| >>>What is the difference between file share and making a tape of your favorite music and giving it to your friend as a gift? You're not making money that belongs to the originator. No, I'm not dumb. Just looking for some comments.>>>
Assuming for a moment that file sharing hurts the musician as much as we are being told. The net adds a measure of convenience to the process of taking music without musician compensation, that making tapes does not. I burn favorite tracks to my Mini Disc Recorder. Therefore, I break the law.
I see your point, however. There is no real difference when you get right down to it. Except for this: the web makes it possible to illegally distribute music to hundreds of thousands of other people. Not just "Fool on the Hill" but the entire Apple catalog.
What about IPOD users? Surely much of the user base "illegally" transfers their CD collection to their IPODs. When I purchase such a unit, I will transfer lots of music.
A favorite album of mine is "Dark Side of the Moon." I bought it on vinyl, on 8-track, on cassette, and as a CD. I bought it on vinyl several times because of damage and several times on casette because of theft. PF got my money many times and if I want to copy a few tracks to my disk, I will. PF lost nothing due to my violation of the law.
Pinky Floydy is not the only group I love to tears, and I have bought multiple times on 33-1/3, 8-track, cassette, and on CD. I do not have the right to make copies, but in a way, I think I do. I feel no compulsion to spend more money downloading the songs from a legal DL service. Especially the embarrassing stuff like The 1910 Fruitgum Company, Murray Head, or the entire Cowsills catalog.
Making a tape takes time and money. Downloading takes neither. Well, usually. I gather that there are thousands of people with tens of thousands of illegally obtainedDLs, and their efforts took nothing more than a little bandwidth and some HDD space. Those are the people that create the file-sharing problems and concerns; most certainly not people like me. That being said, a crime is a crime is a crime.
Yes, making tapes is just as "harmful" to the musician monetarily as using a file sharing system. But, tape costs money, and Internet access often does not cost much.
Friends give me music every week. I discovered a hot as hell Russian bluegrass band, Alison Krause/Union Station, Gary Hoey, and Danny Gatton because of these illegally copied CDs and/or illegal DLs. Guess what? Had I not listened to people these performers, I would have paid little attention. Because I heard illegal copies, I now own every CD these groups released or will likely ever release. My scurrilous activities and shameless disregard for the letter of the law actually put money into the record company’s coffers.
I heard some other bands this weekend and next week, it will be another large Visa authorization, because I like the music and I would never have found the bands on my own.
Music is expensive. I purchase perhaps ten-fifteen CDs every month from the stores. Sometimes I take a chance on a new band because I was given a tape or CD and I like what I hear. Sometimes, the song I listened to is the only good song the band is capable of creating, so quite often I waste my money buying crap.
A DL -illegal or free- gives me a chance to listen before I waste my money. Same thing when I am given an illegally burned copy of this or that. If I like it, I always buy the music.
For people like me (and I suspect there are quite a few) illegal Dls and CD swapping often leads to more purchases. I have a list of several hundred CDs I am waiting to buy all because I got my hands on music from largely "illegal" sources. Those downloads will lead to record sales. In fact, if my ship arrived tomorrow, I am betting I would order more than a thousand CDs because I discovered the music on the web or friends gave it to me.
It is interesting to note how cheap music is on Amazon. I recently ordered a few CDs and they cost me a few dollars each. So, rather than DL the music (I am on dialup) it is easier and far cheaper to purchase used copies. The artist is not being paid for the used copies being sold.
I am betting some people buy a CD, copy it then sell the CD later.
Musicians make music and they want to sell it. I make music and one day I want to try to sell it. Asking a customer to part with ten bucks for a homemade CD from an unknown is hard, unless the music is good. So illegally downloading my music might actually help me. I just need to locate people that love hack banjo and accordion players.
I have downloaded music before and I will say that what I did was illegal. However, I do not DL thousands of songs, just a few here and there to learn about the artist. If it is good music, I will buy the CD on Amazon. If the music is bad, I delete. That way, I am not stuck with bad music.
I recall buying a CD based solely on a sample clip. Perhaps ten seconds of music and it sounded great. As it turned out, the CD was terrible and the ten seconds I listened to were the only good ten seconds on the entire CD. So having a few tracks to DL is good in my opinion.
I do not spread bad music among my friends. The ability to DL a few tracks (illegally) has had a direct impact on the artist’s bottom line that record companies might not wish to promote: it has been improved (in some cases) because if I like the songs I will buy the artist’s work. I gather there are many people like me that ultimately purchase the CD.
The web has made it possible to distribute music illegally; to be sure, this is not generally good. In some cases, it hurts the artist. I am not convinced how bad, however. Besides, before the web, making copies of tapes was done all the time. Right or wrong, all digital files are at risk.
Bob … Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com |
