I steal music.

[BrianT]

jihadjoe75;4120871
In the mean time, I will personally be giving my music away for free, because it is, quite frankly, not worth $10 for an album.

And therein lies the whole secret to the OP's rationalization of stealing. Since he is magnanimous enough to give away his music (which is BTW not very good in his own estimation), he can feel better about taking music from other people. The fact that those other people do not wish to give their music away is thereby rendered irrelevant.

Since he gives his bad music away for free, they should give him their good music for free as well.

Humans are clever creatures. They can make sense out of the most senseless of their own actions.

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by HobbyCore

I think you're completely out of touch with people who freely put their music online.

Yes, freely of their own free will.

I suggest joining some communities that focus on creative commons, mashups, remixing or similar concepts to learn how the community works.

But 'mashups' and 'remixes' aren't completely original anyway. They usually include other people's ideas/material.
How about you show us some communities of people who only survive by writing their own songs..... and yet give them away freely.

[joelkanning]

Originally Posted by HobbyCore

Err, yeah... I didnt read any sarcasm in what you wrote. I read it again and I still don't see it. I'm normally pretty good at this online sarcasm thing, since I tend to overuse it myself

I would like to know what you were trying to say.

Hmm. Now I've re-read it and suddenly don't see the sarcasm either. Damn. Well, I have no idea what I was trying to say. Think I'll go steal me a couple of new albums - that always helps clear my mind...

(nice one, btw. touché)

[hobson]

Originally Posted by hello people

I just wanted to say that I steal music, and I'm here tonight to stand up for the rights of other music stealers. I mean uh, all our lives we've been laughed at and made to feel inferior. And tonight, those bastards, they trashed our house. Why? Cause we're smart? Cause we look different? Well, we're not. I'm a music stealer, and uh, I'm pretty proud of it.

Hi. I'm a music stealer too. I just found that out tonight. We have news for the beautiful people. There's a lot more of us than there are of you. I know there's alumni here tonight. When you went to Adams you might've been called a spazz, or a dork, or a geek. Any of you that have ever felt stepped on, left out, picked on, put down, whether you think you're a music stealer or not, why don't you just come down here and join us. Okay? Come on.

Originally Posted by hello people

Some of you suits need to read this one again and explore the studio space with it...I mean really explore the space

too funny... i remember this movie (and SNL skit) well (and your avatar, of course) - though some on this thread may not get the connection... the "nerd" abides...

back on topic - can't help but think of the Simpsons episode where Homer steals cable:

the pamphlet: So you've decided to steal cable.
Myth: Cable piracy is wrong.
Fact: Cable companies are big faceless corporations, which makes it okay.

Homer enjoys his new toy.

Marge: Homer, we've talked about cable before. You really think we can afford it?
Homer: Nothing a month? Yeah, I think we can swing that.

When Marge expresses her concern over the legality of stealing cable, Homer gives her the pamphlet.

Myth: It's only fair to pay for quality first-run movies.
Fact: Most movies shown on cable get two stars or less and are repeated ad nauseum.

[HobbyCore]

Originally Posted by chrisso

But 'mashups' and 'remixes' aren't completely original anyway. They usually include other people's ideas/material.
How about you show us some communities of people who only survive by writing their own songs..... and yet give them away freely.

Audio - Creative Commons

Browse away. Lots of people listed there, and a very incomplete list it is. I get a very large portion of my music from people like these folks as they tend to put much more effort into making their product valuable.

Ironically, in my experience, most of them tend to be living quite comfortably while similar artists who delve into the restrictive rights realm seem to be struggling more. Maybe my perception, but I don't place much value in it regardless. I rather just reward people for providing me with a quality product, however they do it.


That's just one example, there are many more in the music world. We can even step out of the box a bit.. for instance, think about software developers who make their product fully-functioning with no demo limitations, or even open source, and still make a living off it.

[Gearhero]

I used to dl pirated music until someone finally got it and provided a subscription service where you can stream all the music you want and transfer it to an mp3 player for a reasonable free. It's called Rhapsody.

Now I pay $15 a month and I haven't 'bought' a single song going on 4 years (nor have I dl any pirated music). Subscription based music is the way of the future. But I think Apple and the majors are going to hold out as long as they can with their pay per download scheme. I feel sorry for all the suckers that keep buying the same tunes over and over again in new formats... from LP to Cassette to CD to DRM to DRMfree mp3 to lossless. The 'old' industry loves you and is laughing all the way to the bank.

[HobbyCore]

Originally Posted by Gearhero

I used to dl pirated music until someone finally got it and provided a subscription service where you can stream all the music you want and transfer it to an mp3 player for a reasonable free. It's called Rhapsody.

Now I pay $15 a month and I haven't 'bought' a single song going on 4 years (nor have I dl any pirated music). Subscription based music is the way of the future. But I think Apple and the majors are going to hold out as long as they can with their pay per download scheme. I feel sorry for all the suckers that keep buying the same tune over and over again from LP to 8track to Cassette to CD to DRM to DRMfree mp3 to lossless. The 'old' industry loves you and is laughing all the way to the bank.

How can I get that music on my iPod? Is there a way to use a subscription service to listen to music "on the go" (where 90% of my, and I suspect most people's music listening is done).

I'm genuinely curious. If there really is subscription service that works like that, I'd be all over it. Ala carte radio essentially.

edit: I see rhapsody does allow mp3 player usage, but it's restricted to a bunch of crappy brand/models. Meh. Some sansas are nice, but I'm not moving from my ipod touch.

[soundrick]

Originally Posted by chrisso

It's kind of a moot point though isn't it.
If you enjoy great art (in this case music) why not contribute to the musicians ability to keep creating it?

Maybe a moot point, but not to be misunderstood, we'll have art one way or the other as long as people are making it.

I personally don't download music. I have a friend who gives me stuff that I wouldn't ordinarily buy just to check out. That's hardly relevant though because I wouldn't buy their music anyway in most cases, so they aren't losing anything. If I like the stuff enough I end up buying it, or the next record at least.

I've never been paid for a piece of my own music (I have been paid to record/produce plenty), but I still keep making it. I'm sure it's not "great", but I'm still driven beyond compulsion to play that stupid guitar.

[lhm1138]

Creative Commons and Fair Use are both an entirely different matter from what's being discussed here.

[soundrick]

Originally Posted by bgrotto

However, literature isn't the subject here, music is (though I stand by my statement). So consider all the great masterpieces written by the master composers of the past five hundred years or so. I'd wager that the majority of them were written on commission and performed by musicians who were being adequately compensated for their performances.

You said "great art", I took that at face value.

You make an interesting point though about performers being paid for their performances.
Just to play the devil's advocate here:
Don't most bands make the majority of their money from touring and merch?
They probably couldn't survive on record sales from a label alone anyway.

I'll pretend I'm a mildly successful touring label artist........I get basically a sucker's pay from my label for selling units that would have me impoverished if I couldn't sell $20 t-shirts and make a much bigger profit, plus a cut of the door at any medium-sized and up venue.
The kids that are coming to see me play and support me by paying the door and for the merch are paying my bills. They're downloading my record that I would only get PENNIES from anyway, and this is a problem, how?
Not to mention, I don't have to pay a gazillion dollars to make my next record in a big studio, because they're all closing anyway. That will certainly cut overhead. Also, I can put my music on iTunes and make 70% instead of .01%, even at a fraction of sales with people stealing my music, I'm way out ahead of my label deal.

It's a brave new world, friends......whether or not you or I agree with downloading music for free, it's happening, and so far it doesn't seem like anyone is going to be able to stop it. So we can piss and moan about it, or evolve and make it work. These are the times that separate the wheat from the chaff.

[Nu-tra]

We as musicians and engineers are stuck with a crappy generation of music fans. You can't go to an art opening and borrow a painting. You can't take it home to see if it looks good in your living room.

I feel the same way about music.

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by HobbyCore

Audio - Creative Commons

Browse away. Lots of people listed there, and a very incomplete list it is.

Interesting site indeed.
Of course it's all a little fringe and based on free will, rather than enforced sharing.
The first few music 'case studies' I read seemed to highlight the fact CC'ers are using the service as a promotional tool as much as anything, and gaining additional income from standard music industry methods like live shows and downloads from their own websites.

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by soundrick

Just to play the devil's advocate here:
Don't most bands make the majority of their money from touring and merch?
They probably couldn't survive on record sales from a label alone anyway.

I'll pretend I'm a mildly successful touring label artist........I get basically a sucker's pay from my label for selling units that would have me impoverished if I couldn't sell $20 t-shirts and make a much bigger profit, plus a cut of the door at any medium-sized and up venue............

Please, please don't keep repeating the same line about touring bands.
Downloading effects more people than young bands who want to tour constantly.
This has come up in nearly all the threads, and more people than me have pointed out the inaccuracy of claims that bands make more money on t-shirts, record companies routinely rip them off, and downloading only hurts major label bands who can tour whenever they want. etc, etc....
I mean why should Brian Eno suddenly put together a band, print some t-shirts and head out on the road for a year?
Aren't we always saying the older bands are rock dinosaurs and shouldn't be doing the Enormo-domes anymore?
You can't force anyone who's ever had a one hit wonder or put out an album to tour just to keep the wolf from the door.
There simply is much more to the music industry than bands playing live.

[Croaker]

Originally Posted by soundrick

I personally don't download music. I have a friend who gives me stuff that I wouldn't ordinarily buy just to check out. That's hardly relevant though because I wouldn't buy their music anyway in most cases, so they aren't losing anything. If I like the stuff enough I end up buying it, or the next record at least.

we have all heard this before..."I dont download music", I just get it from a friend who does..blah blah blah..I wouldn't buy it anyway, so they arent losing anything.

and the best line..If I like it enough I end up buying...or the next record at least LMAO

why dont you guys just get some balls and say I take music for free instead giving all the lame reasons..You cant even do it yourself, you have to get it from somebody else so you can declare in front of everyone.."I dont download music". Why you do it is hardly relevant.

[MarsBot]

OK folks. Here's a little thought experiment. Let's say a foolproof method is found for easily preventing music piracy. So suddenly, if you want music, you have to pay for it, get free releases, or run a very real risk of criminal prosecution.

If this happens, does anybody think that the price people are willing to pay will really go back up to 20 bucks per CD? Will the perceived decline in the industry stop? In a certain way, the piracy issue is a red herring because so many other forces are pushing the value of music lower: a huge and ever-growing supply of product; streaming services that offer ultralow per song rates; the proliferation of good-sounding, relatively cheap recording equipment; artists' recently acquired ability to by-pass traditional distribution and reach customers directly on the internet, the popularity of remixing (collage art) and the movement towards a creative commons.

None of these things is going to go away if piracy is instantly halted, and they are all pushing the average value of a "song" lower and lower. I actually believe that technology will make piracy increasingly difficult. But people in the music industry will continue to feel increasing pain as all these trends converge and feed on each other, driving the price of music lower. Eventually it will stabilize one hopes. But we're in a big industry shakeout with piracy being only one factor.

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by MarsBot

If this happens, does anybody think that the price people are willing to pay will really go back up to 20 bucks per CD?

No, because the public have settled on a delivery system that's much cheaper to produce (mp3's and lossless audio files).
Back in the 90's I was angry about the price of CD's myself, they were more than '20 bucks' in the UK.
Maybe the mainstream industry screwed up, but you also can't assume a $20 CD cost $2 to make.
There's purchasing and copying of CD's, artwork design, artwork printing, distribution, warehousing, profit margin for store over and above cost of running stores.
Cost of making the music in the first place.......

[Croaker]

You make some good points. I dont think anybody wants to pay $20 for a CD or expects anybody else to. but I think artists would rather have a legal market place dictate prices than people taking their music for free.

Originally Posted by MarsBot

OK folks. Here's a little thought experiment. Let's say a foolproof method is found for easily preventing music piracy. So suddenly, if you want music, you have to pay for it, get free releases, or run a very real risk of criminal prosecution.

If this happens, does anybody think that the price people are willing to pay will really go back up to 20 bucks per CD? Will the perceived decline in the industry stop? In a certain way, the piracy issue is a red herring because so many other forces are pushing the value of music lower: a huge and ever-growing supply of product; streaming services that offer ultralow per song rates; the proliferation of good-sounding, relatively cheap recording equipment; artists' recently acquired ability to by-pass traditional distribution and reach customers directly on the internet, the popularity of remixing (collage art) and the movement towards a creative commons.

None of these things is going to go away if piracy is instantly halted, and they are all pushing the average value of a "song" lower and lower. I actually believe that technology will make piracy increasingly difficult. But people in the music industry will continue to feel increasing pain as all these trends converge and feed on each other, driving the price of music lower. Eventually it will stabilize one hopes. But we're in a big industry shakeout with piracy being only one factor.

[MarsBot]

Originally Posted by chrisso

No, because the public have settled on a delivery system that's much cheaper to produce (mp3's and lossless audio files).
Back in the 90's I was angry about the price of CD's myself, they were more than '20 bucks' in the UK.
Maybe the mainstream industry screwed up, but you also can't assume a $20 CD cost $2 to make.
There's purchasing and copying of CD's, artwork design, artwork printing, distribution, warehousing, profit margin for store over and above cost of running stores.
Cost of making the music in the first place.......

This is a good point and it's another thing I should have added to my list of stuff that's driving the price down: distribution without dedicated physical storage media. I think piracy will be stopped by producers taking anti-theft measures that gradually become quite difficult to circumvent, just like stealing from a store is. Right now, I think we're still in the days of the musical "wild west" and 10 years from now this kind of wholesale piracy won't exist. But the industry will be trying to survive on a smaller value per song because so many factors are pushing this value down. Removing piracy isn't going to stop this from happening.

[chrisso]

The industry already re-adjusted post cassette copying in the 70's and 80's, then the more damaging CD copying from the 90's onwards.
I've worked in the industry through that time, and recording budgets, studio time and session fees are all way, way down.
Thankfully some of the pressure has been taken off creativity by the developments in digital recording. In short, you don't have to book Air Studios for three months at $2k a day to make your album. You can do much of it at home...... and many (even major) artists now go this route.
The industry is smaller and leaner as a result.
I'm not holding my breath for this security technology you speak of.
As I've mentioned, illegal copying has been going on since the 70's.
The movie industry has more at stake, and they haven't successfully secured film or DVD yet, let alone the download sites.

[illacov]

Here's a novel concept. Man plays guitar on the street corner and lays down his cap. People throw money in his cap to show appreciation. Pirating is the same as taking money out of his hat. Why? Because pirates don't just download music, they actually trade in goods! I'll prove it to you, these guys put up rapidshare downloads etc of your music and then want "props" for it. Now the giving of props may seem dumb until you realize that how many prop points you get opens gateways for the pirates to more valuable stuff like software, movies and even credit card numbers. So while pirates argue that music has no value and that they are not stealing then why are they trading music or bartering with it? Vice laws are a great litmus test for this. You can get arrested for prostitution if you agree to have sex with someone in exchange for a pack of gum. Why? Because the gum has a demonstrable value. So if you want a movie in exchange for my CD then you just admitted value and tangible property. Peace
Illumination

[hello people]

Originally Posted by chrisso

Who do you perceive on Gearslutz as 'a suit'?

Anyone who doesn't get it

[hello people]

Originally Posted by hobson

too funny... i remember this movie (and SNL skit) well (and your avatar, of course) - though some on this thread may not get the connection... the "nerd" abides...

back on topic - can't help but think of the Simpsons episode where Homer steals cable:

the pamphlet: So you've decided to steal cable.
Myth: Cable piracy is wrong.
Fact: Cable companies are big faceless corporations, which makes it okay.

Homer enjoys his new toy.

Marge: Homer, we've talked about cable before. You really think we can afford it?
Homer: Nothing a month? Yeah, I think we can swing that.

When Marge expresses her concern over the legality of stealing cable, Homer gives her the pamphlet.

Myth: It's only fair to pay for quality first-run movies.
Fact: Most movies shown on cable get two stars or less and are repeated ad nauseum.

Haha...cool...I'm glad someone got it

[bleepbleep]

the truth is - its got nothing to do with the delivery system, nothing to do with the sound quality, its got nothing to do with libertarianism

it comes down to one thing -

when you download for free, you got more money to spend on beer, pot, going out, clothes, fags and generally pissing up the wall.

plus you dont feel left out because you havnt got the latest band/tracks/movies etc -

i know this as a fact becuase a worked at a college with kids, adults etc and this is the answer they all gave me when we discussed this.

any other justification is pure B.S. from someone coming from a developed country.

this is the bottom line in the O.P.s post -

Originally Posted by jihadjoe75

If music is free and I'm short on cash, I'm absolutely going to download it. Even if all of a sudden the main stream music industry started putting out genuinely quality work, I would still not buy it
With love,
Joe Hertler

that's why we have to make it socially unacceptable and inexcusable, just like sweat shop labour for cheap goods (although were not quite there with that yet either)

[lostinmusic]

To the OP:

You're just young. The world's always changing but stealing isn't going to become the new economic model. When in the future you have a job, property, a family, a trade... you might not wish to give it all away to a student who can't afford what you're selling.

You know, this whole piracy argument is such a bore. Can we get back to preamps?

[bleepbleep]

Originally Posted by hello people

Haha...cool...I'm glad someone got it

so - how does this work when you are downloading the latest release that someone has leaked form a Promo mailout, or you are watching the new X-Men film before it has had all the special fx done???

its not all rehashed, old, seen it before shite that is downloaded, in fact a large part of it is all new releases and leaks from egoists trying to boost their online status as a content proivider.

[Susceptor]

I wonder if iSteal brand is available - an upgrade from iStyle; steal with style.

With all the iPods, iPhones and iDiots I bet I could make millions with iSteals

[Kainer]

Originally Posted by MrT

Will someone please think of the children ... sorry that's all I thought when I read that.


And just you guys wait till the generation that's now coming up in high school matures. Most have NEVER purchased music or heard an uncompressed song!

right.

don´t now where you guys live, but I think your long time music buisiness working got u all out of touch with reality.

go to the schools and check which one of the kids are paying for their mp3-songs.

pop-songs are very short-lived things and not worth to pay for them if you can get them by phone-transfer the next morning in school.

the industry missed the evolution.
don´t hate the player, hate the game.


frankly I do understand the op. not my way (I don´t listen to buyable music which I don´t buy) but it´s obviously that u can´t get people (especial kids) with this ethically based argumentation.

[goldphinga]

Originally Posted by oudplayer

To the OP:
I bought hundreds of albums while a college student and working for $5.25 an hour at $hit jobs. If it's really important to you, you'll budget for it, or you'll work extra hours. You don't have to have a cell phone, you don't have to eat overpriced fast food out, you don't need to own a car (well, in many locales), you don't need...

It's a choice you make. You don't have an inherent right to listen to any recording you want, whether it's easily available through means that you admit you know are illegal.

couldnt have put it better myself...

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by hello people

Anyone who doesn't get it

A yes, you are a man of the world who doesn't get the fact Saturday Night Live isn't easily viewed outside North America.

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by Susceptor

I wonder if iSteal brand is available -

With all the iPods, iPhones and iDiots I bet I could make millions

With a sense of humour like that you could make millions.
Very clever post. (I love 'iDiots')