Downloading Flying Music?

In article , "L.D."
writes:


There is also bittorrent, but there u have to have some knowledge of
computers.
Good for full albums. Emule and edonky work. Napster if u wanna pay, I
tunes
and a few others for paying. If u decide to keep something u should buy it
however


Someone said "You're using something of value without paying for
it". when speaking of downloading music.

When I listen to music on my car radio, I am using something of value
and I'm not paying for it. Oh! shame on me. Now if I want to record it
on cassette, 8 track, CD, or even get my note pad out and write it down
to read and hum along later, that is my business. Next they are going to
tell me if I loan my hammer to someone, he or me will have to pay for it
again because he is using something of value without paying for it. I
know a hammer isn't a song but is is still "something of value".



Your example is such a poor one that it is almost funny. First, the hammer you
loan out is something that you paid for to begin with. It is yours by right of
that payment and you can loan it or even give it away if you so desire. The
difference is that loaning the hammer to someone else denies you the use of the
hammer in the mean time and does not duplicate the hammer in the process. When
you download music, copy CD's and otherwise reproduce music without paying for
the right, you are stealing a potiential sale from the owner of the rights to
reproduce and sell the music (or software). When you listen to music on your
car radio, you are paying for that song by buying the products of the station
sponsors, who pay the stations, and the stations pay for playing the song. It
is not free.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

In article e.rogers.com,
"Doug" writes:


Not quite...........what you describe with the airplane analogy is indeed
theft, no question about it. What downloading music is like, is I go to the
airport and make a copy of your airplane and take it for a spin. At no time
was your airplane unavailable for your use.

Doug



Oh but you are paying for it. That radio station has paid advertisers who use
the station to get you to buy their products. You are paying the advertiser,
the advertiser pays the station, and the station pays a fee for every time they
play the song. The fee is dependent on the ratings of the station and varies
based on the number of rated listners.

It is NOT free.

Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

In article , Bob Fry
writes:


Sure you can. I justify it for this reason:


Yeah, yeah, yeah, everyone can find some justification for what they want to do
inspite of the moral and legal issues involved. Every bank robber is equally
justified in his own mind that its the only thing to do.

"To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for
limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their
respective writings and discoveries;" US Constitution, Article I,
Section 8, Clause 8.

The US Congress passed a law which Clinton signed which extends
copyright for some works to nearly 100 years! Does that sound like
"limited times to authors"? Hell no! Congress some time ago ruined
the original intent of copyright and patents, and electronic
reproduction of text, images, and sound has made the whole notion even
more meaningless. Why is it that the little guy is forced to follow
some law which big corporations forced upon the populace; but those
big corporations don't have to follow the Constitution?

I'm for the original intent of the Constitution: authors of works
should enjoy exclusive right to their works for a limited time; then
they're up for grabs. Especially in today's rapid-paced, instantly
connected world--far different than 200+ years ago--"limited time"
should be something between 5 to 10 years for most works, probably
only 3 to 5 years for software.



Spoken like someone who will never have to see the results of their work simply
taken because it can be done and justified because they think they have waited
long enough. Yet another example of situation ethics.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

DBlumel wrote:
Actually, its more like; you are a brilliant inventor and you just invented the
hammer, nothing else like it exists. You have a patent on it and you would like
to make a living from this new invention. You don't have the financial
resources to market or manufacture large quantities of hammers so you sell your
patent or provide a license to a large corporation who will pay you a royalty
for every hammer they sell on your and now also their behalf.

Would it be so simple. The music industry screws the artists as much as
they screw their customers. They are not in the business of exposing you
to as much new and interesting music as possible, or helping as many new
bands as possible get a chance to make it. They are in the business of
predictably selling their product. They only sell songs we know from
bands we like, or new songs from bands we like, or new bands that sound
like bands we like. It is all about control and predictability.

Do you travel around the country? Ever notice how you can hear a Doobie
Brothers song you haven't heard in a while (hey, they played china
Grove...cool) and them fly to CA and here the same song on the Classic
Rock station there, ditto in Denver. How'd that happen?

Playlists. Control. Money. They control what you hear with the radio
stations, see their videos, so you will buy predictably what they want.

I used Napster when it came out. I could give you a list 4 pages long of
bands I'd never heard of before, much less heard their music, that are
now on my A-list to listen to. It was awesome. All of the sudden, I had
access to any and all music out there. The barrier was down. Seeya,
record company.

Yep, it was stealing. I wonder of the members of Six Mile Bridge, a
celtic band I got turned onto through Napster, cared. What I want to
happen, is bands create web sites and sell their music directly to me,
with no music industry middle man. They are not needed. We need the
music industry giants like the Model T needed stables with fresh hay. I
can deal directly with the artist now, thank you very much.

Necessary reading if you have kids, and want to understand what the
music business is all about.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/cool/

And here's one from Courtney Love, of all people. Based on her tone,
she'd make a fine RAH participant. Testimony to congress.
http://dir.salon.com/tech/feature/20...ove/index.html

Bob
I'm not sure , but I think you are responding to the wrong person. Anyway,
my point isn't whether it's ethically or morally right or wrong to download
music , but that to call it 'theft' or 'stealing' is not correct. It 'isn't'
theft, it's copyright infringement and trying to equate that to theft is
wrong.

Doug


"RobertR237" wrote in message
...
In article
e.rogers.com,
"Doug" writes:


Not quite...........what you describe with the airplane analogy is indeed
theft, no question about it. What downloading music is like, is I go to
the
airport and make a copy of your airplane and take it for a spin. At no
time
was your airplane unavailable for your use.

Doug



Oh but you are paying for it. That radio station has paid advertisers who
use
the station to get you to buy their products. You are paying the
advertiser,
the advertiser pays the station, and the station pays a fee for every time
they
play the song. The fee is dependent on the ratings of the station and
varies
based on the number of rated listners.

It is NOT free.

Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

"L.D." wrote in message
...
CW9371 wrote:

Don't use Kazzaa,,,, they install spyware/adware on your system...




There is also bittorrent, but there u have to have some knowledge of
computers.
Good for full albums. Emule and edonky work. Napster if u wanna pay, I
tunes
and a few others for paying. If u decide to keep something u should buy
it
however


Someone said "You're using something of value without paying for
it". when speaking of downloading music.

When I listen to music on my car radio, I am using something of value
and I'm not paying for it. Oh! shame on me. Now if I want to record it
on cassette, 8 track, CD, or even get my note pad out and write it down
to read and hum along later, that is my business. Next they are going to
tell me if I loan my hammer to someone, he or me will have to pay for it
again because he is using something of value without paying for it. I
know a hammer isn't a song but is is still "something of value".


But the radio station IS paying for it. As for recording you are not getting
a digitly perfect copy as you are on a download. Hence it has never been
that popular of a way to get music and it certainly didn't replace the sales
of records.

As far as the hammer is concerned if you have a way that both you and the
person or 10,000,000 people you lend it to can use it at the same time I'm
sure they will come up with a licencing agreement for the product.

Let me ask you this. Is there a price that the record industry could set
that you would then say that "Hey, I don''t need to pirate music anymore."?

The guy that stole money from the bank down the street wasn't charged with
stealing either but he stole.




"Doug" wrote in message
e.rogers.com...
I hate to break it to you , but downloading music is 'not' stealing ,
regardless of what spin they put on it. No one has ever been charged with
theft by the RIAA. What it is , is copyright infringement, and that is
what
people 'are' being charged with.

Doug


"DBlumel" wrote

Sorry Jim, we live in a free market economy. If you don't want to buy
because
the price is too high in your estimation, that's your choice. But you
cannot
justify stealing because you think they charge too much. I suppose you
would
only mark your products up 10% before selling, If you had anything
someone
else
would want. So if you don't like a price in the store I guess you would
steal
that also. Or if you though they charged you too much last time you can
steal
it this time. With irrational thinking like that its no wonder our
country
is
going to hell in a hand basket.

Oh, look what I started. Shame on me.
--
Jim in NC

RobertR237 wrote:

In article , "L.D."
writes:



There is also bittorrent, but there u have to have some knowledge of


computers.


Good for full albums. Emule and edonky work. Napster if u wanna pay, I


tunes


and a few others for paying. If u decide to keep something u should buy it
however




Someone said "You're using something of value without paying for
it". when speaking of downloading music.

When I listen to music on my car radio, I am using something of value
and I'm not paying for it. Oh! shame on me. Now if I want to record it
on cassette, 8 track, CD, or even get my note pad out and write it down
to read and hum along later, that is my business. Next they are going to
tell me if I loan my hammer to someone, he or me will have to pay for it
again because he is using something of value without paying for it. I
know a hammer isn't a song but is is still "something of value".





Your example is such a poor one that it is almost funny. First, the hammer you
loan out is something that you paid for to begin with. It is yours by right of
that payment and you can loan it or even give it away if you so desire. The
difference is that loaning the hammer to someone else denies you the use of the
hammer in the mean time and does not duplicate the hammer in the process. When
you download music, copy CD's and otherwise reproduce music without paying for
the right, you are stealing a potiential sale from the owner of the rights to
reproduce and sell the music (or software). When you listen to music on your
car radio, you are paying for that song by buying the products of the station
sponsors, who pay the stations, and the stations pay for playing the song. It
is not free.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)




"you are stealing a potiential sale from the owner of the rights to
reproduce and sell the music"

Ok it may be a poor example, but if it is, so is yours. Substitute hammer for music in your example. Then I stole the right of the maker of that hammer of a potential sale.

OK I do say I shouldn't copy music and sell it. Neither should I copy that hammer and sell it. I have a pretty nice shop and I've copied several tools. Now if anyone is going to tell me I can't copy a tool in my shop for my use or a friend of mine, then our country is getting worse than a dictatorship. Same goes for music.

He's my take on your story...

YOU are a brilliant inventor and you just invented the
hammer, nothing else like it exists. You FILE a patent on it and you
would like
to make a living from this new invention. You don't have the financial
resources to market or manufacture large quantities of hammers so you
TRY TO sell your patent or provide a license to a large corporation
who will pay you a royalty for every hammer they sell on your and now
also their behalf. But instead, they tell you that they were already
working on a similar nail pounding product in their own R&D
department, and by the way, the 100 page NDA they asked you to sign
when you walked in the door said in 8 point type that anything you
show them they can use, and they weren't going to give you the time of
day until you signed it. In addition, when you protest, they say that
if you ever do try to produce your hammer, their council will be suing
YOU for infringing THEIR nail pounding device.

So why should consumers support a system in which they are net payers?
Most of the world, and indeed, these great United States didn't
enforce intellectual property law until they felt that it would be to
their own benefit to do so. This was the late 19th century when they
started, a good 100 years like how China currently views intellectual
property.

The 2nd and 3rd worlds should hold out on the intellectual property
issue, until we stop subsidizing our agriculture which is THEIR main
export.

I'm starting to wonder if their should be such a thing as ownership of
an idea, image, sound, etc. Nothing wrong with trying to hide it, but
if its in plain view...

The recent copyright extension to 100 years, custom tailored for
Disney, is just old fashioned corruption in politics. "We'll give you
a cut of the take if you extend the law protecting our monopoly."
There was just too much money at stake and too few voters that
understand the gravity of what was changed.

And the story of someone flying your plane... you were denied nothing
by the person having benefit, so why stop them, because you didn't
gain? Thats one of the reasons file trading works so well, people can
help other people and it costs them NOTHING to do so, the good feeling
is worth every "bit".

There was a musician interviewed by MTV about file trading. They
asked him "Don't you think file trading hurts music?" To which he
answered "No man, it just hurts money." Music will always be there,
promoters may not. Bands can have concerts, remember that? The live
performance? Promoters can go get real jobs that produce something
real instead of just selling hype.


(DBlumel) wrote in message
Actually, its more like; you are a brilliant inventor and you just invented the
hammer, nothing else like it exists. You have a patent on it and you would like
to make a living from this new invention. You don't have the financial
resources to market or manufacture large quantities of hammers so you sell your
patent or provide a license to a large corporation who will pay you a royalty
for every hammer they sell on your and now also their behalf. For a while it
provided a good and steady income for you. You quit your old job as a factory
worker and are working full time to develop other great ideas. However the
money stream has slowed and you haven't got any of your other new ideas ready
and you might have to try to get your old job back. Many early customers have
bought one of your hammers used and liked them so much they have now made
identical molds from the originals and are now giving them away for free to
anyone and everyone they know. Your dream of a secure income is quickly fading.