Ripping music to your computer illegal?

[Splat]

The Recording industry now wants to make sure that you don't even download a CD to your own computer regardless if you aren't planning to share it?

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/showbiz/2008/01/02/lklv.hostin.music.chetry.cnn

Sorry if all ready posted.

[JagHombre22]

that's stupid...they will be hurting themselves...because if you download from itunes it's already on your computer...

[Xiomera]

How in the hell could this be enforced?

Or are they counting on the honor system . . .

[drowe]

coooooooool. so, i don't download music basically because i don't know how. BUT, i do have an Mp3 player. so the only way i get music on my player is to rip a cd to my puter and then put it on the player...but i'm not supposed to do that anymore? so, should i just wipe my ass with my Mp3 player and donate it to somebody that actually does steal music online?

[Xiomera]

coooooooool. so, i don't download music basically because i don't know how. BUT, i do have an Mp3 player. so the only way i get music on my player is to rip a cd to my puter and then put it on the player...but i'm not supposed to do that anymore? so, should i just wipe my ass with my Mp3 player and donate it to somebody that actually does steal music online?

Sounds like a mighty good plan. http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/forum/images/icons/icon10.gif

[cardsalltheway]

How in the hell could this be enforced?

Or are they counting on the honor system . . .

You say that as if the honor system wouldn't be an effective method here.

[Splat]

I think it is crap I don't download or share music but I do rip my CD's to my PC for my own use I don't see any thing wrong with it if you paid for the CD's.

[Cashmoney]

the music industry is ran by retards. music should be free anyways....

[someone447]

I will admit that I download music for free. You can't really call it stealing, because it doesn't deprive the artist of anything. I support the artists by going to as many concerts as I can, and I will buy cds and t shirts from those concerts. The artists make almost no money when you buy a cd. It is ridiculous. The people who should be making the money actually make very little off of what I pay for.

Support artists by buying directly through them and going to concerts. **** the RIAA

[OSUGiants17]

How in the hell could this be enforced?

Or are they counting on the honor system . . .

they can make it so you can't download the cd onto a comp.

[JagHombre22]

anyone who still buys CDs from RIAA artists is an idiot. i don't necessarily advocate anything that RIAA has paid congress to call "illegal", but if you're still paying them $18 for 9 songs of crap and 1 song they pay DJs to endlessly play on the radio for a week, you need to seriously reconsider your interest in music/general economic sense.

then again, you could just listen to the independant labels and none of this would be an issue.

says you...if everyone did things independently there would be no record...anyways, I'm sure your a fan of the independent movies as well...independent labels can't afford to make the music like the huge record companies...thus the reason why people still buy the big record label cd's...they want quality (as in sound) music...that basement crap only sounds good for so long...

[someone447]

they can make it so you can't download the cd onto a comp.

And within a week it would be cracked. The internet is an incredibly powerful tool. Major media corporations don't have much time, unless they embrace the internet and use it to their advantage, rather than trying to shut it down.

The older people in charge of the media don't realize the true power of the internet. Hell our generation takes the power of the internet for granted. You have to talk to the late 20's early 30 year olds. The people who didn't grow up with the internet. They will tell you how much it has changed our world already. We are only scratching the surface of what it will do.

[TimD]

Horray Limewire!

[badgerbacker]

I will admit that I download music for free. You can't really call it stealing, because it doesn't deprive the artist of anything. I support the artists by going to as many concerts as I can, and I will buy cds and t shirts from those concerts. The artists make almost no money when you buy a cd. It is ridiculous. The people who should be making the money actually make very little off of what I pay for.

Support artists by buying directly through them and going to concerts. **** the RIAADownloading music for free is absolutely stealing. Even if you aren't taking much away from the artist, you're still getting something that you would typically pay for. It does all end up going back to the artist anyway, because if the record companies start making less money, they start paying the artists less money.

[JagHombre22]

Downloading music for free is absolutely stealing. Even if you aren't taking much away from the artist, you're still getting something that you would typically pay for. It does all end up going back to the artist anyway, because if the record companies start making less money, they start paying the artists less money.

what does it matter...downloading music will continue to happen whether the major corporations want it to or not...

[Twiddler]

anyone who still buys CDs from RIAA artists is an idiot. i don't necessarily advocate anything that RIAA has paid congress to call "illegal", but if you're still paying them $18 for 9 songs of crap and 1 song they pay DJs to endlessly play on the radio for a week, you need to seriously reconsider your interest in music/general economic sense.

then again, you could just listen to the independant labels and none of this would be an issue.

I see your point, but there is a lot of music that I want to own on CD. For my favorite bands I get some feeling of pride when I own their music especially if I own all of the CD's. But yeah, for everything else I just download it legally (and freely) off of the internet site that my college has a deal with. Then since it is copyrighted so that it can't be put on CD's or MP3's I just use a program on my computer that rerecords the tracks and then it's free to go wherever. Its a legal process, technically... :)

[j05son]

I will admit that I download music for free. You can't really call it stealing, because it doesn't deprive the artist of anything. I support the artists by going to as many concerts as I can, and I will buy cds and t shirts from those concerts. The artists make almost no money when you buy a cd. It is ridiculous. The people who should be making the money actually make very little off of what I pay for.

Support artists by buying directly through them and going to concerts. **** the RIAA

QFT

Horray Limewire!

Limewire :-/

You should upgrade to torrents.

[Twiddler]

like someone398572340 said, buy it from the artists directly. i don't have a problem with people supporting radio bands necessarily, but it's never made sense to me why people go to, say, virgin records and pay exorbitant prices that don't support the group anyways. i'll admit that i listen to a few bands on the RIAA labels (and own their albums), but you won't ever catch me in best buy getting their CD.

Eh, I honestly don't own that many(20 CD's at the max) and a lot of the bands that I do buy are ones that do their best to keep their music off of any downloading site (like Tool) so I have to physically buy the CD to get it legally. Like you say I could buy directly from the artists but I haven't had many opportunities for that kind of stuff so I just surrender a few more bucks and go to a store. Even if that money doesn't necessarily support the group. (there, I think I'm good, correct me if my understanding is wrong on anything in here, I haven't paid too much attention to this stuff in the past)

[badgerbacker]

what does it matter...downloading music will continue to happen whether the major corporations want it to or not...

Oh yeah, I'm not saying it will ever stop. I'm just saying that having the mindset that it isn't actually stealing is totally wrong.

[Splat]

Oh yeah, I'm not saying it will ever stop. I'm just saying that having the mindset that it isn't actually stealing is totally wrong.

I agree you are getting some thing that by law you should have to pay for how is that not stealing?

[bantx]

i dl music and dont even think much of it, only time i buy cds is when i need some blank ones to burn

[jballa838]

i listen more to free mix tapes than commercial music. When i go to school in the morning i listen to mike and mike in the morning. This does still effect me though, because if you can't rip a CD, how are you going to put music on a website? Better yet, how is someone going to make a music video? You have to get the music from somewhere, and music sharing is illegal according to these guys.

flaws. sorry for the incoherent babbling, but i make a point. somewhere.

[someone447]

I agree you are getting some thing that by law you should have to pay for how is that not stealing?

It is copyright infringement, not stealing. Stealing requires that the rightful owner be deprived of what was stolen. The artist wasn't deprived of something that wasn't his. Is it a matter of semantics? Yes. But there is a reason no one has ever been prosecuted for it as theft.

Even though it isn't stealing, it is still illegal any way you slice it. But there are lots of laws that I don't follow. I support all artists that I like. I just don't support them by giving my money to big media conglomerates of which the artists get pennies.

When more artists start realizing they don't need to go through the record companies and start to release music by themselves through their website, I will stop downloading music.

[ny10804]

Musicians should follow the same route Radiohead took with In Rainbows. Sell directly to the people for a price they choose. Not gonna happen though.

[7-11]

Musicians should follow the same route Radiohead took with In Rainbows. Sell directly to the people for a price they choose. Not gonna happen though.

If every musician around the world was as rich as Radiohead i'm sure they'd love to. Too bad the ability to write a song doesn't naturally translate to being a multimillionaire

[ny10804]

If every musician around the world was as rich as Radiohead i'm sure they'd love to. Too bad the ability to write a song doesn't naturally translate to being a multimillionaire

And guess what? Radiohead probably made more money off that album than all their others did.

I don't know the exact figures, but I don't imagine it costs an extreme amount to create and distribute your own quality music. They'd need a nice studio, but it'd be doable.

[7-11]

And guess what? Radiohead probably made more money off that album than all their others did.

I don't know the exact figures, but I don't imagine it costs an extreme amount to create and distribute your own quality music. They'd need a nice studio, but it'd be doable.

That's because it's Radiohead and people love them enough to volunteer their money unnecassarily to get their work.

Can you imagine people volunteering enough of their own money for bands to make a living for albums that are not nearly as anticipated? I just can't see it happening

[JagHombre22]

you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. how would there be no record? there are literally thousands of indie companies MAKING RECORDS. and making money off those records. but gosh, wonderful insight. if you start off with a flawed premise, you're likely to get bad results. keep trying kiddo, keep trying.

what you are describing is someone listening to Death Cab Cutie (for example) and just because they sell their CD's at 7.99 per cd instead of the major label price at, say, 12.99...you should buy their CD, doesn't matter if their music is crap (to you)...buy their CD because they are independent and you should support them...that is flawed logic....

if you are a fan of Kelly Clarkson or Brittney Spears and you want to spend the 12.99 for their new cd, then by all means go get it...don't chastise people for liking "radio" bands as you call them...and if Independent bands made so much money wouldn't you think that they'd be marketing their item as well as the "radio" bands?

[7-11]

what you are describing is someone listening to Death Cab Cutie (for example) and just because they sell their CD's at 7.99 per cd instead of the major label price at, say, 12.99...you should buy their CD, doesn't matter if their music is crap (to you)...buy their CD because they are independent and you should support them...that is flawed logic....

if you are a fan of Kelly Clarkson or Brittney Spears and you want to spend the 12.99 for their new cd, then by all means go get it...don't chastise people for liking "radio" bands as you call them...and if Independent bands made so much money wouldn't you think that they'd be marketing their item as well as the "radio" bands?

are cd's really $12.99 in the US?
$25+ here. ****

[JagHombre22]

are cd's really $12.99 in the US?
$25+ here. ****

well...more of 12.99-15.99

there are even some stores (FYE, Borders, etc;) that sell cd's for 18-22 dollars...that are on crack if they think I will buy a cd for $18....

[Caddy]

are cd's really $12.99 in the US?
$25+ here. ****

Not at Big W my friend. :)

[j05son]

are cd's really $12.99 in the US?
$25+ here. ****

I'm going to guess cost of living is higher in Australia then in America. When I had to research Sydney for Thule's league, I know they had a very high per capita income which means your cost of living has to be much higher then ours. Halo 3 in America is around 60 dollars where in Australia it's around 100 [escapist magizine has online videos of yahtzee and zero production ;-) ].

And guess what? Radiohead probably made more money off that album than all their others did.

I don't know the exact figures, but I don't imagine it costs an extreme amount to create and distribute your own quality music. They'd need a nice studio, but it'd be doable.

It's the master copy which costs so much money. After that, it's ripping it to the cd's for sale, placed in the packaging and artwork and all the whistles and bells. CD's by them self are cheap, esp for the mass amounts the artist would have to have for ripping [remember, if you buy in bulk, the price drops] and the same for the album artwork and all.

Then theres marketability. Say in Radiohead's situation. You can purchase their album for however much you thought it was worth, .01 on up. They could have easily given "free" gifts to the people are paid more etc. Word gets our fast and people might be willing to pay regular price for a CD if it comes with that full length DVD that would retail for $20+ [not talking about those 3 song dvd's that come with the CD].

I'll agree that Radiohead probably made more money than a label mate with similar status/fame but they also got big time rep from the fans who may want to see them live. Touring is were the money is for musicians.

[JagHombre22]

did you even read my original post, or did you just think you'd get away with being the cool dude standing up to the nasty mod? oh poor fricking you. i said anyone who buys a cd from RIAA is an idiot and i stand by that. want the 10 song cd? fine. buy it from the artist. you're still an idiot, but for other reasons.

next, you proposed that an indie record company won't make money. which is utterly moronic. i shouldn't even need to, but let me point to the radiohead posts above, where they cut ALL labels out of the process. jonah matranga has done a similar deal for YEARS and has survived perfectly well as an artist (sorry, no, he's not platinum, god forbid).

seriously, why bother? pretty much everything you've replied with thus far has been either provably incorrect, a complete deviation from what you were arguing with, or worthless conjecture. you've added absolutely no value whatsoever to this discussion.

I could care less if you are mod or just plain joe smoe....it doesn't take away from the fact that you are just spewing your opinion making it seem like fact...seriously, why take everything so seriously and argue it like there is no tomorrow?

Radiohead and Jonah Matranga are two artists that if you polled 50 people probably 7% listen to...not a good example...if people want to buy from RIAA, who cares...as long as you're not spending your precious 13 dollars what does it matter? name me one indie label company that has done as well as a big time label company (like Def Jam or Island)?

[drowe]

anyone who still buys CDs from RIAA artists is an idiot. i don't necessarily advocate anything that RIAA has paid congress to call "illegal", but if you're still paying them $18 for 9 songs of crap and 1 song they pay DJs to endlessly play on the radio for a week, you need to seriously reconsider your interest in music/general economic sense.

then again, you could just listen to the independant labels and none of this would be an issue.

hey. have your opinion but don't call me an idiot. my taste in music doesn't make me an idiot and my crappy computer situation doesn't make me an idiot. i've been buying CDs since i was 12 and i like adding to my collection.

[drowe]

no one suggested it had anything to do with your taste in music. but there are options other than buying the CD new from a mega store and downloading the music.

for instance, buy it used. the money still doesn't go to the artist, but if you can justify that by supporting them in another way (merch, concerts, whatever), fine.

for the record, i have several thousand CDs and continue to buy them. but i'm very careful about what and where i'm buying them. i have no interest in a system that's able to both legally take away any rights you have to use a product you bought as well as utterly fail to compensate the person(s) who actually did the hard part and created the product. the same argument applies in a number of ways to computer software.

yeah, i would never spend the actual retail price for a cd....$17 - $19 for a single disc is ricockulous. i usually go to best buy for my cd buying...they have a better selection than the actual record stores.

used CD stores are getting harder and harder to find.

[rainbeaukid2]

has anyone here ever been caught downloading music illegally? one of my cousins said that they don't download any cuz they are scared of that and i thought that that was a totally illegitimate claim.

[j05son]

has anyone here ever been caught downloading music illegally? one of my cousins said that they don't download any cuz they are scared of that and i thought that that was a totally illegitimate claim.

I've heard of people getting emails from their ISP provider about them downloading.

[badgerbacker]

so because the RIAA labels are able to shove their material down the throat of the major stores, we should just bown down and buy their ****? because an indie label can't market and distribute it's material as well currently, they are crap and will always be crap? what, exactly, is your point? and i care. i care that they're actually helping a system that does everything it can to screw over both the artist and the consumer, in the name of making money only for the label exec's, who haven't done anything in the process.
You mention the key factor in major record companies. Their ability to market and distribute their artists music. You can complain that these companies "screw over both the artist and comsumer," but if it weren't for these same companies, many of these artists would be unknown people still singing in the street or in garages. I agree that it sucks to overpay for music and it seems unfair that the artist doesn't see a majority of the album profits, but you have to remember the adage, it takes money to make money. The record companies are the ones putting down the dollars for these artists early in their careers to get them started and in the public's eye. One could argue that the marketing ability and the ability to distribute the music is just as important as the actual music itself.

You talk about a few artists who are able to produce music and distribute it on their own dime, and in the perfect world, this would be the way it is all done. The fact of the matter is, most beginning artists simply don't have the financial capabilities to do this, and so they are forced to turn to the major labels for their start.

[someone447]

You mention the key factor in major record companies. Their ability to market and distribute their artists music. You can complain that these companies "screw over both the artist and comsumer," but if it weren't for these same companies, many of these artists would be unknown people still singing in the street or in garages. I agree that it sucks to overpay for music and it seems unfair that the artist doesn't see a majority of the album profits, but you have to remember the adage, it takes money to make money. The record companies are the ones putting down the dollars for these artists early in their careers to get them started and in the public's eye. One could argue that the marketing ability and the ability to distribute the music is just as important as the actual music itself.

You talk about a few artists who are able to produce music and distribute it on their own dime, and in the perfect world, this would be the way it is all done. The fact of the matter is, most beginning artists simply don't have the financial capabilities to do this, and so they are forced to turn to the major labels for their start.

The internet is completely changing that. Although this isn't exactly the same, look at Dane Cook. Look at Tucker Max. The internet is a powerful tool. It allows you to get yourself out there for very small amounts of money.

Just watch, the recording studios will go the way of the dodo in less then 10 years.

[badgerbacker]

The internet is completely changing that. Although this isn't exactly the same, look at Dane Cook. Look at Tucker Max. The internet is a powerful tool. It allows you to get yourself out there for very small amounts of money.

Just watch, the recording studios will go the way of the dodo in less then 10 years.Great point, and that's absolutely true. I would love it if you were right and the record companies end up being obsolete.

[awfullyquiet]

says you...if everyone did things independently there would be no record...anyways, I'm sure your a fan of the independent movies as well...independent labels can't afford to make the music like the huge record companies...thus the reason why people still buy the big record label cd's...they want quality (as in sound) music...that basement crap only sounds good for so long...

that's not true.

def jux makes good music. they're independent. (el-p? aesop rock?)
victory makes bad music. they're independent (and huge).
sub pop? independent. oh, and they were nirvana's record label. and nirvana was the best band of the nineties (don't argue).


i think you have a terribly misguided idea on how the music industry works. go look it up sunshine.

'independent labels can't afford to make music like the huge record companies' is the same ignorant crap which leads me to believe you don't listen to anything more than that ignorant crap.

the reason why people move to larger record labels is just for the money. (what they don't understand is the headaches). I've been in some bands, i've worked with some labels. (notably de soto records)... i can tell you, from my conversation with bill barbot from Jawbox (after they signed to atlantic records)... it's a big pile of **** what they do. big big ******* pile of **** what big record labels do.

i think when people realize that you go into music to make music not to get rich does people finally become content... i mean, how does dischord records stay in business for 20 years with DIY and bare-bones production and yet still takes fantastic care of it's artists? because it recognizes that fact and expects the artists to be artists and not money-grubbing punks (which, in reality, they don't become because that's really the job of media execs...)

[someone447]

how many "beginning bands" do you actually think get signed by major labels? then, how many as a percentage of total bands who are on labels? and it absolutely doesn't take money to make money. someone referenced tucker max, who basically got a book deal and continues to profit from a small, independant media site. most beginning artists are perfectly capable of producing their own record in their own basement at this point, and if they're motivated, getting multiple local shows out of it. i mean gosh, i've actually done it recently. anyone who watches MTV might remember a band called "No Fair Fights" who was played on one of their idiotic challenge things. they don't even HAVE a record deal and they sell out large venues here and get regular radio play.

the sad fact is that people don't actually believe that there's anything out there beyond what the radio tells them to like, and that they get this warped view of the music industry (see above) wherein you can't be successful without a major label deal. it's ridiculous.

more to the point, by buying their albums where next to money goes to the artist, you're simply adding to the problem. it really shouldn't be that difficult to give RIAA a major reality check. unfortunately, enough people think it's either still ok or that they don't have a choice other than to buy crappy albums or buy albums you like for too much money that never finds its way to the artist.

Exactly. Regardless of your personal opinions on Tucker Max(I know many people on this site can't stand him) what he did is an example to any artist. He got on the NYT bestseller by the strength of his website alone.

Myspace is allowing people to get their music out to people. If you are good, all you need are some people to start digging you. I am really excited to see this new revolution go. The writers strike will only accelerate this in every artistic medium.

[awfullyquiet]

Exactly. Regardless of your personal opinions on Tucker Max(I know many people on this site can't stand him) what he did is an example to any artist. He got on the NYT bestseller by the strength of his website alone.

Myspace is allowing people to get their music out to people. If you are good, all you need are some people to start digging you. I am really excited to see this new revolution go. The writers strike will only accelerate this in every artistic medium.

hype machines are cheap these days. promoting yourself in one central location is easier than it used to be.

multimedia sites are running close to 5-7k$... (i know, because i freelance)

[JagHombre22]

Exactly. Regardless of your personal opinions on Tucker Max(I know many people on this site can't stand him) what he did is an example to any artist. He got on the NYT bestseller by the strength of his website alone.

Myspace is allowing people to get their music out to people. If you are good, all you need are some people to start digging you. I am really excited to see this new revolution go. The writers strike will only accelerate this in every artistic medium.

myspace is probably the greatest thing to happen to the music industry in a long time...I know, me personally, that I'll search Myspace for new music by random artists and if I like the music I'll try to support the artist by purchasing a cd....

really, anybody of dreaming of accomplishing anything with music would be wise to put it on myspace...