How to Turn A Music Lover to Piracy 521
dugn writes to tell us The Consumerist is running a story about how a run of the mill (read non-tech-savvy) music lover was pushed to become a pirate. "I've devoted a not-inconsequential chunk of my life to collecting music; to tracking down obscure records, cassettes, 8-Tracks and CD's of all genres and styles. And now apparently that is all but over. Music has somehow evolved from tangible things into amorphous collections of 1's and 0's guarded over by interested parties as if they were gold bullion. How so very sad."
hmmm... (Score:5, Insightful)
What? Music has always been data. This guy isn't a music lover, he's a memorabilia lover.
Correction (Score:5, Insightful)
Piracy = Freedom (Score:5, Insightful)
An audiobook lover moves to piracy. (Score:5, Insightful)
And that is the funny thing. I have been downloading the *EXACT* same books that I have paid Audible for from bittorrent. I have no problem buying Audio Books - but when I buy them, the DRM gets in my way, and I cannot always listen to the book I paid for in the manner I want. I *WANT* to pay for the books, I have no problem with that. I just want to be able to listen to them as I choose, not as the company controlling them chooses.
In the same way, I have found myself downloading MP3's of music that I already own on CD because it is faster for me to download the music that I already have, than to go through my CD collection and rip all the music.
I cannot see any of these industries surviving for long when they stand in the way of what consumers who are willing to pay for what actually want. The Barenaked ladies have it right. The author of this article is correct, we are being driven to piracy. At least I have never used Rhino.
Re:hmmm... (Score:4, Insightful)
What? Music has always been data.
That's right. Way back in Vienna, before their falling out, Prince-Archbishop Colloredo would pay Mozart rather well for his data.
Re:hmmm... (Score:5, Insightful)
Then, some guy (named Edison) created an anomily. A peculiar quirk of technology that turned it inot a PRODUCT.
Luckily, technology has come around to return Music to it's proper place. It is now, once again, a Service
That's hat really bug me about the music industry. They are trying to sell a Service, like it was a Product, and then they have the audasity to blame US for their problems. RIAA, here's a free clue for you. "Contempt of Business Model" is not a crime. Your market was a fluke; an abhoration of technology that has been corrected. Just like that buggy-whip manufacturer in the oft-quoted Danny Devito flick, your time has passed. Adapt, or die. Just like every body else.
Re:hmmm... (Score:5, Insightful)
It hasn't always been digital data...It hasn't even always been recordable data...prior to analog recording techniques, the only way to record a song was to write it down and learn to play it yourself. And before notation, the only way to copy a song was to listen to somebody else play it, and lean to play it yourself (still the most rewarding way to learn new music, IMHO)
Been there, done that (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:hmmm... (Score:3, Insightful)
Sand on a beach (Score:5, Insightful)
Trying to sell digital information on the internet is literally like trying to sell sand on a beach. It's infinitely available. They're using DRM to create the illusion of scarcity, kind of like shovelling sand back into the sea, what they're really doing is just digging a big hole for themselves instead of trying to find somewhere which doesn't have any sand (improving their business model). When the tide comes in they'll just bury their heads and hope for the best.
Not pushed or forced... chose (Score:5, Insightful)
This entire blog post should be retitled "Why I chose to become a pirate, and how my own ignorance of media formats helped it along." The guy made a mistake (downloading WMA format music to play on an iPod) and rather than deal with it and eat his $10 losses, decided that he would rather get his music for free.
Please... if you pirate music, good for you. But don't claim it was forced on you, and don't claim that you didn't choose to do it of your own free will. Man up and take responsibility for you actions.
Note: I am not a record-industry shill, I'm just sick of people justifying their actions in order to clear their consciences.
Re:What's a Pirate in This Context (Score:5, Insightful)
I think there's truth to the idea. The problem is, the media companies won't take a stance on what you're paying for when you buy a CD. Are you buying a product, or some kind of license. They won't take a stance because they want to have their cake and eat it too.
They obviously don't want to say you've "purchased" anything, since it implies that you have some ownership. Ownership implies rights, and they don't want consumers to have any rights. On the other hand, if you've purchased a "license", then it becomes even more ambiguous. What are the terms of the license? When did I agree to it? If I'm purchasing a "license to listen" as you suppose, then what if I play my CD for a friend-- that friend has no license to listen. That friend is as much an "unlicensed listener" as if they downloaded the MP3 from the internet.
Of course, things would be made more clear if the media companies would simply agree that the issue is simply copyright, and the problem is with mass duplication and distribution. Of course, this is really only sticky because they don't seem to want to stipulate that consumers have fair-use rights or that copyrights have limits. With "licensing", they can continually charge consumers on whatever terms they wish, making the same person pay for the same media content repeatedly (i.e. once for your phone, once for your mp3 player, again when you buy a new mp3 player), but the idea of "fair use" threatens those sorts of business models.
Start with... (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:What's a Pirate in This Context (Score:1, Insightful)
Forget RIAA (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:hmmm... (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course, but the author of the article is conflating the information with the media. His real complaint is that the music industry is transitioning from a convenient media system to an inconvenient media system.
Whether or not the music data is stored Digitally, or in an Analog fashion is irrelevant. Music hasn't evolved into data, just like any other kind of information hasn't evolved into data in the transition from oral tradition to magnetic storage.
That sound that you hear faintly in the background (Score:3, Insightful)
IMO, that is the ONLY possible outcome of the head-on crash of the entertainment industry, technology, and their desire to control the use of content. It may take awhile, but the current entertainment industry will die. It will probably be slow, painful, and not fun to watch but it is inevitable.
What goes around and around comes around and ... (Score:3, Insightful)
And here you all thought that you owned all those 8 track tapes, when in fact you're just storing them for the company that made them.
I've seen some of my grandparents' early 45s and they did indeed have a label with a license printed on them. It said things like RCA owned the record and the music on it and all you had was a license to listen to it under certain terms yadda yadda.
(I think one of the terms was that it had to be a genuine RCA branded player, too. Shades of the CSS licensing scheme! Also mattress tags and video tape "FBI warnings".)
Re:Not pushed or forced... chose (Score:5, Insightful)
It sounds like he's simply saying he was always willing to spend his money on music, as long as he got 3 things out of the transaction. First, he expected to receive a good quality recording (better than what he'd get from some 2nd. generation copy). Second, he expected that some of his money would find its way back to the artist, to ensure they were fairly compensated for their work. And lastly, he expected the music to be playable on any device that advertised itself as capable of performing a music playback operation on that type of media. (EG. A tape player should play back ANY audio cassette he purchased. A record player should play back ANY vinyl record he purchased. And an iPod should play back ANY digital music purchases of his.)
The current state of the industry means those requirements are no longer being universally met - so yes, that effectively "pushes" him towards looking at piracy as a more viable alternative.
Re:Not pushed or forced... chose (Score:3, Insightful)
He spent $10 on the music. He shouldn't have to check formats and DRM licenses, especially licenses that *would not download* (did you get that far?). He was trying to gain the ability to listen to the music he downloaded legally. And he couldn't do it. From TFA:
In the end, I never was able to get the music to play on anything--my computer, on a CD or on my iPod. I invested $10, several hours of my time, and my reward was, well, nothing.
He *couldn't get it to play* because the license wouldn't download. This was after he passed up getting the music for free in a
The guy guesstimated having spent $20,000 on music in his life. He's not the type who'd rather get it for free -- sounds like he was happily paying out the nose for music, when it worked. This guy was a model customer for the music industry and he just got pissed off when anti-piracy measures bit him in the ass.
Which is something a lot of people on
Re:hmmm... (Score:2, Insightful)
I bet music as a service to other people existed from day number two after Ogg the Caveman learned to beat two trees together and formed Stone Zeppelin.
Re:Not pushed or forced... chose (Score:3, Insightful)
CDs and cassettes have been runaway successes in the past precisely because they avoided this kind of problem; you didn't need to 'research' anything to get what you wanted. You buy the CD, it works in any CD player. Of course various companies have got egg on their face when they tried to ignore the red book standards; hello Sony.
So a consumer assumed downloadable music would work the same way. A rather honest mistake in my eyes. I don't think the onus should be on consumers to research downloadable music, the players and the various formats.
As for his actions afterwards, well, that is a different matter. But I don't think anyone should be made to jump through hoops just to get an online content.
wasted time (Score:3, Insightful)
Perhaps part of the realization is that was wasted time, as now you can collect music from anyone who ever existed in a matter of seconds. The fun was probably not the music, but the journey, experiences, and people met in doing so.
Re:Not pushed or forced... chose (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe not "forced to pirate", but they definitely sent the message that doing business with record companies in a legitimate manner means throwing money away for no return. They sent the message that, if you just want to listen to music, and you're not a computer genius, you're better off downloading illegal DRM-free copies.
So what? Why should Joe Sixpack be expected to track the licensing differences between WMA and AAC? If I went to a record store, spent $10 on a cassette, and then went back and wanted to exchange it for a $10 credit on the same album in CD form, you'd be able to do that. (At least, you used to be able to do that) Why not the same for WMAs? If what he really purchased was the right to listen to that music, we shouldn't he be able to retrieve whatever format he likes to exercise that right?
It sounds more like the record company felt entitled to his $10 whether or not they provided him with anything of value.
Re:hmmm... (Score:5, Insightful)
I think you are neglecting the quite proliferate history of an oral tradition through song amongst various indigenous peoples, which is a common pattern all over the world. It was quite commonly accompanied by instrumentation, typically percussion.
Re:Not pushed or forced... chose (Score:5, Insightful)
(The other solution to this is that since the iPod is the de-facto standard for personal music players at this point Apple could just pony up the money to license the WMA codecs. I'm sure that Microsoft would take the money no matter where it came from)
Re:Not pushed or forced... chose (Score:3, Insightful)
The day I'll start respecting the licenses on music is the day the stop selling it as a product. Choose is it a license or a product? If it's a product stop telling me how it's to be used. If it's a license then I should be able to replace it if it were damaged. If it's too restrictive then it's not worth anything to me.
Re:hmmm... (Score:4, Insightful)
Only insofar as religion is involved in everything in these people's lives. For example, many Native American peoples attribute[d] a spirit to basically everything. In such a case, everything they do is "religious". Is it then still accurate to characterize such work as "religious"?
I would argue that the [psuedo]historical aspect is more significant, at least to those particular people, than the religious. It would more accurately be termed "spiritual", but again, so would their entire life.
Only one of many problems (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:An audiobook lover moves to piracy. (Score:5, Insightful)
On the other hand if I never owned these albums at all, shouldn't the RIAA be after whoever robbed my car while resupplying me with new copies of those CDs?
All kidding aside, I have often wondered about the legality of what I did.
Now if you excuse me I have to run before the DMCA Death Squads gets here.
Re:Correction (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:hmmm... (Score:5, Insightful)
Untrue. This was "high music," as in the music of the high culture, but the low culture (which didn't have the advantage of writing the official history) produced music as well. You're not seriously asserting that no one but priests sang a note, are you? That's like saying there was never any literature other than the bible. Of course there was. It's just that the church had the means to record what they were doing.
Just so you know, I've been playing in renaissance music ensembles for decades, so I know what I'm talking about. (15th century music, on historical replicas of the instruments.) A lot of what we play is dance music, and they ain't dances for the gods.
So, please. Folk were probably singing before they were talking.
Happy Music Customer (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:hmmm... (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't quite understand why you make such a distinction between music for religious purposes and music for "pleasure." I mean, for these people it was more than just religion, it was their culture. They didn't really have such distinctions like church/state, religion/pop culture.
Kinda like how I use music today. Nothing helps me remember the lyrics to songs better than the music. And I'm a big fan of Bob Dylan... so there is your "spicing up stories" right there.
Anyway, so what was your point, again? I guess I missed it.
-matthew
Re:hmmm... (Score:3, Insightful)
I love your point and I myself would add a few things. As kind of a musician myself, I think nowadays is the best time to be a musician. And that has nothing to do with money. It's the best time now to be any kind of artist. Anyone doing it merely for the beauty of art will find that you can create works of art with little to no investment. You can buy half decent recording equipment for a couple hundred dollars, and with the Internet you can have a fanbase like in no other time, generated from nothing but your own blood sweat and tears. The fact of the matter is that most musicians, in the past, in the present and in the future reach no one with their art. They are born, they live and they die, creating art or performing and 99% of them never amount to even a record contract. Nowadays, you don't even have to have a record contract to have others enjoy your music. You can make your track and send it all around the world to your friends and family and anyone else who might be interested all for very little cost. The same thing exists for writers today, for programmers, for anyone. If you want to do your work professionally, you want to not have to do anything but play rock music, gather enough to get a tour together and get a fanbase. However, unlike the bard of day's past we can afford to eat and still practice our crafts in our freetime without having to live on the street or beg or borrow to do it.
Re:What's a Pirate in This Context (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:hmmm... (Score:4, Insightful)
We live in a world where someone can make a functionally identical recording of a performance quickly and easily, and do so in bulk. Said recordings can be played as many times as desired through relatively cheap hardware.
In essence, a CD player and some speakers can functionally replace ANY music performer. This is very consistent and very cheap to do. With our current music culture the only thing a concert is good for is to see personalities on stage (I hesitate to call them musicians) and to see an expensive show. (Pyrotechnics, etc)
So you tell me how a performer can compete with technology without any kind of legal protections. If someone can record my performance and play it in their nightclub every night of the week, why the hell would they pay me to do it live?
Don't get me wrong. I disagree with a lot of things in the music industry. Especially the flagrant abuse of copyright by major labels. But thinking that you can apply a business model from 500 years ago to the current market is just as rediculous.
Re:hmmm... (Score:3, Insightful)
Lest you think this is a joke, this is what between 1/3 and 1/2 of the USA's population believes. Much of Turkey's population believes similar things (i.e. that Darwin's theory is false), so take that into consideration before you admit them into the EU.
Re:Not a license to listen (Score:2, Insightful)
Of course the big question is the legality of such copy protections themselves, since they overreach the rights of the copyholders in that they prevent actions that are perfectly legal under fair use.
Re:hmmm... (Score:4, Insightful)
Right. Religion is only one brand of nonsense. Before they start acting snobbish and turning Turkey away, they may wish to clean up their own house first.
Re:hmmm... (Score:4, Insightful)
The fact that 2006 US music sales included 588.2 million albums and 581.9 million digital tracks indicates that there is perhaps a bit of money in the field of selling albums and music, and not just performing.
When it is so patently obvious that owning music is worth quite a bit to hundreds of millions of people, the old argument that recorded music "should" just be used to draw people to concerts seems more than a little self-serving.
Re:Only one of many problems (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:hmmm... (Score:2, Insightful)
Big concerts are amazing, probably my favourite form of entertainment. It's a combination of several thousand like-minded people, all "dancing" in time to the music, many of them "singing" along, I find it really exhilarating. I can scream along to the words but no one can hear me, act like a lunatic and not care in the slightest, dance all the time (well, jump up and down in time...) and really just go wild for a few hours. I then leave, utterly exhausted and drenched in other people's sweat (and once or twice blood...) with a buzz that lasts for days.
I suspect church-goers (in places where it's popular, so not here...) might get some of that feeling with a really uplifting song.
In a nightclub the music is less relevant -- if it's of a style I like it doesn't usually matter if I know it or not, sometimes I'll hear the first few seconds of something I love and run to the dancefloor, but usually my attention is on my friends. Or sometimes the music is completely irrelevant for a few hours ;) and I don't notice twenty songs have gone by.
Disclaimer: I am crazy. The people most people think of as crazy think I'm crazy. So YMMV.
Re:hmmm... (Score:3, Insightful)
Also, homeopathy and other such things have become quite popular here in the USA, too. Personally, I blame it on the medical community, and on the government and its stance on medical research, pharmaceutical patents, and universal healthcare and insurance (or lack thereof). In a nutshell, people have a lot of illnesses and problems (such as fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue syndrome, lupus, etc.) which the medical community completely ignores and provides no treatment at all for, and worse tells these sufferers that "it's all in your head". So, desperate, they of course go to anyone who promises to help them.
If we spent the money we have on wars on medical research instead, if we provided normal people with decent insurance, if we took away pharmaceutical patents and put all medical research into the hands of highly-funded government and academic labs (the way Cuba, a world leader in medicine does) instead of corporations bent on profit who refuse to research things which aren't highly profitable, then people wouldn't have a need to turn to these mystical "alternative" treatments which are most likely, but not necessarily, bunk.
Re:hmmm... (Score:3, Insightful)
Dude, he uses and iPod and buys music thru iTunes. iTunes sells nothing but fair-use-restricted, DRM-encumbered music. The schmuck isn't complaining about DRM, he is complaining about the other guys DRM that doesn't play nice with his iPod. He seems to be fine with DRM as long as it works with his toys. He's a fuckwit.