Music for ipod

[MadPict]

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]

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.

[JoeSoap]

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.

[The Angel Of Death]

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]

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.

[JoeSoap]

[...] 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...

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.

[JoeSoap]

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]

Talking of tripe...

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?

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.

[MadPict]

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]

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.

I did the same and MY insider said that I'm right, and that your insider doesn't know what he's talking about.

[MadPict]

That's just funny.

I did the same and MY insider said that I'm right, and that your insider doesn't know what he's talking about.

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]

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.

[golach]

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]

LOL!

Copyright infringement isn't theft!

[MadPict]

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.

[JoeSoap]

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]

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]

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?

[MadPict]

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]

How about you take the hint, stop stealing and pay the 79p to get the song from iTunes?

Its not stealing, its sharing...............

I thought Limewire was working last night when i tried it.
Try Bearshare.