illegal downloaders should have their internet taken away - u2 manager

[MrBrau1]

The ISPs do not break any copyright laws. nor should you or the government assume that any person that sign up is going to use his subscription for breaking the law.

Anything can be abused. Should we tax the crap out of anything and everyone because of that?

How would you ever sell a knife or an axe, if you had to make those assumptions? "Sorry Sir, can't sell this to you, because I will have to assume that you are going to kill somebody with it".

It works with car insurance.

 

[indra]

No, but you know perfectly well that unless there is a high risk of getting caught, lots of kids will do it.

I'm no fan of the record companies, but this is exactly why I never feel bad for the assholes who get sued by the RIAA. Let a few thousand jerks get hit with massive judgements against them and perhaps the "kids" will give it a bit more thought.

 

[ybab gnuthca]

Now you are still assuming the selfish side of it...

Create a cheaper one that won't allow access to torrents or only to certain torrents...

Some compromise can be met.

What would the reasoning be here?

If you pay for the expensive one, will it will be ok for you to download illegal material using torrents?

No? Why would the music industry have to be paid those extra money then?

 

[BVS]

Because there is nothing 'illegal' in the bittorrent technology per se, just like it is the case with an ISP subscription.

Bittorrent is just a clever technology used to distribute material using a p2p protocol. As long as you only use it to distribute linux distributions, freeware, your own art, etc. there is nothing illegal about it, and taxing everyone using it would be unfair.

Well there's technically nothing illegal about a bulletproof vest, but only certain individuals can use them legally.

Also, most freeware will and can be distributed by the designers website.

 

[ybab gnuthca]

Well there's technically nothing illegal about a bulletproof vest, but only certain individuals can use them legally.

Also, most freeware will and can be distributed by the designers website.

Excluding people from using new technology such as p2p protocols is a silly idea and not the solution to this problem at all. Neither now or in the future.

Why don't we just cut people's electricity already?

 

[BVS]

What would the reasoning be here?

If you pay for the expensive one, will it will be ok for you to download illegal material using torrents?

No? Why would the music industry have to be paid those extra money then?

If you pay for the extra one you'll be downloading copyrighted material legally, therefore artist will get paid with their share of the "tax".

 

[BVS]

Excluding people from using new technology such as p2p protocols is a silly idea and not the solution to this problem at all. Neither now or in the future.

Why don't we just cut people's electricity already?

How ridiculous can you get?

People already limit their internet bandwith by how much they are willing to pay. If you give them packages, it's no different from any other form of entertainment or communication like cellphones or cable packages.

 

[ybab gnuthca]

If you pay for the extra one you'll be downloading copyrighted material legally, therefore artist will get paid with their share of the "tax".

And the people that don't use torrents to download material illegally?

But need them for other purposes?

 

[MrBrau1]

And the people that don't use torrents to download material illegally?

But need them for other purposes?

yeah, all 4 of them.

 

[BVS]

And the people that don't use torrents to download material illegally?

But need them for other purposes?

How much of torrent use is used for material you can't get off of an official website?

 

[ybab gnuthca]

How ridiculous can you get?

People already limit their internet bandwith by how much they are willing to pay. If you give them packages, it's no different from any other form of entertainment or communication like cellphones or cable packages.

Hopefully not as ridiculous as you. But please refrain from this kind of rhetoric.

There's something you don't understand here. Internet bandwith is an article sold by an ISP, and they can easily decide the prices themselves. higher bandwith, higher price. Nothing problematic here at all, as long there is free competition.

ISPs did not invent the p2p technology. It's not their property.

They can choose to close down the available ports to their subscribers, greatly limiting their possibility of using p2p protocols (among several other things), but I frankly don't think that the music business should have any saying in what kind of technology people should be allowed to use, as long as they don't abuse it.

 

[ybab gnuthca]

How much of torrent use is used for material you can't get off of an official website?

linux distributions are often several gbs in size now, and they are downloaded with p2p protocols.

entirely legally.

 

[MrBrau1]

Can I get stolen credit card numbers off a p2p?

How bout kiddie porn?

Is there an aggregator for credit card and kiddie porn torrents?

 

[ybab gnuthca]

Can I get stolen credit card numbers off a p2p?

You could probably get stolen credit card numbers if you walked down to the ugly looking guy on the corner.

But we want saw your legs off just because of that fact.

 

[MrBrau1]

You could probably get stolen credit card numbers if you walked down to the ugly looking guy on the corner.

But we want saw your legs off just because of that fact.

that seems like bad business.

I could have been a repeat customer.

 

[BVS]

Hopefully not as ridiculous as you. But please refrain from this kind of rhetoric.

There's something you don't understand here. Internet bandwith is an article sold by an ISP, and they can easily decide the prices themselves. higher bandwith, higher price. Nothing problematic here at all, as long there is free competition.

ISPs did not invent the p2p technology. It's not their property.

They can choose to close down the available ports to their subscribers, greatly limiting their possibility of using p2p protocols (among several other things), but I frankly don't think that the music business should have any saying in what kind of technology people should be allowed to use, as long as they don't abuse it.

Rhetoric?

You took the ridiculous jump to cutting off their electricity, so let's be careful...

I'm just trying to find a way to monitor and control it, whereas you see it as a free for all.

I understand your principal view, though you haven't discussed any of the details. In your world artist will still never get paid. What kind of world is that?

 

[MrBrau1]

I understand your principal view, though you haven't discussed any of the details. In your world artist will still never get paid. What kind of world is that?

That's what it is dude. The ISP's create the roads. They have no say over who or what drives on them.

stolen personal information.
movies
music
kiddie porn
dorky video games

All the ISP does is provide the service. The content is provided by the sick pieces of shit that are the entire world.

The RIAA kinda look like heros now.

 

[BVS]

linux distributions are often several gbs in size now, and they are downloaded with p2p protocols.

entirely legally.

They are a different animal, therefore different setup...

 

[Pinball Wizard]

The attempts here at moral equivalency are ridiculous. Stealing, in the very narrow definition that most have provided in this thread, is currently the most profound way to affect market change. Boycotting sends no message whatsoever, downloading from iTunes says that consumers want shit quality recordings, and buying CDs perpetuates packaging and distribution costs (and mark-ups). The music industry should be paying more attention to leaked material and torrenting services (beyond finding ways to stop them... as we've seen the hydra of torrenting will continually reappear, even if one of its heads is chopped off). As of now, there is no service providing legitimate and approved content that can compete with the infinite selection, very high quality recordings, and the ease of accessibility found on most p2p torrent sites. This is what the "stealing" community (and probably others) want... all things being equal, if there was a monthly fee site that offered the same platform as something like OiNK, there would be a huge demand for subscriptions. A legal service like that could circumvent leak issues and provide content in a more user-friendly (and affordable) way. Personally, I buy off iTunes now (begrudgingly), because I have no tolerance for anymore physical CDs (due to storage and all the extraneous packaging that they come with), and I don't want to have to worry (albeit limited, being Canadian) about using illicit torrent sites. I'm swallowing low quality and low selection, instead of being "criminal".

Artists will always get paid, because some group in society will be (unfortunately) forced to subsidize illicit activity, whether it be through ISP surcharges, CD-R royalties, or CD price mark-ups. I don't know why there is such a pre-occupation and worry for certain musicians and their livelihood, because the industry will inevitably have to shrink. Artists like The National were not able to be dedicated musicians until their last album... they all had other jobs, and it seems like they were able to provide for themselves. Through time, proactivity, eventual label support, and recommendations from internet sites like Pitchforkmedia (and I would even say p2p sharing), The National were able to become self-sufficient.

If the music industry were to have an effective business model that ensured payment for all artists, there would be an immediate shrinkage in the number of artists who could actually make a living completely off of music. It's a bottleneck and a double-edged sword for artists and labels... either there will be fewer that can make a living, or there will be more artists with less opportunity to accumulate capital.

On a sidenote, I find it interesting that people in this thread continue to bash the relatively small (in a global sense) illegal downloading/uploading community, when countries like China have an immense CD piracy market. An emerging 250 million people-strong middle class with disposable income and easy access to cheap ripped off CDs and merchandise is a lot scarier than a few million downloaders. To give you an indication, while visiting Beijing a few times in the last couple of years, the most predominant English words used there were "CD" and "DVD" (illegal variety, of course).

Regardless, the moral high horse is not the answer to any of the industry's problems. In fact, it just perpetuates them. Offering a competent legal service is the only way artists will recover expenses... not through random acts of litigation or broad-based service charges.

 

[Bonoscoolness78]

just wanted to add one more little thing.
I'm pretty damn poor.
I'm unemployed.
student.
Not enough loans to even pay rent.

Yet I love music.
If not for p2p sharing programs I wouldn't be exposed to half the bands I love..and I would be much worse off for it. In 2007 I bought what I could, but I can't take the stealing thing as justification for missing out on great music. I just cannot do it!! I'm sorry.

so it's a trade off. I can recognize some bands names where I wouldn't before. I can only think that this is good for the bands. I'll pay the 30 bucks for their live show when they come to town rather than the 15 for the cd.

not justification. I know I'm a thief.

 

[MrBrau1]

just wanted to add one more little thing.
I'm pretty damn poor.
I'm unemployed.
student.
Not enough loans to even pay rent.

Yet I love music.
If not for p2p sharing programs I wouldn't be exposed to half the bands I love..and I would be much worse off for it. In 2007 I bought what I could, but I can't take the stealing thing as justification for missing out on great music. I just cannot do it!! I'm sorry.

so it's a trade off. I can recognize some bands names where I wouldn't before. I can only think that this is good for the bands. I'll pay the 30 bucks for their live show when they come to town rather than the 15 for the cd.

not justification. I know I'm a thief.

Just do us a favor,

when you have children, be sure to instill in them the belief that, when you really want something, but can't pony up the $ to pay for it, it's totally cool to steal it.

As long as it's really easy to steal.

 

[MrBrau1]

CD's are too expensive?

I just landed 6 off Amazon. $10 a piece.

 

[indra]

just wanted to add one more little thing.
I'm pretty damn poor.
I'm unemployed.
student.
Not enough loans to even pay rent.

Yet I love music.
If not for p2p sharing programs I wouldn't be exposed to half the bands I love..and I would be much worse off for it. In 2007 I bought what I could, but I can't take the stealing thing as justification for missing out on great music. I just cannot do it!! I'm sorry.

so it's a trade off. I can recognize some bands names where I wouldn't before. I can only think that this is good for the bands. I'll pay the 30 bucks for their live show when they come to town rather than the 15 for the cd.

not justification. I know I'm a thief.

That is one of the arguments I hate the most. You do know that damn near all of us were poor students at one time, don't you? You do know that you can go without stealing music, you simply do not want to. It's not about need at all it's about what you want. The music will still be there when you have enough money to buy it, the only reason to steal it now is greed.

At least you know it's not a justification.

And I'm pretty damned poor too. When I can't afford something I want I don't get it. What a novel idea!

 

[Pinball Wizard]

Whatever, Mr. Brau1 and Indra. It's the industry's responsibility to cater to the demands of the consumer. If the industry cannot meet the demand, people will go elsewhere (or steal). Of course, stealing is not justified, but moaning on about it and taking kids and grandmothers to court is foolish. Labels and artists need to pony up and provide better alternatives rather than dwelling (and whining) about their inability to make a living.

This comment is coming from both a consumer and someone whose livelihood depends on the whim of clients.

Not sexual, of course.

 

[indra]

Whatever, Mr. Brau1 and Indra. It's the industry's responsibility to cater to the demands of the consumer. If the industry cannot meet the demand, people will go elsewhere (or steal). Of course, stealing is not justified, but moaning on about it and taking kids and grandmothers to court is foolish. Labels and artists need to pony up and provide better alternatives rather than dwelling (and whining) about their inability to make a living.

This comment is coming from both a consumer and someone whose livelihood depends on the whim of clients.

Not sexual, of course.

The thing that pisses me off is that you do not seem to understand that the commodity (music) IS readily available. It's not as if it's at all hard to find legitimately -- it's easier that ever to find -- legally -- any music anyone could possibly want. The ONLY reason people steal is greed -- not because the product isn't there. So I hope more people get sued by the RIAA and I hope more have large judgements levied against them. Let them feel some of the pain they dish out so thoughtlessly.

 

[Bonoscoolness78]

CD's are too expensive?

I just landed 6 off Amazon. $10 a piece.

fuck.

Okay, now I'm getting sick of this.

Of course I know I can wait. I literally don't know if my rent cheque will bounce this month. yet I want to listen to new music now! damnit, I don't want to wait 2 years to get this music.
I want to listen to it now.
fuck all your 'holier than thou' posturing.

goddamnit, I'm sick of it.

I don't know if I'll ever be able to afford the dozens of albums I download every year, but fuck you I'll download them.

and you know what..I take back my justification remark. I feel completely vindicated in downloading this music. I don't know why I expected any more than cliche "it's only 10 bucks" remarks from the goddamn u2 forum to beat all u2 forums.

I buy what I can and download the rest, and until they arrest me I'll keep downloading.

jesus...so many people playing the priest card here.

 

[Bonoscoolness78]

also
fuck you RIAA

 

[BVS]

We're all a victim of a shit economy...

 

[Pinball Wizard]

The thing that pisses me off is that you do not seem to understand that the commodity (music) IS readily available. It's not as if it's at all hard to find legitimately -- it's easier that ever to find -- legally -- any music anyone could possibly want. The ONLY reason people steal is greed -- not because the product isn't there.

Ummm... no. Some music is almost impossible to find, and if it is deleted or hard to come by, it's insanely expensive. If I were to purchase some of these products off of something like ebay, how would the artist receive the profit from the seller? I realize there's a moral difference between illegally downloading material and trading or exchanging via ebay, but what difference does it make for the artist?

Like it or not, there are ambiguities to this issue. Trent Reznor, of Nine Inch Nails, called OiNK the best music store in the world... not because everything was free... but because everything was there. And easy to find.

If the industry can eliminate one element of convenience, that being accessibility and variety, then it would reign in a lot of its former or non-consumers.

 

[Pinball Wizard]

We're all a victim of a shit economy...

Yeah. Wanna go for a drink? I know of a water fountain nearby.