or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment, Culture, and Sports › Ever download mp3s "illegally"?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ever download mp3s "illegally"? - Page 2

post #16 of 28
I'll add the contrarian view to Brian's comments. I was an undergrad during the height of Napster (1996-2000). I didn't have a single friend who bought a single CD during the entire period. I did, however, have many friends who downloaded 2-3000 songs during that period and a few who quit buying movie tickets as well, opting to watch pirated early cuts over the web. A lot of these same kids bought 3 or 4 CDs a week during high school, so at least in my small sample, downloading eliminated a lot of CD purchases.
post #17 of 28
Maybe I am misinformed, but I thought I heard that people who only download, and do not share are getting sued now? Is that wrong? I would love to start DLing again, when I was, I was only sharing video clips (sports, commercials, music videos, etc), but I stopped since I heard downloaders are getting busted, even if they dont share.
post #18 of 28
honestly, since i started downloading mp3's i haven't bought an album...i am also a starving college student.... ...
post #19 of 28
Quote:
honestly, since i started downloading mp3's i haven't bought an album...i am also a starving college student.... ...
how many albums did you buy before you started downloading? one-five per week? one-five per month? one-five per year?
post #20 of 28
Thread Starter 
I have not studied the demographics of p2p users, but I'm guessing I am at the far end of the "old" spectrum. I have always owned a lot of recorded music (when I was in college I had over 1,000 lps). Nevertheless, I found I had stopped buying music. When I first discovered Napster, and then LimeWire, I browsed a lot and downloaded a little. But I also noticed I was spending a lot more time in record stores buying cds or at the library checking out new music. I'm guessing that I am probably spending more now on cds (adjusted for inflation) than I ever did in the heyday of my music acquistion phase. I am willing to wager, however, that members of younger generations, who've always had p2p sharing at their disposal, don't spend nearly much on recorded music than mine ever did.
post #21 of 28
I agree with Brian on this one, the amount of music that I purchase has definitely not decreased in the wake of file-sharing software. However, the amount of bad music I buy has decreased substantially. I no longer buy a CD for only one song if the rest of it sucks, instead that money might be used for buying a CD with songs I consistently like, just none I like as much as the first single. Strangely enough, it seems like it's the really bad artists that are the ones so strongly opposed to file sharing. Their business certainly has suffered as I no longer purchase on the basis of a single song. I'm looking at the stack of CDs/SACDs next to my computer, and they're almost all artists I started listening to by downloading MP3s, and because I liked their music I purchased the full disc. Several of these discs include Journey's Greatest Hits and Mile's Davis's Kind of Blue SACDs and the Ray soundtrack.
post #22 of 28
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Strangely enough, it seems like it's the really bad artists that are the ones so strongly opposed to file sharing.
Is this similar to how only really ugly women truly believed in the free love movement? (From my own personal experience, at least) Seriously though, h_s, I think you've captured the essence of my experience. I can't remember the last disc I bought that was relegated to the trade-in pile. That certainly wasn't the case before p2p.
post #23 of 28
Sorry to post this again, but the posts kind of took off on a tangent, and I didnt get any responses... Does anyone know if the RIAA is targeting people who only download and do not share? Is that considered illegal to DL if you arent sharing? Thanks.
post #24 of 28
Quote:
I think p2p downloading is good the way it is. My opinion hasn't changed a bit. Artists don't lose jack from having mp3s shared on the internet. The amount of music I buy (and all of my friends) did not decrease due to music downloading. In fact, it seems the more music I download, the more music I buy. If record companies seriously think that every time I download an album, they lost money because I would have bought it, they are smoking crack. No way could I, or would I ever make blind purchases of albums of all the bands I am interested in hearing. Either I download a lot of music and get to hear a lot of music easily on my computer, or I don't download a lot of music and have to search for other means to hear the music (mixtapes, etc).
There's plenty of places to get free samples of bands legally. Amazon.com, mp3.com, etc. etc. Just because you and your friends buy more music since the dawn of file sharing doesn't mean everybody does. One of my buddies, who claims to be neck deep in scenes from here to Indiana, hasn't purchased a real record from a real store in probably two years. It's a wonderful test of morality, I think. Here we have an opportunity to do something that is clearly wrong (benefiting from the work of others with no reciprocation) with absolutely no consequences. Forget about music or how the industry reacts to file sharing (which seems to be pumping out bands with people who look good on t-shirts and in videos), let's think about if this is really helping us toward goodness. Not to mention the fact that now any trio of Saliva-listening geeks can record a record in their basement, share it with all their friends, and claim to be a band w/o touring or sleeping on floors and eating MacDonald's three times a day. Ever notice how venues have to have a decently-known act to get anybody to come out? Nobody goes just to check out a few bands anymore; they can do that at a much lower volume while eating potatoe chips at their computer. Sure, Postal Service and Cursive shows are always crowded, but nobody's there to check out My Other Car is a Kayak or Over and Over. Ugh...when did this scene get filled w/such elitist jerks?. (Post has veered quite off topic, sometimes so subtely it's hard to notice. I'm not implying Brian is an elitist jerk.)
post #25 of 28
Quote:
There's plenty of places to get free samples of bands legally. Amazon.com, mp3.com, etc. etc. Just because you and your friends buy more music since the dawn of file sharing doesn't mean everybody does. One of my buddies, who claims to be neck deep in scenes from here to Indiana, hasn't purchased a real record from a real store in probably two years. It's a wonderful test of morality, I think. Here we have an opportunity to do something that is clearly wrong (benefiting from the work of others with no reciprocation) with absolutely no consequences. Forget about music or how the industry reacts to file sharing (which seems to be pumping out bands with people who look good on t-shirts and in videos), let's think about if this is really helping us toward goodness. Not to mention the fact that now any trio of Saliva-listening geeks can record a record in their basement, share it with all their friends, and claim to be a band w/o touring or sleeping on floors and eating MacDonald's three times a day. Ever notice how venues have to have a decently-known act to get anybody to come out? Nobody goes just to check out a few bands anymore; they can do that at a much lower volume while eating potatoe chips at their computer. Sure, Postal Service and Cursive shows are always crowded, but nobody's there to check out My Other Car is a Kayak or Over and Over. Ugh...when did this scene get filled w/such elitist jerks?. (Post has veered quite off topic, sometimes so subtely it's hard to notice. I'm not implying Brian is an elitist jerk.)
Well, you can make the argument commonly used in economics and say that if you weren't going to purchase the disc in the first place, downloading it doesn't cause any harm. It is the same argument used to explain how moonlighting and selling items without sales tax isn't necessarily bad if the customer(s) wouldn't have made the purchases in the presence of taxes. Of course, I've said that I've stopped buying pop-trash discs for one song, and started buying real music. In the end, the volume of purchases remains the same, but it has shifted from the pop-crap artists to the real musicians, at the expense of the pop-crap artists.
post #26 of 28
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Does anyone know if the RIAA is targeting people who only download and do not share? Is that considered illegal to DL if you arent sharing?
It is illegal to possess mp3 file of a song you have not purchased, unless it was offered as a free sample, etc.; clearly a violation of U.S. intellectual property laws. Although I don't think the RIAA is focusing their efforts on people who are "only" downloading.
post #27 of 28
Thanks Dakota. I am debating rolling the dice and beginning to DL again.
post #28 of 28
Quote:
There's plenty of places to get free samples of bands legally. Amazon.com, mp3.com, etc. etc. Just because you and your friends buy more music since the dawn of file sharing doesn't mean everybody does. One of my buddies, who claims to be neck deep in scenes from here to Indiana, hasn't purchased a real record from a real store in probably two years.
I don't do the "free samples" things, because it's just not enough for me. I have to hear the album. If I can't hear the whole album by downloading it online, I'll get a friend to copy his CD for me and watch my CD case grow and grow and grow.
Quote:
It's a wonderful test of morality, I think. Here we have an opportunity to do something that is clearly wrong (benefiting from the work of others with no reciprocation) with absolutely no consequences. Forget about music or how the industry reacts to file sharing (which seems to be pumping out bands with people who look good on t-shirts and in videos), let's think about if this is really helping us toward goodness. Not to mention the fact that now any trio of Saliva-listening geeks can record a record in their basement, share it with all their friends, and claim to be a band w/o touring or sleeping on floors and eating MacDonald's three times a day.
I agree here, but it sounds preachy to make the assumption that all being in a band is about is touring, sleeping on the floor in a creepy guy's house, etc. There is absolutely nothing wrong with making a song in your basement and sharing it with your friends - that's how it all starts. As for the test of morality - I care not how my habits bring me towards goodness, I only care about how my habits bring me towards good music. There are two kinds of people here, really: those who like a band after they're gained notoriety, or those who create the notoriety for the band. I consider myself one of the latter, and it appears that you would as well, but I am not quite as frustrated with the entropy in the music industry. It is sad that not many people go to the bar just to check out what bands are playing that night, but the truth is not many people ever did. File sharing is just one medium for many people to gain free access to music - if it weren't there, my closet would be overflowing with mixtapes and copies. Maybe the Postal Service (or whatever monstrosity Mr. Gibbard happens to be cranking out) wouldn't be the band that's popular, but some other horrible band surely would have taken its place, and people would still be showing up to shows half-way through the last opener's set. I am dedicated to my obsession, and I will *always* personally hand a band member $15 for their CD so they can pay for gas before I go to the record store and get it for $3 cheaper. I will drive down to the bar during a show night just to see whats happening, or on a blind recommendation. I would consider this far from being an elitist jerk, and those who sit in front of their computer with a bag of potato chips are not elitist jerks either, they're losers. I am sorry about those who never ever buy music now that they can download it, but I just don't care. I am too happy with the state things are in and the fact that my friend can tell me about the new demos he heard from some Canadian Beach Boys-influenced experimental band and I can usually hear it the same day, because there are bound to be a couple freaks who have it in their shared directory before I do. This post is pure rambling. I agree with most of your sentiments but disagree with your file sharing perspective
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment, Culture, and Sports › Ever download mp3s "illegally"?