Illegal downloading [Archive] - ThisisBigBrother.com

Spike

17-11-2009, 07:01 PM

I download TV shows and I don't think thats bad because unless people have a BARB box, which measures their viewing for viewing figures, then nobody is losing money. Also with US shows its so easy to see spoilers if you don't watch the episode close to the US airdate. So I don't see a problem with illegally downloading TV shows.

Music and film downloading are worse because people are losing out on a potential profit. I rarely download films, only ever if im unsure I will like it and after viewing the downloaded version I will go and buy the DVD if I like it.

I am guilty of illegally downloading music but if the music is good enough then I will buy the album, tour tickets and merchandise.

I'm not against illegal downloading because even with it a profit can be made for example from the sale of the DVD TV boxset, the film DVD or the music tour

Firewire

17-11-2009, 07:15 PM

Yes lol.

Music (I'll buy charity songs)
TV Shows (e.g. Gossip Girl, Glee, Big Brother USA)

Not really films though.

Crimson Dynamo

17-11-2009, 07:33 PM

Anything that would annoy that Pikey Lilly Allen must be a good thing, non?

Patrick

17-11-2009, 07:37 PM

arista

17-11-2009, 07:55 PM

I download music and videos directly from Youtube.

I couldnt give a **** about how sad artist feel over this.
I also dont understand why some pricks go out and waste money on an album they can listen to and download on the PC.

Waste Money on a CD - never

As your Download is Compressed
so it is poor quality.

Kids of Today
do not want quality.

Sign Of The Times.

Enid

17-11-2009, 08:03 PM

Mhm. Everything. Real robbery is charging £50-60 for a video game...

Captain.Remy

17-11-2009, 08:06 PM

I'm still pi$$ed that, from the 1st of January 2010, the French Government will have the power to cut your internet connection off for a year but you'll still pay for it if you ever get caught while downloading. I'm so gonna get caught because I do download, but my sister does it too (yeah, she does download crappy TV shows like Gossip Girl, One Three Hill, Grey's Anatomy, Paris' Hilton BFF...)

So yeah, I'm pi$$ed.

arista

17-11-2009, 08:07 PM

Mhm. Everything. Real robbery is charging £50-60 for a video game...

Not on Amazon with Free P&P

Ross

17-11-2009, 08:08 PM

iTunes for Music.
I buy films in HMV/Tesco.

I never really download unless there's already a download link for me, I wouldn't go searching.

Dolphin-and-Whale

17-11-2009, 08:56 PM

I convert my music from youtube which is handy and allows me to get remix's of songs I otherwise wouldn't get.

I watch a tv show on the internet sometimes, I don't download them to the computer though, i just watch them on the site.

I always buy films, or rent from local store. I don't download films. I hate watching Pirate movies, I can't enjoy something if the quality isn't as good.

Firewire

17-11-2009, 09:33 PM

ew. YouTube rips.

Stu

17-11-2009, 10:27 PM

I cannot believe people use YouTube as there main source of music. That's one argument that can be made against illegal downloading. Apparently it has lowered a lot of ear standards up and down the country.

My method with music is simple. I will 'get into' an artist by downloading the entire artists discography. Then, if I like the artist, I will turn this digital discography over time into a physical one. Sounds good to me.

There is no right or wrong with downloading music. The issue is not as simple as that. Both good and bad points have come from it. But notice how it's mostly singles focused, airhead pop artists who speak out against it? Legit musicians who put time and effort into music seem to know that they have a loyal following because of this time and effort who will pay good money for the albums.

I personally have no qualms 'stealing' from an artist that had a minimal effort in the production of their own music.

Also, anyone who tells you that music is dying because of it is a dirty rotten liar though. Music is fine and healthy. It's the big labels who bullied artists for years when giving them only a small percentage of the profits who are dying.

Hey, **** happens.

setanta

17-11-2009, 10:43 PM

Ah come on Stu, you're stealing off them like I do on occassion. There's no degrees of right or wrong in a situation like this or excuses to be made when we're basically shop lifting their tunes.

Stu

17-11-2009, 10:46 PM

Ah come on Stu, you're stealing off them like I do on occassion. There's no degrees of right or wrong in a situation like this or excuses to be made when we're basically shop lifting their tunes.
Of course there is. Due to the availability of free music online, thousands of artists have discovered fan bases salivating for fresh material. On the other hand, record sales are down. There are both good and bad sides to everything. Much like the late King Of Pop, it's neither black nor white.

Is it okay to 'steal' from certain artists more than others? Absolutely. Without question.

Stephanie

17-11-2009, 10:48 PM

i normally only download tv shows

setanta

17-11-2009, 10:51 PM

Of course there is. Due to the availability of free music online, thousands of artists have discovered fan bases salivating for fresh material. On the other hand, record sales are down. There are both good and bad sides to everything. Much like the late King Of Pop, it's neither black nor white.

Is it okay to 'steal' from certain artists more than others? Absolutely. Without question.

But stealing is stealing really; I don't think there's degrees involved with it.

Yes, it's nice to see new music out there on the internet but for every new discovery people make, do you think they'll go out and buy their cd or attend their gigs? I'm not so sure.

Stu

17-11-2009, 10:54 PM

But stealing is stealing really; I don't think there's degrees involved with it.
If you want to think stealing all the cash and jewelery from a pensioner living alone and stealing a rock from Richard Branson's prized chest of rocks is the same thing, without degrees, because of some bollocks pseudo moral 'stealing is stealing' mentality then sure, shoot for the stars.

Yes, it's nice to see new music out there on the internet but for every new discovery people make, do you think they'll go out and buy their cd or attend their gigs? I'm not so sure.
I am. Record sales may be down, but live gig attendances went through the roof this decade. That's a fact.

For every negative of illegal downloading there is a lot of positives. When record prices are nosediving in years to come, be sure to send us hooligans a letter of thanks!

File sharing is driving a knife right through the corporate underbelly of the music industry. ****ing celebrate.

setanta

17-11-2009, 11:03 PM

If you want to think stealing all the cash and jewelery from a pensioner living alone and stealing a rock from Richard Branson's prized chest of rocks is the same thing, without degrees, because of some bollocks pseudo moral 'stealing is stealing' mentality then sure, shoot for the stars.

I am. Record sales may be down, but live gig attendances went through the roof this decade. That's a fact.

For every negative of illegal downloading there is a lot of positives. When record prices are nosediving in years to come, be sure to send us hooligans a letter of thanks!

The live gigs are by and large for the bands that people like Branson and the like produce and yes, stealing is stealing. I find it highly unlikely that people who download relatively unknown bands for free will suddenly have a mad desire to find an original copy and buy it or travel over to Finland or Russia or wherever to see them perform live. And the stealing is stealing is in reference to your assertions involving the music business, not with regard to all forms of stealing.

Stu

17-11-2009, 11:11 PM

I find it highly unlikely that people who download relatively unknown bands for free will suddenly have a mad desire to find an original copy and buy it or travel over to Finland or Russia or wherever to see them perform live.
I find it highly unlikely that the situation is always as exaggerated as you portray it to be.

Also, they would have more of a chance of been seen live than if the person never downloaded the music in the first place. Music should be the number one priority for any real artist. I for one would be delighted if thousands more got to hear my music through illegal download for free.

Plus your ignoring the fact, again, that the channels many of these bands have been found through in the first place have been ... you guessed it ... the INTERNET!

And it's not all small artists. There is so much of this you are ignoring. In their conceptual stages Lilly Allen, Arcade Fire, The Arctic Monkey's and more have all started out as viral internet phenomena.

And the stealing is stealing is in reference to your assertions involving the music business, not with regard to all forms of stealing.
So stealing actually isn't stealing? Or is it stealing within the music business is all the same? Either way, it's a riddiculous theory your putting forward. Just substitute Richard Branson for Britney Spears and Pensioner for Rubak Schtanziey - Russia's finest folktronica quartet.

setanta

17-11-2009, 11:19 PM

I find it highly unlikely that the situation is always as exaggerated as you portray it to be.

Also, they would have more of a chance of been seen live than if the person never downloaded the music in the first place. Music should be the number one priority for any real artist. I for one would be delighted if thousands more got to hear my music through illegal download for free.

Plus your ignoring the fact, again, that the channels many of these bands have been found through in the first place have been ... you guessed it ... the INTERNET!

And it's not all small artists. There is so much of this you are ignoring. In there conceptual stages Lilly Allen, Arcade Fire, The Arctic Monkey's and more have all started out as viral internet phenomena.

So stealing actually isn't stealing? Or is it stealing within the music business is all the same? Either way, it's a riddiculous theory your putting forward. Just substitute Richard Branson for Britney Spears and Pensioner for Rubak Schtanziey - Russia's finest folktronica quartet.

No no, you've stated that it's ok to steal off some bands and not off others but I don't believe people are guided by such principles when they download off the internet. And they're not principles in the first place really because, as I said before I don't believe that many go out and buy an original copy after downloading a pirated one. People don't work that way in life, as we've already seen from some of the comments posted on this thread.

Stu

17-11-2009, 11:30 PM

No no, you've stated that it's ok to steal off some bands and not off others but I don't believe people are guided by such principles when they download off the internet. And they're not principles in the first place really because, as I said before I don't believe that many go out and buy an original copy after downloading a pirated one. People don't work that way in life, as we've already seen from some of the comments posted on this thread.
Yes, I do believe it is okay to 'steal' from some artists and not others. That's my personal opinion. Well, actually, it's more a fact, but at the risk of sounding pretentious, god forbid, I will leave it in the opinion basket.

'Stealing' an album from an artist who is overpaid and who is underworked, studio wise, and 'stealing' an album from a band struggling to make ends meet who put effort into creating genuinely interesting, unique soundscapes are two very, very different things.

I don't really see where you are coming from, to be honest. Your just running off on tangents instead of confronting the arguments I have posted. I don't see why you are using TiBB of all places as the template for gauging what illegal downloaders do. Your argument has no real statistical merit and merely boils down to ''well I reckon most people download artists and never buy them''.

Your probably right, the majority probably don't buy all of what they 'steal', but people are different. They, like this issue, can't be generalised into such daft concepts as 'good' and 'evil'.

Again, I show you the upsides of this 'crime' : Increasing live ticket sales, exposure for new bands, new channels of media for pre existing bands, slashing long overpriced record sales, wider consumer choice, easier access to otherwise rare and experimental material, a greater shift to independent labels where artists have both more of a say and more of the profits, a return to genuinely trying to create records the public will want to buy because it's not the same old ****, a D.I.Y approach to being able to create and share - bedroom production - the very thing that kick started both Punk and the 90's dance explosion.

I could go on...

BBUK4LYFE

17-11-2009, 11:30 PM

MrGaryy

17-11-2009, 11:35 PM

(yeah, she does download crappy TV shows like Gossip Girl, One Three Hill, Grey's Anatomy, Paris' Hilton BFF...)

So yeah, I'm pi$$ed.

Yeah cos Ugly Betty is real quality TV.

I do download, but if I really love an album and it's rereleased then I'll go buy the rereleased on physical. If it's a new artist then i'll buy on iTunes. But when it's someone like Britney or Leona, I personally don;t think they a) deserve the money when they have **** all to do with the making of it and b) will miss the money seeing as they're loaded as it is. And if it's an artist I support til I like die - so really only Christina Aguilera - then i always buy what she does physically.

I might download a movie the odd time and I go through phases of downloading TV shows but atm Glee is the only one I download every week.

InOne

17-11-2009, 11:39 PM

It is what comes with the net really. If people see something for free they will take it. Human greed.

Dolphin-and-Whale

17-11-2009, 11:40 PM

Youtube Converter is quality for getting the tunes.

Stu

17-11-2009, 11:43 PM

Youtube Converter is quality for getting the tunes.
Yeah but the audio quality from YouTube is terrible in most cases, and in all cases never up to the scratch of more conventional methods of listening.

Dolphin-and-Whale

17-11-2009, 11:47 PM

Yeah but the audio quality from YouTube is terrible in most cases, and in all cases never up to the scratch of more conventional methods of listening.

I'm not too fussy about the quality so I don't really mind.

I used to download through Limewire but stopped doing that.

Stu

17-11-2009, 11:50 PM

I'm not too fussy about the quality so I don't really mind.

I used to download through Limewire but stopped doing that.
Aye I used to use it constantly years ago but it's washing up less and less gems these days.

Princess

17-11-2009, 11:58 PM

Youtube Converter is quality for getting the tunes.

YT sound quality is so bad! Try buying an album and listening to it on a cd player(hi-fi whatever) and you'll see the difference.

Oh and I argee with Stu on the whole some artists deserve to be 'stole' off more than others. Although the ones who 'deserve' it aren't really artists at all.

MrGaryy

18-11-2009, 12:02 AM

yuck YouTube rips sounds awful. Limewire is too risky for my liking, I rely on direct download links.

Jords

18-11-2009, 12:03 AM

I can get good quality songs, jsut the odd song which is really bad its like noooo! Haha, then I use Itunes for that.

You sort of mix and match, use free downloads if possible (if theyre available + half decent quality) and cost downloads if not.

setanta

18-11-2009, 12:57 AM

Yes, I do believe it is okay to 'steal' from some artists and not others. That's my personal opinion. Well, actually, it's more a fact, but at the risk of sounding pretentious, god forbid, I will leave it in the opinion basket.

'Stealing' an album from an artist who is overpaid and who is underworked, studio wise, and 'stealing' an album from a band struggling to make ends meet who put effort into creating genuinely interesting, unique soundscapes are two very, very different things.

I don't really see where you are coming from, to be honest. Your just running off on tangents instead of confronting the arguments I have posted. I don't see why you are using TiBB of all places as the template for gauging what illegal downloaders do. Your argument has no real statistical merit and merely boils down to ''well I reckon most people download artists and never buy them''.

Your probably right, the majority probably don't buy all of what they 'steal', but people are different. They, like this issue, can't be generalised into such daft concepts as 'good' and 'evil'.

Again, I show you the upsides of this 'crime' : Increasing live ticket sales, exposure for new bands, new channels of media for pre existing bands, slashing long overpriced record sales, wider consumer choice, easier access to otherwise rare and experimental material, a greater shift to independent labels where artists have both more of a say and more of the profits, a return to genuinely trying to create records the public will want to buy because it's not the same old ****, a D.I.Y approach to being able to create and share - bedroom production - the very thing that kick started both Punk and the 90's dance explosion.

I could go on...

God, you go on a bit. I never said it was good or evil and don't accuse me of having daft concepts; I'm talking about what's right and wrong and how this thread illustrates how people view the internet as a tool for accessing other peoples creative endeavours for free, with free and illegal being the important issues here.

You can go on and on about the advantages of having an outlet to promote a more expansive and wide ranging range of music and creativity (which in part I agree with) until you're blue in the face, but the reality is that most people are motivated by greed and how much they can get for nothing - they wont go out and buy the cd after getting it for free online.

Stu

18-11-2009, 01:03 AM

God, you go on a bit
Of course I go on a bit. I am coming from an intelligent discussion angle here predicating the strengths and weaknesses of illegal downloading. Not making statements like ''I reckon most people steal it den not buy it coz thats what most people do''.

Also, I was not specifically accusing you of daft concepts, merely illustrating that it's not a simple black versus white issue. Simple.

but the reality is that most people are motivated by greed and how much they can get for nothing - they wont go out and buy the cd after getting it for free online.
The reality is everything positive I have listed, also. You can't speak for everyone on these little AutoSurvey aspects of your arguments. Some would say forking out for physical albums when you can get them for free is being greedy considering digital downloads are worthless in the material sense.

I'm talking about what's right and wrong and how this thread illustrates how people view the internet as a tool for accessing other peoples creative endeavours for free, with free and illegal being the important issues here.
And what you were saying was stealing any music is the same equal crime of stealing. I explained to you how this is not the case. Now I can't see what your point is. Again, there is no black or white right and wrong.

Shaun

18-11-2009, 01:06 AM

I download shitloads, but then try to buy what I like out of that. I wouldn't have bought The Cure/Jimi Hendrix's CDs yesterday if I hadn't got them illegally first.

setanta

18-11-2009, 01:08 AM

Of course I go on a bit. I am coming from an intelligent discussion angle here predicating the strengths and weaknesses of illegal downloading. Not making statements like ''I reckon most people steal it den not buy it coz thats what most people do''.

Also, I was not specifically accusing you of daft concepts, merely illustrating that it's not a simple black versus white issue. Simple.

The reality is everything positive I have listed, also. You can't speak for everyone on these little AutoSurvey aspects of your arguments. Some would say forking out for physical albums when you can get them for free is being greedy.

And what you were saying was stealing any music is the same equal crime of stealing. I explained to you how this is not the case. Now I can't see what your point is. Again, there is no black or white right and wrong.

Of course there is.... I accept that it's stealing and I'm not particularly happy whenever I download the odd sneaky album because it's reflects poorly on me and on the pockets of the artists. I'm not particularly proud of any that I've gotten for free and I don't think anyone really should be.

My point again is, is it legal? Well, is it? Why don't you do it the old fashioned way and listen to snippets of the songs on allmusic and then if you like what you hear buy it? Don't sugarcoat what we're all doing here by saying it's taking it away from the mainstream.

MrGaryy

18-11-2009, 01:11 AM

I love how going on to a website and digitally listening to snippets of songs is now considered 'the old fashioned way'.

setanta

18-11-2009, 01:13 AM

I love how going on to a website and digitally listening to snippets of songs is now considered 'the old fashioned way'.

Lol, well it is isn't it? Most people just download them now like they're switching channels on tv.

Stu

18-11-2009, 01:15 AM

Of course there is.... I accept that it's stealing
Yes but stealing an album is not just stealing an album. I have already made this clear. Depends on such a large variety of factors.

I accept that it's stealing and I'm not particularly happy whenever I download the odd sneaky album because it's reflects poorly on me and on the pockets of the artists.
I don't quiet think the word 'poorly' and the pockets of Jay-Z can co-exist in the same universe, but if it's bugging your conscious that much, don't do it.

My point again is, is it legal? Well, is it?
That's not a point, it's a question. A question that has nothing to do with this argument. Try and argue the ethics of it from your own educated point of view without bringing legality into it.

Why don't you do it the old fashioned way and listen to snippets of the songs on allmusic and then if you like what you hear buy it?
Because I like to listen to full albums of artists work, then later buy the albums if I like them, like I already explained. Your old fashioned way does not suffice for all, sorry.

Don't sugarcoat what we're all doing here by saying it's taking it away from the mainstream.
But alot of it is. Likewise, don't sugarcoat it all as being evil stealing, even after I continue to list to you the beneficial effects of file sharing you persist in ignoring my arguments seemingly to try and drag us all to the same moral guilt trip pedestal your on.

Thousands of today's artists would not have even got a record deal, never mind a record sale, if it had not been for filesharing. That's a fact. When families are struggling to put food on the table, hotwiring a Leona Lewis album when everyone involved in that album is raking it in is probably not going to turn too many heads. Rightly so.

Princess

18-11-2009, 01:15 AM

The old fashioned way is called vinyl....

setanta

18-11-2009, 01:22 AM

Yes but stealing an album is not just stealing an album. I have already made this clear. Depends on such a large variety of factors.

I don't quiet think the word 'poorly' and the pockets of Jay-Z can co-exist in the same universe, but if it's bugging your conscious that much, don't do it.

That's not a point, it's a question. A question that has nothing to do with this argument. Try and argue the ethics of it from your own educated point of view without bringing legality into it.

Because I like to listen to full albums of artists work, then later buy the albums if I like them, like I already explained. Your old fashioned way does not suffice for all, sorry.

But alot of it is. Likewise, don't sugarcoat it all as being evil stealing, even after I continue to list to you the beneficial effects of file sharing you persist in ignoring my arguments seemingly to try and drag us all to the same moral guilt trip pedestal your on.

I'll tell you what I find ignorant Stu -your persistent ability to just dismantle other peoples comments and continually patronize in an attempt at self promotion. There's really no need it. Can't you just write your own comments without indulging in such gameplaying?

I've heard all your comments and I agree with many but the simple fact is we're still taking off artists for free and illegally with the majority of them never getting a cent from our pockets. You can't deny this.

setanta

18-11-2009, 01:22 AM

The old fashioned way is called vinyl....

Oh I love vinyl. Far better sound off it.

InOne

18-11-2009, 01:24 AM

All The Smiths on vinyl. That is all I need. Also have a vinyl 7" Juke Box.

MrGaryy

18-11-2009, 01:28 AM

The old fashioned way is called vinyl....

clearly not in this context :P

and yeah InOne, I suppose it is, seems weird when you say it. Times are changing so rapidly.

Stu

18-11-2009, 01:29 AM

I'll tell you what I find ignorant Stu -your persistent ability to just dismantle other peoples comments and continually patronize in an attempt at self promotion. There's really no need it. Can't you just write your own comments without indulging in such gameplaying?
That's exactly what I am doing. I am arguing my points. In fact, my posts contain more arguments than yours do. Sure I have a snappy style I season it all with, but that's just me. You seem to be pretty paranoid of a lot around here that seems to me is all in your head. Gameplaying? That's one for the ***** and giggles handbook, right there. You sound like a conspiracy loon.

the simple fact is we're still taking off artists for free and illegally with the majority of them never getting a cent from our pockets. You can't deny this.
Actually yes, I can. If you paid any attention at all to my arguments, which may be why I am getting slightly frustrated, you will see that illegal downloading is driving a huge shift to ticket sales and independent promotion. That equates to quiet a bit of extra revenue. The real loosers here are the record companies. Sure many, many artists loose out, but the upswing more than makes up for it. Most downloaded artists are pretty loaded anyway. Oh and again that's not to mention the artists who would never have had record deals in the FIRST place if it were not for illegal downlading. I made that point more than once already.

You make illegal downloading sound like a bad thing, but it's not. It has bad elements, but there are a whole slew of good elements which I have spent more than enough time and patience listing for you. Good elements and bad elements. Just like everything else.

setanta

18-11-2009, 01:37 AM

That's exactly what I am doing. I am arguing my points. In fact, my posts contain more arguments than yours do. Sure I have a snappy style I season it all with, but that's just me. You seem to be pretty paranoid of a lot around here that seems to me is all in your head. Gameplaying? That's one for the ***** and giggles handbook, right there. You sound like a conspiracy loon.

Actually yes, I can. If you paid any attention at all to my arguments, which may be why I am getting slightly frustrated, you will see that illegal downloading is driving a huge shift to ticket sales and independent promotion. That equates to quiet a bit of extra revenue. The real loosers here are the record companies. Sure many, many artists loose out, but the upswing more than makes up for it. Most downloaded artists are pretty loaded anyway. Oh and again that's not to mention the artists who would never have had record deals in the FIRST place if it were not for illegal downlading. I made that point more than once already.

You make illegal downloading sound like a bad thing, but it's not. It has bad elements, but there are a whole slew of good elements which I have spent more than enough time and patience listing for you. Good elements and bad elements. Just like everything else.

Yep, I have a problem with your approach to discussions to be honest with you, when by and large they consist of a slightly ridiculing and sardonic tone with a propensity for cutting and pasting at will which highlights a reactionary and possibly egotistical individual. There's simply no need for it.

It's still illegal to download for free and I'd imagine the vast majority of people don't decide to buy originals afterwards. I love seeing the big man get hit hard but still, there's going to be many casulties on the other end of things too.

Stu

18-11-2009, 01:46 AM

Yep, I have a problem with your approach to discussions to be honest with you, when by and large they consist of a slightly ridiculing and sardonic tone with a propensity for cutting and pasting at will which highlights a reactionary and possibly egotistical individual. There's simply no need for it.
Sardonic tone? I'm Stu, pleased to meet you. I make points with a sarcastic edge, absolutely, but so do others, and we all have fun with it. Those of us with a stable mind, at least.

Cutting and pasting at will? It makes it easier for both me to argue and for the reader to read. A point with a counterpoint. Beats a whole wall of text. There is nothing else behind it apart from that.People can still view your original posts, I just copy an argument and reply to it. Simple. That equates to me being egotistical? Thanks for your amateur psychological interpretation of my keyboard skills. Want mine? Your paranoid.

For clarification :

Your original argument that I was responding to was that, in your mind, stealing from an artist is stealing from an artist, end of story. I already made my view on this quiet clear by explaining just how many variables are behind the situation. Artists wealth, album quality, artists input, exposure, you name it. Stealing an album produced by an overpaid diva with ghost written songs and a large record corporation distribution and advertising network is absolutely not the same thing as stealing an album from a struggling artist on an independent label with minor distribution.

It's just not in the same league. In the eyes of the law it might be the same but in the eyes of rational ethics and common sense? Hell no.

Tom4784

18-11-2009, 01:47 AM

I can't stand watching TV shows or films on my PC so I always wait for it to air on Brittish TV or buy it on DVD/ Go to cinemas. I get most of my games from a friend's game shop because I get a discount and he does Imports.

I prefer CDs to downloading as I like to have a product in my hands really as legal downloads can be so easily lost. If I'm iffy about an artist though I might download their album for a listen and If I like it I'll buy it, If I don't I'll delete it.

I don't have any qualms for people who do download though like Stu says there's a fair few positives to the practice.

setanta

18-11-2009, 01:59 AM

Sardonic tone? I'm Stu, pleased to meet you. I make points with a sarcastic edge, absolutely, but so do others, and we all have fun with it. Those of us with a stable mind, at least.

Cutting and pasting at will? It makes it easier for both me to argue and for the reader to read. A point with a counterpoint. Beats a whole wall of text. There is nothing else behind it apart from that.People can still view your original posts, I just copy an argument and reply to it. Simple. That equates to me being egotistical? Thanks for your amateur psychological interpretation of my keyboard skills. Want mine? Your paranoid.

For clarification :

Your original argument that I was responding to was that, in your mind, stealing from an artist is stealing from an artist, end of story. I already made my view on this quiet clear by explaining just how many variables are behind the situation. Artists wealth, album quality, artists input, exposure, you name it. Stealing an album produced by an overpaid diva with ghost written songs and a large record corporation distribution and advertising network is absolutely not the same thing as stealing an album from a struggling artist on an independent label with minor distribution.

It's just not in the same league. In the eyes of the law it might be the same but in the eyes of rational ethics and common sense? Hell no.

Nope, not paranoid, just don't enjoy seeing my thoughts dismantled for your benefit and not my own. This is our conversation and I would like to think that I have the ability and intelligence to traverse a "wall of text" without your guidance.

Of course there's pros and cons in everything in life but in this case it's still grabbing someone elses thoughts, inspiration and creativity for free and it can leave me feeling slightly cold and ashamed, that's all.

Stu

18-11-2009, 02:06 AM

Nope, not paranoid, just don't enjoy seeing my thoughts dismantled for your benefit and not my own.
Might I suggest not getting involved in such debates in the future then. Not patronisation, but friendly advice. Taking apart and scrutinizing another's post is ... kind of the point.

This is our conversation and I would like to think that I have the ability and intelligence to traverse a "wall of text" without your guidance.
Good for you, but I still find it much easier to make points this way. There is nothing pleasurable or sinister to it, it's just the way I conduct my business. The fact that you took it upon yourself to twist it in a slightly more ominous, manipulative light is your own crazy onus, but each to there own.

in this case it's still grabbing someone elses thoughts, inspiration and creativity for free and it can leave me feeling slightly cold and ashamed, that's all.
Really? It's my opinion that thought and inspiration should not necessarily come with a price tag. And again I might allude you to the fact that many of these artists would not have even been able to put said thought and said inspiration to disc if it were not for filesharing. And also, if I were an artist I would be delighted for all these additional people to receive my thoughts and inspiration, free of charge.

Of course there are the bad points, but that's part of the parcel of my argument. Merely illuminating the shades of grey that exist in the world of filesharing and pointing out the benefits.

setanta

18-11-2009, 02:19 AM

Might I suggest not getting involved in such debates in the future then. Not patronisation, but friendly advice. Taking apart and scrutinizing another's post is ... kind of the point.

Good for you, but I still find it much easier to make points this way. There is nothing pleasurable or sinister to it, it's just the way I conduct my business. The fact that you took it upon yourself to twist it in a slightly more ominous, manipulative light is your own crazy onus, but each to there own.

Really? It's my opinion that thought and inspiration should not necessarily come with a price tag. And again I might allude you to the fact that many of these artists would not have even been able to put said thought and said inspiration to disc if it were not for filesharing. And also, if I were an artist I would be delighted for all these additional people to receive my thoughts and inspiration, free of charge.

Of course there are the bad points, but that's part of the parcel of my argument. Merely illuminating the shades of grey that exist in the world of filesharing and pointing out the benefits.

Nah, you have a patronising and condescending tone to your arguments that isn't terribly agreeable to me, and the very fact that cutting and pasting takes time reinforces my argument that it's something that you take great delight in doing. And the thing that puzzles me is that you yourself have said there's not alot in my comments that merits scrutiny so why hew it asunder if only to satisfy something else within you?

Twilight

18-11-2009, 04:23 AM

I do it all the time with albums and movies.

Captain.Remy

18-11-2009, 06:39 AM

That's not that bad actually. In other countries you can get fined thousand of dollars plus jail time.

Well, I forgot to explain that if you get caught once, they send you an e-mail then you must not download for 3 months. If you still download within the 3 months, you receive a letter, you must not download for a year.
If you get caught within the year, you go to the court, get your internet connection cut off AND depending on the amount of downloads, you get fines + jail time.

Captain.Remy

18-11-2009, 06:40 AM

Yeah cos Ugly Betty is real quality TV.

Yeah it's amazing. :hugesmile:

Stu

18-11-2009, 11:07 AM

Wow. So he ignores all my individual points which explain myself yet again. Maybe that's why he decided to spin a failing debate into a more personal angle.

and the very fact that cutting and pasting takes time reinforces my argument that it's something that you take great delight in doing.
Even though I already explained to you how it actually saves me time? Christ, this is getting ridiculous now. Your like a big child making assumptions in your own little fantasy paranoia zone. Grow up and take the way I argue my points or don't bother wasting my time at all at all, alright?

You get into discussions but you don't want your posts dissected? What are you looking for, a cuddle and a rubdown? Might I suggest a daily dose of not taking an internet forum seriously. It works wonders for most of us, who are much younger than you and manage to take sardonic wordplay as part of the routine here. Not that I consider 'moral guilt trip pedestal' to be sarcasm or patronisation. Just exactly the way I felt about your arguments.

atieah2009

18-11-2009, 11:16 AM

I don't agree or disagree the only song i downloaded Illegaly was Down and that was because it took 5months to come here and when it did i bought it off Amazon mp3 downloads as i usaully do.

Life In The Rich City.

setanta

18-11-2009, 03:16 PM

Wow. So he ignores all my individual points which explain myself yet again. Maybe that's why he decided to spin a failing debate into a more personal angle.

Even though I already explained to you how it actually saves me time? Christ, this is getting ridiculous now. Your like a big child making assumptions in your own little fantasy paranoia zone. Grow up and take the way I argue my points or don't bother wasting my time at all at all, alright?

You get into discussions but you don't want your posts dissected? What are you looking for, a cuddle and a rubdown? Might I suggest a daily dose of not taking an internet forum seriously. It works wonders for most of us, who are much younger than you and manage to take sardonic wordplay as part of the routine here. Not that I consider 'moral guilt trip pedestal' to be sarcasm or patronisation. Just exactly the way I felt about your arguments.

I've been grown up about things here - just asking questions on why you choose to respond to me at all and on the methods you choose to respond with, which I believe is fair considering that you have such disdain for my answers in the first place. You enjoy it a little too much my friend.

And as for your excuses for stealing other peoples creativity, no, I still don't accept them because we're quickly turning into a society that believes it's normal to get music for nothing - with the quick click of a button you access everything and sure isn't that what this thread is all about.... illegal downloading?

Exposure for the smaller bands is all well and good, but not when people are downloading their tracks for absolutely nothing, thereby denying them the money that's essential for their survival as artists. I could point out to some bands on independent labels who have pleaded with their fans on their sleeve notes not to copy or download because they believe it's killing the smaller people in the business as much as it is the big moguls.... remember the guys that have been at the centre of many of your arguments?

We're setting a trend now with illegal downloads that will be followed on by others and it's ultimately going to be damaging for many artists and for music in general.

Stu

18-11-2009, 03:37 PM

I've been grown up about things here - just asking questions on why you choose to respond to me at all and on the methods you choose to respond with, which I believe is fair considering that you have such disdain for my answers in the first place. You enjoy it a little too much my friend.
Why I choose to respond to you at all? This is a debate, I was assuming. Like I already said. The idea is to respond with counterpoints.

The methods I choose to respond with? Perfectly fine by me and by most other people on the forum with the ability to not take it so seriously. Like I already said. Perhaps you would like to quote pieces of my arguments you have found to contain untold evil.

Such a disdain for your answers? Again, this is a debate. I was assuming, like I already said already said back that time when I already said it, you seem to be missing the point here. A lot.

Enjoying it too much? That's not for you to say. I already explained to you countless times why I chop up quotes and respond to them individually. Your solution to this, like a child, is to block your ears, close your eyes, and convince yourself I am getting some perverse pleasure out of it, whilst it is merely my method of posting. I have a 32" HDTV. I have a right hand and a hungry dick. I don't need to speak to you for kicks.

Again, if you want to twist things to such a sinister, menacing angle, that's your choice.

And as for your excuses for stealing other peoples creativity, no, I still don't accept them because we're quickly turning into a society that believes it's normal to get music for nothing - with the quick click of a button you access everything and sure isn't that what this thread is all about.... illegal downloading?
It's better than a society that considers it normal to plop down twenty quid for the same tired pop rehashes. Record prices will eventually drop. In fact, they are already dropping. This equation will balance itself out.

Exposure for the smaller bands is all well and good, but not when people are downloading their tracks for absolutely nothing, thereby denying them the money that's essential for their survival as artists. I could point out to some bands on independent labels who have pleaded with their fans on their sleeve notes not to copy or download because they believe it's killing the smaller people in the business as much as it is the big moguls.... remember the guys that have been at the centre of many of your arguments?
I have already refuted this point countless times by explaining to you how many artists would not have had a record deal never mind a record sale in the first place if it were not for us downloading for free. Are my denying some small artists are loosing out? No. So your essentially arguing a tired point with a wall.

We're setting a trend now with illegal downloads that will be followed on by others and it's ultimately going to be damaging for many artists and for music in general.
Despite the countless positive benefits I have pointed out to you? I am not denying it damages the industry but overall do I think it's damaging to music? Hell no. See I am willing to expand my horizons to factor in both the good and bad here.

Quick hint : It's not.

setanta

18-11-2009, 03:52 PM

It's better than a society that considers it normal to plop down twenty quid for the same tired pop rehashes. Record prices will eventually drop. In fact, they are already dropping. This equation will balance itself out. .

This is the same argument you've been rehashing endlessly. What will it balance out to when we're downloading for nothing? This thread is about illegal downloading for free.... nothing is going into the hands of the artists and I've stated already that some smaller bands are trying to pursuade their fans to buy rather than copy. When you put no price on music it becomes valueless, particularly in a society like ours.

I have already refuted this point countless times by explaining to you how many artists would not have had a record deal never mind a record sale in the first place if it were not for us downloading for free. Are my denying some small artists are loosing out? No. So your essentially arguing a tired point with a wall.

Like I said before, we're creating a society that chooses not to put a value on music or creativity. We'll lose out eventually, with smaller bands disappearing while big moguls will still be here. They're not going away Stu, no matter how much you'd like to think that you're doing this for music and freedom.

Despite the countless positive benefits I have pointed out to you? I am not denying it damages the industry but overall do I think it's damaging to music? Hell no. See I am willing to expand my horizons to factor in both the good and bad here.

Quick hint : It's not.

It is and it will damage it more and more if we download for nothing. It's stealing, no matter what way you look at it.

Stu

18-11-2009, 03:58 PM

Smaller bands disappearing when big moguls will still be here? This decade saw the rise of more homegrown bedroom talent than ever, and it was all down to the internet. That is a fact.

Big record labels are fast running out of business. That is another fact.

So no, smaller bands are not going anywhere and yes, big moguls are going the way of the dodo.

Big record companies are going the way of the dinosaur. They're unnecessary middlemen and to be fair, it's their own greed and incompetence that has dug the hole even deeper. They ****ed over both the artists and the punters for generations. Good ****ing riddance. People will still make good music and people will still respond to it.

Illegal downloading is damaging music but overall I believe the positives will outweigh the negatives in time. It's far easier to argue a point when you have facts on your side.

Enid

18-11-2009, 04:03 PM

I just want to say that this is the information age, and there will always be ways to get this information for FREE. Whether that be music, documents, programs, education, films and games. Those that have discovered these ways are not thieves. We're opportunists. If I know I can get away with it, I will have it.

Sharing is caring.

setanta

18-11-2009, 04:08 PM

You're still not talking about the illegal aspect of downloading for free Stu. I agree that the internet affords smaller, more independent bands the opportunity to gain a following or to gain some exposure but you're neglecting to comment on the illegality behind free downloading and how much it can really hurt these bands trying to eek out an existence.

For every band that's made it huge I'm sure there's dozens and dozens who've said "f£ck it" and decided to get full time jobs rather than watch their blood sweat and tears being accessed and downloaded for nothing on the net. And this will not get any better if we all decide to embrace illegal downloading and accept it as part of the norm.

You really think the big boys are going to disappear? I doubt it, particularly when we're in an age of mass media.... tv, radio, film you name it. They've got it all sewn up and losing out on cd sales isn't really going to put that big a dent in their pockets.

Stu

18-11-2009, 04:14 PM

you're neglecting to comment on the illegality behind free downloading and how much it can really hurt these bands trying to eek out and existence.
No I am not. You just need to read more carefully. I already acknowledged the damage being done. As for the illegal aspect of it ... what is there to debate? It is illegal. People break the law by doing it. And?

For every band that's made it huge I'm sure there's dozens and dozens who've said "f£ck it" and decided to get full time jobs rather than watch their blood sweat and tears being accessed and downloaded for nothing on the net. And this will not get any better if we all decide to embrace illegal downloading and accept it as part of the norm.
And vice versa. There is no point really in arguing this. Like I said, I already have acknowledged the pros and cons. And I believe the pro's outweigh the cons. Quiet extraordinarily, in fact.

You really think the big boys are going to disappear? I doubt it, particularly when we're in an age of mass media.... tv, radio, film you name it. They've got it all sewn up and losing out on cd sales isn't really going to put that big a dent in their pockets.
They are certainly playing less of a role already, and there unnecessary roles will continue to drop ever further in the future. You mention mass media : What's the driving force behind virtually all mass media today? The hub? The internet. The internet is a nightmare for these guys. It's an entirely free market and it's entirely user driven.

Loosing out on CD sales is not putting a big dent in there pockets? Was that a little in joke or a serious point? Holy ****ing ****. These guys are taking an absolute hammering financially, and more and more artists are choosing the independent route. It's been a nightmare of a decade for big labels.

setanta

18-11-2009, 04:31 PM

I don't agree. They're taking a hammering in cds maybe, but what about dvd sales and tv/radio spots and touring? These guys have their fingers in many, many pies.

And yes, we're breaking the law by trying to make it acceptability when it's clearly not. I don't care about the big boys, I care about the smaller lads who are trying to earn a crust. And stealing is stealing, whether it's from Tescos or your local grocery shop. You decide to embrace it and we'll lose out on many interesting artists.

Niamh.

18-11-2009, 04:39 PM

I'd say ye will have to agree to disagree on this one Setanta & Stu!!

Stu

18-11-2009, 04:42 PM

I don't agree. They're taking a hammering in cds maybe, but what about dvd sales and tv/radio spots and touring?
I am talking about record labels here, and record label branches of larger corporations, not other channels of media. Dozens of record labels are going out of business, dozens already have. It's not for you to agree or disagree with, it's just a plain fact.

And yes, we're breaking the law but trying to make it acceptability when it's clearly not. I don't care about the big boys, I care about the smaller lads who are trying to earn a crust. And stealing is stealing, whether it's from Tescos or your local grocery shop. You decide to embrace it and we'll lose out on many interesting artists.
Well if you care about the smaller lads you should be delighted in knowing they made an impression like never before this decade thanks to the internet. It is far easier to break into music now than it was fifty years ago when you had to know somebody. Harder to sell records, yes, but easier to get into music.

As for stealing is stealing? Bullshit. I have already explained this to you a dozen times. How on earth could you consider stealing from a major artist on a major label the same thing as stealing from a struggling artist on an independent label? Stealing is only stealing in principal.

As for embrace it? Again your putting yourself on a moral pedestal. I am not embracing illegal activity, I am embracing the benefits of downloading while recognising the drawbacks. And I am not the only one. Take Radiohead, for instance. They had they're finger firmly on the button and so do many other artists who would disagree with you and say it's important to embrace this change because it's not stopping. Major labels have lost out this decade because they have been slow to embrace change.

I don't think we will be loosing out on many interesting artists either, chief. I think I am hearing slightly more artists now than when I did before I had the use of the internet.

setanta

18-11-2009, 04:57 PM

But why get into music if you lose out from it eventually? Hardly the type of incentive that's necessary to motivate young, creative minds.

As for Radiohead, yes, they asked their fans to give what they could for the new album, not to just grab for free. But of course they've already made their fortune and are in a more fortunate position than many other struggling artists.

You hear more music... that's nice. Do you pay for that privilege? Obviously not. Do I think that it will have a massive impact in years to come? Yes, big time.

Stu

18-11-2009, 05:06 PM

But why get into music if you lose out from it eventually?
You don't. Not if your smart. Adaptation.

they've already made their fortune and are in a more fortunate position than many other struggling artists.
Again, this decade has seen the biggest influx of struggling artist turned star increase ever. All thanks to the internet. Why don't you ask Elbow if they are loosing out.

You hear more music... that's nice. Do you pay for that privilege? Obviously not. Do I think that it will have a massive impact in years to come? Yes, big time.
Careful with the assumptions, kid. I buy albums. I never said I didn't. Of course it will have an impact in years to come. And in my opinion it's going to be a very positive one. More and more artists breaking through thanks to the internet, more and more existing artists realising it's smarter to switch to independent labels, increasing live sales, cheaper albums, artists getting more profit than what they normally would have in the pre download era, so on and so forth.

The future looks bright.

setanta

18-11-2009, 05:39 PM

I really don't think so. You'll see less and less people becoming artists nevermind being willing to shell out cash for the honour of producing and distribuiting albums that people will never buy anyway. Do you know how expensive it is?

And you keep mentioning artists that have made it big... what about the ones who haven't and the others who condemn the theft of their work off the net?

I agree that the internet is hugely important in the fight against the tyranny of corporate airheads who feed us the usual mainstream rubbish and monopolize airtime but that doesn't make downloading for free right. You can play the crusading Robin Hood role if you like, but it doesn't hold water for me when you're consuming other people's creativity for nothing.

Stu

18-11-2009, 05:47 PM

I really don't think so. You'll see less and less people becoming artists nevermind being willing to shell out cash for the honour of producing and distribuiting albums that people will never buy anyway. Do you know how expensive it is?
Baseless, factless assumption. More people have broke through this decade than ever before, all down to the benefits of the internet. More people want to be artists than ever before. We are, also thanks to the internet, hungry for more and more types of experimental music and the labels are starting to listen. More people want to be famous more than ever, too. This concept that illegal downloading is discouraging people from wanting to be artists is quiet frankly utterly hilarious and without validity, regardless of your opinions on illegal downloading itself.

And you keep mentioning artists that have made it big... what about the ones who haven't and the others who condemn the theft of their work off the net?
Seriously, can you read? I have mentioned at least sixteen times now that I recognize and acknowledge the harmful effects it is having on the industry. I merely believe, with fact's and figures in lieu of daft assumptions and guesswork, that the benefits of downloadable music far outweigh the negatives, and will rise to fruition even more visibly in the future.

I never said it was right. I was shedding light on it's beneficial effects. It's such a shame your basing your arguments around tedious statement making without facts and poor assumption.

setanta

18-11-2009, 05:59 PM

Well it's hardly an attraction, particularly when you hear of famous artists not even bothering to release anymore because of illegal downloading. Your argument is based on the internet providing a platform for many new artists, which I agree on - I've always said that. What I disagree with is illegal downloading not being harmful and not stealing, which it most certainly is. That's what this thread is about for f cuks sake. It's not about the pros and cons of the internet; it's about the right and wrongs of taking from others for nothing.

And it's not guesswork, it kinda obvious that production values on albums will fall as a result of people not actually buying anymore. Downloading for free is theft, no matter what spin you choose to put on it. I'll leave the final word to Cinematic Orchestra here, who work on an independent record label from a year or two ago.

"Before you copy, burn or upload these recordings, please take a moment to think about what you're doing and what you're not doing. You are not 'sticking it to the man'. You are not 'striking a blow against outdated copyright laws'. You are not 'liberating content from the corporations'. Nor are you 'promoting our records for us'. You are making it much harder for the musicians in Cinematic Orchestra to make anything like a living wage for creating the music which is good enough to give to friends and associates."

WOMBAI

18-11-2009, 06:05 PM

Stu

18-11-2009, 06:06 PM

Well it's hardly an attraction, particularly when you hear of famous artists not even bothering to release anymore because of illegal downloading.
Some 'artists' they are.

What I disagree with is illegal downloading not being harmful and not stealing.
And who exactly might you be disagreeing with? Because I never said it was not harmful and I never said it was not stealing.

That's what this thread is about for f cuks sake. It's not about the pros and cons of the internet; it's about the right and wrongs of taking from others for nothing.
This thread is about illegal downloading. I am talking about the pros and cons of illegal downloading. Shoot me.

it kinda obvious that production values on albums will fall as a result of people not actually buying anymore
So when album sales fall the big wigs sit around a table and say ''right lads, less effort into the next project. That will get the punters buying again''? Please don't ever work for me. Wrong, the opposite will happen. In fact, the opposite is already happening. These days you can get all sorts of extra tracks and bonus DVD's with your CD's for making a legit purchase. Thousands of artists are adapting to change and are coming up with new and exciting ways to get people to buy the albums. Labels realise they have to both drop the price and offer more. Production values are falling? That's a killer.

Downloading for free is theft, no matter what spin you choose to put on it.
Marvelous. Because I was not putting a spin on it.

setanta

18-11-2009, 06:14 PM

Again, you persist with chopping and pasting other people's words. Can't you just answer without grabbing segments of my thoughts in attempt to big up yourself?

And standards will fall.... like I said it's incredibly expensive to produce and distribute music. You're whole argument is based on the fact that you want the little man to do well out of this but I can't see it happening if this trend continues. You'll see a drop in musicians wanting to release material and the quality will decrease too as they find it more and more difficult to break even in their investment. Cinematic Orchestra said it better than I ever will.

Stu

18-11-2009, 06:18 PM

Again, you persist with chopping and pasting other people's words. Can't you just answer without grabbing segments of my thoughts in attempt to big up yourself?
Did you expect me to change my posting style just to appease your childish little bouts of virtual paranoia? I have already been through this with you countless times. How on earth is dividing my argument meant to big me up?

And standards will fall.... like I said it's incredibly expensive to produce and distribute music. You're whole argument is based on the fact that you want the little man to do well out of this but I can't see it happening if this trend continues. You'll see a drop in musicians wanting to release material and the quality will decrease too as they find it more and more difficult to break even in their investment. Cinematic Orchestra said it better than I ever will.
It is getting cheaper to produce music. Standards will increase as people will strive to make other people buy the product. Simple business economics. And like I already said, you can see the standards increasing with relation to the disc format all around.

setanta

18-11-2009, 06:22 PM

Did you expect me to change my posting style just to appease your childish little bouts of virtual paranoia? I have already been through this with you countless times. How on earth is dividing my argument meant to big me up?

It is getting cheaper to produce music. Standards will increase as people will strive to make other people buy the product. Simple business economics. And like I already said, you can see the standards increasing with relation to the disc format all around.

It's always going to be difficult and an expensive process to produce, record and distribute music of a high technical standard. That will never change.

Stu

18-11-2009, 06:23 PM

It's always going to be difficult and an expensive process to produce, record and distribute music of a high technical standard. That will never change.
Difficult? Yes. Expensive? Yes. But it is getting cheaper. That's all I was saying. That also happens to be a fact.

setanta

18-11-2009, 06:28 PM

Difficult? Yes. Expensive? Yes. But it is getting cheaper. That's all I was saying. That also happens to be a fact.

It's not fact. It costs a fortune to get a cd out there and you wont see as many artists being willing to fork out the cash when there's no market for it. Sound recording and distribution is a time consuming and expensive business.

Stu

18-11-2009, 06:31 PM

It's not fact. It costs a fortune to get a cd out there and you wont see as many artists being willing to fork out the cash when there's no market for it. Sound recording and distribution is a time consuming and expensive business.
Which is getting cheaper. I never said it was a fact that it was cheap. I said it was a fact that it was getting cheaper. Which, like everything else, it is, as technology improves. Read.

setanta

18-11-2009, 06:33 PM

Which is getting cheaper. I never said it was a fact that it was cheap. I said it was a fact that it was getting cheaper. Which, like everything else, it is, as technology improves. Read.

Nope, even with technology it's still time consuming and expensive, and that's only in creating your album. Distribution is another massive headache and advertising.

Stu

18-11-2009, 06:38 PM

Nope, even with technology it's still time consuming and expensive, and that's only in creating your album. Distribution is another massive headache and advertising.
Jesus christ.

I never said it was not time consuming or expensive. I said it was getting cheaper and more efficient, which it is. As technology improves, it can be produced and thus sold for cheaper. As technology improves, it also speeds up otherwise difficult processes.

Producing a named electronic album today is about a third of the cost of producing the same album ten years ago, which was a third of a cost of producing it ten years prior.

setanta

18-11-2009, 06:42 PM

Jesus christ.

I never said it was not time consuming or expensive. I said it was getting cheaper and more efficient, which it is. As technology improves, it can be produced and thus sold for cheaper. As technology improves, it also speeds up otherwise difficult processes.

Producing a named electronic album today is about a third of the cost of producing the same album ten years ago, which was a third of a cost of producing it ten years prior.

You do realise how many albums these smaller bands have to sell before breaking even don't you? Thousands man. They wont even bother now that people are stealing off them for nothing. Again, I've mentioned this before and I have friends who work in sound recording. Its still expensive and time consuming and you're clutching at straws here anyway. This is theft, plain and simple. Anyway, I'm done here.

Vladimir

18-11-2009, 06:43 PM

I do download music and TV series like Big Brother UK & USA, GG, Lost, DH. If I'm a fan of some artist then I'll go buy the cd.

Stu

18-11-2009, 06:48 PM

You do realise how many albums these smaller bands have to sell before breaking even don't you? Thousands man. They wont even bother now that people are stealing off them for nothing. Again, I've mentioned this before and I have friends who work in sound recording. Its still expensive and time consuming and you're clutching at straws here anyway. This is theft, plain and simple. Anyway, I'm done here.
I am clutching at straws? Do you even know what straws I am clutching at? My point is and always was that illegal downloading has provided the industry with both positives and negatives. It is theft. Bravo. Give yourself a nice, big pat on the back. I never denied it was theft.

But artists both big and small are not going to stop making music because of it. Fact.

Crimson Dynamo

18-11-2009, 06:50 PM

haha

stu and setanta

you both know that there is only ONE way to settle this...

setanta

18-11-2009, 06:54 PM

I am clutching at straws? Do you even know what straws I am clutching at? My point is and always was that illegal downloading has provided the industry with both positives and negatives. It is theft. Bravo. Give yourself a nice, big pat on the back. I never denied it was theft.

But artists both big and small are not going to stop making music because of it. Fact.

There's that famous sarcy and dismissive tone again. It's dull Stu.

Novo

18-11-2009, 06:55 PM

I'm done here.

:rolleyes:

Ramsay

18-11-2009, 06:57 PM

haha

stu and setanta

you both know that there is only ONE way to settle this...

Shoooooot offfffff:laugh:

Stu

18-11-2009, 06:59 PM

There's that famous sarcy and dismissive tone again. It's dull Stu.
Not only did I put it in intentionally to create irony, which you just completely missed out on, but you created your own additional little piece of irony by being sarcastic in a post dismissing sarcasm. Well done.

haha

stu and setanta

you both know that there is only ONE way to settle this...
Old style western showdown? I'm game :blush:.

Shaun

18-11-2009, 07:00 PM

don't say "shoot off" to Stu, he'll get the wrong ide-

*runs for cover from flying white stuff*

Stu

18-11-2009, 07:02 PM

Fly my pretties. Populate the nation with ignorant, patronising little ART THIEVES!

Muhuhaha.

setanta

18-11-2009, 07:05 PM

Not only did I put it in intentionally to create irony, which you just completely missed out on, but you created your own additional little piece of irony by being sarcastic in a post dismissing sarcasm. Well done.

Old style western showdown? I'm game :blush:.

Oh really? I'm sorry that your attempt at subtlety was lost on me, but it's kind of understandable when you consider that you're asking me to differentiate between your last comment and the rest of them when the tone has always been the same. That's the greater irony really.

Stu

18-11-2009, 07:08 PM

Oh really? I'm sorry that your attempt at subtlety was lost on me, but it's kind of understandable when you consider that you're asking me to differentiate between your last comment and the rest of them when the tone has always been the same. That's the greater irony really.
No, the greater irony is that I am currently downloading Ironic, by Alanis Morrisette, for free, whilst you are boring the bejaysus out of us with these posts.

setanta

18-11-2009, 07:10 PM

No, the greater irony is that I am currently downloading Ironic, by Alanis Morrisette, for free, whilst you are boring the bejaysus out of us with these posts.

No, the greater irony is that song contains relatively no irony whatsoever. Listen and take note kid.

Stu

18-11-2009, 07:11 PM

No, the greater irony is that song contains relatively no irony whatsoever. Listen and take note kid.
We have all seen the Ed Byrne sketch, and we all know the song isn't really ironic.

Try harder, kid. Besides which, it was sarcasm that time. Not subtlety. I ****ing hate Alanis Morrisette.

setanta

18-11-2009, 07:14 PM

We have all seen the Ed Byrne sketch, and we all know the song isn't really ironic.

Try harder, kid. Besides which, it was sarcasm that time. Not subtlety. I ****ing hate Alanis Morrisette.

So why reference it in the first place unless you're one of those fellas who needs the last word and it was your desperate attempt at a comeback? And I dont' know the sketch you're talking about.
And yes, she's shite.

WOMBAI

18-11-2009, 07:15 PM

Oh to be 18 again and know it all! Those were the days!

Stu

18-11-2009, 07:16 PM

So why reference it in the first place unless you're one of those fellas who needs the last word and it was your last desperate attempt at a comeback? And I dont' know the sketch you're talking about.
And yes, she's shite.
Last word? We are on a forum, mate. There obviously has to be a last post to everything. However I am not a child and thus I do not believe in the concept of 'nah nah, last word'. It's a shame that you do. Just like it's a shame how you are going about seemingly lowering the standards of your own mighty posts to contradict everything you have said earlier.

My what an experiment this has been :joker:.

I think I am finally drawing some fun out of you. Chill.

Oh to be 18 again and know it all! Those were the days!
Thank you for your contribution. And what is that I think I know everything about, my dear?