piracy, again

[eduardo_b]

Companies are not chasing teenagers with lawsuits because they think it's the right thing to do. They're doing it because they want the moolah.

And that's really it, isn't it? Everything, from copying CDs to using samples, is now totally about money. Every time there's an advance in consumer electronics technology, the record companies and movie studios are trying to keep it from seeing the light of day. They never see opportunities, only threats to their business, which is extracting as much money as possible from their customers. And that means trying to prevent fair use of music we buy, the ability to copy movies we already own and now the opportunity to record digital television content.

[Giva-Scotta-Bone]

What is a moral? So many people on here are posting the lack in "morals" of the big companies. But we cannot expect a large entity to live up to the morals of individuals...it is simply not the same. What is more important is the individual's moral in the situation

If the question is: "is it 'morally right' to copy a CD for a friend?" Then ask yourself where your loyalties are more genuinely: a musician who you sincerely enjoy or your friend....either answer being completely 'noble'.
Then, balance what the loss of the other will be in relation to your actions: the loss of a good listening experience (and it is GOOD for all you Norah haters) or the loss of a potential sale.

If your question is "is copying a CD for a friend legal?" Then, of course not.

IN ANY CASE, don't gripe that a big company is trying to make money; that is precisely why it exists.

[John Vulich]

IN ANY CASE, don't gripe that a big company is trying to make money; that is precisely why it exists.

Learn how to read before you reply. I'm not griping that "big" companies make a lot of money. I'm griping that they dishonestly distort the facts regarding the issues.

[soulkraka]

I also feel that the demonization of P2P systems has a lot to do with the recording industry's fear that artists will be able to distribute their music directly to the public in an extremely powerful and effective manner. This would eventualy render the labels useless. Face it, they're basicaly just pimps that control the access and distribution of goods to the consumers. Once they lose their control of that, their days are numbered. I really believe that part of their posturing on this issue has a lot to do with laying down the groundwork to eradicate any competition on their monopoly over the distribution proccess.

good point

[John Vulich]

Dude, how's Tokyo treating you?

[soulkraka]

hey man...I Pm'ed you

[vurt]

even now ill knowck up cds with stuff i mention and my mates look blankly at me,one track by each band tho or maybe two
i cant see how that hurts anybody to be honest

By that reasoning, it should be an acceptable practice to pirate audio apps, just as long as it is only one or two apps/vstis/vsts from each of the companies!

Voxengo has sooo many good vsts though, I'll have to choose my quota carefully!

Heh... Sorry Vurt... Just having some fun!

nope thats a dfferent thing altogether...maybe not legally but morally.
i know your having fun with what i said and i can see where the logic comes into it but seeing the logic aslo enables me to see its flaws...
one song from a whole album may give a person a taste of an artist they had never heard before,they may like them and buy more of their music.if i give someone a copy of say gmedia imposcar and they think wow this synth rocks it doesnt mean in anyway that they would like the mtron or have any need for any other plugs from gmedia. on the other hand recording a whole album for someone means they,even if they like the band,dont have to buy that one album whereas had i done one track and they liked it the ambum is still there to purchase.
man i wish i hadnt had a smoke before logging in now...
im not saying what i do is legal,im pretty sure i isnt,but like i said its not like id do someone a cd,i do mixes,nowadays i do em on the pc too so i even segue stuff so they get tracks running into other tracks.
bet you wish you hadnt tried havin fun now

[fake]

This whole argument falls down badley and shows it is all just about money and not about artists rights.

How much does an artist get from a cd, very little of the actual cost as they will be lucky to get 10%. So who is being ripped off, the record companies not the artist. The artist will have usually signed a contract which would guarantee them an income for a set period. Ok, diferent for the small independant lables, which I prefer to stick to.

Now look at what sony have recently spent millions on, copy protecting cd's and what was the result, chaos.
Now do a search for "hi fi" style cd recorders, guess what, Sony produce them as well....Sony RCD-W500C Cd Recorder with guaranteed perfect copies!!!!

Which bit of the apple do they want?


fake

[jplanet]

If you order cd's through Columbia House or BMG through that whole mail order deal, teh srtist gets nothing from those sales. Nothing. It's considered a part of their "promotion package".

They are the worst thieves on the planet. They are just so huge that they can "make it legal".

[Hink]

How much does an artist get from a cd,

I worry more about how much I get out creating the cd, seeing how I never released an actual cd it would seem I'm getting what I need out of it...

[james0tucson]

The old folks here will remember the beginnings of FM broadcast. Before it became the vast empty bowl of shit that it is today, it used to have some merit. I can think of countless taping parties we had back then when FM stations would have "album hours" during the weekends. The King Biscuit Flower Hour, for example.

I don't know which side of the argument this supports, but when the Pink Floyd album "The Wall" came out, a promo copy was played on a local fm station. My tape of that broadcast was (and remains) the only copy of that music I ever had, until relatively recently, where I somehow got a CD in a big trade.

I have King Biscuit tapes I still listen to now and then.

But here's the deal: Unless I broadcast or distribute this material, I'm fully within my rights to have it, and to listen to it. To deny this, at least under the laws in the country where I live, would be a more serious abridgement of my own rights, than any rights that can be claimed by a corporation.

I resent, and totally reject, the notion that a media corporation's interests supersede my own rights.

[The Chase]

In elementary school the only tapes I had were recorded radio songs (back when the radio was tight and they played Prodigy and crystal method and Korn and such). I dont consider home taping of the radio theft. It probably is, but i really don't see anything wrong with it. The only difference between recording a bit of radio music and waiting for them to play the song again is that you have to sit through their advertising. That is the problem they have. When I listened to the radio I phased out the commercials anyway.

[munchkin]

Rapper's Delight got to number 3 in the UK and no. 36 in the US. In Europe we don't let copyright get in the way of a good tune.

[deastman]

I only had time to read about half this thread, so forgive me if this is repetitive...

I have seen a number of posts so far which started from the position of "of course it isn't legal to copy a CD for a friend." I am not so sure.

There may be changes to the USA copyright laws which I am not aware of, but historically speaking, it has always been legal to make a copy of an album (or at least individual songs, or a mix tape) for a friend. This falls under the fair use provision. As I recall, even the judge who reviewed the Napster case agreed with this point. She felt, however, that sharing your music collection with ten million of your closest friends did not qualify as fair use.

That said, a shift in the balance of power has been taking place for a few years now, with the copyright holders hold increasing power, and the consumers of copyrighted material falling subject to increasing restrictions on how they can use that material. Copying a song may qualify as fair use, but circumventing copy protection in order to make that copy is now illegal, thanks to the Digital Millenium Copyright Act.

I don't claim to be any sort of authority on copyright law. I'm just pointing out that the issue is not as cut-and-dry as "of course its illegal!"

[Reverse Engineer]

I wonder when the time will come where we'll be sued for remembering songs and humming them to ourselves in the shower