 sj |
||
|
||
what can replace napster
|
|
|
Subject: what can replace napster From: texastoolman Date: 15 May 01 - 03:29 PM i can no longer download anything from napster and i sure do miss it i was able to get a lot of the real old blues recording they are so hard to come by unless you have a lt of money to invest in collecting whole collections at a time what about it does anyone have any viable suggestions tex |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Clinton Hammond Date: 15 May 01 - 03:36 PM Yup... First, learn to punctuate... Then download one of the apps from Gnutella.com... Enjoy eh! ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: GUEST,Ed Date: 15 May 01 - 03:47 PM Napster still works for me, although there's less there than there used to be. Alternatives include: ImeshNot working at the moment. I've not tried all of these so I'm not sure how good they are. Do you have newsgroup access? If so there are lots of binary groups out there where you can exchange stuff. Ed |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Bluebelle Date: 15 May 01 - 04:15 PM And, please, do remember, while you're downloading music from Napster, that you are taking money away from the folk, old-time, bluegrass, etc., musicians who are not making the big bucks, anyway. |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: texastoolman Date: 15 May 01 - 04:20 PM i apologize for tha way my words come out on the thread after i submit it ,i'm not used to being edited by some word watching gatekeeper,like mudcat seems to have.i write in a blank verse style ,kind of like the beatniks poetry of the 50's.but i can't do in this particular format and it makes my word seem ignorant and cluttered perhaps someone could enlighten me |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: GUEST,Ed Date: 15 May 01 - 04:28 PM You need to use some html to format your words how you'd like to see them. There's loads of information about this in the Mudcat FAQ (right at the top of the threads list). In your case entering <br> whenever you want a line break should suffice. Ed |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Clinton Hammond Date: 15 May 01 - 04:29 PM Oh please... the number of people who's mp3's I've downloaded and then gone out and purchased that without Napster I never would have even heard of I can't even count! And the people I now know to look for?!?! jeeze... Share the music folks... THAT'S what it's for! toolman... 50's beat poetry? cool enough, but no one want's to read it 24/7... I find people get a much more favourable response to their posts if they use "The Queens English" so to speak... Save the poetry for the coffee house... Now where did I put that black turtle-neck?? ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: texastoolman Date: 15 May 01 - 05:20 PM well it's too much trouble to do here anywayand i'm not about to get into an argument over the way i choose to express myself .if "your queen's english " is godd enough for you then so be it.it just seems a shame to be limited by some machines lack of imagination.free your minds as well as the music |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: GUEST,Ed Date: 15 May 01 - 05:28 PM OK, But you might like to say thanks for the help and useful links. Common courtesy and all that? Ed |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Art Thieme Date: 15 May 01 - 05:45 PM The only way you might replace Napster is to go to your favorite music store while they're closed, bust out their window, step inside and steal all the CDs you want. Art |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: SeanM Date: 15 May 01 - 05:48 PM Without rehashing the entire "Is Napster the Antichrist?" argument we go through occasionally, this IS one of the occasions where damage is done by shutting down the service. When I had the connection and memory for it, I used Napster on several occasions to download songs that I could not find for sale ANYWHERE - on the web, in the record stores, what have you. Quite a few other songs could only be found as part of tremendous (and tremendously expensive) collections. Unfortunately, even with these collections, 99% of the artists featured will not see a penny for the sales of them. They're considered 'fair use' by the record companies that own the rights, and even if the artists still live, chances are that there will not be any re-releases of the original material while any rights holder could possibly lay claim to any portion of the profits. Without discussing the rights and the wrongs of MP3 et al, I'll just say - an alternative is needed. The current situation bottles up the vast majority of music created within the past century, and with the fairly regular extensions that RIAA and the major labels push through congress it's likely that the material will NEVER enter public domain. That's not what it was created for. It's wrong. M |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Bluebelle Date: 15 May 01 - 05:50 PM Clinton Hammond: I've no doubt that you do exactly, as you've described, however, for every one of you, there are ten others, who have spent the money for a CDRW, but don't spend a penny on cd's, preferring instead to download their music from Napster, et.al. Texastoolman: You may write in any mode you wish, however, if you want your inquiries answered, I would suggest you write in such a way that others may understand what you are saying/asking. If you are unable to write in an understandable manner, let the folks know and they will take pains to decipher your words. It may, of course, take longer than usual, therefore, delaying the answers to your inquiries. |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Clinton Hammond Date: 15 May 01 - 06:02 PM 10 others? I some how doubt it... otherwise cd sales wouldn't be UP as high as they are since the inception of Napster... I honestly believe that the image of a Napster addict, downloading entire libraries of music and squirting it straight to his long chain of CDR's is a horrid fallacy, perpetrated by the SOB's at the helm of major record companies... What it boils down to is this... if you're uncomfortable using file sharing, then don't use it... but don't crap on everybody who does... there are plenty (I'd hazard a guess at a MAJORITY) of users sharing legit files for legit purposes... I AM not one of those... I am a pirate! I always will be! Arrrrrrrg! LOL!! |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Bill D Date: 15 May 01 - 06:05 PM what a blessing that we don't have to decipher folks handwriting here..*grin*....random spelling and runtogethersentences are bad enough!.... (the first law of hitchhiking is "look like who you want to pick you up"...the first law of writing for help in 'sanil mail' is "include a stamped, self-addressed envelope"...perhaps we could make the first law of 'requests' in here be "take enough time to be coherent"?) |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: dick greenhaus Date: 15 May 01 - 06:09 PM SeanM- You obviously haven't looked everywhere. You never called CAMSCO 800/548-FOLK |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: SeanM Date: 15 May 01 - 06:22 PM OK. Napster's wrong. I'm the Antichrist for downloading "Cocaine Lil" from an old compilation CD online that didn't even have an artist named. I'll accept that, even if I have yet to find it anywhere that I could buy it. The idea that I most like - and oddly, an idea that the major labels fight tooth and nail - is a 'pay to download' or subscription service for their back catalogue. Yes, it would be limited in scope. Chances are, it would only be the serious old music junkies and researchers. However, it would also be low overhead. One search routine and already existing sales software would cover the entire software end of it, and most major labels have already converted most or all of their back catalogues to digital. Even without it, the limited start up cost would doubtless be rewarded by the people who wish to get the recordings that are out of circulation. Heck, do the "MP3.com" thing and offer entire CDs from the back collection. I'd be willing to imagine they could make a pretty penny from having Bessie Smith's earliest recordings available on an 'as requested' basis. A service like this would also (FINALLY) give them something they could take the high ground over. The legitimate complaints from Napster (and other) users that they're stifling out-of-print releases would be silenced. With the decreased overhead, they would (hopefully) be able to actually route money to the artists or estates of the artists still protected by copyright. Plus, it would be a handy little revenue stream. The only major disadvantage that I can see to the record labels is that it takes the control over what their PR execs feel the public needs to be conditioned to away to a degree. However, to me, this plan makes sense. That alone probably dooms it. M |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Matt_R Date: 15 May 01 - 06:24 PM Hey Dick, does Camsco have any Embrace, JJ72, Bluetones, Gomez, Mansun, or vintage Move albums? I need those! |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: SeanM Date: 15 May 01 - 06:25 PM And Dick... I love CAMSCO. Had I actual money (or a job, at the moment), there are several recordings I would purchase... however, some of them just aren't available. I've been looking for a Clancy Brothers recording (Songs of the Sea, I believe) for a couple years, and aside from one song on Napster (that I later found on a compilation CD) I haven't found more than mentions that it exists... M |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: GUEST,Ed Date: 15 May 01 - 06:33 PM Napster (and clones)are the only way I know of hearing unavailable Nic Jones songs and tunes. As such I'm very grateful for it. I would happily pay for them, but they're not available. Therefore I download them from these sites. I've sent Nic some money, because I believe he deserves it. Legally, I'm in the wrong. Morally? I think not. Ed |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Bill D Date: 15 May 01 - 06:45 PM funny thing about programs like Napster...everyone who DOES use it in a sane, legal, responsible way will wear a big label telling you so.....but the MILLIONS who simply see it as a way to get something for nothing just grumble in the background and look for replacements. It's like a bird feeder...if you make it accessible to the birds you like, it is VERY difficult to keep the squirrels from stealing the bulk of the goodies. |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: GUEST Date: 15 May 01 - 06:57 PM Bill, To continue your analogy - would you prefer it if the birds went hungry? Of course, it's open to abuse. However, it's here and it's here to stay. Use it as your morals permit. |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Matt_R Date: 15 May 01 - 07:25 PM Since I got Napster, my CD buying has gone up to 1 or 2 a week! |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: texastoolman Date: 15 May 01 - 07:58 PM i'm gonna see if this works like you say it should |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: texastoolman Date: 15 May 01 - 08:01 PM i still don't ge4t it ,guess i'll have do more research or ask for more help.i do appreciate the help buyt i was off line for a bit.i have to share the phone with my 9 yr. old daughter |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: texastoolman Date: 15 May 01 - 08:05 PM i'm trying once again |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: GUEST,Ed Date: 15 May 01 - 08:07 PM texastoolman, Maybe I'm alone in feeling this way, but the fact that, (alhough you've been promted to), you've not bothered to say 'thank you' to people who have offered you advice. As a result, I, for one, will not try to help you anymore. That's a shame when all it needed was a 'thank you' Ed |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Big Mick Date: 15 May 01 - 09:04 PM Yeah..........but I still want someone to just admit that despite all the lofty load of shite that you wrap around it, it still comes down to the fact that you like having the ability to get something for nothing. And SeanM, if you use to get stuff you can't get somewhere else, then I assume you wouldn't mind it if there were a slight charge for that? In other words, if they brought Napster back in a form where you could download all the tracks you wanted at, say $0.75 US per cut, then you wouldn't mind? Because that is the only way I would buy into that line of reasoning. Nope..........ARE YOU LISTENING, CLINTON????..........this all comes down to the fact that, for a brief moment, you had the ability to steal from the candy store, and they took it back. Just admit it folks. C'mon........someone say it.....say "Yes Mick, I like it because I don't have to pay for that which I used to have to pay for". It is theft. Pure and simple. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: catspaw49 Date: 15 May 01 - 09:11 PM Sign me on with Art, Bill, and Mick. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: SeanM Date: 15 May 01 - 09:14 PM Well, Mick, if you'll read the idea that I posted above, no I would NOT mind if they came up with a way to let the out of circulation tracks I preferred be downloaded for a reasonable charge. Unfortunately, from the press releases I've seen, the majority of the recording industries likens that to suggesting that we stake their daughters down in the public square naked with signs saying "Take me now" posted over their heads. They also have this reaction with the concept of letting samples of 'their' artists' recordings be listened to beyond the mass released singles (Gee, I wonder if you could actually hear more than the one 'top 40' single... maybe that would be the end of the 'one song' wonders? Hmmmm....) I think that most of what the recording industry (NOT the artists, mind you) disagrees with is the loss of their control. As it is now, major labels decide when and how ANYTHING is released, regardless of demand. Why make an artist's work available all the time, when instead (despite his/her/their wishes) you can create an artificial drought and charge MORE for the same product in fifteen years? M |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: GUEST,robomatic49 Date: 15 May 01 - 09:25 PM Napster enabled pirating from such folk as Madonna, Britney Spears, Metallica, and REO Speedwagon without paying for it. But that was not the ONLY good thing it did. It enabled people like me to explore what was out there and listen to a lot of music for a few times (MP3's do NOT sound as good as CDs) and then decide what was worth buying. I found out through Napster there WAS such a group as the Austin Lounge Lizards. Went out to buy their albums. Next day, no more Austin Lounge Lizards on Napster. A close call. Now so many more people will not even know they exist. Many people distributed music no longer commercially available. What will follow? Something even harder to extinguish such as peer to peer sharing. Napster isn't the antichrist. It's large, overfunded labels which are trying to dominate the airwaves and commercial outlets, sucking in credulous young ears like so much plankton. |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Big Mick Date: 15 May 01 - 09:28 PM OK, Sean, I accept that you would. And if you check on my previous posts on this issue, you would find that I care fuckall about the major labels. If this were about them, then I wouldn't have as much to say, although I would still be troubled by the perception that the taking of something without paying the cost for it is OK. But the real danger, in my mind, is to the Camsco's and the Folk Legacy's of the world. And right behind that is the small band doing an independent release. I think of the Jed Marum's, the Rick Fielding's, the Seamus Kennedy's, the Dan Milner's..............yeah, even the Conklin Céilí Band's of the world. I believe that the folks at Napster blew a great opportunity. Had they marketed their service to small labels and artists at the outset, with them collecting the fees and taking a cut, building a market and momentum, the big labels would have had to deal with them. But when they went right out and created a way to steal the property of others, they played right into the powers that be. And this is not 20/20 hindsight on my part. I said as much before the decisions came down. Damn shame. Could have been a helluva tool. All the best, Sean. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: ddw Date: 15 May 01 - 09:59 PM I've never opend the Napster site — not for any lofty moral reasons, just because I'm only on-line at work — but when I retire in a few years I'll be buying the best computer I can afford and certainly a CD burner. Pay for download? You betcha! I would LOVE to be able to make my own compilation CDs or ones of particular artists and not have half the music be songs I don't like. I'm also with the camp that says Napster's freebies are pure theft if they're used as the sole source of music, but if they're used for sampling (as Matt and Clinton claim they do), I would remind the hardliners that you can go into a music store and listen to what's on offer. I don't see any enormous difference there. And, adding to SeanM's thoughts, maybe of the major record companies would use, instead of fighting, services like Napster, they might discover interest in material that they have no current plans to release. It might prompt them to expand their offerings a little to cater to those of us with more esoteric tastes.... david |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Matt_R Date: 15 May 01 - 10:38 PM Ddw, you don't GET it. There aren't any listening stations at CD stores for the music I want because NO fucking CD stores sell what I want. AND there are no free listens in CD stores for ever single CD. It's just popular stuff, which is NOT what I'm looking for. |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: GUEST,Geordie Date: 15 May 01 - 11:33 PM I miss Napster..one of the things that isn't mentioned is that a number of artists do make incredibly bad records from time to time..the Bruce Cockburn Christmas album springs instantlt to mind. When this happens there is never any discussion of compensenating the buyer who has spent a fair amount of money on a shoddy product. Napster let me listen first and avoid the junk. My CD purchases went up..buit I will buy no more..I feel I've been manipulated and accused of theft by a lot of very pompous and arrogant people..I just want to hear the music, it's that simple. Please do't load that "theft" shit on me...it is soooooo self serving. |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: ddw Date: 15 May 01 - 11:50 PM Matt, Maybe it's you who doesn't get it. I've never asked to hear a CD in a store and been refused. I know it might be difficult for you to have that much social interaction with a real person, but maybe you should try it. david |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Clinton Hammond Date: 16 May 01 - 12:05 AM ouch...
|
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: SeanM Date: 16 May 01 - 12:47 AM Actually, DDW, I can attest to MANY times being told that a CD was not listenable to. I used to work in a 'corporate' music store - "The Wherehouse". We were told quite firmly that if a customer wanted to hear music that WE HAD A DEMO CD FROM, that we were allowed to wait until the current CD on play was over and then put that in. However, if a customer wanted something not on 'playlist', then they were out of luck. Didn't matter if the artist in question was selling well, or if we'd HAD a demo cd but someone on staff had 'borrowed' (i.e., stolen) the CD before the alloted time that we were required to have it available expired. Blockbuster Music (for all I'm aghast at the corporation) had for a short while before they folded a 'listen to any CD in the store' policy. Of course, there, the problem was that they didn't stock anything too far out of mainstream, and special order CDs were exceptions to the policy. Our chain attempted to create a similar program (which you can still find in place) with 'listening stations'. However, speaking for the store I worked for, the station had 6 pre-set CDs and was locked to prevent anyone but the designated corporate rep from changing out the discs within. Further, I believe what Matt's referring to above is not even so much the issue that he can't listen to the CDs he wishes to in store, but the fact that the stores don't carry them. So, no. Unfortunately, listening in-store isn't a viable option. In 'major urban' markets, neither is listening to the radio. I recently relocated to the sticks, and find the musical variety on the air INCREDIBLE compared to the tripe that I could get in the city. Whereas before there was nothing but mass market radio and 2-3 low band NPR stations that you could only recieve a few hours a day, out here there are dozens of non-mass stations. It's heaven. Too bad it's so miserable otherwise. And Mick... I do agree with you to a large extent. However, I think that unfortunately Napster rather blew up in a naive programmer's face. The original programmer wrote something that I don't believe he ever put the forethought of 'right or wrong' into, and it became something MUCH larger than he'd ever intended it to be. When Napster first started gaining popularity, an interview with the guy basically said that he had no clue that anyone besides he and a few friends would find it useful, and that he'd posted it mainly because that's what most independent developers do - write programs of limited use, post them on a website, and hope that someone who has money recognizes their talent and hires them on to a REAL job. That being said, I do agree that when it started expanding he should have taken the route you suggest. I can only surmise that by that point, he was probably rather taken with the 'pirate' aspect of what was going on - it's a big 'net ethic' thing to tweak the noses (and wallets) of the 'big guys' who want to restrict 'your fun'. Of course, this is the same rationale that results in credit card numbers being stolen, websites hacked, virii being written... Anyway, enough ranting. In my mind, if you want to think about where the guy's mind was when he wrote this and how big he thought it would get, just think about the name... he named it after his cat. M |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: dick greenhaus Date: 16 May 01 - 01:45 AM Matt R-
Is there something you want to buy, or are you just sounding off? CAMSCO specializes in folk and folkish music. Organizationally, it's much more tolerant of non-folk stuff than I am personally. No freebies, though. dick greenhaus CAMSCO Music |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Fibula Mattock Date: 16 May 01 - 06:59 AM Right, without joining the "is napster bad?" debate, its problem was (as far as I know) that it had a central server that indexed all the users and mp3s. This meant that it was possible for files to be blocked at the record companies' request. Mis-spelling band and/or song names will get round a lot of the blocks - thing is, because its users have diminshed, so have the amount of available mp3s. The peer-to-peer applications mentioned in the 3rd post (e.g. gnutella) do not index using a central server, instead they seek out other users online and link to yet more. Which means more files, less blocks. |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Matt_R Date: 16 May 01 - 08:27 AM Great Scott! Actually Dick, those are ones I'm looking for, but I was being tongue-in-cheek about Camsco having them! Man...wait till my friend here this! The Move on Camsco! Well, they DID cover "Long Black Veil" and "The Last Thing On My Mind"...maybe that's how Camsco picked them up! Lol! WHOA! |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: LR Mole Date: 16 May 01 - 09:56 AM Has anyone ever done a statistical breakout of pop fluff cloned off Napster (Britny, Witny, InZinc, etc.) vs. the sort of exotic stuff most people have mentioned? Different issues, it seems to me. If people want the Top Ten, they should buy the Top Ten. That way they could get the fetching photo as well. But one would think there must be a way to differentiate. On the other hand, if the Napsterer only wants the HIT (because the rest of the album is rehash or crapola), maybe there isn't. Maybe there's some sort of inverse correlation: the more one Napstered, the less..oh, bother. Here's one for free: thanks, Ed. And a purely gratuitous note: I generally do OK with interaction with real people. Whoever they are. |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Bill D Date: 16 May 01 - 11:03 AM a tardy reply to 'guest'....neither the birds nor the squirrels usually 'go hungry', but in the natural order of things, they usually have to do a bit of work for their dinner. *grin*..I feed the birds 'primarily' so they'll be cute in front of MY window, but in altering the pattern of making the bird food 'easy', I also make it easy pickins for the squirrels, who not only steal the bird food, but chew up the plastic feeder. If I have to point out the analogies with Napster, I am wasting my time anyway. I don't have to explain to the birds that they have no 'right' to demand free, easy food...if I stop, they will eat elsewhere with a little more effort...but I can't explain to the SQUIRRELS that if they (the squirrels) get to be too much of a nuisance, ALL feeding will stop 'cause I just can't afford it. Similar analogies by request about pushy, selfish drivers in merging traffic and those who take 23 items into the 7 items express line at the grocery store. (BTW...I HAVE managed to 'block' most of the squirrels with a clever device above my feeder, but the hungry, determined, greedy ones still manage at times...) |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: GUEST,yum yum Date: 16 May 01 - 12:10 PM Texastoolman, you might try audiogalaxy.com it works on the same basis as napster. I have found that it is a little slower but just as good. Don't give up on napster, it could be back. yum yum |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: mousethief Date: 16 May 01 - 12:37 PM I would gladly pay $1 a cut or more to get rare and out-of-print stuff from a download service. And I would gladly pay the equivalent of a new CD (or slightly more) for a new CD's worth of cuts which I get to select myself, even though I *could* go out and buy 20 CD's, to get the 20 songs I want, wtih the 380 songs I don't want. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: M.Ted Date: 16 May 01 - 12:46 PM Some of you assert, and in fairly inflammatory language, that use of Napster is, somehow, "stealing"--I wish that you would clarify exactly why you think it is "stealing"-- According to your understanding of the law--I have yet to hear any compelling arguement that has given me even the slightest indication that the people who use Napster are violating any laws-- As I understand it, even the recording industry is only acting against Napster, rather than any of the Napster users, who they contend, are infringing, and this, as pointed out above, because of way that Napster processes the file exchanges-- Anyway, as a longtime practitioner of the "Weasly Arts" of Marketing, Advertising, and Public Relations, I can assure you that musicians and performers are not in danger of losing any money because of Napster--quite the opposite, they can benefit from it incredibly(and without those "downlad fees" that people keep talking about)--it is the record companies who are threatened by it--because it takes the control away from them and gives it back to the audiences and the artists-- Be aware that when you stand against Napster, you stand against the real interests of performers and artists, and solidly in line with those whose interest lies in systmatically exploiting them and preventing them from reaping the benefits of their own creative work!!!!!(And I am not kidding, either!!) Dick, I owe you a phone call--I promised to call you to have a marketing discussion if you were interested, and you sent me a PM that I just got, owing to having two MTed mailboxes--And I will call you soon--
|
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Clinton Hammond Date: 16 May 01 - 01:20 PM Limewire, a gnutella clone, looks like it might be pretty good... just installed it... gonna play around wih the interface for a bit... Whole whack of Jethro Tull right off the bat... pretty cool! ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: mousethief Date: 16 May 01 - 01:26 PM Geez, M. Ted, it iesn't that hard a concept. You're getting music for free that somebody else paid for, rather than paying for it yourself. Except for music specifically authorized by the artist, it's stealing. It's like you had ten friends who went in together, bought one album, and made nine copies. That would be "stealing." I can't see how this is a difficult concept. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Matt_R Date: 16 May 01 - 01:28 PM So what if you just tape off the radio? Or rare record from an old library? What should you do, pretend to lose the record, pay the library the money so you can keep it? Is that "stealing"? |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: mousethief Date: 16 May 01 - 01:53 PM Taping off the radio is problematic also. The rare record case is a little grayer, but it's apples-and-oranges to compare that to downloading the latest, hottest CD, which is the majority of use Napster gets. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Bill D Date: 16 May 01 - 02:13 PM here's the concept: guy makes music..wants to make some sort of profit from it. He makes a CD or tape and tries to figure out how to get enough people to buy it to make the whole effort worthwhile. Now, he MAY put out free demos, he MAY go with a producer/distributor, he MAY stand on the corner and sing the songs and sell CDs from a bin....but it should be his choice. If he guesses wrong, he'll learn better. If HE wants to put up samples on the WWW, fine...makes a certain amount of sense, depending on the music, and it's easy enough to do if that's what HE wants. But if YOU decide to distribute HIS stuff in ways he does not approve,(even if you're SURE he's wrong), that's illegal, immoral and mean. All the rhetoric about "record companies' loss of control" is just noise if the artist has agreed with the record companies about who makes marketing decisions! The point is, there must be ONE set of rules...there are LOTS of choices within the set of rules. Simply deciding that you'll download stuff just because it's there, without checking to see if this artist put it there or approves, is just plain stealing, even if you kid yourself that no one but some corporate entity is 'really' being hurt.
|
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: M.Ted Date: 16 May 01 - 02:26 PM As I understand the doctrine of fair use, your ten friends have a perfect right to copy the CD that they bought, and they also have a right to tape whatever they like off the radio--as well as to make tapes or MP3 files of the Madonna CD--if you can point to a legal decision that contradicts this, I would be very interested in reading it-- |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Bill D Date: 16 May 01 - 02:46 PM 'make' copies? sure...I 'make' copies of records THAT I OWN all the time...but I would not give them to people who could get them by going to the store. I HAVE made copies of a very few out of print things for friends...and I have taped stuff in order to learn songs...but when I was able to find the originals, I **bought** them. The very first time I met Sandy Paton, I told him I had had some tapes of some Folk-Legacy records for several years, and before that 'look' on his face could develop into a glare *grin*, I proceeded to buy the records from him on the spot.........a LOT of this goes on, and always will, but if you never NEED to see an original, it sure gets tempting. (and seriously, folks, I am awfully glad my major interest is in trad folk, where taste and whim and fad don't change every 20 minutes..I can see how expensive it CAN be to keep up with the latest pop/rock stuff!) |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Big Mick Date: 16 May 01 - 03:09 PM First off, MTed, there is a difference between inflammatory language and being straight forward. Some people, when they are on the wrong side of an argument (or at least feel like they are), hide behind the inflammatory comments when they don't have a better argument. I don't know if that is the case here or not. Stealing is a concept. It is a term developed over the millennia to describe the taking of something that doesn't belong to you. It is a violation of a basic moral priniciple, or a commandment if you are a religious person of most major religious persuasions. It can also be a violation of the law. The reason that the prosecutors aren't after the users probably has to do with scale as well as the wording of the lawsuit. But that has nothing to do with immorality of taking someones property without their consent. The music is the intellectual property of the creator, to do with as they please. If you don't get this, reread Bill D's post until you do. I also object to copying from the radio, but that is a red herring arguement anyway. No one wants to copy off the radio because of quality,commercials, etc. That is why they like Napster. Near CD quality for nothing. Now, as far as the sampling new music goes, let me make a proposal. Let's say that they could build the site so that you could listen to any cut you wanted but just couldn't download it without a fee per cut, thus giving you all the right to hear whatever music you want and as many times as you want, but you couldn't download it to CD withoug paying. That would be super, right? See.........I know you won't be honest with me here. A couple of you will say, yeah that would be fine. But most of you bigtime supporters of Napster know that the reason you like it is because you get the music without paying for it. And you have yet to admit that basic fact. And that, friend M Ted, is stealing. It is ripping off the owner of the music. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: M.Ted Date: 16 May 01 - 05:19 PM Since Thursday last, I have bought and paid for at least 10 CD's. including one by the above mentioned Nic Jones--I resent any implications that I am a thief, and particularly any intimations that I am less than honest about this(or anything else)-- That said, I will re-assert, I have a legal right to fair use of any and all recorded materials that I own, and your opinions about stealing and rights and all, really don't apply to fair use-Even the RIAA acknowleges that copying and related fair use of the copied material is acceptable-- I have been following the Napster legal issues since they initially emerged, and the discussion that has been put forth here does not relate to those issues, and, as a matter of fact, the issues that the plaintiffs have filed against Napster haven't even been set out here-- And Bill, a performing artist doesn't necessarily have any control of either commercial distribution or commercial use of their work--let alone the fair-use personal use that indiviuals may excercise-- |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Big Mick Date: 16 May 01 - 05:34 PM M. Ted, take a breath, willya. I am stating an opinion not calling you a thief. My opinion is that it is stealing, yours is that it is not. Don't take it any further than that. I am pleased as hell that you have been following the legal arguments from the beginning, bully for you. Apparently you chose to ignore the moral arguments. Respond to those if you choose. And take it easy, this is a discussion, not an argument. It is not personal. But do me a favor, admit that you like Napster because you get the music for free. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: SeanM Date: 16 May 01 - 06:26 PM Mick - Do you know of a resource where you can listen to the variety of music that Napster carried on an average day? If so, I'd LOVE to hear about it. I'd be on in a second. Even with the items I downloaded, I used them in a very similar manner - I 'leeched' from Napster (i.e., downloaded the original and kept it in a private folder for personal use, not further dissemination) and listened to them while I worked. A resource such as you mention would be WONDERFUL, as it would accomplish the same thing without eating up the tremendous chunks of memory the average MP3 does. And one of M. Ted's points is one that I've heard several 'pro-Napster' artists point out. With contracts the way they are and with the marketing machines set up the way they are, the 'average' recording artist has VERY little control over the way that their music is advertised or released. And, with the continuing joyful contractual abuses that I hear about (my ex-band just recently turned down a contract for a smaller label due to the terms basically guaranteeing a large expense for the band and a likely zero return ever), it's doubtful that this will be changed. Of course, this really isn't germane to the Napster conversation besides to point out that beyond the VERY small labels and artists, most released musicians do NOT have any real control over their works. Two wrongs don't make a right. But SOMETHING has got to change, because as it is you have the artists vs. the labels, and the artists vs. Napster, and everyone vs. the artists. That's just wrong. M |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Bill D Date: 16 May 01 - 06:28 PM a performing has ALL the rights to his own stuff until he signs something...his choice as to what he signs. If I buy a copy of his stuff, no matter where from, I can't see me getting the right to post it on the internet as part of that deal unless it is specifically spelled out. I am NOT defending anyone, or attacking anyone specifically...in fact, I like the idea of people being able to trade 'legal' songs so easily...just don't like bulk, wholesale rip-offs. |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: SeanM Date: 16 May 01 - 06:45 PM Neither do I, Bill. But unfortunately, chances are that if you want your music to go beyond the confines of the club you're playing in, you HAVE to 'sign something' giving away your rights. Recent developments in copyright laws have basically stripped the artist of any input or rights to his work once recorded - it's now a 'work for hire', owned by the label and not the musician. There have been many wonderful threads started by a few of our resident copyright watchers around... and I agree with their point that the record label's take on all this has become obscene. Once again - this doesn't make the Napster issue any more right or wrong. But it DOES point out the need for an alternative. This, Napster was. A BAD alternative possibly, but an alternative nevertheless. M |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: M.Ted Date: 16 May 01 - 07:27 PM When you talk about business, which, unfortunately, music is, morality is not a driving force-- At any rate, I pay too much money out of pocket for you to ever convince me that I am getting anything for free--In addition to the money that I pay for CD's and shows, I pay up to $50 per month for this damned, slow, internet connection (server fees plus a hefty overtime fee if I exceed my monthly limit) and a phone connection charge-- I am more inclined to think that if things were a bit more fair, a part of the the money that goes to Verizon and company ought to be divided among those who create and provide the content that I am accessing on the internet-- When you think about it, we all pay for everything we view or download on the internet, it is just that all the money goes to the carriers, and not to the content providers--
|
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: GUEST,Grabster ....lol Date: 16 May 01 - 08:21 PM Really folks the whole idea is silly to start. The other day while poking around in Pal Talk joined a free acoustic jam and guess what, that music was narural happy and far far better than the edited tight boring freaking crap that is supposed to be popular. Listening to the popular CD selections these days explains a lot of things like violence and depression in our society. Mudcatters sometimes play there too and it is fun. The fact is that Music used only be live, there was no recorded material in those times which some elementary math shows to be a far greater age. The one thing that is missing from the Corpomusic is spontaneity and fun. Listen to Garth the CorpoDrone and be disgusted. Net Music is going toward Live and away from recorded because Live is better. Grabster - if you want secondhand stale music - go ahead have a nice fantasy and be depressed, if you want to fooo fooo go sing, play and listen to Real People in Real Time and be happy. |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: harpgirl Date: 17 May 01 - 01:16 AM Just for the sake of argument, dialectics if you will, let me venture an opinion. The argument that "music is the intellectual property" of the maker is an argument that is not intrinsically, morally right. It is argued to be morally right in the context of a capitalist "for profit" milieu. I believe that the only way to argue effectively that downloading an artist's music for free is morally wrong is to first ask that artist if he or she objects. Some may not. Morality, to me is a concept that exists only in the context of the direct personal interaction between one person and another. I am always skeptical of any argument about morality in the context of capitalism. Moreover, we are beset with religions across the world which argue that their version of "morality" is the correct one. Just my two cents...harpgirl |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: GUEST,yum yum Date: 17 May 01 - 05:26 AM I have only just got back into the thread. It's ok to sort the rights and wrongs of whether to use napster and other such outlets, BUT Texastoolman's request has got lost somewhere along the way. So, after reading all that has been said since my departure I can only add: A new thread should be started on 'FOR/AGAINST NAPSTER' and 'Should we judge folk on their manners when they make a request'? My opinion, Ed is correct, so: texastoolmaninfutureifyoumakearequestiforonewillignoreyouatleastuntilyouhavethemannerstosaythanksbesidesthefactyouhavebeenaskedtodosomanytimesinthisthread! I feel better for that. thankyou all my love Yum Yum. |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Fibula Mattock Date: 17 May 01 - 05:38 AM er, what I was trying to say waaaayyy back up there was that napster may be detested by many, but the new alternatives such as gnutella and the rest can't be subject to the same method of control that napster has now established as they are not centralized. It is virtually impossible to shut down or filter these new peer-to-peer services. At least napster had some degree of control over the files being transmitted. With these new methods, it's not just mp3s that can be shared - you can get mpegs etc. as well We have to face up to the fact that file sharing over the internet is here to stay, and instead of attempting to stop it, which isn't going to work, we should be looking for changes in licensing and copyright laws and royalty payments. |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Big Mick Date: 17 May 01 - 07:53 PM Fair enough. I agree that it is pretty hard to put the genie back in the bottle. But I don't think we can start addressing the issues of royalties, licensing and copyright until people recognize that artists do indeed own their intellectual property, and it is their decision as to how they choose to put it out. There is an analogy. If one owns a GM car, they can certainly loan it to whom they want. But go ahead and make an exact copy of that car and make it completely available to the world to do the same for nothing and see how far it gets. Or even attempt to copy some of their technology in a different design of vehicle, and then give the copies away for nothing. Not a lot of difference. When I continually tease you folks by telling you to fess up to the fact that despite the lofty arguments what you are really after is free music, I do it because I don't think the issue can be resolved until folks admit to the basic premise. And once you do, all the other arguments become pretty weak. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: harpgirl Date: 17 May 01 - 09:27 PM Owning a GM car, copying it and giving the copies away for nothing. Now there is a moral act. Particularly if you gave them away to people who needed them, sorta like habitat for humanity...that's morality to me. Take creative accomplishments out of the frame of capitalism. Then think about them. Thank God for the National Museum of Art. The rich and poor can view great works. Why can't the rich and the poor hear great music in the same way? It's about capitalism, not morality....geez |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Bill D Date: 17 May 01 - 09:42 PM the poor can view great works AND hear great music...but they usually don't try to take home an 'exact' copy of the Picasso or Rembrandt...and the copies they have are for SALE. You can go hear Rick Fielding play music, but he might have an opinion if you were to plug your digital recorder into the sound system. Now, you can record any durn thing that *I* play, 'cause I'm not trying to make a living or writing songs. |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: harpgirl Date: 17 May 01 - 09:46 PM What about giving copies of AIDS drugs away for nothing? Is that immoral? I think not. But those drugs are some coporation's "intellectual property." hg |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: harpgirl Date: 17 May 01 - 09:50 PM Bill I didn't say people shouldn't try to make a living. I am a capitalist, God help my soul. Just don't mix up morality with capitalism. |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: pipsqueak Date: 17 May 01 - 11:59 PM Quote from Bill D :-'make' copies? sure...I 'make' copies of records THAT I OWN all the time...but I would not give them to people who could get them by going to the store. I HAVE made copies of a very few out of print things for friends...and I have taped stuff in order to learn songs...but when I was able to find the originals, I **bought** them. The very first time I met Sandy Paton, I told him I had had some tapes of some Folk-Legacy records for several years, and before that 'look' on his face could develop into a glare *grin*, I proceeded to buy the records from him on the spot.........a LOT of this goes on, and always will, but if you never NEED to see an original, it sure gets tempting. (and seriously, folks, I am awfully glad my major interest is in trad folk, where taste and whim and fad don't change every 20 minutes..I can see how expensive it CAN be to keep up with the latest pop/rock stuff!) ----------------------------------------- I'm just using your letter to help me illustrate my angle on the 'free music' issue Bob, nothing personal. I know the thread is old now but I couldn't sleep after pondering 'moral' issues here. Bill's letter made me think about the roots of folk music ....how it was a community experience 'shared' by musicians & audience alike, without the audience, trad/folk wouldn't exist ! It was born from communities 'sharing' their joy and musical appreciation, and making each other's lives, a bit more endurable. No-one 'charged' entry fee. The musician received as much inspiration from the singer's & dancer's & social interaction, as they received from the musician. So - you could conceivably say that a 'folk' musician, deciding to go pro and charge his audience, is actually 'stealing' from Traditional music full stop. I'm not saying this is how it is, just a different angle. Also I'd bet that most of the 'artists' that whine about losing money because of Napster, - didn't give 2 short shits about inflicting their 'free' music on their neighbours ears during their less talented years. It's all swings & roundabouts, but I think it's a very harsh judgement to call people thieves, because they download a 'freeby'.
|
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Ella who is Sooze Date: 18 May 01 - 03:26 AM I've been using soundjam (tm) MP not bad and fairly quick! Ella |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Big Mick Date: 18 May 01 - 09:32 AM Well, pipsqueek, you should note that I didn't call anyone a thief, but what I did do is define what stealing is to me. After all, this place is about expressing ones opinion as much as anything else. Once again, certain among you seek to obfuscate the issue. You try to make analogies that are completely off base. I agree that it would suit my own Robin Hood sensibilities to take from GM to give to others, Habitat would be great. But you know damn full well we weren't speaking about that. We are speaking about intellectual property. We are speaking about the right of the artist to have their music distributed according to THEIR OWN wishes. All these platitudes about the old days certainly make me wish I lived then, but we don't. We live in the age of computers, and by the use of the PC, someone has found a way to take that which I work hard on, and invest my time and MONEY in, and give it away. This is a direct subversion of my wishes and costs me money. Ultimately, for the small independent artist, this could lead to the inability to create new music. And I repeat my basic contention, that none of you will admit to. Despite all your attempts to justify it through smoke and mirrors, this all really boils down to one thing. You have found a way to have something for nothing and you are using every obfuscatory argument that you can to avoid admitting that simple premise. Websters 7th New Collegiate Dictionary lists this as one of the definitions of the word "steal". "To take from another without right or without detection". That is not my definition, but theirs. But what I would say is, if the shoe fits, put it on. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Mark Clark Date: 18 May 01 - 10:30 AM I saw this article from the Gartner Group (an IT research firm) on it's Tech Republic Website and thought some of the participants in this thread might be interested. They discuss the implications of peer-to-peer (P2P) technology for the music industry and suggest a new business model for the record companies. - Mark |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: mousethief Date: 18 May 01 - 10:35 AM Can professional musicians make enough money playing live gigs to forego royalties from recordings? Because if technologies like Napster et al. prevail, and no way is found to make people pay for recorded music, and more and more people get CD burners and download music for free, this question will become more and more relevant. If the answer is no, then we will have a world without professional musicians. On the issue of mixing morality and capitalism: Morality applies to all of life, if it applies at all. If there is some area of your life which is free from ethical scrutiny, what you're saying is that there is some area of your life where you admit you're doing wrong, or want the right to do wrong. Which is wrong. Just my li'l ol' opinions. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Big Mick Date: 18 May 01 - 10:41 AM Great article, Mark. Your contributions, whether we agree or disagree, are always valuable and I look forward to reading them always. This article is a well thought out essay on the problem and potential solutions. Given that we are all pretty set in our opinions on the right/wrong of it all, this could serve as a basis for further discussion of proper solutions. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: GUEST,Pontiac Joe Date: 18 May 01 - 10:44 AM I'm sure Son House and Freddie King aren't making any money of record sales. |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: mousethief Date: 18 May 01 - 10:47 AM I'm all for letting copyrights lapse at the death of the artist, or some reasonably short time (eg 50 years), whichever comes last (so people who die young can leave "life insurance" in the form of royalties to their children). Alex |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Big Mick Date: 18 May 01 - 10:56 AM And those are good examples, Pontiac. I think one of the things that bother me most about all these folks trying to justify their positions is that they attempt to cloud the real issue by using the big companies as the whipping post. I care less about the big labels, and agree that they rip off artists. I agree that GM, et al, rip off folks. I fight about the use of sweatshop labor in Walmart/Kathie Lee goods every single day of my life. But to use that as the basis for justifying YOU taking from the artists just boggles my mind. To set up a system so that you can steal from the big boys that also allows and encourages you to take from the ones you profess to have empathy for, is madness and immoral. And to try and act like it is OK because it is easy and everyone does it has plenty of precedent in the pantheon of mass misdeeds. It still comes down to you want what I create for nothing. And then you attempt to act indignant when we protest. Find me a way to use this technology to sell my efforts and support me doing more, and I will. But I will choose who I will give my music to. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Big Mick Date: 18 May 01 - 11:00 AM BTW, I really liked your post on morality, Alex. We may not always agree either, but keep callin' 'em like you see 'em. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: mousethief Date: 18 May 01 - 11:08 AM If two people agree on everything, one of them is unnecessary (in the discussion, I mean, not in life). I think the only way the music industry can get behind online distribution of music is if there is a way to prevent somebody copying a song the second time. What's the use of charging for downloading a song from sony.com when the downloader can turn around and email it to 50 friends? I think it is possible, however, if the big music bucks would put a lot of $$$ behind researching a system of encoding which is vastly superior to anything we have now, but which disallows secondary copying (however that might work). People would buy the music because it sounds so much better than an mp3. What's sad is that there is SO much stuff which is out of print, and not very likely to come back into print (e.g. they've done a CD of "greatest hits" of Allan Sherman, but have not brought out all of his albums; or has anybody ever seen more than one CD of Biff Rose?). THESE things, which the music industry isn't making any money on anyway, they could easily slap onto mp3 or some other electronic format and sell on the web, and those of us who are more interested in good music than new music would probably pay for the privilege of downloading it. I know I would. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Mark Clark Date: 18 May 01 - 11:23 AM I confess I wasn't really following this thread, I just posted the article because I thought it might be germane. My own moral compass seem to be more closely aligned with Big Mick's, I just haven't figured out a way to fix the problem. I never download tunes from the Net. All the MP3s on the systems I use were encoded directly from CD's that I personally paid for and own. If I enjoy a performer, I buy a CD—from the performer himself if I can. I've even purchased recordings from performers I wasn't wild about but felt they deserved my support. I'm not in a position to directly influence the behavior of others so I work on trying to improve my own. - Mark |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: harpgirl Date: 18 May 01 - 11:47 AM I don't think several of you really understand my point. Attempting to get something of value for as small an investment as possible is a basic tenet of capitalism. I think anyone who participates in a capitalist system runs the risk of having their creations taken for as little return as possible. It is the capitalist way. It is also the capitalist way to try to sell something of value for as large a return as is possible. I never said this is right. In fact, it is logical to thus conclude that capitalism is stealing and capitalism is immoral. I want to live in a world where artistic creation is free to all to enjoy. But I won't until I cross the river.... |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Big Mick Date: 18 May 01 - 11:58 AM I understand, and understood, your points, Harpgirl. The only way it will happen when you cross over the river is if there is a way for the maker of the music to do so and still take nourishment, and not take resources from his/her family so you can enjoy the music. Since context is hard to get here, please understand that I am not directing that comment at you in a critical way. I actually applaud the desire. The comment is made more to make a general point about the subject at hand. I don't think that those who defend the use of napster understand, sometimes, that the artist (in order to create a recording) has to use resources that otherwise would be used to support themselves and their families. Now, we know that motivation is to share the music. But one can only justify the use of the resources for a couple of reasons. One must be that they can afford to continue making/collecting the music, and still feed the family unit. And being and living in a capitalist society, another would be to make a modest profit. Both of those are jeopardized by this technology. I will sit around the campfire and share my music with anyone, and at anytime. But the recorded music must be mine to control for the above stated reasons. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: harpgirl Date: 18 May 01 - 12:07 PM And by logical extension, fighting to keep capitalists from totally ripping one another off day in and day out is a very noble way of spending one's energy. Perhaps if small independent artists didn't have to make a living in the immoral world of capitalists, the stealing that affects them wouldn't exist.It would be interesting to fund a study to find out if places like napster (which I have never even visited, let alone used) ultimately improve the small artist's ability to make a living with their music.My guess is they do because of distribution. Morality and moral acts are not relative to me. I don't see how anyone can conclude that from what I am arguing. |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: GUEST Date: 18 May 01 - 12:15 PM Big Mick, I don't agree that it all boils down to one thing - "Us trying to get something for nothing" ! I share your concerns about it putting the smaller artists out of business....but on the whole people who support those 'struggling' artists, are as aware of our obligation to support them by paying for their product, as you are. I AM fully aware of that moral aspect.....however - I have downloaded from napster a few times....specifically to see what Skunk Anansie was like, I had heard some great stuff of their's & some awful stuff & wasn't sure if I wanted to waste my money on something I wouldn't listen to - CD's are expensive. I'm quite skint most of the time. This led me to buy three of her albums & go rushing out to buy every new release - "without" going back to Napster & downloading bad quality, glitchy recordings. The professional musicians would be very divided on this issue - some would see it as a way to improve their sales, some would regard it as the opposite, if the record companies allowed their musicians to 'speak-out' for themselves, I am sure the serious fans would respect their wishes & not take the 'freebie' option. pip (sorry I ramble - I'm not so good at self-expression)
|
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: harpgirl Date: 18 May 01 - 12:16 PM I also think that capitalism fuels the use of this amazing technology. But ultimately I believe that using one's gifts to build a computer, or paint a picture or write a piece of music is a gift from God.(You know, that Puerto Rican lesbian person!!!) Capitalists use our amazing technology to find better and better ways of getting something of value for as small an investment as possible. The dominant culture does not seek to fight napster because it is immoral but because it affects profits, I'm afraid. |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: GUEST,pipsqueak Date: 18 May 01 - 12:18 PM that last post was from me !!! (unless someone is posting to the board right now ) |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: GUEST,pipsqueak Date: 18 May 01 - 12:22 PM Damn !!! sorry harp girl, the one before harpgirl is from pipsqueak ....didn't realise we had to sign in & out. |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: M.Ted Date: 18 May 01 - 01:45 PM Here is the article that Mark posted the link to above--according to Kenny Rogers life is a poker game, so read em and weep!!! Commentary: The record industry is in denial about peer-to-peer Feb 15, 2001 © 2001 TechRepublic, Inc. By Robert Batchelder, Gartner Analyst The recording industry won the battle to shut down Napster, but the U.S. Appeals Court's ruling also asserted that peer-to-peer (P2P) file sharing is legal—and many services will take advantage of that opening. The Appeals Court ruled that Napster's architecture and the way it ran its service violated copyright laws. Napster lost because it tried to stretch "fair use" laws (which allow individuals to duplicate copyrighted materials for personal use) too far. Napster facilitated mass swapping of copyrighted material between parties who were largely unknown to each other. Generally, a party that enables that activity is not liable unless it knows copyrighted material is being illegally swapped and has a reasonable way to stop it. Internet service providers (ISPs) that simply forward e-mail can legitimately claim such a defense. However, the court believed that Napster (with music companies' help) could have better policed its centralized online directories and subscribers. The court also ruled that individuals who share copyrighted material via Napster without the owners' permission do so illegally. Interpreted broadly, the ruling could imply that file swapping via the Internet is not protected by the fair use doctrine. Interpreted more strictly, the ruling could mean file swapping of copyrighted material is illegal if the parties are anonymous. However, the court did state that file-sharing services are legal—even if they have the potential to transmit copyrighted material improperly. That part of the ruling opens the door to file-sharing systems architected differently from Napster's. Napster maintained centralized, searchable directories that enabled users to connect with each other and swap copyrighted music in MP3 format. P2P file-sharing systems not based on central directories will minimize the legal risk because their operators will have no practical means of knowing what type of information is exchanged. For example, America Online does not create one large searchable directory out of its members' buddy lists. Aimster adds a further degree of anonymity because all messages and files are encrypted during their transfer (via third-party servers). The inevitable progression of P2P technology means big trouble for copyright holders in general and the music industry in particular. The Napster ruling has not killed P2P file sharing—quite the contrary. File-sharing services will simply look for the same kind of insulation that ISPs have (i.e., they will operate without knowing the content being exchanged). Thus, P2P systems will be used extensively for downloads of every type of content, copyrighted or not. The music industry's challenge is to embrace this method of distribution effectively. Record companies today focus on mass distribution; they are abysmal at micromarketing and distribution—for which Internet is a perfect vehicle. Record companies have to learn how to make one dollar on a thousand bands rather than a thousand dollars on one band. Bertelsmann plans to sell subscriptions for accessing its record library through Napster. However, Gartner believes that such arrangements will have limited appeal for consumers. The record companies should take a lesson from Gillette, which gives away the razor to sell the blades. Hit songs are the razor, the complementary revenue streams that a song generates are the blades. Napster's success demonstrated consumers' preference for loosely organized communities centered around a common interest. Record companies would therefore do well to sell modestly priced membership in P2P communities focusing more narrowly—say, on particular artists. Hit records would act not so much as revenue generators in and of themselves but as free advertisements. With that mindset, record companies would want hits to be distributed in as many places as possible, to induce consumers to sign on. For a year's subscription, consumers would get access to all of an artist's music as well as information about the artist, concerts, memorabilia and so on. The record companies will likely have to take the risk of losing revenue from hits to drive revenue from communities. Otherwise, consumers will simply turn to P2P sites that will offer the same music for free. The industry will not be able to stamp them out as it did Napster, and it will be very difficult, if not impossible, to enforce copyrights and collect royalties. Given the court's ruling and the pace at which P2P technology advances, the music industry has months, not years, to develop a credible Internet distribution strategy. Unfortunately, the music industry does not seem to realize how quickly it will lose the P2P war, even though it won the Napster battle.
|
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: GUEST,pipsqueak Date: 18 May 01 - 02:21 PM Thank-you M Ted. I've been getting in a terrible muddle round this discussion board ... I missed that link. |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: M.Ted Date: 18 May 01 - 02:34 PM I think that the article shows that the court feels that it is possible for indivduals to continue to exchange music files via the internet, with certain constraints that conform pretty much to the fair-use doctrine--in other words, in principle P2P exchange of files, via the internet is *not* stealing--Given that, the court was also clear in indicating that there are certain types of distribution that infringe on copyrights--The courts always like to give a little bit in principle to both sides--In practical terms, Napster is destroyed (except for those of us who are sharing the music that is old and obscure--but, as the author points out, in the long run, P2P wins out-- Those who are interested in the "making a living" aspect of this should read what he says very carefully, like it or not, that is the way things will be going-- Now on to you Mousethief-- The true fact of the matter is that the recording industry and the availability of recordings (which we love so much) pretty much destroyed the career prospects for most musicians--there was a time that, if you wanted to dance, you had to hire a band, or at the very least, sit Uncle Fred down at the piano--then radio, jukeboxes and sound systems made it possible for people to listen to their favorite songs, by their favorite artists-- The time was, if you learned to play an instrument and read a little bit, you had a career(meaning when you played, you got paid, and there was enough work to pay the rent and feed the family on a steady basis), same as a roofer,a teamster, or a plumber--now most of the money goes to the people who distribute the records. with only a small bit going to those who actually play the music on them--
|
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: hesperis Date: 18 May 01 - 03:08 PM If one is hungry and one steals a loaf of bread... what then? Is that immoral? But it is illegal... and you can be put in prison for it. It is wrong to punish someone for a basic human need. I also consider art to be a basic human need, particularly if you are poor in money. Art can keep you going when nothing else can. Art can lift you out of depression. Art is the inspiration that makes me determined to get healthy, so that I can make money someday. Should I just lay down and die because neither the goverment or the social support systems are willing to recognize my disability and help me? Is it stealing if you couldn't have bought it anyway? In high school, friends gave me mix tapes because they knew I'd never have the music and the memories otherwise. I still cherish those tapes. (This was after someone helped me out by giving me a small portable radio/tape/CD player.) Without money, I can't support other people to do their art - because I myself need support. (BTW, I don't have napster.) |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Mark Clark Date: 18 May 01 - 03:53 PM The law in its wisdom punishes the rich as well as the poor for sleeping under bridges and stealing bread. - Mark |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Big Mick Date: 18 May 01 - 06:44 PM Harpgirl, I haven't read all the responses down to here, but I want you to know that I don't think you are arguing. Most of the points you are making are salient and well thought out. The fact that I disagree with a portion is simply part of discussion. At the risk of sounding as though I am pandering, I find myself agreeing with what you wish for. There are just elements, in a practical sense, that I don't think can work. I willread the rest now, but I wanted you to know that. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Big Mick Date: 18 May 01 - 06:55 PM OK then, Pip, I will assume that you wouldn't mind if they take the ability to download and put it under control. Here is what I have in mind. Answer, please, if you find it acceptable. Napster is changed so that you can listen only to any and all tracks. That way you can hear anything you want without purchasing. Those tracks you like you can download for a per track fee, of say $0.75 to $1.00 US. The download will have encryption so you cannot recopy it onto another CD-R. I would appreciate all you who think that is OK to say so. If it is not OK, say so. I believe that most won't like it, because it stops them from the one thing that I contend drives them - they get it free. Let's see. M. Ted, I think you should reread the article. They were very specific about the interpretation of the fair use doctrine. And they were very clear about the rights of the copyright holder. The author, not the court, went on to hypothesize that the industry had better get busy and find a way to incorporate P2P strategies. I can't wait until you and I meet in Lansing. We are going to have a helluva good discussion, I believe. All the best, Mick |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: GUEST,Pipsqueak Date: 18 May 01 - 09:01 PM Yep I go along with all those proposals Mick - great ideas. How would we actually listen to these files - technically speaking ???? I'm quite new to computer 'stuff', but am just wondering how we would listen to the tracks, - I've tried 'radio stations' over the net, but they are too awful to listen to for more than a minute, (sound quality wise). Pip |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: M.Ted Date: 18 May 01 - 09:20 PM I read the article fairly carefully Mick--you didn't read my post very carefully--the court's contention, at least as I get it through what has been reported(I haven't gotten a hold of the decision yet) is that in the case of Napster, because the files were exchanged among people who were primarily unknown to one another, the principles of fair use were not a primary issue--I will get the court documents and post them here, but I won't have time to look for them this weekend-- At any rate, Napster is still there, and there are still plenty of files to he heard-- |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: SeanM Date: 18 May 01 - 09:23 PM I've said it before, Mick, and I'll say it again - Great idea! The only problem is that current wisdom from 'the big guys' is that they do not want that to happen. They prefer a system whereby they have exclusive control over what 'their' artists have available on the market - something that Napster and other 'P2P' services threaten, and something which they've put a lot of effort into making sure is their provenance (and not the original aritsts). Though, actually, technically there is a problem. I'll go out on a limb here and say that there will never be an 'uncrackable' coding system to keep people from copying. It's the 'foolproof' dilemma. For every foolproof system, some damn idiot goes out and invents better fools. Much the same for software security. A recent example was the 'unbreakable' coding that a company actually issued a challenge to the 'hacking' community over, claiming that their software was un-reproduceable within some very tight artificial confines - i.e., the code had to be cracked within a certain time, the ORIGINAL copy made from the broken code had to be doable by someone with limited skill (rather than the reality of a hacker breaking the code and then the MP3s spreading to the less enlightened), and other restrictions. Despite these artificial 'rules', and despite a fairly vigorous effort on the part of the "underground" to discourage anyone from taking the company up on the offer, it still took (I believe) One week for eight different groups to step forward with broken and copied files. M |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Rich(bodhránai gan ciall) Date: 19 May 01 - 05:07 PM While we're arguing over Napster cutting into artists' rights, look at the fact that the Britney Spears, Metallicas, and Puff-Daddy's of the world, who are the most downloaded, are losing out on pennies for a lost record sale. The real rip-off is the record companies who keep the lion's share for the artists "intellectual property", before anyone on line, ever gets involved. It's a real shame to see the independant recording ripped off, but I really don't see that happening too often. If Art Thieme had a nickel for ever CD sale he's lost to napster, he could buy a cup of coffee. (No offense intended, Art. I bought one of your Cds from a vendor at a concert, and enjoy it. That was the first or last I've heard of you outside of the Mudcat.) Bill D brought the subject of live taping (if you tried to plug in a digital recorder to the sound system). There are a good number of artists who actually encourage it, David Grisman Quintet, String Cheese Incident, Leftover Salmon, Hypnotic Clambake, The Grateful Dead, Donna the Buffalo, the Freight Hoppers just to name a few. It's been described as the ultimate word of mouth. I can tell you that this band or that is great live, but If I hand you a tape, and say, "This was a nice show", you don't have to take my word for it. I got into an argument with a local agent here, when I offered to make her a tape of a David Grisman Quintet show, she had missed. She got quite indignant with me spouting about artists losing revenue and blah-blah-blah. My friend who had taped the concert did it with David's blessing. I've got a lot of bootleg tapes of different artists, but I don't have many tapes of artists, I've not later on gone and paid the almighty dollar to see. Rich |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: hesperis Date: 20 May 01 - 01:50 PM Mark - except that the rich steal bread from the mouths of the poor and call it legislation... when it is about the power of the rich, not about fairness or justice. |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Mark Clark Date: 20 May 01 - 02:08 PM That was the point. The rich are never caught sleeping under bridges and stealing bread. There once was a rich man who found a way to steal all the savings of middle class Amercians. By law, the funds had to be replaced by the very people from whom the money was stolen. Now that rich man's brother has become President Per Curiam of the nation. - Mark |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Mark Clark Date: 22 May 01 - 10:55 AM O'Reilly Publishing sponsered a recent conference on the whole peer-to-peer phenomenon. Dr. Dobbs Journal recorded many of the sessions and has made them available as Real video Webcasts. Here is link to the Dr. Dobbs site where you will find links to the various sessions. As I write this, I'm viewing the panel discussion entitled "Free Code, Free Culture" moderated by Tim O'Reilly, O'Reilly & Assoc. With: Larry Lessig, Stanford Law School, John Perry Barlow, Electronic Frontier Founation, Dan Gillmore, San Jose Mercury News, Clay Shirky, The Accelerator Group. These sessions aren't just short clips, they're conferece sessions but if you have an interest in P2P and creative rights, you may find them interesting. - Mark |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: Matt_R Date: 22 May 01 - 11:06 AM The Old 97's support tape-swapping as well. OR you could do like Pearl Jam did...they had every show on their American 2000 tour recorded and released. Where I get CD's, they have about 15 of them. I think something like 45 of them were released. All listed by date & location, so you can listen to any live show from the tour. Plus, you can skim through them, if you're looking for certain songs in the playlist, until you find one that has the songs you want on it. A dissedent is here. |
|
Subject: RE: what can replace napster From: mousethief Date: 22 May 01 - 11:57 AM Too bad the Old 97's don't support real music.
ducking and running, |
| Share Thread: |