people take shit without paying for it. thats the definition of stealing.
It might be under the certain laws of you country right now. But in my Country I'm not doing anything illegal.
Not only that, but since 1998 a company for the music industry has been collecting a levy on every blank piece of recordable media that is sold in our country. This money is suppose to be collected and paid to copyright holders.
Right now, they are trying to put that levy on anything classified as a "recording medium".
So that means, for every ipod sold in Canada, a levy of 75 bucks could be added to the price.
people take shit without paying for it. thats the definition of stealing.
It might be under the certain laws of you country right now. But in my Country I'm not doing anything illegal.
Not only that, but since 1998 a company for the music industry has been collecting a levy on every blank piece of recordable media that is sold in our country. This money is suppose to be collected and paid to copyright holders.
Right now, they are trying to put that levy on anything classified as a "recording medium".
So that means, for every ipod sold in Canada, a levy of 75 bucks could be added to the price.
I'm not stealing...
OK -- but your Canada laws aren't really saying its not stealing, theyre just saying its legal/tolerated. and to make up for the stolen goods, they pay copyright holders.
ASCAP does that in the US, they collect and distribute $$ for blank media. it depends on how big your catalog is, and it doesn't add up to much tho, to my knowledge.
OK -- but your Canada laws aren't really saying its not stealing, theyre just saying its legal/tolerated. and to make up for the stolen goods, they pay copyright holders.
Yes it does.
The levy is not a law and is not part of it. And I don't think there is any levy in the US, but I could be wrong.
The levy is something totally separate.
The law in canada makes it so it's totally legal to download any music you want. Your just not allowed to share music with anyone.
I believe this is the law.
80. (1) Subject to subsection (2), the act of reproducing all or any substantial part of (a) a musical work embodied in a sound recording, (b) a performer's performance of a musical work embodied in a sound recording, or(br> (c) a sound recording in which a musical work, or a performer's performance of a musical work, is embodied
onto an audio recording medium for the private use of the person who makes the copy does not constitute an infringement of the copyright in the musical work, the performer's performance or the sound recording.
Canada's current levies are as follows: $0.29 per unit for Audio Cassette tape (40min or longer); $0.77 per unit for CD-R Audio, CD-RW-Audio & MiniDisc; $0.21 per unit for CD-R, CD-RW (non audio).
But those fees will be raised soon, with the adding of a levy on all "recording medium".
But it also has eveyone that doesn't download music pay for it. So some dude that has to buy a CD-R to back-up his data paying money to record labels. Eventhough he will never download a track in his life.
Not to make this too academic but really, what complicates matters here is that there's two different items:
intellectual property as a product of creative labor physical product/merchandise
For example: historically, would taping a song off the radio and sharing it with friends be considered stealing? I don't know about legally but I can't imagine this would have upset artists.
But what if I'm taping off of satellite radio and the song quality I get off it was close enough to CD quality sound that it's more or less indistinguishable?
For a long time, there was enough of a technological gap that made these kinds of conversations moot. It's only in an era where replication is nearly perfect that it's become an issue. The thing is: people have been dubbing, taping, sharing for many years. What's changed is less the action of the consumers but rather, the technology of the medium.
Its not going to save the industry. To think that is living in a fantasy land. However most consumers that are interested in music for the most part wold rather pay for it than deal with anything that could be skewed as illegal. Especially with older consumers. You will always have piracy and trading happening however the key is to give people a reason to download the DRM version, there has to be an advantage.
If no hardware manufacturers support MP3 or only very expensive players supported MP3 formats but they all supoprted the Music DRM format you would have a fairly fast shift to the new DRM. But to do this would require a very long plannign period and cooperation between the device and content creators which realistically would not happen. And again this also is mostly the fault of the music industry for being short-sighted and licensing product instead of creating a new speciic product.
And I don't necessarily support alot of this but I have given it alot of thought with people I know in music and on the device end. And its been the only way i can see the industry at least partially gaining some profitability. I don' see their sales ever hitting the figures they did a few years ago again.
The thing is. Does any type of DRM stop piracy? And the answer will always be no. All DRM does is restricted the consumer from allowing them to use the product any way they wish. If I download a groups record, I don't wanna hear that I can only listen to the album on what device the RIAA states I can listen to it on. If the RIAA had their way, you would have to pay as many times as possible to play the same song on different devices. And this is wrong.
Could you imagine the TV industry making it so you could only watch TV shows on certain brands of TV's?
I agree its not a complete stop to piracy but it is definately a deterrent. If you look at Downloading and how popular it has become, it makes sense that if the industry still sees sales of individual songs/albums as a viable way to make money then they need to protect it in some way (not saying that DRM is the ultimate solution) so that they can earn money off the sales. I know having a free and open market without any protections and trading is the most ideal situation for the consumer. Why pay for the cow when you get the milk for free?
The problem is that artists need to make a living (moreso than the record labels etc.). I understand that touring helps and is a bulk of the money they earn, but they also continually get royalty checks etc. for their published work. By eliminating the sales of music then you are taking a significant chunk of, not necessarily their paycheck, but money that goes into the costs of operating the industry (as most sales go to the label and administrative positions). So take the percent that the industry earns in sales and you are left with a hole in the business that needs to be filled. How that gets filled is any number of ways and would be a seperate conversation.
There has always been piracy and trading its factored into the cost of doing business. However there has never been outright trading between a majority of the music buying audience, its always been a percentage relegated to a mostly younger audience or a lower wage earning public. Its obviously more economical to buy a pack of CDs and copy your friends CDs or music than it is to buy all of those CDs.
The issue of downloading is really only one part of the industry that has fucked it. Add on to that an expectation that their music is worth more than it really is ($20 for a cd? eh I don't think so), add onto the fact that with downloads whole albums don't sell, add onto the fact that the industry itself is bloated and has for a long time made a lot more money than they will in the future, and you have a whole system that needs some major changes implemented.
DRM to me, is a solution, but again it would have to be implemented correctly. As it is right now its a mess. There is no cross platform technology between MACs that is DRM compatible its either or, no in between. That is the first major hurdle with Downloading. Add to that the plethora of Device manufacturers that have their own support for different DRMs and you add another factor that would need to be changed. I look at it like this. When the Tape/Record/CD formats were created, ever device manufacturer was forced to make devices that worked with those formats. You didn't have Sony making one type of Tape and Denon making their own, and Pioneer making their own etc. To do this would have lead to the same issues that the current DRM situation has created and it would have made it EXTREMELY difficult on the consumer as it is today.
Anyway its pretty much a mess any way you look at it and unfortunately like I stated above there is too much money involved from the past in the industry and not enough forward thinking people in the music industry to get these problems addressed and fixed so that consumer purchasing music can again become viable. Unless they do that their nly other option is to let everything go for free and try and make up the loss of revenue somewhere else or tighten their belts.
PS. I am playing devils advocate and more just presenting an alternate view for discussion sake.
Also its not that I think everyone is a criminal/pirate its jsut being realistic about human nature. If i can get something for free then I am not going to pay for it would you?
Not to make this too academic but really, what complicates matters here is that there's two different items:
intellectual property as a product of creative labor physical product/merchandise
For example: historically, would taping a song off the radio and sharing it with friends be considered stealing? I don't know about legally but I can't imagine this would have upset artists.
But what if I'm taping off of satellite radio and the song quality I get off it was close enough to CD quality sound that it's more or less indistinguishable?
For a long time, there was enough of a technological gap that made these kinds of conversations moot. It's only in an era where replication is nearly perfect that it's become an issue. The thing is: people have been dubbing, taping, sharing for many years. What's changed is less the action of the consumers but rather, the technology of the medium.
That's a good point, but also a huge difference is the ease of sharing now. In the past music was shared between friends, now if someone throws up a zshare zip file of an album it can get blogged and downloaded thousands of times in a day.
Sorry to drag this thread out any longer cause I think we all realize the up and downsides of downloading, but while downloads can help upstart artists create buzz, it is unlikely to help an upstart label in the same way, especially if the label name is not tagged on the mp3.
I agree its not a complete stop to piracy but it is definately a deterrent.
Really tho? Can you find one person out there who if they really wanted to, couldn't download an album??? And thats the point. Anyone who really[/b] wants to get the album, will get it.
Let's remember here. That the 2nd biggest site on the net selling music, is a site that offers DRM free music. Selling a majority of indie bands. I think that says something.
I agree its not a complete stop to piracy but it is definately a deterrent.
Really tho? Can you find one person out there who if they really wanted to, couldn't download an album??? And thats the point. Anyone who really[/b] wants to get the album, will get it.
I agree if you REALLY want something you are ging to get it. if you REALLY want a dimebag you can get it. However for most of the law abiding public there are too many issues and problems with getting a dime to actually do it. Its not going to stop everyone from trading etc. but its going to stop alot of the public from doing so.
And even though its weak on the RIAA's part but whenever they actually prosecute someone for sharing etc. or go after and shut down a file sharing site that is flaunting the "lawful" way of getting music it has an effect. I mean look at what happened with DJ Drama. Its not that Mixtapes stopped, but overall there has been a huge cutback in the amount produced and distributed.
I agree its not a complete stop to piracy but it is definately a deterrent.
Really tho? Can you find one person out there who if they really wanted to, couldn't download an album??? And thats the point. Anyone who really[/b] wants to get the album, will get it.
I agree if you REALLY want something you are ging to get it. if you REALLY want a dimebag you can get it. However for most of the law abiding public there are too many issues and problems with getting a dime to actually do it. Its not going to stop everyone from trading etc. but its going to stop alot of the public from doing so.
I agree its not a complete stop to piracy but it is definately a deterrent.
Really tho? Can you find one person out there who if they really wanted to, couldn't download an album??? And thats the point. Anyone who really[/b] wants to get the album, will get it.
I agree if you REALLY want something you are ging to get it. if you REALLY want a dimebag you can get it. However for most of the law abiding public there are too many issues and problems with getting a dime to actually do it. Its not going to stop everyone from trading etc. but its going to stop alot of the public from doing so.
But what if you could download a dimebag?
weedshare.net, coming soon!
Plaese to upload a half-ounce of bubble berry to Real Potheadz Know The Deal.
At least the smell via your pc or mac...they workin on it...
but to chime in late in this thread, my 2 cents here:
DRM will always fail. There is no reason to sell an inferior product. If I want a CD, I want it. I don't want a CD I can only play there or so many times.
2007 will have the nail in the coffin of promo vinyl. It's just not worth it anymore.
More exposure via shared files gets you more exposure. Which translates to less sales automatically.
The youth of today do not experience music in a haptic way nomore. All 0's and 1's, apart from those "I do because I care dudes"
All CD's in the market will loose their information after 80 years. This is fact. Then, it all comes back to 0's and 1's somewhere and, you name it, vinyl.
Again, if something is dope, people will buy your shit.
Wasn't there a party recently with Large Pro and Rob Swift in Ny where it was stated on the flyer "dance to the warm sounds of vinyl"? There will be a Seratobacklash, at least i don't always want to look like I am checking emails when rocking a crowd...
You can cry all you want about "boot leggin'" and downloading, but it's a reality so you either deal with it and find new ways to make money within the current climate (namely, performances) or you continue bitching for ever.
This is just how the game is now. Deal with it.
Ain't no way youre going to convince millions and millions of people to stop downloading so they can "support" you and just as quickly as "encryption" shit pops up, "de-encryption" will pop up. The music industry is going to crumble soon (hopefully), and it'll be very interesting to see what things look like in a decade or so, but as of right now, there is[/b] money to be made out there if you're willing to adapt and stop crying.
I find it pretty amazing how callous people are over something which is a legitimate gripe. For anyone here who actually creates anything - whether through physical or intellectual labor - seeing your product being distributed or pirated beyond the means of your control simply fucking sucks. And while people may be correct in noting that some trends just won't reverse themselves, they act as if there's no legit grievance to begin with.
There will be a Seratobacklash, at least i don't always want to look like I am checking emails when rocking a crowd...
This is ludicrous. (A) Nobody really cares what a DJ looks like he's doing when he's on stage and (B) the things Microwave allows you to do as a DJ greatly benefits everyone's club-going experience. You think people are going to suddenly revolt against Microwave on some "Wow, this dude is doing some crazy shit and I'm totally enjoying myself but, he looks like he's checking his email up there! WHAT THE FUCK?! BUZZKILL!! I'm no longer drunk and having fun and I no longer want to have sex with this girl in front of me because DJ man looks like he's checking his email!!! NOOO!"
The fuck outta here.
By the way, who wants to hear "warm sounds of vinyl" in the club? That shit just needs to knock.
"Wow, Becky! Listen to how warm the 808s sound on this Chris Brown song! Let's Dance!"
I find it pretty amazing how callous people are over something which is a legitimate gripe. For anyone here who actually creates anything - whether through physical or intellectual labor - seeing your product being distributed or pirated beyond the means of your control simply fucking sucks. And while people may be correct in noting that some trends just won't reverse themselves, they act as if there's no legit grievance to begin with.
It's not anything new is the point. This has been a conversation piece for, what, i dunno, 5 or 6 years? And, people are STILL all up in arms about this shit?
But more importantly, for independent acts like the people bitching in this thread, I am simply not convinced that bootleggin' hasn't helped them more than it has hurt them. For example: me. I been traveled the world to dj BECAUSE[/b] of bootlegging. People in Sweden are flying me out to DJ there BECAUSE they bootlegged my shit. And, I don't think I'm the exception here. DJs like the Rub folks and hella other folks make way more money off of performances than they do product. That's just the game and that's BEEN the game. Rappers BEEN making pennies off of per-CD sales. Their stupid, boring tours is where they get the big money. This is just as true for underground rappers as it is mainstream rappers.
People who think this is a "legitimate grievance" have wildly unrealistic expectations of what a "career" in music is all about and where the money comes from. Folks making living wages off of record sales is reserved for the few and equating every downloaded CD as a loss of $10 is just unrealistic math.
Lastly, I'm sick of people are acting as if them bitching about this shit is going to have some sort of widespread cultural impact.
It's not anything new is the point. This has been a conversation piece for, what, i dunno, 5 or 6 years? And, people are STILL all up in arms about this shit?
but em - HIS SHIT IS BEING DOWNLOADED NOW!!!!!! HE'S WORKING WITH PRIME TIME CATS AND HIS SHINE IS NOT MATCHING HIS PHOTO SHOOTS!!!!!
It's not anything new is the point. This has been a conversation piece for, what, i dunno, 5 or 6 years? And, people are STILL all up in arms about this shit?
but em - HIS SHIT IS BEING DOWNLOADED NOW!!!!!! HE'S WORKING WITH PRIME TIME CATS AND HIS SHINE IS NOT MATCHING HIS PHOTO SHOOTS!!!!!
It's not anything new is the point. This has been a conversation piece for, what, i dunno, 5 or 6 years? And, people are STILL all up in arms about this shit?
but em - HIS SHIT IS BEING DOWNLOADED NOW!!!!!! HE'S WORKING WITH PRIME TIME CATS AND HIS SHINE IS NOT MATCHING HIS PHOTO SHOOTS!!!!!
Comments
But your making it sound like all people downloading music for free off the net are thieves. And I'm sorry to say your wrong.
how so?
Your saying that downloading music and not paying for it is wrong. That is stealing. People are pirates....
people take shit without paying for it. thats the definition of stealing.
It might be under the certain laws of you country right now. But in my Country I'm not doing anything illegal.
Not only that, but since 1998 a company for the music industry has been collecting a levy on every blank piece of recordable media that is sold in our country. This money is suppose to be collected and paid to copyright holders.
Right now, they are trying to put that levy on anything classified as a "recording medium".
So that means, for every ipod sold in Canada, a levy of 75 bucks could be added to the price.
I'm not stealing...
OK -- but your Canada laws aren't really saying its not stealing, theyre just saying its legal/tolerated. and to make up for the stolen goods, they pay copyright holders.
ASCAP does that in the US, they collect and distribute $$ for blank media. it depends on how big your catalog is, and it doesn't add up to much tho, to my knowledge.
Yes it does.
The levy is not a law and is not part of it. And I don't think there is any levy in the US, but I could be wrong.
The levy is something totally separate.
The law in canada makes it so it's totally legal to download any music you want. Your just not allowed to share music with anyone.
I believe this is the law.
80. (1) Subject to subsection (2), the act of reproducing all or any substantial part of
(a) a musical work embodied in a sound recording,
(b) a performer's performance of a musical work embodied in a sound recording, or(br> (c) a sound recording in which a musical work, or a performer's performance of a musical work, is embodied
onto an audio recording medium for the private use of the person who makes the copy does not constitute an infringement of the copyright in the musical work, the performer's performance or the sound recording.
Canada's current levies are as follows: $0.29 per unit for Audio Cassette tape (40min or longer); $0.77 per unit for CD-R Audio, CD-RW-Audio & MiniDisc; $0.21 per unit for CD-R, CD-RW (non audio).
But those fees will be raised soon, with the adding of a levy on all "recording medium".
But it also has eveyone that doesn't download music pay for it. So some dude that has to buy a CD-R to back-up his data paying money to record labels. Eventhough he will never download a track in his life.
intellectual property as a product of creative labor
physical product/merchandise
For example: historically, would taping a song off the radio and sharing it with friends be considered stealing? I don't know about legally but I can't imagine this would have upset artists.
But what if I'm taping off of satellite radio and the song quality I get off it was close enough to CD quality sound that it's more or less indistinguishable?
For a long time, there was enough of a technological gap that made these kinds of conversations moot. It's only in an era where replication is nearly perfect that it's become an issue. The thing is: people have been dubbing, taping, sharing for many years. What's changed is less the action of the consumers but rather, the technology of the medium.
I agree its not a complete stop to piracy but it is definately a deterrent. If you look at Downloading and how popular it has become, it makes sense that if the industry still sees sales of individual songs/albums as a viable way to make money then they need to protect it in some way (not saying that DRM is the ultimate solution) so that they can earn money off the sales. I know having a free and open market without any protections and trading is the most ideal situation for the consumer. Why pay for the cow when you get the milk for free?
The problem is that artists need to make a living (moreso than the record labels etc.). I understand that touring helps and is a bulk of the money they earn, but they also continually get royalty checks etc. for their published work. By eliminating the sales of music then you are taking a significant chunk of, not necessarily their paycheck, but money that goes into the costs of operating the industry (as most sales go to the label and administrative positions). So take the percent that the industry earns in sales and you are left with a hole in the business that needs to be filled. How that gets filled is any number of ways and would be a seperate conversation.
There has always been piracy and trading its factored into the cost of doing business. However there has never been outright trading between a majority of the music buying audience, its always been a percentage relegated to a mostly younger audience or a lower wage earning public. Its obviously more economical to buy a pack of CDs and copy your friends CDs or music than it is to buy all of those CDs.
The issue of downloading is really only one part of the industry that has fucked it. Add on to that an expectation that their music is worth more than it really is ($20 for a cd? eh I don't think so), add onto the fact that with downloads whole albums don't sell, add onto the fact that the industry itself is bloated and has for a long time made a lot more money than they will in the future, and you have a whole system that needs some major changes implemented.
DRM to me, is a solution, but again it would have to be implemented correctly. As it is right now its a mess. There is no cross platform technology between MACs that is DRM compatible its either or, no in between. That is the first major hurdle with Downloading. Add to that the plethora of Device manufacturers that have their own support for different DRMs and you add another factor that would need to be changed. I look at it like this. When the Tape/Record/CD formats were created, ever device manufacturer was forced to make devices that worked with those formats. You didn't have Sony making one type of Tape and Denon making their own, and Pioneer making their own etc. To do this would have lead to the same issues that the current DRM situation has created and it would have made it EXTREMELY difficult on the consumer as it is today.
Anyway its pretty much a mess any way you look at it and unfortunately like I stated above there is too much money involved from the past in the industry and not enough forward thinking people in the music industry to get these problems addressed and fixed so that consumer purchasing music can again become viable. Unless they do that their nly other option is to let everything go for free and try and make up the loss of revenue somewhere else or tighten their belts.
PS. I am playing devils advocate and more just presenting an alternate view for discussion sake.
That's a good point, but also a huge difference is the ease of sharing now. In the past music was shared between friends, now if someone throws up a zshare zip file of an album it can get blogged and downloaded thousands of times in a day.
Sorry to drag this thread out any longer cause I think we all realize the up and downsides of downloading, but while downloads can help upstart artists create buzz, it is unlikely to help an upstart label in the same way, especially if the label name is not tagged on the mp3.
Really tho? Can you find one person out there who if they really wanted to, couldn't download an album??? And thats the point. Anyone who really[/b] wants to get the album, will get it.
Let's remember here. That the 2nd biggest site on the net selling music, is a site that offers DRM free music. Selling a majority of indie bands. I think that says something.
I agree if you REALLY want something you are ging to get it. if you REALLY want a dimebag you can get it. However for most of the law abiding public there are too many issues and problems with getting a dime to actually do it. Its not going to stop everyone from trading etc. but its going to stop alot of the public from doing so.
But what if you could download a dimebag?
weedshare.net, coming soon!
Plaese to upload a half-ounce of bubble berry to Real Potheadz Know The Deal.
I'm amazed at how many still operate though. I know I'm in a legal grayzone but complete albums? That's like sending RIAA a telegram to come bust 'em.
At least the smell via your pc or mac...they workin on it...
but to chime in late in this thread, my 2 cents here:
DRM will always fail. There is no reason to sell an inferior product. If I want a CD, I want it. I don't want a CD I can only play there or so many times.
2007 will have the nail in the coffin of promo vinyl. It's just not worth it anymore.
More exposure via shared files gets you more exposure. Which translates to less sales automatically.
The youth of today do not experience music in a haptic way nomore. All 0's and 1's, apart from those "I do because I care dudes"
All CD's in the market will loose their information after 80 years. This is fact. Then, it all comes back to 0's and 1's somewhere and, you name it, vinyl.
Again, if something is dope, people will buy your shit.
how about this as a solution?
Wasn't there a party recently with Large Pro and Rob Swift in Ny where it was stated on the flyer "dance to the warm sounds of vinyl"? There will be a Seratobacklash, at least i don't always want to look like I am checking emails when rocking a crowd...
I think this was the guy who was leaking the new Thes-one lp.
This is just how the game is now. Deal with it.
Ain't no way youre going to convince millions and millions of people to stop downloading so they can "support" you and just as quickly as "encryption" shit pops up, "de-encryption" will pop up. The music industry is going to crumble soon (hopefully), and it'll be very interesting to see what things look like in a decade or so, but as of right now, there is[/b] money to be made out there if you're willing to adapt and stop crying.
-e
This is ludicrous. (A) Nobody really cares what a DJ looks like he's doing when he's on stage and (B) the things Microwave allows you to do as a DJ greatly benefits everyone's club-going experience. You think people are going to suddenly revolt against Microwave on some "Wow, this dude is doing some crazy shit and I'm totally enjoying myself but, he looks like he's checking his email up there! WHAT THE FUCK?! BUZZKILL!! I'm no longer drunk and having fun and I no longer want to have sex with this girl in front of me because DJ man looks like he's checking his email!!! NOOO!"
The fuck outta here.
By the way, who wants to hear "warm sounds of vinyl" in the club? That shit just needs to knock.
"Wow, Becky! Listen to how warm the 808s sound on this Chris Brown song! Let's Dance!"
Blah.
-e
It's not anything new is the point. This has been a conversation piece for, what, i dunno, 5 or 6 years? And, people are STILL all up in arms about this shit?
But more importantly, for independent acts like the people bitching in this thread, I am simply not convinced that bootleggin' hasn't helped them more than it has hurt them. For example: me. I been traveled the world to dj BECAUSE[/b] of bootlegging. People in Sweden are flying me out to DJ there BECAUSE they bootlegged my shit. And, I don't think I'm the exception here. DJs like the Rub folks and hella other folks make way more money off of performances than they do product. That's just the game and that's BEEN the game. Rappers BEEN making pennies off of per-CD sales. Their stupid, boring tours is where they get the big money. This is just as true for underground rappers as it is mainstream rappers.
People who think this is a "legitimate grievance" have wildly unrealistic expectations of what a "career" in music is all about and where the money comes from. Folks making living wages off of record sales is reserved for the few and equating every downloaded CD as a loss of $10 is just unrealistic math.
Lastly, I'm sick of people are acting as if them bitching about this shit is going to have some sort of widespread cultural impact.
Adapt your play to the climate of the game.
-e
but em - HIS SHIT IS BEING DOWNLOADED NOW!!!!!! HE'S WORKING WITH PRIME TIME CATS AND HIS SHINE IS NOT MATCHING HIS PHOTO SHOOTS!!!!!
^^^^Due for an unsolicited diss PM