Who downloads/who does'nt

[Krow]

this thread just needs closed. I cant imagine much else will be said, other than some splitting of hairs and random posters coming in, saying they download and try to justify it and the same voices for anti-downloading saying it's still wrong, lather, rise, repeat and repeat for eternity.

tl:dr I think this thread has served it's purpose.

 

[PhlegethonVeins]

Agreed.

 

[skeptik]

It is available on said devices, however saying its as transferable as downloaded files is just silly. You can't burn it to a disc, nor to music player applications and the like, which are still higher up in usage than youtube apps. With already downloaded music you don't need internet access where you have you device, which yes its readily available, but still semi spacious and the stream times for many locations would straight up be an inconvenience. And once again, you're not in possession of the file.

That in no way discounts the fact that unauthorized uploads are still just as illegal as unauthorized downloads. The 'degree of wrongness' is pretty irrelevant here, especially since most have already concluded that that degree for downloading is already negligible. It is a song uploaded to a database that anybody can access at any time without the permission of anybody with the authority to grant said permission. What exactly makes you think this is okay? It's not like driving over to your buddy's house because you really need to hear "A Fine Day to Die" RIGHT NOW. Uploading to a database is in no way a permissible means of sharing granted to the owner of the physical product.

 

[Saparmurat_Niyazov]

Youtube videos can be made into mp3's with audacity, btw.

 

[PhlegethonVeins]

That in no way discounts the fact that unauthorized uploads are still just as illegal as unauthorized downloads. The 'degree of wrongness' is pretty irrelevant here, especially since most have already concluded that that degree for downloading is already negligible. It is a song uploaded to a database that anybody can access at any time without the permission of anybody with the authority to grant said permission. What exactly makes you think this is okay? It's not like driving over to your buddy's house because you really need to hear "A Fine Day to Die" RIGHT NOW. Uploading to a database is in no way a permissible means of sharing granted to the owner of the physical product.

I didn't say I think its ok. Actually I said it isn't ok. However it isn't a direct parallel. That is all I stated.

I agree with you points, and personally am not a supporter of putting albums on YouTube (hence why I was listing other sources of sampling music before purchasing) however I will gladly argue it not being a direct parallel to downloading.

Youtube videos can be made into mp3's with audacity, btw.

They most certainly can. But that does require a couple different pieces of software, and of course falls into downloading even if it isn't through a torrent or p2p network.

 

[Seditious]

It's not a direct parallel to downloading music. One is certainly far more severe than the other, and as stated is transferable in all forms that people take music on the go with them these days, and is constantly used in that manner, where as the other one, as a general rule isn't viewed more than once or twice by a singular person(yes there is the occasional exception) and doesn't hold near the same power as for 'being able to take with you on the go, wherever you go'.

so, before iPods existed, back not along, back when Americans still had enviously rapid broadband connections, what was your position on this?

There isn't possession of it, trying the argue that temporary internet files is possession of it is silly.

if you don't need to use bandwidth to play something, you have possession of it.

you might choose to download an FLV to TEMP files, play it today, dislike it, not buy it, let it get deleted, or choose to download an MP3 to Downloads, play it today, dislike it, not buy it, and let it get deleted or choose to delete it within 24-72 hours. ...you've not committed a worse crime by virtue of the format or the location on your computer.

 

[Seditious]

They most certainly can. But that does require a couple different pieces of software.

having a dial-up connection, missing out on the youtube craze, someone put me on to this nifty gadget:
http://www.video2mp3.net/index.php

and of course falls into downloading even if it isn't through a torrent or p2p network.

all it does is save in one location what you had saved in another (e.g., Temporary Internet Files).

everything is 'downloaded', it's just a question of how long it stays on your drive--how long you have it without having to expend a trivial amount of broadband to hear it again.

 

[Seditious]

Uploading to a database is in no way a permissible means of sharing granted to the owner of the physical product.

yea, don't most things have some sort of 'not to be played before an audience'/private use type restrictions (which is why radio stations pay to play)?

haven't they always said that you don't even have the right to burn a duplicate CD of a CD you bought (even for personal use or backup--keeping the original safe while using a copy in your car, for example), never mind sharing it, MP3ing it, or anything else.

 

[PhlegethonVeins]

My position was still against downloading, as people did it and burned it to cds.

you might choose to download an FLV to TEMP files, play it today, dislike it, not buy it, let it get deleted, or choose to download an MP3 to Downloads, play it today, dislike it, not buy it, and let it get deleted or choose to delete it within 24-72 hours. ...you've not committed a worse crime by virtue of the format or the location on your computer.

1) The courts disagree with that last bit.

2)99% of viewers wouldn't do that.

3)You are arguing for the sake of arguing. My statement stands, it is by no means a direct parallel. If we are talking about whomever uploads the songs / albums, that is a completely different story.

 

[crimsonfloyd]

My position was still against downloading, as people did it and burned it to cds.



1) The courts disagree with that last bit.

2)99% of viewers wouldn't do that.

3)You are arguing for the sake of arguing. My statement stands, it is by no means a direct parallel. If we are talking about whomever uploads the songs / albums, that is a completely different story.

Why do you keep using the term "direct parallel". They are two types of illegal activities that fit under the same category (music piracy). There is no need for a parallel.

 

[PhlegethonVeins]

Why do you keep using the term "direct parallel". They are two types of illegal activities that fit under the same category (music piracy). There is no need for a parallel.

Uploading the file to youtube is illegal. Watching it isn't.

 

[Avigrus]

FYI you can DL all Youtube clips with Keepvid website. I like to download funny clips

Do people that argue against downloading feel the same about DL'ing TV shows/movies? Just curious.

What about albums that are no longer available for sale? IE the new Destroyer 666 7". I found out about this release only recently, and have been trying to get a copy on Ebay, but they are going for close to $100. I've downloaded this and will keep it until i can snag a reasonably priced copy.

 

[The Butt]

Uploading the file to youtube is illegal. Watching it isn't.

Tbh, in Canada, last I checked, downloading music for free from the internet isn't actually illegal, only uploading it is. So assuming that is true, firing up Soulseek and watching a Youtube video are pretty near analogous and interchangable in this case.

 

[PhlegethonVeins]

Tbh, in Canada, last I checked, downloading music for free from the internet isn't actually illegal, only uploading it is. So assuming that is true, firing up Soulseek and watching a Youtube video are pretty near analogous and interchangable in this case.

Oh? I wouldn't know how that goes as far as Canadian laws go. Interesting if that is the case.

Here downloading music is still quite illegal, but thats pretty obvious.

 

[crimsonfloyd]

Uploading the file to youtube is illegal. Watching it isn't.

Good point. However, by watching the videos you are encouraging/ supporting the illegal uploading of videos onto youtube. They're not uploading them for themselves, since they obviously have the music already. It seems like a fickle difference. Bottom line is both are means of hearing a bands music without purchase or authorization.

 

[PhlegethonVeins]

Good point. However, by watching the videos you are encouraging/ supporting the illegal uploading of videos onto youtube. They're not uploading them for themselves, since they obviously have the music already. It seems like a fickle difference. Bottom line is both are means of hearing a bands music without purchase or authorization.

As I said, I don't support it as it is listening to the music in an unintended method that does indeed support those whom upload them, also it does give the whole thing a false sense of innocence with most as "its only youtube!". At the same time, its not to the same degree as downloading. Anyways, I think I made my point, whether others agree with it or not. Lets just set it to the side, eh?

 

[crimsonfloyd]

As I said, I don't support it as it is listening to the music in an unintended method that does indeed support those whom upload them, also it does give the whole thing a false sense of innocence with most as "its only youtube!". At the same time, its not to the same degree as downloading. Anyways, I think I made my point, whether others agree with it or not. Lets just set it to the side, eh?

Yeah, if we're talking about a difference in degree, then I am in agreement with you.

 

[CF87]

I'll fuck lebanon to hell. fuck that place

 

[Onder]

I'll fuck lebanon to hell. fuck that place

You first fuck your own shit, then fuck everybody else's shit. I know how to fuck shit, but you know shit about that shit so wake the fuck up bitch. Stop being important.

EDIT: And don't kill yourself because I love you dude.

 

[Seditious]

did any bands wake up today to find out they'd been robbed? I accidentally downloaded a couple albums last night.

will they only begin to suffer once I've actually heard some of it like it were on youtube, or once I've heard it on an mp3 player unlike youtube?

I'd like to delight in my wickedness, but I don't know if I've succeeded yet in bringing misfortune to others.