downloading music

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Crowhugger
Date: 05 Nov 10 - 02:08 PM

Well I can answer dick greenhaus' question a wee bit after the fact...

Usually I make CD's to play on the car stereo the learning tracks of music I have to learn for chorus. The chorus buys the sheet music & part-alone and/or part-dominant tracks (depends on the supplier), and members download their tracks from a secure site. Then most of us put those tracks on CD so we can learn the music in our cars. Frankly I'd be happier if I could simply plug a USB stick into my car stereo, but I can't so I must use the intermediary of a CD. So I have to pay the 20cents gnu mentions even though we've already paid the royalties and often also a separate arrangers's fee.

Great system...not.

If I ever bought digital music over the internet I'd have to put it on CD to listen to it in the car or on my home stereo, and again I'd be happier simply to plug in a USB stick. Maybe it shows the age of my home stereo but my car is barely 2 years old and USB sticks were ubiquitous when it was made, yet no such option.

The few downloads I have from the internet are those that were offered for free; usually I play those on my computer while I'm doing other stuff so they don't end up on CD.

So I'm curious now, is it my responsibility to research every one of those downloads for some (unknown to me) person's permissions to distribute and/or to find out if the website where I got it is legally allowed to distribute it? I wouldn't know where to start.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: gnu
Date: 05 Nov 10 - 01:08 PM

Fines.

Haven't read the whole thread but saw this article about music piracy or "file sharing" on the net.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 29 Jan 08 - 04:59 PM

Oh to be a pontificator about downloading live music!

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 28 Jan 08 - 09:52 PM

I personally dont download music, I barely have time to listen to the hundreds of cd's I already have - as well as play and learn all the fiddle tunes I'd like to learn..
however I do buy plenty of blank cdrs - mostly for backups for my printing business as graphic files tend to be large. In Canada we have to pay a 20cent levy per blank cd - which according to
Socan is distributed to musicians according to some fancy formula.
What Id like to know is how much if any of this actually gets to the small folk musicians.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 28 Jan 08 - 07:18 PM

Hmm-
I can't seem to get an answer to mt question on either thread. Anyone, now---why do you make CDs?

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 27 Jan 08 - 07:53 PM

Mick-
I'll repeat the question I asked in another thread. Why do you make CDs?
I'm interested in people's motives.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: GUEST,Rich
Date: 27 Jan 08 - 05:58 PM

This is very similar to another thread the other day, and my opinion hasn't changed. I'm still with Big Mick and George; stealing is stealing.

Big music companies may be ruthless and everything that goes with it, but I don't think this gives us the right to steal something that isn't ours.

If I think drinking in my local boozer is too expensive I don't order the pint. I don't drink it and then say I'm not going to pay for it. You can say its different, but it isn't. Copyright law is just as valid as any other form of ownership.

The best modern day example is probably Tesco's, 12.5% of the TOTAL UK high street market, and I'm sure they are as cutthroat as any music company. But because all of their products are tangible and you can hold them in your hand, I bet nobody here would admit to walking out of a store without paying for any of it, even if the suppliers of the products (i.e. the equivalent of the artists) get screwed over along the way.

By the way, harpgirls questions about copyright come down to just that, its about copying it. Yes you can play it to someone but you cannot copy it. Essentially you have bought the plastic disc with a single copy of that piece of work, but you have not bought the rights to the work. i.e. its not yours to do with as you will. Its just like a patent - your not allowed to copy it.

I also don't but the cost argument anymore. I've not paid more than a tenner for a CD for ages which I think it pretty good value.

I think Gillian Welch wrote the song 'Everything is Free' about this, have a listen.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 27 Jan 08 - 03:55 PM

http://www.dimeadozen.org/torrents-browse.php?page=0

This is the best live music download site in my opinion, but you need to register first.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Flatnote
Date: 27 Jan 08 - 02:54 PM

I have just waded through this discussion, at length, amazed !
I am a law abiding folky, honest and happy to pay for all work I request. To the artists here please note that I have paid for CD's and their live performances which I selected AFTER having heard them somewhere initially free from charge (radio, friends', club background) or I would not have known to seek them out.
I have now come looking to remind myself of the tune to words which I copied down years ago from an LP, now extinct, which I purchased from the artist himself at a folk club performance. I would like to sing the song as an unpaid floor singer (though my name may suggest that this is a dubious benefit to the original artist). A download would be an enormous advantage. Surely research for the tune, in the same vein as for words, is no crime? If I must pay for a download, so be it, but I feel uncomfortable. How often do I have to pay for the same material? The ethics I leave to theologians.

Tunefully,

Flatnote.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: harpgirl
Date: 28 Jan 05 - 11:43 PM

...well, Mickster, paddymac tells me I never actually got the computer to copy your CD and so he doesn't have a copy. It was a good story, though!LOL

love, harpgirl

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: John P
Date: 28 Jan 05 - 09:09 AM

Hey Cutie 16,
I'm in the middle of saving up enough money to make my next CD. Please send me a check.

And please tell me where you work so I can contact your boss and let them know that you think it's all right for people to go to work and not get paid for it. You're not really losing anything if you work all day and don't get any money are you? Jees, don't be so selfish. Just go help your boss out, he's your greatest fan and just loves the work you do so much that he wouldn't think of offering you money for it. In fact, he'll not only not pay you for your work, he'll loan you out to all his friends so you can work for them without getting paid as well. It's still not costing you anything -- you should be glad to do all that work for all those people, just because they all love you so much and appreciate all the work you do.

John Peekstok

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Big Mick
Date: 27 Jan 05 - 12:21 PM

That's because you are 16, or pretending to be 16, and you have no clue what it is like to sacrifice and save to put out a CD. You don't understand that some artists, like myself and Jed Marum, actually have to mortgage our homes or retirement funds to get these CD's made. That's because you don't realize the value of businesses like Folk Legacy or Camsco in the preservation of Folk and Blues. They do it because they love the music and are committed to its perpetuation, and success for them is merely surviving and paying the bills. The nameless "they" that everyone doesn't exist the way that folks imply. Most music recorded today is done for the love of it, but one has to have the way to recover the cost, and pay bills, or they can't continue. We have families to support. The folks that act like it is OK to steal the fruits of my labor are self centered prats with no concept or concern for the future of that which they misappropriate.

I repeat. If we can, and we will, find a way to see to it that the artist is protected, then this technology is a boon. But those who think they have a right to steal are short sighted.

Mick

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: GUEST,cutie_16
Date: 27 Jan 05 - 12:00 PM

Personally i think its crap that downloading music is illegal because te artists are just selfish. Their not losing any money they just want more money because their greedy.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Big Mick
Date: 26 Jan 05 - 07:36 PM

Just a gawdammed minute here, Harpie! If I want to be bloated by pomposity, you just let me be. Neither of you owes me $15.00, what I was saying is that I would happily have sent a copy to either of you. But you will have to bring some Guinness to the Getaway.

It tickles the hell out of me that you and he are coming. This is going to be the best yet.

Mick

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: harpgirl
Date: 26 Jan 05 - 06:21 PM

Now he'll probably make me buy Friday night entertainment....or worse yet, tell me I didn't burn a copy of your CD, I just thought I did, which is certainly a possibility. I could have remembered wrong...oh well, off to see Kinsey....it's sixty degrees here!

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: harpgirl
Date: 26 Jan 05 - 06:18 PM

ah gee wiz, Mickster...Paddymac wanted to hear your CD, I asked him if he wanted to me to burn him a copy and I said, "But you will owe Mick 15 bucks!" We both laughed and he agreed that he would pay you. Since I write ethics opinions for my profession and he is a hearing officer (judge), we both know you are owed the money! He and I are very close so I'm not ratting him out. SO LIGHTEN UP ALREADY! I'm bringing the money to the Getaway...and paddymac if he'll come...

We just made light of an issue that we know is a mudcat controversy! and by the way, I have never downloaded anyone's music that wasn't expressly permitted by the artist....but I have broken many other laws in my life...
love, harpgirl

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Big Mick
Date: 26 Jan 05 - 05:55 PM

I would say you could, provided the humorist approved. But if that same humorist retained the rights to it (i.e. ownership) then if you take it without permission you are stealing it. I would liken it to you owning a radio, or a CD, and you broke it or lost it. Should you be allowed to just appropriate one to replace it?

I am enjoying this thread too. Nice to have a decent discussion of the issue.

Mick

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: robomatic
Date: 26 Jan 05 - 05:49 PM

I'm enjoying this thread for the most part, but I'm not trying to mitigate guilt. I'm trying to explain behavior and suggest that we need to re-examine definition of copywrited (copywritten?) materials in the light of new technology. I thought Richard Bridge made a good point about several separate issues being interlocked here.

Let's say I recorded a monologue off the air by a gifted but comparatively unknown humorist over twenty years ago. I've been looking for his work EVERYWHERE. There was a record once, but I don't think anything he did ever made it to CD, nor is it likely to. If I find that on the web, why am I nont entitled to download it? It would be to replace a personal copy I already own.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 26 Jan 05 - 05:18 PM

No Mick, not seeking to justify anything. I want two tracks. 'cos I want to learn them. I'm quite happy to pay for them. But the systems won't let me 'cos I won't install Gates' Spyware. So I haven't got them.

Incidentally, when you want the words to a song, or the dots, (or a midi of the tune) do you always buy the sheet music, or do you ever download them?

You can't rationally resolve argument if you do not separate the issues.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 26 Jan 05 - 04:07 PM

Bite you? But it's all bloated... gross!

:-)

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Big Mick
Date: 26 Jan 05 - 03:48 PM

Clinton, I don't think we ever did finish that swap. Drop me a line, or I can take care of it next time I am in Windsor. Anyplace there I can show up and do a song or two?

GUEST, I went back and read your post. Fair enough on my response. You weren't advocating stealing, and I apologize for my response.

With regard to the bloated pomposity issue, bite me. There are certain people hereabouts who think that espousing an honorable position equates with being pompous.

Mick

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Jan 05 - 02:49 PM

Let peace prevail. It is only a discussion.

I can only talk about mp3downloading which failed to install. I wrote to their "support services". No reply. I wrote again complaining. My email was returned by hotmail postmaster. I wrote again and again blocked. I then wrote from my alternative email address and after thgree weeks still have no reply. I was charged €38 euro - for nothing - no install - no download. I have contacted the Credit Card Company but am not too hopeful.

Has anyone else had a similar experience. Incidentally, their internet advert says that they are 100% legitimate.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Jan 05 - 02:43 PM

Big Mick, you are out of order and getting carried away with your bloated pomposity.

all I said was 99c is too high a price to be applied as a flat rate
for all kinds of music.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 26 Jan 05 - 02:13 PM

Did we ever swap CDs Mick?? I know we TALKED about it...

:-)

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Big Mick
Date: 26 Jan 05 - 01:41 PM

GUEST, you are one of those people who thinks that anything that doesn't allow you to steal someone's property is a rip off.

Harpgirl, I don't know what the point of you bringing paddymac into the conversation was? Why rat him out? What was your motivation? And had you told me that you wanted a CD, I would have given you one.

Richard, your attempt to intellectualize the argument is only partially correct IMHO. The other part is an attempt to rationalize, or mitigate, guilt.

Mick

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Jan 05 - 12:54 PM

a legal download system operating with a flat rate of 99c per track is an extortionate rip off.
certainly for 'vintage' & 'archive' kinds of music for folks like us.

its sheer overinflated profiteering.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 26 Jan 05 - 12:46 PM

This discussion is being bedevilled by the conflation of distinct issues.

The first is whether downloading (of any particular kind) is lawful.

The second is whether it would be to anyone's economic benefit if a downloader actually paid for a particular download or indeed downloads in general.

The third is what is for the optimum aggregate public benefit (whether economic or other)

The fourth is whether effecting free downloads is moral, or "right".

Some may or may not coincide, but no two are necessarily the same.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 26 Jan 05 - 11:49 AM

"people SHOULD speak out for what they feel is right"

They just shouldn't be surprised when/if they meet other people who don't care...

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Bill D
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 10:59 PM

yep, Mick...people SHOULD speak out for what they feel is right, and I hope they can work out offering individual tracks in a way that will be safe, reasonable and fair. (I'm not sure why 99¢ is such a magic number, though...that can easily exceed the cost of a regular CD)....The problem will be that so many will consider it a challenge to find free, bootlegged versions anyway, and mathematics will tell you that someone will always be willing to post or 'share' illegal copies, just to make a point.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: harpgirl
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 08:44 PM

Mick, according to your rules for well-meaning friends, paddymac owes you a check...love, harpgirl

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Big Mick
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 08:11 PM

But the issue is sufficiently important that someone speak out, Bill. I think it is useful for me to point out that I am not opposed to filesharing, just when it is used to steal. Is it a useful technology with legitimate uses in our industry? Hell yes. In fact, done correctly, it could be a tremendous boon to the small artist in competing with the large labels, and eliminating the middle man. But the artist must be compensated. I love the ideas for selling tracks one at a time.

But if you should be paying, and you know it, then stealing is stealing. I don't see much wiggle room.

Mick

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Bill D
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 07:56 PM

...and if 97% of everyone felt that way, Mick, there'd be no issue. As it is, there are 97 different versions of "should be paying" ....Clinton is at one end of the spectrum, you are at the other. I could write tedious treatises on "moral relativism" and how Clinton is practicing it, whether he cares to define or defend it or not.....but it will not convince anyone either way...and there is little tolerance for 'tedious' around here..*grin*

I'm just glad what I do isn't usually subject to this discussion.....

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Big Mick
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 07:10 PM

Bill, you can come up with a million "supposes". Hell, when I was a kid, I taped music. Probably even gave it away. But then I realized that I was taking something I was supposed to pay for. When I became a performer, and subsequently had other recording artists as friends, it became even clearer. I am glad you ultimately bought from Sandy, but that has nothing whatever to do with the issue. It is quite simple, and no offense intended to you, my very good friend, but if you should be paying for it and you take it, that is wrong. Are there some exceptions? I am sure. But for the life of me I can't think of any. I feel so strongly about this that when some well meaning fan gives me a tape they have made of someone, I send the artist a check.

Mick

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 05:31 PM

"absurd to talk about morality when you talk about the music business"

LOL!!

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: M.Ted
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 05:25 PM

My thought is that it is ultimately absurd to talk about morality when you talk about the music business.

El Greko, if you recorded an album and it cost you $1000, consider yourself lucky--I know a few people who recorded albums for major labels, and found themselves in debt to the labels for in the area of $250.000--

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 04:42 PM

No... i never said I was referred to specifically... I was expanding on my comment, only for the sake of conversation...

:-)

"If there is no permanent file left behind"
There probably is, cached somewhere in the gibberish "Temp Internet" files... and they can likely very easily be converted BACK into a usable file format by anyone who put half an ounce of effort into learning how to...

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 04:09 PM

If there is no permanent file left behind, that would be fine with me. It's like listening to a friend's album - i.e. "fair use".

CH, I was not referring to your posts specifically (re "justifying actions"); though your need to respond goes counter to your having the guilt gland removed (tease). Perhaps you should ask for your money back ;-)

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: GUEST,MMario
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 03:41 PM

hesp - there is no way to listen without downloading. There may be ways to listen without knowing where on your computer the file sits - or the program may wipe the file from memory as part of the transaction - but you cannot listen without a download.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: hesperis
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 02:54 PM

For those who want to legally listen to music without paying for it, check out mercora or whatever it's called. It's a new peer-to-peer streaming service. It'll allow you to listen to other people's files, but not download them. Then if you like what you hear, you can go buy the album or the song download.

Have fun!

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Bill D
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 02:49 PM

Mick....obviously, I do not side with CH on this, as I INTEND to remain as moral and legal as I can figure out..(I wonder where Clinton had that gland removed, and whether part of the brain was included in the surgery...*grin*)...but neither do I think it is quite as simple as you'd like to make it...

many years ago, I was given a taped copy of a Folk Legacy LP, because I didn't even HAVE a record player...(and was poor..*grin*)...several years later, Sandy Paton came to the Getaway with records, and I bought THAT record and several more...both because I wanted a 'hard copy' and because I now had a player and some money!...Now...what if Sandy hadn't been there, or I hadn't been there...or I had remained poor. I always intended to buy the record if I had the chance..(basic honesty)...so should I have asked myself, "Should I be paying for this?" when I got the tape, and therefore refused it? And how long should I keep that tape before erasing it, if I never got the LP?...and...and... maybe there are better hypotheticals, but you get the idea.

I see your point about the difference bewteen allowing some to watch a movie with me, and copying the movie to give them a copy, ...but what about allowing them to watch it on THEIR VCR while YOU have it rented? Maybe it is only watched once by each person, no matter how many copies are made, so the ultimate outcome is the same as if "fair use"
were followed...You can easily define what is obviously illegal, and what is 'legal'...but some situations just don't fit neatly. If the matter ends up in a court, a decision WILL be reached based on some interpretation of whatever law is in force, but I *honestly* don't know whether I morally "should be paying for" an odd file I see on my PC. Sometimes I don't KNOW how to pay for it, and I don't want to wait months to hear it when a twitch of my finger will allow me to hear it now.

I repeat...I do NOT indulge in "album theft" and I do not post files for others....it sure feels 'gray' to me...

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 02:08 PM

"Should I be..."

Subjective... your 'shoulds' are not my 'shoulds' any more than mine are yours...


Oh... and to reply to something from above.. I make no attemtp to 'justify' my actions to anyone here... I do what I do... and if you don't like it, don't do it... I continue in this thread simply as a matter of discussion... I feel no need to justify my actions... It was a false urge that went away when I had my guilt gland removed many years ago...

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Big Mick
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 01:02 PM

The clean line is quite simple. Ask yourself the question, "Am I getting something for nothing that I should be paying for?". It is no more complicated than that.

The example of 10 folks watching a rented movie is not germaine. That is covered under the doctrine of "fair use". What would not be legal would be copying the movie and giving each guest one.

Library? Again, it is easy. If you borrow it from the library, follow the same rules you would if you took out a book. You can't copy it to get around the purchase. Reading it is, again, fair use.


Morality may have grey areas. Ethics, and theft, do not. It comes down to a very simple question. Should I be paying for this?
Am I stealing from someone? As the world becomes smaller, data becomes more available, and technology makes stealing easier, it is going to become more and more important that society recognizes basic right and wrong and demands it of their citizens. In the 50's the issue was shoplifting. In the 21st century it will be stealing intellectual property. But the basic values must remain the same. If not, the alternative will be a breakdown of the ability to do business, create new music, make a living with one's musical creativity.

Mick

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 12:52 PM

"Well, it is not (moral)"
Like morals are universal... ya right... as if...

"I'm glad to say I have a sense of ethical responsibility..."
Well, bully for you... ya want a medal?

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Bill D
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 12:49 PM

John...I didn't say I approved of it, and I certainly didn't say I DID it...I was trying to enlarge on the complications of the issues involved. Perhaps I should have not phrased the hypothetical in the first person.

It remains true, for example, that 'if' someone rents a movie and allows 10 friends to watch it with him, the rental company and the movie producer..etc...make less money than if all those people rented or bought it individually....but no one complains about this, as it is totally unenforcable. Likewise, if a movie theater manager sees some kids he knows have no money, and allows them to come in without tickets, there is no 'loss of income', as long as the kids do not occupy seats of paying customers. Illegal? Sure...immoral?..*shrug*...I don't know...it's too fuzzy an area. And it certainly is different than going in a store and stealing an orange, a sweater....or a CD!

Now...if, as I said, someone posts a link to a file of an MP3 of an old, out of print LP from 1965, and I go download it...it 'might' be illegal...i.e., it might still be under copyright, and might be planned for release as a CD 'someday'....but...I've always wanted to hear...ummm...Pete Seeger's "Jesu, Joy of Man's Desiring" on the banjo, from his "Goofing Off Suite"...do I go download it? Am I crossing the line? What if it's the entire album?
....this analysis could go on & on, and we know that if George (El Greco) makes a new CD, and I think I MUST have it, but I know how to do some file-sharing thing and get the whole album without El Greco making a penny, I am WAY over the line.

What I have done in the past is to make someone a tape of an old LP album that was either out of print, or not easy to find....and I suppose that I maybe shouldn't have..."hey, Pete Seeger is still alive...go out and look for a legal copy of that!"...right....

I am reasonably competent on the computer, and I know where some music is occasionally posted in MP3 format, and if it looks interesting, I sometimes listen to some stuff, and I DO have a few MP3s on my PC that 'might' be available on a still-in-print CD if I went and looked hard enough.........what I do NOT do is request current music so I can obtain new releases for free. I DO buy some CDs from Dick Greenhaus a couple of times a year...gritting my teeth because I can't afford all the ones I want.

I simply do not know how & where to draw a clean, non-fuzzy line between having NO music that I did not shell out cash for at retail, and finding used CDs or LPs at a sale, and sharing a tape of an old album with a friend, and getting most of my music free by using Kazaa of some other perr-to-peer system...I know *I* won't complain if the industry finds a way to prevent unauthorized copying, and I'll say "tsk, tsk" to the guys who do complain....

It's a really, really, really complex moral, legal, and technological conundrum, and I'm the ex-philosopher who sees all the grey areas. I simply shake my head at those who think it's all black and white.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: John P
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 10:47 AM

An interesting quote from Bill D: "I know I'm not going out and buy the CD, so if I copy the song...technically an illegal act...the artist has lost nothing"

Bill, I wish you weren't retired so I could try to find out who your boss was so I could let them know that you think working without getting paid for it is OK. The musician finds or writes the music, learns to play the instruments, buys the instruments, and records the CD. What makes you think they shouldn't get paid for their work? It would be like a retail clerk showing up and running the cash register all day, only to be told that they weren't getting paid for it -- they haven't lost anything, have they?

If the fact that I can do something means it's OK, then our society is in a very bad place. I could, if I wanted, steal a lot of money from the company I work for. I could steal cars. I could litter without getting caught. I'm glad to say I have a sense of ethical responsibility that keeps me from doing these things. The fact that you can easily download music without getting caught and without paying for it doesn't mean you should. If you do it, it just means you are ethically challenged.

Dewey and Clinton -- please don't ever come into my store. I really don't like thieves.

John Peekstok

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 05:10 AM

Harpgirl,

borrowing a CD from a friend to listen to it is of course fine. Copying it is different - it provides an additional permanent record, which has been created outside of copyright laws. It is therefore illegal - though I appreciate that it is difficult to enforce the law in all cases. It is certainly immoral: If you want a permanent record of the CD for yourself, buy it, and let everyone who had a hand in making it share in the proceeds; don't try to get something for nothing!

For the same reason, borrowing a book from a friend to read it is fine. Photocopying it to keep a copy for yourself is certainly not fine - same laws and logic as above.

Libraries pay an additional fee to PRS (in the UK) for lending music albums. It's not high, a few pence for each.

A lot of the talk on this thread tries to justify copying works (whether music, books, or works of art) as perfectly moral, just because it can be done so easily with today's technology. Well, it is not (moral). The acid test is this: Would you be happy to advertise the fact that you are copying CDs and books, for all to know? Would you? Really?

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Dewey
Date: 25 Jan 05 - 12:38 AM

I record from my XM radio PCR, connected to my sound card. This method, however, is already outdated: the new radios come with save and pause features built right into theradio itself.

Yes, the hypocrite that I am, I use winmx profusely, I usually disable the filesharing capacity and just take whatever is available. It someone gets angry with me for not sharing with them, I usually don't worry about it, (I have the ignore feature set up for incoming messages as well) they have their perrogative to share and I have mine. If I am refused access for a file by one user I usually just try to find another, 9 times out of 10 I can find the file I want through persistance.

Although I am sure the recording companies are not happy that there are so many downloading these files, it should also be noted that though most files on the internet are still in abundance, it has slowed down the traffic of the file sharers in general. I am not a file sharer myself, and take only what I find. The only way I would share any of my files would be with a friend FTP style, that is trading with indiividuals.

As far as the promulgation of the music, that is pointless, and the recording companies already know this. They couldn't stop recorded tape and Fm radios, The couldn't stop the new XM radio market from storing and recording saved content, they couldntstoppeople from buying used CD's recording them and reselling them after they are stored, they couldn't stop internet radio. They are so many ways and forums to do the same thing nowadays, it is insane for the reocd companies to even worry about this and in realilty, I really do think they do, as far as extracting files on an individual basis.

Its the droves of people that are posting files without permission that they are concerned about. It is the pirating of entire music albums in forerign countries Singapore, Indonesia, Russia, to mass markets throughout the world that is the thrust of their concern. I've seen complete boxed sets of artist on the internet that can be purchased for as little as a dollar in various hot counterfitting places around the world, its an industry for some people not just a hobby for their own perusal and enjoyment.

There various formats, Being able to control all of them is rediculous, technology nowadays and in the past is intermingled profusely with this medium. I would be shocked to learn that the RIAA is actual going to continually follow through on its threats toward individual files sharers in the future. (Please post otherwise, should you learn any different!)

I use what is legally availble to me within the letter of the law. I do not promulgate the sharing of files. I take what is available legally (I'll let everyone else debate the ethics)

I'm not the one posting it all or any of it. If I see it available however I do not hestitate to take whatever I find, the same would be true if I found a dollar bill on the floor, however.

I don't generally buy music, the same was true even before file-sharing arrived on the internet. I've also been recording music on the radio for years, and no one arrested me for doing that either. I haven't seen one kid and his boombox in jail yet over piles of un-credited TDK tape LOL.

I like the hits. I usedto record them offthe radio. Now I do it throughthe XM PCR thorugh my computer.

I also for historic reasonslike having all the songs from a particular year. I go to WABC music radio list on the internet (do a google I can't remember the URL) and download all the songs avialble directly off the charts for that year.

I have every song from 1965, 1967,1968 though 1979 etc. It takeswork to do this though. It becomes more of a hooby than a reliable method of theivery, which is why I believe in actuality, the RIAA, really isn't as concerned as they claim to be about individual users. It's took me years to do this. I do not have my files wide open with a DSL connection and 100 available slots, this is the sophistication I believethe recoding industry is acually interested in, altought they try to spook everyone else into thinking otherwise. My connection is 52k telephone snail modem. I record/ download about 8 songs a day, for my own private use, withthe filesharing option disabled. It is just my hobby and for my own personal use. I am not in the recording and/or record business. I just believe in milking my own technology and the forums that are currently available for all that they are worth, and for my personal enjoyment. If they come after me they've got to find something legallly that I am doing wrong.

If you want to pay at Itunes go ahead, I record movies off the television for my own personal use with the VCR I own and no one has ever thrown me in jail for doing this. The tapes stay within the privacy of my own house, and Im not making 20 copies to sell on the street at flea markets, garage sale stores etc.

If it sounds a bit like I am trying to justify my actions, I guess I will confess soemwhat that I am, but htese technologies and methods are around every corner and in every corner device imaginable. If this wasn;t the direction and the naturally evolution of the media forum for for music and movies, let them placed a devise and a chip or something else into everything that we own: our car radios, our satellite radios, our television sets. The problem most like is not the technoligical advancedment itself, butthe level of crimes that people are tempted to engage in because of the technology. As far as the technology, it is not waning it is actually getting stronger and more diverse. I think private use of recorder file mediums it inevitable. We'd all have to unplug, entirely in every luxerious technology we posess in order to end it.

I think thoughthe RIAA is angry about the current technology, they have pretty much accpeted its reality. Their compeign I believe was mostly set up to remind poeple ofthe abuse in the system, tyring to at least encourage people to cut back on what ultimately inevitable.

For the record, my guilt on download is still there some, but minimal. This technology is not only tempting for us all, but it also inevitable.

Just don't try to DSL link ten computers to your network, open your file-sharing options to 100, and start and ebay store with your new found riches.

Dewey (musicman and typing genius)

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Jan 05 - 10:44 PM

harpgirl asks some important questions: I own 500-600 LPs and many tapes and CDs,...all legally bought... but I simply cannot afford to buy all that I'd like to now that I'm retired and on a seriously limited budget...if I see a song online that I'd love to have, but have no spare funds to by the whole CD, what do I do? I know I'm not going out and buy the CD, so if I copy the song...technically an illegal act...the artist has lost nothing (just as a theater owner would lose nothing by letting some kids in for free when they had no money, and would not have come in legally anyway.)

Later, I 'might' buy that CD , and those kids 'might' come back and pay for a seat....and that's the argument used by some who use peer-to-peer, or download from newsgroups, and if that's all it was everyone would be fine. But if someone keeps up with music, and WANTS all the latest CDs of some particular genré, and INTENDS to get them without putting out a dime, except for the cost of his computer equipment, he is clearly defeating the purpose of the artist, who wants to make money from his talent........and you and I could both write scripts that fall between those two extremes, just as harpgirl's questions suggest.

Like many issues, it WILL work itself out in some way, as musicians will NOT continue to make CDs in the same way if they can't make a living at it...maybe some folks will get by on live concerts...and some honest folks will continue to BUY CDs...we'll see how many.

You notice that Clinton H. and others seldom defend their decision to 'take' free music wherever thay can get it...they state that they feel no guilt, and dare you to do anything about it. That is what I don't understand...why announce that you get most of your music for free and illegally? Why not just do it quietly? Something in the personality, I guess.."stolen fruits are so delicious".....Are they suggesting that everyone do as they do? Do they know the argument that "it's ok for ME to throw trash out the window of my car, because, after all, just a few people doing it doesn't make much difference..."?

It is interesting that the habits of some could not easily exist without many others doing it legally......funny how our minds work, hmmmm?

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: harpgirl
Date: 24 Jan 05 - 09:39 PM

I have some questions relative to this issue.

If the Public library in your town buys a copy of your CD and then several thousand people listen to it, is that stealing? If so, why? If not, why not?

If some of these people copy your CD and listen to it, is this stealing? Why or why not? They can listen to it by checking it out or copying it. What is the difference?

Why is listening to someone's CD after borrowing it or copying it, different from reading a book from someone who gives it to your or lets you borrow it? Is each copy of a book only for the individual who buys it? Is each copy of a CD only for the individual who buys it? What is the difference in these two examples? If any?


Does it follow that if you can not listen to a CD without first purchasing it that you can not read a book someone wants to lend you without first purchasing it? What if your CD is discarded by someone else? Is it stealing to then find this CD and copy it?

If you view an artwork must you first purchase it? How is viewing an artwork without purchasing it different than downloading someone's song and listening to it?


The concept of whether one is stealing music by downloading without paying the artist for his work seems much more complex than the assertion that downloading without paying is always stealing, period.

Anyway, I have suspicion of pronouncements about what is right and wrong in this regard and these questions illustrate some of what I think about regarding this issue. Moral issues seem much more complex to me.


love, harpgirl the real one

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 23 Jan 05 - 04:49 AM

Just about on MY point gargoyle, he being protected from loss while said UK sources can do nothing when he steals from them.

PRS et al please note:- The playing field has a considerable list to the high dollar side.

BTW! Mum didn't raise any cops, as some of my songs on the subject would prove. I don't judge or advise others, just live by my own sense of what is right.

Don T.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Ritchie
Date: 23 Jan 05 - 04:19 AM

and whist I'm on the subject, photocopying is wrong. Damn technology, lets get back to the good old days.

Pavane, that's the reason I want to download 'most' of my vinyl collection ...no turntable....'ragtime cowboy jew' unplayed....it's a shame...nay ...it's a disgrace!

regards

the reverend ritchie.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: GUEST,.gargoyle
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 09:06 PM

Spoken just like a cop Mr. Wysiwyg.

Another entire thread could be devoted to Mr. Simon and his unaknowledged "borrowing" from UK sources.

Sincerely,
Gargoyle

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: GUEST,.gargoyle
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 09:01 PM

At the moment - I also go with LIME-WIRE

You won't find "Punch the Horse" or LaughKat's "Wyoming Memories of Utah" however, you will find classics whose performers are long dead.

Sincerely,
Gargoyle

I've ftp-ed, morphed, napped and kazaa-ed, but my key for moment is lime.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 07:52 PM

I have never downloaded music that I have not paid for, because I agree that theft is theft, and no amount of rationalisation can change that.

Having said that, and drifting slightly from the thread (sorry), can anyone tell me what is the difference between that and using someone else's song in live performance, without permission, to earn money.

Please don't tell me that that is covered by the PRS (Performing Rights Society, in Britain) licences that a few venues bother to pay for. Everyone knows that unless you are Paul Simon, or someone of that calibre, the PRS don't want to know you, far less pay you a share of the millions they collect. As a jobbing folkie with a CD of original material which is selling quite well at venues, I get no benefit from this, and anyone can use my material with no possible comeback. My heart grieves for the millionaires who are losing money, but when might I expect the same protection that they enjoy.

Don T.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 07:23 PM

... which sentiments can only be spoken by someone who has never 'walked a mile in another man's shoes'........

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 07:02 PM

"You are attempting to mitigate your guilt."

I had my guilt gland removed several years ago, and have never been happier... Guilt is a bogus emotion, laid on you by other people who THINK you SHOULD be doing things the way THEY do...

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 06:55 PM

Go one better Mick. Forget the record industry - I have funded all 5 of my albums 100%, recording the first 4 using my own kit that I bought for $1800, and paying for studio and artists for the fifth out of my own pocket. I also paid for the artwork design (when I did not do it myself), the creation of a master and the manufacturing. Ah, yes, for the advertising too.

Now, I don't have unlimited funds, neither do I expect to make money out if all - breaking even would be a dream.

Therefore, to have my tracks appear for free downloading without my permission and then to hear woolly arguments about the rights and wrongs of the record industry is an insult to my one-man "cottage industry". And no excuses about buying an album only to find that it is crap. You should have listened to a few tracks first, most record stores let you do that. You cannot compare downloads to a trial listening - why? Because you can KEEP downloads, obviating the need for a purchase!

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Big Mick
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 05:00 PM

Richard and Robo, I see no problem with downloading on a pay per track basis. Nor do I see a problem with mp3 files that allow you to sample my music. In fact, that is the legitimate and useful purpose of the file sharing medium.

Robo .... you continue to mouth the same arguments. You are attempting to mitigate your guilt. The fact that you don't like that the industry has the ability to amortize their costs and then enter into a higher profit margin is not germaine. That is called capitalism. If you want to have a thread about the relative merits/failings of economic systems, that is one thing. But you, like so many before you, always try to sidestep the issue by debating a false predicate. When you take something for nothing, that you would otherwise have to pay for, that is called stealing. This isn't about the companies ripping you off. It is about you getting free music to my detriment as a recording artist. Simple as that.

Mick

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 04:53 PM

There are two songs I particularly want to download. I'm learning them to play, and I'd like to refresh my memory of how they sounded. I'm quite prepared to pay 99 cents (or the rather greater 99p we get charged in the UK, someone spot a restrictive practice?) - but I can't. Why? 'cos I run Win98SE (actually I've got two other machines on my network, one with ME and the other with 95, but I disgress) and the legal Napster and the other one whateveritis only run with XP. I refuse to run XP because I don't want Mr Gates spying on me. Eveything I have is legal (subject as below), but I object to to him snooping on me.

And I cannot find either on Kazaa (lite) or Soulseek either.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: robomatic
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 04:02 PM

Big Mick and El Greko:

If you go to a CD store and purchase a CD, take it home, and find out it stinks, the chances are you are out your money AND you have an expensive new coaster.

It is my understanding that:
1) The RIAA companies have charged that their sales are diminished due to downloading but this has not been proven.
2) The real financial loss to the recording industry is not from downloading but rather from counterfeiting (particularly movies).

The gain for musicians and consumers is an entirely new medium with which to engage in commerce, and circumvent the big companies. The big companies are trying to tie up the new medium, and should not be allowed to.

If I go into a record store, the better ones anyway, I can still request that they play a track off an album and if I don't like it, I don't buy it. Utilizing a download for the same purpose is a difference with no distinction.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 03:57 PM

Mick.. I've called my mom worse to her face...

And really I doubt she cares what you or anyone else think of her and what she does...

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 03:52 PM

2) CDs are incredibly cheap to mass produce, and the machinery for making them has long since been amortized, yet the companies are still charging $10 to $20 for 'em (the artist gets a small cut).

True, but MAKING the cd is expensive if you're paying your fellow artists to play on it, a recording studio to record it, a designer to make the booklet, roayalties to writers and publishers..all paid before pressing costs.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: M.Ted
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 03:44 PM

You can actually pay to download music--if anyone were to ask me--I would tell them that it wouldn't be a half bad idea to have a Mudcat/Camsco site where one could download folk/traditional/music at a competitive rate--all nice and legal, of course--browsing through a the music section of the forum would be much more fun if one could download the songs and artists that were being discussed--

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Big Mick
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 02:43 PM

Right, George. I agree that it can be a great tool. But only when one chooses to use it as such. There is no inherent right to download my property.

Clinton, I would rather we didn't get personal, but let me just say that a Mother that is downloading, IMHO, is stealing too. Good thing we are friends, or you might come hunting me over that one.

:^)

Mick

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 02:38 PM

My mom downloads music too...

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 12:58 PM

I'm with Big Mick on this one, though there can be a few well-argued exceptions. One such is relevant to original music, where the songwriter or composer actively wishes to "put the song about" as it were, and makes MP3s available on purpose. In my case, I have put 8 MP3s on my website and also made them available from Download.com at no charge. I have no problem with these being copied, and indeed they have about 200 "hits" a week on Download.com - 10,000 to date.

The way I see it, that is 10,000 people who have listened to "Empty Handed" (an earlier version, not the new one with Cloudstreet), that otherwise might not have heard of it. Have I missed sales from this? Realistically, perhaps $500 worth. But I have had scores of emails from people through this, from all over the world, and some did buy albums. The thing is, this was MY decision to put the songs out.

At the same time, I was told that the whole of my fourth album is now available on eMule; well, not too happy about that, because someone took the decision out of my hands. It's not so much the revenue loss (again, probably not much), but the arrogance of the c***t that did it, that annoys. As Big Mick says, that is theft pure and simple.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: pavane
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 12:33 PM

Ritchie
I do have Stefan Grossman's album 'Ragtime Cowboy Jew' containing 'Satisfied & tickled too' - BUT currently no record deck!

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Big Mick
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 08:50 AM

Great arguments, Robo. Problem is that they are all based on an incorrect premise. They are based on the argument that there is a justification for taking something that one is supposed to pay for. I agree with the issue that the "big labels" are ripping off artists and the public. But I also think that about automobiles. Yet it is no more correct to steal from someone, just because you don't agree. The proper response is to not utilize their services. The other thing that doesn't fly in all this is that once a person rationalizes that it is OK to copy from the big dudes, then it is a short walk to doing it from me. It costs me from $9.00 to $12.00 to produce a CD. Toss in the factor for the promo copies I give away, and the cost of travel to promote it, never mind the cost of my equipment, and you can see why it is difficult to make money at $15.00 a copy. Folk Legacy Records, a jewel we cannot afford to lose, barely makes ends meet at $15.00 a copy. Dick at Camsco keeps going out of love for the music, because he is lucky to break even.

But stealing is stealing, no matter how you cut it. Ask your Mom.

Mick

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: robomatic
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 08:32 AM

1) I have bought music beCAUSE I discovered it online.
2) CDs are incredibly cheap to mass produce, and the machinery for making them has long since been amortized, yet the companies are still charging $10 to $20 for 'em (the artist gets a small cut).
3) The powers of the industry have got Congress to extend copyrights well beyond a good societal norm in order to enable them to lock in future profits with capital.
4) mp3's are not the equivalent of CD tracks.

Fight the power. Boycott the members of RIAA.
Listen to live music. Pay real people. Buy CDs at performance venues.

I like old Radio Shows, Goons, ISIRTA, ISIHAC, Navy Lark, Dad's Army, Suspense, CBS Radio Mystery. I may download a top 40 to give it a listen and a toss, but if I'm regularly listening to something I've downloaded, I'll buy it. That's what happned with Austin Lounge Lizards and Fiery Furnaces.

I used to use Kazaa, they included a lot of garbage sales stuff with their program, ultimately I bought into limewire and have been happy with it.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 19 Jan 05 - 04:30 PM

I download nearly everything I want...

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Ritchie
Date: 19 Jan 05 - 03:44 PM

without doubt, listening or playing it ...but buying it!!

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 19 Jan 05 - 02:55 PM

Nope... it's more like music to me is as essential as blood or air...

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Ritchie
Date: 19 Jan 05 - 02:54 PM

talk to my wife "how on earth are you going to listen to it all?"

"you probably don't know what you've got or where half of it is"

mind you i have been known to buy the same cd twice ...I love a bargain ...although I must admit I've stopped 'sneaking them into the house' probably cos I've cut down on browsing.

there must be some sort of 'music aholics society' though.

Clinton you're an honoray member!

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 19 Jan 05 - 02:11 PM

"I spend far too much on music"

Error... does not compute... no such concept!

LOL

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: GUEST,drat I'm gonna have to sort my cookie out
Date: 19 Jan 05 - 01:57 PM

well according to my wife I spend far too much on music!

most of the things I download are old tracks that I've got on vinyl, which reminds me, does anyone have a copy of 'give it one more chance' by gary farr and the t bones or 'satisfied and tickled too' by stefan grossman?

Usually when i download some music, it's before I go to see someone perform, which also costs an arm and a leg or like s6k I buy more of that artist.

The type of music i like I cant download and here in the UK i have to pay quite a bit for.

for goodness sake it's a bit like borrowing a book, come on don't tell me you've never done that, if anyone wants back what I've downloaded ok.

oh yes, I nearly forgot I use soulseek.

all the very breast

Ritchie

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 19 Jan 05 - 12:16 PM

" So, is there a legal, buy-a-track site people like?"

Nope... eMule...

:-)

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: DMcG
Date: 19 Jan 05 - 12:07 PM

Is there a legimate music download site - like iTunes, etc - that people find good for whatever-their-personal-definition-of-folk-music?

I looked at iTunes when it was it was first available in the UK and have just looked again, and there is very little of what I would call folk (Example test: How many Watersons/Carthy songs does it hold?)

So, is there a legal, buy-a-track site people like?

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: s6k
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 01:21 PM

well, if i download an album, and i really like it, then i will end up buying the CD in the end anyway.
i am an audiophile and you cant get mp3s to sound like the real thing.

But i contest at the people who say dont download because its hurting artists: when was the last time you bought an album and hated.
i must ask... why do i not have the right to download the album and listen to it before i decide to buy it or not.
if i buy it and dont like it, ive wasted my money, but if i download, have a few listens and think: yeh ill buy this, then surely thats just common sense?

i think this is a very legitimate counter argument. MP3 is good to listen to on my pc while im sat working at home, or in my walkman. but if i really want to LISTEN to music, ill listen to the album, which if i own the mp3, im gonna own the album too because it means i must like it.

thanks for your time.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: mooman
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 11:45 AM

All the music I download I have either already bought the CDs or have bought them subsequently.

moo

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: GUEST,Displaced Camelotian
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 11:21 AM

Furthermore. most artists get ripped off by the record companies from Day One anyway. Why make it worse? Buy the CD, or pay a buck to download the track.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Once Famous
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 10:34 AM

JohnP, I agree. Maybe we are old fashioned. I like to go buy a CD, read the liner notes, see who is credited with writing the song, look at the pictures of the artists, see where the music was recorded, and see who the musicians are on the recording.

I also believe that artists should get royalties and record companies are entitled to make money.

An article I just read by Chet Filipo on CMT.com (he is the former Rolling Stone journalist who writes a weekly on-line column) says the war by the record companies is far from over. Artists are getting ripped off constantly by the many free-loaders. I guess there is now some legal downloading available. I'd rather go buy the product.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: John P
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 10:04 AM

I don't get the whole thing about downloading music. Why not just buy a CD? How do you go about paying the artists when you download music?

JP

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: mcgrathof altcar
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 09:57 AM

Limewire. yummy. I've even downloaded some music with me on it!

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: s6k
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 06:09 AM

Limewire is better than kazaa, it never gets a corrupt file, however kazaa has more users. Kazaa lite is infinitely superior to kazaa, as it has an automatic UNLIMITED search more function, no ads or popups, and lots of extra little features.

the best place for torrents is www.suprnova.org - yes, its spelt without the E. it has everything from films, albums etc. not very good for individual songs though.

the best program to use for torrents from suprnova is ABC Client... type it in google, its the first result. it always downloads at the maximum your modem can handle, and is small and a child could use it.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: mooman
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 06:00 AM

Limewire Pro for the Mac.

moo

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 04:44 AM

Kazaa lite was the no-add-ware version of Kazaa... the guy who was keeping up the site where you could get the program was forced to shut down...

Look around the net... it's not too hard to find...

Like anything else ya want...

:-)

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: C-flat
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 03:50 AM

Only ever used Kazaa myself, though I've never heard of Kazza lite.
You cutting down Clinton?
C-flat.

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 22 Jul 04 - 10:31 PM

Someone wise in the ways of FTP is always a pleasure to find!

:-)

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Amos
Date: 22 Jul 04 - 10:25 PM

Bit Torrent is great especially for large files like movies. For everyday sound files, I use iTunes, or an FTP application.


A

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: woodsie
Date: 22 Jul 04 - 10:05 PM

I'm quite inpressed with bittorents the albums come in folders with seperate tracks and often with the sleeve artwork as well

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 22 Jul 04 - 12:10 AM

Kazaa mostly... well, Kazaa lite actually...

Subject: RE: downloading music
From: mack/misophist
Date: 21 Jul 04 - 10:40 PM

I use dsl. It seems to be enough.

Subject: downloading music
From: woodsie
Date: 21 Jul 04 - 10:05 PM

What do mudcatters use for downloading music? Personaly I like winMX.

Bittorents is a good little piece of software that allows you to download music, software, movies, tv progs, comics etc, etc.

Have any muscatters tried it?