Ok, the connection is taking something without permission under the excuse that it's out of your financial reach. It's the same principle, although you can get in more trouble if you nick a FerarriCymbalSplittingSkinbasher wrote:First of all, the Ferrari/Bay analogy is way off base. That's a rather expensive ride & Mr. Bay might be somewhat hard to get ahold of. I don't see the connection there.
Well, if you download something from an artist that is bound to such a label that gives the artist next to nothing of each purchase, aren't you doubly hurting that artist by downloading? It won't help change the labels, that's for sure. Matter of fact, they start to compensate for their losses and the price of cd's will only go up, so that's defenitly not the desired effect.Secondly, you know as well as I do that this whole music business industry is a big mess, & I'm not blaming it all on them, but imo, they're a HUGE part of the problem. Why have some artists & bands started their own labels? Oh, I forgot, it's because the major labels are so easy to work with & they give the artist 75% of the earnings, right? Do you think that greed by the labels might be a factor here? Hmmmm!
You know, with each purchase you did, being it a T-shirt, Concert ticket or whatever, you're buying just that. You are not saving credits, although a lot of people seem to think so. That's just not how the Real World (tm) works.As for me, I don't have the "I don't care attitude," I care very much & if you seen my music collection of "legal" purchases, you'd probably crap yourself. Oh yeah, & all of my "legally purchased" concert ticket stubs, posters, t-shirts etc...I give a tremendous amount to the music industry, both in time & money, & have done so for almost 30 years. Not 3 years, 30 years.
I've spend litterally tens of thousands of dollars at the gas station over the last couple of years. And I often buy extra stuff when I go fill my gas tank, such as smokes or the occasional DVD etc. Whatcha think, after supporting them with so much dough (btw, it's 1.40 Euro per Litre in holland right now), perhaps I should fill my tank without paying today? It's not that shell isn't greedy or anything.....
Because IMHO, when you start downloading stuff you aren't supposed to download, you're not supporting the artist.I agree that another part of the problem is also those that don't ever support the bands & artists that they like, & they EXPECT EVERYTHING for free, without ever giving back in return. As long as you truly support the bands & artists you like, why is there a problem?
And if a contemerary artists wants to do that, he can choose so. Just as he can choose not to. THere are countless artists who do, just go check your favorite mp3.com like site.You know, we were talking about a guy like Robert Johnson on another thread, & I know that's a whole different era, but a guy like that would probably have sold his soul to the devil a second time to have the resources available to him that artists have today. RJ travelled more in his time than Lonnie Johnson, Charley Patton & Blind Lemon Jefferson COMBINED! And why? Because he wanted to SHARE his music with people, & I doubt if he ever became extremely wealthy from it.
No, not everone is (and I don't imply you are). But the majority is. It's similar to software. The ammount of shared software and cracked software is huge.I definitely contribute to helping my fav bands & artists earn a living & live the lifestyle(s) that they do, & if people like me have to suffer because of all of the people that don't support them & expect free handouts all across the board, that's not only very unfair, its a damn shame too, imo. Every single person that uses p2p formats is not a low-life, scum of the earth cockroach that never buys anything, quite the contrary I'd say.
You can't generalize a statement like that, because a good ammount of music is legally available elsewhere.I'm hoping that some of you don't find these statements to reflect your true feelings:
"If you don't purchase music, you therefore forfeit any rights that you may have to listen to that particular music."
"Music should only be listened to, &/or be in the possession of those that can afford to purchase it."
I'm not sure what you mean with that last part ' and only for yourself' , but, in general, yes. Sorry. There are tons of things I think I'm entitled to have, but can't afford. But I don't go about obtaining it illigally. When I was in school and cash-less (ol' grandpa Jeroen here ), I had to save up for my favorite CD's. And if you really want a particular CD, it's not an ammount that's the end of the world. Especially for an Artist such as Vai. I mean, I paid the equivelent of 12 Euro's for a full length double DVD (Astoria). I can't even buy a bad B movie here for that ammount."If you can't afford to purchase a particular cd, then you don't deserve to to listen to that cd until you can afford to purchase it for yourself, and ONLY for yourself."
Anyway, all IMHO.