What are your questions on downloading & copying music legally?

buzzablinio

sugarcoma101 wrote: »

What would you class as a 'reasonable price' considering from a 79P download, the artist, the songwriters, the musicians, the recording engineers, the studio time, the graphic designers, the marketing and promotions teams, the press teams, the manufacturers, the producers, the sales teams AND the retailers need to be paid for their fair work from it?

You seem to be as blinkered as the music industry. I said - 10p a track, 50p an album. Its pointless whinging about illegal downloads if you don't look at all the causes...the most blatant being that the industry charges more for a down load than it costs me to have a CD delivered to my door from the other side of the world ... rediculous. Lower the prices, sales increase, everyone is happy. It would be a very easy theory to test - just sell the next U2 album on download for 50p ... see how many more legal copies they sell. Anyway, for the record, I buy all my music legally in good old fashioned CD format, but I'll never pay for the over inflated download prices the music industry expects people to pay - what a con - and our MPs blindly go along with the industrys calls to pile pressure on illegal downloaders. What makes the music industry upset is that we have a more level playing field now ... overcharge and consumers will just bypass you and become 'pirates'.

melody69

Is it legal to transfer all your vinyl to CDs/computer/MP3 player etc?

ukandy24

There has been a few analogies about stealing crisps or chocolate but how about this one:
A boy has 5 loaves and 2 fishes and gives them to Jesus to share with 5000 people, when they have gone around and everyone is full, there is more left than they started with! Have they stolen from the baker and fishmonger?
(Matthew 14:13–21)

dudes_2

Why doesn't the industry push forward new technologies and standards that are as good as the p2p alternatives? When will the industry provide:

- Lossless music?
- Be able to backup music. For example, will the BPI support a "public right to copy"?

Why does the BPI seem to confuse copyright infringement with theft? Doesn't this risk alienating, instead of winning over, file sharers?

acestuff

• If a copyrighted mp3 is embedded into a website so that my browser downloads it then caches it on my machine, is it illegal?

• If I then fetch this file from the browser's cache and save it [FONT=&quot]permanently [/FONT]onto my hard-drive, it this file ownership now illegal?

• Do you agree that it is an impossible task in trying to stop illegal file sharing on the internet due to it been essentially undetectable and much easier to do than actually paying for things?

Colin

sugarcoma101

dawson001 wrote: »

If I steal a chocolate bar, someone else is not able to have it - Theft!
If I duplicate a track it does not impeed someone else's use - Copyright!
Clear on the difference?

My issue is with the children is: If the child downloaded something illegal - the phone line is registered in the adults name - but if the adult has no idea what a bit torrent is who's fault is it?

Wrong. If you obtain a product by an illegal means and do not pay for it, it is theft, plain and simple.

And it is the adults fault for not educating themselves on what potentially illegal activities their kids are up to online and monitoring their use of it, absolutely.

jimbo49

dont know how old you are, sugarcoma101, but i wonder how you would feel or do feel if/when you are under constant surveillance? if you have kids, how they feel having someone watching their every move? they must be really impressed with having you for a parent! if you are accused of doing something, even if you haven't done it, how will you feel when trying to protest, let alone prove, your innocence? wonder how you felt when your parents were on you like the proverbial fly on m**k, watching whatever you were doing? how can copying any music track be seen by people like you to be such a hanus crime as to warrant the kind of punishment that you obviously condone? there are so many 'crimes' that are of far greater severity than this and have far lesser punishments and far less reaching consequences. it wouldn't be so bad if the information given out by all the copyright industries, not just the BPI was true and reliable, instead of being, as the Americans now admit, grossly over exaggerated, with the stated losses nowhere near to the extent that they say. so i ask again, why not embrace new technology and give a 'legal', fast, drm free, sensibly priced alternative before trying to disconnect, fine and/or imprison customers? keep people on your side and make money at the same time. a little is better than none!

allan2006

dawson001 wrote: »

My issue is with the children is: If the child downloaded something illegal - the phone line is registered in the adults name - but if the adult has no idea what a bit torrent is who's fault is it?

I dont think its fair that the person who pays the broadband bill is prosecuted when it could be someone else breaking the law.

if say a 17yo is downloading loads of mp3s illegally, if the account holder is unaware why is it them being prosecuted??

say a 17yo is driving a parents car and breaks the speeding limit its not the car owners fault!

sugarcoma101

jimbo49 wrote: »

dont know how old you are, sugarcoma101, but i wonder how you would feel or do feel if/when you are under constant surveillance? if you have kids, how they feel having someone watching their every move? they must be really impressed with having you for a parent!

So your arguement is that parents are not responsible for trying to make sure that their kids dont do illegal things?

Rubbish.

Do YOU have kids Jimbo? Would you not feel a certain responsibility for keeping an eye on your childs activities (not neccessarily on the computer, but in general?). I would assume your answer would be yes...and if you feel that that applies to everything bar computer related activities, then plain and simply, it is a ridiculous double standard.

jimbo49 wrote: »

how can copying any music track be seen by people like you to be such a hanus crime as to warrant the kind of punishment that you obviously condone? there are so many 'crimes' that are of far greater severity than this and have far lesser punishments and far less reaching consequences.

What punishment are you talking about here exactly? What 'crimes' that are of far greater severity and have far lesser consequences are you talking about? None of that paragraph has any basis in reality! The Digital Economy Bill proposes that PERSISTENT offenders will have their internet connections either slowed down first and then cut off for repeated offences.

If as you say, parents are not monitoring their kids activities and not seeing that they are downloading illegally, they will first be sent a warning, therefore giving them adequate opportunity to pay more attention to what their kids are doing online.

jimbo49 wrote: »

so i ask again, why not embrace new technology and give a 'legal', fast, drm free, sensibly priced alternative before trying to disconnect, fine and/or imprison customers? keep people on your side and make money at the same time. a little is better than none!

......iTunes?

curriej99

Watto1990 wrote: »

When are you going to drop the ridiculous idea that every single illegal download is automatically a lost sale, and using that to calculate your "losses", when most people who illegally download have never and will never step foot in a record shop, buy an album or pay for a download?

I suppose by that logic it is okay to break into a gig, or a cinema, or squat in someone's house when they're on holiday, or any other such pursuits, as, had you not got it for free, you'd be scamming something else, somewhere else?

D. Advocate