OnePlus 5 review
Why don't they ban TVs, Radio, cassette recorders, CDRW Drives, Floppys, Camereas........ oh well you get the point
Agree totally with you DieSse. Also consider banning Radio's and PC's as well as MP3 players etc etc...
My only gripe with P2P are the number of viruses under the description of legitimate files.
Oh and the spyware associated with some programs...(;o)))
But if the record companys developed a site where you payed a resonable amount per song and no monthly subscription i would pay. Especially as you are garanteed a good quality download and no viruses and spyware.
What SteeveScotland says is very true I think a lot of people would go along with that Idea, a reasonable price per download I would certainly go along with that as well, as long as it didnt contain restrictions such as time limitations or not being able to copy it to cd.
The record companies (in particular) have nearly missed the most phenomenal opportunity, to change the whole method of product distribution, whilst still maintaining their share of the market. How luddite can they be.
It doesn't matter how hard they try, they've shot themselves in the foot by their actions and attitude (both feet?).
This is one genie that'll never get put back in the bottle.
that file-sharing sites per se are perfectly legal, and they can fulfil a useful purpose.
As can cyanide, and cocaine for instance.
The problem comes when people decide to use the file-sharing facility to offer copyrighted material for free distribution. The site owners might try to argue that all they do is offer a service - users may download some free software which enables them to show a directory or directories on their computer to all and sundry. They provide full access to the files in these directories, and anyone may download said files. If the files happen to be music tracks, or software applications, well, that's life.
The opposite side of the story is argued by the music industry and software companies. They say that the operators of these sites are acting as the 'distributors' of these copyright-protected files by allowing users to give anyone access to them. Everyone involved is partly to blame. The site owners because they facilitate the illegal transfers, the downloaders because they are using unlicenced software and listening to music they haven't paid for, and the providers of the files because they are also 'distributors' of unlicenced software and copyright-protected music.
My view, and that of many others, is that no matter how hard you try you will never fully succeed in eliminating this practice - any more than you'll fully eliminate tax dodging, or speeding, or any of the other offences that people don't really perceive as wrongdoing because the people involved don't see them as offences against an individual. Those who suffer are companies or governments, or even society as a whole, and suitably anonymous. This helps to protect the offender from feelings of guilt, and they'll often justify their actions by using such phrases as 'fat cats' or 'rip off' or 'corrupt politicians' in order to make it sound almost as if they are entitled to steal whatever it is they steal, or to break the speeding laws or whatever.
DieSse is right - copyright thieves would be largely unaffected if P2P server X was closed tomorrow, because P2P server Y would open the following day. The 'something for nothing' culture has no conscience, and will therefore carry on as it always has.
I hope not. After years of buying LP's and latterly CD's with rubbish tracks apart from the one song you bought it for it's nice to get one over on the music business. By the way, when I used to buy LP's in the 60's the price was always the same, no matter who was the musician, so obviously the most popular artists made money by virtue of selling the most recordings, but nowadays the most fashionable artists cost more per record. Why?
Cars should be banned as they can travel more than 30mph. Dull question, obvious replies.
This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.