You’re assuming 1) there was a cheaper store in my area and 2) whatever you pay in your area is the norm.
Well then the problem is the area you live in. That is an absurdly high price which in no way is indicative of the market. I don't recall seeing any prices over $12 except in high profile shopping malls which jack up the prices of everything. But having traveled around a lot, I am can say that that's not the usual cost.
I’m pretty sure I said if I like something I buy it. When did paying for something become stealing? They use this concept in grocery stores; I had a mini-pizza the other day and bought a whole box of them.
Yes I understand. But I meant to yous "You" in a proverbial sense, and not you personally. In fact I have never met anyone on the internet that actually steals music from torrents. everyone just does it to later buy the same material. And the other 99.999% are just other people. But your position is anything but the norm. But in your example, the store had the choice of offering a small sample, just like is the case with music. And you aren't able to take an unlimited number of samples, thus removing the need to buy the product.
I’m conceding this point to you. All we have here is speculation that IF Napster hadn’t made file sharing popular and IF the XYZ industry had of been the one to kick the snowball instead of the one trying to stop the avalanche things might have been different.
But this is simply how business works. Any large business is not going to be able to be the first to jump on a new technology. The machine in any area of large business is simply too big to make sudden changes. And had they been there first it would not change the fact that someone can still get their products for free and not pay. The issue isn't about who came out first, it's that no one can compete with free. Not even itunes who make their profit on ipod sales.
Yes it does, people have gotten use to doing something easy, doing things the “hard” way is illogical. Alienating them by imposing DRMs, ridiculous EULAs and making laws that will most likely only affect “innocent” people only makes things worse. Sorry the box is open you can’t put the bad things back in
Most people that steal from torrents now were not old enough to have been downloading when the Napster issue happened. Many don't even know what the issue was. They only know that they can download a simply program and have any song they want and never have to pay for it. Again, no one can compete with free. Nothing can be easier than free. And DRM was not implemented from the start. It was added after it was realized how rampant theft was. But it was still a failure, because no one can compete with free. So they can not use copy protection and people will steal. Or they can use copy protection and peal will steal AND complain about copy protection. Either way, they have no means to protect their business.
The cap is what the market is willing to pay.
Now that's a contradiction to your previous statement. They should be able to make what the market will bear, but when they do you have a problem with it. Isn't that a bit unfair?
The music industry makes an initial investment to record something, and then makes money indefinitely off distribution of the product. They recover the cost and then make profit hand over foot only having to pay for the media the product is distributed on. If only there was a magical way to distribute a product over a large “digital” network using other peoples machines as a place to store it.
This is a misconception. Because what you may not be aware of is that for every successful album that sells well, there are 20 that lose money. Music is an art and there is no way to predict what will and won't be a commercial success. The big profit you see from a hit is eaten up by all the rest of the projects. And by taking away that profit you are also taking away from the ability to finance developing new artists. it also means there is not enough budget to work on artists that might be more risky and artistic because a loss is could put the company out of business. So by stealing, people aren't simply taking money from some evil corp, they are hurting new artists who are trying to be different. This is why you see so much of the Disney pop crap. This is the must that people who buy music are still buying. If people would buy the good stuff instead of stealing it, then that's what you would hear on radio and see promoted.
And the costs don't just go to the label. You have the song writers, the artists, the producers, the advertisers, the video artists, engineers. The list goes on and on. That pie gets cut up very quickly. It's amazing any money is made at all.
I picked a good profession, went to university and worked hard for the money I make. No one else has to decide for me that I make too much money, because I do. I’d do my job for free if I didn’t need to eat and live somewhere. Seems to me actors and musicians living in Hollywood live in Multi-million dollar homes and spend close to if not more what I make in a year on a dress/suit and jewellery for a night at an award ceremony.
So some professions should not have caps and others should. And anyone who's calling and love in life is music, art, or writing should just suck it? And so everyone who wants to be in those fields should not be in them? Most people in music, video, and writing would do what they do for free if they could too. But like you they have a right to earn a living. And like you, no one should be deciding for them how much money they should be allowed to make. What would you do if your customers decided they didn't feel like paying you? Would you agree with them? They could justify it as them feeling like you make too much money and the work you put into it isn't enough to justify paying you.
Most people don't live in multi-million dollar homes. You just watch some TV and think that that somehow represents an entire industry. That everyone is jet setting around. But they aren't. Sure there's some top people who are. Just like in ALL business. Donald Trump is living it up. Should he be stopped too? Should we justify stealing from him because he doesn't deserve to live that life style?
And again, what about the majority who are just trying to put food on their table?
I worked my way through university at a fast-food restraint, I’m telling you, they have a right to complain about how much I make. Their jobs have to be 100 times more stressful then mine, they work harder hours and don’t get nearly the respect they deserve. Hopefully they will make as much as me eventually. Can I ever hope to make as much as Jessica Simpson, Our Lady Peace, Three doors down, etc!! No. What did they do to get where they are? Sure they must have worked hard, but harder then me It’s kind of an apples and oranges comparison.
And most people in the media business have to. Some have done more education than you and some have done less. And having not worked all the jobs in media, how do you have a right to say you work more? Most people in those buinesses have an average 16 hour work day 6 days a week. Most have to give up most of their life just to be a part of it. There's a misconception that it's all easy and no work, but nothing could be further than the truth. The people who work in music and TV make up a large part of the working force of the country. And they work harder and longer than most. They have more to complain about than most of us. People like Jessica Simpson are not representative of several entire industries. There are million and millions of people working in these industries, and people like Jessica Simpson and the rest of the big stars make up maybe a couple thousand people at best. And their success only lasts for a couple of years. If they have a 10 year run, that's very lucky.
Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha oh, you’re serious.
DEAD serious. And it's these kinds of misconceptions that need to be addressed. Maybe you watch MTV or E and think that's representative of several entire industries. And it's not. This doesn't mean there isn't gluttany, or people making money they don't deserve. That's jut a fact of life found in every business. That's not something unique to any business. How many people made millions by happening to register a certain domain name? How many people just happened to invest in a tech stock that took off? Do they represent the computer industry? Should we steal from online companies because some people make easy money while we have to work hard?
If by steal you mean make a copy of something they have without degrading it in anyway and leave them with the original so they can continue to use it sure.
Yes that IS stealing. You are copying someones intellectual property without permission which is a violation of the law.
What if I decide not to pay my doctor for a service they provided? After all they aren't losing anything right?
What if you were a band selling CDs at your show. You spent $1000 and made 100 CDs to sell for $10 in hopes you could pay for the production costs. I buy one of your CDs, and I make all the copies I want and set up a booth next to yours and give them away for free. It cost you $1000 to make yours, it cost me $10. Now everyone takes the free ones and you're out $990. I didn't actually take anything from you. I just made copies. So no harm done right? After all you should just be glad to do it for free right (oops, not free, you paid $990).
I am not trying to be snide or anything. I am simply trying to offer you a perspective from the other side. It sounds like no damage is being done because it's just a copy, but can you see how it actually is?
It’s not stealing if I give it to you.
But the artists and media companies aren't giving it to you. You (and I don't mean specifically you) are taking it without permission.
I think you deserve to be modded up. You’ve encouraged discussion, made some valid points and it’s never easy to take a P.O.V. that’s different then the majority. Taking an opposite P.O.V. proves you’re an individual and not just another sheep, although taking the same P.O.V. as the majority doesn’t automatically make you a sheep either, it could just mean you’re right.
Well thank you for the kind words. But unfortunately most people take my responses as hostile or as trolling as it's the unpopular one here. And I thank you for having a respectful and civil argument. I don't think there is a wrong or right. I think it's a gray issue. And there are valid points on all side. I just tend to think the one I bring is one not well represented. And I imagine my wording probably comes off in the wrong tone.
Funny there’s still music being made. Are they able to make music without said people? Why were they needed in the first place? Why would the do something for profit if they weren't making any?
There is and always will be. But it's becoming more of a hobby. But what's happening is that talented people are being discouraged from making music now. People won't be able to make a living at it. Which means having a different job will have to be a priority. What if Led Zepplin couldn't make a living in music? Would they be able to make the music they did? Certainly it would suffer. What if the Beatles had to all have 40 hour a week day jobs?
People do it with the hopes that they will be that one in a million that is successful. Most don't and end up poor and starving. The business has always been a gamble even in its hey day. As for every success you see, there are 100s of failures. Though I guess that may be true of all industries.
Either way, thank you for a good discussion!
Over the shoulder supervision is more a need of the manager than the programming task.