US CD Sales Increase in 2004 398
Lindsay Lohan writes "BBC is reporting that CD sales rose by 2.3% in the U.S. in the year 2004 despite the growing popularity of legal digital music downloads through services such as iTunes. On the other hand, a BBC report from last July noted that pirated CD sales have hit a record high. Sounds like the RIAA should be going after the real pirates, not little Susie or Grandma."
damn! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:damn! (Score:2)
Re:damn! (Score:5, Interesting)
Exactly, the RIAA is going to take this data and use it as PROOF that their legal assautls are working and that P2P piracy is 100% of the reason that sales took a dive to begin with.
I remember a few years ago when the labels were bitching about declining sales and Napster, someone did a study and determined that if even the most ridiculously high estimates of P2P usage were true and counting that every downloaded song as a lost CD sale that P2P only accounted for like 20% of the drop in CD sales since the 90s economy bubble.
In reality it was the economy that caused sales to drop, after all buying CDs is just about the most optional thing and the first thing to go when the .com that was overpaying you ran out of funding.
Now the economy is on the upswing, and surprisingly people are spending more on leisure items like music.
Never mind that the recording industry cut .... (Score:3, Interesting)
We never heard an explanation for that. Hmmm.
No one questions the RIAA on these issues. The big labels cut all their dead weight, low-volume artists, cut production, yet saw an increase in sales?
I have a friend that works for a niche label, and he saw the changes coming, and was happy to sign some of these lower-volume artists as it strengthened th
Re:damn! (Score:2)
Well it's sorta an inverse of the same standard Slashdot uses with Microsoft. When sales go down, it's piracy's fault. When they go up, it's because their campaign was effective.
Of course... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Of course... (Score:2, Insightful)
Honestly, I really believe it has a lot more to do with easy of purchase and single track downloads more than the price.
Albums for $9.99+ isn't exactly inexepensive when there is no tangible media. Most new releases at respectible outlets (not in large shopping malls) are 12.99 or so.
People are still paying an overinflated price for crap that the RIAA puts out. Th
Re:Of course... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Of course... (Score:2)
Compared to piracy via P2P, Apple is only mildly successful. They are as well not making any money but using it to boost ipod sales.
It's not that clear-cut (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't exactly think the world of the recording industry, and it's a good point that there's a huge fallacy in their argument. I don't think it's a very serious one because most people in the financial world probably consider it a loss if they were expecting money and it doesn't com
Re:It's not that clear-cut (Score:2)
Isn't that the American Way though? Confuse them all, and let-the-market-sort-it-out/chips-fall-where-they-
The figures show just how insignificant piracy is (Score:5, Insightful)
Or maybe the prices have dropped, making the product more desirable to the consumer.
However, they'll just say that it is the result of their "anti online piracy" actions.
Re:The figures show just how insignificant piracy (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The figures show just how insignificant piracy (Score:2, Interesting)
It probably also means that tat won't get bought, and maybe greater sales of music are down to there being better music advertised to the consumer. Instead of pop tat, there is a lot more variety of music advertised these da
Re:The figures show just how insignificant piracy (Score:2, Insightful)
> But you can't state that file sharing has not had a negative effect as a result of a positive increas
> in sales.
I'd like to see some evidence of this assertion. I'm very wary of things that seem at face value to be common sense, and I don't see any reason to buy this particular claim. The last album I bought (Brian Wilson's SMiLE) was purchased after I heard a P2P download of Heroes and Villai
Re:The figures show just how insignificant piracy (Score:2)
There is no evidence to the contrary, either.
Does Not Follow... (Score:5, Insightful)
What if it is the Pirate CD sales that are the primary motivator behind the 2.4% increase? Come on guys... be consistent. All methods of piracy can have some beneficial network effects on sales. All methods of piracy can ALSO cause lower sales under different circumstances.
It is, in a word, wrong to deify music swapping online, but demonise pirate CD sales. They're both illegal... the only real difference is that one has a profit motive, and the other doesn't. But the actual level of illegality, under current law, is about equal. It's illogical to praise one and not the other, don't succumb to the same stupidity that is rife within the **AA.
Re:Does Not Follow... (Score:2)
Re:Does Not Follow... (Score:2, Interesting)
A common refrain from those in support of filesharing is that the network effect ("Hey, this band is really good, listen to this!") that piracy makes cheap and easy can lead to increased sales of legitimate CDs. Thus, the RIAA should support filesharing networks because it is 'free advertising'.
And yet, the same argument can be pointed at the makers of pirate CDs. They are like AOL CDs, a cheap way to try out a band you would not have blown $15 to listen to otherwise
Re:Does Not Follow... (Score:2)
... just ask Bill Gates. If it were impossible to pirate Windows and Office, he'd lose his lock-in overnight.
From their site: http://www.riaa.com/issues/piracy/default.asp [riaa.com]
And this is why they want $150,000 per song on your hard disk? Do the math. According to their own figures about piracy
Re:Does Not Follow... (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't see why two things being equally illegal makes them morally equivalent.
Re:Does Not Follow... (Score:3, Interesting)
What if the guy on the street is selling at cost? Does that make it less bad for the copyright holder? Does it make him morally better? Compare this to the person running an FTP with a ratio... you have to upload 2MB to do
Re:Does Not Follow... (Score:2)
Napster-style piracy is not about money, but simply content. Using it as a metric against sales is probably foolish. There is a different relationship between music-sharers than between sellers/buyers.
However, copyright infringement that involves a sale is an actual threat, because it is competition. In terms of sensible law and a legal strategy for the RIAA, it makes far more sense to go after profit-driven infringment. The average file-sharer is not competition, but a poten
Re:Does Not Follow... (Score:4, Informative)
Sharing copyrighted material for free is a civil offence and could land you a fine.
Sharing copyrighted material for profit is a criminal offence and could land you in jail.
Re:Does Not Follow... (Score:2)
Re:Does Not Follow... (Score:3, Interesting)
Try running bittorrent in 'no sharing' mode. You are giving away none of your precious bandwidth to the other users of the network. You are not 'paying'. And your download speed is pitiful.
Now, start uploading to the bittorrent network. As you start 'paying' for your bits by sending out bits, your downloading i
Inundated (Score:5, Funny)
Time for a revolution!
Re:Inundated (Score:2)
I think a lot of people confuse the music business (mainstream radio, CDs, MTV, etc) with music in general (available music, concerts, etc). Sure, there's going to be a lot more emphesis on that which is being sold by the business, but it's not like the rest isn't out there to be found and enjoyed.
Re:Inundated (Score:2)
Unless somebody hits the button for the wrong song during the "live" performance, or worse you let them actually "sing" live in front of 70,000 people; then people won't like it. The Orange Bowl halfime show trainwreck even overshadowed the game.
Re:Inundated (Score:2)
I don't need a revolution which ousts a bunch of artists I don't give a rip about for a new set that I don't want either. Replacing Brittney Spears with Wierd Al isn't going to enrich my musical experience. It'll just change the jokes I use to talk about popular music. I need a mechanism to easily find bands like Collide [collide.net], Abney Park [abneypark.com] or Gossamer which are going to be considered junk by many but which I personally think are grea
Surprising (Score:5, Funny)
2 things (Score:4, Interesting)
2) It seems to me that the year-long push by the RIAA to associate P2P filesharing with stealing is paying off, though only to the tune of 2% or so. If they can convince enough people that piracy is a crime, then it is guaranteed to boost actual sales of CDs at the expense of filesharing.
People are generally good and are willing to follow the law. The RIAA's push to make people aware of copyright law has finally made some progress, but also consider that music artists have also become generally better lately than they were in say the mid-late 90's. Of course, the increase in sales corresponds more to the anti-piracy push than to the improvement in music quality (Good music can still be pirated as easily as bad music).
Re:2 things (Score:4, Insightful)
When I download some songs and say to myself, "Hmm, maybe this artist's entire elbum doesn't suck", then go out and buy the ridiculously overpriced CD, I'm not just being a sucker: I'm being a LAW-ABIDING sucker.
I'll sleep so much better now.
Fuck you and your Devil's advocacy.
When consumer-level (read 'us') audio tape became a reality, the **AA trundled out assholes such as Elton John to weep and wring their hands, and claim they'd go broke. Instead they got even richer.
When consumer-level (read 'us') video tape became a reality, the **AA trundled out more assholes to weep and wring their hands, and claim they'd go broke. Instead they got even richer.
Now that digital music is the current reality, and future, they do the same shit, while still getting richer.
They are a pack of irredeemably parasitic scumbags. They cannot be defended or excused. Their time is over, and the sooner the blood-sucking leech whores just curl-up and fucking die, the better.
As I said earlier, fuck your Devil's advocacy.
Re:2 things (Score:3, Insightful)
Most CD stores in China are pirate *only*. In these stores, you can't find a single legal CD. The only stores that sell genuine stuff are the malls, since they need to have a somewhat credible reputation. But even they carry pirated material occasionally.
I don't see how the **AA is going to police this... in the minds of the Chinese, there is no such thing as immaterial rights. Everyt
Obvious solution: (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Obvious solution: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Obvious solution: (Score:2)
Define "real pirates." (Score:5, Interesting)
This was not just onesy-twosey stuff. Any given week I'm sure one fellow sold 20 or 30 CDs at five bucks a pop. Multiply this by 1000's of businesses across the country and it's easy to see how it can really add up.
What amazes me is people really cannot tell the difference (or don't care) between a real CD and a POS CDR burnded from MP3s. I would be indignant about the pirates SELLING this stuff, but given these people are buying something akin to a cassette tape all you can really say is "it's their money to waste."
Re:Define "real pirates." (Score:2)
The MPAA and RIAA should say, "We know we're suffering some from piracy, but it's bad PR to go after teenagers and bad strategy not to go after large pirates. So here's what we'll do: we won't go after anyone only downloading our materials for their own use. If it's already on the servers, oh well.
"We will, however, go after people who upload the material (willingly or by default [this includes BitTorrent]) or who distribute the material for others, and press criminal charges if they request
Re:Define "real pirates." (Score:3, Interesting)
I believe in FREEDOM of information exchange. I didn't like Napster because it was commercial, I have never supported the commercial p2p networks, and the day MP3.com abandonded their own artists and tried to co-opt madonna they lost my support as well.
Commercial piracy is an affront
what do you expect? (Score:2, Interesting)
grandma (Score:2)
The added benefit of suing the lil' guys is that they don't have enough money to fight back....but have just enough money to make a settlement worthwhile....especially when they don't have too many middlemen to pony up to.
Either way, they can't say that downloading is really hurting them any more....they are still selling more and more and the fact that they aren't focusing their attention to real pirates...and yet manage a gain in sales..
That's not good growth compared to economy, DVD's (Score:5, Interesting)
Those numbers don't look so good if you compare the growth in CD sales to the sales of video (VHS/DVD's) software, or to the economy as a whole:
Video: Consumer Electronics Association: [ce.org] DVD Software Sales Benefit: Although movie-ticket sales fell one percent to $9.2 billion in 2003, consumer spending on the purchase or rental of video software (VHS tape and DVD) rose 18.2 percent to $22.5 billion, according to DEG. DVD accounted for 72 percent of total home video spending.
Overall Economy: CNN [cnn.com] The economy has expanded at rates exceeding 3 percent for the past six quarters and seems poised to keep growing. The White House last Friday estimated GDP will expand 3-1/2 percent in 2005.
Re:That's not good growth compared to economy, DVD (Score:2, Insightful)
however Cd's havent changed format and there's no reason to buy all your old favorites again. Maybe when DVD-A or SACD takes off we'll see a big spike in music sales too.
Better music? (Score:2, Interesting)
They really should just go after this (Score:5, Interesting)
Moral Weight (Score:2)
Perhaps if they stop suing people and lobby for sane copyright laws (like a 14 year term with mandatory registration and repealing the DMCA and all other related legislation) and wait a few years, I might reconsider my boycott, but I
Can't win... (Score:5, Insightful)
If sales slump, **AA will blame it on piracy, and use it as justification to enact even more legislation to protect their profits.
And if sales rise, they'll use it as justification that their methods are starting to work against piracy, and consequently we need to make them even stronger.
Re:Can't win... (Score:2)
A little bit off topic... (Score:5, Funny)
Hi Lindsay!! I luv u!!!
I went to your site and "rocked out" to the intro, and then i saw nothing but PINK! My eyes actually screamed in pain. I heard them. I shit you not.
Please Lindsay. Redesign your site... for me?
And show me your knockers. :-)
Re:A little bit off topic... (Score:2, Funny)
I Wonder.... (Score:4, Funny)
Are there more hot girls like her running linux?
Maybe it's time to finally try that new pickup line of mine: "What's your distro, baby?"
Re:A little bit off topic... (Score:3, Funny)
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0517820/
Evide
Sales increase, but p2p hurts sales? (Score:5, Insightful)
The report, for the country's National Bureau of Economic Research, studied the habits of 412 students.
Hmmmm.... they studied the habits of students. Aren't students usually short on money but have broadband on campus? This is hardly a realistic "sampling" of the population, so therefore cannot be taken seriously.
So which is it?
demand for pirated materials / scare tactics (Score:5, Interesting)
This affects the demand for pirated materials which in turns lowers the economic viability for pirates.
The real issue for the RIAA / MPAA is getting all the "not sure if it's really wrong, I do it sometimes, I still buy occasional CDs and DVDs but like to try them" crowd over to the "It's wrong." view. Until they can do that, no amount of efforts will slow piracy down because so many people are doing it, and OK with doing it, that there is a serious strength in numbers.
The crux of the matter is, and will always be, people give their money to companies for often irrational reasons. If more people contributed to artists and things they liked and enjoyed directly, we wouldn't need oppressive middle-men grasping at straws to retain their distribution powers.
Lindsay? (Score:2)
Or is this the new career? Would explain why we never see you anywhere without the Sidekick I guess...
---
You think this is something? Click here [blogspot.com]
Yeah, but when it comes to a war of wits against.. (Score:2)
Mod the article... (Score:4, Funny)
I would mod your article -1 Redundant. We've been saying that for two years plus.
There is not a strong correllation here (Score:5, Informative)
The fundamental flaw is that in order to exaggerate their losses they come up with absurd calculations like loss = num_files_shared_last_year * retail_price. That is absurd.
I was watching C-SPAN last night and saw the confirmation hearing of U.S. President Bush's new Commerce Secretary. He was asked by Sen Gordon Smith (R-OR) how he would handle the copyright violations and IP issues that are crippling our innovative entrepreneurial spirit. I believe thre new Commerce Sec nominee has been CEO of Kellogg company. Wasn't that the company who was price-fixing cereal some time ago? Does anyone remember?
Speaking of Lindsay Lohan (Score:5, Funny)
No sh*t! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:No sh*t! (Score:2)
A picture is worth 1000 words.... (Score:3, Informative)
Pretty much all you need to know to understand why CD sales dropped for a few years, then rose again in 2004.
Re:A picture is worth 1000 words.... (Score:2)
Any President is stuck with the previous administrations economy for 2 - 3 years. If he made changes dur
Economics of Piracy (Score:4, Interesting)
Now, when were talking about digital media, the price to reproduce the good is very close to 0. So we can think of the song/movie/whatever information as being free to reporduce. Now, the RIAA/whoever sets the price of the song/movie to something that is much higher than 0, causing a price floor. If I remember correctly, in my micro-economics class, the teacher said that when you introduce a price floor, black markets emerge. Does this "justify" the online piracy or at least explain in economic terms why it exists?
Of course, I could be confused and have it all wrong
Who the hell... (Score:2)
It has nothing to do with piracy (Score:2, Informative)
Obvious reasons... (Score:2)
That and circut citys 9.99$ for any cd made the price right for me to start getting some more music....
out of sight/sound, out of mind.... (Score:2)
How do I know this?
Its simple, back in teh napster days beginnings a co worker had put together some 80's popular song CD and many ofthe works I liked and thought of getting a copy from him, that I might better be able to find the albums at the record store... something for the sales clerks to hear and help me with..
But IP shit hit the fan about that time and I lost intere
Could someone just get honest... (Score:5, Insightful)
The behavior is perfectly consistent with the abuses against all IP being waged by corporate entities and their legal minions, in the pitched battle to own, control, restrict, and monopolize all human knowlege, invention, and the freedom to create. In a world that has substantively shifted to an information economy, the owner and controller of all IP is king.
We're all quick becoming pawns in a war between human freedom and self determination, and corporate design. The science of shaping opinion, controlling the masses, and disinforming entire nations for fun and profit is run riot directly over the ethical and social designs of our forefathers. We are confronted with the conundrum of the successful operation that kills the patient, and in this scenario, you and I are the patient. Either, collectively as a people, we get some backbone, and a whole lot more intelligence, or we can expect to obsolete ourselves in the next several decades.
This is simply one more expression of our own ignorance, the worst of our animal nature, run amock. The beast that blindly grabs for the reins of all human enterprise is without foresight, mind numbingly stupid, infinitely self absorbed, and manned by men with the conscience of politicians. It's up to us (that would be not only the person writing these words, but also the people reading these words), to lay down new laws, build new barriers to barbarism, and set the stage for the next 200 years of human development. The alternative, is a furture shaped a lot like the fossil record for all of us naked apes.
Genda
Just a pricing point... (Score:5, Insightful)
Pirates of the Carribean Soundtrack... $18.
That is why few purchase CDs anymore.
Re:but... (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh, and they can't if they shut down a large scale CD manufacturing plant in SE Asia?
Re:but... (Score:2)
Re:but... (Score:4, Insightful)
If Pirated CD sales (from large scale CD factories, not burned copies, if you read the article) are becoming bigger than legal CD sales, maybe P2P isn't quite as big of a problem as 21 large scale factories in Russia and many more in SE Asia supplying the rest of the world...
Re:but... (Score:2, Insightful)
Sueing customers and 80 year old Mac owners who can't even install Kazaa, let alone use it to download music looks better than closing a manufacturing plant?
Which record studio hired you??
Re:but... (Score:3, Insightful)
they talk with one face to the goverment yelling wolf and with the "everything is so GOOOD!" to the investors...
Re:but... (Score:2, Insightful)
They will talk about how good the effort is going in stopping P2P.
And most likly ignore the fact that CD sales are tracking the economy fairly well.
Re:but... (Score:2)
Low Hanging Fruit (Score:4, Insightful)
Just think about the headline for a moment. (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh, oh, I know -- I know! {raised, waving hand}
The reason they aren't going after these "real" pirates is because they are in nations who's legal systems have no incentive to stop the flow of pirated American, European and Japanese media.
It really makes me sad to see this kind of uninformed tripe in a headline. It brings out the general ignorance of the masses in these threads.
Re:Just think about the headline for a moment. (Score:2)
People like to collect tangible things, but don't like to be ripped off. The labels that make up the RIAA need to think about that.
Re:Just think about the headline for a moment. (Score:2)
Don't just hit reply to get on the first page, fool.
Re:Just think about the headline for a moment. (Score:2)
At the least, they can try to stop the sale of these goods in the US. In New York, it's not at all uncommon for there to be someone on a street corner with a table set up selling lots of pirated dvd's and cd's. I've been eating in a pizzeria and had a guy come in and go table to table offering pirates dvd's and cd's.
Re:but... (Score:3, Interesting)
The real question is what are they doing about music quality. Inundation of Britany Spears and the Backstreet boys have made me care much than less.
I have not bought a CD in 2 years. I HAVE, however, downloaded iTunes entire albums and countless singles. There's no point when I'm just going to put it in my mp3 collection anyway so that it's portable.
The REAL question(s) is (are) 1)what are recor
Re:Sue the actual criminal gangs ? (Score:4, Funny)
Considering this was reported by the BBC, you are probably right.
Re:Little theif, big theif (Score:2)
Not exactly, hell, it's not even a good troll but I'll play anyways. Non property owners who occupy a
Re:Little theif, big theif (Score:2)
A moot point at best since, in every country I'm aware of, land is merely leased from the state...
Re:A thief? Hardly. (Score:3, Informative)
Do you now have it? Yes.
Did you take it without permission? Yes.
Sounds like a textbook case to me.
You can justify your crime all you want, but it still boils down to your decision to deprive someone of potential earnings. They can only afford to create that product (that you pirated) because of the potential to recover their investment.
It's one thing to not understand this. It's another thing to take issue with the word "theft" simply because you're not physically depriving anyone
Re:A thief? Hardly. (Score:2)
At aristry (for example music)?
At mathematical knowledge (for example computer programs)?
Maybe at a cure for cancer?
And even more importantly; who draws that line?
I am not saying the answer is set in stone, and I am not saying artistic works should be out of the author's control - I am trying to distinguis thieves from something else.
Re:A thief? Hardly. (Score:2)
Don't like the price of music currently? Then just don't buy it.
Re:A thief? Hardly. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:A thief? Hardly. (Score:5, Insightful)
Do you now have it? Yes.
Did you take it without permission? Yes.
So anything you get for free is stealing. I can think of a lot of examples where this is not the case. Say I recorded a show off CBS. I would still answer the same to all three of your questions.
Hate you break you out of your little black and white world there, but when you talk about copyright it is just as infringing to forward an email without permission as it is to download a song, singing "Happy Birthday" in public is legally actionable and girl scouts pay a fee every year to sing campfire songs together. In the real copyright world it is just as infringing for me to make duplicates of my parents wedding pictures or to copy a photo out of my high school year book. In the real copyright world my four year olds scribbles are instantly copyrighted and her preschool teacher better have permission before she duplicates them. I bet you personally have infringed copyright hundreds of times in 2004, but because you disapprove of the way I do it, I'm a theif and a pirate.
Tell you what. If they come up with a copyright system that makes any sense, then I'll respect it.
Hey (Score:3, Funny)
Re:A thief? Hardly. (Score:2)
This statement, right here, is exactly where the gray area is residing. Whether or not potential earnings were lost. There are some out there who are doing exactly that. Downloading music in lieu of buying it. There are some who are downloading music because they already have the CD and want an MP3 version of it. There are some out there that are simply trying to find new music
Re:A thief? Hardly. (Score:3, Insightful)
Do they still have it? Yes.
Sorry to "take issue with the word 'theft'", but it is significant, both in a legal and moral sense. Legally, theft is defined as taking something with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of it, therefore downloading music is not theft. It is copyright infringement, which is a very different legal concept.
Whether or not downloading music actually deprives the record companies of potential earnings is also far less clear than they would have us believe. It is only deprivi
Re:A thief? Hardly. (Score:5, Insightful)
Do you now have it? Yes.
Did you take it without permission? Yes.
Did you see the sign? Yes.
Did you understand the sign? Yes.
Did you drink from the "Whites Only" water fountain? Yes.
It's yet another to understand all of this and still believe that you're not doing anything wrong.
Yeah, that's called civil disobedience. Happy Birthday to You [songfacts.com] should be public domain by now. Sharing copyrighted files without making a profit only became illegal seven years ago when the No Electronic Theft Act was signed into law. By comparison, prohibition lasted 14 years.
Don your Elliot Ness attire. Keep busting those average Joes. Personally, I hope your kind stays the course. I hope RIAA legal activity mushrooms. Once you piss off enough regular people, this becomes a campaign issue and the majority is clearly not on your side. Go RIAA GO! :-)
Re:A thief? Hardly. (Score:5, Insightful)
If the law is broken secretly or the lawbreaker attempts to get out of the punishment, the powerful moral logic of civil disobedience breaks down. It becomes easy to accuse the protester of breaking the law just for personal gain rather than for the greater good. If he or she breaks the law openly from the beginning and requests enforcement of the unjust law, he or she is immunized from this line of attack.
If you want to practice civil disobedience against current copyright law, you should copy some tracks (like Happy Birthday) that you believe you have a moral right to own and you should alert the authorities and the media. Force the RIAA and the FBI to arrest you. Accept the ridiculous fines and jail terms that come with the crime, and thereby show everyone the ludicrous and immoral nature of the law.
Don't, however, copy 100GB of songs off of P2P networks secretly and call it civil disobedience. It's not. It's just lawbreaking.
Re:A thief?-Stealing of value. (Score:2)
Re:A thief? Hardly. (Score:2)
But on iTunes they have extremely high quality previews at a reasonable length that allow you to determine whether or not you'd want to spend 99cents. You're piracy is still wrong.
Re:A thief? Hardly. (Score:3, Interesting)
So, basically, what you're saying is this: You think that you have the right to determine whether or not you should pay for someone else's IP, AFTER you've already garnered the benefit of it? Or, are you saying that you think that you have the right to benefit from it for free, because you think that it is crap?
Ah, I get it - either stance is in strict accordance with the beliefs of the pro-piracy (Whoops, I'm sorry: Pro-copyright infringement - I need to learn to