Thread: Copyrights & Theft

Sadly it is more like

you go to a sandwich shop, and duplicate the sandwiches on sale and take them home with you.


So the sandwich shop is losing out on business.

it isn't theft, but its as good as.

Like some standup comedian once said:

Would I steal a car? No. But if my friend bought a car, and told me he'd burn me a copy, I'd be ok with that.

Originally Posted by Carôusoul

So the sandwich shop is losing out on business.

Aah, shame......
their business model is broken, revise it or go bust

A company does not have any right to make a profit.
especially if they're trying to sell something which is no longer a scarce commodity

With the invention of the sandwich duplicator, sandwiches are no longer a scarce commodity.
therefore you cannot sustain a business model of selling sandwiches for profit.

I'd say it is theft because the product is the information, not the distribution method. When you steal and/or distribute that information - be it music, software, photos, etc... - without permission, you divert business away from the rightful owner. That's not to say that everyone who obtains illegal copies would have bought it to begin with but, the fact is that some would have and no longer will.

Well you can't really compare real physical examples with electronic ones.

If copying software becomes widespread, then software developers will have no incentive to produce anything. Why spend so much money to develop something when only one person is going to spend money to buy it, and then share it with all his/her friends for free? It's the underlying reason why communism fails.

Even if we take your example... what do you think the sandwich shop should do? How should it revise its business model? There's no way for it to sustain itself by making sandwiches anymore.

And it's not just a business model. It's captialism, that's how it works.

Well, there are (electronic) business models that work with free goods. Namely advertising.

Hell, TV is supported fully by ads. Why can't other stuff be? Such is the nature of business. You have to re-model to fit whats happening.

Originally Posted by Ynot

Aah, shame......
their business model is broken, revise it or go bust

A company does not have any right to make a profit.
especially if they're trying to sell something which is no longer a scarce commodity

With the invention of the sandwich duplicator, sandwiches are no longer a scarce commodity.
therefore you cannot sustain a business model of selling sandwiches for profit.

I'm sorry but that is such a stupid answer!!!

Ripping off someone else's idea/product is a good as theft. Music production for example, it is possible to illegally obtain the music produced, so what you saying? People should stop making music because it can be ripped off easily? Goes for anything really which infringes copy write laws.

I'm a musician.

I have spent my life learning my instrument, purchasing equipment and lessons and gaining experience, both playing and with life in general.

From my unique combination of life and musical experience, I write a song.

I can't get a major label interested in my song because they aren't making money anymore with all the pirating going on. So I start my own label, SquirrelyDog Records (squirrelydog.com,) as a business entity to finance what comes next.

I go to a studio with my guitars and amps, hire a bass player, drummer and singer to show up, pay the engineer and the studio and record the song. It costs a lot to get this little piece of my soul recorded and mixed.

Then I take it to a mastering house and pay them to prepare it for commercial release.

Then I pay to have CDs copied and printed. Then I need to decide whether to pay to try marketing it or not, as I'd have to sell several hundred (at least) CDs to cover my expenses thus far - and those are just the "hard" expenses of the technical side of things. None of this takes MY time, talent, inspiration or artistic sense into account.

Then somebody with the tragically common attitude rips my song and puts it up on a torrent. I net $0 from every copy that is downloaded, and every copy that is distributed dilutes the value of the CDs I am trying to sell.

That is theft, and it is theft of a particularly insidious nature. It is far worse than you coming into my store and shoplifting, because this thing - book, song, photograph or whatever - is a unique piece of ME. The thief has become a parasite, sucking my life blood from a place I cannot ever reach to squash him.

So yeah... I'm a little sensitive to copyright issues.

I'm with PJ on this one (and am a musician to boot!).

I can hear the gears turning in some of your heads... "But what if we just take the big label's music? They have so much money it shouldn't affect them much!"

Imagine I bust my butt finally getting someone interested in my music. Wow! I got a contract with Arista to put out an album! They think it's great, and predict I will sell tons of records! I further bust my butt getting the record recorded, produced, mastered, pressed, etc and everybody loves it! In fact, they love it so much, that they go immediately online and find it for free. Now what happens? Well, Arista decides to pass on extending our contract to another recording. "Sales were really lower than we expected, sorry. You know how it is these days. Good luck." Career over.

I'm not a musician but a DJ - So I download a hell of a lot of music each month (legally). I have to have a licence to play out too to prove I can play this music. It pisses me off to hear other DJs go on about how they download all their tracks for free!!!

That's really nice formulated PJ.

You guys forget that selling CDs isn't the only way of making money.

Oh, and forgive me, I don't think its morally right to infringe on copyright (in fact, all the music I listen to comes from artists who give it up for free listening.) But I can't help but play devil's advocate.

There is a huge market for music but people only seem to look at the CD portion of it. The two biggest other ways of making money are making music for movies/tv shows and playing live (and not just concerts, mind you)

Now with music, I only ever download to 'sample' things I'm not sure I'll like or in some cases, preview an album that is leaked online early. I delete the stuff I don't like and buy physical copies of the things I do. Somehow I've convinced myself this is ok, though obviously it's not

Originally Posted by Alex D

Now with music, I only ever download to 'sample' things I'm not sure I'll like or in some cases, preview an album that is leaked online early. I delete the stuff I don't like and buy physical copies of the things I do. Somehow I've convinced myself this is ok, though obviously it's not

Morally, thats fine. If everybody did this. There would be (almost) no issue.

Of course, the people you didn't buy from might be unhappy because you didn't buy it thinking you'd like it =P

Originally Posted by Alex D

Now with music, I only ever download to 'sample' things I'm not sure I'll like or in some cases, preview an album that is leaked online early. I delete the stuff I don't like and buy physical copies of the things I do. Somehow I've convinced myself this is ok, though obviously it's not

Alex - you make a very good point. I (and most independent musicians I know) give away some songs for this very purpose, or at least make samples available. The point there is that it is a choice we have available to us, right up to the moment somebody else decides to take that choice away from us.

Obviously (responding to prior posts now) CDs are not the only way to make money in music, and obviously there is a trade-off in publicity value if something I do give away gets really popular and my name gets known. I've done a great deal of writing over the years with expressly open copyright, for example, in hopes that somebody would take note of my writing skill and style and become willing to pay for a column or something. None of this is relevant to the question at hand though. What is key is whether you are getting something that really and truly belongs to somebody else with or without their blessing.

If it is without the owner's consent, then it is theft.

Originally Posted by arby

Well, there are (electronic) business models that work with free goods. Namely advertising.

Unfortunately I see that AdBlocker is the most installed Firefox entension and there are calls to integrate one into the mighty Opera browser I use. This is down right fucking stupid, it's not exactly killing online business now but if it becomes a popular tool...

Originally Posted by arby

Well, there are (electronic) business models that work with free goods. Namely advertising.

Hell, TV is supported fully by ads. Why can't other stuff be? Such is the nature of business. You have to re-model to fit whats happening.

Save for cable/satellite TV. But that's beside the point. However, to expect everything to be supported solely by ads is ridiculously naive. What happens when everything is expected to be given away for "free" because everything is expected to be supported by advertisement? Where will all of these advertising revenues come from when every one's giving their product away? Who's going to pay to advertise when every one steals their product anyway?

Originally Posted by arby

You guys forget that selling CDs isn't the only way of making money.

No, neither is bagging groceries or selling insurance or repairing automobiles or... But just because there are other ways to produce income doesn't imply license to steal.

There is a huge market for music but people only seem to look at the CD portion of it.

We're looking at the distribution aspect of music, whether that be in hard copies or electronic transfers.

The two biggest other ways of making money are making music for movies/tv shows and playing live (and not just concerts, mind you)

You're acting like it's easy for a musician to come by a movie soundtrack gig. Nothing's farther from the truth. And as far as playing live goes, you're again kidding yourself. I was a working drummer for over 6 years and, let me tell you, staying in gigs isn't as straight-forward as you seem to believe. I also know comedians in the same position.

Luckily I was able to get in with a guy who had a rather large following in the Tampa area or I'd have been sitting on my ass not playing out much. But I know of plenty of very good bands that can't get bookings because there's always some damn karaoke DJ lined up waiting to undercut the real bands. Remember, we're in an age where live music takes a back seat to canned, cheap-dollar shows. Most of the local bars - that used to thrive on live music - now lure in drunks with karaoke crap. And guess how much money the real musicians are making from most of these DJs who take their product and make money from its use? Diddly-squat: that's how much. I can guarantee you that MOST DJs are not paying ASCAP/BMI or other licensing fees.

So, before you try to put the blame on the victims, maybe you should target the real problem: people who shamelessly steal and exploit copy-written material.

Originally Posted by Oneironaught

And guess how much money the real musicians are making from most of these DJs who take their product and make money from its use? Diddly-squat: that's how much.

So, before you try to put the blame on the victims, maybe you should target the real problem: people who shamelessly steal and exploit copy-written material.

Wrong!

As a DJ I pay for my licence to play this music out, which goes back to the artist. I buy the music to play, which goes to the artist. If a CD is made, be it compilation or otherwise then a proportion goes to the artist.

DJ's don't get their music free (well ok I get a load of promotional material free) but we still have to pay a lot to actually play this. And if it wasn't for the DJ a lot of this music wouldn't get the air time which makes it so fucking popular! All these radio DJ's who can make or break records by playing them, if anything are doing that artist a huge favour!

Oh and how much does the artist pay me to promote their material for them? NOTHING!

Originally Posted by AdamA

Wrong!

As a DJ I pay for my licence to play this music out, which goes back to the artist. I buy the music to play, which goes to the artist. If a CD is made, be it compilation or otherwise then a proportion goes to the artist.

DJ's don't get their music free (well ok I get a load of promotional material free) but we still have to pay a lot to actually play this. And if it wasn't for the DJ a lot of this music wouldn't get the air time which makes it so fucking popular! All these radio DJ's who can make or break records by playing them, if anything are doing that artist a huge favour!

Oh and how much does the artist pay me to promote their material for them? NOTHING!

Yes, Adam. But you are doing things the legal way. Unfortunately, most don't. I'm not talking about radio DJs anyway. Radio stations are forced to pay the fees. I was in a comedy club a few weeks ago. After the show, they go on to do karaoke. Just like most DJs doing that crap here in town, they had books and books of burned CD. And I can tell you, the DJs around here ARE NOT paying usage royalties AT ALL. I know enough people in the industry to know that for a fact.

The argument here is about those who don't follow the legal channels: and there are far more that don't than do.

And another point: What people like hasn't got sh!t to do with what makes it to the radio. That's all part of the internal politics of the commercial pop music industry. Again, I know this. I'm not talking out of my ass.

Originally Posted by Oneironaught

Yes, Adam. But you are doing things the legal way. Unfortunately, most don't. I'm not talking about radio DJs anyway. Radio stations are forced to pay the fees. I was in a comedy club a few weeks ago. After the show, they go on to do karaoke. Just like most DJs doing that crap here in town, they had books and books of burned CD. And I can tell you, the DJs around here ARE NOT paying usage royalties AT ALL. I know enough people in the industry to know that for a fact.

The argument here is about those who don't follow the legal channels: and there are far more that don't than do.

And another point: What people like hasn't got sh!t to do with what makes it to the radio. That's all part of the internal politics of the commercial pop music industry. Again, I know this. I'm not talking out of my ass.

Ah ok, I thought you were refering to DJs as a whole. And yes, I know a fair few DJs who refuse to buy their music. Which is a shame really.

Ok, first off
It's not just about music
It's about information

In the good old days, information was scarce. It had to be written to, stored, and used from a physical medium produced by a manufacturer. The ability to get this information without having the manufactured medium was difficult and costly.

It was a good business model to sell the medium with the information stored on it.
The media was mass produced in bulk, and cost the end-user far less than they could ever hope to achieve on their own.

Today, information is not scarce.
I can get this information quicker, cheaper and easier than the manufacturers can provide.

This goes for music, films, shopping, anything
am I stealing the checkout girl's wages 'cause I shop online?
you may say "no"
but then, what if everybody buys online, and the local high street shop closes....What then?

As I said, it's not just about music
but music seems to be used here, so I'll reply with music in mind...

The ability to sell music on physical digital media is dying.
For the most part, I personally don't want (or need) the physical media
I note that there's a lot of DJ's replying - well add one more.

I DJ vinyl
I also buy vinyl
it's actually useful to me as a physical product.


Now, PJ

Originally Posted by pj

I net $0 from every copy that is downloaded, and every copy that is distributed dilutes the value of the CDs I am trying to sell.

"I net $0 from every copy that is downloaded"
It also hasn't cost you anything.

let's say, for now, that one person has downloaded your track off the net.

You have not lost any money.
You've failed to make a profit,
but you haven't incurred any loss.

You still have the same number of CD's out there on the market
(let's call the number of CD's sold 'n')

only difference is, it's possible for n+1 people to listen to your track.

Now....
the problem comes when the availability of the free online version eclipses that of the physical CD version.
(number of downloaded copies - 'd')

When d is far (far) greater than n, you're getting angry (and it's understandable)

But no-one is stealing any n's from you.
the only thing their getting for free, is the information stored on the n's.

"every copy that is distributed dilutes the value of the CDs I am trying to sell"

Oh, it does....horrendously....

The major problem at the moment, is that legally purchased music is less useful than freely obtained music.

CD's have copy protection, and some (sony in particular) twist the ISO standards - relying on the in-built error correction to compensate - CD standards to such an extent that playback isn't always guaranteed on all players.

legal downloads are locked to certain players, and certain proprietary formats, and are usually lower quality than the freely obtainable versions.

The problem is intentionally making the product you're trying to sell inferior to that of the freely obtainable versions....

Solution:
Make the n's (physical CD's) more attractive than the d's (downloads)
basic business, in all honesty.

Put a voucher inside every CD case, that gives the buyer free admission to one of your gigs.

You download the CD, you get the tracks only
no problem, because you know it's not viable to sell music alone any more.

But, you buy the CD, you get the tracks, plus a free gig, and maybe a poster as well.

Originally Posted by Oneironaught

Save for cable/satellite TV. But that's beside the point. However, to expect everything to be supported solely by ads is ridiculously naive. What happens when everything is expected to be given away for "free" because everything is expected to be supported by advertisement? Where will all of these advertising revenues come from when every one's giving their product away? Who's going to pay to advertise when every one steals their product anyway?

Material goods.

You see, you can classify it into 2 different categories. Intellectual property and material property. Material property is pretty much the stuff that had to be constructed / put together in a plant.

Intellectual property however is simply an arrangement of something that already exists. If a million monkeys at a million keyboards ... would eventually produce all the intellectual property in the world type of thing.

Now, the economy was founded almost solely on material goods. The food we eat, the clothes on our back. If you take these out of the equation, there is really no economy. If everyone was supplied with all the necessary things for life, and you no longer have a real need for money.

Its a subject I personally find fascinating. What if we automated the material world? If we replaced all human workers with machines? It'd be like a perfect communist system because nobody would be FORCED to work. We would evolve to a world based solely on reputation and what you have done.

But back on topic.. All money originates in material things and all money returns to material things. (the artist has to eat)

Also, consider history. Change is inevitable and change will happen. Do not think of this as an isolated event or a first-time occurrence. History is cratered with change such as this. There really is no way to stop it (i'm not saying this makes it a good thing) but those who are wise, will change themselves before the world changes itself.

Originally Posted by arby

consider history. Change is inevitable and change will happen. Do not think of this as an isolated event or a first-time occurrence. History is cratered with change such as this. There really is no way to stop it (i'm not saying this makes it a good thing) but those who are wise, will change themselves before the world changes itself.

In a nut-shell
it's a poor business practise to try and sell an abundant (ie. non-scarce) resource or commodity

From a musicians point of view,
Digital music is abundant
Vinyl is scarce
Live gigs are scarce

Way of the world, unfortunately
Adapt or die

Yeah, with ynot's earlier point, lots of people arn't too much against paying. Its just that its a hassle... really.. If you can just click a button in the comfort of your own home instead of driving out to the store, looking for a copy of a CD, waiting in line, paying, driving home.. you get the point. Even online paying is inherently annoying due to security issues.