Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Originally posted by Gus
Jettredmont, that was indeed a nice post. Thank you!

I would just like to add that some of you have this "Robin Hood" complex about your habits; you steal things (music, information, software, etc.) and because you are stealing it (obstensibly) from a "Big Corporation", you justify it as being right, or worse, legal. Remember, copyright laws are intended to protect those who have the direct link to the creative process. The musician/artist/composer/author, etc. it counting on the money made from their creative output to live.

Granted, the "Big 5" labels are making a killing off of these artists, but to fight this, the artists themselvess need to take a stance of some sort, but they seem relatively happy. Just because you don't like a law or a rule doesn't mean you can break it, and then justify it as "being the right thing". I refer to Jettredmont's comments about filetting your neighhbors. Just because you don't like your neighbors because their dog craps in your yard, you can't barbeque Fido for it without a legal consequence.

Ok, I'm rambling now.

Just think of this: before copyright laws existed, Mozart made his living as a self-employed composer, the first self-employed composer at that. Because so many people were obtaining copies of his music, rewriting them in their opwn hand, and then publishing them as their own, the man made no money. He died in a pauper's grave (mass grave) in Vienna. Instead of people buying his music, they bought illegally copied versions, and Mozart made ni money.

I'm done. :eek:

Regards,
Gus

some people just don't live in reality. do you honestly think people think twice about burning a cd of something to a friend. the law is broken and no one cares so why do you?
 
Just a thought about software ...

What stops someone from buying software, refusing to install because the buyer didn't like the terms of the licensing agreement, then returning the software to the vendor?
 
Re: Just a thought about software ...

Originally posted by QuiteSure
What stops someone from buying software, refusing to install because the buyer didn't like the terms of the licensing agreement, then returning the software to the vendor?

Well now, there's a conundrum: even if you wanted to return the software, you couldn't - most (all?) software resellers have a final-sale policy on software. Opened or not, it can't be returned.

So, a very good question indeed!
 
Re: Re: Just a thought about software ...

Originally posted by Codemonkey
Well now, there's a conundrum: even if you wanted to return the software, you couldn't - most (all?) software resellers have a final-sale policy on software. Opened or not, it can't be returned.

So, a very good question indeed!

That's all very interesting. Technically, according to the software companies, the end user does not buy software, they buy a license to use the software. But you don't know the terms of the license before you open the box. And it's true -- most if not all software vendors will not accept opened software boxes.

Imagine the novice software buyer who buys his first piece of software thinking that he OWNS THE SOFTWARE, then actually reads the license and discovers he doesn't, and refuses to participate in this system. What recourse is there for him?
 
when i bought windows 3.1 (i know, i'm a bad person)

the disks (hehe, disks) themselves were inside a plastic bag, that are clearly marked that by opening the bag, not the box, you are agreeing to the license.
 
Originally posted by melchior
when i bought windows 3.1 (i know, i'm a bad person)

the disks (hehe, disks) themselves were inside a plastic bag, that are clearly marked that by opening the bag, not the box, you are agreeing to the license.

Yep, but the issue lies in that once you've cracked the cellophane on the box, you can't return it... which makes agreement/disagrement with the EULA a moot point... :(

It's a weird concept - shelling out cash (some times thousands or even tens of thousands of dollars) for software, that a) you never own and b) may not even want to use after reading the EULA, but seemingly have no other recourse than to either throw away the software, or just choose not to use it.

Neither of those options seem very cost effective.... :confused:
 
Just got back from ten days in London without a computer, so sorry for the late comment...

Audible lets you burn a CD of their content that can be played in any normal cd player (that plays cd-r's that is), BUT iTunes will not let you rip that audio cd into an mp3 or even copy the "song" files from the cd to your drive and open them. I am assuming that Apple is doing something subtle to the tracks. I am sure that someone can write something that can extract the content, but for the casual user, it works fairly well at keeping them from distributing multiple copies of each Audible track. Apple also only lets you burn an audible track one time.

Something like this could be put into a music sharing system fairly easily. They could pretty much do what they do for Audible, just do it for music tracks.

I hope they do come out for a service like this. I would love to be able to download a few songs from new artists (legally) before I buy an album. A dollar per song isn't too bad. I hope they also have an option to buy the whole album at a discount. Even better, if you pay $3 to get three songs, then want to buy the album, you would only pay <discount price for entire album> - <how much you have paid for songs on album>

That would make it a pretty darn cool service. If they added on top of that a way to print out your own liner notes and disk labels, it would rock!. I would think it would be trivial to allow that to be done, have them in pdf format, support direct to disk printers, it would be a hit.
 
Originally posted by twelve
some people just don't live in reality. do you honestly think people think twice about burning a cd of something to a friend. the law is broken and no one cares so why do you?

What a refreshingly short-sighted response that was to a well thought-out reamrk.

I guess it would have to personally injure you before you cared if someone stole your coworker's car.

Dan
 
can i just mentioned, dan
I guess it would have to personally injure you before you cared if someone stole your coworker's car.

Dan
even though it has been said a thousand times.

copyright infringement IS NOT stealing, do not equate the two things and perpetuate the RIAA propaganda. copyright infringement is wrong. it's against the law. it's a criminal offense. BUT, it is not stealing. no physical property is lost, only intellectual property. very different.
 
Originally posted by melchior
copyright infringement IS NOT stealing, do not equate the two things and perpetuate the RIAA propaganda. copyright infringement is wrong. it's against the law. it's a criminal offense. BUT, it is not stealing. no physical property is lost, only intellectual property. very different.

Semantics.
 
Originally posted by melchior
can i just mentioned, dan even though it has been said a thousand times.

copyright infringement IS NOT stealing, do not equate the two things and perpetuate the RIAA propaganda. copyright infringement is wrong. it's against the law. it's a criminal offense. BUT, it is not stealing. no physical property is lost, only intellectual property. very different.

i would have to disagree with the statement i bolded in your quote. though it is illegal it is not wrong. do not confuse morailty and legaility. often the two coincide, but not always.

modern intellectual property rights are anachronistic. the conflicts raging regarding digital media simply brings to light the inherent hypocracy and illogical nature of the intellectual property rights laws in this country. the sooner everyone admits to this and decides on fixing the situation rather than trying to force our modern lifestyles into ancient laws the better off we all are.
 
sorry, ambitiouslemon, you're right. i was letting my own beliefs taint my statement. i do, personally, believe copyright infringement is wrong. but that is an opinion, not a fact.
 
Originally posted by twelve
why would i use this when i can find free songs everywhere else and i guarentee they will not have hard to find or anything on the hundreds of independent labels. what a waste of time and energy. go back to work on the G5, thank you.

Please, please, don't crowd the boards with a comment that has already been expressed several times...Your repetition is not really contributing to the discussion AT ALL...But what really annoys me is your G5 comment. Let's think about this:

The G5 is a processor. To a great deal, processors depend on, hmmm, PROCESSOR DESIGNERS/MANUFACTURERS, like Motorola. I think most sensible people would agree that Apple has no fault in Moto's inability to manufacture processors...Anyway, Apple has a hardware AND software division. Now, I find it highly doubtful that you would send iTunes programmers to go work on designing a motherboard for the G5, but that's just me.

Sorry for being curt, but I'm sick of people laying undeserved blame on Apple.
 
I think copyright infringement is "wrong", though that doesn't prevent me from using KaZaA :D . I don't think you can argue that copyright infringement is "right". I mean, you ARE stealing music. It's not like that music was released free of charge by the artists into the public domain. No, the artists slapped a price tag on their CDs.

Why? Because they want a financial return for their work. One of the main reasons my friends dpon't download the songs from their FAVORITE bands, but dl everything else, is because they feel that they're supporting the people whose music they love.

I really can't see how you argue that copyright infringement could be morally right, at least the way it's being applied to digital music.



P.S. - what's the speculative timetable for this music service release/ipod update?
 
Mad world

Fresh from Mac Daily News, an article adressing the question of whether-or-not the Apple music service will be Macintosh-ONLY.

"We've received information from multiple sources that suggest that rumors of Apple's forthcoming online music service will not be "Mac-only" as most rumors have described. Rather, information we've received suggests that Apple's music service will be "iPod-only," meaning that Windows iPod users will be able to use the rumored service. We stress that this information remains unconfirmed and should be categorized as "rumor," as is the "music service" itself at this point."

http://www.macdailynews.com/comments.php?id=P763_0_1_0
 
iTunes and Listed Radio Stations

Strangest thing just happened...

March 28, 9:35 pm (Tokyo time)

Was browsing through the Radio stations to find a station to tune in to and wham!, a whole list of station appeared in the iTunes radio list.

Things like "For Kids", "Personal Broadcasts", and a whole lot of other stations popped up for ever so briefly with channel listings, but no service enabled.

A few minutes later, the station list disappeared and reverted back to the standard fistful.

Any idea what that was?

CHeers.
 
No, but it's very interesting.

Assuming you saw something not ready for primetime, the question is whether it has anything to do with the rumored music buying program.
 
Originally posted by peterjhill
Audible lets you burn a CD of their content that can be played in any normal cd player (that plays cd-r's that is), BUT iTunes will not let you rip that audio cd into an mp3 or even copy the "song" files from the cd to your drive and open them... I am sure that someone can write something that can extract the content
One work around is "Audio Hijack" and "Audio Hijack Pro" ... the latter allows MP3 recording from any applications, wereas the first only records in AIFF (big files -- bad for books)

http://rogueamoeba.com/audiohijackpro

The quality is very good.
 
Originally posted by peterjhill

That would make it a pretty darn cool service. If they added on top of that a way to print out your own liner notes and disk labels, it would rock!. I would think it would be trivial to allow that to be done, have them in pdf format, support direct to disk printers, it would be a hit.

Yeah, I totally agree.

Even though download whole albums off limewire, i always go buy the album afterward, because i want to have the art, liner notes, and CD art. That is the only thing that has kept me from signing up for the other music services (yes, i do have a PC as well as my ibook, damn it). But if you could print out art and liner notes, i would love to use a service, especially if it was Apple....

And I think a lot of other people feel this way too. Hey, I could be wrong, but that is the feeling i have been getting from my friends....
 
Originally posted by nuckinfutz
Yeah and some people though Apple was "crazy" for developing an MP3 player.

I'm still a fan of the CD myself. I'd just like to see them come down to an avg price of $7 and I'd be in Silver Platter Heaven.

Oh for crying out loud, that's what a cassette tape used to cost me in 1985!
Who wouldn't be in Heaven?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.