|
previous topic :: next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Kraemer

Since 24 Apr 2006
1736 Posts
Sky Pilot
Unicorn Captain
|
Fri Dec 05, 08 11:38 pm |
|
|
itunes limits you to 5 uses of the track. It won't import directly into an edit system either.
After 5 registrations-- the song you bought is expired!
At first I thought--I bought it from itunes-- I should be able to use it where I want.
I might as well gotten it from Limewire!... those mp4 teabagging apple bastards! |
|
|
Intrepidquest
Since 09 May 2008
31 Posts
HoodRiver
|
Sat Dec 06, 08 12:15 am |
|
|
I think ppl in general are just greedy.
NO! You can't use this song because I own it and I'm not getting any money out of it!
LAME!
No you didn't ask first; That is disrespectful.
What is this about? Prestige based on owning art? Come on! Stop being selfish and moneygrubin. Life is about enjoying and sharing enjoyment. That is the very point of art.
For those of you who really disagree. You are too narrow minded to see that no one really owns anything. You probaly won't be convice of my point of view and that is all right. Because if you did posses my point of view I would have to charge you  _________________ PeaCe OuT! |
|
|
Inept_Fun

Since 14 Apr 2005
1417 Posts
Hood River
XTreme Poster
|
Sat Dec 06, 08 6:21 pm |
|
|
I just gotta say this to all you sore asses out there who are calling this stealing and getting all bent out of shape about it.
Its not like you were making the music, and hes not making any money off of it, so why do you even care???
Its not like people who make music are poor...
Also what is the artist losing by having someone put their music in a video on youtube??
If anything they gain exposure, maybe someone who watches the video will go buy their music. _________________ I heart dangling |
|
|
Moto

Since 03 Sep 2006
2698 Posts
Still a gojo pimp!
Moto Mouth
|
Sat Dec 06, 08 7:54 pm |
|
|
| Intrepidquest wrote: | Because if you did posses my point of view I would have to charge you  |
Damn it!! - I owe intrepidquest some money allright man - send me a bill  _________________ Still rockin gojos, *ssless chaps, and ankle weights! |
|
|
Hein
Since 08 Mar 2005
1314 Posts
Possessed
|
Sat Dec 06, 08 8:23 pm |
|
|
You guys should start a kiter commune
Where you can share everything
All will be bliss
for a week or two  |
|
|
boardrider

Since 05 Apr 2006
1034 Posts
Ventura, CA
XTreme Poster
|
Sat Dec 06, 08 8:26 pm |
|
|
There are some very cool musicians out there, that make music b/c they love it.
Example: WILCO - heard JT say in an interview that once he releases a song, he feels it belongs to everyone. Pretty f-in cool guy !
There are some pretty uncool musicians out there that see music and their fans as a ca$h cow that they will milk till the teets are raw and bloodied. They are the ones that will sue your a$$.
Support the cool musicians - their music is usually better anyway
PS
Portland is very fortunate to have SO MANY great bands in town - go check 'em out.  |
|
|
Hein
Since 08 Mar 2005
1314 Posts
Possessed
|
Sat Dec 06, 08 8:47 pm |
|
|
Some musicians choose to make their music for the public domain. -Sweet
Others choose to retain ownership and make money off it. -Fine
The fact is that under current copyright laws,
it is THEIR choice
NOT YOURS
If you don't like it,
vote to have the LAW changed.
Until then, respect it.
The same laws apply to software, BTW. Last edited by Hein on Sat Dec 06, 08 8:54 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
boardrider

Since 05 Apr 2006
1034 Posts
Ventura, CA
XTreme Poster
|
Sat Dec 06, 08 8:53 pm |
|
|
hahahah - I think we all get your point Hein, and I personally agree with you in most respects.
Support the cool musicians. The overproduced, overmarketed bands are usually only good for a song or two anyway
OH, and as long as we are bitching, how 'bout TICKETMASTER - now THOSE guys are true teabaggers  |
|
|
Intrepidquest
Since 09 May 2008
31 Posts
HoodRiver
|
Sat Dec 06, 08 9:30 pm |
|
|
| boardrider wrote: | | Support the cool musicians. The overproduced, overmarketed bands are usually only good for a song or two anyway |
True that! _________________ PeaCe OuT! |
|
|
Hein
Since 08 Mar 2005
1314 Posts
Possessed
|
Sat Dec 06, 08 10:31 pm |
|
|
I like to listen to music and appreciate all musicians who create it.
Sorry to get on my high horse about this subject. When I struck out on my own as a consultant and design engineer, I invested over 30K in top of the line CAD software. It was not long before I found myself competing with folks who had pirated copies of the same tools. Over the years I've done a bunch of product development for individuals seeking to make their idea into money. It's a form of the American dream. I've seen the hard work and passion that these people have put into their creative idea and the time and money they have spent developing it into a potentially viable product.
The experience has allowed me to gain great respect for the creative work of another person and the value it has to them. |
|
|
tautologies
Since 24 Aug 2006
602 Posts
Oahu
Addicted
|
Sun Dec 07, 08 3:27 am |
|
|
| Intrepidquest wrote: | I think ppl in general are just greedy.
NO! You can't use this song because I own it and I'm not getting any money out of it!
LAME!
No you didn't ask first; That is disrespectful.
What is this about? Prestige based on owning art? Come on! Stop being selfish and moneygrubin. Life is about enjoying and sharing enjoyment. That is the very point of art.
For those of you who really disagree. You are too narrow minded to see that no one really owns anything. You probaly won't be convice of my point of view and that is all right. Because if you did posses my point of view I would have to charge you  |
Now without being too existential, and before you continue to argue strawmen, what it all comes down to is actually not at all share and enjoy. Copyright infringement hinders innovation. As easy as that. If it was okay for people to copy freely, there would be no creating anything, or atleast the process would be very different. Companies would wait to see if others would invent so they could just copy instead of spending money on R&D.
Youtube must by judgement delete files that infiringe on copyrights...simply because if they don't delete a file after someone notifies them they are liable.
Now that said, changing the business model in which artists earn is way way overdue, and there are a lot of other way for artists to earn their keep...but at least reference the work you "borrow". You can however use sampling which makes for interesting compositions.
Funny how people who has not created anything or had their crap stolen argues to share everything. Let the creator decide.
Anyhow..here is a freebee form Thom Yorke...
http://stereogum.com/archives/mp3/new-thom-yorke-tchk-harrowdown-jump-rmx_033621.html#more |
|
|
tonyb

Since 09 Oct 2006
973 Posts
Stevenson in the summer & SPI in the winter
Bolstad Clan
|
Sun Dec 07, 08 6:45 am |
|
|
I'm with Hein on this one. Sorry to steer off of music and on to software but the subject is very similar. Someone spent time working to create it and deserves to be compensated. Our company uses scheduling software that costs $5,000 a copy plus $1,800 a year in license fees - for each person that has it on their computer. And it's frustrating to compete with firms that have pirated that software when we've got over $50,000 invested. I'm sure 95% of people play by the rules but the ones that don't are just plain thieves.
Just because music is fun and entertaining for us or we view it as "art" doesn't mean there wasn't work behind it to make it happen or that it should be free. If you want it free, make it yourself. Respect the artists decision. If he gives it away fine (we give away some of our stuff), but if he wants to be paid for and control his main body of work, respect it.
Tony |
|
|
boardrider

Since 05 Apr 2006
1034 Posts
Ventura, CA
XTreme Poster
|
Sun Dec 07, 08 9:27 am |
|
|
I think the 'lameness' w/r/t music ditribution is often brought about by the middle men. The leeches that don't actually produce anything, but want to profit off the work of the musicians.
I don't think that all musicians care that thier work is used by others, with or without asking - They may even want others to share it. It may be the middle men that wants the strict copy right control so they can control the cash flow into thier own pockets. Yes, some of these middle men have a legit interest in the music as well and should be payed. But - how about the artist who wants to spread his music around and have it heard - but the middle men prevent this via copy right law ? Artist has lost control of thier work in this scenario as well - and I would call that lame.
Think of CURT KOBAIN
Alot of cool bands will release free, 'live' versions of songs, and ask you to pay for the recorded stuff . I think it was RADIOHEAD that provided one of thier latest albums for online purchase, asking their fans to pay what they thought it was worth. This is a fairly intellegent stratagy. One song on iTunes @ .99 - One ticket to your favorite band @ 50.00$ + .
Totally agree with the copy right infringement stuff you guys are talking about, esp w/r/t software. I'm not sure if it is so cut and dry with music. I'm not in the music biz tho, so I really don't know . It was fun discussing it w/ you guys anyway  |
|
|
Inept_Fun

Since 14 Apr 2005
1417 Posts
Hood River
XTreme Poster
|
Sun Dec 07, 08 10:29 am |
|
|
| tonyb wrote: | I'm with Hein on this one. Sorry to steer off of music and on to software but the subject is very similar. Someone spent time working to create it and deserves to be compensated. Our company uses scheduling software that costs $5,000 a copy plus $1,800 a year in license fees - for each person that has it on their computer. And it's frustrating to compete with firms that have pirated that software when we've got over $50,000 invested. I'm sure 95% of people play by the rules but the ones that don't are just plain thieves.
|
Each year you have to pay $1,800 a year in "licensing" fees? If you ask me that sounds like the real robbery, you already have the software, thats some BS that you would have to pay to use it every year.
Ask yourself who are the true robbers?? _________________ I heart dangling |
|
|
kyle.vh
Since 11 Jul 2007
713 Posts
city of angels
Addicted
|
Sun Dec 07, 08 10:39 am |
|
|
i think that there's going to be a transition for software and other media like music.
people need to shift their thinking on how to make $$ in the internet age. It can be fruitful.
musicians need to work with websites who will pay them to post their music, based on ad revenue. so music will be free for the end user, but musicians and the site owners can make money through ad sales. that will require regulation, too...
open-source software is showing it can be highly profitable for folks who customize and provide add-on value. in this way, software is largely free, but developers still make money.
thats my 2 cents. |
|
|
registered

Since 12 Jul 2005
1319 Posts
tsunami
Sandbagger
|
Sun Dec 07, 08 11:10 am |
|
|
If your making something useful or not ....it may have value to be determined by ??
Contact the creator and negotiate the compensation .....it may be free .
life is not free as an adult and most things don't magically appear from thin air.
there are alternatives to most obstacles be creative and move on.
work smarter not harder and stop being such frinking whinners.
oh and don't land on pole dancers and think its a good thing.
or not  |
|
|
DROCK999

Since 31 May 2007
852 Posts
Left Coast
Opinionated
|
Sun Dec 07, 08 11:11 am |
|
|
My bigger question here is: Stringer did you give credits to the music in your video?
But it's for the specific reason that iTunes puts limits on their songs that I avoid buying music on iTunes and is saved for a last resort. _________________ BIP- "YOUR GIRLFRIENDS FAVORITE" |
|
|
|