| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Steve D.
Average Member
USA
640 Posts |
 Posted - 21 January 2003 : 22:34:10
|
| I know that I love using file sharing to find great old swing tunes. I've spent enough money on crappy cd's. Then once I find the ones that I like, I know what to go out and buy. Lots of times too it's impossible to get a Chick Webb cd from 1934, and all you want is one song... |
Swing Dancing Video Clips - It's All Swing! Forum |
 |
|
|
seahorse
Senior Member
USA
1075 Posts |
Posted - 21 January 2003 : 23:49:33
|
From what I understand, in the past it wasn't financially possible to sell a single track from an album economically. But with mp3s you can do that now. I don't see why companies shouldn't go with somekind of inexpensive downloading of single tracks unless they want to squeeze more money out of customers by adding "value" in unwanted tracks.
You don't see anyone in the book industry saying if you want the latest Stephen King thriller, you have to buy Carrie, Cujo, and Pet Cemetary too. You don't buy DVDs that way either.
The Snitz license doesn't say if you want to use the snitz forum you have to use snitz IM too. Only MS can get away with that  .
|
Ken
===============
Worldwide Partner Group
Microsoft |
|
|
|
RichardKinser
Snitz Forums Admin
USA
16655 Posts |
Posted - 22 January 2003 : 00:05:11
|
you can buy singles on this site:
http://www.liquid.com/
not mp3s (which don't sound all that great anyway), but you can get them in Liquid Audio Format (Which in my opinion, is the best lossy compression format available), RealAudio (the worst format ever, again, in my opinion), or Windows Media Format (sounds ok).
Personally, I use Monkey's Audio Compression (which is a lossless compression scheme). I rip all of my CDs and then compress them using Monkey's Audio. I then put the CDs up so they don't get dirty or scratched. |
|
|
|
Gremlin
General Help Moderator
New Zealand
7528 Posts |
Posted - 22 January 2003 : 03:47:02
|
| Ogg Vorbis is my prefereance at the moment for encoding Audio. |
Kiwihosting.Net - The Forum Hosting Specialists
|
|
|
|
Roland
Advanced Member
Netherlands
9335 Posts |
Posted - 22 January 2003 : 04:32:11
|
I've read a lot of things, let's try to reply to some of it 
File sharing is wrong. That's 100% true.
Why is it wrong? Because the owner of the copyright of the file you're sharing (usually MP3s) don't get paid. My whole point was that IF record companies want to make you pay for your (MP3) file sharing behavior by making your ISP pay, you are in fact paying for the MP3 files you share. That, in turn, makes it perfectly fine to share MP3 files.
I don't download MP3s, I don't upload MP3s so friends can download them. I always buy the original CDs and do always make a copy of my CDs so the originals won't get scratched up. The copies usually end up in my car or near the computer. From what I remember about copying laws, you are allowed to make a copy for your own personal use. Copy protection is stinks (especially when it means you can't play the CD on your computer), but 99% of the time, you can make a direct copy of the CD, and end up with a perfectly useable disk.
I read in the paper yesterday that Robbie Williams said he doesn't care about people sharing his songs. He's gotten paid for them and only enjoys knowing people listen to his music. |
|
|
|
HuwR
Forum Admin
United Kingdom
20600 Posts |
Posted - 22 January 2003 : 07:28:12
|
quote:
My whole point was that IF record companies want to make you pay for your (MP3) file sharing behavior by making your ISP pay, you
And why should the ISP have to pay ? it is nothing to do with them
quote:
I read in the paper yesterday that Robbie Williams said he doesn't care about people sharing his songs. He's gotten paid for them and only enjoys knowing people listen to his music.
Precisely my previous point, it is not the artists who write the music that object, it is the corporate music machine trying to get a foot hold into new media. If joe public had never been able to pirate/copy music, we would not have the diverse music culture we have today.
I wouldn't be doing what I do know if I had had to buy every piece of software when I first started out, admittedly they are all bought and paid for these days, but I would not be a programmer today if it hadn't been for a pirated copy of Watcomms C/C++ compiler, and pretty much all the paid for software on my machines is only there because I tried a pirated version first, it is a bit different now with most software available as a demo, but it wasn't always like that.
I now spend anything from £2000 to over £10000 a year on software |
|
|
|
Roland
Advanced Member
Netherlands
9335 Posts |
Posted - 22 January 2003 : 08:11:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by HuwR
quote:
My whole point was that IF record companies want to make you pay for your (MP3) file sharing behavior by making your ISP pay, you
And why should the ISP have to pay ? it is nothing to do with them
You're absolutely right, but that's what the article in my original post was about. The record companies want to get back the money they don't make thanks to dropping CD sales. How? Well people who share MP3s won't stop, and people aren't willing to pay for MP3s, so according to that article, record companies want to turn to ISPs as the ones who should pay up.
My theory is simple. Right now sharing of MP3 is illegal, basically because the copyright owners don't get paid, right? But if ISPs would have to pay record companies for their users' sharing of MP3 files, then what do you think the ISPs will do? They'll raise the costs accordingly (or a bit more ). In the end everyone, even those who don't share MP3 files, will be paying the record companies.
If you pay the copyright owner for an MP3, you're not doing anything illegal. So unless I'm wrong here, the record companies want to make it legal to share MP3 files. |
|
|
|
HuwR
Forum Admin
United Kingdom
20600 Posts |
Posted - 22 January 2003 : 08:50:41
|
No, the record companies want to make money, they have no other agenda.
What will happen if ISP's have to pay ?
They either won't pay or will ban mp3's from their servers and email etc. so the record companies won't gain anything from it. |
|
|
|
OneWayMule
Dev. Team Member & Support Moderator
Austria
4969 Posts |
Posted - 22 January 2003 : 09:28:49
|
First of all, I do use file sharing software to download mp3's.
But not because I don't wanna buy cd's (I got far more than 400 currently!); I am more looking for special versions of certain songs eg live/acousic or whatever which are not available on official cd's and maybe on bootlegs. (So should I buy a bootleg instead which is much more expensive as a normal (legal) cd?)
Also, I think I have the right listen to the songs I've bought with cd they're on everywhere and on any system. My cd-rom is not able to play 2 of the latest cd's I've bought because of their stupid copy protection! So what should I do? Get a new cd-rom?
And regarding that "record companies making less money": has anyone ever seen how much money they make with over-priced music dvd's? I wanted to buy a music dvd of one of my favourite bands... EUR 35!!!
Ha - scr** them. (sorry)
I think they should keep the cd prices as they are, lower the dvd prices, and maybe add more (multimedia) content to cd's, that's at least what keeps my bying cd's. |
My MODs:
Birthdays - Custom Policy - F.A.Q. Administration - Forum Rules - Guestbook
Links Manager - MyOwnGoogle - Profile Views - Search Log - WebSearch
Useful stuff:
Forum and MOD Installation - MOD Installation Guide - Snitz v3.4.05 Readme - Free ASP Hosts - Support Snitz
|
|
|
|
Nathan
Help Moderator
USA
7664 Posts |
Posted - 22 January 2003 : 10:45:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by FrutZle
File sharing is wrong. That's 100% true.
Why is it wrong? Because the owner of the copyright of the file you're sharing (usually MP3s) don't get paid.
No, thats not true. Not all music thats out there is protected by such copyrights. I even own a few albums that say quite explicitly "The content of this media is protected by Copyright law and cannot be duplicated in any form without expressed written permission. Therefore, we grant you permission to duplicate and share the music on this disk." |
 Nathan Bales
CoreBoard | Active Users Download |
|
|
|
Roland
Advanced Member
Netherlands
9335 Posts |
Posted - 22 January 2003 : 11:39:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by HuwR
No, the record companies want to make money, they have no other agenda.
Right, but that's what all big businesses are about
My remark about record companies wanting to make it legal to share MP3s obviously didn't come out right. They don't want to do that, but by making people pay (or at least they want to try) for sharing MP3s, they are, most likely without meaning to, saying it's okay if you pay.
quote:
What will happen if ISP's have to pay ?
They either won't pay or will ban mp3's from their servers and email etc. so the record companies won't gain anything from it.
The other option they have is charging their users a little extra, but then they'll be punishing people for something others do...
quote:
Originally posted by Nathan
No, thats not true. Not all music thats out there is protected by such copyrights. I even own a few albums that say quite explicitly "The content of this media is protected by Copyright law and cannot be duplicated in any form without expressed written permission. Therefore, we grant you permission to duplicate and share the music on this disk."
I've never seen anything like that, and I think CDs that have those kinds of texts make up a very small percentage of all CDs available. That text is what I'd expect to find on a CD of a small and starting band. There are enough of those, some of them offer their songs on MP3 only, hoping to get some fame through file sharing, and save some money at the same time. I remember a site that people could go to for those kinds of (free) MP3s only. Don't know if it still exists though.
What these are, are exceptions.
But in all honesty, I don't think they can legally pull it off. |
|
|
|
seahorse
Senior Member
USA
1075 Posts |
Posted - 22 January 2003 : 21:33:38
|
Nathan,
What album is that?
|
Ken
===============
Worldwide Partner Group
Microsoft |
|
|
|
OneWayMule
Dev. Team Member & Support Moderator
Austria
4969 Posts |
|
|
seahorse
Senior Member
USA
1075 Posts |
Posted - 23 January 2003 : 03:50:03
|
Out of curiosity, do the record companies own exclusive rights to distribute an artist's music, or just the CD rights?
I was just wondering what could prevent an established group/artist from doing what Robbie Williams suggested? An artist could set up their own site and sell downloads of MP3s and possibly make more money than what they'd get from the record companies.
|
Ken
===============
Worldwide Partner Group
Microsoft |
|
|
|
HuwR
Forum Admin
United Kingdom
20600 Posts |
Posted - 23 January 2003 : 05:04:28
|
| they generally own the rights to ALL distribution even on media that does not yet exist |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Topic Locked
