DescentBB

Posted: **Tue Apr 06, 2004 12:31 am**

As has been established, a little bit of copying can be a good thing for exposing new artists. It's when it becomes widespread (such as it is now) that even the smaller artists get nervous about it because it can really make or break their careers. If a multi-million dollar artist can claim losing $100,000 in sales (strictly an arbitrary number), it's no big thing to the bottom line. But for four guys in a van it can be the difference between continuing in music or calling it quits.

Posted: **Tue Apr 06, 2004 1:12 am**

bash wrote:But for four guys in a van it can be the difference between continuing in music or calling it quits.

Can you show me any numbers at all on how much "four guys in a van" make from album sales? Would even doubling the sales make any noticable difference at all? What about cutting off a huge portion of free advertising, and therefore revenue from concerts and other events?

Posted: **Tue Apr 06, 2004 1:53 am**

Heh. No, that sort of income/artist level isn't tracked by Billboard or any other industry group. It's just common sense. At the level I'm talking, these artists' recordings might not even be available at your local record store and are often only sold at the shows, hence no tracking. Doubling sales would make a huge difference, imo, as far as knowing what they can afford as far as tour length, show size, crew, etc. As far as swapping as a source of advertising, I wouldn't know how that would compare regarding lost CD sales vs. increased attendance/t-shirt sales. But the ticket market is a whole different scam industry that artists have to contend with. It varies from gig to gig, promoter to promoter, market to market. At least album sales via download would be a something a band could semi-control the price of and track for the purposes of budgeting for studio time, equipment, living and travel expenses, etc. Most of the stuff you're asking isn't tracked, even by the bands themselves, which is why so many go belly up or end up as indentured servants. Musicians, on a whole, make really lousy businessmen.

Posted: **Tue Apr 06, 2004 2:03 am**

like i said.. those are potential sales.. like numbers on paper. no one ever went broke from losing paper sales.

I can write on paper that my whiz-bang invention sold 20 million units on paper but i didn't see a penny from it. I'm neither richer nor poorer because of that.

Posted: **Tue Apr 06, 2004 2:28 am**

i still dont see how file sharing on the internet has any effect on the scale your referring to.

the four guys in a van probably dont have any songs floating around on kazaa, and if they did, how many people would really be searching for them? probably not enough to matter. i don't think anyone but the bigger fish in the pond are effected by file sharing.

Posted: **Tue Apr 06, 2004 5:34 am**

Well, frankly, we've gotten off track. Fact is, it isn't relative to anything, nor conditional on where an artist is on the ladder to fame or obscurity. Taking an artist's work without compensating them is theft. If people want to delude themselves even so far as to think they are *helping* an artist by taking their work, no amount of statistical or anecdotal evidence is going to convince them otherwise. The moral cement has hardened. As for me, this is probably the first time I've gone so far into thinking about the issue and past posts from me would reveal I was in favor of file-sharing. After this little exploration, however, I've deleted what little I had and don't intend to continue downloading. So, in a way, it hasn't been a complete waste of time.

Posted: **Tue Apr 06, 2004 9:32 am**

bash wrote:If people want to delude themselves even so far as to think they are *helping* an artist by taking their work, no amount of statistical or anecdotal evidence is going to convince them otherwise.

If by deluding myself you mean buying more CDs and going to more concerts because I was able to download music I wouldn't have even heard of until then, then yes.

The only real deluding I've ever done was buying an album based off one or two halfway decent songs I've heard off the radio. I've gotten burned way too many times for me to do that again.

The fact of the matter is, if I can't download or get the music free from other sources first, I won't even bother considering it. Unless you want me to 'help' the record industry by having me spend my cash on things I probably won't like, it looks like we've come to an impasse.

Posted: **Tue Apr 06, 2004 11:23 am**

Ok bash. I'll go out right now and waste my hard earned money on a CD that has only one decent song.. cuz you know.. I don't want to feel guilty or anything. I'll just go over to my moneytree and get twenty bucks...

Posted: **Tue Apr 06, 2004 3:06 pm**

Tetrad, answer me this (and don't fib): What is the size in gigabytes of the copyrighted files you share and what percentage of that was purchased by you?

Posted: **Tue Apr 06, 2004 3:36 pm**

bash wrote:Tetrad, answer me this (and don't fib): What is the size in gigabytes of the copyrighted files you share and what percentage of that was purchased by you?

You're making assumptions again. I don't share my files, except in my private circle of friends.

But if you want to know music, I have about 205 albums on my computer, and about 150 CDs sitting in my corner.

As far as other copyrighted material, keep in mind that most of my anime and TV shows are either not licensed for distribution in the states, or not out on DVD yet.

I will admit that I have downloaded several hundred movies which I don't own. But then again that was more of a collecting phase, as it didn't really bother me at all when a 100 gig drive filled with movies failed on me.

Edit: Granted there is a small difference between CDs I own that I haven't ripped, and CDs I have, but I'm not going to sit here and itemize everything. Besides I have several albums I've download that I can't find on CD. Right now there are at least 3 CDs I want which Amazon doesn't carry.

Edit2: Oh and that 205 number is a bit high, since I forgot I have several albums that are 2 CDs, and I only did a quick folder count.

Posted: **Tue Apr 06, 2004 4:06 pm**

Heh, and how big is this *private circle*? And are these real-life friends or online friends? Plus I didn't see any breakdown as to how much of what you have that you actually paid for. You have it so obviously you deemed it worthy to keep (ie worthy of purchase). Did you then purchase? If so, how much of what you have did you purchase? btw, the *unable to get in NA* is bs and we both know it. The Internet enables all of us to buy from any country where these things are sold, as long as they ship to the US.

My point here is it's small wonder you are having difficulty understanding the concept of stealing because of the large scale of theft that you are involved in. Folks like you and your *circle of friends* have gone beyond *sampling* to a culture of theft.

Posted: **Tue Apr 06, 2004 4:13 pm**

Private friends meaning people I know personally.

The 150 CDs I meant CDs I've bought.

And by not sold in NA I mean not in English. I've imported dozens of albums.

Posted: **Tue Apr 06, 2004 11:55 pm**

bash wrote:My point here is it's small wonder you are having difficulty understanding the concept of stealing because of the large scale of theft that you are involved in. Folks like you and your *circle of friends* have gone beyond *sampling* to a culture of theft.

Culture of theft? That's a new one. I prefer to think of it as smart consumerism. I'll pay what I think it's worth. If it sucks, I won't pay for it. If it's good, I'll buy it.

But then again I don't really have an issue with harddrive space, so you can't exactly blame me if something I downloaded and didn't buy just sits there untouched for a while.

And I object to your sarcastic tone about my circle of friends. If you have a buddy who wants a copy of a CD you have, do you tell him to piss off and buy it himself?

Posted: **Wed Apr 07, 2004 12:04 am**

Heh, try that next time you go eat at a restaurant. *Na, I didn't enjoy it quite as much as I hoped, here's half payment.*

Consider for a moment the artists that entertain you. Write them a fan letter and let them know how much you've taken without paying for and let's see the sort of response you get. What do you think they would consider you, a *smart consumer* or a thief?

Posted: **Wed Apr 07, 2004 12:09 am**

What part of "I buy CDs" don't you understand?

Posted: **Wed Apr 07, 2004 12:16 am**

bash wrote:Precisely, Ferno, but that won't solve the issue of unauthorized copying. An arrow won't hit that heel until that is settled. Once artists feel they can protect themselves they will stampede away from the music industry's parasites that have been artificially inflating the cost of music (arguably the biggest rationalization for it's theft). People won't steal when the price is right, imo, or at least not enough of them to make it too big an issue. My concern is people are ingraining habits out of anger toward the masters which will be hard to break when the slaves are freed.

bash, you've got to realize that piracy is here to stay. No ammount of laws or penalties is going to bring it to an end. Its been going on for hundreds of years and its not stopping anytime soon. The only way to really combat it is to either:

1. Make it harder to steal. (Copy protecting CDs only keeps honest people honest. If its audible, it can be copied. No ammount of copy protection will keep that from happening.)

or

2. Make it more worth their while to buy. (More extras for the store-bought version, while offering just the music on a pay service like iTunes or Napster.)

The second option means less income for the RIAA for sure, but it sure as hell sweetens the deal for consumers.

Posted: **Wed Apr 07, 2004 12:19 am**

bash wrote:Heh, try that next time you go eat at a restaurant. *Na, I didn't enjoy it quite as much as I hoped, here's half payment.* Consider for a moment the artists that entertain you. Write them a fan letter and let them know how much you've taken without paying for and let's see the sort of response you get. What do you think they would consider you, a *smart consumer* or a thief?

bash, are you even READING Tetrad's posts?

Tetrad wrote:The 150 CDs I meant CDs I've bought.

Tetrad wrote:But if you want to know music, I have about 205 albums on my computer, and about 150 CDs sitting in my corner.

Posted: **Wed Apr 07, 2004 12:21 am**

Yes, if the math is correct (and tetrad's not lying) that's about 205 albums he didn't pay for. N'est pas? Evidently since these are albums he's kept, one can assume he deemed them worthy to keep (ie worthy of purchase) and yet his rationalization of try-before-buy is shown to be false since he apparently didn't purchase them. Add that to the hundreds of films/video he's admitted to downloading and tell me how I've misrepresented him.

Posted: **Wed Apr 07, 2004 12:28 am**

Sting, shut this damn thread down. it's going nowhere.

Posted: **Wed Apr 07, 2004 12:31 am**

bash wrote:Yes, if the math is correct (and tetrad's not lying) that's about 205 albums he didn't pay for. N'est pas? Evidently since these are albums he's kept, one can assume he deemed them worthy to keep (ie worthy of purchase) and yet his rationalization of try-before-buy is shown to be false since he apparently didn't purchase them. Add that to the hundreds of films/video he's admitted to downloading and tell me how I've misrepresented him.

bash, you do realize that ripping CDs to your computer is possible.....right?

Tetrad wrote:Edit: Granted there is a small difference between CDs I own that I haven't ripped, and CDs I have, but I'm not going to sit here and itemize everything. Besides I have several albums I've download that I can't find on CD. Right now there are at least 3 CDs I want which Amazon doesn't carry.

Your reading skills are astounding bash.

Furthermore, I ask you to read up on copyright law. See, if he downloads the contents of a CD to his computer, then later buys that CD, then those mp3s are LEGAL. Its called having a backup copy. Under copyright law, you're allowed to have 1 backup copy of any media you have purchased. The form of the backup is not specified.

edit: FURTHERMORE, trying before you buy isn't a crime. Ever heard of shareware?

Posted: **Wed Apr 07, 2004 12:35 am**

MD: according to Bash, having an MP3 wether or not you own the CD before or after obtaining said MP3's constitute a lenghy jail sentence. It's quite clear that he's for what the RIAA is doing. sure he says he isn't but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know he's bought into their bs and rooting for them.

Also, there's the new legal download system just starting out. I tried it myself and it needs a lot of work. once you lose your licenses the songs are useless. there's just too much uncertainty with that system. and I don't even know where my money's going.

Posted: **Wed Apr 07, 2004 12:37 am**

bash wrote:Yes, if the math is correct (and tetrad's not lying) that's about 205 albums he didn't pay for.

What MD said. That number is closer to 50.

Edit: and even though it probably doesn't make a damn bit of difference to you, all the CDs in my current playlist I either own, or can't find anywhere.

Posted: **Wed Apr 07, 2004 12:40 am**

Ferno wrote:MD: according to Bash, having an MP3 wether or not you own the CD before or after obtaining said MP3's constitute a lenghy jail sentence. It's quite clear that he's for what the RIAA is doing. sure he says he isn't but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know he's bought into their bs and rooting for them.

Then by his own logic, he should be locked up in "pound me in the ass prison" as well since he openly admitted to "stealing" music.

Posted: **Wed Apr 07, 2004 12:42 am**

lol no kidding MD. what's he going to propose next, an internet police?

Posted: **Wed Apr 07, 2004 12:47 am**

My, my, look at all the straw men.

Posted: **Wed Apr 07, 2004 12:52 am**

bash wrote:Evidently since these are albums he's kept, one can assume he deemed them worthy to keep (ie worthy of purchase)

You'd be better assuming that I'm don't care enough to delete them.

Posted: **Wed Apr 07, 2004 1:04 am**

Bash, welcome to the minority opinion here on the DBB E&C forum

...you should start an affirmative action or reparations thread or something to shake this experience off.

Posted: **Wed Apr 07, 2004 1:22 am**

*One man with courage makes a majority.*

Don't fret for me, Goob, you ought to know by now that I never take a position unless I know it to be right. If you ponder on the caliber of folks attempting to shout me down, you'd see I couldn't have chosen a better endorsement for my viewpoint.

Posted: **Wed Apr 07, 2004 1:26 am**

Good job. You don't answer my questions and accuse other people of strawmaning when you're doing it yourself. I'm totally convinced that since I'm disagreeing with you that you must be right.

Posted: **Wed Apr 07, 2004 1:30 am**

What questions have you asked that were more than rhetorical or that have definitive answers that I could locate and provide?

Posted: **Wed Apr 07, 2004 1:40 am**

Tetrad wrote:If you have a buddy who wants a copy of a CD you have, do you tell him to piss off and buy it himself?

Posted: **Wed Apr 07, 2004 1:45 am**

Ah, I perceived that as a rhetorical question in a manner to compliment yourself on the generosity of your friendship. Quite altruistic of you to give away what isn't yours to give.

While I wouldn't use such terms and I'd play it for their appraisal, assuming they were in my car or visiting, and probably recommend it but I'd expect them to purchase their own copy, not copy mine. Was that really so pressing an inquiry that it warranted your above criticism that *you don't answer my questions*? Seems like you've hit bottom and started digging.

Posted: **Wed Apr 07, 2004 1:55 am**

Oh please.

Posted: **Wed Apr 07, 2004 1:56 am**

If at first you donâ??t succeed, pretend that you did, nobody was really paying attention anyway, eh Sandman?

-Krom

pulled from the D3k obsidian dragon thread, for those of you who want to argue with bash.

Posted: **Wed Apr 07, 2004 2:00 am**

i know its wrong... -kurupt

Why even post that irrelevant quote, kur, when you yourself have stated you consider files-sharing wrong? That's the position I'm taking here. So, you agreed with me earlier but now you're intimating that I'm on the wrong side of this debate. Which one is it?

Posted: **Wed Apr 07, 2004 4:55 am**

that quote is very relevant, as i've learned the long frustrating way.

all i was implying by it was that its impossible to debate with you, becuase when you win you win and when you lose you still act like you win. was trying to save some people some trouble

Posted: **Wed Apr 07, 2004 7:11 am**

Your opinion on that probably would have been more biting had you waited to post it in a topic where you didn't agree with me.

Posted: **Wed Apr 07, 2004 8:25 am**

bash wrote:My, my, look at all the straw men.

Pot, meet Mr. Kettle.

Far as I can tell, you're the one ignoring whats being posted so who's the one grasping at straws here?

Posted: **Wed Apr 07, 2004 9:00 am**

yeah, but i probably would have forgotten by then.

Posted: **Wed Apr 07, 2004 11:20 am**

Bash, I know you're simply doing an act, but it's become old and tiring.. and your playground taunts mean that you've taken the low road.

DescentBB

Swapping is legal in Canada.