Is "file-sharing" basically a nice way to say "stealing"?

it not really stealing until you get caught

 

It is simply not that black and white...

Theft is a concept built around physical items. It's indubitably wrong to share things you don't have the right to share, and theft is a scary word for the RIAA to throw around in court and on bogus loss charts, but it is simply not comparable.

If you have a baby, and I take it and walk away, and sell it on a middle eastern street corner, that's theft. If I take a picture of your baby and sell it on a middle eastern street corner when you have forbid me to, while it is wrong, I did not steal your baby, I simply made an image of it.

 

selling babies?..lol

 

good metaphor!
stealing an actual CD is not the same as downloading content.

 

I disagree.

Theft *was* a concept built around physical items. Today (and actually, probably at least since the "cassette" days of easy re-recording to copy) theft is *also* about non-physical things.

Now, I'm not going to get into a long multi-post debate about it. I am just saying I disagree with you on this. Feel free to feel otherwise!

 

I agree that intangible items can be stolen. I mean, is plagiarism not a form of theft?

But I think the point still stands that nothing is being taken. You are downloading copies of the files. The only way that the corporations are losing money is if you would've bought them otherwise.

 

What is being "taken" is the royalty that the artist and distributors would earn had a person purchased instead of stolen.

Yeah - one specific actual "object" isn't being taken - but that's got nothing to do with the definition, IMO.

 

Youtube videos are either the "official" video of the band and not available for sale anywhere or they are composed of an individual's video composition coupled with some commercial artist's music in the background. This is considered fair use and as a practical matter should increase public awareness of the band, generate album and memorabilia sales, and improve attendance at live concerts.
Record companies are sabotaging this service and should be stopped.

 

Again, that's not true if the person wasn't going to buy it either way.

 

Point taken. Old argument. My feeling on that is ...

If they weren't going to buy then they have no business listening or watching. Simple. Fuck them that think that it is okay or there is no "theft" "just because" they weren't going to buy it anyways.

Now to be clear I am not talking about occasional copying to "check something out" and maybe see if someone "likes" something. I'm talking about those that habitually copy shit and don't buy it and partly "justify" it with that argument "I wasn't going to buy it anyways so there is no "loss". Fuck them I say

JMO

 

I didn't know you liked me so much :biker:


Fair enough.

 

Hey man, nothing personal. It's just my take on it. I am just saying I don't "buy" those arguments. I wasn't saying "fuck you" to you personally. I was saying "fuck you" to those sorts of "debate points" though hehe

 

^ Agree some of these people are deluded but this thread really shines a whole lot of light on how people justify stealing, cheating and things of that sort.

 

I was like Mc...but now I have unlimited bandwith...OMG.
That's why I've been away for a several days.
I was waiting to have it set up...then I was dancing for two days. :2thumbsup:

I have to agree.

Do you not think that the smaller artists crave a label to distribute their material?
I think that's most artists goal.
They want to pay their bills after all.
I think most major labels have smaller subsidiaries/distributors to cater for upcoming artists or material that is not suited for the main brand.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Sony_Music_Entertainment_labels
Imo, the bigger companies shut down these smaller labels they own or are reluctant to invest money in an unknown quanity if their profit margins are going down due to people downloading artists that sell in there million.
I presume it is the same in the film industry too.
So, there just might be artists/back room guys that are being kept from making money due to the reasons given above.
Imo, there are far more struggling artists than there are well known artists. They seem to be the forgotten element in the download saga.

 

Which is an easier and more honest way to get your music known, appreciated and bought?

Sharing your music online so people can listen to it, and having those that like it and want to support it from a point of actually liking your music will buy it.

or

Waiting til a label picks you up and you are added to the advertising machinery and people buy it because they are told to?

Personally, I would rather people like me for me, then for the image pumped out through a label company looking to make another buck off the next 'big' thing...


On a side note, I find it highly interesting that some people who argue against the capitalist system argue for it when it comes to this issue...

 

I guess there are many artists with many differing thoughts on how they wish to distribute their music, to get it heard.
I think you are basically sticking your fingers up to any artist that does not see it your way, chonic'...
So it's ok to deprive a large section of artists from making money (the goal of 99% of artists/filmmakers etc)...because they want a label/distributor and be whores?
Don't they deserve a living too?

 

Actually as I stated at the start of this, nothing I do deprives anyone of any money.

As for me sticking my fingers up to any artist that doesn't see it my way... Considering that same thing can be said to anyone who doesn't agree with YOUR way of thinking, I guess I would have to agree.

 

Where? Anyhoo, if you see no merit in my argument, time to end this discussion.

I think there is truth in both our arguments. Would you not agree?

 

File sharing can also help smaller artists to increase their fan base, and many of them give their albums away for free for that reason.

I think that people illegally download music is because it costs too much, and people who torrent I think also buy records so they are also giving money to the industry. If anyone is robbing from smaller artists it's the big record companies,

 

I don't think I ever said your argument had no merit... lol I just don't agree with it...

Absolutely... except for personal beliefs, I could argue your side of this.

Unfortunately for your side of the argument, having music artists and movie stars as some of the richest people in our societies doesn't do a lot to convince me that they are being hurt by it.

By the same token, having some really good musicians and artists on the verge of starving to death or giving up their music in order to be able to 'get by' doesn't help either, and those ones, don't have labels or albums out that COULD be bought, because they were not accepted by a label.

Musicians, artists, actors and all other forms of individualistic expression should be encouraged and supported... That does not mean we have to support those that hang on to their ankles and keep 90% of the pie...