What is your opinion on downloading (normally bought) music, programs, etc. for free?
What is your opinion on downloading (normally bought) music, programs, etc. for free?
-when they come for me, I'll be gone-
8.22.09 - Epicenter//Pomona Fairplex
2.23.11 - A Thousand Suns World Tour//Staples Center
9.10.12 - Honda Civic Tour//Cricket Wireless Amphitheatre
File Sharers Buy More
Well, according to that they do.
alsoSource: Communications & Strategies
Van Eijk's conclusions appear in a recent paper for the journal Communications & Strategies (PDF), one coauthored with Joost Poort and Paul Rutten. While van Eijk doesn't deny that specific industries (like recorded music) have been in decline, he paints a more complicated picture of the content industries as a whole.
For instance, Sweden has long been regarded as a worldwide piracy hub—it's home to The Pirate Bay, the VPN IPRedator, and it sent a member of the Pirate Party to the European Parliament. But van Eijk draws on 2009 research showing that "total revenues [in Sweden] from recorded music, live concerts and collecting societies remained roughly stable between 2000 and 2008."
That doesn't help the recording industry, however, unless music labels get a cut of revenues from live music and merchandise. That's exactly what has started to happen via so-called "360 deals" over the last few years, where labels will invest in recording and promotion budgets for bands, but only when they benefit from all parts of the band's revenue stream.
Van Eijk sees this as a necessary business model change in response to file-sharing, but he argues that far more innovation is needed. And he blasts the music industry in particular for acting out of fear. Labels tried to "stem the tide of unlicensed music file sharing with their conservative strategy of abstaining from innovation, promoting legal measures against supposed offences, and digital rights management," he wrote.
"This strategy resulted in the current backlash, providing space for a new entrant establishing a major brand in the online music business: Apple's iTunes. Reinvention of the business model looks like the only way out for the traditional players in the music industry."
If you attend music industry conferences, you never have wait long for someone to say that we have entered an age in which people are unwilling to pay for content; that is, traditional business models are dead.
Van Eijk still sees life left in direct content sales, but he notes that current prices are far out of line with consumer expectations. When file-sharers were surveyed about what a "reasonable" price would be for an album, a movie, and a video game, the answers were surprising. A full 75 percent of file-sharers thought €8 was appropriate for an album—not too far off from current pricing
and don't forget this old gem
So far it's only been about albums and such but what about hardware.
What did Sony have to say about it at least?
They admit it helps yet the still scrutinize it. It's kind of unfathomable, really...“It sometimes fuels the growth of hardware sales, but on balance we are not happy about it,”
and book sales (albeit this is a little unfair considering it's only one author. But on the other hand he is a multi million dollar author.
You can also read further into this debate as you head over to http://freeratio.org/showthread.php?...t=file+sharing
The multi-million selling author Paulo Coelho has demonstrated that online book piracy has increased sales of his books in hard copy.
One of Coelho's fans posted a Russian translation of one of his novels online and sales of his books increased from 3,000 to 100,000 to 1m in three years, claims a report in The Guardian.
"This happened in English, in Norwegian, in Japanese and Serbian," Coelho said. "Now when the book is released in hard copy, the sales are spectacular."
However, Coelho ran into a spot of bother with his US publisher, HarperCollins, when the company's ex-boss Jane Friedman pulled him up on a supposedly unauthorised version of one of his books that the author had linked to from his own website.
The problem? The unauthorised version was found to contain Coelho's own author's notes!
Not digital versus print
A workable compromise was reached between the author and his publisher and readers can now read a different Coelho novel each month for free via HarperCollin's online reader.
While Coelho is fully aware of the possibility of new technologies (he Twitters, he blogs, he encourages his readers to submit their thoughts on developing stories – or their pictures to Flickr) The Guardian notes that "he still believes in print."
The key here is that this: "isn't a matter of print v digital. It's a question of what comes when you add digital to print.
"What does it bring him? "It gives me a lot of joy," he said, "because writing is something you do alone."
Read more: http://www.techradar.com/news/intern...#ixzz0uPi6cV8G
I will download an album to know what I'm getting myself into. If I end up digging it, I'll purchase it.
There are a great deal of artists that I would've never discovered without piracy.
I am not Mike Shinoda.
It's an arbitrary thing to me. If something means a lot to me, if I think something's really good, I'll inevitably pay money for it. That's what it comes down to for me, what it should always come down to; if I feel it's worth my money, then I'll pay money.
Last month, I bought a physical copy of an album, one of my favourites ever, that I discovered by illegally downloading MP3's five years ago.
I might download or stream something that I find I don't like at all, and, then, I'd obviously be very thankful that I didn't waste my money buying it.
Reznor has the right idea offering his recent releases for free download and letting his fans judge whether it's worth paying money for.
Okay, interesting views, everyone! (By the way, thanks for the links Jesse. Quite interesting!)
Here's my opinion on the whole thing:
I think listening to a couple of songs from an album (be it by YouTube or a download) that you're interested is fine. If you really enjoy it, I think you should buy the songs and support the artist. Same goes with software. Most companies offer free trials of whatever program you want. Get the trial, and buy the full version if you like it. And yes, while downloads may help sales, they still take money away one way or the other.
So yeah, call me hypocritical...
There are quite a few artists, Linkin Park included, that don't care if their albums are pirated. They understand the business aspect of being musicians today, but still want to expand their audience and get their music out to the masses. In a perfect world, we'd be sensitive to what the artists want.
But, in the real world, you've got kids going to prison for this. Not a 5 star resort prison. A federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison. For what? Something that takes just a few minutes to download?
Yeah, downloading things you didn't pay for can in some instances be piracy, but governments and corporations need to get the stick out of their ass and address the issue by talking to the people who do the downloading, rather than acting butthurt.
i agree with all of you, who download stuff and then buy it when they think it's worth the money... i just find that fair, cause i don't want to spend nearly 20€ on an album that sucks ass. sorry, but i don't have a gold mine at home (unfortunately^^). so i'm downloading some songs before buying a cd. i'll never hesitate to spend my money on the bands/music i really love though.
also i'm not buying whole albums, when i only like one song...
I don't buy an artist album because I have heard a couple of songs and "liked it". If I have the money, then why no contribute to the cause? It also depends which artist though (and this might seem ignorant) but I'm not going to go to best buy and walmart to buy a CD from Miley Cirus or Britney Spears; they already have other 20 million people do that for me. I rather buy something from someone who I think it's worth it, and that I want for them to grow/nurish in the business. Whatever I can't afford, I download it.
They said that when they were trying to make a name for themselves and never said it in relation to any studio album. It's a different story when they're signed to a major label unfortunately. Maybe they don't really mind, I don't know I'm not LP, but if it was me, I'd hate that I worked so hard an album and it leaks early and people get to download it before they have a chance to buy it and experience it as it was intended, which unfortunately, seems to be the case nowadays.
As for music piracy, yes, I download music. A lot. I'm not exactly proud of it, but that hasn't stopped me. On the flipside, downloading has exposed me to bands and artists I otherwise would've ignored. Shit, I wouldn't listen to three quarters of the bands I do now had I not had the opportunity to sample their music beforehand.
And, like Minus, if I like what I hear from an artist, I'll happily plunk down the cash for their music.
People Dont Wanna Pay For C.D's
Now Every Other House Holds Got P.C's,
They Download On Mp3's,
People Please Be Reasonable (Yeah)
How Am I Gonna Make My G's,
If You Got My Album Before The Release,
The Qualitys Rubbish And There Aint No Sleaves,
Do You Deem That Feesable?
IMO Sway is the best UK rapper out there at the moment!
Castle of Glass
If I do like an artist, then yes I would buy it, and I'm willing to do the same for all other artirts that suck just because... they still gotta pay bills; its their job regardless & I can always give it to someone else who wants it. But if I don't have the money for the people that I DONT like then yeah I will highly download it
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)