Illegal music downloaders spend 4x more $ on music

At least in Great Britain they do anyway.

What’s the point of this exactly? Either music piracy is ok (stick it to the man, down with the RIAA and corrupt music industry, whatever!) or it’s not (you’re stealing, whatever!). If piracy is not ok, then it doesn’t matter how much legitimate music you’re buying on top of that. You’re still stealing some of it. That’s still not ok. Who cares what the reasons behind the phenomena are? Maybe all we’re seeing is as obvious as the idea that people who really really like music are going to get lots and lots of it, both from piracy and legitimate sources. And if piracy is ok, then who cares about this in the first place? If you’re taking the stand that piracy is ok, then have the balls to actually defend that stance instead of trying to claim it’s ok because they also buy music. That’s just admission of guilt, giving in and saying it’s not ok, but trying to rationalize it with some meaningless statistic.

It’s the fansub situation. Technically fansubs are illegal. Anime production companies let the production of fansubs slide until a series has been licensed by an American distributer because fans getting excited about a series can help a new series get licensed and the anime market in America is not robust enough to go around pissing off all their fans.

Obviously the situation is not the same. But the idea of letting an illegal practice slide if the net results are good for business is not a new one.

I’m going to argue that your point incorrect. There can (and should) be some freedom to both use and share music both with and without purchasing it.

I spend about 4 times as much on music as I used to, thanks to WASTE. So yeah, technically I’m illegally downloading, but in a crappy, hit-driven music industry that thoroughly alienated me, an album-centric buter, I’m now able to better discern the artists I actually want to support by trying full albums before I buy them. Not everyone downloads music just to be cheap or to stick it to the man - some of us do it to get an honest appraisal of music we want to invest in, and the alternative is not investing at all anymore.

I guess I just can’t get over my cynicism and believe that people like you are any more than an anomaly.

I guess I just can’t get over my cynicism and believe that people like you are any more than an anomaly.[/quote]

If you find your beliefs in contention with reality you may need to find a better method of determining your philosophy…

I guess I just can’t get over my cynicism and believe that people like you are any more than an anomaly.[/quote]

I can see both sides. There’s no need to assign ratios, but it just seems that there are so many more people who have no interest in shelling out for anything unless they have no choice. Of course, that can’t be proven true or false …

I guess I just can’t get over my cynicism and believe that people like you are any more than an anomaly.[/quote]

If you find your beliefs in contention with reality you may need to find a better method of determining your philosophy…[/quote]
I wouldn’t call my cynicism toward music pirates my “philosophy” in the broad sense, nor would I call Crypt’s anecdotal evidence grounds for contention with reality. But then, I might just be misunderstanding what you’re saying.

Sure, Crypt’s evidence is anecdotal. But this thread started with a link to an actual statistical study of larger-than-anecdotal reality. One of a growing number of such studies…

Sure, Crypt’s evidence is anecdotal. But this thread started with a link to an actual statistical study of larger-than-anecdotal reality. One of a growing number of such studies…[/quote]
But it’s hardly conclusive, unless I’m missnig something. As I said before, it could be something as simple as “People who have a lot of music, have a lot of music.” The top pirates are the top spenders are the top pirates. Maybe purchasing legitimate music leads to piracy!!1!

Wholly- And it doesn’t matter if Crypt is unique or not. Morally, pirating music is either stealing(wrong) or not wrong(sharing).

Trying to evaluate before you buy is either wrong since it’s stealing or not wrong since it’s sharing. But if it’s not wrong because it’s sharing it’s not wrong for me to download 100% of my music from the internet for free. Since it’s just sharing, right?

If it’s wrong, spending more money doesn’t mean shit. That’s not how morality works. “I may have robbed the 7-11, but with all that money I was able to buy a lot of candy from the 7-11 so it’s OK!”

If it’s not wrong, spending more money doesn’t mean shit. It’s not even trivia.

Technically you could say it is a more efficient distribution mechanism, because it is based strictly on demand, rather than payola.

Demand based markets will outperform centrally controlled markets every time.

Done the same thing since I joined WASTE. I used to “try before I buy” in the old days of Napster et al but since listening to a lot of music that I otherwise wouldn’t became a lot harder I bought far fewer records.

Music radio and TV is fine if you want to hear the latest Robbie Williams or Britney Spears, but I could have every radio station in the UK piped into my ears over the visuals of every music TV stations and would never in a million years have come across Lacuna Coil or Guano Apes.

I don’t doubt that there are people with gigs of MP3s and a CD collection of one but I’ve never been especially convinced that they necessarily make up an overwhelming majority of everyone that’s ever downloaded an MP3 that they dont have a hard copy of [yet].

In other news RIAA sue people for making music avaliable to people who aren’t paying for it, and BMG/SONY bribe radiostations to get them to make their music avaliable to people who aren’t paying for it.

The RPGfilms story is a hoax.

http://www.boingboing.net/2005/07/27/riaa_we_didnt_take_d.html

I’m with Crypt on this issue.

Sharing is like my own personal radio stations that I can use to find those albums I truly want taking up space in my crammed apartment. After all, it’s not like I can trust the radio stations to introduce me to music I might actually like. How else am i suppose to find good music?

If it was always just small groups of people sharing, a la a private Waste network, no one would have a problem with any of this stuff. (Well, some would, but it wouldn’t be a huge issue.) That’s not entirely unlike me making a mix tape and giving it to friends.

But when that sharing goes out to P2P, where it’s zillions of your non-friends downloading, that’s not really “sharing,” per se. You’re not saying, “Hey man, check this out!” You’re saying, “Everyone anyone, download away.”

It may seem somewhat arbitrary, but the difference to me between sharing and copyright infringement is really the number of people I’m offering someone else’s stuff to. I’m fine with handing stuff around, giving it to friends, and even giving them a copy. I’m not so keen on making it available to the entire planet.

I agree, Steve, though I’m sure the position seems ludicrous to the ‘THERE IS ONLY BLACK AND WHITE’ folks who posted earlier in the thread. There is a practical difference between sharing and widescale distribution. It’s unfortunate that there is no legal difference, however, or, for people like Ben, no moral difference.

Mix tapes were protected, I believe, so that might be applicable to small-scale networks. And I think the moral issues are close to what Ben describes, insofar as they’re connected to the actual laws.