07-10-2009, 12:27 PM
(07-10-2009, 03:48 AM)ayadew Wrote: I've not read the posts up to this point, but I thought I'd share a result of piracy:
https://www.spotify.com/en/
It's a client that hosts mainstream music for free, with the drawback of having to listen to commercials every 5 song or so. I think this is a great change, and I often use it instead of pirating. I think it costs a little to initially get the program now though, and may only be aviable in Sweden, Norway, Finland, the UK, France and Spain.
http://www.pandora.com/ is another great one. But it's ad-free so far as I know. The audio quality is about the same as the FM radio however.
Bring4th_Monica Wrote:We've all grown up listening to music on the radio for free, and watching music videos on tv for free, and we have always had the ability to record them. I still have my old collection of cassette tapes I recorded off the radio back in the 70s!
The difference is that the artists and record label heads, etc. know in advance that this will happen and are happy to let it happen. Permission is given, whereas it is not in digital music copying. Although it is a great point to bring up!
Bring4th_Monica Wrote:Music is food for the soul...and, as has been pointed out, copying it does not diminish it. Sort of like the saying "A candle loses none of its light by lighting another candle."
And yet copying does diminish the sales that would otherwise be earned, hurting the artists themselves on some level. Ali said earlier that in some instances, bands have to produce three good albums before they can even start to see revenue. As unjust as that is, is that not the agreement that is made with the artist's knowledge? They know what they're getting in to by this point, I can't accept that they are being victimized in the same way that some have portrayed it. (not necessarily anyone here).
Certainly reform is needed, but I am undecided as to whether pirating music is the proper avenue. Wouldn't the better route be from the bottom up, instead of the top down? I.e. the musicians themselves boycott RIAA affiliated record labels or other organizations that are unfair and thereby spur change. Why is it that the music fans are the ones that are helping the artists, instead of the artists helping themselves?
I may be going overboard here, but could we liken the situation to peaceful vs. violent protests? Both have the ability to bring about change, but one is harmful and one is not. Likewise with music industry reform, one is illegal (copying digital music files) while one is not illegal (musicians standing up for themselves and giving their business to fair companies)... Artists like Reznor, Saul Williams, Madonna Radiohead (to an extent) are taking responsibility. Not to mention every artist who has submitted work here: www.jamendo.com
It is a very interesting topic for me.