you people sure pick odd things to become passionate over. i suppose i should be happy you're passionate about something. why not take this energy and throw it into something worthwhile that actually needs saving. wah wah over some billionaire while millions of people live in poverty in this very country and animals are tortured and killed daily.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Stealing
- Thread starter jps
- Start date
Pronatalist
Registered Senior Member
The government is the biggest thief of all, with their runaway taxes!
And the government sets a bad example for the rest of us.
Abolish all the income taxes!
Abolish all property taxes!
Now!!!
Constitution Party
Libertarian Party
And the government sets a bad example for the rest of us.
Abolish all the income taxes!
Abolish all property taxes!
Now!!!
Constitution Party
Libertarian Party
Originally posted by jps
Its not stealing because they haven't lost anything. They weren't going to get that twenty bucks from you anyway, so the only thing that has changed is that you have something that you didn't before.
If you take a photo of a picture in a museum, have you stolen it?
The picture in the museum wasn't being sold! You are taking something which you have no right to have, and in doing so are cheating someone out of the money that you should have paid for the music you downloaded! It's simple, if you want to legaly obtain a peice of music, then you have to follow the rules set forth by the person who owns that peice of music, if you obtain it in any other way you are stealing.
Stealing??
I just wanted to throw in my $0.02.... Which is not too shy of the cost of producing a music CD (including the amount that the record companies pay the artists).
Ok... Here is an economic breakdown that I like to refer to when thinking of the RIAA. Charge $4.50 for each CD sold. Split the money as such: $0.50 for local sales taxes, etc; $1.00 for the record store; $0.50 for the artwork, design, and production team; $0.50 for the maufacturing of the CD; $1.00 for the Record Company; and finally $1.00 for the Artist(s). Take Eminem's last CD: 8 MILLION sold.... That's $8 million for Eminem, $8 million for the record company, and $8 million for the record store.....
EVERYONE WINS! But some would say "what about artists that don't sell 8 million albums??" I say that they are making proportionally what their fans believe they should make. It is a DIRECT relation to their popularity. If you are told "the harder you work, the more money you make" most work harder and try to produce better quality (that is the real world). Artists should feel the same.
Now, I do not believe that downloading music is stealing. I believe it to be a revolution in the way we share culture. It allows people who do not have access to some music (be it out of print, out of stock, or simply not available in your country/region/state/city/village) to come in contact with art that they would otherwise be deprived of. It is my opinion that recording artists should be basing their income on tours, merchandise, exclusive content (PayPerView concerts, satellite broadcasts, and live internet streaming content).
I for one, buy many CDs. I have a collection of over 2,000 CD's. I LOVE MUSIC. I download music I am unable to find. Songs for which I can not justify buying the whole album. Some would then argue "But the album is the artist's intent. For it to be in that order. It's their art." You name one of these major artists that are shouting this that has had a GOOD ALBUM in the past 10 years. Madonna? 1 out of 5... Pearl Jam? only 1 ever... Dave Matthews Band? sorry, but never... If a whole album was good, and the artists/companies themselves truly believed this... they would release EVERY song in the order in which it was recorded on the album.
As for the concept of stealing software valued at $100 is like stealing a $100 bill... Wrong... Software is hugely marked up and today is based on so much open source that it is obscene to even think that it could be that expensive. The reason it is so expensive is our PERCEIVED VALUE of the product. If we didn't all rush out to get the latest Photoshop, it wouldn't be $500+ dollars! But, we are willing to pay it, so Adobe keeps going up...
We are on the verge of a new era in culture. A time when the theory of capitalism will give way to thirst for information. When you look into the future, what do you want to see? Companies controlling our destiny and what we can and can not see/hear/taste/touch/feel/do? Or do you want to see people (the fans) telling the companies how they can satisfy our needs? Companies are supposed to provide services to people. If they do not, they collapse. If they do, they profit. It looks to be as if the people want music, software, culture for free or inexpensive.... Companies should find a way to give this and survive.
That's my opinion...
I just wanted to throw in my $0.02.... Which is not too shy of the cost of producing a music CD (including the amount that the record companies pay the artists).
Ok... Here is an economic breakdown that I like to refer to when thinking of the RIAA. Charge $4.50 for each CD sold. Split the money as such: $0.50 for local sales taxes, etc; $1.00 for the record store; $0.50 for the artwork, design, and production team; $0.50 for the maufacturing of the CD; $1.00 for the Record Company; and finally $1.00 for the Artist(s). Take Eminem's last CD: 8 MILLION sold.... That's $8 million for Eminem, $8 million for the record company, and $8 million for the record store.....
EVERYONE WINS! But some would say "what about artists that don't sell 8 million albums??" I say that they are making proportionally what their fans believe they should make. It is a DIRECT relation to their popularity. If you are told "the harder you work, the more money you make" most work harder and try to produce better quality (that is the real world). Artists should feel the same.
Now, I do not believe that downloading music is stealing. I believe it to be a revolution in the way we share culture. It allows people who do not have access to some music (be it out of print, out of stock, or simply not available in your country/region/state/city/village) to come in contact with art that they would otherwise be deprived of. It is my opinion that recording artists should be basing their income on tours, merchandise, exclusive content (PayPerView concerts, satellite broadcasts, and live internet streaming content).
I for one, buy many CDs. I have a collection of over 2,000 CD's. I LOVE MUSIC. I download music I am unable to find. Songs for which I can not justify buying the whole album. Some would then argue "But the album is the artist's intent. For it to be in that order. It's their art." You name one of these major artists that are shouting this that has had a GOOD ALBUM in the past 10 years. Madonna? 1 out of 5... Pearl Jam? only 1 ever... Dave Matthews Band? sorry, but never... If a whole album was good, and the artists/companies themselves truly believed this... they would release EVERY song in the order in which it was recorded on the album.
As for the concept of stealing software valued at $100 is like stealing a $100 bill... Wrong... Software is hugely marked up and today is based on so much open source that it is obscene to even think that it could be that expensive. The reason it is so expensive is our PERCEIVED VALUE of the product. If we didn't all rush out to get the latest Photoshop, it wouldn't be $500+ dollars! But, we are willing to pay it, so Adobe keeps going up...
We are on the verge of a new era in culture. A time when the theory of capitalism will give way to thirst for information. When you look into the future, what do you want to see? Companies controlling our destiny and what we can and can not see/hear/taste/touch/feel/do? Or do you want to see people (the fans) telling the companies how they can satisfy our needs? Companies are supposed to provide services to people. If they do not, they collapse. If they do, they profit. It looks to be as if the people want music, software, culture for free or inexpensive.... Companies should find a way to give this and survive.
That's my opinion...