So, I spoke briefly on Friday about the girl that was sued by the RIAA who lost, and now owes upwards of $200,000 for downloading and sharing a few songs. Now, while I am do agree that there should be some regulation, and that nothing should just be totally free, I think that this whole war against those that share music has gotten out of hand (as evidenced by this case). In fact, what is forgotten, and I think on purpose for whatever reason, is that most people that download music actually end up buying most of that which they download.
Take me for example. I buy CDs all of the time. Most of those CDs are CDs that I downloaded first, in order to see what they were like. Most of the stuff that I download is stuff that I haven’t heard of, and want to check out. If I get a chance to check out something new, and end up enjoying it, I definitely want to support the artist, and 9 times out of 10, I do.
So is what I am doing helping or hurting the music industry? I would say that it is helping because I am buying the products that are being produced; and most often I am buying the minor artists, and supporting music that would otherwise never be heard. Additionally, many of the smaller artists that I find this way, would never have been discovered without my trying to find them. I also go to concerts of these artists regularly, and support them even more in that manner.
If I relied on the radio for my every music need, I would miss many of the amazing artists that I love today, and I think that not only is that a terrible shame, I think that it clearly shows that the RIAA is not about saving music… they are about their profits.
However, I still contribute to their profits. Willingly. Yet, they still come after those like me, those that love music, and just want to be able to share it with others, in hopes that they will enjoy and support those artists that they might have never heard of; that is, if I didn’t play them that “illegal” mp3.
I think this whole issue is bullshit, and it just makes me angry that big corporations get all angry when they can’t control every single aspect of something. This is especially infuriating with regards to trying to control music that I legitimately pay for… If I bought it, so back off. You got your money, now let me enjoy my CD, or even make a copy for a friend if I choose to do so; I payed for it! In the end, it is clear to me, that the RIAA is always the one that wins, because like I said, most of those suggestions lead to purchases; and most of the profits are never even seen by the artists themselves.
I gave $5 to the save Jammie fund, because I know that if I were in her shoes, I would really be freaking out. I feel sorry for her that the RIAA has chosen so ridiculously to make an example out of her. Asking her to pay a $1 for each song she shared is one thing, but what they are doing is robbery. So, here’s $5 from me, Jammie, I hope that you can raise enough to pay off the bloodsuckers that are on your back.
What do you guys think about sharing music/downloading music? Do you think the whole thing is just another greedy scandal by corporations to make as much money as possible? Or do you really think that artists suffer? What about sharing music is so bad, especially if you are like me, and you almost always go out and buy the CD? Additionally, sharing music was meant to discover new artists, which for me, it totally does… what would happen to the obscure artists if this ability was taken away? How would it effect you?
Bullshit or not, the rules are the rules…
And it’s not the downloading thats the main point of contention, it’s the sharing through P2P networks that got her in the end. So you can, technically download til your hearts content, it’s once you open that file up for sharing that they can get you
Thats why P2P and open torrent trackers are not the place to find good music (or movies). Newsgroups or closed trackers like Oink are definately the way to go.
Word. I agree… but only to a degree. If you are sharing something with a friend to get them to check it out, it falls under the same jurisdiction as this case; which is where I don’t see it helping the music industry at all.
Sharing music is way different than, say, leaving a file in your sharing folder for kazaa while it’s open or leaving that torrent open
Last time I checked, the RIAA can’t track CD burning habits, if you openly share files online like that then you’re an idiot and dont deserve a penny for anyone… You pay for your own mistakes
What’s the name of that song that goes “Wooo hoo… (doot doot doot)..wooo hooo (doot doot doot)” (in high pitched way)?
I think that you are referring to “Song 2″ by Blur? Their one “see, we can crack American music, even though we don’t really care to” song.
Radiohead has just released their new album, free (you can pay what you want for it), or you can wait for the discbox. Others are following suit. I like buying CD’s and don’t illegally download. However, I get copies of stuff from my roommate (technically illegal probably). They are making an example out of her. Rules are rules but going to jail is bullshit in this free country of ours. Did she re-sell the music and make profits? So she just shared it on P2P networks for others (which she got from other P2P neteworks in the first place). Jail WAAAAAY to heavy a price for this small time crime.
No, I just heard a sample on itunes and that’s not it. This one sounds like it’s sung by females. They used to play it at Blake’s a lot. It sounds almost country.
Duane,
Remember there are sites like rhapsody (that I belong to) that are around 15 bucks a month and allow you to load full songs onto your mp3 player to “rent” them. You don’t own them and you can’t burn them unless you buy them, but you can listen all you want. And it is legal. Though I do think 200,000 is too much, but the artists need to make money too.
Oh, and I almost forgot Youtube! I see so many videos for international recording artists and it lets me check out the song for free!
With all the bullshit, I just quit listening to music.