Is illegal downloading justifiable? [ENDS 23/05/2010]

Is illegal downloading justifiable?

Ends: 23/05/2010

This has been a hotly debated issue, cropping up ever more commonly in recent years. For many of us in the world today, we view it as a great element that we don't have to pay a single dime for our music and can get thousands of songs from any artist in the world, with the quality and variety getting better and better each day. Figures show that only one in just twenty people actually go through the legal means to obtain their music.

However, there is an another side to this argument. Some view it as immoral and consider it as 'stealing', for example, would you steal a car? Then why steal music? Another more pressing argument is that from illegal downloads we will all be poorer in the end, as most of the profits from legal downloads and CD sales go to the record labels, which then can use those funds to continue to operate a business.

Only small measures have been implemented to combat against this. For example, some internet providers now lower bandwidth or cut the internet of completely. However, legislation is weak in many countries and most people get away with it. So, the question of this week's debate is whether illegal downloading of files, music, videos is justifiable?

I see the reasons why this is majorly wrong. But you can't compare it to stealing a car, people shouldn't have to pay for SONGS, they should get them free :D

Why don't people take down Limewire etc. if they care so much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shazzy

I see the reasons why this is majorly wrong. But you can't compare it to stealing a car, people shouldn't have to pay for SONGS, they should get them free :D

Why don't people take down Limewire etc. if they care so much.

---

Because programs like Limewire aren't illegal, they're P2P software that can be used for legitimate things.

I don't think illegal downloading is justifiable, I'm one of the very few that does actually pay for music. I pay for music so I can keep it on CD and use it in different places (car, stereo etc). I bet half of the people that download music also don't know that it's technically illegal to put music you've purchased on a CD onto an iPod/MP3 player. xD
But to summarise, no I don't think it's justifiable, just go out and buy the music. If you were to say to me ''well some of us can't afford it'' then I'd simply reply with, well then you'll have to wait untill you can afford it or use Spotify/Youtube. :)

I personally download music and console games all the time, mainly for these reasons, music artists make enough money doing gigs and i download flashed games due to the fact that i'd rather spend that money on clothes and other stuff although if its a decent game where the producers deserve the money i'll buy it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by syko2006

Because programs like Limewire aren't illegal, they're P2P software that can be used for legitimate things.

I don't think illegal downloading is justifiable, I'm one of the very few that does actually pay for music. I pay for music so I can keep it on CD and use it in different places (car, stereo etc). I bet half of the people that download music also don't know that it's technically illegal to put music you've purchased on a CD onto an iPod/MP3 player. xD
But to summarise, no I don't think it's justifiable, just go out and buy the music. If you were to say to me ''well some of us can't afford it'' then I'd simply reply with, well then you'll have to wait untill you can afford it or use Spotify/Youtube. :)

---

yh dan if they r 10, its common sense. I download music, movies, games, the whole shabang. I think its grand the artists now days r greedy ****es they make money off gigs etc. Il never stop downloading illegally, even if im caught il just stop downloading at home and il just download music from internet cafes etc.

Isn't it only illegal if you distribute it rather than just putting it on a CD?

Anyway illegally downloading is technically stealing so no, it's not really justifiable. The only thing you could say is that you're not physically taking another person's tangible property but that doesn't take anything away from the fact that it is their property which they're trying to sell. That excuse will only become obsolete in the future when hard copies of everything slowly die out completely and everything is digital (I'm assuming this will be the case given that it's cheaper to produce, more reliable as a method of distribution and a better quality of product for the customer).

The stuff I download I wouldn't have bought anyway, so I think that is quite justifiable.

However, I do facilitate illegal downloading for quite a lot of people which probably has more of an effect.

I don't illegally download anything; but then again I don't really have the die-hard urge to listen to music every minute of my life like some teenagers today do. If I want to listen to music, I'll just load up Spotify and listen to it there - it's fast, free, legal, and you have a massive database to choose from.

I don't have enough money to buy music legitimately. If I want to listen to a song or an album and I know that I can do so for free, without getting caught if I'm cautious then I'm going to do so, regardless of whether it's morally justifiable.
You could easily argue that it's not justifiable for an artist to record a song once then burn countless copies onto countless CDs and charge £7-8 for them even though it cost's next to nothing to make. If CDs were cheaper then I might consider buying them but I'm not paying £700 for 1000 songs.
Artists could live on gig tickets alone and I don't see any artists without a roof over their head because people are stealing all their potential profits.

The point made about not stealing cars is totally irrelevant. If I could steal a car while 2000 people were stealing identical cars from the same garage at the same time then I would probably steal cars in that situation. For me it's not about the moral issue, it's about whether I will or won't get caught.

If i were A) rich enough B)available and C)were in russia - i wouldnt download movies but seeing as i cant go to a cinema for every movie i wanna watch it is the only viable option for me at this current climate to download, i watch movies i wanna watch i download what i already have watched or isnt coming out for a good few weeks.

I download music for the pure fact that £8 for an album i only like 3 songs on isnt a good idea for me to be using my money for, id rather download those 3 songs for free.

I only acquire games legally nowadays unless its a crappy pc game like plants vs zombies or something similar.

If prices were cheaper for under 18s then it would encourage more teens to purchase them.

IMO downloading music isnt a bad thing, as many artists apposing the recent digital economy act, they would rather it be free as its free publicity which leads onto more sales of concert tickets and what not which gains alot more profit than a few cds (if people on here have informed be correctly, they barely make 10% off a cd sale)

The reference to stealing a car is invalid, a car is £10,000 whereas a movie is about £6 - Cars are needed for travel and have been paid for not for profit but for necessity, Music being paid for is for novelty, it shouldnt be as much as it is. Movies i agree with, few million to make and advertise, some movies make fractions of profit which has to pay all the staff, music pays mainly the producers not the performers.

It is wrong yeah, but i'd much rather the police and government worry about the real criminals and crooks before they start targeting people simply downloading music for free to save them money, not to mention the fact a lot of people are cash-strapped in general thanks to soaring taxes so people will attempt to make savings.

i personally download albums and songs all the time and yeah its probably wrong but so what? if its there to get for free, then get it?
most of the songs i download are like 90's rap so there isn't much of a market for it anymore either, i don't listen to new obnoxious and idiotic music from the UK - it's all crap.

people can get internet for free, cable tele for free, clothes from the local lorry raider for next to nothing - so why not download an album?
nothing really gets done about it anyway, so everybodys at it.

Consumer software used to cost a ridiculous amount, and there's some developers who still think they can rip you for 50 smackers per application (meet Apple which actually wants hundreds of dollars for freeware comparable applications). Piracy was usually the only choice to get the entertainment out of your computer which should have been, well--otherwise free. Since the iPhone/Android and the app store, the popularity of linux amongst consumers where package managers are of choice for obtaining software (and it's always freeware) and because of how easy, and well published developing tutorials are for languages like vb.net or JAVA (which even has the built in GUI toolkit and rediculously easy to use IDEs like netbeans), and particularly how easy Google's made android developing (where you can basically construct a wondrous GUI with just basic XML knowledge and hardly any object oriented mindset at all). Now-a-days developers are pushing out freeware applications because it's easier to develop an application and get published to such a high audience (with help of app stores). A lot of mobile app and web based app developers gain revenues from ads anyways.

So no, I don't think pirating is justifiable anymore. There is most likely always a freeware alternative (atleast on Windows) for most all your apps (save for most games). I don't understand why we should pirate applications, when we can download the freeware alternatives, give feedback to the (usually) opensource developer and s/he can even profit from the little ad revenue or thrill of knowing someone's using an application they made!

Okay first off, you got to think of the the possible things that we do pirate. I think we can categorize into four main groups - Audio, Video, Applications, & Games.

Audio costs a ridiculous amount of money. There is no doubt about it that people like me, that live in developing countries that have VERY LOW GDPs making $1 per song skyrocket to around $5 per song. I'm a living college student that has to pay tuition fees and depends on that one or two dollars per day as my meal for lunch or dinner.
Also, big companies. What these big companies are doing today is that they are they ARE NOT selling music anymore but on the other hand they are selling a PRODUCT. Meaning that they only care about the money and not really about the quality of the music.
Overall, exceptionally skilled people SHOULD be able to make a living off themselves by using that skill. If you take Mozart is an example he wrote most of his music even with a day job to support himself. The absence of intellectual property didn't stop Mozart from achieving what he did and today he is regarded as one of the most famous of the classical group of composers with a lot of references to pop culture and influenced by many bands. Many artists achieved by using their skills WITHOUT intellectual property.
If I want to support the artist, I'll go to there live concert, buy their merchandise, and maybe even paying the artist directly rather than paying the record company which only a small fraction of that money goes to the artist.

As for videos, I feel that there is too much stuff on a DVD that I don't want. When I download a pirated film, I don't have to worry about the advertisements which are a pain to watch. I also don't want all the extras that a DVD comes with. Do I really need "deleted" scenes? There's a reason why they are deleted. I also don't want trailers. DVDs are also pretty expensive with $10 a pop making them hard to get.

On the other hand, applications are completely different. If you can't afford it, then just look for a freeware alternative. People complain about the expensiveness of anti-virus and other programs, when there are a bunch of freeware waiting for you at download.com. Also, applications aren't culture, so they shouldn't be made to the public for free.

As for games, I'm two-faced about them. DRM is kind of killing the game industry where publishers are pushing their products to have the latest "security" to protect it from piracy. What DRM is actually doing is an inconvenience to a lot of gamers out there. Why do I have to be on the internet to play a single-player game? The number of legitimate users should be enough not to add a DRM to games. DRM is not a good way to combat piracy - instead it's kind of backfiring.

To put things in summary, I don't agree with piracy but it's more convenient as it is right now. Why put up with the entertainment industry and their laws? I definitely would like to see an overall change to the system which I can freely support. But that would probably be a long, long time before that can happen.

Personally, i do see Illegal downloading as bad. But.. Its there? You can google it and its there, Straight off to download. Why not?

As for music - I'll download an album, If its good - I'll BUY the CD - If not, I'll delete it and Youtube it if i want to listen to one song.
Movies - Dont really watch them
Games - I've got a few games on steam, They are all i play/download - BOUGHT games.
Xbox games - I have a flashed console, BUT i cannot use my hard drive with them, So - i'll download a game - If its good, I'll buy the retail disk for my None-flashed xbox
Apps - Come on, Whos going to pay £100+ for a program that a google search cant answer.. Not all freeware alternatives have the features of a paid program (Like photoshop for example, or Flash)

As above - DRM. It only affects REAL PAYING CUSTOMERS.. People who download games have NO problem with DRM usually, Leaving only paying customers to be troubled..

I use Limewire and I know that I getting songs which I should really pay for, for free. But I don't think it's illegal or anything :)

I buy CDs of albums I really want, because I like my music to be in FLAC format, which is often difficult to find. Otherwise, I'll just download the albums in the highest quality I can find. I don't feel the need to justify it to myself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shazzy

I see the reasons why this is majorly wrong. But you can't compare it to stealing a car, people shouldn't have to pay for SONGS, they should get them free :D

Why don't people take down Limewire etc. if they care so much.

---

Because being a musician is a skill. A bit likely building houses. Do you think people should get houses and food for free too?

Depends if you're selling it on or not - only then it's wrong

i do use the odd website to rip mp3s off youtube, and it is simply because of the ridiculous prices on itunes etc atm. 99p for a song (in some cases)! this is very overpriced. i think if they lowered the price, then a lot more people would actually use it, and not illegally gain songs.

ive never downloaded illegal copies of games etc though, just music x

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Android

Because being a musician is a skill. A bit likely building houses. Do you think people should get houses and food for free too?

---

Say I'm a artist with a record label of any sort. I record an album in the studio, maybe refine it a bit on the same day. From there it's out of my hands, it's simply a matter of pressing burn over and over again.
If I'm someone who builds houses, I build one house at a time. From then on I don't just clap my hands and identical houses appear infront of me requiring no effort.
If an artist loses one album to an illegal downloader, they can burn a new copy and there's another potential sale. Analogies do not constitute evidence against illegal downloading because the circumstances are totally different.

Yes, it is.

Some people have barely enough money to live on, like me, and I'll be damned if I'm giving any money to some superstar for his/her tenth solid gold helicopter.

Games? I use illegal downloading as a demo of sorts. Demos show ONLY the good bits of a game, whereas playing through it once gives me a better idea of what to expect. If I love a game, I'll buy it. If not, I delete and move on.

Movies simply because £6-7 for a cinema ticket is bloody insane and pure greedy. Older or rare movies I download because I can't find a physical copy of it.

As for software, how much is it for Photoshop these days? My point exactly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LoveToStack

Say I'm a artist with a record label of any sort. I record an album in the studio, maybe refine it a bit on the same day. From there it's out of my hands, it's simply a matter of pressing burn over and over again.
If I'm someone who builds houses, I build one house at a time. From then on I don't just clap my hands and identical houses appear infront of me requiring no effort.
If an artist loses one album to an illegal downloader, they can burn a new copy and there's another potential sale. Analogies do not constitute evidence against illegal downloading because the circumstances are totally different.

---

But the point is these people are skilled people. Believe or not Recording studios are expensive, for example when I go with my band it normally costs £1.5k - apart from this summer where we are going due to winning it at a competition - but even though that isn't much it is for a unknown band, and proper artists spend WAY more.

I would like to see you be part of Take That or someone similar. Takes so much more skill than being a builder anyway.

----

Niall don't be so bloody ignorant. 'Barely enough to live on' - living in a ******* hut in Africa is barely enough to live on.

Piracy is good. For those services which offer paid music/games etc. they should continue to make their services more avaliable. What they shouldn't do is try to use absolute awful methods to make their service 'pirate proof' as you'll only end up hurting the consumer.

I got into most of the music I have in my library today thanks to file sharing. File sharing isn't piracy, it's actual sharing and I don't see why it's so bad. I hear an artist I like I'll go to a service like Spotify and buy the song. I doubt pirates are evil, or strapped for cash, they just see so many restrictions.

Fighting piracy gets you nowhere, you only end up harming the consumer.

Its justifiable but I prefer to buy solid copies of things so apart from the rare song I'l download from YouTube, I don't do it.

Although I am strongly against downloadable £10 cd's, I am for the downloading of the £750> software, that the everyday person clearly cannot afford.

That sort of pricing is aimed at buinesses, there should be a 'home' and 'business' version or something.

"would you steal a car?"
well if it was very easy with virtually no chance of being prosecuted and the car dealership didn't actually lose the car then yes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Android

But the point is these people are skilled people. Believe or not Recording studios are expensive, for example when I go with my band it normally costs £1.5k - apart from this summer where we are going due to winning it at a competition - but even though that isn't much it is for a unknown band, and proper artists spend WAY more.

---

Fair enough if it costs you a grand and a half every time you go to the studio but, and I mean this sincerely, how many people do you think illegally download your band's stuff? For big artists you can argue that it cost's way more but the people who "suffer" from illegal downloading are the massive artists who make tonnes of sales anyway! What's a lot to you or me isn't a lot to them. I can confirm that every album I own's artists will not be struggling because they're missing out on my £7.99.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Android

Although I am strongly against downloadable £10 cd's, I am for the downloading of the £750> software, that the everyday person clearly cannot afford.

---

I agree but in the same breath, just like you can't afford a genuine copy of photoshop, for example, other's can't afford to pay £10 every time they wan't a CD. I can see why people would then say, well then if you can't afford it you can't have it but in my eyes £10 for a CD is a scam for what you get and the production costs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jxhn

"would you steal a car?"
well if it was very easy with virtually no chance of being prosecuted and the car dealership didn't actually lose the car then yes

---

Made the exact same point. Proves analogies to not apply. :8

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LoveToStack

Fair enough if it costs you a grand and a half every time you go to the studio but, and I mean this sincerely, how many people do you think illegally download your band's stuff? For big artists you can argue that it cost's way more but the people who "suffer" from illegal downloading are the massive artists who make tonnes of sales anyway! What's a lot to you or me isn't a lot to them. I can confirm that every album I own's artists will not be struggling because they're missing out on my £7.99.



I agree but in the same breath, just like you can't afford a genuine copy of photoshop, for example, other's can't afford to pay £10 every time they wan't a CD. I can see why people would then say, well then if you can't afford it you can't have it but in my eyes £10 for a CD is a scam for what you get and the production costs.



Made the exact same point. Proves analogies to not apply. :8

---

I could get the genuine copy, I am more than likely to buy the student version if and when it is available from software4students.

I just used my band as an example, although other artists would spend far more (X Factor prize is a deal worth 1 million pounds for example.)