Is it wrong to steal music u have already bought?

[SirReal]

I'm interested in the automatic assumption of some of the commentors that since something is "illegal" it is automatically wrong. Maybe I'm just a radical, but just because the state or a multinational company says something is wrong, doesn't necessarily mean that it is.

I definitely don't believe that just because "it's" illegal, "it's" wrong but nobody has delivered an argument for downloading music off of the internet for free that doesn't inherently screw the artist. I personally couldn't care less about some multiconglomerate company, it's the artist that created the media that's ultimately screwed with the current state of things. And it's the frame of mind that it's ok to screw the person that created the thing you want, that I have a problem with. If I HONESTLY thought that every person who downloaded music off the internet without paying for it at the time, went and paid the artist personally if they liked or deleted it immediately if they weren't going to use it, then I'd be ok with it BUT that's not happening.

[djhipnotikk]

That may not be illegal as the law currently exists(not sure) BUT how did the file get there? If the artist or label didn't allow it then it's existence is illegal thus making your downloading of it potentially illegal at best(worst), certainly morally suspect. I don't want to keep flogging a dead horse but, for those that stand on the side of feeling they are in the right of downloading these files, what do you all do for a living? BTW I find this topic very interesting but I'm hoping we can keep it civil.

i don't think the way it got there matters to the end user in the example i made. if the file was uploaded/made available by illegal means, that's on the uploader. by downloading it you don't "support" them or their act if you already have purchased the song. just my opinion.

I'm interested in the automatic assumption of some of the commentors that since something is "illegal" it is automatically wrong. Maybe I'm just a radical, but just because the state or a multinational company says something is wrong, doesn't necessarily mean that it is.

this. lance seems to playing the ultra-law-abider role, and that's cool if you're morals are in the same stance. but to shut everyone and their arguments down for the simple fact it's deemed "illegal" is quite silly IMO. there are such things as unjust laws. not saying this one in particular is, just stating a fact.

[SirReal]

@DJTom420

I actually don't see an issue with the situation you pose BUT because the way the format currently exists allows for anyone to download said file, it allows for people who haven't ever paid for the song to get it for free. That's what I have a problem with and that's what I believe is a HUGE part of the problem with the current state of the industry.

[djfrogstar]

And what about listening to a podcast that someone makes with DL mp3s? or going to a club pumping with insane bass, 3 girls pull you on the dancefloor and then you see the screen on the laptop of the current dj and your recognize how its labeled or titled as a rip.
Do you tell the girls.. sorry.. but this is illegal.. and storm out of the club. Even though you had nothing to do with the download.. but you sure are having a good time dancing to this stolen merchandise. What is the difference at this point. Are you so hardcore you will go call the police to shut the club down and send the feds. Why dont we go arresting famous directors of movies who blatantly ripped off other peoples works without giving credit... you can throw away movies like the terminator (phillip k. dick) or throw out starwars which is stolen from Kurosawa. I dont see their names mentioned in the credits. They got away with it... just like apple got away with their xerox theft and bill gates and his friends CL?(cant remember the last letter)


There are certain things which are not available to buy hardcopy or digital... but people upload them...
for all the insane thriftshop wierd stuff like hungarian 70s porn soundtracks or little marcy I love my little pussy childrens record.
so its on youtube.. but no where else unless you magically find someone on EBAY and buy the vinyl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXL9JXnzLLw

or what about downloading Rasheeds? I bet all you patriotic types would not be against this.

[djhipnotikk]

If I HONESTLY thought that every person who downloaded music off the internet without paying for it at the time, went and paid the artist personally if they liked or deleted it immediately if they weren't going to use it, then I'd be ok with it BUT that's not happening.

they may not pay the artist direct, but they put more money in the industry than the law abiders

Those who download illegal copies of music over P2P networks are the biggest consumers of legal music options, according to a new study by the BI Norwegian School of Management. Researchers examined the music downloading habits of more than 1,900 Internet users over the age of 15, and found that illegal music connoisseurs are significantly more likely to purchase music than the average, non-P2P-loving user.

http://arstechnica.com/media/news/20...rage-folks.ars

so hey all you people getting mad at pirates here, they support the industry more than you!

[Djtom420]

@DJTom420

I actually don't see an issue with the situation you pose BUT because the way the format currently exists allows for anyone to download said file, it allows for people who haven't ever paid for the song to get it for free. That's what I have a problem with and that's what I believe is a HUGE part of the problem with the current state of the industry.

And u would be right. Im only arguing for the OP who said he OWNS the vinyl that he wants to DL. So he at one time paid for it so he should be able to get a digital copy how ever he gets it. Whether he records it from a TT, gets it form the label direct or gets it from Pirates bay or what ever torrent site. Im only arguing that its not stealing in the same way someone who just DLs mp3s without paying for them one way or the other, i.e. cd, tape, vinyl.


And u know i say this as someone who bought Dark side of the moon 3 times, the wall 3 times, Viynl, tape, CD. Green days dookie, tape, tape, then CD and then CD again. Greendays Nimrod, tape and CD the same fricken day. Every Nirvana album i owned on tape then CD. Oh shot, and Nine inch nails, I had pretty hate machine (the album that changed my life forever), brockn, and downward spiral ALL on tape and then repurchaed all of them on CD. so its not like I have been screwed by the media changes of the Record industry

Luckily i was able to digitize them all b4 i ever had to repurchase them again LOL....

U know I wonder if some of the loses the industry is feeling is people dont have to replace Stuck mp3s or scratched MP3s. i can back up everything on multiple harddrives and never lose it or have to replace it.

[SirReal]

I have a problem with the logic of that study. It's based on people who use P2P networks. Older generations don't use them, I'd got as far as to say don't even know about them. Also, younger generations have always been the ones to purchase more music but the "survey" does no % comparison to a sales study of the same age range from previous years, before p2p, showing how much less is actaully spent on the same amount of product.

[Djtom420]

And what about listening to a podcast that someone makes with DL mp3s? or going to a club pumping with insane bass, 3 girls pull you on the dancefloor and then you see the screen on the laptop of the current dj and your recognize how its labeled or titled as a rip.
Do you tell the girls.. sorry.. but this is illegal.. and storm out of the club.

Damn IT Frog star I almost spit water all over my screen. I loled so loud my wife looked at me funny and i had to read her your post at which she LOLed to. So thank u for the LOLzzz....

[SirReal]

@DJTom

And I was arguing the "devil's advocate side". I agree with your thought process and feel the same but think that in the current state of things it's wouldn't be prudent for the OP to do it. Maybe there needs to be some "media purchase #" associated with every media purchase(a password so to speak) that would allow the consumer to access the media in other formats, once purchased. I'm just trying to argue for the artist because I've seen too many get screwed by the current state of things and have to give up their art for an occupation that can pay the bills.

[LanceBlaise]

And what about listening to a podcast that someone makes with DL mp3s? or going to a club pumping with insane bass, 3 girls pull you on the dancefloor and then you see the screen on the laptop of the current dj and your recognize how its labeled or titled as a rip.
Do you tell the girls.. sorry.. but this is illegal.. and storm out of the club. Even though you had nothing to do with the download.. but you sure are having a good time dancing to this stolen merchandise. What is the difference at this point. Are you so hardcore you will go call the police to shut the club down and send the feds.

I doubt you will see a big named DJ in the techno scene playing ripped music. Not sure what or who you are listening to. I personally have not gone out to a club night to party in years, and I really only listen to the CLR podcast... I just don't have the time to go to clubs etc. But when I was frequenting clubs and stuff this wasn't really an issue. I personally don't have any DJ friends who are downloading illegal music, most of us don't have the time to be scouring the internet for torrents and download links for a track. I know I personally haven't purchased a track in the last 3 years at least, everything I play I get sent to me on promo. And promos themselves become a chore to search through.

Anyway, the point i am making is that I am not out listening to DJs who are stealing tracks on the internet... but that's me.