| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
ayers
- FB Fan -
USA
24 Posts |
 Posted - 09/23/2002 : 19:29:30
|
Is it wrong to ask a friend to burn a copy of "Devil's Workshop" ? I have the intention to buy it when i get money, but as of now i'm piss broke. I just wanna hear it. Share the Music!
--Why must I live in Ewan? -- |
|
|
Chip Away Boy
= Cult of Ray =
914 Posts |
Posted - 09/23/2002 : 19:43:44
|
| not as long as you buy it |
 |
|
|
ayers
- FB Fan -
USA
24 Posts |
Posted - 09/23/2002 : 19:46:47
|
oh i plan to
--Why must I live in Ewan? -- |
|
|
|
BrendanT
= Cult of Ray =
Canada
907 Posts |
Posted - 11/19/2002 : 08:44:42
|
Have you bought your copy yet?!
Strummer-man
I had me a vision!
I bid a good-day to you sir! |
|
|
|
KingOfSiam
- FB LinkMaster -
USA
460 Posts |
Posted - 11/19/2002 : 08:51:28
|
| I do believe it is wrong to copy studio cd's and give them away. I do also think that not selling merch at concerts is bad as well! I would tithe 10% of my income to Frank if it was required to listen to his music. I just would like to be able to buy a freakin' T-shirt or sticker or some sort of trinket when I go to his shows and the last 3 concerts - no merch! What is up? |
|
|
|
FranknWeezer
= Cult of Ray =
USA
356 Posts |
Posted - 11/20/2002 : 08:44:51
|
BTW, I usually make backup's of the few cd's I do buy and keep them in the car in case of theft, but I couldn't copy BLD (haven't tried DW yet)....either my burner is on the blink or FB wised up and has his cd's copy-protected now. And I wholeheartedly agree about not selling tour merch. I have one of few (apparently, from reading posts) of the tan FB+C's shirts with the silhouette of the soldiers with arms linked from the first tour and would LOVE to update.
FranknWeezer |
|
|
|
St. Francis
= Cult of Ray =
Canada
548 Posts |
Posted - 11/22/2002 : 07:42:33
|
I think it is okay to burn bullshit like Creed or whatever uber-super-huge-alterna-boy-band is popular at the moment, but, not Frank...definite stint in Purgatory for doing that my friend.
If you are broke though and promise to one day buy the album, give change to homeless and say hail marys each night I think you could reduce your time in Purgatory and the bad Karma associated with copying the CD.
I've had the same moral dilemma
Lord-a-mercy! |
|
|
|
Atheist4Catholics
= Cult of Ray =
USA
925 Posts |
Posted - 11/22/2002 : 07:59:31
|
Never EVER download, burn or buy used, a CD from an indie label (unless you absolutely WILL buy it). When you "steal" music from indie labels you cost the artists up to $7 a disc. That adds up really damn fast as opposed to a major label where the artist is lucky to get even $1 per disc.
Just imagine an indie artist in line at Burger King for his one big meal of the day. He reaches into his wallet for a five dollar bill, but no, it's empty. Someone downloaded that $5 off the internet and is now spending it on Pokemon cards . . . |
|
|
|
holzgrafe
- FB Fan -
USA
75 Posts |
Posted - 11/22/2002 : 09:05:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by Atheist4Catholics
Never EVER download, burn or buy used, a CD from an indie label (unless you absolutely WILL buy it).
Why the prohibition on buying used indie CDs? The label & artist have already gained from the initial sale of the new CD, and in exchange the purchaser had gained the listening enjoyment. Later the purchaser has sacrificed access to that enjoyment by surrendering the CD. The second purchaser gains access by compensating the original purchaser and the used vendor, and there is still just one purchaser with access. How does that constitute an injustice for the label and/or artist? - Mel |
|
|
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
Posted - 11/23/2002 : 00:39:00
|
holzgrafe - s/he would have bought a 'new' CD instead, so the artist would have gotten the $$.
I appreciate that A4C is being more consistent tho - if you're opposed to MP3's, you should also be opposed to used CD sales.
I would like to see an effort made where used shops sent a percentage of their sales directly to the muso... Not likely tho. |
|
|
|
holzgrafe
- FB Fan -
USA
75 Posts |
Posted - 11/23/2002 : 11:59:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Noisy
holzgrafe - s/he would have bought a 'new' CD instead, so the artist would have gotten the $$.
I understand. I'm suggesting that foregoing used CDs out of a sense of justice makes as much sense as buying the used CD but then also mailing the artist a fiver out of good will. Such generosity is commendable in and of itself, but it does not mean that buying used CDs is wrong. When I find a clean used copy at a discount I don't at all feel that I'm ripping off an artist whose work I like. No big deal, just wanted to clarify. Of course I agree about burning and downloading commercially available material, especially that of artists you admire, but I think that's categorically separate from buying used CDs. - Mel |
Edited by - holzgrafe on 11/23/2002 12:00:57 |
|
|
|
Atheist4Catholics
= Cult of Ray =
USA
925 Posts |
Posted - 11/23/2002 : 12:39:44
|
quote:
Of course I agree about burning and downloading commercially available material, especially that of artists you admire, but I think that's categorically separate from buying used CDs. - Mel
holzgrafe:
When someone burns a CD or uploads songs from a CD the songs usually originated on an original copy, right? So how is it that different from someone buying a used copy? The only difference is that the guy with the original copy gets to keep it. The artist is still out $7.
I agree that burning and downloading are worse than buying used only because one original can spawn thousands of copies, but they are definitely in the same category; theft is theft.
I also agree with Dave that used CD shops should send a percentage to the artists. Maybe Don Henley can spearhead that movement when he's done fighting the labels . . . |
Edited by - Atheist4Catholics on 11/23/2002 12:41:22 |
|
|
|
stymie
= Cult of Ray =
385 Posts |
Posted - 11/23/2002 : 19:24:39
|
| Buy the music not find it! |
|
|
|
holzgrafe
- FB Fan -
USA
75 Posts |
Posted - 11/24/2002 : 14:05:23
|
quote:
[i] The artist is still out $7.
I agree that burning and downloading are worse than buying used only because one original can spawn thousands of copies, but they are definitely in the same category; theft is theft.
The idea that buying used CDs involves stealing would be laughable were it not that a human "mind" evidently can believe such a thing. Obviously you must extend this "idea" to books, fine art, and every other product which retains its original value. The artist sets a price and the buyer pays it. So long as unauthorized copying does not occur, the art can then be re-sold without any further involvement with the artist. You have no case. I applaud your will to support the artist, but you need further work on ethical reasoning. - Mel |
|
|
|
Atheist4Catholics
= Cult of Ray =
USA
925 Posts |
Posted - 11/24/2002 : 15:42:41
|
quote:
You have no case. I applaud your will to support the artist, but you need further work on ethical reasoning. - Mel
Mel,
You can talk down to me all you like, but the fact is that despite whatever semantics you wish to use (whether you call it theft, or just simply unconscientious consumerism)the artists are still being denied money that they would otherwise receive. That's the ethical point. The distinction you're making is not an ethical one, it's a legal one. Just because it's legal to buy used CD's does not mean it's ethical. On top of this, a large percentage of the CD's sold in used stores were never even purchased once, but were given away free to radio stations, booking agents, and as packaged deals to record stores (they're not always marked.)
We as consumers have an ethical responsibilty to financially support the artists we enjoy. If we don't, it will be impossible for independent artists to produce. Mediocre, corporate backed artists like boy bands dominate the market because of reasons like this - which gives us a selfish motivation as well. When we fail to be responsible, intelligent consumers of the arts and start talking about albums like they're cans of tuna, then that's what we get - banal, mass produced crap. - Tim
PS - California has legally acknowledged the rights of visual artists to re-sale royalties. This demonstrates the ethical "grey area" surrounding the sale of used creative works. |
|
|
|
holzgrafe
- FB Fan -
USA
75 Posts |
Posted - 11/24/2002 : 17:17:30
|
This will be my last post on this, I hope. I would prefer to not talk down to you but you leave me little choice. Almost every one of your points is invalid. You're the one who accused buyers of used CDs of being thieves, so invocation of the cover of semantics comes too late. My ethical point has nothing to do with the legality of buying used CDs but instead has everything to do with the original purchase of the new CD simply sufficing to ethically meet the rights of the artist. They offer for sale, we pay the price. We are not ethically or legally obligated to refrain from resale. You're right in thinking that buying used does deprive the artist of a new sale but wrong in thinking they have an ethical right to that sale. My own experience has been that a small percentage of the CDs available used originated as complimentary copies. Even if you were correct, that gives rise to a separate issue and does not get at the ethics of used CD purchases in general. Your point asserting that buying used favors mediocre artists at the expense of indie artists is unintelligible. It would be just as unethical for one as for the other, if indeed it were unethical. While I hardly regard albums in the same way that I do canned goods, such a distinction of object is completely irrelevant to ethical consideration of the rights of those involved in resulting transactions. Finally, I leave it to you to hold up California as a model in matters regarding property rights, intellectual or otherwise. - Mel
p.s. Perhaps you have resided for too long in the People's Republic of Massachusetts. |
Edited by - holzgrafe on 11/24/2002 17:22:32 |
|
|
|
MIRV
- FB Fan -
178 Posts |
Posted - 11/24/2002 : 17:38:57
|
no, of course not.
i figure as long as you support the band in one way or another it's kosher.
for instance, i burned all three QOTSA cds. however, i supported them by going to their concert, as well as buying a t-shirt. |
|
|
|
Atheist4Catholics
= Cult of Ray =
USA
925 Posts |
Posted - 11/24/2002 : 17:42:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by holzgrafe
This will be my last post on this, I hope. I would prefer to not talk down to you but you leave me little choice. Almost every one of your points is invalid. You're the one who accused buyers of used CDs of being thieves, so invocation of the cover of semantics comes too late. My ethical point has nothing to do with the legality of buying used CDs but instead has everything to do with the original purchase of the new CD simply sufficing to ethically meet the rights of the artist. They offer for sale, we pay the price. We are not ethically or legally obligated to refrain from resale. You're right in thinking that buying used does deprive the artist of a new sale but wrong in thinking they have an ethical right to that sale. My own experience has been that a small percentage of the CDs available used originated as complimentary copies. Even if you were correct, that gives rise to a separate issue and does not get at the ethics of used CD purchases in general. Your point asserting that buying used favors mediocre artists at the expense of indie artists is unintelligible. It would be just as unethical for one as for the other, if indeed it were unethical. While I hardly regard albums in the same way that I do canned goods, such a distinction of object is completely irrelevant to ethical consideration of the rights of those involved in resulting transactions. Finally, I leave it to you to hold up California as a model in matters regarding property rights, intellectual or otherwise. - Mel
p.s. Perhaps you have resided for too long in the People's Republic of Massachusetts.
You've missed the point. Go ahead and buy used CD's, just don't try and pretend you're being ethical. If you buy Devil's Workshop used, Frank doesn't get the money - end of story.
Corporate artists get tour funding, endorsements, airplay royalties, and other means of financial backing that independent artists do not. They also only get $1 in royalties if they're lucky. I wouldn't buy corporate used CD's either, but I think the ethical dilemma is less than buying used indie's.
I regret calling used CD's theivery because you aren't really taking something away, you're depriving someone of something. I brought the issue of semantics up as a way to dismiss that aspect of the arguement because it was clouding the real issue that THE ARTIST ISN'T GETTING THE MONEY HE/SHE DESERVES.
I've tried really hard to not diminish this discussion by talking down, or calling names and I'd appreciate the same in return. It's not like we're argueing that far away from each other. |
Edited by - Atheist4Catholics on 11/24/2002 17:54:03 |
|
|
|
MIRV
- FB Fan -
178 Posts |
Posted - 11/24/2002 : 17:43:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by Atheist4Catholics
quote:
You have no case. I applaud your will to support the artist, but you need further work on ethical reasoning. - Mel
Mel,
You can talk down to me all you like, but the fact is that despite whatever semantics you wish to use (whether you call it theft, or just simply unconscientious consumerism)the artists are still being denied money that they would otherwise receive. That's the ethical point. The distinction you're making is not an ethical one, it's a legal one. Just because it's legal to buy used CD's does not mean it's ethical. On top of this, a large percentage of the CD's sold in used stores were never even purchased once, but were given away free to radio stations, booking agents, and as packaged deals to record stores (they're not always marked.)
We as consumers have an ethical responsibilty to financially support the artists we enjoy. If we don't, it will be impossible for independent artists to produce. Mediocre, corporate backed artists like boy bands dominate the market because of reasons like this - which gives us a selfish motivation as well. When we fail to be responsible, intelligent consumers of the arts and start talking about albums like they're cans of tuna, then that's what we get - banal, mass produced crap. - Tim
PS - California has legally acknowledged the rights of visual artists to re-sale royalties. This demonstrates the ethical "grey area" surrounding the sale of used creative works.
using your logic of ethics, it would be wrong to give away an old cd you didn't listen to (that someone else wanted) because that person would have otherwise purchased the music.
retarded, anal-retentive, logic.
|
|
|
|
holzgrafe
- FB Fan -
USA
75 Posts |
Posted - 11/24/2002 : 19:24:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by Atheist4Catholics
I've tried really hard to not diminish this discussion by talking down, or calling names and I'd appreciate the same in return. It's not like we're argueing that far away from each other.
When YOU used the term "theft", the gloves came off. First the legitimate and ethical practice of buying used CDs is impugned as unethical, and then as theft. I appreciate that you regret part of that, now. - Mel |
|
|
|
Visiting Sasquatch
= Cult of Ray =
USA
451 Posts |
Posted - 11/24/2002 : 19:35:17
|
| Paying $18.99 + tax + s/h = highway robbery. But then again CD stores are competing with Best Buys and Circuit Citys, who sell CDs almost at cost, leaving other CD retailers with a razor slim margin to compete with. Used CDs are probably what's keeping most indie CD retailers in business. And another thing, buying and selling licenses for personal use is totally legal. And that is exactly what you are doing when you buy and sell a used CD. Different people have different standards for morality, and you can't judge someone because they decided to pay $7.99 for a used Frank Black CD, because you wouldn't have done that in good conscience. Some people can't afford your moral standards. I'm sorry for these run-on/incomplete sentences, but I'm mad tired. |
|
|
|
floop
= Wannabe Volunteer =
Mexico
15297 Posts |
Posted - 11/24/2002 : 20:21:16
|
i completely agree with Mel's (well-argued) view .. (though we disagree on issues regarding gun violence and rap artists, but that's a different story).. 
if buying used makes you a thief, then our man Frank himself is a criminal because i saw, with my very own eyes, he and Dave P. purusing the used section at Amoeba Records earlier this year.
the idea that used CD sales is a major contributing factor to the shit state of the music industry is, while a good effort, an unfounded argument.
one could argue the opposite: that buying ONLY used is a way of NOT supporting a corrupt music distribution paradigm.. when you buy used, you're sending a message to distributers (the real evildoers in this scenario) that says, "we're not going to pay your fucking absurd prices".. every time you don't buy a brand new CD, true, you're denying the artist his/her share, but along with that, more importantly, you're denying the heartless, multi-national corporate distributers their criminally ridiculous share.
i wouldn't argue this either though...
i think the music industry is fucked for other reasons, and used CD sales is a non-issue.
duplicating and selling cd's is a different story.
here's a moral conundrum for you though: what if there's an absolutely impossible-to-find, out-of-print, out-of-circulation recording of your favorite artist. there's ZERO chance that you'll ever find it in a record store, new or used, but you find a duped copy of it somewhere..
A.) do you deny yourself music you will truly love and cherish? or B.) do you buy it but, in the processs, support evil dupe sellers ??
anyone had this experience? |
Edited by - floop on 11/24/2002 21:03:35 |
|
|
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
Posted - 11/24/2002 : 21:27:32
|
holzgrafe - Mind if i approach this situation from another angle?
How does the artist benefit from you buying their CD used? And further - how does it benefit them more than getting a burned copy from a friend?
I completely agree with VS - if you want to talk about theft/robbery, let's talk about the record companies and RIAA. $1 (if they're lucky!) out of a $20 sale goes to the musician (to SPLIT with the Catholics)??
Wondering where that other $19 goes has severely harmed my interest in buying CD's. And the fact that CD's are getting MORE expensive doesn't help. (There was an article yesterday in WIRED i believe about how the 'big five' companies [and three record stores] were found to be guilty in price fixing.)
As mentioned, i think the best way to support a musician is to go to their shows and tell all your friends too. I'm not convinced buying CD's is. I'd love to hear Frank's opinion on this...if anyone is going to a show, this would be a killer question to ask him..
Nice to see everyone acting relatively respectful tho. =)
floop - there's one case of this i know of, there's a Martin Tielli CD called Nick Buzz, that **was** almost impossible to get a hold of, and i believe the Rheostatics email list (Martin is a member of the band, which is why it'd be discussed on that list) agreed that it was fair to make it available on their FTP site.
Of course, a couple years later, it's been reissued and taken off the FTP site.
On retrospect, i know Martin monitors that list and he never spoke out, so i assume it was cool with him too. |
|
|
|
floop
= Wannabe Volunteer =
Mexico
15297 Posts |
Posted - 11/25/2002 : 00:30:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Noisy
floop - there's one case of this i know of, there's a Martin Tielli CD called Nick Buzz, that **was** almost impossible to get a hold of, and i believe the Rheostatics email list (Martin is a member of the band, which is why it'd be discussed on that list) agreed that it was fair to make it available on their FTP site.
Of course, a couple years later, it's been reissued and taken off the FTP site.
On retrospect, i know Martin monitors that list and he never spoke out, so i assume it was cool with him too.
dave (like that boldface usage?).. yeah, i had this problem when i wanted to get Beck's inpossible-to-find first albums: "Golden Feelings" and "Western Harvest."
in the end, i gave in and bought a dupe from some guy who burnt it from his vinyl.. but i felt really guilty about it.
palabra a tu madre. |
|
|
|
vilainde
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
Niue
7443 Posts |
Posted - 11/25/2002 : 01:36:46
|
I absolutely totally agree with floop & Mel! But everyone had some very good arguments. This has been one of the best threads so far on this list.
Dave - Buying a used CD is obviously better than downloading and burning it; in the first case someone bought the CD in the first place and the musician or band got their money from it. Mel explained all this much better than me.
Floop - You're totally right - buying used CDs is the only (legal) way to stay out of the major companies' policies.
A4C - I agree on the subject of people selling CDs they got for free, journalists, DJs and such; it's a very common fact and this indeed is theft.
My last word on the subject: the best way to buy CDs, legally and ethically, is to go to concerts and purchase the records from the musicians themselves. It's much cheaper than buying them in record stores and the musicians earn more from it.
Denis |
|
|
|
johndietzel
= Cult of Ray =
Burkina Faso (Upper Volta)
464 Posts |
Posted - 11/25/2002 : 02:34:38
|
My turn on earth. Seriously, just skip this cause it's long, but the way it sounded in my head was only like 3 lines worth, and it was all pure genius.
I don't know if this distinction has been made already, but I think that if you sell your CD while maintaining a personal backup, it is different than simply "ridding" yourself of music that isn't worth the amount of money you could get in return. It's musical natural selection, in that the stuff that people are happy with (theoretically, based on the assumption that they arent copying the CD before selling it) stays in their hands, making fewer copies of the discs available to purchase used. Regardless of people's shitty tastes, if the artist presents a product that displeases half his audience, he reaps what he has sown. And a beautiful example of the RIAA or whatever taking at least a small hit is the fact that there are almost always a dozen or more of the Hootie & the Blowfish CD in the used bins. I went with my buddy to try and sell some discs one time and not only would they not pay him a single note for his Hootie CD, they wouldn't even take it as a donation, because they said it would just take up space in the shop.
An analagous situation is with a university bookstore. I don't mean to say that the wide acceptance of its practice means it is ethically faultless, but the sanctioned resale of individual executions of these copyrighted works is encouraged and fully supported by many (most?) universities (American maybe?). So academic establishments aren't the paragon of righteousness or anything, but they certainly represent a less "seedy" example of what the dark, underground used music peddlers are doing.
Maybe it's because "intellectual property" is a relatively new concept. But I just don't see why a tangible music disc [complete with slick packaging and liner notes, often a cool image on the disc itself, a superior durability to most other media (including CD-R), and the singular collector's value, being THE "official" execution as approved by the artist] should have special ethical protection, superior to that of its many peers. I own a trademark designed (but still only ONE instance of the item) Fender Telecaster. If I want to sell it, I will, and I don't think I'm screwing Freddie F or anyone else, for that matter, in the ass. While it possibly might not apply across the board, I think the concept stands up to scrutiny in most cases. Any single execution of a mass-marketed item that I have purchased is mine with which to do what I please.
And as far as the logic of saying it's wrong because you deprive the originator of the item the 5% of a disc's value to which he is entitled, I would suggest starting somewhere a little lower on the poverty scale than with "starving musicians." I mean every time you sell some cheap electronic item used, you are (by the same logic) depriving some Chinese or Taiwanese or Maylasian kid his 8 cents or whatever.
So perhaps this was a given, but I doubt that any of us would argue that buying a CD, copying it, and then selling it, is ethical. I think with any comparible situation, the principle would still apply (like photocopying an entire book). But, otherwise, I don't consider it to be wrong.
"I don't trust anything said by a news anchor who doesn't have a believable hairpiece."
Dennis Miller |
|
|
|
Atheist4Catholics
= Cult of Ray =
USA
925 Posts |
Posted - 11/25/2002 : 07:08:50
|
quote:
the best way to buy CDs, legally and ethically, is to go to concerts and purchase the records from the musicians themselves. It's much cheaper than buying them in record stores and the musicians earn more from it.
Denis
I think we can all agree on that.
Again, I didn't mean to call anyone here a "theif". Lord knows I've bought my share of used CD's in the past. The important thing is that people need to conscious consumers and supporters of the arts. If every Frank Black CD you own was bought used and you've never bothered to see him live, you're not being a responsible consumer.
I admit that used CD sales aren't ripping off artists as much as their labels are, but this is why I've stressed not buying used indies. Anything that I can do to help the artists I like, I do. There are exceptions to this as well. Frank Zappa may be on his own label, but he's dead and his estate is already worth millions; so I don't feel very bad about buying Chunga's Revenge used. If someone buys a used CD as a way to check out unfamiliar artists, fine. If you like what you hear then don't buy the rest of their catalog used. It's not retarded, anal retentive logic. It's about using your goddamn brain and conscience. I bought a Superdrag CD used because I couldn't find it anywhere else at the time. I felt bad, so I went to see them live several times even though I don't think they're that great live. I appreciate how great their CD's are and want them to be able to keep making more.
 I would definitely like to hear FB's thoughts on this topic.
I guess that my main motivation for all this is that I am an independent artist who knows the feeling of taking money from CD sales and buying dinner at Taco Bell with it. I work really hard at what I do and feel like if someone is benefiting from it, they should compensate me for it. |
Edited by - Atheist4Catholics on 11/25/2002 07:18:30 |
|
|
|
darwin
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
USA
5454 Posts |
Posted - 11/25/2002 : 08:29:39
|
| Is it alright if I sell my used car? When I buy that car, I buy it and the right to sell it when I want to. If I'm not going to gain the right to sell that car, then I better pay less for it. Same goes for the CD. |
|
|
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
Posted - 11/25/2002 : 09:40:22
|
vilainde - I generally agree with you...but it isn't so cut'n'dry..
What if the used CD was bought and resold 4 times? (Well, i guess that means it must really suck. =)
And all MP3's come from a CD most likely purchased as well...
It's all symantics, but how is getting MP3's from a friend who owns the CD gonna benefit the artist more than a used CD that has been resold several times?
Again, i agree that buying a used CD is more beneficial to the artist than MP3's, but i don't think it's significantly better.
floop - Good work with the bold, i saw my name right away. =)
jb - Good point about poorly treated workers.
a4c - Stop calling everyone a thief!!! ;) |
|
|
|
holzgrafe
- FB Fan -
USA
75 Posts |
Posted - 11/25/2002 : 22:37:02
|
Hey, I just want to apologize for being such a jerk toward you A4C. The insults were not fair, and served only to detract from my points. No hard feelings toward you, at all. It's obvious we both care deeply about doing the right thing.
Dave, of course you're right that the artist benefits very little from purchase of their material used. I admit that most of my purchases focus on how they will benefit myself. To my mind there just doesn't seem to be any perfect solution to the balancing of the inclination to achieve a desirable outcome such as supporting those deserving and that of serving one's own selfish desire for entertainment and stimulation. We try, we struggle, but it's pretty much a dirty process that's barely amenable even to discussion, much less to resolution. Earlier, when I was attempting to argue solely from principle, I was reluctant to get into the pragmatics of shopping for used CDs. Like many of those here, I've accumulated a fairly large collection of CDs. I estimate that less than 5% of those were purchased used. Frankly, that percentage would be higher if the used prices were lower, but usually the CDs I'm looking for are only a couple dollars less than what I would pay for them new. I am a tightwad and so really don't like paying more than $12.99 for a typical disc, especially those mass-marketed and therefore frequently offered at discount. The situation is different with the indie labels, and I bow to reality, though those are often priced quite reasonably, largely as a gesture toward fans. I hardly ever shop the used sections of the large chain retailers, but the local Recycled Records has a nice selection and a friendly atmosphere. The appeal is largely that you never know what you'll find. Yeah, one can find anything in the larger world of retail, especially online, but it's almost essential to know in advance what you're looking for. For example, my most recent used purchases, all unplanned, have been a Belly ep, a Throwing Muses promo that consisted only of two non-album versions of "Dizzy", a disc from the Allman Brothers boxset (when I didn't want the entire box but that one disc had some rarities I hadn't heard), a Portuguese import of two 13th Floor Elevators albums on one disc. You get the idea, and I suspect most of us have similar stories. You find the craziest things that you wouldn't have even thought to look for had you not come across them while browsing. And it's fun. The Muses promo I mention is something I suspect was never even released commercially, but no, I didn't even think to do the conscientious thing by going home without and researching its availability through official channels. They wanted $5 so I grabbed it. I hardly ever buy a standard release used, unless it's on a whim to sample something I've been curious about.
Anyway, I wanted to say a few things about this issue, in part as a way of acknowledging that I realize that this argument (actually more of a "dispute"), like most ethical debates, is much less clear than my earlier posts might suggest I believe. The world is a messy place of greytones, as A4C alluded. I plan on being away for a few days but I felt an obligation to post this, if only because it felt wrong to simply disappear after I had been so adament above. Sorry about the long post. Thanks. - Mel |
|
|
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
Posted - 11/26/2002 : 00:55:47
|
Great post Mel - thanks.
You're right - we're all just trying to do the right thing. =)
Here's a potential option..it's a site (originally called Fairtunes) called Music Link, and they allow you to send $$ to your fav. artists directly.
I see FB is actually already on here, and has had some $$ sent to him:
http://www.fairtunes.com/functions/mlmain.php?mlsection=pay+the+artist&mlpage=%3Fpay+the+artist&caller=url&artist=11017
I've actually made some money from this site, people have 'bought' my CD's this way, so it's legit. (I knew the creators, but they sold it to some other folks..)
Thoughts? |
|
|
|
Solidgld
- FB Fan -
USA
104 Posts |
Posted - 11/26/2002 : 01:14:02
|
A question is it wrong to download stuff on the internet? I really like the song Manitoba (saw it live in September)is it wrong to download that? I'd really like to know! A cd is one thing but, an unreleased song that another topic. About the cd if I burned every FB&TC CD from my friends it wouldn't matter becuase I'd end up buying every CD I need it for my collection. If you like something you need it to be complete artwork and lyrics the package!
Let me hear about my question cause I want to hear about what you guys think. |
|
|
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
Posted - 11/26/2002 : 08:39:36
|
I think most fans (and musicians) will agree that bootlegs are very different from commercially available (and recorded) material.
The copy of Manitoba you can download will be very different from what you'll hear when it comes out on a CD. |
|
|
|
BrendanT
= Cult of Ray =
Canada
907 Posts |
Posted - 11/26/2002 : 08:55:16
|
I will make a couple of points. (I hope!?) A little off topic....when Frank was asked about the taping of Catholics shows, he said, tape away! Just don't get in the way. (Fair enough) A few years back (before highspeed cable became so accessible - Frank was asked how he felt about people downloading his work off of the computer. His answer, Hey if you have the time to sit and wait around for hours, go ahead and good luck! I am not sure if his views have changed since the advent of highspeed modems, but I doubt it. The last comment I will make is, if you are sitting on a stack of cash and just being a dick about spending your hard earned money on a release of art from a man/woman comparable to that of Frank Black, then you are a cheat. If you cannot afford it, but have the means to download the music and enjoy it with the intention of giving back somehow. Ie. MIRV who supports through shows and merch sales, then I think you can rest easier. I know that when my little, obscure, shitass band was around, we gave our cd's away - in hopes that some people might actually listen. When an artist creates something they create it with the hopes that it will be seen, felt or heard. The symantics of money comes after. Unfortunatley in our little world, money seems to come first and foremost. How does El Barto feel about this subject. Do you want money or exposure for The Bennies? We don't live in a perfect world!
Strummer-man
I had me a vision!
Why should I leave America for America junior? |
|
|
|
Atheist4Catholics
= Cult of Ray =
USA
925 Posts |
Posted - 11/26/2002 : 11:16:42
|
Mel - No hard feelings. I'm glad to be able to discuss topics like this with intelligent, like minded people. You right though, it's a very grey world . . . 
I agree with you about the wonderful dicovery aspect of used CD stores. There was a used store in Boston called Mystery Train that had the most amazing stuff I'd never seen before. They also let you listen to CD's and Vinyl before you buy, so it became a sort of obscurist library to me.
I think bootlegs, rare, and unreleased tracks (unless they're from an upcoming release)are fair game. How else are you going to get the original Bat Chain Puller? In fact, sometimes when thousands of people are downloading these materials it prompts record companies to get off their asses and officially release them, which benefits the artist.
Using the internet and used CD's to discover new artists is a good thing, I think. Most artists would probably give up some royalties for the extra, initial exposure. Again it's a grey area. I usually just go to amazon.com and listen to RA snippets.
Anyhow, this has been a great thread! There's been a lot of very intelligent and interesting ideas expressed and I'm glad it's resolving itself in a friendly and respectful way. Any fan of Frank's can't be that bad . . . |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
