[ZeroSignal]

Originally Posted by JBroll

The labels or bands give away a song or two so that you can decide if the song is right for you. That's the advertisement they give.

Do you expect to watch a movie or eat a meal at a restaraunt before deciding whether you should pay for it? I wouldn't. You see the commercials and trailers, or you have a sample (depending on the restaurant), but if you try to get away without paying for the whole thing only if you like it you're nuts...

Jeff

Is this what you meant?

If so than hell yeah you're right.

[oompa]

Originally Posted by JBroll

The labels or bands give away a song or two so that you can decide if the song is right for you. That's the advertisement they give.

Do you expect to watch a movie or eat a meal at a restaraunt before deciding whether you should pay for it? I wouldn't. You see the commercials and trailers, or you have a sample (depending on the restaurant), but if you try to get away with paying for the whole thing only if you like it you're nuts...

Jeff

thats entirely uncomparable. if you had to pick an album you wanted to listen to once and thats it - then fine, listen to one song and make a decision. i dont see any reason at all i should buy an album i havent listened through several times. what are they afraid of? that i will think it sucks? then they want to trick me into buying something i will think suck in a while = screw em.

and actually, on several real restaurants you can get away with not paying if you dont like the meal. really. and also, a meal you eat once. say you had to pick a restaurant you'd HAVE to eat at (and that one only) for the next 20 years of your life. want to make that decision based on tasting one dish they pick out? i wouldnt.

simple as this: if you believe its fair to try to trick people into buying an album they will find out is shit after a couple of spins = sure. ban the interweb. if you believe that you should be able to tell wether the album is good or not by actually listening to the whole of it a couple of times = allow the interweb.

movies do not have nearly the same replay value so it is not comparable (even if they can fool you in the same way. how many times haven't you watched a commercial for a comedy and when you see the movie the only two good jokes/scenes were the ones in the trailer..). a record has a potential of a thousand replays, you might enjoy it for 20 years or more, or the rest of your life. would you pick a wife to marry by looking at a picture of her feet?

if they have nothing to hide, then i see no problem. if they do = screw em anyway. win-win situation, screw scams. and if you dig the album and dont buy it, then atleast they were fair and you are the asshole.

[JBroll]

Yeah, whoops, let me fix that.

EDIT: Response...

Originally Posted by oompa

thats entirely uncomparable. if you had to pick an album you wanted to listen to once and thats it - then fine, listen to one song and make a decision. i dont see any reason at all i should buy an album i havent listened through several times. what are they afraid of? that i will think it sucks? then they want to trick me into buying something i will think suck in a while = screw em.

It's not that they're afraid of anything, it's that they've decided on fair terms to restrict how much of the album can go out legally. As for any reason... they aren't giving it to you to try like that, so you're accessing it without permission... we call that 'theft' if I'm not mistaken.

Originally Posted by oompa

and actually, on several real restaurants you can get away with not paying if you dont like the meal. really. and also, a meal you eat once. say you had to pick a restaurant you'd HAVE to eat at (and that one only) for the next 20 years of your life. want to make that decision based on tasting one dish they pick out? i wouldnt.

Actually, that's entirely incomparable. You're comparing a whole sample to a refund. You might be able to talk a label into a refund, but you can't get refunds out of everyone - and the refund is legal because it was given willingly by the manager.

As for picking one restaurant for 20 years... that's even worse. One, eating there for twenty years is a massive investment that far outweighs the purchase price (and expected life) of a CD; two, you can buy other CDs; three, you can transfer ownership of that CD; four, you would get any dish you wanted any way you wanted it at any time and place suitable for you guaranteed. There is really no comparison at all there. If you've ever paid your way into a movie, you got a worse deal than that. "Well, what if you had to watch one (and only one) movie for the next 20 years of your life?" Do you have to listen to one (and only one) CD for twenty years at a time? Am I missing some part of this that's supposed to make sense, or can someone else confirm that it isn't there?

Originally Posted by oompa

...simple as this: if you believe its fair to try to trick people into buying an album they will find out is shit after a couple of spins = sure. ban the interweb. if you believe that you should be able to tell wether the album is good or not by actually listening to the whole of it a couple of times = allow the interweb...

Again, the provider of the music has only authorized a given part of the recording for evaluation. Taking anything more is THEFT, end of discussion, no matter whether or not you think they're trying to trick you by putting one good song in with ten bad ones. Sell it back, get a refund, whatever... but the moment you take something that belongs to someone else and hasn't been given to you, you've stolen something. Again, can't do this with sandwiches or movies...

Originally Posted by oompa

movies do not have nearly the same replay value so it is not comparable (even if they can fool you in the same way. how many times haven't you watched a commercial for a comedy and when you see the movie the only two good jokes/scenes were the ones in the trailer..). a record has a potential of a thousand replays, you might enjoy it for 20 years or more, or the rest of your life. would you pick a wife to marry by looking at a picture of her feet?

Replay value is entirely subjective... I still watch Dr. Strangelove extremely often, because it's not about 'fooling me' or catching me off guard.

As for the wife thing... bad comparison. See, I would pick a wife by spending a portion of my life with her to determine whether or not I should stay with her forever, and then upon deciding to marry I would have a permanent wife. I'm not spending my whole life with her to decide after a few decades "Hell, let's get married..." "You bastard, we have grandkids and my parents disowned me for being a whore." "SHINY RING!" or anything like that. I'm getting a 'sample' (dating) with which I can evaluate the benefits of going for the full deal (marriage) and maybe having to back terms up for a refund (divorce) in the future.

Originally Posted by oompa

if they have nothing to hide, then i see no problem. if they do = screw em anyway. win-win situation, screw scams. and if you dig the album and dont buy it, then atleast they were fair and you are the asshole.

There's a line you have to draw between wearing tin-foil hats and thinking that everyone is out to fuck you over with shitty CDS and taking things that aren't yours because you think you have a right to them.

I don't know how simple this needs to be... if it isn't given to you, and you take it, you're stealing. You can't steal something to decide whether or not you want to keep it... still stealing, you're just less of a bastard a few days later. Try that with anything but music - a car, a film, whatever - and see how that goes.

Jeff

[ZeroSignal]

Originally Posted by oompa

thats entirely uncomparable. if you had to pick an album you wanted to listen to once and thats it - then fine, listen to one song and make a decision. i dont see any reason at all i should buy an album i havent listened through several times. what are they afraid of? that i will think it sucks? then they want to trick me into buying something i will think suck in a while = screw em.

and actually, on several real restaurants you can get away with not paying if you dont like the meal. really. and also, a meal you eat once. say you had to pick a restaurant you'd HAVE to eat at (and that one only) for the next 20 years of your life. want to make that decision based on tasting one dish they pick out? i wouldnt.

simple as this: if you believe its fair to try to trick people into buying an album they will find out is shit after a couple of spins = sure. ban the interweb. if you believe that you should be able to tell wether the album is good or not by actually listening to the whole of it a couple of times = allow the interweb.

movies do not have nearly the same replay value so it is not comparable (even if they can fool you in the same way. how many times haven't you watched a commercial for a comedy and when you see the movie the only two good jokes/scenes were the ones in the trailer..). a record has a potential of a thousand replays, you might enjoy it for 20 years or more, or the rest of your life. would you pick a wife to marry by looking at a picture of her feet?

if they have nothing to hide, then i see no problem. if they do = screw em anyway. win-win situation, screw scams. and if you dig the album and dont buy it, then atleast they were fair and you are the asshole.

Yeah but you wouldn't just go into even a small art gallery and take a painting off the wall and say "meh, I don't really like it but I'll take it anyway".

I mean I listened to "Bleed" and "Combustion" on YouTube last night and now I know I'm definitely buying obZen. That's also what online reviews and MySpace pages are for and while I accept that they can only tell you so much downloading at will is still stealing and it hurts the artist just as much as the big businesses.

The only song I have EVER downloaded was Sit In The Mountain which is available for free download on HevyDevy.com and I only did that because I can't find the Christeen EP anywhere (or is it LP? I can never remember) and I have it on order from a metal music shop in Dublin city.

[oompa]

Originally Posted by JBroll

Yeah, whoops, let me fix that.

EDIT: Response...



It's not that they're afraid of anything, it's that they've decided on fair terms to restrict how much of the album can go out legally. As for any reason... they aren't giving it to you to try like that, so you're accessing it without permission... we call that 'theft' if I'm not mistaken.

well as usual you are mistaken Jeff. theft means that i take something. i dont. i copy it. that is not theft, that is breaking copyright laws.

you know that old story about a dude downloading a song from another dude, and when it is finished, the other dude starts downloading the same song back from him.. the first dude asks him "what are you doing?" to wich the second dude replies "getting my song back, fucker".

i bet you dont see whats funny about that one.

Originally Posted by JBroll

Actually, that's entirely incomparable. You're comparing a whole sample to a refund. You might be able to talk a label into a refund, but you can't get refunds out of everyone - and the refund is legal because it was given willingly by the manager.

As for picking one restaurant for 20 years... that's even worse. One, eating there for twenty years is a massive investment that far outweighs the purchase price (and expected life) of a CD; two, you can buy other CDs; three, you can transfer ownership of that CD; four, you would get any dish you wanted any way you wanted it at any time and place suitable for you guaranteed. There is really no comparison at all there. If you've ever paid your way into a movie, you got a worse deal than that. "Well, what if you had to watch one (and only one) movie for the next 20 years of your life?" Do you have to listen to one (and only one) CD for twenty years at a time? Am I missing some part of this that's supposed to make sense, or can someone else confirm that it isn't there?

yeah, its there Jeff and you are missing it as usual. the point was not that you should dissect my comparison into bits and do a full scale evaluation. the point was easy, that you select something you are supposed to possibly enjoy for the rest of your life, based on one taste or sample.

Originally Posted by JBroll

Again, the provider of the music has only authorized a given part of the recording for evaluation. Taking anything more is THEFT, end of discussion, no matter whether or not you think they're trying to trick you by putting one good song in with ten bad ones. Sell it back, get a refund, whatever... but the moment you take something that belongs to someone else and hasn't been given to you, you've stolen something. Again, can't do this with sandwiches or movies...

again you are wrong Jeff. it is not theft. it is breaking copyright laws. if i steal their master tape, and supposedly magically make them forget how to create the same piece again, it would be theft. theft means i take something from you so that i have it and you dont. and i can't always send it back and get a refund cus i think it sucks. either way that is exactly what i am doing by downloading, it just takes place in a different order, that is alot easier for both parts.

Originally Posted by JBroll

Replay value is entirely subjective... I still watch Dr. Strangelove extremely often, because it's not about 'fooling me' or catching me off guard.

As for the wife thing... bad comparison. See, I would pick a wife by spending a portion of my life with her to determine whether or not I should stay with her forever, and then upon deciding to marry I would have a permanent wife. I'm not spending my whole life with her to decide after a few decades "Hell, let's get married..." "You bastard, we have grandkids and my parents disowned me for being a whore." "SHINY RING!" or anything like that. I'm getting a 'sample' (dating) with which I can evaluate the benefits of going for the full deal (marriage) and maybe having to back terms up for a refund (divorce) in the future.

No Jeff, replay value is not entirely subjective. for someone who just likes to argue for no reason over something that is commonly accepted, it might be entirely subjective. but for the rest of the world it is not. a music album has higher replay value than a movie. stop trying to create angles that are not there. you are just going with the "but i know this exception that makes your commonly accepted theory useless" argument. get real. you say you'd pick your wife after spending a portion of your life with her. well then we are the same. i do the exact same thing with a CD. the marry a girl part was another example from the top of my head how "picking something potentially longlasting by a tiny sample" is what i dislike.

and isn't getting a divorce abit harder than selling CD by your logic then? wich side are you on? before you do your best to dismiss every example everywhere, try to see if the other guy might have seen some very simple similarity. its close to common sense, and it makes discussing things with you alot easier.

Originally Posted by JBroll

There's a line you have to draw between wearing tin-foil hats and thinking that everyone is out to fuck you over with shitty CDS and taking things that aren't yours because you think you have a right to them.

yeah Jeff, a paranoid mind might suggest that people think like that. well i dont wear a tin foil hat sad to say. nor do i think that everyone is out to get me. i dont think that everyone would steal my wallet on the street either, but i promise you that if went out and put it on the street and turned away, someone would grab it sooner or later, wich is why i dont do that. thats again Jeff is what we call common sense. i dont think they are "out to get me" with my "tin foil hat". i just dont give them a chance to sell me CD that i wont like. gosh simple things seem so complicated from your point of view.

Originally Posted by JBroll

I don't know how simple this needs to be... if it isn't given to you, and you take it, you're stealing. You can't steal something to decide whether or not you want to keep it... still stealing, you're just less of a bastard a few days later. Try that with anything but music - a car, a film, whatever - and see how that goes.

Jeff

i agree it is simple. third time Jeff - breaking copyright laws. i take something from you means i get it and you dont. copying something = copyright laws. and i am buying what i decide to have, you might be against that for reasons i dont understand, but i am all for it. i remove what i decide not to have. and yeah, i am less of a bastard a few days later, and it changes nothing and no one sees any difference in anything, i do it in a different order. instead of paying, getting, listening, disliking, sending back, getting refund - i download. if i like, i buy. if i dont, i delete. veeery simple.

and no, i wouldnt try that with a car since that would actually be theft, i know the difference. and films are not the same thing since everyone with common sense knows films have less replay value than music.

and i do not watch alot of movies, but i rather go see them at the cinema if i read good stuff about them, since i prefer to see them on a huge screen with good sound, since chances are great that i only see it once, i pay - i play, same with music - if it is good. i dont pay if it sucks like you want me to.


--

and Zero Signal: no i dont go into an art gallery and steal a painting. but i have a digital picture of van gogh's starry night on my user page for example, and i can assure you i dont feel guilty over that (wouldnt if he was alive either.)

otherwise i wont argue with anyone who doesnt want to download stuff because it feels wrong - its their opinion and they are acting according to law.

i just love how bands like NIN have realised this and dump their new cd for free.

[garthfluff]

I'm for it for sampling music with the intention to buy, and theres nothing better than the relief when you realised you saved yourself buying a shitty album. Does anyone use any extra protection when file sharing?

[ZeroSignal]

Originally Posted by oompa

otherwise i wont argue with anyone who doesnt want to download stuff because it feels wrong - its their opinion and they are acting according to law.

I'm sorry? I thought you even admitted that you were breaking the law by downloading illegally? If it's iTunes then that's fine but that's not what we're talking about here.

[Metal Ken]

As far as everyone goes about samples --

I can read a whole magazine at a bookstore before i decide to buy it. If i dont buy it, i put it back on the shelf, and the guy who does buy it cant even tell i've read it.
Thats a far better comparison than using a meal at a restaraunt.

[JBroll]

Originally Posted by oompa

well as usual you are mistaken Jeff. theft means that i take something. i dont. i copy it. that is not theft, that is breaking copyright laws.

you know that old story about a dude downloading a song from another dude, and when it is finished, the other dude starts downloading the same song back from him.. the first dude asks him "what are you doing?" to wich the second dude replies "getting my song back, fucker".

i bet you dont see whats funny about that one.

Actually, I do see what's funny about that. However, either you've forgotten or you're ignoring that it takes quite a bit of time and money to produce music, and while you're not preventing anyone else from enjoying it you're reaping the benefits of someone's work without them receiving any compensation.

Originally Posted by oompa

again you are wrong Jeff. it is not theft. it is breaking copyright laws. if i steal their master tape, and supposedly magically make them forget how to create the same piece again, it would be theft. theft means i take something from you so that i have it and you dont. and i can't always send it back and get a refund cus i think it sucks. either way that is exactly what i am doing by downloading, it just takes place in a different order, that is alot easier for both parts.

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

In the criminal law, theft (also known as stealing) is the illegal taking of another person's property without that person's freely-given consent.

So how many times can we stick 'as usual/again you're wrong' into an argument?

They own that music. They decide how it is distributed, and if they only allow it to be distributed in exchange for goods or services then you are taking their property without their 'freely-given consent'...

Originally Posted by oompa

No Jeff, replay value is not entirely subjective. for someone who just likes to argue for no reason over something that is commonly accepted, it might be entirely subjective. but for the rest of the world it is not. a music album has higher replay value than a movie. stop trying to create angles that are not there. you are just going with the "but i know this exception that makes your commonly accepted theory useless" argument. get real.

Me? Get real? I'm not the one making a claim about how many times someone can enjoy something. I'm not just finding one random example from the middle of nowhere, there are plenty of films that I can watch several times and enjoy them fully. I know I'm not alone, too - plenty of people feel the same, and that's why they purchase films instead of renting [EDIT, screwed that one up... meant renting, sorry] them. Do you really want to argue about how many times films can be enjoyed?

Originally Posted by oompa

you say you'd pick your wife after spending a portion of your life with her. well then we are the same. i do the exact same thing with a CD. the marry a girl part was another example from the top of my head how "picking something potentially longlasting by a tiny sample" is what i dislike.

However, the woman involved consents to everything I'm doing, whereas we're under the assumption that the other party in your downloading scheme does not consent to your downloading. If, during the 'trial period', you evaluated her sexual perfomance without her permission (sampling without consent, if you will), you'd be a rapist.

(And I don't believe JJ needs the competition.)

Originally Posted by oompa

i just love how bands like NIN have realised this and dump their new cd for free.

I like that too - even when I'm given the option to get something for free, I buy it just because I support that approach so much... and honestly I don't see myself selling anything I've created, for that matter (music, videos, writing, whatever) for a lot of reasons. However, too many great people I know have gotten shafted by the music business - people who have and have not given their whole albums for a free listen, people who support and oppose downloading, people who consider it theft and people who don't, et cetera - and had their hard work fly from their hands with nothing given in return for me to be able to support downloading.

Jeff

[ohio_eric]

Originally Posted by Metal Ken

As far as everyone goes about samples --

I can read a whole magazine at a bookstore before i decide to buy it. If i dont buy it, i put it back on the shelf, and the guy who does buy it cant even tell i've read it.
Thats a far better comparison than using a meal at a restaraunt.

I can really check out a book at a bookstore before I buy it. Why not the same with music? There is no worse feeling than buying a CD and finding out 90% of the songs sound like ass. So like Metal Ken said it's just being an informed consumer and also like him I'm highly loyal to bands I like. IF I like your music I will buy your CDs and go to your concerts. Also if you're not into country, pop or radio rock it's a bitch to find new music if you don't download. So only the big time bands with the big ass marketing machines behind them stand to lose anything. The small outside the mainstream bands can pick up a lot of fans by letting their music get downloaded so they can get heard.