Slashdot Mirror
How to Turn A Music Lover to Piracy
dugn writes to tell us The Consumerist is running a story about how a run of the mill (read non-tech-savvy) music lover was pushed to become a pirate. "I've devoted a not-inconsequential chunk of my life to collecting music; to tracking down obscure records, cassettes, 8-Tracks and CD's of all genres and styles. And now apparently that is all but over. Music has somehow evolved from tangible things into amorphous collections of 1's and 0's guarded over by interested parties as if they were gold bullion. How so very sad."
Back the early 80's there was an infamous BBS named "Pirate Harbor". The misuse of the term wasn't new then.
Trolling is a art,
and do it youself.
http://www.ion-audio.com/
http://www.plusdeck.com/
Cheers,
Jonathan
It will cost Rhino far more to deal with the credit card company's fees for his refusing payment than he paid originally for the music.
"My opinions are my own, and I've got *lots* of them!"
Yes, I have heard of bard, troubadours, etc.. They became prominenet...in the Late Baroque era. Like I said. And most of them traveled from fiefdom to fiefdom and sang and played...for kings and lords, also like I said. It was the only way they could eat; playing for commoners (though it did happen on occassion) didn't fill the stomach until the economy could support it (think late classical period).
And respectfully, while fantasy novels on the whole are entertaining and occasionally even thought provoking, are by and large utter shite when it comes to historical accuracy. The closest one comes to historical accuracy in a novel like that is something like "Doomsday Book" by Connie Willis. And that portrayed the late medieval period; ain't no bards there.
All the techniques ever used to make men moral have been themselves thoroughly immoral... (Nietzsche)
Summary says "turn to piracy", not "change into a pirate".
FA says "Does DRM drive even honest well-meaning people to piracy?"
You are complaining about an attack that never came.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
It's pretty old. In its entry for pirate (in this sense) OED has:
1603 T. DEKKER Wonderfull Yeare sig. A4, Banish these Word-pirates (you sacred mistresses of learning) into the gulfe of Barbarisme.] 1668 J. HANCOCK Brooks' String of Pearls (Notice at end), Some dishonest Booksellers, called Land-Pirats, who make it their practise to steal Impressions of other mens Copies. 1703 D. DEFOE True-born Englishman in True Collect. I. Explan. Pref. sig. B3v, Its being Printed again and again, by Pyrates.
Igor Presnyakov stole my hat
FTA (journal entry dated March 20, 2007):He mentioned before that he spent 20k on vinyl and CDs already. He just wanted the Luna compilation. If you go to Rhino, you can purchase the Luna cover:
1. He had the option of purchasing the CD (as he professed to in the past), but
2. He purchased a cheaper WMA with this big DISCLAIMER directly below (once you checkout):He opted for 2, and ignored the disclaimer.
I thought you can purchase a CD and download them to your iPod. Am I mistaken? I fail to see that as justification for becoming a music pirate.
I hope, when they die, cartoon characters have to answer for their sins.
What a stunningly ignorant sequence of statements!
Let me see if I can shed a little light.
Tivo chose DRM. They chose it because they felt they would be sued into oblivion if they did not. You may have a point here, although I believe that they made the correct decision - as in, they wouldn't have lasted a month if they didn't go the DRM route.
Microsoft and Apple both had to implement DRM if they wanted to be able to sell music. Microsoft had to implement DRM if they wanted to make Windows Media the most popular format around, even before they were selling music. The labels simply would not have permitted them to sell digital downloads without DRM. So yes, they very much were forced to use DRM - it was either that, or not compete in the industry at all. They have a responsibility to their shareholders to make money. So yes, they had to use DRM.
A 20 dollar DVD player can play DivX with no problems. That's correct. But the issue here isn't playing non-encrypted content. The issue is that the content creators want protection. This is why they're releasing media which is encrypted. Sure, you can make a player that plays unencrypted media. It's not useful for playing mass-media content; virtually no DVD releases are unencrypted, although I have seen one example. Try selling a DVD player that doesn't support CSS and let me know how far you get!
Yes, it was his choice to use DRM and make money, or refuse to use DRM, and be lynched by the shareholders. What a choice!
Money is the root of all of this evil, but next in line is the MAFIAA.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
My first Experience with DRM was many years ago. I bought 4 books from a web site that sold them as protected acrobat files. Which is great for me to read them. However since then I have changed my computer and the files can no longer be opened, becasue they where licenced to my old computer. I can not redownload the licence for my new computer, because the company is now out of business. So the books I bought, are no longer usable, even though I have purchased the rights to be able to view them on my computer. If they had been significantly cheaper than the paper versions, I would just ignore it, and move on. However, they where not, and becasue of the experience I pretty much avoid all DRM protected content. Think about the response you would have, if apple closed tomorrow, and took everything with it, so that all that music on your ipod is good until your ipod dies and then it is all gone.
this anaolgy is so invalid that it borders on trolling.
CD and a record are fundamentally incompataible due to the way they work.
an iTunes-downloaded AAC file and a non-iPod AAC-compatile music player are not fundamentally incompatable. they're supposed to work together, but this CRAP prevents that.
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
I concur that Nero did not play the fiddle or violin, most likely he picked at his lyre http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyre.
-- Cave quid dicis, quando, et cui
Legally? It depends on where in the world you live, but you can do it without further expense. See an old article I wrotre a few years ago if you're interested.
In many cases (Boston 1 and 2*, Led Zeppelin Presence), if your original media are in good shape, or better yet virgin, your home-made CD of that LP will sound better than the CD you can buy at the store.
-mcgrew
* from the linked Wikipedia article:Note, I haven't heard the newest remasters of these CDs but the original CDs were indeed crap. The dynamics were missing completely, the frequency response was likewise flattened.
Actually, they have taken a stance:
Assuming the mentioned case got as far as a court, Sony's claimed that in court. I'm pretty sure they're estopped from later claiming that what's transpiring is a license sale.
Have you considered just avoiding music from RIAA labels? There are plenty of independent labels out there. I have found the RIAA Radar to be very helpful.
The troubadours and trouvères were travelling musicians in 13th century Burgundy -- some 500 years before the "late Baroque." One of the most remarkable things about the 19th century was the popularity of music among the middle classes -- Beethoven's audience was the middle class, not the nobility and gentry. This is, I suppose, "late classical," but your concept of "commoner" is a bit off. You might want to review your history and your dates, if you're going to criticize people for historical accuracy.
What you're missing is that music, until the beginning of recording, was something almost everybody did. You sang; you played the piano (if you were well-educated and middle-class), you played other instruments. When you got together at parties, you'd either hire a few local musicians or take turns. Even up to the 1950s, well-educated people could all read music and sing or play the piano.
Recording turned music from an *activity* into a *product*.
Generally singing is considered one form of music, but even ignoring that there's this neat technique called "whistling" that has been popular for a little while now. Also the reed whistle, flute, horn and drum all predate even the earliest forms of writing. People were beating rhythms on hollow trees long before the concept of currency was invented.
They told me I had to file that under homeowners insurance... which I don't have... because I don't have a home... I have an apartment.
:)
Renter's contents insurance has been available for decades.
You're free to not purchase it (hey, many renters don't own much), but don't make out like you couldn't have had insurance
Otherwise I agree with your point completely. It's a good question, and has actually come up in insurance claims similar to yours.
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
Almost certainly via "pirate radio stations". These were ships which would broadcast FM radio from just outside a country's territorial waters, so that they could be heard on land. They'd play music without paying any royalties, play records which were banned from the radio or not released to radio stations, etc., and were just about legal because no one had the power to arrest people in international waters for something as trivial as copyright violation.
So you can see how "piracy" got linked to "copyright infringement" - via actual seagoing music pirates. Surprised no one else pointed it out.
# cat
Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
They would if they would sell their own music, or found distributors that gave them favorable terms. (And don't try the crap about there being no such thing -- there is; you just don't get the marketing muscle that the big names have.) I feel no sympathy for the poor, downtrodden artists who sign away the rights to their music in hopes of becoming multimillionaires. They played the lottery, they lost.
In any case, I was responding to the statement "That's where the money is, anyway. not the Albums," which is obviously false. Many more people buy music than go to concerts, and are willing to pay for it. There's money in both.
How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?