Do you see the issue here, yet? Because there's a fundamental disagreement here and I am not even going to attempt to resolve it. Because I don't really feel like shouting "yes it is" and "no it isn't" back and forth.
Alright. Let's establish a basic fact here. I think--and many agree with me--that music is fundamentally different than any other product available for public consumption for a variety of reasons.
Here's a couple of them, literally:
music has no hard value. Music is worth exactly as much as it is being sold for, and for entirely arbitrary reasons. If an album is five dollars it's not because it's "worth" five dollars. That's just how much the artist, or, more likely, their backing label decided to make it worth. Now, the prices of some physical items are artificially inflated (diamonds are a great example), but it is literally impossible--completely and totally impossible--to objectively weigh the monetary value of music. That's problem #1.
music is very rarely the sole product of one person. This is actually more a way that music is similar to other products than a way it's different. Music is almost always based on older music. Be it in direct sampling or interpolation, or in more distant influences like standard chord progressions. Because of this--and here's the difference between music and a physical item--music revenue almost never goes to whoever created the original. There are a billion reasons for this, ranging from the practical (the owner is long dead) to the downright greedy (the rights were bought up by a multibillion dollar company). This is a legitimate issue and one that's rarely thought of. So the question becomes, if we're to pay for music, how do we make sure it goes to the right person? Actual example: "Happy Birthday" was composed by a pair of sisters. Currently, the copyright is owned by Warner, who, yes, still make tons of money off of licensing fees. Would you not call that theft on behalf of the Warner corporation? I would, personally, but that's a matter of opinion. Add on top of this incredibly thorny issues (mostly of opinion) about what constitutes "originality", and you've got one hell of a conundrum on your hands.
those are the two big things I have an issue with personally. There are other factors that are often brought up as well, but you can read those on any old list of "why piracy isn't inherently evil" stuff.
But would any of this be an issue if the basic dilemma of "I want this but I don't want to pay for it" wasn't there?
As for problem #1, if you don't feel music is worth what you'd have to pay for it, there's a very simple solution: don't buy it. Pirating just proves one thing: the music itself is wanted but no one wants to pay for it, but that doesn't encourage anyone to change prices, just security measures.
As for problem #2, this is a legitimate complaint, but not one piracy can solve. "I don't know who to pay, so I won't pay anyone."
Doctor Who reference in Pokemon B2W2? Headcanon accepted.
The advent of file-sharing and later on itunes was the swift kick in the ass the music industry has needed. Not to say it was for the good of the music industry, either; but it was very good for the consumer.
As for problem #1, if you don't feel music is worth what you'd have to pay for it, there's a very simple solution: don't buy it. Pirating just proves one thing: the music itself is wanted but no one wants to pay for it, but that doesn't encourage anyone to change prices, just security measures.
The ways in which music is different from other products fundamentally prevent me from knowing if I want to buy any piece of music before I actually listen to it.
Convoluted comparisons are often made to apples here, but a way more apt one is to a car. Would you really buy a car without test-driving it first? No, you wouldn't. Because that would be a waste of money. Same thing, smaller scale.
And see, to me this is self-evident. But it's clearly not to you, and that is why arguments like this should not be had. Because now we've reached an impasse, and what do we do now but argue about what the "real issue" is?
Honestly, how much music is there that you can't hear without buying? It's entirely possible to legally listen to music on Youtube or the radio (although 99% of music on the radio is crap).
Honestly, my main issue with piracy is when people pirate games.
Honestly, how much music is there that you can't hear without buying? It's entirely possible to legally listen to music on Youtube or the radio (although 99% of music on the radio is crap).
Honestly there's quite a lot of music you can't hear without either pirating or shelling out ludicrous amounts for. Have you ever tried to import a record? Shit's insanity. This is without going into things that are out of print, only ever existed in limited copies, etc. etc. etc.
And frankly 99% of the things I pirate I listen to once and then only ever touch again when I move them to the recycling bin. Most things simply don't impress me enough to warrant re-listens and thus, purchases. I do buy music I listen to more than once. Most people do. That's why I own two copies of every Burial album. One I got off of rapidshare and one I actually bought (in general I prefer to use DRM-free copies, hence why I keep the ones off of rapidshare or wherever).
This is also why Bandcamp's so popular. You can listen to an album as much as you want before you decide to buy it.
Maybe you shouldn't have scolded Kexruct for expressing an opinion on it, then?
Cream, I explained my reasoning for what I said elsewhere and I am not going to re-post it. You are the only one still dragging this particular facet of the conversation out, and it really does not need to be dragged.
Mojave Music said: Kexruct said:Honestly, how much music is there that you can't hear without buying? It's entirely possible to legally listen to music on Youtube or the radio (although 99% of music on the radio is crap).Honestly there's quite a lot of music you can't hear without either pirating or shelling out ludicrous amounts for. Have you ever tried to import a record? Shit's insanity. This is without going into things that are out of print, only ever existed in limited copies, etc. etc. etc.And frankly 99% of the things I pirate I listen to once and then only ever touch again when I move them to the recycling bin. Most things simply don't impress me enough to warrant re-listens and thus, purchases. I do buy music I listen to more than once. Most people do. That's why I own two copies of every Burial album. One I got off of rapidshare and one I actually bought (in general I prefer to use DRM-free copies, hence why I keep the ones off of rapidshare or wherever). This is also why Bandcamp's so popular. You can listen to an album as much as you want before you decide to buy it.
Do you really think people would stop pirating if everything was like Bandcamp? Because I agree, I'd prefer if more music places were like it, but piracy isn't going to solve that.
99% of the things I pirate I listen to once and then only ever touch again when I move them to the recycling bin. Most things simply don't impress me enough to warrant re-listens and thus, purchases. I do buy music I listen to more than once. Most people do. That's why I own two copies of every Burial album. One I got off of rapidshare and one I actually bought (in general I prefer to use DRM-free copies, hence why I keep the ones off of rapidshare or wherever).
Do you really think people would stop pirating if everything was like Bandcamp?
I think the vast majority of people would.
I'll admit to having been lazy with my to-buy backlist lately (currently next on that is Toro y Moi's debut album), but that's just because my mother keeps asking me for gas money. :/
Because I agree, I'd prefer if more music places were like it, but piracy isn't going to solve that.
Did I imply it would solve anything? Piracy is a workaround, not a form of protest.
You are the end result of a “would you push the button” prompt where the prompt was “you have unlimited godlike powers but you appear to all and sundry to be an impetuous child” – Zero, 2022
It's entirely possible to legally listen to music on Youtube
I know this isn't your main argument, but I'd just like to point out that you inadvertently hit on one way in which this is much more complicated than it might appear.
That is to say, nowadays you can listen to music on YouTube legally, but this is actually an indirect result of piracy. In the early days of YouTube, people would upload music without permission from the copyright holders. Once the record companies got tired of the DMCA takedown game (take it down, it gets uploaded again, and so on), they eventually realized they were better off allowing their music to be used on YouTube in exchange for a cut of the ad money.
Do you really think people would stop pirating if everything was like Bandcamp?
I think the vast majority of people would.
Because I agree, I'd prefer if more music places were like it, but piracy isn't going to solve that.
Did I imply it would solve anything? Piracy is a workaround, not a form of protest.
But because most people don't pirate, said workaround is harming the average consumer.
There has never been any serious study into how many people in the United States pirate anything. You have no stats to back that claim up unless something's somehow slipped under my radar.
Do you really think people would stop pirating if everything was like Bandcamp?
I think the vast majority of people would.
Because I agree, I'd prefer if more music places were like it, but piracy isn't going to solve that.
Did I imply it would solve anything? Piracy is a workaround, not a form of protest.
But because most people don't pirate, said workaround is harming the average consumer.
There has never been any serious study into how many people in the United States pirate anything. You have no stats to back that claim up unless something's somehow slipped under my radar.
Okay then, I'll edit my statement.
Piracy is harming the music industry by pirating by causing them to focus on security measures rather than the consumer.
Do you really think people would stop pirating if everything was like Bandcamp?
I think the vast majority of people would.
Because I agree, I'd prefer if more music places were like it, but piracy isn't going to solve that.
Did I imply it would solve anything? Piracy is a workaround, not a form of protest.
But because most people don't pirate, said workaround is harming the average consumer.
There has never been any serious study into how many people in the United States pirate anything. You have no stats to back that claim up unless something's somehow slipped under my radar.
Okay then, I'll edit my statement.
Piracy is harming the music industry by pirating by causing them to focus on security measures rather than the consumer.
I do not have the interests of the music industry as a concern when I pirate things.
The artists themselves? Certainly. But as far as I know, every artist I listen to is doing fine, monetarily. With the exception of like, soundcloud rappers, and they don't ask for money anyway.
Companies are not things I care about. If your main point is "it's hurting the industry", you're not going to win me over, or many people over, for that matter.
The quality might be bad but if you only want to hear a track once and never again, it is probably just to know what it sounds like, and in such a case, I don't think that quality is really a big thing.
This is true, it's just one of those annoying things.
You can also crank up the quality somewhat by switching to higher definitions on the video player, but it doesn't help too much.
You are the end result of a “would you push the button” prompt where the prompt was “you have unlimited godlike powers but you appear to all and sundry to be an impetuous child” – Zero, 2022
Piracy is harming the music industry by pirating by causing them to focus on security measures rather than the consumer.
I think that's much more true of the software and video game industries in this day and age than it is the music industry. The latter figured out in the late 2000s that selling 99-cent MP3s with no copy protection would get them way more money than selling digital music in proprietary formats with cumbersome DRM.
And yeah there's really no music company out right now that's majorly hurting. Only example I can think of is the folded Def Jux, which was folded for reasons that have remained undisclosed but I can't imagine have much to do with piracy, given that it was one of the most successful independent rap labels of the 2000s.
Do you really think people would stop pirating if everything was like Bandcamp?
I think the vast majority of people would.
Because I agree, I'd prefer if more music places were like it, but piracy isn't going to solve that.
Did I imply it would solve anything? Piracy is a workaround, not a form of protest.
But because most people don't pirate, said workaround is harming the average consumer.
There has never been any serious study into how many people in the United States pirate anything. You have no stats to back that claim up unless something's somehow slipped under my radar.
Okay then, I'll edit my statement.
Piracy is harming the music industry by pirating by causing them to focus on security measures rather than the consumer.
I do not have the interests of the music industry as a concern when I pirate things.
The artists themselves? Certainly. But as far as I know, every artist I listen to is doing fine, monetarily. With the exception of like, soundcloud rappers, and they don't ask for money anyway.
Companies are not things I care about. If your main point is "it's hurting the industry", you're not going to win me over, or many people over, for that matter.
If the industry is harmed then the artists are harmed.
Piracy is harming the music industry by pirating by causing them to focus on security measures rather than the consumer.
I think that's much more true of the software and video game industries in this day and age than it is the music industry. The latter figured out in the late 2000s that selling 99-cent MP3s with no copy protection would get them way more money than selling digital music in proprietary formats with cumbersome DRM.
Doctor Who reference in Pokemon B2W2? Headcanon accepted.
Crafting copy-protection schemes is pretty much the same thing as trying generate free energy. In regards to both, attempts are made constantly to succeed but never do.
Do you really think people would stop pirating if everything was like Bandcamp?
I think the vast majority of people would.
Because I agree, I'd prefer if more music places were like it, but piracy isn't going to solve that.
Did I imply it would solve anything? Piracy is a workaround, not a form of protest.
But because most people don't pirate, said workaround is harming the average consumer.
There has never been any serious study into how many people in the United States pirate anything. You have no stats to back that claim up unless something's somehow slipped under my radar.
Okay then, I'll edit my statement.
Piracy is harming the music industry by pirating by causing them to focus on security measures rather than the consumer.
I do not have the interests of the music industry as a concern when I pirate things.
The artists themselves? Certainly. But as far as I know, every artist I listen to is doing fine, monetarily. With the exception of like, soundcloud rappers, and they don't ask for money anyway.
Companies are not things I care about. If your main point is "it's hurting the industry", you're not going to win me over, or many people over, for that matter.
If the industry is harmed then the artists are harmed.
That really isn't true.
Most mainstream artists make their money from either concerts or a small cut of radio play revenue.
Most independent artists make their money from a combination of concerts, merch sales, donations, and the dedicated part of their fanbase that buys everything they put out.
The only people who get harmed when the industry is harmed are the businessfolk, who I do not care about, because their skills are equally useful in pretty much every industry, and in the unlikely event a record label were to fold solely because of piracy, it would not be hard for them to get a new job.
Comments
I do not think it's that simple.
Do you see the issue here, yet? Because there's a fundamental disagreement here and I am not even going to attempt to resolve it. Because I don't really feel like shouting "yes it is" and "no it isn't" back and forth.
Fine, but I warned you.
Alright. Let's establish a basic fact here. I think--and many agree with me--that music is fundamentally different than any other product available for public consumption for a variety of reasons.
Here's a couple of them, literally:
those are the two big things I have an issue with personally. There are other factors that are often brought up as well, but you can read those on any old list of "why piracy isn't inherently evil" stuff.
Yes? If anything the above is, at least to me, way more pressing a pair of issues than the reasoning behind why people pirate.
The ways in which music is different from other products fundamentally prevent me from knowing if I want to buy any piece of music before I actually listen to it.
Convoluted comparisons are often made to apples here, but a way more apt one is to a car. Would you really buy a car without test-driving it first? No, you wouldn't. Because that would be a waste of money. Same thing, smaller scale.
And see, to me this is self-evident. But it's clearly not to you, and that is why arguments like this should not be had. Because now we've reached an impasse, and what do we do now but argue about what the "real issue" is?
Hence why I wanted to not talk about this in the first place.
Do you see the problem here, yet?
Damn that's awesome. I need to check those guys out.
Honestly there's quite a lot of music you can't hear without either pirating or shelling out ludicrous amounts for. Have you ever tried to import a record? Shit's insanity. This is without going into things that are out of print, only ever existed in limited copies, etc. etc. etc.
And frankly 99% of the things I pirate I listen to once and then only ever touch again when I move them to the recycling bin. Most things simply don't impress me enough to warrant re-listens and thus, purchases. I do buy music I listen to more than once. Most people do. That's why I own two copies of every Burial album. One I got off of rapidshare and one I actually bought (in general I prefer to use DRM-free copies, hence why I keep the ones off of rapidshare or wherever).
This is also why Bandcamp's so popular. You can listen to an album as much as you want before you decide to buy it.
That has little to do with this, honestly. At least as far as I know, I don't really know much about game piracy beyond I generally find DRM annoying.
That's not what I'm saying.
What I'm saying is that music's value is wholly subjective. Thus, so should be the price tag of all music.
This model works fine for folks who make a living off of Bandcamp sales, so I fail to see why it shouldn't work for anyone.
Cream, I explained my reasoning for what I said elsewhere and I am not going to re-post it. You are the only one still dragging this particular facet of the conversation out, and it really does not need to be dragged.Do you really think people would stop pirating if everything was like Bandcamp? Because I agree, I'd prefer if more music places were like it, but piracy isn't going to solve that.
I think the vast majority of people would.
I'll admit to having been lazy with my to-buy backlist lately (currently next on that is Toro y Moi's debut album), but that's just because my mother keeps asking me for gas money. :/
Did I imply it would solve anything? Piracy is a workaround, not a form of protest.
Youtube's selection is vast but it's unfortunately not infinite.
I wish it were, though.
True. The snares on a lot of rap music get horribly brickwalled when uploaded to youtube.
Example: the remix of A-Trak's "Piss Test".
I do not have the interests of the music industry as a concern when I pirate things.
The artists themselves? Certainly. But as far as I know, every artist I listen to is doing fine, monetarily. With the exception of like, soundcloud rappers, and they don't ask for money anyway.
Companies are not things I care about. If your main point is "it's hurting the industry", you're not going to win me over, or many people over, for that matter.
This is true, it's just one of those annoying things.
You can also crank up the quality somewhat by switching to higher definitions on the video player, but it doesn't help too much.
That really isn't true.
Most mainstream artists make their money from either concerts or a small cut of radio play revenue.
Most independent artists make their money from a combination of concerts, merch sales, donations, and the dedicated part of their fanbase that buys everything they put out.
The only people who get harmed when the industry is harmed are the businessfolk, who I do not care about, because their skills are equally useful in pretty much every industry, and in the unlikely event a record label were to fold solely because of piracy, it would not be hard for them to get a new job.