Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > iOS Blog Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Apr 26, 2013, 09:03 AM   #26
ArtOfWarfare
macrumors 603
 
ArtOfWarfare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Send a message via Skype™ to ArtOfWarfare
Quote:
Originally Posted by chocolaterabbit View Post
If you're telling people to support indies, shouldn't you be telling people to buy from iTunes instead of boycotting them? After all, Spotify pay out almost nothing to indie artists.
I meant to say boycott the iTunes Music Store but continue supporting your local indie app developers by still shopping on the App Store. You should listen to your music on Spotify.
ArtOfWarfare is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 26, 2013, 10:36 AM   #27
RolyPolyBird
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArmCortexA8 View Post
I use iTunes to browse only, then use TPB to obtain - works well for me.
Mate somebody needs to invite you to waffles or what.cd. TPB is for junkies.

That said I also use iTunes just to browse, if I am going to support an artist I do so with a concert ticket or buying directly from the label shop (when they have one).
RolyPolyBird is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 26, 2013, 12:10 PM   #28
The13thDoctor
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: @TheRoyalDoctor
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArmCortexA8 View Post
I use iTunes to browse only, then use TPB to obtain - works well for me.
How the hell can you be proud that you do that?
The13thDoctor is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 26, 2013, 12:17 PM   #29
PinkyMacGodess
macrumors 68000
 
PinkyMacGodess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Midwest America.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArmCortexA8 View Post
I use iTunes to browse only, then use TPB to obtain - works well for me.
And I often listen to the free snippet on iTunes and go and buy the real CD.

I know many musicians and try to support them as best I can. It's the parasite 'recording industry' that is sucking their, and our money, living off of their creativity...

"Out in Hollywood, the paper money rolls
They feed their egos, instead of their souls
A million here, a million there, a mindless corporate dance
Get paid for borkin' off, in the south of France
They don't do the shows, but they act like the stars
They fly around in G4's and suck on big cigars
It ain't about the talent, it ain't about the skill
It's all about the silly stupid horse poop deal
You write the big checks, but I pay your bills
Now someone's got to tell you 'bout overkill"
PinkyMacGodess is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 26, 2013, 07:37 PM   #30
Bubba Satori
macrumors 68040
 
Bubba Satori's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: B'ham
Thank goodness for independent and non-conflict of interest iJournalism.
Bubba Satori is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 26, 2013, 08:37 PM   #31
tranceking26
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Free music? I've been getting that since I first used the internet. Big deal.

Why did some of the press get something and the actual users/paying customers get nothing, and if we did, what/where ;-)
tranceking26 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 26, 2013, 09:03 PM   #32
ArmCortexA8
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Terra Australis
Quote:
Originally Posted by The13thDoctor View Post
How the hell can you be proud that you do that?
Easy, when you read the history of Copyright and how its been used for profiteering (which it was never designed for) and how major companies control the creative works via "agents", this goes against the fundamentals of copyright and free sharing - read: http://questioncopyright.org/promise

Excerpt "There is one group of people not shocked by the record industry's policy of suing randomly chosen file sharers: historians of copyright. They already know what everyone else is slowly finding out: that copyright was never primarily about paying artists for their work, and that far from being designed to support creators, copyright was designed by and for distributors that is, publishers, which today includes record companies. But now that the Internet has given us a world without distribution costs, it no longer makes any sense to restrict sharing in order to pay for centralized distribution. Abandoning copyright is now not only possible, but desirable. Both artists and audiences would benefit, financially and aesthetically. In place of corporate gatekeepers determining what can and can't be distributed, a much finer-grained filtering process would allow works to spread based on their merit alone.

We would see a return to an older and richer cosmology of creativity, one in which copying and borrowing openly from others' works is simply a normal part of the creative process, a way of acknowledging one's sources and of improving on what has come before. And the old canard that artists need copyright to earn a living would be revealed as the pretense it has always been
."

Excerpt 2 "None of this will happen, however, if the industry has its way. For three centuries, the publishing industry has been working very hard to obscure copyright's true origins, and to promote the myth that it was invented by writers and artists. Even today, they continue to campaign for ever stronger laws against sharing, for international treaties that compel all nations to conform to the copyright policies of the strictest, and most of all to make sure the public never asks exactly who this system is meant to help."

Excerpt 3 "Yet a close look at history shows that copyright has never been a major factor in allowing creativity to flourish. Copyright is an outgrowth of the privatization of government censorship in sixteenth-century England. There was no uprising of authors suddenly demanding the right to prevent other people from copying their works; far from viewing copying as theft, authors generally regarded it as flattery. The bulk of creative work has always depended, then and now, on a diversity of funding sources: commissions, teaching jobs, grants or stipends, patronage, etc. The introduction of copyright did not change this situation. What it did was allow a particular business model mass pressings with centralized distribution to make a few lucky works available to a wider audience, at considerable profit to the distributors."

Excerpt 4 "To read the true history of copyright is to understand just how completely this reaction plays into the industry's hands. The record companies don't really care whether they win or lose these lawsuits. In the long run, they don't even expect to eliminate file sharing. What they're fighting for is much bigger. They're fighting to maintain a state of mind, an attitude toward creative work that says someone ought to own products of the mind, and control who can copy them. And by positioning the issue as a contest between the Beleaguered Artist, who supposedly needs copyright to pay the rent, and The Unthinking Masses, who would rather copy a song or a story off the Internet than pay a fair price, the industry has been astonishingly successful.

They have managed to substitute the loaded terms "piracy" and "theft" for the more accurate "copying" as if there were no difference between stealing your bicycle (now you have no bicycle) and copying your song (now we both have it). Most importantly, industry propaganda has made it a commonplace belief that copyright is how most creators earn a living that without copyright, the engines of intellectual production would grind to a halt, and artists would have neither means nor motivation to produce new works."

In the end copying is good, not bad as you are merely copying what already exists. Of course the "industry" does not want people to know the truth because they are profiteering from it.
__________________
Apple iPod Touch 64GB 5th Gen (Retina) / Apple iPhone 5 64GB (3G / LTE) / Apple MacBook Air 13" (2011) Core i7 / 256GB
ArmCortexA8 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 26, 2013, 11:36 PM   #33
ijohn.8.80
macrumors 65816
 
ijohn.8.80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Adelaide, Oztwaylya.
Quote:
Originally Posted by skittlescat View Post
I am an tv broadcaster , can I get a copy?
You obviously don't plug Apple products very well then if you were overlooked!
__________________
YouTube is not the resurrection of Dada
ijohn.8.80 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 27, 2013, 05:03 AM   #34
The13thDoctor
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: @TheRoyalDoctor
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArmCortexA8 View Post
Easy, when you read the history of Copyright and how its been used for profiteering (which it was never designed for) and how major companies control the creative works via "agents", this goes against the fundamentals of copyright and free sharing - read: http://questioncopyright.org/promise

Excerpt "There is one group of people not shocked by the record industry's policy of suing randomly chosen file sharers: historians of copyright. They already know what everyone else is slowly finding out: that copyright was never primarily about paying artists for their work, and that far from being designed to support creators, copyright was designed by and for distributors that is, publishers, which today includes record companies. But now that the Internet has given us a world without distribution costs, it no longer makes any sense to restrict sharing in order to pay for centralized distribution. Abandoning copyright is now not only possible, but desirable. Both artists and audiences would benefit, financially and aesthetically. In place of corporate gatekeepers determining what can and can't be distributed, a much finer-grained filtering process would allow works to spread based on their merit alone.

We would see a return to an older and richer cosmology of creativity, one in which copying and borrowing openly from others' works is simply a normal part of the creative process, a way of acknowledging one's sources and of improving on what has come before. And the old canard that artists need copyright to earn a living would be revealed as the pretense it has always been
."

Excerpt 2 "None of this will happen, however, if the industry has its way. For three centuries, the publishing industry has been working very hard to obscure copyright's true origins, and to promote the myth that it was invented by writers and artists. Even today, they continue to campaign for ever stronger laws against sharing, for international treaties that compel all nations to conform to the copyright policies of the strictest, and most of all to make sure the public never asks exactly who this system is meant to help."

Excerpt 3 "Yet a close look at history shows that copyright has never been a major factor in allowing creativity to flourish. Copyright is an outgrowth of the privatization of government censorship in sixteenth-century England. There was no uprising of authors suddenly demanding the right to prevent other people from copying their works; far from viewing copying as theft, authors generally regarded it as flattery. The bulk of creative work has always depended, then and now, on a diversity of funding sources: commissions, teaching jobs, grants or stipends, patronage, etc. The introduction of copyright did not change this situation. What it did was allow a particular business model mass pressings with centralized distribution to make a few lucky works available to a wider audience, at considerable profit to the distributors."

Excerpt 4 "To read the true history of copyright is to understand just how completely this reaction plays into the industry's hands. The record companies don't really care whether they win or lose these lawsuits. In the long run, they don't even expect to eliminate file sharing. What they're fighting for is much bigger. They're fighting to maintain a state of mind, an attitude toward creative work that says someone ought to own products of the mind, and control who can copy them. And by positioning the issue as a contest between the Beleaguered Artist, who supposedly needs copyright to pay the rent, and The Unthinking Masses, who would rather copy a song or a story off the Internet than pay a fair price, the industry has been astonishingly successful.

They have managed to substitute the loaded terms "piracy" and "theft" for the more accurate "copying" as if there were no difference between stealing your bicycle (now you have no bicycle) and copying your song (now we both have it). Most importantly, industry propaganda has made it a commonplace belief that copyright is how most creators earn a living that without copyright, the engines of intellectual production would grind to a halt, and artists would have neither means nor motivation to produce new works."

In the end copying is good, not bad as you are merely copying what already exists. Of course the "industry" does not want people to know the truth because they are profiteering from it.
okay mate, don't you get it? By saying that pirating software or music does not harm the artist or developer in anyway shape or form is completely retarded. It really doesn't matter whether you consider pirating or stealing to be the same thing. It also really doesn't matter whether you think piracy is stifling creativity or not. What really matters is that YOU are actively taking somebody's hard work and sharing it online, making it so the the artist or developer does not receive (for lack of a better term) "royalty" for their work.

You might not think that piracy is such a big deal, but to somebody who's major source of income is primarily from online content. Its a pretty big friggin deal. For example, RoosterTeeth primarily makes it money through CD sales, Youtube views and other merch. If people were to start copying content and start uploading it to their channels, it would cost them quite a lot of views and ad revenue. Same goes for their music and DVDs, if one person uploads it online for free, there wouldn't be that much of a demand for their soundtracks or DVDs.

So you can start quoting whatever you think the definition of piracy is. In the end the only people that are getting screwed over, are the small companies and the people who are actively trying to make an actual living off of their work. So don't be so proud that you pirate, if you want to 'stick it to the corporations' there are better ways to do it, such as buying from the artist directly. Pirating is definitely not a way to do so.
__________________
My butt feels leaky...
The13thDoctor is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 27, 2013, 07:34 AM   #35
jns2001
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by decafjava View Post
Absolutely. Plus needing a connection to play your music sucks.
ON Spotify you can dowload to your iDevice and play without the need of a connection.
jns2001 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 27, 2013, 04:51 PM   #36
MacGuffin
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jessica Lares View Post
I don't understand the hatred in here. It's a promotional item. Do you know how much promotional stuff gets passed around, especially to the press? A LOT. A majority of record labels throw albums to these people all the time, there's probably multiple copies of albums/singles just floating around in someone's drawers too.
Jessica, it isn't "hatred" but instead a little thing you might bump into one day, quite by accident I'm sure, called critical thinking.

Have you never wondered how the illusion of good press for a product is maintained, ie, bought and sold?

Go look up "payola" in Wikipedia. A mind is a terrible thing to waste on corporate propaganda!
MacGuffin is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 29, 2013, 06:43 AM   #37
Angra-mainju
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by komodrone View Post
and then someone makes a Spotify playlist of those 100 songs and shares it.
and then somebody legally iTunes Match it
__________________
iPhone 5 64GB White
iPad 3 32GB Black RED Smart Cover
13-inch Retina MacBook Pro 2013 Haswell, 256GB SSD
Angra-mainju is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 29, 2013, 07:56 PM   #38
stuckwithme247
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by decafjava View Post
Absolutely. Plus needing a connection to play your music sucks.
To be fair, they let you sync music for "offline play" with both the desktop and iPhone apps.
stuckwithme247 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 30, 2013, 12:58 AM   #39
CrushChee
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
re

Really only press get this, they should give everyone a (or ten) free song to celebrate this event.
__________________
Ashford Promo Code
CrushChee is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 30, 2013, 11:35 AM   #40
stuckwithme247
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrushChee View Post
Really only press get this, they should give everyone a (or ten) free song to celebrate this event.
Feel free to buy it if you really want it that bad. There aren't any exclusive songs on there as far as I know... Really, they should give away over $100 of music to everybody? Yeah right...

Last edited by stuckwithme247; Apr 30, 2013 at 11:49 AM.
stuckwithme247 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 4, 2013, 05:23 AM   #41
Fralle
macrumors Demi-God
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: South part of North
Quote:
Originally Posted by stuckwithme247 View Post
Feel free to buy it if you really want it that bad. There aren't any exclusive songs on there as far as I know... Really, they should give away over $100 of music to everybody? Yeah right...
I as a collector of everything iPod AND iTunes wants this card and booklet bad! I'm not interested in the value or the free download of songs. Only the card...but Apple couldn't care less
__________________
www.ipod.se - the ipod reference site - www.ipod.se
Fralle is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > iOS Blog Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Apple Sends Email to iTunes Users Offering Refunds for Unauthorized In-App Purchases MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 68 Mar 27, 2014 12:44 PM
Tim Cook Sends Email to Apple Employees Reflecting on Second Anniversary of Steve Jobs' Death MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 117 Oct 18, 2013 06:10 PM
Apple Celebrates 'A Decade of iTunes' With New Milestone Feature MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 44 Jun 7, 2013 04:08 AM
Moving to Android, trouble getting DRM free songs on iTunes (using iTunes match) miamialley Alternatives to iOS and iOS Devices 2 Apr 28, 2013 11:17 AM
Apple accidentally sends me a lot of Mountain Lion free codes!!!! Retina MacBook OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion 19 Jul 27, 2012 01:26 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:08 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC