A recent article in Rolling Stone magazine discussed the US music industry sueing illegal music downloaders. The article stated that over 11000 downloaders had been sued by the Recording Industry Association of America, while some of the dowloaders who were sued were liable for up to US$500 000 those that could afford to settle out of court had to pay a few thousand dollars in fines peer to peer services such as Kazza and Grokster were targeted. The article surprised me a little as I had never really thought of downloading as illegal. I guess to some extent it is unfair on the record industry and the musicians to download or burn CDs. In the case of burning CDs I think it's unaceptable to copy the music of local musicians, the New Zealand music industry is so small that we need to support local talent and buy their music rather than obtaining it for free.
posted by Anonymous @ 11:06 am
1 comments
1 Comments:
This seems to me to be a contradiction. Why is it that the smaller scene should be exempt but one that is larger it’s fine to copy such music? Just because they are better established, it makes piracy more ok? Don’t get me wrong, I think what the RIAA has done is absurd and I’m completely against it. But at what point are you drawing the line. As a slight correction, the RIAA is not targeting downloader’s. That’s impossible. They are targeting uploaders. These are people they can verify have large collections and they can press charges against. They also are fighting uphill. They have already lost two major court cases and most of their settlements come out of court, it’s all a scare tactic in the end. In terms of large scope scene, I think the free distribution of single songs over the internet is a good practice. One a song is purchased free mobility is amazing. Why i hate iTunes. Their copyright now allowing you to play it on other computers is absurd. I can play CDs in other peoples CD players, why can’t I do the same with MP3? Frankly, RIAA is fighting the impossible war. They will never win against the open source generation and this fight is the betamax type argument all over again that the video industry is dealing with. I think the major questions are at what point you can make the determination between fair trade and private media. I think that no matter the market, the music should be open to some sort of sample for enjoyment. I won’t buy a CD unless I like it. For example, I downloaded both albums of the Black Seeds, a local NZ band, as yall most likely know. I didn’t pay a dime for any of these mp3's. Tisk tisk I know. I was so impressed with their sound and ability that I went and purchased both CDs. It’s the type of music i enjoy and i wanted the artists to get the profits for their good work. It’s a band i have no problem supporting. This was only once I had heard it, a major issue in the RIAA case. Most people if asked if they would buy a good cd if they heard the mp3s to prove it have time and time again said yes. The RIAA just has their own surveys to back their side since they want every penny and they don’t care that people don’t want to buy crap CDs they put out anymore. Anyway, enough with the rant, i just wanted to stress where does the line cutoff between piracy and open usage and to what degree do you follow that?
Post a Comment
<< Home