Message from the community
At CDFreaks.com, we always care for your opinion. We appreciate the valuable input you provide us, and the thoughts you share with us. This is such one thought that was shared with us by Mary, and we would like to share it with all of you. Therefore, we would like to give Mary the opportunity to let her share her thoughts with the whole community. Mary, the stage is all yours.
The message below displays the personal thoughts and opinions that belong to one of our members. This message was not edited in any way. CDFreaks.com would like to thank Mary for her contribution.
I’m Really Getting Fed Up About This – And You?
As a consumer, I’ve bought music…on 45 and 33 rpm vinyl records, then on tape (yes, I missed the 8-Track phase as well as the Laser players), and onto CDs. Next stop: MP3 digital on the computer. How many times do I have to buy the same old songs? And, believe me, you "have to” buy it again because copying it from one format to another – well – there’s just so much of that a song will stand. I repeat: How many times must I buy it?
The answer to that is: I have to repurchase whenever the entertainment industry decides to "rip off" America one more time by making obsolete the present formats and forcing something new on us. This is not considered illegal – but copying your older stuff from one format to another borders on "cheating" the artists out of their "much deserved revenues"! Oh, and don’t dare make a copy of an old song for your friend that’s out of work and can’t afford to "repurchase" their collection in the new format – that’s pirating!
The entertainment industry can make whole collections obsolete by refusing to sell and or, support the equipment you need to play it with. Somehow, this dishonorable habit flies below the radar of ethics. The Powers That Be determined that re-inventing the industry every few years would help keep the American economy healthy while providing security for Americans jobs – wink…wink! This is how we justified being wasteful with our resources, and for making “sub-standard” equipment that would not last longer than the planned obsolescence of seven years.
But there’s a few flaws in this plan. Look around. The Japanese have taken over manufacturing these new “innovative” machines. And, the support or help-line jobs have been out-sourced to places like India. Many major companies are keeping their main offices “off-shore” to avoid paying their fair share of American taxes. Now, in the “aftermath” of this “wink…wink” understanding, how stable is our American economy? Aren’t we also suffering a severe unemployment rate? Makes one wonder just whose side these Powers That Be are on, huh?
Nevertheless, such is the reasoning that may soon make your CD and DVD collections obsolete! Almost humorously, in direct opposition, news headline bid us to feel sorry for these people of the Entertainment Industry who are complaining about losing billions of dollars in potential profits this past year due to piracy.
When an industry artificially manipulates the availability of equipment – they have no right to moan about loss! After all, when they stopped selling phonographs in favor of tape decks, and stopped selling tape decks in favor CDs, and cut into CD sales in favor of digital equipment – iPods, MP3 players, etc. they callously kicked entire collections to the curb that depended on those earlier formats. And why? So they could exploit their customer base and sell the same old stuff they’ve sold before – in the "more modern" formats!
Now, it’s movies…remember Beta tapes? Remember VHS? Sure, DVDs are still popular, but how long before Blu-Ray or some other format push into obsolescence the very equipment you need to play your collection on now? That’s one of the goals of Blu-Ray – to have all new movies come out “only” in Blu-Ray! So, you will “have to” buy their format or lose out. We, the consumers, continue to sit silently, while the Entertainment Industry shouts about how badly "they" are being ripped off!
Shouldn’t we demand that someone start reporting how these "would-be victims" have been victimizing the consumer – under the guise of "new and improved"? Here we are with all digital formats and we’re being told that vinyl – the old 33s and 45s - have better sound! Best Buy is actually clearing space to start selling vinyl records again! New and improved – yeah – right?! They’re the victims – only in the headlines! In truth, we’re the victims – you and me! It’s time to acknowledge that.
Originally, I had no opinion about “pirating”. But, I’m an American. You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to realize that Americans “share”. That’s our nature. We’re a generous people. And, it seems, the less we have, the more we are apt to share it. If someone who has cancer says they wish they could see a particular movie, do you really think someone else won’t rip off a copy of that movie and give it to them ease their suffering? Anyone telling them they aren’t “legally” allowed to do that, amounts to telling them that they can’t show “mercy”! The Entertainment Industry should figure it out – You don’t legislate morality or human kindness. Calling such a person a “pirate” only alienates their customer base and further erodes good will. Having people publicly arrested, fined and imprisoned for piracy, isn’t an effective deterrent to others? That’s creating martyrs! And, changing the minds of people like me who previously had no opinion on the subject.
In the aftermath, I find that I’m not really all that offended by people pirating DVDs and CDs. It means that something is finally being “Made in America” again!
The Golden Rule says that you are to do unto others as you would have them do unto you? Well, then, where is the real basis for complaint against “pirating”? The Entertainment Industry has employed a “wink…wink” strategy that has severely “harmed”, not helped, America. And, they intend to keep right on employing it! They don’t care if we suffer because of it. All that matters is their bottom line! Pirates are children of their own thinking – doing exactly the same thing to them that they are doing to us. So, where’s the problem?
Microsoft gave us Vista…a software that meant you had to replace older peripherals like your scanner, printer, etc. in order to use it. This was a way of “forcing” consumers to buy new equipment. America responded by simply “not” buying Vista! With that, even a company of the magnitude of Microsoft had to stop and listen to the consumer!
It may be wise to think twice about buying a new format. Ask yourself who, exactly, is it profiting? At what ultimate cost? We get fairer treatment and better products when we hold out for fairer treatment and better products. Who knows, someone might even have an epiphany and offer a “free” 5 year warrantee on their product? (Okay, I’m reaching!)
But do remember, whether they like it or not: Your dollars are “your vote”! Use them wisely.
Mary Cahill – age 63 - A Baby-boomer
Have any thoughts of your own you would like to share? Comment below, check out our forums or hit the support form if that is more of your liking.
76 Comments
A very well written letter. I never gave it much thought on this subject till now.
All true! This reminds me of how many times I have bought Van Halen's 1984 back in the day. I originally bought it on cassette tape and I misplaced it. Then I bought it on CD and it got stolen. Bought it again on CD and again got stolen. For some reason, this particular album and group had that appeal to thieves, go figure. Anyways, do I feel bad downloading the lossless version off the net? No, I bought the damn thing 3 freaking times. One time might of been my fault for losing it but the other 2 times it was stolen. How is that MY fault? Why should I have to buy it again? My belief is, once you buy it, you should own it for life not until the next "upgrade".
I have lost, had stolen, or had it damaged in some form or fashion several hundred if not thousands of dollars of music in the past. Do I feel bad downloading that music I originally owned? Hell no, I could give a crap what the RIAA thinks.
I have lost, had stolen, or had it damaged in some form or fashion several hundred if not thousands of dollars of music in the past. Do I feel bad downloading that music I originally owned? Hell no, I could give a crap what the RIAA thinks.
So if you buy something, and it gets stolen - you say it is OK to obtain that item through other means than through official channels?
Good read and good points!
Well other then Mary missing the 8 track phase being she is 63 I have to agree with her plus I can up her a little. How bout this:
Vinyl LP Mono, Vinyl LP Stereo, Vinyl LP Digital, Vinyl 45 mono, Vinyl 45 stereo, Direct 2 Disc, 4 Track, 8 Track, Cassette, DAT, CD, HDA and I think I missed a few. Age 54
Vinyl LP Mono, Vinyl LP Stereo, Vinyl LP Digital, Vinyl 45 mono, Vinyl 45 stereo, Direct 2 Disc, 4 Track, 8 Track, Cassette, DAT, CD, HDA and I think I missed a few. Age 54
Here here.... I absolutely agree 100%.
@Logitacer;
Yes, that is what he is saying and that is what many people believe regarding "intellectual property". According to the original letter/post above, if you want to give something to someone because they are dying of cancer, it is OK to obtain that thing other than through official channels, as well.
It's interesting that most people would not say that if their car got stolen, it would be OK to steal another one to replace it. However, many believe just the opposite when it comes to music or movies.
It is also interesting that the RIAA and MPAA subscribe to the "stolen car" way of looking at it.
When people say that comparing the two is not valid because a car costs a lot more than a song or a movie, I am reminded of the old joke about a man proposing to pay a woman a million dollars for sex, and she shyly says, "Well...OK." and then
he says "Never mind, how about ten dollars?"
She replies, "No! What kind of girl do you think I am?"
He replies, "We've already established that. Now we're just haggling over the price."
I'm not an advocate of thinking about songs and movies either way, but I can certainly see the MPAA and RIAA's point, in some ways.
Yes, that is what he is saying and that is what many people believe regarding "intellectual property". According to the original letter/post above, if you want to give something to someone because they are dying of cancer, it is OK to obtain that thing other than through official channels, as well.
It's interesting that most people would not say that if their car got stolen, it would be OK to steal another one to replace it. However, many believe just the opposite when it comes to music or movies.
It is also interesting that the RIAA and MPAA subscribe to the "stolen car" way of looking at it.
When people say that comparing the two is not valid because a car costs a lot more than a song or a movie, I am reminded of the old joke about a man proposing to pay a woman a million dollars for sex, and she shyly says, "Well...OK." and then
he says "Never mind, how about ten dollars?"
She replies, "No! What kind of girl do you think I am?"
He replies, "We've already established that. Now we're just haggling over the price."
I'm not an advocate of thinking about songs and movies either way, but I can certainly see the MPAA and RIAA's point, in some ways.
I do not buy the "car" theory. Why?
Because music and movies are not a physical object that I own. They are IP of the manufacturer (like the car's design). I own the right to enjoy and use the IP and that is the basic argument against restricting my access by creating new formats and stupid laws made by ignorant senators (no surprise there). Now the industry has not come up with an effective manner of licensing said IP and can only come up with the car concept which is just a silly argument. Stealing a car and maintiaining my right to the music and videos I paid for is more like the industry stealing my car because they own the IP and that being legal (which seems to be the opinion of some very misguided legal experts). It has notthing to do with "money" and everything to do with licensing and then fair use of such license.
Because music and movies are not a physical object that I own. They are IP of the manufacturer (like the car's design). I own the right to enjoy and use the IP and that is the basic argument against restricting my access by creating new formats and stupid laws made by ignorant senators (no surprise there). Now the industry has not come up with an effective manner of licensing said IP and can only come up with the car concept which is just a silly argument. Stealing a car and maintiaining my right to the music and videos I paid for is more like the industry stealing my car because they own the IP and that being legal (which seems to be the opinion of some very misguided legal experts). It has notthing to do with "money" and everything to do with licensing and then fair use of such license.
The question isn't, "Did you buy a CD?" The question is, "Did you buy a license to listen to a song or album?" If it's the latter, then as long as you have the medium the song came on, you should have access to the song/album in whatever form it's made available to the public, wheither it be on vinyl, cassette, CD etc.
If all that isn't enough to get your blood moving, check out this link.
http://news.ecoustics.com/bbs/messag...81/549087.html
They've finally decided that getting fans for free by allowing radio stations to broadcast music isn't enough. Now they want to get paid by the stations. Screw 'em. The stations should charge to play an artist's songs. It's not like the artists shared the revenue they made in concerts that were attended by fans they garnered from radio play. It's gotten too ridiculous. Lazy morons just want to get paid over and over for doing nothing. I hope the radio stations just say "up yours, we'll broadcast talk radio and the songs of anyone who gives them to us for free, and the rest of you go to hell." If artists were face with getting ZERO air time, I'm sure they would have a change of attitude.
http://news.ecoustics.com/bbs/messag...81/549087.html
They've finally decided that getting fans for free by allowing radio stations to broadcast music isn't enough. Now they want to get paid by the stations. Screw 'em. The stations should charge to play an artist's songs. It's not like the artists shared the revenue they made in concerts that were attended by fans they garnered from radio play. It's gotten too ridiculous. Lazy morons just want to get paid over and over for doing nothing. I hope the radio stations just say "up yours, we'll broadcast talk radio and the songs of anyone who gives them to us for free, and the rest of you go to hell." If artists were face with getting ZERO air time, I'm sure they would have a change of attitude.
It's interesting how the lack of physical attributes for songs or movies makes it easier for people to justify what others might call stealing.
How's this for a possible future scenario?:
You have a paperback book and it gets stolen. The library doesn't have any copies.
You have an Amazon Kindle or some other e-book reader.
Someone invents some software to download and/or copy e-book files and store them on your reader without paying anything.
Your book that was stolen is available where it can be accessed by this new software.
Do you feel the same way about the e-book file that you do about music and movies?
If you do, is this because the book/e-book does not have any physical properties anymore?
Would you feel justified in getting a free copy of the e-book because you already paid for it once as a physical book?
How's this for a possible future scenario?:
You have a paperback book and it gets stolen. The library doesn't have any copies.
You have an Amazon Kindle or some other e-book reader.
Someone invents some software to download and/or copy e-book files and store them on your reader without paying anything.
Your book that was stolen is available where it can be accessed by this new software.
Do you feel the same way about the e-book file that you do about music and movies?
If you do, is this because the book/e-book does not have any physical properties anymore?
Would you feel justified in getting a free copy of the e-book because you already paid for it once as a physical book?
What an idiotic screed.
Something? What ya mean something? Something could mean anything. I meant it in regards to music and what are the proper channels? Back in the 80's, they didn't have "proper" channels. And to answer your question, yes. Like I said, I bought the 1984 album several times and gave the record companies and artist all they are due thrice over. Do I feel bad about downloading it, hell no!
Exactly my thinking. Comparing downloading music and stealing a car is just a silly argument. So using Ferd's logic, if I for instance lost some piece of software, on the physical medium that it once existed on, I couldn't download the software even though I had the license for the software.
Yes it's really a format war (me a strong advcate of Blu-ray). The 'Industry' does not want to go down the road of proper licensing like they do with radio stations Etc. We should have a license for personal use. Actually radio stations have always 'paid' for the music.
That was the argument about the Internet radio and it's not free if you broadcast it. Even me putting my speakers out the window could (not saying it will) get me a bill from the Indusry. I remember Supermarkets getting in trouble for this (and where 'Musak' really came from)
I can do anything with my car, chop it up, put horns on it, feathers, part it out, sell you each part, why you could even make more money selling off again. I can put the car on YouTube, tape it's sounds. But my CD, or worse my DVD, that I can not sell nor 'piece out' because ? Because the Industry has blocked fair use by creating a legal law that tells me I can not break the encryption. Let's not argue about fair use let's create a law that makes it ilegal for me to copy my own DVD because the Industry put a lock on it. This has nothing to do with pirating or 'downloading' but my right to the data on the bloody disc. The Industry is using the format to define ownership for me but for them they define their ownership by working around my right to fair use (for personal use). I would argue that if they want to go down this road then we all should get license numbers for every album and song so we each can prove 'ownership/fair use' It's not the storage media. I would point out the fact that we are starting to see the Industry in it's own spineless way by releasing Blu-ray/DVD/Digital copy that they are aware of the conflict. They just don't like the possibilities of the consumers demanding proper licensing rights.
IMHO
That was the argument about the Internet radio and it's not free if you broadcast it. Even me putting my speakers out the window could (not saying it will) get me a bill from the Indusry. I remember Supermarkets getting in trouble for this (and where 'Musak' really came from)
I can do anything with my car, chop it up, put horns on it, feathers, part it out, sell you each part, why you could even make more money selling off again. I can put the car on YouTube, tape it's sounds. But my CD, or worse my DVD, that I can not sell nor 'piece out' because ? Because the Industry has blocked fair use by creating a legal law that tells me I can not break the encryption. Let's not argue about fair use let's create a law that makes it ilegal for me to copy my own DVD because the Industry put a lock on it. This has nothing to do with pirating or 'downloading' but my right to the data on the bloody disc. The Industry is using the format to define ownership for me but for them they define their ownership by working around my right to fair use (for personal use). I would argue that if they want to go down this road then we all should get license numbers for every album and song so we each can prove 'ownership/fair use' It's not the storage media. I would point out the fact that we are starting to see the Industry in it's own spineless way by releasing Blu-ray/DVD/Digital copy that they are aware of the conflict. They just don't like the possibilities of the consumers demanding proper licensing rights.
IMHO
The answer is to vote and vote wisely ... with your dollar and in every election. Do not vote for people that are narrow minded and arrogantly pro business.
Welcome to Capitalism. Population: The World.
You're only entitled to what you can afford. Sad, isn't it?
You're only entitled to what you can afford. Sad, isn't it?
This aticle is somewhat pointless. She argues that we have to buy the new format. what she fails to say, is that her record player didnt stop working the minute cds or tapes came out. If this lady wants, she can just keep them 45s spinning withot a problem.
She then says they stopped selling tape decks. Where? I can still go to an electronic store an buy some form of cassette player. Hmm, same goes for record player.
In one breath she says the old format (such as records) are obsolete, and in another says best buy is selling records.
Bottom line, nobody forced you to buy the new album again. What you think is obsolete, still seems to be around.
She then says they stopped selling tape decks. Where? I can still go to an electronic store an buy some form of cassette player. Hmm, same goes for record player.
In one breath she says the old format (such as records) are obsolete, and in another says best buy is selling records.
Bottom line, nobody forced you to buy the new album again. What you think is obsolete, still seems to be around.
I think where the "theft" arguments fall apart is in the reality that real theft involves the denial of use of the item stolen, and the loss of the resources used to purchase/create it. If I steal your car, you can no longer drive it, sell it, enjoy it, and you're out the money you paid. If I steal your money, you can no longer spend it, invest it, burn it. If I steal your favorite book you can no longer read it, share it with a friend, or prop up your dinner table with it. If I steal your ideas and beat you to market you can no longer profit from those ideas, or control how they are exploited. But if I "steal" a song or a movie, well, nothing happens; you can still sell it, play it, give it away, change it, etc. There is no real damage from a song or movie being "pirated" other than the person "pirating" may not buy what they have "stolen," but there is also no certain way to know if that person would have purchased the item if it couldn't have been "stolen."
This is why the fines they've come up with for "stealing" music and movies are so out the world crazy. They don't fit with the damage done in any sane manner. And they don't take into account that there are myriad LEGAL means to get the same materials for free, though perhaps in differing formats and levels of quality. The whole thing just plain stinks, and I'm disgusted with our elected "representatives" for allowing fair use rights to die and for not protecting the people from these greedy corporations.
This is why the fines they've come up with for "stealing" music and movies are so out the world crazy. They don't fit with the damage done in any sane manner. And they don't take into account that there are myriad LEGAL means to get the same materials for free, though perhaps in differing formats and levels of quality. The whole thing just plain stinks, and I'm disgusted with our elected "representatives" for allowing fair use rights to die and for not protecting the people from these greedy corporations.
I agree with Shaolin007. I have purchased albums, tapes, and CDs of the same titles far too many times. And they pull the crap that I don't own what I bought, but I've just been given a license to use it? Oh, ok, then the media it is on won't matter. So I can go ahead and transfer my CD copy to any other format I choose, since it isn't the media, but the license I bought, right? Yeah, I don't feel bad one bit re-acquiring titles I've already paid for in the past.
I don't think you're understanding my point. When they "obsolete" a format, they stop producing "new" songs and/or movies on them. Can you find the soundtrack for Rent on an LP? Are the latest musical top 10 hits still coming out on tapes?
When everything goes Blu-Ray, you'll either buy Blu-Ray equipment or you won't be able to buy the newer movies that are released on Blu-Ray "only"! You know, like how many movies are being released on VHS tape now???
And, by the way, the parts to repair your older equipment have a limited shelf life allowed by law - so even to stay in the older formats, you may have to re-buy and re-buy because they aren't made to last. Buying "new" is what was suppose to keep the economy strong...question is...whose economy? Ours isn't exactly thriving, is it?
People use to be able to buy a house and car and have money in the bank besides. But, they weren't on a purchasing tread-mill of having to replace their electronics over and over. That's an artificially created, unnecessary drain on our budgets! Why are we allowing this? How much long can we "afford" to allow it? Don't we deserve better? That's what I'm asking?
When everything goes Blu-Ray, you'll either buy Blu-Ray equipment or you won't be able to buy the newer movies that are released on Blu-Ray "only"! You know, like how many movies are being released on VHS tape now???
And, by the way, the parts to repair your older equipment have a limited shelf life allowed by law - so even to stay in the older formats, you may have to re-buy and re-buy because they aren't made to last. Buying "new" is what was suppose to keep the economy strong...question is...whose economy? Ours isn't exactly thriving, is it?
People use to be able to buy a house and car and have money in the bank besides. But, they weren't on a purchasing tread-mill of having to replace their electronics over and over. That's an artificially created, unnecessary drain on our budgets! Why are we allowing this? How much long can we "afford" to allow it? Don't we deserve better? That's what I'm asking?
Rontheripper - You win - I did forget the various stages LPs came out with! There was a 4-Track!
Thanks for proving the point even more.
Thanks for proving the point even more.
Thought provoking reply - Chuckwagon, put your finger right down on it!
And, speaking only for myself, if it were not for ripped copies, the Entertainment Industry would not have made the money they have on me. Yes, Amazon.com loves me!!! When someone prices their series at over $100.00 for the set, I'm not going to buy it without a preview - so a ripped copy is to me like the previews in the theater. Many might not agree with that - but I've bought thousands of dollars of legitimate DVDs because of ripped copies. Now, if those ripped copies weren't available, those legitimate sales would not have happened.
I think the Entertainment Industry might be better off letting pirating happen - it developes a market for their products in times and places that their "marketing dollars" won't reach. Instead of "pirates" - the Industry should regard them as "unpaid" advertisers - whose sole perk is the use of the product in passing.
I don't watch TV any more. But, I do go on YouTube. I saw a YouTube video of The Middleman - never heard of it until then! Thanks to the "unlicensed" use of their product by a fan on YouTube, I've now got the entire series on pre-order awaiting an August release date.
Chuckwagon - you said it well when you stated that "there no real damage done from a song or movie being pirated" - brilliant catch! I just wish there was some way to chart how much pirating has increased the sales of music and movies?
And, speaking only for myself, if it were not for ripped copies, the Entertainment Industry would not have made the money they have on me. Yes, Amazon.com loves me!!! When someone prices their series at over $100.00 for the set, I'm not going to buy it without a preview - so a ripped copy is to me like the previews in the theater. Many might not agree with that - but I've bought thousands of dollars of legitimate DVDs because of ripped copies. Now, if those ripped copies weren't available, those legitimate sales would not have happened.
I think the Entertainment Industry might be better off letting pirating happen - it developes a market for their products in times and places that their "marketing dollars" won't reach. Instead of "pirates" - the Industry should regard them as "unpaid" advertisers - whose sole perk is the use of the product in passing.
I don't watch TV any more. But, I do go on YouTube. I saw a YouTube video of The Middleman - never heard of it until then! Thanks to the "unlicensed" use of their product by a fan on YouTube, I've now got the entire series on pre-order awaiting an August release date.
Chuckwagon - you said it well when you stated that "there no real damage done from a song or movie being pirated" - brilliant catch! I just wish there was some way to chart how much pirating has increased the sales of music and movies?
If I could turn in my worn out vinyl or scratched CD to recover the 'license fee' I paid when I purchased it and apply that license to a new copy I would. How many times are you expected to pay royalties on the same content?
I totally agree. I am 38 and I have noticed a drastic change from 20 years ago. I think one of the major problems plaguing society nowadays are credit cards. Back in the day, it wasn't easy getting a credit card. You had to usually start with like a store credit card, with very limited credit, and build your "credit" up enough to apply for like a Visa or Mastercard and even then they only gave you a little bit of credit. Nowadays, they give someone, with little thought about their past, thousands of dollars in credit right off the bat. Now, we are in this, "Gotta have it now!", mentallity that the credit card companies put us in or trained us in. Back in the day, you had to have 1000's of dollars, most of the time, to put as a down payment on a house just to get a house. Look at us now with the "easy" credit. They have us all trained and they want us to "consume" as much junk as possible so they come up with schemes like Mary suggested to feed that and to fatten their wallets.
It sounds like Mary is getting emotional about this subject (LOL). However, I would have to agree with others here, she did write a very good article.
Very well expressed but also a bit unrealistic on some details/points.
I agree to a point but at the same time I am very happy to adopt SUPERIOR new formats. Format changes are not always about the industry making more money and soley for finacial reasons.
Moving from DVD to Blu ray is a step up in technology and in my opinion a far superior experience. After owning a 42" plasma for 3 years with only DVD, when I finally got a BR player I felt I was finally getting the value from my HDTV. No more grainy SD movies ! If I go out and re-purchase LOTR or Star Wars on Blu Ray (which I already own on DVD), I'm doing it because I want to own them in high def and will enjoy them more than my DVD versions.
Blu ray players can play your DVD collection. I do understand your frustration when they make new titles only available on the newer formats but at the same time, they don't usually do that until the older format is really dying off and a significant % of consumers are on the new format.
It look a long time for them to release movies on DVD exclusively and stop releasing VHS versions, that was only a few years ago.
It will be a while before studios ignore the huge DVD market and push blu ray only for movie release.
But I agree that once you've bought music, you should be allowed to convert it to any other format. Expecting me to buy an album for my iPod that I already own on CD is absurd and I will never do that.
I also don't agree that you can shoudl have any problem converting betweent formats. Your CD is your "master quality" version and you can convert songs to MP3, AAC or whatever you want. You always have the master CD to go back to...
Finally, many of the format changes are because of evolution of technology. If music industry stuck to CD and there was no MP3/AAC formats, how could you have a thumb size iPod that can play 1000's of songs ? You couldn't. We woudl all be walking around with goofy discman players and bulky CD wallets. Pretty lame...
I agree to a point but at the same time I am very happy to adopt SUPERIOR new formats. Format changes are not always about the industry making more money and soley for finacial reasons.
Moving from DVD to Blu ray is a step up in technology and in my opinion a far superior experience. After owning a 42" plasma for 3 years with only DVD, when I finally got a BR player I felt I was finally getting the value from my HDTV. No more grainy SD movies ! If I go out and re-purchase LOTR or Star Wars on Blu Ray (which I already own on DVD), I'm doing it because I want to own them in high def and will enjoy them more than my DVD versions.
Blu ray players can play your DVD collection. I do understand your frustration when they make new titles only available on the newer formats but at the same time, they don't usually do that until the older format is really dying off and a significant % of consumers are on the new format.
It look a long time for them to release movies on DVD exclusively and stop releasing VHS versions, that was only a few years ago.
It will be a while before studios ignore the huge DVD market and push blu ray only for movie release.
But I agree that once you've bought music, you should be allowed to convert it to any other format. Expecting me to buy an album for my iPod that I already own on CD is absurd and I will never do that.
I also don't agree that you can shoudl have any problem converting betweent formats. Your CD is your "master quality" version and you can convert songs to MP3, AAC or whatever you want. You always have the master CD to go back to...
Finally, many of the format changes are because of evolution of technology. If music industry stuck to CD and there was no MP3/AAC formats, how could you have a thumb size iPod that can play 1000's of songs ? You couldn't. We woudl all be walking around with goofy discman players and bulky CD wallets. Pretty lame...
Thank you!
shaolin007 - two major moves that began the destruction of the American economy was "taxing savings" - everyone took their money out of the bank and put it into the unpredictable stock market; and second, you named it - Credit Cards!
What really is even more disappointing is that fact that Industries employ psychiatrists, psychologists and other mental behavioral specialists specifically to tell them how to package, advertise and display their product so as to undermine our resistance to buy! That's why groceries actually "sell" shelf space" in their stores - the primo location being eye level and within easy reach! Companies who employ these pros get the mentality that we are just sheep that they, vias their professionals, can lead anywhere to do just about anything. And, too often, sad to say, they are right. You've got a right to point that out as part of the problem!
What really is even more disappointing is that fact that Industries employ psychiatrists, psychologists and other mental behavioral specialists specifically to tell them how to package, advertise and display their product so as to undermine our resistance to buy! That's why groceries actually "sell" shelf space" in their stores - the primo location being eye level and within easy reach! Companies who employ these pros get the mentality that we are just sheep that they, vias their professionals, can lead anywhere to do just about anything. And, too often, sad to say, they are right. You've got a right to point that out as part of the problem!
If you start a movement to recover the "license fees" already paid - I'll sign the petition! It would certainly make the Entertainment Industry very aware of the losses consumers, like you and I, have been taking on a regular basis.
Yes, it is sad, Fritzy_NO.1 - Do you think we, the consumers, can actually change that present reality by not buying impulsively, or perhaps, another strayegy? Any ideas?
All you young whippersnappers got ripped off listening to 2 dimensional music, never knowing the pleasure of being imersed in sound that surounds you with only one speaker (if done right, I prefer stereo). Video is different, the pictures have gotten better though you still have to pay a lot to get a tv that doesn't seem jittery. People do all the things that are being labeled "illegal", no one talks about it, but a lot do it. That is the nature of society. You can't compare music and video to cars, apples and oranges. With a simple sales tax license, you can buy a DVD and rent it out 1000 or more times and not pay a cent to anyone except the state's sales tax. Then sell the DVD. It's all bull.
Mary, I agree with you 100%! Marry me 
!!
Ivid, I acknowledge some of your points as true, but also to say that walking around with a bulky DiscMan & CD wallet is lame, well, different strokes for different folks. For those of us geezers that have arthritic hands/joints, to have to manipulate the micro buttons that are put in/on these "evolutionary" products are, quite frankly, a pain in the ass. I'll take the over-sized buttons and readouts anyday. Will there come a time that my mind will change for something newer than the latest Nanopod? Sure, but the arguement will still be the same - what is mine is mine, and if I want to 'share' it to my own 'Gobbledeegook' player without a license then by Gawd there had better be a Belchfire 2000 to let me do it!
!!Ivid, I acknowledge some of your points as true, but also to say that walking around with a bulky DiscMan & CD wallet is lame, well, different strokes for different folks. For those of us geezers that have arthritic hands/joints, to have to manipulate the micro buttons that are put in/on these "evolutionary" products are, quite frankly, a pain in the ass. I'll take the over-sized buttons and readouts anyday. Will there come a time that my mind will change for something newer than the latest Nanopod? Sure, but the arguement will still be the same - what is mine is mine, and if I want to 'share' it to my own 'Gobbledeegook' player without a license then by Gawd there had better be a Belchfire 2000 to let me do it!
In regards to music, analog is superior to digital. However with that said, it is more expensive to go the analog route and more convenient to go the digital route, with emphasis on convenient. So a progression in technology doesn't necessarily mean "superior". Vinyl sounds better than CD, if you have the right equipment, due to the increased dynamic range. But again, you have to have really good equipment. Also, MP3 is not a superior format to CDDA. That is the industry trend now, which really should scare everyone. I was listening to a MP3 track today, around 200VBR, that a friend of mine wanted me to listen to and it had cymbals in the music. I was like, damn that sounds horrible, the cymbals that is. They sounded really washed out and hollow. Add lossy compression and another industry trend, dynamic range compression, and you got a recipe for some horribly sounding noise because that is all it will ever be, noise.
HI TO ALL...THIS ARTICLE YOU ARE READING ...WAS FORMATTED BY A ..POLITICIAN..OR A VERY SMART SALES PERSON IT HAS MADE YOU BITE....CAN"T YOU SEE THAT..[NEW PRODUCTS RELY ON GREED ] THEY HAVE SUCKED YOU IN LIKE A BIG FISH....MUZZA.http://www.cdfreaks.com/jochem/../im...ies/7/clap.gif
"When they "obsolete" a format, they stop producing "new" songs and/or movies on them. Can you find the soundtrack for Rent on an LP? Are the latest musical top 10 hits still coming out on tapes?"
Now you are talking about a new release. Thats something different from buying the same old record on dvd. One more time...if you want to listen to your fabulous sounding record, then do so. Nobody is stopping you. As far as parts for repairs, if you went to garage sales, you would probably find a turntable every weekend for about $20. And not just some crappy ass kmart brand. I bought several Technics that ran better than the new ones today.
Get with the technology or get left behind. I bet if I went to your house you would be a cock on the walk with your i-pod, i-phone, and i-car.....yet bitch about it. I bet you bitch about $5.00 per gallon (europe prices), but fly like a bat out of hell when the light turns green. Makes sence.
Now you are talking about a new release. Thats something different from buying the same old record on dvd. One more time...if you want to listen to your fabulous sounding record, then do so. Nobody is stopping you. As far as parts for repairs, if you went to garage sales, you would probably find a turntable every weekend for about $20. And not just some crappy ass kmart brand. I bought several Technics that ran better than the new ones today.
Get with the technology or get left behind. I bet if I went to your house you would be a cock on the walk with your i-pod, i-phone, and i-car.....yet bitch about it. I bet you bitch about $5.00 per gallon (europe prices), but fly like a bat out of hell when the light turns green. Makes sence.
foo. posting to clear notification.
Perhaps you aren't understanding my complaint, or as you prefer to refer to it - my "bitch"! Why should I "have to" get with the technology? Especially when, if you've read the other comments, you'll see more techno-advanced and experienced persons than myself are attesting to the fact the "new" does not necessarily mean "better" - it only means a new carrot to dangle in front of impulsive consumers? See what Zathros has to say above - worth the read.
Equally, you are not appreciating that when one collects, and the Entertainment Industry stops producing in your format - your collecting days are over - thereby "forcing" you into the new technology, or, you do without. So, you see...it's all about the "new releases" - that's the crowbar they use to pry consumers from their old technology to the new - whether it's improved or not?
Sorry to say, but I don't own an i-pod, i-phone or i-car - so you'd lose your bet. I'm one of the poor that just keeps getting poorer by this revolving door policy of technology - making changes for the sake of "profit" - whether it improves we, the consumers, or not.
Equally, you are not appreciating that when one collects, and the Entertainment Industry stops producing in your format - your collecting days are over - thereby "forcing" you into the new technology, or, you do without. So, you see...it's all about the "new releases" - that's the crowbar they use to pry consumers from their old technology to the new - whether it's improved or not?
Sorry to say, but I don't own an i-pod, i-phone or i-car - so you'd lose your bet. I'm one of the poor that just keeps getting poorer by this revolving door policy of technology - making changes for the sake of "profit" - whether it improves we, the consumers, or not.
I think it is an excuse to buy music because is the right thing to do. I have several hundreds of CD's that I have downloaded and will not deny that most I have never listened a single track. I have also purchased several hundreds of CD's and some I have duplicated only because were re-released as remastered editions with the LP cover art and "better sound".
In many cases I download the music and purchase the actual CD only because I like to have them.
I am not against labels re-releasing the same music with different covers, or different formats since it is their way of making money. One is not obligated to purchase their product a single time. I am against labels stopping production of older items in their catalogues and do try to get it (if I like it) by any measn possible. (And for those against piracy I am talking about music and movies only. If I like a 1970 Mustang I will not go out and steal it.)
As for the commenst about Blue-ray, those machines are backwards compatible with DVD's (as far as I know) and just because an old movie was re-released in the new format does not grant purchasing the movie again (I am yet to see an old movie take advantage of the new format or a justifiable picture difference between DVD and Blu-ray, that's just me).
Not that I am promoting piracy but when the industry fails to provide the product, I don't see why we should not get it free of charge if there is an oportunity.
In many cases I download the music and purchase the actual CD only because I like to have them.
I am not against labels re-releasing the same music with different covers, or different formats since it is their way of making money. One is not obligated to purchase their product a single time. I am against labels stopping production of older items in their catalogues and do try to get it (if I like it) by any measn possible. (And for those against piracy I am talking about music and movies only. If I like a 1970 Mustang I will not go out and steal it.)
As for the commenst about Blue-ray, those machines are backwards compatible with DVD's (as far as I know) and just because an old movie was re-released in the new format does not grant purchasing the movie again (I am yet to see an old movie take advantage of the new format or a justifiable picture difference between DVD and Blu-ray, that's just me).
Not that I am promoting piracy but when the industry fails to provide the product, I don't see why we should not get it free of charge if there is an oportunity.
Ok for one, could you be a little more abrasive in getting your point across? Jeez dude, get some help, really. 
Seems to me this whole intellectual property thing can go on forever (depending on who\'s point of view!) Just my two cents worth. The industry never made a huge amount of \"noise\" when we converted our vinyl to cassette. Seems to me they were \"OK\" with it as long as we purchased the original vinyl to begin with. Flash forward a few decades, give us \"perfect sound forever\" and they\'re ranting that (due to p2p) file sharing webaren\'t paying for the \"property.\" I like her article in that it\'s ultimately are hard earned $$ that \"vote\" the economics involved. What I\'m not happy about is that there\'s a whole industry that wants to legislate (meaning getting my $$) if I want a more convenient way to get it onto the new technology. What I\'m saying is, what our forefathers in America once said that lead to our revolution....\"taxation without representation is tyranny\"....meaning we are being forced to repay for what we have already bought....its one thing to p2p something I don\'t own (Stealing IMHO) vs. taking something I\'ve bought and using/converting (like vinyl to cassette) for convenience
they :::: the record companys had [ 1 bite--]--vinyl....[.2 bite ]cassettes......[..3 bite ] cd.....[ .4 bite ] ... dvd.mp3.....plus all the extra rereleases of the same music it adds up to a big cash - rip off what did they pay to the writers /musicians/copyrights ....next to nothing ...because of there greed....they don"t get a cent THEY ...FORGOT...YOU .
It's true that in our contemporary society it appears that the ultimate goal has become the sole purpose of increasing revenue. Sometimes those that are enpowered to make these decisions are either crupt or use poor judgement. The question that comes up for me is, "Have things in my world improved because of their decisions?"
I heartily agree with the originally posted well written letter from Mary Cahill as reprinted above.
Unfortunately today's youth will never have known what was given up in exchange for what they believe to be "progress".
I heartily agree with the originally posted well written letter from Mary Cahill as reprinted above.
Unfortunately today's youth will never have known what was given up in exchange for what they believe to be "progress".
Perhaps I've got my wires crossed, Chuckwagon, but back in the day of Elvis, wasn't it quite the "scandal" to find out that a radio station was getting "paid" to promote a particular artist - because such heavy exposure could make or break their career?
Now, using that reasoning, if a radio station "refused" to pay to play, then wouldn't that artist be minus the necessary exposure that creates a market for their music? And, newer artists - well - they wouldn't have any real way to break into the national market - would they? What's left to them except word of mouth - TV interviews with free performances (while most people are at work)? I'm at a loss to see their next best means of nation-wide public exposure?
If stations have to pay to play, the days of "free radio" will likely bite the dust - or, become talk radio only. Much like TV has become mostly "reality TV" these days. Bummer!
Now, using that reasoning, if a radio station "refused" to pay to play, then wouldn't that artist be minus the necessary exposure that creates a market for their music? And, newer artists - well - they wouldn't have any real way to break into the national market - would they? What's left to them except word of mouth - TV interviews with free performances (while most people are at work)? I'm at a loss to see their next best means of nation-wide public exposure?
If stations have to pay to play, the days of "free radio" will likely bite the dust - or, become talk radio only. Much like TV has become mostly "reality TV" these days. Bummer!
Murray_bredin - you hit on a very sensitive point! It is much like charity affairs where 95% of what is raised goes to the "organizers" and 5% to the actual charity. The "money handlers" tend to not only cut themselves in for a piece of the action, they - as you indicated above - cut a lot of others "out". I, for one, when I buy a DVD, am not interested in supporting the "handlers" - but rather, my dollars are to support and encourage the "artists".
When I saw my charity dollars weren't going where I wanted, I stopped giving to "organized" charities and put my dollars to work with my family, friends and neighbors, etc.
If these artists decide to stop being handled, and put themselves at the mercy of their fans, who agree to pay on the honor system - I think we'd all be a lot happier. There's nothing keeping these artists from starting their own download website and testing the idea for themselves with a few new songs? If they don't get a cent from the present arrangement, what have they got to lose?
When I saw my charity dollars weren't going where I wanted, I stopped giving to "organized" charities and put my dollars to work with my family, friends and neighbors, etc.
If these artists decide to stop being handled, and put themselves at the mercy of their fans, who agree to pay on the honor system - I think we'd all be a lot happier. There's nothing keeping these artists from starting their own download website and testing the idea for themselves with a few new songs? If they don't get a cent from the present arrangement, what have they got to lose?
AmiWolf - you noted the one distinct difference between the Senior and Youthful markets - the size of the appliances! Young eyes see the small letters on those teeny-tiny phones while old eyes may have a little trouble. Younger fingers can texts on those itsy-bitsy buttons while older fingers can hit six buttons at once. Okay, as we age, it isn't so much about having a "cute" little anything so much as an "easy to use" something!
AmiWolf, you stated it well - different strokes for different folks! Oh, and thanks for making my day with your impulsive proposal!
AmiWolf, you stated it well - different strokes for different folks! Oh, and thanks for making my day with your impulsive proposal!
Interesting thread. One thing that springs to mind is the fact record companies have posted 'record' profits becos of file-sharing but they want to ban it & criminalize those involved. I recall the fuss on cassettes 'killing music' yet the record companies made huge revenues selling blank cassettes. The pop 'idol' show is a great example of empty promises that makes the record companies rich. Muppets like Cowell get paid $m's & the 'winner' gets a few cents per sold album. On the same note it's OK for Corporations & Governments to bankrupt businesses & steal the workers pensions, becos they can write in their own immunity when passing laws, but it's not OK for a consumer to expect fair-play. (How many DVDs were sold that were simply transfers from tape i.e. no improvement in quality even if the tech could support it.) For me the argument isn't about whether it is or isn't theft or even what constitutes theft, but why the notion only applies to 'ordinary' people -i.e. the people paying the highest percentage of their income in taxes & giving the highest percentage of their lives keeping the world ticking. If you copy & share some files & are caught you are quite likely to be punished with seizures & fines. Conversely the 'collapsing economy' is a threat to everyone but corrupt bankers & politicians won't be having their assets (gleaned from stolen pensions, funds for 'rebuilding' Iraq, etc etc ) seized will they....
How about a million Freak march on Washington?
tl;dr
Caught the part about being forced to repurchase the music. Nobody is forcing you to do anything of the sort. If you have the CD it's easy to copy it to whatever format you like. Screw what the 'law' says about that. As long as you are not sharing it with everyone on the planet then don't worry (The whole sharing thing is another argument altogether). The MP3 etc formats were NOT created by the music industry in order to force you to buy into another format. They would have been very happy to continue selling CD's. The MP3 format and it's ilk came along and FORCED the music industry to sell in this format to try and compete with FREE copies made available through filesharing. I do not side with the music industry at all and wish their demise pronto. But lets not mix up our facts. If you do not want to repurchase make a copy of the CD or vinyl you already have for personal use and quit bitching.
Caught the part about being forced to repurchase the music. Nobody is forcing you to do anything of the sort. If you have the CD it's easy to copy it to whatever format you like. Screw what the 'law' says about that. As long as you are not sharing it with everyone on the planet then don't worry (The whole sharing thing is another argument altogether). The MP3 etc formats were NOT created by the music industry in order to force you to buy into another format. They would have been very happy to continue selling CD's. The MP3 format and it's ilk came along and FORCED the music industry to sell in this format to try and compete with FREE copies made available through filesharing. I do not side with the music industry at all and wish their demise pronto. But lets not mix up our facts. If you do not want to repurchase make a copy of the CD or vinyl you already have for personal use and quit bitching.
Oh and equipment will ALWAYS become obsolete. Hey that's progress and technology for you and the free market economy (Capitalism) for you. You can't keep using that 8 track tape player forever you know.
OK read through some more of it. SO much bilgewater in this it defies belief. WTF has Vista got to do with music? Again market forces (Everyone wants a new 50" HDTV right?) makes these changes. Not the industry as a whole. Sure they offer it. But if the consumer does not want it they can tell them to shove it and it will fail (Look at digital audio cassette's for an example). Market forces drive this thing. 'Pop' music is still 'popular'. Celebrities are still making millions and idiots like you or I are still buying into this crap. Blame the consumer not the industry.
You seem to have some very "intense" feelings about all this. First, to answer "WTF has Vista got to do with music?" It was an example of what customer "refusal" can do - even to a mighty company like Microsoft. If it worked regarding Vista, might not the same approach have the an influence in the CD/DVD appliance market?
You are a prime example of who this article was written for. You say "Oh and equipment will ALWAYS become obsolete. Hey that's progress and technology for you and the free market economy (Capitalism) for you." I'm questioning - Why? Who says? Okay, let's "progress" - but rewrite the laws so older equipment doesn't totally obsolete every 7 years? That's having both - security for our present equipment plus progress! Why "must" we forfeit the one for sake of the other? Who wrote these rules! And, more importantly, why aren't we "re-writing them"?
If we "demand" better - we just might "get" better. But, if we merely submit to the idea without challenging it - as you are doing - then all we get is the same ol' same ol'.
You have energy because you seem to respond to me with enthusiasm. One can only wonder what enthusiasm like that might be able to do to improve everyone's situation if you questioned - REALLY QUESTIONED - some of this stuff you're telling me in such a "that's how it is" way?
Who says it has to be that way? If we don't question and instead, merely allow it to continue - yes - that's how it's going to be. But, if we start questioning - that's where change comes from.
I'm aware of all the "that's how it is" dogma that people use to talk themselves out of doing things. But, there comes a time - like when we're facing massive unemployment and a depressed economy that we have to admit it would be nice to put our money to use buying something else instead of "re-buying" the same old stuff we bought a few years ago...and the poor keep getting poorer! If you can't question who is pulling the strings and ask if there's something you can do to stop it, then you've simply missed the point of the article.
You are a prime example of who this article was written for. You say "Oh and equipment will ALWAYS become obsolete. Hey that's progress and technology for you and the free market economy (Capitalism) for you." I'm questioning - Why? Who says? Okay, let's "progress" - but rewrite the laws so older equipment doesn't totally obsolete every 7 years? That's having both - security for our present equipment plus progress! Why "must" we forfeit the one for sake of the other? Who wrote these rules! And, more importantly, why aren't we "re-writing them"?
If we "demand" better - we just might "get" better. But, if we merely submit to the idea without challenging it - as you are doing - then all we get is the same ol' same ol'.
You have energy because you seem to respond to me with enthusiasm. One can only wonder what enthusiasm like that might be able to do to improve everyone's situation if you questioned - REALLY QUESTIONED - some of this stuff you're telling me in such a "that's how it is" way?
Who says it has to be that way? If we don't question and instead, merely allow it to continue - yes - that's how it's going to be. But, if we start questioning - that's where change comes from.
I'm aware of all the "that's how it is" dogma that people use to talk themselves out of doing things. But, there comes a time - like when we're facing massive unemployment and a depressed economy that we have to admit it would be nice to put our money to use buying something else instead of "re-buying" the same old stuff we bought a few years ago...and the poor keep getting poorer! If you can't question who is pulling the strings and ask if there's something you can do to stop it, then you've simply missed the point of the article.
Ranspo, what a wonderful idea! However, most people can't afford the trip because they're still paying the credit card companies high rates for the new 50" TV they bought last month!
However, what about a million Freak signature petition? I'm on board - show me where to sign!
However, what about a million Freak signature petition? I'm on board - show me where to sign!
Great article, Mary!! One thing I want to chime in on is having backup copies. CDs were just beginning to replace cassette tapes when I was a kid, and after a while, I didn't want the cassettes anymore anyway, so that wasn't a problem for me. But when CDs came around, I always wondered when the day would come when I could make my own CDs, much like I used to make mixtapes of my favorite songs, or when I taped things off the radio. I was ecstatic when CD-Rs hit the scene, because that meant I could take all my CDs and make copies of them, and then put the real CDs in storage so they wouldn't get all scratched up!
And regarding filesharing actually boosting profits of the record companies, that's spot-on as well! Now that mp3s are here, all I do is download the music, then either delete the album if I hate it, or go out and buy the CD in a store or online if I like it. (I like having something tangible when I buy my music, even if digital format might be cheaper and more environmentally-friendly, but that's not really in the scope of this article.) Then, I rip the CD to mp3s and put them on my mp3 player, and then put the CD right back in its case and into a box for safe keeping.
I'm living proof of how file sharing boosts the sales of albums. If there was no way to preview an album, there's no way I'd take an upwards of $10-$15 risk by buying an album when I had no idea how it sounded. In this day and age, with all the bands selling out and making poppy music (which I despise), I can't afford to buy an album on blind faith anymore. Less Than Jake is a prime example of a band whose CDs I won't buy anymore, because I don't like their newer musical style, whereas with bands like Rancid and Dropkick Murphys, I will buy their new albums, because after listening to them, I still enjoy what the band is doing. And, no, little 30-second clips of select parts of each song are not enough to determine if the whole album is good or not. I've tried that before and I've been burned, so now I'm in full favor of downloading pirated copies of albums and then either deleting them, or buying the album afterwards (in which case you're legally allowed to keep those mp3s, because you now legally own the album!)
And regarding filesharing actually boosting profits of the record companies, that's spot-on as well! Now that mp3s are here, all I do is download the music, then either delete the album if I hate it, or go out and buy the CD in a store or online if I like it. (I like having something tangible when I buy my music, even if digital format might be cheaper and more environmentally-friendly, but that's not really in the scope of this article.) Then, I rip the CD to mp3s and put them on my mp3 player, and then put the CD right back in its case and into a box for safe keeping.
I'm living proof of how file sharing boosts the sales of albums. If there was no way to preview an album, there's no way I'd take an upwards of $10-$15 risk by buying an album when I had no idea how it sounded. In this day and age, with all the bands selling out and making poppy music (which I despise), I can't afford to buy an album on blind faith anymore. Less Than Jake is a prime example of a band whose CDs I won't buy anymore, because I don't like their newer musical style, whereas with bands like Rancid and Dropkick Murphys, I will buy their new albums, because after listening to them, I still enjoy what the band is doing. And, no, little 30-second clips of select parts of each song are not enough to determine if the whole album is good or not. I've tried that before and I've been burned, so now I'm in full favor of downloading pirated copies of albums and then either deleting them, or buying the album afterwards (in which case you're legally allowed to keep those mp3s, because you now legally own the album!)
I too remember the kerfluffle (don't ya' love the word?) when we started taping vinyl way back when. Like me, friends who copied albums were also the ones who bought the most music.
They lost nothing
The simple fact is I can't buy all I'd like to buy but when I hear something I really like I end up buying.
I may have missed the point in another posting but the only one's really making money on album sales are the record companies - your average 'rolling stones' type band might get $1 per album. Most bands risk losing their shirts selling records and end up owing the lables- hence artist owned lables and recording companies.
Power to the people!
Great article Mary!
They lost nothing
The simple fact is I can't buy all I'd like to buy but when I hear something I really like I end up buying.
I may have missed the point in another posting but the only one's really making money on album sales are the record companies - your average 'rolling stones' type band might get $1 per album. Most bands risk losing their shirts selling records and end up owing the lables- hence artist owned lables and recording companies.
Power to the people!
Great article Mary!
Blu ray like Vista is already dead. U just don't know it yet. The next generation of digital media is already being developed for the consumer market. If not for the likes of Sony it would already have bit the dust. So start saving to buy the latest copies of your LP, EP's, CD's etc etc. Once more to the store. The best bet for everyone would be to hold on to your DVD's. It was an excellent article
My biggest issue with the compressed formats being sold as a replacement for CD's is just that. It's lossy and of less quality (and therefore less value to me) and yet they want people to buy this low quality muck for the same price. MP3 was created and adopted by the online community and the record companies were forced into trying to make a buck from it. When it's not worth a buck to begin with. Now we are in a world where low quality compressed audio files are becoming the norm and CD's are under threat of going extinct with NO high quality audio replacement.
I bet anyone with a high end audio system is gnashing their teeth right now with frustration.
I bet anyone with a high end audio system is gnashing their teeth right now with frustration.
Mary: You have a lot to say about something that has hurt me for years. I am disabled and have to stay home all the time. All I have are my records which saw me though many a decade. Now I cannot play them. Can't repair my equipment, and can't afford new equipment. Then there are the cd's, which I cannot buy because they cost too much. Although I have some, I have never been able to replace even half my records. I am soon to be 62, in very poor health, is it asking too much to just be able to stay home and be happy? Why must I spend my last years looking to replace songs I already own. Well thanks Mary for saying what someone should have said 40 years ago.
Mary: You have a lot to say about something that has hurt me for years. I am disabled and have to stay home all the time. All I have are my records which saw me though many a decade. Now I cannot play them. Can't repair my equipment, and can't afford new equipment. Then there are the cd's, which I cannot buy because they cost too much. Although I have some, I have never been able to replace even half my records. I am soon to be 62, in very poor health, is it asking too much to just be able to stay home and be happy? Why must I spend my last years looking to replace songs I already own. Well thanks Mary for saying what someone should have said 40 years ago..
Gee Mary, do I take that as a maybe on the proposal? I'm fifty seven, so you'd not be robbing the craddle Enquiring minds wanna know!
DeadMan, whether or not the CD or MP3 has 'quality', it all depends on the person listening to it. If you have a set of KlipschHorn monitors driven by whatever the latest big watt amp & pre-amp setup is now a-days, it's your ears that will sense the change. I've listened to King Crimson's first album <---) and have heard the CD, "In The Court of The Crimson King" on both high end and a low end system. Difference? Obviously the bodily punch from the Horns was impressive, but I just wanted to hear the music, so played on my little Emerson 25 CD gizmo was just as enjoyable.
I did purchase a TEAC LP-to-CD machine, just for the shere pleasure of converting the 800 albums sitting in my basement over to CD so that I can put them on my computer. To share? Nope, just becaue they're mine and I will do well what I want to with them.
Janelda, I symphathise with you, my pereprial neuropathy is getting worse and worse, by the day. Only a matter of time before I'm chained to a chair staring at the wall(s)...
Enquiring minds wanna know!DeadMan, whether or not the CD or MP3 has 'quality', it all depends on the person listening to it. If you have a set of KlipschHorn monitors driven by whatever the latest big watt amp & pre-amp setup is now a-days, it's your ears that will sense the change. I've listened to King Crimson's first album <---) and have heard the CD, "In The Court of The Crimson King" on both high end and a low end system. Difference? Obviously the bodily punch from the Horns was impressive, but I just wanted to hear the music, so played on my little Emerson 25 CD gizmo was just as enjoyable.
I did purchase a TEAC LP-to-CD machine, just for the shere pleasure of converting the 800 albums sitting in my basement over to CD so that I can put them on my computer. To share? Nope, just becaue they're mine and I will do well what I want to with them.
Janelda, I symphathise with you, my pereprial neuropathy is getting worse and worse, by the day. Only a matter of time before I'm chained to a chair staring at the wall(s)...
Markymar@bellsouth.net - I really, really...really wish I could tell you that you are wrong - but you aren't! Money seems to be the sole motivation these days - and you stated that right up front.
And, unfortunately, you are right again...our "so-called" progress did come at a price! I doubt that where we are - is where any of us intended to land? I, for one, had something much better in mind. Sounds like you did too!
And, unfortunately, you are right again...our "so-called" progress did come at a price! I doubt that where we are - is where any of us intended to land? I, for one, had something much better in mind. Sounds like you did too!
Hartfordpunkrocker, I had to laugh when I read that "And, no, little 30-second clips of select parts of each song are not enough to determine if the whole album is good or not." You are sooooooo right!
What would we do without YouTube? That's one of the sites where I usually can preview the full song - and then decide whether to buy it or not.
I don't think it falls outside the scope of the article to discuss having something tangible regarding your music - that's money spent - in one fashion or another. Most people who are "into" either music or videos tend to be of the "collector" mentality - and that usually means that having the "hard copy" is a must.
One point you make that is fresh is that we can't "blindly" buy on band or artist "name recognition" any more. Too many artists selling out. Wise of you to point that out!
What would we do without YouTube? That's one of the sites where I usually can preview the full song - and then decide whether to buy it or not.
I don't think it falls outside the scope of the article to discuss having something tangible regarding your music - that's money spent - in one fashion or another. Most people who are "into" either music or videos tend to be of the "collector" mentality - and that usually means that having the "hard copy" is a must.
One point you make that is fresh is that we can't "blindly" buy on band or artist "name recognition" any more. Too many artists selling out. Wise of you to point that out!
Wow - looks like the Enterainment Industry is ripping "everyone" off - artists and consumers alike! Thanks for the insight, Xavieronassis.
AmiWolf -
A TEAC LP to CD machine, huh? You sure know how to turn a girl's head! Getting one of those is on my "wish list". But, first, I bought the Toshiba D-VR600KU VCR to DVD video recorder.
I can appreciate what you are saying about sound quality - that it doesn't "have to be" superior to be enjoyed. I'm pretty much the same way with video. I've kin that own 50" TVs that they sit 2 feet in front of because their house isn't big enough to allow them to get the proper distance from the screen. They bought it because they want more sensational explosions, etc. Me? - if I want reality - I'll look out the window. I tried watching Blu-Ray and got distracted by the poorly covered zit on Spiderman's face! Dating myself, for sure, I remember when entertainment was all about escapism!
Might I ask, does the TEAC LP to CD machine require special-made CD's or will any brand do? I imagine by now, you've had to replace the needle - are those expensive and hard to get?
And, as for inquiring minds, I met my first and only husband because a friend wanted me to answer her brother's letters - they were too involved for her. So, I did. And shortly thereafter, he came to see just who it was writing him. He proposed the first week - we were married by the second. (This is where you swollow nervously!) The marriage lasted until his death some 17 years later and was a happy one. See what can happen to men with inquiring minds!
Pereprial neuropathy usually has an underlying base like diabetes or even environmental conditions like working a jack-hammer in the dead of winter, etc. The condition is said to be one that may well be expected to improve on its own once that base cause is removed. We'll keep a good thought that "your" condition does improve.
A TEAC LP to CD machine, huh? You sure know how to turn a girl's head! Getting one of those is on my "wish list". But, first, I bought the Toshiba D-VR600KU VCR to DVD video recorder.
I can appreciate what you are saying about sound quality - that it doesn't "have to be" superior to be enjoyed. I'm pretty much the same way with video. I've kin that own 50" TVs that they sit 2 feet in front of because their house isn't big enough to allow them to get the proper distance from the screen. They bought it because they want more sensational explosions, etc. Me? - if I want reality - I'll look out the window. I tried watching Blu-Ray and got distracted by the poorly covered zit on Spiderman's face! Dating myself, for sure, I remember when entertainment was all about escapism!
Might I ask, does the TEAC LP to CD machine require special-made CD's or will any brand do? I imagine by now, you've had to replace the needle - are those expensive and hard to get?
And, as for inquiring minds, I met my first and only husband because a friend wanted me to answer her brother's letters - they were too involved for her. So, I did. And shortly thereafter, he came to see just who it was writing him. He proposed the first week - we were married by the second. (This is where you swollow nervously!) The marriage lasted until his death some 17 years later and was a happy one. See what can happen to men with inquiring minds!
Pereprial neuropathy usually has an underlying base like diabetes or even environmental conditions like working a jack-hammer in the dead of winter, etc. The condition is said to be one that may well be expected to improve on its own once that base cause is removed. We'll keep a good thought that "your" condition does improve.
Janelda - you are right - after 62 years of life, you should expect more. 40 years ago, we had no idea that poorer segments of today's society would be selling their blood on a regular basis just to afford gas for their cars? The Powers That Be promised a much rosier picture as I remember? If only we knew then what we do now, huh?
Dear Miss Mary: You just keep right on impressing me. Not only do you understand about all those things with the numbers behind their names. Nevertheless, about health too. I have more health trouble than you can even begin to understand. However, I would lay money that you would. How does one get so smart?
AmiWolf : Janelda, I sympathies with you, my pretrial neuropathy is getting worse and worse, by the day. Only a matter of time before I'm chained to a chair staring at the wall(s)...
Thanks for understanding.
AmiWolf : Janelda, I sympathies with you, my pretrial neuropathy is getting worse and worse, by the day. Only a matter of time before I'm chained to a chair staring at the wall(s)...
Thanks for understanding.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_tec_music_downloading
A Minnesota mother has been found guilty of violating copyright laws for 24 songs. The record companies have been awarded $80,000 per song, which totals to $1.92 million. This case is an appeal from a 2007 case, which resulted in a $220,000 judgment.
The RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) was willing to settle for only $3,000 to $5,000 per song earlier in the case. They claim to still be willing to settle.
The case stems from an accusation of her offering 1,700 songs on Kazaa in 2005, before the company became a legal subscription service. The record companies chose to only pursue 24 infringements.
Now that's justice... NOT!
A Minnesota mother has been found guilty of violating copyright laws for 24 songs. The record companies have been awarded $80,000 per song, which totals to $1.92 million. This case is an appeal from a 2007 case, which resulted in a $220,000 judgment.
The RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) was willing to settle for only $3,000 to $5,000 per song earlier in the case. They claim to still be willing to settle.
The case stems from an accusation of her offering 1,700 songs on Kazaa in 2005, before the company became a legal subscription service. The record companies chose to only pursue 24 infringements.
Now that's justice... NOT!
Frook, "Justice" is suppose to make us feel good - but the events you mention only stimulate "outrage". Shouldn't we name names here? According to what I was able to dig up:
The companies suing are subsidiaries of all four major recording companies, Warner Music Group Corp., Vivendi SA's Universal Music Group, EMI Group PLC and Sony Corp.'s Sony Music Entertainment.
Perhaps not purchasing goods from these companies for a substantial period of time - like until they "forgive" this womans' debt would be an attention-getting reaction of disapproval that these companies might notice??? They obviously don't care that we "think" they are villians. Negative public approval doesn't seem to be hurting their profit line any? Not buying their products might? At least, now, we know who they are.
The companies suing are subsidiaries of all four major recording companies, Warner Music Group Corp., Vivendi SA's Universal Music Group, EMI Group PLC and Sony Corp.'s Sony Music Entertainment.
Perhaps not purchasing goods from these companies for a substantial period of time - like until they "forgive" this womans' debt would be an attention-getting reaction of disapproval that these companies might notice??? They obviously don't care that we "think" they are villians. Negative public approval doesn't seem to be hurting their profit line any? Not buying their products might? At least, now, we know who they are.
Mary, Companys' who can afford to buy the politicians who write the 'Law' clearly have the edge.
If 'recession' isn't enough reason to boycott products (i.e. not to be robbed by unreasonable profit margins & planned obsolescence), then knowing the 'Law' supports such wilful & grandiose vengeance & thus perpetuates the many price-fixing tactics, should be.
No profit = no pay-offs. If the gravy-train could be derailed, real 'Justice' might appear.
If 'recession' isn't enough reason to boycott products (i.e. not to be robbed by unreasonable profit margins & planned obsolescence), then knowing the 'Law' supports such wilful & grandiose vengeance & thus perpetuates the many price-fixing tactics, should be.
No profit = no pay-offs. If the gravy-train could be derailed, real 'Justice' might appear.
Frook, I suppose that listing every product these companies are presently selling along with a suggestion that buying those products enables them to continue to persecute hapless folks might be a way to start something? Your thoughts?
Mary, you may have 'got me started'.
If I envisage a 'worst-case' scenario.....
Listing every product exhaustively would require building & updating a major database, the sheer volume of which could likely reduce the interest of potential 'rebels'.
That said, a list of companies & subsidaries could be enough to get people doing the research they wished to do.
I suspect that if one were to openly attack any company of this size, regardless of 'Truth' their lawyers would quickly bankrupt most individuals before anything ever got to trial. They can create any number of problems & if that were to fail there are the 'anti-terror' laws which are flexible enough to cripple anything they choose. Censoring the internet is just one way to eliminate discussions like this thread.
One would need legal advice as to how & what could be said. I personally imagine comments such as:
'I believe company X is responsible for these atrocities: - A, B, C & urge everyone to investigate & follow their conscience' & maybe provide info URLs as support, could provide you enough of a legal loop-hole to snowball a reaction.
That does not mean the companies concerned couldn't pressure any web-host hosting a site with said commentary into difficulties given the amount of money & power involved.
The biggest problem with any real 'rebellion' peaceful or not is the lengths to which the opponents will go to preserve their power.
How often does one see a big player spend $m's to recover/protect pennies? It's not about just cash it's about preserving the status quo. If politicians collude with big business then any serious challenge to said business must be outlawed or marginalised in some way.
I will not say it cannot be done, just that doing it successfully can be problematic in many ways one does not imagine.
A serious concern is the general notion of worth/value held by many people at large.
I've been asking why, if the price of a product reflects real value, does it depreciate so quickly (computers being a fine example of planned depreciation that goes on & on.)
Too few people make that kind of assessment & the greedy go unchallenged.
The mentality of the ideal consumer is to resist (by any means) any suggestion that they are wrong to accept the conditions of their slavery. The result is they work against the very thing that could 'save' them.
The Romans who introduced things like 'conspicuous consumption' & the 'fast food joint' to the world knew very well the power of the subjugation that resulted. Re:- Tacitus.
2000 years on it hasn't got any easier....
A multi-pronged attack would be nice.
There must be many approaches that would legitimately heighten awareness of industry duplicity & thus increase the possibility of boycotting unhelpful & unscrupulous manufacturers.
Right now I imagine sales law would allow for lobbying to force companies to label Blu-ray discs (& their successors) with data on the source recording - i.e. was it filmed in full HD on full HD equipment or is it a VHS recode originally filmed on low grade celluloid being re-issued?
The consumer would have a chance to more fully assess the need for the purchase & the validity of the price with more detailed labelling.
How's that for a few thoughts?
If I envisage a 'worst-case' scenario.....
Listing every product exhaustively would require building & updating a major database, the sheer volume of which could likely reduce the interest of potential 'rebels'.
That said, a list of companies & subsidaries could be enough to get people doing the research they wished to do.
I suspect that if one were to openly attack any company of this size, regardless of 'Truth' their lawyers would quickly bankrupt most individuals before anything ever got to trial. They can create any number of problems & if that were to fail there are the 'anti-terror' laws which are flexible enough to cripple anything they choose. Censoring the internet is just one way to eliminate discussions like this thread.
One would need legal advice as to how & what could be said. I personally imagine comments such as:
'I believe company X is responsible for these atrocities: - A, B, C & urge everyone to investigate & follow their conscience' & maybe provide info URLs as support, could provide you enough of a legal loop-hole to snowball a reaction.
That does not mean the companies concerned couldn't pressure any web-host hosting a site with said commentary into difficulties given the amount of money & power involved.
The biggest problem with any real 'rebellion' peaceful or not is the lengths to which the opponents will go to preserve their power.
How often does one see a big player spend $m's to recover/protect pennies? It's not about just cash it's about preserving the status quo. If politicians collude with big business then any serious challenge to said business must be outlawed or marginalised in some way.
I will not say it cannot be done, just that doing it successfully can be problematic in many ways one does not imagine.
A serious concern is the general notion of worth/value held by many people at large.
I've been asking why, if the price of a product reflects real value, does it depreciate so quickly (computers being a fine example of planned depreciation that goes on & on.)
Too few people make that kind of assessment & the greedy go unchallenged.
The mentality of the ideal consumer is to resist (by any means) any suggestion that they are wrong to accept the conditions of their slavery. The result is they work against the very thing that could 'save' them.
The Romans who introduced things like 'conspicuous consumption' & the 'fast food joint' to the world knew very well the power of the subjugation that resulted. Re:- Tacitus.
2000 years on it hasn't got any easier....
A multi-pronged attack would be nice.
There must be many approaches that would legitimately heighten awareness of industry duplicity & thus increase the possibility of boycotting unhelpful & unscrupulous manufacturers.
Right now I imagine sales law would allow for lobbying to force companies to label Blu-ray discs (& their successors) with data on the source recording - i.e. was it filmed in full HD on full HD equipment or is it a VHS recode originally filmed on low grade celluloid being re-issued?
The consumer would have a chance to more fully assess the need for the purchase & the validity of the price with more detailed labelling.
How's that for a few thoughts?
HI TO ALL the only thing we own is freedom of thought i own mine ....next thing i will hear they have cloned that ...then we will be up a creek without a paddle PS...they own everything else...muzza.http://www.cdfreaks.com/jochem/../im...ies/7/clap.gifhttp://www.cdfreaks.com/jochem/../im...lies/6/eek.gif
Frook, I love the depth of your thinking. And, you've convinced me that going through proper channels is not only dangerous - it's probably also just a waste of time and energy.
Me, I'm of a mind to just start an email - you know - the kind that you send to everyone on your email list - no muss - no fuss! Needless to say, I'd make every effort to be as exactingly accurate as possible. I mean, if, like you say, the politicians are in the pocket of Industry, then the only hope is to contact the "people" directly?
If the email was to have the email addresses of the big 4 behind these law suits, and everyone were to email them that they are not buying until these trials cease - well - do you think that would work? Your thoughts?
Me, I'm of a mind to just start an email - you know - the kind that you send to everyone on your email list - no muss - no fuss! Needless to say, I'd make every effort to be as exactingly accurate as possible. I mean, if, like you say, the politicians are in the pocket of Industry, then the only hope is to contact the "people" directly?
If the email was to have the email addresses of the big 4 behind these law suits, and everyone were to email them that they are not buying until these trials cease - well - do you think that would work? Your thoughts?
Mary - nice to be appreciated !!!
I guess that an email would be simple start, Oaks from Acorns. & if u want to be cautious/paranoid you could start anonymously in a web-cafe etc.
Emailing the companies directly has 2 basic weak-spots - 1. Spam-filters & 2. the message doesn't get seen by anyone 'important' enough to make a difference.
If you could flood the servers with millions of emails simultaneously they would have to investigate a little but orchestrating that would be tricky. Furthermore people would actually have to stop buying for a signifcant period of time for the threat to have meaning. And the media would have to be tipped-off.
There must be other small things that even given official channels can still have a snowball effect in terms of public awareness. They're not war-winners but every bit helps. Official channels are designed to be slow & soul-destroying dead-ends, but a few moments of media time sparks interest, & then the emails start arriving....
Of course there is risk associated with any public action. Especially as you cannot expect fair-play but still have to be a 'white-knight'.
Theoretically I think that the notion of asking for a change in how labels report contents could have mileage because it could have politicial & media interest, because it is a reasonable & legitiimate concern. (Compare the labelling of food additives that has become legally required) & I expect that even suggesting it would cost the companies, financially & in negative publicity. Internal rivalries could propel that kind of controversy.
With the appeal of class-actions I could envisage being able to mount an attack on the basis of "re-encoded bit-rate isn't a substantial improvement on source quality & this 'HD' movie is therefore being mis-sold." The discussions on 'HD movies' that can't possibly be 'HD', is already underway on the net etc & riding that wave might get needed impetus.
You just need an suitable 'Lawyer' ...
On a broader note if one could make people genuinely curb their 'retail therapy' addiction the planet might have a chance. How about a 'Spending Strike' - no-one buys anything they don't absolutely need for a week. Or a year... (& I guess that would definately label me a terrorist as it definately would be 'against national interest' to organise that bad boy )
I find it strange that any society can routinely force people out of work in the name of economy but still expect people to pay inflated costs for every item or service they use. If you remove income who can actually buy tomorrows' rubbish that's being mass-produced?
As a personal struggle just starting this thread was a victory & has helped a few people to review their position (even if they only came to the wrong conclusion ). Any way you can spread legitimate concerns has the potential to help. One just has to remember to be careful.
I guess that an email would be simple start, Oaks from Acorns. & if u want to be cautious/paranoid you could start anonymously in a web-cafe etc.
Emailing the companies directly has 2 basic weak-spots - 1. Spam-filters & 2. the message doesn't get seen by anyone 'important' enough to make a difference.
If you could flood the servers with millions of emails simultaneously they would have to investigate a little but orchestrating that would be tricky. Furthermore people would actually have to stop buying for a signifcant period of time for the threat to have meaning. And the media would have to be tipped-off.
There must be other small things that even given official channels can still have a snowball effect in terms of public awareness. They're not war-winners but every bit helps. Official channels are designed to be slow & soul-destroying dead-ends, but a few moments of media time sparks interest, & then the emails start arriving....
Of course there is risk associated with any public action. Especially as you cannot expect fair-play but still have to be a 'white-knight'.
Theoretically I think that the notion of asking for a change in how labels report contents could have mileage because it could have politicial & media interest, because it is a reasonable & legitiimate concern. (Compare the labelling of food additives that has become legally required) & I expect that even suggesting it would cost the companies, financially & in negative publicity. Internal rivalries could propel that kind of controversy.
With the appeal of class-actions I could envisage being able to mount an attack on the basis of "re-encoded bit-rate isn't a substantial improvement on source quality & this 'HD' movie is therefore being mis-sold." The discussions on 'HD movies' that can't possibly be 'HD', is already underway on the net etc & riding that wave might get needed impetus.
You just need an suitable 'Lawyer' ...
On a broader note if one could make people genuinely curb their 'retail therapy' addiction the planet might have a chance. How about a 'Spending Strike' - no-one buys anything they don't absolutely need for a week. Or a year... (& I guess that would definately label me a terrorist as it definately would be 'against national interest' to organise that bad boy
)I find it strange that any society can routinely force people out of work in the name of economy but still expect people to pay inflated costs for every item or service they use. If you remove income who can actually buy tomorrows' rubbish that's being mass-produced?
As a personal struggle just starting this thread was a victory & has helped a few people to review their position (even if they only came to the wrong conclusion
). Any way you can spread legitimate concerns has the potential to help. One just has to remember to be careful.
I agree greatly with the commentary
Most popular headlines
Repeat UK file sharers to be banned (2)
- Wednesday 28 October 22:56 by Randomus
- Piracy
Internet users in the United Kingdom accused of illegally sharing copyrighted music and movie files will face stiff penalties, starting with warning letters that will lead to bandwidth restrictions, according to media reports from the UK.
Nintendo to launch larger screen DSi
- Wednesday 28 October 01:35 by Randomus
- Game Consoles
Nintendo is expected to launch a new DSi hand-held gaming device in Japan that has a larger screen, as the company tries to increase sales in the hand-held gaming market it once dominated.
T-Mobile offers no contract phone plan
- Tuesday 27 October 22:46 by Randomus
- Mobile Phones
In an effort to better compete with Verizon Wireless and AT&T, T-Mobile has introduced new no-contract wireless plans that include unlimited voice services.
2 new Roku boxes launched for Netflix & more
- Tuesday 27 October 21:50 by JaredNewman
- Online Video
Roku's streaming set-top set-top boxes now come in three flavors, adding new features as well.
