RSS
Add to Chrome
Guest Op-Ed: Why I’m a Third-World File-Sharer

Guest Op-Ed: Why I’m a Third-World File-Sharer

Bilal, a regular reader of ZeroPaid, shares his thoughts on piracy, observing that the entertainment industry’s outdated content distribution system means he gets a ‘sorry, this content is not available in your territory’ message on almost every music or video website he visits

I’ve been listening to music for as long as I had ears, literally. I remember (from my baby pictures of course) when I was 1 year old, my mom used to put a small radio next to my bed, n it on for me to sleep while listening to music, and I grew up appreciating that.

Fast-forward a few more years, looking at my father’s tape collection, a mix of Bee Gees, Aretha Franklin, Status Quo, and lots of old Maxell and red Sony mix tapes that I’m still clueless about their content names, made his catalog, but all I know is that they were the songs that changed my life, crafted long lasting memories and tunes into my head, and I would give my right arm to get these tapes back. Opening an old black tape case, pulling out the Maxell tape and putting it in the old cracky-noise-making stereo tape player that we had to listen to Bootsy Collins work his Bass Guitar, was and always will be a sparkling memory.

When my teenage years came, my friends used to come over to listen to the newest tapes. Of course, it was the time of being cool, less Pet Shop Boys, and more of Backstreet Boys. We used to exchange tapes, make copies and mix tapes for each other, that was the trend back then, that was the early 90s Facebook.

Of course that might sound like any of your childhood stories, well you better save them somewhere and tell them to your kids with a “once upon a time” at the beginning of your conversation.

If this would happen these days, my father would spend the rest of his life behind bars, and I would probably be in the cell next to him doing 5 to 10 years, and the Maxell graveyard would have been full with demolished tapes.

How do I listen to music 2 decades after my first tooth? Just like 95% percent of the earth’s population. Of course, my reasons could be different from any of them.

I live in a place, a doomed place should I say, called the “3rd World”, where we get the leftovers of the Western world, where we get to listen to Kasabian’s new album 6 months after the British do, and where we get the “sorry, this content is not available in your territory” message on almost every music or video website.

Retail stores such as Virgin Megastore, are the best place to buy the new Shakira album, but don’t even think of searching for Mingus Big Band Live at UCLA, you will only get a “huh?” answer from the people behind the counter.

Just to name a few, iTunes, Amazon MP3, and all other legal online music stores, are simply not available in this part of the world. And just for the record, their content, before last week, was DRM protected. Some songs on iTunes and Amazon MP3 have been made more expensive, from $0.99 to $1.29 a song.

Pandora was an amazing online radio, free and simple to use, but one day, they have decided that people outside the United States are not worthy listeners. Last.fm is another cool free online radio, but soon it will charge people outside USA, UK, and Germany for its services. Spotify is a new online radio that offers a huge library of music content, of course, you have to be “not” in this part of the world to be able to use it, even if you paid 99 Euros for the premium account.

So you tell me, where can I get the new PJ Harvey and John Parish album from?

I have worked for a major record label for a little less than two years, and believe me, everything made sense back then, but moving away from it made me realize how disconnected they are from the people, and from music fans. Just to listen to a song nowadays is considered a privilege, an achievement, how about buying it.

So the next time you talk about, what you call, piracy and how to fight it, I consider providing any original album of Steven Wilson’s Incredible Expanding Mindfunk, from any retailer in this region, a great step for mankind.

___________________________________________

**Thanks to Bilal, his last name I left purposely unmentioned, for taking the time to share your story with us. If any of you have file-sharing or P2P related stories you think readers will be interetsted in please submit to [email protected]**

Jared Moya
I've been interested in P2P since the early, high-flying days of Napster and KaZaA. I believe that analog copyright laws are ill-suited to the digital age, and that art and culture shouldn't be subject to the whims of international entertainment industry conglomerates. Twitter | Google Plus
Insane Cranium Dude
Insane Cranium Dude

The music/movie industries should take advice from Valve (the video game producer.) When they did worldwide simultaneous (all regions at the same time) releases, piracy rates dropped significantly.The whole idea of "region codes" and "regional distribution limitations" is BS and only promotes more piracy. Why should the UK, Egypt, etc have to wait for something that is already out in Japan or the US? It makes no sense!

rustplay
rustplay

this is ridiculous. file sharing copyrighted material is not even stealing. if a record company releases an album and i buy a legal CD and then lend it to a friend who makes a copy and then gives it back to me IT IS NOT STEALING how is that stealing? i still have my cd and the record company still has the master.this is what i think is stealing. if you go to car dealership, hot-wire one of the cars and drive away, then you are stealing because the car no longer will be there to be sold.The record companies don't realise that "losing money" might actually be because people don't like new music anymore because is sold more like a product, not as an art work, so they dont lose money because people "steal music" it might just be that people don't like what they offer.And to those content creatiors out there: if you can't deal with those things then do something else instead, like cooking arab food or something, i've tasted it, it's delicious seriously. i bet it sells good and no one can fileshare your food. LOL Anyway, no job is perfect, you will always have to deal with something like comepeting companies.

LoL
LoL

- Is the little guy that suffers?I'm yet to see proof of that, just by visiting torrent sites or other P2P forums you don't see Joe the musician being pirated because Joe it's not even seen. What I do see is new models sprung it up like "slicethepie" or "sellaband" that make the promoting and discovery of new bands a profitable proposition for fans and create a thousand new scouts for new artists and the costs of making new CDs is paid ... surprise!... by the fans and it seems to be working all those guys would have flopped already.- People are thiefs? No they aren't people listen to music and enjoy videos for free already it's called TV and Radio and it doesn't happen to have a negative impact and to be honest radio stations in the U.S. don't even paid royalties to the copyright industry because when they were forced to pay it they stopped airing and the industry in a hurry back off of the idea because of falling sales, but right now the industry is at it again trying to squeeze money and they got smart too because they lobby it for something that prevents radios stations from going indie even if they wanted too. So no because people are listening to music for free it doesn't mean the end of a market or the music industry would have be gone a long time ago, people use the internet the same way the use TV and Radio and to think that listening to radio or viewing free TV is criminal is just wrong and it is what people are trying to do right now with this copyright BS saying the people robbed them of income when was the industry that robbed society, lied to society and cheated society from their culture first implementing 150 years of copyright, if we had 2 years of copyright we would probably not be having this discussion.- The people are doing it to themselves? People like to blame the other side always and it is no different in this case, in one side people will say it is the on damn fault of the industry for people to go to other places to find things and on the other hand they blame people for the laws they are forced to put in place how nice of them. The only thing I really now is that I'm not buying music ever again from an industry that can hurt me or I will pirate it or I will find alternatives that use liberal licences like CC Commons that you can find in Jamendo and for TV you have Miro, come and get me if you can, when I cannot hide anymore I just will change my habits, it is not funny how in the year 2007 or 2008 the CD sales fall 50% in a sharp decline that could not be explained by piracy alone and it coincided with the public statement from the music industry that they would not sue more costumers? Push people and you will see what happens.Conclusion:Hell yah! I'm taking my chances, I'm pissed and tired and so are a lot of people. Pass ACTA or other draconian laws and you see more and more people jumping the pirate wagon doubt that? don't say we didn't tell ya before.

Dorothy
Dorothy

Sam I Am wrote:"And if you think government’s all over the world are going to sell out artists and the entertainment industries who support them (and not incidentally PAY them, too) and the essential tax base they provide, go ahead, think that too. ... "Governments protect and allow privacy and freedom to their citizens in direct proportion to the respect the citizens offer in return. Expect nothing but greater surveillance, a profound loss of privacy, a near ruined internet and a growing police state to make Orwell blush if you keep this shit up. And don’t take my word for it. Take a history class sometime."------------Good God man, you have been holed up in the entertainment business too long. The world does not revolve around your industry. Homo Sapiens everywhere care much more about their environment, food, health, safety, and family. I can and do go see a local artiste or poet if I feel the need to be entertained. I don't need your corporate packaged and distributed aural and visual junk food.Today I shared a good home cooked meal with a group of friends, we joked and talked, and the last guest stayed to play a round of chess. Tomorrow I'll play tennis and attend the opening of a local art exhibition. We are happy.We'll be spending our limited money and time to travel more and share the joy of being face-to-face with our fellow human beings and see the beauty of this world, and less on media. We don't like being talked down to as if your product is as essential as air. it's not.The reason why you need to sustain such a high profit margin is that it has to be applied to marketing to convince people to buy stuff they don't need. It's a vicious cycle you're stuck in, like a lot of corporate America.You represent a dispensable industry, Sam I Am. Get over it, and get a life too.

Reality
Reality

SamIAm has given up the use of logic and reasoning. If you look at his "arguments" carefully, they are full of ad hominem or just straight unsupported BS."You must be drunk." "The fatcats are as fat as ever"Come on, Sam. What *is* the difference you are referring to between the world oil markets and the world music markets? I'm sure there is one; I'm not so sure you're smart enough to describe it.How *can* you sustain a business where you paint many of your best customers as your worst enemies and sue them?Is it only struggling or well-established singers who can afford to give their stuff away? I've heard both from you here in this same thread; get your story straight.Do you even understand the distinctions between intellectual property and real property, or the way computers function by repeatedly copying information internally? With your "the law is the law" views about $1,920,000 judgments, do you support the Spanish judicial decision that digital distribution is not distribution and does not constitute a a violation of copyright law absent evidence of the file's actual use?See, I don't think you do. I happen to think that you only want what's best for you, not the consumers, not your artists, and not the artists your industry has dumped by the wayside all these years. They just weren't good enough for you to retain your approval, they didn't have the "grand new sound".Well, now you've got the cold shock of the real world to contend with so you scream and scream as fast as you can manufacture lies. Good luck in this fight, man. You'll need it.

Skymonrie
Skymonrie

Sam I AmPeople here are repeatedly telling you, you're stuck in old ways and every time the reply is very defensive.Take a moment to reread what is actually being talked about calmly and you will see they are right."The recording industry, like it or not, owns the rights to everything they’ve signed and promoted since before Sam Phillips launched SUN in the early 1950’s. Same with the motion picture industry. Same with books, games, that’s how the structure works. Change the structure, work within it or take your chances. This was never that complicated."In all these cases mentioned people CAN get a good idea what the product is like for themselves before endulging in a full on purchase.Motion pictures - you get trailers; enough of the film to give you a good idea about the WHOLE filmBooks - Quite simply; you can pick the book up off the shelf and have a quick read of the synopsis at least without a clerk trying to bite your leg off.Games - Demo's, trailers, full on in-depth preview, gameplay footage, the list goes on and onThe problem that a lot of people have when it comes to music is that, you will hear one or two songs from the radio and other peoples opinion on the other 3/4 of an album. At no real point do you get the chance to guage the overall product; a purchase is a bigger "gamble".Music is a very opinionated form of entertainment and can be sold and enjoyed without any physcial action needed. I'm not defending piracy as the act of stealing content with the intention of passing it on for personal profit is like stealing a content makers air but what has been so often labelled as "clear cut piracy" is not explained by just one word

Sam I Am
Sam I Am

Soulxtc, I've read all those studies when they first broke and I regularly serve on industry and legislative panels here in Manhattan trying to sort this mess out. You aren't offering anything new here, so I'll try to make this simple for you.The recording industry, like it or not, owns the rights to everything they've signed and promoted since before Sam Phillips launched SUN in the early 1950's. Same with the motion picture industry. Same with books, games, that's how the structure works. Change the structure, work within it or take your chances. This was never that complicated.if you think that going digital is going to foment revolution and create a new world order, fine, have at it if it makes you feel better.If you think civil disobedience is going to change the entire legal/industrial/governmental complex of the world, go ahead, be my guest. Seriously. Take your best shot.If you think that the worlds governments are going to throw their hands up and walk away from the network, discarding the promise of digital commerce and digital distribution then all I can offer is, "Yeah. Right." You must be drunk.And if you think government's all over the world are going to sell out artists and the entertainment industries who support them (and not incidentally PAY them, too) and the essential tax base they provide, go ahead, think that too.And if you think "you can't stop us" is a valid justification and market force for why rules of commerce and social behavior offline will not be inevitably applied online as well when this finally gets sorted out, you'll enjoy Tenenbaum's trial in a few weeks.I couldn't care less how much legal purchasing a sometimes thief also does, and neither will right minded societies and their justice systems the world over.There's still never been a single valid reason why digital theft should be given even the slightest credibility and your suggestions are old, discredited and long abandoned by anyone genuinely inside this issue.Governments protect and allow privacy and freedom to their citizens in direct proportion to the respect the citizens offer in return. Expect nothing but greater surveillance, a profound loss of privacy, a near ruined internet and a growing police state to make Orwell blush if you keep this shit up. And don't take my word for it. Take a history class sometime.And finally Reznor would still be washing cars back at the dealership where he began were it not for a decade and millions of dollars of support and promotion directly from the industries that created his platform and made him a household name in the first place. You know it and I know it.Fans can buy or pass. Consumers in EVERY market of every product can buy, or pass, but they cannot steal it and call it market evolution whether you would like that or not, and the legal trends are clearing. Get caught pirating our content and make my day, Soulxtc. There's a lot more going on than you even know.And finally, if you really think that pitchforks and torches to the capital building for your "right" to free entertainment on our hardworking backs is what's next, then organize the revolution or move along. Otherwise, you are a waste of time and electrons.

Sam I Am
Sam I Am

No one given to genuine thought about this issue characterizes it as “fighting technology”, Soulxtc. It’s a clear and illegal misuse of tech. Any just society uses its resources to combat the illegal misuse of anything. Tools, cars, video. You name it. Misuse it? Government will always try to stop you. Pirates have long claimed superior numbers. Change the laws if you think you have so much influence and we have no problem, right?“To say that all file-sharers are thieves ignores the reality that many cannot afford access to the same pool of cultural works as others.” is actually quite funny. Why not also “To say that all car thieves are thieves ignores the reality that many cannot afford access to the same pool of transportation as others.”? lol That’s just poor quality reasoning.And Rubin’s famous licensing canard, on the other hand, is given scant respect in virtually EVERY school of thought, pirates alike, because the industries would just LOVE a solution like that. Here’s why.At least under current legal business practices, all industry must make real investment and then accept the risk that their investment might not pay off. In entertainment, they must seek, find and sign the talent, then nurture and develop it in a dozen different very expensive ways before an artist begins selling recordings and creating the revenue stream (in) that justifies the risk (and investment revenue) out. If you have a problem with this basic model your argument is with capitalism, not any particular industry, and you are whining on the wrong board.But if Rubin’s (extremely bad) idea took hold the industries you claim to hate and hope to destroy are now SAVED, even permanently institutionalized without ever having to lift a finger. Now their money flows in every month regardless of whether they develop hits or not; they literally cash in on their old catalog without ever having to do anything but collect.Worse, their (once) 16 billion a year industry earned through copyright and their own work now balloons to an industry many magnitudes greater. Consider that 150 million signed and paying isp licensing accounts wouldn’t be hard to achieve when there are well over 300 million people in America alone, so do the math.150 million accounts times 20 bucks a month is a staggering 3 billion a month, or a clean and easy 36 billion a year without lifting a finger. An industry “10 times the size it is now” is only 80 or 90 billion a year at the current size, an easily achievable figure when licensed around the world. And they are guaranteed this cashflow WITHOUT HAVING THE RESPONSIBILITY TO DO ANYTHING BUT COAST NOW AND FOREVERMORE. Have you ever really thought about this?I didn't think so.

rez
rez

I see SamIAm has found a new home! Same ole, same ole SIA :) still puking out his outlandish rubbish.

Sam I Am
Sam I Am

Bilal, I feel your frustration and I appreciate your purchases, but every industry must retain the right when, how and if to enter certain markets or not for a large variety of reasons too complicated for this blog. In your case, licensing issues are likely the obstacle and industry would go in if they could, believe me: if there is a buck to be made they’d be there if they could. But alas, I don't agree with you. I sincerely apologize. I've never believed consumers have any right to use an unpaid taking (or outright theft) as a market force.Shadowblack, the fatcat administrations in every digital business have gotten raises every year since Napster as always, largely because there are so many consumers with ethics who still create vast revenue streams, but also because the administrations now have their usual responsibilities PLUS this mess they now have to deal with, even though your theft is in no way their fault. Auto theft isn't the fault of the world's automakers, either, no matter how high the price, how limited the models or paint colors or how inflexible the option packages. I just don't buy it. Stealing is wrong, and digital industry isn’t “stealing” from you when you purchase with no gun to your head. If you think our work is such crap, why do you take unpaid copies of it?But as legitimate sales figures fall since the advent of piracy, what is drying up is royalty and residual to the artists themselves due to the drop in sales. They have to sell units or they don’t get paid so it’s the little working musician you have fucked far worse than anything the industry has ever done, and BOY do they know it.Also R&D of new artists has been almost eliminated and signing bonuses are now tiny because the labels know that the recordings will not make a return on their pirated investment, hence, small bands have smaller investments and far less chance in this market. And no small band willingly handles PR, marketing, touring, graphics work, promotion and recording and still try to write tunes and lyrics as well. One of the biggest lies in the debate is that the labels don’t do anything. In point of fact the labels do an enormous amount of work and support and they pay bigtime, too, they have enriched countless artists and working musicians well beyond their dreams in the past 50 years. But piracy doesn’t pay and we all know it.My firm writes lighting shows and touring support, industrial shows and product showcase all over the world for music and a hundred different brand names you’d know. Since going digital in the mid 90’s our licensed shows have been blatantly ripped off, copied illegally and used again and again unpaid, all over the planet. Our legal staff can’t even keep up with it. Even my own staffers know piracy limits our growth and our hiring and is the problem and not a solution, EVERY established content creator sees what’s happened to their income and it’s no coincidence it corresponds to Fanning’s Napster in 1999. Piracy is about hypocrisy and TPB are now the poster boys.No-to-Mafia’s comment seeks to compare international contractual energy agreements between governments upon which the safety and security of the world’s people and the entire world’s economy arguably is based....... with um..... stealing a copy of IronMan online.On our side of the debate/divide, it’s this kind of uneducated thought that gathers credibility for us in the courts and legislatures, and increasingly in the court of public opinion, too. People know piracy is wrong. I’m no hypocrite No-To-Mafia, I’ve been consistent for a long time on this issue of digital theft. What a deep thinker you must be. Thanks for commenting. lol

No-to-MAFIAA
No-to-MAFIAA

Sam I Am:What would you do if , say, the Middle East, Canada, Russia, Venezuela and Nigeria decide that they wouldn't export oil anymore and that what they produce will be for domestic consumption only. What then?Would you stay on your moral high horse or will you invade?Don't be a hypocrite. You know which option you'll choose.

Sam I Am
Sam I Am

Coconut, I think I hear the sincerity in your voice and I thank you for that. I blogged and spoke in schools and worked for years trying to head off this legal confrontation but pirates just won't stop stealing. Now I consult with industry and law enforcement and I personally lobby my legislators for less privacy and harsher laws and serious penalty. But I tried to educate for years, Coconut. I tried. This isn't the buggy whip situation at all, our product is the whip and you still enjoy it everyday. Only the distribution is changed and THAT is what you've used to steal a buggy whip you still want and the stealing just won't end. Our products are as viable as ever if they were properly protected from stealing, as clearly, they must be.What filesharer's don't realize and don't want to think about is damage and the enormous bad will built up amongst the artists themselves. The fatcats are as fat as ever, you are kiliing the little guy before he ever gets a fair chance. A small handful of beginning artists sometimes support filesharing for the exposure it can bring, but think about the 10's perhaps 100's of thousands of well established recording and motion picture artists, game designers, book writers, families all with kids to feed and house and educate and lives to fund while realizing filesharing is halving their income while their work is as hugely enjoyed as ever. What about us? Your very actions make clear you don't give a shit about us, Coconut. Finally, as in Jammie Thomas's case, we are only returning the favor.No one expects a free taste at a restaurant or a free mixed drink to try it or a free short-stay at a hotel or a short flight with an airline or a few blocks in a cab to try the service and see if you like it. No one expects a free trial of automotive service or parts, or lawnwork or carpentry or carwashing or concert-going before you buy, so why a chance to watch a movie to decide if you want to actually PAY to watch it again? Are you kidding? That's what the trailer is for. Ad-based RADIO is how you sample properly. Do YOU get paid for your work, Coconut? Take it as we sell it or just leave it just like your job, like every other business, don't buy it, but stop stealing our stuff for sale and trying to ethically justify it. If shoplifting were off the charts in consumer protest you might have a point, but no analog business is plagued in this way, and that is why your arguments ring so empty and so untrue.In fact, Coconut, only the digital industries are affected in this way, and that (as we all know) is NOT based on some higher nobility, (free speech ha) it's because technology and privacy laws still facilitate your theft. Your arguments would hold far more credibility if the world's consumers stopped buying and demanded free trials of everything first, but they don't, only digital, because thieving online is fast and simple and takes no courage.So instead you hide anonymously and fill terabytes with our work calling it "samples" and thinking you are being clever. And incredibly, you complain (!) as we reluctantly take legal steps (at our own expense again) to curtail this and defend our right to be paid as we have earned it. For ten years, now, we've tried to respect your privacy while careers have been decimated and pirates seek new ways to continue the damage they are doing. It's sad and it's vile and "everything must be free" will not last forever. It will only last until extraordinary surveillance and punishment curtails it. It's YOU who is forcing this mess, Coconut, not us. You could always, ALWAYS, just not buy it and do without it. This is not food or healthcare, you know.Which is why, at the end of the day, legislators and prosecution and punishment and lawyers are what established artistic professionals have to work with. So we do what you have driven us to do. You started it and we sat quietly to see where this was going while you stole us blind for years, but now we are fighting back. If you continue to take without paying first, perhaps someday I'll see you in court. There is no way we are going to throw our education and experience and hard earned careers away because you feel entitled to "try before you buy." There is NO way my employees and I will ever accept this third rate status in the market, and Tenenbaum is next. NO WAY Coconut. NO.....WAY. Not now, not ever. We get paid, too. Take care.Sam I Am

Coconut1967
Coconut1967

Last post: Corruption is well documented, there are all kinds of lists of who is on the payroll for the entertainment industry and you know it. If you don't know it a simple Google search will assist. If you are a content creator I am genuine in saying sorry you are losing money, I seriously am. I don’t want the people who make good things lose money. With that said I don’t want to lose more of my money to bad things created just to rob me of my money and you know that this is done. If you are a good creator then I highly doubt you are losing that much money. As a creator I am sure you want to only put out your best product and you want people to enjoy it and obviously buy it. As a creator how many of not your best product was released as just filler or not completed because your owner forced you into producing something less than what was desired by your self?Seriously I don’t want to take money from you and I want to pay you if I enjoy your product. It is the company’s forcing consumers to be this way and the internet is helping us no doubt. Is it wrong? Maybe by the law, but I think try before I buy is a good thing. Sam, I am serious when I say if you are producing good product I probably own it (paid for by me) Just watch you don’t piss off all the paying people like me. Its not that I don’t want to buy, its, I don’t want to buy crap.Take care

Sam I Am
Sam I Am

Your arguments are old and tired and discredited with every new courtcase. Technology is way out ahead of the law and some percentage of consumers will steal when given the anonymous chance. Does this come as some noble surprise to you?If you have evidence that laws or courts or jurors or judges are being "purchased" in any country anywhere I suggest you document the corruption or just be quiet. Nothing gets solved with baseless allegation.If you were a content creator, (as I am) and if you were raped for your income as we've been these past 10 years, you'd likely see things differently.But as a consumer with an internet connection and a belief that you are now entitled through technology to try our work for free, to watch or listen or play it, to sample it, to keep it without paying or to pay only if you feel like it, and to do all this for nothing paid to us in the meantime, your sense of "fair" is warped and now more and more it winds up in court where it belongs. Finally. Even the acolytes of "free", TPB, *sold* their website. It was their work for years and they wanted to get paid for it. Imagine that.It's a sincere pleasure watching the lives of the figureheads of online infringement being held accountable to their own selfish entitlement. And if you think digital distribution of merchandise over the internet will be abandoned by government and industry because they "can't stop you", pay close attention to the Joel Tenenbaum case beginning in a week or so. This entire debacle is only just beginning, and the ISP's are finally being drawn into their own form of accountability. Your free ride will slowly, painfully but mercifully draw to a close. Take and pay as always or be caught, convicted and punished, and good luck with that.

Coconut1967
Coconut1967

So the laws need to be changed in the US. I've been screwed way too many times, everything will be tried before I buy. How is it theft if I try it don't like it and delete it, or if I like it and go an buy it? We will never agree but fair is fair and if people get screwed enough they find ways to not be screwed anymore. Sure the industry has piled tons of money into buying laws, not that they are right or just or even fair and they did this with consumers money in order to bite the hand that feeds. This is and will not go away and the entertainment industry will lose in the end. Sure they will win the odd battle by sueing the odd consumer but in the end the consumers will win the war. File sharing of copy rights has grown a few more rigged or paid court wins and everyone will rebel! It is time to find some fair ground for consumers and industry. Lets face it the entertainment industry never was fair to creators or consumers and they are not about to change. If you truely believe these laws are fair, then there is nothing I can further say to you. Somehow this makes sense for you to screw customers and creators and expect your buisness to grow. Fine come and get me and the millions of others, the only thing your winning at is convincing me to buy nothing, even the stuff I like ever again.Good luck with that!

Sam I Am
Sam I Am

And you made the reference to thieves. It's timely, it's appropriate, indicative and analogous, and it's why punishments are continuing to ratchet up, but I didn't make it.You did.

Sam I Am
Sam I Am

Coconut, we've all licensed music on deteriorating purchased formats for decades. I've also purchased my fair share of albums with only the hit tune displaying any real quality. All of that is inherently beside the point. You can take it as offered or leave it. But you don't "test drive" a movie, book, game or recording. If you do, you'll be punished.Don't know it? FINE. Don't buy it. Don't "testdrive it", either, don't "try before you buy" because the product is there if you want to risk it or simply leave it alone and do without if it is not available at all. The rules are clear. Play by them or accept the risk of prosecution. Why is this so complicated for you?Folks like you and Bilal bend over backwards in a rationalization of ethical gymnastics that breaks the law while you whine about loss of privacy, prosecution, conviction and punishment.Keep downloading unavailable product, or "trying" before you buy until you get caught, and then explain to the judge how the rules are unfair in your view (poor baby) and laws don't apply to you, and you *should* be allowed priviliges while the creators who actually do the work of creation, distribution and accept the risk of sale..... should not.

Coconut1967
Coconut1967

Sam I understand your argument, however it is as flawed as everyone elses. It is not as simple as you state the problems. Even a car you get to try before you buy. Most so called pirates like myself try before I buy. I download content. If it sucks why in the hell would I ever keep it? If I went and bought that CD or game or software and I did not like it or it did not work I am not entitled to return it except for the same CD, Game or software. I am not entitled to a return of my funds. I did not create this policy Music, game and movie industries came up with this to screw consumers and steal more money from them. Music, Game and movie industries are more like pirates than any downloader as they have stollen from us for years. Sam I bet you have tons of product that you bought wished you had not and are now stuck with it because you are not entitled to return it. I agree at least you had the oportunity to fully test drive your car before you bought it but this is not a good example when comparing to the entertainment industry. You were allowed to make an informed decision. Downloading allows users to make informed decisions and the entertainment industry is losing money because of informed decisions more that the odd people who steal. Also there are plenty of car theifs also.

shadowblack
shadowblack

@Sam I AmYou forget one "minor" detail - digital goods DO NOT follow the same rules as physical ones. Once you have a digital copy of a song or movie you can make MILLIONS of copies for free and in very short time. Such a thing is simply impossible with physical goods.and one other thing: "I think I understand what Bilal is telling us, but I’m unsympathetic to an entitled mindset that says “If you don’t offer product to me when where and how I want it–and at a price I say is reasonable–I will obtain it however I am able.” That’s just wrong."No, IT"S NOT WRONG.This is PRECISELY how the real world works: I go to a shop looking for a product. If they don't have it - I go to another shop (whether I'll buy the same product or another - similar - one doesn't matter). If they have it, but the price is too high - I go to another shop. Something wrong with that?I want a product when I want, how I want it, and at a price I find reasonable. Either the shop offers to to me, or I go elsewhere. It's that simple. That's not entitlement, that's how the world works.

malcolm hume
malcolm hume

If you don't like the product, leave it alone.The thing is, local artists and poets usually have the university system to fall back on. Almost always. Popular musicians have to ply their trade in a different arena. So it's apples and oranges.

mal greenborg
mal greenborg

Then pay a dollar for thesong you like on itunes and leave the rest. This argument at least sounded like it made sense ten years ago but it's just not real anymore.

D.AN
D.AN

"If you think that the worlds governments are going to throw their hands up and walk away from the network, discarding the promise of digital commerce and digital distribution then all I can offer is, “Yeah. Right.” You must be drunk."On the contrary: the governments are encouraged to utilize new technologies more effectively.Who knows where you get all of your delusions from?"And if you think government’s all over the world are going to sell out artists and the entertainment industries who support them (and not incidentally PAY them, too) and the essential tax base they provide, go ahead, think that too."You are way out of touch."And if you think “you can’t stop us” is a valid justification and market force for why rules of commerce and social behavior offline will not be inevitably applied online as well when this finally gets sorted out, you’ll enjoy Tenenbaum’s trial in a few weeks."Rules of social behavior? Do you think that people follow a strict set of rules to interact with others in the society? Do you think that behaviors are static and that the same physical rules apply online? You are an imbecile."I couldn’t care less how much legal purchasing a sometimes thief also does, and neither will right minded societies and their justice systems the world over."You have ridiculous ideals. You are not the ideal human and it is selfish of you to want others to live the way that you do in the way that you see it."There’s still never been a single valid reason why digital theft should be given even the slightest credibility and your suggestions are old, discredited and long abandoned by anyone genuinely inside this issue."Blatant lies and misuse of words.By 'valid' you obviously intended to write 'legal'. Well, if you always called it theft in the first place, then of course you would always consider it illegal.False intimidation does not work here and you have not established any credibility. In fact, every one of your points are old and fallacious; that's the weakness of your so called 'consistency'.As for "long abandoned by anyone genuinely inside this issue", you obviously mean you and those that oppose downloading. Your use of 'genuine' is an affront: people are "genuinely inside this issue" when they analyze the issue and observe the phenomenon, unlike many that just blindly continue idiotic speculations and applying their interests, morals, and personal experiences while having no knowledge of the main foundations of the problem."Governments protect and allow privacy and freedom to their citizens in direct proportion to the respect the citizens offer in return."Iran."Expect nothing but greater surveillance, a profound loss of privacy, a near ruined internet and a growing police state to make Orwell blush if you keep this shit up."Applications of science and mathematics are outside the wills of governments. Privacy is a fundamental right of a human and by principle it cannot be taken without just cause to remove the human's innocence."And don’t take my word for it. Take a history class sometime."History classes are meant to teach people to allow them to prevent past mistakes from transpiring. They also allow one to ridicule past follies."And finally Reznor would still be washing cars back at the dealership where he began were it not for a decade and millions of dollars of support and promotion directly from the industries that created his platform and made him a household name in the first place. You know it and I know it."The conditions have changed since then, so your point no longer applies now. Get with it."Fans can buy or pass. Consumers in EVERY market of every product can buy, or pass, but they cannot steal it and call it market evolution whether you would like that or not, and the legal trends are clearing."Just to mention this now in case you haven't been paying attention: merely downloading is not stealing. That essentially negates most of your arguments. By principle, you cannot just assume every downloader to automatically be a thief.As well, you have just compared digital markets to non-digital markets, some of which would have great influences to the global economy. Just some more evidence that you equate digital theft to physical theft.As for "the legal trends are clearing", you clearly have no idea what you mean by that."Get caught pirating our content and make my day, Soulxtc. There’s a lot more going on than you even know."You assume ignorance on him? How pathetic."And finally, if you really think that pitchforks and torches to the capital building for your “right” to free entertainment on our hardworking backs is what’s next, then organize the revolution or move along."Perhaps some demand "free entertainment"; however you cannot assume every single consumer to share the same perspectives. Perhaps you have ingrained into your worthless brain too many deluded ideas of what a consumer is."Otherwise, you are a waste of time and electrons."You are a waste time and space, imbecilic fool.

soulxtc
soulxtc

You still dont get it. Say you somehow got rid of P2P today. One could still send content vis a vis e-mail attachments or encrypted data-encoded pics (Usenet anyone?).Unless the govt inspects every single byte of data you can't beat P2P, so the question is what to do as business.You have yet to answer that question.Nobody's claiming a right to free entertainment, only that it be of a certain quality and affordability.As for studies, the Canadian Govt is anything but inept..."Our analysis of the Canadian P2P file-sharing subpopulation suggests that there is a strong positive relationship between P2P file-sharing and CD purchasing. That is, among Canadians actually engaged in it, P2P file-sharing increases CD purchasing. We estimate that the effect of one additional P2P download per month is to increase music purchasing by 0.44 CDs per year. Furthermore, we find indirect evidence of the 'market creation' effect of P2P file-sharing in the positive coefficient on the variable 'Not available elsewhere'." http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/ippd-dppi.nsf/eng/ip01462.htmlAnd you're also seriously arguing that the 2nd largest business school in all of Europe has its facts wrong too? Then whose facts are you citing in contradiction to it? Ones deduced on your own?To say they lack credibility makes you look frighteningly ignorant.Case in point.A guy can DL 12 movies but would most likely have gone only to 2 or 3, which he surely does, because a CAM just cant beat the real deal.A guy can also DL 100 albums this very minute, but never would have purchased them all. He most likely would've bought 10% of them, or in this iTunes era, a dozen or so dig singles. He like what he hears and checks them out live when they're in town and perhaps even buys a t-shirt.Again all that hard work and resources to get a guy to buy a song for 99 cents from an album of 12 songs you've spent hundreds of thousands is the real killer.That is certainly so with Reznor, but the difference is he's trying to be creative and figure out how to reach his fans.Again > http://www.zeropaid.com/news/85963/video-trent-reznor-on-nins-buisness-model-future-of-music/ “We’re in between business models,” he continued. “You know, the old record labels are dead, and the new thing hasn’t really come out yet. So, I’m hoping that whatever gets established puts a lot more power in the hands of artists and more revenue.”In fact, he mentions that he’s been talking to some artists about building an infrastructure, which is still “in it’s infancy,” that would allow artists to distribute their music without having a percentage taken from them. He says it’s needed so long as record labels refuse to adapt.“I know the people running these labels and they don’t know what’s going on,” Reznor adds.Reznor also notes what artists do or do not need a record label.He says that if you want to be a sort of “Justin Timberlake-esque or American Idol-esque artist mainstream superstar” you need a record label’s bankroll and marketing power, their “permeation in the market.”But, if you are “trying to change the world when you play music,” it’s your passion, and you have a unique sound that’s not heard on the radio, then you’ll want something different.“If you have nothing in common with American Idol, and you don’t want to be The Pussycat Dolls, then you really don’t want to be on, certainly a major record label,” he adds.Why? Because he says that all a record label is concerned with is profits, they only see an artist as a “means to make revenue.”“At every fork in the road that will be what’s put first,” he comments.”Not your longevity, not your vision. How can we make money from you.”SamIam you're just a SadOldMan, and as for political representation to take on outdated copyright laws, at least we have a chance in a parliamentary, non-DEM, non-REP system in the Europe to fight the good fight. http://www.zeropaid.com/news/86617/swedish-pirate-party-copyright-laws-threaten-our-online-freedom/We'll leave the pitchforks to you as you try to try to fight the inevitable progress of content distribution.

shadowblack
shadowblack

I'm getting really sick and tired of this whole "copying == theft" crap. It's NOT the same thing.Another thing I'm getting sick and tired of is the fact that people like you keep on pretending that DIGITAL stuff is the same as physical stuff. IT"S NOT THE SAME.Once you have at least ONE digital copy you can make BILLIONS of other copies. As soon as one digital copy is made you have an infinite supply of that particular thing (be it a song, a movie, a game, or something else). How can anyone treat an infinite supply of something the same way as a finite supply of something is completely beyond me.

D.AN
D.AN

"No one given to genuine thought about this issue characterizes it as “fighting technology”, Soulxtc."Your misuse of the term 'genuine thought' is an affront. If you have not realized yet, it always has been the industries' resistance to advancing technologies."It’s a clear and illegal misuse of tech."Unintended, but not illegal. Declaring it as illegal misuse implies that the law has been properly updated to fit new technologies, which is false."Any just society uses its resources to combat the illegal misuse of anything."That's an over-simplified ideal you have there."Tools, cars, video. You name it. Misuse it? Government will always try to stop you."Can you be more specific on what you mean by "misuse"? Or is that the typical style that you use to write for your job?"Pirates have long claimed superior numbers. Change the laws if you think you have so much influence and we have no problem, right?"What the hell are you babbling about?“To say that all file-sharers are thieves ignores the reality that many cannot afford access to the same pool of cultural works as others.” is actually quite funny. Why not also “To say that all car thieves are thieves ignores the reality that many cannot afford access to the same pool of transportation as others.”? lol That’s just poor quality reasoning.That's an affront to logic. Prove that file-sharers are thieves and then say that they are thieves, but you just called them thieves to say that they are thieves. Imbecile. Whatever you would consider 'quality reasoning' can never withstand against logical reasoning. I'm quite certain that you never use the latter."And Rubin’s famous licensing canard, [...] nurture and develop it in a dozen different very expensive ways before an artist begins selling recordings and creating the revenue stream (in) that justifies the risk (and investment revenue) out."That's one of dumbest things I have read today."If you have a problem with this basic model your argument is with capitalism, not any particular industry, and you are whining on the wrong board."So you are assuming that any argument against this "basic model" is with capitalism? You are a very poor debater."But if Rubin’s [...]"The rest of this post is utterly pointless babble.

soulxtc
soulxtc

"Change the laws?" You know as well as I do that the demographic most prolific in its use of tech is also that which turns up least as the polls. Why? Apathy and for good reason. Even last year's "teabaggers" managed to have little effect on domestic borrowing and spending, with the House Majority Leader even mulling a 2ND STIMULUS PACKAGE since the first seems not to have produced the desired results.Govt cant stop data sharing for the simple reason that it would be an intrusion of privacy similar to reading ones mail."Poor quality reasoning?" How so? You've said time and time again that you expect those who want a particular album or movie to buy it on Amazon.com like everybody else irrespective of economic capacity.This DOES IGNORE THE FACT that many could not or would not buy it in the first place. You're the one being intellectually dishonest here.Read this CANADIAN GOVT STUDY: http://www.zeropaid.com/news/86009/study-pirates-buy-10-times-more-music-than-they-steal/...or this one from the BI Norwegian School of Management, the largest business school in Norway and the second largest in all of Europe, http://www.zeropaid.com/news/86009/study-pirates-buy-10-times-more-music-than-they-steal/If the business model of music industry investment IS OUTDATED as you claim, that the music industry no longer has the financial resources to nurture talent as before, then it too much change.Musicians have existed long before record labels and will be here long after. It doesn't take millions to have talent any more than it takes millions to market and distribute what it produces.Rubin's idea bad? Permanently institutionalized "bad industries?" Figures you'd prefer the status quo. It would be VOLUNTARY, and he and I are not alone is suggesting this business model.Perhaps you'd be wise to read Techdirt’s Michael Masnick case study of Trent Reznor and what NIN has done to make money in a world of free music. (http://www.zeropaid.com/news/10000/case_study_trent_reznor_and_the_future_of_the_music_industry/) [VIDEO: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Njuo1puB1lg]Connect With Fans (CwF) + Reason To Buy (RtB) = The Business Model ($$$$)"A second point that needs to be discussed is that a true reason to buy (RtB) is a voluntary transaction. Too often we've seen musicians or other content creators think that there is some sort of obligation to buy. And, so they put something out with a price tag, but without doing a very good job convincing fans why they should buy. There was no real reason -- and then they seem to lash out at their fans for hurting them. The fault, however, lies with the musician (like any business) who failed to give a proper reason to buy, and falsely assumed that fans had some sort of obligation to buy. If an artist believes there's an obligation to buy, fans will often educate the artist very quickly."Exactly.The sad truth Sam I Am is that the Earth is no longer flat in the music industry. The linear physical distribution model has gone digital and many in the industry like yourself just cant wrap your head around it.What to do? Like Masnick says focus on making good music and give fans a reason to buy. Its that simple.

D.AN
D.AN

Since it's your belief I'm not going to say anything about it."... even though your theft is in no way their fault."Now that is naive."Auto theft isn’t the fault of the world’s automakers, either, no matter how high the price, how limited the models or paint colors or how inflexible the option packages."You cannot compare digital products to cars."I just don’t buy it. Stealing is wrong, ..."But you need to confirm what is stolen."... and digital industry isn’t “stealing” from you when you purchase with no gun to your head."Con artists."If you think our work is such crap, why do you take unpaid copies of it?"Because it's been "such crap", the human mind will tend to think the quality of the next work to be the same "such crap" as well."But as legitimate sales figures fall since the advent of piracy, what is drying up is royalty and residual to the artists themselves due to the drop in sales."You should be reminded that 'real' piracy existed long before your birth. What you have stated is a false causation unless you have proved it to be real."They have to sell units or they don’t get paid so it’s the little working musician you have fucked far worse than anything the industry has ever done, and BOY do they know it."The 'artists are suffering because of piracy' fallacy again?"Also R&D of new artists has been almost eliminated and signing bonuses are now tiny because the labels know that the recordings will not make a return on their pirated investment, hence, small bands have smaller investments and far less chance in this market. And no small band willingly handles PR, marketing, touring, graphics work, promotion and recording and still try to write tunes and lyrics as well. One of the biggest lies in the debate is that the labels don’t do anything. In point of fact the labels do an enormous amount of work and support and they pay bigtime, too, they have enriched countless artists and working musicians well beyond their dreams in the past 50 years. But piracy doesn’t pay and we all know it."Speculations, not facts. As well, beliefs do not belong in any debate."My firm ... "That's what I thought." ... writes lighting shows and touring support, industrial shows and product showcase all over the world for music and a hundred different brand names you’d know."It would help you to actual mention any random one, you know?"Since going digital in the mid 90’s our licensed shows have been blatantly ripped off, copied illegally and used again and again unpaid, all over the planet. Our legal staff can’t even keep up with it. Even my own staffers know piracy limits our growth and our hiring and is the problem and not a solution, EVERY established content creator sees what’s happened to their income and it’s no coincidence it corresponds to Fanning’s Napster in 1999. Piracy is about hypocrisy and TPB are now the poster boys."You talk about credible arguments, but I suppose that never meant anything about you being credible."No-to-Mafia’s comment seeks to compare international contractual energy agreements between governments upon which the safety and security of the world’s people and the entire world’s economy arguably is based... with um... stealing a copy of IronMan online."The world is gradually become less reliant on oil for energy, if you haven't realized."On our side of the debate/divide, it’s this kind of uneducated thought that gathers credibility for us in the courts and legislatures, and increasingly in the court of public opinion, too."If you haven't noticed yet, that "credibility" continues to decrease."People know piracy is wrong."But what is real piracy in this matter? It is ridiculously obvious that you are merely thinking that downloading is piracy; as a consequence, you are only regarding the 'creators' and non-end-users as the 'people'."I’m no hypocrite No-To-Mafia, ..."Oh really?"I’ve been consistent for a long time on this issue of digital theft."Then that just simplifies my derivation of your apparent perspectives from your postings."What a deep thinker you must be."He posted a single comment of 57 words excluding your name, which is hardly enough information. One could say you are just making things up. Perhaps you are thinking too deeply on over simplified fallacies."Thanks for commenting. lol"lolfail

soulxtc
soulxtc

Good luck fighting technology SamIAm being that's it's worked so well thus far. Truth be told file-sharers will simply move to darknets, VPNS, and other forms of anonymized P2P which the legislature in a FREE SOCIETY can never outlaw short of full data packet inspection.The only reason file-sharing exists in the first place is to shore up gaps in its current business model, for some markets will bear different prices for content than others, as does availability (think TV shows, movies, and sports programming).To say that all file-sharers are thieves ignores the reality that many cannot afford access to the same pool of cultural works as others.At what point does the music of long dead artists like Jimi Hendrix or Frank Sinatra belong to society, as part of its great cultural fabric, rather than languish for decades under the dictate of corporate entities?Now I'm not saying that content creators shouldn't be fairly compensated, but surely there is need for reform on the level of revenue distribution as well as the number of years they are copyright protected.Moreover, the music industry ignores the future at its own peril. Digital "pick and choose" stores like iTunes have done a great deal to change the industry as well. Years of hard work poured in for a single 99 cent purchase is a shame.The answer? ISP level "all you can eat" music licensing as suggested by none other than music wunderkind Rick Rubin himself (http://tiny.cc/Wou9B)“You would subscribe to music,” Rubin explained, as he settled on the velvet couch in his library. “You’d pay, say, $19.95 a month, and the music will come anywhere you’d like. In this new world, there will be a virtual library that will be accessible from your car, from your cellphone, from your computer, from your television. Anywhere. The iPod will be obsolete, but there would be a Walkman-like device you could plug into speakers at home. You’ll say, ‘Today I want to listen to … Simon and Garfunkel,’ and there they are. The service can have demos, bootlegs, concerts, whatever context the artist wants to put out. And once that model is put into place, the industry will grow 10 times the size it is now.”

D.AN
D.AN

"But I tried to educate for years, Coconut. I tried."Merely trying is nothing. It's how and who you attempted to educate that is important."Our products are as viable as ever if they were properly protected from stealing, as clearly, they must be."Non Sequitur."What filesharer’s don’t realize and don’t want to think about is damage and the enormous bad will built up amongst the artists themselves."Do you have confirmation?"The fatcats are as fat as ever, you are kiliing the little guy before he ever gets a fair chance. A small handful of beginning artists sometimes support filesharing for the exposure it can bring, but think about the 10’s perhaps 100’s of thousands of well established recording and motion picture artists, game designers, book writers, families all with kids to feed and house and educate and lives to fund while realizing filesharing is halving their income while their work is as hugely enjoyed as ever. What about us? Your very actions make clear you don’t give a shit about us, Coconut. Finally, as in Jammie Thomas’s case, we are only returning the favor."After looking at the last few sentences I can safely say you have no idea what you are writing."No one expects a free taste at a restaurant or a free mixed drink to try it or a free short-stay at a hotel or a short flight with an airline or a few blocks in a cab to try the service and see if you like it. No one expects a free trial of automotive service or parts, or lawnwork or carpentry or carwashing or concert-going before you buy, so why a chance to watch a movie to decide if you want to actually PAY to watch it again? Are you kidding? That’s what the trailer is for. Ad-based RADIO is how you sample properly."Can you recall that you guys classified radio as stealing?"Do YOU get paid for your work, Coconut? Take it as we sell it or just leave it just like your job, like every other business, don’t buy it, but stop stealing our stuff for sale and trying to ethically justify it. If shoplifting were off the charts in consumer protest you might have a point, but no analog business is plagued in this way, and that is why your arguments ring so empty and so untrue."I can say exactly the same thing about you."In fact, Coconut, only the digital industries are affected in this way, and that (as we all know) is NOT based on some higher nobility, (free speech ha) it’s because technology and privacy laws still facilitate your theft."So you're saying it's the law's fault now? I thought that you took the lawful route as you kept spouting "it's the law", but I suppose you just took the personal one. Now that's hypocritical!"Your arguments would hold far more credibility if the world’s consumers stopped buying and demanded free trials of everything first, but they don’t, only digital, because thieving online is fast and simple and takes no courage."One more time, the rules for physical products do not apply to digital products. Now you mention courage, I suppose you are encouraging physical product theft, which causes real damages, over digital product theft, which really just depends on the specific item."So instead you hide anonymously and fill terabytes with our work calling it “samples” and thinking you are being clever."Now that's as simple as simple gets simplistic. Too bad it's not actually that simple, but I suppose simple is the reason you guys are acting this same way."And incredibly, you complain (!) as we reluctantly take legal steps (at our own expense again) to curtail this and defend our right to be paid as we have earned it."Reluctantly? I laugh at you."For ten years, now, we’ve tried to respect your privacy while careers have been decimated and pirates seek new ways to continue the damage they are doing."Erroneous. Well, it depends on what you mean by 'pirates'."It’s sad and it’s vile and “everything must be free” will not last forever."Who are you accusing of saying “everything must be free”?"It will only last until extraordinary surveillance and punishment curtails it."Well you can't just classify all people as 'thieves'. It's wrong by principle."It’s YOU who is forcing this mess, Coconut, not us."'Force' causes reaction. You are the one causing this reaction."You could always, ALWAYS, just not buy it and do without it. This is not food or healthcare, you know."Can you PROVE that? You may not speculate. Your complete disregard to human factors is an affront."Which is why, at the end of the day, legislators and prosecution and punishment and lawyers are what established artistic professionals have to work with."Perhaps, but many artists do not actually want any of that."So we do what you have driven us to do."That is logically impossible."You started it and we sat quietly to see where this was going while you stole us blind for years, but now we are fighting back."The same can be said by the other side."If you continue to take without paying first, perhaps someday I’ll see you in court."Now that's old-man thinking!"There is no way we are going to throw our education and experience and hard earned careers away because you feel entitled to “try before you buy.”"It doesn't matter what education, experience, or "hard earned careers" that you have, but what you do. For example, you assume everyone feels "entitled to “try before you buy.”" and rant about it."There is NO way my employees and I will ever accept this third rate status in the market, and Tenenbaum is next."That's subjective. It does not belong in any debate."NO WAY Coconut. NO…..WAY. Not now, not ever. We get paid, too. Take care."Yawn. I'll just skim the next few posts.

shadowblack
shadowblack

"The fatcats are as fat as ever, you are kiliing the little guy before he ever gets a fair chance."Explain something to me: Why are the fatcats "as fat as ever"? I'm really curious about this.Oh, would you mind telling us exactly what you have created so far? I'm curious about that too.

Bilal
Bilal

Sam I Am, I guess your conversation drifted a bit with Coconut from my main topic. The only thing that I request is for labels and studios to give me content, I swear I am a paid user, but I need content to buy, and I still don't see how you don't understand me. I am a registered paid user in many independent music sites (14 tracks, Amie Street, etc), but unfortunately, where I live, I don't have as many options as you do, no iTunes, no AmazonMP3, no Spotify, nothing, if I had the option to buy them, I definitely would. By the way, please understand that whenever I do find the original product in stores, I legally purchase it.I would really like to discuss this issue in private with you, how is that possible? We seem to be strongly opinionated on this.

D.AN
D.AN

"Your arguments are old and tired and discredited with every new courtcase."That statement could actually have strong impact if you actually cited any of these court cases."Technology is way out ahead of the law and some percentage of consumers will steal when given the anonymous chance. Does this come as some noble surprise to you?"What percentage of what kind of consumers will steal what given what anonymous chance in what conditions? Your statement can be quite strong if you were more specific than "people will steal using the Internet"."If you have evidence that laws or courts or jurors or judges are being “purchased” in any country anywhere I suggest you document the corruption or just be quiet."Pirate Bay Trial.You wrote to document the corruption, but you never stated how. As well, you very much emphasized "just be quiet"."Nothing gets solved with baseless allegation."Well the thing is that the allegations have actual foundations, which cannot be removed just by using the burden of proof fallacy."If you were a content creator, (as I am) and if you were raped for your income as we’ve been these past 10 years, you’d likely see things differently."But under what circumstances? Nobody will give sympathy to such an ambiguous statement. For example, you could have been "raped for your income" by having too many expenses. Your content could also have been not so appealing."But as a consumer with an internet connection and a belief that you are now entitled through technology to try our work for free, to watch or listen or play it, to sample it, to keep it without paying or to pay only if you feel like it, and to do all this for nothing paid to us in the meantime, your sense of “fair” is warped and now more and more it winds up in court where it belongs."You assume the same physical and psychological conditions for every consumer with Internet access. That is another demonstration of your simplistic views."Finally. Even the acolytes of “free”, TPB, *sold* their website. It was their work for years and they wanted to get paid for it. Imagine that."What does this have to do with the consumer?"It’s a sincere pleasure watching the lives of the figureheads of online infringement being held accountable to their own selfish entitlement."That's quite selfish of you to write that when your own views are far too simplistic to understand the complications of different circumstances."And if you think digital distribution of merchandise over the internet will be abandoned by government and industry because they “can’t stop you”, pay close attention to the Joel Tenenbaum case beginning in a week or so."On the contrary: digital distribution over the Internet should not be abandoned by government and industry."This entire debacle is only just beginning, and the ISP’s are finally being drawn into their own form of accountability."ISPs are not accountable for their clients' activities as the service that they sell is quite specific: to provide Internet services (e.g. access)."Your free ride will slowly, painfully but mercifully draw to a close. Take and pay as always or be caught, convicted and punished, and good luck with that."Now that's what I call vindictive!You might as well keep writing text walls with no specific details for any point you make; you are just using this phenomenon as a scapegoat for your losses.

D.AN
D.AN

I hope that you didn't major in English!?

D.AN
D.AN

"You can take it as offered or leave it. But you don’t “test drive” a movie, book, game or recording. If you do, you’ll be punished."Oh really?"Don’t know it? FINE. Don’t buy it. Don’t “testdrive it”, either, don’t “try before you buy” because the product is there if you want to risk it or simply leave it alone and do without if it is not available at all. The rules are clear. Play by them or accept the risk of prosecution. Why is this so complicated for you?"Nice lawful stand, but complete disregards to economics, human psychology, and observations of ongoing phenomenon, but especially the economics. Your choice of going through the 'lawful route' is pretty much why you cannot fathom “test driving” a digital product. The laws do not simplify anything as logical reasoning is often not used to create them. Indeed, they are easily manipulated as most lawmakers are quite ignorant."Folks like you and Bilal bend over backwards in a rationalization of ethical gymnastics that breaks the law while you whine about loss of privacy, prosecution, conviction and punishment."Now that's a good example of extreme.Or maybe it's just the horrible combination of imagery and wording."Keep downloading unavailable product, or “trying” before you buy until you get caught, and then explain to the judge how the rules are unfair in your view (poor baby) and laws don’t apply to you, ..."So you want the US to sue Third World users for merely downloading some digital product that they can't even obtain physically due to impossible circumstances, which would not be considered that theft let alone a crime."... and you *should* be allowed priviliges while the creators who actually do the work of creation, distribution and accept the risk of sale... should not."Non Sequitur. First you claim downloading to be a crime, i.e. stealing, and now you claim it to be deprivation of creators' rights.You have not yet explained how merely downloading a digital product is theft, which is the basic problem at hand.

mal greenborg
mal greenborg

The reason they created that policy back in the 90's is because lots and lots of people were buying stuff on digital media, ripping it then returning it. So we, the pirates, did create the policy.What's so absurd about not buying something if you think it's too expensive? Then you don't get to have it. If they lower the price, fine, if not, fine. If you don't think you'll like something, don't buy it.

mal greenborg
mal greenborg

Um.... so you keep going to shops, and then when you don't find what you want where you can pay for it, you steal it? Really? I don't do that, I just go without.Then again, I suppose that is the world, that's also why they put security cameras and scanners all over the place - just like they are shutting down the freedom of the internet. Because people steal.

Skymonrie
Skymonrie

"If you don’t like the product, leave it alone. "Open your eyes! We are never even going to have the chance to dis/like a product until we've already bought it...Oh wait *stares fuzzy eyed at the TV* this advert says it is the years most important album, I'll go and buy that right away. *gets home with a nice shiny new CD* It's any years worst album...*slaps thigh*...if only I had a way to know that before I bought the piece of junk

D.AN
D.AN

"Then pay a dollar for thesong you like on itunes and leave the rest."What? That's not how music works or why artists make music, malgre."This argument at least sounded like it made sense ten years ago but it’s just not real anymore."I thought I told you to either elaborate or shut up with the stupid speculations.

Skymonrie
Skymonrie

"Then pay a dollar for thesong you like on itunes and leave the rest."Did you even read a single word i wrote before posting the same shpeel that has been written TOO many times on the net :pThe point I was trying to make is quite simple...How on Earth am i going to know if I like, yet alone, want the "rest" of an artists creations if I have no real idea what they even are???I don't go out and buy every piece of clothing from the same store just because I liked a couple of pieces they have; even then I can SEE the product with my own eyes anyway :p

soulxtc
soulxtc

Why leave the rest? Dont music ARTISTS appreciate having people enjoy their music?If they dont then theyre simply music manufacturers. :(

D.AN
D.AN

"The rest of this post is utterly pointless babble."Should read"The rest of your post is utterly pointless babble."

mal greenborg
mal greenborg

Do you realize that popular musicians were basically gypsies and carnies before the recording age (the age of record labels)? Do you realize what kind of shit life they led? Yes there have always been musicians. It was only in the 29th century with the ability to *sell* copies of their music the way publihsers sold books or sheet music that they could ever even approach the level of 'artist' or own a home or have a stable family. Your non-scheme sets the art and artists back hundreds of years.

D.AN
D.AN

"over simplified"Should read"over-simplified"

D.AN
D.AN

"Now you ..."Should read"Now that you ..."

malgreenborg
malgreenborg

Because the fat cats own a lot more than just record companies.

D.AN
D.AN

"... considered that theft let alone a crime."Should read"... considered theft let alone a crime."

D.AN
D.AN

I'm going to assume you are regarding only digital media and cars."So we, the pirates, did create the policy."You're a pirate?"What’s so absurd about not buying something if you think it’s too expensive?"Coconut1967 is writing about getting ripped-off too many times, malgre."If you don’t think you’ll like something, don’t buy it."A prospective consumer often wouldn't know.

D.AN
D.AN

"Um…. so you keep going to shops, and then when you don’t find what you want where you can pay for it, you steal it? Really? I don’t do that, I just go without."Where did shadowblack state that he would steal it, malgre? If one sector of shops doesn't give the right deal, shadowblack could either go to another or pick the best deal or search for a similar item."Then again, I suppose that is the world, that’s also why they put security cameras and scanners all over the place"Weren't you suppose to the optimistic one? Anyway, the reason is that they assume everyone to be a criminal, which is wrong by principle.'– just like they are shutting down the freedom of the internet. Because people steal."I suppose they are the ones who neither know what the Internet is used for nor know how to properly deal with criminals who do actual crimes.Or perhaps hypocritical people like you and sam who can't distinguish P2P from real theft.

D.AN
D.AN

"Do you realize that popular musicians were basically gypsies and carnies before the recording age (the age of record labels)? Do you realize what kind of shit life they led?"The same "shit life" many others had, idiot."It was only in the 29th century ..."This is the 21st century, dumbass."... with the ability to *sell* copies of their music the way publihsers sold books or sheet music that they could ever even approach the level of ‘artist’ or own a home or have a stable family."You speculate that all musicians in the past lived in poverty?"Your non-scheme sets the art and artists back hundreds of years."Blatantly erroneous. Do you know what happened back hundreds of years? Global development and advancing technologies, but don't start speculating on that now.

D.AN
D.AN

That's an obvious detail, not an explanation, malgre.



VyprVPN Personal VPN lets you browse securely