Is it hypocritical?

[Profpointy]

although I'm rather in the theft-sceptic camp I am perfectly happy to pay a reasonaable amount for music. Classical music is now ridiculoualy cheap with box sets of often outstanding back catalogue stuff, or collections of newer stuff for that matter being such bargains it would simply be churlish to rip them off. I am glad to feed some dosh into the pockets of musicians - and I suspect once you're away from the very biggest names (in Classical) they're not on huge money. I listed free on radio 3, but anything any good - well that's another fiver in the metaphorical passed hat and and a cd is bought.

Now pop music £10+ for a CD selling in millions - not so moved by bleatings about piracy killing music, or is it killing kittens. Don't listen to much non-classical anyway

 

[400bhp]

In what way?

Brits very much "fair play", whereas other countries "live and let live".

 

[Fnaar]

Well, I see it as theft... the royalties I get for books wot I wrote have halved over the last 2 years, as one in particular is available in so many pdf versions all over t'interweb. Each one downloaded potentially costs me about 80p, So yes, I see that as theft.

 

[Dan B]

Well, I see it as theft... the royalties I get for books wot I wrote have halved over the last 2 years, as one in particular is available in so many pdf versions all over t'interweb. Each one downloaded potentially costs me about 80p, So yes, I see that as theft.

So if the number of downloads were to exceed the number sold, would you have to give back 80p * the difference?

 

[Dan B]

although I'm rather in the theft-sceptic camp I am perfectly happy to pay a reasonaable amount for music.

Likewise, providing I can obtain it in a format I want and without ridiculous "you don't own it, we can have it back off you if we change our mind" licensing. In practice this means I'm practically the only person I know still buying CDs instead of iGoogle Tunazon

 

[Shut Up Legs]

This thread is a perfect demonstration of why lawyers are (a) paid obscene salaries and (b) aren't too popular.

 

[Dan B]

This thread is a perfect demonstration of why lawyers are (a) paid obscene salaries and (b) aren't too popular.

You mean, because they are the ones pointing out that the rest of us haven't really thought it through and there's more to consider than the "simple" analogies we'd like to believe apply?

You're probably right - nobody likes a clever cogs

 

[Andrew_P]

I download from Russian sites that look 100% legit, just so I can claim naivety and that I pay for my music. I have now blown my cover.

 

[Fnaar]

So if the number of downloads were to exceed the number sold, would you have to give back 80p * the difference?

Nope... I get money for each one sold, so do the publishers (more than me ). They used to chase up download sites, now they don't bother, as there are too many. Most of them seem to be based in Russia.

 

[Vapin' Joe]

Remember too that by illegally downloading music and films you are also defrauding HMRC, who are deprived of their whack.

 

[Booyaa]

Brits very much "fair play", whereas other countries "live and let live".

Ah right. Thanks.

 

[Pat "5mph"]

Is there a difference in stealing someone's bike and stealing someone's digital content?

Yes there is, obviously: still, both are illegal.
Does not mean commiserating someone on their bike loss and downloading illegally is hypocritical. One may relate strongly to a bike loss on a bike forum, but not to the loss of a work of creativity, probably it's the other way round on an artists forum.
I did not realize people do still download illegally, it's so cheap to download stuff nowadays.
I used to, years ago before you couldn't buy the music of my favorite Italian and Greek singers in the UK, in mp3 format, I think there was some copyright issue at the time. I remember deleting Itunes from my computer because it wouldn't let me buy anything!
Also in the past, I have downloaded very old stuff not available to buy in hard copy anymore, still, I had bought most of it before moving here, left it behind or lost it.
Now that all one can wish for is available to download legit why break the law?

 

[400bhp]

Remember too that by illegally downloading music and films you are also defrauding HMRC, who are deprived of their whack.

Yeah, like when you buy off Amazon.

 

[raleighnut]

Likewise, providing I can obtain it in a format I want and without ridiculous "you don't own it, we can have it back off you if we change our mind" licensing. In practice this means I'm practically the only person I know still buying CDs instead of iGoogle Tunazon

Never downloaded a song, all the music I play on my HiFi is either on LP or CD. The sound quality of 'downloads' is abysmal if what people have played me on their set-ups is anything to go by but I suppose if 'streaming' or listening on an i-player is how you consume music then you'll never hear the difference (a bit like Bang & Olafson really, looks good but sounds pants)

 

[swee'pea99]

It's an interesting poll really, in that there are only two options, neither of which is correct.

It isn't theft plain and simple.Theft leaves the original owner without his property. But nor is it victimless. Clearly the people whose livelihood comes from selling their creativity lose out if people can access their creativity without paying for it.

I suspect the bottom line is that just as home taping didn't in the end kill music, nor will illegal downloading. Nor, it seems safe to assume, will efforts to prevent it succeed. Music, and film, and other creative media, will just have to adapt to a new reality. My guess is, they will.