NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.biggercheese.com/comics/0276.png

My University is illegaly blocking us from downloading Kazaa!!!

STOP THE REEFER MADNESS SYNDROM!!!

My University is illegaly blocking us from downloading Kazaa!!!

STOP THE REEFER MADNESS SYNDROM!!!

Your Unis doing you a favour - Kazaa is crap, and filled with Spyware. Get yourself Emule or Soulseek.

My University is illegaly blocking us from downloading Kazaa!!!

STOP THE REEFER MADNESS SYNDROM!!!

Why stop it? I loved that film.

My University is illegaly blocking us from downloading Kazaa!!!

STOP THE REEFER MADNESS SYNDROM!!!Yeah because that's what Uni is for, stealing software.... hold up. Yes it is! Steal away my good friend!

My University is illegaly blocking us from downloading Kazaa!!!

STOP THE REEFER MADNESS SYNDROM!!!

Your Unis doing you a favour - Kazaa is crap, and filled with Spyware. Get yourself Emule or Soulseek.

You ever heard of Kazaa lite?

My University is illegaly blocking us from downloading Kazaa!!!

STOP THE REEFER MADNESS SYNDROM!!!

Your Unis doing you a favour - Kazaa is crap, and filled with Spyware. Get yourself Emule or Soulseek.

You ever heard of Kazaa lite?

Yeah, but the community on Kazaa/KazaaLite is pitiful, and hasn't got the right tunes/warez I'm after. Also, your immediately in a queue of 100-odd people. Same problem with WinMX.

My University is illegaly blocking us from downloading Kazaa!!!

STOP THE REEFER MADNESS SYNDROM!!!

Your Unis doing you a favour - Kazaa is crap, and filled with Spyware. Get yourself Emule or Soulseek.

You ever heard of Kazaa lite?

Yeah, but the community on Kazaa/KazaaLite is pitiful, and hasn't got the right tunes/warez I'm after. Also, your immediately in a queue of 100-odd people. Same problem with WinMX.

What is it your looking for?

What is it your looking for?

Basically stuff not in the mainstream. I use WinMX (and occasionally KazaaLite) if I'm looking for classic tunes - usually 70/80's punk- but for my trip-hop, ambient noize, underground techno, digital hardcore and electronica (the stuff I usually download), Soulseek does the job. Emule is fantastic for software. Got me a luverly bundle of VJ warez. *drool*

ITs the same community. How is the KL commnity spiteful?

I always download my Beatles songs because I refuse to give Michael Jackson a dime.

ITs the same community. How is the KL commnity spiteful?

Not spiteful. Piteful. As in severly lacking the tunes that I want.

Yeah, the less mainstream the better. I agree. Of course its foolish to limit yourself to one network.

Hehe, funny :lol:

Stupid bloody RIAA...

Hehe, funny :lol:

Stupid bloody RIAA...

I still can't believe you're a moderator.

But please don't prove it to me....

i miss napster
it was so nice when everybody had just one program and you could get whatever you wanted

Ladies and gents...perhaps it's just because I believe in the right of artists but don't any of you think that perhaps it was wrong of Napster and it's subsequent copy-cats in that you're allowed to take some artists property without compensating that artists for his/her work?

http://home.comcast.net/~zarubi/mp3communism.jpeg

Damnit! Stop taunting me. For ages I've been searching for the one that says.

"When you pay for mp3's, your rockin out with the man" With the moneybags guy in the background. From gnutella..

Oh well

http://overstated.net/media/RIAA_PSA.mpg

Damnit! Stop taunting me. For ages I've been searching for the one that says.

"When you pay for mp3's, your rockin out with the man" With the moneybags guy in the background. From gnutella..

Oh well

http://modernhumorist.com/mh/0011/mp3/images/MP3_man.jpg

There's lots of stuff here, if you follow the MP3s=Communism link:

http://modernhumorist.com/

Seriously kids?...don't you feel in the least bit wrong in what napster and it's ilk have done?...the artist is not being compensated for services provided everytime something like this occurs....if he/she wants to give away their work for free then great..otherwise it's theft...pure and simple.

Seriously kids?...don't you feel in the least bit wrong in what napster and it's ilk have done?...the artist is not being compensated for services provided everytime something like this occurs....if he/she wants to give away their work for free then great..otherwise it's theft...pure and simple.

I think it's more a protest of the way the RIAA is acting than a question of whether it's right or wrong.

Seriously kids?...don't you feel in the least bit wrong in what napster and it's ilk have done?...the artist is not being compensated for services provided everytime something like this occurs....if he/she wants to give away their work for free then great..otherwise it's theft...pure and simple.

I think it's more a protest of the way the RIAA is acting than a question of whether it's right or wrong.

On the contrary...if we can't distinguish right from wrong then nothing is sure....it's theft if taken without compensation...

Seriously kids?...don't you feel in the least bit wrong in what napster and it's ilk have done?...the artist is not being compensated for services provided everytime something like this occurs....if he/she wants to give away their work for free then great..otherwise it's theft...pure and simple.

I think it's more a protest of the way the RIAA is acting than a question of whether it's right or wrong.

On the contrary...if we can't distinguish right from wrong then nothing is sure....it's theft if taken without compensation...

That's not the issue though.

Did you actually read my post?

We're not debating whether downloading music is right or wrong, we're debating whether the actions taken by the RIAA are right or wrong.

http://overstated.net/media/RIAA_PSA.mpg

LOL! But does anyone know what B-movie they took that scene from though?

Seriously kids?...don't you feel in the least bit wrong in what napster and it's ilk have done?...the artist is not being compensated for services provided everytime something like this occurs....if he/she wants to give away their work for free then great..otherwise it's theft...pure and simple.

I think it's more a protest of the way the RIAA is acting than a question of whether it's right or wrong.

On the contrary...if we can't distinguish right from wrong then nothing is sure....it's theft if taken without compensation...

That's not the issue though.

Did you actually read my post?

We're not debating whether downloading music is right or wrong, we're debating whether the actions taken by the RIAA are right or wrong.

But don't you think that's the original issue to begin with?...were it not for Napster and it's actions then the RIAA would not have even been in the picture now would it?

Seriously kids?...don't you feel in the least bit wrong in what napster and it's ilk have done?...the artist is not being compensated for services provided everytime something like this occurs....if he/she wants to give away their work for free then great..otherwise it's theft...pure and simple.
It's not about hurting the artists, it's about helping the artists. How much of the $18 that you spend on a CD goes to an artist? Well, a lot, if it's an independent label. Therefore, I download a) stuff that I don't like and b) stuff that wouldn't help out the artist if I bought it anyway.
My friend Josh wrote a pretty eloquent rant about it on his website, but I can't figure out how to link directly to the rant, so copy paste!
Eh...forget that...I'm always paranoid, so I figured I'd remove that in case the RIAA has a spy around here!
Salishe, if you'd remove it too
if not, whatever, it's still available on his website, so it's not like it's a secret

Seriously kids?...don't you feel in the least bit wrong in what napster and it's ilk have done?...the artist is not being compensated for services provided everytime something like this occurs....if he/she wants to give away their work for free then great..otherwise it's theft...pure and simple.
It's not about hurting the artists, it's about helping the artists. How much of the $18 that you spend on a CD goes to an artist? Well, a lot, if it's an independent label. Therefore, I download a) stuff that I don't like and b) stuff that wouldn't help out the artist if I bought it anyway.
My friend Josh wrote a pretty eloquent rant about it on his website, but I can't figure out how to link directly to the rant, so copy paste!

I was just surfing the internet as usual, when I came across (for the second or third time) an article about the slump in music sales. I'm quite interested in the state of the major labels, if only because I would make a prime candidate for a lawsuit. After re-reading the article, I realized something which should be painfully obvious to all involved, but for some odd reason it seems the recording industry has ignored.

I haven't always been actively interested in music. I didn't start developing a true taste until late middle school, or early high school. Incidentally, this was about the same time that Napster was starting to become popular. I was with Napster from fairly early on, spending hours upon hours downloading albums. Much of my taste in music has come from hearing about a band, downloading their music, and deciding whether I like them or not. I did know one thing, CD's were expensive, and I didn't have the cash for them. Napster was free.

I'll admit that I knew what I was doing was wrong, and always justified it by saying that once I actually had the money to do so, I would purchase the albums I was downloading. Then my perception of the music industry started to change. I avidly followed the legal battle that Napster fought. The entire world did. At first I found it funny, since Napster was so obviously illegal. After Napster gave some really good arguments, and even tried to compromise a few times, I started to find it less amusing. The recording industry was just picking on this company, blindly thinking that if they were to kill Napster it would stop this from ever happening again.

We all know what happened. The recording industry did end up killing Napster, and instead of one, unified, controllable P2P network, we wound up with 50 smaller ones. Good job, RIAA. At this point I started to dislike the RIAA. It sure didn't have a very positive or intelligent image in my mind. It was more like an older sibling who was used to always getting his way, then got really upset when he was challenged. I continued to download, feeling a little less remorse.

During all of this, I had grown attached to my now-favorite band, XTC. In learning more about XTC, I learned how they had gone on strike for 7 years just to get out from under the oppressive rule of Virgin records. They formed their own record label, and put out two of their best records to date. I realized that I was hurting these smaller groups when I was downloading. Since then I have purchased nearly the entirety of XTC's enormous catalog. I have also supported any other independent band or artist who I like alot. When I know the artist is getting the money, I don't feel so bad about paying.

Recording industries screw their artists, who are why they exist and have millions, in every way imaginable. They pay the artists a small percentage of album sales, and then make the artists pay for tour costs, production costs, studio time, etc. Doesn't seem very fair to me. This is just one more reason I don't feel bad screwing the recording industry back. I do feel a little sad when I download music from a really great band who is still with a major label. But, then I realize that by being signed to a major label they're just perpetuating this horrid system, not to mention they would have only gotten a dollar of the 15 I would pay for the album. If my conscience really bugs me I'll give the band a buck.

Now, that we've been brought up to speed, let's deal with the past year that was in question in the aforementioned internet articles. In 2003 the RIAA started bringing lawsuits against individuals who downloaded music. Bravo. You wonder why your sales go down? It is because of me, and people like me. The RIAA has established what has to be one of the worst public images in the modern age. And now you want us to give you money? You're kidding, right?

Finally, when it comes to legal music downloading services, I just don't feel it. If it had been implemented in the heyday of Napster, I would have seen it as a given. Probably would have stopped downloading music, and gone back to buying it. But, it wasn't implemented then, and since then I have become much more educated in the entire system. So, why is it that it costs a dollar to download a single song? Albums are overpriced at roughly $15, which you tend to get between 11 and 15 songs per album (on average). Now, if you're downloading the music instead of buying it in a store, you shouldn't be paying for the cd, or the case... or the artwork and design. So it works out to be about the same cost as buying the CD in the store, if not slighly more expensive. And didn't we already agree that CD's are overpriced in the stores? Yes, hence the music revolution. iTunes, you're gonna have to drop the prices, AND guarantee that the money is going to the artist, and not the recording industry. Maybe then I'll go street legal.

I wish that everyone shared my viewpoint, but sadly they don't. There are people out there who download both RIAA music, and independent labels with the same zest. The RIAA will always survive off of crap music like Justin Timberlake and 50 Cent, but independent labels need the support of all of their limited fans. They keep good, creative, original music coming into this world. (Unlike the RIAA - and I quote they, "have also been slashing costs, dumping B-list stars and cutting staff." The B-list stars are the good ones, too.) Support independent labels, and screw the recording industry. That's my opinion, the opinion of a 5-year pirater, with over 10,000 songs downloaded.

Oh, and in case you were wondering? Before Napster I spent about $15 a year on music. Since then I have probably spent $150-200 a year, on average. I might be a special case, but then again I think I'm what is referred to as the "target demographic." I only wish that the recording industry would change. It's high time it did.

I'm sorry..I just can't agree..irregardless of how much an artist makes, it is still theft to take without paying for it.

90% of the games, movies and music I bought I would not have were it not for p2p programs.

actually, I've read that people who DL anyways wouldn't buy music anyways. The article below also says, that P2P downloading hasn't actually effected sales at all.

http://www.globetechnology.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20040330.gtstudy0330/BNStory/Technology/

http://www.treetrybe.com/imm/images/terroristmp3.gif

I'm sorry..I just can't agree..irregardless of how much an artist makes, it is still theft to take without paying for it.
I don't think we're arguing (I'm not at least) whether it's theft or not
I'm only arguing about whether it's morally "right" or not
I don't think that it's right for the recording industry to take that money away from the artists, so I don't think it's wrong for me to withold the money from them
Regardless, I have thousands of dollars worth of CDs (well maybe worth isn't the word, let's say "cost") And I would never buy music anymore if it wasn't for downloading programs. A friend of mine mentions a good band, so I download some of their music, and if I like it, I buy the CD. That's how I cam to love Reggie and the Full Effect and Broken Social Scene. Or if I see an awesome video on MTV2 I'll download more videos by the same band. That's how I came to love the White Stripes and Our Lady Peace.
Besides, probably 90% of my music is either something I own or something I downloaded from a band's website (or from a friend who downloaded it from the website) or is otherwise not available for sale
And most of that last 10% is bad