quadence
Oasis Roadie
"Maybe you're the same as me, we see things they'll never see"
Posts: 105
|
Post by quadence on May 4, 2005 0:34:13 GMT -5
If I break into a store to steal some bread the store will not go bankrupt However, what most, if not all here are doing are simply getting a taste of the songs. i believe they will go buy it. So your example is really like taking a piece of the bread from a loaf, and then going back later and paying for the whole thing. meaning not much harm done;D |
|
|
|
Post by albertzz on May 4, 2005 0:36:17 GMT -5
I can sort of seeing what you're saying but given the problem that a) you might share it with others who won't later buy it b) you might (hey, it's possible) not buy it yourself b/c you don't like it or you just don't feel like spending money and c) it's not their intention not to mention that d) I would have thought it'd be cooler to get the album and hear it for the first time the old fashioned way and e) the ethical problem of downloading itself listed in an earlier post
then yeah, I think you should wait
like, let's say your friend has an art exhibit that'll cost $20 - but you can sneak into the gallery when it's closed and take a look at the stuff? I don't think you should do it.
|
|
|
|
Post by albertzz on May 4, 2005 0:39:58 GMT -5
However, what most, if not all here are doing are simply getting a taste of the songs. i believe they will go buy it. So your example is really like taking a piece of the bread from a loaf, and then going back later and paying for the whole thing. meaning not much harm done;D yeah, that's true, except taht's not what people end up doing further, going around and posting a sign on your house saying "free bread at this place" isn't a nice thing to do - the act itself is still wrong - it might not be AS wrong - but that's after the fact justification |
|
quadence
Oasis Roadie
"Maybe you're the same as me, we see things they'll never see"
Posts: 105
|
Post by quadence on May 4, 2005 0:47:07 GMT -5
I can sort of seeing what you're saying but given the problem that a) you might share it with others who won't later buy it b) you might (hey, it's possible) not buy it yourself b/c you don't like it or you just don't feel like spending money and c) it's not their intention not to mention that d) I would have thought it'd be cooler to get the album and hear it for the first time the old fashioned way and e) the ethical problem of downloading itself listed in an earlier post then yeah, I think you should wait like, let's say your friend has an art exhibit that'll cost $20 - but you can sneak into the gallery when it's closed and take a look at the stuff? I don't think you should do it. I'm just saying we live in a time where this shit is gonna happen, no way around it. If you choose to not download it great, you really want to support Oasis. If you download it, that's fine. You obviously can't get enough of Oasis and have to hear it, isn't that what music is about (i know the industry isn't but the art of music is about the joy of hearing it). I just don't like seeing people chastise other in these threads for stating their opinions about downloading. That's it. |
|
|
|
Post by turnupthetruth on May 4, 2005 0:49:23 GMT -5
Hey AlbertZZ, why don't you go read some passages from the bible and study up to become a Catholic priest. Downloading music is illegal, but it certainly isn't unethical. The laws have to catch up with societal norms, but unfortunately the law is still lagging behind when it comes to technology and the internet.
Back in the 1980's it was illegal to copy a radio broadcast onto cassette tape. It also used to be illegal to video tape broadcast television. Do you think that these activities are "unethical?"
If the album is leaked onto the web, it is Sony's fault. It is their responsibilty to safeguard the album.
If a soda machine accidentally gives you two bottles of Coke instead of one, are you going to send a check for $1 to Coca Cola headquarters in Atlanta? I certainly hope not! Why don't you go spread your morality somewhere else buddy. This is an Oasis site, and we are a bunch of bloody heathens. You are preaching to the wrong audience.
|
|
quadence
Oasis Roadie
"Maybe you're the same as me, we see things they'll never see"
Posts: 105
|
Post by quadence on May 4, 2005 0:50:35 GMT -5
This is an Oasis site, and we are a bunch of bloody heathens. You are preaching to the wrong audience. Very true |
|
Gauss
Madferrit Fan
Posts: 59
|
Post by Gauss on May 4, 2005 0:57:55 GMT -5
It's a ritual for me - new Oasis album, get it when it leaks, buy it the day it comes out - album reminds me of a lot of Sgt. Pepper...
|
|
|
|
Post by albertzz on May 4, 2005 1:04:27 GMT -5
dude I'm a heathen too but our chemistry's definitely off
(sorry)
anyway I am well aware that illegal does not entail ethical and vice-versa
but it does in this case why for easons I've already stated that I don't want to have to state again - if interested read previous posts
as for the argument that you didn't steal it first therefore you're not stealing also doesn't make sense
A thief gains no title and as such can bequeath none to others
as in you steal a car it's not yours and it's not mine even if you sell it or give it to me
as in your argument "it's sony's job to protect it" is kind of dumb.
so if I succeed in breaking into your house and stealing your stuff, good for me? um, i don't think so, if so let me know
I'm also just posting my opinions, if you don't like it fine, deal with it, you don't have to read it - the forum topics called "why can't people wait after all?" ffs. there are plenty of other threads where you can talk about how great it is to steal shit
|
|
|
|
Post by turnupthetruth on May 4, 2005 1:16:50 GMT -5
If a theif sells you a car that is stolen, and you don't know that it is stolen, you are a bonifide purchaser. You are legally entitled to keep the property.
If a thief pays you in stolen money, check, or other negotiable instrument, you are considered a holder in due course. You are entitled to keep it.
There are a few exceptions such as fraud. If you want to learn more about these things you know nothing about, go read some legal textbooks.
|
|
|
|
Post by albertzz on May 4, 2005 1:21:28 GMT -5
um actually while you are not thought of as a thief yourself (usually) you don't get a title to it - you are however entitled to your money back, at least in canada
|
|
|
|
Post by albertzz on May 4, 2005 1:27:40 GMT -5
I also like the fact that your counter-example was beside the point because we are talking about goods that we KNOW are stolen
"If you knowingly take an action that can reasonably lead to the commission of an illegal act, you can be charged with aiding and abetting criminal behavior.
To use a similar analogy, if someone sells you stolen goods you can be charged with a crime called "theft by receiving". It doesn't matter whether you claim ignorance or not, a jury may decide that you reasonably should have known the item was stolen (hint: if retail cost is $500 but the guy is selling it for $50, you might want to be concerned). The converse of this is also true, and any lawyer would be happy to explain why it's illegal for you to do so."
thanks for being smug though
|
|
|
|
Post by albertzz on May 4, 2005 1:31:51 GMT -5
oh and this from Caerphilly council in Wales
"Incidentally, stolen cars (in common with other stolen goods) will ALWAYS remain the property of the person from whom they were stolen."
|
|
|
|
Post by turnupthetruth on May 4, 2005 1:32:12 GMT -5
I see what you are saying. I was talking about the American Legal system, we were on different pages.
But anyway, I am positive that even if the record company knew the identities of all the downloaders, they would still lose in any court action.
Either the record company (their employees) or someone along the distribution chain leaked the songs. All these groups involved in making and distributing the album are "agents" of the record company. The record company is normally responsible for their actions (once again unless fraud or some other exception is involved).
Also, what would it be that we have stolen? Songs that aren't even yet for sale? A judge really can't put a value on something like that. And it is near to impossible for Oasis to prove that sales were hurt due to downloads. They have no idea how sales would have been without the downloading, so it is pretty difficult for them to prove that they've suffered a lose. Also pretty impossible to put a value on such a so-called lose.
|
|
|
|
Post by turnupthetruth on May 4, 2005 1:36:58 GMT -5
We don't know that the goods are stolen! Sony may have leaked the tracks themselves as a strategic marketing decision (to spread word of mouth, get publicity).
Albert, can you tell me that the songs were stolen? And if so, who the hell stole them? When were they stolen? How were they stolen? You have no information to prove that the songs were stolen.
Don't you think it is a bit strange that one song is leaked (Lyla), then three more songs are leaked one week later, and then the rest of the tracks are leaked today, a few weeks later? This is no accident brought on by theft. This is the marketing plan by Sony.
|
|
|
|
Post by albertzz on May 4, 2005 1:38:27 GMT -5
well whoever leaked the album is the initial thief and whoever subsequently "steals" (for lack of a better word) from them is also a thief - (actually this raises an interesting point, and perhaps defense - as in - if you are just copying songs from someone who is willingly sharing them with you then you're not stealing at all, he's giving them to you - so - to the extent that it was originally stolen I see how you don't acquire a title to it - but I don't see how you're committing a crime, (which is different from doing something that is wrong, I still think that you're probably doing something wrong) but while it is true that the album isn't out yet if you're not stealing the album you're at least infringing their copyright on the songs - ie they own those songs and so you can't own them unless they sell them to you
|
|
|
|
Post by turnupthetruth on May 4, 2005 1:41:34 GMT -5
I think with copyright law, you can own them, you just can't sell them or use them for economic advantage.
|
|
|
|
Post by albertzz on May 4, 2005 1:43:14 GMT -5
well my initial argument was an ethical one rather than a legal one but I've been dragged into a legal one that I didn't intend on arguing in the first place but here goes
you could be right - sony may have leaked them - or some guy might have leaked them in segments like this so he wouldn't trigger as many alarms as quickly
I don't know, regardless if I leave a different safe open in my house every day for a week deliberately this doesn't change the fact that if you come along and take the money you're still taking it
(of course is putting stuff on the web and then people taking it equivalent to stealing - not when there's no restriction - the law seems so vague taht I don't see how they can claim that ignorance is not an excuse does anyone get it? I don't)
|
|
|
|
Post by albertzz on May 4, 2005 1:44:29 GMT -5
that's true,
i have no idea
|
|
|
|
Post by turnupthetruth on May 4, 2005 1:47:00 GMT -5
Well, we should be happy and proud. Happy that Oasis is going to have another hit album. And proud that we've debated each other better than George W. Bush would have been capable of.
Cheers.
|
|
Gauss
Madferrit Fan
Posts: 59
|
Post by Gauss on May 4, 2005 1:53:37 GMT -5
Albert - the thief analogy doesn't apply to this situation - it'll be on the shelves in 3 weeks anyways. Oh, BTW 99% of all people with the tracks are planning to and will buy the album - you forget we're diehard Oasis fans...
|
|
|
|
Post by albertzz on May 4, 2005 1:54:25 GMT -5
yeah good stuff mate, (though I don't know if bush as a standard is exactly that difficult)
|
|
|
|
Post by starglow on May 4, 2005 8:50:00 GMT -5
I think not everyone who works for Sony Music and/or relies on album sales for their income is a millionare. the executives who work for sony aren't hurting, a lot of them ARE millionares or close to it.... even those that aren't... oh no, they might have to buy a 2004 BMW instead of a 2005! people who work for record companies are scum anyways, they make far more money off of music they didn't create than they should. i don't mind that kind of outlook - I just dislike it when people try to condem those that download the leak as though they are saints from heaven. |
|
|
|
Post by starglow on May 4, 2005 8:53:45 GMT -5
Look, I understand they make millions so waht's the big deal argument - but it actually doesn't make sense. Ethics isn't about what will actually make a difference or not it's about being consistent and not being a jerk. ie - If I go out and murder someone, the world will not collapse into anarchy. If I break into a store to steal some bread the store will not go bankrupt If I kick you a little bit, you're not going to die, If I steal some money from you you're not going to be broke BUT IF EVERYONE did these things then shit would be fucked up. That's why it's immoral. and so if you cannot permit everyone to do it what makes you so exceptional - ie - what makes you an exception? Nothing! It's unethical, plain and simple. If I steal the CD from the store the store will still be in business. If everyone steals the CD it won't. Why can I say I should steal the CD, but others can't. On what grounds? None. Not only does "it's ok b/c not everyone's doing it" not give you a legitimate reason to do it, but infact it is a reason for hwy you shouldn't do it, b/c if you do it then it gives OTHERS a reason to do it as well (as in, well if bill's going to steal from the store, why can't I?) do you people get it yet? read an ethics textbook I'm sorry I missed the part where you were perfect. fact is, I don't feel that if I buy the album after I download the leak that I'm doing anything ethically wrong... everyone gets their money from me in the end... if you feel differently thats fine but don't patronize and lecture me. I already said I was NOT defending those who download and don't buy it because I don't do that so you're bitching to the wrong person. |
|
|
|
Post by albertzz on May 4, 2005 9:16:41 GMT -5
when you buy the album you right the wrong somewhat but that is still after the fact justification
I'm not claiming I'm perfect or a saint or anything like that, the degree to which I am a good person or not is completely irrelevant to whether what I'm saying is true or not
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2005 9:21:19 GMT -5
when you buy the album you right the wrong somewhat but that is still after the fact justification I'm not claiming I'm perfect or a saint or anything like that, the degree to which I am a good person or not is completely irrelevant to whether what I'm saying is true or not well said..i am biting my tounge here..i will buy everything they put out but if i can here it now i will listen..fuck the holier than thou ones there loss i know i will drop as much money as possible, so gettin leaked stuff is a bonus if people choose not to fine TRUST ME ON THIS IF THE YEAR WAS 1979 AND THERE WAS THE NET AND THE JAM HAD A LP LEAKED NOEL WOULD LISTEN!...CASE FUCKIN CLOSED |
|
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5