Quote:
Originally posted by Shaun
bigbr0ther - how do you respond to the argument that downloading music for free is exactly the same, in terms of availability and easiness, as watching the song on YouTube whenever you like? There's absolutely no difference. In fact, with YouTube you even get to watch the music video as well, which is even more than what you get with just an mp3 recording.
|
The difference is that actually having the song on mp3 is more convenient and accessible to you, and you are paying for that convenience every time you buy a song. You save time searching for the song every time you want to listen, you can put it in your iTunes and add it to playlists, you can put it on your iPod.
If watching on YouTube were easier and better, why wouldn't you just watch it on YouTube instead of ever downloading it?
Quote:
|
As well as this, are artists actually losing anything? Do you see the likes of Rihanna and Mika living in squalor because of this? No. They're living it up at parties and awards and raking the cashflow in, and for those of us without the money to pay for whatever music we want to listen to, which we could do anyway by YouTube, radio, or whenever, it's a much easier and, IMO, morally-sound alternative.
|
"which we could do anyway by YouTube, radio, or whenever" Then why don't you just do that?
It's not okay to steal from someone that has a lot of money, and in any case the money from the music sales doesn't just go to the artist. It gets divided up between a lot of other people on the way, and you're stealing from all of them too. A lot of people and talent go into making a CD, not just the artist.