NO FILESHARING! Discuss the album, NOT WHERE TO FIND IT!
- Thread starter COBHC Webmaster
- Start date
dreams_of_eternal_hate
I'm in space
@ people downloading the album with torrents. Enjoy getting busted by the RIAA (Chances are low but anyway).
Get Stoned
The Catalyst
- Mar 2, 2011
- 15
- 0
- 1
I understand what you are saying. You think people shouldn't be able to enjoy the music untill it's officially released, out of respect.
I'm saying the reason artist don't want their music "leaked" is because of the potential lost of profits. If people hear music they don't like before they buy the album, then some people won't buy that album. So to make sure people buy the albums, artist/record labels ask for albums not to be "leaked". I was saying it's naive to think that there's any other reason besides money, for not wanting their album listened to before the official release date.
So what are you really respecting, the artist/record labels ability to make money off of you from buying music you potentially may not even like? Im guessing thats the reason there is so much "bad" music out there today. So many people blindly buying/supporting music they don't even like.
No, there is no such thing as a utopia, thats a myth. The world we live in is constantly changing, therefore a utopia is impossible because there will never be a final state of being. However, an economy that isn't based on the monetary system is quite possible and is made possible through technology.
If you can replicate artist work, how can that even be considered stealing?
For example, If I created a replica of a music cd by making a FLAC copy onto my computer, it isn't stealing the information from the original cd because the cd itself still contains the information on it.
To "steal" something is to take something away from something or someone else. A copy is something you create, not steal. The copy you create is not the original, therefore can't be considered "stolen". Once you realize that the outdated concept of "ownership" or "property" never really existed in the first place, you will then realize the absurdity to think something could be "stolen". Nothing in this world is truly owned by anyone. At best, "owning things" can be best described as: borrowing for a limited amount of time.
predator2353
Member
- Mar 1, 2010
- 899
- 14
- 28
Cheggit out guys:
Sorry, son, the world doesn't work this way.
how about we go in his house and take his HD TV and all the stuff I'm sure he wouldn't mind it
Get Stoned
The Catalyst
- Mar 2, 2011
- 15
- 0
- 1
That example proves my point exactly.
"Nothing in this world is truly owned by anyone. At best, "owning things" can be best described as: borrowing for a limited amount of time."
Doesn't it?
Communism has money, banks, armies, police, prisons, charismatic personalities, social stratification, and is managed by appointed leaders. Seems much like the world we live in now.
predator2353
Member
- Mar 1, 2010
- 899
- 14
- 28
Get Stoned
The Catalyst
- Mar 2, 2011
- 15
- 0
- 1
Actually, it does use money. Communism has no blueprint or methodology to carry out their ideals and along with capitalism, fascism, and socialism, will ultimately go down in history as failed social experiments.
People that download torrents are not risking shit, its the uploaders that get fucked with.
Generally yes. You still can get pursued. This makes me think...I have an anecdote related to this situation. Here it is:
About a year ago, my friend asked me if it was okay to use some of my bandwidth and download Autodesk 3DSMAX 2010. I didn't care since I had 120 gigs/month and I accepted. 2 weeks later, my ISP sent me a message concerning the download via torrent and they said in the message that Autodesk could complain. If it was the case, then my ISP would give my infos to them. I guess it happened to the 300000 users who downloaded it.
if TLDR == 'on'
then
printf('ISP's aren't your firewall. Downloads are risky.');
end
Just saying.
Necroraven
Member
- Nov 21, 2007
- 2,193
- 1
- 36
Always the same "it's not stealing if the owner doesn't lose a physical copy"-argument
Stealing might not be the right term, but still if you download an artist's work, he doesnt get money he needs to live. Of course you can say, that "I wouldn't have bought it anyway, so artist lost nothing", and some people might not buy indeed, but most people do buy albums if they can't get them otherwise. Sadly we don't live in your Soviet Union comrade, so spare us the terms you learned on your first philosophy course, an tell how artists should make living (in this world, monetary system etc.) if everyone would download their albums.
dreams_of_eternal_hate
I'm in space
What do you think how the leeching/seeding system works? You download and upload parts of the file you use and therefor also spread (parts of) the file.
SteveMCsteve
Member
I can't tell if you are being serious or sarcastic, as it is nothing like that were I am. Society is full of different classes and I can't think of anything that is free from the government as my taxes are what pay for those things. (unemployment, medicare, social security, etc..)
heavy metal
Member
just to add my point to the debate,i'm going to the manchester gig, never seen bodom huge amon amarth fan and i like ensiferum, so, i have heard the new album in full and it shreds your face off so when i rake a bit more cash up i will be buying.
Necroraven
Member
- Nov 21, 2007
- 2,193
- 1
- 36
Get Stoned
The Catalyst
- Mar 2, 2011
- 15
- 0
- 1
That's because it isn't stealing. Stealing implies taking away something. If nothing is technically being taken away, only created, then it isn't stealing. This is why I dont understand why people call it what it isnt.
Well, you just countered your own point. If the people who download albums never had the money to buy the albums in the first place, then those artists were still never going to get paid by those people.
Well, Im not sure what you mean when you say youre sad because you don't live within my soviet union. But if it really makes you sad, then try doing something to change that situation for yourself. As for artist making money... Maybe they should try producing a good that people want, and can't be easily replicated. To make more money, they should design their product for planned obsolescence. That way people will have to continue to purchase. After that, the artist can monopolize the market for their product to ensure that no one else gets any of the potential profit. But of course that idea only works on the premise that the consumer will have the money to pay for the good in the first place. Otherwise, that idea will collapse just like the current economy.
Get Stoned
The Catalyst
- Mar 2, 2011
- 15
- 0
- 1
"non appropriate parallel"? I don't care what you think is or isn't appropriate, as it is irrelevant to the point I was making. There is no inaccuracy in what I said and Im well aware of what a communist society consist of. If you're going to quote a source, I would recommend something more substantial than wikipedia... Besides, I wasn't necessarily making a specific connection "between capitalism and communism" as you say I am. This is what I actually said:
In fact, I was never "claiming these are the same". How you arrived at that conclusion, I don't know.
The point that I made contradictory to what Crzy_Aus was saying, is to show that the world does use much of the same methodology as communism. Sure communism differs in some degree, but they all generally operate in a similar manner.
Similar threads
