Piracy....movies, music, software, etc.
 

What do you guys think about this raid on downloading pirated software, music, movies, etc.?

University students, small business, and the general public getting harsh penalties for sharing illegal data? I think it is more of a threat tactic, because I don't think it is possible to charge millions of people. Everybody uses , Kazza, Morpheus, so on and so forth.
I know it is illegal, but who can afford multimedia software. If you have a small business or private school, and are expected to install a licensed copy of maya on each machine, at $10,000 a pop (well that was the cost a few years back), how is it possible?
If you are a student or graduate...how can you be expected to afford this software on top of student loans and living expences, and attempt to make a living?
I think that there must be a compromise. These companies should be lowering their prices if they want people to use licensed software.
The same with music and movies.

It is obviously wrong to steal this stuff, but it is also wrong to suck the life out of everyday Joe because he believes the best things in life are free!

:rolleyes:

load of bullshit.

they cant govern me, damnit

software piracy rules!!!! i think all this crack down stuff is bull
sh@t . the music and movie industy say they're losing millions of dollars every year from file sharing. its bull. then how can they pay all these crappy actors millions for one movie?

i dont really
steal music though because the artist suffers most. lets say
a band makes 7 million albums and the record company sells those cd's to different distibuters. they sell them for roughly 4 bucks a piece so thats 28 million dollars. now the record company gives the band a total 0f 4 points on each cd sold . each point is equal to one cent so they get 4 cents on every album. then depending on how many people are in the band they split that money. also they have to pay for studio time promotion,ect.ect. so in the end the musician dosn't make that much dough. then if he actually wants to trully own his or her music that person has to
buy publishing rights to their own f&@king music. so when amusician complains about audio piracy i sympathize.but when it
is those greedy record execs i say f&@k those greezy bastards.

as for software prices arent that bad considering all the work the programmers and scientists put into a program like maya.
theve dropped prices considerably now maya complete is about
$2000 and maya unlimited is $7000. this is alot cheeper than 4 years ago when maya complete was $15,000 and maya unlimited
was $25,000 and you also needed a special sgi workstation to
handle the program . but still im a poor bastard and i hate working so of course im going to download a $ 20,000 app. when i find it!!!! !

Looking at it logically:

People work hard to put together a product or service for the consumer. I don't feel it is out of the question to expect them to charge a fair price for that.

However, fair is subject to interpretation. Do I think Maya is worth that much? No, not really.. until one thinks that movie houses use it and benefit greatly from it.

CDs, on the other hand... man.. don't get me started.

they havent been doing it for the past 20 years i dunno y they started now?

selling pirated software is wrong and those ppl should be prosecuted but if i give a burnt cd to a friend, thats different, still illegal but no reason for me to be arrested.

also there HAS to be much more to all those stories than they are telling us. for example maybe that college student had done soemthing the the school had no proof of (drugs), but found whatever they could to get them kicked out.

for businesses, it is usualy a disgruntaled employee that says something to the authorities.


Piracy is never ok, it's just accepted as not that bad. which is true but the people making thousands of dollars off selling pirated movies, music, etc.. whould be the ones the gov't is looking at .

I'm torn. On one hand, people have worked hard to produce these goods, and should be compensated in some way. On the other hand, most of these people are greedy bastards and are screwing consumers. I know theft will probably just drive the prices up, but somehow I can't bring myself to care when it's a matter of shelling out hundreds of dollars for software that'll be obsolete in a month.

The RIAA is grasping at straws. I have no objection to paying artists for their work, but I'll be damned if I'm going to pay $20 for a CD I may or may not like, $19 (at least) of which goes to the record company and not to the artist. They've gotten greedy and now they are going to pay unless they can come up with a more flexible and reasonable distribution system. I'd love to see the artists take control of their own production and distribution. You don't need the huge infrastructure that you used to in the pre-digital days - all you really need is a decent server and some advertising.

I agree with lurkette. The artist should make the money, not those who create the artificial infrasturcture to distribute the art. Kind of like how the DeBeers diamond cartel controls the availability of readily available diamonds so that they are expensive.

RIAA almost has me scared, but I find it ridiculous that they want to sue one of their customers who's bought many CD's from downloading a single or two. My dad's a part-time DJ and if he even wants to break even (and still not charge alot for the dances/parties) he has me download some singles for him. He used to have to buy all the CD's he wanted, and he about quit because it was costing him money to do his service! However, now he has lowered his charge and still makes a profit, and we both still buy CD's fairly regularly (although usually unless it's Eminem, we try to get non-mainstream material to help out the artists who really need sales).

I don't really advocate privacy, but I will no longer buy an album without downloading it first and listening to it. If I like it enough that I want a high quality version, I will go buy it. Otherwise I usually delete it.

I try to stick with mainly shareware for software because it is a hell of a lot more affordable, but in some instances, it just isn't really possible coughphotoshopcough. I will always pay for Shareware, but I have a hard down throwing down six bills for one application.

I don't pirate movies. DVDs offer a lot of great stuff for a mere $15 - $20.

i think personally there just tryn' to scare everyone. i mean ever since napster hit tons of people are setting up programs.

it will never go away.....muuuuuuuuuhahhahahhahhaa there will always be away around it.

I mostly download music. The main reason is that CD stores over here bring mostly the most mainstrem music, so if you're looking music from some new band or something, its really hard to buy it. And the other reason is that why should I pay for something I can get for free?

why pay for something you could get for free? Because unlike most examples that people make, there are not *that* many artists who sell millions of albums. So they get squat for writing songs, producing them, performing etc.

So the biggest names might not be hurt as much, but the 90% of bands that don't sell millions of copies (prolly a higher percentage even) and will stop doing it. Leaving us all in the end with the big names and nothing else.

So that's why

I used to pirate a lot of software. Then my friends got jobs at software companies. Then they got laid off. The only pirated stuff I have now are old (10+ years) games, that I couldn't run on the computer I had at the time, and they are no longer available to purchase.

I view music a bit differently. I just don't see most of the money going to anyone who adds any value to the product. I buy few CDs now (mostly used), and only rarely download an mp3 file (3-4/year).

This is a touchy issue, on one hand i think the movie & music industry is going to far with their threats of action, and are getting a bit ridiculous with the penalties. Instead of spending all that money lobbying congress, and trying to put measures in place to prevent piracy, which we all know will only last long enough for some hacker to break, they could try reducing costs, or maybe even jump on the internet bandwagon. But i also feel that it does put a damper into there profits, and admitely i have plenty of music and programs that were not paid for, and i know i'm not the only one, and the numbers add up, quick.

So you tuck that loaf of bread under your jacket when you go to the store too?

Personally, I don't see a problem with it- at least the way I am acting. I download music to open myself up to new bands that I would otherwise not know about. If I really like it, then I go out and buy the CD. I buy as many CDs now as I did before any of the file sharing programs out there. (But that's also probably beacuse I like to collect CDs.)

I don't think I am alone when I say that I don't believe my piracy is causing any loss of revenue for anyone. I say this because I only download media that I would normally never buy or watch anyway. If I download music and like it, I do go buy the CD. The pirated things you'll find on my computer or in my CD collection are either things I wouldn't pay money for or backups of things I already.

This said, I understand it's still a copyright violation and against the law. Also, my actions promote more piracy so I can be causing loss of revenue that way, but that seems a bit indirect. In the end, it's just how I justify it to myself.

You know what I've noticed lately? The recording industry keeps saying that it's loosing tons and tons of money SOLEY because of file sharing applications. As we all know, with more and more people getting broadband connections, the number of movies being traded on the internet is also increasing. Here's the funny part, the movie industry is booming! Big blockbuster movies today are raking in more and more cash because they are quality and people want to see them in the theaters. Clearly, the music industry isn't loosing money only because of file sharing... I say it's partly because of their shitty music! I went from buying two albums a month to almost no albums in an entire year. Why? Because the music today sucks! I hate the vast majority of the shit they're coming up with these days. I really believe that the RIAA is too busy pointing their fat ass fingers at KaZaA to even realize the real reason they're losing all their money. And this crack down on music swaping is complete bullshit. All they will successfuly do is alienate their customers. Yesterday I didn't buy any new albums because they all suck, today I refuse to even go near a record store because those greedy fat fucks are trying to steal my wallet. According to CNN, when you buy a record the artist is only getting an average of 12% of that purchase. Where does the real money go? To the RIAA. They can screw themselves... and don't give me that shit about the artists starving without me.

I'd rather download a $15 album of KaZaA and send a check for $1.80 (12%) directy to the artist.

Heres what I said earlier in another post.

The RIAA is soooo STUPID! They lost against the software companies because they have that loophole. Which was pure genius. Personally i think that judge was downloading it to but...Anyways the RIAA is doing this because theres nothing else they can do. They are sooo desperate, and don't know what they are doing. I dispise the RIAA, they are nothing more than a national organization to inflate cd prices. There is no reason I should have to pay 20 bucks for a cd that i want one song. Get a clue! I will buy a CD when it is reasonably priced, and we are talking 5 bucks. I have no problem even doing the apple.com thing.

But heres what I say to cheat the system. First of all don't use Kazaa. That program has so many viruses and hackers I don't trust it. Use WinMX, its known, but not to the degree as Kazaa and the RIAA isn't using it to search for the ppl. 2, Keep your older downloaded files in a seperate folder which is not shared. I have a seperate download folder which I clear out once a year. It gets maybe 100 files in it. and 3, If you ever get caught the best way to rub it in the RIAA's face is to go out and buy every CD which song of music is on that pc. Keep most of them in wrappers, but as long as you have that reciept you can take the back after the trial. Just my way of telling the RIAA to stop inflating prices....

If your playing music to make money, then you've forgotten the whole point of playing music.

moelester: if that option was available for every artist, how many people do you really think would do that? Not a great many, I'll tell you what.

The only real solution would be to have every mp3 out there contain a code or key so it will only play on 1 particular PC. And even then it would only be a matter of time till they figure out how to strip that code off of it, and you'll have the same problem.

If you believe that, you need to get out from your haze of bong smoke. Almost everyone who wants to be a musician has aspirations of fancy cars, big houses, etc. When they say, "It's just for the music, the money doesn't matter, they lie."

yea, they may still play because they love it, but I don't see many of them giving back that paycheck because they don't want to forget the point of playing music.

Agreed. If artists TRULY felt that the money didn't matter, they'd ditch the big labels, give more free concerts, play small clubs instead of football stadiums, and most importantly, support P2P. After all, do they want their fans to HEAR their music, or do they want their fans to BUY their music?

This is their livelihood, this is how they support themselves. They deserve to get paid something, no argument there. But when people bitch about how pro athletes are paid millions of dollars to play sports, but don't say a word about the ridiculous recording contracts that musicians sign, it's hypocrisy. I could invoke teachers, police officers, military personnel, and plenty of other professions that are much more important in the grand scheme of things that get paid much much less, but that argument has been made before.

If me and you downloading a CD instead of buying it means the artist only gets to buy 3 cars instead of 4 this year, believe me, I'll sleep okay.

-Mikey

soo .... the guys that do nothing make alot of money for many many many many years.. .. now it is about to either come to an end.. or change dramatically.. and it is a crime.. boooo hoooo. .. I am mostly talking about music here... I get all the new discs that come out that I am interested in on the net now.. through irc.. .. yadda yadda yadda.. if I cannot find it.. a community that I have been hanging with for a few years now.. puts it on the FTP..and I get it .... If I like it.. and I like the artist.. I go out and buy it... but .. things like the new metallica.. .. I do not go out and buy...

as far as the software... I think that is wrong.. personally.

movies... again.. I get alot of them before they even hit the screen.. but if I like them.. especially action ones with good effects.. I go see them in the theater anyway... allthough.. I do not spend 12 extra bones on popcorn and a med. drink.. LOL.

What I don't understand is why software and mp3s have to be different than everything else that you own.

If I buy a book, and want a friend to read it, it is totally legal for me to give him/her the book, as a gift, or whatever.

Same goes with dvds, cds, vinyl, Nike shoes, etc, etc...

By me giving these things to friends, the "artist/creator" of said items is not making any profit, but it is legal.

Why, then, is it all of a sudden illegal when the "giving" happens over the internet? Because of the large scale of the "giving"?

How is this different than operating a used cd store? They are all over the place and do huge business. The "artist/creator" makes no money off the resale of these cds, yet it happens all over the world.

How is it piracy if someone pays for something and then gives it to someone else?

If you were printing off perfect copies of the new harry potter book and giving them away for free to thousands of people you would go to jail.

two words: private ftps. as has been demonstrated many many many many MANY times before, innovations and the communities built around them that provide valuable services to the general public will never just 'go away'. they'll just get forced underground where they have a greater potential for shanghai-ing by the so-called 'criminal element'. I'm sure our wonderful president George II would just *love* a completely underground, encrypted network that 'terrorists' could play around on...

I think of it as poetic justice for pimping contempt for police and authority in general to children via music for years and years, who would have thought these kids were listening?

Suck it, RIAA. (I don't pirate music by the way).

The way i look at it...

I 'acquire' software from 'non usual' sources for one reason...

I'm teaching myself to use it.

That way i can go into work and tell my boss he needs to buy it.

That way almost everyone is happy.

I didnt pay $25,000 for some application that i have no hope of recovering the cost of, my boss ends up with software that is right for him and is understood and working great... and the software companies have made a sale to somone who wants/needs their product.

Call me a commie but isnt the idea to supply those who need.

The day they provide me with a quality digital source alternative is the day i stop downloading.

I think the RIAA, MPA and whoever else miss the entire point. They have yet to even provide a reasonable alternative for people to get what they want, so they get it from wherever they can, and it just happens to be on Kazaa or Morpheus.

Who has time these days to see all 50 movies that come out over the course of a summer? I know that I don't, so I DL the movie on my computer and watch it, if I really like the movie I'll still go see it in the theatre where I can get full surround sound and a better quality experience. I would gladly pay money to DL a movie online, even just one-time use if it was available.

The only type of video I download is TV shows, or little clips of stuff. I'm totally not into downloading movies for two reasons.

1) I prefer renting/buying the DVD version of whatever movie because of the superior quality and extras
2) The few times that I have downloaded movies, I always end up with the version that has asian subtitles. I hate that.

I'd have to say that of all the music I ever downloaded that I didn't pay for I would buy none of it. What am I gonna go spend 20 bucks on a cd that I might listen to 1 song 1 time in the next 10 years for? As if....they haven't lost a sale....and besides, try to find your favorite esoteric 80's punk on any pay site.....good luck

I tried the pay models......emusic, mp3.com et. al

shitty catalogs, the bands 2nd best album etc..... gimme what I want, when I want it, at a fair (read cheap) price. Is that too mucking fuch to ask?

p2p gives me that......

by the way while wer'e giving the RIAA the bird....fuck sony too