Music downloading is it good or bad?

[Death Aflame]

Cyth pretty much said what I was going to retort with.

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough in my line of questioning so I'll try again--can one (this can be a single person, organization, or a collectivity, it does not matter) legitimately own an abstraction of the mind as property?

The 'products of the mind' term is misleading because it infers a physical object that can be owned, which is not what intellectual property proper is. For instance, if I come up with (the phrasing here is itself misleading, but that's not what we are talking about) the idea for a bicycle, that is distinct, I think we would agree, from a particular physical manifestation of a bicycle itself. My line of questioning refers to the former: the elusive idea, not the physical implementation of said idea.

 

[razoredge]

does this really require that much thought ? Isnt this why copyright, plagiarism and patent laws were developed ? Does any other thought mean to imply that stolen art work is not really stolen its just being passed around the commune ? Does this mean artists can not expect to do their work professionally but only as volunteer work.

 

[Dak]

You are being a little too broad razor. We are talking specifically about duplication of digital media.

 

[razoredge]

if your music (art) is aquired freely you have just done voluntery work or were robbed. You worked hard on this stuff, you spent exhorbitant funds recording and mastering it, yet you do it all for FREE ? and some lame ass youngster who doubtedly has worked a hard weeks work in their life wants to question if your entitled to an income from your creativity, expenses and labor, why am I not suprised by this

 

[Dak]

But what was lost by copying it? Nothing physical that's for sure. I would argue infinitely more effort and money (directly by the band) was put into recording demo tapes for trading around underground back in the day and no one complained.
What was the purpose? To get people to come see them live. Now the band doesn't even have to record and hit the streets with stacks of tapes. People just rip/copy/paste.

 

[razoredge]

when was this done ? those people sold those tapes. How would you say it was more effort, writting and recording is so much effort anyhow, one way you get some investment money back the other you do not.

It also seems people have it backwards today or it has reversed.You play shows to get the word out so people buy your recordings, not give away thousnads of recordings so hundreds of people come to your shows.I mean lets get serious, who goes to more shows a year then they aquire CD's? Tours were to support albums, not vica versa

 

[Dak]

The record companies arranged it that way, which is the reason the recording studios are the ones making almost all the fuss. The artists make a much higher percentage from shows/band merch than albums.

 

[razoredge]

Higher pecentage does not mean incomes from either are equivelent. The most successful musicians are those that sold multi million albums. Their tours and recording process was also supported by labels, the big machine that was the music industry would not have come to be without this networking between labels, studios, venues, equipment manufacturers, we would still be listening to bootleg and garage quality recordings by less than adequate bands.

 

[Dak]

Unprovable hypothetical alternate futures do not prove arguments.

 

[razoredge]

It would be a stretch to disprove, how is it you think it would have worked out ? Are you unaware of how much the studios, engineers and producers contributed to the quality of music released ? Do you think that musicians had the money for adequate recording equipment, vinyl presses and what ever else it took ? Musicians barely kicked out a living on the road and this is mostly still true outside of top bands and how is it you think these bands became top bands, through the funding allowed by the large music industry, not their own pockets.

 

[Dak]

Funding provided by the industry? Lol, that's as ass backwards as saying the government provides the funding for social programs.

The industry leeched off the artists like loan sharks, providing the cash up front for a band to "make it big"/record if they sell their soul to the label, which your mostly under/basic educated garage rockers would do.

With patience and touring and proper fund management, the bands wouldn't need them. Now, with the computer advances, bands can record professional albums at home. The labels are screaming, for the leech is losing bodies.

 

[razoredge]

I fail to see what any of that post has to do with how the industry came to be and the benefits that came with it. Today bands still thrive to get signed by better labels, its how all industry works, you need money people for funding. Everybody whores themselves out to make it, regardless the industry. All these at home bands are putting music up on myspace for charity, they are mostly a dime a dozen clones of somebody else, 99% will never get the chance to even be hasbeens, they will get a real job and never be heard from. Just improper promotion and distrubution from a label has killed many a good band that did bring something special to the table.

 

[Dak]

This still doesn't answer what exactly has been stolen if I download an album. For theft to occur, someone has to take something that someone else has, and the original owner no longer has it.

 

[razoredge]

So we can steal painting from anyone so long as its not the origional artist ?

Dont get me wrong I have had my share of free downloads but am enough in touch with reality to admit I stole the music rather than going through proper channels and putting money back in the hands of those that put the funds and effort into the recording.

If anyone thinks in the end any good will come from this they are wrong, music is rapidly heading for the expensive hobby stage outside of the pop industry.

 

[Silver Incubus]

I'm actually going to agree with almost everything Razoredge has said in this thread. The Intellectual Property rights gives the artist the power.
So say a major artist on a major or sub-major label gets 5% of ever album sold. If the suggested retail price was 16.99 and you don't pay that, it is more money not given back to the company that recorded you and that is usually how it works for bands. The company takes the risk in recording you after considerable calculations about the market and your music. The artist doesn't make any money from albums until it is recooped by the company.

 

[Dak]

So we can steal painting from anyone so long as its not the origional artist ?

lolwut?

You obviously haven't understood a word I said.

Dont get me wrong I have had my share of free downloads but am enough in touch with reality to admit I stole the music rather than going through proper channels and putting money back in the hands of those that put the funds and effort into the recording.

I have no interest in supporting labels. I do however, attempt to go to concerts when I can. I woudl go to concerts probably weekly/monthly if I didn't live 200+ milesa away from the nearest venues.

If anyone thinks in the end any good will come from this they are wrong, music is rapidly heading for the expensive hobby stage outside of the pop industry.

Yeah, because bands won't tour anymore

 

[razoredge]

Well with contracts I believe they sign over alot of power but they still recieve what ever income the contract states and then % above and beyond. My main points there was the power within the networking of the industry as well as the refinement in recording methods and equipment that would not have come to be on a individual band level. This is why the labels can not be totally slagged, they serve a purpose that can be beneficial.

I also think most artists that today do not protest against free downloading is simply a matter of avioding negative publicity. We all see the stupid fan folly that occured when Lars spoke out against it, he and the band has been slagged ever since. So we have people with their hands out, downloading music for free slagging those that spent a life time doing it professionally because they said they did not like being robbed of sales... imagine that... is that along the lines of robbers calling crooks... "theives"

Then another thing you see is people getting pissed when a band does not offer thier entire album on my space or where ever and some bust the songs up so they can not be heard in their entirety, and people get pissed off.... "gee, I wonder why"... cant save to files, thats why.

I stopped free downloading 6 years ago when my conscience just couldnt deal with it anymore. Many were samples that got deleted because I couldnt stand the stuff but there were plenty I did keep. Now I shell out the $12-15 when there is something I want, I prefer full CD's anyhow with sleeve, credits and all that comes with it.

 

[razoredge]

lolwut?

You obviously haven't understood a word I said



Yeah, because bands won't tour anymore

Wheres the money come from for a tour dipstick ? Or where does a venue decide to pay a band for a show if no ones ever bought a recording by them ? How do we keep track of the volumn of recordings bought ?

you obviously havent understood a word I said

 

[Dak]

Wheres the money come from for a tour dipstick ? Or where does a venue decide to pay a band for a show if no ones ever bought a recording by them ? How do we keep track of the volumn of recordings bought ?

The simple fact that venues have bands all the time that maybe only have a demo they hand out, shows that the album sales have nothing to do with getting gigs.

Why do we need to track how many albums were downloaded? In these internet times, you can get a good idea of how many fans you have through social networking sites.

you obviously havent understood a word I said

lol. You never answered my question, as to what theft has occurred if you download music. If you download a song from me, I still have the song, but now you do as well. For theft to occur, I would have to steal a cd or something, because then the original owner no longer has it. If I merely download it, there has been no physical loss.

 

[razoredge]

its a monetary loss to the artist, its what they do for a living, you aquired their work for free. You dont see this happening much with books, how would you like to write a book for free ?

Small gigs on demo tapes means you better not quit your day job. If your good, bring something not rehashed to the table, want national or international attention and decent paying gigs to support a tour bus, food, air flights, you'll be looking for a label and thats not going to change much but as it is concerts, bands, musical success is not what it was just 15 years ago outside of the pop field.

How come you didnt respond to the truth that more CD's are bought/stole than concert tickets. THe average music involved person goes to what maybe 3 concerts a year but buys or steals far more CD's. How come you dont talk about how venues rip off musicians, booking agencies, you just are using concert money for an excuse to steal someone elses labor. Or its OK if I burn this CD cause I might buy a concert ticket if they come around.

So a band plays a concert to a crowd of 15,000, take the radious that crowd came from and tell me how many CD's by the band are floating around the same area.

Being a musician was never a good deal and with the recordings going for free its on the downhill slide.