Quiting piracy.

[Lohengrin]

From now on im never going to download anything illigali, im going to erease everything ive downloaded trough piracy sites. If i havent bought it or being given it by a legal and contributing way, im not going to use it.

The biggest diffrence there will be is music, ive downloaded non-stop since ive discovered kazaa being twelve years old. I currently have over 60 gb with music, its all going to be deleted. From now on im buying every cd im going to listen to. Ive already bought 90% of the movies ive ever seen, now its gonna be 100%. I will even refuse to watch downloaded movies with others.

The reason im doing this is both selfless and selfserving purposes, this will help be building a more honest character and get me closer to the music i actualy love so much, and cut some slack to both the artists and the record companies who worked so hard to both make and distrubate all the wonderfull music, if it werent for the both of them i wouldnt discovered it in the first place.

One thing wich is allowed is listening to music i dont own, is on myspace, since the artist descision to put it out there, and i improve their popularity by using it, even if im in the middle of a song ill wish to skip it to the end to make the listening rate go up.

So what do ya think ?

[moriez]

I can relate to the reasons why you want to do this. Its a good feeling to support the artists who's music you really enjoy. Also I found that having a lot less music and only the real quality stuff is much more satisfying. Less is definitely more! 60gb for example sounds like quite the overkill to me. On the other hand, if it wasnt for filesharing we would never know most of these artists and would never even be able to consider supporting them. If you really dig it you can always choose to buy the product. You could view the filesharing as a preview. Ive learned that going from 0% to a 100% is too much in whatever you do. Take it slow and dont be too harsh on yourself.

Good intentions though.

(Y)

[cylon]

You are doing the right thing.

I am old enough to remember a day that when you wanted music from your favorite artist, you went to a "record store", put money on the counter, and walked home with a physical product that you put into either a cassette player or cd player.

Those days are gone, and these days it's much easier to just get whatever you want. And much easier to justify why it's ok to just download it. "Well, the artists never get paid by the record companies anyway." "They can still make money by putting on concerts."

Just think of if you made something, and wanted to earn a living from it. And then people just take it without paying you. Maybe you'll give up because there's no money in what you're doing. People want it, but they aren't willing to pay for it. Not the type of world I want to live in, and I'm glad you are feeling the same way.

Now, I am not perfect. Occasionally, if it's a band that I love and can't wait to hear their new album, and it's leaked online before the release date, I will probably download it. But I ALWAYS buy it when it is officially released.

The internet has changed things so much, we are now in a situation where you can listen to songs all the way through before deciding to buy them. There are legal sites that let you do this. And there are plenty of bands, especially indie ones, who give away free songs to music sites in the hopes that if you like their debut single, you'll buy the album. Artists and record labels are working with the public more now than they used to. Some bands will even stream their entire album for free on their myspace page for a certain amount of time.

At the end of the day the question is simple. "Do people deserve to be paid for the art they create?"

[Trezker]

Originally Posted by Lohengrin

From now on im never going to download anything illigali, im going to erease everything ive downloaded trough piracy sites. If i havent bought it or being given it by a legal and contributing way, im not going to use it.

The biggest diffrence there will be is music, ive downloaded non-stop since ive discovered kazaa being twelve years old. I currently have over 60 gb with music, its all going to be deleted.

Good! I want to do this but there are a couple things I still can't let go of.

But, delete ALL of your music, are you saying you've never downloaded free music?
Check out Jamendo, there you can download anything you want for free and later choose to donate as much as you think the music is worth to you or how much you can afford.

Finding free music is not a problem. You'll be surprised when you discover the quality of the music that's produced by people who don't do it for the money. My biggest problem is TV and movies, quantity is really lacking in the free market.

By free market, I mean products that aren't made by greedy people who will drag you to court with false evidence and maffia methods.

[aphorist]

It's actually legal to download music for a 24 hour trial period, after which, you're required to delete it from your computer. (but don't quote me for legal advice on this)

There are other music subscription sites where you can listen to as much music as you want as long as you're subscribed, it is legal, artists get paid. Myspace, Pure Volume, Last.fm all offer music which the artists choose if they let it play or not. Last.fm actually pays the artists per play!

For me personally, I can't handle downloading a 192kbs file and totally enjoying it. That, imo, is murdering art. So many people make quality music, and it's cut in half so people can play it on crappy hardware (ipod anyone?).

I just rent movies. Saves the environment from more trash, and I usually don't watch movies more than once (if I will, I buy it).

[BlackoutsBox]

I have a different stance on this. There is too much crap out there to buy everything you are considering, so I'll download music and software, and if I like it or it is useful to me, I will buy it, and I feel perfectly moral and correct in this way of doing things.

[Trezker]

Originally Posted by aphorist

It's actually legal to download music for a 24 hour trial period, after which, you're required to delete it from your computer. (but don't quote me for legal advice on this)

There are other music subscription sites where you can listen to as much music as you want as long as you're subscribed, it is legal, artists get paid. Myspace, Pure Volume, Last.fm all offer music which the artists choose if they let it play or not. Last.fm actually pays the artists per play!

For me personally, I can't handle downloading a 192kbs file and totally enjoying it. That, imo, is murdering art. So many people make quality music, and it's cut in half so people can play it on crappy hardware (ipod anyone?).

I just rent movies. Saves the environment from more trash, and I usually don't watch movies more than once (if I will, I buy it).

Do they really pay the artists? Doesn't something like 90% go to record companies?
I don't want those greedy companies to get anything from me. If I buy music I want all my money to go to the artist. With the Internet as distribution medium the record company is completely unnecessary. The artist only needs a recording studio for a few days to record and polish their work, that's a one time expense per album. There's absolutely no reason for music artists to give up any of their income to someone else.

[Victor Vikingr]

Originally Posted by Trezker

Do they really pay the artists? Doesn't something like 90% go to record companies?
I don't want those greedy companies to get anything from me. If I buy music I want all my money to go to the artist. With the Internet as distribution medium the record company is completely unnecessary. The artist only needs a recording studio for a few days to record and polish their work, that's a one time expense per album. There's absolutely no reason for music artists to give up any of their income to someone else.

I agree.

The environment was mentioned earlier, and that's my cause no. 1. Downloading is a lot less harmful way of spreading art, therefore, I'm i favour of a broadband tax (say, 10$-20$ /month) which is distributed directly to the artists based on number of downloads. Fair, simple, and environmentally friendly. Also, what better way is there for making your work known but through the Internet?

[Trezker]

Originally Posted by Victor Vikingr

I agree.

The environment was mentioned earlier, and that's my cause no. 1. Downloading is a lot less harmful way of spreading art, therefore, I'm i favour of a broadband tax (say, 10$-20$ /month) which is distributed directly to the artists based on number of downloads. Fair, simple, and environmentally friendly. Also, what better way is there for making your work known but through the Internet?

Actually that is not certain to be fair at all. We already have such taxes on storage media, radio, TV, pizza stores, dance clubs... And most of that money ends up in the hands of those who are supposed to distribute it. The money that goes to record companies doesn't reach any artists. Even when it does reach artists it only reaches the top chart artists.

My opinion is that we should remove all those taxes and let consumers choose for themselves which artists they want to support. Jamendo does exactly that. Why should I passively have to pay the copyright holder to dead artists like Elvis or artists I would never listen to like Britney Spears when I'm using the internet and my harddrive to download alternative music and film? It's an even more stupid concept when I'm using my internet to surf this forum, download a Linux distro...
And what about all the deaf people using internet who can't listen to music even if they want to?

Let people donate money to the artists they want to see more works from. Go to live gigs, buy the t-shirts and so on.

[Victor Vikingr]

Originally Posted by Trezker

Actually that is not certain to be fair at all. We already have such taxes on storage media, radio, TV, pizza stores, dance clubs... And most of that money ends up in the hands of those who are supposed to distribute it. The money that goes to record companies doesn't reach any artists. Even when it does reach artists it only reaches the top chart artists.

Well, that doesn't mean it can't be fixed. For example, an official government's money distributor or something could do the job.

Originally Posted by Trezker

My opinion is that we should remove all those taxes and let consumers choose for themselves which artists they want to support. Jamendo does exactly that. Why should I passively have to pay the copyright holder to dead artists like Elvis or artists I would never listen to like Britney Spears when I'm using the internet and my harddrive to download alternative music and film? It's an even more stupid concept when I'm using my internet to surf this forum, download a Linux distro...
And what about all the deaf people using internet who can't listen to music even if they want to?

You wouldn't be paying any copyright holder, because Elvis would be getting it directly – if he weren't dead. I want artists to be able to make a living from making high-quality art, so I think the fact that everyone would be paying no matter what they use the Internet for isn't a big problem. What about all the tax money that are used for war, bailouts, etc.?

I'm not talking only about music, but also movies and other forms of digital art, by the way, and deaf people can watch movies, for example.

Originally Posted by Trezker

Let people donate money to the artists they want to see more works from. Go to live gigs, buy the t-shirts and so on.

This could work, but I think most new artists couldn't make a living from it. And what about film makers?

[Trezker]

I think creative people will find ways to get the money they need without forcing people to pay.

Popular things especially have a tendency to get quite a bit of donations when they ask for it. There are plenty of examples where a project puts up a funding goal that says "We would like to get this much by this date to do this" with varying results but I've mostly seen successful donation runs. Donation is like an investment in a future experience. These projects don't get much major investors but they have access to the money of thousands to millions of fans with some spare change in their pockets.

They "simply" have to align their budget with the interest of people, meaning they have to market their project well to get a lot of money. Marketing is more of less free on the Internet.
I dream of a future where big projects are funded by truly democratic forces.

One big project that works not on money but on computer processing power donated by 435,154 members around the world has been very successful.

[Andrew Gubb]

I feel you, but I think a better way should be found. I think when I have the money I'll start sending cash directly in donations to the actual artists. I think we could make some sort of movement to that effect: a site that helped you find out how to pass on money directly to the people without funding evil corporations.

[moriez]

Originally Posted by Andrew Gubb

I think we could make some sort of movement to that effect: a site that helped you find out how to pass on money directly to the people without funding evil corporations.

Agreed. All artists should have a Paypal button on their site or something similar.

[David Cain]

Good for you for quitting piracy. I think it's something a lot of music fans feel like they should do but don't.

[Matt Willard]

I download music sometimes, but I have stopped downloading books I want to read. I realize my problem is with money-by not having any, it justified me previously to downloading things.

[alreturnslol]

Pandora.com is a GREAT resource for free and legal music. You should check it out

[spirit4711]

Originally Posted by Andrew Gubb

... without funding evil corporations.

I'm quoting you Andrew, but actually I'm replying all who think record companies are no good. Why on earth do you think so?

Artists make music; producers and studio technicians polish the end result; designers design the cover and maybe also the marketing materials; record companies take care of mass production (CDs, DVDs), promotion, distribution and sales to retail shops. Everybody wants a slice of the pie, nobody wants to work for nothing.

Record companies also scout for new talent, and invest in them. Those investments have to be recouped, through sales.

Now the role of the record companies has changed a lot through the internet, and they are protesting (not smart) and protecting their investments (smart). The very smart companies figure out new ways to earn money.

Some artists take control of the whole process (create own record companies for instance); others distribute their product by themselves. Whatever works for them. Nobody forces them to sign with a record company.

So please, let's stop the record company bashing.

BTW, I'm not in the music business and not an artist.

Best regards,
Fred

[Eric Roosevelt]

I think this whole business of illegal downloading shows that people tend to value practicality over morality. As soon as something becomes available, people will take it. Most people only start thinking about "right" and "wrong" when they're taking a personal risk (i.e. when some sort of punishment or stigma becomes likely). I'm glad people on this forums are at least thinking about this issue.

[Andrew Gubb]

Originally Posted by spirit4711

I'm quoting you Andrew, but actually I'm replying all who think record companies are no good. Why on earth do you think so?

Artists make music; producers and studio technicians polish the end result; designers design the cover and maybe also the marketing materials; record companies take care of mass production (CDs, DVDs), promotion, distribution and sales to retail shops. Everybody wants a slice of the pie, nobody wants to work for nothing.

Record companies also scout for new talent, and invest in them. Those investments have to be recouped, through sales.

Now the role of the record companies has changed a lot through the internet, and they are protesting (not smart) and protecting their investments (smart). The very smart companies figure out new ways to earn money.

Some artists take control of the whole process (create own record companies for instance); others distribute their product by themselves. Whatever works for them. Nobody forces them to sign with a record company.

So please, let's stop the record company bashing.

BTW, I'm not in the music business and not an artist.

Best regards,
Fred

I'm against large companies in general, because they would never get that large normally if it weren't for greed. They never need to be that big. Sure, they do service but they try and make it as small as possible

^I started to write that and then detected some unconscious vibes going on.

I think your perspective has value too... hm...

Yes, there are evil companies, but is focusing on the evil not just whining?

I'm not sure.

Nobody forces them to sign with a record company.

That's something true enough.

I suppose if you're on a plane of light yourself you'll find a light-based record company, same as anything else. If you're on a greyer plane and it's your pattern to become a victim, then you'll become a victim.

Going around shouting "they shouldn't!" is just judgement (unconsciousness). Darkworkers exist... and they have been given a place in the world to play their games.

But now what are we arguing about? Whether record corporations are evil or not?

Well, if they try to control sharing of music through laws (threat of violence) then they're dark in my book, yeah.

In fact, I think any old-style record corporation should realise that the old way is dead and change itself entirely. If they try to survive, then they're being controlling and destructive.

Sharing is the future as far as I can tell. Seeing as the commodity is free to reproduce I think it's dark to try and stop anyone doing so. I think the real strategy is to concientise the people who share that there is a real artist behind it and help them send money back. They will - the radiohead experiment worked - and even if they don't ALL pay for EVERYTHING, who cares? The artists will get enough. Quite likely more than before. There will be much lesser costs to making music this way, and less jobs will be needed - which I consider good, who would want to work a job for a task that wasn't necessary to the world?

[Trezker]

Originally Posted by Andrew Gubb

The artists will get enough. Quite likely more than before. There will be much lesser costs to making music this way, and less jobs will be needed - which I consider good, who would want to work a job for a task that wasn't necessary to the world?

Exactly my thoughts. Artists can use the internet to ge direct contact with their customers, no middlemen that take most of the profit. They don't need to sell as much as before to make a living.

Less grunt jobs is a good thing too, it means more people are available to work on culture, science and development.

[spirit4711]

Originally Posted by Andrew Gubb

...
The artists will get enough. Quite likely more than before.

...

Andrew, thanks for this post! It shows you are willing to dig deeper, and that is inspiring!

One note, on what you state here. It's not up to us customers to determine whether an artist has enough, or not. That is up to him or her. Apart from that, I'm not so sure they will receive more than before.

We can only say: "I'm willing to pay this price for that product, or not."

@Trezker, yes the internet is cutting out middlemen everywhere. It's an incredible efficiency improvement! (Remember you used to stand in line to get money or deposit money at your bank? I haven't seen the inside of a bank for years now, and spend much less time on administration.)

Some middlemen can survive because they adapt, and offer different valuable services or products. Some disappear. That's evolution in action.

[lemuria]

Hmm...
Funding evil companies? Pirate stuffs because the money won't get into their hands anyways? The actors/artists will get rich anyway even if we pirate their works (oh, btw, in case you haven't notice, there are other people than just actors who are working to make a movie)
You sure you are "fighting" for a nobler purpose? Or is this just an avoidance behaviour? Or maybe you just following the social norms (like here, in Malaysia)? Maybe you'll lose your friends if you told them that you quit piracy (I haven't told anyone of them, yet)
Or maybe you don't have the resources. Yeah... you can get the latest Adobe Softwares (all of them) here in Malaysia for a maximum $2.78 (that's USD). I can make a LOT of money through that!


So yeah, congratulation on the decision to quit piracy. Though I still can't quite justify whether reading a comic online is considered piracy.
How about reading books in the library? I've read many Bertrand Russell's books there, without paying any cents.
How about paying for The Prince? In case you missed the news, the author have been dead for hundreds years.
How about the "try before you buy" argument?
Ultimately, it come from your intentions...


Come to think of it... I've got an assignment that require me to use an expensive (more expensive than my laptop, I can tell you that) software but the prof. told us to just use the pirated version. The due date is 16/04... today is 13/04... 3 days left...
I still have time to get the software, install it into my laptop, finish the assignment, get my "A"...
This is hard... should I go back to piracy? Or should I refuse to do the assignment?
But then, grades don't do much in developing my consciousness... nor will it develop my power.

[Dot]

"I currently have over 60 gb with music..."

Wow, that sounds more like a problem with greed. : )

Are you really a "pirate?" Are you stealing? Are you selling illegally obtained music and software?

If you want to listen to just about anything under the sun, there's an excellent site at Grooveshark -- Listen to Free Music Online -- Internet Radio -- Free MP3 Streaming

[Trezker]

Originally Posted by Dot

"I currently have over 60 gb with music..."

Wow, that sounds more like a problem with greed. : )

I think it sounds more like a guy who never throws anything out even if he never uses it.
I have 15 gb in my music folder, though I really should gett around to looking for more reggae on Jamendo.

[pauldickinson]

I agree with this, it has been one thing that has bugged me for a while now! It's got to the point where family members and friends ask for pirated things from me, I'm going to join you on this, I'm going to start replacing my pirated music and software!

[Trezker]

I just deleted quite a lot of my not quite legal part of the music collection. There's some I still can't let go of.

But it was enough to spur me into downloading more from jamendo. Though I haven't gotten back up to the amount I had before the purge, that'll take some time.