Apple.com "Music" Tab becomes "iTunes"

[skymaXimus]

As of right now there are two different iTunes pages
http://www.apple.com/ilife/itunes/
and
http://www.apple.com/itunes/
which is very un-apple. Mr. Webmaster needs to get to work.

 

[BillyShears]

Originally posted by gwangung

Um, right.

I SELL my music. Downloading MY music is taking money from me, because you're depriving ME of MY right to sell the music or distribute it as I see fit. I created it, I get that right...it ain't yours to do that.

No, I never said it was anyone's right to redistribute your music, but that isn't theft. You aren't deprived of anything, you can still distribute it as you see fit, no one is hindering your ability to do that. Think about theft from a store. If I steal a CD, that owner is without the CD... they can't sell it. If I download a CD, the owner still has the CD, and still can make a profit off it. I'm not saying downloading music without paying is right, but it's not "theft." Things aren't as clearcut as a slogan like "theft is theft."

Originally posted by simX
You should go back to the store, return the CD, and say it is defective. If it doesn't work with your computer and won't allow you to rip it, then it is defective and you have the right to return it. The Compact Disc standard does not allow for such technologies, and thus it is not a CD if it has copy protection.

If you really feel mean, go to the store and buy *ALL* their copy-protected CDs. Go home, try to rip each one to your computer, and return the ones that don't allow you to do that (presumably all of them). This will force the store to return the CDs to their manufacturers (since they're defective), and eventually they'll get the message. If nothing else, the store will be incredibly inconvenienced and will refuse to stock those copy-protected CDs.

I would, and I considered it, but there is generally a no-return policy on CDs. I can imagine trying to return an opened CD and explaining that I was trying to copy it. This would take a lot of my time, and time is money. I do support the idea, though... I guess I'm just lazy. Also I like my independant record store, I don't want to cause them any trouble. BTW, I read somewhere Radiohead supports P2P..... kind of funny.

 

[Potus]

Theft is the taking of anything of value with the intent to permanently deprive. Value can be determined by the "owner" thereof, however transitory. Therefore, if I work in a store and you take from me the key I use to open the bathroom, even though it is not my key, but actually the store owner's, nevertheless the taking is a theft.

 

[BillyShears]

Originally posted by Potus
Theft is the taking of anything of value with the intent to permanently deprive. Value can be determined by the "owner" thereof, however transitory. Therefore, if I work in a store and you take from me the key I use to open the bathroom, even though it is not my key, but actually the store owner's, nevertheless the taking is a theft.

In that case I am depriving you of the use of said key, since you no longer have it. If I download your music, I am not depriving you of your ability to sell your music and make a profit.

 

[Daveman Deluxe]

This is really getting ludicrous, but I'm tossing my two cents in anyway.

Let's start over again with the definition of the word "theft" as set forth previously:

1. (Law) The act of stealing; specifically, the felonious taking and removing of personal property, with an intent to deprive the rightful owner of the same; larceny

People who are comparing this to shoplifting CDs are going about this the wrong way. The physical CDs are the store's property, but the content is not. However, there is no physical property involved in downloading music, there is only content. The "personal property" in question is the content.

So who rightfully owns the content in question? It's a rhetorical question; the owner is obviously the copyright holder, who is (in the case of contracted records) the recording studio.

When you download music illegally, you are depriving the ability of the studio to make a profit off of the sale of the content to you. That is theft.

 

[BillyShears]

Originally posted by Daveman Deluxe
When you download music illegally, you are depriving the ability of the studio to make a profit off of the sale of the content to you. That is theft.

If anything... at the worst you are depriving the studio of potential profit from you. You may also raise the potential of sale. I had never heard of Beta Band before... someone mentioned it offhand, so I downloaded a couple tracks. Loved them. Bought 3 or 4 of their CDs within a week. Like I said... if I download a song, I may go and buy it the next day. The studio still has the chance to make the money from me. I'd have to download a full-quality CD, print off covers on glossy paper, etc for my chances of buying the CD to be null. Also, there is no guarantee I would have bought the CD anyway.

So what we are stealing, exactly, is potential of sale. But if we are going to say that anything that lessens the likelihood of someone buying the CD is theft, then is not a bad review of the CD "theft"? They'd be taking away the ability of the studio to make profit off anyone who reads the review.

 

[Potus]

You can steal intangibles such as future rights to use even if the rights are only based only on a potential to vest. Another example is identity theft. Music/copying is in the area of "intellectual" property, as compared to real property or personal property. Each type of property has different hallmarks and therefore the hallmarks of deprivation are different. ["Fox News Network trademarked the phrase "Fair and Balanced" in 1998 to describe its news coverage, and network lawyers claimed that Mr. Franken's use of the phrase in his book would "blur and tarnish" it."]

 

[ZeppelinArmada]

I hope this is an early sign that iTunes will be appearing on PC. Many of my PC friends are very anxiously awaiting the iTunes music service. If it doesn't happen soon they may just join one of the PC ones out there.

 

[Daveman Deluxe]

Billy-

In my mind, the issue has nothing to do with people who download music to "try before they buy". The issue is all about people that download music so they NEVER have to buy music. THAT is stealing.

 

[BillyShears]

Originally posted by Daveman Deluxe
Billy-

In my mind, the issue has nothing to do with people who download music to "try before they buy". The issue is all about people that download music so they NEVER have to buy music. THAT is stealing.

OK, but by the same token this person may never have bought the CD in the first place, yet they downloaded the one song. Now, there was never a potential of sale, the record company had ZERO chance of making money off this person. What have they been deprived of? I understand that this is wrong: if you want it, buy it (like I do), but I wouldn't call it theft.

Potus: it is in the IP domain, but it is not IP THEFT. If someone steals your identity you can no longer use it as you would. (eg. your credit cards have larger bills, etc.)

 

[ckelley]

Regarding the Radiohead Album

Just where exactly did you get a Copy Protected version? Mine's not. I bought it just a few weeks ago.

Just wondering, it seems odd to do that.

 

[rjgjonker]

Theft is theft, downloading isn't

Originally posted by gwangung
I SELL my music. Downloading MY music is taking money from me, because you're depriving ME of MY right to sell the music or distribute it as I see fit. I created it, I get that right...it ain't yours to do that.

I don't see how people downloading your music make it impossible for you to sell your music.

Downloading music illegally might be both morally wrong and illegal, but that doesn't make it theft.

 

[rueyeet]

Originally posted by BillyShears
OK, but by the same token this person may never have bought the CD in the first place, yet they downloaded the one song. Now, there was never a potential of sale, the record company had ZERO chance of making money off this person. What have they been deprived of? I understand that this is wrong: if you want it, buy it (like I do), but I wouldn't call it theft.

The difference is: If you neither buy the CD, nor download the song, you don't have their music and you haven't paid for it.

If you don't buy the CD, but download the song, you do have their music, and you haven't paid them for it. When you get something without paying for it, and its owner has not given their permission for that to occur, it's generally understood to be theft, plain and simple. Quoting the dictionary only shows that you're using the letter of the law to violate its spirit.

Such arguments--along with the "the RIAA steals from the artists, so it's okay to steal from them" excuse--are just an attempt to morally justify getting something for nothing. I wonder if you'd feel the same about it if it was YOUR paycheck at stake....after all, the artists may be being ripped off of most of the sales income by the greedy-ass record execs, but when you buy the music, they at least get their pittance. When you don't buy the music, they get nothing at all, and your not buying the music won't change the system that ensures that.

 

[SiliconAddict]

Can I ask why Apple doesn't allow users to browse the list of songs without iTunes? Its annoying not knowing what they do and don't have. I've had to ask a few iBook users I know to look up some songs for me.
If Apple really wants to push their music store let the people browse!

 

[BillyShears]

Originally posted by rueyeet
The difference is: If you neither buy the CD, nor download the song, you don't have their music and you haven't paid for it.

If you don't buy the CD, but download the song, you do have their music, and you haven't paid them for it. When you get something without paying for it, and its owner has not given their permission for that to occur, it's generally understood to be theft, plain and simple. Quoting the dictionary only shows that you're using the letter of the law to violate its spirit.

Such arguments--along with the "the RIAA steals from the artists, so it's okay to steal from them" excuse--are just an attempt to morally justify getting something for nothing. I wonder if you'd feel the same about it if it was YOUR paycheck at stake....after all, the artists may be being ripped off of most of the sales income by the greedy-ass record execs, but when you buy the music, they at least get their pittance. When you don't buy the music, they get nothing at all, and your not buying the music won't change the system that ensures that.

Yes, I am agreeing it is morally wrong to get something that usually costs money without paying for it. It is not theft, though. I'm not saying it's not illegal, immoral, and doubleplusungood, but it is not theft. By quoting the dictionary I am obeying the letter of the law, which is the true spirit of the law.

1. (Law) The act of stealing; specifically, the felonious taking and removing of personal property, with an intent to deprive the rightful owner of the same; larceny

Why would they add "with an intent to deprive the rightful owner of the same", were it not necessary?

 

[andyduncan]

Originally posted by shecky
if you click on the store link or the .Mac link, the "itunes" tab changes back to "music"

even on the pages that have the "new" itunes gifs, the alt text is still "Music".