Internet Sharing

[Dude_Doc]

Do you think it is illegal to share music, movies, books and other kind of media trough the internet? Is it positive or negative? How would you react if your music was distributed for free on the internet? Would you accept it?

I mentioned this because at the beginning of next year, they will strengthen the rules for net-sharing, in my country (was it EU policy?). This means that if you are catched with unathourized music, movies or books on your computer, you will be punished (first you have to pay for it, then you risk going into jail).

Personally, I like the idea of sharing. You get to hear or see what you want to, then you can decide if the movie, music or book is worth spending money on.

What do you think?

[GhostHunter]

I personally believe it's prefectly legit, I would ban it if they lowered the prices, I find it absurd to pay 25 dollars for a new CD which will most likely have three songs at three minutes that I really enjoy. The record companies complain about the file sharing yet people still buy the CD's, and thanks to downloads more people become INTERESTED in the CD's. But I am truley sorry Mr. Big Record Company, if you won't get that new Ferrari to go along with one of the three of your Coastside mansions because no one wanted to pay jacked up fees, I really am quite sympathetic.

[Gobalopper]

Well its not really legal but the record companies are bringing it upon themselves by charging high prices when they should be looking at alternative sources of distribution that will allow them to reach a wider audience and for less money.

[Navaros]

i've already made a post about this in the past, so i'm gonna copy and paste that here:

music is perfectly fine to download. do you know that the Recording Industry leeches money off you every time you buy a CD-R or CD-RW disc? that's right, even though your purchase may have NOTHING to do with them at all and they are in no way involved with the manufacture or selling of the discs, they still are allowed to immorally leech away your money because they paid off lawmakers to allow themselves that "right". all sales of CD-R and CD-RWs here in Canada and most parts of the US too (i think) are "levied", meaning everyone pays the Recording Industry for buying CD-Rs just because the Recording Industry has the warped idea that they "should" be paid even though they are in no way involved with those CD-Rs at all. i am shocked that society has not committed a huge revolt against such abhorrent extortion that still is legally going on every day. i buy CD-R and CD-RWs simply to legally backup data and still I am leeched off of by the Recording Industry with each disc I ever buy. so i say, screw them. they are gonna commit crimes against humanity by thieving money that they have no moral right to claim from people, then i am never buying a music CD again. i can download anything i need on the net, so if they wanna screw with me and every poor average Joe who wants to buy a CD-R just to backup data he legally owns, i'm gonna screw them too and even harder. download music as much as you like, don't buy music CDs

as for what Gob just said: i ain't ever paying for music that I can get for free, i don't care *how* much cheaper it gets than the current price of CDs. if the Recording Industry tries to distribute over the Internet like file-sharing services and slaps a cost on it, they still can't compete with getting the same thing for FREE. i am sure many people feel the same way as me.

[Dude_Doc]

i've already made a post about this in the past, so i'm gonna copy and paste that here:

music is perfectly fine to download. do you know that the Recording Industry leeches money off you every time you buy a CD-R or CD-RW disc? that's right, even though your purchase may have NOTHING to do with them at all and they are in no way...

But how would you feel if it was your music? You have spent both money and time to achieve your work. Should people then get it for free?

[SurlyPIG]

Well its not really legal but the record companies are bringing it upon themselves by charging high prices when they should be looking at alternative sources of distribution that will allow them to reach a wider audience and for less money.

Ditto to that. Until the record industry changes, I don't think enforcement is fair. Like Nav said unless they stop leeching every time somebody buys a blank CD they're not going to gain any public respect. I mean, just look at the industry...

Remember that post empworm made in general about a record company owing every American that purchased a CD between 1995 and 2000 $20 for bad business practices? Thats the kind of thing I'm talking about...

[Egeides]

http://tim.oreilly.com/p2p/ would be my complete answer. But since not everyone is ready to read this, I'd say that major companies are stealing artists. If a system of payment could be based on peer-to-peer programs' traffic of songs, then they could get their money correctly, without the all mighty intermediaries that place themselves as the only solution.

If you wanna know at which point the industry is getting crazy, read this new idea that consists into destroying computers: http://www.salon.com/tech/wire/2003/06/17/hatch_download/index.html

I wonder who lobbied this guy :O

[DukeLeto]

If you wanna know at which point the industry is getting crazy, read this new idea that consists into destroying computers: http://www.salon.com/tech/wire/2003/06/17/hatch_download/index.html

I wonder who lobbied this guy :O

Typical Republican. Looking out for big business at any cost to the people. ::)

Anyways, my view is about the same as Gob's on this.

[SurlyPIG]

Well doing it remotely is a terrible idea but they do remove the online rights of internet pedophiles and the such, so it's not completely farfetched...but pretty friggin close...

[Mahdi]

That isn't the same O'Reilly who recently said that the internet should be heavily censored because it lets the regular guy criticize rich, famous, and powerfull people, is it?

[zamboe]

I personally download stuff from the net and also spend money buying CDs./DVDs

There are some bands/artists & movies/concerts, that I really want to have the original so I buy them, even if I can get them on the net, I still buy them.

When it comes to some things I want to try, I usually download it, and if I really like it I buy it. However, I've downloaded several things that I ended up deleting.

[Egeides]

Mahdi:

No idea. This guy wrote so much stuff that it would take a week to resume... But he's the guy who wrote something about Dune and I think he talked to Frank Herbert :P What he wrote is on his website I think...

[Acriku]

It's only bad morally when you could buy it, and would if you couldn't download it. So if you download it with these two things, it's morally wrong. It's stealing. But, many things I download I would never buy. So, it isn't stealing. No one is losing money, and no one is getting hurt. I buy what I think deserves to be bought (which is most games, and half cd's). If thgey lower cd prices, I would buy a lot more. And the game prices are really high, so I won't be able to buy many of those.

[Dude_Doc]

On the bright side: At least it is better than kiling and raping.

[nemafakei]

Ideally, we could make the law such that all such media is state-funded, and so no amount of copying does any harm. But that'd require some sort of world body to organise...

Or a complete reform to a different system of economy and government (see left wing discussion)

[zamboe]

"Ideally, we could make the law such that all such media is state-funded, and so no amount of copying does any harm. "

I don't think that is an ideal. state-flat-funded media would drive to an absence of artists and bands.

[SurlyPIG]

Ditto to that, it's not the position of the state to determine what's good art and what isn't. Net sharing isn't fair to artists but the current system isn't fair to consumers either. I still support artists I really like by attending concerts and buying the occasional album if I think it's worth it.

[exatreide]

Kazza is no different then VRC's or Blank discs. The programs just provide the means, and its legel for you to make copies of what you have and give them away isnt it? As long as your not selling them its not piracy.

[Egeides]

The music isn't fair to artist neither. Espescially the ones that arten't ultra-popular. Saw many artists that were pro-P2P (=peer-to-peer, like Kazaa), saying that it was the best way to get known. I guess the present industry will now be obliged to adapt. Meanwhile, I'll do as ACE...

[zamboe]

However, the union of artist still have ways to get their $$$ that they deserve. In all public places e.g.: restaurants,pubs,stations,disco and also parties in homes they charge for music that is being played, not much, but I'd rather that way than having to pass through their record companies.

[SurlyPIG]

I guess it really depends on the artist's situation whether P2P sharing effects them positively or negatively. Probably for the 'starving artist' type it would help them greatly, get their name on the market, get people interested and wanting more. Who it would hurt would definately include the big selling, mass producing artists that don't tour much. Not that it would so much as dent them because they have such easy alternate methods to earn money. I really dislike how music is becoming so commercialized, especially popular music that ends up being more of a manufactured products that cater to the trendy wants of society rather than being reflective of the musicians. The whole industry is just one giant mud puddle...

[Caid Ivik]

Do you think it is illegal to share music, movies, books and other kind of media trough the internet? Is it positive or negative? How would you react if your music was distributed for free on the internet? Would you accept it?

I mentioned this because at the beginning of next year, they will strengthen the rules for net-sharing, in my country (was it EU policy?). This means that if you are catched with unathourized music, movies or books on your computer, you will be punished (first you have to pay for it, then you risk going into jail).

Personally, I like the idea of sharing. You get to hear or see what you want to, then you can decide if the movie, music or book is worth spending money on.

What do you think?

Why not? I use WinMX for nearly a year and feel no regret for those hours of music I've downloaded. Not only some music you cannot buy in your area, but also I have my own digest, I wouldn't buy a disc for one song. Musicians must show their qualities on other places than in warm studios, where their voices are artificial. Let they make more concerts. There I would pay for a live show. If they'll try a playback, let they run ahead of my rifle! What is recorded is like any other folklor song, cultural testimony of our civilisation, our common property. Once the recorders will try to ban even if you are singing it for yourself. I would say, some communism is good for the cultural health ;D

[Dude_Doc]

Yes. I agree with you that it is a total waste of money if you just like one of the songs the musician created. Or, the CD/game/book doesn't exist in your area.

[Caid Ivik]

I like also that anonymity. For example, if you want some kind of banned music (it is true, even neonazis can work with guitars...), you cannot just go and buy it...

[Dude_Doc]

Ironic, isn't it?

http://edition.cnn.com/2003/TECH/internet/06/25/download.suits.ap/index.html