BBC Newsbeat - Guy - Music Pirate Are Going To Hell

Well, I don't know about going to hell - can't recall "Thou shalt not rip files illegally" on the 10 commandments list - but I agree that illegal file sharing is stealing from artists. Whenever material that I want is available for legal download, I pay for it and have no problem with that.

Well, somehow I can understand Guy. I always try to get music legally, if it is available in my area and when Radiohead did that "free if you want" thing with "in Rainbows" I downloaded it for 10 Euro. I could have done it for 1 Euro but I thought, they should be payed for making that good music.
I just hope downloading and buying CDs will be affordable for me, because I can't download all that I am interested in. If I want to listen again to some guilty pleasure song like e.g. "Indian Lady" by Roger Whitaker I don't want to buy his record. So I listen to it at youtube. But if I hear that e.g. The Engineers have a new record I order it at once legally at their merchandise place at kscope.
One thing was quite strange: I ordered Augie March records directly from Down Under at sanity.au and even with shipping it was still less expensive as if I would have ordered via amazon.de!!

I hope I can afford at least the music that I really like, like Mogwai, Elbow, Engineers, Augie March, Peter Gabriel ect.

I can see the argument becoming irrelevant in a couple of years. With services like Spotify, music will be by 'subscription' only and we'll pay a monthly fee (in much the same way as we do with Sky) to listen to our favourite bands. It's the only way I can see it working as it's too easy to download illegally and most pirates don't have consciences, despite the Reverand Garvey's dire warnings of fire and brimstone.

Out of curiosity, how does he feel about people buying second-hand albums from e-Bay or Amazon? The reason I ask is that, as with pirated material, the artist and label doesn't see any of the revenues. Just a thought ...

Cozzer wrote:

I can see the argument becoming irrelevant in a couple of years. With services like Spotify, music will be by 'subscription' only and we'll pay a monthly fee (in much the same way as we do with Sky) to listen to our favourite bands. It's the only way I can see it working as it's too easy to download illegally and most pirates don't have consciences, despite the Reverand Garvey's dire warnings of fire and brimstone.

Out of curiosity, how does he feel about people buying second-hand albums from e-Bay or Amazon? The reason I ask is that, as with pirated material, the artist and label doesn't see any of the revenues. Just a thought ...

I love Spotify and think it well worth the £10 it costs me per month. I find I am listening to an ever broader range of music - stuff I would never consider if I had to pay specifically for it - as well as catching up on the many "classic" albums I have missed, just because I can.

As for second hand CDs - it is not the same as piracy. Selling something that you have purchased but no longer want is very different to buying something then copying it redistribute 1000s of times.

Suppose all professional 'artists' are concerned with ensuring their work is valued and also rewards them for their efforts. It is their living after all.

I'm not sure where I sit on the whole debate, i completley agree (obviously) that pirate / illegal distribution is wrong. I think the music producers also need to box clever themselves, with better digital promotions, maybe linked marketing rewards for purchasers or something with the intention of leading to more legitimate purchases - (at the correct price).

I'm also in the camp where if i am exposed to different music i possibly wouldn't have came across before that it actually leads me to buying albums from artists that otherwise would not have got my attention.

As far as classic or older albums go. Being of a certain age - we have a whole trunk load of Vinyl albums and singles that were purchased back in the day and havent seen the light for years because we don't have a turntable. I have bought some of these again digitally, but there is a cynical part of me that thinks some people are only releasing their old content digitally to further capitalise on songs that were produced ages ago. If they want further money - then release newer stuff - do some work for it

Cozzer wrote:

I can see the argument becoming irrelevant in a couple of years.

There is a stream of thought that will suggest in coming years, the LP (or CD) format will be no more. Bands will record and release as a stream (torrent?) rather than bulking it all together... you can't row back from computers now, with the ability to distribute electronically i can't see how you will ever stop it?

Mr_K wrote:

As for second hand CDs - it is not the same as piracy. Selling something that you have purchased but no longer want is very different to buying something then copying it redistribute 1000s of times.

But in a sense both artist and distributer are deprived their due recompense .. and the original purchaser enjoys a belated 'discount' when selling on the item. I don't disagree with you by the way - just highlighting the fact that it's not completely black and white.

On a similar note, how do you feel about second-hand software? Have been on numerous music production forums where people get very hot under the collar about folks selling on their copies of Cubase 4.5 (or whatever). Similarly the developers have clauses in their Ts&Cs expressly forbidding it. Not that it stops the practice mind ...

I can see his point, but i was very happy to see the "loyal fans" comment, it's nice to think the guys are making the music they want and they think their fans we like rather than trying to one up the last record, a thing i like to call snowpatroleyesopen syndrome!

After seeing MEN tickets are already on ebay for £125… are ticket touts going to hell too? Or is not quite the the same kind of crime to re-sell tickets, as the band already have their cut in their pockets???

I don't think it's about money in pockets half as much as it is about the priciple of the the thing, which is why Garvey said "Those that can afford to buy.." ultimately it's about the music, but if you can afford it, you should buy it, legally.
Don't get me started on touts.