Free music (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> Morality & Ethics



Message

meymey -> Free music (1/11/2008 8:30:34 PM)

is using limewire a sin if anyone does use it please let me know



lightoutofdarkness2 -> RE: Free music (1/11/2008 11:44:48 PM)

Technically it would be stealing, but legally you can download and preview a song for 24 hours if you delete it at that time.

To be honest, I think that greedy record labels shouldn't be suing people and Itunes, etc should drop their prices. Especially since what they sell you have to burn and re-rip in order to have the highly useful mp3 format that you can play with any program or on any mp3 player.

And now they've even made it illegal to rip your own CD's. I guess if you want an mp3 player you have to buy an Ipod and re-buy all of your music off of Itunes at 99 cents a pop.

Russian comsumers can now legally download music for twenty cents a song. At least one site was ruled legal by the Russian courts because it gave half of it's profits to their version of the RIAA.

But in America, whether you as a consumer can use Russian sites is a grey area. Technically it's legal, but iffy.

Oh, and before anyone bites my head off about supporting the artists, just ask the Goo Goo Dolls about how fair the labels are to the artists.
You are better off going to a concert than buying a CD. The only good buying a CD does it it ensures that the label keeps putting out music by that artist.

And if you want Indie music, E-music sells it legally for about thrity cents a song. In mp3 format of all things.



meymey -> RE: Free music (1/12/2008 12:13:44 AM)

well on their website they say that we let you try it as long as you want and then you then pay for it what if l do download some songs but l am planning on paying for it but l just don' have the money right now but l am planning paying for it later on



lightoutofdarkness2 -> RE: Free music (1/12/2008 2:12:02 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: meymey

well on their website they say that we let you try it as long as you want and then you then pay for it what if l do download some songs but l am planning on paying for it but l just don' have the money right now but l am planning paying for it later on


I'd hate to give bad advice, but the legality is a bit shady here. So I would probably avoid using Limewire. If anything, you can hear thirty-second preiviews for free on Itunes, then buy the CD later.

If anything, go to Ebay to purchase your music. CD's can be bought pretty cheaply there. If you at least have a bank account, you can use Paypal.



meymey -> RE: Free music (1/12/2008 3:22:38 AM)

so can we say the inventors of limewire are wrong? and they lead people to steal



stellaluna -> RE: Free music (1/12/2008 10:21:57 AM)

No, they're not wrong or leading people to steal. Limewire allows users to share files. The service simply doesn't police which files are being shared.



lightoutofdarkness2 -> RE: Free music (1/12/2008 12:18:47 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: stellaluna

No, they're not wrong or leading people to steal. Limewire allows users to share files. The service simply doesn't police which files are being shared.

Exactly. If you share classical music, I believe that it is basically public domain. But if you put up the latest Eminem album, you're breaking the law.

I could go on another rant, but I won't. I will mention that I was trying to find a filesharing program that worked on both the PC and MAC platforms so I could transfer my music between my desktop and my laptop. But on one of the pages for the programs, I got a warning about "illegal activities" and that my IP had been logged. [:@]



tenfour -> RE: Free music (1/12/2008 11:50:03 PM)

"Technically it would be stealing, but legally you can download and preview a song for 24 hours if you delete it at that time. "

I think this is a false rumor that's become very widespread.

" And now they've even made it illegal to rip your own CD's. "

This is actually debatable. The RIAA says it is illegal, but if a specific case like this has not yet been tested by the courts, then its legality not clear. The actual copyright laws do not specifically mention this particular situation so it is up to a judge to decide, the first time it is brought to court.

I took a course on intellectual property in grad school, and that was what I never realized before.

Laws are very vague, because they cannot possibly describe every possible thing a person might do that could be illegal. So when an issue like this comes up in court, what happens is the judge will decide whether it is legal based on his/her own interpretation of existing law. This judge's ruling becomes a very strong influence on all future similar litigation cases. Down the road, a new Copyright Act will be drawn up, and it will attempt to be clearer on all the issues that have come up as debatable in court.

---

Another interesting thing about copyright law is that I'm not sure it's correct to say that it is "illegal" to violate a copyright. You can only get in trouble with the law if the owner of the copyright chooses to sue you. Copyright owners must police their own work. In many cases, bands or authors of other works decide to allow their work to be copied freely for everyone. You are literally breaking their copyright by copying the music, but it's not really illegal--if the copyright owner chooses not to enforce it, then no one cares that you are violating the copyright. You haven't broken any laws. It's all very iffy.



tenfour -> RE: Free music (1/12/2008 11:55:58 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: lightoutofdarkness2

Exactly. If you share classical music, I believe that it is basically public domain. But if you put up the latest Eminem album, you're breaking the law.


Actually, all music recordings are "illegal" to share in this way.

The musical notes themselves are public domain, but the recording is copyrighted. All it means when a piece of music is in public domain is that you can create and sell your own recordings of it or sheet music of it without paying anyone any royalties.

I don't like the term "sharing" when it comes to music. That is trying to spin it like you are just lending someone your CD. But you are literally copying something and giving it to someone that you do not have the legal right to copy.



edgibson -> RE: Free music (1/13/2008 8:04:40 AM)

One of the youth at our church was in the sound booth talking with my friend and I. She was asking us some questions about her new MP3 player that had recently been replaced.

She was lamenting that she had to reload her 4000 or so songs back onto it.

My buddy asked her how she accumulated so many songs. And I asked her if they were legal copies.

She responded that all of the copies were perfectly legal. Her cousin paid for them all before she copied them from him!

D'oh![8|]



David-West -> RE: Free music (1/13/2008 6:52:48 PM)

Pirating music is a sin because it is stealing. People often try to justify digital piracy because they aren't "physically taking anything" or "hurting anyone." This is absolutely false. You are taking something that belongs to the artist without paying for it, causing them monetary damage. Look at it this way: if you buy an album from, say, iTunes, the artist is getting a percentage of the $9.99 that you pay. If you pirate it, they are not getting the money that they rightfully deserve. It is morally NO different than stealing a CD from a store shelf.

The argument that the record companies are greedy and the artist has already made plenty of money is nonsense. It may be true, but that does not make stealing their music any more acceptable. The same logic could be applied to almost any business but you don't see many people trying to justify stealing things from store shelves.



meymey -> RE: Free music (1/13/2008 8:59:59 PM)

so if l pay for the limewire program would it still be stealing



stellaluna -> RE: Free music (1/13/2008 9:35:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: meymey

so if l pay for the limewire program would it still be stealing

No, Limewire is not illegal. You need to quit thinking of it in terms of a software that makes it possible for you to download copyrighted music. Limewire allows people to share files--any files.



David-West -> RE: Free music (1/14/2008 3:19:00 AM)

quote:

so if l pay for the limewire program would it still be stealing

Yes, it would still be stealing. The problem isn't that you're using limewire it's what you're doing with it; namely downloading copyrighted music without paying for it.

Limewire and other file sharing programs DO have their legitimate uses. For example, as an amateur filmmaker I've known people who have distributed DVDs of their films on bittorent so that people can download it and put it on DVD themselves. I know a lot of indy bands also distribute their music freely just to get their name out there.



lightoutofdarkness2 -> RE: Free music (1/14/2008 11:33:25 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: David-West

Pirating music is a sin because it is stealing. People often try to justify digital piracy because they aren't "physically taking anything" or "hurting anyone." This is absolutely false. You are taking something that belongs to the artist without paying for it, causing them monetary damage. Look at it this way: if you buy an album from, say, iTunes, the artist is getting a percentage of the $9.99 that you pay. If you pirate it, they are not getting the money that they rightfully deserve. It is morally NO different than stealing a CD from a store shelf.

The argument that the record companies are greedy and the artist has already made plenty of money is nonsense. It may be true, but that does not make stealing their music any more acceptable.


I'm going to have to shut you down a little there. You refer to it as "nonsense" then directly correlate it to "stealing". Yeah, it doesn't give you the right to steal, but does it really give them the right to charge you so much to buy the stuff? They are basing their prices on the standard 10-song CD, but what if you make a mix - such as a best of - with 20 songs? It would then cost you $20 to make the mix. The Elvis #1's CD has 31 tracks. Assuming that CD didn't exist and you had to buy the individual tracks from Itunes, it would cost you $31.


So you're not really getting that great of a deal with these "legal" methods.

I just had to point that out. Because people tend to use certain language to knock down an idea. Like the other night I mentioned Universal Healthcare in a conversation and some of the words thrown out were "communist" and "socialist". Those ideas scare people so much that when associated with something that might work with modification, people are made afraid to try it.



meymey -> RE: Free music (1/14/2008 1:34:58 PM)

okay now l am confused if some people say its wrong and some say its watever so what is? l am so confused



1love1God1way -> RE: Free music (1/14/2008 2:49:59 PM)

Just to through a thought into this topic....

Stepping away from music, let me use movies. If someone were to purchase a movie, and then have a large showing of this movie to many people, this is illegal. However, in this situation, it is the person showing the film and making it available to others is the one at fault. It is not punishable to those who simply take advantage of the situation to see the movie.

Now, going back to music...why is it illegal for those who take advantage of what was made available to them? Is not the person who made the copy and put it onto a P2P program the guilty one?



stellaluna -> RE: Free music (1/14/2008 3:05:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: 1love1God1way
Just to through a thought into this topic....

Stepping away from music, let me use movies. If someone were to purchase a movie, and then have a large showing of this movie to many people, this is illegal. However, in this situation, it is the person showing the film and making it available to others is the one at fault. It is not punishable to those who simply take advantage of the situation to see the movie.

Now, going back to music...why is it illegal for those who take advantage of what was made available to them? Is not the person who made the copy and put it onto a P2P program the guilty one?

Indeed. And that is why the RIAA has sued those distributing music, not those downloading it. The question is whether someone should seek out and download music they didn't pay for. IOW, is taking advantage of something made available the same thing as stealing?

meymey--Here's the deal. There is nothing wrong with using Limewire; it is merely a piece of software that is used to share any sort of file. Paying for Limewire does not mean you're paying for the music you download. You must decide if you feel comfortable downloading copywritten music without paying for it. No one can make that decision for you.



meymey -> RE: Free music (1/14/2008 10:56:07 PM)

so the limewire people don't pay for the music they are making available to the public? so they steal the music? is that wat you are saying?



1love1God1way -> RE: Free music (1/14/2008 11:11:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: stellaluna


Indeed. And that is why the RIAA has sued those distributing music, not those downloading it. The question is whether someone should seek out and download music they didn't pay for. IOW, is taking advantage of something made available the same thing as stealing?




People do get arresting for downloading and possessing pirated material.



1love1God1way -> RE: Free music (1/14/2008 11:13:05 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: meymey

so the limewire people don't pay for the music they are making available to the public? so they steal the music? is that wat you are saying?


There are no "limewire people" other than those who use limewire itself.



edgibson -> RE: Free music (1/15/2008 7:51:48 AM)

None of the music files reside on a "limewire computer". There is no limewire mainframe anywhere. All the files that you see on limewire are physically on other users' computers.

Limewire is the highway system that is making the connection between your computer and their's. So, to take the analogy further, driving on the highway is not illegal. Stopping at a point on the highway and picking up something that doesn't belong to you, is illegal.

As to the movie analogy; viewing the illegal showing is also illegal. It is just more difficult to prove. With the music downloads you also end up with a "product", i.e. the file.

It wouldn't matter if the recording companies charged $1million for a CD. It would still be illegal and unethical to copy it. The answer to the high cost of CD's is to simply not purchase them. If enough people abstain from spending the money on them the price will come down. Supply and demand economics really works. The problem here is, everyone complains that they cost too much, but they still buy them. Therefor there is no incentive on the recording companies to lower the price. Just like gasoline.



tenfour -> RE: Free music (1/15/2008 8:58:34 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: lightoutofdarkness2

quote:

ORIGINAL: David-West

Pirating music is a sin because it is stealing. People often try to justify digital piracy because they aren't "physically taking anything" or "hurting anyone." This is absolutely false. You are taking something that belongs to the artist without paying for it, causing them monetary damage. Look at it this way: if you buy an album from, say, iTunes, the artist is getting a percentage of the $9.99 that you pay. If you pirate it, they are not getting the money that they rightfully deserve. It is morally NO different than stealing a CD from a store shelf.

The argument that the record companies are greedy and the artist has already made plenty of money is nonsense. It may be true, but that does not make stealing their music any more acceptable.


I'm going to have to shut you down a little there. You refer to it as "nonsense" then directly correlate it to "stealing". Yeah, it doesn't give you the right to steal, but does it really give them the right to charge you so much to buy the stuff? They are basing their prices on the standard 10-song CD, but what if you make a mix - such as a best of - with 20 songs? It would then cost you $20 to make the mix. The Elvis #1's CD has 31 tracks. Assuming that CD didn't exist and you had to buy the individual tracks from Itunes, it would cost you $31.


So you're not really getting that great of a deal with these "legal" methods.

I just had to point that out. Because people tend to use certain language to knock down an idea. Like the other night I mentioned Universal Healthcare in a conversation and some of the words thrown out were "communist" and "socialist". Those ideas scare people so much that when associated with something that might work with modification, people are made afraid to try it.



Why should it matter whether they are charging what you consider to be a fair price? If Wal-mart charges $250 for a toaster, that does not make it suddenly okay to shop lift that toaster because you want it so bad.



stellaluna -> RE: Free music (1/15/2008 9:47:25 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: 1love1God1way

quote:

ORIGINAL: stellaluna


Indeed. And that is why the RIAA has sued those distributing music, not those downloading it. The question is whether someone should seek out and download music they didn't pay for. IOW, is taking advantage of something made available the same thing as stealing?




People do get arresting for downloading and possessing pirated material.

I don't know of any cases of that. Actually, I don't know of any cases of people being arrested for distributing copywritten music. (We're only discussing music here.)



1love1God1way -> RE: Free music (1/15/2008 11:50:28 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: stellaluna

quote:

ORIGINAL: 1love1God1way

quote:

ORIGINAL: stellaluna


Indeed. And that is why the RIAA has sued those distributing music, not those downloading it. The question is whether someone should seek out and download music they didn't pay for. IOW, is taking advantage of something made available the same thing as stealing?




People do get arresting for downloading and possessing pirated material.

I don't know of any cases of that. Actually, I don't know of any cases of people being arrested for distributing copywritten music. (We're only discussing music here.)


I read a report...unfortunately do not have the link...of some college students that were arrested and fined fairly heavily for downloading music through their school network.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI