Music Piracy

Man you've really convicted me tonight. I used to download a lot of music illegally too. Now I buy from iTunes or the store.I think part of the problem is, music in its digital form is intangible and many of us do not feel like we're actually 'stealing' because we have no physical object, just a file. Intellectual property is a hard thing to quantify. I am not making excuses you understand. I would often download a sample of songs and then go and buy the album if I liked it. Some would argue that this has broadened musical appeal, and some artists don't mind that at all. For some bands, it has given them an opportunity to get passed the big record companies and promote their music. Either way, it is illegal to download copyright music without paying, and THOU SHALT NOT STEALGood for you for giving up the files you had already downloaded.

Well, I for one dont want to leak my credit card over the internet for some packet sniffer to get his hands on. Second, i dont like buying a cd with 20 songs and only 1 or 2 being good songs. All in all yes its bad, wont disagree there.

Artists could still make money through live performances, with the help from God, their performancewould be great.

Don't get me started on this RIAA stuff. First, I'll tell you my age. I'll be 49 this Monday. Secondly, when I was young, we all waited for our favorite song on to come on the radio and recorded it. As a matter of fact, in the 80's I purchased a stereo system with the designed purpose of recording off of the radio using direct channel to the tuner and even an equalizer to set the volume level. I had cassettes worth of music recorded off of the radio as surely as people get CD's or electronic music these days.I don't download music myself because I am more concerned with viruses, but if there are songs I like on youtube instead, I'll save it, convert it to mp3 files and then use a conventional burner to put it on a CD. Moral of the story: They've been giving us these tools all along and been doing it for over 30 years, and all of a sudden its wrong?The real issue is the rapid speed that computers (as opposed to tapes) could distribute these songs, and the RIAA living back in the 70's yet cannot keep up with technology, and the mega bucks salaried guys are ticked off they can't keep their 9 or greater digit salary any longer. And indeed, when they do extort, er, I mean sue for illegal songs, it does not go to the artists. As a matter of fact, there was a news article out recently about artists suing to obtain some of that money.Any organization that sues little kids and dead grandmothers mustn't have all their brain screws tightened, not to mention that all this reeks invasion of privacy and false accusations. I don't even want to remotely associate myself with the morals of the likes, lest I am perceived as siding with those goons.From a technical slant, I believe music is a file like anything else, words, pictures and whatnot. What's on your computer should only be your business.

How could it be called stealing, when the artist is still in possession of the song?

Stealing is by the artists and the record company's they are full of greed.Concert tickets are a way over price and Cd's as well. These artist earn disgusting amount of money and overcharge us and its done legally.People are alway going to try to get something for nothing, when they have to pay so high prices.Is it legal? not really. But I suppose I have no sympathy for them only the genuine Artist who work hard for reasonable gains.I always refuse to pay high prices for goods that i can do with out. I very really buy Cd's anymore, but I would rather buy, that get off the Internet.People pay lots of money each week for DVD's when they only have to wail a couple of years and you can see the film for nothing on TV, people just can't wait.Watching films on youtube or goggle, These sites have films on them and lots of music, nobody prosecutes them. If your don't download illegal music your conscience is clear and you must feel better for it. If you can't afford to buy or don't want to buy because of the high prices being charged than you should go without. Refraining is a good feeling too.

If I sing a psalm of David, who should I pay for royalty?"'But now bring me a musician.' And when the musician played, the hand of the Lord came upon him."2 Kings 3:15 (ESV)"For who sees anything different in you? What do you have that you did not receive? If then you received it, why do you boast as if you did not receive it?"1 Corinthians 4:7 (ESV)"Now the full number of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one said that any of the things that belonged to him was his own, but they had everything in common."Acts 4:32 (ESV)

I figure whatever is on youtube is up for grabs. They have a policy in place where someone can claim copyright infringement and pull it off. If nobody complains, it's there for us to hear.Now..... for this ol' man's technique to grab a song you like off of youtube.1. First of all, I use Mozilla Firefox browser (because I'm starting to get a disdain for many things Microsoft). Anyway, they have a plugin you can add to this browser to save a video on youtube in .flv format (flash video) on your hard drive. You can get it here: Download helper2. Now, what can you do with a flash video? Well, unless you have an application to run it, not much. But there are freeware programs out there that convert .flv to mp3. I used this one:Freez-Flv-To-MP-Converter3. Now for you kids, you are already there since mp3 is the format I think you usually like to play in your Ipods. But for us old timers that like to pop in a CD in our automobile's CD players or something to that effect, use any conventional burner program to convert the mp3's to CD format and burn them.The only trouble that I found is that depending who submits the song, the audio quality or volume is not there, but I did not find that a major problem. Most submit reasonably good audio quality songs.Furthermore, nobody knows you are doing this. Just don't be dumb and then display it on a file-sharing program for all to see (that's how these kids get nabbed). But to have your own personal copy, I do not see a problem. It's nobody's business what kind of file you have on your computer or on a CD you burned yourself using software freely given to us.

(tim_from_pa;38819)
I figure whatever is on youtube is up for grabs. They have a policy in place where someone can claim copyright infringement and pull it off. If nobody complains, it's there for us to hear.Now..... for this ol' man's technique to grab a song you like off of youtube.1. First of all, I use Mozilla Firefox browser (because I'm starting to get a disdain for many things Microsoft). Anyway, they have a plugin you can add to this browser to save a video on youtube in .flv format (flash video) on your hard drive. You can get it here: Download helper2. Now, what can you do with a flash video? Well, unless you have an application to run it, not much. But there are freeware programs out there that convert .flv to mp3. I used this one:Freez-Flv-To-MP-Converter3. Now for you kids, you are already there since mp3 is the format I think you usually like to play in your Ipods. But for us old timers that like to pop in a CD in our automobile's CD players or something to that effect, use any conventional burner program to convert the mp3's to CD format and burn them.The only trouble that I found is that depending who submits the song, the audio quality or volume is not there, but I did not find that a major problem. Most submit reasonably good audio quality songs.Furthermore, nobody knows you are doing this. Just don't be dumb and then display it on a file-sharing program for all to see (that's how these kids get nabbed). But to have your own personal copy, I do not see a problem. It's nobody's business what kind of file you have on your computer or on a CD you burned yourself using software freely given to us.
Dang. Tim is under the radar >.>Kidding. I use to do some major piracy. Why? Because I'm broke.

personally, i dont feel guilty at all for downloading music. I mean, downloading music is not stealing, they have the music on there for a reason, and that is promotion. I download, but the only songs i actually upload to my music device are songs i actually listen to. And before I used to download like crazy, nowadays, i only download 1 or 2 good songs that i might enjoy from an artist. I in no way feel bad, or "guilty" for doing this. Think of this: why would i go and purchase $15 or so on a whole cd with only 1 or 2 good songs, when i could just get those 2 songs from the internet. That is all the joy i want, i do not wish to completely import every song from any artist from any cd and (the part that i consider piracy) sell this in mass quantities to the public. Also, if i know someone that has that cd, or has those songs i want, then i could easily get it from them and this would not be considered stealing. This is the same way i download a song i like, because i know others have it on their computers and they share it with other users. Like i said i do not wish to exploit the artist for any money gain. lol, this is only my objective, and I know that if i was to break it down into PIRACY, or NO PIRACY, i would say PIRACY, because i understand it's good to give credit to the musician right. But for the sake of what i forementioned, downloading a file that is legally shared by other users is not at all a crime to me. But i would admonish anyone who distributes these.

It usually costs thousands of dollers for a musician to record and distribute a song. This is an investment musicians make to give us (the listeners) something to own and enjoy. If we own this music, without the musician (OR investor) making a profit, it's stealing. What does our law say about music duplication? Aren't we told in the Bible to follow the law of the land? If we can find a "loophole" that doesn't break a law (God's or man's), then I guess it's a personal decision. If not, then we're just making excuses.

The web allows people to download music. If they don't alllow people to download, no one can download it. If any one can download any music from any website, he is not stealing. If someone is going to be charged, it should not be downloader, it should be provider. Catch and take action against providers in stead of downloader. Don't blame drinker, blame the one who provide alcohol. Stealing is taking from someone without permission or knowledge.Without provider no one can download anything.

(Mikey;39358)
It looks like a lot of you think if it is possible to do something or someone has made it possible to do something, that makes it ok. Or if someone gives you something and you accept it, you are not at blame. This makes no sense.
If someone gives you something and you accept it. Are you to be blamed?He gives you! You take it! Are you to be blamed? Nonsense!

Stealing is taking from someone without permission or knowledge.
Exactly. I don't have permission to own someone's music until I pay for it. As far as knowledge goes, if someone steals and the victim does know about it, that doesn't make the theif any less a theif. Scenario:My neighbor has a bike in his carport. Just because it exsists where I can get it, it doesn't mean it's free to take. If I take the bike that was "provided", won't I be the one to answer to the cops (not my neighbor)? Let's involve someone trying to help me get the bike for free (i.e. webservices to download music for free). He moves the bike from my neighbor's carport to the ally behind my house. Can I just take it now? Regardless of how the bike is stolen, whoever has the stolen property can't have it legally. I can tell the cops "I found the bike in the ally"... but this "bike" (music) has my neighbors name (i.e. artist's name) all over it still, and I know it. The fact remains: I can't own something that's not mine. That's stealing. If my neighbor puts a sign on the bike that says "free", that's when it's really provided to me. It's not mine until the owner gives it to me. As for free music, if you want to know if it's legal to download, I challenge you to write a record label and ask them if they say their music is free. It doesn't matter how I get it; if I have something that I don't own (pay for), then I'm stealing.

First of all, let me remind everyone that music downloading is an emotionally charged subject. Unfortunately, the sides haves become very clear. The likes of the RIAA calls it stealing. Well, isn't that the pot calling the kettle black? So, I would advise anyone who would get preachy about the morality of this to consider what side they appear to be on. There's not one normal person who remotely would support the likes of the RIAA, and the articles against them on the Internet are astounding.Secondly, I like the old definition of copyright in my dictionary here:"A document granting exclusive right to publish and sell literary or musical or artistic work."In other words, this says what I always understood the meaning of copyright infringement was: to make your own profit off of someone else's work, either by publishing or selling it.What we are seeing happening today is the lunk-headed legalese system redefine the meaning of copyright infringement to simply having a copy for your own use. That has to do with this digital whatever laws that these money-pocketed characters wanted---- like I already stated, years ago, nobody made an issue of one recording their own music off the radio, and indeed they even made equipment to do that---- I know, I still have mine packed away here somewhere in my house. Also, there's a "record" button on your VCR yet, right?Lastly, all the preachy folks out there that are starting to sound like the RIAA I want you to get rid of your computers right now if you truly practice what you preach. Why? By the digital copyright definition, I guarantee you, you have copyrighted photos on your computer. You have copyrighted materials, even if its someone's email! Every time you open a youtube song, even if you do not copy it, it goes into your RAM so you already have a "copy"Any takers of my suggestion? I thought not. Case closed. I rest my case.

Let's revive your case You have a technical point about computers copying information. Don't blame me for what my computer does though. I never told it to store information, that's the way it works so I can view/hear it. Thankfully, computers are not agnest the law to own because any copywrited information that is saved to the hard drive isn't tangible. Not until a user tampers with what is stored (using the resources you've mensioned earlier), can any of it really be accessed in a posessive way. Listening to something on the radio/YouTube/tv doesn't mean I own it. It's only owned when I take it from those sources. It may sound like a thin line, but I believe it's very black and white. Where's the user's intension at; to sample media, or to own it? In truth, copywrite infringement is when you interfere between someone and their right to "publish and sell" their product. If you receive a product, but don't buy it from the one who has the rights, you're trespassing: between the product liscensed and the one with the copywrite. This is infringement. This is what's agents the law. Sampling media helps media owners publish and sell, while stealing media hurts them and infringes upon the copywrite. Furthermore, whatever claim of lack of integrity is placed on the RIAA, it doesn’t justify breaking their rules. That's anarchy. There's only one perfect leader. The perfect leader wants us to obey the imperfect leaders. This is explained by the parable of the "hireling" in John 10. We are still told to be submissive and obedient to them. (Romans 13:1-7) Romans 13 1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. 2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: 4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. 5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. 6 For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. 7 Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour. Copywrited material on YouTube is only to be uploaded by the ones who own the rites to them, according to the upload agreement. If the owner puts it out there for others to listen to, it's only free to listen to, not to own. Otherwise, it would be legal for YouTube to put a "download" link on the videos on their pages and people wouldn't be taking these back doors. Opposed to what copy write holders give for free, when things are available, we need to know when we're crossing a line (by law). Just because I can record anything and everything with current technology doesn't mean I'm allowed to. I can also steal most anything I really, really want to physically if I have the right technology (weapons, bombs, spy-gear ). The difference is that there isn't much of a risk of being caught online, because the digital market isn't very lawfully secure. I have yet to notice any cops watching me while I search the pages of the web. This makes it easily justifyable to steal. The Word of God remains: "Render therefore to all their dues". Now about your meathods of discussion, what does "preachy" even mean? Can you give me a definition, or was it just an insult? I just wanted to address the facts of the matter. You're allowed to ignore me. Laying blind offence doesn't solve anything. In response to your "practice what you preach", I accept judgement to the same measure that I judge. If I am stealing media, I want to know it and intend to repent of any theift of copy writed matterial. If Satan could use God's own Words to manipulate into temptations agents Christ, then I imagine there's no end of us seeing what we want to see as long as we choose to see it (even if we source the law of God or the law of man). I don't know if what I said will mean anything, but I hope there will be an ounce of edification from the Biblical aspect of Romans 13.