End p2p music sharing?

It does not really bother me about the quality of files downloaded, I like the feel of a nice shiny CD for music. I agree CD/DVD media could be a little cheaper, but cost of a LUXURY does not excuse the stealing of someone elses copyrighted work.
Probably for another thread, but has societies morals dropped enough for 'minor' stealing to become the norm and those that dont do it become the minority?
 
VeNT said:
then how is it I can go to america and buy a CD for sub £10 after all the taxes?
Click to expand...
First thing will be US sales tax at typically about 6%, rather than 17.5% VAT. Then they'll be economies of scale due to tye size of market. And US versions of the CD are usually different to the UK ones, which means separate production process. Besides, it may well be cheaper to manufacture in the UK than manufacture inthe US and ship to the UK.

Then there's the cost of operating in the US. Most US malls carry nothing like the business overheads that UK shops do, because there is (in most cases) nothing like the premium on land. And so on.

But all that is besides the point. I said that my specific figures were enitely hypothetical, but the principle isn't. It isn't about whether they can or do sell in the US, it's about what price point ensures maximum profit. It may be that in the UK, they could sell at £10 without going into loss. I'd be astonished if they couldn't. But, if they reduce profit by doing so, why would, or should, they?

And if that is the case, it is UK buyers that are to blame. If you won't pay £15, they would HAVE to cut prices. But frankly, if they don't have to, they won't. Nor would I. As I said, they are a business, not a music-providing social service.

And to anyone that says they should cut prices even if it reduced profits, when was the last time you refused a pay rise, or suggested your boss pay you less? Quite. Then why should investors in record companies do so?
 
Andelusion said:
I'm a musician and compose my own stuff so can appreciate the price of CDs (well, by certain artists who actually go through sweat and blood to write their material).

I wouldn't complain if CDs were made cheaper, but I certainly don't think they're overpriced.
Click to expand...
Quite so.

Though, personally, I'm not going to weep many tears for record companies if they balls their marketing up so badly that musicians, from unknowns to superstars, decide to bypass the marketing machine and do their own thing, digitally and via the web.

If a musician could do a DIY job, and get £5 per disk selling direct rather than £1 from a record company, and without the restrictive contracts, great. The artist gets more, the customer gets cheaper music and the record company gets precisely what it deserves.

At the end of the day, the retail price of music is what it is because that is what the market will bear. I fully sympathise with people that regard it as too expensive and won't pay it, but then, that isn't a justification (IMHO) for piracy. It is, however, a reason for doing without that music.
 
If i had no intention of purchasing an album in the first place, the record company have not lost a sale.

I may be listening to something which i am not entitled to listen to, but i am not causing sales to decline as there was never going to be sale.


I know this view sounds very simplistic but it is valid, IMHO.
 
Something that someone told me a while ago - record companies are considereing making vinyls more now to help reduce piracy. Not because it's harder to copy the music from, but because people like the feel and size of it, you feel like you're getting more for your money... Interesting concept i thought, might work, might not.
 
Downloading something you didnt consider good enough to buy is greed. Downloading it simply because you can. Cybergluttony. Not to mention that you are eating bandwidth, that could be otherwise used, to download a file you dont actually want.

Saw a whisper about this watermark thing a couple of weeks ago, the hint then was that instead of using it to stop p2p directly it could be used to prove, beyond doubt, that a collection of files is or is not legitimately owned. Beyond that it was also implied that key parts of a computer software environment might be utilised to detect the watermark and prevent the file from playing.
 
malfunkshun said:
Downloading something you didnt consider good enough to buy is greed. Downloading it simply because you can. Cybergluttony.
Click to expand...

What does downloading to preview before making a purchase count as?
 
malfunkshun said:
Saw a whisper about this watermark thing a couple of weeks ago, the hint then was that instead of using it to stop p2p directly it could be used to prove, beyond doubt, that a collection of files is or is not legitimately owned. Beyond that it was also implied that key parts of a computer software environment might be utilised to detect the watermark and prevent the file from playing.
Click to expand...
That's the way I understand it but software would have to be specifically designed to not play illegitmate files. Quite possible the likes of MS and
Apple would comply and build it into their software but there will always be open source players that will play anything.
 
Psyk said:
That's the way I understand it but software would have to be specifically designed to not play illegitmate files. Quite possible the likes of MS and
Apple would comply and build it into their software but there will always be open source players that will play anything.
Click to expand...

Be sure to give me a call when an open source player will play HD-DVD.
 
vonhelmet said:
What good would that do? If people won't pay £10-£15 for a CD, what makes you think they'll pay £5-£10 for one? Beyond that, plenty of people have some absurd notion that you shouldn't even pay for music at all. Lots of people just horde music they never listen to. Others do it to stick it to the man. Very little of this has anything to do with money.
Click to expand...

I'd certainly buy more CD's if they were cheaper, as it stands I only buy full price CD's for other people, if its something I want, I either get it online or wait until I see it onsale or its reduced down, I refuse personally to purchase any music for more than £10.00, it also forces me to go to music fairs which are amazingly good fun.

I picked up both Audioslave albums the other day for a tenner, bargain if you ask me. (I actually own the original album from Itunes, but I much prefer to have physical copies of these things.)
 
Psyk said:
Would there be licensing issues with that? That's the only reason I could think of for there not being an open source player.
Click to expand...

any prevention of fair competition is monopoly surely? so I would imagine any attempt to quash an open source player would be jumped on by EFF et al.

remember that dutch? guy who broke DVD decoding so he could write an open source linux player since there were no non mac / windows players... he got away with it on the basis of fair use IIRC.
 
P2P will allways be for the uneducated masses who are not bothered about quality.

Sure there is better quality of media available online but how many people have the hardware to enjoy it to it's full potential? For that matter how many people notice the difference between MP3 and CD? Also, how many people download material then buy it if they like it?
 
malfunkshun said:
i cant deny doing that myself now and then.
Click to expand...
Nor can I. That's the extent of my downloading though .... about half a dozen tracks.

Occasionally, just occasionally, an artist I don't know is recommended. Then, if it isn't convenient to get to the shops, I've been known to download a track or two. If I like them, I order the album and dump the downloaded tracks. If I don't, I just dump the downloaded tracks.

malfunkshun said:
If nothing else it saves me onverting the cd when i buy it (which you arent meant to do either as i understand UK law on the matter)
Click to expand...
Correct.
 
weescott said:
P2P will allways be for the uneducated masses who are not bothered about quality.

Sure there is better quality of media available online but how many people have the hardware to enjoy it to it's full potential? For that matter how many people notice the difference between MP3 and CD? Also, how many people download material then buy it if they like it?
Click to expand...

Quality on p2p isnt an issue though, a load of torrents are 320kbps rips, which people would burn to a cd and listen to on their cd player. So the hardware isnt a problem.
 
What proportion of people will know the kbps difference and who will have the hardware to differenciate between the quality? Someone on a £50 Aiwa hi-fi isn't going to know the difference between a ripped mp3 and an original are they?

And even if they did know the difference on whatever equipment they play it on, will they be bothered unless they are an audiophile?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom