Do you feel downloading off kazaa is wrong ?

[rhino47]

I feel it is no worse then lending someone one of my cds to copy.

[aden_nak]

1. I buy any good music where the price is relative to the production cost.

And if that isn't some Doublespeak, I don't know what is. Hell, I could be a White House Press Secratary with that kind of non-answer.

[Magrittes Pipe]

2. Yes.

SoulSeek is much better. :P

[rhino47]

3. lol I meant the whole P2P thing

Downloading without paying.
But thanks for the heads up I will check out soulseek.I use ares now anyhow.Kazaa has too much malware/spyware in it.

[roenyc]

4. i like shareaza

[bobbobbins]

5. I buy new stuff from artists i think deserve it

other than that, for older albums and stuff i wouldn't buy normally, i'll download it, i figure, if the artist is dead or already rich, hes not gonna miss the dollar my album purchase would have given him.

[progmom]

9. No, but many labels are able to stay liquid because of catalog sales...

...without the steady sales of older albums, they aren't able to risk putting out albums by new unproven talent.

At least that's most definitely how it is in the jazz industry.

[bobbobbins]

15. true...BUT!!!

if they see that the sales are being generated just by me buying the new unproven talent, then they'll change their ways, if i buy just anything from them, they'll keep releasing crap anyway.

[psychopomp]

6. Yeah, Kazaa sucks

I was doing emule then went straight to torrent files--either of which are improvements over kazaa.

[realisticphish]

14. torrents rule

ive downloaded over 60 MST3K eps using Tomato Torrent...I love it


:hippie: The Incorrigible Democrat

[dolo amber]

7. Nope

99% of artists make diddly from record sales, but the labels sure clean up...if you want to support an artist the best way to do so is to pay to see them live or buy something directly from THEIR website. It's all about merchandising. ;)

[redqueen]

11. What she said

Labels should stop fleecing the artists, demmit!

[progmom]

8. Yes, yes I do.

But then I'm in the music biz, and I see how everyone is being affected by illegal downloading. And it's not just the fat cat executives.

[Squatch]

10. Yeah...that's why I use Limewire

[realisticphish]

12. no

because I use it to find stuff i like, then buy the album used. im too poor to buy everything i want to try, and my music just doesnt get played on the radio.

:hippie: The Incorrigible Democrat

[Ready4Change]

13. I'm of two minds.

The critical point, I think, is whether the "starving students" convert to paying customers once they start earning enough money, or if they adopt the "Music should be free because I just don't feel like paying" mentality.

I can respect the former, and revile the latter. I know people in both camps.

my .02

[SKKY]

16. In principle, yes, however comma...

...until the recording industry gets with the program, I don't see it stopping any time soon. I mean, look at where this whole thing started, and look at where it's at. It started with sharing files on IRC, then Napster came about. Then Kazaa emerged as did the Gnutella network. Then the edonkey network. Now we have an even less "centralized" P2P in bit torrents. The recording industry has failed to innovate and progress along with the P2P companies, and they're paying the price. File sharers haven't failed the artists, RIAA has failed the artists by insisting on protecting their out dated model. Now, having said all that, I do think it's wrong to steal intellectual property.

[rhino47]

17. I feel that P2P might also give exposure to artists

That I might not otherwise have the chance to listen to.If I really like a few songs I download I do buy the cd.What I think pissed me off was how the single cds where priced.It was total bullshit.In the late 90s it was 18.99 for most cds.The singles (if you only wanted one song) was 8.99.The record labels got greedy.Almost daring you to go download it.I remember in the 70s when I was a kid there was such a thing as 45s.You could buy the 45 for I think 1.25 at the time.That boosted sales that might not have been there for the whole album.There are certain cds I would refuse to steal .Rock against Bush ,, and other charity driven cds.Other then that I think its fair game.
Stealing intellectual property could be said if I loaned someone a book for them to read,to copy a dvd I have or burn my cds.What is the difference between that and getting it from another person online?
My friend in australia lost her driver for her digital camera.I burned one and sent it to her.Did she steal also?

[Lex]

18. Well, that's different and there is an exception in the law for that

--for making copies of stuff for family member and friends.

Opening it up to unknown people for thousands of downloads is a little different, don't you think?

Personally I don't care if people download or not, but there's a difference in making copies of your own CDs and DVDs for family and friends (which is allowable), and opening your copies up for thousands of strangers online.

[SKKY]

19. I agree with you to a point...

...there are several bands I will ALWAYS buy CD's from. Nine Inch Nails, Days of the New, Jarabe de Palo, etc. But I refuse to by the full album by someone like Sugar Ray, who gives you 1 good song and the rest suck ass. Make no mistake about it, if I download an album from an artist that hasn't allowed me to do so, it's stealing. I've tried my hardest, but I can't find a way around it.

[fit4life]

20. Only songs?

Does anyone download programs or anything other than songs? How do you feel about that?

Personally, I feel that any time I can get a Microsoft program without contributing to them monetarily, I've scored some sort of minor victory.

[name not needed]

21. Yes

Limewire is much better. :)

[miss_kitty]

22. Only for the spyware it fucks your computer up with

Screw the RIAA.

[bunkerbuster1]

23. yes, always have

Although I've grown to love the ideological hoops that cheapskates will jump through to justify stealing shit.

[Nye Bevan]

24. Not if you try to get the song from itunes first....

I will happily pay 99 cents for a fast, reliable download. So I will try itunes first. BUT if the music industry has NOT made the song I am looking for legally available I don't feel guilty about looking for it elsewhere.

And I refuse to get involved with ridiculous DRM limitations. So anything I download from itunes I immediately burn to a CD-RW and then rip back to MP3 form. Again, I'm paying 99 cents, so no guilt here.

[Radical Activist]

25. Not at all

I use it to find out what artists I might like enough to buy a CD. If the record companies would let me listen to most of the crap they produce first, then I would know what to buy without using Kazaa. I've found out about a number of artists I otherwise would never have heard, so they have made more money from me buying their CDs thanks to Kazaa.

It's also very hard for me to feel that the anyone downloading from Kazaa is robbing the artist because the artists loses maybe a fraction of a cent per downloaded song. The record companies get most of the money for every CD sold, not the artist. If people are really mad about artists getting ripped off they should do something about the record industry, who are the real crooks losing money from file sharing.

[Halliburton]

26. Yes

Limewire is much better than Kazaa. All Kazaa is these days, is a bundle of spyware that allows you to search for songs that a horrible screeching sound. But sharezaa/bittorent are pretty good for getting bigger files like movies.

[MrSlayer]

27. Yeah because Kazza sucks.

Even the lite version is loaded with spyware. You should look into mIRC and the newsgroups.