This is absolutely the weakest argument for piracy.
Sure the Granny was just keeping the money under her bed.. she wasn't even using it!
-
Welcome, guest!
Why not take a moment to register an account?
If you already have an account, remember to Log In!
ISPs providing addresses of p2p users to the IRMA? (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter jimmybreeze
- Start date
- Replies 566
- Views 74K
- Watchers 16
This is absolutely the weakest argument for piracy.
Sure the Granny was just keeping the money under her bed.. she wasn't even using it!
no, I don't think that for a minute. But I think a lot of people who download illegally wouldn't be ones to buy music either way. If that was the case I'd rather they had my album illegally than not have it at all.
That way I might sell a few more concert tickets, t-shirts, whatever. The other way, I definitely don't make any money.
I've downloaded plenty in my time. If I like, I buy. If not, I discard. Thats just me though I suppose.
george mcfly
My Name Is Prince.
Yurn!
New Member
i told you to stop posting my PM's up here.
- Thread starter
- #25
jimmybreeze
Well-Known Member
Yikes,they were threatening fines not prison tho,so ya might escape a rodgering.
Incidentally,anyone know anyone whos ever received a letter about this?
They claim to have prosecuted 66 in the last 2 years
Yes. Sort of. It's a firewall. But, like all firewalls, it's not perfect. It basically stops recognised ip addresses from sharing with you. ie, the Feds, IRMA-types, etc.
It's a first-stop against them. The list is updated all the time cos they keep trying with new ip addresses.
They even tried putting up a dodgy version of peerguardian themselves a while back, which allowed them to snoop. But it was easy enough to recognise it as it polled a different server for its updates.
Look, when I was a poor child licking chips over the street to survive, I saved up money for a few weeks to buy a record I wanted.
I didn't say "Ah, sure I can't afford Siamese Dream, I'll just head out and play football instead."
People might have fewer albums, but they'd still buy the stuff they really wanted.
RSJ
Well-Known Member
I think it's safe to say also that while many people on thumped might have huge CD collections, most people buy about two CDs a year (kaiser chiefs and franz ferdinand probably) and download shitloads of music to their ipods. If they ever see the band/buy some merch, the gig will be {insert huge corporate music festival} and the band will be paying 50% of the merch takings to the venue. Not to stick up for IRMA, but it's not as simple as "the bands should be thanking me for downloading their album".
Plus remember that 90% of major label albums have two good songs, most people will download the songs they want and ignore the rest of the album.
Plus remember that 90% of major label albums have two good songs, most people will download the songs they want and ignore the rest of the album.
ratmonkey
New Member
Maybe taking Granny's money, putting it in the bank, taking the interest and putting Granny's initial amount back under the bed would be a better analogy.
I have a dislike of spurious statistics, like the IRMA lads saying this is costing X amount, when it's really closer to Y.
RSJ
Well-Known Member
Oh and this - bollocks. EVERYBODY downloads music illegally, it's not mad pirate bastards who download it for the sake of downloading music. The same people whos horrible music taste made Oasis and Travis happen are the same people who now download their albums instead of buying them.
What the hell are you talking about?
c0De_n1NjA
New Member
haha, i though i was the only one downloading that "robbed granny" porn! Which ones do you have??
Either way the music industry is making no friends through this kind of thing, and if people hate how the music industry works then they are gonna feel less and less regret for fucking them over.
Suing and threatening to sue your own customers is the dumbest business strategy possible.
Suing and threatening to sue your own customers is the dumbest business strategy possible.
Yeah, but the problem is that the people who will suffer most will be the musicians, not the industry. The big labels will still get their cut, but the artists will get smaller cuts, or maybe never make a cent after they've finished paying the production costs. Ok, so we know that they make most of their money from touring, but do you think a record company is going to spend money on promoting if they're not making the sales?
Of course, it's unlikely that much, if any, of the fines will go to the artists either, but there has got to be a better way of registering dislike of the music industry.
I like the suggestion on that link Jimmybreeze posted about itunes showing the amount of each download that would actually go to the artist... that's a good idea.
Franco
Well-Known Member
gigging and selling merch is how most bands make a living these days.
when you see everyone Babs Streisand to Jandek coming out of the woodwork to play gigs, it's safe to assume that revenues from music sales are getting seriously dented.
i'm not in a band so i dunno if this is good thing or a bad thing.
I just wonder would bands like Talk Talk have been able to survive in this climate, and have gotten the kind of studio time to create their music, without being pressurised to play live. (although it did all go tits up with EMI in the end but that's another matter.)
when you see everyone Babs Streisand to Jandek coming out of the woodwork to play gigs, it's safe to assume that revenues from music sales are getting seriously dented.
i'm not in a band so i dunno if this is good thing or a bad thing.
I just wonder would bands like Talk Talk have been able to survive in this climate, and have gotten the kind of studio time to create their music, without being pressurised to play live. (although it did all go tits up with EMI in the end but that's another matter.)
skinnerchinner
New Member
I think the crux of my point is that music used to be for people who were really into music. People who saved up their pocket money to get an LP every 7 or 8 weeks, and wouldn't spend music on anything else. When I say 'music' I don't refer to the commercial shite you'd hear on 2fm. I refer to more niche stuff.
I think nowadays, even the most ignorant of people have a better awareness of music. Its more popular in general, and thats largely down to the fact that people have access to more than what they can afford every couple of months (I was that soldier too).
There is a lot of bad shite because of this. But theres also a lot of good. I get the impression that its easier nowadays for a local act to get a bit of recognition and a bit of notoriety, and thats largely down to the fact that people can share music more easily. The more people that have it, and god knows people talk, the more people will know about you. Bottom line is getting your name out there, having people talk about you and generating general levels of interest in you.
Its just my opinion but I think illegal music sharing (and the internet in general) has played a major role in music becoming more popular for one, and in helping spread the word about certain bands for another.
Ideally people would go out and buy it if they liked it (a kind of try and buy if you like). If 100 people having my album illegally meant I sold 20-30 extra copies of my album whereas the converse would be no extra sales, I think I know what option I'd take, especially given the other 70-80 could still make cash for me by other means.
Its just my opinion and its based on my own experiences of downloading, and similarly, my mates.
ratmonkey
New Member
My Granny analagy does need some refinement; Granny still has her initial cash, someone else benefits from it, but Granny doesn't.
oh you're right for sure but who in the public feels sorry for record companies? People are much more willing to give money to a band than to a corporation.
There is a lot of very serious talk at the moment of this being the last year of cd's, flick through the lefsetz letter and you'll see examples. Lefsetz is of the opinion that record companies are dead in the water; no one listens to the radio, media hype doesn't sell records anymore so artists have got no reason to sign to a major label. In a peer to peer age songs sell a band.
Of course media hype still sells loads of records but not in the way it did in the nineties....
skinnerchinner
New Member
id saying showing how much the artist gets on itunes will make fuck all difference
i reckon fuck all peeps give a fuck how much snog dicky doo doo is getting when
they buy his album from i-tunes
and if they are buying johnny independents music on i-tunes its probably
because they cant find the cd or record anywhere else and theyre too fucking
thick to check bands website to see if theres a link to buy it over the net
through someone else
i reckon fuck all peeps give a fuck how much snog dicky doo doo is getting when
they buy his album from i-tunes
and if they are buying johnny independents music on i-tunes its probably
because they cant find the cd or record anywhere else and theyre too fucking
thick to check bands website to see if theres a link to buy it over the net
through someone else
Users who are viewing this thread
Activity
So far there's no one here
21 Day Calendar
Similar threads
Support thumped.com
Support thumped.com and upgrade your account
Upgrade your account now to disable all ads...
Upgrade now
