Shocking: 95 Percent Music Downloads Still Illegal

Status
Not open for further replies.

afrobacon

Distinguished
Feb 20, 2008
124
0
18,630
0
Last I checked an overwhelming majority of the revenue doesn't make it to the artist. For that reason alone I refuse to pay for music.

There was a proposal a while back my another member here I would be in strong support of. Something like paying a monthly premium for downloading, with most of the money going directly to the artist.
 

Thor

Distinguished
Jan 5, 2004
51
0
18,580
0
I'm so sad to see that soon Madonna will need to sell one of her 100 Castle.
:'(

Oh Dear !


I'm so sad for Nazi RIAA who continue spy everybody so Music Companies continue to make billion.

I'm so sad to see Music Companies sell their song more than $1 each when we know their value is less than 1 cent.

Poor Poor billionnaire.
I'm so sad to see this year they will make just 10 billion of profit at least of 11.
Poor poor them...

Really they have no "Justice" (for that they have any millionnaire/billionnaire in prison)...

 
G

Guest

Guest
I will be a pirate till the day i die. When has music become more about the money then the message. These musicians already make more then they deserve, its music, and everyone has it in them to create, no need to play them millions of dollars. Most of the music we listen to now and days is shoved down our throats through mtv and radio. They play what they want you to hear. www.thepiratebay.org bitches
 

fulle

Distinguished
May 31, 2008
391
0
18,930
0
My favorite artists, after fighting with these blood sucking leeches for years, opted to just release music for free on the net and rely on touring to make the real cash.

nin.com
http://remix.nin.com/
http://www.bigheadtodd.com/
 

JumpKickJoe

Distinguished
Jan 15, 2009
24
0
18,560
0
Why am i going to pay for a single hit song that i heard on the radio for free when i could download it from some p2p and use it in my mp3 player, flash drive to connect to my car deck and share it with my friends? Those cluckers have got to be kidding.
 
G

Guest

Guest
I love how the statistic does nothing but benefit them and comes FROM them. I'd love to see just how they could actually track something of such a magnitude as downloading music with any sort of accuracy. I am sure the margin of error is like + or - 75% which is just laughable. If only they would redirect all their energy of prosecuting and lynching to a much better avenue.
 

zodiacfml

Distinguished
Oct 2, 2008
248
0
18,830
0
not surprised. downloads are no different to cassette tape recording/dubbing in the old days though downloading is easier and is vast.
 

cruiseoveride

Distinguished
Sep 16, 2006
218
0
18,830
0
bullshit statistic, how do they know its 95%? they just made that up. In order to know that you have to know how much music has been downloaded in the world - which means, you have to know, all the torrent trackers and peers, all the gnutella network (limewire and such), direct connect hubs, websites, ftps etc.. how the fuk does anyone get that information?

I call B.S on 95%

music online should be free, if you want a CD to put on your shelf, go buy one, i'll download thanks
 

resonance451

Distinguished
Feb 13, 2008
98
0
18,580
0
Uhh $0.60 of my $0.99 cents per shitty DRM song on iTunes goes to the record label. Those greedy pricks can go die in a fire. I'm not signing to a label for my first album because I'm not interested in feeding corporate greed; I want to reach out to people with music, not into their wallets to buy an executive his new Bentley.

The statistic is pointless, since there is no indication of how much revenue is actually being lost, and it's also no indication of how the artist is supposedly suffering. Funny how the poor, humbled industry is still making millions and the artists pushed through the mass-marketing pipeline seem to be doing fine rolling in their millions. I don't see the @#$^ing Jonas Brothers on the streets for all the illegal music downloading that probably goes on from preteens that don't have the means or care to buy an album.

Any estimation is stupid; you'd have to be estimating the sum total of all data transfer involving copyrighted material from person to person or god knows what else based on arbitrary criteria. I downloaded some System of a Down for free, then ended up buying at least three copies of each album (don't ask why, that's not important), so I'd say the execs more than got their share, and I gave Serj Tankian and Daron Malakian enough for a latte each. Oh and the world didn't implode because I got a song for free.

As someone who is interested in the industry and plans on doing this for a living, I think these people should be ashamed of themselves. Of course I want to make a living, and I want to be paid for my work, but I'm not going to be a naive numberwhore because the industry wants to pile up outrage when pushy execs trying to get artists to sell their souls just aren't enough anymore.
 

DjEaZy

Distinguished
Apr 3, 2008
338
0
18,930
0
... 95 Percent Music Downloads Still Illegal, and the producers and managers are angry that they don't get tha fast money from no talented 'one-day' or 'one-song' bands and singers... on the other side, there are artists, who made huge amounts of money by working, touring... and wee get quality concerts and shows... the live experience can not be pirated!!!
 

whiz

Distinguished
Jan 15, 2009
18
0
18,560
0
I definitely wouldn't trust an association that claims to represent the music production WORLDWIDE, for any data it shares with the public. Plus that's cr*p - If pirated music didn't exist people in countries like Bulgaria where I'm from would listen only to the mainstream cr*p they play on repeat on the radios and sell in the music stores. And I fully agree with DjEaZy - I end up buying the albums after I pirate them if they are worthy.
 

JeanLuc

Distinguished
Oct 21, 2002
64
0
18,580
0
[citation][nom]resonance451[/nom]Uhh $0.60 of my $0.99 cents per shitty DRM song on iTunes goes to the record label. Those greedy pricks can go die in a fire. I'm not signing to a label for my first album because I'm not interested in feeding corporate greed; I want to reach out to people with music, not into their wallets to buy an executive his new Bentley.The statistic is pointless, since there is no indication of how much revenue is actually being lost, and it's also no indication of how the artist is supposedly suffering. [/citation]

Well every cloud has a silver lining, it would appear from what I've read most record labels are in trouble and the whole idea a band or artist needs a nig name record label behind them to be successful is going to be a thing of the past in the next 10 years thanks to internet downloads.
 
G

Guest

Guest
I laugh at all the people here who justify their actions (see: piracy). I also laugh at people who get angry at those who have amassed wealth due to a working business model (see: "poor billionaires").

Your justifications do not change the morality of stealing something (see: definition of theft; taking something that isn't yours without permission).

The business model may not be perfect; but if you have beef, simply boycott and do not buy the product. Your lack of agreement does NOT make piracy any more or less moral - stealing is stealing, period.

Nobody said capitalism was perfect, but the artists would be giving away their music for free if they wanted you to have it for free. Newsflash: the artists you worship just might want you to purchase the CD/MP3 because, even though they don't make the majority of the profit, they make SOME of the profit... and that is called their INCOME. Period.
 

Qwakrz

Distinguished
Mar 1, 2004
7
0
18,510
0
I gave up buying music when the RIAA forced me to rent it (DRM on anything means you can only use it while the seller wants you to). No, I do not pirate it either.

Its a known fact that the RIAA have had threats from artists over lack of payment before and the fact that the RIAA represented companies have a long track record of screwing over both sides of the equation just to get more money for themselves (remember, the RIAA keep about 60% of the overall costs of a music track and the artist usually gets less than 1% which seems very unfair). Its about time they got a dose of reality and actually had a business model that did not involve extortion.

I also agree that 95% of the current artist line-up just produce garbage and I suppose a lot of the sales of good music goes to prop the crap ones up.

And finally, don't forget that purchasing music is actually paying for the drug trade.... (how many artists have been linked to drugs before, alot more than pirates linked to it).
 

captaincharisma

Distinguished
Oct 13, 2004
1,844
0
20,060
98
everyone knows this and sense the advent of napster illegal music downloading is still in full force and that it affects everything. new bands these days just have one good album "there first one" because the first album is always the best because they are innovative and at there best but with there next album there so scared because of the state the music industry is in so they will tone it down or go completely different and fall into the vortex thats called mainstream music
 
G

Guest

Guest
So basically the music industry could drop their prices from 1$ per track to .25$ per track and if they went from 5% download share to 20% they'd break even.

Does anyone think that would happen? Obviously they don't.

I do.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
W Streaming Video & TVs 1
Jill Scharr Streaming Video & TVs 8
G Streaming Video & TVs 1
G Streaming Video & TVs 2
Z Streaming Video & TVs 11
Z Streaming Video & TVs 28
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 6
Z Streaming Video & TVs 23
Z Streaming Video & TVs 4
Z Streaming Video & TVs 19
Z Streaming Video & TVs 41
G Streaming Video & TVs 39
G Streaming Video & TVs 19
G Streaming Video & TVs 6
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 29
R Streaming Video & TVs 2
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 33
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 11
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 35
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 52

ASK THE COMMUNITY