Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Plump-DJ · 08-15-2002, 07:33 AM

What's your view on downloading MP3's off the net? I have an absolute pooload of MP3s (Gigs worth) which I download on a regular basis. I was just wondering do people think it's morally wrong?

I mean am i stealing songs? How will i know where the artist stands on this issue? Some don't mind -- other's do? Sometimes i wonder if it is wrong. Many feel it's not.

Perchance · 08-15-2002, 07:40 AM

Well, since I get all my MP3's now from places like MP3.com where the artists have given permission, I don't think it's immoral.

I did use Napster in the past, something for which I'm still not sorry. The artists could have easily used Napster for free advertising (some, like Barenaked Ladies, did) and other purposes, but instead strove to shut it down, causing more bad feeling and resentment. I know a few people who haven't bought a single CD since, in protest.

Technological advances, where they can't be stopped, should be co-opted and used, not screamed at.

I do still buy CD's, but I haven't bought a "mainstream" one in so long (my tastes run to Celtic and New Age) that I don't think the shutting down of Napster changed the way in which I shop at all.

-Perchance.

Ab_Normal · 08-15-2002, 03:34 PM

My personal stance is download only those MP3's I cannot get on CD-ROM. I do not download anything I can purchase elsewhere. Of course, I very rarely buy new CDs, because of budgetary constraints.

Conversely, my department at work has an MP3 server, to which we rip our personal CDs to share at work. We're at 3000+ files and rising.

Here's how I rationalize it: 4 people sharing files is like making a tape for a friend. Making files available on the Internet is like making tapes for several thousand people. Smells like piracy to me. I'll stay away from it.

I do agree with Perchance that the record companies need to come to terms with the technology which makes this possible, instead of trying to turn back the clock.

Bree · 08-16-2002, 08:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Perchance:

Technological advances, where they can't be stopped, should be co-opted and used, not screamed at.

YAY.

I still have my "FUCK METALLICA" button

.

As a musician, I can see how other musicians would be angered that their livlihood was being freely shared with no profits gathered. Not everyone is making shitloads of money, and for some artists, MP3s are hurting their profits.

But the majority of artists whose music is being traded - hell, they aren't losing that much. My music-industry friends would beg to differ, but come on! Alanis is making MILLIONS. Does she honestly think she'd be making that much more if there were no MP3s out there?

Zippy · 08-16-2002, 09:07 AM

Recent research suggests that MP3s are actually good for the music biz (http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/26710.html).

Paul

Perchance · 08-16-2002, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bree:
As a musician, I can see how other musicians would be angered that their livlihood was being freely shared with no profits gathered. Not everyone is making shitloads of money, and for some artists, MP3s are hurting their profits.

Agreed.

I think even small artists can benefit from MP3's, though. If not for Napster, I wouldn't have even known there was a pagan music genre out there. And quite a few of the songs I found were repeats or variations- just enough to whet my appetite and encourage me to go looking for the artists and listen to more of their music, and buy their CD's where I can find them.

If there were a way for artists to control what MP3's got released, I don't think it would be immoral at all. And even at MP3.com, there are lots of songs that you can listen to but not download. Enticement.

-Perchance.

RogerLeeCooke · 08-16-2002, 05:24 PM

To broaden this a bit, let's consider downloading things in general: text, pictures and sound. At the risk of sounding Clintonesque, I'd say there is no controlling legal authority. Anybody who doesn't want a file downloaded should make it impossible to do so. It's not that hard to do. On the other hand, trading for profit in files that have been downloaded is and ought to be illegal. Downloading a picture and then pasting it into a book to be sold for profit is an example.

Samhain · 08-16-2002, 06:16 PM

I will respond with a quote from Maynard James Keenan of <img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" /> TOOL <img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" />

Quote:

My music is not yours to give.

And in an interview with Aggro Active:

Quote:

AA: You guys aren�t millionaires?

MJK: No. By no stretch of the imagination are we millionaires. I�ve never had a million dollars in my bank account, ever. Let�s clear that one up right away. It�s just not the case.

more...

Quote:

AA: Speaking of the Internet and Napster, what�s your feelings?

MJK: Once again, it goes back to the element of communication. Nobody is communicating to these kids who are taking music off of Napster.
The implications and the repercussions of their actions on the artist�they just don�t know. It�s not that they�re doing it vindictively,
they just don�t understand. They don�t understand how little a band makes on a record. In average case scenarios, a band makes about a dollar a record�and that�s after they�ve paid back everything that they spent making the record and doing the video and promotions and tour support and all that. It�s quite overwhelming.

AA: Kids look at it like they�re screwing the labels and not necessarily the artists.

MJK: And it ends up making the band do shit that the label tells them because they�re broke. You get desperate and you start doing silly shit like TRL.

[ August 16, 2002: Message edited by: Samhain ]

08-16-2002, 06:27 PM

If i could not download mp3's
my cd collection would be much smaller
then it currently is.

If i like an album i'll buy it,
but i don't have the economy to
buy albums because i might
like it.

[ August 17, 2002: Message edited by: Nameless One ]

AWAKENOW · 08-16-2002, 07:14 PM

I would probably not pose the question based on morality; I feel it has more to do with ethics. Honestly, I think that today's society has so many shades of gray that it has become almost passe to delineate an action as right or wrong. I have heard no arguments supporting the notion that downloading an artists works, often times without any permission, is anything other than unmitigated theft. It is difficult, however, to assess the losses accrued by the individual artists, but one thing that can be done is to use the maxim of putting ourselves in the artists shoes. Would we be indifferent to our 'work' being shared without us realizing any profit, I doubt it. Technology has far outpaced our ability, as a society, to rationalize its many uses, both good and bad. It is also unfortunate that the masters of technology tend to be the young who feel they are getting even with the powers that be - 'stealing is ok', 'it's just technology and no one is getting hurt'. Maybe the recording industry has its faults, but two wrongs don't make a right. [THEFT IS THEFT].

08-15-2002, 07:33 AM	#1
Plump-DJ Regular Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Oztralia (Aussie Aussie Aussie) Posts: 153	Is it immoral to download MP3s? What's your view on downloading MP3's off the net? I have an absolute pooload of MP3s (Gigs worth) which I download on a regular basis. I was just wondering do people think it's morally wrong? I mean am i stealing songs? How will i know where the artist stands on this issue? Some don't mind -- other's do? Sometimes i wonder if it is wrong. Many feel it's not.

08-16-2002, 06:27 PM	#9
Nameless One Guest Posts: n/a	If i could not download mp3's my cd collection would be much smaller then it currently is. If i like an album i'll buy it, but i don't have the economy to buy albums because i might like it. [ August 17, 2002: Message edited by: Nameless One ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-15-2002, 07:40 AM	#2
Perchance Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Kentucky Posts: 1,059	Well, since I get all my MP3's now from places like MP3.com where the artists have given permission, I don't think it's immoral. I did use Napster in the past, something for which I'm still not sorry. The artists could have easily used Napster for free advertising (some, like Barenaked Ladies, did) and other purposes, but instead strove to shut it down, causing more bad feeling and resentment. I know a few people who haven't bought a single CD since, in protest. Technological advances, where they can't be stopped, should be co-opted and used, not screamed at. I do still buy CD's, but I haven't bought a "mainstream" one in so long (my tastes run to Celtic and New Age) that I don't think the shutting down of Napster changed the way in which I shop at all. -Perchance.

08-15-2002, 03:34 PM	#3
Ab_Normal Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 2,842	My personal stance is download only those MP3's I cannot get on CD-ROM. I do not download anything I can purchase elsewhere. Of course, I very rarely buy new CDs, because of budgetary constraints. Conversely, my department at work has an MP3 server, to which we rip our personal CDs to share at work. We're at 3000+ files and rising. Here's how I rationalize it: 4 people sharing files is like making a tape for a friend. Making files available on the Internet is like making tapes for several thousand people. Smells like piracy to me. I'll stay away from it. I do agree with Perchance that the record companies need to come to terms with the technology which makes this possible, instead of trying to turn back the clock.

08-16-2002, 09:07 AM	#5
Zippy Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: England Posts: 115	Recent research suggests that MP3s are actually good for the music biz (http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/26710.html). Paul

08-16-2002, 05:24 PM	#7
RogerLeeCooke Regular Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Burlington, Vermont, USA Posts: 177	To broaden this a bit, let's consider downloading things in general: text, pictures and sound. At the risk of sounding Clintonesque, I'd say there is no controlling legal authority. Anybody who doesn't want a file downloaded should make it impossible to do so. It's not that hard to do. On the other hand, trading for profit in files that have been downloaded is and ought to be illegal. Downloading a picture and then pasting it into a book to be sold for profit is an example.

08-16-2002, 07:14 PM	#10
AWAKENOW Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: ATLANTA, GA Posts: 6	I would probably not pose the question based on morality; I feel it has more to do with ethics. Honestly, I think that today's society has so many shades of gray that it has become almost passe to delineate an action as right or wrong. I have heard no arguments supporting the notion that downloading an artists works, often times without any permission, is anything other than unmitigated theft. It is difficult, however, to assess the losses accrued by the individual artists, but one thing that can be done is to use the maxim of putting ourselves in the artists shoes. Would we be indifferent to our 'work' being shared without us realizing any profit, I doubt it. Technology has far outpaced our ability, as a society, to rationalize its many uses, both good and bad. It is also unfortunate that the masters of technology tend to be the young who feel they are getting even with the powers that be - 'stealing is ok', 'it's just technology and no one is getting hurt'. Maybe the recording industry has its faults, but two wrongs don't make a right. [THEFT IS THEFT].

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.