View Full Version : Music for ipod
ellie-lou
22-Oct-08, 21:36
Hi can anyone tell me where i can download free music for my ipod,limewire doesnt seem to be working.
How about you take the hint, stop stealing and pay the 79p to get the song from iTunes? [disgust]
Metalattakk
22-Oct-08, 21:59
If it's stealing, how come there has never been a criminal prosecution in the UK for doing so?
I'll let you know why - downloading copyrighted music isn't illegal.
Under Scottish law, it can't even be taken to a civil court.
If it's stealing, how come there has never been a criminal prosecution in the UK for doing so?
File-sharing copyrighted material is theft and has been prosecuted (http://digital-lifestyles.info/2008/08/19/uk-file-sharer-has-to-pay-16000-historic-background/). Unless you think that software somehow falls under a different definition of copyright than music?
I'll let you know why - downloading copyrighted music isn't illegal.
“The communication to the public of the work is an act restricted by the copyright in a sound recording (http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2003/20032498.htm)”
You do understand how P2P file sharing works, don't you (the clue is in the name)?
Under Scottish law, it can't even be taken to a civil court.
Good thing it's covered by uk legislation then, eh? Unless you are going to claim that copyright law was devolved?
Honestly though: do you really believe that sharing copyrighted material isn't illegal? Honestly? :eek:
Metalattakk
22-Oct-08, 23:00
You're mistaking 'sharing' for 'downloading'.
Sharing is illegal. Downloading isn't.
ellie-lou
22-Oct-08, 23:08
why doesnt joe soap mind his own buisness,im sure he pays for all his downloads!!;)
Metalattakk
22-Oct-08, 23:11
Hang on there a minute...
File-sharing copyrighted material is theft and has been prosecuted (http://digital-lifestyles.info/2008/08/19/uk-file-sharer-has-to-pay-16000-historic-background/). Unless you think that software somehow falls under a different definition of copyright than music?
That wasn't a criminal prosecution. That was a civil prosecution under English law. Proof of guilt isn't even a requirement, merely the probability of guilt.
If it was theft, it would have been successfully prosecuted under criminal law.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/newsid_4480000/newsid_4480800/4480880.stm
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number6.12/british-isp-virgin-letters
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2005/jun/25/newmedia.netmusic
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/news/virgin-warns-illegal-downloaders-stop-or-face-prosecution-842086.html
John Baikie
23-Oct-08, 00:41
You're mistaking 'sharing' for 'downloading'.
Sharing is illegal. Downloading isn't.
I am pretty certain that it's illegal to download music without paying for it!
Metalattakk
23-Oct-08, 00:50
MadPict, all of those linked stories can be debunked as either scaremongering ('three-strikes' for a start was dropped not long ago by the BPI and the corresponding ISPs) or no more than outright sensationalism.
No one has been criminally prosecuted for downloading copyrighted music. It's not theft.
The woman who was sent a threatening letter from an agent of the BPI was under no obligation to stump up the £2,500 demand, and I hope she didn't. This was no more than bully-boy tactics from the rich against the poor, and wouldn't stand up in a court of law. This is why they used to go through the civil courts. They've stopped doing that now, of course.
It seems the BPI are finally on the verge of realising that their business model is borked, and has been for over 10 years. Rather than fighting the digital tide, they need to learn to use it and work with it.
Metalattakk
23-Oct-08, 00:52
I am pretty certain that it's illegal to download music without paying for it!
No, it's not. It is illegal to share it. It's not illegal to download it from someone who is sharing it.
ellie ask ur bro hes a genius il fill ur i pod tomorrow cant believe u never asked lol never head numpties on here 79 p a track gie most are millionares for wot cause i can sing lol gie ur lucky ,most edited anyway [lol] only best artist id be willing for his hard time and dedication is james excellent man best true reallity songs cant beat a man that still gets gigs 15+ years on lot of bands could learn a lot from him wah wah my favourite albulm go to you tube listen to james song called sound or anyone of his tracks waltzing along ring the bells etc pure class blow oasis bros away any day little twats they are anyway full of it where as james aint :) rant over ps ellei fone u in morning hope u had good birthday today x
I am pretty certain that it's illegal to download music without paying for it!
meiko the boy tom the man lol
why doesnt joe soap mind his own buisness,im sure he pays for all his downloads!!;)
more like joe bloggs
Metalattakk
23-Oct-08, 04:47
ellie ask ur bro hes a genius il fill ur i pod tomorrow cant believe u never asked lol never head numpties on here 79 p a track gie most are millionares for wot cause i can sing lol gie ur lucky ,most edited anyway [lol] only best artist id be willing for his hard time and dedication is james excellent man best true reallity songs cant beat a man that still gets gigs 15+ years on lot of bands could learn a lot from him wah wah my favourite albulm go to you tube listen to james song called sound or anyone of his tracks waltzing along ring the bells etc pure class blow oasis bros away any day little twats they are anyway full of it where as james aint :) rant over ps ellei fone u in morning hope u had good birthday today x
meiko the boy tom the man lol
more like joe bloggs
Who with the what where now, eh?
im sure he pays for all his downloads!
Yes. I do. :roll:
You're mistaking 'sharing' for 'downloading'.
Sharing is illegal. Downloading isn't.
No, it's not. It is illegal to share it. It's not illegal to download it from someone who is sharing it.
No, I’m really not making that mistake.
If you accept that ‘sharing’ is illegal perhaps you should take a look at how peer-to-peer clients (such as Limewire) work.
You think that when you download music with P2P you aren’t also ‘sharing’ it? [lol]
Metalattakk
23-Oct-08, 11:12
No, I’m really not making that mistake.
If you accept that ‘sharing’ is illegal perhaps you should take a look at how peer-to-peer clients (such as Limewire) work.
You think that when you download music with P2P you aren’t also ‘sharing’ it? [lol]
Not necessarily. On Limewire there was an option to disable uploading (effectively, sharing none of the content). There are many ways to limit your upload speed to 0kbps using firewalls, port blocking etc., etc.
Now, back to the unanswered question: If it's illegal, how come no one has been prosecuted under criminal law in the UK?
must admit, i always pay 79p for mine as i dont think it is fair to expect to get it for m=nothing, after all you wouldnt go into woolies or tescos and just help yourself to cds or dvd, so why expect to beable to do it online.
Filesharing of copyrighted material is illegal. Downloading copyrighted material is illegal.
It is theft. By doing either you are depriving the artists and copyright holders of the income from that song (or game).
As balto points out, you would not go into Woolies and take a music CD off the shelf and walk out without paying for it. If you did and you got caught you would be prosecuted for theft. "Caught" is the important word here - many people steal physical items and do not get caught. Just as many people download/share copyrighted material and get away with it.
Just because copyrighted media is a file on the internet doesn't lessen the fact that you are depriving the owner of the 'work' of their rights to income from their work.
People who do buy the CD and want to put it onto their MP3 player may find that they cannot because the CD is protected. They might complain (and rightly) but unfortunately the idea that you can do what you like with copyrighted media is false.
By buying the CD you are not granted a licence to copy or share that media. That licence remains with the copyright holder. So even copying the contents of a CD to an MP3 player is illegal. But the record companies have gone no further than trying to disable copying.
Go back a few years to the attempts to put a tax on blank cassette tapes. That was driven by the music industry to stop home taping. It never happened.
I suspect that they are taking a soft approach on this matter hence the lack of 'criminal prosecutions' but if they feel the problem is costing them more than they can afford to 'absorb' they will come down hard on those who illegally distribute copyrighted material.
If of course you are a lawyer with experience of copyright law and not just an armchair expert then I am prepared to stand corrected. But if you are just one of the many who indulge in stealing music by sharing and feel it is your right then I cannot accept your 'argument' for sharing.
Metalattakk
23-Oct-08, 12:28
must admit, i always pay 79p for mine as i dont think it is fair to expect to get it for m=nothing, after all you wouldnt go into woolies or tescos and just help yourself to cds or dvd, so why expect to beable to do it online.
I wouldn't pay 79p for a low quality version of any music file. Especially as in the US they pay only 79 cents for the same track.
What I do is download it if I think I might like it. Then if I do, I buy the CD and rip the tracks from it to my mp3 player. That way I don't waste my hard-earned on music that I thought might be good, but turns out to be tripe.
The music industry has had it good for too long - releasing rubbish music backed up with advertising and media-controlled publicity, and ripping the eyes out of us in the process.
The digital age is upon us, and most of us have adapted just fine. Except those luddites who run the music industry of course.
Not necessarily. On Limewire there was an option to disable uploading (effectively, sharing none of the content). There are many ways to limit your upload speed to 0kbps using firewalls, port blocking etc., etc.
Sorry, but I seriously doubt that somebody who goes to a community forum to ask about alternatives to a ‘broken’ limewire for downloading music is the kind of person with enough understanding of P2P to even consider limiting their upload bandwidth. I find it even less likely that they would have the knowledge (let alone the inclination) to reconfigure their firewall and/or router to block the two ports used for uploading by limewire.
Now, back to the unanswered question: If it's illegal, how come no one has been prosecuted under criminal law in the UK?
I’m afraid you’d need to ask the CPS.
But I can say that legislation comes into effect when an Act of Parliament is implemented, not when the first prosecution goes to court.
I’m quite certain that there are a fair few laws which have never been tested in court – that doesn’t make them any less binding.
I have a whole bundle of straws here if you’d like to clutch at a few more in trying to justify yourself.:roll:
The Angel Of Death
23-Oct-08, 12:38
Exactly wasn't that long ago that they were still charging up to and over £15 an album for 30 mins of sometimes crap music if digital downloads were introduces years ago at a reasonable price then more people would have bought into it but as metalattack said the fat cats were not willing to loose there pot of cash they were raking in all the time another example of the kind of rip of that us the brittish public have had to endear for years now
Metalattakk
23-Oct-08, 12:42
Filesharing of copyrighted material is illegal. Downloading copyrighted material is illegal.
It is theft. By doing either you are depriving the artists and copyright holders of the income from that song (or game).
I believe you are wrong. If it was theft, why have no criminal prosecutions been brought in the UK?
(I'll keep asking this question until people either stop misrepresenting file-sharing as 'theft', or someone answers my question.)
As balto points out, you would not go into Woolies and take a music CD off the shelf and walk out without paying for it. If you did and you got caught you would be prosecuted for theft. "Caught" is the important word here - many people steal physical items and do not get caught. Just as many people download/share copyrighted material and get away with it.
Your analogy doesn't work, MadPict. Thieving a physical item is completely different to downloading a digital, non-physical file. The two cannot be compared, especially under the eyes of the law. A semi-competent lawyer would have it laughed out of court.
I suspect that they are taking a soft approach on this matter hence the lack of 'criminal prosecutions' but if they feel the problem is costing them more than they can afford to 'absorb' they will come down hard on those who illegally distribute copyrighted material.
You don't think they haven't already tried to come down hard on file-sharers? Believe me, they've tried everything except working with the public to provide a suitable alternative to file-sharing.
They seem hell-bent to learn their lesson the hard way.
[...] low quality version [...]
[...] I don't waste my hard-earned on music that I thought might be good, but turns out to be tripe. [...]
Talking of tripe... :rolleyes:
Do you really think there is a difference in the quality of a track downloaded legitimately from iTunes and one which you have burned yourself from a CD? You think the freeware (I assume you don't pay for software either) you use has a superior compression algorithm to that used by the music companies when they give their tracks to Apple?
Do you really think your ears are sensitive enough to detect it? Through whatever cheap, natty speakers/headphones somebody who is too cheap to pay 79p for a single has?
As for the excuse that you steal music tracks, listen to them and then buy the ones you like: absolute twaddle. That’s just something people say to try to justify their theft. I don’t believe for one second that you have a CD collection that includes every track you’ve ever downloaded and liked.
If it was theft, why have no criminal prosecutions been brought in the UK?
(I'll keep asking this question until people either stop misrepresenting file-sharing as 'theft', or someone answers my question.)
And I will keep giving you the same response: ask the CPS. I will also keep pointing out that your suggestion that no prosecutions = no law is a fallacy.
Metalattakk
23-Oct-08, 13:11
Talking of tripe... :rolleyes:
Do you really think there is a difference in the quality of a track downloaded legitimately from iTunes and one which you have burned yourself from a CD? You think the freeware (I assume you don't pay for software either) you use has a superior compression algorithm to that used by the music companies when they give their tracks to Apple?
What? Are you getting confused here? My preferred mode of listening is from a CD. Mp3s are much of a muchness - enough to get a good idea of whether a track or album is worth spending money on to get the CD.
Through whatever cheap, natty speakers/headphones somebody who is too cheap to pay 79p for a single has?
No need for that. Resulting to insults because you're losing the argument? :D
As for the excuse that you steal music tracks, listen to them and then buy the ones you like: absolute twaddle. That’s just something people say to try to justify their theft.
It's not theft, so I am not stealing anything. I'm not justifying theft, because it isn't theft. It's nowhere near being theft.
I don’t believe for one second that you have a CD collection that includes every track you’ve ever downloaded and liked.
I couldn't care less what you believe, but I shall defend your right to be wrong.
Why no prosecutions have happened in UK - as JoeSoap stated "Ask CPS".
If an artist makes his material available for free downloads on their site or via P2P networks that is fine. To be honest I think musicians get a raw deal from the music companies and I wish that more would strike out on their own and break the apron strings of the big music companies. Many artists now do that. I have downloaded music direct from an artists website or through iTunes.
As for the analogy to shoplifting? It does work and has been discussed numerous times on varios forums I visit. It is an anology that has even been argued by an author who has had his written work copied illegally.
Just because there is nothing physical being stolen doesn't mean the act of theft has not been committed.
I actually know a lawyer who specialises in this - I have just this minute put your argument to him via AIM and he says you are completely wrong.
Metalattakk
23-Oct-08, 13:15
If an artist makes his material available for free downloads on their site or via P2P networks that is fine. To be honest I think musicians get a raw deal from the music companies and I wish that more would strike out on their own and break the apron strings of the big music companies. Many artists now do that. I have downloaded music direct from an artists website or through iTunes.
I agree. The music industry is changing (has been for a while) whether the music industry likes it or not. This is a good thing.
I actually know a lawyer who specialises in this - I have just this minute put your argument to him via AIM and he says you are completely wrong.
That's just funny. :D
I did the same and MY insider said that I'm right, and that your insider doesn't know what he's talking about. :lol:
That's just funny. :D
I did the same and MY insider said that I'm right, and that your insider doesn't know what he's talking about. :lol:
Well I can always post a screen shot of the AIM conversation here - I doubt if you can do the same.
You are just trying to defend your own behaviour on this subject.
Metalattakk
23-Oct-08, 13:21
No, I'm trying to get people to stop harassing people who download music by calling them thieves.
Downloading isn't theft.
File-sharing isn't theft.
Stop calling them thieves.
No, I'm trying to get people to stop harassing people who download music by calling them thieves.
Downloading isn't theft.
File-sharing isn't theft.
Stop calling them thieves.
But they are........................they are infringing the Copyright!!!! If you want to listen to music.....buy it!!!!
Metalattakk
23-Oct-08, 13:25
LOL!
Copyright infringement isn't theft!
No, I'm trying to get people to stop harassing people who download music by calling them thieves.
Downloading isn't theft.
File-sharing isn't theft.
Stop calling them thieves.
Downloading NON COPYRIGHTED material is not theft.
Flie-sharing NON COPYRIGHTED material is not theft.
Operative word in this argument is COPYRIGHT.
I think you need to brush up on intellectual property rights law.
What? Are you getting confused here? My preferred mode of listening is from a CD. Mp3s are much of a muchness - enough to get a good idea of whether a track or album is worth spending money on to get the CD.
No, I don’t think it’s me who is getting confused. You seem to be changing your story somewhat:
What I do is download it if I think I might like it. Then if I do, I buy the CD and rip the tracks from it to my mp3 player.
Metalattakk
23-Oct-08, 13:49
Downloading NON COPYRIGHTED material is not theft.
Flie-sharing NON COPYRIGHTED material is not theft.
Operative word in this argument is COPYRIGHT.
I think you need to brush up on intellectual property rights law.
None of it is theft, copyrighted or not. It is copyright infringement, not theft.
Copyright infringement is not a criminal offence.
Metalattakk
23-Oct-08, 13:52
No, I don’t think it’s me who is getting confused. You seem to be changing your story somewhat:
Key word (as they're so popular right now) is 'preferred'.
Yes, I'll rip my tracks from my legally acquired CD if I want to. Given a choice I'd rather listen to the CD though. Got a problem with that?
Yes, I'll rip my tracks from my legally acquired CD if I want to. Given a choice I'd rather listen to the CD though. Got a problem with that?
As I mention previously you do not have any right to do that. You may believe you have but you are mistaken. Songs ripped at a higher rate and in some formats are as good as the quality from a CD. I don't have a problem with it though as I believe that if you have paid for a CD making one digital copy for use on an MP3 player is 'fair use' and this is a concept which is enshrined in some nations laws (much to the annoyance of record companies). Just in the same way that a song/album downloaded from iTunes Store is authorised to be stored on up to five computers. Hope my double standards have not confused you too much ;)
None of it is theft, copyrighted or not. It is copyright infringement, not theft.
Copyright infringement is not a criminal offence.
Fine - you carry on with that belief.
I'll prefer go with the opinion/experience of the author and the IP lawyer I know, if that's OK with you. :)
Invisible
23-Oct-08, 13:54
How about you take the hint, stop stealing and pay the 79p to get the song from iTunes? [disgust]
Its not stealing, its sharing...............
I thought Limewire was working last night when i tried it.
Try Bearshare.
Metalattakk
23-Oct-08, 13:58
.
Fine - you carry on with that belief.
I'll prefer go with the opinion/experience of the author and the IP lawyer I know, if that's OK with you. :)
Yup, that's fine by me. I don’t agree with you, but I’ll certainly defend your right to be wrong. ;)
There's never been much money going to artists for selling CD's anyway, it's always been the record companies way of clawing back on their investment. If they weren't so greedy all those years... then people would probably still willingly pay for music.
I play in a band and we've released two cd's and ok, we try and make a few quid back on them. However, on the recent sleeve, we put something like "copying, public performance etc of this CD is encouraged"
Who cares if people steal your music? If the people like and go to a show or buy some piece of merch, then that's cool. Music isn't about money, it's about enjoyment.
Bands make money from touring these days, in fact, I'm pretty certain that's where the majority of bands make money now.
Metalattakk
23-Oct-08, 14:30
Bands make money from touring these days, in fact, I'm pretty certain that's where the majority of bands make money now.
Yep, that's one of the reasons the music moguls are miffed off these days - bands/musicians now actually have to have talent and an ability to perform in a live environment.
This also is a good thing.
Here's some words from Thomas Jefferson:
If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.
..and I'm happy for you to be wrong with your rights ;)
Let me just clarify my stance - I think the big music companies approach to digital downloads is wrong. They claim it will kill the 'traditional' music industry as it is. But maybe the previous model needs killing. Giving more power back to the artists is the important thing in my opinion. Breaking the stranglehold that the big five (?) have is a good thing. And contrary to what they claim downloads (of the legal sort ;) ) haven't impacted on CD sales. The cost of CDs has. It costs about £3 to make a CD - the cost of CDs hasn't really dropped since they first came out. A friend works for one of the big labels so I know my basic cost of a CD is right. They were about £18 when I got my first CD player. The price of some still hovers around the £14 mark all these years later.
It's old technology now so surely the costs should be coming down?
Some stores sell CDs at lower prices (FOPP is one I frequent for golden oldies) but new albums are still expensive to buy in the physical format. So if I can get the latest album for £7.99 from iTunes that may be saving me a fiver. If it is only at 128kbps quality my ears cannot detect any great difference these days and it is one less CD to have to dust!
Artists that use the internet to distribute their music, be it free or at a low cost, is probably the way forward. As more and more big named bands/artists break free from their contracts we may see more and more free/cheaper albums and songs coming through.
Bands still need finance to get on the road and this still comes from the big labels in order to promote their 'product'.
Jeid,
Is your playing your sole source of income? If not then maybe you can afford to be generous and give your music away. But if it is your only source of income I wonder if you would feel differently?
John Baikie
23-Oct-08, 17:09
I can't understand where this is going but as far as I am concerned downloading without paying is a breach of copyright and therefore is an offence. Whether someone has been done for it or not I don't know, but I also know that if there hasn't that doesn't mean it isn't a law :lol:
Whether you agree with it or think it should be allowed or whatever doesn't get away from the fact that it is illegal. Personal opinions on moral issues don't count.
On a personal side of copyright - I can't remember hearing of people being prosecuted for copying and printing work of photographers or artists but it happens all the time. It's still illegal.
Anyway the OP wanted advice on downloading music, and I agree that the way to do it is to pay for them.
Just wait a few years-you'll get the CD free with a newspaper. [lol]
Get mine "free" from Demonoid.
I dont "share" cos I am a tight git.
I download then dont upload cos that would be illegal right [lol]
I could "share" but that would make me a bad boy so I wont admit to having a 3.01 Ratio on Demonoid cos that would be wrong innit? ;)
I do still buy CD's though from woolies, but they never have anything on so I end up putting music on it myself, its about time they put some songs on them, would stop me doing it then ;)
Talking of tripe... :rolleyes:
Do you really think there is a difference in the quality of a track downloaded legitimately from iTunes and one which you have burned yourself from a CD? You think the freeware (I assume you don't pay for software either) you use has a superior compression algorithm to that used by the music companies when they give their tracks to Apple?
Do you really think your ears are sensitive enough to detect it? Through whatever cheap, natty speakers/headphones somebody who is too cheap to pay 79p for a single has?
As for the excuse that you steal music tracks, listen to them and then buy the ones you like: absolute twaddle. That’s just something people say to try to justify their theft. I don’t believe for one second that you have a CD collection that includes every track you’ve ever downloaded and liked.
I find the downlaods from Tesco's etc are not such good quality as whats available on Demonoid, pirate bay, Mininova etc. Most of them are 128kbps(itunes) to 192kbps wheras I download nothing less than 256kbps which is "true" CD quality so it is below par.(most the tunes I get are 320k) So maybe if they stopped selling 2nd rate files then people wouldnt use file sharing so much?
I can tell the difference between the quality and normally only use FLAC as it is superior to MP3.
Unless you are dealing with the original wav master file then the quality of the file you download will always be of inferior quality no matter what format it has been uploaded in.
Sapphire2803
23-Oct-08, 18:07
Here's a link to the copyright laws http://www.ipo.gov.uk/cdpact1988.pdf
Read, mark, learn and inwardly digest. :D
Unless you are dealing with the original wav master file then the quality of the file you download will always be of inferior quality no matter what format it has been uploaded in.
Aha... someone with sense.
MP3 is a format that will always have a lower quality, no matter what.
I don't get what it matters tbh, people will always download music, legal or otherwise.
I find the downlaods from Tesco's etc are not such good quality as whats available on Demonoid, pirate bay, Mininova etc. Most of them are 128kbps(itunes) to 192kbps wheras I download nothing less than 256kbps which is "true" CD quality so it is below par.(most the tunes I get are 320k) So maybe if they stopped selling 2nd rate files then people wouldnt use file sharing so much?
I can tell the difference between the quality and normally only use FLAC as it is superior to MP3.
256kbps is not true cd quality, 1411 Kbps is the exact cd bit rate
It's only illegal if you are caught, and how do you police it? It's illegal to carry a knife but people still do it.
The Courts are only interested in the big fish who SELL the pirate copies, unless your downloading thousands of albums everyday then that might be different.
It's only illegal if you are caught, and how do you police it? It's illegal to carry a knife but people still do it.
The Courts are only interested in the big fish who SELL the pirate copies, unless your downloading thousands of albums everyday then that might be different.
How do you police it?...eh...with ip addresses, it's your digital fingerprint.
But they are........................they are infringing the Copyright!!!! If you want to listen to music.....buy it!!!! buy it lol :roll: her ipod is fill now we e best tunes going so sorry all u millionares we ur edited tracks for 20 od reg for an albulm go ................... self james is e kiddy lol bunch of winges on here best thing u can all do is stop preaching judging maybe even listen she was only asking for help not a caithness.morg debate push the of button if u dont like it
:lol:
John Baikie
23-Oct-08, 22:56
buy it lol :roll: her ipod is fill now we e best tunes going so sorry all u millionares we ur edited tracks for 20 od reg for an albulm go ................... self james is e kiddy lol bunch of winges on here best thing u can all do is stop preaching judging maybe even listen she was only asking for help not a caithness.morg debate push the of button if u dont like it
:lol:
speak english boy :lol:
Sapphire2803
23-Oct-08, 23:09
buy it lol :roll: her ipod is fill now we e best tunes going so sorry all u millionares we ur edited tracks for 20 od reg for an albulm go ................... self james is e kiddy lol bunch of winges on here best thing u can all do is stop preaching judging maybe even listen she was only asking for help not a caithness.morg debate push the of button if u dont like it
:lol:
Ok first of all.... what?? eh??
Secondly...
You don't go onto a community website and ask for advice on how to do something illegal. Unless of course you are mentally deficient in some way, in which case it would be understandable. What you have just done btw is make a written statement to the effect that you have downloaded stolen music for distribution.
Well done genius :roll:
Aha... someone with sense.
MP3 is a format that will always have a lower quality, no matter what.
I don't get what it matters tbh, people will always download music, legal or otherwise.People always will and even when they manage to shut down one Bittorrent file linking site, another ten open in their place.
John Baikie
23-Oct-08, 23:50
Ok first of all.... what?? eh??
Secondly...
You don't go onto a community website and ask for advice on how to do something illegal. Unless of course you are mentally deficient in some way, in which case it would be understandable. What you have just done btw is make a written statement to the effect that you have downloaded stolen music for distribution.
Well done genius :roll:
:lol::lol:
speak english boy :lol:
kopsi sluga na varym dupek at good enough for ya[lol]
Ok first of all.... what?? eh??
Secondly...
You don't go onto a community website and ask for advice on how to do something illegal. Unless of course you are mentally deficient in some way, in which case it would be understandable. What you have just done btw is make a written statement to the effect that you have downloaded stolen music for distribution.
Well done genius :roll: yeah and wot about it
Sapphire2803
24-Oct-08, 00:41
Which part of that did you not understand?
Or did you understand it all, choose to ignore the first part and show complete disregard for the consequences of the second part?
Believe it or not I am actually in agreement with metalattak here!.
I often download some songs and If its good enough then I'll buy the CD, at least that way I am only buying music that I will like. How often have you heard a song on the radio/seen the album adertised on Tv and then bought it and found the rest is all rubbish? Happened too many times for me, so now I try before I buy.
I normally listen to the songs on youtube or similar. If I like them I buy the album.
There's something nice about owning the real CD rather than a download in my opinion.
Valerie Campbell
24-Oct-08, 14:44
How about trying legalsounds.com? Have a wee look and see if it's for you.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.