Comments on: Is file-sharing morally wrong?

By: Kerry H

Kerry H — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 19:44:22 +0000

Though I have not had the time to read all the comments here, I think I get the jist of what many of you are saying…same say that since we don’t downlaod books, video games, dvdes, or computer softwear for free, why should that be okay for music? Others say that downlaoding is like lending a friend a book or a video game and that’s not illegal is it? The truth is though that musicians need to put food on their plates. And being a musician myself, it scares me to think about the way the industry is headed. In the comment from Ransack Productions, they stated “Most people understand that major record labels will loss but feel that their artists wouldn’t loss because they make their monies off of tours shows, and other marketable commodities with in the music industry that they can capitalize on” but hoenstly, tours and merch wont pay the bills. Unless you are completly DIY (which is hard to get noticed and gain a fan base) you are going to need a record company to help you out with some cash flow. But what most people don’t know is that they expect you to repay that money back, which comes from touring and soemtimes merch. When people attain music for free they are taking valuble money away from those bands that do infact need to repay those record companies. I think in the end this will cause good music to suffer. All those young kids that want to play in bands will soon realize there is no money in the industry (untill we find a way around this) which in turn will cause many potential musicians to turn other ways to support themselves.

So, I don’t know if I would saying the act of downlaoding is morally wrong (like theft or what not) but I think technology has come back to bite us in the ass. We did this to ourselves. And I think it sucks. Untill we find a new way around this mess…the future of the music industry is looking pretty gloomy.

By: Adam!!!

Adam!!! — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 13:18:09 +0000

You guys helped some of my friends.

By: Ransack Productions

Ransack Productions — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 07:24:16 +0000

File sharing is morally wrong depending on what generation someone might be speaking too! In a time of chaos from the globally economy to the music industry that is becoming over saturated on a daily basis. We all live in a time that easy means better and better may mean free for some. Music use to cost the average consumer $10-15 for an Album that they would be able to enjoy in the comfort of their own home. Most listeners who couldn’t afford an album back in the 80’s would just record their favorite song off of the radio station with the radio deejay’s commentary talking over the beginning of their favorite song! Most people liked that they could listen to the song on their walkman cassette player or in their car on their way to school or work. But what most didn’t like is the deejay talking over the beginning and end of the song that they enjoyed. In this case they would just wait for the song’s single to be release and go to the music store and by the album of single released. And in today’s times it is not much different except that technology is way more advanced and now listeners and potential consumers are able to obtain higher quality music threw CD’s and mp3’s digital files without the radio deejay broadcasting the songs title by talking over the beginning and end of the song. This is where the problem beginnings as for ‘Free music’ because listeners can now get songs for free without any interruption which may lead them to not buying the song from stores because they’ve gotten the highest recorded one for free online. And with this option they are able to also share the media mp3 song file with their friends and family at no cost! Most people understand that major record labels will loss but feel that their artists wouldn’t loss because they make their monies off of tours shows, and other marketable commodities with in the music industry that they can capitalize on. But at the same time if the major labels loss money they will not sign new talent because they need to show a profit margin gain from some sort. It is a catch 23 scenario. And this is because if major labels fall out of the picture that is going to help on the financial end of marketing & promoting the new and up and coming artists out there? This causes an industry of saturation of artists who only get recognized on a low level because of the financial gain from music that it gives in this time. The industry will still consist of artists but maybe not at the same caliber of what it use to be because of the lack of money involved in the industry.

By: cadeeto

cadeeto — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 00:09:16 +0000

Im realy interested in seeing the case files though as i know there is much much more to it

By: cadeeto

cadeeto — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 23:47:39 +0000

I beleive that these media companys are putting out feeler files to catch torrent users,that said,there are so many files avalable on these sites its impossable for the unknowing user to tell which files are copywrited and which are not,there are program hackers who crack these files and its them that make these illigal files avalable,thay are like drug dealers, most work for these media companys,some are clever board rich young kids that know no better,so why dont they go after those not joe public,yes it`s a new world and a new drug,

By: Bob

Bob — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 14:37:49 +0000

I think file sharing is wrong. If you think its ok to download music then shouldnt it also be ok to download books, games, and everything. So basically everything should be free? Thats a nice thought but its not how the world works.

At the same time they charge very unfair prices for things. I remember reading somewhere that less than 10 cents of a itunes song goes to the artists and the rest goes to apple/record company.

I think 50 cents would be a fair price for a song if an artists gets their share(not that a lot of them actually need it).

Most people can’t even comprehend how much money some artists and movie stars have. Maybe thats why our economy is so bad because we have rich people sitting on all the dough. They spend more on a piece of furniture than a average home costs.

I think the honest way to do things is to just rent or borrow whatever you can. With something like netflix you can rent whatever you want and not worry about downloading movies. Try to find used cd’s or be more selective about what you buy.

I think piracy for the most part will end. They have unlimited money and will sue and find ways to control the internet.

By: Chris

Chris — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 09:41:52 +0000

I am a DJ in South Africa. Origional CD’s are expensive expensive expensive. And there are only realy full albums available.

I charge about R150 an hour for a club…a cd costs R120 to R200. And I only want one or two songs on the frikkin CD. I can download single tracks off of the internet for a much lower costs, but have to put in credit card details…the bank wont give me a credit card because I am a DJ.

I can easily download a popular track off the internet for free.

Secondly, South Africa takes forever to get the latest tracks. I know what songs I need, but cant find them in the stores. Therefore I do not have the tracks that some people want me to play (as I play in an extremely commercial club). Therefore I am considered a bad DJ. I am promoting my brand as a DJ and need to keep the crowds happy.

Yes the recording labels need to make money, but they are only profit driven. I doubt any of them remember what the reason was that they got into the music industry. Do they hear a song and go WOW that is a good song, or just hear a cash register?

By: Colleen

Colleen — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 15:31:11 +0000

Ask yourself this question: How would you feel if you had to take a pay cut, work for free or generally itemize your pay in respect to your hours worked? How would you react? Yet, this is a reality for thousands of professionals worldwide who are victims of illegal downloads. The truth of the matter is most small businesses are struggling to survive to b/c of individuals who think “sharing” is OK. It doesn’t matter b/c they are not stealing anything from an individual it is a big corporation - WRONG.

I am a small business owner who is struggling b/c individuals are “sharing” my work with others. I have had a huge dip in sales and revenues due to copyright infringement.

I find it appalling that one would justify this type of action as “fee advertising”. Would you work for free? How am I supposed to support my family, my employees and their families? Who is going to suffer b/c of your theft? We are! So let’s call a spade a spade and jump into reality. When you download copyrighted information you are stealing not only from the company but from the workers and their families. I hope you are ready to support these families when they need to file for aid from the government b/c they were layed off from their job.

Oh right, I forgot it’s their fault.

By: Greg

Greg — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 14:13:59 +0000

I just want to make one quick remark: The businesses that succeed and survive across ages are simply businesses who have managed to reinvent themselves and stay at the top of their game. Record companies have for much too long done nothing but create fictional artists which do not even record their own music and collect staggering amount of money for being the middle man between the production and the artist. The world has changed and record companies should have followed. This is the only industry in which we can see major companies crying because they have not managed to adapt to a changing environment. With this attitude and if it was not for the ambiguous legal situation of file sharing these companies would have died long ago. I’d like to underline the fact to close my comments that most of the noise made in this debate comes from these companies rather than the artists.

By: Greg

Greg — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 04:43:21 +0000

file sharing is a direct response to a complete failure on the part of providers of entertainment to adapt to rapidly evolving technology. i do not think file sharing is morally wrong. i will focus just on the music industry here. people still go see live music, which more often than not compensates the entertainer more than royalties received from purchased cds. the internet has also opened up many smaller bands to larger audiences, eventually putting more money in their pockets (if their product ie music, live show, is any good). the only people it hurts is record companies, and mainly larger record companies. now what is happening, in response to this trend, they form a union and go after potential cutstomers with outrageous lawsuits. they are going after the wrong people. if the record companies want to go after the real players in their current downward spiral, they have three main groups or people to subpoena. 1. the research group of, Leon van de Kerkhof, Leonardo Chiariglione, Yves-François Dehery, Karlheinz Brandenburg, James D. Johnston who built upon other people’s research and developed the mp3. the record companies neglected to see any future in securing this technology to protect their product and let the cd become obsolete as computers became more and more a part of everyday life. 2. is Justin Frankel who developed winamp in 1997, allowing computer users the first venue to organize and play music coded in this new format. 3. (people are going to laugh when i say this) steve jobs. steve jobs brought the final blow to the record industry as we used to know it with the release of the ipod, the first fully functional portable mp3 player. i have a 60 gig ipod, and to fully fill it at apple’s prescribed format of 128kbs with 20,000 songs the cheapest legal way (through the itunes store at 99 cents per song) it would cost me $19,800, plus the $399 i paid for the ipod, a grand total of $20,199. does anyone actually believe that anyone is filling their ipods legally at these exorbitant costs? now ipods are 80 and 160 gigs, even more costly to fill. steve jobs was brilliant because he saw an opening that the record executives did not; how to make money off of all of the people who are stealing music. also, he finalized the shift from cd to mp3 and will make money selling ipods regardless of whether or not people are legally acquiring the data they put on their ipods. the real brilliance of steve jobs is the itunes store, which prevents him from any attacks from the recording industry because he provides a legitimate way (though it makes a small amount of money for apple) to put music on the ipod.

so there you have it. file sharing is not morally wrong. stealing music may be, but people share other things too, things they have rights too. to black list a technology because some people use it for questionable ends is criminal. companies should try and adapt to their customers habits instead of trying to punish them. at least try and punish the people who have really hurt them. file sharing is not going anywhere, and maybe they will realize that when they are bankrupt after they tried to continue to sell something that was obsolete.