Pro-IP Act is signed into Law

[goodman528]

..... Marx .....

There is no free lunch; there is only a lunch someone else pays for.

A game is a product, it's not art, the same goes with most movies, but that's more of a grey area.

Though you may not believe it, but I believe in justice as much as you and Jim. The pop music business has been artificially packaging and selling musicians for so long, they no longer believe music is art, to them it's just a product that turns a profit. They have you thinking the same way, and they are paying so much money on ads to justify their position. Filesharing is fair to real musicians. But to a lot of them who are just in the business for money, it's not fair, but then again, that would be their fault, if you want money, join a bank not a band.

The whole thing about music companies and musicians, and releasing new musicians, etc, is another discussion altogether.

 

[goodman528]

That's just insulting. if it was your dream to cure cancer, would you do it for free? even if there was a massive personal cost to you and it was all you ever wanted to do with your life? Would you be happy working a crappy dead end job to fund your "hobby" of research and disease curing?

What do you think university lecturers and professors do all day?

One of my supervisors is literally in a dead end position, doing massive amounts of work everyday, and in some ways neglecting his family, because it is his dream to design better concrete structures in the future. Another professor I know has spent the past 10 years working on a ESA probe to detect background microwave radiation, he works weedends and overtime all the time, because his dream is to understand the beginning of the universe. These people are earning nothing compared to what they could earn if they used their skills in a consultancy.

Prey, how does music work if not like this? and how many musicians do you see hocking anything but musical equipment? and how much do you think musical equipment sponsorship is going to be worth if nobody's making music?

If 50 cent did a gun advert, I'm pretty sure it would be the most popular gun in school shootings for quite a while. I'm not even talking about sponsorship, just advertising.

 

[jim_doki]

uni lecturers get paid. Not only that, they get free, unrestricted access to labs and various other things.

and sponsorship and advertising are the same thing.

 

[AceDiamond]

This is already happening with games. Look at what the CEO of Ironclad Games said. He loves to play shooters. His company doesn't make shooters because there's no money in it - too much theft.

Meanwhile Halo 3 sells $170 million in sales in its first day alone. This argument does not hold water.

On a PC-exclusive figure, Crysis has sold 1.5 million copies worldwide and since that beat EA's expectations, it's a success.

 

[goodman528]

If I made a music album and one in 3 people paid for it......
.....
Still not saying filesharing is all good, it DOES hurt the industry, but its not theft, its something else, and its not as detrimental as the money grubbers want you to think it is. There way of thinking is "I made 10 million $$ in profit, but I wanted to make 12 million. Im angry!"

That's quite cowardly isn't it, filesharing is bad for musicians, so it's OK if like, 1 in 3 people did it, but not if everyone did it... Where is the fairness in that?! If you think filesharing is bad for the industry, and you are still doing it, where are your morals? If 3 out of 3 people were filesharing, then you are not OK with it, then who gets to decide who is that 1 person out of 3 allowed to fileshare? How is that fair on the other 2 people not allowed to fileshare and have to pay for CDs?

I think 3 out of 3 people should be filesharing, because filesharing benefits musicians. I.E. Filesharing is morally correct.

 

[jim_doki]

I think 3 out of 3 people should be filesharing, because filesharing benefits musicians. I.E. Filesharing is morally correct.

are... are you serious?

my god, you are.

ok, im sorry, i've been arguing with someone who doesn't get basic economics. I'm sorry so so sorry

 

[Neopopulas]

The fundamental problem i have with a lot of the arguments is that 'piracy' is a bad term for it. 'File-Sharing' is a much better (and nicer) term. For example, if my friend buys a CD, and copies it, and gives me the copy, why is that illegal? They bought it, its theirs now, they are sharing it with me, just like VHS and Cassette Tapes before it. File-sharing MP3s, movies and so forth is just much, much more global, its more wide-spread. Whats the difference between simply recording a movie on TV, and downloading it with a torrent? If its already released. If its already out there, there are ways to get it. Recording it straight from TV, you're friend bought the game and made you a copy.

Everything had this before. Cassettes, VHS, they even tried to ban recording radio stations. Yes, those items are out there and for sale, but if your friend buys it, and lends it to you, or makes a copy of THEIR item (they paid for it) for YOU. How is that illegal? How do the creators retain control of the product after someone pays for it. Its like saying that, say, you buy a poster, then you scan and print it, then GIVE it away for free. The person that created that poster can't dictate what you do with it once you pay for it.

 

[jim_doki]

neo, its simple. can someone else drive using your licence? no. they need their own

cds are exactly the same. you are paying for the right to listen to them whenever you want. you can let your freind listen to it, thats fine, but if HE wants to listen to it whenever he wants, he needs to pay for his own licence

and as for the name, you can call a turd a chocolate bar, it dont make a lick of difference to the taste

 

[goodman528]

I think 3 out of 3 people should be filesharing, because filesharing benefits musicians. I.E. Filesharing is morally correct.

are... are you serious?

my god, you are.

ok, im sorry, i've been arguing with someone who doesn't get basic economics. I'm sorry so so sorry

lol. What are you talking about? Basic economics...? As in every human in society is a profit maximiser, yer? I mean Adam Smith said that, this is the most foundamental assumption of capitalism, so for you economics doesn't get much more basic than this, yer? Well, it's total bullshit, and everyone knows it, because it is blatantly obvious no one in the world is a profit maximiser.

Your only concept of value seems to be money. So to be honest, I really struggle to believe you would do volunteering work. Because the only value the consumers of the fruits of your labor can return to you, which you recognise, is money.

b)Regardless of how i feel about my music, i commited a lot financially and personally into it

3)on those grounds, i feel that if somebody wants to use that service (see "listen") they should have to pay for it

This is not about who is right, or who is wrong, or whatever. That aside. Just one of these days, really think through what the music industry is? What is the musician's purpose in creating music? What is music distribution? What is music? What value does a man derive from working? What is the secrete to all these rich people's success?

On a forum, you may feel I am right and everyone else who disagrees is wrong, every argument I can not counter, I can just ignore. But when you are just thinking to yourself one day, and it doesn't matter who's right or wrong, think through these things critically, and don't accept anything just because someone told you so.

 

[goodman528]

The fundamental problem i have with a lot of the arguments is that 'piracy' is a bad term for it. 'File-Sharing' is a much better (and nicer) term. For example, if my friend buys a CD, and copies it, and gives me the copy, why is that illegal? They bought it, its theirs now, they are sharing it with me, just like VHS and Cassette Tapes before it. File-sharing MP3s, movies and so forth is just much, much more global, its more wide-spread. Whats the difference between simply recording a movie on TV, and downloading it with a torrent? If its already released. If its already out there, there are ways to get it. Recording it straight from TV, you're friend bought the game and made you a copy.

Everything had this before. Cassettes, VHS, they even tried to ban recording radio stations. Yes, those items are out there and for sale, but if your friend buys it, and lends it to you, or makes a copy of THEIR item (they paid for it) for YOU. How is that illegal? How do the creators retain control of the product after someone pays for it. Its like saying that, say, you buy a poster, then you scan and print it, then GIVE it away for free. The person that created that poster can't dictate what you do with it once you pay for it.

I agree, Filesharing is not piracy.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.73955?page=5#823385

But by your line of thinking, it would still be wrong to download music from the net, because there was no precedence to this in VHS.

 

[PrimeSynergy]

Wow....isn't there some other things they should be worrying about right now...like uhh not this...

 

[Dark Crusader]

Well, personally I pirate.
If it's a bunch of shit, bye-bye goes the music.
If it's alright, it stays.
If it's good, I'll buy it.
If it's alright, but still a little band, I'll buy it, just to support them and help them on their way.

This... Is just utter crap. The day the goverment in my country even thinks of passing a law like this, is the day that they loose my vote.

I'm glad I don't live in the U.S, too many jumped up *****.

 

[Captin Planet]

Its sad To see so much hate of Sharing. I Personally have no problems with sharing anything except my wife. I'd like to be in a world with no money. In my dream world every one has clean water, food and air to breath with free games, music, movies and porn.

 

[jim_doki]

This is not about who is right, or who is wrong, or whatever. That aside. Just one of these days, really think through what the music industry is? What is the musician's purpose in creating music? What is music distribution? What is music? What value does a man derive from working? What is the secrete to all these rich people's success?

On a forum, you may feel I am right and everyone else who disagrees is wrong, every argument I can not counter, I can just ignore. But when you are just thinking to yourself one day, and it doesn't matter who's right or wrong, think through these things critically, and don't accept anything just because someone told you so.

The music industry is just that. an industry. you put money in, product comes out. What you are saying is that this is not the way it works. You are saying that it runs on the artist's passion and love for his work. this is, as i have said before, complete balls.

Look, I love music. I am willing in a lot of cases to give away music i make for free. What I think you are missing is that I make the choice about what's to be done with my music. not you, not the label, ME. By downloading music and arbitrarily saying that music should be free, you're taking that power away from me.

as much as I dislike the system, it's the way it is. I personally would like to see musicians paid on a salary or something. All I care about is that music keeps going, and musicians get what's theirs. All of you who download things are stopping this. I don't know why you think you deserve this for free, but like anything else in the world, if you don't pay for music that's being sold, you are breaking the law. it doesn't make you immoral or evil, it does make you a criminal. now we're trying to police it the best we can, but technology is constantly fucking us over.

if anybody here can honestly say to me that they can find a better solution to the piracy problem than this massive, MASSIVE deterrant, i would be happy to hear it. In the meantime, avoid the law problems and support the artists you like.

 

[Alex_P]

Obviously you are an underpants gnome.
Step 1: Give away music.
Step 2:
Step 3: Profit

Well, this particular formula is known to work very well:

Step 1: Give away some music.
Step 2: Sell stuff to people who like that music.
Step 3: Profit.

The catch is, if the "stuff" in step 2 is more music, you usually need to figure out a way to separate your free music from your paid music. With radio and CDs, this is easy because you've got two different media. Also, the CD adds value by allowing you to play the music any time, which is something that users desire. With MP3s and CDs or MP3s and more MP3s, differentiating the free stuff from the profit-making stuff is a lot harder, so you mostly have to resort to asking nicely -- which, on occasion, does work out, but is definitely not something I'd bet a million dollars on. Selling music-related stuff that is not music itself is another option: concerts, t-shirts, &c.

-- Alex

if we took that argument to any other business in the world, we would be taken to court and our employees would laugh.

Boss: "How about you work for free for a little while. we'll give you some money when your higher-ups produce something which has your name on it, and that you have to pay for"

empolyee: "..." *Fist to face*

if you can give me one explination as to why music is any different, i'll again, concede the point.

It's hard to have a conversation when you insist on putting words in my mouth.

That "argument" you think I made? It's not in my post. Anywhere. WHERE DO I SAY THAT THE AVAILABILITY OF ALTERNATE REVENUE STREAMS ACTUALLY JUSTIFIES COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT? GO FIND IT! OH, WAIT, YOU CAN'T, BECAUSE I DIDN'T!

However, it is important to observe that some companies voluntarily adopt the "give something away, then sell a related product or service" model and make money by doing so.

This is pretty much how radio has worked since the early days of Top 40 -- royalties paid to record companies for radio play are absolutely dwarfed by sales generated through radio exposure. Music companies actively lobby radio stations to get their stuff on the air because it's pretty much the best way to actually advertise their music. The only practical function of the licensing fees is to make sure that only radio stations that firms consider legitimate are playing their music.

-- Alex

 

[axia777]

Yep, makes me want to vomit. Thank you Bush for more of your bullshit legacy. History will not be kind to that douche I can assure you all.

 

[Alex_P]

Yep, makes me want to vomit. Thank you Bush for more of your bullshit legacy. History will not be kind to that douche I can assure you all.

This one isn't really his fault. Bills that pass with an overwhelming minority are veto-proof.

The DoJ opposes the measure: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/30/AR2008043003360.html

-- Alex

 

[axia777]

Yep, makes me want to vomit. Thank you Bush for more of your bullshit legacy. History will not be kind to that douche I can assure you all.

This one isn't really his fault. Bills that pass with an overwhelming minority are veto-proof.

The DoJ opposes the measure: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/30/AR2008043003360.html

-- Alex

But he did sign on the dotted line.....

 

[Alex_P]

But he did sign on the dotted line.....

The only other thing he could do is try to pocket-veto a veto-proof bill -- that's basically rabidly overstepping the bounds of executive power. Now, he has done that once before and tried to vigorously argue that it's within the president's power, but that was on some big defense spending bill that would impact all of his plans for the year. He doesn't have enough political capital to try it with some random thing he doesn't really care about.

-- Alex

 

[jim_doki]

That "argument" you think I made? It's not in my post. Anywhere. WHERE DO I SAY THAT THE AVAILABILITY OF ALTERNATE REVENUE STREAMS ACTUALLY JUSTIFIES COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT? GO FIND IT! OH, WAIT, YOU CAN'T, BECAUSE I DIDN'T!

However, it is important to observe that some companies voluntarily adopt the "give something away, then sell a related product or service" model and make money by doing so.

This is pretty much how radio has worked since the early days of Top 40 -- royalties paid to record companies for radio play are absolutely dwarfed by sales generated through radio exposure. Music companies actively lobby radio stations to get their stuff on the air because it's pretty much the best way to actually advertise their music. The only practical function of the licensing fees is to make sure that only radio stations that firms consider legitimate are playing their music.

-- Alex

One, calm down. I dont like being yelled at

2, Selling music-related stuff that is not music itself is another option: concerts, t-shirts, &c.

this was the part I was referring to. the artist making/selling something that isn't music. if that's not what you meant I apologise. What I meant in that statement is that If iyou you are hired to do one job, and the boss expects you to do another before you get paid, which is what i inferred from your statement, you would punch him in the face.

3, the big difference with radio is artists give permission and are paid for it, and they are able to limit the access to that track. that doesnt happen with downloads