Should file sharing be illegal
 

I have to sign off till mid feb as of Friday as I have a project to do away fromthe pc but my mate got done for file sharing songs on an illegal website.
He argues people sell records at bootfairs and record off radio so if he has bought a song he should be able to share it or pass it on.
I bet many music fans here find illegal ways to get songs downloaded for free.
Should they be prosecuted?
Don't bands make enough money through radio and tours and doesn't file sharing help promote unsigned bands freely.
Should certain countries outside of the law be able to continue these file sharing methods or do record companies have the right to prosecute?

should it be illegal though.
They shut down and prosecute that is a different question and one very important in music.
films and other stuff too and some get done when they claim they got the ip wrong.
illegality rather then simply good idea.
illegality is what I meant.
they apparently keep opening up new sites and chanage them and have people in countries where laws cannot be applied pop up new sites and links and it will be a big case in the media soon.
should it be illegal worldwide.
internet laws don't really exist so how do each country prosecute people from other countries where the lawmay not be the same?
supposing switzerland doesn't impliment US law?
there is no global law on the net.
this effects file sharing as there will be havens like there are tax havens and different laws on sex.

Should it be illegal? Yes... we are stealing. Why do we engage in such acts though? Because records cost 10-15 dollars a piece, and no one can afford that. The entire system is flawed, and if record companies want to stop the thievery from happening then they need to rework the entire system, and not just expect everyone to conform to their outrageous business practices.

I agree.I mean, people sell cds are boot fairs and they can give a cd to a friend and yet if they pass it on on a blog they can get done.
But the thing is that pop idol such like shows that society is just fed a diatribe of crap mr blobby marketed rubbish and the best thing about the neet is that all types of bands and ideas can get an airing and the record companies want to monopolise it and use international laws to stop expression.
If you are not signed up you wont get exposure and noone will hear your stuff, I found many great songs over the years from bands noone has ever heard of and this is because they made their own album and put out a few.
The net means bands can get an airing and the RC's want to stop this freedom by introducing international laws.
Remember that new bands want exposure and freedom to share stuff helps this and they can then get more people to their gigs which is the point of being in a band.
I hate the control of the music buis as all people get is crap and many people haven't the time to search for new stuff and rely on the tv and radio to give it to them after work and unless we have free exchange the majority will never see stuff they may love to bits.
This stifles creativity and is outdated.
That is my opinion

At what point did 'Not choosing to buy something' become stealing?

because of copyright laws

So what am I supposed to do , block my ears every time someone drives past me in a car playing a CD loudly?

I don't think it's the same as stealing, really. If you copy a music file, it's not like you're taking it from anyone. The only thing you are removing is perhaps some of the probability that you will go and buy that bit of music. So - potentially - you copying could mean that the industry makes less money, but maybe you would never buy it anyways even if you didn't copy. Unless you distribute the file, that should for most parts be the end of that.

I'm not saying it should be legal because I think it's important that it's possible to make money off music, but while you could argue that "stealing" is a good word for it, I find it a bit unsatisfactory.

I haven't got that much else to add except I think products that can potentially have a digital existence should be sold over the internet - purely. Physical products like DVDs should be collector's items, not the norm. While it is nice to have physical products in your collection, I don't think it justifies all the production, transport, hiring people to sell them, etc. stuff that comes with it.

The music industry could perhaps make money with software such as spotify. Instead of having music on your own computer, you would stream it through spotify and artists would make money because of a little subtle commercial that would occasionally come up. If the service was good enough, for example so good that you get all the benefits of having the world's largest music collection without having to go through the trouble of actually collecting it yourself, then people would use it.

If the Rcs could find a way to make you pay for that they would.
how they control the new digital sharing noone yet knows.
perhaps they will just rely on the fact that most people haven't time to investigate what is out there and will buy what is marketed by pop idol.
Been a festival goer I have always noticed how many people see a small band or artist in a small tent and love them and buy their stuff.
Would they ever come across them in the record shops?
Books are the same.
Waterstones market certain books and not others because publishers pay them,
This is hemogeny and a result of the market.
This is why I think music should be free and bands that get a following will make aliving from other things like gigs and advertisng.

Pay bands what they are worth and they will keep making great music!

We all want new passionate music....be willing to pay for it!:dj:

I agree.
Especially on the net. If people love a new band they donate to them to support them.
But the Rcs don't like as they dont get their cut.
Who are the rcs to say who can share a song or album if they own it anymore then lending a cd or book to a friend?

Tell that to the record companies... less than 20% of what you pay for an album will actually go to the band. I have no problem paying a band I like money, because if they're good I'll almost certainly see them in concert anyways if I'm given the opportunity.

that is why the rcs want to stop all this I feel.
They are going mad to try to control this digital age.
I don't know how they will do it.
I once asked what the biggest revolution in music was and jackhammer said it was the internet.
I think he is right.
The pistols would never have been sacked today.
The Rcs are trying to introduce international laws.
Big bands like radiohead asked for donations and it worked. I see new ways of bands getting big and it may not involve rcs at all.

None of us wants to work for free....do we? Especially in this tough economy...

Bands have to fight with record companies for more money.

If you are making passionate new music and touring....(working for it)...the money will come.

Ask bands like Coldplay, U2, and others who are showing everyone else the way!

:laughing: I'll be sure to ask them

Seriously dude, you do realize that most of a band's revenue comes from touring and merchandise sales these days because of the lucrative nature of all record deals, right?

I think the point is don't steal music. Pay for it.:clap:

The title of this thread is about file sharing and yet most of the discussion has been about paying for music or getting the music for free.

I think the point is that most people here would pay 10-15 quid 20-30 dollars a year subscription to download as much music as they want ontop of their broadband bills.

Fuck that. I can't afford to.

I'd rather download a crap album for free than pay for it.

I'll pay for good music.

Life's a bitch :o:

Well, if I want to listen regularly to some obscure music that would normally cost me $200.00 because only X number of CDs were made and it was never put on ITunes, what other feasible way is there besides DLing it by whatever means I choose? Also, what if the band I like doesn't come to tour where I live and local places don't carry any of their albums in stock? Very annoying circumstances wouldn't you say?

And really, when you think about it, it's actually quite a wonder that MORE people aren't DLing music without paying right now, since for the most part if you have WinRAR and the ability to type in "Band+album+blogspot" on Google, you can download and extract almost any album you want within seconds/minutes.

Amen. I own the discographies of a lot of my favorite bands, but when someone says "hey check these guys out," I'm not going to drop $15 on the recommendation of some dude on the internet.

In a lot of cases with quite a few obscure bands you only have to type in the bands name to find a download link because someone upping an obscure album on a blog is the only attention these bands have had in decades.

Take Arctic Monkeys for example. They encouraged people to share their demos over the net and such and as a result they had a HUGE debut. Now they're insanely successful.

I probably would buy more often when I start seeing these:

http://i41.tinypic.com/zxjyo4.gif

Good point.:clap:

So yeah file sharing is ok...if you are willing to pay for it...like iTunes or one of those sites...sure!


(I still prefer having the CD though.):)

I have one more

11 More songs that sound EXACTLY the same as the single

LOL, truth hurts^^

Exactly. They even encouraged fans to make & sequence their own custom demos to send out to the world via the www. They were visionaries in that they understood the significance and scalability of the web. Within a few months everyone was listening to "I Bet You Look Good On The Dancefloor"

lol

Visionaries? Not exactly that f*cking hard to figure out that exposure leads to CD sales.

Many? How about all. Anyways you have a better chance of winning the lottery than being prosecuted for downloading.

It probably should be illegal, people have the right to charge money for their intellectual property. But just like a lot of illegal things I don't really find it morally wrong.

It's not like a lot of bands are out there saying "hey put this shit on limewire!" I am friends with a band currently trying to make it and they HATE HATE HATE it if you give their songs to people cause they want to sell more of their shitty $5 LPs. Arctic Monkeys aren't visionaries, but they are one of the biggest success stories of file sharing. Give them a little credit lol.

I saw an interview with Paul McCartney where he said he didn't mind if people were sharing his music. He was happy people wanted to share it. It's not as sensational since he's already made it, of course, but it's interesting trivia.

I wouldn't say he has made it.
okay, he's made a few good albums over the years but whether he has made it is debatable.
of course why should his ex wife have 4 first class flights a month while their kid is only allowed two and the other two in business class.

George Michael doesn't mind if people download his music for free.
So if you want to download the most pretentious crap ever created on the internet feel free to copy and paste my comments!

You're saying ex-beatles, ex-wing, successful solo artist Paul McCartney hasn't made it? What the hell?

How can you make it if being a tremendous success both musically and financially is not good enough? :p
Sorry man, but that's moronic. Maybe you should listen to and read a bit more about music and it's history.

I'm talking bollox as usual mate.
McCartney is like been a living mozart or jesus and even he says sometimes while gardening he thinks "****, I'm paul mccartney".

>.<

Mental note to self : Never take ADELE's posts seriously.