Poll: Where do you draw the line on illegal downloads?

[SkyBell]

It really is perosnal rather then money wise. I used to use a p2p network to download music (Everyone here does) But i stopped about a year ago.

I won't lie, I have downloaded windows xp, and some older version of photoshop. Maybe a few other things I can't remember. I won't download anything from a small company, because they probably need the money and I would feel really guilty if I illegally downloaded the software.

 

[it5five]

Honestly I was the Napster generation and I went all out downloading music, but being that radio was still dominant in the market(some what). I did not really get music from the US but instead found the world of music outside of USA. Rock, indie and other genres that could not be found in local radio. It open the world to me, thats my belief why bands do not make money(big name) as before because the joe schmo gig gets good amount of fans than Justin Timberlake at cheaper price.

The problem with that is companies do not show the value of importance of their products. I mean software companies market towards the corporations but nothing towards the students market. Hence why they do not care downloading their software.

I'd like to add something, since this reminded me of it. I have discovered so many new artists and new music since I download.

Since I usually download/listen to indie artists though, like I said, I eventually buy the LP (since I already have a digital version, I like buying the record) or go to shows/buy merchandise like t-shirts directly from the bands website.

 

[Markleshark]

I'd prefer not to be preached at as im not going into my reasons or trying to justify anything, but I'll be honest and say I buy Operating Systems, and thats it.

Even that is only Apple Operating Systems. Windows gets downloaded. Quite ironically, the only other software ive paid for is Acquisition

 

[Eraserhead]

I think that downloading Music is the least bad as the artist gets very little money from their sales, the industry badly needs a shakeup.


After that Hollywood movie downloads and Software made by big companies (MS, Adobe etc.) if you can't afford the software as it is expensive. I think stealing $20 shareware and arthouse movies is worse as they need the money more from the sales.

Though in the case of software if you can get Photoshop for free why would you buy a $50 alternative (that is worse)?

 

[Gymnut]

I stopped downloading songs from p2p sites once the iTunes store came online. Even during my days of using p2p, I drew the line at never downloading software.

 

[Blue Velvet]

I don't download anything illegally. I'm a content creator so am well aware of the issues of copyright and ownership... I pay for royalty-free images and I also pay for all the shareware apps on my Mac.

All this crap about music companies making all the money. Do any of you have any idea of how much it costs to produce, record and market an artist, many of which won't even see a return on their investment?

Don't even try and kid me that you're doing something noble. You're hurting the industry through your greed, and you're also responsible for corporations imposing copy-protection schemes and product activations that hurt the honest consumer. You give absolutely nothing in return... while retailers close their doors and recording studios go to the wall.

There's no justification for it at all... all my software is legit. It helps that I obviously get it through work, using the second licence install. But if I didn't need it for work, I wouldn't need it at all. If I was freelance, then it would be a justifiable business expense.

If you're going to argue from the position of not wanting to support corporations, then do the right thing and support the open-source community.

 

[Much Ado]

interesting. Here's some food for thought - what "hurts" more?

1. Downloading a struggling indie artist song/album
2. Downloading Office from big, bad, rich Micro$oft.

just sayin!

Or watching clips from a Paramount film on YouTube (clips that's all) and then deciding you don't want to see the film any more.

Or ripping a friend's CD into iTunes

Or borrowing a DVD for one-off viewing.

Yes, it goes on, and it's murky stuff. Which is why i follow my conscience with this sort of thing, and don't illegally download. But i won't get angry if a friend goes and gets a copy of 'Creep' by Radiohead, who probably couldn't care less right now.

Good thread, btw.

 

[janey]

No line. I'm just as likely to buy an album or go to a concert as I am to download it, and that goes to pretty much everything.


There's a few things that are a bit in the grey area though...I download a fair number of TV shows and movies that will never show up in the US legally, or in a version I want...or necessarily not be available for an unknown amount of time, if some lame studio here didn't decide to remake it BADLY first. I absolutely adore some of them too, my current favorite is Fonejacker.

And before the internet (was fast enough), there was copying files and sneakernetting/mailing it to others. Still happens. You think people have the patience to download something like Final Cut Studio (like what..several DVDs, some of which are DL, so assume 30-60GB) sometimes?

 

[arkitect]

I pay for all the software I generate my income with (and that goes for software I use in my leisure time as well).

If a "trial version" of potential software is crippled then a couple months of "free" testing is something I feel no guilt about. Should it fit my needs I will buy it. If it doesn't work out, I trash it. End of.

Music. I buy CDs — my iTunes downloads are pretty minimal — BUT: What to do about an album released in, say the mid 40's and never re-released on CD… someone records the vinyl and it pops up on everyone's favourite torrent site.
Incredible performances languishing in recording companies' archives…
So what to do? Take the moral high ground and refuse to listen? Why? The record company is taking no interest in it at all. What money is being lost?

For what it's worth…

 

[Compile 'em all]

interesting. Here's some food for thought - what "hurts" more?

1. Downloading a struggling indie artist song/album

I think you really don't have a good grasp on how the music industry works. If you want to really support an artist then go to his concerts and buy merchandise.

 

[Southern]

I think you really don't have a good grasp on how the music industry works. If you want to really support an artist then go to his concerts and buy merchandise.

This man is correct; most of the time, the money from the sale of a CD goes to the RIAA and the record label. Concerts and merch are band-run methods of gaining cash where they don't have to pay such a huge chunk of profits to their labels.

Personally, I don't download from p2p, especially after the Kazaa witchhunts and so on, but the industry needs to adapt rather than put up prices and then blame people downloading as the reason for lower sales in CDs. Online music services are a better bet, but to be honest I find myself buying less music these days anyway, and then usually from places that are quite cheap like Amazon. I find it much easier to rip, mix and burn what I want to listen to from CDs. Podcasts are a good way of getting new music to listen to when you want to and there are plenty of places to get free music. Because I can't resist plugging a good website, try www.legaltorrents.com for their collections of free online record label archives - there's something for everyone there (mp3s and oggs, get VLC if you haven't already to listen to them).

 

[AdeFowler]

My sister (bless her) bought her first iPod the other day. I helped her set it up and explained the iTunes store to her. "We won't be needing that", she said, "everything we need's on Limewire". Well on to my high horse I got and lectured her as if on a moral crusade. Later that day...

A mate popped in with the latest 'Porcupine Tree' album for me to listen to. I put it in my G5 and before I know it iTunes has stuck it on my hard drive and applied the cover artwork to it. Bugger. It's not a bad album, I wouldn't have bought it but now it's there I'm inclined to keep it. So maybe my sister's not such a miscreant after all

For what it's worth I buy a lot of music, all of my software's legal (even the MS stuff) and I purchase and promote a lot of shareware.

 

[2nyRiggz]

All my stuff is bought by myself or given to me(connections baby!) There are times when I can't find a song I really want and I'm tempted to limewire it but I'm afraid of virus files.



Bless

 

[Eraserhead]

All this crap about music companies making all the money. Do any of you have any idea of how much it costs to produce, record and market an artist.

Well seeing as I saw someone on the streets of Oxford yesterday with recorded CD's of their music, clearly not very much.

Now sure to create a really good quality album probably costs a lot, but if the music industry only produced high quality albums for their most profitable artists then maybe they could pay them a bit more. And you can still get a taste of someone's music recorded with relatively cheap equipment.

 

[Much Ado]

Well seeing as I saw someone on the streets of Oxford yesterday with recorded CD's of their music, clearly not very much.

It does, it really does. Mastering CDs is important, and it costs a lot to do it right.

And you can still get a taste of someone's music recorded with relatively cheap equipment.

I'm sure they'd much prefer their music to be given as much care as anyone else's, if they had the chance.

 

[Queso]

I think the only way you can justify illegal downloading is if you don't have legal options to pursue. For music I either buy the CD or download off iTunes. DVDs I buy. Software I either buy or use the Open Source alternative. Heh heh, I even pay for Shareware

Which leaves occasional TV shows as the only dodgy use I have for BitTorrent (I use it legitimately anyway for Open Source stuff). I suppose I justify that by my actually paying subscriptions to the TV channels that show them here, so in my mind I'm simply watching them early. I'll even watch most of them again when they hit normal TV, so I guess nobody, not even the advertisers, are losing out. Also if the shows were available on iTunes (hurry up Apple!!) I would pay for them as I do for music.

And....reading that, it does look like I'm obviously feeling a bit guilty about the TV shows doesn't it? I don't want to get all preachy, but you should at least aim to pay for the stuff you use.

 

[Eraserhead]

I think the only way you can justify illegal downloading is if you don't have legal options to pursue. For music I either buy the CD or download off iTunes. DVDs I buy. Software I either buy or use the Open Source alternative. Heh heh, I even pay for Shareware

Which leaves occasional TV shows as the only dodgy use I have for BitTorrent (I use it legitimately anyway for Open Source stuff). I suppose I justify that by my actually paying subscriptions to the TV channels that show them here, so in my mind I'm simply watching them early. I'll even watch most of them again when they hit normal TV, so I guess nobody, not even the advertisers, are losing out. Also if the shows were available on iTunes (hurry up Apple!!) I would pay for them as I do for music.

I do pretty much the same, except I borrow CD's from friends sometimes, however when iTunes gets iTunes Plus to most artists I'm sure I will buy the stuff that I haven't got totally legally.

It does, it really does. Mastering CDs is important, and it costs a lot to do it right.

Well they can just stick their music online. You can get around 65¢/track download (rather than 10¢/track) for that, and your music won't get used in films/ads without you getting paid for it.

I'm sure they'd much prefer their music to be given as much care as anyone else's, if they had the chance.

And I'd like to fly first class on the aeroplane when I go on holiday, the thing is that I can't afford to, if the artist wants to spend a lot recording their music that should be their risk.

I agree that piracy is wrong, but it seems to be facetious to not admit that the music industry is particularly corrupt and is in general screwing the artist.

 

[iBlue]

I draw the line...

right about...

here:





I'm going to take the chance and say it: I download dodgy copies of things somewhat regularly. It's a dirty rotten thing to do and I know it, and I'm not going to justify it at all because it would be BS. I'm just a selfish pirating tosser and there's little foreseeable hope for my despicable ways.

 

[gikku]

None of the above is "too" illegal to download or "borrow" for a little while.

I bought XP, now I wish I had downloaded it.

 

[Markleshark]

I'm going to take the chance and say it: I download dodgy copies of things somewhat regularly. It's a dirty rotten thing to do and I know it, and I'm not going to justify it at all because it would be BS. I'm just a selfish pirating tosser and there's little foreseeable hope for my despicable ways.

Yarrrrrrr!

 

[Rodimus Prime]

interesting. Here's some food for thought - what "hurts" more?

1. Downloading a struggling indie artist song/album
2. Downloading Office from big, bad, rich Micro$oft.

just sayin!

and there we have the reason on why Microsoft puts in all the activation crap in their software. It is to protect themselves from pirating. It does not stop the hardcore ones who pirate but it does reduce the casual pirates by huge amount.

Now in some of the software makers eyes I do pirate a lot of software because I install it on 2 computers that only I really use so it not like 2 copies will ever be running at the same time. I personally like the software that put in the user arements that allow you to install it on multiple computers and have a per user agreement on it. The licensing is per user. One copy means one user.

 

[edesignuk]

All this crap about music companies making all the money. Do any of you have any idea of how much it costs to produce, record and market an artist, many of which won't even see a return on their investment?

Don't even try and kid me that you're doing something noble. You're hurting the industry through your greed, and you're also responsible for corporations imposing copy-protection schemes and product activations that hurt the honest consumer. You give absolutely nothing in return... while retailers close their doors and recording studios go to the wall.

...but

Before the rise of broadband internet the record companies were raking it in and ripping off consumers hugely. CD singles were almost £4 for one stupid song, and albums were ~£14. The availability of pirated material has forced them to lower costs to make owning an original copy an appealing option, for that we have piracy to thank.

Do record companies need to be such dicks spending absurd amounts of money promoting certain artists? No, they do because they want to. They do because they want their artists who haven't sold a damn thing to look like they have the success of someone who has sold millions of records. Good music will make it on it's own without the kind of PR bull**** they spend big bucks on, but they want to sell the latest crap they have to peddle to us, and preferably they'd like to rip us off doing it. Fortunately because of piracy they are forced to offer their new one hit wonders album for £8 these days.

 

[bartelby]

...but

Before the rise of broadband internet the record companies were raking it in and ripping off consumers hugely. CD singles were almost £4 for one stupid song, and albums were ~£14. The availability of pirated material has forced them to lower costs to make owning an original copy an appealing option, for that we have piracy to thank.

Huh? I regularly see albums for £17.
There was talk of CDs being a rip off in the late 80s early 90s when they were £12 a cd.

I thought labels hiked the price to recover losses because of piracy.

 

[edesignuk]

Huh? I regularly see albums for £17.

Most "popular" albums I see advertised these days are anywhere from £7-9 (not including double CD albums).

 

[Eraserhead]

Now in some of the software makers eyes I do pirate a lot of software because I install it on 2 computers that only I really use so it not like 2 copies will ever be running at the same time.

So do I.

I personally like the software that put in the user arements that allow you to install it on multiple computers and have a per user agreement on it. The licensing is per user. One copy means one user.

I think thats fair though I'd prefer a licence of one per person or one per computer, as you shouldn't have to buy more copies if you share a computer.

Though if they offer a cheap extra licence for a second machine ala Apple with their family pack, I'd shell out the extra.

Most "popular" albums I see advertised these days are anywhere from £7-9 (not including double CD albums).

I was looking at music for one of my friends on Amazon yesterday, and most of them were £5-£7.