Shocking: 95 Percent Music Downloads Still Illegal

[dvmoo7]

what??? i wish someone would make up there mind. this says it down..

http/www.tomsguide.com/us/Music-Illegal-Download-MP3,news-2755.html

 

[joex444]

I have definitive proof that 95% of music downloads were not illegal.

This "report" was on my local news, and they mentioned something this doesn't. They mentioned that last year 95% of music downloads were illegal.

So, in 2008, there was a 25% increase in legal downloads yet the ratio of legal to illegal downloads was unaffected. How could this be? It must have been that illegal downloads shot up 25%.

So, tell me, how could all the Internet users suddenly decide that they demand 25% more music than last year. Even the pirates are pirating more? Sounds too ridiculous. How about your estimate is too high -- as in you figured the ratio was constant and didn't bother to realize this implied a 25% increase in music demand year-over-year. The only reasonable conclusion we can make is that the method by which they are obtaining illegal download counts is highly inaccurate. They should disclose this method in the interest of accuracy.

 

[neiroatopelcc]

@ joex444 : I gave the explanation for the growth in illigal downloads in my first post on page 2. In short - with faster internet and bigger harddrives people don't just download a specific album, but might download 5 from hte same artist, to see if they're all as good. Thus inflating the overall download number. And the legal download growth might have to do with the increased number of drm free or easy-to-use sites. Even drm based downloads work if the site is easy enough to use. My parents have an isp where they recently added a service without added cost, that enabled them to download most popular music for free - with drm. And they use the feature.

 

[neiroatopelcc]

@ techtre2003 : As I said earlier, it depends on the person. Some don't actually care if they steal or not, and will choose the easiest option. Others will steal because they can, and yet others won't steal unless they can't afford the stuff without doing so

 

[Guest]

"Not only is capitalism not perfect, it's as much of a failure as communism was." Whoever makes this kind of comment probably failed heir econ 101 and social studies classes and just repeats whatever political line their heard from their favorite nut job

 

[resonance451]

[citation][nom]Intelligence II[/nom]

Piracy might be misunderstood in the music industry; rather than being concerned over immoral acts of theft, executives are simply angry about figures. I'm sure many couldn't care less about the artists' cash flow, and I'm sure some do. I'm very glad that you've decided to legally build a large digital music collection; we need more people like you.[/citation]

However, I'd like to remove record labels from the equation.

[citation][nom]Intelligence II[/nom]

Strangely though, I don't remember saying that "the actual effect of things doesn't matter".I find it interesting, however, that you think morals have levels of complexity. Honestly, I find morals to be relatively easy - arriving at the moral conclusion, or accepting said conclusion, can be difficult.[/citation]

You just contradicted yourself; my point was that you don't take into account all the complexities of the argument and instead oversimplify things based on morals which you perceive to make things black and white. No moral can break things down that simply.

[citation][nom]Intelligence II[/nom]

However, if you bothered to read several of the previous posts above my original comment, you'll notice a slew of idiots who have no moral qualms about stealing due to their ridiculous justifications.Lets see - how many people basically said that "Music today is crap; therefore its moral for me to steal something because I don't think highly of it"? Not only is that completely contradictory and hypocritical, but its plainly ignorant.[/citation]

I did read those posts, and although it is poor justification, perhaps if we were to remove the cause, then piracy would drop. You can scream morality all you want, but until you listen to and work with your adversaries it will be impossible to come to an agreement.

[citation][nom]Intelligence II[/nom]

For you to think capitalism is as much of a fail as communism was shows you ignorance to this world. My family comes from an island named "Cuba", and let me tell you my friend - you are sorely mistaken when you infer that capitalism has failed along with communism. You cannot possibly comprehend the stark contrasts between socialistic economic policies and capitalistic policies. If you truly need me to elaborate on this point, its not worth my time because you're obviously not thinking straight.[/citation]

I am not your friend, and I was born in Bulgaria, under the communist regime there, so you can't tell me what is and what isn't. My parents were set to be executed in an "accident" for making a documentary exposing the perestroika. I don't want to hear your bleeding-heart heritage stories. Capitalism is as unsound as communism. It hinges on the same thing that communism depends upon: integrity. And that is something we can hardly count on. The companies have no integrity, and so the dollar is placed above every other value, leading to a situation in which we sell ourselves and our beliefs and values out for profit. this has led to unjust wars and an overall degradation in the quality of our society's principles. What good is freedom if you've sold your soul and your liberties are falling by the wayside one by one in exchange for a Big Mac?

[citation][nom]Intelligence II[/nom]

I can't argue that America has turn into a consumer society; this is true, but not quite directly relevant to our discussion. I already mentioned that the business model isn't perfect; but I have a surprise for you: nothing has changed even in 100 years.[/citation]

It is directly relevant to this discussion. Everything that is happening right now is a result of the fundamental issues at hand. I would, however, tend to agree that this isn't something new. We've had a long downfall, though things have only gotten exponentially worse as each decade passes.

[citation][nom]Intelligence II[/nom]

It's true that the executives drain money greedily from funds that could be going directly to the artist; then again, if you'll check some of the previous posts, people mention how "artists have enough money, they don't deserve those millions because I said so, therefore STEALING is okay!".[/citation]

Those artists promoted by the record labels after they've signed their souls over are more often than not the ones with the profit. The ones with integrity and a sense of ingenuity who make music for the sake of the art are all too often left without any profit, even enough to make a living and put food on the table. Not that this is justification for stealing, but you're once more calling up the opinions of others, not my own.

[citation][nom]Intelligence II[/nom]

I stand by my point when I say "If you don't like the fact that the product costs that much money, simply don't buy it". I never said stop listening to music - I simply said avoid the issue altogether, as opposed to STEALING.[/citation]

How do you listen to a particular song without purchasing it? Internet radio does not let you choose songs. To listen to a particular song without purchasing it, you have to illegally download it or listen to it on an illegal streaming service like playlist.com which does not pay royalties. Either way, that is technically in violation of copyright and illegal, and stealing. Unless you're saying there's a difference, because whether you're listening to it on your computer through streaming or through an illegal download, you are listening to it in the same manner. One is considered stealing, and in the other you haven't taken anything, just viewed it. Though technically data transfer, whether it is stored on your computer or not, is still occurring during streaming. Which is ethical? The ethics behind physical copies in the earlier days no longer apply. In the digital age, things aren't so clear anymore.

[citation][nom]Intelligence II[/nom]

If society decided to react solely on impulses, we'd be in a pretty big mess. Imagine America completely disregarding red lights, stop signs; there is such a thing as common sense, with common decency, and common OBVIOUS morals.[/citation]

Morality is a very subjective thing, and what might seem obvious here might not seem obvious in another culture, so your argument doesn't work. And we do work on impulse. When the nation was apparently under attack, Americans acted on impulse and decided to give a free pass to the administration to do whatever they felt they had to do. That's impulsive, to give one's freedoms away in an instant in a bill passed overnight. This country is based very much on impulse. You can see that in every aspect of capitalism, consumerism, and even the spirit of being an entrepreneurial American. Impulse is not always a bad things, but regardless it is ever-present.

[citation][nom]Intelligence II[/nom]

Since stealing isn't an alternative, apart from not purchasing a particular product (that's what music has been for over 100 years at this point, since the first phonograph: a product) there's nothing more you can do.[/citation]

Wrong again. Music is no longer based strictly off of physical media, and a representation in data is not the same thing as a physical product. In this age, that definition simply doesn't work anymore.

[citation][nom]Intelligence II[/nom]

Nobody is forcing you to purchase that product, and despite label/artists contracts, I highly doubt that musicians want you to steal their music, as opposed to pay for it. Regardless of where they make a majority of their money is irrelevant; I know that artists make a lot of money off of tours. Does that change the relevance or morality of "Stealing music is wrong"?[/citation]

I'm saying that the definition of stealing is warped. Streaming isn't viewed as stealing, hearing it in a public place isn't always considered stealing (whether having been paid for or not by those playing it), yet listening to it on your computer after you have the data on your computer is suddenly stealing, even if for all intents and purposes it's reaching you in the same manner as if you'd not been complicit in procuring a copy. I'm saying that while stealing may not be right, instead of placing cuffs on the pirates, perhaps we should try to cure the problem instead of treat the symptoms. If we remove all these auxiliary problems, perhaps we'll get to the root of the cause and remove cause for piracy. Unless we have such a strong desire to expand our prisons.

[citation][nom]Intelligence II[/nom]

I don't "staunchly support a broken system". I simply support the undeniable moral that stealing is wrong, and sometimes it really saddens me to see people as ignorant as many of the previous posters. Stealing is wrong; but completely denying that fact shows that people are voluntarily ignoring their conscience, and possibly nullifying any sort of ethics they originally had with this mind state.[/citation]

Another example of a land where nothing is sacred. If we have a society in which not everything can be bought and paid, then maybe people will have an attachment to morals and ideals. If doing good or evil only reflects itself in profit margins, what's the point? There needs to be a reminder of what honor and accountability mean, and until this whole system is turned around, I don't see it happening.

[citation][nom]Intelligence II[/nom]

My post was about the immorality of stealing something, and the idiotic justifications people place behind them. It wasn't a debate on all these topics such as communism, the ethics of the music industry, or how musicians make their money.[/citation]

I happen to think the general landscape of things is very relevant to this microcosm of the current human condition.

[citation][nom]Intelligence II[/nom]

Now that I've answered your statements, perhaps you more clearly derive the purpose behind my original post.Stealing, regardless of one's reasons, is wrong: undeniably so. People need to face this fact.[/citation]

I better understand your motives now, and appreciate your clarifying them. I agree that it is wrong to steal, however I think that the simplicity of the moral should not serve to detract from this situation's complexity. To me it was never a question of whether stealing is wrong or not. One needs to take into account the entire situation rather than simply passing judgment.

 

[resonance451]

Oh, and I thought I'd mention, the RIAA is trying to insinuate that copying music from your CD collection to play on your iPod is piracy. Not my words, they don't want to let you listen to your own music for your own personal use on your own iPod. Ahahaha. Greed at its finest.

 

[resonance451]

[citation][nom]k2000[/nom]"Not only is capitalism not perfect, it's as much of a failure as communism was." Whoever makes this kind of comment probably failed heir econ 101 and social studies classes and just repeats whatever political line their heard from their favorite nut job[/citation]

Actually, it isn't a line from anybody else. It is my own personal belief from my observations. I didn't fail any such classes, and this has nothing to do with how good it is at making profit. As for social studies, I can draw many parallels to history that work to my advantage.

 

[Guest]

No matter who the money goes to, if your downloading a song that is on Amazon or iTunes for 99 cents, then your suppose to pay for it obviously. If your not paying for it, your stealing. I don't care if my friends call me lame for not listening to their pirated music or not downloading it myself. This new generation needs to be taught that stealing on the computer is like stealing in a store. Oh well, I'll do what I think is right. =)

 

[Guest]

I agree

 

[Guest]

Why is the music industry, in particular, record labels held to a different standard than other companies? If Walmart or any other company is making millions and billions and putting mom and pop stores out of business, no one justifies walking in and shoplifting products off the shelves.
And from someone who has worked in the music business in Nashville for many years...on all sides from artist to labels...the Sony's and other big labels are the 1%.... the MAJORITY of people making a living in the music business do not live in castles or mansions or million dollar homes .... I know many of them personally and this change has hurt them way more than it has hurt that 1% of major labels.
But with all things... it brings about a change ...and this will...and is reinventing the music business. It is what it is!