You are viewing an archive of the old fxhome.com forums. The community has since moved to hitfilm.com.

Music file swappers sued!!!

Posted: Tue, 9th Sep 2003, 3:34am

Post 1 of 35

cantaclaro

Force: 2036 | Joined: 24th Oct 2001 | Posts: 875

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

I saw this and found it rather funny...check it out...the best part is the amnesty program that they are offering to all offenders...

Cary Sherman: "We're willing to hold out our version of an olive branch"

http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/internet/09/08/music.downloading/index.html

This whole situation is ridiculous...and they are about to piss a bunch of hackers off...Tell me what you think...

Canta unsure
Posted: Tue, 9th Sep 2003, 10:42am

Post 2 of 35

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Why is it ridiculous? They're acting against people who are making thousands of songs illegally available, as is not only their right but their responsibility.

There's whole other side issues here of course, such as the fact that the music industry needs to work out a sensible way of embracing the internet rather than running away from it. But that's another debate entirely.

Arresting these guys is no different from arresting the dodgy geezer down the local market who sells crappy VHS copies of movies. It's all theft of material at some point down the line.
Posted: Tue, 9th Sep 2003, 11:00am

Post 3 of 35

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

True. Making a file available for others to download or downloading them yourself is as illegal and wrong as if you'd go into a store and steal something there.

Problem is, people are not aware of this. And "everyone" does it.



If I'd be in charge, I would make a squad randomly going from door to door with a warrant and check peoples harddisks. And if they have something illegal, wich they will MOST probably have, I'd make em pay.

Fortunately I'm not in charge... wink
Posted: Tue, 9th Sep 2003, 11:05am

Post 4 of 35

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Sollthar wrote:

If I'd be in charge, I would make a squad randomly going from door to door with a warrant and check peoples harddisks. And if they have something illegal, wich they will MOST probably have, I'd make em pay.
Why do I get the feeling that would involve extreme violence?
Posted: Tue, 9th Sep 2003, 11:06am

Post 5 of 35

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Because you watch too many films? wink
Posted: Tue, 9th Sep 2003, 11:18am

Post 6 of 35

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Too many of your films, perhaps. wink
Posted: Tue, 9th Sep 2003, 11:28am

Post 7 of 35

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Heh, most probably... smile



Maybe I should change "make em pay!" to "get them to financially redeem the economical damage caused by their misanderstanding of the law without usage of unappropriate force." biggrin
Posted: Tue, 9th Sep 2003, 11:35am

Post 8 of 35

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Hm, better be careful. Sidewinder might attack you for being politically correct. razz
Posted: Tue, 9th Sep 2003, 11:36am

Post 9 of 35

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Argh... You can't do it right these days.... smile
Posted: Tue, 9th Sep 2003, 11:42am

Post 10 of 35

b4uask30male

Force: 5619 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2002 | Posts: 3497

Windows User

Gold Member

an easy way to stop the vhs down the local market is to release the films in each country at the same time, this would stop such things as dvd region 1 coming out in the states before the UK even gets it on the cinema.

a little forward thinking on the music side might not hurt, lower the price of discs ? Don't let sony make disc to disc machines or mp3 players.
don't pay the artist so much, the music companies say they will go under because of the internet, just pay the artists a normal amount, they don't need millions.

Then I think people would respect the music industry and feel happy about buying disc's.
Posted: Tue, 9th Sep 2003, 12:51pm

Post 11 of 35

Kid

Force: 4177 | Joined: 1st Apr 2001 | Posts: 1876

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

Some people here (me glances at Tarn) are quick to take the side of music distributers and say that people are stealing music without really thinking about why.

The music industry are mainly the distributers of the product who are making the money, charging huge amounts of the profit when their cost of distribution has been coming down and down, and now due to the internet they find themselves unnecesary. The fact that they get almost all the money you pay for doing practically nothing is wrong and society if not the law should recognise that.

If prices came down to a fair price and the money actually went to the artists and promoters there would be a lot less piracy about. The RIAA know full well that they arn't really needed which is why they are kicking up all this fuss to try and make the internet distribution methods look bad and make people instantly think that not paying extortionate amounts in shops is morally wrong.
Posted: Tue, 9th Sep 2003, 12:54pm

Post 12 of 35

cantaclaro

Force: 2036 | Joined: 24th Oct 2001 | Posts: 875

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

The reason that I find it funny is because the RIAA thinks that they have the power to search out and destroy all of the evil doers that are depriving their millionaire artists of lost revenue...I don't download music myself, I use the Apple Music Store, but I do believe that try as they might...the RIAA will soon find out that all of their efforts are in vain...It is a good idea, but they are just gonna piss more people off rather than fix the problem...So they catch a few guys without firewalls...they are gonna mess with the wrong guy one of these times and everybody is gonna regret it...If they can find you, you can find them.

Canta unsure
Posted: Tue, 9th Sep 2003, 12:57pm

Post 13 of 35

cantaclaro

Force: 2036 | Joined: 24th Oct 2001 | Posts: 875

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Well put Kid...music is extremely expensive in the stores...$20 for a crappy album with 2 good songs on it isn't fair to the consumer either...Just because they are the ones doing the suing doesn't make them correct...

Canta unsure
Posted: Tue, 9th Sep 2003, 12:59pm

Post 14 of 35

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Did you actually read my post kid? I said the music industry needs to sort itself out, because at the moment they have it all wrong.

However, that doesn't change the fact that distributing music like this is illegal. Rather than me coming down on the music industry's side, I'd say it's more-often-than-not you coming down on the pirates' side, without thinking about the consequences.

Sure, the music industry is a big bloated mess than is way behind the times. But as I said in my post, that's an entirely separate debate.
Posted: Tue, 9th Sep 2003, 1:02pm

Post 15 of 35

Kid

Force: 4177 | Joined: 1st Apr 2001 | Posts: 1876

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

Rating: +1

Ah yeah but you are saying it is their duty to follow the law and chase traders. Well I am saying it is our duty to question the law when it no longer reflects right and wrong rather than just blindly following it.
Posted: Tue, 9th Sep 2003, 1:04pm

Post 16 of 35

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

But the law isn't the issue here. The law is fine - it's the music industry that needs to get a grip and sort themselves out.

If I made an album, then found a bunch of people distributing it via mp3 on the internet, I'd be pretty damn pissed off. Simple as that really.
Posted: Tue, 9th Sep 2003, 1:12pm

Post 17 of 35

er-no

Force: 9531 | Joined: 24th Sep 2002 | Posts: 3964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

'Laws are based on act utilitarian theories of ethics, they are not always right but form to produce the better outcome in the greater number.'

Anyways, in the case of music its the industry that is hurting itself. p2p will not stop because of the way its evolved. The music industry need to recognise that, lower prices and shut the hell up.
Posted: Tue, 9th Sep 2003, 1:24pm

Post 18 of 35

Kid

Force: 4177 | Joined: 1st Apr 2001 | Posts: 1876

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

Yeah but laws need to change with the times and copyright law being pretty old applys well to computers only at first glance. They need to be revised sensibly in a way that protects individuals and not just the big companies with the money like the American's DMCA.

Now I am off to York to kill a welshman after 10pm. razz
Posted: Tue, 9th Sep 2003, 1:33pm

Post 19 of 35

otteypm

Force: 1494 | Joined: 29th Mar 2001 | Posts: 775

Windows User

Gold Member

Now I am off to York to kill a welshman after 10pm
You can do that In my hometown too, but only within the town walls, and only if you use a longbow. You might want to check on the local weapons restrictions... crazy
Posted: Tue, 9th Sep 2003, 3:21pm

Post 20 of 35

Coldfuse

Force: 240 | Joined: 29th Jun 2003 | Posts: 428

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

Well this is an issue that many people find an on going problem. and so far the only people i have heard speak out are people that have a lifestyle of 1000's of pounds a day. And are complaing, if u actually look. MANY artist agree with the way of the internet. of course it cant be a lasting moment. otherwise the industry will go down.

Like most people, i do use such programs. Im not afriad to say it or hide from the truth. People who speak out against it, are probably being hipacritical. because im sure u use it too. Just to affraid to admit it. What i find very funny. is how the music industiry is havnig a go at us, but the people who supply the programs them selfs have spyware, which allows other compaines to target u. i mean its a constent cosmipolitan money making system.

I chose to d/l music not because i dont know, the problem. but the fact that it is very hard for me to get the music i like. if there was resources for my music tastes, then i would buy them fine off. the only way i can get music is by going to that country say japan and buying it there. also i get pissed off, even though i still buy albums and only d/l singles ive been cheated for a number of years now for overly priced music. i mean when a single comes out, on cd the first week its £2.99 if not £3.99 give it a week later the thing is like £10.99 i mean whats with that? Untill the music industry will sort it self out, and make it able for me to obtain music then i shall obide, but if i cant allocate a piece of music that is my onle way. I will surely back and pay someone for there music. I am in a band and i wouldnt mind people d/l my music. i think people forget what music is about. When u first started off u never got paid for nothing. now people have these big life styles and cant support it. I mean many people buy mecendise and go to gigs. well thats my opinion on it
Posted: Tue, 9th Sep 2003, 7:09pm

Post 21 of 35

Spanish Prisoner

Force: 310 | Joined: 21st Aug 2003 | Posts: 378

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

Sollthar wrote:


...


If I'd be in charge, I would make a squad randomly going from door to door with a warrant and check peoples harddisks. And if they have something illegal, wich they will MOST probably have, I'd make em pay.

Fortunately I'm not in charge... wink
well the problem is you don't get a warrant that easy.
Posted: Wed, 10th Sep 2003, 2:12am

Post 22 of 35

wdy

Force: 1700 | Joined: 30th Dec 2002 | Posts: 1258

CompositeLab Lite User EffectsLab Lite User MacOS User

Gold Member

I see that apples product iTunes is having an archive of individual songs for mac users that you can download for $1.00 per song. We just need to wait for a windows platform. Chances are whoever creates such software might just make "lots" of money. I'd definately download individual songs for $1.00. Just think if one of us designed a program like iTunes for selling music we might be ritch...ohhhh the feeling smile Ofcourse the money paid for the songs wouldn't goto the owner of the software, but with the ads that the software uses such as something similiar to Kazaa you'd make some good moola only wish I knew programming.
Posted: Wed, 10th Sep 2003, 2:41am

Post 23 of 35

sfbmovieco

Force: 2354 | Joined: 19th Mar 2002 | Posts: 1552

VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Rating: +1

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=495&ncid=1776&e=3&u=/ap/downloading_music


Come on here. They just sued a 12 year old girl. What a bunch of punks...
Posted: Wed, 10th Sep 2003, 2:50am

Post 24 of 35

Coldfuse

Force: 240 | Joined: 29th Jun 2003 | Posts: 428

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

Now that is getting very out of hand. see if anything, i would expect an increase of d/ling now just because to get back at them. I mean they paid 29.99, they shouldnt be sued. the company charging them to d/l illegal music should be sued. thats the problem.

ahh dear whats the world coming to...
Posted: Wed, 10th Sep 2003, 7:27am

Post 25 of 35

b4uask30male

Force: 5619 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2002 | Posts: 3497

Windows User

Gold Member

her mother agreed Tuesday to pay $2,000 to settle the lawsuit

Looks like Britney now has a spare $2.000 sad



I read in a magazine the M. Jackson agrees that court action is wrong, he said " How can you take the fans to court, if you don't have fan's your nothing"
Posted: Sat, 13th Sep 2003, 5:56am

Post 26 of 35

Ice_Man

Force: 1390 | Joined: 26th Nov 2002 | Posts: 1208

Windows User

Gold Member

Tarn wrote:

If I made an album, then found a bunch of people distributing it via mp3 on the internet, I'd be pretty damn pissed off. Simple as that really.
don't be pissed, be flattered. they liked it enough to share with other people. that's a good thing.


if even 50% of musical artists can speak truthfully when they claim that they're doing this to express themselves as individuals, and not to sell out, then we should have no freaking problems.


I personally don't see why so many people are uptight about music sharing being an illegal practice.
Going 5 miles an hour over the speed limit is illegal, and everyone does that on a rather regular basis
Jay-Walking (crossing a street at any location other than an officially labeled crosswalk) is illegal, and everyone has done that at some point or another
Posted: Sat, 13th Sep 2003, 5:58am

Post 27 of 35

raider

Force: 774 | Joined: 25th Mar 2002 | Posts: 360

Windows User

Gold Member

It really is a touchy subject; quite the quandry but here's my take - I wrote this back when Napster was in litigation:

“Your work is mine!” from the November – December 2000 issue of Technology Review magazine is a torrential abasement of the Napster concept. The author accuses Napster and similar Web services of unethical sharing of data at the producer’s expense. It seems rather clear, however, that this is all about Napster. I disagree with the author, Michael Dertouzos, and feel as if he needed a controversial topic in a hurry. The overall gist of the article leads me to believe he has no experience with Napster other than hearsay.
He begins the article by focusing on the issue of work involved versus a final product. The value of all research, planning, creative thoughts, and legwork is something that someone should be compensated for. The final product pales in comparison to the amount of work that went into it – be it a song or a piece of furniture. This concept makes perfect sense. The work to put anything together whether it’s tangible or audible should be compensatory to the originator.
The part where it gets discombobulated is when he writes, “…more than half of human work in the industrial world will no longer be valued!” I call it free advertising. If someone else hears the music you downloaded, it may send him or her right to the CD shop asking for it. There’s a vast majority of people out there who don’t have a computer much less the Internet. There are other ways to get music. Should we stop the production of cassette recorders? The radio stations are publicly airing this music for the taking. Are we going to have to start paying radio taxes to receive this blatant dissemination? Not to mention the market on home stereos with built in CD recorders.
The author then has the audacity to compare downloading music off of Napster to stealing a chair. First of all you’d have to steal the chair piece by piece – one leg at a time, the seat, the back, and finally the cloth to get the equivalent of a CD. Now let’s say each robbery attempt the cops would try to interfere – some nights you’d even have to go home to try again another time. Any Napster user would know exactly what this means – transfer interruption.
The mostly valid reasons that Napster users give to justify their practice is called “baloney” by Mr. Dertouzos. Although there probably isn’t a plethora of Mel Torme or Sinatra I’m sure the author would find something on Napster to want to hear more or want some original products by the newfound artist. True supporters and fans of a group will want to buy an original CD. Most of today’s CDs have “extra stuff” such as pics of the band, screensavers, hyperlinks, etc.
In conclusion, the author does offer a feasible solution. He suggests that we download directly from the artists. They could have their songs on a personal web page and charge a fee for the download or a subscription to exclusive access areas. I really don’t believe the music artists are seeing red in their budgets just because of the download site. It is still illegal for K-mart to sell pirated discs. Napster is being made to employ a small subscription fee for the valuable service because of the controversial lawsuit brought up by Metallica. Wonder if all the other artists are unaware of this wrongdoing?
I take advantage of the Napster service and found this article offensive. As if I had to make feeble justifications to use the ever-common procedure of downloading. I wouldn’t think twice when downloading upgrades or graphic enhancements to my computer. The same was true with Napster. I just ordered a slew of CDs from a mail order company. The music from Napster is a great way to sample before buying just as you might with utility or gaming programs. Hey Mike, I think I’m going to make several photocopies of your article and let my friends read it for free (just as they might in a hospital waiting room) – hope you’ll be able to pay your mortgage this month.

I hear a lot of users not having some of the high-end software. What a waste of talent. Try it out, learn it, get good at it; master it! When you start making money from it – then buy it, by all means. Most individuals don’t have a corporate budget. The software was intended, I believe, for business and students. You owe the world your creativity.
Posted: Sat, 13th Sep 2003, 10:49am

Post 28 of 35

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Ice_Man wrote:

Tarn wrote:

If I made an album, then found a bunch of people distributing it via mp3 on the internet, I'd be pretty damn pissed off. Simple as that really.
don't be pissed, be flattered. they liked it enough to share with other people. that's a good thing.
Hang on, i'm supposed to be pleased that somebody is copying my work without permission?

If I was an amateur, or just doing it for fun, then sure. But if you make a living out of music/writing/etc, and people start illegally distributing your work it can severely cripple you. Most artists barely make enough money to live as it is, if they start losing out to pirates it becomes even more difficult.

So you're saying we should be pleased when people try to pirate AlamDV, because it means it's popular? Riiiight.... Sorry, your point of view is great from an idealistic point of view, but if you're trying to make a living at this stuff, it doesn't really have any relevance.

Last edited Sat, 13th Sep 2003, 11:11am; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Sat, 13th Sep 2003, 11:06am

Post 29 of 35

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Don't get confused just because some of the most known artists make millions, as b4 mentioned earlier. Fact is, that isn't the truth.

The truth ist, that from 100 artists, 1 earns too much and 99 earn too little.
Posted: Sat, 13th Sep 2003, 11:53am

Post 30 of 35

b4uask30male

Force: 5619 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2002 | Posts: 3497

Windows User

Gold Member

So then the music companies are still to blame.

The truth ist, that from 100 artists, 1 earns too much and 99 earn too little.

Then split it fairly.
Posted: Sat, 13th Sep 2003, 12:02pm

Post 31 of 35

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

You make that sound really easy...
Posted: Sat, 13th Sep 2003, 12:05pm

Post 32 of 35

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

b4uask30male wrote:

So then the music companies are still to blame.

The truth ist, that from 100 artists, 1 earns too much and 99 earn too little.

Then split it fairly.
You could probably argue it is split 'fairly', if you compare the huge sales of Britney Spears et al with the relatively tiny sales of Random Artist #543.

The entertainment industries reward success with money. There's always a select few that sell an inordinate amount of records/ticket sales/etc, and they always receive an inordinate salary in return.

It's not a good system, but it's probably inevitable.
Posted: Sat, 13th Sep 2003, 12:53pm

Post 33 of 35

b4uask30male

Force: 5619 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2002 | Posts: 3497

Windows User

Gold Member

I do agree with you guys, but from the public's view why should we have to pay the music companies large amounts of money for CD's because they have to pay a high amount to 1 artist.
I bet they would sell more CD's priced at £5 and then put the pirates out of bussiness.

I was going to go on about the price of DVD's, such as a vhs is £12.99 and the same film on DVD is £17.99 and the DVD DOES cost less to make, produce, store and transport than VHS.

GREED I guess, and thus pirates will be around to use that as their advantage. confused
Posted: Sat, 13th Sep 2003, 1:43pm

Post 34 of 35

Ice_Man

Force: 1390 | Joined: 26th Nov 2002 | Posts: 1208

Windows User

Gold Member

I don't hold that the same is true for software, or even for movies, but that is still how I feel about music


if your art is popular enough to be spread freely among a few pirateers, then it's plenty popular enough to sell to make up for it.
and if you're worried about the royaltes from a few sales, then you're charging too much: record companies and artists don't get a whole lot from each individual sale. it's the touring circuit where artists make all their mad crazy cash.

and it seems that everyone here agrees that the problem in the whole system lies around the record companies, yes? if so, THEY should be the ones to be sorted out. not the poor 12 year old girl who wanted to preview Christina Aguilara's latest 'hit' before she had mommy buy the cd
Posted: Sat, 13th Sep 2003, 1:44pm

Post 35 of 35

Kid

Force: 4177 | Joined: 1st Apr 2001 | Posts: 1876

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

We also seem to be missing the point that only a tiny fraction of profits from music sales goes to artists at all. Even the rich ones. Most of it goes to the fat cats at the record company.

(I wrote that before Iceman made his latest post btw)