| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Suicide_Samurai |
Posted - 04/06/2005 : 10:31:14
Its pretty rare to find any Catholics stuff on programs like winmx but i managed to score Devils workshop on there earlier. I do about 4 checks a day for any Frank material i havent got and it appears to have payed off. The guy I got it of was "deano9690_47524" Was it by any chance one Mr Cult_Of_Frank? |
| 35 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| VoVat |
Posted - 03/10/2006 : 14:38:01
quote:
It's like finding out you're 30 and living with your mother or something.
Hey! I resemble that remark!
Okay, I'm actually only 28.
I agree with most of what Jason said, although I wonder if good music stores closing down might have just as much to do with people buying their music at huge chain stores as with their buying and/or illegally downloading it online.
"If you doze much longer, then life turns to dreaming. If you doze much longer, then dreams turn to nightmares." |
| Doog |
Posted - 03/09/2006 : 11:36:58
The terrorism aspect is questionable, but people make money from selling DVD/video copies of stuff they've rented or borrowed.
www.myspace.com/doog = music
www.myspace.com/doogdoogdoog = emo |
| Suicide_Samurai |
Posted - 03/09/2006 : 10:42:13
I was watching a DVD today (one I actually bought!) and at the end was this thing on piracy. On it, the voiceover said "piracy funds terrorism."
Now, do they actually have anything to back up this ridiculous statement, or are they just going to extreme lengths to hammer into people’s brains that piracy is stealing and to make damn sure you feel bad about it?
Piracy doesn't even generate money unless you sell your downloaded stuff. I imagine most people are DIY pirates nowadays anyway. |
| Jason |
Posted - 03/08/2006 : 21:23:17
I think if vinyl managed to survive after CDs became dominant (and vinyl has survived), then the physical record (whatever form it is) will survive when/if sound files become dominant.
My stance on file-sharing:
I don't care about it. I don't participate in it, but I don't care if others do. If your resources are low (you're a kid), then I say download away. However, if you're a full-grown, gainfully-employed adult and getting all of your music via internet piracy, I sort of can't help but look down on you over it. It's like finding out you're 30 and living with your mother or something. If you make even halfway-decent money, $16 for a new CD isn't THAT much. Drop a little cash, ya cheapo. $16 is just a little more than what you're already willing to spend on one trip to Starbuck's.
The GOOD thing about file-sharing (in my opinion):
If you're a kid somewhere without much money or good local sources, you can get access to cool music. When I was in high school in the early 90s and figuring things out in the universe of cool music, I resorted to ripping off BMG and Columbia House to get ahold of a Velvet Underground CD. I'd get the free introductory CDs and then never follow through with the deal (does anyone ever follow through? Most people I've spoken to about it haven't. They just got their free CDs and then enjoyed all the weird collection letters they'd get addressed to whatever fake name they signed up under.) THAT was my SoulSeek when I was 17.
The BAD thing about file-sharing (also, in my opinion):
I don't know if this is related or not, but lots of good record stores are going under. Good stores with heritage. My two favorite stores around here have closed up shop in recent years. Both had been around for at least a decade or two. The stores that have survived are okay, but aren't nearly as interesting. The ease of buying music on the internet surely plays a big part (maybe the biggest part) in this, but file-sharing can't be helping.
Me (and I bet there are lots of others like me), I don't deal with the whole file-sharing thing because
1. I work a lot and I don't care to spend my free time keeping up with what the latest prime file-sharing communities are. From my side of the fence, it looks like too much fuss. It's much simpler for me to just go to a store or go online (midheaven, ebay, labels that do their own mailorder) and just buy what I want.
2. I like music enough that I consider it worth paying for. If I don't like something, I can just sell it or trade it. I get some degree of satisfaction that my purchase is helping to support an artist I like, a label I like, a store/dealer I like. Some people like to talk about file-sharing as some revolutionary thing and they're helping to kill off a monster by downloading the new Strokes album. I disagree. The REAL and most meaningful contribution to a revolution, the most REAL and TANGIBLE STATEMENT from you, the music fan, is giving financial support to those artists/labels/stores who you think are doing things right in the usual cesspool that is the music bizness. |
| VoVat |
Posted - 03/08/2006 : 14:07:22
Yes, but you can't make a high-quality copy of any of those other things before selling the original. (Well, I suppose you technically could with the book, but it would be expensive.)
"If you doze much longer, then life turns to dreaming. If you doze much longer, then dreams turn to nightmares." |
| Jason |
Posted - 03/08/2006 : 09:14:55
Buying used CDs is no different than buying any other used item. If one is opposed to the idea of selling/buying used CDs, then one also has to be opposed to the selling and buying of used cars, books, furniture, clothing, vaccum cleaners, etc.
And that would be pretty silly. |
| PixieSteve |
Posted - 03/07/2006 : 20:31:41
no, it's illegal to share cds with friends. i'm pretty sure it's technically illegal to allow anyone else to listen to a cd when you are.
the law is not always morally right. just look at drugs laws for example..
 |
| Visiting Sasquatch |
Posted - 03/07/2006 : 19:12:23
Yes. Yes. No. I believe it is within fair use to share CDs with friends, but I certainly couldn't turn around and make 10 copies of it and sell them at a flea market... |
| jtanner |
Posted - 03/07/2006 : 13:33:49
That's a reasonable explanation, Visiting Sasquatch. It makes sense that it's a license. But, I've seen promo copies of CDs for sale that clearly state in so many words "property of the record label - do not sell". I've bought some in my day. Did I buy stolen property? Can the used record shop guy get in trouble for that? Are the record labels just having fun with us?
Sneaking out of Best Buy with a Bo Diddley CD tucked in your shorts to avoid paying for it is stealing. If I let you borrow my Herb Alpert CD and you copy it, are you stealing or am I sharing it. Afterall, I hold the license. This is a tough one. |
| Visiting Sasquatch |
Posted - 03/07/2006 : 12:29:02
If you look at buying used CDs, (or new ones for that matter), as buying licenses, then it's (technicially) good. The RIAA has a problem with it, but they can't enforce it, (I forgot why). Selling your used CD is simply giving up your license to copyrighted material. And by the way, I agree Blackhead in that both the artist and the music industry will just have to be more creative with how they make their money, which goes back to my first post...file sharing is here to stay, but stealing is *still* bad. Spinning the truth doesn't make it "right". |
| vilainde |
Posted - 03/07/2006 : 09:36:42
Aren't you tempted to buy used Frank Black CDs everytime you see one, even if you already have them twice? Happens to me all the time.
Denis
I love Guitar Wolf from the Erath! |
| BLT |
Posted - 03/07/2006 : 09:23:11
quote:
Originally posted by jtanner
Is it moral to buy or sell used CDs since neither the artist nor the label is making any money off it?
If you bought it used, then the label gave it away for promotion or someone else already paid full price for it. You could argue that your own purchase/consumption of it helps create a vaccuum which will eventually help to move new units. That's the only explanation I can think of.
Cyberhugs are for pussies. |
| vilainde |
Posted - 03/07/2006 : 08:26:53
good question, jtanner. I buy a lot of used CDs myself.
Denis
I love Guitar Wolf from the Erath! |
| jtanner |
Posted - 03/07/2006 : 08:07:31
Is it moral to buy or sell used CDs since neither the artist nor the label is making any money off it?
ScottP, it's good to see someone here who appreciates FZ's Only In It For The Money. Freak Out and Absolutely Free are similarily great also. |
| jtanner |
Posted - 03/07/2006 : 06:21:18
quote:
Originally posted by Blackhead
Illegally downloading music is a reality, and no amount of lecturing is going to stop it. However, I wouldn’t worry too much about the livelihood of good musicians. They’re a clever bunch, which means they will simply find new ways to market themselves and their material to make money in the 21st Century. Touring with the Pixies is a great example of how Frank Black has managed to make money. Songs popping up in video games, commercials, and movies are other examples.
Perhaps illegally downloading will force the outdated recording industry to reinvent itself… or perhaps we’ll all have to learn how to play our own instruments and—God forbid—entertain ourselves and each other.
We're already seeing the new ways to market themselves. Every other commercial on TV has a Cold Play or U2 soundtrack. Eventually, music will be made only to sell to Pepsi, Honda, etc. The rest of the bands will record and play music purely for the love of music and it will become just a hobby like square dancing. |
| Blackhead |
Posted - 03/06/2006 : 21:57:19
Illegally downloading music is a reality, and no amount of lecturing is going to stop it. However, I wouldn’t worry too much about the livelihood of good musicians. They’re a clever bunch, which means they will simply find new ways to market themselves and their material to make money in the 21st Century. Touring with the Pixies is a great example of how Frank Black has managed to make money. Songs popping up in video games, commercials, and movies are other examples.
Perhaps illegally downloading will force the outdated recording industry to reinvent itself… or perhaps we’ll all have to learn how to play our own instruments and—God forbid—entertain ourselves and each other.
|
| Doog |
Posted - 03/06/2006 : 15:37:26
ahahahahahah
Ahhhhhhhhhhh I like to laugh.
www.myspace.com/doog = music
www.myspace.com/doogdoogdoog = emo |
| vilainde |
Posted - 03/06/2006 : 15:02:15
Frank should release his stuff on toilet paper. Then you'd only need a comb to play the songs.
Denis
I love Guitar Wolf from the Erath! |
| VoVat |
Posted - 03/06/2006 : 14:59:49
Man, I'd LOVE to have a Frank player piano scroll. Of course, then I'd need a player piano to play it on.
"If you doze much longer, then life turns to dreaming. If you doze much longer, then dreams turn to nightmares." |
| TRANSMARINE |
Posted - 03/06/2006 : 13:15:20
ODDBALLS was released only on cassette tape and player-piano scroll.
Hank the 8th was a duplicated man
-bRIAN |
| s_wrenn |
Posted - 03/06/2006 : 11:42:00
hey everyone,
does anyone know where i could buy oddballs.
cant seem to find it anywhere on the web |
| MMD |
Posted - 03/06/2006 : 06:56:47
I don't know how some of you are still not getting this, I know it was a lot to read but I thought I explained it pretty clearly. Let's take an even more extreme case. Imagine someone has no money at all, all their necessities are taken care of. There are two options, one go without the music or two violate copyright and get the music for free. In both options the direct effect on the artist is absolutely nothing, it makes no difference to the artist whether the person breaks copyright or not, it does not cost them anything and it does not benefit them anything. So now explain to me why this is immoral. If you would chose option one and voluntarily deprive yourself how is that better for the artist? Are you going to write them a letter saying hey man I really dig your songs I heard on the radio but I can't afford the CD but don't worry, I'm not going to download it because I have too much respect for you. Is that going to benefit them? Personally if I were an artist I would prefer as many people as possible to hear my music and someone not listening to my work that I have put a lot of effort into just because of some irrational falsely moral frankly dumb reason seems like a lot more disrespectful.
Obviously that example is a theoretical extreme I have used to explain to you that not ALL piracy is bad, in reality it's not black and white but there are many different shades of grey. In real life people do have money to spend on luxuries but in nearly ever persons case they don't have enough money to buy all the music they could possible want, so why not supplement?
The reason that theft is immoral is because you are taking something away from someone, clearly with piracy this is not always the case and that is why theft and piracy are different things.
|
| spunXtain |
Posted - 03/05/2006 : 19:01:22
|
| ScottP |
Posted - 03/05/2006 : 18:55:52
quote:
Originally posted by jtanner
quote:
Originally posted by ScottP
quote:
Originally posted by jtanner
Good analogy, Suicide Samurai.
ScottP, you stole "Ohhhh, my hair is getting good in the back" from Frank Zappa.
Yes, but I also bought Frank Zappa a bowl of delicious Cheerios for his trouble by paying for that wonderful record.
Ohhhh, my hair is getting good in the back.
Credit Zappa with the quote and reference the CD so others might buy it...
"Ohhhh, my hair is getting good in the back." -Frank Zappa
(quoted from the purchased Rykodisc CD, Frank Zappa/The Mothers Of Invention
"We're Only In It For The Money" [RCD 10503])
Check my posting on the "what are you listening to now" thread. I changed my signature that same day hoping somebody would get the connection and listen to that great record.
Ohhhh, my hair is getting good in the back. |
| Suicide_Samurai |
Posted - 03/05/2006 : 18:08:55
Haha. Oh yeah.
Well that just makes it even worse. |
| Doog |
Posted - 03/05/2006 : 17:25:15
quote:
Originally posted by Suicide_Samurai
I think if a musician would choose to have an extra tenner in his pocket than to share his music with one more fan, then that is one musician who shouldn't be in this business.
As if the artist makes that much of a percentage of the cd price!
www.myspace.com/doog = music
www.myspace.com/doogdoogdoog = emo |
| jtanner |
Posted - 03/05/2006 : 16:58:44
Metallica is a good example of a band who succeeded *because* of free downloads. People loved their music - for free.
|
| Suicide_Samurai |
Posted - 03/05/2006 : 16:04:08
I think if a musician would choose to have an extra tenner in his pocket than to share his music with one more fan, then that is one musician who shouldn't be in this business. That's what seperates Frank from Metallica. Probably.
I mean I know they could and should have both, but again it all comes back to money. People download much more albums than they could possible buy, but the musician should still prefer to share his music and not get payed than for no one to hear his music at all. |
| jtanner |
Posted - 03/05/2006 : 13:29:32
quote:
Originally posted by Suicide_Samurai
Yes, yes we know this. It's a luxury. My point? Why deny yourself of this luxury? Why punish yourself?
Imagine you could download food. Would you seriously go out and buy it from the supermarket still? If you would, you probably cry when you step on a worm. Ok food is a necessity, but that doesn't affect the point I'm making. I could use anything as an example.
By the way I TAKE IT WE ALL CREDIT OUR PORN ARTISTS AND BUY ALL THE PORN WE ENJOYED?!
Don't even try to deny it.
Excellent. |
| Doog |
Posted - 03/05/2006 : 13:28:05
I just download all the free trailers on the sites, que 'em up and imagine my own segues to make it a sexy whole.
And denying yourself something because it is illegal and losing people money? It's called being moral. Maybe you're just one of these jerks who does everything for personal gain, I dunno.
www.myspace.com/doog = music
www.myspace.com/doogdoogdoog = emo |
| Suicide_Samurai |
Posted - 03/05/2006 : 13:22:34
Yes, yes we know this. It's a luxury. My point? Why deny yourself of this luxury? Why punish yourself?
Imagine you could download food. Would you seriously go out and buy it from the supermarket still? If you would, you probably cry when you step on a worm. Ok food is a necessity, but that doesn't affect the point I'm making. I could use anything as an example.
By the way I TAKE IT WE ALL CREDIT OUR PORN ARTISTS AND BUY ALL THE PORN WE ENJOYED?!
Don't even try to deny it. |
| Doog |
Posted - 03/05/2006 : 13:11:56
quote:
Originally posted by starmekitten
and lo smaller less established farmers became bankrupt or their farms never had chance to get hold because everyone got their milk from the magic cow and the new exciting flavours of milk these other farmers had developed were never known to the townspeople. Many farmers became corporate bankers tired of working for nothing and when the magic cow died and there was no more milk for there were no farmers left to provide for the people.
Brilliant.
Face it, music ISN'T a neccessity of life. You're not gonna die without it. It is, essentially a luxury. Don't try and justify it with this "oh but I'm too poor" bullshit. If you want something bad enough, you can afford it, just like every other luxury.
That isn't so much aimed at Suicide Samurai as much as at those cunts who just que up a record shop's worth of music on Soulseek, get it all, enjoy it immensly and don't pay a penny back to the people who gave them that pleasure. One of those people happens to be one of my best buds ever and it can cause a bit of unwanted friction..
www.myspace.com/doog = music
www.myspace.com/doogdoogdoog = emo |
| VoVat |
Posted - 03/05/2006 : 13:07:05
Is this magic cow like the one owned by the King of Mo, which produces ice cream instead of milk?
"If you doze much longer, then life turns to dreaming. If you doze much longer, then dreams turn to nightmares." |
| Visiting Sasquatch |
Posted - 03/05/2006 : 12:26:28
quote:
Originally posted by MMD
When you're talking about information or intellectual property where the cost of one more person having the product is nothing you cannot use words like theft, the artist has not been deprived of anything and that is the distinction between theft and piracy, organisations like the RIAA and MPAA deliberately use incorrect words like theft or steal in their propaganda to try and hype up the 'evil' of piracy but it's just spin.
So which one are you, a thief or a pirate? Just because the product isn't tangible doesn't mean it can't be stolen. (How much is your time worth? If your job didn't pay you for your time, assuming you don't work in a factory, it will not deprive anyone of anything, just ask Suicide_Samurai.) And how is it that YOU can decide if an artist deserves your gracious money or not? Who made you the artist's GOD? If you listen to their "product", pay for it.
quote:
Originally posted by Suicide_Samurai
I realise it's taking something you're not paying for, of course I do, but just what reward is in it for you by refusing to take it? There is no reward. There is nobody watching you. No one will ever know but you.
Call it whatever you want, it's still illegal to steal. The second half to your argument is left up to your god; (or what's left of your morals if you're atheist...) |
| jtanner |
Posted - 03/05/2006 : 12:07:33
quote:
Originally posted by ScottP
quote:
Originally posted by jtanner
Good analogy, Suicide Samurai.
ScottP, you stole "Ohhhh, my hair is getting good in the back" from Frank Zappa.
Yes, but I also bought Frank Zappa a bowl of delicious Cheerios for his trouble by paying for that wonderful record.
Ohhhh, my hair is getting good in the back.
Credit Zappa with the quote and reference the CD so others might buy it...
"Ohhhh, my hair is getting good in the back." -Frank Zappa
(quoted from the purchased Rykodisc CD, Frank Zappa/The Mothers Of Invention
"We're Only In It For The Money" [RCD 10503]) |
