Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on March 20, 2012 at 9:58pm

Comment by Steph S. on March 20, 2012 at 11:23pm

Nice Ruth! Thanks!

Comment by Kyu on March 21, 2012 at 9:56am

Tony, that argument would work if you were actually paying the artist, and not the artist's management company.  In fact, the artist has a contract with a major record label, they would be better served by you dropping them a $5 and downloading the music on a torrent site.  They'd get more money out of it that way.  While it's possible the numbers have changed, I doubt they've changed drastically.  In the past, an artist would generally see about $.25 in profit for every CD sold.  Artists make money on tours, primarily, not on CDs.  Digital distribution models are changing how the industry does business and in many ways, the copyright infringement issue (piracy being a misnomer, as is theft) is because these management companies (RIAA/MPAA) failed to adapt to the changing digital environment. 

The "downloading is bad" argument also ignores a lot of legitimate use - out of print or otherwise unavailable music that is still tied up in copyright yet not able to be obtained.  Orphaned works, foreign projects with no distribution in your area (as an example: importing a single CD of a band I favor can run me $60 because it is not released here in the states), and of course there are scads of things that are now in the public domain.   Just my two cents, though :)

Comment by Tony Carroll on March 21, 2012 at 10:10am

Kyu I agree. That is why I try the artists web sites first, and try to buy and download from there. Hoping more of the money goes to them.

If the music is public domain, a bit trickier,but still try to find a way. Sometimes not possible. But it is public domain, so it is fair game.

Once paid about $15.00 more for a cd from Lighthouse, and that is a group from Canada, but I think it was worth it. Thanks, man. Just my thouhgts. Have a good one.

Comment by Steph S. on March 21, 2012 at 10:19am

I don't pirate anything! Good topic. We could probably start a discussion on that.

Comment by Tony Carroll on March 21, 2012 at 10:24am

I think you're right Steph. It would be good for a discussion. And I still don't pirate. Even if I have to go to WAL-Mart, or Amazon, or Apple, they[the artists] are still getting something. Not enough in my opinion. The  system seems to be broken. Have any ideas?

Comment by Sarah Walton on March 21, 2012 at 2:52pm

I don't buy or even listen to music released by RIAA companies as a rule. In their overzealous push to protect their dying distribution model they have shut down legitimate services and sued 12 year olds. They have permanently lost me as a customer. I think my name is on just about every petition seeking to block laws their lobby is trying to pass for the past 10 years. That system is worse than broken; it's useless at best and dangerous at worst.

Comment by Mike Sherman on March 21, 2012 at 3:50pm

Has anybody else noticed that the quality of music declined greatly about the same time file sharing became popular? Maybe it was a coincidence, maybe not.

Comment by Tony Carroll on March 21, 2012 at 4:07pm

Mike, I just assumed it was me. You know, getting older and liking what I grew up listening to. So much of todays music seems derivitave, but I quess it always has been to a degree. I mean Mozart listened to Bach, Mick Jagger listened to Howlin' Wolf. Maybe influences would be a better term? Just my take.

Comment by Idaho Spud on March 24, 2012 at 1:54pm

The nerds at Pima Air and Space Museum in Tucson, Ariz., built and flew a 45-foot-long paper airplane:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13772_3-57403328-52/omg-thats-a-45-foot-p...

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 23
• 24
• 25
• 26
• 27
• …
• 82
• Next ›
• Page