| reply to CitizenX9
Re: I will ALWAYS rip you off Mr. Michael Greene That is the most ridiculous thing i've ever heard..."stopping the pirating will make them lower prices on cds." Give me a break, the record companies are BLOOD suckers, some artists get f*cked over by their own record companies, like the goo goo dolls did. They could care less about the people that buy the music, they just want the $$$. |
|
 ArchAngel21xWaiting For iPhone 5Premium
join:2001-10-28
Lincoln, NE
 ·Internet Nebraska
| said by CitizenX:
That is the most ridiculous thing i've ever heard..."stopping the pirating will make them lower prices on cds." Give me a break
Just in case you are responding to me, I never said that. I am saying pirating music is wrong. "Because the CDs cost too much" is just a poor excuse to pirate music. If you feel so strongly about this then start a movement to boycott CDs form labels that are as you say "bloodsuckers".
You realize the main reason CDs are high in price is because of demand. People will keep buying them at a certain price. You want to hurt these "bloodsuckers"? Get an effective boycott campaign going and hurt their bottom line. Don't just complain on dslreports with justifications to do something illegal.
One more thing CitizenX. People like you are the reason Morpheus and Kazaa are in danger of being shut down, despite their legal uses....
--
Arch Angel - "Death is irrelevant"
[text was edited by author 2002-02-28 17:51:43]
[text was edited by author 2002-02-28 17:54:38] |
|
| Oh, I do believe it's beginning elsewhere as well... Too many average people are beginning to ask why they're spending upwards of almost $20 for crap music. A large part of the drop in sales isn't piracy as they're whining it is- it's because the economy just can't sustain the model they've shifted to (Whereas before it was akin to mass logging the money from the population, it's more akin to strip-mining now...). |
|
|
|
| reply to ArchAngel21x
You realize morpheus is 99.9% made up of people like me? I guess not...and I'd rather STEAL from the music companies (or atleast that's what they call it)than boycott. Pirating music has nothing to do with them losing money, statistics actually prove that after naspter was created the record industry was making more profit. Oh and something else....a LARGE number of bands said they would like their music to float around the internet for free, big bands, not just small local groups that want to be heard. The record company owns those certain bands' music so it's not even the bands music anymore, it's the record companies. It's to the point where if you want to be a BIG SHOT band you have to sell everything you work hard to create to a record company that gives you 3% of the total income you make for them. That's pathetic. The record companies use the fact that they lose money to justify shutting down napster, and just like them, i will use the fact that they are overpricing to an extreme to pirate. |
|
ArchAngel21xWaiting For iPhone 5Premium
join:2001-10-28
Lincoln, NE Reviews:
·Internet Nebraska
| My final thought on this I think the record companies don't pay the artists enough. I also think CDs could cost less. The bottom line is stealing is stealing is stealing. Pirating by any other name with any excuse is still pirating. Pirating, instead of simply going without, or buying the music, is not the legal, moral, or mature way to handle this. That is my story and I am sticking to it. Have a nice day.
--
Arch Angel - "Death is irrelevant" |
|
| reply to CitizenX9
Re: I will ALWAYS rip you off Mr. Michael Greene I believe the bands you are referring to must have signed agreements with these record companies. Those agreements specify the terms and conditions of the business relationship.
No one forced the bands to sign. They signed because they saw a benefit to them for doing so. If they didn't see a benefit they would not have signed. There are certainly places they could have gone to have their music published without willingly entering into an agreement with a major label.
I also agree that stealing is stealing is stealing.
There are other ways to change the system if you don't like it. |
|
 jhudson2Copyright Martyr
join:2000-11-07
San Marcos, CA | said by JustInit:
I also agree that stealing is stealing is stealing.
It really isn't quite as simple as that, is it? The RIAA has defined "stealing" quite broadly and, not surprisingly, defined the term in their favor. I don't accept their definition because it's not in MY favor. Who has the moral high ground?
As for your assertion that there are other places to get music published aside from record company dominated ones I would suggest that if that were true the bands themselves would keep the $18 or so profit on each CD and use these venues. They do benefit by being on a major label ONLY because the market is rigged by those same labels the bands "voluntarily" signed with.
Clearly there are "other ways to change the system" but why bother? The system has already changed by pure capitalistic means and the record companies lost. Who has a problem with that, except the record companies? |
|
| reply to JustInit
Do you not get it? The ONLY way a band can make it big is by signing on with a big record company. It's either be a small, nobody band, or sell your creative talent COMPLETELY to a record company, tough choice. |
|
| said by CitizenX:
Do you not get it? The ONLY way a band can make it big is by signing on with a big record company. It's either be a small, nobody band, or sell your creative talent COMPLETELY to a record company, tough choice.
I get it CitizenX. I have a fairly clear understanding of the situation.
Every industry has it's "rules". It appears that you do not agree with the "rules" of the recording industry so you have decided to violate established law (regardless of what you would like your reality to be there are laws against copyright infringement) as your protest against the rules that you do not like.
You have said it your self. The bands you are so worried about have CHOSEN to sell their music and the rights to it to the record labels of their choice. They must see some benefit and personal gain in the arrangement or they would not do it. If they sign these agreements without an understanding of what they are signing then they need to gain a better understanding of the business world they have chosen to work in.
If the bands felt the same way you did they would not enter into such agreements.
Perhaps you could become a manager for one of these bands and help to drive a legitimate reform of the recording industry. |
|
| said by JustInit:
You have said it your self. The bands you are so worried about have CHOSEN to sell their music and the rights to it to the record labels of their choice. They must see some benefit and personal gain in the arrangement or they would not do it. If they sign these agreements without an understanding of what they are signing then they need to gain a better understanding of the business world they have chosen to work in.
Look up "Hobson's Choice". |
|
| How is it they have no choice?
See the previous post regarding a band that chose to make their own CD and sell it for $5.
I do not disagree that there are some very serious problems with the recording industry. However, the fact remains that bands that sign with major record labels do so of their own free will and choice. Or did someone hold a gun to their head and force them?
I work in the television industry. If do not like the business environment I have chosen to work in I can choose to change what I do. So can you. So can a musician.
Or, if I get tired of working in a corporate environment I can choose to work as a free-lance consultant or system integrator.
There may be a situation where a musician is so poor and desperate that he feels he has no choice but to sign away the rights to his music but he still does so with the hope that his fortune will turn around.
My point is there is always a choice. The choice may not be a pleasant one or one that we would prefer but there is always a choice. For instance, rather than sign the rights to your music away to a major label you could choose to have it produced by a lesser known studio, or rent a studio and do it yourself.
Artists sign with major labels because they expect to reap a personal gain (bigger house, faster car, public recognition, whatever) from the deal. |
|
