paying for music and films

whitegoods_engineer

CKhalvashi wrote: »

Martin (who runs this site) owns a company called Tunechecker, where you can compare the price of songs to download.

If you hate adverts, and hate paying for things, don't listen to music, as mentioned above, if you do this to one of my artists, you're stealing from me and from them.

CK

Just interested in whether you are just bigging yourself up for effect, Just what 'artists' do you represent?

Have we ever heard of any one of them?

googler

turtleneck wrote: »

I am torn between spotify (or similar) and downloading from amazon mp3.

Unlike books, with music I have no worries about it being digital as long as its cd-quality.

You won't get CD quality from mp3.

esuhl

Nada666 wrote: »

Idiomatic use of language trumps legal pedantry. Films and music are being stolen by thieves. Your petty correction belongs to a jurisprudence discussion, not a consumer forum.

It's hardly legal pedantry! Someone infringing copyright is clearly not stealing anything. You don't need to be a lawyer to understand that.

It'd make more sense to refer to interest repayments as theft -- at least you're being permanently deprived of something!

All I'm saying is that, as a slogan to dissuade people from infringing copyright, "theft is theft" fails to address the fact that (as I understand it) most people who break copyright law do not see their actions as being morally equivalent to theft. "Middle-class" kids who would never steal someone's property are a lot more likely to make unlicensed copies of copyright material. I don't think that's just because they think they can get away with it.

Dumbing down the debate, or using loaded language to disguise what is actually happening is disingenuous; a tactic of cheap tabloids to incite an unthinking knee-jerk response.

Clearly, there is a great social value in the legal system of copyright that we currently have as a motivator for creativity. But let's not pretend that breaching copyright is the same as theft. That's just silly.

esuhl

turtleneck wrote: »

I hate adverts and would rather pay a small fee not to have them.

I am torn between spotify (or similar) and downloading from amazon mp3.

Unlike books, with music I have no worries about it being digital as long as its cd-quality.

I have never used itunes or ipods so have no ties to them.

Any advice?

My advice... do what I do and just buy the CDs! That way you get proper CD quality and no adverts!

Spotify and YouTube are great for discovering new music, though... but the sound quality isn't too great...

CKhalvashi

whitegoods_engineer wrote: »

Just interested in whether you are just bigging yourself up for effect, Just what 'artists' do you represent?

Have we ever heard of any one of them?

I am not allowed to advertise, as you are perfectly aware, however several have hit the charts in UK.

CK

erasion

esuhl wrote: »

All I'm saying is that, as a slogan to dissuade people from infringing copyright, "theft is theft" fails to address the fact that (as I understand it) most people who break copyright law do not see their actions as being morally equivalent to theft.

Your logic is exactly what I meant by saying: "Theft is theft. Justify it any way you like to ease your conscience." At no point did I suggest this as an anti-crime slogan, merely a reflection that people who break the law always seem to want to justify it. Heck, even murderers seem to want to justify their acts even though I think the vast majority of us would agree they are wrong.

If you are taking something you have NO LEGAL ENTITLEMENT TO, whether by illegally downloading it or removing it from a shop, your action is wrong. If you don't want to call it theft then that's your choice, but whether it is downloading a pirated album, using a forged Sky viewing card or stealing a £1 pack of sweets from Poundland, the end result is you have obtained something at the expense of the person you should pay the appropriate fee to. It's amazing how often you hear something along the lines of "they're a big company, they can afford it" used as an excuse for theft.

Oh well, whatever helps you sleep at night.

turtleneck

In a gift economy, artists and bands would release music for free and people could donate money if they liked it and felt it improved their lives.

Jenna_Appleseed

turtleneck wrote: »

In a gift economy, artists and bands would release music for free and people could donate money if they liked it and felt it improved their lives.

Some musicians already do - http://www.jamendo.com/en/

CKhalvashi

turtleneck wrote: »

In a gift economy, artists and bands would release music for free and people could donate money if they liked it and felt it improved their lives.

The market economy, where we do the work and take 25% plus VAT of sales, plus 50% of marketing costs, works fine for me.

The gift economy is used, and does work, but it's not the way I do business.

CK

jonesMUFCforever

I am now an expert in starting the next track on Spotify free, before the current one finishes to avoid the adverts.