With all due respect to the mods, how is this a troll?
He's right; maybe/. types recognize that this is stealing (or maybe everyone does, and only/. types care, it doesn't matter), but the general public could not care less.
To the average joe, Kazaa is free music, no consequences, no risks, easy, and generally high-quality (except, perhaps, to audiophiles). So, why is a typical Kazaa user going to switch to iTunes or MS's new system or whatever? Maybe if the prices respected the fact that we're talking about INTELLECTUAL property, that is, property that can be copied without cost (at least digitally), there might be more people willing to pay (reliable downloads, higher quality, licensed, etc.) but until that point, Kazaa is going to be infinitely more attractive to almost everyone.
Well, I find the store-theft analogies to be a bit off, because intellectual property and physical property are worlds apart. Intellectual property can be copied and taken without directly taking profits (unless it's done instead of buying a CD), while stealing physical property directly deprives a store of profit, but that's not really the point anyway.
I wasn't arguing for intellectual theft so much as asking why would people do this. I think there are plenty of arguments to counter all of those, really. If you have the ability, you're not going to get caught, and it's essentially the same thing except that there's no need to pay, why not? To support the artists? Most of the profits go to the RIAA anyway, a seriously corrupt organization that exists only to take profits away from the artists. That's a hypocritical argument, admittedly (since by stealing, you're taking profits away yourself), but it does raise the question of just whom you're supporting. As for that fuzzy feeling you get when you do something legally, well, maybe that works for you, but I just get a sick feeling when I pay 13 bucks for a CD that has one or two decent songs, both of which I could have easily gotten free from Kazaa. (Which, yes, this service does attempt to fix, but it still seems overpriced, and there's still the question of where the profits go.)
And finally, I would question just how much the artists get directly from a service like this. My impression is that the artists make a lot of their money thanks to 'filler' on their CDs, and using a service like this, that 'filler' is removed from the system. Take off the profits from the service offering (in this case Microsoft), take off profits for the RIAA, and so on, and just what's left for the artists?
It just doesn't make sense to me, and I think there are millions out there who are going to realize that there are two ways to get music online; you can pay for it, or get it for free. Pick one.
At the risk of coming off as a low-down music pirate (aren't we all...), why on earth would anyone do this? If you have access to a computer and you're looking to load files on portable media, I see no incentive when you can get any songs you want, as many as you want, FOR FREE on Kazaa or one of the dozens of P2P programs now available.
There are, as I see it, some advantages to buying the CD (directly support artists, etc.), but what's the incentive to buy this unless the customer is so clueless that they do not even know about P2P?
Slashdot Mirror
With all due respect to the mods, how is this a troll?
/. types recognize that this is stealing (or maybe everyone does, and only /. types care, it doesn't matter), but the general public could not care less.
He's right; maybe
To the average joe, Kazaa is free music, no consequences, no risks, easy, and generally high-quality (except, perhaps, to audiophiles). So, why is a typical Kazaa user going to switch to iTunes or MS's new system or whatever? Maybe if the prices respected the fact that we're talking about INTELLECTUAL property, that is, property that can be copied without cost (at least digitally), there might be more people willing to pay (reliable downloads, higher quality, licensed, etc.) but until that point, Kazaa is going to be infinitely more attractive to almost everyone.
Well, I find the store-theft analogies to be a bit off, because intellectual property and physical property are worlds apart. Intellectual property can be copied and taken without directly taking profits (unless it's done instead of buying a CD), while stealing physical property directly deprives a store of profit, but that's not really the point anyway.
I wasn't arguing for intellectual theft so much as asking why would people do this. I think there are plenty of arguments to counter all of those, really. If you have the ability, you're not going to get caught, and it's essentially the same thing except that there's no need to pay, why not? To support the artists? Most of the profits go to the RIAA anyway, a seriously corrupt organization that exists only to take profits away from the artists. That's a hypocritical argument, admittedly (since by stealing, you're taking profits away yourself), but it does raise the question of just whom you're supporting. As for that fuzzy feeling you get when you do something legally, well, maybe that works for you, but I just get a sick feeling when I pay 13 bucks for a CD that has one or two decent songs, both of which I could have easily gotten free from Kazaa. (Which, yes, this service does attempt to fix, but it still seems overpriced, and there's still the question of where the profits go.)
And finally, I would question just how much the artists get directly from a service like this. My impression is that the artists make a lot of their money thanks to 'filler' on their CDs, and using a service like this, that 'filler' is removed from the system. Take off the profits from the service offering (in this case Microsoft), take off profits for the RIAA, and so on, and just what's left for the artists?
It just doesn't make sense to me, and I think there are millions out there who are going to realize that there are two ways to get music online; you can pay for it, or get it for free. Pick one.
At the risk of coming off as a low-down music pirate (aren't we all...), why on earth would anyone do this? If you have access to a computer and you're looking to load files on portable media, I see no incentive when you can get any songs you want, as many as you want, FOR FREE on Kazaa or one of the dozens of P2P programs now available.
There are, as I see it, some advantages to buying the CD (directly support artists, etc.), but what's the incentive to buy this unless the customer is so clueless that they do not even know about P2P?