Piracy ... where do you stand ?

[Migs]

I was recently talking about the whole piracy issue (more in relation to pirated movies than music).  Then yesterday in the media here there was a story about the film and music industries diverging on thier policy.  Movie people want pirates to have their internets access cancelled whereas the music has stepped away from that stance.

The film industry reckons their research indicates that piracy is costing the film industry here $1.4 billion a year.

I must say, I don't feel sorry for either industry or the struggling artists these days and I don't agree with the figures on losses sustained.

At the weekend I ... I mean a friend of mine ... watched a pirated movie.  If it weren't given to him for free, he would not have watched it.  Hence, no loss to anyone.  If he had paid to see it, he would have wanted his money back.  The movie was complete rubbish but at least the actors got some exposure.

I also think record companies have failed their artists by not being ahead of the curve in terms of distribution and not preempting the changes that any numpty could see coming.

People are happy to pay a reasonable amount for music/movies. The problem with the record companies and the film industry, particularly in Australia, is that everything is over priced.  You can not get a recent release CD for under $20.

I just checked pre-release prices to to take a family of 4 to see the next Harry Potter movie. 2 adults and 2 kids = $94.00.  Add to that a bucket of popcorn and a drink and you will have dropped maybe $140 to go see a movie with your kids.

THAT is why we have piracy.




Any thoughts ?

[Saijinn Maas]

Is the question WHY we have piracy, or where do stand regarding piracy.

No matter what is said to "justify" it, piracy happens for one reason and one reason only. The desire to have or use something without having to pay for it. Whether that reason is due to the belief that you will not like it does not change the fact that any other commercially sold product, you have to purchase or rent it in order to use it.

Piracy is theft, plain and simple. You are consuming, or accessing, a product in which you would not be able to do so without having purchased it normally. I am not judging. I personally don't really care as long as it is not my product being stolen, but don't dance around and try to justify that it is anything but theft. I can't afford a drastically overpriced Ferrari, but it is still grand theft auto if I go and take one because "I wouldn't have been able to afford one anyway so it's not like they lost my sale." Justified or not, it is what it is. Going to the movies is a ripoff nowadays, so I go to movies less and stream others. But I am not fool enough to think I am justified.

[Blooby]

Piracy is theft, plain and simple.

I think that says it for me.  Funny...when I had multitudes of cassette tapes, I never thought of it as theft.  The Internet sure has changed the game. I have downloaded copyrighted items before, but these days, I try to stick to live shows of trade-friendly bands. I'm no angel as I have swapped USB drives of music with buddies, but I can't rationalize it away. It takes money out of the pockets of the artists I should be supporting.

A by-product of downloading has been the extravagant surcharges on concert tickets as well as the ticket prices themselves. As somebody who sees a bunch of concerts per year, the prices are killing me, but I understand why prices are going up. Unless you're a mega-seller, it's just too difficult to eke out a proper living for a family on album sales. No wonder we are seeing stranger and stranger lavish boxed sets with books, video, ticket stubs, t-shirts, etc. Hell, I saw one with band bobbleheads the other day. Anything to make the purchase more desireable. Meet-and-greets and other backstage experiences will continue to rise as well.  I'm not star-struck enough to drop a couple bills to shake the hand of a musical hero, but if it puts food on their family's table, more power to them.

I have been intrigued to watch the scambling of the corporate side of the record industry. People always complain that music isn't as good as the old days, but if most folks were just a tad more proactive than being satisfied being fed what the major markets give to them, they would see that good music never went away.  The trends may not be to their tastes, but good music is always out there in the ether. I'm curious to see what the main mechanism for getting music in the future will be. I would imagine it will be a Pandora-type deal with the purchase of something you like is a click away.

I was reading an interview the other day that focused on playing live music, and some artist referred to the shift in the industry as a potential "musician's business" as opposed to simply the "music business." While I agree they are both oxymoronic, the former sounded a little more hopeful.  How wonderful would it be to limit the influence of the big labels?

Blooby

[cuthbert]

Intellectual property (intangible) and physical property (tangible) are not identical things. Until fairly recently in human history, there was no such thing as intellectual property. That said, I believe that intellectual property is a valid device, but it's not absolute, and there are limits/grey areas...

Is it theft if you buy a media product and later rip it for playback in another device? Many corporate copyright holders will say yes, it is- even though they have no product for your device.

Is it theft if you play it for your friends, or loan it to your friend for their enjoyment?

Is it theft if the item is otherwise no longer available for purchase?

Is it still theft if you end up later purchasing the item? - not out of guilt, but because after watching/listening, you find you want to buy it? A sale has been made that likely would otherwise have been lost. I'll admit, this case is more difficult to justify than the above three.

[Oldrottenhead]

as a pastafarian
i have no choice

[64Guitars]

Migs, I agree with everything you said. The music industry is dying and it isn't because of piracy. It's because of their own stinking greed. In the eighties, when the CD came out, I was working for a company that manufactured pre-recorded cassettes. People I knew in the industry were excited because CDs would cost them less to make than cassettes (under a dollar). Yet they sold the CDs for about $25 while cassettes sold for about $8. That's just pure, evil greed!

The majority of people who download music and movies do so only because the opportunity is there. They wouldn't buy the same music and movies if they couldn't download them because they're fed up with the ridiculous prices. All the claims of lost sales are bullshit meant to influence lawmakers.

The music industry will die because everyone's fed up with it and we don't need it anymore. There's plenty of great music available for free legally at sites like Songcrafters. And copyright is expiring on older recordings. Imagine what the world will be like in a hundred years. The quality and quantity of free music by talented amateurs will be amazing. And copyrights will have expired on all of the music of the 20th century. With all this great music legally available for free, why would anyone purchase recordings? The music industry doesn't stand a chance. All of their current bitching is just their dying last gasp. They'll soon be gone, and I say good riddance to the greedy buggers.

The movie industry will probably last longer, only because it's harder for amateurs to make good movies. But that's changing too. Some very good animated productions have been made using open source software and these can be legally downloaded for free. For example, check out the quality of this free animated short:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRsGyueVLvQ

You can download a high-quality version of it at http://www.sintel.org/

And copyrights are expiring on old movies. Check out the movies at publicdomaintorrents.com which can be legally downloaded for free because their copyrights have expired. Like I said, imagine the world in a hundred years when all of the movies and television programs of the 20th century are public domain. Why would anyone pay the ridiculous costs of going to a movie or buying/renting a movie on DVD when there's so much good stuff legally available for free?

[Saijinn Maas]

It is completely a romantic notion to believe that there is any justification to take something in which you would normally have to purchase. There is no grey area. It's for sale, you don't want to pay for it (for whatever reason), and you take it.

All of us have purchased music, movies, games, etc that we are completely unhappy with after getting it home. that is the nature of buying almost anything. It sucks to feel that you just wasted your money on something you find out later was not worth it in your opinion.

It doesn't matter what anyone's feelings on greed may be. This is subjective. People have a right to make money. If it is too high, then no one would pay it. As long a people continue to pay, the companies are justified in charging what they charge. Where the companies are failing is in their refusal to follow basic economic concepts. They might actually see an increase in sales if they weren't so adamant about keeping their exorbitant profit margins. One of the reasons that iTunes has taken market share from standard sales, though the ease of downloading is big, is because of the cost. I can buy a full album for $10 on iTunes that would cost $15-$20 at traditional outlets. 

It seems funny to me that only hobbyist and only those who fancy themselves the poor "starving artist" actually think there is a problem with making money at something you do well. Now I am not saying that everyone should only be striving to make millions. But I would love to be able to make enough money playing music that I would not need to work a traditional 9-5 job.

In a hundred years when today's music is public domain, there will be new music out there for sale. If you never plan on listening to current music, then you're set. I know people that only read public domain books. That is fine for them, not so for me. The music, books, and movies are like are unfortunately not in the public domain. And until then I have to purchase them.

Working in the game industry, I know many artists and animators who work on shorts and independent projects. Unless they are hobbyists, they all do it for the same reason. That someday it will lead to more money, better jobs, heading their own bigger projects, etc. It all goes on the resume.

Regarding Intellectual Property...

Intellectual property (IP) refers to creations of the mind: inventions, literary and artistic works, and symbols, names, images, and designs used in commerce.

IP is divided into two categories:  Industrial property, which includes inventions (patents), trademarks, industrial designs, and geographic indications of source; and Copyright, which includes literary and artistic works such as novels, poems and plays, films, musical works, artistic works such as drawings, paintings, photographs and sculptures, and architectural designs.  Rights related to copyright include those of performing artists in their performances, producers of phonograms in their recordings, and those of broadcasters in their radio and television programs.

There is no such thing as "intangible" IP. Using he example given by Cuthbert:
1st - Companies have never been able to convince the courts that people cannot transfer legally purchased product to different media for personal use.
2nd - Playing it for, or lending it, to friends is hardly an issue. That is not to be confused with sending mp3 files. This is not borrow, but has become something given. A transfer has taken place, and it is this transfer that you break the law.
3rd - This IS currently a grey area. If it is no longer available for purchase, it may still not be under public domain. The problem for us in using this as an argument is that this constitutes an incredibly small percentage of the types of downloads that consumers are doing, or that they companies are complaining about.
4th - This is where I usually fall. If I download something that I really like, I make it a point to purchase the retail copy. The problem is that no matter how many people say that this is why they download anything illegally, it is not the case.

In the end, it is still a product. Somethings are free, somethings are not. Just because it would be "nice" to not have to pay for it, does not mean it is right to take it. The companies will eventually fail not because they are doing anything "wrong", but because they refuse to adapt to common economic principles.

Oh, and the music industry will not die. Change yes, die no. The millions of people willing to shell out money for Britney Spears and Justin Bieber will see to that. :/

 

[Tony W]

I would love to add valuable input, but realistically I can't. I'm jaded. Why not ask if polygamy is right or wrong, legal or illegal? That pretty much depends on your religion and where you live. It is human nature to take what you want, plain and simple. If you don't agree, then watch a few toddlers playing in the same area. If modern civilization were to fail, the laws go with it and we are back to survival of the fittest. Does that mean I'm against all law? not really, just the ones which annoy me, or I have no use for.

If I'm strapped daily with political correctness, then I'm going home and watching a pirated movie to restore balance.

[AndyR]

Really interesting discussion here.

I must admit that personally I'm pretty much in the same camp as Saijinn.

If an item is not "free", then getting it without paying for it, knowing that you've gone a route to avoid paying for it, no matter how many other people are "doing it too", is ripping off the people who made it, who are distributing it, etc, etc, and, more importantly, the rest of the society that we are members of. It's cheating the system, and for most things we all call it stealing...

Why we seem to regard "art" as not really fitting into this always kind of amazes me.

Years ago, when I realised I was a songwriter, and what that might mean if I intended to try and make a living, I decided that "home-taping" was not something I wanted a part of. If someone said "I'll do you a tape" I'd go "no thanks". If someone asked to tape an album of mine I'd say no. I would lend it to them, but do my utmost to make them feel extremely bad if they did make a copy without telling me. I got in a few arguments over this, but I think most folks I argued with realised that I regarded them as stealing. I wasn't prepared to stop them, doesn't even stop me liking them, but I wanted them to know that's what I thought about what they were doing before they made the decision to do it.

I do have one or two CDs and DVDs that people have burned for me. Since digital has arrived, people seem to give you copies of things you were discussing without you asking. It's kind of hard to say "get lost" when a friend thinks they're actually doing a nice thing for you... With the exception of one album, which was "why do you think I want to listen to this?", I have listened or watched them all once. I haven't been able to bring myself to use them again (I've probably even binned some of them).

I am however VERY happy to convert one media form to another. For example, record an LP I own, burn it to CD and convert it to MP3 so that I can actually listen to it on the kit I use nowadays. I might be wrong in this, but I've never felt any problem over it.

[Oldrottenhead]

Oh, and the music industry will not die. Change yes, die no. The millions of people willing to shell out money for Britney Spears and Justin Bieber will see to that. :/

but those people don't know how to use computers.

simon cowel won a watch when susan boyle entered britains got talent.

 a recent survey carried out by the british phonograph institute found that 90% of people who bought susan boyle cds, didnt have or know how to use a computer.  and a further 37% didn't have or now how to use a cd player.