If sharing means buying a CD- buring three of four copies for your buddies, then no, it should not be legal. One thing I find in the argument against the artists and labels that are taking action is that it's ok to make copies and share files because they are rich.
If you mean downloading and sharing files that are free. Go for it.
Music is a product. Inside those record companies are many people like you and me. They sweep floors. Do accounting. Make sales calls etc. These people depend on that "product" getting distributed at a profit. But the companies make too much money you say? So what. They have the right, as do you.
My friend is an artist, a darn good one. http://www.godardgallery.com/birch.htm (check him out)
He painstakingly works and reworks a piece until it is complete. These can take weeks. This is how he pays for his life. He then sells them for thousands of dollars, after broker fee's (if involved) and the gallery take it's cut he is left with considerably less. Let's say I decide to buy one (which I have, deeply discounted buddy price though). I then buy a spanky new photo copier and make really high quality copies for all my friends to hang on thier walls. Are they going to buy a Nathan Birch, likely not, they already have one. That is not right.
__________________
Axim X3 400 MHz
All the way up in Canada To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To be honest I DO download songs now and then. But I will typically purchase the CD if I like the songs. Does that make it right? Not really no, but I can sleep at night :)
Artisits deserve to be paid for their work, just like I do. If I download a song and I like it then it's fair that I purchase it. Typically the quality of the CD is better anyway and it's the right thing to do.
__________________
Always read stuff that will make you look good if you die in the middle of it.
Everybody should unite and eat millions and millions of Big Macs. Then, we can get tonnes of free music, the record companies get paid from Ronald and after we are all good and fat we can all join our fat little hands together and file a class action lawsuit against McDonalds and the record companies for not properly labeling the burgers and MP3 files as containing calories that may contribute to weight gain. It's genius.
We will have had a great time stuffing our faces, rockin' out to some swingin' tunes and then all get stinkin' rich.
What do you think, who's with me?
__________________
Axim X3 400 MHz
All the way up in Canada To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
I liked the idea of an incorporated company buying one copy of every CD. Then selling stocks for a low price. Every stock holder would be a partial owner of all the cd's and would have teh right to download them legally.
It may sound like a bad idea, but with the amount of people using iTunes and the like, it would probably work. Very risky venture though.
All you people voting that "music is for everyone" are morons. If music is distributed freely, then there will be music for no one as artists will no longer be able to produce albums due to a lack of money. If you like an artist's music and want to listen to it, buy the cd. Downloading music is no different than "borrowing" money from someone else's wallet...you are a petty thief.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
you realise that an artists makes about $2 off his/her cd? You realise that by buying a cd, you are infact helping the major record labels slap down independent musicians? You realise an artist makes only 11 cents off of Napster/iTunes??? You realise that 75+% of an artist's revenues come from concerts???
Download the music, if you like them, go to the show. Slap the recording labels back, and pay the artists, not the corporations who leech the artists dry.
That's the dumbest load of bullsh!t I've ever heard. If you only make minimum wage, should I just go ahead and take your $5.15 an hour? Come on, you're just trying to justify theft. And what's $.11 for each song x 1,000,000 people who download it? That's a lot of money, and a lot of theft.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
they may sitll be making money, but not enough for what they do. The label's are the ones losing real money. Artists should host their downloads on their own sites, and bypass the record industry all together. besides, more people listen to what they can get for free ( i would imagine) which means that some band's wouldnt be heard unless for p2p. Those people listening may like them enough to see them in concert. It makes the independant artist alot of money.
wmcjhi, thats quite pathetic, you sure you don't work for the riaa?;) If you do work for the riaa, I have other words to say to you. The artists are forced to do that. I would love to pay the artists directly. The riaa deserves nothing. I bet you haven't even looked at the site above.
Remeber the 'The record company' is a large number of secretaries, accountants, warehouse staff, graphic designers, et al. They that more from the CD because of the staff they have to pay. If they go out of business, tens of thousands of your neighbours are going to be out of work.
(burgers + tunes = happy) * (fat + bad labeling) = millions
__________________
Axim X3 400 MHz
All the way up in Canada To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Follow Us
RSS Feed
Follow on Twitter
Facebook
YouTube
Should P2P be legal???
Addicted Member
