Best Place to Download Music

[Cosmic Charlie 10+ year member]

Books are copyrighted, what does that make a library?

 

[JaJay721 10+ year member]

Originally posted by Aurorav8 Well since stealing is illegal, and a court in CA recently ruled that file sharing IS legal, by reason of deduction, file sharing is not stealing.

 

Elementary my dear(s)...file sharing IS LEGAL...stealing IS NOT.

 

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t287-s2133938,00.html

Is that the same court who awarded millions to the lady who burned her tongue on a cup of coffee at McDonalds? The court system is messed up and decisions are based on technicalities. If you can't see that copying music and sending it to others is not the same as breaching a license for a software program then there is no hope for you.

 

[JaJay721 10+ year member]

Originally posted by Cosmic Charlie Books are copyrighted, what does that make a library?

Are you serious? Libraries don't break copyright laws because they don't make copies of books. Look at the word COPYright. You then get into the photocopying of books which there are laws pertaining to.

 

[Aurorav8 10+ year member]

So I guess the same can be said about taking a book from the library, carrying it over to the $0.10 copier, and copying the material in the book...which the library does not frown upon.

Or say, going to a certain web page...and printing off the copy written material that is on said page?

 

[Aurorav8 10+ year member]

Originally posted by JaJay721 Is that the same court who awarded millions to the lady who burned her tongue on a cup of coffee at McDonalds? The court system is messed up and decisions are based on technicalities. If you can't see that copying music and sending it to others is not the same as breaching a license for a software program then there is no hope for you.

It's stealing only if you are taking the music from a place of business (music store, distributor, etc.) without paying for it, or if you are taking it from another person's property without his/her consent. If the music was bought and paid for somewhere along the line (i.e. if some dude bought a CD, saved it on his computer, then shared it online for someone else to download to his computer, then you download it off of that person's computer) then it is not stealing, it is sharing.

The shady area is in how anybody would know whether what they are downloading is stolen property or not. That is why it is so hard to enforce copyright laws in this genre. Once the music passes into the consumers' hands via music store, radio, internet, etc., an artist and record label loses virtually all control of their product.

 

[eengrms 10+ year member]

Originally posted by Aurorav8 It's stealing only if you are taking the music from a place of business (music store, distributor, etc.) without paying for it, or if you are taking it from another person's property without his/her consent. If the music was bought and paid for somewhere along the line (i.e. if some dude bought a CD, saved it on his computer, then shared it online for someone else to download to his computer, then you download it off of that person's computer) then it is not stealing, it is sharing.

 

The shady area is in how anybody would know whether what they are downloading is stolen property or not. That is why it is so hard to enforce copyright laws in this genre. Once the music passes into the consumers' hands via music store, radio, internet, etc., an artist and record label loses virtually all control of their product.

Dude you're a fu*king idiot. I understand your point, which got lost about 15 posts back when you first tried to make it. Yes there are loopholes to calling it stealing, but they are only loopholes. And the thing about a loophole is that it is a way to get out of calling a spade a spade. And just because you found a loophole doesn't negate the fact it is stealing.

Read this:

IF YOU ATTAIN SOMETHING THAT WAS NOT YOURS TO BEGIN WITH AND YOU DID NOT PAY FOR IT- IT IS STEALING. No ifs ands or buts about it.

I love how people try and justify downloading music. And the mix-tape excuse... Making a mix-tape is not illegal. Giving one to your friends is- that is if you retain ownership of the original tapes you made it from.

If you really want to argue this please make sure your statements are well thought out and at least have some bearing on the discussion. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/nono.gif.eca61d170185779e0921b0faa9704973.gif

...Oh and for those of you on the 'library' debate. When you take a book from the library, the library no longer has that book. So technically there are no copyright laws broken. Plus- the owner of the book (author) donates those books to the library and has no discernable rights to what happens to it anymore, other than people copying it and passing it off as their own work.

 

[Aurorav8 10+ year member]

Dude you're a fu*king idiot. I understand your point, which got lost about 15 posts back when you first tried to make it.

Well isn't that intelligent...I'm the "****ing idiot", yet you're the one that has to resort to name calling...how cute.

If you understand my point, then how ****ing idiotic can it be? And considering I've only made about 4 or 5 posts pertaining to this subject, then I doubt my point got "lost" about 15 posts back.

IF YOU ATTAIN SOMETHING THAT WAS NOT YOURS TO BEGIN WITH AND YOU DID NOT PAY FOR IT- IT IS STEALING. No ifs ands or buts about it.

There are plenty of "ifs ands or buts about it". I recieve quite a few christmas gifts on Dec. 25th, and they were neither mine to begin with, and I didn't pay for it....did I in turn "steal" these gifts? No.

Downloading music, is, in a sense, a "gift"...it is sharing music...plain and simple.

If you really want to argue this please make sure your statements are well thought out and at least have some bearing on the discussion.

Looks like somebody needs to heed their own advice. You've contradicted yourself in this your previous post already. Saying my post is "****ing idiotic" then saying you get my point, even though it was lost 15 posts ago...someone didn't think their statement out too well.//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/nono.gif.eca61d170185779e0921b0faa9704973.gif

 

[mattj 5,000+ posts]

Decentralized File-sharing Tools Ruled Legal

By Mike Darrah

Published April 25, 2003 @ 04:20 PM

Streamcast and Grokster have won a major court decision in Los Angeles, shifting the tides of the on-line P2P legal war. Federal court Judge Stephen Wilson has dismissed much of the studios' claims in their lawsuits against them, stating that Morpheus and Grokster were not liable for copyright infringements that took place using their software.

The ruling stated loud and clear that innovating decentralized peer-to-peer Gnutella-like software is perfectly legal, and shouldn't be deemed illegal in the courts. The courts compared the technology with the innovation of the original Sony videocasette recorder (VCR).

Fred von Lohmann of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) stated the case is far from over, but that the case sends a "strong message to the technology community that the court understands the risk to innovation" the case could represent.

The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) offered no comment, but are of course issuing an appeal to the ruling already.

The ruling does not affect the case against Kazaa that the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) have filed against them. The difference was ruled because "StreamCast now employs the "open" (i; e. , not proprietary) Gnutella technology, and distributes its own software - Morpheus - instead of a branded version of the Kazaa Media Desktop." (as quoted from the official scanned court documents linked below).

 

[JaJay721 10+ year member]

Originally posted by Aurorav8 So I guess the same can be said about taking a book from the library, carrying it over to the $0.10 copier, and copying the material in the book...which the library does not frown upon.

 

Or say, going to a certain web page...and printing off the copy written material that is on said page?

Are you serious? Yes you can use a photocopy machine, but there are laws governing the use and quantity of it.

Originally posted by Aurorav8 It's stealing only if you are taking the music from a place of business (music store, distributor, etc.) without paying for it, or if you are taking it from another person's property without his/her consent. If the music was bought and paid for somewhere along the line (i.e. if some dude bought a CD, saved it on his computer, then shared it online for someone else to download to his computer, then you download it off of that person's computer) then it is not stealing, it is sharing.

 

The shady area is in how anybody would know whether what they are downloading is stolen property or not. That is why it is so hard to enforce copyright laws in this genre. Once the music passes into the consumers' hands via music store, radio, internet, etc., an artist and record label loses virtually all control of their product.

Wrong again. Here's an example... Microsoft Windows has an end user license agreement. In that agreement it states it is to be used on one computer and one computer only. Therefore, "sharing" it with your friends is wrong. Technically, even putting it on more than one computer is wrong which is why they sell multiple licensed copies for businesses. What you are saying is that I can buy one copy of Microsoft Windows and send it to everyone in the world and it's not stealing and Microsoft does not take a monetary penalty. And some other rocket scientist stated that the price of that product would not change.

I really have no problem with people burning CDs. I just can't stand when people are this ignorant and make assinine points. When you buy a CD it is copy protected which prevents the buyer from producing copies.

For the slow people: Copy-right-ed = Right to not be copied (By Law)

CD Burning and file "sharing" = producing a copy of a copyrighted material.

Some companies will allow you to make a single copy for backup purposes only, however, no company would allow you to produce multiple copies and distribute them. By allowing people to download them off your computer or downloading them yourself you are producing and/or distributing them.

 

[Aurorav8 10+ year member]

Wrong again. Here's an example... Microsoft Windows has an end user license agreement. In that agreement it states it is to be used on one computer and one computer only. Therefore, "sharing" it with your friends is wrong.

I've stated that there is a difference between downloading a song and downloading software.

How many times have you gone to a music store, picked the CD you wanted, walked up to pay for it and had to sign an "end user agreement"? How many times have you bought a CD, and before you could use it, had to enter a registration number?

Maybe the day will come when you have to sign a "contract" of sorts and enter a registration number for a CD before it plays...but until then...weather the record companies like it or not...the music will be "shared".

 

[JaJay721 10+ year member]

Originally posted by Aurorav8 There are plenty of "ifs ands or buts about it". I recieve quite a few christmas gifts on Dec. 25th, and they were neither mine to begin with, and I didn't pay for it....did I in turn "steal" these gifts? No.

 

Downloading music, is, in a sense, a "gift"...it is sharing music...plain and simple.

If you receive a CD for a gift you are not breaking copyright laws and you are therefore not stealing money from the company who made the item. Downloading music is not a "gift" it is producing a copy of a copyrighted material and not paying the company their money for their product, hence stealing.

I do not understand how you cannot understand that.

 

[Aurorav8 10+ year member]

And, as I understand it, you can make a million copies of a CD or movie, as long as you don't resell the copies, or charge people to watch/listen to the product.

 

[JaJay721 10+ year member]

Originally posted by Aurorav8 I've stated that there is a difference between downloading a song and downloading software.

 

How many times have you gone to a music store, picked the CD you wanted, walked up to pay for it and had to sign an "end user agreement"? How many times have you bought a CD, and before you could use it, had to enter a registration number?

 

Maybe the day will come when you have to sign a "contract" of sorts and enter a registration number for a CD before it plays...but until then...weather the record companies like it or not...the music will be "shared".

You don't need an end user license agreement. The fact that it is legally copyrighted puts it under federal copyright laws. End user license agreements is a contract between the buyer and the seller. You don't need an EULA for it to be breaking copyright laws, in fact, they little to do with each other. I just used it as an example since EULAs are more personal than copyrights. You really do not know what you are talking about and I am wasting my time...

 

[Aurorav8 10+ year member]

I do not understand how you cannot understand that.

I guess the federal courts and I have something in common then. Neither of us consider "file sharing" theft.

 

[JaJay721 10+ year member]

Originally posted by Aurorav8 And, as I understand it, you can make a million copies of a CD or movie, as long as you don't resell the copies, or charge people to watch/listen to the product.

You understand it wrong. I will show you what copyright means since you obviously do not know. This is from http://www.loc.gov/copyright or http://www.copyright.gov.

WHAT IS COPYRIGHT?

-To reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords;

-To prepare derivative works based upon the work;

-To distribute copies or phonorecords of the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending;

-To perform the work publicly, in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual works;

-To display the copyrighted work publicly, in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work; and

-In the case of sound recordings, to perform the work publicly by means of a digital audio transmission.

WHAT WORKS ARE PROTECTED?

Copyright protects "original works of authorship" that are fixed in a tangible form of expression. The fixation need not be directly perceptible so long as it may be communicated with the aid of a machine or device. Copyrightable works include the following categories:

literary works;

musical works, including any accompanying words

dramatic works, including any accompanying music

pantomimes and choreographic works

pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works

motion pictures and other audiovisual works

sound recordings

architectural works