Things You Don't "Get"

[useless]

 

It's value is up to the individual if someone else wants to pay for digital downloads then that's up to them. In the case with music I don't get the same enjoyment from listening to a music file as say I do from listening to something on an LP or in some cases a cassette even.

Okay, so you don't get the same value, but how can you say the value you get from the "copy" to be zero?

 

 

I haven't said that the value of a digital copy is zero just that I wouldn't pay for one.

[mjmooney]

I don't understand why you think that something virtual is in some way less than something real. If you get the same pleasure / use out of it, what's the difference?

Very true. Same goes for live music. You may as well say "I won't pay for a gig, as I don't get a tangible object out of it".

You can't reproduce the experience of a specific live performance, many times over. As you can with a digital download.

I don't understand how that makes one of the two valueless.

Exactly - it was kind of the point I was making. A gig has value, as it's an experience. A download arguably has even more value, as it's a repeatable experience. You aren't paying for 'nothing', just because you don't get a CD in your hand. Whereas (as somebody suggested upthread), buying a secondhand CD or book is arguably a form of theft, if it were otherwise possible to buy a new, royalty-paying version of the same item.

Doesn't stop me buying secondhand CDs and books, mind.

[useless]

 

I don't get the same enjoyment from listening to a music file as say I do from listening to something on an LP or in some cases a cassette even.

 

That's kind of strange, in a way. I mean some of the best enjoyment I've had from music has been when something's come on the radio I've never heard before, and it's blown me away. Or from a podcast, say.

 

Given music is sound, and therefore not tangible, the medium used to deliver it - CD, LP, digital file and player etc. is kind of irrelevant.

I get the pleasure in owning Vinyl, or CDs where you get to look at the cover, put the needle on the record, or slot the CD into the player, and I suppose that's part of the overall listening thing, in a way - like a japanese tea ceremony or something.

 

Cassettes are bobbins mind.

 

 

Someone bought a cassette from me for about fifty pounds, I did feel guilty though and sent him a few other bits and pieces.

 

Another plus with having actual physical copies is that you can sell them on if your bored and use that money to buy more music.

[useless]

 

...(as somebody suggested upthread), buying a secondhand CD or book is arguably a form of theft, if it were otherwise possible to buy a new, royalty-paying version of the same item.

Doesn't stop me buying secondhand CDs and books, mind.

 

 

It was me who raised the subject of secondhand CDs and Books but I wasn't trying to imply that buying them is a form of theft. It's no more a form of theft than borrowing something from a Library or receiving books that have been passed down from family members. All I meant by it is that it's an example where the artist/authors don't get financially rewarded for their work.

[useless]

Does anybody here rip CD's for family members? That's also is just as much a form  of theft as getting the files from a filesharing site. Or does everyone just make them buy their own copy?

 

With 3D printers people will be pirating more than just digital downloads in the future.

[limpid]

With 3D printers people will be pirating more than just digital downloads in the future.

Indeed, but some (most?) people will still recognise that it's wrong and pay for people who create the things that they download. It's going to leave you in a right quandary though.

 

Are you going to answer the question? Why do you think that if one thing is "worth" (in your opinion) less than something else that it's valueless ie. you wouldn't pay for it? I'm asking about you because that's what you said, even if you haven't said that this is what you do.

[useless]

 

With 3D printers people will be pirating more than just digital downloads in the future.

Indeed, but some (most?) people will still recognise that it's wrong and pay for people who create the things that they download. It's going to leave you in a right quandary though.

 

Are you going to answer the question? Why do you think that if one thing is "worth" (in your opinion) less than something else that it's valueless ie. you wouldn't pay for it? I'm asking about you because that's what you said, even if you haven't said that this is what you do.

 

 

How will it leave me in a right quandary? I've said that I wouldn't pay for something that isn't tangible or that can be copied almost infinitely, neither would be the case with something printed using a 3D printer.

 

And as far as I know I haven't said that if something is worth less than another thing then it's valueless. When I say I wouldn't pay for it I don't mean that I'd 'steal' it instead, I mean I wouldn't bother with it at all.

[brendanvillatalk]

Why does the internet allow someone who can't differentiate between 'your' and 'you're' to use a keyboard?

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

ur right about that.

[useless]

Why does the internet allow someone who can't differentiate between 'your' and 'you're' to use a keyboard?

 

I sometimes make that mistake, although I know the difference. Maybe some people have learning difficulties or something. It's no reason for them to be excluded from using the internet.

[useless]

I see that some of the posts on the last page accusing me of stealing content have received likes. Just to put the record straight all the music I listen to has been paid for because it's usually on a physical format bought straight from the musician or the label that has released the work, if I'm listening to files those files have been made available for free by the artists themselves.

[useless]

Actually not all of it, if a record is out of print and it's only available on the second hand market for extortionate prices then I'll download a rip and when I say extortionate I mean hundreds of pounds.

[mjmooney]

Actually not all of it, if a record is out of print and it's only available on the second hand market for extortionate prices then I'll download a rip and when I say extortionate I mean hundreds of pounds.

I totally endorse this.

[useless]

Do you have something against content creators getting paid for the work they do or something? ;)il

 

The only thing I download is TV shows that aren't broadcast or available on Netflix over here in the UK. I don't feel bad for downloading stuff like that. I don't really understand why you feel it's okay to steal content just because you don't get a physical copy of it, especially when most of the time you could buy a physical copy. You're basically stealing and then trying to justify it, at least in my opinion.

 

This post is still bugging me. How does anything I've written suggest I feel it's okay for me to steal content because you don't get a physical copy? Pretty much everything I listen to is released on a physical format and not available as a download anyway. If something is only available as download then I don't bother with it at all, unless it's been made available for free.

 

You tell me that I'm stealing but in the same post you say you download TV shows and your justification is that they aren't available in the UK. What about buying the DVDs.

 

Actually I'm not bothered what you download or pay for or not. I just think it's harsh to be accused of stealing when it's not true.

[Davkaus]

Can we stop using the word "steal" when referring to copyright infringement/unauthorised sharing please? It's almost as dishonest as calling it "piracy".

 

It's not the same as theft, and it's disingenuous to pretend that it is. An act of theft deprives the owner of an item, unauthorised copying leaves the original intact with the original owner and creates an additional copy. It is not stealing.

Edited February 22, 2015 by Davkaus

[coda]

Thief.

[Davkaus]

Thief.

 

Ever watch a music video on Youtube that wasn't authorised by the copyright holder?

 

Most of our population would be imprisoned if we actually treated copyright infringement as theft.

[Ginko]

 

Do you have something against content creators getting paid for the work they do or something? ;)il

 

The only thing I download is TV shows that aren't broadcast or available on Netflix over here in the UK. I don't feel bad for downloading stuff like that. I don't really understand why you feel it's okay to steal content just because you don't get a physical copy of it, especially when most of the time you could buy a physical copy. You're basically stealing and then trying to justify it, at least in my opinion.

 

This post is still bugging me. How does anything I've written suggest I feel it's okay for me to steal content because you don't get a physical copy? Pretty much everything I listen to is released on a physical format and not available as a download anyway. If something is only available as download then I don't bother with it at all, unless it's been made available for free.

 

You tell me that I'm stealing but in the same post you say you download TV shows and your justification is that they aren't available in the UK. What about buying the DVDs.

 

Actually I'm not bothered what you download or pay for or not. I just think it's harsh to be accused of stealing when it's not true.

 

 

I said in a later post that I do buy the DVDs when they become available for the most part. The few times I haven't bought the DVDs is when the show is then licensed in the UK and shown on TV. I pay for my TV licence and have a subscription to Sky, so it's pretty much like I'm paying for it at a later date. I will reiterate. The only times I download TV shows are when there is no other option in order to see it.

 

I'm sorry you found my post so offensive. Stealing was a harsh word and inappropriate as Davkaus has pointed out. I just didn't understand your logic. I can't say I've ever come across much music that is solely available as an expensive collector's item or an illegal download, mind you. I'd fully expect that illegal download to be a copy of a legitimate digital download, meaning there is the opportunity to purchase it outright and for what I can only imagine to be significantly cheaper than the expensive physical copy.

 

I'm no expert on this, however, and I expect it will depend entirely on the music in question.

[useless]

 

 

Do you have something against content creators getting paid for the work they do or something? ;)il

 

The only thing I download is TV shows that aren't broadcast or available on Netflix over here in the UK. I don't feel bad for downloading stuff like that. I don't really understand why you feel it's okay to steal content just because you don't get a physical copy of it, especially when most of the time you could buy a physical copy. You're basically stealing and then trying to justify it, at least in my opinion.

 

This post is still bugging me. How does anything I've written suggest I feel it's okay for me to steal content because you don't get a physical copy? Pretty much everything I listen to is released on a physical format and not available as a download anyway. If something is only available as download then I don't bother with it at all, unless it's been made available for free.

 

You tell me that I'm stealing but in the same post you say you download TV shows and your justification is that they aren't available in the UK. What about buying the DVDs.

 

Actually I'm not bothered what you download or pay for or not. I just think it's harsh to be accused of stealing when it's not true.

 

 

I said in a later post that I do buy the DVDs when they become available for the most part. The few times I haven't bought the DVDs is when the show is then licensed in the UK and shown on TV. I pay for my TV licence and have a subscription to Sky, so it's pretty much like I'm paying for it at a later date. I will reiterate. The only times I download TV shows are when there is no other option in order to see it.

 

I'm sorry you found my post so offensive. Stealing was a harsh word and inappropriate as Davkaus has pointed out. I just didn't understand your logic. I can't say I've ever come across much music that is solely available as an expensive collector's item or an illegal download, mind you. I'd fully expect that illegal download to be a copy of a legitimate digital download, meaning there is the opportunity to purchase it outright and for what I can only imagine to be significantly cheaper than the expensive physical copy.

 

I'm no expert on this, however, and I expect it will depend entirely on the music in question.

 

 

To be honest I don't care if you or anyone else downloads content for free or not and wouldn't call anyone a thief based on that. I mean I watch stuff on youtube as Davkaus mentions and also I watch streams of football matches.

 

Trust me the music I speak of when talking about old out of print records, isn't available as a legitimate digital download and never has been as there wouldn't be a market for it in that format. Basil Kirchin's first World within Worlds, is a recent example of something I downloaded, if I wanted to buy that I'd be looking at £200 at least probably more. There are literally thousands of records from the past that haven't been digitized.

 

Other than that I don't bother with downloads at all  unless they're free, usually mixtapes.

[Seat68]

I fall into both camps, I have a kindle but also buy a ton of books. I stream and download a lot of moody music, I also buy numerous CD's every month. I don't watch too many films but TV shows I stream/download just because they won't be shown here or I am impatient. I have been doing the latter since I was on dial up. Buffy used to take all night to download.