you don't want to sell your product, then let them come and experience it without taking it with them. (clubs, live shows, movie theaters etc.)

Someone pays you, you give them something, they own it. I don't care how many laws you write or how many lawyers you have. Simply trying to redefine the rules of currency doesn't cut it.

uh, yeah, you "Own" it. But you own the CD, not the rights to the music in whatever form it may come in. Don't be fucking ridiculous, it's not "legalese." If you "owned the music," you'd be able to go to a store if you lost the CD and get a new one, but you can't. If you buy a print of a famous painting, you don't own the art, and to say you did is just stupid.


Its an object, and If i want to cut up a picaso that I buy and make a paper machet ninja claw with the pieces I can. I own an object with media on it. The music industry is trying to say what I can do with something that I bought.
In my house, on my own time, with my own tools. And I don't care how many Orrin Hatches they buy, I can still do what I feel like with my own shit.



First off, a picasso is not a good analogy. They're one of a kind. You, owning a CD, have a mass produced object.

And sure, you can do whatever you want. Some of it's covered under fair use, and you're a small enough fish that nobody will notice anyway. Even I break DRM and rip CDs, and hopefully after this whole Sony debacle labels will think twice about trying it.

But start testing your "ownership" of said media in a big way, like making copies and selling them online en masse, or make a hit song sampling it without permission, and you'll see just how much of it you "own".

olum

olum

I'm lost
August 2005

NOV 15, 2005 07:15 PM

This is really interesting. I hope this thread is here when I get back from tour. I'm writing a Ph.D on the legal implications of P2P music filesharing and part of it is analysing the mindset of why people download. Feel free to contact me with any thoughts.

PS: DVDs are apparantly being phased out in 3 years and CDs in 8 years to be replaced by HD technology, which admittedly is better quality as it doesn't need psychoacoustics as in CDs and so all the frequency range is represented and it will be like listening to master tapes apparantly. I'm gutted though at the prospect of potentially having to replace my music collection.

JimmyBackfire

JimmyBackfire

Tulsa, OK
March 2005

NOV 15, 2005 08:07 PM

FridgeMagnet said:
I rob banks because that's where the money is.



thank you, willie sutton. wink

just for the record, i download music because i like it and it's free for me and i can expose myself to as much devil music as possible. biggrin

KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Qatar
January 2005

NOV 15, 2005 08:15 PM

downloading if for sinners

KMFCM

KMFCM

Peekskill, NY
September 2002

NOV 15, 2005 08:21 PM

MXV said:

KMFCM said:

I download music, because buying blind makes no sense to me anymore.
it is my "rental"

if the album has 3 good songs out of 11, whoever made that record, is shit out of luck.
step your game up.




LOL, that's most mainstream artists now. They all suck except for a standout track or 2. smile




not to mention a lot of underground artists that wanna go mainstream so bad they start producing shit
(I'm lookin' at YOU 80% of metalcore bands since the return of Headbangers Ball)

illstabyou

illstabyou

Brooklyn, NY
March 2004

NOV 15, 2005 09:47 PM

I'm old fashioned and I want hard goods -- I'm one of those people who wants to be able to hold the album in my hands, put the cd in the cd player, look at the artwork, read the lyrics, and experience the album the way the artist intended. Downloading mp3s (legally and illegally) just doesn't cut it for me.

I will admit though that I think downloading is great for bootlegs, rarities, and out of print albums that you wouldn't be able to get your hands on otherwise without an awful lot of effort.

SirPsychoSexy

SirPsychoSexy

Ridgewood, NJ
January 2004

NOV 15, 2005 10:13 PM

venomkid said:
But start testing your "ownership" of said media in a big way, like making copies and selling them online en masse, or make a hit song sampling it without permission, and you'll see just how much of it you "own".


Obviously.

venomkid

venomkid

I'm lost
January 2003

NOV 15, 2005 10:55 PM

SirPsychoSexy said:

venomkid said:
But start testing your "ownership" of said media in a big way, like making copies and selling them online en masse, or make a hit song sampling it without permission, and you'll see just how much of it you "own".


Obviously.


So what was your point?

PointBlank

PointBlank

New York, NY
November 2004

NOV 16, 2005 06:31 AM

venomkid said:

SirPsychoSexy said:

venomkid said:
But start testing your "ownership" of said media in a big way, like making copies and selling them online en masse, or make a hit song sampling it without permission, and you'll see just how much of it you "own".


Obviously.


So what was your point?


It keeps changing.

clarky_182

clarky_182

United Kingdom
October 2004

NOV 16, 2005 07:23 AM

SirPsychoSexy said:

PointBlank said:

SirPsychoSexy said:

venomkid said:
Your argument is fallacious and doesn't take into account many things.

First, you don't own the music. Not even close. You own a copy of it, the right to listen to it, and some "fair use" rights to make copies for yourself. You could make a CD from your eight track if you wanted to.

Second, by your "musical ownership" argument, if you bought the eight track of an album and your dog ate it, you should get another one free. It's just as absurd as your insinuation that you should be getting free upgrades.

Third, when new media is created from old masters, work goes into it. Lots of work. Those people need to get paid. The words "Digitally Remastered" don't just get stamped there for no reason.

And last, artists make plenty of money off of new media re-issues, not just record companies. So you're still denying them their fair share.

How about you just stop rationalizing, acknowledge that what you're doing is unethical (even criminal), that you're not sorry, that you really don't care enough about the artists to buy the song off of iTunes for 99 measley cents, and move on.


BS.

Just because an industry springs up and tries to capitalize on a technology by rewriting the law doesn't mean I don't own something I buy. Its legalese BS.

If I don't "own" the music on a CD, why can't I take it back to the store and get my money back after I get sick of listening to it? You sell a product, you lose the ability to regulate it, since you no longer own the product. If you don't want to sell your product, then let them come and experience it without taking it with them. (clubs, live shows, movie theaters etc.)

Someone pays you, you give them something, they own it. I don't care how many laws you write or how many lawyers you have. Simply trying to redefine the rules of currency doesn't cut it.

uh, yeah, you "Own" it. But you own the CD, not the rights to the music in whatever form it may come in. Don't be fucking ridiculous, it's not "legalese." If you "owned the music," you'd be able to go to a store if you lost the CD and get a new one, but you can't. If you buy a print of a famous painting, you don't own the art, and to say you did is just stupid.


Its an object, and If i want to cut up a picaso that I buy and make a paper machet ninja claw with the pieces I can. I own an object with media on it. The music industry is trying to say what I can do with something that I bought.
In my house, on my own time, with my own tools. And I don't care how many Orrin Hatches they buy, I can still do what I feel like with my own shit.




Its not "your shit" though, you own the compact disk that the media is on. the ,copywrite is clearly stated on the back, just because you have bought the disk doesnt mean you have the legal right to copy or potentially distribute the music.
using my band as an example, it clearly says on the inside sleeve "The copywrite in this sound recording is owned by freaky fortnight", not "the copywrite in this sound recording is owned my freaky fortnight.....and whoever buys this e.p and feels like copying it"

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next