Quote:
Originally Posted by Julie in the rv mirror
Well OK, the artist does get some on record sales, but probably not as much as people think. It's a complicated system.
|
One of the arguments people use to try and justify illegally downloading an album is that the record companies rip off the artist by taking a piece of the pie that is a lot bigger than what they are due.
I agree that the record companies shouldn't get the percentage that they do.
The record company may put the album out, and deserve a considerable return on their investment, but the artist creates the music, and that's where the lions share should go.
The record companies are just money men.
But why punish the artist for the way the music industry works?
If you like the artists work, they deserve the recognition of decent album sales, and the money that goes in their pocket.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adje
Piracy is getting a copy that's shared by someone (who most likely has the hard copy). But even if the person sharing hasn't got the original it's still not the same as stealing. Making/dpwnloading a copy and not buying IS NOT stealing.
Going into a store and take the CD whitpout paying for it, now that's stealing.
I read somewhere in this topic someone comparing it with a burglar taking away a vcr and stuff. That's a really silly example as one has nothing to do with the other.
|
Another reason often given why the big bad record company is ripping us all off is the small cost that is involved in making the actual CDs.
The CD itself, the CD case, the booklet, they all cost pence rather than pounds, which is why CDs should be cheaper, right?
But it's not the
CD you are paying for, you are paying for the work that's on it.
If the CD only costs (say for example) 10p to produce, there's only a difference of 10p between shoplifting the album and stealing it on the net
You could argue that the low cost of producing the physical CD is so small that it makes the difference between shoplifting and stealing it from the net pretty much insignificant
I've heard plenty of arguments.
"I believe music should be free".
"The record companies charge too much for the albums, so i'm Robin Hood".
"It's not stealing if you have nothing in your hand".
"I wouldn't have bought it anyway, so why not dowload it for free?"
IMHO it's clutching at straws to grab some warped moral high ground to justify the fact they don't want to pay for what they use