Limewire is getting sued for a buttload of money. I say go ahead and let people dl free music, just compress the file and lessen the quality...its a good source of promotion/publicity for free...
I think that is true, but don't lessen the quality... I feel that it is good publicity. Artists should be praising the P2P community. Because it helps them get their voice and music out there. Plus, it's not like I am going to purchase it anyways...
I think we have more problems to worry about rather than these rich famous people not being able to buy more ferarris... such as the homeless people eating out of garbage cans, what about them?
Well, I made my opinion known here: http://www.frihost.com/forums/vt-45701.html but in case you don't want to read the other thread on this, I have a major objection to downloading music for free since I make part of my living on royalties from record sales. Every time someone downloads something instead of buying it, that's more money I don't get....
I know how you feel HDirtwater... how often do you go to the store, pick up some album from an artist you never even heard of, and buy their album...
Unless you own the album store, I doubt that would happen. If you get your voice out there and people hear about it, you could make alot of money from doing concerts, plus, if people really like your music, and want to support you, they will buy your album.
I mean... if those people never would have bought your album in the first place, how is it money that's been lost? Nobody will even THINK about buying your album unless you get famous first, or get your voice out there, and P2P should help, and get people talking about your music
This situation reminds me of marriage... Marriage is for Lawyers, just as Suing P2P clients is to Record Company's
If the artists are good and worth buying the CD, I'll buy it. Hell, I know that P2P sharing keeps money away from the artist, but it's very good for those who don't know how to back up their CD's or don't have the patience or time.
I am all for downloading I know artist complain and there are some who dont get the big bucks who feel it on one hand however artists branch out into so many other fields that they tend to make the money back. They also get damn good promotion whenever someone download their song, there are people who download and then go out and buy the album, there are many who actually go to the live shows and spread the word of mouth.
These artist need to realise that making a mediocre album will not cut it anymore and alot of listeners are marketing savvy enough to know when someone is trying to do a marketing act.
There will always be that set of buyers who will purchase the albums from the shop and even some who will download it from a retailer.
Artist need to disclose how much they currently earn from selling an album and single compared to the cost of making them, they also need to include touring etc. Then give us their costs, if they can prove to me that they are losing huge chunks then I maybe tempted to think again, but for now they are making far too much from low quality music for me to feel too sorry for them
I'm neutral really, more towards pro though. I personally do not use Limewire but I do use forms of p2p sharing. I don't think its that big a deal really because there will ALWAYS be pirating no matter what, and p2p sharing and downloading is being taken so seriously because it is done on such a large media (the internet). I do purchase albums, dvds, and games whenever I can because I personally like owning the real thing, but the majority (if not all) the music I like originate outside North America, so a cd would cost $30. I usually download the album ahead of time to see whether I like it or not. If I like it enough, I'll go to the record store and pick up the album whenever I can afford it to lol.
Besides, without internet pirating and file sharing, the majority of the people would not be privilaged enough to experience media other then what is available in the immediate region. And we won't be able to develop skills for programs such as Photoshop (which is what, $1000?!) and a large number of us wouldn't even have Windows XP, hahahha.
|HDirtwater wrote: |
|I have a major objection to downloading music for free since I make part of my living on royalties from record sales. Every time someone downloads something instead of buying it, that's more money I don't get.... |
I am with you. I hate to think how much money has basically been stolen from me. True, the artist gets a little publicity out of it but the songwriter doesn't get anything. I mean royalties are not that much but they can add up.
I find it sad when you can download everything an artist has ever done.
Honestly i'm all up for downloading. I even use Limewire. In my country, its hard to find some artists, especially rock, and alternative, and when you finf them thy're outrageously priced. Besides, i only really download when i havent any part of the whole album and i dont want to buy something i wont like. Just get the song i want, and be done with it
I know it would probably be a pain the neck for songwriters and such, but... there'll always be that THING...
I dl almost everything... The prices in stores are way too high, the prices on iTunes are good though.
But hey, why would I buy something when I can dl it too ?
Ofcourse, there are lots of arguments, but I spend my money on other things
i really like downloading... althoguh i know i'm pretty much hurting all my favourite bands by not actually buying their releases it is pretty hard to find all the records i need... the metal landscape is not very developed and although a band like Opeth is really big you can't find any original albums, not to mention if the band is in the swedish metal underground!
in my opinion bands can really get their money out of concerts, and by downloading you can be the judge of the album without having a mental block that says "i payed a lot of money for this so it does not SUCK!". I really like to find out new bands and listen to as much as i can, so...
this is just an opinion it does not encourage nor discourage the usega of peer2peer download utilities!
Downloading audio music from P2P apps is probably the best way to get to know new artist and have a look at their discography. Besides, many artists nowadays deliver their music for free over the internet which makes it quite useful for that music to be distributed over P2P due to bandwidth reasons
downloading songs i like coze i can download only the song like and listen to just it .
Artists make most of their money doing concerts and such...The industry gives their artist 14% royalties per cd sold...so say your band consisting of four members has a cd on sale for 15 bucks....the band would make about 1.80$ divided by four, each member makes about 45 cents per CD sold...while the label makes 13.20...Artists pretty much get all the support they need from their label...unless the label is tiny like mine...so we really are not hurting the artists all that bad... the majors just want to monopolize the industry and rake in all the dough they can...i dont remember the exact parameters of the lawsuit but the industry is suing for a rediculous amount of mooolah
I only download music to sample a band's material (2 songs of 1 album most of the time), to make sure I won't make a mistake in buying the album. From bands I already love, I buy new stuff blindly.
I do think it's wrong when you only download music and don't spend any money on it at all though... that's not cool. Besides, when you actually get an album you value it more - because you bought it, you have the booklet, etc.
There have already been numerous topics on this subject, and virtually all of them have been closed - please read the rules of the forum and search before posting.