napster

today's napsters big day in court. lets all show our support and try to keep the song swapping industry free!

[Edited by Irontoto on 02-12-2001 at 11:43 AM]

It's not just yours.

Mine won't connect either.

I'm on.


Surprise, surprise.
But I logged on hours ago.

Nevermind

I just got on...

Let's not.

I sing for free because i love music. If someone pays me fine if not oh well i'm doing something i love.

if you love making music and are making a career of it you have many many ways to get money from it. more than just cd sales.

more than just ripping kids off for 15 buck a shot to bu a cd with one song on it that they enjoy.

the "artists" involved in the fight to stop napster are the ones who know that they are losing moeny cause their cd is overpriced and of inferior quality.

artist or corporate whore

You make the call!

for all the people who are against this: ask yourself, have you or your kids or other family member borrowed a cd, cassette or even a video tape from a friend or a family member and taped it for your pleasure?

if you did, it's the same thing!

thats called music and video swapping

You sing for free because you are not famous

you know I do feel a little guilty about downloading music that I'm not going to pay for but CD's cost £15 each in this country and if I didn't I'd never be able to listen to new or even old music.

CB I understand that a lot of Indian music makes it over here so you might want to try UK music stores for your stuff

Musidian

If i want a house built, you'll do it for free? Napster iz a good way to advertize, but ripping off the money making musician...

i think that carini said it best go napster

carini said:

I sing for free because i love music. If someone pays me fine if not oh well i'm doing something i love.

if you love making music and are making a career of it you have many many ways to get money from it. more than just cd sales.

more than just ripping kids off for 15 buck a shot to bu a cd with one song on it that they enjoy.

the "artists" involved in the fight to stop napster are the ones who know that they are losing moeny cause their cd is overpriced and of inferior quality.

artist or corporate whore

You make the call!

Click to expand...

go napster

i have some bad news i just got done watching the news and there was a report on about napster the court ruled that napster can no longer let people down load copy writed material and that napster may have to shut down oh no i hope not cause i think that all of that is a bunch of bull shit they charge to much for cds i really feel bad for the kids that have to go to the store and pay 15 dollars or higher for a cd especially for the kids that work hard and bust their damn asses to buy cds its not right i dont care what any 1 says im not saying all this cause i cant afford to buy cds cause i can and im sure that all of you can too but what the hell why pay money 4 what you can get 4 free lets all pray that napster can find a way around all this

Siren... Why are you so vehement about busting us napster fan's balls? Your not gonna convince us NOT to like Napster you know... *Shaking my head sadly.* Sorry, but thats cold hard fact.

Art exists for the people. It’s a creation of the artist, but always with the intent for it to be received by someone else. It's put out there FOR the public. Sure, artists are people and they need to survive, but just because one song makes it as a hit, do I think a songwriter or performer should be able to coast on it the rest of their lives? Nope. Let ‘em get a day job like everyone else. I don't think athletes should get millions, either, and their careers are often just as short lived.

This "stealing is stealing" argument doesn't impress me (and that's not against you, Siren, hon, that's everyone who uses it). It's not about the "stealing." It's about the end of the exploitation of the public by the music industry. And it’s got NOTHING to do with the integrity of the medium. It’s all about MONEY.

The IRONIC thing is that everyone I know buys MORE CDs because of Napster, not less. I know I do. I am MUCH MORE likely to get a CD if I like 2 or 3 songs already. 90% of the stuff I download from Napster I download because it is not available on a CD. The other stuff I mostly own. Am I the average Napster user? I have no idea.

But...I'll tell you something. When I buy a CD and I only like one song on it, there is NO record company, recording artist or songwriter who offers me 90% of the money back I wasted on that CD.

Record companies have been screwing the public out of money for years and the artists haven't moaned in protest once. The public has gained CONTROL of what they want to hear and THAT is what has the fat cows terrified.

Granted, the ones who will get really screwed are the “little guys” wallowing in obscurity who write a few songs here and there. Dems the breaks. Those who toil in mediocrity always get the shaft when times change. It’s a cold, cold world, and it’s a BUSINESS world. Don’t get into it if you can’t stomach the consequences. They’d probably be happier and better off as managers at the local K-Mart anyway.

I think the free system will go away, but I think it will lead to the mainstream availability online of paying ONLY FOR THE MUSIC YOU WANT. And THAT is where I'd like to get to. Let me sample a song and see if I want to buy it without having to pay for 12 other songs I don't like.

Do artists deserve to make a living with their art? Hell yes. As much as painters, writers, dancers, and any other performer. Sure.

But...if they only have "one" hit, should they be able to live off that for the rest of their lives? Should they be able to make zillions? Should they be able to force you to pay for 12 other songs because you want 1? That's not my call, but I'm not crying for them.

The entire recording industry has been stealing from the public for decades. The public has done something about it. How it ends up, I have no clue, but I think it will be a fairer system for both sides.

I do understand Siren's point. As a writer, I would be uncomfortable with someone making money off my writing without getting a cut. But, if I've already been paid for the piece at a price I settled on, that's the end of the story. If someone buys a book I wrote and then loans it to a friend instead of buying their own, that's just the way it goes.

There are enough people out there who will buy something honestly and support what they like without shafting the public. No, it won't make you Madonna, but you'll be able to make a living.

But for the recording industry to come out whining about "stealing" when they've been MASTERING the art of it for all these years (sorry about the pun)...it doesn't sway me. Sorry.

Just MHO

MP

Havent you figured it out yet Ravenloft???/

Re: Havent you figured it out yet Ravenloft???/

Siren said:

I just love to bust balls....
I am a devils advocate.

Click to expand...

you;rea hot to argue with..,it;s fun to argue wt someone who knows their shit

Carini......ditto kiddo

Do you look anything like Charlize Theron, Siren?

Nope, I wish I did cuz she is a hottie....

Devils advocate, DUH!

If you had said yes I would have told you to keep an eye on your Ovaries or something like that...

So, you look more like a Thora Birch then?!

Kinda only....

Madame Pandora said:

If someone buys a book I wrote and then loans it to a friend instead of buying their own, that's just the way it goes.

Click to expand...

MP, I appreciate your points but have an issue with this metaphor. Napster isn't the equivalent of loaning your book to a friend -- it's the equivalent of putting your copyrighted book on a hugely popular Internet site and encouraging the entire world to download and read it for free. Those lost sales not only cost you direct dollars, but possible second printings, paperback sales... I may be the exceptionally self-centered writer, but I consider that stealing from me and the fact that it's in cyberspace is the only thing that differs from "earthbound" copyright infringement.