illegal downloading

  herc182 18:55 12 Dec 2004

If there is such a hype about people using programs such as bearshare, winmx, kazaaa (to name but a few) then why is it not a case of suing the makers?

furthermore, torrent files. although it is near impossible to detect whos doing what (as you download striaght from someone elses computer and not a dedicated server), why can the ISP's take action (or inform those appropriate) that people are downloading huge quantities? eg if someone is using 60gb+ every month then it doesnt take a genius to know something is up! they must have a record of all websites visited?

I am a little annoyed that you hear all of the money lost to illegal downloading yet nothing seems to be done. it is possible to stop it surely?

  IClaudio 23:07 19 Dec 2004

"£3 for a CD with a few tracks on is very expensive." Compared to what? The last time I plucked up the courage to eat a Big Mac (two or three years ago), it was about that much - and lasted about 4 minutes.

"About £2.90 of that is profit, as it only costs about 10p for the actual manufacturing of the CD." Sigh... Imagine you're walking down the street - there's a lovely Ferrari parked at the side of the road. It's a beautiful machine and you really really want it. The cost of the materials (sheet metal, rubber, plastic, glass) that went to build it is about £5,000 but they're charging £100,000 for the car. Sheer profiteering! So you're perfectly justified in stealing it then...

Of course, a CD costs pence to press, but it doesn't just materialise at the pressing plant - apart from the artist who has spent months or years of their time dreaming about their music and in some cases practising for hours every day to perfect their music-making, there's the time spent by engineers, editors, re-mixers and (yes) Record Company Execs to help this artist realize their dream. Yes, the record company profits from the CD (this is business after all), but so does the artist.

No-one has the right to have music - if you want a particular piece of music, then pay for it, as you would pay for a car.

Of course, it's easier to download music than it is to download a car...

  Eargasm 23:22 19 Dec 2004

No-one has the right to have music - if you want a particular piece of music, then pay for it.

I totally agree with you, can you tell me where the checkout is for the Doris Duke album?

  Forum Editor 01:35 20 Dec 2004

Everything's relative. I doubt that you would class Elton John's CD royalties as a 'low salary' or Kylie's. Of course performers can make big money from touring, but in the main they tour on the back of CD sales - no sales, no tour dates.

The other thing to remember is that recording artists don't always write their lyrics and often don't write the music. The people who do that can't go on tour - their income may come from volume CD sales. It's a complex business and there are many vested interests.

  kev.Ifty 22:26 20 Dec 2004
  Eargasm 22:44 20 Dec 2004

What an absolute STAR you are!!!

How the hell did you find those
links? Iv'e been searching for ages.

The first link is a bit pricey your'e right (i would have to be on F.E's salary to afford that)

The second link looks fantastic and there is loads of other albums on there i am interested in.

I have emailed them to see if it still in stock at £5 it is an absolute steal (fingers crossed)

Once again a BIG BIG thanks for the link. (herc182 sorry for rather hijacking your thread)

Thanks Phil

  herc182 21:36 21 Dec 2004

i read an article click here

looks like the wheels ARE in motion.....

  Forum Editor 23:53 21 Dec 2004

You may well be fed up with copyright, but that's because you don't earn your living (or a part of it) from the fees that people pay you to reproduce your work. I do earn a part of my living that way, and I get hopping mad if someone simply takes my work and reproduces it, without so much as asking.

It's all a question of your point of view, and if you were a recording artist you would undoubtedly feel different. You can't simply abolish copyright - many other things besides music are protected by it - but you can try to deter copyright theft, and one way of doing that is to make it a less than attractive proposition to download music - either by reducing the retail cost or by punitive measures, or by a bit of both.

  herc182 22:43 22 Dec 2004


lets assume that you will have a constant stream of 1Mb/s. if you do then pinch yourself and you will wake from your slumber....

  Forum Editor 09:57 27 Dec 2004

The last line of your penultimate paragraph would normally have resulted in your post being deleted - this is a family show, and we can do without crude attempts to draw parallels.

Unfortunately your very long post is riddled with contradictions and inaccuracies. The fact that you consider a law hasn't "been made clear enough" is never a justification for breaking it, and frankly statements such as "...if I have not had time, or no-one else wants to see a particular film, I'll download it" are a classic example of the type of ludicrous double standards under which many confirmed downloaders operate. On the one hand you freely admit that you know it's illegal to download copyright-protected files, and yet you blatantly continue to "downloading almost constantly". To make such an admission in a public web forum is a disgrace, and I imagine you might be receiving a brown envelope through your door quite soon.

You are an example of the worst kind of downloader - the ones who try to justify what they're doing by spouting a torrent of ill-informed rubbish and to say that "there are other programs which I use, yet find the price tag obscene, and therefore download for free" is a disgrace - you should be ashamed of yourself, but I doubt that you have enough moral conscience for that to happen.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 release date & specs

The Pantone Colour of the Year 2019 is 'Living Coral'

Can Macs Get Viruses & Do Macs Need Antivirus Software?

Comment baisser votre ping ?