What are your questions on downloading & copying music legally?

tangowithcash

I want to know what constitutes a 'free legal' vs an illegal download. I interpret an illegal download as an unpaid for copy of something which is offered legally for sale. It follows that if there is no download LEGALLY available to buy, any downloads cannot be illegal.

I.E. live performaces of songs which were never released, but the recording has been converted into mp3. I'd be most intrested to know the posistion on plays and shows recorded from live radio to listen to later (like making your own podcasts.)

I wouldn't consider listening to youtube or lastfm illegal as you are never download the track and so aren't in possession. Similarly copying a CD you have bought, as you have bought the music.

I too think the performing rights society classing radios in offices as a public performance is ridiculous. :mad:

charleyhellfire

tangowithcash wrote: »

I wouldn't consider listening to youtube or lastfm illegal as you are never download the track and so aren't in possession. Similarly copying a CD you have bought, as you have bought the music.

That's not entirely correct - in the act of listening online, you are, in effect, downloading at the same time - technically as things stand....illegal.

Maybe the BPI can tell us where the elastic line begins and ends?

:cool:

adouglasmhor

charleyhellfire wrote: »

That's not entirely correct - in the act of listening online, you are, in effect, downloading at the same time - technically as things stand....illegal.

Maybe the BPI can tell us where the elastic line begins and ends?

:cool:

I pay £1.50 a month for my lastFM subscription. I assume as they are London based the industry gets their cut.

sugarcoma101

jimbo49 wrote: »

insisting that everyone is downloading illegally and has to lose their internet connection.

I never said that.

jimbo49 wrote: »

for someone that belongs to an industry that relies totally on people buying their products, regardless of what media it is on or the format it is in, you are shooting yourself in the foot.

Wrong actually. Artists and labels have other sources of income besides record sales but carry on....although I’m not really clear how I am ‘shooting myself in the foot’?

jimbo49 wrote: »

you reckon that the only thing people are going to understand is their disconnection from the internet! i think the only thing you are going to understand is when you get 'the finger' from the very people on which you wholly rely. do you honestly expect to retain customers after treating them in the manner you propose? do you expect people to go rushing to the nearest music store to buy an over-priced cd, that, as is common today, contains maybe 2 tracks that are worth listening to, simply because they now have no internet?

Ok you’ve totally lost me here. Those who download ILLEGALLY are not ‘customers’ and they are not the people that the music industry are trying to retain as THEY DONT PAY FOR MUSIC. They will be ‘treated’ as the law breakers that they are. They don;t have to rush to a music store, just download legally from ITunes or a similar, legal service. You can buy individual tracks from there?

jimbo49 wrote: »

i actually feel sorry for you and your like.

I can live with that. I have my facts straight on this one but as I have pointed out above, you clearly don’t.

jimbo49

i must have hit a nerve as you only pick on me. am i the only one that disagrees with you? or am i the only one that tells it like it is and you cant handel it? the only thing you have straight, sugarcoma101, is your attitude towards customers. regardless of what 'other sources' there may be for income, no customers equals no sales, equals no money, equals shooting yourself in the foot. and just to put you 'straight' on another point, it has been proven time after time that people that download actually spend more on purchasing music than those that dont download. why? because they have access to a greater amount and diversity of music as well as up-coming bands, than is in the shops and are able to support those bands. however, you wont be satisfied with whatever is stated here, other than your own outdated and bigoted opinions. cast off the brainwashing and get into the 21st century. see what good the internet can do you and your industry instead of continuously condeming it and its users.

charleyhellfire

Well said Jimbo.
:T

Sugacomo101, I download mash-up stuff done by some really clever people, I wouldn't be able to buy recordings like that in the shops, or from sites like iTunes...simply because that kind of material isn't commercially available.

Should I deny myself this new take on the tired formula which is, new music, because it may impinge on intellectual property rights?

BceREuphoria

If i purchase an album and the songs overlap / mixed into one another am i able to download the songs individually i have just started djing i got good 30 albums sitting there with some of my favorite music (good example is Ministry of Sound the Annuals) but cant use because of the over lapping. Because it is a profession i wish to abide by the rules so please help me.

sillywilly

I have heard that by using Freecorder you can record music off the Internet that is freely available on sites such as Youtube - who I doubt in a lot of cases even have the authority to be hosting such music. But they are Google so I doubt they care what any company smaller than half their size thinks anyway!

You can apparently also record off "listen again" providers and radio stations.

Only downside is that you have to listen to everything in real time whilst recording.

I know nothing about the legalities of this but struggle to find it any different to recording stuff off the radio or TV onto audio or video tape.

Apologies if this very simple way of obtaining music has been posted - probably numerous times! Just trying to help.

charleyhellfire

When is the BPI rep coming then?

jimbo49

any further info on when the BPI guy is supposed to be appearing? interested to hear all their excuses to justify ripping off customers, wanting them off the internet and then taken to court, instead of trying to win the public back to their side by doing as has been asked for months, if not years!